The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Host Species and Environmental Effects on Bacterial Communities Associated with Drosophila in the Laboratory and in the Natural Environment
Open accessAbstract
The fruit fly Drosophila is a classic model organism to study adaptation as well as the relationship between genetic variation and phenotypes. Although associated bacterial communities might be important for many aspects of Drosophila biology, knowledge about their diversity, composition, and factors shaping them is limited. We used 454-based sequencing of a variable region of the bacterial 16S ribosomal RNA gene to characterize the bacterial communities associated with wild and laboratory Drosophila isolates. In order to specifically investigate effects of food source and host species on bacterial communities, we analyzed samples from wild Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans collected from a variety of natural substrates, as well as from adults and larvae of nine laboratory-reared Drosophila species. We find no evidence for host species effects in lab-reared flies; instead, lab of origin and stochastic effects, which could influence studies of Drosophila phenotypes, are pronounced. In contrast, the natural Drosophila-associated microbiota appears to be predominantly shaped by food substrate with an additional but smaller effect of host species identity. We identify a core member of this natural microbiota that belongs to the genus Gluconobacter and is common to all wild-caught flies in this study, but absent from the laboratory. This makes it a strong candidate for being part of what could be a natural D. melanogaster and D. simulans core microbiome. Furthermore, we were able to identify candidate pathogens in natural fly isolates.
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
Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography
Yatsunenko, T., Rey, F. E., Manary, M. J., Trehan, I., Dominguez-Bello, M. G., Contreras, M., Magris, M., Hidalgo, G., Baldassano, R. N., Anokhin, A. P., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11053 · Cited by 7,815
Host-gut microbiota metabolic interactions
Nicholson, J. K., Holmes, E., Kinross, J., Burcelin, R., Gibson, G., Jia, W., & Pettersson, S. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1223813 · Cited by 4,760
Evolution of mammals and their gut microbes
Ley, R. E., Hamady, M., Lozupone, C., Turnbaugh, P. J., Ramey, R. R., Bircher, J. S., Schlegel, M. L., Tucker, T. A., Schrenzel, M. D., Knight, R., et al. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1155725 · Cited by 3,747
The gut flora as a forgotten organ
O'Hara, A. M., & Shanahan, F. (2006) · The EMBO Reports · doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400731 · Cited by 2,791
Evolution of genes and genomes on the Drosophila phylogeny
Drosophila 12 Genomes Consortium (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06341 · Cited by 2,010
Diet Drives Convergence in Gut Microbiome Functions Across Mammalian Phylogeny and Within Humans
Muegge, B. D., Kuczynski, J., Knights, D., Clemente, J. C., González, A., Fontana, L., Henrissat, B., Knight, R., & Gordon, J. I. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1198719 · Cited by 1,988
Cited by
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
Microbiome interactions shape host fitness
Gould, A. L., Zhang, V., Lamberti, L., Jones, E. W., Obadia, B., Korasidis, N., Gavryushkin, A., Carlson, J. M., Beerenwinkel, N., & Ludington, W. B. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1809349115 · Cited by 579
Gut Microbiotas and Host Evolution: Scaling Up Symbiosis
Shapira, M. (2016) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2016.03.006 · Cited by 448
Frequent Replenishment Sustains the Beneficial Microbiome of Drosophila melanogaster
Blum, J. E., Fischer, C. N., Miles, J., & Handelsman, J. (2013) · mBio · doi:10.1128/mbio.00860-13 · Cited by 311
The Microbiome of Animals: Implications for Conservation Biology
Bahrndorff, S., Alemu, T., Alemneh, T., & Lund Nielsen, J. (2016) · International Journal of Genomics · doi:10.1155/2016/5304028 · Cited by 309
Metadata
- Authors
- Staubach, F., Baines, J. F., Künzel, S., Bik, E. M., & Petrov, D. A.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2013-08-13
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e70749
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2129736385
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 17.12
- 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 Species and Environmental Effects on Bacterial Communities Associated with Drosophila in the Laboratory and in the Natural Environment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0070749
- The paper
- Staubach, F., Baines, J. F., Künzel, S., Bik, E. M., & Petrov, D. A. (2013). Host Species and Environmental Effects on Bacterial Communities Associated with Drosophila in the Laboratory and in the Natural Environment. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0070749
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.