DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix III: OTU's Found to Be Differentially Abundant Between CD and Control Patients Via Metagenomeseq Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Appendix III: OTU's found to be differentially abundant between CD and control patients via metagenomeSeq analysis OTU Log2 (FC CD / FDR Adjusted Phylum Class Order Family Genus Species Number Control) p value 518372 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 2.16 5.69E-08 194497 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 2.15 8.93E-06 175761 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 5.74 1.99E-05 193709 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 2.40 2.14E-05 4464079 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales Bacteroidaceae Bacteroides NA 7.79 0.000123188 20421 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Coprococcus NA 1.19 0.00013719 3044876 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae [Ruminococcus] gnavus -4.32 0.000194983 184000 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 2.81 0.000306032 4392484 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales Bacteroidaceae Bacteroides NA 5.53 0.000339948 528715 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 2.17 0.000722263 186707 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales NA NA NA 2.28 0.001028539 193101 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.90 0.001230738 339685 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Peptococcaceae Peptococcus NA 3.52 0.001382447 101237 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales NA NA NA 2.64 0.001415109 347690 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Oscillospira NA 3.18 0.00152075 2110315 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 1.47 0.001609606 185068 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.67 0.001632 890882 Actinobacteria Actinobacteria Actinomycetales Actinomycetaceae Actinomyces NA -2.95 0.00165125 4474255 Proteobacteria Betaproteobacteria Burkholderiales Alcaligenaceae Sutterella NA 2.03 0.001857837 176868 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Dehalobacteriaceae Dehalobacterium NA -1.02 0.002146762 4329132 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA -3.59 0.002482182 182089 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.94 0.002587873 186248 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.98 0.002636611 530327 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 1.86 0.002728229 184420 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 1.23 0.002826497 4375889 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 2.57 0.002826497 4446902 Firmicutes Bacilli Gemellales Gemellaceae NA NA -2.73 0.002864017 185088 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae [Ruminococcus] gnavus 1.55 0.002866554 4457872 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales Bacteroidaceae Bacteroides NA 4.49 0.00300482 3443092 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 1.82 0.003054182 184249 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales NA NA NA 2.24 0.003098819 175545 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.51 0.003303848 183532 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 2.05 0.003344644 174270 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Blautia NA 3.89 0.003353554 4450214 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 3.54 0.004043323 175397 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Coprococcus NA 2.06 0.004452497 177732 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 1.32 0.004475797 3232397 Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriales Enterobacteriaceae NA NA -1.46 0.004801527 732765 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales Bacteroidaceae Bacteroides NA 4.64 0.004883684 910500 Firmicutes Bacilli Lactobacillales Streptococcaceae Streptococcus NA -2.42 0.005188952 355355 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.60 0.006400429 4453304 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 4.24 0.006574081 185001 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 2.44 0.006824993 4454068 Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriales Enterobacteriaceae Serratia NA -1.83 0.007027138 4324240 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 1.97 0.007198793 4472174 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae [Ruminococcus] NA 1.38 0.007259662 246937 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales NA NA NA -2.43 0.007360569 4413347 Actinobacteria Actinobacteria Bifidobacteriales Bifidobacteriaceae Bifidobacterium NA 2.85 0.007789277 195120 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 1.49 0.007847919 4429536 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Blautia producta -4.67 0.008134399 192228 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 1.74 0.008506686 4464473 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae [Ruminococcus] gnavus -2.92 0.008546401 189142 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.12 0.008810268 304641 Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriales Enterobacteriaceae NA NA -1.89 0.009101771 1972262 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 3.15 0.009283961 4381338 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae [Ruminococcus] torques 2.26 0.009454436 4368754 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 4.90 0.009474286 180182 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.32 0.009735305 178420 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales NA NA NA 3.54 0.009923018 1028632 Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriales Enterobacteriaceae NA NA -2.36 0.010128511 3768338 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Blautia NA -1.96 0.011179678 3449122 Firmicutes Bacilli Lactobacillales Streptococcaceae Streptococcus NA -2.22 0.011250349 181931 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.81 0.011297621 304242 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Ruminococcus NA 1.69 0.011322368 4474380 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Blautia NA -4.55 0.012659454 911422 Firmicutes Bacilli Lactobacillales Streptococcaceae Streptococcus NA -1.89 0.01327303 2877100 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 2.10 0.013302828 1775194 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales NA NA NA 2.54 0.013472813 520774 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 1.15 0.013542622 3123133 Proteobacteria Betaproteobacteria Burkholderiales Alcaligenaceae Sutterella NA -4.49 0.013550376 1694319 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 1.88 0.013840043 194648 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Blautia NA 2.12 0.014172163 175717 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Coprococcus NA -3.40 0.01450776 197988 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Oscillospira NA 1.75 0.015245336 178980 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Clostridiaceae NA NA 1.93 0.015440895 Appendix III: OTU's found to be differentially abundant between CD and control patients via metagenomeSeq analysis OTU Log2 (FC CD / FDR Adjusted Phylum Class Order Family Genus Species Number Control) p value 168071 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 2.48 0.016145264 3124103 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae [Ruminococcus] NA 1.28 0.016159928 164304 Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriales Enterobacteriaceae NA NA -1.90 0.016724781 859619 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 2.30 0.017807567 189478 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Coprococcus NA 1.06 0.018531906 193644 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA -3.48 0.018531906 354461 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 2.87 0.0185407 192461 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 1.41 0.018665683 189356 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 2.15 0.018742581 181160 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Clostridiaceae Clostridium NA -1.91 0.020235235 1015007 Proteobacteria Betaproteobacteria Rhodocyclales Rhodocyclaceae Methyloversatilis NA -1.62 0.020607857 361581 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 1.00 0.020754035 184309 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.98 0.021068608 4343184 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae NA NA 3.31 0.02120183 173135 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 3.30 0.023122366 923098 Firmicutes Bacilli Lactobacillales Streptococcaceae Streptococcus NA -1.98 0.023371487 4404224 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales Prevotellaceae Prevotella copri -2.93 0.024275624 4429986 Proteobacteria Betaproteobacteria Burkholderiales Alcaligenaceae Sutterella NA 3.84 0.02512309 4386814 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium prausnitzii 2.65 0.026009991 965141 Firmicutes Bacilli Lactobacillales Streptococcaceae Streptococcus NA -2.76 0.026009991 1144463 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Veillonellaceae Veillonella NA -1.88 0.026264632 4357222 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales Bacteroidaceae Bacteroides ovatus -1.42 0.02730158 750031 Proteobacteria Alphaproteobacteria Rhodobacterales Rhodobacteraceae NA NA -1.48 0.028482966 4394763 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae [Ruminococcus] gnavus -2.00 0.029415163 102910 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae NA NA 1.51 0.029638154 2642538 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales [Odoribacteraceae] Odoribacter
Recommended publications
  • The Influence of Probiotics on the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes Ratio In

    The Influence of Probiotics on the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes Ratio In

    microorganisms Review The Influence of Probiotics on the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes Ratio in the Treatment of Obesity and Inflammatory Bowel disease Spase Stojanov 1,2, Aleš Berlec 1,2 and Borut Štrukelj 1,2,* 1 Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Ljubljana, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia; [email protected] (S.S.); [email protected] (A.B.) 2 Department of Biotechnology, Jožef Stefan Institute, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia * Correspondence: borut.strukelj@ffa.uni-lj.si Received: 16 September 2020; Accepted: 31 October 2020; Published: 1 November 2020 Abstract: The two most important bacterial phyla in the gastrointestinal tract, Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes, have gained much attention in recent years. The Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes (F/B) ratio is widely accepted to have an important influence in maintaining normal intestinal homeostasis. Increased or decreased F/B ratio is regarded as dysbiosis, whereby the former is usually observed with obesity, and the latter with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Probiotics as live microorganisms can confer health benefits to the host when administered in adequate amounts. There is considerable evidence of their nutritional and immunosuppressive properties including reports that elucidate the association of probiotics with the F/B ratio, obesity, and IBD. Orally administered probiotics can contribute to the restoration of dysbiotic microbiota and to the prevention of obesity or IBD. However, as the effects of different probiotics on the F/B ratio differ, selecting the appropriate species or mixture is crucial. The most commonly tested probiotics for modifying the F/B ratio and treating obesity and IBD are from the genus Lactobacillus. In this paper, we review the effects of probiotics on the F/B ratio that lead to weight loss or immunosuppression.
  • Mobile Genetic Elements in Streptococci

    Mobile Genetic Elements in Streptococci

    Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. (2019) 32: 123-166. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21775/cimb.032.123 Mobile Genetic Elements in Streptococci Miao Lu#, Tao Gong#, Anqi Zhang, Boyu Tang, Jiamin Chen, Zhong Zhang, Yuqing Li*, Xuedong Zhou* State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China. #Miao Lu and Tao Gong contributed equally to this work. *Address correspondence to: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Streptococci are a group of Gram-positive bacteria belonging to the family Streptococcaceae, which are responsible of multiple diseases. Some of these species can cause invasive infection that may result in life-threatening illness. Moreover, antibiotic-resistant bacteria are considerably increasing, thus imposing a global consideration. One of the main causes of this resistance is the horizontal gene transfer (HGT), associated to gene transfer agents including transposons, integrons, plasmids and bacteriophages. These agents, which are called mobile genetic elements (MGEs), encode proteins able to mediate DNA movements. This review briefly describes MGEs in streptococci, focusing on their structure and properties related to HGT and antibiotic resistance. caister.com/cimb 123 Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. (2019) Vol. 32 Mobile Genetic Elements Lu et al Introduction Streptococci are a group of Gram-positive bacteria widely distributed across human and animals. Unlike the Staphylococcus species, streptococci are catalase negative and are subclassified into the three subspecies alpha, beta and gamma according to the partial, complete or absent hemolysis induced, respectively. The beta hemolytic streptococci species are further classified by the cell wall carbohydrate composition (Lancefield, 1933) and according to human diseases in Lancefield groups A, B, C and G.
  • Validation of the Asaim Framework and Its Workflows on HMP Mock Community Samples

    Validation of the Asaim Framework and Its Workflows on HMP Mock Community Samples

    Validation of the ASaiM framework and its workflows on HMP mock community samples The ASaiM framework and its workflows have been tested and validated on two mock metagenomic data of an artificial community (with 22 known microbial strains). The datasets are available on EBI metagenomics database (project accession number: SRP004311). First we checked that the targeted abundances (based on number of PCR product) from both mock datasets were similar to the effective abundance (by mapping reads on reference genomes). Second, taxonomic and functional results produced by the ASaiM framework have been extensively analyzed and compared to expectations and to results obtained with the EBI metagenomics pipeline (S. Hunter et al. 2014). For these datasets, the ASaiM framework produces accurate and precise taxonomic assignations, different functional results (gene families, pathways, GO slim terms) and results combining taxonomic and functional information. Despite almost 1.4 million of raw metagenomic sequences, these analyses were executed in less than 6h on a commodity computer. Hence, the ASaiM framework and its workflows are proven to be relevant for the analysis of microbiota datasets. 1Data On EBI metagenomics database, two mock community samples for Human Microbiome Project (HMP) are available. Both samples contain a genomic mixture of 22 known microbial strains. Relative abundance of each strain has been targeted using the number of PCR product of their respective 16S sequences (Table 1). In first sample (SRR072232), the targeted 16S copies of the strains vary by up to four orders of magnitude between the strains (Table 1), whereas in second sample (SRR072233) the same 16S copy number is targeted for each strain (Table 1).
  • Altered Fecal Microbiota Composition in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

    Altered Fecal Microbiota Composition in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Brain, Behavior, and Immunity 48 (2015) 186–194 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Brain, Behavior, and Immunity journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ybrbi Altered fecal microbiota composition in patients with major depressive disorder Haiyin Jiang a,1, Zongxin Ling a,1, Yonghua Zhang b,1, Hongjin Mao c, Zhanping Ma d, Yan Yin c, ⇑ Weihong Wang e, Wenxin Tang c, Zhonglin Tan c, Jianfei Shi c, Lanjuan Li a,2, Bing Ruan a, a Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, the First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310003, China b Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine, The Seventh People’s Hospital of Hangzhou, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310003, China c Department of Psychiatry, The Seventh People’s Hospital of Hangzhou, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310003, China d Department of Psychiatry, Psychiatric Hospital of Hengshui, Hebei 053000, China e Department of Infectious Diseases, Huzhou Central Hospital, Huzhou, Zhejiang 313000, China article info abstract Article history: Studies using animal models have shown that depression affects the stability of the microbiota, but the Received 29 July 2014 actual structure and composition in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) are not well under- Received in revised form 29 March 2015 stood. Here, we analyzed fecal samples from 46 patients with depression (29 active-MDD and 17 Accepted 29 March 2015 responded-MDD) and 30 healthy controls (HCs). High-throughput pyrosequencing showed that, accord- Available online 13 April 2015 ing to the Shannon index, increased fecal bacterial a-diversity was found in the active-MDD (A-MDD) vs.
  • Fatty Acid Diets: Regulation of Gut Microbiota Composition and Obesity and Its Related Metabolic Dysbiosis

    Fatty Acid Diets: Regulation of Gut Microbiota Composition and Obesity and Its Related Metabolic Dysbiosis

    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Review Fatty Acid Diets: Regulation of Gut Microbiota Composition and Obesity and Its Related Metabolic Dysbiosis David Johane Machate 1, Priscila Silva Figueiredo 2 , Gabriela Marcelino 2 , Rita de Cássia Avellaneda Guimarães 2,*, Priscila Aiko Hiane 2 , Danielle Bogo 2, Verônica Assalin Zorgetto Pinheiro 2, Lincoln Carlos Silva de Oliveira 3 and Arnildo Pott 1 1 Graduate Program in Biotechnology and Biodiversity in the Central-West Region of Brazil, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande 79079-900, Brazil; [email protected] (D.J.M.); [email protected] (A.P.) 2 Graduate Program in Health and Development in the Central-West Region of Brazil, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande 79079-900, Brazil; pri.fi[email protected] (P.S.F.); [email protected] (G.M.); [email protected] (P.A.H.); [email protected] (D.B.); [email protected] (V.A.Z.P.) 3 Chemistry Institute, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande 79079-900, Brazil; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +55-67-3345-7416 Received: 9 March 2020; Accepted: 27 March 2020; Published: 8 June 2020 Abstract: Long-term high-fat dietary intake plays a crucial role in the composition of gut microbiota in animal models and human subjects, which affect directly short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) production and host health. This review aims to highlight the interplay of fatty acid (FA) intake and gut microbiota composition and its interaction with hosts in health promotion and obesity prevention and its related metabolic dysbiosis.
  • Microbial Strain-Level Population Structure and Genetic Diversity from Metagenomes

    Microbial Strain-Level Population Structure and Genetic Diversity from Metagenomes

    Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 1, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Method Microbial strain-level population structure and genetic diversity from metagenomes Duy Tin Truong,1 Adrian Tett,1 Edoardo Pasolli,1 Curtis Huttenhower,2,3 and Nicola Segata1 1Centre for Integrative Biology, University of Trento, 38123 Trento, Italy; 2Biostatistics Department, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA; 3The Broad Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, USA Among the human health conditions linked to microbial communities, phenotypes are often associated with only a subset of strains within causal microbial groups. Although it has been critical for decades in microbial physiology to characterize individual strains, this has been challenging when using culture-independent high-throughput metagenomics. We introduce StrainPhlAn, a novel metagenomic strain identification approach, and apply it to characterize the genetic structure of thou- sands of strains from more than 125 species in more than 1500 gut metagenomes drawn from populations spanning North and South American, European, Asian, and African countries. The method relies on per-sample dominant sequence variant reconstruction within species-specific marker genes. It identified primarily subject-specific strain variants (<5% inter-subject strain sharing), and we determined that a single strain typically dominated each species and was retained over time (for >70% of species). Microbial population structure was correlated in several distinct ways with the geographic structure of the host population. In some cases, discrete subspecies (e.g., for Eubacterium rectale and Prevotella copri) or continuous mi- crobial genetic variations (e.g., for Faecalibacterium prausnitzii) were associated with geographically distinct human populations, whereas few strains occurred in multiple unrelated cohorts.
  • Distribution and Characteristics of Bacillus Bacteria Associated with Hydrobionts and the Waters of the Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan I

    Distribution and Characteristics of Bacillus Bacteria Associated with Hydrobionts and the Waters of the Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan I

    ISSN 0026-2617, Microbiology, 2008, Vol. 77, No. 4, pp. 497–503. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2008. Original Russian Text © I.A. Beleneva, 2008, published in Mikrobiologiya, 2008, Vol. 77, No. 4, pp. 558–565. EXPERIMENTAL ARTICLES Distribution and Characteristics of Bacillus Bacteria Associated with Hydrobionts and the Waters of the Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan I. A. Beleneva1 Zhirmunskii Institute of Marine Biology, Far East Division, Russian Academy of Sciences, ul. Pal’chevskogo, 17, Vladivostok 690041, Russia Received May 28, 2007 Abstract—Bacilli of the species Bacillus subtilis, B. pumilus, B. mycoides, B. marinus and B. licheniformis (a total of 53 strains) were isolated from 15 invertebrate species and the water of the Vostok Bay, Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan. Bacilli were most often isolated from bivalves (22.7%) and sea cucumbers (18.9%); they occurred less frequently in sea urchins and starfish (13.2 and 7.5%, respectively). Most of bacilli strains were isolated from invertebrates inhabiting silted sediments. No Bacillus spp. strains were isolated from invertebrates inhabiting stony and sandy environments. The species diversity of bacilli isolated from marine objects under study was low. Almost all bacterial isolates were resistant to lincomycin. Unlike B. pumilus, B. subtilis isolates were mostly resistant to benzylpenicillin and ampicillin. Antibiotic sensitivity of B. licheniformis strains was variable (two strains were resistant to benzylpenicillin and oxacillin, while one was sensitive). A significant fraction of isolated bacilli contained pigments. Pigmented strains were more often isolated from seawater sam- ples, while colorless ones predominated within hydrobionts. B. subtilis colonies had the broadest range of co- lors.
  • Development of the Equine Hindgut Microbiome in Semi-Feral and Domestic Conventionally-Managed Foals Meredith K

    Development of the Equine Hindgut Microbiome in Semi-Feral and Domestic Conventionally-Managed Foals Meredith K

    Tavenner et al. Animal Microbiome (2020) 2:43 Animal Microbiome https://doi.org/10.1186/s42523-020-00060-6 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Development of the equine hindgut microbiome in semi-feral and domestic conventionally-managed foals Meredith K. Tavenner1, Sue M. McDonnell2 and Amy S. Biddle1* Abstract Background: Early development of the gut microbiome is an essential part of neonate health in animals. It is unclear whether the acquisition of gut microbes is different between domesticated animals and their wild counterparts. In this study, fecal samples from ten domestic conventionally managed (DCM) Standardbred and ten semi-feral managed (SFM) Shetland-type pony foals and dams were compared using 16S rRNA sequencing to identify differences in the development of the foal hindgut microbiome related to time and management. Results: Gut microbiome diversity of dams was lower than foals overall and within groups, and foals from both groups at Week 1 had less diverse gut microbiomes than subsequent weeks. The core microbiomes of SFM dams and foals had more taxa overall, and greater numbers of taxa within species groups when compared to DCM dams and foals. The gut microbiomes of SFM foals demonstrated enhanced diversity of key groups: Verrucomicrobia (RFP12), Ruminococcaceae, Fusobacterium spp., and Bacteroides spp., based on age and management. Lactic acid bacteria Lactobacillus spp. and other Lactobacillaceae genera were enriched only in DCM foals, specifically during their second and third week of life. Predicted microbiome functions estimated computationally suggested that SFM foals had higher mean sequence counts for taxa contributing to the digestion of lipids, simple and complex carbohydrates, and protein.
  • Streptococcaceae

    Streptococcaceae

    STREPTOCOCCACEAE Instructor Dr. Maytham Ihsan Ph.D Vet Microbiology 1 STREPTOCOCCACEAE Genus: Streptococcus and Enterocccus Streptococcus and Enterocccus genera, are Gram‐positive ovoid (lanceolate) cocci, approximately 1 μm in diameter, that tend to occur in singles, pairs & chains (rosary‐like) may be long or short. Streptococcus species occur as commensals on skin, upper & lower respiratory tract and mucous membranes; some may act as opportunistic pathogens causing pyogenic infections. Enteroccci spp. are enteric opportunistic & can be found in the intestinal tract of many animlas & humans. Growth & Culture Characteristics • Most streptococci are facultative anaerobes and catalase‐negative. • They are non‐motile and oxidase‐negative and do not form spores & susceptible to desiccation. • They are fastidious bacteria and require the addition of blood or serum to culture media. They grow at temperature ranging from 37°C to 42°C. Group D (Enterocooci), are considered thermophilic & can gorw at 45°C or even higher. • Colonies are small about 1 mm in size, smooth, translucent & may be greyish. • Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumococcus or diplococcus) occurs as slightly pear‐shaped cocci in pairs. Pathogenic strains have thick capsules and produce mucoid colonies or flat colonies with smooth borders & a central concavity “draughtsman colonies” aer 48‐72 hrs on blood agar. These bacteria cause pneumonia in humans and rats. 2 • Some of streptococci grow on MacConkey like: Enterococcus faecalis, Strept. bovis, Sterpt. uberis & strept. lactis producing very tiny colonies like pin‐point appearance aer 48 hrs of incubaon at 37°C. • Streptococci genera grow slowly in broth media, sometimes forming faint opacity; whereas others with a fluffy deposit adherent to the side of the tube.
  • WO 2018/064165 A2 (.Pdf)

    WO 2018/064165 A2 (.Pdf)

    (12) INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (19) World Intellectual Property Organization International Bureau (10) International Publication Number (43) International Publication Date WO 2018/064165 A2 05 April 2018 (05.04.2018) W !P O PCT (51) International Patent Classification: Published: A61K 35/74 (20 15.0 1) C12N 1/21 (2006 .01) — without international search report and to be republished (21) International Application Number: upon receipt of that report (Rule 48.2(g)) PCT/US2017/053717 — with sequence listing part of description (Rule 5.2(a)) (22) International Filing Date: 27 September 2017 (27.09.2017) (25) Filing Language: English (26) Publication Langi English (30) Priority Data: 62/400,372 27 September 2016 (27.09.2016) US 62/508,885 19 May 2017 (19.05.2017) US 62/557,566 12 September 2017 (12.09.2017) US (71) Applicant: BOARD OF REGENTS, THE UNIVERSI¬ TY OF TEXAS SYSTEM [US/US]; 210 West 7th St., Austin, TX 78701 (US). (72) Inventors: WARGO, Jennifer; 1814 Bissonnet St., Hous ton, TX 77005 (US). GOPALAKRISHNAN, Vanch- eswaran; 7900 Cambridge, Apt. 10-lb, Houston, TX 77054 (US). (74) Agent: BYRD, Marshall, P.; Parker Highlander PLLC, 1120 S. Capital Of Texas Highway, Bldg. One, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78746 (US). (81) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every kind of national protection available): AE, AG, AL, AM, AO, AT, AU, AZ, BA, BB, BG, BH, BN, BR, BW, BY, BZ, CA, CH, CL, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DJ, DK, DM, DO, DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, HN, HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IR, IS, JO, JP, KE, KG, KH, KN, KP, KR, KW, KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LU, LY, MA, MD, ME, MG, MK, MN, MW, MX, MY, MZ, NA, NG, NI, NO, NZ, OM, PA, PE, PG, PH, PL, PT, QA, RO, RS, RU, RW, SA, SC, SD, SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TH, TJ, TM, TN, TR, TT, TZ, UA, UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, ZM, ZW.
  • Development of Bacterial Communities in Biological Soil Crusts Along

    Development of Bacterial Communities in Biological Soil Crusts Along

    1 Development of bacterial communities in biological soil crusts along 2 a revegetation chronosequence in the Tengger Desert, northwest 3 China 4 5 Author names and affiliations: 6 Lichao Liu1, Yubing Liu1, 2 *, Peng Zhang1, Guang Song1, Rong Hui1, Zengru Wang1, Jin Wang1, 2 7 1Shapotou Desert Research & Experiment Station, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese 8 Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, China 9 2Key Laboratory of Stress Physiology and Ecology in Cold and Arid Regions of Gansu Province, Northwest Institute 10 of Eco–Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China 11 12 * Corresponding author: Yubing Liu 13 Address: Donggang West Road 320, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China. 14 Tel: +86 0931 4967202. 15 E-mail address: [email protected] 16 17 Abstract. Knowledge of structure and function of microbial communities in different 18 successional stages of biological soil crusts (BSCs) is still scarce for desert areas. In this study, 19 Illumina MiSeq sequencing was used to assess the composition changes of bacterial communities 20 in different ages of BSCs in the revegetation of Shapotou in the Tengger Desert. The most dominant 21 phyla of bacterial communities shifted with the changed types of BSCs in the successional stages, 22 from Firmicutes in mobile sand and physical crusts to Actinobacteria and Proteobacteria in BSCs, 23 and the most dominant genera shifted from Bacillus, Enterococcus and Lactococcus to 24 RB41_norank and JG34-KF-361_norank. Alpha diversity and quantitative real-time PCR analysis 25 indicated that bacteria richness and abundance reached their highest levels after 15 years of BSC 26 development.
  • Download (PDF)

    Download (PDF)

    Supplemental Table 1. OTU (Operational Taxonomic Unit) level taxonomic analysis of gut microbiota Case-control Average ± STDEV (%) Wilcoxon OTU Phylum Class Order Family Genus Patient (n = 15) Control (n = 16) p OTU_366 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Oscillospira 0.0189 ± 0.0217 0.00174 ± 0.00429 0.004** OTU_155 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Ruminococcus 0.0554 ± 0.0769 0.0161 ± 0.0461 0.006** OTU_352 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Ruminococcus 0.0119 ± 0.0111 0.00227 ± 0.00413 0.007** OTU_719 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Oscillospira 0.00150 ± 0.00190 0.000159 ± 0.000341 0.007** OTU_620 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Unclassified 0.00573 ± 0.0115 0.0000333 ± 0.000129 0.008** OTU_47 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Lachnospiraceae Lachnospira 1.44 ± 2.04 0.183 ± 0.337 0.011* OTU_769 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Unclassified 0.000857 ± 0.00175 0 0.014* OTU_747 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Anaerotruncus 0.000771 ± 0.00190 0 0.014* OTU_748 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Unclassified 0.0135 ± 0.0141 0.00266 ± 0.00420 0.015* OTU_81 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales [Barnesiellaceae] Unclassified 0.434 ± 0.436 0.0708 ± 0.126 0.017* OTU_214 Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiales Ruminococcaceae Unclassified 0.0254 ± 0.0368 0.00496 ± 0.00959 0.020* OTU_113 Actinobacteria Coriobacteriia Coriobacteriales Coriobacteriaceae Unclassified 0 0.189 ± 0.363 0.021* OTU_100 Bacteroidetes