The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of the bacterial diversity in the feces of cattle using 16S rDNA bacterial tag-encoded FLX amplicon pyrosequencing (bTEFAP)
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The microbiota of an animal's intestinal tract plays important roles in the animal's overall health, productivity and well-being. There is still a scarcity of information on the microbial diversity in the gut of livestock species such as cattle. The primary reason for this lack of data relates to the expense of methods needed to generate such data. Here we have utilized a bacterial tag-encoded FLX 16s rDNA amplicon pyrosequencing (bTEFAP) approach that is able to perform diversity analyses of gastrointestinal populations. bTEFAP is relatively inexpensive in terms of both time and labor due to the implementation of a novel tag priming method and an efficient bioinformatics pipeline. We have evaluated the microbiome from the feces of 20 commercial, lactating dairy cows. RESULTS: Ubiquitous bacteria detected from the cattle feces included Clostridium, Bacteroides, Porpyhyromonas, Ruminococcus, Alistipes, Lachnospiraceae, Prevotella, Lachnospira, Enterococcus, Oscillospira, Cytophage, Anaerotruncus, and Acidaminococcus spp. Foodborne pathogenic bacteria were detected in several of the cattle, a total of 4 cows were found to be positive for Salmonella spp (tentative enterica) and 6 cows were positive for Campylobacter spp. (tentative lanienae). CONCLUSION: Using bTEFAP we have examined the microbiota in the feces of cattle. As these methods continue to mature we will better understand the ecology of the major populations of bacteria the lower intestinal tract. This in turn will allow for a better understanding of ways in which the intestinal microbiome contributes to animal health, productivity and wellbeing.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Prevotella, Bacteroides, Ruminococcus, Faecalibacterium, Roseburia and Clostridium are consistently identified in fecal samples from ruminants and are considered part of the core microbiota (Dowd et al., 2008; Durso et al., 2012).”
From Addressing global ruminant agricultural challenges through understanding the rumen microbiome: past, present, and future (2018) · cites this paper as Dowd et al., 2008
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Basic local alignment search tool
Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W., & Lipman, D. J. (1990) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1990.9999 · Cited by 98,669 · cited 2×
“The resulting TC FASTA for each sample was then evaluated using BLASTn [77] against a custom database derived from the RDP-II database [78] and GenBank http://ncbi.”
MethodAn obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy harvest
Turnbaugh, P. J., Ley, R. E., Mahowald, M. A., Magrini, V., Mardis, E. R., & Gordon, J. I. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05414 · Cited by 12,444 · cited 1×
“Results and Discussion Recent research related to host physiology (obesity) and the gastrointestinal bacterial populations have sparked a renewed interest in understanding the gut microbiome [26,27].”
BackgroundHuman gut microbes associated with obesity
Ley, R. E., Turnbaugh, P. J., Klein, S., & Gordon, J. I. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/4441022a · Cited by 8,785 · cited 1×
“Results and Discussion Recent research related to host physiology (obesity) and the gastrointestinal bacterial populations have sparked a renewed interest in understanding the gut microbiome [26,27].”
BackgroundDiversity of the Human Intestinal Microbial Flora
Eckburg, P. B., Bik, E. M., Bernstein, C. N., Purdom, E., Dethlefsen, L., Sargent, M., Gill, S. R., Nelson, K. E., & Relman, D. A. (2005) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1110591 · Cited by 7,913 · cited 1×
“Information on microbial diversity within the gastrointestinal tract of humans has increased in recent years as a result of 16S rDNA-based analyses [9,10], yet similar data on the microbiomes of livestock is lacking [11,12].”
BackgroundFood-Related Illness and Death in the United States
Mead, P. S., Slutsker, L., DIETZ, V. J., McCaig, L. F., Bresee, J., Shapiro, C. A., Griffin, P. M., & Tauxe, R. V. (1999) · Emerging infectious diseases · doi:10.3201/eid0505.990502 · Cited by 7,305
CAP3: A DNA Sequence Assembly Program
Huang, X., & Madan, A. (1999) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.9.9.868 · Cited by 5,261 · cited 3×
“The ace files generated by CAP3 were then processed to generate a secondary FASTA file containing the tentative consensus (TC) sequences of the assembly along with the number of reads integrated into each consensus.”
MethodInfluentialEcological and Evolutionary Forces Shaping Microbial Diversity in the Human Intestine
Ley, R. E., Peterson, D. A., & Gordon, J. I. (2006) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2006.02.017 · Cited by 3,358 · cited 1×
“Information on microbial diversity within the gastrointestinal tract of humans has increased in recent years as a result of 16S rDNA-based analyses [9,10], yet similar data on the microbiomes of livestock is lacking [11,12].”
BackgroundHungate, R. E. (2013) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2013-0-12555-x · Cited by 3,060
Bacteroides : the Good, the Bad, and the Nitty-Gritty
Wexler, H. M. (2007) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00008-07 · Cited by 2,388
Determination of microbial diversity in environmental samples: pitfalls of PCR-based rRNA analysis
von Wintzingerode, F., Göbel, U. B., & Stackebrandt, E. S. (1997) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1574-6976.1997.tb00351.x · Cited by 2,085
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Větrovský, T., & Baldrián, P. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057923 · Cited by 1,201
Bailey, M. T., Dowd, S. E., Galley, J. D., Hufnagle, A. R., Allen, R. G., & Lyte, M. (2011) · Brain, Behavior, and Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2010.10.023 · Cited by 1,123
“NET and C# analysis pipeline the resulting BLASTn outputs were compiled, validated using taxonomic distance methods, and data reduction analysis performed as described previously (Dowd et al., 2008b).”
MethodSegata, N., Haake, S. K., Mannon, P., Lemon, K. P., Waldron, L., Gevers, D., Huttenhower, C., & Izard, J. (2012) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2012-13-6-r42 · Cited by 1,076
Banerjee, S., Kirkby, C. A., Schmutter, D., Bissett, A., Kirkegaard, J. A., & Richardson, A. E. (2016) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.03.017 · Cited by 1,050
Pyrosequencing study of fecal microflora of autistic and control children
Finegold, S. M., Dowd, S. E., Gontcharova, V., Liu, C., Henley, K. E., Wolcott, R. D., Youn, E., Summanen, P. H., Granpeesheh, D., Dixon, D., et al. (2010) · Anaerobe · doi:10.1016/j.anaerobe.2010.06.008 · Cited by 977
Metadata
- Authors
- Dowd, S. E., Callaway, T. R., Wolcott, R. D., Sun, Y., McKeehan, T., Hagevoort, R. G., & Edrington, T. S.
- Affiliations
- Agricultural Research Service (US)
- Corresponding author
- Dowd, Scot E
- Venue
- BMC Microbiology
- Published
- 2008
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 125
- ISSN
- 1471-2180 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2515157
- OpenAlex
- W2105807803
- Cited by
- 1,121
- References
- 80
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 68 · 2017: 105 · 2016: 116 · 2015: 121 · 2014: 129 · 2013: 99 · 2012: 75
- FWCI
- 11.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- BMC Microbiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Agriculture
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
- Keywords
- fecal microbiota, bacterial diversity, dairy cattle, Clostridium, Bacteroides, Ruminococcus, Lachnospiraceae, foodborne pathogens, Salmonella, Campylobacter, gut microbiota
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Bacteria, Cattle, DNA, Bacterial, DNA, Ribosomal, Feces, Female, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Gastrointestinal Tract, Biodiversity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
