Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39440211›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2024

Comparative Analyses of

Fei Zhu, Ke Sun, He Zhang, Jing Lu, Peng Guo, Jiaqi Zhang, Yu Xu, Bing Lyu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Fei ZhuSchool of Life Sciences Guizhou Normal University Guiyang Guizhou China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1570-2967
Ke SunSchool of Life Sciences Guizhou Normal University Guiyang Guizhou China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9859-5486
He ZhangGuizhou Academy of Forestry Guiyang Guizhou China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9511-2552
Jing LuSchool of Life Sciences Guizhou Normal University Guiyang Guizhou China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3508-4393
Peng GuoFaculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Engineering Yibin University Yibin Sichuan China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5585-292X
Jiaqi ZhangFaculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Engineering Yibin University Yibin Sichuan China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2107-163X
Yu XuSchool of Life Sciences Guizhou Normal University Guiyang Guizhou China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9437-3267
Bing LyuFaculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Engineering Yibin University Yibin Sichuan China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5594-1543

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The interactions between hosts and the gut microbiota are intricate and can significantly affect the ecology and evolution of both parties. Various host traits, including taxonomy, diet, social behaviour, and external factors such as prey availability and the local environment, all play an important role in shaping composition and diversity of the gut microbiogta. In this study, we explored the impact of intestinal microorganisms on the host in adapting to their respective ecological niches in two species of snakes. We collected feces from

Indexed as

different regionsgut microbiome differencesLycodon rosozonatusLycodon rufozonatusmicrobial diversity

Identifiers

PMID39440211
PMCPMC11495892

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.