A gut commensal niche regulates stable association of a multispecies microbiota
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The intestines of animals are typically colonized by a complex, relatively stable microbiota that influences health and fitness, but the underlying mechanisms of colonization remain poorly understood. As a typical animal, the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, is associated with a consistent set of commensal bacterial species, yet the reason for this consistency is unknown. Here, we use gnotobiotic flies, microscopy, and microbial pulse-chase protocols to show that a commensal niche exists within the proventriculus region of the Drosophila foregut that selectively binds bacteria with exquisite strain-level specificity. Primary colonizers saturate the niche and exclude secondary colonizers of the same strain, but initial colonization by Lactobacillus physically remodels the niche to favor secondary colonization by Acetobacter . Our results provide a mechanistic framework for understanding the establishment and stability of an intestinal microbiome. One-Sentence Summary A strain-specific set of bacteria inhabits a defined spatial region of the Drosophila gut that forms a commensal niche.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".