- Original Article
- Open access
- Published:
Collection methods of wild barn owl pellets at low environmental contamination and proposals of microbiological and ecological investigations
Annals of Microbiology volume 74, Article number: 14 (2024)
Abstract
Background
The barn owl Tyto alba is a medium-sized nocturnal raptor, predator of small mammals, birds, reptiles, and insects, distributed all over the world. Environmentally uncontaminated wild barn owl pellets are hard and rare to find and provide a natural matrix for biological investigations.
Results
Different solutions for collecting wild barn owl pellets at low environmental contamination are proposed. These solutions are based on a daily sanitized surface for sample retrieval, followed by rapid analysis. As an example of the possible investigations that can be carried out on these matrices, with the aim to highlight the relevance of the obtained results also from a biotechnological perspective. Two rare pellet samples from wild barn owl T. alba, appropriately collected in a rural area of central Italy, were analyzed using culture-dependent, molecular (Next-Generation Sequencing), and enzyme profile analysis techniques. The osteological observations of the bone remains provided useful information for identifying the prey, mainly rodents (Apodemus sp.). Under our experimental conditions, the results revealed both a wide heterogeneity between the pellet microbiota and a great percentage of uncultured bacteria not classified at the species level. Furthermore, microbial cultures of Malbranchea albolutea, Debaryomyces hansenii, and Lactobacillus sp. were isolated and studied.
Finally, we quantified the environmental impact of our experimental work in terms of CO2 equivalent release. To compensate for the release of 300 kg/CO2 eq., three Taxus. baccata L. were planted.
Conclusions
This work provides a starting point for developing an effective strategy to study and characterize wild barn owl pellets at low environmental contamination. It presents a simple and easy technique/protocol for collecting the pellets. The microbiota heterogeneity found in the two analyzed samples suggests that barn owl pellets can represent a potential natural reservoir for the discovery of new microorganisms to be used in various biotechnological applications. This could open the way for further large-scale studies on a greater number of samples and populations.
Graphical Abstract

Introduction
The barn owl (Tyto alba) is a medium-sized nocturnal raptor representing the most widespread owl species on Earth (Kross et al. 2016). It is distributed in Europe, Africa, Southern Asia, Oceania, North and South America, both on mainland and on islands (BirdLife International 2019; Viganò et al. 2020). This raptor plays a very important role in the ecological balance of a territory. Beyond its ecological importance as a top predator, T. alba may be considered a biological control agent of rodent pests in agriculture (Marti et al. 1979; Wood and Fee 2003; Whelan et al. 2008; Meyrom et al. 2009; Kross et al. 2016, 2018).
Barn owls readily occupy human-made structures, persist in agricultural settings better than many bird species and, with enough nests, several breeding pairs may be present in one km2 (Taylor 2003; Kasprzykowski and Goławski 2006; Meyrom et al. 2009; Roulin 2020). These factors, together with their ability to remove large quantities of rodents and the abundance of rodent pests within agroecosystems, make them an attractive option for farmers to control pests (Durant et al. 2004; Marti 2010; Kross et al. 2016; Johnson et al. 2018; St. George and Johnson 2021).
Raptors have a varied diet, some rely on insects, others on small birds, many on small vertebrates (Teta et al. 2012; Roulin and Dubey 2012; Roulin and Christe 2013). In the raptor stomach, the small mammal is subjected to the action of digestive juices that destroy the tissue leaving the skin and skeleton intact. These residues, under the action of a rotational movement, aggregate together until they gradually form an ovoid mass, which the bird of prey will regurgitate after a few hours. This small elongated greyish ball, often pointed at its extremities, is called “pellet” or “rejection ball”. The formation of pellets avoids a long and difficult digestion of the unassimilated elements by the raptor (mammal hair and bones, insect chitin, insect larvae hair, etc.). Raptors usually reject one pellet per day, rarely two or three, which may contain the remains of several small mammals. The pellets accumulate at the foot of nocturnal raptor nests, in church steeples, in isolated attics, in hollow trees, on cliffs and in cave entrances (Chaline et al. 1974). Since the analysis of pellet content is relatively easy and cheap, barn owl diet has been thoroughly investigated, especially in Europe and America (Jaksic et al. 1982; Bellocq 2000; Love et al. 2000; Cagnacci et al. 2012; Milana et al. 2016, 2018; Romano et al. 2020). Barn owl diet can offer a source of information on the state of conservation of the environment surrounding their settlement (Chaline et al. 1974). However, despite the several studies carried out on barn owl pellets, almost no one has focused on the analysis of pellet associated microbial communities. The study of microbial community dynamics is important for many aspects, including ecological and scientific discovery, biotechnological development, sustainable agriculture, environmental protection, and human health (Bucci et al. 2017).
It is well known that nature offers great potential for the study of both microbial biodiversity and functional ecology. The study of animals living in captive conditions are quick, convenient, easy, and more easily attributable to a specific individual (e.g. age, sex, etc.). Indeed, the collection of residues and wastes (feces, urine, litter, etc.) for example from cages and aviaries is a usual practice. However, the condition of captive life (e.g., feeding regimen, instinctive behavior, etc.) induces profound alterations in animals compared to the wildlife (Rawat and Agarwal 2015; Feckler et al. 2023).
Obtaining "genuine" samples of residues and wastes from animals in the wild free from environmental contamination is very difficult and complex. In fact, wild animals release their residues randomly and very unpredictably. Therefore, the collection of samples from free-living animals in natural matrices (e.g., soil, plant surfaces, water, etc.) is tedious, time-consuming, and often fails to yield useful results. The environment rapidly induces contamination of free-living animal residues altering the genuineness of the samples (Holt and Miller 2010). In view of this, how to collect wad samples at low environmental contamination? What kind of useful information could be derived from samples obtained from wild raptors? (Hegedus et al. 2023).
To address these questions we propose: (I) a feasible solution for recovering residual pellet samples from wild nocturnal raptors; (II) microbiological investigations to characterize T. alba wad microbiota and to unravel the potential presence of novel and uncharacterized strains of biotechnological interest; III) a method to acquire information on the barn owl diet through wad osteological observations; IV) finally, an evaluation of the environmental impact of our experiments, in terms of CO2 equivalent release, and how to compensate it.
Materials and methods
Experimental design
The experimental design adopted in this research (Fig. S1) has been developed with the aim to provide an effective strategy to collect and study from a microbiological and ecological perspective wild barn owl pellets, at low environmental contamination.
Sampling site
The sampling site of this study is located at a rural area (42° 20′ 59.23″ N 14° 01′ 55.38″ E) of Rosciano municipality, Abruzzo region, (Central Italy). The area is at 20 km from Adriatic Sea, where the territory is mainly hilly (150–300 m altitude) at a transitional zone from Mediterranean to temperate bioclimate (Blasi et al. 2014). The area is characterized by i) a mosaic of croplands, mainly herbaceous (cereals) and horticultural crops used in succession as sheep pasture; ii) uncultured areas with Mediterranean and sub-Mediterranean arboreal and shrubby vegetation, hedges and coppices composed of mixed Quercus pubescens Willd. and riparian vegetation of the valley floor; iii) large area with destination both to traditional and specialized orchards (olive cultures) and vineyards (Montepulciano d’Abruzzo cultivar). The landscape composition was confirmed using Google Earth (®) (last accessed July 2023) and landscape elements were analyzed within a 1 km radius around the nest site of barn owls (Fig. S2a and b).
Pellet collecting systems
Based on previous long-term observations of the area where the active wild barn owls’ nest was located (less than 20 m), we noticed that adults released their pellets by night. It was noticed that remains of pellets were sometimes found in a narrow area, under the tree canopy, in the garden. Therefore, four different sample collecting systems were proposed, tested, and compared (Fig. 1a and b).
-
System 1. A hard, flat surface of about 2.5 m2, like a Table (2.40 m × 1.0 m; height from the ground, 90 cm) in PVC, green coloured, was adopted. A daily checked table surface covered with a transparent plastic sheet was cleaned before nightfall by a hygienic water solution of alkyldimethylbenzylammonium 10% w/v (Neo-Desogen®, Teleflex Medical S.r.l., Varedo, Italy) and rinsed with sterile water. The two main reasons for the operating conditions described above are: (a) to avoid contamination by soil microorganisms and, (b) to define the date of recovery of samples.
-
System 2. A perforated (1.0 × 1.0 cm), rigid PVC net suspended two meters above the ground; tension is provided by tie rods on 4 posts driven into the ground, placed at the corners of the rectangular-shaped net (2.0 m × 5.0 m). Every day, the surface of the net is inspected and cleaned of plant residues that may have settled inside, fallen by gravity or atmospheric events (rain, wind, etc.). Before sunset, the upper surface of the net is washed and disinfected from above with a spray bar containing a 2% benzalkonium chloride solution in water, followed by a final rinse.
-
System 3. A perforated (1.0 × 1.0 cm), roll-up net in nylon, suspended two meters above the ground; tension is provided by tie rods on 4 posts driven into the ground, placed at the corners of the rectangular-shaped net, followed by sanitisation phase, as above (system 2);
-
System 4. A vegetable roll-up fabric net (natural hemp, jute, cotton, etc.), adopted like the above system 2 and 3.
Samples and sampling
Two pellet samples (henceforth reported as A and B) were collected in Rosciano municipality. After sampling, A and B pellets were quickly subjected to the following laboratory activities: partial sterile dissection for optical observation and morphological analyses; inoculation in different media, for microbial growth, isolation, and characterization of isolates; DNA extraction for molecular investigations of the microbial communities. The pellets A and B from wild barn owls (T. alba) were freshly collected in the same site on 15th and 30th December 2022, respectively. Both pellets were collected under a 40-year-old tree (Pinus nigra J.F. Arnold). Then, the pellets were handled with latex gloves, immediately placed in sterile conical centrifuge tubes (volume 50 mL) (Corning Pharmaceutical Glass, SPA, Pisa, Italy), and transferred to the laboratory under refrigerated conditions for subsequent analyses, as quickly as possible, and no later than 48 h.
The collection surface is located less than 20 m from an active nest located under the roof of a historic building dating from the late 18th century (Villa Vanda, Rosciano, Italy) (Fig. 1a and b). The nest location allowed us to know the beginning and end of nocturnal predation activity. Therefore, images were acquired manually with a digital camera (Nikon, Coolpix L19 model) at first light when the raptors returned to the nest (Fig. 1c and d).
Pellet analyses and morphological observations
At laboratory scale, sterile conditions were adopted to avoid contaminations during the main phases of pellet analyses. Preliminary, pellets were weighted by a lab balance (Extend mod., Sartorius, Goettingen, Germany), under a bunsen flame. Then, the pellets were processed and disassembled, under sterile cabinet, to obtain sub-samples (in small pieces) both for microbial cultivation and molecular investigations of bacterial and fungal communities. Measures of pH and conductivity were performed with HI 763100 and HI11310 probes, respectively (Edge mod., Hanna Instruments, Woonsocket, RI, USA). The pH values were determined in ratio 1:10 w/v a physiological solution (0.9 M NaCl).
The remaining, almost complete pellets were submitted to optical observation by stereomicroscope (Axioplan mod., Zeiss, Germany) at 10x, 20x and 35x magnifications to identify barn owl prey. Records of images and morphological data (shape and dimension) with bar scale were acquired (Fig. 2a and b). The osteological parts were observed, and the identification was performed at the lowest possible taxonomic level (species level) comparing the undigested bone rests with the reference literature (Chaline et al. 1974; Di Palma and Massa 1981; Erome 1982; Brom 1986; Nappi 2001; Paolucci and Bon 2022). According to McDowell and Medlin 2009, the minimum number of individuals obtained by counting the most common diagnostic osteological remnants (element) of each species of small mammal in each pellet determined the prey number (McDowell and Medlin 2009).
Media and cultural techniques
The microbial growth tests were performed under sterile conditions. From both A and B pellets, several sub-samples were taken separately, cutting each pellet with a thin metal blade, previously sterilized under the flam.
Each pellet sample was cut into small pieces, randomly collected, and weighed into a sterile test tube. Then, 1.0 g of pellet was added to 9.0 mL of sterile saline (0.9% NaCl w/v). Samples ranged from 10 to diluted to 1.0 × 10–8 were inoculated into agar culture media: TSA (Tryptic Soya Agar -Biolife Italiana, Milano, Italy) for bacteria determination and PDA (Potato Dextrose Agar -BD Difco™, Milano, Italy) added with 100 µg/mL ampicillin (Fisher BioReagents) for fungi. The plates were incubated at 37 °C for 24–72 h to allow the growth of bacteria, and at 28 °C for 4–5 days for fungi.
C-EC agar (Biolife Italiana, Milano, Italy) was used for discriminating between total and fecal coliforms and Escherichia coli (Aquilano et al. 2022).
Bacillus spp. determination was performed by a total spore count. The saline sample mixture was heat shocked at 80 °C for ten minutes on a water bath. Then, 0.1 mL of the sample mixture was plated onto TSA and incubated overnight at 37 °C (Murray and American Society for Microbiology 1995). Lactobacillus spp. determination was carried out on MRS medium, incubation at 30 °C for 72 h (de Man et al. 1960; DSMZ 2023). All microbial counts were expressed as Colony Forming Unit (CFU) per 1.0 g of fresh weight (f.w.). The statistical data were expressed in terms of mean ± Standard Error (SE).
Microbial isolation
Morphology of individual colonies supported us in the strain isolation. Colonies with different color, size, border shape, and texture were chosen and inoculated in TSA and PDA. Then, the purity of each isolate was confirmed, and the isolated strains were observed under optical microscope.
In addition, preliminary identification tests were performed, including morphological properties under microscopic observations and physiological and biochemical tests for bacteria by a Gram reaction and API-Systems (Biomerieux Italia, Firenze), according to Bergey’s Manual (Bergey et al. 2000).
To confirm the identity of microbial isolates, the yeast and fungal strains were sequenced for the ITS rDNA (ITS1, 5.8S, and ITS2 28S rRNA gene) (Raja et al. 2017) whereas bacterial strains were subjected to the partial sequencing (500 bp) of the 16S rRNA gene (Drancourt et al. 2000). Sequencing was performed by BMR Genomics (Padua, Italy). The obtained sequences were submitted to GenBank in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (Zhang et al. 2000; Morgulis et al. 2008). Bacteria isolated from barn owl pellets were stored at − 80 °C in cryovials (Microbank), whereas fungi and yeasts were preserved at 4 °C on PDA slants (Jurado et al. 2021).
Enzymatic activities
Multiple enzymatic activities of pellet as a whole and of isolated microorganisms were determined by the API-ZYM system (bio-Merieux Italia, Rome, Italy). A semi-quantitative evaluation of the activities of 19 hydrolytic enzymes [alkaline phosphatase, esterase (C4), esterase–lipase (C8), lipase (C14), leucine arylamidase, valine arylamidase, cistine arylamidase, trypsin, α-chymotripsin, acid phosphatase, phosphoamidase, α-galactosidase, β-galactosidase, β-glucuronidase, α-glucosidase, β-glucosidase, N-acetil-b-glucosamidase, α-mannosidase, and α-fucosidase] was performed (Ranalli et al. 2001; Viti et al. 2006). All determinations were made on three replicates. The reproducibility was > 95%. Results are reported in figures by MS Excel, radar function.
16S rRNA gene and ITS2 region amplicon library preparation and sequencing
Next Generation Sequencing analysis was performed at BMR Genomics company (Padova, Italy), following the protocol previously used by Monaco and colleagues (Monaco et al. 2020, 2021) for bacterial community investigation. The V3–V4 regions of the 16S rRNA gene were amplified using the primer pair 16S_univFor and 16S_univRev, modified with universal tails (Nadkarni et al. 2002).
The ITS2 regions of fungi were amplified using the modified primers ITS3_KYO2 (Toju et al. 2012) and ITS4r (White et al. 1990). PCR products were purified with Thermolabile Exonuclease I (NEB) and amplified with Nextera XT Index (Illumina) on a second PCR step. Amplicons were then normalized with SequalPrep (Thermo Fisher) and multiplexed. The pool was purified with Agencourt XP 1X magnetic beads. The library was run on the Illumina MiSeq and sequenced with V3 chemistry – 300PE strategy. Bioinformatics analysis was performed using QIIME2 tools version 2021.4 (Caporaso et al. 2010; Bokulich et al. 2018).
The obtained reads were cleaned of primers by using the Cutadapt software (v. 2021.4) and then processed with the denoised paired plugin of the DADA2 software (Callahan et al. 2016). Briefly, sequences have been trimmed at the 3′ end and filtered by quality and length. Then, they were de-replicated and merged to obtain unique sequences, and chimeras were eliminated. The Amplicon Sequence Variants (ASVs) with a frequency < 0.01% were not considered. All reads from bacterial communities were classified to the lowest possible taxonomic rank using a reference dataset from the SILVA database (version 138). On the other hand, all reads obtained from fungal communities were classified to the lowest possible taxonomic rank using a reference dataset from the UNITE database (version 8.3). Sequences generated in the present study were deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under the accession number PRJNA957615.
Alpha-diversity was calculated by using the Shannon index whereas similarity between the investigated bacterial and fungal communities (beta-diversity) was calculated by using Bray–Curtis dissimilarity index (Ärje et al. 2016; Caprari et al. 2023).
Predictive functional analysis on sequencing data
The predictive functional profiling/analysis of microbial communities (taxa bacteria) responds to the question: who does what! For the functional ecological rules of microbial communities 16S rRNA marker gene sequences were analyzed (Langille et al. 2013; Xia et al. 2019) by the python script “collapse_table.py”, Python 3 environment by FAPROTAX database (version 1.2.6, Available online: https://pages.uoregon.edu/slouca/LoucaLab/archive/FAPROTAX/lib/php/index.php, accessed on 13 December 2023) (Zhang et al. 2023; Liu et al. 2023). Such a script works in two steps. Firstly, it maps the list of prokaryotic clades detected in the previously mentioned NGS analysis to the respective metabolic or ecologically relevant functions. To do this, it relies on the FAPROTAX database, which consolidates information from the literature by explicitly providing such mappings. Second, it counts the occurrences of the functions and reports. As a result, we obtained a list of functions with the respective number of occurrences. We executed the script for our two samples (A and B). We plot the obtained results using a heatmap in which the rows represent the detected functions, the columns represent the samples (A and B), and each cell contains a circle sized proportionally to the number of prokaryotic clades detected in the sample (column) for the function (row). We only report functions for which we observed at least one occurrence.
Environmental impact, CO2 equivalent emission and mitigation actions
In order to assess, reduce and mitigate the greenhouse gas generated by the laboratory activities originating from these researches, we adopted the protocol and indicators (Table 1) of a previous work (Palmieri et al. 2023).
Results
Comparison methods for collecting wild raptor pellets, at low environmental contamination.
The results among the four tested systems to collect wild raptors pellets, comparing the advantages and limits, are described in Table 2.
Because of the detailed notes above reported, method 1 was evaluated positively and adopted. Therefore, the collection of wild barn owl pellets was carried out using a table surface (about 2.5 m2), daily sanitized. It can be considered useful and adequate for sampling recovery on the site selected.
Pellet characteristics
Results of preliminary analyses on T. alba pellets are shown in Table 3.
Both samples appeared fresh, intact, in good condition, of brown color and shiny appearance with some bony elements on the surface alongside, others deepening. The two pellet samples were characterized by small size (< 40 mm) and weight less than 3.0 g each.
Morphological observations
Results of the prey identification at the lowest possible taxonomic level (Fig. 3a and b) were: Apodemus sylvaticus and Apodemus spp. for pellet A, and Apodemus flavicollis and Rattus rattus for pellet B.
Microbial count and isolated microorganisms
Regarding bacterial viable counts (Table 4), high values were obtained for both pellet samples, with average values of 106—107 CFU/g f.w. At the same time, spore-forming bacteria showed a colony amount ranging from 103 to 104 CFU/g f.w. Results of fungal counts varied from 104 to 105 CFU/g f.w. The presence of yeasts was observed only in pellet A. In both pellets, similar amounts of Enterobacteriaceae colonies, including, E. coli were detected.
In Fig. 4a and b, one yeast colony and one fungal colony were reported, respectively. Table 5 shows the identification of microorganisms isolated from the analyzed pellets based on the comparison with DNA sequences available in reference databases.
Information databases using the internal transcribed spacer region from the fungi type and reference material showed that isolate strain 3B_1 had 100% identity with Malbranchea albolutea and the isolate strain AS4 had 100% identity with Penicillium sp. However, the ITS marker alone for identification does not discriminate at the species level in certain fungal genera such as Penicillium sp., and it may be necessary to sequence one or more protein-coding genes to obtain a more precise identification at the species level (Raja et al. 2017).
The isolate A5 showed an identity of 100% with both Debaryomyces sp. isolate FBFY22 and Debaryomyces hansenii clone Turkey strain M 6.3.
Analogs analyses with bacterial strains revealed that the strain N2 showed 100% of identity with E. coli strain LWY24; NB1 strain showed 100% of identity with E. coli strain AVS0973; NB2 strain showed 100% identity with Enterobacter ludwigii strain RHB47; NB3 strain showed 100% of identity with Pseudomonas fragi strain NMC25.
Enzymatic profiles
Figure 5a and b show two enzymatic profiles obtained by the API ZYM assay on both pellet A and B. As expected, pellet A showed many enzyme activities (15 out of 19), while a lower number we recorded in pellet B (12 out 19) reflecting differences in microbial communities.
Figure 5c and d show the enzymatic profiles obtained by isolated yeast D. hansenii and bacterial strain P. fragi, respectively. The yeast D. hansenii shows 7 out of 19 profiles, with the peculiar presence of esterase-lipase (C8) and α-galactosidase enzymes, although with a low activity.
In contrast, the enzyme profile of the isolated bacterial strain of P. fragi reported here shows a greater number of enzymes (13 out of 19), with the peculiar presence of trypsin and β-glucuronidase enzymes.
Microbial community composition
NGS analysis provided interesting information about the composition of microbial communities associated with barn owl pellets. With regards to Bacteria, sequencing of the V3–V4 regions of the 16S rDNA resulted in 106 ASVs (Amplicon Sequence Variants) for sample A and in 104 ASVs for sample B, with a total number of 33,211 and 27,396 final reads, respectively. For fungal communities, the ITS2 region sequencing allowed 39,942 final reads and 33 ASVs for pellet A, and 37,963 final reads and 51 ASVs in the case of pellet B.
Overall, the microbial communities of the two wild barn owl pellets consisted of a few dominant phyla: Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteriota, Bacteroidota, and Desulfobacterota for Bacteria and Ascomycota, Mucoromycota, Basidiomycota, and Mortierellomycota for Fungi (Fig. 6). In more detail, the analysis of the bacterial community structure revealed that Firmicutes were the main phylum in both wild pellets, with a relative abundance of 61.3% in sample A and 90.8% in sample B.
Proteobacteria showed a percentage of 30.4% in pellet A (with Gammaproteobacteria class particularly abundant), but they were poorly represented in pellet B (0.2%). The relative abundance of Actinobacteriota varied from 5.5 to 8.1%, whereas Bacteroidota ranged between 0.2 and 2.4%. Desulfobacterota, not found in pellet A, was among the top phyla of pellet B (0.9%).
Regarding mycobiota composition, Ascomycota phylum was the most represented in both investigated wads (relative abundance 78.4% in sample A and 83.1% in sample B), followed by Mucoromycota, which showed percentages between 14.7 (sample B) and 21.4% (sample A), and Basidiomycota (0.1% sample A; 2.1% sample B).
Fungi belonging to Mortierellomycota phylum were not retrieved in wad A, whereas they were found in pellet B even if in a very low percentage (0.1%).
At genus taxonomic level (Fig. 7), the similarity based on Bray–Curtis index between the investigated bacterial communities was 43.5%. Lactobacillus was the most abundant genus in both samples but in the wad B it was predominant accounting nearly 90% of the total reads, with L. oris (26.5%) and L. gasseri (15.3%) among the most represented species. Enterorhabdus (3.3%), Muribaculaceae members (2.3%), Desulfovibrio (0.9%), Corynebacterium (0.9%), and few other bacterial genera with relative abundance values ≤ 0.5% completed the composition of the microbiota B.
In pellet A, unclassified species of Lactobacillus genus accounted for 38.8%, followed by species belonging to the genera Yersinia (21.0%), mainly Y. enterocolitica (20.1%), Streptococcus (15.8%), Escherichia-Shigella (8.8%), Bifidobacterium (3.9%), Sporosarcina (3.0%), Enterorhabdus (1.9%), Staphylococcus (1.2%), Turicibacter (1.1%), and Corynebacterium (0.8%).
Overall, a high percentage of uncultured and unclassified bacteria at species level was detected both in sample A (77.1%) and in sample B (56.0%).
As regards the mycobiota, the similarity percentage at genus level was 79.7%. In sample A, Penicillium and Mucor dominated fungal communities, with percentages of 75.9 and 21.4%, respectively. In pellet B, in addition to these two genera that represented 79.6% of the mycobiota, other fungal genera such as the yeast Meyerozyma (6.8%) and the mold Cladosporium (5.4%) showed high relative abundance values (Fig. 7).
The alpha diversity was estimated through the Shannon relative index (h). The obtained results for bacterial communities were 0.59 (pellet A) and 0.47 (pellet B) whereas for fungal communities the obtained values were 0.49 (pellet A) and 0.44 (pellet B).
Predictive functional analysis
The predictive ecological and functional data of microbial communities and microorganisms (bacteria) found on two pellets are reported in Fig. 8. The identified bacterial functional groups were 17, both for pellet A and pellet B. In the two samples, great amounts of bacterial sequences were assigned to fermentation and chemoheterotrophy (anaerobic predominance). Furthermore, in pellet A, invertebrate parasites and animal parasites or symbionts were detected. A low number of bacterial sequences were assigned to aerobic chemoheterotrophy, human pathogens, nitrate reduction and ureolysis.
In pellet B, different predictive ecological-functional characteristics were noticed with abundance assigned to human gut, human associated, mammal gut and animal parasites or symbionts. The function of sulfate respiration and respiration of sulfur compounds were detected only in pellet B. The functions of human pathogens pneumonia, plant pathogen, and aromatic compounds degradation were rare in both pellets.
Environmental impact, CO2 eq. emission and mitigation actions
Here we report the evaluation of environmental impact related to this study, the CO2 equivalent emission, and mitigation actions by new plantations, according to the Mat e Meth section. The evaluation of the environmental impact of this manuscript, in terms of social cost and CO2 equivalent emission, resulted in 12.0 euro and about 300 kg CO2 eq., respectively. This bring us to provide a new plantation by tree Taxus baccata L. plants for mitigation actions and a QRcode tag linked to this manuscript was added to each tree planted in the Green Campus – Unimol (41° 60′ 76″ N 14° 26′ 50″ E).
Discussion
Concerning the daily observations and collection of fresh pellets when present, our experimental protocol guarantees the rapid analyses in the lab. The sanitized table represents a valid and simple solution to study wild barn owl pellets, and minimizes potential environmental contamination. Since the rarity of the phenomenon, in four months we could observe only two samples, therefore our protocol should be considered as a valid model to collect and analyze wild barn owl pellets.
The determined pH values of these pellets were not acidic as expected but slightly above neutral. The data appeared to be markedly different from values reported in previous research, where pellets were characterized by acidic pH values. A large amount of reflux of alkaline pancreatic or intestinal fluid into the stomach could explain our observations (Leprince et al. 1979).
Ecology of barn owl prey
Based on the remains found in the analyzed pellets, barn owl prey can be fitted in two main groups of species. The first comprised A. sylvaticus and R. rattus that are adapted to almost all habitat types in agroecosystems due to their generalist behavior and their characteristics that allow them to exploit the spatial niches provided by ecotone-rich landscapes (Tattersall et al. 2001; Amori et al. 2008; Loy et al. 2017). The second group included A. flavicollis which is mainly related to highly heterogeneous landscapes in which the presence of natural patches of shrub or forest habitats is remarkable (Paniccia et al. 2022). This ecological information on the prey species is consistent with the environmental features of the territory in which pellets were collected. A mosaic of wide agricultural areas surrounded by native oak edges can host a diverse micromammal community. The different pellet composition we observed is related to different hunting events conducted by barn owls in the habitats of the study area. Indeed, in agro-forestal environments barn owls have home ranges not very vast (average 6.6 km2) and tend to prey in habitats located not so far from their nest (Séchaud et al. 2021).We believe our pellet are composed by preys hunted on agricultural patches and on woody edges, where different mice species live.
Wild barn owl pellet microbial communities and predictive functional analysis
To date, little is known about microbiological aspects of wild barn owl pellets (Orosz-Coghlan et al. 2022). Consequently, we have examined the microbiota of the two wild T. alba pellets collected on a sanitized surface. Information on the structure and composition of the bacterial and fungal community is just one example of information that can be obtained from samples at low environmental contamination. To achieve this goal, both traditional cultivation techniques (culture-dependent methods) and molecular investigations (Next-Generation Sequencing) have been employed.
NGS analyses of the two wild barn owl samples revealed differences in the structure and composition of microbial communities and the predominance of a limited number of bacterial and fungal taxa. Regarding the bacterial communities, most of the sequences were assigned to enteric bacteria, first Lactobacillus species (Firmicutes phylum), which are considered the most important probiotic bacteria of the gut microbiota (Afrin et al. 2021; Rastogi and Singh 2022). Moreover, pellet A contained a relatively high percentage of bacteria belonging to the genus Bifidobacterium, gut colonization obligate anaerobes widely used as probiotics (Sharma et al. 2021). However, in addition to lactobacilli and bifidobacteria, pathogenic bacteria such as Yersinia enterocolitica have also been found in the analyzed pellets. This species, which in pellet A reached a relative abundance of 21.0%, is widely distributed in nature and it can be isolated from terrestrial and aquatic habitats, as well as from the gut of numerous mammals, avian species, and cold-blooded animals. The presence of fecal indicator bacteria and enteric organisms implicated in human infections within barn owl pellets was also reported by Orosz-Coghlan and colleagues, who therefore recommended handling with caution pellets used for educational purposes (Orosz-Coghlan et al. 2022). It is likely that the enteric bacteria found in the examined pellets may derive from T. alba prey (mice and rats), rather than from the barn owl itself. This is further supported by the presence of bacteria typically associated with mouse gut, including species belonging to Enterorhabdus genus and Muribaculaceae family (Clavel et al. 2009, 2010; Lagkouvardos et al. 2019). Moreover, it seems that the abundance of some taxa, such as Turicibacter, one of the main bacterial genera of mammalian gut microbiota, that in sample A showed a percentage of 1.1%, may vary in relation to host sex and age (Zhou et al. 2019; Wu et al. 2022). Consequently, the investigation of pellet microbial communities, especially if extended to a larger number of samples, could indirectly provide information about raptor diet and prey, useful to integrate morphological analysis data.
With regards to mycobiota analysis, Penicillium and Mucor were the main genera shared between the two T. alba pellets. Penicillium fungi are ubiquitous ascomycetes commonly found in soil, air, as well as in extreme environments, in certain food products, or associated with plants.
It is noteworthy that a high percentage of unclassified and/or uncultured microorganisms (including Bifidobacterium, Enterorhabdus, Lactobacillus, and Muribaculaceae members for bacteria and Penicillium species for fungi) was detected in both T. alba pellets. Consequently, barn owl pellets could also be an important source of new, yet un-described microorganisms with further interesting potential applications (probiotic strains, biocontrol agents, producers of biologically active compounds, food-associated molds, etc.).
Microbial ecological functions refer to the natural processes carried out by microorganisms in the environment (Zhao et al. 2023). The preliminary results of our predictive functional analysis suggested an involvement of the pellet microbiota both on T. alba diet and its digestive processes.
Potentiality of isolated strains
The aim of isolating microorganisms potentially useful in the field of biotechnology was largely achieved. Among the isolated strains, there was D. hansenii, a halotolerant yeast, which showed esterase-lipase (C8) and α-galactosidase activities (Nguyen et al. 2009). Due to their enzymatic activities, D. hansenii strains could be not only of considerable biotechnological and commercial importance (in food, dairy, detergent, and pharmaceutical industries), but they could also be used in biorestoration field to remove unwanted residues like fats and lipids on altered artworks (Banik 2003; Papagora et al. 2013; Ranalli and Zanardini 2021).
Based on the enzyme profile in Fig. 5d and the metabolic versatility of the genus Pseudomonas, P. fragi could be adopted in various biotechnological applications like bioremediation and degradation of various xenobiotic compounds in soil and polluted wastewater (Viti et al. 2006; Bosch-Roig et al. 2016). The peculiar presence of trypsin enzyme could be associated with a potential use in new strategies to pest control (Pilon et al. 2017). Furthermore, β-glucuronidase activity can lead to a reduction in glucuronide conjugation, which causes xenobiotic-induced toxicity in humans (Dashnyam et al. 2018).
Among fungi, M. albolutea was also isolated. As reported by (Díaz-Rojas et al. 2021) M. albolutea Sigler & Carmich [Onygenaceae; syn. Auxarthron alboluteum Sigler & Hambleton] is a keratinophilic fungus isolated from soil worldwide (Sigler and Carmichael 1976). Recently, the same authors affirmed that no chemical and pharmacological investigations on M. albolutea were carried out to biosynthesize different classes of bioactive compounds. For these purposes, a first report of a great interest were received on M. albolutea for the ability to produce alboluteins A-C (1–3), ardeemins and sartoryglabrins analogs; these compounds are involved in the PTP1B inhibitions, a negative modulator of insulin and leptin signaling, highly validated pharmacological target against insulin resistance and obesity (Kerru et al. 2018). For these reasons, the importance to future deep study and comparison among several M. albolutea strains, on the possible effects that alboluteins A-C have antitumoral potential since PTP1B is like a positive regulator of tumor progression (Díaz-Rojas et al. 2021).
Conclusions
T. alba pellets represent a natural matrix for analyzing wild barn owl diet and associated microbial communities. For this reason, we developed a strategy to properly collect and analyze these rare and precious matrices. The main conclusions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
-
1)
Under our experimental conditions, the collection system 1 proved to be a viable and simple solution for both recovering wild barn owl pellets and minimizing potential environmental contamination.
-
2)
Microbiological analyses can unravel the biodiversity existing in these poorly investigated matrices and lead to the discovery of microorganisms that could play a key role in biotechnological processes. Moreover, the results obtained can be considered as a starting point to develop more effective cultivation- based techniques for the isolation, the growth, and the characterization of a larger number of microorganisms still unidentified in barn owl pellets of wildlife specimens.
-
3)
Osteological analyses can be considered a useful tool to identify the barn owl preys, and when coupled with microbiological investigations, may provide more detailed information on their diet.
-
4)
The environmental impact in terms of CO2 eq. was evaluated and mitigation actions were performed by new tree plantation.
Availability of data and materials
The numerical data used to support the findings of this study are included in the article. The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available in the NCBI repository, the link used for data upload: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/, and accession numbers are: OR044424; OR044425; OR044426; OR044427; OR044530; OR044531; OR044532.
References
Afrin S, Akter S, Begum S, Hossain MN (2021) The prospects of Lactobacillus oris as a potential probiotic with cholesterol-reducing property from mother’s milk. Front Nutr 8:619506. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3389/fnut.2021.619506
Amori G, Contoli L, Nappi A (2008) Mammalia II. Erinaceomorpha, Soricomorpha, Lagomorpha, Rodentia. Il Sole 24 ORE Business Media Srl (ed) Collana “Fauna d’Italia.” Edizioni Calderini, Milano, p 752
Aquilano C, Baccari L, Caprari C et al (2022) Effects of EOs vs. antibiotics on E. coli strains isolated from drinking waters of grazing animals in the upper Molise region, Italy. Molecules 27:8177. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/molecules27238177
Ärje J, Choi KP, Divino F et al (2016) Understanding the statistical properties of the percent model affinity index can improve biomonitoring related decision making. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 30:1981–2008. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1007/S00477-015-1202-6
Banik G (2003) Removal of starch paste adhesives and relinings from paper-based objects by means of enzyme poultices. In: Cremonesi P (ed) Materiali tradizionali ed innovativi nella pulitura dei dipinti e delle opere policrome mobili. Il Prato, Piazzola sul Brenta (Padova), Italy, p 33–38
Bellocq MI (2000) A review of the trophic ecology of the Barn Owl in Argentina. J Raptor Res 34:108–119
Bergey DH, David H, Holt JG (2000) Bergey’s manual of determinative bacteriology. Lippinccott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia
BirdLife International (2019) Tyto alba (amended version of 2016 assessment). IUCN Red List Threat Species 2019. ISSN 2307-8235 (online) IUCN. 2019: T22688504A155542941
Blasi C, Capotorti G, Copiz R et al (2014) Classification and mapping of the ecoregions of Italy. Plant Biosyst - an Int J Deal with All Asp Plant Biol 148:1255–1345. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1080/11263504.2014.985756
Bokulich NA, Kaehler BD, Rideout JR et al (2018) Optimizing taxonomic classification of marker-gene amplicon sequences with QIIME 2’s q2-feature-classifier plugin. Microbiome 6:90. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s40168-018-0470-z
Bosch-Roig P, Decorosi F, Giovannetti L et al (2016) Connecting phenome to genome in Pseudomonas stutzeri 5190: an artwork biocleaning bacterium. Res Microbiol 167:757–765. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.resmic.2016.09.003
Brom TG (1986) Microscopic identification of feathers and feather fragments of palearctic birds. Bijdr Tot Dierkd 56:181–204. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1163/26660644-05602001
Bucci A, Petrella E, Celico F, Naclerio G (2017) Use of molecular approaches in hydrogeological studies: the case of carbonate aquifers in southern Italy. Hydrogeol J 25:1017–1031. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1007/s10040-017-1562-8
Cagnacci F, Bolzoni L, Rosà R et al (2012) Effects of deer density on tick infestation of rodents and the hazard of tick-borne encephalitis. I: empirical assessment. Int J Parasitol 42:365–372. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.ijpara.2012.02.012
Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ et al (2016) DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods 13:581–583. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1038/nmeth.3869
Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J et al (2010) QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7:335–336. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1038/nmeth.f.303
Caprari C, Fantasma F, Monaco P et al (2023) Chemical profiles, in vitro antioxidant and antifungal activity of four different Lavandula angustifolia L. Eos Molecules 28:392. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/molecules28010392
Chaline J, Baudvin H, Jammot D, Saint Girons MC (1974) Les Proies Des Rapaces. Petit Memmiferes et Leur Environnement, Paris
Clavel T, Charrier C, Braune A et al (2009) Isolation of bacteria from the ileal mucosa of TNFdeltaARE mice and description of Enterorhabdus mucosicola gen. nov., sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 59:1805–1812. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1099/ijs.0.003087-0
Clavel T, Duck W, Charrier C et al (2010) Enterorhabdus caecimuris sp. nov., a member of the family Coriobacteriaceae isolated from a mouse model of spontaneous colitis, and emended description of the genus Enterorhabdus Clavel et al. 2009. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 60:1527–1531. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1099/ijs.0.015016-0
Dashnyam P, Mudududdla R, Hsieh T-J et al (2018) β-Glucuronidases of opportunistic bacteria are the major contributors to xenobiotic-induced toxicity in the gut. Sci Rep 8:16372. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1038/s41598-018-34678-z
de Man JC, Rogosa M, Sharpe ME (1960) Medium for the cultivation of lactobacilli. J Appl Bacteriol 23:130–135
Di Palma MG, Massa B (1981) Contributo Metodologico per Lo Studio Dell’alimentazione Dei Rapaci. Atti I Convegno Italiano di Ornitologia, Aulla, pp 69–76
Díaz-Rojas M, Raja H, González-Andrade M et al (2021) Protein tyrosine phosphatase 1B inhibitors from the fungus Malbranchea albolutea. Phytochemistry 184:112664. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.phytochem.2021.112664
Drancourt M, Bollet C, Carlioz A et al (2000) 16S ribosomal DNA sequence analysis of a large collection of environmental and clinical unidentifiable bacterial isolates. J Clin Microbiol 38:3623–3630. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1128/JCM.38.10.3623-3630.2000
DSMZ (2023) List of media for microorganisms. https://www.dsmz.de/collection/catalogue/microorganisms/culture-technology/list-of-media-for-microorganisms. Accessed 22 Apr 2023
Durant JM, Gendner J-P, Handrich Y (2004) Should I brood or should I hunt: a female barn owl’s dilemma. Can J Zool 82:1011–1016. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1139/z04-078
Erome GAS (1982) Contribution à l’identification des proies des rapaces. Le Bièvre 4:129–135
Feckler A, Wolfram J, Schulz R, Bundschuh M (2023) Reducing pollution to levels not harming biodiversity and ecosystem functions: a perspective on the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. Curr Opin Environ Sci Heal 35:100495. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.coesh.2023.100495
Hegedus C, Andronie L, Uiuiu P et al (2023) Pets, genuine tools of environmental pollutant detection. Animals 13:2923. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/ani13182923
Holt EA, Miller SW (2010) Bioindicators: using organisms to measure environmental impacts. Nat Educ Knowl 3:8
Jaksic FM, Seib RL, Herrera CM (1982) Predation by the Barn Owl (Tyto alba) in Mediterranean habitats of Chile, Spain and California: a comparative approach. Am Midl Nat 107:151. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.2307/2425196
Johnson MD, Wendt C, St. George D et al (2018) Can barn owls help control rodents in winegrape vineyard landscapes? A review of key questions and suggested next steps. Proc Vertebr Pest Conf 28:360. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.5070/V42811037
Jurado V, Gonzalez-Pimentel JL, Hermosin B, Saiz-Jimenez C (2021) Biodeterioration of Salón de Reinos, Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid. Spain Appl Sci 11:8858. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/app11198858
Kasprzykowski Z, Goławski A (2006) Habitat use of the Barn Owl Tyto alba and the Little Owl Athene noctua in central-eastern Poland. Biol Lett 43:33–39
Kerru N, Singh-Pillay A, Awolade P, Singh P (2018) Current anti-diabetic agents and their molecular targets: a review. Eur J Med Chem 152:436–488. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.ejmech.2018.04.061
Kross SM, Bourbour RP, Martinico BL (2016) Agricultural land use, barn owl diet, and vertebrate pest control implications. Agric Ecosyst Environ 223:167–174. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.agee.2016.03.002
Kross SM, Ingram KP, Long RF, Niles MT (2018) Farmer perceptions and behaviors related to wildlife and on-farm conservation actions. Conserv Lett 11:e12364. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/conl.12364
Lagkouvardos I, Lesker TR, Hitch TCA et al (2019) Sequence and cultivation study of Muribaculaceae reveals novel species, host preference, and functional potential of this yet undescribed family. Microbiome 7:28. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s40168-019-0637-2
Langille MGI, Zaneveld J, Caporaso JG et al (2013) Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences. Nat Biotechnol 31:814–821. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1038/nbt.2676
Leprince P, Dandrifosse G, Schoffeniels E (1979) The digestive enzymes and acidity of the pellets regurgitated by raptors. Biochem Syst Ecol 7:223–227. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/0305-1978(79)90053-X
Liu J, Wu F, Xiang T et al (2023) Differences of airborne and mural microorganisms in a 1,500-year-old Xu Xianxiu’s Tomb, Taiyuan, China. Front Microbiol 14:1253461. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1253461
Love RA, Webon C, Glue DE et al (2000) Changes in the food of British Barn Owls (Tyto alba) between 1974 and 1997. Mamm Rev 30:107–129. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1046/j.1365-2907.2000.00060.x
Loy A, Cassini MH, Colangelo P, Di Febbraro M (2017) Distribution, spatial interaction and niche analysis in three species of European moles (genus Talpa, Soricomorpha: Mammalia) in Italy. Biol J Linn Soc 122:872–882. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1093/biolinnean/blx085
Marti CD (2010) Dietary trends of Barn Owls in an agricultural ecosystem in Northern Utah. Wilson J Ornithol 122:60–67. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1676/09-025.1
Marti CD, Wagner PW, Denne KW (1979) Nest Boxes for the Management of Barn Owls. Wildl Soc Bull 7:145–148
McDowell MC, Medlin GC (2009) Using the diet of the barn owl (Tyto alba) as an indicator of small vertebrate abundance in the Channel Country, south-western Queensland. Aust Mammal 31:75. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1071/AM08116
Meyrom K, Motro Y, Leshem Y et al (2009) Nest-Box use by the Barn Owl Tyto alba in a biological pest control program in the Beit She’an Valley, Israel. Ardea 97:463–467. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.5253/078.097.0410
Milana G, Lai M, Maiorano L et al (2016) Geographic patterns of predator niche breadth and prey species richness. Ecol Res 31:111–115. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1007/s11284-015-1319-6
Milana G, Luiselli L, Amori G (2018) Forty years of dietary studies on barn owl (Tyto alba) reveal long term trends in diversity metrics of small mammal prey. Anim Biol 68:129–146. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1163/15707563-17000095
Monaco P, Divino F, Naclerio G, Bucci A (2020) Microbial community analysis with a specific statistical approach after a record breaking snowfall in Southern Italy. Ann Microbiol 70:63. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s13213-020-01604-6
Monaco P, Bucci A, Naclerio G, Mello A (2021) Heterogeneity of the white truffle Tuber magnatum in a limited geographic area of Central-Southern Italy. Environ Microbiol Rep 13:591–599. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/1758-2229.12956
Morgulis A, Coulouris G, Raytselis Y et al (2008) Database indexing for production MegaBLAST searches. Bioinformatics 24:1757–1764. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1093/bioinformatics/btn322
Murray P, American Society for Microbiology (1995) Manual of Clinical Microbiology. ASM Press, Ann Arbor
Nadkarni MA, Martin FE, Jacques NA, Hunter N (2002) Determination of bacterial load by real-time PCR using a broad-range (universal) probe and primers set. Microbiology 148:257–266. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1099/00221287-148-1-257
Nappi A (2001) I micromammiferi d’Italia. Esselibri-Simone, Napoli
Nguyen H-V, Gaillardin C, Neuvéglise C (2009) Differentiation of Debaryomyces hansenii and Candida famata by rRNA gene intergenic spacer fingerprinting and reassessment of phylogenetic relationships among D. hansenii, C. famata, D. fabryi, C. flareri (=D. subglobosus) and D. prosopidis: descriptio. FEMS Yeast Res 9:641–662. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/j.1567-1364.2009.00510.x
Orosz-Coghlan P, Sullivan L, Gerba C, Schmidt R (2022) The microbiology of barn owl pellets, with special reference to pellets used in educational settings. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.13140/RG.2.2.15224.11523
Palmieri M, Lasserre B, Marino D et al (2023) The environmental footprint of scientific research: proposals and actions to increase sustainability and traceability. Sustainability 15:5616. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/su15075616
Paniccia C, Laura Carranza M, Frate L et al (2022) Distribution and functional traits of small mammals across the Mediterranean area: landscape composition and structure definitively matter. Ecol Indic 135:108550. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108550
Paolucci P, Bon M (2022) Mammiferi terrestri d’Italia. Riconoscimento, ecologia e tricologia, WBA HANDBO. WBA-HANDBOOKS, Verona
Papagora C, Roukas T, Kotzekidou P (2013) Optimization of extracellular lipase production by Debaryomyces hansenii isolates from dry-salted olives using response surface methodology. Food Bioprod Process 91:413–420. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.fbp.2013.02.008
Pilon FM, da Silva C, R, Visôtto LE, et al (2017) Purification and characterization of trypsin produced by gut bacteria from Anticarsia gemmatalis. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 96:e21407. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1002/arch.21407
Raja HA, Miller AN, Pearce CJ, Oberlies NH (2017) Fungal identification using molecular tools: a primer for the natural products research community. J Nat Prod 80:756–770. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b01085
Ranalli G, Zanardini E (2021) Advanced biocleaning system for historical wall paintings. Microorganisms in the deterioration and preservation of cultural heritage. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 217–233
Ranalli G, Bottura G, Taddei P et al (2001) Composting of solid and sludge residues from agricultural and food industries. Bioindicators of monitoring and compost maturity. J Environ Sci Heal Part A 36:415–436. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1081/ESE-100103473
Rastogi S, Singh A (2022) Gut microbiome and human health: Exploring how the probiotic genus Lactobacillus modulate immune responses. Front Pharmacol 13:1042189. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3389/fphar.2022.1042189
Rawat US, Agarwal NK (2015) Biodiversity: concept, threats and conservation. Environ Conserv J 16:19–28
Romano A, Séchaud R, Roulin A (2020) Global biogeographical patterns in the diet of a cosmopolitan avian predator. J Biogeogr 47:1467–1481. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/jbi.13829
Roulin A (2020) Barn Owls: evolution and ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambrige
Roulin A, Christe P (2013) Geographic and temporal variation in the consumption of bats by European Barn Owls. Bird Study 60:561–569. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1080/00063657.2013.847051
Roulin A, Dubey S (2012) The occurrence of reptiles in Barn Owl diet in Europe. Bird Study 59:504–508. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1080/00063657.2012.731035
Séchaud R, Schalcher K, Machado AP et al (2021) Behaviour-specific habitat selection patterns of breeding barn owls. Mov Ecol 9:18. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s40462-021-00258-6
Sharma M, Wasan A, Sharma RK (2021) Recent developments in probiotics: an emphasis on Bifidobacterium. Food Biosci 41:100993. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.fbio.2021.100993
Sigler L, Carmichael JW (1976) Taxonomy of Malbranchea and some other Hyphomycetes with arthroconidia. Mycotaxon 4:349–488
St. George DA, Johnson MD (2021) Effects of habitat on prey delivery rate and prey species composition of breeding barn owls in winegrape vineyards. Agric Ecosyst Environ 312:107322. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107322
Tattersall FH, Macdonald DW, Hart BJ et al (2001) Habitat use by wood mice (Apodemus sylvaticus) in a changeable arable landscape. J Zool 255:487–494. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1017/S095283690100156X
Taylor I (2003) Barn Owls: Predator-Prey Relationships and Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK)
Teta P, Hercolini C, Cueto G (2012) Variation in the diet of Western Barn Owls (Tyto alba) along an Urban-Rural Gradient. Wilson J Ornithol 124:589–596. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1676/11-173.1
Toju H, Tanabe AS, Yamamoto S, Sato H (2012) High-coverage ITS primers for the DNA-based identification of Ascomycetes and Basidiomycetes in environmental samples. PLoS One 7:e40863. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1371/journal.pone.0040863
Viganò M, Ancillotto L, Agnelli P et al (2020) Frequency of occurrence and ingested biomass of different prey of the Barn Owl Tyto alba in an island ecosystem. Birds 1:5–12. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/birds1010002
Viti C, Mini A, Ranalli G et al (2006) Response of microbial communities to different doses of chromate in soil microcosms. Appl Soil Ecol 34:125–139. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.apsoil.2006.03.003
Whelan CJ, Wenny DG, Marquis RJ (2008) Ecosystem services provided by birds. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1134:25–60. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1196/annals.1439.003
White T, Bruns T, Lee S et al (1990) Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA Genes for phylogenetics. PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. Academic Press, Inc, Cambridge, pp 315–322
Wood BJ, Fee CG (2003) A critical review of the development of rat control in Malaysian agriculture since the 1960s. Crop Prot 22:445–461. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/S0261-2194(02)00207-7
Wu Y, Peng X, Li X et al (2022) Sex hormones influence the intestinal microbiota composition in mice. Front Microbiol 13:964847. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3389/fmicb.2022.964847
Xia F, Zhou X, Liu Y et al (2019) Composition and predictive functional analysis of bacterial communities inhabiting Chinese Cordyceps insight into conserved core microbiome. BMC Microbiol 19:105. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12866-019-1472-0
Zhang Z, Schwartz S, Wagner L, Miller W (2000) A greedy algorithm for aligning DNA sequences. J Comput Biol 7:203–214. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1089/10665270050081478
Zhang Y, Su M, Wu F et al (2023) Diversity and composition of culturable microorganisms and their biodeterioration potentials in the sandstone of Beishiku Temple, China. Microorganisms 11:429. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/microorganisms11020429
Zhao D, Hou H, Liu H et al (2023) Microbial community structure and predictive functional analysis in reclaimed soil with different vegetation types: the example of the Xiaoyi Mine Waste Dump in Shanxi. Land 12:456. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/land12020456
Zhou W, Xu H, Zhan L et al (2019) Dynamic development of fecal microbiome during the progression of diabetes mellitus in Zucker diabetic fatty rats. Front Microbiol 10:232. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00232
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Paola Fortini supporting the selection of trees for mitigation action (Garden of the Apennine Flora of Capracotta—Museo Giardino della Flora Appenninica, Capracotta, Italy). Furthermore, Chiara Paniccia for wild barn owl pellet examination consultancy and to the project OpenMICE. The authors would like to acknowledge the Vanda Mili family (Rosciano, Italy) owners of the house where part of the research activities took place. We sincerely thank Immacolata Doganieri and Sandra Ciccone for their support with the administration of the funding and procurement management.
Data availability statement
Sequences deposited in the NCBI GenBank database on Sequence Read Archive (SRA), accession number PRJNA957615.
Funding
This research received internal funding from the University of Molise, titled Nature, environment, and forest: from theory to practice, years 2022–2023. DiBT 27/22.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Investigation: C.C. and G.R.; data curation: A.B., C.C., F.D., S.G., E.M., P.M., G.P., L.Q., S.S. and G.R.; writing—original draft preparation: A.B., C.C., M.P., and G.R.; writing—review and editing: A.B., C.C., M.P., and G.R.; funding acquisition: C.C. and G.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Additional file 1: Fig. S1.
Schematic protocol adopted in this work.
Additional file 2: Fig. S2.
a View of the area around the nest; b QR code for panoramic view by drone
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Caprari, C., Bucci, A., Divino, F. et al. Collection methods of wild barn owl pellets at low environmental contamination and proposals of microbiological and ecological investigations. Ann Microbiol 74, 14 (2024). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s13213-024-01759-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s13213-024-01759-6