↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of the fecal microbiota of domestic commercial meat, laboratory, companion, and shelter rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculi)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of the fecal microbiota of domestic commercial meat, laboratory, companion, and shelter rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculi)
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12917-018-1464-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Kylie, J. Scott Weese, Patricia V. Turner

Abstract

Rabbits are cecotrophic, hindgut-fermenters that rely heavily on their gastrointestinal microbiota for optimal digestion of plant-based diets. Dysbiosis, caused by disruption of the gastrointestinal microbiota, is known to predispose rabbits to rabbit enteritis complex (REC), a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The objectives of this study were to describe the fecal microbiota of domestic rabbits from a variety of settings (commercial meat, companion, laboratory, and shelter) and to identify how factors such as age, season, and routine antimicrobial use affect the fecal microbiota composition. A total of 86 pooled commercial meat, 54 companion, 14 pooled laboratory, and 14 shelter rabbit fecal samples were evaluated using 16S rRNA gene sequencing of the V4 region. In all sample types, the predominant bacterial phylum was Firmicutes. Other commonly identified phyla (composing ≥ 1% of the total microbiota composition) were Verrucomicrobia, Proteobacteria, and Bacteroidetes. Significant differences in composition were noted between commercial, companion, laboratory, and shelter rabbit samples for proportions of Verrucomicrobia (P < 0.01), Proteobacteria (P < 0.01), and Lentisphaerae (P = 0.01) within the total microbiota. Within the commercial meat rabbit samples, significant differences between the microbiota composition of growers (n = 42) and does (n = 44) were limited to one unclassified Firmicutes (P = 0.03) and no differences were identified at the phylum level. Significant differences were present between fecal samples taken from rabbits during the summer (n = 44) compared to the winter (n = 42), with Firmicutes (P = 0.04), Verrucomicrobia (P = 0.03), Proteobacteria (P = 0.02), Deinococcus-Thermus (P = 0.04), Armatimonadates (P = 0.003), and Actinobacteria (P = 0.03) forming significantly different proportions of the microbiota. The only significant difference in composition between those farms that routinely reported antimicrobial use and those that did not was in one unclassified Bacteroidetes (P < 0.05) and no differences were identified at the phylum level. Rabbit husbandry and diet, in addition to season, significantly influence the fecal microbiota composition of domestic rabbits, while age of the rabbit post-weaning has minimal impact.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Researcher 10 15%
Other 7 11%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 16 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 10 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 19 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 August 2018.
All research outputs
#3,300,631
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#236
of 3,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,142
of 326,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#5
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,072 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.