Skip to main content
Frontiers in Veterinary Science logoLink to Frontiers in Veterinary Science
. 2026 Sep 18;13:1981863. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2026.1981863

Correction: Pilot study evaluating tolerability and changes in fecal microbiota associated with novel probiotic administration to dogs with diarrhea

Jessi Doshier 1,*, Brooke Anderson 2, Fan Yang 2, Samuel D Stewart 3, Kayla A Calapa 2, Rachel Cooper 3,4, Heather Wilson-Robles 3, Mallory Embree 2, Chand Khanna 3
PMCID: PMC13632467  PMID: 42828283

There was a mistake in Figure 2 as published.

Figure 2.

Panel A shows a stacked bar chart of microbial family relative abundances in five to ten dogs at days zero, seven, and fifty-six, color-coded by family. Panel B displays a line graph of the log-ratio of healthy versus IBD-associated ASVs for each dog over the same days. Panel C presents a line plot with shaded error representing abundance (as an rCLR value) of the three supplemented bacterial strains across the same time points, with each species differentiated by color.

Taxonomic characterization of each dog's fecal samples at each collected time point. (A) Family-level relative abundance of ASVs in fecal samples collected during the screening visit (day 0) and after 7 and 56 days of AMP treatment. Asterisks mark screening samples from dogs later classified as non-responders. (B) Changes in the ratio of ASVs that align to taxa used in the dysbiosis index (18), expressed as a log-ratio of ASVs more common in healthy dogs to those more common in CE/IBD dogs (see Methods section). The ratio is computed as summed reads from Fusobacterium, Faecalibacterium, Turicibacter, Blautia, and Peptacetobacter hiranonis divided by summed reads from Streptococcus and Escherichia coli. Open symbols indicate non-responders. (C) Abundance of the administered AMP strains, quantified as the mean rCLR-transformed value of ASVs with 100% identity to the sequenced 16S rRNA gene region of each canine-derived strain included in the AMP.

Panel C contained an incorrect taxonomic annotation. The strain ASCUSCA103 was erroneously labeled as Enterococcus faecalis; the correct taxonomic assignment is Enterococcus faecium, consistent with its identification elsewhere in the article.

The corrected Figure 2 appears below.

The original version of this article has been updated.

Footnotes

Edited and reviewed by: María-Aránzazu Martínez, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain

Generative AI statement

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.


Articles from Frontiers in Veterinary Science are provided here courtesy of Frontiers Media SA

RESOURCES