MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2731761335 · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-05662-w

Vertically and horizontally transmitted microbial symbionts shape the gut microbiota ontogenesis of a skin-mucus feeding discus fish progeny

2017· article· en· W2731761335 on OpenAlexafffund
François‐Étienne Sylvain, Nicolas Derôme

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsMucusBiologyGut floraOntogenyZoologyZebrafishMicrobiomeFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyMicrobiologyGeneticsGeneFisheryImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fish gut microbial communities play key functions for their hosts, but their ontogenesis is poorly understood. Recent studies on the zebrafish suggest that gut symbionts are recruited naturally through horizontal transmission from environmental water. We used an alternative fish model, the discus (Symphysodon aequifasciata), to identify the main factors driving fish gut microbiota ontogenesis. The discus exhibits a unique parenting behavior: both discus parents vertically feed their fry with a cutaneous mucus secretion during three weeks post-hatching. We hypothesized that vertical microbial transmission via parental mucus feeding, along with horizontal transmission of environmental microbial symbionts, helps to shape the taxonomic structure of the discus fry gut microbiota. To assess this premise, we thoroughly documented the gut microbiota ontogenesis of a discus progeny during 100 days post-hatching. The V4 16S rRNA gene was sequenced to assess taxonomic structure of fry gut, parent mucus, and water samples. Our main results suggest that specific microbial symbionts both from the parents skin mucus and environmental water play important roles in shaping the structure of the fry gut microbiota.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations150
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207