Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 215

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Host Gut Motility Promotes Competitive Exclusion within a Model Intestinal Microbiota

Open access
Wiles, Travis J, Jemielita, Matthew, Baker, Ryan P, Schlomann, Brandon H, Logan, Savannah L, Ganz, Julia, Melancon, Ellie, Eisen, Judith S, Guillemin, Karen, Parthasarathy, Raghuveer·2016·PLOS Biology

Abstract

The gut microbiota is a complex consortium of microorganisms with the ability to influence important aspects of host health and development. Harnessing this "microbial organ" for biomedical applications requires clarifying the degree to which host and bacterial factors act alone or in combination to govern the stability of specific lineages. To address this issue, we combined bacteriological manipulation and light sheet fluorescence microscopy to monitor the dynamics of a defined two-species microbiota within a vertebrate gut. We observed that the interplay between each population and the gut environment produces distinct spatiotemporal patterns. As a consequence, one species dominates while the other experiences sudden drops in abundance that are well fit by a stochastic mathematical model. Modeling revealed that direct bacterial competition could only partially explain the observed phenomena, suggesting that a host factor is also important in shaping the community. We hypothesized the host determinant to be gut motility, and tested this mechanism by measuring colonization in hosts with enteric nervous system dysfunction due to a mutation in the ret locus, which in humans is associated with the intestinal motility disorder known as Hirschsprung disease. In mutant hosts we found reduced gut motility and, confirming our hypothesis, robust coexistence of both bacterial species. This study provides evidence that host-mediated spatial structuring and stochastic perturbation of communities can drive bacterial population dynamics within the gut, and it reveals a new facet of the intestinal host-microbe interface by demonstrating the capacity of the enteric nervous system to influence the microbiota. Ultimately, these findings suggest that therapeutic strategies targeting the intestinal ecosystem should consider the dynamic physical nature of the gut environment.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002517

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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 7 references

Cited by

See all 215

Metadata

Authors
Wiles, T. J., Jemielita, M., Baker, R. P., Schlomann, B. H., Logan, S. L., Ganz, J., Melancon, E., Eisen, J. S., Guillemin, K., & Parthasarathy, R.
Venue
PLOS Biology
Published
2016-07-26
Volume
14
Issue
7
Pages
e1002517
ISSN
  • 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7885
OpenAlex
W2476829857
Cited by
215
References
7
FWCI
11.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Host Gut Motility Promotes Competitive Exclusion within a Model Intestinal Microbiota. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002517
The paper
Wiles, T. J., Jemielita, M., Baker, R. P., Schlomann, B. H., Logan, S. L., Ganz, J., Melancon, E., Eisen, J. S., Guillemin, K., & Parthasarathy, R. (2016). Host Gut Motility Promotes Competitive Exclusion within a Model Intestinal Microbiota. PLOS Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002517

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.