| Literature DB >> 27716401 |
Jun Chen1, Yoshitaka Toyomasu2,3,4, Yujiro Hayashi2,3,4, David R Linden2,4, Joseph H Szurszewski2,4, Heidi Nelson5,6, Gianrico Farrugia2,3,4,6, Purna C Kashyap2,3,4,6, Nicholas Chia1,4,5,6, Tamas Ordog7,8,9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nutritional interventions often fail to prevent growth failure in childhood and adolescent malnutrition and the mechanisms remain unclear. Recent studies revealed altered microbiota in malnourished children and anorexia nervosa. To facilitate mechanistic studies under physiologically relevant conditions, we established a mouse model of growth failure following chronic dietary restriction and examined microbiota in relation to age, diet, body weight, and anabolic treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Animal model; Anorexia nervosa; Dietary restriction; Gut microbiota; Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1); Machine learning; Protein-energy malnutrition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27716401 PMCID: PMC5048651 DOI: 10.1186/s13073-016-0357-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Med ISSN: 1756-994X Impact factor: 11.117
Overview of experimental groups
| Group No. | Group name | Limited feeding (study days) | Ad libitum feeding (study days) | LONG R3 rhIGF1a (study days) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AL | — | 0–167 | — |
| 2 | LF | 0–167 | — | — |
| 3 | LF-RF | 0–96 | 97–167 | — |
| 4 | TLF-RF | 0–96 | 97–167 | 13–167 |
aLONG R3 recombinant human IGF1; 2 × 150 μg kg−1 day−1 subcutaneously
Fig. 1Low body weights persist following correction of chronic dietary restriction initiated at post-weaning in female mice. a Time course of normalized body weight changes from day 0 (Δbwt) representing 4 weeks of age (n = 12 mice/group). AL ad-libitum-fed cohort, LF limited-fed mice subjected to dietary restriction titrated to prevent weight gain, LF-RF limited-fed-refed mice representing a subset of LF mice given unrestricted access to food following 97 days of dietary restriction, TLF-RF a subset of LF-RF mice treated with twice daily subcutaneous injections of LONG R3 recombinant human insulin-like growth factor 1 (LONG R3 rhIGF1), a potent IGF1 analog with reduced affinity for IGF-binding proteins, from day 13 of the study. b Time period identified by gray shading in A. Vertical lines indicate feces collection. c One-week average body weight changes centered on the day of the last feces collection (days 117–123). *, P < 0.05 by Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparison tests. n.s. not significant. d Average food intake of TLF-RF mice between days 0 and 96 expressed as the percentage of average food intake of LF mice over the same period. n.s. not significant. e Two-day average food intake determined on days 117 and 123. *, P < 0.05 by Dunn’s multiple comparison tests. n.s. not significant. LF mice weighed ~60 % less than AL controls after 167 days of dietary restriction. Body weights did not recover for at least 10 weeks after ad libitum refeeding despite comparable food intake. LONG R3 rhIGF1 facilitated body weight recovery
Relative contribution of age, diet, and weight to the overall microbiota variabilitya
| Distanceb | Age | Diet | Weight | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 c |
| R2 |
| R2 |
| R2 |
| |
| UniFrac | 7.3 % | <0.001 | 1.8 % | <0.001 | 0.6 % | 0.429 | 14.4 % | <0.001 |
| GUniFrac | 6.4 % | <0.001 | 3.6 % | <0.001 | 1.4 % | 0.167 | 15.4 % | <0.001 |
| WUniFrac | 6.9 % | 0.003 | 3.8 % | 0.008 | 1.1 % | 0.139 | 15.5 % | <0.001 |
aBased on ad libitum-fed (AL) and limited-fed (LF) diet groups
bUniFrac, GUniFrac, and WUniFrac represent unweighted, generalized (α = 0.5), and weighted UniFrac distance, respectively
cR2 represents the percentage of microbiota variability explained by corresponding covariate adjusting for other covariates
dSignificance was assessed based on 1000 permutations. For age and weight, permutation was confined within each subject
Fig. 2Age explains more microbiota variability than diet and body weight. a The first two PCs from the PCA on the unweighted UniFrac distance matrix are plotted. Symbols represent data from individual diet regimens color-coded by sampling days. The main axes of the ellipses correspond to the PCs of the group with the heights and widths representing variances in the corresponding components. b The percentage of microbiota variability explained by age, diet type, Δbwt, and their combination (total) based on different UniFrac distances. UniFrac, GUniFrac, and WUniFrac represent unweighted, generalized (α = 0.5), and weighted UniFrac distance, respectively. Non-linear age effects are assumed
Fig. 3Predicting mouse chronologic age based on gut microbiota using Random Forests. a Heat map of the mean relative abundance of age-discriminatory OTUs selected by the Boruta algorithm for the AL diet group. Rows represent the OTUs and columns represent the sampling day (Age). Hierarchical clustering on the left was based on complete linkage and Euclidean distance. Importance Z-scores from the Boruta alogrithm are plotted on the right. A large importance Z-score indicates stronger ability of corresponding OTU to discriminate chronological age. Green and yellow colors indicate the significance level (‘confirmed’ and ‘tentative’, respectively). b Predicting the age of the microbiota samples from the other diet groups using samples from the LF group as the training set. The y axis represents the predicted age (microbiota age) by Random Forests. Colors represent individual diet groups. Mice under dietary restriction (LF-RF and TLF-RF groups before the reintroduction of the ad libitum diet) exhibited lower microbiota ages than AL mice
Fig. 4Altered gut microbiota community structure persists after correction of chronic dietary restriction. a–d PCA on days 69 (a), 96–97 (b), 98–99 (c), and 120 (d). The first two PCs from the PCA on unweighted UniFrac distance matrix are plotted. Symbols and colors represent data from individual diet regimens. The main axes of the ellipses correspond to the first two PCs with the height and width representing variances in the corresponding coordinates. Note that the LF-RF and TLF-RF data remained different from the AL data on day 120 despite a significant separation from the LF group; and that IGF1 treatment (TLF-RF group) mitigated the difference from the AL mice
Fig. 5Specific bacterial taxa show hysteresis effect under chronic dietary restriction. a Cladogram generated with GraPhlAn (http://huttenhower.sph.harvard.edu/galaxy/) showing “hysteresis” bacterial taxa identified by comparing their abundance in the AL group to LF-RF and TLF-RF mice (refed groups) on day 120. Red represents abundance increase in the AL group and green represents abundance increase in the refed groups. b Log2 fold change (refed groups/AL) of the abundance of taxa identified at an FDR of 10 %. The horizontal fuzzy line represents the 95 % confidence interval of the log fold change estimate