Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species
Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, s...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Chong, Rowena [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2019 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s) 2019 |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Animal microbiome - [London] : BioMed Central, 2019, 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:1 ; year:2019 ; number:1 ; day:03 ; month:10 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
SPR038625342 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR038625342 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230328215415.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 201007s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR038625342 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 1 | |a Chong, Rowena |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species |
264 | 1 | |c 2019 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © The Author(s) 2019 | ||
520 | |a Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Captivity |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Carnivore |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Reintroduction program |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Wildlife translocation |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Dysbiosis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
700 | 1 | |a Grueber, Catherine E. |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Fox, Samantha |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Wise, Phil |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Barrs, Vanessa R. |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Hogg, Carolyn J. |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Belov, Katherine |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Animal microbiome |d [London] : BioMed Central, 2019 |g 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. |w (DE-627)1067731326 |w (DE-600)2965862-7 |x 2524-4671 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:1 |g year:2019 |g number:1 |g day:03 |g month:10 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 1 |j 2019 |e 1 |b 03 |c 10 |
author_variant |
r c rc c e g ce ceg s f sf p w pw v r b vr vrb c j h cj cjh k b kb |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:25244671:2019----::oknlkteoasumcoimcagsoteesia |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2019 |
publishDate |
2019 |
allfields |
10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 doi (DE-627)SPR038625342 (SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Chong, Rowena verfasserin aut Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. Captivity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Carnivore (dpeaa)DE-He213 Reintroduction program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wildlife translocation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dysbiosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Grueber, Catherine E. aut Fox, Samantha aut Wise, Phil aut Barrs, Vanessa R. aut Hogg, Carolyn J. aut Belov, Katherine aut Enthalten in Animal microbiome [London] : BioMed Central, 2019 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. (DE-627)1067731326 (DE-600)2965862-7 2524-4671 nnns volume:1 year:2019 number:1 day:03 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2019 1 03 10 |
spelling |
10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 doi (DE-627)SPR038625342 (SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Chong, Rowena verfasserin aut Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. Captivity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Carnivore (dpeaa)DE-He213 Reintroduction program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wildlife translocation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dysbiosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Grueber, Catherine E. aut Fox, Samantha aut Wise, Phil aut Barrs, Vanessa R. aut Hogg, Carolyn J. aut Belov, Katherine aut Enthalten in Animal microbiome [London] : BioMed Central, 2019 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. (DE-627)1067731326 (DE-600)2965862-7 2524-4671 nnns volume:1 year:2019 number:1 day:03 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2019 1 03 10 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 doi (DE-627)SPR038625342 (SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Chong, Rowena verfasserin aut Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. Captivity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Carnivore (dpeaa)DE-He213 Reintroduction program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wildlife translocation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dysbiosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Grueber, Catherine E. aut Fox, Samantha aut Wise, Phil aut Barrs, Vanessa R. aut Hogg, Carolyn J. aut Belov, Katherine aut Enthalten in Animal microbiome [London] : BioMed Central, 2019 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. (DE-627)1067731326 (DE-600)2965862-7 2524-4671 nnns volume:1 year:2019 number:1 day:03 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2019 1 03 10 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 doi (DE-627)SPR038625342 (SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Chong, Rowena verfasserin aut Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. Captivity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Carnivore (dpeaa)DE-He213 Reintroduction program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wildlife translocation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dysbiosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Grueber, Catherine E. aut Fox, Samantha aut Wise, Phil aut Barrs, Vanessa R. aut Hogg, Carolyn J. aut Belov, Katherine aut Enthalten in Animal microbiome [London] : BioMed Central, 2019 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. (DE-627)1067731326 (DE-600)2965862-7 2524-4671 nnns volume:1 year:2019 number:1 day:03 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2019 1 03 10 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 doi (DE-627)SPR038625342 (SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Chong, Rowena verfasserin aut Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. Captivity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Carnivore (dpeaa)DE-He213 Reintroduction program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wildlife translocation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dysbiosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Grueber, Catherine E. aut Fox, Samantha aut Wise, Phil aut Barrs, Vanessa R. aut Hogg, Carolyn J. aut Belov, Katherine aut Enthalten in Animal microbiome [London] : BioMed Central, 2019 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. (DE-627)1067731326 (DE-600)2965862-7 2524-4671 nnns volume:1 year:2019 number:1 day:03 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2019 1 03 10 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Animal microbiome 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. volume:1 year:2019 number:1 day:03 month:10 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Animal microbiome 1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt. volume:1 year:2019 number:1 day:03 month:10 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Captivity Carnivore Reintroduction program Wildlife translocation Dysbiosis |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Animal microbiome |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Chong, Rowena @@aut@@ Grueber, Catherine E. @@aut@@ Fox, Samantha @@aut@@ Wise, Phil @@aut@@ Barrs, Vanessa R. @@aut@@ Hogg, Carolyn J. @@aut@@ Belov, Katherine @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2019-10-03T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
1067731326 |
id |
SPR038625342 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR038625342</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230328215415.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR038625342</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chong, Rowena</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Captivity</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Carnivore</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Reintroduction program</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Wildlife translocation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dysbiosis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grueber, Catherine E.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fox, Samantha</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wise, Phil</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Barrs, Vanessa R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hogg, Carolyn J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Belov, Katherine</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Animal microbiome</subfield><subfield code="d">[London] : BioMed Central, 2019</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1067731326</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2965862-7</subfield><subfield code="x">2524-4671</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:03</subfield><subfield code="g">month:10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">03</subfield><subfield code="c">10</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Chong, Rowena |
spellingShingle |
Chong, Rowena misc Captivity misc Carnivore misc Reintroduction program misc Wildlife translocation misc Dysbiosis Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species |
authorStr |
Chong, Rowena |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)1067731326 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
springer |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
2524-4671 |
topic_title |
Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species Captivity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Carnivore (dpeaa)DE-He213 Reintroduction program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wildlife translocation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dysbiosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
topic |
misc Captivity misc Carnivore misc Reintroduction program misc Wildlife translocation misc Dysbiosis |
topic_unstemmed |
misc Captivity misc Carnivore misc Reintroduction program misc Wildlife translocation misc Dysbiosis |
topic_browse |
misc Captivity misc Carnivore misc Reintroduction program misc Wildlife translocation misc Dysbiosis |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Animal microbiome |
hierarchy_parent_id |
1067731326 |
hierarchy_top_title |
Animal microbiome |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)1067731326 (DE-600)2965862-7 |
title |
Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR038625342 (SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e |
title_full |
Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species |
author_sort |
Chong, Rowena |
journal |
Animal microbiome |
journalStr |
Animal microbiome |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2019 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Chong, Rowena Grueber, Catherine E. Fox, Samantha Wise, Phil Barrs, Vanessa R. Hogg, Carolyn J. Belov, Katherine |
container_volume |
1 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Chong, Rowena |
doi_str_mv |
10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 |
title_sort |
looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species |
title_auth |
Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species |
abstract |
Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. © The Author(s) 2019 |
abstractGer |
Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. © The Author(s) 2019 |
abstract_unstemmed |
Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes. © The Author(s) 2019 |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
1 |
title_short |
Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species |
url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Grueber, Catherine E. Fox, Samantha Wise, Phil Barrs, Vanessa R. Hogg, Carolyn J. Belov, Katherine |
author2Str |
Grueber, Catherine E. Fox, Samantha Wise, Phil Barrs, Vanessa R. Hogg, Carolyn J. Belov, Katherine |
ppnlink |
1067731326 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4 |
up_date |
2024-07-03T19:11:27.538Z |
_version_ |
1803586253665337344 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR038625342</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230328215415.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR038625342</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s42523-019-0012-4-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chong, Rowena</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Looking like the locals - gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Captivity presents extreme lifestyle changes relative to the wild, and evidence of microbiome dysbiosis in captive animals is growing. The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host health. Whilst captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction to the wild is important for conservation, such efforts often have limited success. Post-release monitoring is essential for assessing translocation success, but changes to the microbiome of released individuals are poorly understood. The Tasmanian devil was previously shown to exhibit loss of microbiome diversity as a result of intense captive management. This current study examines changes in the devil gut microbiome in response to translocation and aims to determine if perturbations from captivity are permanent or reversible. Methods Using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we conducted temporal monitoring of the gut microbiome of released devils during two translocation events, captive-to-wild and wild-to-wild. To investigate whether the microbiome of the released devils changed following translocation, we characterized their microbiome at multiple time points during the translocation process over the course of 6–12 months and compared them to the microbiome of wild incumbent devils (resident wild-born devils at the respective release sites). Results We showed that the pre-release microbiome was significantly different to the microbiome of wild incumbent animals, but that the microbiomes of animals post-release (as early as 3 to 4 weeks post-release) were similar to wild incumbents. The gut microbiome of released animals showed significant compositional shifts toward the wild incumbent microbiome of both translocation events. Conclusion Our results suggest that the devil gut microbiome is dynamic and that loss of microbiome diversity in captivity can be restored following release to the wild. We recommend the broader application of microbiome monitoring in wildlife translocation programs to assess the impacts of translocation on animal microbiomes.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Captivity</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Carnivore</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Reintroduction program</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Wildlife translocation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dysbiosis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grueber, Catherine E.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fox, Samantha</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wise, Phil</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Barrs, Vanessa R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hogg, Carolyn J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Belov, Katherine</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Animal microbiome</subfield><subfield code="d">[London] : BioMed Central, 2019</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2019), 1 vom: 03. Okt.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1067731326</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2965862-7</subfield><subfield code="x">2524-4671</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:03</subfield><subfield code="g">month:10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42523-019-0012-4</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">03</subfield><subfield code="c">10</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.39787 |