Cited by 272Gut microbiota and healthAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchDiet and metabolism studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ketogenic diet modifies the gut microbiota in a murine model of autism spectrum disorder

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal dysfunction and gut microbial composition disturbances have been widely reported in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This study examines whether gut microbiome disturbances are present in the BTBR(T + tf/j) (BTBR) mouse model of ASD and if the ketogenic diet, a diet previously shown to elicit therapeutic benefit in this mouse model, is capable of altering the profile. FINDINGS: Juvenile male C57BL/6 (B6) and BTBR mice were fed a standard chow (CH, 13 % kcal fat) or ketogenic diet (KD, 75 % kcal fat) for 10-14 days. Following diets, fecal and cecal samples were collected for analysis. Main findings are as follows: (1) gut microbiota compositions of cecal and fecal samples were altered in BTBR compared to control mice, indicating that this model may be of utility in understanding gut-brain interactions in ASD; (2) KD consumption caused an anti-microbial-like effect by significantly decreasing total host bacterial abundance in cecal and fecal matter; (3) specific to BTBR animals, the KD counteracted the common ASD phenotype of a low Firmicutes to Bacteroidetes ratio in both sample types; and (4) the KD reversed elevated Akkermansia muciniphila content in the cecal and fecal matter of BTBR animals. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that consumption of a KD likely triggers reductions in total gut microbial counts and compositional remodeling in the BTBR mouse. These findings may explain, in part, the ability of a KD to mitigate some of the neurological symptoms associated with ASD in an animal model.

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/s13229-016-0099-3

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Assessment of total microbial content, partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA), and variable importance of projection (VIP) scores for relative bacterial abundance. Descriptive comparisons of total microbial content, score plots of PLS-DA, and VIP scores for both cecal and fecal matter are presented. a Total bacterial species composition measured from cecal matter. b Total bacterial species composition measured from fecal matter. c PLS-DA score plot for cecal matter showing model discrimination between each genotype. d PLS-DA score plot for fecal matter showing model discrimination between each genotype. e Cecal VIP plot indicating the most discriminating bacteria in descending order of importance. f Fecal VIP plot indicating the most discriminating bacteria in descending order of importance. Statistical comparisons between genotype and diet were determined by ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s post hoc test. PLS-DA and VIP scores were assessed using MetaboAnalyst 3.0. Ellipses represent 95 % confidence intervals for each individual group on PLS-DA plots with Q 2 and R 2 values being used to assess the robustness of the model and the amount of variation represented by the principal components, respectively. VIP scores reflect the degree of importance of a bacteria, with values >1.0 seen as driving the calculated discrimination. All data were collected using qRT-PCR and are presented as mean 16S rRNA gene copies/mg of corresponding tissue ± SEM (CC, B6-chow; CK, B6-ketogenic; BC, BTBR-chow; and BK, BTBR-ketogenic; n = 11, 10, 15, and 10, respectively). p < 0.01 if values do not share a superscript letter. An adapted version of this table has been previously published. Reprinted with permission of the American Chemical Society, Copyright 2016
Fig. 1 Assessment of total microbial content, partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA), and variable importance of projection (VIP) scores for relative bacterial abundance. Descriptive comparisons of total microbial content, score plots of PLS-DA, and VIP scores for both cecal and fecal matter are presented. a Total bacterial species composition measured from cecal matter. b Total bacterial species composition measured from fecal matter. c PLS-DA score plot for cecal matter showing model discrimination between each genotype. d PLS-DA score plot for fecal matter showing model discrimination between each genotype. e Cecal VIP plot indicating the most discriminating bacteria in descending order of importance. f Fecal VIP plot indicating the most discriminating bacteria in descending order of importance. Statistical comparisons between genotype and diet were determined by ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s post hoc test. PLS-DA and VIP scores were assessed using MetaboAnalyst 3.0. Ellipses represent 95 % confidence intervals for each individual group on PLS-DA plots with Q 2 and R 2 values being used to assess the robustness of the model and the amount of variation represented by the principal components, respectively. VIP scores reflect the degree of importance of a bacteria, with values >1.0 seen as driving the calculated discrimination. All data were collected using qRT-PCR and are presented as mean 16S rRNA gene copies/mg of corresponding tissue ± SEM (CC, B6-chow; CK, B6-ketogenic; BC, BTBR-chow; and BK, BTBR-ketogenic; n = 11, 10, 15, and 10, respectively). p < 0.01 if values do not share a superscript letter. An adapted version of this table has been previously published. Reprinted with permission of the American Chemical Society, Copyright 2016CC 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 30 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Newell, C., Bomhof, M. R., Reimer, R. A., Hittel, D. S., Rho, J. M., & Shearer, J.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Newell, Christopher
Venue
Molecular Autism
Published
2016-09-01
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
37-37
ISSN
2040-2392 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2509638174
Cited by
272
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 2
FWCI
10.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Molecular Autism (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Alberta Children's Hospital Foundation
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • MitoCanada
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Diet and metabolism studies
Keywords
ketogenic diet, autism spectrum disorder, gut microbiota, gut-brain axis, Akkermansia muciniphila, Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio, cecal microbiota, fecal microbiota, dietary fat, gastrointestinal dysfunction
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Animals, Bacteria, Behavior, Animal, Cecum, Disease Models, Animal, Feces, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Social Behavior, Mice, Diet, Ketogenic

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