| Literature DB >> 25887414 |
Wenjun Liu1,2, Yi Zheng3, Lai-Yu Kwok4, Zhihong Sun5,6, Jiachao Zhang7, Zhuang Guo8, Qiangchuan Hou9, Bilige Menhe10, Heping Zhang11,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Traditional fermented dairy products are major components of the typical Mongolian diet since ancient times. However, almost all the previous studies on the microbial composition of traditional Mongolian fermented dairy products analyzed food samples from the Chinese Mongolian region and Mongolia but not the Russian Mongolian region. In this study, the bacterial and fungal community diversity of nineteen naturally fermented cow's milk (NFCM) samples from local Mongolian families residing in Kalmykia and Chita of Russia was investigated with pyrosequencing.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25887414 PMCID: PMC4345014 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-015-0385-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Sample information, sequence abundance and microbial diversity in the naturally fermented cow’s milks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| E12 | Kalmykia | 14533 | 8631 | 68 | 21 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 93.1 | 23.8 | 68.0 | 21.0 |
| F10 | Kalmykia | 12367 | 10087 | 211 | 18 | 3.9 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.1 | 329.0 | 20.9 | 210.6 | 18.0 |
| F2 | Kalmykia | 15173 | 8265 | 168 | 50 | 2.5 | 2.3 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 228.8 | 98.3 | 167.8 | 49.8 |
| F3 | Kalmykia | 12249 | 10296 | 126 | 31 | 2.4 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 193.0 | 38.4 | 125.8 | 30.9 |
| F4 | Kalmykia | 13465 | 5854 | 55 | 53 | 1.8 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 72.2 | 69.5 | 54.9 | 52.9 |
| F6 | Kalmykia | 18820 | 8596 | 29 | 52 | 0.5 | 2.8 | 0.1 | 0.7 | 68.0 | 61.2 | 29.0 | 51.9 |
| F9 | Kalmykia | 14361 | 3639 | 104 | 56 | 2.5 | 2.9 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 141.0 | 76.1 | 103.9 | 55.8 |
| F11 | Kalmykia | 12640 | N.F. | 131 | N.F. | 2.7 | N.F. | 0.7 | N.F. | 181.9 | N.F. | 130.9 | N.F. |
| Ra17 | Kalmykia | 12215 | 5545 | 51 | 21 | 1.8 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 66.0 | 25.2 | 51.0 | 21.0 |
| Mean (Kalmykia samples) | 13980.3 ± 2123.5 | 6768.1 ± 3362.4 | 104.8 ± 60.1 | 33.6 ± 19.9 | 2.1 ± 1.0* | 1.5 ± 1.2 | 0.5 ± 0.3* | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 152.6 ± 89.6* | 45.9 ± 31.9 | 104.7 ± 60.0* | 33.5 ± 19.9 | |
| D8 | Chita | 13743 | 5956 | 67 | 17 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 84.4 | 19.2 | 66.9 | 17.0 |
| D9 | Chita | 13379 | 6426 | 87 | 19 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 112.1 | 54.5 | 86.9 | 19.0 |
| D12 | Chita | 13449 | N.F. | 38 | N.F. | 0.2 | N.F. | 0.0 | N.F. | 50.9 | N.F. | 38.0 | N.F. |
| E1 | Chita | 14114 | 3886 | 44 | 14 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 96.5 | 28.0 | 44.0 | 13.9 |
| E2 | Chita | 12510 | 6020 | 28 | 25 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 63.5 | 32.4 | 28.0 | 25.0 |
| E3 | Chita | 9929 | 8736 | 57 | 33 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 80.9 | 84.8 | 57.0 | 33.0 |
| E4 | Chita | 17494 | 9768 | 64 | 36 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 77.1 | 40.8 | 63.9 | 36.0 |
| E5 | Chita | 17059 | 1240 | 54 | 37 | 2.1 | 3.4 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 84.2 | 48.0 | 53.9 | 36.8 |
| ELS10 | Chita | 16157 | 9999 | 56 | 34 | 1.2 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 68.2 | 72.4 | 56.0 | 33.9 |
| ELS20 | Chita | 7721 | 556 | 41 | 22 | 1.3 | 2.5 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 61.9 | 36.4 | 41.0 | 21.2 |
| Mean (Chita samples) | 13555.5 ± 3041.0 | 5258.7 ± 3728.7 | 53.6 ± 16.9 | 23.7 ± 11.8 | 1.1 ± 0.7* | 1.3 ± 1.0 | 0.3 ± 0.2* | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 78.0 ± 17.9* | 41.7 ± 24.8 | 53.6 ± 16.9* | 23.6 ± 11.8 | |
‘N.F.’ denotes for ‘not found’. *:p < 0.05 (by Mann-Whitney test) was considered significantly different between the two sample groups.
Figure 1Relative abundance and diversity of bacteria (A, B) and fungi (C, D) in the samples.
Phylum and genera showing significant difference between the two sample groups
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| |||||
| Acidobacteria | 0.009 | 0.034 | 0.007, 0-0.042 | 0.02, 0-0.09 | 0.02 |
|
| |||||
|
| 0.139 | 0.000 | 0.008, 0 -1.197 | 0 | 0.022 |
|
| 2.036 | 0.000 | 0.059, 0-18 | 0 | 0.006 |
|
| 0.015 | 0.001 | 0.016, 0-0.042 | 0, 0-0.007 | 0.006 |
|
| 20.284 | 0.278 | 3.046, 0.065-99.044 | 0.241, 0-0.785 | 0.022 |
|
| 0.007 | 0.000 | 0.008, 0-0.021 | 0 | 0.022 |
|
| 15.520 | 42.877 | 2.627, 0.021-67.581 | 20.418, 1.783-99.552 | 0.043 |
Figure 2Phylogenetic tree constructed based on the OTU sequences. Reference sequences from the species L. helveticus, L. acidophilus, L. buchneri, L. kefiranofaciens, L. kefiranofaciens subsp. kefiranofaciens, L. delbrueckii subsp. delbrueckii, L. casei, L. paracasei subsp. paracasei, L. rhamnosus, L. salivarius, L. capillatus, L. pentosus, L. plantarum were retrieved from the NCBI database.
Figure 3UniFrac principal coordinate analysis of the bacterial (A, B) and fungal (C, D) communities in the NFCM samples. Red and blue symbols represent samples from Kalmykia and Chita, respectively.
Figure 4Biplot of redundancy analysis (RDA) of the bacteria (A) and fungi (B) in the NFCM from Chita and Kalmykia. Red arrows represent the constrained explanatory variables, Kalmykia and Chita. Blue arrows represent the response variables with the first ordination axis explaining respectively for at least 8.6% and 1.8% of the variability of the bacterial and fungal microbiota. The p-values generated from the Monte Carlo Permutation Test are included in the plots.