The DOI matches its Crossref record; 154 of the 154 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A critical assessment of the “sterile womb” and “in utero colonization” hypotheses: implications for research on the pioneer infant microbiome
Open accessAbstract
After more than a century of active research, the notion that the human fetal environment is sterile and that the neonate's microbiome is acquired during and after birth was an accepted dogma. However, recent studies using molecular techniques suggest bacterial communities in the placenta, amniotic fluid, and meconium from healthy pregnancies. These findings have led many scientists to challenge the "sterile womb paradigm" and propose that microbiome acquisition instead begins in utero, an idea that would fundamentally change our understanding of gut microbiota acquisition and its role in human development. In this review, we provide a critical assessment of the evidence supporting these two opposing hypotheses, specifically as it relates to (i) anatomical, immunological, and physiological characteristics of the placenta and fetus; (ii) the research methods currently used to study microbial populations in the intrauterine environment; (iii) the fecal microbiome during the first days of life; and (iv) the generation of axenic animals and humans. Based on this analysis, we argue that the evidence in support of the "in utero colonization hypothesis" is extremely weak as it is founded almost entirely on studies that (i) used molecular approaches with an insufficient detection limit to study "low-biomass" microbial populations, (ii) lacked appropriate controls for contamination, and (iii) failed to provide evidence of bacterial viability. Most importantly, the ability to reliably derive axenic animals via cesarean sections strongly supports sterility of the fetal environment in mammals. We conclude that current scientific evidence does not support the existence of microbiomes within the healthy fetal milieu, which has implications for the development of clinical practices that prevent microbiome perturbations after birth and the establishment of future research priorities.
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
Figures


![Fig. 3 Venn diagram of bacterial genera hypothesized to contribute to the infant gut microbiome. Aagaard and colleagues [9] hypothesized that bacteria translocate from the mother’s oral cavity into the placenta, contributing to in utero colonization of the fetal gut. They further suggest that placentas contain low abundance communities of commensal bacteria. However, 36% of the bacterial genera found by Aagaard and colleagues [9] also appear on the list of contaminants found in reagents by several independent research groups as reported by Salter and colleagues [90]. Not all genera were included for each individual microbiome due to space constraints. Genera found in the infant gut [2, 101, 102, 105, 148] include taxa described in both vaginally and cesarean section-delivered babies [101, 105] and show a substantial overlap with genera found in the adult gut microbiome [145–147], but little overlap with taxa found in the placenta [9, 91] or as contaminants [85–91]](/paper-figures/2100973d93204718825b622ed53d1ff8/a-critical-assessment-of-the-sterile-womb-and-in-utero-colonization-hypotheses-figure-3.jpg)
![Fig. 4 Schematic representation of the generation of axenic rodents by aseptic hysterectomy. In rodents, germ-free offspring are derived by aseptic hysterectomy. Germ-free foster mothers housed in a sterile isolator are time-mated to become pregnant in synchrony with holoxenic (conventional) females. Breeding pairs are mated on such a schedule that the aseptic hysterectomy of the donor mother can be performed a few hours before her scheduled pupping and a few hours after the foster mother gives birth. To perform the hysterectomy, donor females are euthanized, and the uterus is harvested and clamped, aseptically introduced into a germicidal bath, and then transferred into the sterile isolator where the foster mothers reside. The pups are then revived and placed under the care of the foster mother [123–125]. If there are no germ-free foster mothers available, then pups are hand-raised using sterile formula. Figure adapted from Hedrich and Hardy [125]](/paper-figures/ef0326c32c0f49378900f14f4bac7ff8/a-critical-assessment-of-the-sterile-womb-and-in-utero-colonization-hypotheses-figure-4.jpg)
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, oral bacteria have been detected at various sites within the uterus.110, 111”
From The oral microbiome: Role of key organisms and complex networks in oral health and disease (2021) · cites this paper as [110]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Conversely, but equally important, the infant gut is largely thought to be sterile in utero and colonized during birth and postnatally with a trajectory toward an adult-like complexity taking approximately 3 years (Clarke et al., 2014a;Perez-Munoz et al., 2017).”
From Gut reactions: Breaking down xenobiotic–microbiome interactions (2019) · cites this paper as Perez-Munoz et al., 2017
In the citing paper
“Current research findings suggest that the prenatal oral cavity is sterile until birth after which colonization with microorganisms occurs upon exposure to the external environment.110”
From The oral microbiome: Role of key organisms and complex networks in oral health and disease (2021) · cites this paper as [110]
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
Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome
The Human Microbiome Project Consortium (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11234 · Cited by 11,726
Dominguez-Bello, M. G., Costello, E. K., Contreras, M., Magris, M., Hidalgo, G., Fierer, N., & Knight, R. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1002601107 · Cited by 4,774
Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.
HESSE, M. B., & Popper, K. R. (1965) · The Philosophical Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2218271 · Cited by 4,213
The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations
Kaplan, N. M., Merton, R. Κ., & Storer, N. W. (1974) · Technology and Culture · doi:10.2307/3102264 · Cited by 4,030
Reagent and laboratory contamination can critically impact sequence-based microbiome analyses
Salter, S. J., Cox, M. J., Turek, E. M., Calus, S. T., Cookson, W. O., Moffatt, M. F., Turner, P., Parkhill, J., Loman, N. J., & Walker, A. W. (2014) · BMC Biology · doi:10.1186/s12915-014-0087-z · Cited by 3,463
Dynamics and Stabilization of the Human Gut Microbiome during the First Year of Life
Bäckhed, F., Roswall, J., Peng, Y., Feng, Q., Jia, H., Kovatcheva-Datchary, P., Li, Y., Xia, Y., Xie, H., Zhong, H., et al. (2015) · Cell Host & Microbe · doi:10.1016/j.chom.2015.04.004 · Cited by 3,315
The Placenta Harbors a Unique Microbiome
Aagaard, K., Ma, J., Antony, K. M., Ganu, R., Petrosino, J., & Versalovic, J. (2014) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3008599 · Cited by 2,494
Akkermansia muciniphila gen. nov., sp. nov., a human intestinal mucin-degrading bacterium
Derrien, M., Vaughan, E. E., Plugge, C. M., & de Vos, W. M. (2004) · International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology · doi:10.1099/ijs.0.02873-0 · Cited by 2,094
Early infancy microbial and metabolic alterations affect risk of childhood asthma
Arrieta, M., Stiemsma, L. T., Dimitriu, P. A., Thorson, L., Russell, S., Yurist‐Doutsch, S., Kuzeljevic, B., Gold, M. J., Britton, H. M., Lefebvre, D. L., et al. (2015) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aab2271 · Cited by 1,832
Antibiotics, birth mode, and diet shape microbiome maturation during early life
Bokulich, N. A., Chung, J., Battaglia, T., Henderson, N., Jay, M., Li, H., D. Lieber, A., Wu, F., Perez-Perez, G. I., Chen, Y., et al. (2016) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aad7121 · Cited by 1,469
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Burrage S. Bacteria in the supposedly sterile meconium. J Bacteriol. 1927;13:47.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cryan, J. F., O'Riordan, K. J., Cowan, C. S. M., Sandhu, K. V., Bastiaanssen, T. F. S., Boehme, M., Codagnone, M. G., Cussotto, S., Fulling, C., Golubeva, A. V., et al. (2019) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00018.2018 · Cited by 5,286
Davis, N. M., Proctor, D. M., Holmes, S. P., Relman, D. A., & Callahan, B. J. (2018) · Microbiome · doi:10.1186/s40168-018-0605-2 · Cited by 3,493
Milani, C., Duranti, S., Bottacini, F., Casey, E., Turroni, F., Mahony, J., Belzer, C., Delgado Palacio, S., Arboleya Montes, S., Mancabelli, L., et al. (2017) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00036-17 · Cited by 1,950
An insight into gut microbiota and its functionalities
Adak, A., & Khan, M. R. (2019) · Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/s00018-018-2943-4 · Cited by 1,485
Ferretti, P., Pasolli, E., Tett, A., Asnicar, F., Gorfer, V., Fedi, S., Armanini, F., Truong, D. T., Manara, S., Zolfo, M., et al. (2018) · Cell Host & Microbe · doi:10.1016/j.chom.2018.06.005 · Cited by 1,292
Metadata
- Authors
- Perez-Muñoz, M. E., Arrieta, M.-C., Ramer-Tait, A. E., & Walter, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Calgary (CA)
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Walter, Jens
- Venue
- Microbiome
- Published
- 2017-04-28
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 48-48
- ISSN
- 2049-2618 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5410102
- OpenAlex
- W2609646274
- Cited by
- 1,096
- References
- 154
- Citations by year
- 2026: 56 · 2025: 81 · 2024: 108 · 2023: 116 · 2022: 140 · 2021: 154 · 2020: 167 · 2019: 117 · 2018: 104 · 2017: 52
- FWCI
- 11.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Microbiome (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lincoln (University of Nebraska) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Libraries and Cultural Resources (University of Calgary) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of America
- University of Nebraska-Lincoln
- University of Calgary
- Crohn's and Colitis Foundation
- Nebraska Corn Board
- University of Alberta
- Alberta Innovates
- National Institutes of Health
- Directorate for Biological Sciences
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P20GM104320, R01GM099525)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
- Keywords
- neonatal gut microbiota, placenta, amniotic fluid, meconium, cesarean section, contamination control, bacterial viability
- MeSH terms
- Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Animals, Female, Fetus, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Pregnancy, Uterus, Microbiota
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