Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2023 Oct 14;99(11):fiad127. doi: 10.1093/femsec/fiad127

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of FEMS.

This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)

PMC Copyright notice

Figure 1. — Factors influencing the composition of gut microbiota and diet of woodrats at Whitewater. (A) Euler diagram displaying the significant explanatory factors and their % variance on gut microbiome composition based on redundancy analysis for the entire dataset. (B) Relative abundance of diet items at the family-level averaged by season. (C) Relative abundance of gut bacteria binned by Order by season. (D) Diet diversity by season. Diet was more diverse in the wet season (Kruskal–Wallis test: χ² = 5.112, P = .024). (E) Gut microbiome diversity by season. Gut microbial communities were more diverse in the dry season (Kruskal–Wallis test: χ² = 26.564, P < .001). (F) Principal coordinates analysis of the gut microbiome based on Bray–Curtis distances. Season was a significant factor in structuring microbial communities (PERMANOVA: Sum of squares = 1.065, Pseudo-F = 5.054, R² = 0.030, P = .001). Ellipses represent 95% confidence intervals. Significant differences are denoted by * (* = P < .05; ** P < .01, and *** P < .001).