Microbiological characteristics of different tongue coatings in adults

Caihong He, Qiaoyun Liao, Peng Fu, Jinyou Li, Xinxiu Zhao, Qin Zhang, Qifeng Gui, Caihong He, Qiaoyun Liao, Peng Fu, Jinyou Li, Xinxiu Zhao, Qin Zhang, Qifeng Gui

Abstract

Background: Tongue coating is an important health indicator in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). The tongue coating microbiome can distinguish disease patients from healthy controls. To study the relationship between different types of tongue coatings and health, we analyzed the species composition of different types of tongue coatings and the co-occurrence relationships between microorganisms in Chinese adults. From June 2019 to October 2020, 158 adults from Hangzhou and Shaoxing City, Zhejiang Province, were enrolled. We classified the TCM tongue coatings into four different types: thin white tongue fur (TWF), thin yellow tongue fur (TYF), white greasy tongue fur (WGF), and yellow greasy tongue fur (YGF). Tongue coating specimens were collected and used for 16S rRNA gene sequencing using the Illumina MiSeq system. Wilcoxon rank-sum and permutational multivariate analysis of variance tests were used to analyze the data. The microbial networks in the four types of tongue coatings were inferred independently using sparse inverse covariance estimation for ecological association inference.

Results: The microbial composition was similar among the different tongue coatings; however, the abundance of microorganisms differed. TWF had a higher abundance of Fusobacterium periodonticum and Neisseria mucosa, the highest α-diversity, and a highly connected community (average degree = 3.59, average closeness centrality = 0.33). TYF had the lowest α-diversity, but the most species in the co-occurrence network diagram (number of nodes = 88). The platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) was associated with tongue coating (P = 0.035), and the YGF and TYF groups had higher PLR values. In the co-occurrence network, Aggregatibacter segnis was the "driver species" of the TWF and TYF groups and correlated with C-reactive protein (P < 0.05). Streptococcus anginosus was the "driver species" in the YGF and TWF groups and was positively correlated with body mass index and weight (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Different tongue coatings have similar microbial compositions but different abundances of certain bacteria. The co-occurrence of microorganisms in the different tongue coatings also varies. The significance of different tongue coatings in TCM theory is consistent with the characteristics and roles of the corresponding tongue-coating microbes. This further supports considering tongue coating as a risk factor for disease.

Keywords: Co-occurrence networks; Disease prevention; Driver species; Microbiome; Tongue coating.

Conflict of interest statement

All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Chinese medicine tongue coating types and photos. Tongue coating: a layer of moss-like material covering the tongue. TWF:thin white tongue fur; TYF:thin yellow tongue fur; WGF:white greasy tongue fur; YGF:yellow greasy tongue fur
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Analysis of microbial a-diversity of four different types of tongue coating. A Rarefaction curve: the abscissa is the number of sequencing strips randomly selected from a sample, and the ordinate is the number of OTUs that can be constructed based on the number of sequencing strips, which is used to reflect the sequencing depth. Different samples are represented by curves of different colors. B Venn diagram of OTUs with four different tongue coatings.The Veen diagram depicts the number of OTUs specific and shared by each of the four tongue coatings TWF, TYF, YGF, and WGF. C and D Results of a-diversity analysis of four tongue coatings. C Simpson index; D Shannon index
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Analysis of microbial β-diversity of four different types of tongue coatings A and B Results of β-diversity analysis of four tongue coatings. A unweighted Unifrac distances and (B) weighted Unifrac distances. C and D Cumulative graph of microorganisms with percentages greater than 1 in four different tongue coatings. C Genus level and (D) Species level. E and F The differences in microbial abundance between TWF and the remaining three tongue coating types at the species level showed statistically significant results. E TWF-TYF, (F) TWF-YGF and (G) TWF-WGF
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Discrepancies of co-occurrence networks of the four different tongue coating types ABC and D The complex nature of inter microbial interactions in the ecological community of each tongue coating was characterized by co-occurrence networks using graphs. Main groups of co-occurrence species are presented in different colours, and smaller groups are shown in grey. Networks of species in the four tongue coatings are identified by positive and negative correlations among the dominant bacteria. Red line indicates positive correlation and blue line indicates negative correlation. Only the bacterial connections (edges) larger than cut-offs (correlation values > 0.4) are retained. Each node in the network indicates a species. The size of each node is proportional to the relative abundance of each species. Nodes in red color show driver microbes which significantly contributed to the separation of the networks (NESH-score value of > 2). E, F and G Network view: All nodes belonging to the same community are randomly assigned similar colors, and gray nodes represent nodes existing in both case and control subnets. The node size is directly proportional to its nesh score. If the nesh score of a node is case > control, it will be marked in red. Therefore, a large red node can be regarded as a driving node. For edges, red indicates the interaction that exists only in the case subnet, green indicates the interaction that exists only in the control subnet, and blue indicates the interaction that exists in both subnets
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
A The effect of clinical indicators and demographic variables on the microbial a-diversity of the tongue, with red representing positive correlations and blue representing negative correlations.” + ” indicates p < 0.05,” +  + ” indicates p < 0.001. B Contributions of clinical and demographic variables to the differences in relative abundances of key distinguishing bacterial species for four tongue coatings based on Spearman correlation coefficients and best multiple regression model. Color bar shows correlation values, where red color indicates positive association, blue color negative association, and only significant correlations were shown.” + ” indicates p < 0.05,” +  + ” indicates p < 0.001

References

    1. Sepich-Poore GD, et al. The microbiome and human cancer. Sci. 2021;371(6536):eabc4552. doi: 10.1126/science.abc4552.
    1. Altves S, Yildiz HK, Vural HC. Interaction of the microbiota with the human body in health and diseases. Biosci Microbiota Food Health. 2020;39(2):23–32. doi: 10.12938/bmfh.19-023.
    1. Mohajeri MH, et al. The role of the microbiome for human health: from basic science to clinical applications. Eur J Nutr. 2018;57(Suppl 1):1–14. doi: 10.1007/s00394-018-1703-4.
    1. Lebeer S, Spacova I. Exploring human host-microbiome interactions in health and disease-how to not get lost in translation. Genome Biol. 2019;20(1):56. doi: 10.1186/s13059-019-1669-4.
    1. Wu J, Zhang Y, Bai J. Tongue area extraction in tongue diagnosis of traditional chinese medicine. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2005;2005:4955–4957.
    1. Wang X, et al. Constructing tongue coating recognition model using deep transfer learning to assist syndrome diagnosis and its potential in noninvasive ethnopharmacological evaluation. J Ethnopharmacol. 2022;285:114905. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2021.114905.
    1. Lo LC, et al. TCM tongue diagnosis index of early-stage breast cancer. Complement Ther Med. 2015;23(5):705–713. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2015.07.001.
    1. Kim MJ, et al. The herbal formula CWBSD improves sleep quality dependent on oral microbial type and tongue diagnostic features in insomnia. J Pers Med. 2021;11(5):325. doi: 10.3390/jpm11050325.
    1. Boli Zhang,et al. Investigation and experimental study of healthy human tongue elephants (ii)-tongue moss part. Tianjin J Tradit Chin Med. 1992;6(6):30-33.
    1. Chen H, et al. Microbial characteristics across different tongue coating types in a healthy population. J Oral Microbiol. 2021;13(1):1946316. doi: 10.1080/20002297.2021.1946316.
    1. Faust K, et al. Cross-biome comparison of microbial association networks. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:1200. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01200.
    1. Kuntal BK, et al. 'NetShift': a methodology for understanding 'driver microbes' from healthy and disease microbiome datasets. ISME J. 2019;13(2):442–454. doi: 10.1038/s41396-018-0291-x.
    1. Jin W, et al. Microecology-turbidity toxin theory: correlation between helicobacter pylori infection and manifestation of tongue and gastroscopy. J Tradit Chin Med. 2022;42(3):458–462.
    1. Shang Z, et al. Correlation analysis between characteristics under gastroscope and image information of tongue in patients with chronic gastriti. J Tradit Chin Med. 2022;42(1):102–107.
    1. Yadav D, Ghosh TS, Mande SS. Global investigation of composition and interaction networks in gut microbiomes of individuals belonging to diverse geographies and age-groups. Gut Pathog. 2016;8:17. doi: 10.1186/s13099-016-0099-z.
    1. Nicholson JK, et al. Host-gut microbiota metabolic interactions. Sci. 2012;336(6086):1262–1267. doi: 10.1126/science.1223813.
    1. Belenguer A, et al. Two routes of metabolic cross-feeding between Bifidobacterium adolescentis and butyrate-producing anaerobes from the human gut. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72(5):3593–3599. doi: 10.1128/AEM.72.5.3593-3599.2006.
    1. Flint HJ, et al. Interactions and competition within the microbial community of the human colon: links between diet and health. Environ Microbiol. 2007;9(5):1101–1111. doi: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2007.01281.x.
    1. Sears CL, Pardoll DM. Perspective: alpha-bugs, their microbial partners, and the link to colon cancer. J Infect Dis. 2011;203(3):306–311. doi: 10.1093/jinfdis/jiq061.
    1. Hajishengallis G, Darveau RP, Curtis MA. The keystone-pathogen hypothesis. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2012;10(10):717–725. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro2873.
    1. Lopez-Lozano NE, et al. Bacterial diversity and interaction networks of agave lechuguilla rhizosphere differ significantly from bulk soil in the oligotrophic basin of cuatro cienegas. Front Plant Sci. 2020;11:1028. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.01028.
    1. Kaptchuk T.J. The web that has no weaver : understanding Chinese medicine. Rev. ed. Chicago, Ill:: Contemporary Books. xxvi,; 2000. p. p. 500.
    1. Jiang M, et al. Association between tongue appearance in traditional Chinese medicine and effective response in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Complement Ther Med. 2011;19(3):115–121. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2011.05.002.
    1. Zhao Y, et al. Altered oral microbiota in chronic hepatitis B patients with different tongue coatings. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(30):3448–3461. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i30.3448.
    1. Ye J, et al. Bacillus as a potential diagnostic marker for yellow tongue coating. Sci Rep. 2016;6:32496. doi: 10.1038/srep32496.
    1. Newman ME. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103(23):8577–8582. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0601602103.
    1. van Elsas JD, et al. Microbial diversity determines the invasion of soil by a bacterial pathogen. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(4):1159–1164. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1109326109.
    1. Wei Z, et al. Trophic network architecture of root-associated bacterial communities determines pathogen invasion and plant health. Nat Commun. 2015;6:8413. doi: 10.1038/ncomms9413.
    1. Kageyama S, et al. Transition of bacterial diversity and composition in tongue microbiota during the first two years of life. mSphere. 2019;4(3):e00187. doi: 10.1128/mSphere.00187-19.
    1. Nardelli C, et al. Nasopharyngeal microbiome signature in COVID-19 positive patients: Can we definitively get a role to fusobacterium periodonticum? Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021;11:625581. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.625581.
    1. Yoneda S, et al. Ubiquitous sialometabolism present among oral fusobacteria. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(6):e99263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099263.
    1. Morniroli D, et al. Human sialome and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: An understated correlation? Front Immunol. 2020;11:1480. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01480.
    1. Johswich KO, et al. In vivo adaptation and persistence of Neisseria meningitidis within the nasopharyngeal mucosa. PLoS Pathog. 2013;9(7):e1003509. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1003509.
    1. Altdorfer A, et al. Infective endocarditis caused by Neisseria mucosa on a prosthetic pulmonary valve with false positive serology for Coxiella burnetii - The first described case. IDCases. 2021;24:e01146. doi: 10.1016/j.idcr.2021.e01146.
    1. Al-Hebshi NN, et al. Robust species taxonomy assignment algorithm for 16S rRNA NGS reads: application to oral carcinoma samples. J Oral Microbiol. 2015;7:28934. doi: 10.3402/jom.v7.28934.
    1. Ogorodova LM, et al. Comparison study of oropharyngeal microbiota in case of bronchial asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in different severity levels. Vestn Ross Akad Med Nauk. 2015;6:669–678. doi: 10.15690/vramn532.
    1. Teng T-T, Ergil K. Practical diagnosis in traditional Chinese medicine. New York: Edinburgh Churchill Livingstone. xiv; 1999. p. 549.
    1. Gao L, et al. Study on the correlation of tongue manifestation with fibrinogen and neutrophil in acute cerebral infarction patients. Chin J Integr Med. 2012;18(12):942–945. doi: 10.1007/s11655-012-1298-y.
    1. Bauer R, et al. Heterogeneity of streptococcus anginosus ss-hemolysis in relation to CRISPR/Cas. Mol Oral Microbiol. 2020;35(2):56–65. doi: 10.1111/omi.12278.
    1. Li Y, et al. Oral, tongue-coating microbiota, and metabolic disorders: A novel area of interactive research. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021;8:730203. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.730203.
    1. Guang-Qiang LWMA, Fei Han, Xiao-Ying Huang, Chang-Hua Zhang, Yong-Cui Liao, Hong-Jiao Wan, Cheng-Hua Ding. Differences of microbial populations between yellow greasy and thin white tongue coating in healthy population. Microbiol China. 2020;47:p. 4229–4239.
    1. Su K, et al. Retrospective study on Professor Zhongying Zhou's experience in traditional Chinese medicine treatment on diabetic nephropathy. J Tradit Chin Med. 2013;33(2):262–267. doi: 10.1016/S0254-6272(13)60137-5.
    1. Jiang B, et al. Integrating next-generation sequencing and traditional tongue diagnosis to determine tongue coating microbiome. Sci Rep. 2012;2:936. doi: 10.1038/srep00936.
    1. Pang W, et al. Tongue features of patients with coronavirus disease 2019: a retrospective cross-sectional study. Integr Med Res. 2020;9(3):100493. doi: 10.1016/j.imr.2020.100493.
    1. Qin B, et al. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were useful markers in assessment of inflammatory response and disease activity in SLE patients. Mod Rheumatol. 2016;26(3):372–376. doi: 10.3109/14397595.2015.1091136.
    1. Onafowokan OO, Mateo R, Bonatti HJR. A series of haemophilus parainfluenzae surgical infections and review of the literature. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2021;22(9):940–947. doi: 10.1089/sur.2020.172.
    1. Young RE, et al. Haemophilus parainfluenzae expresses diverse lipopolysaccharide O-antigens using ABC transporter and Wzy polymerase-dependent mechanisms. Int J Med Microbiol. 2013;303(8):603–617. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2013.08.006.
    1. Wang ZC, et al. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of tongue coating diagnosis in traditional Chinese medicine using smartphones: Quasi-delphi study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020;8(7):e16018. doi: 10.2196/16018.
    1. Magoc T, Salzberg SL. FLASH: fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies. Bioinformatics. 2011;27(21):2957–2963. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr507.
    1. Caporaso JG, et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods. 2010;7(5):335–336. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.f.303.
    1. Kurtz ZD, et al. Sparse and compositionally robust inference of microbial ecological networks. PLoS Comput Biol. 2015;11(5):e1004226. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004226.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit