Preprint
Review

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Equine Fecal Microbiota Transplantation: Possible Mechanisms and Future Perspectives

Submitted:

01 February 2023

Posted:

03 February 2023

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
Equine fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an emerging therapy for restoring gut microbiome balance in horses. An imbalance in the gut microorganisms, known as dysbiosis, can cause inflammation and metabolic disruptions. FMT, which involves transferring gut bacteria from a healthy donor to a diseased recipient, has shown positive results in treating gastrointestinal diseases in horses, but is still largely limited to research purposes due to safety concerns and lack of understanding of its mechanisms. This paper aims to shed light on the possible mechanisms of FMT in horses and discuss future perspectives for its clinical application. Further research is needed to develop more effective and safer FMT techniques for horses.
Keywords: 
;  ;  

1. Introduction

The collective term for all microorganisms, including bacteria, fungi, and viruses, is referred to as "microbiota." Advances in culture-independent RNA-sequencing technology, such as 16S rRNA sequencing, and data analysis techniques have revealed that every part of the horse's body is home to a unique microbiota. For example, body sites, such as skin[1], gastrointestinal[2,3], respiratory[4], and reproduction tract[5,6], harbors certain microbiomes. To our knowledge, the gut microbiota of humans and animals has the most diverse microbial community. Bacteria, among them, are the most deeply and widely studied. In the past, bacteria were thought of solely as agents of disease, but recent research has shown they play a significant role in the host's physiology. The bacterial populations in the horse's digestive system vary depending on factors such as pH levels, gut motility, oxygen levels, and nutrient availability along the gastrointestinal tract[2] (Figure 1).
The equine digestive system is home to approximately 1015 bacteria cells[7], consisting of over 108 bacterial genera[8,9] and 7 distinct phyla[3,10]. The most abundant bacteria belong to the Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and Proteobacteria phyla, which are the most stable and dominant in the gastrointestinal tract of healthy adult horses[10,11,12]. The most abundant genera at the genus level are Succinivibrio and Fibrobacter in healthy horses[13].
The horse gut microbiota is used for food digestion and nutrient absorption[14]. The majority of microbiomes colonize in the cecum [15] ,where microbial fermentation takes place suppling 60-70% of energy for the horse body[16,17]. The gut microbiota has a strong connection to gastrointestinal illnesses, such as colitis[11], and diarrhea[18]. In addition, new evidence suggested that the gut microbiome can have an impact on health and disease beyond just the intestine by affecting host behavior and impacting other organs, due to its role in their functioning[19,20].
The horse gut microbiome is a highly intricate biological system, composed of archaea, bacteria, yeast, fungi, viruses, parasites, and protists[21,22,23,24]. Its precise architecture is hard to characterize completely because the gut microbiota has its own unique differences in individual horses although its uniformity happens among different groups of horses. This phenomenon also results in microbial communication that changes and keeps its relative balance based on individual and group horses. Because of such dynamic feature of equine gut microbiota, its status is usually described in temporal way [10,12]. Having the right composition and proportion of gut bacteria is crucial for its role in defending against pathogens and its involvement in various metabolic processes. The horse gut microbiome is a dynamic and evolving system that changes throughout the animal's life and can be affected by various factors[25].
Diversity is an important parameter of healthy gut microbiota, including α-diversity (diversity of species within a given sample) and β-diversity (measurement of similarity or dissimilarity of two communities). In terms of bacterial species, the equine gut microbiota is distributed throughout the different locations of the gastrointestinal tract, which is specialized to perform explicit function. In the stomach, microbial diversity depends upon the presence and absence of Lactobacillus spp.[26]. Compared to the colon bacterial community, the small intestinal microbiota (i.e., duodenum, jejunum, and ileum) is much simpler with medium pH level. The small intestine colonized by low number of commensal microbiota communities is also the main digestion site of protein, soluble carbohydrate, and fat[27]. Cecum microbiota is much more complex, highest number and diversity, than any other sections, and predominated by Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, and Bacteroidetes. Its composition changes with dietary intervention[28]. In horses, it is hard to establish an ideal concept of healthy gut microbiota. However, in general, an ideal state of healthy equine gut microbiota is characterized by Firmicutes-dominated microbial profiles, followed by relative abundance of Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria, or Verrucomicrobia [11,13,29]. It's important to note the interaction between the horse gut microbiome and the immune system, which is crucial in maintaining the animal's overall health. This relationship enables the body to distinguish between beneficial bacteria and coexist with them, while also protecting it from infections caused by opportunistic bacteria[30].
Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) aims to reconstruct a healthy gut microbiota after disrupted by medical intervention or harmful bacteria invasion, which has been widely studied since approved its usage for treating human Clostridium difficile infections (CDI) by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2013[31]. Our knowledge of FMT is far from complete, particularly in horses, although it is gradually becoming a medical option in equine clinics for treating gastrointestinal disorders such as colitis[32,33]. Studies showed that FMT helps restore microbial balance of the dysbiosis gut in horses via transplanting stool microbiota from a healthy individual into the gastrointestinal tract of a diseased patient, whose illness may be caused by a disorder associated with disruption of the intestinal microbiota[32].
Despite positive results, the main barriers to the widespread clinical use of FMT in horses are safety concerns and the difficulty of explaining the treatment's mechanisms to horse owners. Therefore, in this paper, we aim to discuss possible mechanisms and future perspectives of equine FMT to facilitate its therapeutic usage.

1.1. Factors influencing equine gut microbiota

There are many factors that can contribute to disruption of equine gut microbiota[25] (Figure 2). For example, diet (starch/fructose, forge-concentrate, concentrated supplements, and pasture-based management)[28,34,35,36,37,38], obesity and equine metabolic syndrome (EMS)[39,40,41], stress[9,42], medication (antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) and anesthetics and fasting)[42,43,44], and diseases (colitis, and diarrhea, colic, laminitis, and equine grass sickness (EGS))[11,13,29,45,46,47,48,49].
Equine gut microbial community is also reported to be influenced by other factors including exercise[50], season[12], social interaction[51], breed[52], age[53], sex[54], and pregnancy[55].
When the horse gut microbiome is disturbed by these factors, the diversity and abundance of normal gut bacteria decrease, particularly keystone bacteria that play a role in providing resistance against colonization. Impaired gastrointestinal wall would easily cause the colonization of diseases-leading bacteria and various disease reactions.

1.2. Mechanism of fecal microbiota transplantation in horses

The purpose of FMT is to reconstruct the disrupted gut microbiota and restore its composition and function. Gut microbiota in healthy horses is commonly composed of certain phylum and genus with a high-level of taxonomic and functional diversity. In healthy horses, most of these bacteria are beneficial and interact with each other and with other organs to support and maintain a healthy immune protection in the host.
Although the exact mechanism of FMT is still imprecise, four relevant hypotheses have been proposed (Figure 3): (1) niche exclusion, (2) increased competition for nutrition, (3) production of antimicrobials, and (4) increase in secondary bile acid.
Competitive niche exclusion is a possibility for FMT's mechanism. The intestinal tract has limited space in the abdomen, causing the intestinal folds to maximize surface area and create niches. However, these niches provide a haven for pathogens and can render treatments ineffective. Healthy donor stool microbes can replace both healthy and diseased microbes in the recipient's gut, thereby occupying these niches.
In human clinical settings, FMT is frequently used for treating CDI. During treatment, the donor's fecal matter not only interacts directly with the recipient's native gut microbiome, but also indirectly affects it by competing for nutrients with pathogens. For instance, the introduction of non-toxic C. difficile strains can lower the likelihood of CDI recurrence in patients[56]. Sometimes, the fecal microbiota strains from a healthy donor may outcompete the recipient's pathogenic bacteria for available nutrients. This mechanism is similar to competitive niche exclusion. Both of them are aimed to reduce surviving opportunities for pathogenic microbiomes.
Another potential mechanism of FMT treatment is increased production of antimicrobials [57]. This mechanism is also competition-based, and the interaction between the recipient and donor gut microbiota is the source of bacteriocin production [58]. Under the normal condition, the volume of bacteriocins produced by gut microbiota is sufficient for eliminating or deactivating pathogenic and opportunistic microorganisms. However, when the gut flora is disbalanced, the volume of bacteriocin production is diminished and unable to stop harmful agents from colonization and proliferation. Transferring healthy donor microbiota could increase the relative abundance of healthy gut microbiota as well as bacteriocin production, and restore the dynamic elimination of pathogenic and opportunistic microorganisms.
Bile acids are crucial for gut metabolism, signaling, and the composition of the microbiome. The liver produces primary bile acids[59], but gut microbes modify them into various forms, including secondary bile acids, which have been associated with various diseases such as cirrhosis, inflammatory bowel disease, and cancer[60]. Increased secondary bile acid production is the last potential mechanism of FMT [61]. Transferring healthy donor microbiota can change the bile acid metabolism in the recipient related to the altered composition of gut microbiota [62]. One example of the impact of FMT on bile acids is the observed decrease in primary bile acids and increase in secondary bile acid production after FMT treatment for CDI. Studies have also shown that FMT can restore the Firmicutes phylum and secondary bile acid metabolism in CDI patients[63]. Both in vivo and vitro studies have demonstrated that increased production of secondary bile acid can prevent the germination and growth of C. difficile spores[64,65].
CDI is a well-known cause of acute diarrhea in both adult horses and foals[66,67,68]. While FMT has not been studied as a treatment for CDI in horses, its mechanism of treating CDI in human patients has been well researched. It serves as an illustration of the combination of exclusion of pathogens and increased competition for nutrients (Figure 4). Normally, a healthy intestinal internal environment is mostly populated with highly diverse and benign microbiomes. They can prevent pathogenic and opportunistic bacteria such as C. difficile from overgrowing. However, when the host is treated with antibiotics for various reasons, the gut microbiota become less diverse and result in a state of dysbiosis, which allows colonization of C. difficile. C. difficile is a spore-forming bacterium, when ingested via contaminated water or food, it arrives in the intestinal tract, proliferates and produces toxins which leads to CDI. However, common CDI treatment generally involves prescription of antibiotics such as metronidazole or vancomycin[69]. Such medicines could eliminate C. difficile, but its spores could remain in the intestinal tract, and result in rendering recurrent CDI (rCDI). In CDI and rCDI patients, transferring the stool material from a healthy donor to the recipient’s intestinal tract can restore the normal gut flora both in composition and function.

1.3. Fecal microbiota transplantation in horses

FMT has gained popularity in veterinary clinical practices in recent years. However, studies about the application of equine FMT are only a few. So far, it has been used as investigational treatments for gastrointestinal diseases such as colitis and diarrhea.
Disruption of normal gut microbial communities has been associated with CDI and may be a main leading factor for the development of acute, undifferentiated and antibiotic-induced colitis in horses[70]. Although C. difficile is native to the large intestine in healthy horses[71], it becomes toxin-producing and disease-causing bacterium when the GI tract loses microbial balance. Diarrhea is a common symptom caused by CDI, as C. difficile can produce toxins to demolish the intestinal epithelium [72]. Standard treatment for CDI is antibiotic administration. However, it increases the risk factors for CDI and further leads to the development of rCDI[73,74]. FMT has been used for treating CDI in humans with promising results[75,76,77,78]. However, in equine medicine, relevant researches that evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of FMT on CDI recovery are few. According to a previous paper, fresh fecal transplantation was successful in a horse for treating severe CDI, and the stool consistency was returned to normal status after 12 h of post-FMT[79]. However, this was a review paper, not a controlled study. Therefore, further studies with control groups are needed for better evaluating the efficacy of FMT in treating equine CDI.
Colitis in horses is a leading cause of critical illness with an estimated fatality of 25.4% to 35%[80,81]. Without early medical intervention, colitis usually leads to severe complications such as laminitis, coagulopathy, and cardiovascular dysfunction[82]. Studies demonstrated that healthy equine gut microbiota has a significantly greater α-diversity but lower β-diversity compared to the ones with colitis[83,84,85]. Although in most cases the exact cause of colitis remains unclear, gastrointestinal dysbiosis suggests that FMT could be a managable choice[86]. A recent study of five geriatric horses (> 20 years old) with colitis revealed that 3-consecutive-day FMT induced an increased relative abundance of Kiritimatiellaeota (formerly classified as Verrucomicrobia)[87]. Moreover, at the end of the study, the fecal microbiota of treatment responders had a higher α-diversity than prior to treatment and became phylogenetically more similar to that of their donor. Therefore, FMT could help restore the gut microbiota of horses with colitis and resolute diarrhea. However, the biggest limitations of this work were the small sample size and only 3 of the 5 horses responded to the treatment. In addition, this was not a controlled study. Thus, it may need larger case-controlled studies to ensure reliability of these results. In terms of a larger sample size, a study was conducted to better evaluate the FMT efficacy on equine colitis treatments[88]. This work enrolled a total of 22 horses with moderate to severe diarrhea, consistent with a diagnosis of colitis. FMT was performed on 12 horses in 3 consecutive days, while standard care (oxytetracycline, combination of penicillin and gentamicin) without FMT was managed on the rest. The results showed that in all colitis horses improved manure consistency was associated with a greater α-diversity in fecal microbiota. In addition, compared with standard cared horses, FMT-treated patients demonstrated lower UniFrac distance (a distance metric used for comparing biological communities) which suggested greater normalization of the gut microbiota occurred in these horses. However, in this study the control group was collected from a different hospital, introducing potential bias to their results.
Similarly, several other studies also showed that FMT can improve symptoms of acute and chronic diarrhea in horses[89,90]. In conclusion, FMT may serve as a therapeutic option to reduce diarrhea severity in horses with colitis by improving diversity of gut microbiota.
However, it should be made clear to the horse owners that fecal transplant therapy may not work in some situations even though the symptoms are caused by intestinal dysbiosis. For example, Costa et al.[91], indicated that 7 days of FMT treatment in 6 horses with acute and chronic diarrhea was not sufficient for restoring the disrupted microbiota, where only 4 horses showed improved symptoms while the other 2 horses did not survive. In addition, a recent case-controlled study suggested that FMT failed to prevent Metronidazole induced dysbiosis in horses[92]. The biggest drawback in this study was the authors conducted FMT with metronidazole treatment, which could kill beneficial bacteria in the fecal solution. Therefore, based on clinical practices, we suggest conducting FMT treatment before or after 4-8 h of antimicrobial administration which could maximize the efficacy of fecal therapy.

1.4. Risks and limits of equine fecal microbiota transplantation

Based on limited FMT studies in horses, coupled with promising results from human clinics, we might suggest that FMT is a safe choice for treating gastrointestinal disorders with little adverse effects. However, in addition to risk factors mentioned above[93], the medicinal safety concern in equine is the principal limitation of fecal transplant therapy as a lack of research, practical, duplicatable guidelines and appropriate guidelines. Another major concern in FMT therapy is possible to transmit opportunistic bacteria existing in the donor’s intestine without provoking clinical symptoms[94], such as E. coli, Salmonella, and C. difficile.
Presently, the donor selection process is focused on safety by excluding as many risky elements as possible to obtain relatively ‘healthy’ fecal materials. The concept for healthy gut microbiota has never been defined, maybe never will. Now our main objective is to improve the treatment efficiency of FMT, however, as we rely too much on the donor, it is not always easy to control and anticipate the outcomes.
In addition, the equine gut microbiota also includes other microorganisms such as fungi and viruses, which may have an impact on FMT efficacy. For example, in humans, a previous study showed that fungi might have potential influence on FMT efficacy in rCDI treatment[95]. However, the impact of fungi and viruses on efficiency of FMT treatment is an undetermined research area in veterinary science, and more studies are needed.
Also, there is no guarantee that FMT can treat all gastrointestinal disorders. A recent study documented a temporary effect worked when horses with Fecal Water Syndrome were treated with FMT [96]. However, it should be noticed that the main purpose of FMT is to restore a disrupted gut microbiota. It might not be a logical choice to use FMT for treating horse gastrointestinal diseases without dysbiosis. Therefore, the veterinary professionals should offer a detailed explanation of risks and limitations that may involve FMT treatment to the owners before the procedure.

2. Future Prospective

In veterinary medicine, the future of FMT in handling gastrointestinal disorders will be bright, particularly in equine clinical treatments. Horses are extremely subtle to altered gastrointestinal microbial environment and usually present symptoms such as diarrhea, colic or laminitis. Therefore, FMT has enormous potentiality due to its role in restoring the disrupted gut microbiota community to ameliorate such conditions with little adverse events.
Some veterinary specialist proposed possible steps for conducting equine FMT in recent years based on studies and experience. We are now able to select specific donor's gut microbiota aimed at the recipient horse by 16S rRNA sequencing technique. For instance, a study suggested that FMT responders of colitis horses showed an increased relative abundance of Kiritimatiellaeota after treatment[97]. This result indicated that transplanted stool with the highest relative abundance of Kiritimatiellaeota might be more efficient for treating horses with colitis. In the future, studies could investigate such associations, a specific disorder and alternations in the intestinal flora before and after conducting FMT, which might significantly improve the efficiency of equine fecal transplant therapy.
Moreover, evidence indicated that gut dysbiosis can induce psychological status by influencing the gut-brain axis. Abnormal behaviors including stereotype actions, abnormal oral and locomotion, and aggressiveness were the most frequent in mentally stressed horses which could impacted by altered gut microbial composition[98]. Indeed, transplanting gut microbiota could transfer the psychological status of the fecal donor. For example, Kelly et al. indicated that experimental rats with depleted microbiomes in the intestine presented anxiety-like behavior by transferring fecal microbiota from depression patients [99], indicating that gut microbiota can transmit mental stress. It has also been reported that certain bacteria such as Lactobacillus and Bacteroides can alleviate stress and anxiety-like behaviors in mice[100], possibly by restoring specific bacterial metabolites.[101]. In addition, a recent review article in human studies indicated that a decreased depression and anxiety-like behaviors were observed after transplanting healthy fecal microbiota[102]. Although the authors did not discuss how long such therapeutic effects could last, FMT was effective in alleviating symptoms of psychiatric disorders. Equine studies have shown that the intestinal microbiota change dramatically after transportation and sports events[103,104]. Thus, the gut microbiome may serve as a therapeutic target for managing and preventing abnormal behaviors in horses. For example, creating a stool bank using feces from horses with normal physical and behavioral health, and then administering it to stressed horses, especially those involved in frequent sports events and transportations, could be a new approach to improve the wellbeing of horses.
Currently, the process of selecting a donor for FMT mainly focuses on excluding as many pathogens as possible for increased safety, but there is no standard agreement on how to choose a donor horse. Future studies or clinical applications may involve evaluating microbial diversity and a desirable ratio of Bacteroidetes to Firmicutes, which are signs of a healthy gut microbiota. In addition, behavioral evaluations are recommended in the donor selection process, as behavioral abnormalities tend to affect the composition of the fecal microbiota[105]. The criteria for donor screening may be expanded in the future if new pathogens are found to disrupt the composition of healthy gut flora or can be transmitted through fecal transplantation.
The storage of fecal material is a critical aspect in FMT. In many cases of equine FMT, fresh feces are used directly for the procedure without testing for pathogens or drug-resistant bacteria, which could pose a risk to the recipient horse. Research in human studies has shown that frozen feces can be just as effective as fresh ones[106]. This has greater implications in veterinary practices, as the use of pre-screened, readily available frozen feces is both cost- and time-effective, and safer than using fresh feces. The use of frozen feces in horse FMT can overcome geographical limitations, making it more widely available in equine clinical practices (Figure 5). However, it's important to note that the feces must be stored in appropriate conditions. Regular freezing condition (e.g., -20°C) could impair the viability of the microbial population[107].
When creating a stool bank for equine FMT, several important factors should be taken into consideration. Strict screening and selection of donor horses should be performed, including stool microbial culture analysis, antibiotic resistance testing, and necessary hematological exams to minimize risk. Stool banks not only save time and make FMT easier to perform in equine clinics and ranches, but also reduce costs for donor selection and stool handling. Additionally, detailed information about the donor horses should be recorded[108], allowing for easy tracking during and after the FMT procedure and ensuring the safety of the stool bank samples. Therefore, establishing an equine stool bank may be a preliminary groundwork for FMT application in the future.
Unlike other animals, horses are adored for their sports abilities such as jumping and running. New evidence has indicated that gut microbiota plays an important role in human performance ability[109,110]. Results showed that higher relative abundance of lactic-utilizing bacteria in the gut is related to better sport capacity. Although there is a lack of such studies, an in vitro study identified that lactate-utilizing bacteria are present in the equine gut microbiota community[111]. While gut microbiota is reported to be not an indicator predictor of horses in endurance races[112], it is possible that lactic-utilizing bacteria colonized in the intestine can enhance equine performing ability. Therefore, establishing a stool bank using samples from high performance athlete horses rich in these bacteria may be used as a natural stimulator in sports events. Obesity is a growing health issue in horses, as it is linked to metabolic disorders like insulin imbalances, high lipid levels, and laminitis[113,114,115]. Studies have shown that gut microbiota can change in overweight horses after weight loss[116], leading to a significant increase in the alpha-diversity of their fecal microbiota. Given these findings and the impact gut microbiomes have on fitness, using lean horse feces, selected based on Body Condition Score (BCS), as a treatment option for weight loss in overweight horses may be a safe and cost-effective approach.
In equine clinics, the recipients are usually not subjected to any pretreatment during FMT process. However, results from human and mice studies showed that antibiotic pretreatment may enhance FMT efficacy[117,118,119]. This is due to commensal bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract acting as a protector that stops other microbiomes from residing[120]. Antibiotic treatment prior to FMT is aimed to alter the gut microbiota in receipts to increase colonization efficacy by disrupting the colonization resistant barriers that are provided by the receiver’s indigenes gut bacteria. However, using antibiotics in horses is very dangerous and leads to severe conditions such as colitis[121,122,123,124], diarrhea[125,126], colic[127], laminitis[128], etc. Hence, researchers found a potential alternative for eradicating the recipient gut microbiome in horses: polyethylene glycol (PEG 4000). One study demonstrated that administering 40 ml/kg of PEG was effective in cleaning the bowel in human subjects[129]. Another recent study revealed that giving 425 g/l of PEG through oral-gastric gavage at 20-minute intervals could empty the intestine and decrease the microbiome by 90% after four consecutive bowel cleanings in mice[130]. Although FMT has already been successful in treating horses without pre-treating the recipient's gut microbiome, it may still be worth exploring the efficacy of PEG in equine FMT as it can increase its effectiveness by reducing the need for repeated treatments, which would greatly improve equine welfare.

3. Conclusions

FMT is a promising treatment option for treating gastrointestinal microbiota related disorders in equine clinicals and has been used for digestive tract disorders including colitis and diarrhea. Successful FMT is reliant on selecting the most proper donor candidate and the best content of stool materials that plays a crucial role as a regulator otherwise disrupted gut microbiota in the patients. In horses, FMT is becoming a potential choice of treatment, understanding how FMT works is an urgent demand for both veterinary specialists and horse owners. For this regard, we described possible mechanisms of equine FMT to deepen our understanding and to facilitate its therapeutic usage as well as future perspectives that may help direct equine FMT related studies.
The future of FMT in equine will be bright with an increasing number of medical workers and owners preferring to use it as a primary therapeutic option as microbiome modulation and manipulation are the minimum aggressive treatment compared to other methods such as antibiotic intervention. An evidence-based systematic and practical procedure, and a specific disorder of the recipient (a disease-based approach) that defines ‘healthy’ donor gut microbiota in different diseases may also increase FMT efficacy and reduce potential adverse events.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: M.T; Supervision: N.Z, Y.F; Visualization: M.T; Writing - original draft: M.T, W.W; Writing-review & editing: W.W, H.X.

Funding

No external funding available in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

None of the authors have a financial interest in any of the products, devices, or Materials mentioned in this manuscript. The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Westgate, S.J.; Percival, S.L.; Knottenbelt, D.C.; Clegg, P.D.; Cochrane, C.A. Chronic Equine Wounds: What Is the Role of Infection and Biofilms? Wounds 2010, 22, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  2. Ericsson, A.C.; Johnson, P.J.; Lopes, M.A.; Perry, S.C.; Lanter, H.R. A Microbiological Map of the Healthy Equine Gastrointestinal Tract. PLoS One 2016, 11, e0166523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Costa, M.C.; Silva, G.; Ramos, R.V.; Staempfli, H.R.; Arroyo, L.G.; Kim, P.; Weese, J.S. Characterization and Comparison of the Bacterial Microbiota in Different Gastrointestinal Tract Compartments in Horses. Vet. J. 2015, 205, 74–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Bond, S.L.; Timsit, E.; Workentine, M.; Alexander, T.; Léguillette, R. Upper and Lower Respiratory Tract Microbiota in Horses: Bacterial Communities Associated with Health and Mild Asthma (Inflammatory Airway Disease) and Effects of Dexamethasone. BMC Microbiol. 2017, 17, 184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Gao, W.; Chan, Y.; You, M.; Lacap-Bugler, D.C.; Leung, W.K.; Watt, R.M. In-Depth Snapshot of the Equine Subgingival Microbiome. Microb. Pathog. 2016, 94, 76–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Holyoak, G.R.; Lyman, C.C.; Wieneke, X.; DeSilva, U. ; Others The Equine Endometrial Microbiome. Clinical Theriogenology 2018, 10, 273–278. [Google Scholar]
  7. Julliand, V.; Grimm, P. HORSE SPECIES SYMPOSIUM: The Microbiome of the Horse Hindgut: History and Current Knowledge. J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 94, 2262–2274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Venable, E.B.; Fenton, K.A.; Braner, V.M.; Reddington, C.E.; Halpin, M.J.; Heitz, S.A.; Francis, J.M.; Gulson, N.A.; Goyer, C.L.; Bland, S.D.; et al. Effects of Feeding Management on the Equine Cecal Microbiota. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 2017, 49, 113–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mach, N.; Foury, A.; Kittelmann, S.; Reigner, F.; Moroldo, M.; Ballester, M.; Esquerré, D.; Rivière, J.; Sallé, G.; Gérard, P.; et al. The Effects of Weaning Methods on Gut Microbiota Composition and Horse Physiology. Front. Physiol. 2017, 8, 535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Shepherd, M.L.; Swecker, W.S., Jr; Jensen, R.V.; Ponder, M.A. Characterization of the Fecal Bacteria Communities of Forage-Fed Horses by Pyrosequencing of 16S RRNA V4 Gene Amplicons. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2012, 326, 62–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Costa, M.C.; Arroyo, L.G.; Allen-Vercoe, E.; Stämpfli, H.R.; Kim, P.T.; Sturgeon, A.; Weese, J.S. Comparison of the Fecal Microbiota of Healthy Horses and Horses with Colitis by High Throughput Sequencing of the V3-V5 Region of the 16S RRNA Gene. PLoS One 2012, 7, e41484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Salem, S.E.; Maddox, T.W.; Berg, A.; Antczak, P.; Ketley, J.M.; Williams, N.J.; Archer, D.C. Variation in Faecal Microbiota in a Group of Horses Managed at Pasture over a 12-Month Period. Scientific Reports 2018, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Tuniyazi, M.; He, J.; Guo, J.; Li, S.; Zhang, N.; Hu, X.; Fu, Y. Changes of Microbial and Metabolome of the Equine Hindgut during Oligofructose-Induced Laminitis. BMC Vet. Res. 2021, 17, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sugahara, H.; Odamaki, T.; Hashikura, N.; Abe, F.; Xiao, J.-Z. Differences in Folate Production by Bifidobacteria of Different Origins. Biosci Microbiota Food Health 2015, 34, 87–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Mackie, R.I.; Wilkins, C.A. Enumeration of Anaerobic Bacterial Microflora of the Equine Gastrointestinal Tract. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1988, 54, 2155–2160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Argenzio, R.A.; Hintz, H.F. Effect of Diet on Glucose Entry and Oxidation Rates in Ponies. J. Nutr. 1972, 102, 879–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Argenzio, R.A.; Southworth, M.; Stevens, C.E. Sites of Organic Acid Production and Absorption in the Equine Gastrointestinal Tract. Am. J. Physiol. 1974, 226, 1043–1050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cohen, N.D.; Woods, A.M. Characteristics and Risk Factors for Failure of Horses with Acute Diarrhea to Survive: 122 Cases (1990-1996). J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1999, 214, 382–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bulmer, L.S.; Murray, J.-A.; Burns, N.M.; Garber, A.; Wemelsfelder, F.; McEwan, N.R.; Hastie, P.M. High-Starch Diets Alter Equine Faecal Microbiota and Increase Behavioural Reactivity. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 18621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mach, N.; Ruet, A.; Clark, A.; Bars-Cortina, D.; Ramayo-Caldas, Y.; Crisci, E.; Pennarun, S.; Dhorne-Pollet, S.; Foury, A.; Moisan, M.-P.; et al. Priming for Welfare: Gut Microbiota Is Associated with Equitation Conditions and Behavior in Horse Athletes. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 8311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Costa, M.C.; Weese, J.S. Understanding the Intestinal Microbiome in Health and Disease. Vet. Clin. North Am. Equine Pract. 2018, 34, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Dougal, K.; Harris, P.A.; Edwards, A.; Pachebat, J.A.; Blackmore, T.M.; Worgan, H.J.; Newbold, C.J. A Comparison of the Microbiome and the Metabolome of Different Regions of the Equine Hindgut. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2012, 82, 642–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Plancade, S.; Clark, A.; Philippe, C.; Helbling, J.-C.; Moisan, M.-P.; Esquerré, D.; Le Moyec, L.; Robert, C.; Barrey, E.; Mach, N. Unraveling the Effects of the Gut Microbiota Composition and Function on Horse Endurance Physiology. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 9620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Clark, A.; Sallé, G.; Ballan, V.; Reigner, F.; Meynadier, A.; Cortet, J.; Koch, C.; Riou, M.; Blanchard, A.; Mach, N. Strongyle Infection and Gut Microbiota: Profiling of Resistant and Susceptible Horses Over a Grazing Season. Frontiers in Physiology 2018, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Garber, A.; Hastie, P.; Murray, J.-A. Factors Influencing Equine Gut Microbiota: Current Knowledge. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2020, 88, 102943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Ericsson, A.C.; Johnson, P.J.; Lopes, M.A.; Perry, S.C.; Lanter, H.R. A Microbiological Map of the Healthy Equine Gastrointestinal Tract. PLoS One 2016, 11, e0166523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Kienzle, E.; Zeyner, A. The Development of a Metabolizable Energy System for Horses. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2010, 94, e231–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Warzecha, C.M.; Coverdale, J.A.; Janecka, J.E.; Leatherwood, J.L.; Pinchak, W.E.; Wickersham, T.A.; McCann, J.C. Influence of Short-Term Dietary Starch Inclusion on the Equine Cecal Microbiome. J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 95, 5077–5090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Steelman, S.M.; Chowdhary, B.P.; Dowd, S.; Suchodolski, J.; Janečka, J.E. Pyrosequencing of 16S RRNA Genes in Fecal Samples Reveals High Diversity of Hindgut Microflora in Horses and Potential Links to Chronic Laminitis. BMC Vet. Res. 2012, 8, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ottman, N.; Ruokolainen, L.; Suomalainen, A.; Sinkko, H.; Karisola, P.; Lehtimäki, J.; Lehto, M.; Hanski, I.; Alenius, H.; Fyhrquist, N. Soil Exposure Modifies the Gut Microbiota and Supports Immune Tolerance in a Mouse Model. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2019, 143, 1198–1206.e12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nicco, C.; Paule, A.; Konturek, P.; Edeas, M. From Donor to Patient: Collection, Preparation and Cryopreservation of Fecal Samples for Fecal Microbiota Transplantation. Diseases 2020, 8, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Mullen, K.R.; Yasuda, H.; Gr, K.; Divers, T.J. 4.6 Microbiota Transplantation for Equine Colitis: Revisiting an Old Treatment with New Technology. Abstract, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  33. McKinney, C.A.; Bedenice, D.; Pacheco, A.P.; Oliveira, B.C.M.; Paradis, M.-R.; Mazan, M.; Widmer, G. Assessment of Clinical and Microbiota Responses to Fecal Microbial Transplantation in Adult Horses with Diarrhea. PLoS One 2021, 16, e0244381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Destrez, A.; Grimm, P.; Cézilly, F.; Julliand, V. Changes of the Hindgut Microbiota Due to High-Starch Diet Can Be Associated with Behavioral Stress Response in Horses. Physiol. Behav. 2015, 149, 159–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Willing, B.; Vörös, A.; Roos, S.; Jones, C.; Jansson, A.; Lindberg, J.E. Changes in Faecal Bacteria Associated with Concentrate and Forage-Only Diets Fed to Horses in Training. Equine Vet. J. 2009, 41, 908–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Hansen, N.C.K.; Avershina, E.; Mydland, L.T.; Næsset, J.A.; Austbø, D.; Moen, B.; Måge, I.; Rudi, K. High Nutrient Availability Reduces the Diversity and Stability of the Equine Caecal Microbiota. Microb. Ecol. Health Dis. 2015, 26, 27216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Daly, K.; Proudman, C.J.; Duncan, S.H.; Flint, H.J.; Dyer, J.; Shirazi-Beechey, S.P. Alterations in Microbiota and Fermentation Products in Equine Large Intestine in Response to Dietary Variation and Intestinal Disease. Br. J. Nutr. 2012, 107, 989–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Berg, J.T.; Chambers, B.; Siegel, H.; Biddle, A. Equine Microbiome Project: Understanding Differences in the Horse Gut Microbiome Related to Diet. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 2017, 52, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Biddle, A.S.; Tomb, J.-F.; Fan, Z. Microbiome and Blood Analyte Differences Point to Community and Metabolic Signatures in Lean and Obese Horses. Front Vet Sci 2018, 5, 225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Morrison, P.K.; Newbold, C.J.; Jones, E.; Worgan, H.J.; Grove-White, D.H.; Dugdale, A.H.; Barfoot, C.; Harris, P.A.; Argo, C.M. The Equine Gastrointestinal Microbiome: Impacts of Age and Obesity. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 3017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Elzinga, S.E.; Scott Weese, J.; Adams, A.A. Comparison of the Fecal Microbiota in Horses With Equine Metabolic Syndrome and Metabolically Normal Controls Fed a Similar All-Forage Diet. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 2016, 44, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Schoster, A.; Mosing, M.; Jalali, M.; Staempfli, H.R.; Weese, J.S. Effects of Transport, Fasting and Anaesthesia on the Faecal Microbiota of Healthy Adult Horses. Equine Vet. J. 2016, 48, 595–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Walshe, N.; Duggan, V.; Cabrera-Rubio, R.; Crispie, F.; Cotter, P.; Feehan, O.; Mulcahy, G. Removal of Adult Cyathostomins Alters Faecal Microbiota and Promotes an Inflammatory Phenotype in Horses. Int. J. Parasitol. 2019, 49, 489–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sirois, R.J. Comparison of the Fecal Microbiota of Horses Before and After Treatment for Parasitic Helminths: Massively Parallel Sequencing of the V4 Region of the 16S Ribosomal RNA Gene; 2013;
  45. Moreau, M.M.; Eades, S.C.; Reinemeyer, C.R.; Fugaro, M.N.; Onishi, J.C. Illumina Sequencing of the V4 Hypervariable Region 16S RRNA Gene Reveals Extensive Changes in Bacterial Communities in the Cecum Following Carbohydrate Oral Infusion and Development of Early-Stage Acute Laminitis in the Horse. Vet. Microbiol. 2014, 168, 436–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Milinovich, G.J.; Klieve, A.V.; Pollitt, C.C.; Trott, D.J. Microbial Events in the Hindgut during Carbohydrate-Induced Equine Laminitis. Vet. Clin. North Am. Equine Pract. 2010, 26, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Milinovich, G.J.; Trott, D.J.; Burrell, P.C.; van Eps, A.W.; Thoefner, M.B.; Blackall, L.L.; Al Jassim, R.A.M.; Morton, J.M.; Pollitt, C.C. Changes in Equine Hindgut Bacterial Populations during Oligofructose-Induced Laminitis. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 8, 885–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Garrett, L.A.; Brown, R.; Poxton, I.R. A Comparative Study of the Intestinal Microbiota of Healthy Horses and Those Suffering from Equine Grass Sickness. Vet. Microbiol. 2002, 87, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Leng, J.; Proudman, C.; Blow, F.; Darby, A.; Swann, J. Understanding Intestinal Microbiota in Equine Grass Sickness: Next Generation Sequencing of Faecal Bacterial DNA. Equine Veterinary Journal 2015, 47, 9–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Almeida, M.L.M. de; Feringer, W.H.; Júnior; Carvalho, J.R.G.; Rodrigues, I.M.; Jordão, L.R.; Fonseca, M.G.; Carneiro de Rezende, A.S.; de Queiroz Neto, A.; Weese, J.S.; Costa, M.C. da; et al. Intense Exercise and Aerobic Conditioning Associated with Chromium or L-Carnitine Supplementation Modified the Fecal Microbiota of Fillies. PLoS One 2016, 11, e0167108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Antwis, R.E.; Lea, J.M.D.; Unwin, B.; Shultz, S. Gut Microbiome Composition Is Associated with Spatial Structuring and Social Interactions in Semi-Feral Welsh Mountain Ponies. Microbiome 2018, 6, 207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Zhao, Y.; Li, B.; Bai, D.; Huang, J.; Shiraigo, W.; Yang, L.; Zhao, Q.; Ren, X.; Wu, J.; Bao, W.; et al. Comparison of Fecal Microbiota of Mongolian and Thoroughbred Horses by High-Throughput Sequencing of the V4 Region of the 16S RRNA Gene. Asian-australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 29, 1345–1352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Earing, J.E.; Durig, A.C.; Gellin, G.L.; Lawrence, L.M.; Flythe, M.D. Bacterial Colonization of the Equine Gut; Comparison of Mare and Foal Pairs by PCR-DGGE. Advances in Microbiology 2012, 02, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Mshelia, E.S.; Adamu, L.; Wakil, Y.; Turaki, U.A.; Gulani, I.A.; Musa, J. The Association between Gut Microbiome, Sex, Age and Body Condition Scores of Horses in Maiduguri and Its Environs. Microb. Pathog. 2018, 118, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Weese, J.S.; Holcombe, S.J.; Embertson, R.M.; Kurtz, K.A.; Roessner, H.A.; Jalali, M.; Wismer, S.E. Changes in the Faecal Microbiota of Mares Precede the Development of Post Partum Colic. Equine Vet. J. 2015, 47, 641–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Mullish, B.H.; Quraishi, M.N.; Segal, J.P.; McCune, V.L.; Baxter, M.; Marsden, G.L.; Moore, D.; Colville, A.; Bhala, N.; Iqbal, T.H.; et al. The Use of Faecal Microbiota Transplant as Treatment for Recurrent or Refractory Clostridium Difficile Infection and Other Potential Indications: Joint British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and Healthcare Infection Society (HIS) Guidelines. Journal of Hospital Infection 2018, 100, S1–S31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Baktash, A.; Terveer, E.M.; Zwittink, R.D.; Hornung, B.V.H.; Corver, J.; Kuijper, E.J.; Smits, W.K. Mechanistic Insights in the Success of Fecal Microbiota Transplants for the Treatment of Infections. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Krajicek, E.; Fischer, M.; Allegretti, J.R.; Kelly, C.R. Nuts and Bolts of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2019, 17, 345–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hofmann, A.F. The Continuing Importance of Bile Acids in Liver and Intestinal Disease. Arch. Intern. Med. 1999, 159, 2647–2658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Guzior, D.V.; Quinn, R.A. Review: Microbial Transformations of Human Bile Acids. Microbiome 2021, 9, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Weingarden, A.R.; Dosa, P.I.; DeWinter, E.; Steer, C.J.; Shaughnessy, M.K.; Johnson, J.R.; Khoruts, A.; Sadowsky, M.J. Changes in Colonic Bile Acid Composition Following Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Are Sufficient to Control Clostridium Difficile Germination and Growth. PLoS One 2016, 11, e0147210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Staley, C.; Weingarden, A.R.; Khoruts, A.; Sadowsky, M.J. Interaction of Gut Microbiota with Bile Acid Metabolism and Its Influence on Disease States. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2017, 101, 47–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Moayyedi, P.; Surette, M.G.; Kim, P.T.; Libertucci, J.; Wolfe, M.; Onischi, C.; Armstrong, D.; Marshall, J.K.; Kassam, Z.; Reinisch, W.; et al. Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Induces Remission in Patients With Active Ulcerative Colitis in a Randomized Controlled Trial. Gastroenterology 2015, 149, 102–109e6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Theriot, C.M.; Bowman, A.A.; Young, V.B. Antibiotic-Induced Alterations of the Gut Microbiota Alter Secondary Bile Acid Production and Allow for Clostridium Difficile Spore Germination and Outgrowth in the Large Intestine. mSphere 2016, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Theriot, C.M.; Koenigsknecht, M.J.; Carlson, P.E., Jr; Hatton, G.E.; Nelson, A.M.; Li, B.; Huffnagle, G.B.; Z Li, J.; Young, V.B. Antibiotic-Induced Shifts in the Mouse Gut Microbiome and Metabolome Increase Susceptibility to Clostridium Difficile Infection. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 3114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Perk, J.; Cosmetatos, I.; Gallusser, A.; Lobsiger, L.; Straub, R.; Nicolet, J. Clostridium Difficile Associated with Typhlocolitis in an Adult Horse. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 1993, 5, 99–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Arroyo, L.G.; Weese, J.S.; Staempfli, H.R. Experimental Clostridium Difficile Enterocolitis in Foals. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2004, 18, 734–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Jones, R.L.; Adney, W.S.; Shideler, R.K. Isolation of Clostridium Difficile and Detection of Cytotoxin in the Feces of Diarrheic Foals in the Absence of Antimicrobial Treatment. J. Clin. Microbiol. 1987, 25, 1225–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Lamendella, R.; Wright, J.R.; Hackman, J.; McLimans, C.; Toole, D.R.; Rubio, W.B.; Drucker, R.; Wong, H.T.; Sabey, K.; Hegarty, J.P.; et al. Antibiotic Treatments for Clostridium Difficile Infection Are Associated with Distinct Bacterial and Fungal Community Structures. mSphere 2018, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Mullen, K.R.; Yasuda, K.; Divers, T.J.; Weese, J.S. Equine Faecal Microbiota Transplant: Current Knowledge, Proposed Guidelines and Future Directions. Equine Vet. Educ. 2018, 30, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Schoster, A.; Arroyo, L.G.; Staempfli, H.R.; Shewen, P.E.; Weese, J.S. Presence and Molecular Characterization of Clostridium Difficile and Clostridium Perfringens in Intestinal Compartments of Healthy Horses. BMC Vet. Res. 2012, 8, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Rupnik, M.; Wilcox, M.H.; Gerding, D.N. Clostridium Difficile Infection: New Developments in Epidemiology and Pathogenesis. Nature Reviews Microbiology 2009, 7, 526–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Båverud, V.; Gustafsson, A.; Franklin, A.; Lindholm, A.; Gunnarsson, A. Clostridium Difficile Associated with Acute Colitis in Mature Horses Treated with Antibiotics. Equine Vet. J. 1997, 29, 279–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Barr, B.S.; Waldridge, B.M.; Morresey, P.R.; Reed, S.M.; Clark, C.; Belgrave, R.; Donecker, J.M.; Weigel, D.J. Antimicrobial-Associated Diarrhoea in Three Equine Referral Practices. Equine Vet. J. 2013, 45, 154–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Nicholson, M.R.; Mitchell, P.D.; Alexander, E.; Ballal, S.; Bartlett, M.; Becker, P.; Davidovics, Z.; Docktor, M.; Dole, M.; Felix, G.; et al. Efficacy of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Clostridium Difficile Infection in Children. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020, 18, 612–619.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Drekonja, D. Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Clostridium Difficile Infection: A Systematic Review of the Evidence; 2014;
  77. Martínez, J.L. Faculty Opinions Recommendation of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Is Safe and Efficacious for Recurrent or Refractory Clostridium Difficile Infection in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature 2016.
  78. Weingarden, A.R.; Hamilton, M.J.; Sadowsky, M.J.; Khoruts, A. Resolution of Severe Clostridium Difficile Infection Following Sequential Fecal Microbiota Transplantation. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2013, 47, 735–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Mullen, K.R.; Yasuda, K.; Divers, T.J.; Weese, J.S. Equine Faecal Microbiota Transplant: Current Knowledge, Proposed Guidelines and Future Directions. Equine Vet. Educ. 2018, 30, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Costa, M.C.; Arroyo, L.G.; Allen-Vercoe, E.; Stämpfli, H.R.; Kim, P.T.; Sturgeon, A.; Weese, J.S. Comparison of the Fecal Microbiota of Healthy Horses and Horses with Colitis by High Throughput Sequencing of the V3-V5 Region of the 16S RRNA Gene. PLoS One 2012, 7, e41484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Cohen, N.D.; Woods, A.M. Characteristics and Risk Factors for Failure of Horses with Acute Diarrhea to Survive: 122 Cases (1990-1996). J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1999, 214, 382–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Cohen, N.D.; Woods, A.M. Characteristics and Risk Factors for Failure of Horses with Acute Diarrhea to Survive: 122 Cases (1990-1996). J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1999, 214, 382–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Costa, M.C.; Arroyo, L.G.; Allen-Vercoe, E.; Stämpfli, H.R.; Kim, P.T.; Sturgeon, A.; Weese, J.S. Comparison of the Fecal Microbiota of Healthy Horses and Horses with Colitis by High Throughput Sequencing of the V3-V5 Region of the 16S RRNA Gene. PLoS One 2012, 7, e41484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. McKinney, C.A.; Oliveira, B.C.M.; Bedenice, D.; Paradis, M.-R.; Mazan, M.; Sage, S.; Sanchez, A.; Widmer, G. The Fecal Microbiota of Healthy Donor Horses and Geriatric Recipients Undergoing Fecal Microbial Transplantation for the Treatment of Diarrhea. PLoS One 2020, 15, e0230148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Rodriguez, C.; Taminiau, B.; Brévers, B.; Avesani, V.; Van Broeck, J.; Leroux, A.; Gallot, M.; Bruwier, A.; Amory, H.; Delmée, M.; et al. Faecal Microbiota Characterisation of Horses Using 16 Rdna Barcoded Pyrosequencing, and Carriage Rate of Clostridium Difficile at Hospital Admission. BMC Microbiol. 2015, 15, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. McKinney, C.A.; Oliveira, B.C.M.; Bedenice, D.; Paradis, M.-R.; Mazan, M.; Sage, S.; Sanchez, A.; Widmer, G. The Fecal Microbiota of Healthy Donor Horses and Geriatric Recipients Undergoing Fecal Microbial Transplantation for the Treatment of Diarrhea. PLoS One 2020, 15, e0230148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. McKinney, C.A.; Oliveira, B.C.M.; Bedenice, D.; Paradis, M.-R.; Mazan, M.; Sage, S.; Sanchez, A.; Widmer, G. The Fecal Microbiota of Healthy Donor Horses and Geriatric Recipients Undergoing Fecal Microbial Transplantation for the Treatment of Diarrhea. PLoS One 2020, 15, e0230148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. McKinney, C.A.; Bedenice, D.; Pacheco, A.P.; Oliveira, B.C.M.; Paradis, M.-R.; Mazan, M.; Widmer, G. Assessment of Clinical and Microbiota Responses to Fecal Microbial Transplantation in Adult Horses with Diarrhea. PLoS One 2021, 16, e0244381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Mullen, K.R.; Yasuda, H.; Gr, K.; Divers, T.J. 4.6 Microbiota Transplantation for Equine Colitis: Revisiting an Old Treatment with New Technology. Abstract 2014.
  90. Laustsen, L.; Edwards, J.E.; Smidt, H.; van Doorn, D.; Lúthersson, N. Assessment of Faecal Microbiota Transplantation on Horses Suffering from Free Faecal Water. 2018.
  91. Costa, M.; Di Pietro, R.; Bessegatto, J.A.; Pereira, P.F.V.; Stievani, F.C.; Gomes, R.G.; Lisbôa, J.A.N.; Weese, J.S. Evaluation of Changes in Microbiota after Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in 6 Diarrheic Horses. Can. Vet. J. 2021, 62, 1123–1130. [Google Scholar]
  92. Kinoshita, Y.; Niwa, H.; Uchida-Fujii, E.; Nukada, T.; Ueno, T. Simultaneous Daily Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Fails to Prevent Metronidazole-Induced Dysbiosis of Equine Gut Microbiota. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2022, 114, 104004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Mullen, K.R.; Yasuda, K.; Divers, T.J.; Weese, J.S. Equine Faecal Microbiota Transplant: Current Knowledge, Proposed Guidelines and Future Directions. Equine Vet. Educ. 2018, 30, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Niederwerder, M.C. Fecal Microbiota Transplantation as a Tool to Treat and Reduce Susceptibility to Disease in Animals. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2018, 206, 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Ng, S.C.; Kamm, M.A.; Yeoh, Y.K.; Chan, P.K.S.; Zuo, T.; Tang, W.; Sood, A.; Andoh, A.; Ohmiya, N.; Zhou, Y.; et al. Scientific Frontiers in Faecal Microbiota Transplantation: Joint Document of Asia-Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE) and Asia-Pacific Society for Digestive Endoscopy (APSDE). Gut 2020, 69, 83–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Laustsen, L.; Edwards, J.E.; Hermes, G.D.A.; Lúthersson, N.; van Doorn, D.A.; Okrathok, S.; Kujawa, T.J.; Smidt, H. Free Faecal Water: Analysis of Horse Faecal Microbiota and the Impact of Faecal Microbial Transplantation on Symptom Severity. Animals (Basel) 2021, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. McKinney, C.A.; Oliveira, B.C.M.; Bedenice, D.; Paradis, M.-R.; Mazan, M.; Sage, S.; Sanchez, A.; Widmer, G. The Fecal Microbiota of Healthy Donor Horses and Geriatric Recipients Undergoing Fecal Microbial Transplantation for the Treatment of Diarrhea. PLoS One 2020, 15, e0230148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Mach, N.; Ruet, A.; Clark, A.; Bars-Cortina, D.; Ramayo-Caldas, Y.; Crisci, E.; Pennarun, S.; Dhorne-Pollet, S.; Foury, A.; Moisan, M.-P.; et al. Priming for Welfare: Gut Microbiota Is Associated with Equitation Conditions and Behavior in Horse Athletes. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 8311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Kelly, J.R.; Borre, Y.; O’ Brien, C.; Patterson, E.; El Aidy, S.; Deane, J.; Kennedy, P.J.; Beers, S.; Scott, K.; Moloney, G.; et al. Transferring the Blues: Depression-Associated Gut Microbiota Induces Neurobehavioural Changes in the Rat. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2016, 82, 109–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Bharwani, A.; Mian, M.F.; Surette, M.G.; Bienenstock, J.; Forsythe, P. Oral Treatment with Lactobacillus Rhamnosus Attenuates Behavioural Deficits and Immune Changes in Chronic Social Stress. BMC Med. 2017, 15, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Hsiao, E.Y.; McBride, S.W.; Hsien, S.; Sharon, G.; Hyde, E.R.; McCue, T.; Codelli, J.A.; Chow, J.; Reisman, S.E.; Petrosino, J.F.; et al. Microbiota Modulate Behavioral and Physiological Abnormalities Associated with Neurodevelopmental Disorders. Cell 2013, 155, 1451–1463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Chinna Meyyappan, A.; Forth, E.; Wallace, C.J.K.; Milev, R. Effect of Fecal Microbiota Transplant on Symptoms of Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review. BMC Psychiatry 2020, 20, 299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Plancade, S.; Clark, A.; Philippe, C.; Helbling, J.-C.; Moisan, M.-P.; Esquerré, D.; Le Moyec, L.; Robert, C.; Barrey, E.; Mach, N. Unraveling the Effects of the Gut Microbiota Composition and Function on Horse Endurance Physiology. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 9620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Perry, E.; Cross, T.-W.L.; Francis, J.M.; Holscher, H.D.; Clark, S.D.; Swanson, K.S. Effect of Road Transport on the Equine Cecal Microbiota. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2018, 68, 12–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Mach, N.; Ruet, A.; Clark, A.; Bars-Cortina, D.; Ramayo-Caldas, Y.; Crisci, E.; Pennarun, S.; Dhorne-Pollet, S.; Foury, A.; Moisan, M.-P.; et al. Priming for Welfare: Gut Microbiota Is Associated with Equitation Conditions and Behavior in Horse Athletes. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 8311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Staley, C.; Hamilton, M.J.; Vaughn, B.P.; Graiziger, C.T.; Newman, K.M.; Kabage, A.J.; Sadowsky, M.J.; Khoruts, A. Successful Resolution of Recurrent Clostridium Difficile Infection Using Freeze-Dried, Encapsulated Fecal Microbiota; Pragmatic Cohort Study. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2017, 112, 940–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Kopper, J.J.; Alexander, T.L.; Kogan, C.J.; Berreta, A.R.; Burbick, C.R. In Vitro Evaluation of the Effect of Storage at −20°C and Proximal Gastrointestinal Conditions on Viability of Equine Fecal Microbiota Transplant. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 2021, 98, 103360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Terveer, E.M.; van Beurden, Y.H.; Goorhuis, A.; Seegers, J.F.M.; Bauer, M.P.; van Nood, E.; Dijkgraaf, M.G.W.; Mulder, C.J.J.; Vandenbroucke-Grauls, C.M.J.; Verspaget, H.W.; et al. How to: Establish and Run a Stool Bank. Clinical Microbiology and Infection 2017, 23, 924–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Scheiman, J.; Luber, J.M.; Chavkin, T.A.; MacDonald, T.; Tung, A.; Pham, L.-D.; Wibowo, M.C.; Wurth, R.C.; Punthambaker, S.; Tierney, B.T.; et al. Meta-Omics Analysis of Elite Athletes Identifies a Performance-Enhancing Microbe That Functions via Lactate Metabolism. Nat. Med. 2019, 25, 1104–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Mach, N.; Moroldo, M.; Rau, A.; Lecardonnel, J.; Le Moyec, L.; Robert, C.; Barrey, E. Understanding the Holobiont: Crosstalk Between Gut Microbiota and Mitochondria During Long Exercise in Horse. Front Mol Biosci 2021, 8, 656204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Biddle, A.S.; Black, S.J.; Blanchard, J.L. An In Vitro Model of the Horse Gut Microbiome Enables Identification of Lactate-Utilizing Bacteria That Differentially Respond to Starch Induction. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e77599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Plancade, S.; Clark, A.; Philippe, C.; Helbling, J.-C.; Moisan, M.-P.; Esquerré, D.; Le Moyec, L.; Robert, C.; Barrey, E.; Mach, N. Unraveling the Effects of the Gut Microbiota Composition and Function on Horse Endurance Physiology. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 9620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Thatcher, C.D.; Pleasant, R.S.; Geor, R.J.; Elvinger, F. Prevalence of Overconditioning in Mature Horses in Southwest Virginia during the Summer. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 2012, 26, 1413–1418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Potter, S.J.; Bamford, N.J.; Harris, P.A.; Bailey, S.R. Prevalence of Obesity and Owners’ Perceptions of Body Condition in Pleasure Horses and Ponies in South-Eastern Australia. Aust. Vet. J. 2016, 94, 427–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Robin, C.A.; Ireland, J.L.; Wylie, C.E.; Collins, S.N.; Verheyen, K.L.P.; Newton, J.R. Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Equine Obesity in Great Britain Based on Owner-Reported Body Condition Scores. Equine Vet. J. 2015, 47, 196–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Walshe, N.; Cabrera-Rubio, R.; Collins, R.; Puggioni, A.; Gath, V.; Crispie, F.; Cotter, P.D.; Brennan, L.; Mulcahy, G.; Duggan, V. A Multiomic Approach to Investigate the Effects of a Weight Loss Program on the Intestinal Health of Overweight Horses. Front Vet Sci 2021, 8, 668120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Keshteli, A.H.; Millan, B.; Madsen, K.L. Pretreatment with Antibiotics May Enhance the Efficacy of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Ulcerative Colitis: A Meta-Analysis. Mucosal Immunol. 2017, 10, 565–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Ji, S.K.; Yan, H.; Jiang, T.; Guo, C.Y.; Liu, J.J.; Dong, S.Z.; Yang, K.L.; Wang, Y.J.; Cao, Z.J.; Li, S.L. Preparing the Gut with Antibiotics Enhances Gut Microbiota Reprogramming Efficiency by Promoting Xenomicrobiota Colonization. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 1208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Millan, B.; Park, H.; Hotte, N. Others Antibiotics and Bowel Preparation Enhance the Ability of Fecal Microbial Transplantation to Reshape the Gut Microbiota in IL-10-/- Mice. In Proceedings of the canadian Journal of gastroenterology and Hepatology conference; 2016.
  120. Tlaskalová-Hogenová, H.; Stepánková, R.; Hudcovic, T.; Tucková, L.; Cukrowska, B.; Lodinová-Zádníková, R.; Kozáková, H.; Rossmann, P.; Bártová, J.; Sokol, D.; et al. Commensal Bacteria (Normal Microflora), Mucosal Immunity and Chronic Inflammatory and Autoimmune Diseases. Immunol. Lett. 2004, 93, 97–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Weese, J.S.; Kaese, H.J.; Baird, J.D.; Kenney, D.G.; Staempfli, H.R. Suspected Ciprofloxacin-Induced Colitis in Four Horses. Equine Vet. Educ. 2010, 14, 182–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Gustafsson, A.; Båverud, V.; Gunnarsson, A.; Rantzien, M.H.; Lindholm, A.; Franklin, A. The Association of Erythromycin Ethylsuccinate with Acute Colitis in Horses in Sweden. Equine Vet. J. 1997, 29, 314–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Raisbeck, M.F.; Holt, G.R.; Osweiler, G.D. Lincomycin-Associated Colitis in Horses. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1981, 179, 362–363. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  124. Staempfli, H.R.; Prescott, J.F.; Brash, M.L. Lincomycin-Induced Severe Colitis in Ponies: Association with Clostridium Cadaveris. Can. J. Vet. Res. 1992, 56, 168–169. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  125. Baker, J.R.; Leyland, A. Diarrhoea in the Horse Associated with Stress and Tetracycline Therapy. Vet. Rec. 1973, 93, 583–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Wilson, D.A.; MacFadden, K.E.; Green, E.M.; Crabill, M.; Frankeny, R.L.; Thorne, J.G. Case Control and Historical Cohort Study of Diarrhea Associated with Administration of Trimethoprim-Potentiated Sulphonamides to Horses and Ponies. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 1996, 10, 258–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Haggett, E.F.; Wilson, W.D. Overview of the Use of Antimicrobials for the Treatment of Bacterial Infections in Horses. Equine Vet. Educ. 2008, 20, 433–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Basile, R.C.; Rivera, G.G.; Del Rio, L.A.; de Bonis, T.C.M.; do Amaral, G.P.D.; Giangrecco, E.; Ferraz, G.; Yoshinari, N.H.; Canola, P.A.; Queiroz Neto, A. Anaphylactoid Reaction Caused by Sodium Ceftriaxone in Two Horses Experimentally Infected by Borrelia Burgdorferi. BMC Vet. Res. 2015, 11, 197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Fang, S.; Song, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, L. Randomized Clinical Trial: Efficacy and Tolerability of Two Different Split Dose of Low-Volume Polyethylene Glycol Electrolytes for Bowel Preparation before Colonoscopy in Hospitalized Children. Pediatr. Res. 2021, 90, 171–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Wrzosek, L.; Ciocan, D.; Borentain, P.; Spatz, M.; Puchois, V.; Hugot, C.; Ferrere, G.; Mayeur, C.; Perlemuter, G.; Cassard, A.-M. Transplantation of Human Microbiota into Conventional Mice Durably Reshapes the Gut Microbiota. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 6854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Anatomy of gut microbiota distribution in the equine gastrointestinal tract, including bacteria type, number, composition, as well as ideal pH level (Figure created using data from Ericsson et al[2]). (Created with BioRender.com).
Figure 1. Anatomy of gut microbiota distribution in the equine gastrointestinal tract, including bacteria type, number, composition, as well as ideal pH level (Figure created using data from Ericsson et al[2]). (Created with BioRender.com).
Preprints 68137 g001
Figure 2. Factors influencing equine gut microbiota, including diet, obesity/EMS, stress, medication, and disease (Figure created using data from Garber et al[25]). (EGS: Equine grass sickness; EMS: Equine Metabolic Syndrome). (Arrows, upward: increased relative abundance; downward: decreased relative abundance). (Created with BioRender.com).
Figure 2. Factors influencing equine gut microbiota, including diet, obesity/EMS, stress, medication, and disease (Figure created using data from Garber et al[25]). (EGS: Equine grass sickness; EMS: Equine Metabolic Syndrome). (Arrows, upward: increased relative abundance; downward: decreased relative abundance). (Created with BioRender.com).
Preprints 68137 g002
Figure 3. Possible mechanisms of equine fecal microbiota transplantation. (Created with BioRender.com).
Figure 3. Possible mechanisms of equine fecal microbiota transplantation. (Created with BioRender.com).
Preprints 68137 g003
Figure 4. An example of possible mechanisms of fecal microbiota transplantation for CDI treatment. (Created with BioRender.com).
Figure 4. An example of possible mechanisms of fecal microbiota transplantation for CDI treatment. (Created with BioRender.com).
Preprints 68137 g004
Figure 5. Pros and cons of using fresh or frozen stools for fecal microbiota transplantation.
Figure 5. Pros and cons of using fresh or frozen stools for fecal microbiota transplantation.
Preprints 68137 g005
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2025 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated