The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bacterial Communities of Diverse Drosophila Species: Ecological Context of a Host–Microbe Model System
Open accessAbstract
Drosophila melanogaster is emerging as an important model of non-pathogenic host-microbe interactions. The genetic and experimental tractability of Drosophila has led to significant gains in our understanding of animal-microbial symbiosis. However, the full implications of these results cannot be appreciated without the knowledge of the microbial communities associated with natural Drosophila populations. In particular, it is not clear whether laboratory cultures can serve as an accurate model of host-microbe interactions that occur in the wild, or those that have occurred over evolutionary time. To fill this gap, we characterized natural bacterial communities associated with 14 species of Drosophila and related genera collected from distant geographic locations. To represent the ecological diversity of Drosophilids, examined species included fruit-, flower-, mushroom-, and cactus-feeders. In parallel, wild host populations were compared to laboratory strains, and controlled experiments were performed to assess the importance of host species and diet in shaping bacterial microbiome composition. We find that Drosophilid flies have taxonomically restricted bacterial communities, with 85% of the natural bacterial microbiome composed of only four bacterial families. The dominant bacterial taxa are widespread and found in many different host species despite the taxonomic, ecological, and geographic diversity of their hosts. Both natural surveys and laboratory experiments indicate that host diet plays a major role in shaping the Drosophila bacterial microbiome. Despite this, the internal bacterial microbiome represents only a highly reduced subset of the external bacterial communities, suggesting that the host exercises some level of control over the bacteria that inhabit its digestive tract. Finally, we show that laboratory strains provide only a limited model of natural host-microbe interactions. Bacterial taxa used in experimental studies are rare or absent in wild Drosophila populations, while the most abundant associates of natural Drosophila populations are rare in the lab.
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.
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
Schloss, P. D., Westcott, S. L., Ryabin, T., Hall, J. R., Hartmann, M., Hollister, E. B., Lesniewski, R. A., Oakley, B. B., Parks, D. H., Robinson, C. J., et al. (2009) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.01541-09 · Cited by 19,549
FastTree 2 – Approximately Maximum-Likelihood Trees for Large Alignments
Price, M. N., Dehal, P. S., & Arkin, A. P. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009490 · Cited by 14,894
Human 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
Base-Calling of Automated Sequencer Traces Using Phred. I. Accuracy Assessment
Ewing, B., Hillier, L., Wendl, M. C., & Green, P. (1998) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.8.3.175 · Cited by 6,967
Obesity alters gut microbial ecology
Ley, R. E., Bäckhed, F., Turnbaugh, P., Lozupone, C. A., Knight, R. D., & Gordon, J. I. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0504978102 · Cited by 6,176
Turnbaugh, P. J., Ley, R. E., Hamady, M., Fraser-Liggett, C. M., Knight, R., & Gordon, J. I. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06244 · Cited by 6,091
De Filippo, C., Cavalieri, D., Di Paola, M., Ramazzotti, M., Poullet, J. B., Massart, S., Collini, S., Pieraccini, G., & Lionetti, P. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1005963107 · Cited by 5,579
Base-Calling of Automated Sequencer Traces Using Phred. II. Error Probabilities
Ewing, B., & Green, P. (1998) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.8.3.186 · Cited by 5,439
The Ribosomal Database Project: improved alignments and new tools for rRNA analysis
Cole, J. R., Wang, Q., Cardenas, E., Fish, J., Chai, B., Farris, R. J., Kulam-Syed-Mohideen, A. S., McGarrell, D. M., Marsh, T., Garrity, G. M., et al. (2009) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkn879 · Cited by 4,762
Nonparametric estimation of the number of classes in a population
Chao, A. (1984) · Scandinavian Journal of Statistics · Cited by 4,265
Cited by
The gut microbiota of insects – diversity in structure and function
Engel, P., & Moran, N. A. (2013) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1111/1574-6976.12025 · Cited by 2,595
Multiorganismal Insects: Diversity and Function of Resident Microorganisms
Douglas, A. E. (2015) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev-ento-010814-020822 · Cited by 1,315
Host Biology in Light of the Microbiome: Ten Principles of Holobionts and Hologenomes
Bordenstein, S. R., & Theis, K. R. (2015) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002226 · Cited by 1,240
Immunity in Drosophila melanogaster — from microbial recognition to whole-organism physiology
Buchon, N., Silverman, N., & Cherry, S. (2014) · Nature Reviews Immunology · doi:10.1038/nri3763 · Cited by 866
Brooks, A. W., Kohl, K. D., Brucker, R. M., van Opstal, E. J., & Bordenstein, S. R. (2016) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2000225 · Cited by 632
Metadata
- Authors
- Chandler, J. A., Morgan Lang, J., Bhatnagar, S., Eisen, J. A., & Kopp, A.
- Venue
- PLoS Genetics
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2011-09-22
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- e1002272
- ISSN
- 1553-7390 (ISSN-L)
- 1553-7404
- OpenAlex
- W2047123551
- Cited by
- 766
- References
- 85
- FWCI
- 33.06
- 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: Bacterial Communities of Diverse Drosophila Species: Ecological Context of a Host–Microbe Model System. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002272
- The paper
- Chandler, J. A., Morgan Lang, J., Bhatnagar, S., Eisen, J. A., & Kopp, A. (2011). Bacterial Communities of Diverse Drosophila Species: Ecological Context of a Host–Microbe Model System. PLoS Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002272
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.