Colonizing the Embryonic Zebrafish Gut with Anaerobic Bacteria Derived from the Human Gastrointestinal Tract
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The zebrafish has become increasingly popular for microbiological research. It has been used as an infection model for a variety of pathogens, and is also emerging as a tool for studying interactions between a host and its resident microbial communities. The mouse microbiota has been transplanted into the zebrafish gut, but to our knowledge, there has been no attempt to introduce a bacterial community derived from the human gut. We explored two methods for colonizing the developing gut of 5-day-old germ-free zebrafish larvae with a defined anaerobic microbial community derived from a single human fecal sample. Both environmental exposure (static immersion) and direct microinjection into the gut resulted in the establishment of two species-Lactobacillus paracasei and Eubacterium limosum-from a community of 30 strains consisting of 22 anaerobic species. Of particular interest is E. limosum, which, as a strict anaerobe, represents a group of bacteria which until now have not been shown to colonize the developing zebrafish gut. Our success here indicates that further investigation of zebrafish as a tool for studying human gut microbial communities is warranted.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".