Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography

Tanya Yatsunenko, Federico E Rey, Mark J Manary, Indi Trehan, Maria Gloria Dominguez-Bello, Monica Contreras, Magda Magris, Glida Hidalgo, Robert N Baldassano, Andrey P Anokhin, Andrew C Heath, Barbara Warner, Jens Reeder, Justin Kuczynski, J Gregory Caporaso, Catherine A Lozupone, Christian Lauber, Jose Carlos Clemente, Dan Knights, Rob Knight, Jeffrey I Gordon, Tanya Yatsunenko, Federico E Rey, Mark J Manary, Indi Trehan, Maria Gloria Dominguez-Bello, Monica Contreras, Magda Magris, Glida Hidalgo, Robert N Baldassano, Andrey P Anokhin, Andrew C Heath, Barbara Warner, Jens Reeder, Justin Kuczynski, J Gregory Caporaso, Catherine A Lozupone, Christian Lauber, Jose Carlos Clemente, Dan Knights, Rob Knight, Jeffrey I Gordon

Abstract

Gut microbial communities represent one source of human genetic and metabolic diversity. To examine how gut microbiomes differ among human populations, here we characterize bacterial species in fecal samples from 531 individuals, plus the gene content of 110 of them. The cohort encompassed healthy children and adults from the Amazonas of Venezuela, rural Malawi and US metropolitan areas and included mono- and dizygotic twins. Shared features of the functional maturation of the gut microbiome were identified during the first three years of life in all three populations, including age-associated changes in the genes involved in vitamin biosynthesis and metabolism. Pronounced differences in bacterial assemblages and functional gene repertoires were noted between US residents and those in the other two countries. These distinctive features are evident in early infancy as well as adulthood. Our findings underscore the need to consider the microbiome when evaluating human development, nutritional needs, physiological variations and the impact of westernization.

Figures

Fig. 1. Differences in the fecal microbial…
Fig. 1. Differences in the fecal microbial communities of Malawians, Amerindians and residents of the USA at different ages
(a) UniFrac distances between children and adults decrease with increasing age of children in each population. Each point shows an average distance between a child and all adults unrelated to that child but from the same country. Results are derived from bacterial V4-16S rRNA datasets. (b) Large interpersonal variations are observed in the phylogenetic configurations of fecal microbial communities at early ages. Malawian and Amerindian children and adults are more similar to one another than to USA children and adults. UniFrac distances were defined from bacterial V4-16S rRNA data generated from the microbiota of 181 unrelated adults (≥18 years old) and 204 unrelated children (n=31 Malawians 0.03–3 years old, 21 3–17 years old; 30 Amerindians 0.08–3 years old, 29 3–17 years old; 31 residents of the USA 0.08–3 years old, 62 sampled at 3–17 years of age). Abbreviations: * p<0.05; **p<0.005 (Student’s t-test with 1000 Monte Carlo simulations). See Table S3 for a complete description of the statistical significance of all comparisons shown in the Figure. (c) PCoA of unweighted UniFrac distances for the fecal microbiota of adults.
Fig. 2. Bacterial diversity increases with age…
Fig. 2. Bacterial diversity increases with age in each population
Number of observed 97%ID OTUs plotted against age for (a) all subjects, (b) during the first 3 years of life, and (c) adults (in the latter panel, average values ± SEM are plotted). *p<0.05, **p<0.005 (ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test).
Fig. 3. Differences in the functional profiles…
Fig. 3. Differences in the functional profiles of fecal microbiomes in the three study populations
Examples of KEGG ECs that exhibited the largest differences, as determined by Random Forests and ShotgunFuntionalizeR analyses, in proportional representation between USA and Malawian/Amerindian populations. Shown are the relative abundances of genes encoding the indicated ECs (normalized by Z-score across all datasets). (a) UPGMA clustering of 10 USA, 10 Malawian and 6 Amerindian baby fecal microbiomes. (b) UPGMA clustering of 16 USA, 5 Malawian and 5 Amerindian adult fecal microbiomes.
Fig. 4. Differences in the fecal microbiota…
Fig. 4. Differences in the fecal microbiota between family members across the three populations studied
UniFrac distances between the fecal bacterial communities of family members were calculated (n=19 Amerindian, 34 Malawian and 54 USA families with teenage twins). Mean ± SEM values are plotted. The UniFrac matrix was permutated 1000 times; p values represent the fraction of times permuted differences were greater than real differences: ns (not significant; p>0.05), * p

References

    1. Mueller S, et al. Differences in fecal microbiota in different European study populations in relation to age, gender, and country: a cross-sectional study. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72:1027–1033.
    1. Qin J, et al. A human gut microbial gene catalogue established by metagenomic sequencing. Nature. 2010;464:59–65.
    1. Li M, et al. Symbiotic gut microbes modulate human metabolic phenotypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105:2117–2122.
    1. Kurokawa K, et al. Comparative metagenomics revealed commonly enriched gene sets in human gut microbiomes. DNA Research. 2007;14:169–181.
    1. Koenig JE, et al. Microbes and Health Sackler Colloquium: Succession of microbial consortia in the developing infant gut microbiome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;108 (Suppl 1):4578–4585.
    1. Favier CF, Vaughan EE, De Vos WM, Akkermans AD. Molecular monitoring of succession of bacterial communities in human neonates. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002;68:219–226.
    1. Tannock GW. What immunologists should know about bacterial communities of the human bowel. Seminars in Immunol. 2007;19:94–105.
    1. Dominguez-Bello MG, et al. Delivery mode shapes the acquisition and structure of the initial microbiota across multiple body habitats in newborns. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:11971–11975.
    1. Blaser MJ, Falkow S. What are the consequences of the disappearing human microbiota? Nat Rev Microbiol. 2009;7:887–894.
    1. Caporaso JG, et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nature Methods. 2010;7:335–336.
    1. De Filippo C, et al. Impact of diet in shaping gut microbiota revealed by a comparative study in children from Europe and rural Africa. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:14691–14696.
    1. Peach S, Fernandez F, Johnson K, Drasar BS. The non-sporing anaerobic bacteria in human faeces. J Med Microbiol. 1974;7:213–221.
    1. Mackie RI, Sghir A, Gaskins HR. Developmental microbial ecology of the neonatal gastrointestinal tract. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;69:1035S–1045S.
    1. Palmer C, Bik EM, DiGiulio DB, Relman DA, Brown PO. Development of the human infant intestinal microbiota. PLoS Biol. 2007;5:e177.
    1. Penders J, et al. Factors influencing the composition of the intestinal microbiota in early infancy. Pediatrics. 2006;118:511–521.
    1. Lozupone C, Knight R. UniFrac: a new phylogenetic method for comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71:8228–8235.
    1. Knights D, Costello EK, Knight R. Supervised classification of human microbiota. FEMS Micro Rev. 2011;35:343–359.
    1. Arumugam M, et al. Enterotypes of the human gut microbiome. Nature. 2011;473:174–180.
    1. Wu GD, et al. Linking long-term dietary patterns with gut microbial enterotypes. Science. 2011;334:105–108.
    1. Kristiansson E, Hugenholtz P, Dalevi D. ShotgunFunctionalizeR: an R-package for functional comparison of metagenomes. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:2737–2738.
    1. Krautler B. Vitamin B12: chemistry and biochemistry. Biochem Soc Trans. 2005;33:806–810.
    1. Monsen AL, Refsum H, Markestad T, Ueland PM. Cobalamin status and its biochemical markers methylmalonic acid and homocysteine in different age groups from 4 days to 19 years. Clin Chem. 2003;49:2067–2075.
    1. Martens EC, Chiang HC, Gordon JI. Mucosal glycan foraging enhances fitness and transmission of a saccharolytic human gut bacterial symbiont. Cell Host Microbe. 2008;4:447–457.
    1. Hooper LV, Xu J, Falk PG, Midtvedt T, Gordon JI. A molecular sensor that allows a gut commensal to control its nutrient foundation in a competitive ecosystem. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96:9833–9838.
    1. Harzer G, Franzke V, Bindels JG. Human milk nonprotein nitrogen components: changing patterns of free amino acids and urea in the course of early lactation. Am J Clin Nutr. 1984;40:303–309.
    1. Metges CC, et al. Incorporation of urea and ammonia nitrogen into ileal and fecal microbial proteins and plasma free amino acids in normal men and ileostomates. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;70:1046–1058.
    1. Millward DJ, et al. The transfer of 15N from urea to lysine in the human infant. Br J Nutr. 2000;83:505–512.
    1. Meakins TS, Jackson AA. Salvage of exogenous urea nitrogen enhances nitrogen balance in normal men consuming marginally inadequate protein diets. Clin Sci (Lond) 1996;90:215–225.
    1. Langran M, Moran BJ, Murphy JL, Jackson AA. Adaptation to a diet low in protein: effect of complex carbohydrate upon urea kinetics in normal man. Clin Sci (Lond) 1992;82:191–198.
    1. Mora D, et al. Characterization of urease genes cluster of Streptococcus thermophilus. J Appl Microbiol. 2004;96:209–219.
    1. Muegge BD, et al. Diet drives convergence in gut microbiome functions across mammalian phylogeny and within humans. Science. 2011;332:970–974.
    1. Turnbaugh PJ, et al. A core gut microbiome in obese and lean twins. Nature. 2009;457:480–484.
    1. Caporaso JG, et al. Moving pictures of the human microbiome. Genome Biol. 2011;12:R50.
    1. Kaufman L, Rousseeuw PJ. Finding groups in data : an introduction to cluster analysis. Wiley; 1990.
    1. Rousseeuw PJ. Silhouettes - a Graphical Aid to the Interpretation and Validation of Cluster-Analysis. J Computational Appl Mathematics. 1987;20:53–65.
    1. Tibshirani R, Walther G. Cluster validation by prediction strength. J Computational and Graphical Statistics. 2005;14:511–528.
    1. Teal TK, Schmidt TM. Identifying and removing artificial replicates from 454 pyrosequencing data. Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2010;2010
    1. Team, RDC. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2010.
    1. Wiener ALAM. Classification and Regression by Random Forest. R News. 2002;2:18–22.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren