Cited by 209Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchGut microbiota and healthMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The nasal cavity microbiota of healthy adults

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The microbiota of the nares has been widely studied. However, relatively few studies have investigated the microbiota of the nasal cavity posterior to the nares. This distinct environment has the potential to contain a distinct microbiota and play an important role in health. RESULTS: We obtained 35,142 high-quality bacterial 16S rRNA-encoding gene sequence reads from the nasal cavity and oral cavity (the dorsum of the tongue and the buccal mucosa) of 12 healthy adult humans and deposited these data in the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) of the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) (Bioproject: PRJNA248297). In our initial analysis, we compared the bacterial communities of the nasal cavity and the oral cavity from ten of these subjects. The nasal cavity bacterial communities were dominated by Actinobacteria, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria and were statistically distinct from those on the tongue and buccal mucosa. For example, the same Staphylococcaceae operational taxonomic unit (OTU) was present in all of the nasal cavity samples, comprising up to 55% of the community, but Staphylococcaceae was comparatively uncommon in the oral cavity. CONCLUSIONS: There are clear differences between nasal cavity microbiota and oral cavity microbiota in healthy adults. This study expands our knowledge of the nasal cavity microbiota and the relationship between the microbiota of the nasal and oral cavities.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/2049-2618-2-27

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Principal coordinates analysis of nasal cavity, buccal mucosa and tongue microbiota. Principal coordinates analysis was performed on a matrix of θ distances between all samples. OTUs were defined as 3% different. Axis 1, representing 29.8% of the variance, and axis 2, representing 19.3% of the variance, are displayed.
Figure 1 Principal coordinates analysis of nasal cavity, buccal mucosa and tongue microbiota. Principal coordinates analysis was performed on a matrix of θ distances between all samples. OTUs were defined as 3% different. Axis 1, representing 29.8% of the variance, and axis 2, representing 19.3% of the variance, are displayed.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Bacterial community composition of the nasal cavity, buccal mucosa, and tongue. Two hundred sixty-nine sequences were subsampled from each sample. The sequences were then classified as described in the materials and methods, and the relative abundances of sequences classified to major taxonomic groups are displayed.
Figure 2 Bacterial community composition of the nasal cavity, buccal mucosa, and tongue. Two hundred sixty-nine sequences were subsampled from each sample. The sequences were then classified as described in the materials and methods, and the relative abundances of sequences classified to major taxonomic groups are displayed.CC BY · PubMed Central

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 25 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 209

Metadata

Authors
Bassis, C. M., Tang, A. L., Young, V. B., & Pynnonen, M. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Cincinnati (US)
Corresponding author
Bassis, Christine M
Venue
Microbiome
Published
2014-08-11
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
27-27
ISSN
2049-2618 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2161225919
Cited by
209
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 6
FWCI
15.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Microbiome (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
Keywords
tongue dorsum, buccal mucosa, Staphylococcaceae, bacterial community composition, healthy adults, 16S rRNA gene sequencing, actinobacteria, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria

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