ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative analysis of gut microbiota in free range and house fed yaks from Linzhou County.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rewilding reshapes gut microbiomes and parasite exposure in European bison: a 17‑month release from Wilder Blean.Journal for nature conservation · 2026Article
- Differential analysis of gut microbiota between captive and wild forest musk deer (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Metagenomic analysis of fecal and environmental microbiota in rural mixed livestock farming systems in South Africa.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Impacts of Captive Domestication and Geographical Divergence on the Gut Microbiome of Endangered Forest Musk Deer.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gut microbiota variations in response to environmental and nutritional factors are of great significance as gut microbiota plays an integral role in nutrient metabolism, immunity, health, and disease conditions. In this context, limited studies investigated variations of gut microbiota in response to different feeding systems and environmental conditions. The current study obtained fresh fecal samples from house-fed (LS) and grazing yaks (LF) from Linzhou County. 16 S rRNA amplicon sequencing of the V3-V4 and internal transcribed spacer 2 (ITS2) domains generated 16,332 bacterial and 2345 fungus amplicon sequence variants (ASVs). Alpha and beta diversity indices revealed significant variations (p > 0.05) in gut microflora between the two groups. At the phylum level, Firmicutes, Actinobacteriota, Bacteroidota, and Patescibacteria regarding bacteria, and Ascomycota and Basidiomycota regarding fungi dominated. At the genus level, UCG-005, Rikenellaceae_RC9_gut_group, Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1, g__Muribaculaceae, UCG-010, [Eubacterium]_coprostanoligenes_group, Turicibacter, Alistipes, Prevotellaceae_UCG-003, UCG-009, Blautia, dgA-11_gut_group, Candidatus_Saccharimonas dominated in LS, while Anthrobacter and Terrisporobacter dominated in the LF group. Fungal genera like Myrothecium and Plectosphaerella dominated the LS group, while Neoascochyta, Paraphaeosphaeria, and Hypocreales dominated the LF group. Also, significant variations (p > 0.05) in gene expressions were found between the two groups. These findings provide insights into yak gut microbiota adaptations and metabolic changes in response to varied environmental conditions and can provide valuable information, optimizing feeding strategies after identifying specific differences between grazing and house-fed yaks, reducing environmental impacts, and improving yaks' health and productivity in specific geographical settings.
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.