| Literature DB >> 28072421 |
Egija Zaura1,2, Bernd W Brandt1,2, Andrei Prodan1,3, Maarten Joost Teixeira de Mattos4, Sultan Imangaliyev1,2,5, Jolanda Kool1,5, Mark J Buijs1,2, Ferry Lpw Jagers1,5, Nienke L Hennequin-Hoenderdos6, Dagmar E Slot6, Elena A Nicu6, Maxim D Lagerweij7, Marleen M Janus1,2, Marcela M Fernandez-Gutierrez1,8, Evgeni Levin1,5, Bastiaan P Krom1,2, Henk S Brand1,3, Enno Ci Veerman3, Michiel Kleerebezem1,8, Bruno G Loos6, G A van der Weijden6, Wim Crielaard1,2, Bart Jf Keijser1,2,5.
Abstract
A dysbiotic state is believed to be a key factor in the onset of oral disease. Although oral diseases have been studied for decades, our understanding of oral health, the boundaries of a healthy oral ecosystem and ecological shift toward dysbiosis is still limited. Here, we present the ecobiological heterogeneity of the salivary ecosystem and relations between the salivary microbiome, salivary metabolome and host-related biochemical salivary parameters in 268 healthy adults after overnight fasting. Gender-specific differences in the microbiome and metabolome were observed and were associated with salivary pH and dietary protein intake. Our analysis grouped the individuals into five microbiome and four metabolome-based clusters that significantly related to biochemical parameters of saliva. Low salivary pH and high lysozyme activity were associated with high proportions of streptococcal phylotypes and increased membrane-lipid degradation products. Samples with high salivary pH displayed increased chitinase activity, higher abundance of Veillonella and Prevotella species and higher levels of amino acid fermentation products, suggesting proteolytic adaptation. An over-specialization toward either a proteolytic or a saccharolytic ecotype may indicate a shift toward a dysbiotic state. Their prognostic value and the degree to which these ecotypes are related to increased disease risk remains to be determined.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28072421 PMCID: PMC5475835 DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2016.199
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISME J ISSN: 1751-7362 Impact factor: 10.302
Figure 1Heterogeneity of salivary microbiome (left panels) and metabolome (right panels) samples in healthy young adults: (a) spectral clustering co-occurrence plots of the microbiome or metabolome samples ordered along the axes according to the co-occurrence matrix: the more similar the sample profiles, the closer they are together on the axis. Co-occurrence values range from 0 (samples never cluster) to 1 (samples always cluster together) after multiple k-means clustering assignments. The clustering labels are shown below the graphs, according to salivary microbiome (MIC) and metabolome (MET) data sets. Chao-1—estimated species richness per individual microbiome sample. There were significantly more males (gender: blue) than females (gender: orange) in MET_2 and MET_3 clusters and MET_4 contained only males. (b) PCA plots based either on microbiome or metabolome samples. (c) Significantly positively and significantly negatively associated microbial genera and metabolites between samples belonging to different clusters. Only five most abundant genera are shown. Of the 217 negatively associated metabolites only the 6 with the highest negative fold change are shown.
Figure 2Salivary microbiome co-occurrence analysis results per individual microbiome cluster. The size of the nodes is related to the relative abundance of the taxa; the color of the node indicates the connectivity to the other nodes (red—low number of neighbors, green—high number of neighbors). Analysis was performed using CoNet v.1.0b6 in Cytoscape. Taxonomic names at species level were obtained using the representative sequences of the OTUs and the HOMD database. Taxonomic names marked with * have been truncated for legibility.
Figure 3The network of the most significant Spearman correlations (r<−0.5 or r>0.5) between the top 400 most abundant OTUs and the 493 metabolites. OTUs are shown with blue circles, the diameter of which is proportional to the abundance, metabolites—with yellow circles. Positive correlations are indicated with green lines, whereas negative correlations—with red lines. Taxonomic names marked with * have been truncated for legibility.
Figure 4Five of the 14 measured host-related biochemical salivary parameters where significant differences were observed among the samples belonging to the different (a) microbiome and (b) metabolome clusters. The lines connect significantly different clusters (P<0.05, FDR corrected for multiple comparisons).
Figure 5Results of Elastic Net regression on the salivary microbiome data set in predicting (a) buffered salivary pH and (b) salivary lysozyme activity, where distribution of the top four most stable and abundant OTUs that predicted (c) buffered pH and (d) lysozyme activity are shown. For Elastic Net regression, the mean of the buffered pH or lysozyme activity was subtracted of the measured value as to center the data to a mean of zero. Buffered pH was divided into the following quartiles: Q1: pH 4.1–5.9, Q2: pH 5.9–6.3, Q3: pH 6.3–6.6, Q4: pH 6.6–7.3. Lysozyme activity was divided into Q1: 28–464, Q2: 464–1514, Q3: 1514–2491, Q4: 2491–5635.
Figure 6Proposed ecological states or ecotypes of the oral ecosystem and the positioning of the microbiome clusters according to these states. The dichotomy in bacteria-metabolite associations and the relation with salivary parameters is depicted in saccharolytic (left side) or proteolytic (right side) adaptations of the ecosystem. Based on the observed associations, the microbiome-based sample clusters MIC1.2 and MIC3 are positioned toward the specialized state of the system, whereas clusters MIC2, MIC1.1 and MIC1.3 are positioned within the adaptive state of the system. The more specialized the ecosystem becomes, the more it may shift toward dysbiosis.