| Literature DB >> 25000347 |
Mark A Underwood1, Jennifer Arriola2, Colin W Gerber2, Ashwini Kaveti2, Karen M Kalanetra3, Anchasa Kananurak4, Charles L Bevins4, David A Mills3, Bohuslav Dvorak2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Probiotics decrease the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). We sought to determine the impact of Bifidobacterium longum subsp. infantis (B. infantis) in the established rat model of NEC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25000347 PMCID: PMC4167942 DOI: 10.1038/pr.2014.102
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pediatr Res ISSN: 0031-3998 Impact factor: 3.756
Figure 1B. infantis decreased the incidence and severity of NEC. a) Incidence of NEC p<0.01; b) NEC histology scores, horizontal line represents the median value for each group; c) mean length and d) width of villi. ANOVA of all three groups p<0.01 in b, c, and d. ** p<0.01, * p<0.05 for between group comparisons. Error bars represent SEM. White bars and DF = dam fed, grey bars and FF = formula fed, hatched bars and FF+Binf = formula with added B. infantis. Note that the incidence of NEC in the DF group was zero.
Figure 2a) B. infantis attenuated expression of several pro-inflammatory cytokines. ANOVA comparison of all three groups p<0.01 for Il6, Cxcl1, Il10 and p<0.05 for Tnfa and Il23. b) B. infantis attenuated nitric oxide synthase (a marker of inflammation) and Toll-like receptor 2. ANOVA comparison of all three groups p<0.01 for Nos2, Tlr2, Tlr4 (mRNA) and TLR4 (protein). c) B. infantis attenuated altered expression of antimicrobial peptides. ANOVA comparison of all three groups p<0.01 for Reg3b and p<0.05 for Reg3g. d) Experimental NEC altered expression of trefoil factor 3 and MUC2, B. infantis altered expression of trefoil factor 3. ANOVA comparison of all three groups p<0.01 for TFF3 and MUC2. ** p<0.01, * p<0.05 for between group comparisons. Error bars represent SEM. White bars = dam fed (DF), grey bars = formula fed (FF), hatched bars = formula with added B. infantis (FF+Binf).
Figure 3a) Cecal microbiota at the phylum level in experiment A. b) Cecal microbiota at the phylum level in experiment B. Each bar represents an individual animal. Stress = hypoxia and cold stress. DF = dam fed, FF = formula fed, FF+Binf = formula with added B. infantis. In experiment B, all of the animals were exposed to hypoxia and cold stress. Green = Firmicutes, purple = Proteobacteria, the following represented < 3% of total bacteria identified: red = Actinobacteria, yellow = Bacteroidetes, light blue = Deferribacteres, c) LDA scores for taxa differing between treatment groups in experiment A (only the animals exposed to cold stress and hypoxia are included). LDA score correlates roughly with p-values compared to the other groups (e.g. LDA score of 1 ~ p value of 0.1, LDA score of 2 ~ p value of 0.01, etc). Blue bars represent taxa significantly increased in the FF+Binf group (from top to bottom 4 unidentified taxa, Turicibacteraceae, Turicibacterales, Bacillales, Staphylococcaceae, Clostridiaceae). Green bars represent taxa significantly increased in the FF group (from top to bottom γ-Proteobacteria, Enterobacteriales, Enterobacteriaceae, Proteobacteria, Exiguobacteraceae, Exiguobacterales, Enterococcaceae). Red bars represent taxa significantly increased in the DF group (from top to bottom Lactobacillaceae, Lactobacillales, Bacilli, Firmicutes, Veillonellaceae, Actinobacteria, Actinobacteria, Actinomycetales, Micrococcaceae, Streptococcaceae). d) LDA scores from experiment B. The color scheme is the same as in panel c with significantly increased taxa (top to bottom) in the FF+Binf group (Lactobacillaceae, Bacilli, Lactobacillales, Firmicutes, Actinomycetales, Actinobacteria, Actinobacteria, Micrococcaceae), the FF group (Enterococcaceae), and DF group (γ-Proteobacteria, Enterobacteriales, Enterobacteriaceae, Proteobacteria). e) Principal Coordinate Analysis from experiment A. Each symbol represents one animal (red circles = DF, blue triangles = FF, green squares = FF+Binf). F) Principal Coordinate Analysis from experiment B (the color/symbol scheme is the same as panel e).
Figure 4Relative abundance of Enterobacteriaceae Lactobacillaceae, and Enterococcaceae for each animal exposed to hypoxia and cold stress (n=50). Solid lines represent mean values. Differences between all three groups were significant at p < 0.05 for Enterobacteriaceae in both experiments and for Lactobacillaceae and Enterococcaceae in experiment A. Differences between FF and FF+Binf were not significant for any of these three families in either experiment A or B. Circles = dam fed (DF), squares = formula fed (FF), triangles = formula with added B. infantis (FF+Binf).
Figure 5a) Correlation of cecal Enterobacteriaceae with ileal iNOS for all animals exposed to hypoxia and cold stress (left panel R2 = 0.14, p < 0.01) and for all animals excluding one outlier (right panel R2 = 0.11, p = 0.02). b) Correlation of cecal Enterobacteriaceae, and ileal iNOS in all animals exposed to hypoxia and cold stress in experiment A (left panel R2 = 0.28, P=0.01) and excluding one outlier (right panel R2 = 0.43, p < 0.01). c) Correlation of cecal Lactobacillaceae and ileal iNOS in all animals exposed to hypoxia and cold stress in experiment A (left panel R2 = 0.23, P=0.03) and excluding one outlier (right panel R2 = 0.41, p < 0.01).