Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Expectations of peer review?
Published in John Measey, How to Publish in Biological Sciences, 2023
In many journals, the reviewers are directly asked whether the manuscript should be rejected or resubmitted (major or minor revisions). This opinion is given in a set of ‘radio buttons’ in the editorial management software. Depending on the journal, a number of additional qualitative questions are asked of reviewers that may be pivotal to the progress of a manuscript. These questions are set by the gatekeepers for the journal in question, and may ask whether the manuscript is worthy of publication in that journal, in the top 5% of important findings, or similar. Bornmann and Marx (2012) found that some journals require that all reviewers respond with a positive criterion on these questions, or the manuscript will not be considered further. They term this the ‘Anna Karenina Principle’ (AKP) of peer review because it requires ‘positive selection’ on all criteria, whereas previously papers were selected by meeting minimum standards; ‘negative selection’, which is now the overriding principle for ‘no Impact Factor’ journals.
Inflammasomes make the case for littermate-controlled experimental design in studying host-microbiota interactions
Published in Gut Microbes, 2018
Michail Mamantopoulos, Francesca Ronchi, Kathy D. McCoy, Andy Wullaert
Our above described results obtained with littermate-controlled experiments contrast to the previously suggested roles of Nlrp6 and ASC in shaping the intestinal microbiota composition.12,13,15-17 However, each of these earlier reports was based on fecal microbiota comparisons between non-littermate or externally sourced WT and KO mice that were separately housed for multiple generations. Several studies demonstrated animal facility-dependent microbiota differences in otherwise genetically identical mice,7,18-20 indicating that the gut microbiota composition can be influenced by multiple non-genetic factors. The latter could include also stochastic events that initiate random alterations in a given microbiota community, a novel concept that was recently coined the ‘Anna Karenina principle’.21 The variety of distinct microbial profiles arising due to stochastic triggers can later mistakenly be interpreted as ‘dysbiosis’ when transmitted further by maternal inheritance and preserved due to prolonged colony isolation, a phenomenon known as the legacy effect.22 In fact, we also encountered a legacy effect in our animal facility, as none of the littermate-controlled or F2 Nlrp6 analyses reproduced the bacterial taxa differences that we had initially observed in the non-littermate Nlrp6−/− versus C57BL/6J mice.14 As we identified mother and cage covariates as significant contributors to the gut microbiota variation in the latter set-up, microbial differences observed in these non-littermate mice likely represented legacy effects.
Integrating gut microbiome and host immune markers to understand the pathogenesis of Clostridioides difficile infection
Published in Gut Microbes, 2021
Shanlin Ke, Nira R. Pollock, Xu-Wen Wang, Xinhua Chen, Kaitlyn Daugherty, Qianyun Lin, Hua Xu, Kevin W. Garey, Anne J. Gonzales-Luna, Ciarán P. Kelly, Yang-Yu Liu
Consistent with previous studies42–45, we found that the gut microbiota of CDI patients was characterized by lower Shannon diversity than that of the Control group. Interestingly, we observed an increased variation of both immune markers and gut microbial compositions in the CDI group with respect to other studied groups. This suggests that CDI is characterized by a significantly less stable microbiome and immune homeostasis. Our findings are in line with the Anna Karenina principle, which suggests that CDI linked changes in the microbiome and immune homeostasis are likely stochastic, leading to community instability46–48.
The intestinal microbiota and metabolites in patients with anorexia nervosa
Published in Gut Microbes, 2021
Petra Prochazkova, Radka Roubalova, Jiri Dvorak, Jakub Kreisinger, Martin Hill, Helena Tlaskalova-Hogenova, Petra Tomasova, Helena Pelantova, Martina Cermakova, Marek Kuzma, Josef Bulant, Martin Bilej, Kvido Smitka, Alena Lambertova, Petra Holanova, Hana Papezova
The control group exhibited less interindividual variation, which was manifested by core microbiota depletion, as well as a systematic difference in gut bacteriome compared to patients with AN (Table 6). Greater interindividual variation of patients with AN can be explained by the so-called “Anna Karenina principle,” explaining that dysbiotic individuals vary more in microbial community composition than healthy individuals due to stochastic microbiota response to a disequilibrium state induced by stressors. Such effects on the microbiome are common, important, and they are often associated with host health impairment.24