ArticleAnimal microbiome2026
Characterising the gut microbiomes of two baleen whales with different feeding and migratory strategies.
Article in Animal microbiome, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMammalian gut microbiomes are essential for supporting digestion, nutrient absorption and overall host health. While diet and phylogeny are the two main influences on gut microbial composition, other factors, including life history and environment also contribute. Here, we characterised and compared the gut (faecal) bacterial microbiomes of two baleen whale species with contrasting life histories: the Bryde's whale (Balaenoptera edeni brydei), a non-migratory, year-round generalist forager; and the southern right whale (Eubalaena australis; SRW), a seasonal migrating species with a specialised diet of krill and copepods.
resultsWe found that each species harboured distinct gut microbiomes with potential links to their different feeding and migratory strategies. The Bryde's whale gut microbiome bore a strong resemblance to that of toothed whales, with relatively lower bacterial richness and diversity and a high proportion of Proteobacteria after Firmicutes. The core microbiome of these whales included taxa supporting a protein-rich diet and year-round foraging lifestyle, e.g. Carnobacterium and Faecalitalea. In contrast, the SRW had a gut microbiome similar to other baleen whale species, with a higher richness and diversity, and dominated by Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes. The SRW core microbiome featured taxa associated with lipid metabolism, e.g. Erysipelotrichaceae and Coriobacteriia, reflecting a lipid-rich diet and reliance on blubber reserves during migration. We also found that SRWs sampled at different stages in the migratory cycle had significantly different gut microbial compositions. Functional analyses further supported these results, with Bryde's whales being broadly enriched in enzymatic functions including protein digestion and SRWs showing more selective enrichment.
conclusionsAlong with species-specific microbiomes, our findings also suggest that migratory behaviour and foraging patterns - key aspects of cetacean life history - may substantially influence gut microbiome composition. The characterisation of the gut microbiomes of the two whales provides a valuable baseline for the future monitoring of cetaceans and their environments.
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.