Cited by 39Gut microbiota and healthAquaculture disease management and microbiotaZebrafish Biomedical Research Applications

Evaluating the capacity of human gut microorganisms to colonize the zebrafish larvae (Danio rerio)

Open access
Valenzuela, Maria-Jose, Caruffo, Mario, Herrera, Yoani, Medina, Daniel A., Coronado, Maximo, Feijóo, Carmen G., Muñoz, Salomé, Garrido, Daniel +6 more·2018·Frontiers in Microbiology

Abstract

In this study we evaluated if zebrafish larvae can be colonized by human gut microorganisms. We tested two strategies: 1) through transplantation of a human fecal microbiota and 2) by successively transplanting aerotolerant anaerobic microorganisms, similar to the colonization in the human intestine during early life. We used conventionally raised zebrafish larvae harboring their own aerobic microbiota to improve the colonization of anaerobic microorganisms. The results showed with the fecal transplant, that some members of the human gut microbiota were transferred to larvae. Bacillus, Roseburia, Prevotella, Oscillospira, one unclassified genus of the family Ruminococcaceae and Enterobacteriaceae were detected in 3 days post fertilization (dpf) larvae; however only Bacillus persisted to 7 dpf. Successive inoculation of Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium and Clostridioides did not improve their colonization, compared to individual inoculation of each bacterium. Interestingly, the sporulating bacteria Bacillus clausii and Clostridioides difficile were the most persistent microorganisms. Their endospores persisted at least 5 days after inoculating 3 dpf larvae. However, when 5 dpf larvae were inoculated, the proportion of vegetative cells in larvae increased, revealing proliferation of the inoculated bacteria and better colonization of the host. In conclusion, these results suggest that it is feasible to colonize zebrafish larvae with some human bacteria, such as C. difficile and Bacillus and open an interesting area to study interactions between these microorganisms and the host.

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 · 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01032

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Relying solely on high-throughput sequencing to analyze the makeup of gut bacteria is insufficient to conclusively determine whether Lactobacillus can effectively colonize the intestines and exert its beneficial effects.

    “To fully comprehend its significance, it is crucial to acknowledge that relying solely on high-throughput sequencing to analyze the makeup of gut bacteria is insufficient to conclusively determine whether Lactobacillus can effectively colonize the intestines and exert its beneficial effects (Valenzuela et al., 2018).”

    From Lactiplantibacillus plantarum N4 ameliorates lipid metabolism and gut microbiota structure in high fat diet-fed rats (2024) · cites this paper as Valenzuela et al., 2018

    The Results (page unavailable) say direct MiSeq sequencing and culture-based analysis were complementary, and report that persistence in larvae was checked by culture when bacterial DNA could not be amplified for sequencing. The paper also measures Lactobacillus persistence in zebrafish larvae, but it does not assess whether Lactobacillus exerts beneficial effects; that part of the claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Valenzuela, M.-J., Caruffo, M., Herrera, Y., Medina, D. A., Coronado, M., Feijóo, C. G., Muñoz, S., Garrido, D., Troncoso, M., Figueroa, G., Toro, M., Reyes-Jara, A., Magne, F., & Navarrete, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Chile (CL)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (CL)
  • Universidad Andrés Bello (CL)
Corresponding author
  • Magne, Fabien
  • Navarrete, Paola
Venue
Frontiers in Microbiology
Published
2018-05-29
Volume
9
Pages
1032-1032
ISSN
1664-302X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2799762643
Cited by
39
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Microbiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Universidad de Chile (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Repositorio Institucional Académico , Sistema de Bibliotecas Universidad Andrés Bello (UNAB) (Universidad Andrés Bello (UNAB)) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Michigan
  • Universidad de Chile
  • National Institutes of Health
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • Comisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (3160525)
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (T37MD001425)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Aquaculture disease management and microbiota
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Zebrafish Biomedical Research Applications
Keywords
zebrafish larvae, human gut microbiome, bacterial colonization, fecal microbiota transplantation, anaerobic bacteria, Bacillus clausii, Clostridium difficile, endospores, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, early life colonization, host-microbe interactions, gut 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