| Literature DB >> 29046620 |
Irina M Velsko1,2, Katherine A Overmyer3, Camilla Speller4, Lauren Klaus5, Matthew J Collins4,6, Louise Loe7, Laurent A F Frantz1,8, Krithivasan Sankaranarayanan9, Cecil M Lewis10, Juan Bautista Rodriguez Martinez11, Eros Chaves5,12, Joshua J Coon3,13,14, Greger Larson1, Christina Warinner5,10,15.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Dental calculus is a mineralized microbial dental plaque biofilm that forms throughout life by precipitation of salivary calcium salts. Successive cycles of dental plaque growth and calcification make it an unusually well-preserved, long-term record of host-microbial interaction in the archaeological record. Recent studies have confirmed the survival of authentic ancient DNA and proteins within historic and prehistoric dental calculus, making it a promising substrate for investigating oral microbiome evolution via direct measurement and comparison of modern and ancient specimens.Entities:
Keywords: Archaeology; Dental plaque; GC–MS; Metabolomics; Oral microbiome; UPLC–MS/MS
Year: 2017 PMID: 29046620 PMCID: PMC5626792 DOI: 10.1007/s11306-017-1270-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Metabolomics ISSN: 1573-3882 Impact factor: 4.290
Summary of sample demographic and health information and analyses performed
| ID | Agea | Sexb | Smoker | Oral health | Sampled tooth | Analyses performed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Modern | ||||||
| OK1010 | 40 | M | Former | + PD | − Caries, + PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| ES28 | 31 | F | Current | + Caries, + GV | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| ES29 | 30 | M | No | + Caries, + GV | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| ES20 | 23 | M | Current | + Caries, + GV | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| ES15 | 71 | M | Former | + Caries, + PD | − Caries, + PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| Historic | ||||||
| CS06 | 36–45 | M | N/A | + Caries, + PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC-MS/ MSc; GC-MS |
| CS12 | 36–45 | M | N/A | + Caries, + PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MSc; GC–MS |
| CS18 | 36–45 | M | N/A | − Caries, + PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MSc; GC–MS |
| CS24 | 36–45 | F | N/A | + Caries, + PD | + Caries, + PD | UPLC–MS/MSc; GC–MS |
| CS46 | > 45 | F | N/A | + Caries, + PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MSc; GC–MS |
| CS20 | 36–45 | M | N/A | + Caries, + PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| CS21 | 26–35 | M | N/A | − Caries, − PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| CS23 | 26–35 | F | N/A | + Caries, + PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| CS30 | 18–25 | F | N/A | + Caries, − PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| CS31 | 36–45 | F | N/A | + caries, + PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| CS39 | 36–45 | M | N/A | − Caries, + PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
| CS40 | > 45 | F | N/A | − Caries, − PD | − Caries, − PD | UPLC–MS/MS |
PD periodontal disease, GV gingivitis, N/A not available, + present, − absent
aAge of skeletons used for historical calculus sampling is based on osteological indicators and is a range estimate
bHistorical skeleton sex estimate is based on both osteological indicators and DNA sequencing, and was in concurrence between the two methods
cUPLC–MS/MS was performed twice; the first at Metabolon, Inc. and the second at the University of Wisconson-Madison
Fig. 1Heat map summary of metabolites observed in modern and historic dental. Metabolites were quantified by area under the curve and normalized to mass of sample extracted. a UPLC–MS/MS-detected metabolites. Samples were hierarchically clustered, and log2 transformed values are presented above, grouped by super-pathway. b Metabolites detected by GC–MS and LC–MS in historic calculus. Non-filled cells containing a dot indicate the compound was not detected
Fig. 2Compound preservation is correlated with aqueous solubility. a Percent of high ubiquity metabolites in modern calculus that were also recovered in at least one historic calculus sample. Peptides exhibit the poorest representation in historic dental calculus, with only 9% of the peptides observed to be present in all five modern calculus samples also detected in any historic sample. By contrast, Lipids and Energy (TCA cycle) super-pathways exhibit high representation in historic calculus, with > 96% of compounds found in all five modern samples also recovered from historic dental calculus. Xenobiotics, which largely comprise dietary and pharmaceutical compounds, are not shown. b The log2 fold-change (modern/historic) of metabolite abundance versus the 1-octanol versus water partition coefficient (logP), estimated with the ALOGPS tool. In the cases where metabolites were only detected in modern calculus, the log2 values (not fold-change) were plotted relative to logP. The fitted linear model showed a significant effect (p < 0.0001) of logP on metabolite fold-change with and adjusted R2 of 0.22. The outlier from this trend was mead acid (20:3n9)
Fig. 3Differences exist in mean proportions of metabolites detected in at least one historic and one modern dental calculus sample. a Principal components analysis distinctly separates modern and historic calculus samples. b Metabolites with significant differences (q ≤ 0.05, effect size of ≥ 1.0) in mean proportions between historic and modern calculus
Fig. 4Differences exist in proportions of super-pathways, sub-pathways, and metabolites represented in at least one historic and one modern dental calculus sample. Significantly different (q ≤ 0.05, effect size of ≥ 1.0) proportions of a Super-pathways, b Sub-pathways, and c metabolites. Individual metabolites between historic and modern samples
Fig. 5Partial least squares discriminant analysis of metabolites detected at least one modern and one historic calculus sample. a Calculus samples cluster based on time period rather than biological category (sex, age, caries status and periodontal disease status) when including all metabolites detected in at least one modern and one historic sample. b Historic calculus samples cluster based on biological category (sex, age, caries status and periodontal disease status) when including all metabolites detected in at least one historic sample. Ellipses indicate 95% confidence intervals