Beranda  ›  Cohabiting Family Members Share Microbiota With One Another and With Their Dogs

Cohabiting Family Members Share Microbiota With One Another and With Their Dogs

Ditulis Senin, 07 Maret 2022 Tulis Komentar Edit

Comparative Written report

doi: 10.7554/eLife.00458.

Cohabiting family members share microbiota with i some other and with their dogs

Christian Lauber, Elizabeth G Costello, Catherine A Lozupone, Gregory Humphrey, Donna Berg-Lyons, J Gregory Caporaso, Dan Knights, Jose C Clemente, Sara Nakielny, Jeffrey I Gordon, Noah Fierer, Rob Knight

Affiliations

  • PMID: 23599893
  • PMCID: PMC3628085
  • DOI: ten.7554/eLife.00458

Gratuitous PMC article

Comparative Study

Cohabiting family unit members share microbiota with i another and with their dogs

Se Jin Song  et al. Elife. .

Costless PMC article

Abstract

Human-associated microbial communities vary across individuals: possible contributing factors include (genetic) relatedness, diet, and age. However, our surroundings, including individuals with whom we interact, besides likely shape our microbial communities. To quantify this microbial exchange, we surveyed fecal, oral, and skin microbiota from 60 families (spousal units with children, dogs, both, or neither). Household members, particularly couples, shared more of their microbiota than individuals from different households, with stronger effects of co-abode on skin than oral or fecal microbiota. Dog ownership significantly increased the shared pare microbiota in cohabiting adults, and domestic dog-owning adults shared more 'skin' microbiota with their own dogs than with other dogs. Although the degree to which these shared microbes have a true niche on the human being trunk, vs transient detection later direct contact, is unknown, these results suggest that direct and frequent contact with our cohabitants may significantly shape the limerick of our microbial communities. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00458.001.

Keywords: Human; companion animals; ecology microbial reservoirs; family unit structure; metagenomics; microbial community transmission.

Conflict of involvement statement

The authors declare that no competing interests be.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure ane.. Community similarity within and between families across torso sites, and taxa contributing to these differences.

Panels (A–D) evidence average unweighted UniFrac distances between family members (blue) and between members of different families (red). 'Child' refers to all offspring anile 3–eighteen years who cohabit with the parents. 'Infants' were considered to be individuals aged 0–12 months. Palm/Paw refers to the correct palm in the human being comparisons and the back left paw in the domestic dog comparing. Although at that place are distinguishable differences between the left and right palm communities within and across individuals (Fierer et al., 2008), the same analysis using the left palms showed a like blueprint (Table 2) and neither composition nor multifariousness were different enough between palms or amidst the 4 domestic dog paws to touch on the overall patterns. Mean ± 95% CI and R values (ANOSIM) are shown. *p<0.05 and **p<0.001 based on x,000 permutations. Panel (Due east) shows the families of bacteria that showroom the greatest differences in the number of phylotypes (OTUs) shared within and betwixt adult partners on the correct palm. Confined represent the average number of shared phylotypes for a given bacterial family within partners from the same family (blue) and between partners of different families (red). Mean ± 95% CI shown. *p<0.05 after Bonferroni correction (Wilcoxon test). DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00458.006
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Approach towards or difference from the 'adult' state in each body site with historic period.

(A) Each bespeak represents the boilerplate distance (unweighted UniFrac in red; weighted UniFrac in blue) betwixt each participant and all other participants in the 'adult' age subclass. Hither we define baseline 'adult' as thirty–45 years in age (the results are non sensitive to this threshold). Rii values (linear regression model) are shown. *p<0.01, **p<0.001. (B) Phylogenetic variety (PD) of the communities on each trunk site is plotted for all of the offspring in the study (aged 0–eighteen years). DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00458.008
Figure 3.
Figure iii.. Community similarity and phylotype sharing between dogs-owners and their dogs.

The left panel shows the average unweighted UniFrac distance betwixt adult dog-owners and their dogs (blue), between canis familiaris-owners and other (not their own) dogs (reddish), and between adults who do not own dogs and dogs (green). The right panel shows the number of phylotypes shared for the same categories. Comparisons are labeled on the y-axis such that the showtime trunk site listed corresponds to the dog and the second site corresponds to the human. Mean ± 95% CI shown. The presence of asterisks lacking brackets indicates that all pairwise comparisons within that group are meaning. Generally, dog-owners tend to share more similar communities and more phylotypes with their own dogs than with other dogs. *p<0.05, **p<0.001 after Bonferroni correction (Wilcoxon test). DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/ten.7554/eLife.00458.011
Figure 4.
Effigy iv.. Blastoff diversity and shared phylotypes in couples with and without dogs and children.

The left panels show rarefaction curves for peel communities of couples (including seniors) who take dogs (height, in red), those without dogs (summit, in blue), couples (excluding seniors) with infants/children (bottom, in red), and those without infants/children (bottom, in blueish). Mean ± 95% CI shown. The right panels show the average number of phylotypes shared amid individuals from the same categories shown in the left panels. Hateful ± 95% CI shown. *p<0.05, **p<0.001 after Bonferroni correction (Wilcoxon test). DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00458.012
Figure 5.
Figure 5.. Variation within and betwixt the communities of skin, oral, and fecal samples from humans and dogs.

Panel (A) shows a PCoA plot of all the body habitats, using unweighted UniFrac distances of homo and dog samples, rarefied at 5000 sequences/sample. Panels (B–D) show select torso habitats from the full plot. Panel (E) shows a summary of the taxa shaded by relative affluence at the phylum level broken down past specific body habitat; the vii most abundant taxa are shown in the legend. DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00458.016

Similar articles

  • Household noesis, attitudes and practices related to pet contact and associated zoonoses in Ontario, Canada.

    Stull JW, Peregrine As, Sargeant JM, Weese JS. Stull JW, et al. BMC Public Health. 2012 Jul 25;12:553. doi: ten.1186/1471-2458-12-553. BMC Public Health. 2012. PMID: 22831165 Free PMC article.

  • Factors associated with canis familiaris ownership and contact with dogs in a United kingdom community.

    Westgarth C, Pinchbeck GL, Bradshaw JW, Dawson S, Gaskell RM, Christley RM. Westgarth C, et al. BMC Vet Res. 2007 Apr iii;3:five. doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-3-five. BMC Vet Res. 2007. PMID: 17407583 Free PMC article.

  • Interplay of personal, pet, and environmental colonization in households affected by customs-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

    Hogan PG, Mork RL, Boyle MG, Muenks CE, Morelli JJ, Thompson RM, Sullivan ML, Gehlert SJ, Merlo JR, McKenzie MG, Wardenburg JB, Rzhetsky A, Burnham CD, Fritz SA. Hogan PG, et al. J Infect. 2019 Mar;78(3):200-207. doi: ten.1016/j.jinf.2018.11.006. Epub 2018 November 29. J Infect. 2019. PMID: 30503843 Free PMC commodity.

  • Temporal variability is a personalized feature of the human microbiome.

    Flores GE, Caporaso JG, Henley JB, Rideout JR, Domogala D, Chase J, Leff JW, Vázquez-Baeza Y, Gonzalez A, Knight R, Dunn RR, Fierer Due north. Flores GE, et al. Genome Biol. 2014 December iii;fifteen(12):531. doi: x.1186/s13059-014-0531-y. Genome Biol. 2014. PMID: 25517225 Gratis PMC article.

  • Household Transmission of Clostridium difficile to Family Members and Domestic Pets.

    Loo VG, Brassard P, Miller MA. Loo VG, et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2016 Nov;37(eleven):1342-1348. doi: ten.1017/ice.2016.178. Infect Command Hosp Epidemiol. 2016. PMID: 27767004

Cited by 400 articles

  • Donor Screening Revisions of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis.

    Zhang 10, Ishikawa D, Nomura One thousand, Fukuda N, Haraikawa G, Haga K, Shibuya T, Mita T, Nagahara A. Zhang X, et al. J Clin Med. 2022 Feb 17;11(4):1055. doi: ten.3390/jcm11041055. J Clin Med. 2022. PMID: 35207328 Free PMC article.

  • Differences in the composition and predicted functions of the intestinal microbiome of obese and normal weight developed dogs.

    Thomson P, Santibáñez R, Rodríguez-Salas C, Flores-Yañez C, Garrido D. Thomson P, et al. PeerJ. 2022 Feb 16;x:e12695. doi: 10.7717/peerj.12695. eCollection 2022. PeerJ. 2022. PMID: 35190784 Free PMC commodity.

  • Gut- and oral-dysbiosis differentially impact spinal- and bulbar-onset ALS, predicting ALS severity and potentially determining the location of disease onset.

    Kim HS, Son J, Lee D, Tsai J, Wang D, Chocron ES, Jeong S, Kittrell P, Murchison CF, Kennedy RE, Tobon A, Jackson CE, Pickering AM. Kim HS, et al. BMC Neurol. 2022 Feb 21;22(i):62. doi: 10.1186/s12883-022-02586-five. BMC Neurol. 2022. PMID: 35189854 Free PMC article.

  • Knowledge, Mental attitude, and Do Toward Pet Contact Associated Zoonosis in Western Ethiopia.

    Tamiru Y, Abdeta D, Amante M. Tamiru Y, et al. Vet Med (Auckl). 2022 Feb ii;13:47-58. doi: 10.2147/VMRR.S346806. eCollection 2022. Vet Med (Auckl). 2022. PMID: 35141138 Free PMC article.

  • Histone H3K4me3 modification is a transgenerational epigenetic signal for lipid metabolism in Caenorhabditis elegans.

    Wan QL, Meng 10, Wang C, Dai W, Luo Z, Yin Z, Ju Z, Fu X, Yang J, Ye Q, Zhang ZH, Zhou Q. Wan QL, et al. Nat Commun. 2022 February nine;13(i):768. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-28469-4. Nat Commun. 2022. PMID: 35140229 Costless PMC article.

References

    1. Anderson M, Gorley R, Clarke Thousand. 2008. PERMANOVA+ for PRIMER: guide to software and statistical methods. PRIMER-E, Plymouth, Great britain
    1. Bates D, Maechler M, Dai B. 2008. The lme4 package. http://lme4.r-forge.r-projection.org/
    1. Benezra A, DeStefano J, Gordon JI. 2012. Anthropology of microbes. Proc Natl Acad Sci Us 109:6378–81. 10.1073/pnas.1200515109 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, et al. 2010. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Meth vii:335–6. ten.1038/nmeth.f.303 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Caporaso JG, Lauber CL, Costello EK, Berg-Lyons D, Gonzalez A, Stombaugh J, et al. 2011. Moving pictures of the human microbiome. Genome Biol 12:R50. 10.1186/gb-2011-12-5-r50 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

  • Full Text Sources

    • Europe PubMed Central
    • PubMed Central
    • eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd

  • Other Literature Sources

    • Kinesthesia Opinions
    • scite Smart Citations

  • Medical

    • MedlinePlus Wellness Data

manningwhimily1961.blogspot.com

Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23599893/

Belum ada Komentar untuk "Cohabiting Family Members Share Microbiota With One Another and With Their Dogs"

Posting Komentar

Langganan: Posting Komentar (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel