Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39530277›Full record

ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2025

Comparative gut microbiome research through the lens of ecology: theoretical considerations and best practices.

Samuel Degregori, Xiaolin Wang, Akhil Kommala, Noah Schulhof, Sadaf Moradi, Allison MacDonald, Kaitlin Eblen, Sophia Jukovich, Emma Smith, Emily Kelleher and 4 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. International journal of systematic and evolutionary microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

14 authors.

Samuel DegregoriDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4616-580X
Xiaolin WangDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2280-7828
Akhil KommalaDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Noah SchulhofDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Sadaf MoradiDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, 621 Young Drive South, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Allison MacDonaldDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Kaitlin EblenDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, 621 Young Drive South, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Sophia JukovichDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Emma SmithDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Emily KelleherDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Kota SuzukiDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Zoey HallDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Rob KnightDepartment of Pediatrics, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Katherine Ryan AmatoDepartment of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.

Funding

UCSD/SDSU IRACDAK12GM068524 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI TREJO, JOANN · 2003 to 2025
$24.4M
National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Research Fellowship in BiologyNIGMS NIH HHS K12 GM068524
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Comparative approaches in animal gut microbiome research have revealed patterns of phylosymbiosis, dietary and physiological convergences, and environment-host interactions. However, most large-scale comparative studies, especially those that are highly cited, have focused on mammals, and efforts to integrate comparative approaches with existing ecological frameworks are lacking. While mammals serve as useful model organisms, developing generalised principles of how animal gut microbiomes are shaped and how these microbiomes interact bidirectionally with host ecology and evolution requires a more complete sampling of the animal kingdom. Here, we provide an overview of what past comparative studies have taught us about the gut microbiome, and how community ecology theory may help resolve certain contradictions in comparative gut microbiome research. We explore whether certain hypotheses are supported across clades, and how the disproportionate focus on mammals has introduced potential bias into gut microbiome theory. We then introduce a methodological solution by which public gut microbiome data of understudied hosts can be compiled and analysed in a comparative context. Our aggregation and analysis of 179 studies shows that generating data sets with rich host diversity is possible with public data and that key gut microbes associated with mammals are widespread across the animal kingdom. We also show the effects that sample size and taxonomic rank have on comparative gut microbiome studies and that results of multivariate analyses can vary significantly with these two parameters. While challenges remain in developing a universal model of the animal gut microbiome, we show that existing ecological frameworks can help bring us one step closer to integrating the gut microbiome into animal ecology and evolution.

Indexed as

EcologyGastrointestinal MicrobiomeAnimalscomparativeecologyevolutiongut microbiomehost–microbe interactions

Identifiers

PMID39530277
PMCPMC11885713

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.