| Literature DB >> 26251695 |
Padmaja Shastri1, Justin McCarville1, Martin Kalmokoff2, Stephen P J Brooks3, Julia M Green-Johnson1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mechanistic data to support health claims is often generated using rodent models, and the influence of prebiotic supplementation has largely been evaluated using male rodents. Given that sex-based differences in immune parameters are well recognized and recent evidence suggests differences in microbiota composition between sexes, validation of the effectiveness of prebiotics merits assessment in both males and females. Here, we have compared the effect of oligofructose (OF) supplementation on the fecal bacterial community, short chain fatty acid profiles, and gut mucosal and systemic immune parameters in male and female rats.Entities:
Keywords: Butyrate; IgA; Liver; Microbiota; Oligofructose; Sex
Year: 2015 PMID: 26251695 PMCID: PMC4527341 DOI: 10.1186/s13293-015-0031-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biol Sex Differ ISSN: 2042-6410 Impact factor: 5.027
Food intake and growth characteristicsa
| Male | Female | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | OF | Control | OF | |
| Weight gain (g) | 135.2 ± 3.5 | 140.2 ± 3.5 | 55. 9 ± 3.9* | 55.6 ± 3.7* |
| Total weightb (g) | 392.0 ± 6.1 | 401.1 ± 3.9 | 227.5 ± 5.0* | 231.0 ± 5.1* |
| Energy Intake (kcal/d) | 93.0 ± 1.6 | 90.6 ± 1.1 | 71.6 ± 1.5* | 76.1 ± 2.8* |
| Cecal weight (g) | 7.6 ± 0.2 | 9.9 ± 0.2 | 5.1 ± 0.3* | 6.5 ± 0.4* |
OF oligofructose
*Significance based on sex as analyzed by ANOVA
aValues are presented as mean ± SEM for male (n = 13–18) and female (n = 12) rats fed the control or OF-supplemented diet
bThe total weight was taken at necropsy
Fig. 1SCFA (a) and BCFA (b) output in rats fed rodent chow or rodent chow supplemented with OF. Data are shown as mean ± SEM (n = 6–8); significant differences in SCFA or BCFA concentrations are indicated by different letters. Columns are arranged as follows: females fed rodent chow, females fed chow supplemented with OF, males fed rodent chow, males fed chow supplemented with OF
Estimates of richness (Chao1) and diversity (Shannon index) in the fecal community of male and female rats fed chow or the OF-supplemented diet
| Treatment | Chao1a | Shannon indexa |
|---|---|---|
| Male chow | 106 | 3.7 |
| Male chow + OF | 80 | 3.7 |
| Female chow | 87 | 3.4 |
| Female chow + OF | 108 | 3.6 |
OF oligofructose
aCalculated using the Fastgroup II online software [62]
Fig. 2Cluster analysis comparing community diversity (phylotype occurrence and abundance) in feces from rats fed rodent chow or OF-supplemented rodent chow
Fig. 3Change in the male and female fecal community in response to diet. Bar graphs indicate the distribution of phylotypes (%) at the family level. Rats fed rodent chow (black bar) or rodent chow supplemented with OF (white bar). Left panel: females. Right panel: males. Arrows indicate major taxa undergoing change in response to OF (A) Family Porphyromonadaceae. (B) Family Prevotellaceae. (C) Family Lachnospiraceae. Inset: Pie charts show the distribution of phylotypes at the level of phylum in rats fed rodent chow (upper pie charts) or rodent chow supplemented with OF (lower pie charts)
Changes in the abundance of phylotypes aligning within the Genera Barnesiella and Prevotella in rats fed rat chow or rat chow supplemented with OF
| Clone | RDP relative | S_aba | RDP classification | Phylotype abundance (percent of total community) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | +OF | Female | +OF | ||||
| A15461 | S001381749 | 0.96 |
| 1.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| F19056 | S000715072 | 0.98 |
| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.2 |
| F19074 | S001381499 | 1.00 |
| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.6 |
| G19307 | S001380091 | 1.00 |
| 1.1 | 1.4 | 0.0 | 3.9 |
| G19322 | S001080987 | 1.00 |
| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.1 |
| G19350 | S001380841 | 0.99 |
| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.6 |
| G20673 | S000707322 | 0.98 |
| 0.5 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 0.6 |
| G20691 | S001380274 | 0.95 |
| 1.1 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 2.2 |
| G20696 | S001381099 | 0.97 |
| 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 2.8 |
| Total | 4.3 | 4.2 | 3.8 | 14.0 | |||
| F20815 | S001380751 | 0.96 |
| 3.3 | 4.2 | 7.7 | 12.4 |
| G19310 | S003238090 | 0.98 |
| 2.2 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 6.7 |
| Total | 5.4 | 4.9 | 9.3 | 19.1 | |||
| Total increase in | 9.8 | 9.1 | 13.1 | 33.1 | |||
OF oligofructose
aSimilarity coefficient RDP Seqmatch
Fig. 4Changes in immune status in rats consuming rodent chow (black bar) or rodent chow supplemented with OF (white bar). a Liver IgA levels (μg/g) are shown as mean ± SEM (n = 5–6). Males demonstrated significantly (p = 0.01) elevated levels of liver IgA relative to females. An interaction (diet × sex; p = 0.04) for liver IgA was also detected by two-way ANOVA analysis of males compared to females consuming OF. Differing letters denote significant differences as determined by Tukey’s multiple range test. b Serum LPS concentrations (EU/ml) are shown as mean ± SEM (n = 4–5). **Significance (p = 0.004) based on sex, with males having elevated concentrations of serum LPS compared to females
Cytokine levels in gastrointestinal and liver tissue in male and female rats fed control or OF-supplemented diets
| Male | Female | Main and interaction ( | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cytokine(ng/g) | Tissuea | Control | OF | Control | OF | Dietb | Sexc | Diet × sexd | Tissue × diete | Tissue × sexf | Tissue × diet × sexg |
| CINC-1 | Ileum | 0.23 ± 0.01 | 0.25 ± 0.02 | 0.02 ± 0.02 | 0.17 ± 0.10 | ||||||
| Cecum | 0.89 ± 0.23 | 0.69 ± 0.14 | 0.14 ± 0.14 | 0.51 ± 0.19 | 0.08 |
|
| 0.06 |
| NS | |
| Colon | 0.70 ± 0.12 | 0.46 ± 0.07 | 1.59 ± 0.06 | 1.75 ± 0.13 | |||||||
| Liver | 10.95 ± 0.88 | 9.06 ± 0.96 | 6.56 ± 1.30 | 5.27 ± 0.38 | |||||||
| IL-6 | Ileum | ND | ND | 1.33 ± 0.45 | 2.41 ± 0.18 | ||||||
| Cecum | 7.85 ± 0.92 | 7.73 ± 0.86 | 5.83 ± 0.71 | 5.06 ± 0.54 | NS |
| NS | 0.08 |
|
| |
| Colon | 1.94 ± 0.24 | 2.45 ± 0.36 | 6.22 ± 1.17 | 4.59 ± 0.58 | |||||||
| Liver | 159.16 ± 11.94 | 173.42 ± 18.92 | 107.77 ± 9.43 | 93.81 ± 11.67 | |||||||
| TGF-β1 | Ileum | 0.47 ± 0.03 | 0.54 ± 0.04 | ND | ND | ||||||
| Cecum | 2.45 ± 0.91 | 2.22 ± 0.89 | 2.09 ± 1.04 | 2.50 ± 1.25 | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | |
| Colon | 0.44 ± 0.01 | 0.54 ± 0.03 | 0.72 ± 0.05 | 0.72 ± 0.04 | |||||||
| Liver | 36.97 ± 1.51 | 41.54 ± 2.24 | 39.36 ± 3.23 | 37.48 ± 4.70 | |||||||
| IL-4 | Ileum | 0.14 ± 0.02 | 0.13 ± 0.03 | 0.89 ± 0.16 | 1.12 ± 0.17 | ||||||
| Cecum | 2.92 ± 0.53 | 2.28 ± 0.37 | 1.98 ± 0.10 | 2.34 ± 0.07 | NS |
| 0.08 | NS |
| NS | |
| Colon | 1.06 ± 0.14 | 0.80 ± 0.07 | 3.85 ± 0.28 | 4.70 ± 0.12 | |||||||
| Liver | 32.56 ± 0.76 | 40.98 ± 6.13 | 48.99 ± 6.22 | 45.19 ± 6.49 | |||||||
| IL-10 | Ileum | 3.9 ± 0.30 | 4.92 ± 0.66 | 1.28 ± 0.2 | 1.24 ± 0.21 | ||||||
| Cecum | 5.30 ± 0.24 | 6.48 ± 1.27 | 8.16 ± 0.84 | 6.66 ± 0.34 | NS |
| NS | NS |
| NS | |
| Colon | 0.95 ± 0.13 | 0.77 ± 0.12 | 10.03 ± 0.68 | 9.84 ± 0.57 | |||||||
| Liver | 73.21 ± 4.18 | 75.39 ± 7.11 | 108.27 ± 11.09 | 111.42 ± 9.98 | |||||||
OF oligofructose, ND not detectable, NS not significant
aValues denote the mean (ng/g) ± SEM (n = 3–6) for each tissue
bSignificance for diet was detected using three-way ANOVA
cSignificance for sex was detected using three-way ANOVA
dInteractions between diet × sex were detected using three-way ANOVA
eInteractions between tissue × diet were detected using three-way ANOVA
fInteractions between tissue × sex were detected using three-way ANOVA
gInteractions between tissue × diet × sex were detected using three-way ANOVA
Immune cell phenotypes in the mesenteric lymph node (MLN) and spleen of males and female rats consuming either the control rat chow or chow supplemented with OF
| Tissue | Cell phenotypea | Male | Female | Dietb | Sexc | Diet × sexd | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | OF | Control | OF | |||||
| MLN | CD3+ | 72.62 ± 0.86 | 72.97 ± 1.47 | 76.98 ± 0.22 | 76.94 ± 1.25 | NS |
| NS |
| CD3+4+ | 52.19 ± 0.69 | 52.59 ± 0.73 | 54.79 ± 0.76 | 52.82 ± 1.43 | NS | NS | NS | |
| CD3+8+ | 19.02 ± 1.22 | 18.31 ± 1.02 | 20.29 ± 0.67 | 21.83 ± 1.52 | NS | NS | NS | |
| CD45RA+ | 23.36 ± 0.78 | 23.00 ± 1.55 | 18.80 ± 0.58 | 18.71 ± 1.25 | NS |
| NS | |
| CD3−161+ | 0.33 ± 0.08 | 0.31 ± 0.08 | 0.39 ± 0.09 | 0.28 ± 0.04 | NS | NS | NS | |
| CD68+ | 5.94 ± 0.77 | 5.49 ± 0.51 | 8.77 ± 0.78 | 8.09 ± 0.46 | NS |
| NS | |
| Spleen | CD3+ | 71.67 ± 1.18 | 69.03 ± 1.96 | 73.03 ± 0.94 | 69.23 ± 1.12 |
| NS | NS |
| CD3+4+ | 45.53 ± 1.51 | 44.11 ± 1.43 | 46.10 ± 0.94 | 42.65 ± 1.21 | NS | NS | NS | |
| CD3+8+ | 25.47 ± 0.90 | 24.93 ± 0.53 | 25.45 ± 0.67 | 25.04 ± 0.54 | NS | NS | NS | |
| CD45RA+ | 18.52 ± 1.06 | 20.51 ± 1.39 | 15.41 ± 1.21 | 18.56 ± 1.43 | NS | NS | NS | |
| CD3+161− | 1.18 ± 0.2 | 1.57 ± 0.24 | 1.80 ± 0.18 | 1.38 ± 0.13 | NS | NS | NS | |
| CD68+ | 41.58 ± 1.67 | 40.72 ± 1.49 | 45.97 ± 2.41 | 49.15 ± 1.28 | NS |
| NS | |
OF oligofructose, NS not significant
aCell phenotypes are expressed as the percent of the CD45+ (leukocyte common antigen) cell population. Values indicate the percent mean ± SEM (n = 5–6) for each immune cell type in the MLN and spleen
bEffects of diet were detected using two-way ANOVA
cDifferences between sexes were detected using two-way ANOVA
dSignificance of interactions was detected using two-way ANOVA