ArticleBiology open2025
Microbiome transplants may not improve health and longevity in Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in Biology open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microbiome-mediated chemical communication in insects: Implications for pest management.Pest management science · 2026Review
- Host genetics and diet jointly shape the microbiome of Drosophila melanogaster but do not predict lifespan or age-related traits.Biogerontology · 2026Article
- Whole-body homogenates restore disrupted microbiota composition in a model insect better than feces or no restoration treatment.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Pathogen-induced damage in Drosophila: Uncoupling disease tolerance from resistance.PLoS pathogens · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The gut microbiome, which is composed of bacteria, viruses, and fungi, and is involved in multiple essential physiological processes, changes measurably as a person ages, and can be associated with negative health outcomes. Microbiome transplants have been proposed as a method to improve gut function and reduce or reverse multiple disorders, including age-related diseases. Here, we take advantage of the laboratory model organism, Drosophila melanogaster, to test the effects of transplanting the microbiome of a young fly into middle-aged flies, across multiple genetic backgrounds and both sexes, to test whether age-related lifespan could be increased, and late-life physical health declines mitigated. Our results suggest that, overall, microbiome transplants do not improve longevity and may even be detrimental in flies, and the health effects of microbiome transplants were minor, but sex- and genotype-dependent. This discovery supports previous evidence that axenic flies, those with no gut microbiome, live healthier and longer lives than their non-axenic counterparts. The results of this study suggest that, at least for fruit flies, microbiome transplants may not be a viable intervention to improve health and longevity, though more research is still warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.