FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Microbiome / Gut microbiome composition is associated with spatial struct...
Microbiome2018; 6(1); 207; doi: 10.1186/s40168-018-0593-2

Gut microbiome composition is associated with spatial structuring and social interactions in semi-feral Welsh Mountain ponies.

Abstract: Microbiome composition is linked to host functional traits including metabolism and immune function. Drivers of microbiome composition are increasingly well-characterised; however, evidence of group-level microbiome convergence is limited and may represent a multi-level trait (i.e. across individuals and groups), whereby heritable phenotypes are influenced by social interactions. Here, we investigate the influence of spatial structuring and social interactions on the gut microbiome composition of Welsh mountain ponies. We show that semi-feral ponies exhibit variation in microbiome composition according to band (group) membership, in addition to considerable within-individual variation. Spatial structuring was also identified within bands, suggesting that despite communal living, social behaviours still influence microbiome composition. Indeed, we show that specific interactions (i.e. mother-offspring and stallion-mare) lead to more similar microbiomes, further supporting the notion that individuals influence the microbiome composition of one another and ultimately the group. Foals exhibited different microbiome composition to sub-adults and adults, most likely related to differences in diet. We provide novel evidence that microbiome composition is structured at multiple levels within populations of social mammals and thus may form a unit on which selection can act. High levels of within-individual variation in microbiome composition, combined with the potential for social interactions to influence microbiome composition, suggest the direction of microbiome selection may be influenced by the individual members present in the group. Although the functional implications of this require further research, these results lend support to the idea that multi-level selection can act on microbiomes.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2018-11-22 PubMed ID: 30466491PubMed Central: PMC6251106DOI: 10.1186/s40168-018-0593-2Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research focuses on understanding the correlation of spatial structuring and social interactions with the gut microbiome composition in semi-feral Welsh mountain ponies. The findings suggest that the variation in microbiomes within pony groups, spatial structuring, and specific social interactions like mother-offspring or stallion-mare relationships contribute to microbiome diversity.

Understanding Gut Microbiome Composition

  • The study explores how the gut microbiome, the collection of microorganisms living in an organism’s gastrointestinal tract, varies within a population of semi-feral Welsh mountain ponies.
  • The microbiome’s composition can affect the host’s metabolism and immune function. Thus, understanding its composition and underlying drivers is crucial.
  • Despite considerable research, evidence showing group-level convergence in microbiome composition is limited, presenting the need for this study.

Spatial Structuring and Group Membership

  • The research discovers that the microbiome composition varies with the group membership of ponies. This suggests that the microbiome may represent a multi-level trait influenced by factors across individuals and groups.
  • Even within the same group, defined in the study as a ‘band’, spatial structuring or positioning impacts the gut microbiome. This demonstrates that the microbiome is influenced not only by group membership but also by social behaviors within the group.

Social Interactions and Microbiome Composition

  • Specific interactions, such as those between a mother and her offspring or between a stallion and a mare, can lead to more similar microbiomes. This finding supports the idea that individuals within a group can significantly influence one another’s microbiome composition.
  • Foals (young ponies) exhibit a different microbiome composition compared to sub-adults and adults, a variation likely related to diet differences.
  • Such results indicate that microbiomes, with their multiple levels of structuring, may be another element on which natural selection can act.

Implications and Future Directions

  • There is a high level of microbiome variation within individuals, and social interactions can influence its composition. This implies that the group’s selection direction may be impacted by individual members.
  • While the study provides vital insights, the functional implications need further research, affirming the idea of multi-level selection acting on microbiomes. The results provide a novel understanding of microbiomes in social mammals.

Cite This Article

APA
Antwis RE, Lea JMD, Unwin B, Shultz S. (2018). Gut microbiome composition is associated with spatial structuring and social interactions in semi-feral Welsh Mountain ponies. Microbiome, 6(1), 207. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-018-0593-2

Publication

Microbiome
ISSN: 2049-2618
NlmUniqueID: 101615147
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 6
Issue: 1
Pages: 207
PII: 207

Researcher Affiliations

Antwis, Rachael E
  • School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Salford, Salford, UK. r.e.antwis@salford.ac.uk.
Lea, Jessica M D
  • School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Unwin, Bryony
  • School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Salford, Salford, UK.
Shultz, Susanne
  • School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Bacteria / classification
  • Bacteria / genetics
  • Bacteria / isolation & purification
  • Behavior, Animal / physiology
  • Diet
  • Female
  • Gastrointestinal Microbiome / genetics
  • Horses
  • Male
  • RNA, Ribosomal, 16S / genetics
  • Social Networking

Conflict of Interest Statement

ETHICS APPROVAL AND CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE: This study was approved by the University of Salford Research, Innovation, and Academic Engagement Ethical Approval Panel (ST1617-83) and the University of Manchester (Cat-D; non-licenced procedure). CONSENT FOR PUBLICATION: Not applicable. COMPETING INTERESTS: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. PUBLISHER’S NOTE: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

This article includes 69 references
  1. Bordenstein SR, Theis KR. Host Biology in Light of the Microbiome: Ten Principles of Holobionts and Hologenomes.. PLoS Biol 2015 Aug;13(8):e1002226.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002226pmc: PMC4540581pubmed: 26284777google scholar: lookup
  2. Douglas AE, Werren JH. Holes in the Hologenome: Why Host-Microbe Symbioses Are Not Holobionts.. mBio 2016 Mar 31;7(2):e02099.
    doi: 10.1128/mBio.02099-15pmc: PMC4817262pubmed: 27034285google scholar: lookup
  3. Rosenberg E, Zilber-Rosenberg I. The hologenome concept of evolution after 10 years.. Microbiome 2018 Apr 25;6(1):78.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-018-0457-9pmc: PMC5922317pubmed: 29695294google scholar: lookup
  4. Blekhman R, Goodrich JK, Huang K, Sun Q, Bukowski R, Bell JT, Spector TD, Keinan A, Ley RE, Gevers D, Clark AG. Host genetic variation impacts microbiome composition across human body sites.. Genome Biol 2015 Sep 15;16(1):191.
    doi: 10.1186/s13059-015-0759-1pmc: PMC4570153pubmed: 26374288google scholar: lookup
  5. Shapira M. Gut Microbiotas and Host Evolution: Scaling Up Symbiosis.. Trends Ecol Evol 2016 Jul;31(7):539-549.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2016.03.006pubmed: 27039196google scholar: lookup
  6. Fitzpatrick CR, Copeland J, Wang PW, Guttman DS, Kotanen PM, Johnson MTJ. Assembly and ecological function of the root microbiome across angiosperm plant species.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2018 Feb 6;115(6):E1157-E1165.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1717617115pmc: PMC5819437pubmed: 29358405google scholar: lookup
  7. Hanning I, Diaz-Sanchez S. The functionality of the gastrointestinal microbiome in non-human animals.. Microbiome 2015 Nov 10;3:51.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-015-0113-6pmc: PMC4640220pubmed: 26552373google scholar: lookup
  8. Morgan XC, Kabakchiev B, Waldron L, Tyler AD, Tickle TL, Milgrom R, Stempak JM, Gevers D, Xavier RJ, Silverberg MS, Huttenhower C. Associations between host gene expression, the mucosal microbiome, and clinical outcome in the pelvic pouch of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.. Genome Biol 2015 Apr 8;16(1):67.
    doi: 10.1186/s13059-015-0637-xpmc: PMC4414286pubmed: 25887922google scholar: lookup
  9. McKenna P, Hoffmann C, Minkah N, Aye PP, Lackner A, Liu Z, Lozupone CA, Hamady M, Knight R, Bushman FD. The macaque gut microbiome in health, lentiviral infection, and chronic enterocolitis.. PLoS Pathog 2008 Feb 8;4(2):e20.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.0040020pmc: PMC2222957pubmed: 18248093google scholar: lookup
  10. Arrieta MC, Stiemsma LT, Amenyogbe N, Brown EM, Finlay B. The intestinal microbiome in early life: health and disease.. Front Immunol 2014;5:427.
    doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00427pmc: PMC4155789pubmed: 25250028google scholar: lookup
  11. Bates KA, Clare FC, O'Hanlon S, Bosch J, Brookes L, Hopkins K, McLaughlin EJ, Daniel O, Garner TWJ, Fisher MC, Harrison XA. Amphibian chytridiomycosis outbreak dynamics are linked with host skin bacterial community structure.. Nat Commun 2018 Feb 15;9(1):693.
    doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-02967-wpmc: PMC5814395pubmed: 29449565google scholar: lookup
  12. Jack ALH, Nelson EB. A seed-recruited microbiome protects developing seedlings from disease by altering homing responses of Pythium aphanidermatum zoospores. Plant Soil 2018;422:209–222.
    doi: 10.1007/s11104-017-3257-2google scholar: lookup
  13. Turnbaugh PJ, Hamady M, Yatsunenko T, Cantarel BL, Duncan A, Ley RE, Sogin ML, Jones WJ, Roe BA, Affourtit JP, Egholm M, Henrissat B, Heath AC, Knight R, Gordon JI. A core gut microbiome in obese and lean twins.. Nature 2009 Jan 22;457(7228):480-4.
    doi: 10.1038/nature07540pmc: PMC2677729pubmed: 19043404google scholar: lookup
  14. Huse SM, Ye Y, Zhou Y, Fodor AA. A core human microbiome as viewed through 16S rRNA sequence clusters.. PLoS One 2012;7(6):e34242.
    pmc: PMC3374614pubmed: 22719824doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034242google scholar: lookup
  15. Kueneman JG, Parfrey LW, Woodhams DC, Archer HM, Knight R, McKenzie VJ. The amphibian skin-associated microbiome across species, space and life history stages.. Mol Ecol 2014 Mar;23(6):1238-1250.
    doi: 10.1111/mec.12510pubmed: 24171949google scholar: lookup
  16. Loudon AH, Woodhams DC, Parfrey LW, Archer H, Knight R, McKenzie V, Harris RN. Microbial community dynamics and effect of environmental microbial reservoirs on red-backed salamanders (Plethodon cinereus).. ISME J 2014 Apr;8(4):830-40.
    doi: 10.1038/ismej.2013.200pmc: PMC3960541pubmed: 24335825google scholar: lookup
  17. Laforest-Lapointe I, Messier C, Kembel SW. Host species identity, site and time drive temperate tree phyllosphere bacterial community structure.. Microbiome 2016 Jun 18;4(1):27.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-016-0174-1pmc: PMC4912770pubmed: 27316353google scholar: lookup
  18. Falony G, Joossens M, Vieira-Silva S, Wang J, Darzi Y, Faust K, Kurilshikov A, Bonder MJ, Valles-Colomer M, Vandeputte D, Tito RY, Chaffron S, Rymenans L, Verspecht C, De Sutter L, Lima-Mendez G, D'hoe K, Jonckheere K, Homola D, Garcia R, Tigchelaar EF, Eeckhaudt L, Fu J, Henckaerts L, Zhernakova A, Wijmenga C, Raes J. Population-level analysis of gut microbiome variation.. Science 2016 Apr 29;352(6285):560-4.
    doi: 10.1126/science.aad3503pubmed: 27126039google scholar: lookup
  19. Laforest-Lapointe I, Messier C, Kembel SW. Tree phyllosphere bacterial communities: exploring the magnitude of intra- and inter-individual variation among host species.. PeerJ 2016;4:e2367.
    doi: 10.7717/peerj.2367pmc: PMC5012278pubmed: 27635335google scholar: lookup
  20. Bijma P, Muir WM, Ellen ED, Wolf JB, Van Arendonk JA. Multilevel selection 2: Estimating the genetic parameters determining inheritance and response to selection.. Genetics 2007 Jan;175(1):289-99.
    doi: 10.1534/genetics.106.062729pmc: PMC1775010pubmed: 17110493google scholar: lookup
  21. Martinson VG, Danforth BN, Minckley RL, Rueppell O, Tingek S, Moran NA. A simple and distinctive microbiota associated with honey bees and bumble bees.. Mol Ecol 2011 Feb;20(3):619-28.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04959.xpubmed: 21175905google scholar: lookup
  22. Koch H, Schmid-Hempel P. Socially transmitted gut microbiota protect bumble bees against an intestinal parasite.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011 Nov 29;108(48):19288-92.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1110474108pmc: PMC3228419pubmed: 22084077google scholar: lookup
  23. Eubank S, Guclu H, Kumar VS, Marathe MV, Srinivasan A, Toroczkai Z, Wang N. Modelling disease outbreaks in realistic urban social networks.. Nature 2004 May 13;429(6988):180-4.
    pubmed: 15141212doi: 10.1038/nature02541google scholar: lookup
  24. Read JM, Eames KT, Edmunds WJ. Dynamic social networks and the implications for the spread of infectious disease.. J R Soc Interface 2008 Sep 6;5(26):1001-7.
    doi: 10.1098/rsif.2008.0013pmc: PMC2607433pubmed: 18319209google scholar: lookup
  25. Naug D. Structure of the social network and its influence on transmission dynamics in a honeybee colony. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2008;62:1719–1725.
    doi: 10.1007/s00265-008-0600-xgoogle scholar: lookup
  26. Krause J, Croft DP, James R. Social network theory in the behavioural sciences: potential applications. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2007;62:15–27.
    doi: 10.1007/s00265-007-0445-8google scholar: lookup
  27. Archie EA, Tung J. Social behavior and the microbiome. Curr Opin Behav Sci 2015;6:28–34.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.07.008google scholar: lookup
  28. Ren T, Boutin S, Humphries MM, Dantzer B, Gorrell JC, Coltman DW, McAdam AG, Wu M. Seasonal, spatial, and maternal effects on gut microbiome in wild red squirrels.. Microbiome 2017 Dec 21;5(1):163.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-016-0209-7pmc: PMC5740981pubmed: 29268780google scholar: lookup
  29. Griffiths SM, Harrison XA, Weldon C, Wood MD, Pretorius A, Hopkins K, Fox G, Preziosi RF, Antwis RE. Genetic variability and ontogeny predict microbiome structure in a disease-challenged montane amphibian.. ISME J 2018 Oct;12(10):2506-2517.
    doi: 10.1038/s41396-018-0167-0pmc: PMC6155040pubmed: 29942072google scholar: lookup
  30. Yuan ML, Dean SH, Longo AV, Rothermel BB, Tuberville TD, Zamudio KR. Kinship, inbreeding and fine-scale spatial structure influence gut microbiota in a hindgut-fermenting tortoise.. Mol Ecol 2015 May;24(10):2521-36.
    doi: 10.1111/mec.13169pubmed: 25809385google scholar: lookup
  31. Lombardo MP. Access to mutualistic endosymbiotic microbes: an underappreciated benefit of group living. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2008;62:479–497.
    doi: 10.1007/s00265-007-0428-9google scholar: lookup
  32. Tung J, Barreiro LB, Burns MB, Grenier JC, Lynch J, Grieneisen LE, Altmann J, Alberts SC, Blekhman R, Archie EA. Social networks predict gut microbiome composition in wild baboons.. Elife 2015 Mar 16;4.
    pmc: PMC4379495pubmed: 25774601doi: 10.7554/elife.05224google scholar: lookup
  33. Grieneisen LE, Livermore J, Alberts S, Tung J, Archie EA. Group Living and Male Dispersal Predict the Core Gut Microbiome in Wild Baboons.. Integr Comp Biol 2017 Oct 1;57(4):770-785.
    doi: 10.1093/icb/icx046pmc: PMC5886331pubmed: 29048537google scholar: lookup
  34. Moeller AH, Foerster S, Wilson ML, Pusey AE, Hahn BH, Ochman H. Social behavior shapes the chimpanzee pan-microbiome.. Sci Adv 2016 Jan;2(1):e1500997.
    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1500997pmc: PMC4730854pubmed: 26824072google scholar: lookup
  35. Meehan CL, Lackey KA, Hagen EH, Williams JE, Roulette J, Helfrecht C, McGuire MA, McGuire MK. Social networks, cooperative breeding, and the human milk microbiome.. Am J Hum Biol 2018 Jul;30(4):e23131.
    doi: 10.1002/ajhb.23131pubmed: 29700885google scholar: lookup
  36. Lizé A, McKay R, Lewis Z. Gut microbiota and kin recognition.. Trends Ecol Evol 2013 Jun;28(6):325-6.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.013pubmed: 23141109google scholar: lookup
  37. Julliand V, Grimm P. The impact of diet on the hindgut microbiome. J Equine Vet Sci Elsevier Inc 2017;52:23–28.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2017.03.002google scholar: lookup
  38. Winton CL, Hegarty MJ, McMahon R, Slavov GT, McEwan NR, Davies-Morel MC, Morgan CM, Powell W, Nash DM. Genetic diversity and phylogenetic analysis of native mountain ponies of Britain and Ireland reveals a novel rare population.. Ecol Evol 2013 Apr;3(4):934-47.
    doi: 10.1002/ece3.507pmc: PMC3631405pubmed: 23610635google scholar: lookup
  39. Stanley CR, Shultz S. Mummy’s boys: sex differential maternal-offspring bonds in semi-feral horses. Behaviour 2012;149:251–274.
    doi: 10.1163/156853912X636717google scholar: lookup
  40. Stanley CR, Mettke-Hofmann C, Hager R, Shultz S. Social stability in semiferal ponies: networks show interannual stability alongside seasonal flexibility. Anim Behav 2018;136:175–184.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2017.04.013google scholar: lookup
  41. Kahle D, Wickham H. ggmap: spatial visualization with ggplot2. R J 2013;5:144–161.
  42. RStudio Team. RStudio: integrated development for R. Boston: p. RStudio, Inc.; 2016.
  43. R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2017.
  44. Farine DR, Whitehead H. Constructing, conducting and interpreting animal social network analysis.. J Anim Ecol 2015 Sep;84(5):1144-63.
    doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12418pmc: PMC4973823pubmed: 26172345google scholar: lookup
  45. Kozich JJ, Westcott SL, Baxter NT, Highlander SK, Schloss PD. Development of a dual-index sequencing strategy and curation pipeline for analyzing amplicon sequence data on the MiSeq Illumina sequencing platform.. Appl Environ Microbiol 2013 Sep;79(17):5112-20.
    doi: 10.1128/AEM.01043-13pmc: PMC3753973pubmed: 23793624google scholar: lookup
  46. Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJ, Holmes SP. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data.. Nat Methods 2016 Jul;13(7):581-3.
    doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3869pmc: PMC4927377pubmed: 27214047google scholar: lookup
  47. Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, Peplies J, Glöckner FO. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools.. Nucleic Acids Res 2013 Jan;41(Database issue):D590-6.
    doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1219pmc: PMC3531112pubmed: 23193283google scholar: lookup
  48. Yilmaz P, Parfrey LW, Yarza P, Gerken J, Pruesse E, Quast C, Schweer T, Peplies J, Ludwig W, Glöckner FO. The SILVA and "All-species Living Tree Project (LTP)" taxonomic frameworks.. Nucleic Acids Res 2014 Jan;42(Database issue):D643-8.
    doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt1209pmc: PMC3965112pubmed: 24293649google scholar: lookup
  49. McMurdie PJ, Holmes S. phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data.. PLoS One 2013;8(4):e61217.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061217pmc: PMC3632530pubmed: 23630581google scholar: lookup
  50. Oksanen J, Blanchet B, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D. Vegan: community ecology package. 2018.
  51. Lahti L, Shetty S. Tools for microbiome analysis in R. Microbiome package version 1.1.10013. 2017.
  52. Wickham H. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2009.
  53. De Cáceres M, Legendre P. Associations between species and groups of sites: indices and statistical inference.. Ecology 2009 Dec;90(12):3566-74.
    doi: 10.1890/08-1823.1pubmed: 20120823google scholar: lookup
  54. Csárdi G, Nepusz T. The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal Complex Syst 2006;1695:1695.
  55. Yatsunenko T, Rey FE, Manary MJ, Trehan I, Dominguez-Bello MG, Contreras M, Magris M, Hidalgo G, Baldassano RN, Anokhin AP, Heath AC, Warner B, Reeder J, Kuczynski J, Caporaso JG, Lozupone CA, Lauber C, Clemente JC, Knights D, Knight R, Gordon JI. Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography.. Nature 2012 May 9;486(7402):222-7.
    doi: 10.1038/nature11053pmc: PMC3376388pubmed: 22699611google scholar: lookup
  56. Wang J, Linnenbrink M, Künzel S, Fernandes R, Nadeau MJ, Rosenstiel P, Baines JF. Dietary history contributes to enterotype-like clustering and functional metagenomic content in the intestinal microbiome of wild mice.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014 Jul 1;111(26):E2703-10.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1402342111pmc: PMC4084472pubmed: 24912178google scholar: lookup
  57. Carmody RN, Gerber GK, Luevano JM Jr, Gatti DM, Somes L, Svenson KL, Turnbaugh PJ. Diet dominates host genotype in shaping the murine gut microbiota.. Cell Host Microbe 2015 Jan 14;17(1):72-84.
    doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2014.11.010pmc: PMC4297240pubmed: 25532804google scholar: lookup
  58. Ben-Yosef M, Behar A, Jurkevitch E, Yuval B. Bacteria-diet interactions affect longevity in the medfly - Ceratitis capitata. J Appl Entomol 2008;132:690–694.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0418.2008.01330.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  59. Antwis RE, Haworth RL, Engelmoer DJ, Ogilvy V, Fidgett AL, Preziosi RF. Ex situ diet influences the bacterial community associated with the skin of red-eyed tree frogs (Agalychnis callidryas).. PLoS One 2014;9(1):e85563.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085563pmc: PMC3887054pubmed: 24416427google scholar: lookup
  60. Gavriel S, Jurkevitch E, Gazit Y, Yuval B. Bacterially enriched diet improves sexual performance of sterile male Mediterranean fruit flies. J Appl Entomol 2011;135:564–573.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0418.2010.01605.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  61. Lea JMD, Kerley GIH, Hrabar H, Barry TJS. Recognition and management of ecological refugees: a case study of the cape mountain zebra. Biol Conserv 2016;203:207–215.
    doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.017google scholar: lookup
  62. Ransom JI, Cade BS. Quantifying equid behavior — a research ethogram for free-roaming feral horses. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 2009;2-A9:23.
  63. Dominguez-Bello MG, Costello EK, Contreras M, Magris M, Hidalgo G, Fierer N, Knight R. Delivery mode shapes the acquisition and structure of the initial microbiota across multiple body habitats in newborns.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010 Jun 29;107(26):11971-5.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1002601107pmc: PMC2900693pubmed: 20566857google scholar: lookup
  64. Duranti S, Lugli GA, Mancabelli L, Armanini F, Turroni F, James K, Ferretti P, Gorfer V, Ferrario C, Milani C, Mangifesta M, Anzalone R, Zolfo M, Viappiani A, Pasolli E, Bariletti I, Canto R, Clementi R, Cologna M, Crifò T, Cusumano G, Fedi S, Gottardi S, Innamorati C, Masè C, Postai D, Savoi D, Soffiati M, Tateo S, Pedrotti A, Segata N, van Sinderen D, Ventura M. Maternal inheritance of bifidobacterial communities and bifidophages in infants through vertical transmission.. Microbiome 2017 Jun 26;5(1):66.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-017-0282-6pmc: PMC5485682pubmed: 28651630google scholar: lookup
  65. Prest TL, Kimball AK, Kueneman JG, McKenzie VJ. Host-associated bacterial community succession during amphibian development.. Mol Ecol 2018 Apr;27(8):1992-2006.
    doi: 10.1111/mec.14507pubmed: 29411448google scholar: lookup
  66. Meale SJ, Li S, Azevedo P, Derakhshani H, Plaizier JC, Khafipour E, Steele MA. Development of Ruminal and Fecal Microbiomes Are Affected by Weaning But Not Weaning Strategy in Dairy Calves.. Front Microbiol 2016;7:582.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00582pmc: PMC4853645pubmed: 27199916google scholar: lookup
  67. Koenig JE, Spor A, Scalfone N, Fricker AD, Stombaugh J, Knight R, Angenent LT, Ley RE. Succession of microbial consortia in the developing infant gut microbiome.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011 Mar 15;108 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):4578-85.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1000081107pmc: PMC3063592pubmed: 20668239google scholar: lookup
  68. Frese SA, Parker K, Calvert CC, Mills DA. Diet shapes the gut microbiome of pigs during nursing and weaning.. Microbiome 2015;3:28.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-015-0091-8pmc: PMC4499176pubmed: 26167280google scholar: lookup
  69. Jašarević E, Morrison KE, Bale TL. Sex differences in the gut microbiome-brain axis across the lifespan.. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2016 Feb 19;371(1688):20150122.
    doi: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0122pmc: PMC4785905pubmed: 26833840google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 46 times.
  1. Zhu L. Editorial: Animal social behaviour and gut microbiome. Front Microbiol 2023;14:1210717.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1210717pubmed: 37614609google scholar: lookup
  2. Vaziri GJ, Jones MM, Carr HA, Nuñez CMV. Out of the stable: Social disruption and concurrent shifts in the feral mare (Equus caballus) fecal microbiota. Ecol Evol 2023 May;13(5):e10079.
    doi: 10.1002/ece3.10079pubmed: 37187967google scholar: lookup
  3. Bensch HM, Tolf C, Waldenström J, Lundin D, Zöttl M. Bacteroidetes to Firmicutes: captivity changes the gut microbiota composition and diversity in a social subterranean rodent. Anim Microbiome 2023 Feb 10;5(1):9.
    doi: 10.1186/s42523-023-00231-1pubmed: 36765400google scholar: lookup
  4. Rojas CA, Holekamp KE, Viladomat Jasso M, Souza V, Eisen JA, Theis KR. Taxonomic, Genomic, and Functional Variation in the Gut Microbiomes of Wild Spotted Hyenas Across 2 Decades of Study. mSystems 2023 Feb 23;8(1):e0096522.
    doi: 10.1128/msystems.00965-22pubmed: 36533929google scholar: lookup
  5. Bridson C, Vellaniparambil L, Antwis RE, Müller W, Gilman RT, Rowntree JK. Genetic diversity of honeybee colonies predicts gut bacterial diversity of individual colony members. Environ Microbiol 2022 Dec;24(12):5643-5653.
    doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.16150pubmed: 35920034google scholar: lookup
  6. Bi Y, Wei H, Nian H, Liu R, Ji W, Liu H, Bao J. Socializing Models During Lactation Alter Colonic Mucosal Gene Expression and Fecal Microbiota of Growing Piglets. Front Microbiol 2022;13:819011.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.819011pubmed: 35875524google scholar: lookup
  7. Ramirez-Delgado D, Cicala F, Gonzalez-Sanchez RA, Avalos-Tellez R, Solana-Arellano E, Licea-Navarro A. Multi-locus evaluation of gastrointestinal bacterial communities from Zalophus californianus pups in the Gulf of California, México. PeerJ 2022;10:e13235.
    doi: 10.7717/peerj.13235pubmed: 35833012google scholar: lookup
  8. Ang L, Vinderola G, Endo A, Kantanen J, Jingfeng C, Binetti A, Burns P, Qingmiao S, Suying D, Zujiang Y, Rios-Covian D, Mantziari A, Beasley S, Gomez-Gallego C, Gueimonde M, Salminen S. Gut Microbiome Characteristics in feral and domesticated horses from different geographic locations. Commun Biol 2022 Feb 25;5(1):172.
    doi: 10.1038/s42003-022-03116-2pubmed: 35217713google scholar: lookup
  9. Rudolph K, Schneider D, Fichtel C, Daniel R, Heistermann M, Kappeler PM. Drivers of gut microbiome variation within and between groups of a wild Malagasy primate. Microbiome 2022 Feb 9;10(1):28.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-021-01223-6pubmed: 35139921google scholar: lookup
  10. Wang Q, Fang ZQ, Zhang CL, Shen JQ, Lai JD, Han XL, Lu T. Sphingobacterium bovistauri sp. nov., Isolated from the Faeces of Bos Taurus. Curr Microbiol 2022 Feb 7;79(3):92.
    doi: 10.1007/s00284-022-02763-2pubmed: 35129696google scholar: lookup
  11. Neu AT, Allen EE, Roy K. Defining and quantifying the core microbiome: Challenges and prospects. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2021 Dec 21;118(51).
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.2104429118pubmed: 34862327google scholar: lookup
  12. Liu R, Shi J, Shultz S, Guo D, Liu D. Fecal Bacterial Community of Allopatric Przewalski's Gazelles and Their Sympatric Relatives. Front Microbiol 2021;12:737042.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.737042pubmed: 34630362google scholar: lookup
  13. Stothart MR, Newman AEM. Shades of grey: host phenotype dependent effect of urbanization on the bacterial microbiome of a wild mammal. Anim Microbiome 2021 Jul 5;3(1):46.
    doi: 10.1186/s42523-021-00105-4pubmed: 34225812google scholar: lookup
  14. Theelen MJP, Luiken REC, Wagenaar JA, Sloet van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan MM, Rossen JWA, Zomer AL. The Equine Faecal Microbiota of Healthy Horses and Ponies in The Netherlands: Impact of Host and Environmental Factors. Animals (Basel) 2021 Jun 12;11(6).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11061762pubmed: 34204691google scholar: lookup
  15. Cusick JA, Wellman CL, Demas GE. The call of the wild: using non-model systems to investigate microbiome-behaviour relationships. J Exp Biol 2021 May 15;224(10).
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.224485pubmed: 33988717google scholar: lookup
  16. Zhang Z, Yang Z, Zhu L. Gut microbiome of migratory shorebirds: Current status and future perspectives. Ecol Evol 2021 May;11(9):3737-3745.
    doi: 10.1002/ece3.7390pubmed: 33976772google scholar: lookup
  17. Osborne P, Hall LJ, Kronfeld-Schor N, Thybert D, Haerty W. A rather dry subject; investigating the study of arid-associated microbial communities. Environ Microbiome 2020 Dec 1;15(1):20.
    doi: 10.1186/s40793-020-00367-6pubmed: 33902728google scholar: lookup
  18. Bo TB, Kohl KD. Stabilization and optimization of host-microbe-environment interactions as a potential reason for the behavior of natal philopatry. Anim Microbiome 2021 Mar 30;3(1):26.
    doi: 10.1186/s42523-021-00087-3pubmed: 33785073google scholar: lookup
  19. Reese AT, Chadaideh KS, Diggins CE, Schell LD, Beckel M, Callahan P, Ryan R, Emery Thompson M, Carmody RN. Effects of domestication on the gut microbiota parallel those of human industrialization. Elife 2021 Mar 23;10.
    doi: 10.7554/eLife.60197pubmed: 33755015google scholar: lookup
  20. Raulo A, Allen BE, Troitsky T, Husby A, Firth JA, Coulson T, Knowles SCL. Social networks strongly predict the gut microbiota of wild mice. ISME J 2021 Sep;15(9):2601-2613.
    doi: 10.1038/s41396-021-00949-3pubmed: 33731838google scholar: lookup
  21. Li J, Luo W, Zhu Y, Dai Q, Liu G, Zheng C, Zhou L, Li S, Chen Z, Wang J, Feng D, Yang K, Yang Z, Zhu L. Social behavior of musk deer during the mating season potentially influences the diversity of their gut microbiome. PeerJ 2021;9:e10860.
    doi: 10.7717/peerj.10860pubmed: 33604195google scholar: lookup
  22. Cao C, He J, Mak L, Perera D, Kwok D, Wang J, Li M, Mourier T, Gavriliuc S, Greenberg M, Morrissy AS, Sycuro LK, Yang G, Jeffares DC, Long Q. Reconstruction of Microbial Haplotypes by Integration of Statistical and Physical Linkage in Scaffolding. Mol Biol Evol 2021 May 19;38(6):2660-2672.
    doi: 10.1093/molbev/msab037pubmed: 33547786google scholar: lookup
  23. Baniel A, Amato KR, Beehner JC, Bergman TJ, Mercer A, Perlman RF, Petrullo L, Reitsema L, Sams S, Lu A, Snyder-Mackler N. Seasonal shifts in the gut microbiome indicate plastic responses to diet in wild geladas. Microbiome 2021 Jan 23;9(1):26.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-020-00977-9pubmed: 33485388google scholar: lookup
  24. Xu L, Xiang M, Zhu W, Zhang M, Chen H, Huang J, Chen Y, Chang Q, Jiang J, Zhu L. The Behavior of Amphibians Shapes Their Symbiotic Microbiomes. mSystems 2020 Jul 28;5(4).
    doi: 10.1128/mSystems.00626-20pubmed: 32723798google scholar: lookup
  25. Górecka-Bruzda A, Jaworski Z, Jaworska J, Siemieniuch M. Welfare of Free-Roaming Horses: 70 Years of Experience with Konik Polski Breeding in Poland. Animals (Basel) 2020 Jun 24;10(6).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10061094pubmed: 32599935google scholar: lookup
  26. Sarkar A, Harty S, Johnson KV, Moeller AH, Archie EA, Schell LD, Carmody RN, Clutton-Brock TH, Dunbar RIM, Burnet PWJ. Microbial transmission in animal social networks and the social microbiome. Nat Ecol Evol 2020 Aug;4(8):1020-1035.
    doi: 10.1038/s41559-020-1220-8pubmed: 32572221google scholar: lookup
  27. Mach N, Ruet A, Clark A, Bars-Cortina D, Ramayo-Caldas Y, Crisci E, Pennarun S, Dhorne-Pollet S, Foury A, Moisan MP, Lansade L. Priming for welfare: gut microbiota is associated with equitation conditions and behavior in horse athletes. Sci Rep 2020 May 20;10(1):8311.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-65444-9pubmed: 32433513google scholar: lookup
  28. Zhu L, Clayton JB, Suhr Van Haute MJ, Yang Q, Hassenstab HR, Mustoe AC, Knights D, Benson AK, French JA. Sex Bias in Gut Microbiome Transmission in Newly Paired Marmosets (Callithrix jacchus). mSystems 2020 Mar 24;5(2).
    doi: 10.1128/mSystems.00910-19pubmed: 32209720google scholar: lookup
  29. Bird S, Prewer E, Kutz S, Leclerc LM, Vilaça ST, Kyle CJ. Geography, seasonality, and host-associated population structure influence the fecal microbiome of a genetically depauparate Arctic mammal. Ecol Evol 2019 Dec;9(23):13202-13217.
    doi: 10.1002/ece3.5768pubmed: 31871639google scholar: lookup
  30. Plancade S, Clark A, Philippe C, Helbling JC, Moisan MP, Esquerré D, Le Moyec L, Robert C, Barrey E, Mach N. Unraveling the effects of the gut microbiota composition and function on horse endurance physiology. Sci Rep 2019 Jul 3;9(1):9620.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-46118-7pubmed: 31270376google scholar: lookup
  31. Antwis RE, Edwards KL, Unwin B, Walker SL, Shultz S. Rare gut microbiota associated with breeding success, hormone metabolites and ovarian cycle phase in the critically endangered eastern black rhino. Microbiome 2019 Feb 15;7(1):27.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-019-0639-0pubmed: 30770764google scholar: lookup
  32. Griffiths JA, Nirmalkar K, Wu WL, Krajmalnik-Brown R, Mazmanian SK. The gut microbiome shapes social behaviour across animal species. Nat Rev Microbiol 2025 Nov 14;.
    doi: 10.1038/s41579-025-01262-ypubmed: 41238755google scholar: lookup
  33. Li F, Kong X, Khan MZ, Wei L, Wei J, Zhu M, Liu G, Huang B, Wang C, Zhang Z. Gut microbiome regulation in equine animals: current understanding and future perspectives. Front Microbiol 2025;16:1602258.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2025.1602258pubmed: 41070119google scholar: lookup
  34. Curadi MC, Vallone F, Tenuzzo M, Gazzano A, Gazzano V, Macchioni F, Vannini C. Effect of Management System on Fecal Microbiota in Arabian Horses: Preliminary Results. Vet Sci 2025 Mar 28;12(4).
    doi: 10.3390/vetsci12040309pubmed: 40284811google scholar: lookup
  35. Rajbhandari RM, Forcina G, Manandhar P, Rajbhandari PG, Napit R, Raut R, Shrestha S, Sadaula A, Gortázar C, Alves PC, de la Fuente J, Queirós J, Karmacharya D. Gut microbiota diversity among humans, elephants, livestock and wild herbivores in Chitwan National Park bears implications for conservation medicine. Sci Rep 2025 Apr 4;15(1):11596.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-89402-5pubmed: 40185849google scholar: lookup
  36. Chege M, Ferretti P, Webb S, Macharia RW, Obiero G, Kamau J, Alberts SC, Tung J, Akinyi MY, Archie EA. Eukaryotic composition across seasons and social groups in the gut microbiota of wild baboons. bioRxiv 2024 Dec 17;.
    doi: 10.1101/2024.12.17.628920pubmed: 39763902google scholar: lookup
  37. Bishop RC, Kemper AM, Clark LV, Wilkins PA, McCoy AM. Stability of Gastric Fluid and Fecal Microbial Populations in Healthy Horses under Pasture and Stable Conditions. Animals (Basel) 2024 Oct 16;14(20).
    doi: 10.3390/ani14202979pubmed: 39457909google scholar: lookup
  38. Martínez-Renau E, Martín-Platero AM, Bodawatta KH, Martín-Vivaldi M, Martínez-Bueno M, Poulsen M, Soler JJ. Social environment influences microbiota and potentially pathogenic bacterial communities on the skin of developing birds. Anim Microbiome 2024 Aug 15;6(1):47.
    doi: 10.1186/s42523-024-00327-2pubmed: 39148142google scholar: lookup
  39. Buchanan CE, Galla SJ, Muscarella ME, Forbey JS, Reinking AK, Beck JL. Relating gut microbiome composition and life history metrics for pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) in the Red Desert, Wyoming. PLoS One 2024;19(7):e0306722.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306722pubmed: 38985706google scholar: lookup
  40. Samartino S, Christie D, Penna A, Sicotte P, Ting N, Wikberg E. Social network dynamics, infant loss, and gut microbiota composition in female Colobus vellerosus during time periods with alpha male challenges. Primates 2024 Jul;65(4):299-309.
    doi: 10.1007/s10329-024-01132-wpubmed: 38735025google scholar: lookup
  41. Raulo A, Bürkner PC, Finerty GE, Dale J, Hanski E, English HM, Lamberth C, Firth JA, Coulson T, Knowles SCL. Social and environmental transmission spread different sets of gut microbes in wild mice. Nat Ecol Evol 2024 May;8(5):972-985.
    doi: 10.1038/s41559-024-02381-0pubmed: 38689017google scholar: lookup
  42. Boucher L, Leduc L, Leclère M, Costa MC. Current Understanding of Equine Gut Dysbiosis and Microbiota Manipulation Techniques: Comparison with Current Knowledge in Other Species. Animals (Basel) 2024 Feb 28;14(5).
    doi: 10.3390/ani14050758pubmed: 38473143google scholar: lookup
  43. Sarkar A, McInroy CJA, Harty S, Raulo A, Ibata NGO, Valles-Colomer M, Johnson KV, Brito IL, Henrich J, Archie EA, Barreiro LB, Gazzaniga FS, Finlay BB, Koonin EV, Carmody RN, Moeller AH. Microbial transmission in the social microbiome and host health and disease. Cell 2024 Jan 4;187(1):17-43.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2023.12.014pubmed: 38181740google scholar: lookup
  44. Kauter A, Brombach J, Lübke-Becker A, Kannapin D, Bang C, Franzenburg S, Stoeckle SD, Mellmann A, Scherff N, Köck R, Guenther S, Wieler LH, Gehlen H, Semmler T, Wolf SA, Walther B. Antibiotic prophylaxis and hospitalization of horses subjected to median laparotomy: gut microbiota trajectories and abundance increase of Escherichia. Front Microbiol 2023;14:1228845.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1228845pubmed: 38075913google scholar: lookup
  45. Ye H, Ghosh TS, Hueston CM, Vlckova K, Golubeva AV, Hyland NP, O'Toole PW. Engraftment of aging-related human gut microbiota and the effect of a seven-species consortium in a pre-clinical model. Gut Microbes 2023 Dec;15(2):2282796.
    doi: 10.1080/19490976.2023.2282796pubmed: 38010168google scholar: lookup
  46. Roche CE, Montague MJ, Wang J, Dickey AN, Ruiz-Lambides A, Brent LJN, Platt ML, Horvath JE. Yearly variation coupled with social interactions shape the skin microbiome in free-ranging rhesus macaques. Microbiol Spectr 2023 Sep 26;11(5):e0297423.
    doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02974-23pubmed: 37750731google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.