date: 2021-02-10T13:53:53Z
pdf:PDFVersion: 1.4
pdf:docinfo:title: Microbiomes from feces vs. gut in tadpoles: distinct community compositions between substrates and preservation methods
xmp:CreatorTool: Adobe InDesign CS4 (6.0)
access_permission:can_print_degraded: true
subject: Sample type and preservation methods are likely to influence the results of microbiome analyses. Here, we sampled tadpoles of Nanorana parkeri non-invasively for feces, and subsequently for hindgut through dissection. Gut and fecal samples were stored in ethanol, and additionally, part of the gut samples were frozen, but temporarily thawed during transport as it often happens under difficult field conditions. Our results showed that both substrate (gut vs. feces) as well as preservation method can influence the analysis of intestinal microbiomes. Frozen gut samples strongly differed from ethanol-stored samples, and most of the frozen samples were dominated (in relative abundance) by a set of Proteobacteria OTUs that were completely absent from the ethanol-stored samples. This blooming of contaminant bacteria occurred after less than 12 h of thawing, thus caution should be taken when constancy of cold temperatures cannot be maintained in the field for sample preservation purposes. Among ethanol-stored samples, whereas the recovered bacterial richness and phylogenetic diversity did not differ, the community structure varied significantly. Thus, for meaningful gut microbiome meta-analyses it is important to acknowledge the effect of the sampling substrate for the microbial community composition. 
xmpMM:History:Action: saved
dc:format: application/pdf; version=1.4
pdf:docinfo:creator_tool: Adobe InDesign CS4 (6.0)
access_permission:fill_in_form: true
xmpMM:History:When: 2010-04-30T13:35:55Z
pdf:encrypted: false
dc:title: Microbiomes from feces vs. gut in tadpoles: distinct community compositions between substrates and preservation methods
modified: 2021-02-10T13:53:53Z
cp:subject: Sample type and preservation methods are likely to influence the results of microbiome analyses. Here, we sampled tadpoles of Nanorana parkeri non-invasively for feces, and subsequently for hindgut through dissection. Gut and fecal samples were stored in ethanol, and additionally, part of the gut samples were frozen, but temporarily thawed during transport as it often happens under difficult field conditions. Our results showed that both substrate (gut vs. feces) as well as preservation method can influence the analysis of intestinal microbiomes. Frozen gut samples strongly differed from ethanol-stored samples, and most of the frozen samples were dominated (in relative abundance) by a set of Proteobacteria OTUs that were completely absent from the ethanol-stored samples. This blooming of contaminant bacteria occurred after less than 12 h of thawing, thus caution should be taken when constancy of cold temperatures cannot be maintained in the field for sample preservation purposes. Among ethanol-stored samples, whereas the recovered bacterial richness and phylogenetic diversity did not differ, the community structure varied significantly. Thus, for meaningful gut microbiome meta-analyses it is important to acknowledge the effect of the sampling substrate for the microbial community composition. 
xmpMM:History:SoftwareAgent: Adobe InDesign 6.0
pdf:docinfo:subject: Sample type and preservation methods are likely to influence the results of microbiome analyses. Here, we sampled tadpoles of Nanorana parkeri non-invasively for feces, and subsequently for hindgut through dissection. Gut and fecal samples were stored in ethanol, and additionally, part of the gut samples were frozen, but temporarily thawed during transport as it often happens under difficult field conditions. Our results showed that both substrate (gut vs. feces) as well as preservation method can influence the analysis of intestinal microbiomes. Frozen gut samples strongly differed from ethanol-stored samples, and most of the frozen samples were dominated (in relative abundance) by a set of Proteobacteria OTUs that were completely absent from the ethanol-stored samples. This blooming of contaminant bacteria occurred after less than 12 h of thawing, thus caution should be taken when constancy of cold temperatures cannot be maintained in the field for sample preservation purposes. Among ethanol-stored samples, whereas the recovered bacterial richness and phylogenetic diversity did not differ, the community structure varied significantly. Thus, for meaningful gut microbiome meta-analyses it is important to acknowledge the effect of the sampling substrate for the microbial community composition. 
xmpMM:History:InstanceID: xmp.iid:D480E94A4C54DF11A7019775A25391B7
pdf:docinfo:creator: Sten Anslan
meta:author: Huan Li
trapped: Unknown
meta:creation-date: 2021-02-10T13:52:05Z
created: 2021-02-10T13:52:05Z
access_permission:extract_for_accessibility: true
Creation-Date: 2021-02-10T13:52:05Z
xmpMM:DerivedFrom:DocumentID: xmp.did:A3A3058D291CEA118C3EEF8F151DC996
GTS_PDFXVersion: PDF/X-4
Author: Huan Li
producer: Adobe PDF Library 9.0
pdf:docinfo:producer: Adobe PDF Library 9.0
pdf:unmappedUnicodeCharsPerPage: 0
dc:description: Sample type and preservation methods are likely to influence the results of microbiome analyses. Here, we sampled tadpoles of Nanorana parkeri non-invasively for feces, and subsequently for hindgut through dissection. Gut and fecal samples were stored in ethanol, and additionally, part of the gut samples were frozen, but temporarily thawed during transport as it often happens under difficult field conditions. Our results showed that both substrate (gut vs. feces) as well as preservation method can influence the analysis of intestinal microbiomes. Frozen gut samples strongly differed from ethanol-stored samples, and most of the frozen samples were dominated (in relative abundance) by a set of Proteobacteria OTUs that were completely absent from the ethanol-stored samples. This blooming of contaminant bacteria occurred after less than 12 h of thawing, thus caution should be taken when constancy of cold temperatures cannot be maintained in the field for sample preservation purposes. Among ethanol-stored samples, whereas the recovered bacterial richness and phylogenetic diversity did not differ, the community structure varied significantly. Thus, for meaningful gut microbiome meta-analyses it is important to acknowledge the effect of the sampling substrate for the microbial community composition. 
pdf:docinfo:custom:GTS_PDFXVersion: PDF/X-4
Keywords: Amphibia; Anura; Nanorana parkeri; gut microbiota; fecal samples; metabarcoding; 16S rRNA gene.
access_permission:modify_annotations: true
dc:creator: Huan Li
description: Sample type and preservation methods are likely to influence the results of microbiome analyses. Here, we sampled tadpoles of Nanorana parkeri non-invasively for feces, and subsequently for hindgut through dissection. Gut and fecal samples were stored in ethanol, and additionally, part of the gut samples were frozen, but temporarily thawed during transport as it often happens under difficult field conditions. Our results showed that both substrate (gut vs. feces) as well as preservation method can influence the analysis of intestinal microbiomes. Frozen gut samples strongly differed from ethanol-stored samples, and most of the frozen samples were dominated (in relative abundance) by a set of Proteobacteria OTUs that were completely absent from the ethanol-stored samples. This blooming of contaminant bacteria occurred after less than 12 h of thawing, thus caution should be taken when constancy of cold temperatures cannot be maintained in the field for sample preservation purposes. Among ethanol-stored samples, whereas the recovered bacterial richness and phylogenetic diversity did not differ, the community structure varied significantly. Thus, for meaningful gut microbiome meta-analyses it is important to acknowledge the effect of the sampling substrate for the microbial community composition. 
dcterms:created: 2021-02-10T13:52:05Z
Last-Modified: 2021-02-10T13:53:53Z
dcterms:modified: 2021-02-10T13:53:53Z
title: Microbiomes from feces vs. gut in tadpoles: distinct community compositions between substrates and preservation methods
xmpMM:DocumentID: xmp.did:3443D5BAF739EB119C20BF9237ABF548
Last-Save-Date: 2021-02-10T13:53:53Z
pdf:docinfo:keywords: Amphibia; Anura; Nanorana parkeri; gut microbiota; fecal samples; metabarcoding; 16S rRNA gene.
pdf:docinfo:modified: 2021-02-10T13:53:53Z
meta:save-date: 2021-02-10T13:53:53Z
Content-Type: application/pdf
X-Parsed-By: org.apache.tika.parser.DefaultParser
creator: Huan Li
dc:subject: Amphibia; Anura; Nanorana parkeri; gut microbiota; fecal samples; metabarcoding; 16S rRNA gene.
access_permission:assemble_document: true
xmpTPg:NPages: 9
pdf:charsPerPage: 4775
access_permission:extract_content: true
access_permission:can_print: true
pdf:docinfo:trapped: Unknown
meta:keyword: Amphibia; Anura; Nanorana parkeri; gut microbiota; fecal samples; metabarcoding; 16S rRNA gene.
xmpMM:DerivedFrom:InstanceID: xmp.iid:3343D5BAF739EB119C20BF9237ABF548
access_permission:can_modify: true
pdf:docinfo:created: 2021-02-10T13:52:05Z