Species- and subspecies-level characterization of health-associated bacterial consortia that colonize the human gut during infancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The human gut microbiome develops rapidly during infancy, a key window of development coinciding with the maturation of the adaptive immune system. However, little is known about the microbiome growth dynamics over the first few months of life and whether there are any generalizable patterns across human populations. We performed metagenomic sequencing on stool samples (n = 94) from a cohort of infants (n = 15) at monthly intervals in the first 6 months of life, augmenting our dataset with seven published studies for a total of 4,441 metagenomes from 1,162 infants.Results Strain-level de novo analysis was used to identify 592 of the most abundant organisms in the infant gut microbiome. Previously unrecognized consortia were identified which exhibited highly correlated abundances across samples and were composed of diverse species spanning multiple genera. Analysis of a published cohort of infants with cystic fibrosis identified one such novel consortium of diverse Enterobacterales which was positively correlated with weight gain. While all studies showed an increased community stability during the first year of life, microbial dynamics varied widely in the first few months of life, both by study and by individual.Conclusion By augmenting published metagenomic datasets with data from a newly established cohort, we were able to identify novel groups of organisms that are correlated with measures of robust human development. We hypothesize that the presence of these groups may impact human health in aggregate in ways that individual species may not in isolation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".