The Loss of Topography in the Microbial Communities of the Upper Respiratory Tract in the Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: The microbial communities inhabiting the upper respiratory tract protect from respiratory infection. The maturity of the immune system is a major influence on the composition of the microbiome and, in youth, the microbiota and immune system are believed to mature in tandem. With age, immune function declines and susceptibility to respiratory infection increases. Whether these changes contribute to the microbial composition of the respiratory tract is unknown. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to determine whether the microbes of the upper respiratory tract differ between mid-aged adults (18-40 yr) and the elderly (>65 yr). METHODS: Microbiomes of the anterior nares and oropharynx of elderly individuals were evaluated by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. These communities were compared with data on mid-aged adults obtained from the Human Microbiome Project. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The microbiota of the elderly showed no associations with sex, comorbidities, residence, or vaccinations. Comparisons of mid-aged adults and the elderly demonstrated significant differences in the composition of the anterior nares and oropharynx, including a population in the anterior nares of the elderly that more closely resembled the oropharynx than the anterior nares of adults. The elderly oropharyngeal microbiota were characterized by increased abundance of streptococci, specifically, Streptococcus salivarius group species, but not Streptococcus pneumoniae, carriage of which was low (<3% of participants), as demonstrated by PCR (n = 4/123). CONCLUSIONS: Microbial populations of the upper respiratory tract in mid-aged adults and the elderly differ; it is possible that these differences contribute to the increased risk of respiratory infections experienced by the elderly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".