Evidence Hub

Comprehensive profile of the companion animal gut microbiome integrating reference-based and reference-free methods

Tobyn A. Branck, Zhi-Jin Hu, William A. Nickols, Aaron M. Walsh, Amrisha Bhosle, Meghan I Short, Jacob T. Nearing, F. Asnicar et al.

The ISME Journal, 2024

1,909 participants · 22 citations

Abstract

Abstract The gut microbiome of companion animals is relatively underexplored, despite its relevance to animal health, pet owner health, and basic microbial community biology. Here, we provide the most comprehensive analysis of the canine and feline gut microbiomes to date, incorporating 2639 stool shotgun metagenomes (2272 dog and 367 cat) spanning 14 publicly available datasets (n = 730) and 8 new study populations (n = 1909). These are compared with 238 and 112 baseline human gut metagenomes from the Human Microbiome Project 1-II and a traditionally living Malagasy cohort, respectively, processed in a manner identical to the animal metagenomes. All microbiomes were characterized using reference-based taxonomic and functional profiling, as well as de novo assembly yielding metagenomic assembled genomes clustered into species-level genome bins. Companion animals shared 184 species-level genome bins not found in humans, whereas 198 were found in all three hosts. We applied novel methodology to distinguish strains of these shared organisms either transferred or unique to host species, with phylogenetic patterns suggesting host-specific adaptation of microbial lineages. This corresponded with functional divergence of these lineages by host (e.g. differences in metabolic and antibiotic resistance genes) likely important to companion animal health. This study provides the largest resource to date of companion animal gut metagenomes and greatly contributes to our understanding of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,909 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free