| Literature DB >> 29117187 |
Eun Sung Jung1, Hye Min Park1, Seung Min Hyun2, Jong Cheol Shon3, Digar Singh1, Kwang-Hyeon Liu3, Tae Woong Whon4, Jin-Woo Bae4, Jae Sung Hwang2, Choong Hwan Lee1.
Abstract
The attenuating effects of green tea supplements (GTS) against the ultraviolet (UV) radiation induced skin damages are distinguished. However, the concomitant effects of GTS on the large intestinal microbiomes and associated metabolomes are largely unclear. Herein, we performed an integrated microbiome-metabolome analysis to uncover the esoteric links between gut microbiome and exo/endogenous metabolome maneuvered in the large intestine of UVB-exposed mice subjected to dietary GTS. In UVB-exposed mice groups (UVB), class Bacilli and order Bifidobacteriales were observed as discriminant taxa with decreased lysophospholipid levels compared to the unexposed mice groups subjected to normal diet (NOR). Conversely, in GTS fed UVB-exposed mice (U+GTS), the gut-microbiome diversity was greatly enhanced with enrichment in the classes, Clostridia and Erysipelotrichia, as well as genera, Allobaculum and Lachnoclostridium. Additionally, the gut endogenous metabolomes changed with an increase in amino acids, fatty acids, lipids, and bile acids contents coupled with a decrease in nucleobases and carbohydrate levels. The altered metabolomes exhibited high correlations with GTS enriched intestinal microflora. Intriguingly, the various conjugates of green tea catechins viz., sulfated, glucuronided, and methylated ones including their exogenous derivatives were detected from large intestinal contents and liver samples. Hence, we conjecture that the metabolic conversions for the molecular components in GTS strongly influenced the gut micro-environment in UVB-exposed mice groups, ergo modulate their gut-microbiome as well as exo/endogenous metabolomes.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29117187 PMCID: PMC5695601 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187154
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Histograms of a, body weight; b, food intake and food efficiency ratio of mice in each experimental groups.
Body weight was measured every week. All the results were shown as mean ± standard deviation, and did not show significantly differences among groups. Black square-NOR group; red square-UVB group; green square- U+GTS group.
Fig 2Comparison of the intestinal microbiome in the NOR, UVB, and U+GTS groups.
a, Shannon and Simpson’s diversity indices; b, relative abundances of operational taxonomy units (OTUs) at the phylum level; c, histogram of the LDA scores of differentially abundant taxa as calculated by LEfSe; d, the LEfSe cladograms of six-level (from kingdom to genus) representing differentially abundant taxa; e, relative abundances of intestinal microbiome OTUs compared between groups in class, order, and family level; f, relative OTU abundance differentials between groups in genus level; g, partial least square-discriminated analysis score scatter plots of mouse intestinal content extracts analyzed by GC-TOF-MS and UPLC-Q-TOF-MS. The different letters indicate significant differences, as determined by ANOVA followed by Duncan’s multiple range tests (p < 0.05). Black filled square-NOR group; red filled square-UVB group; green filled square- U+GTS group.
The major endogenous metabolites in the large intestinal contents altered by chronic UVB irradiation and GTS, as analyzed by GC-TOF-MS and UPLC-Q-TOF-MS.
| No. | Tentative Metabolites | Ratio of average | No. | Tentative Metabolites | Ratio of average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (NOR/UVB/U+GTS) | (NOR/UVB/U+GTS) | ||||
| Asparagine | 1.00 / 0.81 / | Hexanoic acid | 1.00 / 0.71 / 0.54 | ||
| Isoleucine | 1.00 / 0.98 / 0.74 | Linoleic acid | 1.00 / 1.01 / | ||
| Leucine | 1.00 / 0.92 / 0.51 | Oleic acid | 1.00 / 1.01 / | ||
| Lysine | 1.00 / 0.90 / 0.55 | Palmitic acid | 1.00 / 1.18 / 0.66 | ||
| Methionine | 1.00 / 0.98 / 1.56 | Palmitoleic acid | 1.00 / 0.87 / | ||
| Ornithine | 1.00 / 0.75 / 0.77 | ||||
| Phenylalanine | 1.00 / 1.01 / 0.90 | Lanosterol | 1.00 / 1.05 / | ||
| Proline | 1.00 / 1.01 / 0.82 | Monoolein | 1.00 / 1.07 / | ||
| Serine | 1.00 / 1.00 / 0.70 | Monopalmitin | 1.00 / 0.85 / | ||
| Threonine | 1.00 / 1.02 / 0.77 | Monoacylglycerol (18:4) | 1.00 / 1.74 / | ||
| Tryptophan | 1.00 / 0.85 / | LysoPE(15:0) | 1.00 / 1.38 / | ||
| Tyrosine | 1.00 / 0.97 / 0.83 | LysoPC(16:0) | 1.00 / 0.73 / 0.89 | ||
| Valine | 1.00 / 0.92 / | LysoPC(16:0) | 1.00 / 0.75 / 1.12 | ||
| LysoPE(16:0) | 1.00 / 0.66 / 0.79 | ||||
| Malic acid | 1.00 / 1.38 / | LysoPE(16:0) | 1.00 / 0.66 / 0.88 | ||
| Pyruvic acid | 1.00 / 1.12 / | LysoPE(dm16:0e) | 1.00 / 0.58 / 1.27 | ||
| Succinic acid | 1.00 / 1.23 / | LysoPC(18:0) | 1.00 / 0.64 / | ||
| 1.00 / 1.33 / 0.64 | LysoPC(18:0) | 1.00 / 0.72 / 0.64 | |||
| LysoPE(18:0) | 1.00 / 0.70 / | ||||
| Hypoxanthine | 1.00 / 1.09 / 1.31 | LysoPC(18:1) | 1.00 / 0.75 / 0.72 | ||
| Inosine | 1.00 / | LysoPE(18:1) | 1.00 / 0.67 / | ||
| Uracil | 1.00 / 1.22 / | LysoPE(18:2) | 1.00 / 0.94 / | ||
| LysoPC(20:1) | 1.00 / | ||||
| Fructose | 1.00 / 1.32 / 1.99 | LysoPC(20:1) | 1.00 / 0.68 / | ||
| Fructose | 1.00 / 1.31 / | ||||
| Fucose | 1.00 / 1.16 / 0.78 | Taurocholic acid | 1.00 / 1.05 / | ||
| Glyceric acid | 1.00 / 1.24 / | Taurodeoxycholic acid | 1.00 / 1.44 / | ||
| Glycerol | 1.00 / 1.02 / 1.25 | Taurocholic acid | 1.00 / 0.76 / | ||
| Mannose | 1.00 / 0.71 / | Cholic acid | 1.00 / 1.14 / 1.77 | ||
| myo-Inositol | 1.00 / 0.99 / 1.06 | Deoxycholic acid | 1.00 / 1.22 / | ||
| Sucrose | 1.00 / 1.01 / 3.17 | Deoxycholic acid | 1.00 / 1.13 / 0.66 | ||
| Xylose | 1.00 / 1.04 / 1.92 | ||||
Metabolites selected by VIP > 0.7 from PLS-DA model (Fig 2g) and p < 0.05 of one-way ANOVA analysis. Relative contents rations were normalized by NOR group. LysoPC, lysophosphatidylcholine; LysoPE, lysophosphatidylethanolamine LysoPC and lysoPE were detected as two different forms which contain the fatty acyl chain at sn-1 and sn-2 site on the backbone of glycerol.
a Assignment of metabolites was carried out using HMDB, NIST, Wiley 8, high resolution mass data (ppm), and in house library
b It identified as taurine conjugated with cholic acid affiliation (taurochlic acid or tauro-muricholic acid or tauroallocholic acid or taurohyocholic acid, tauroursocholic acid)
c It identified as taurine conjugated with deoxycholic acid affiliation (taurodeoxycholic acid or tauroursodeoxycholic acid or taurochenodesoxycholic acid)
d It identified as cholic acid affiliation (cholic acid or muricholic acid or lithocholic acid)
e It identified as deoxycholic acid affiliation (deoxycholic acid or ursodeoxycholic acid or chenodeoxycholic acid)
Bold values indicate the fold change > 2.0 or < 0.5 compared to NOR group
Fig 3orrelation network of intestinal microbiome and endogenous metabolites of large intestinal contents according to pearson’s correlation coefficient (-0.99
C Numbers on metabolites were identical on Table 1.
Preliminary identification of exogenous metabolites of green tea catechins in the large intestinal contents and the liver.
| No. | Compounds | Location | [M-H]- ( | Fragment ion (m/z) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ECG | Large intestine | 441 | 169 |
| 2 | EGC sulphate | Large intestine | 385 | 305 |
| 3 | EGC sulphate glucuronide | Large intestine | 561 | 305 |
| 4 | EGCG | Large intestine | 457 | 169 |
| 5 | EGCG sulphate | Large intestine | 537 | 457 |
| 6 | 3,4-diHPP-2-ol | Large intestine | 291 | 247 |
| 7 | 3,4-diHPP-2-ol sulphate | Large intestine | 371 | 291 |
| 8 | 3-HPP-2-ol | Large intestine | 275 | 231 |
| 9 | M4 | Large intestine | 223 | 123/179 |
| 10 | M6/M6' glucuronide | Large intestine | 383 | 207 |
| 11 | Methyl M6/M6' sulphate | Large intestine | 301 | 221 |
| 12 | 5-(3,4,-Dihydroxyphenyl)-valeric acid | Large intestine | 209 | 106/101 |
| 13 | 5-(3,4,-Dihydroxyphenyl)-valeric acid sulphate | Large intestine | 289 | 209 |
| 14 | 3-Hydroxy-4-methoxyl-phenylacetic acid sulphate | Large intestine | 261 | 122 |
| 15 | Dihydroxy-methoxyl-benzenepentanoic acid sulphate | Large intestine | 319 | 162/239/221/177 |
| 16 | EC sulphate | Large intestine, Liver | 369 | 289/245/207/189/181/163 |
| 17 | EGC glucuronide | Large intestine, Liver | 481 | 305/261/175/137 |
| 18 | Methyl EGC | Large intestine, Liver | 319 | 275/257/245/195/167/137/109 |
| 19 | Methyl 3,4-diHPP-2-ol glucuronide | Large intestine, Liver | 481 | 305/175/149/135/85 |
| 20 | Methyl 3,4-diHPP-2-ol sulphate | Large intestine, Liver | 385 | 305/149 |
| 21 | Methyl 3-HPP-2-ol glucuronide | Large intestine, Liver | 465 | 151/135/125 |
| 22 | M4 sulphate | Large intestine, Liver | 303 | 151/135/108/92 |
| 23 | M6/M6' | Large intestine, Liver | 207 | 135/85/73/59 |
| 24 | 5-(Methoxyl-hydroxyphenyl)-valeric acid sulphate | Large intestine, Liver | 303 | 151/135/109/92 |
| 25 | Trihydroxybenzene pentanoic acid sulphate | Large intestine, Liver | 305 | 164/135/123 |
| 26 | Ferulic acid sulphate | Large intestine, Liver | 273 | 193/175/149/134/106 |
| 27 | EC glucuronide | Liver | 465 | 203/135 |
| 28 | Methyl EC | Liver | 303 | 245/151/135 |
| 29 | Methyl EC sulphate | Liver | 383 | 245/203/179/161/159/125 |
| 30 | ECG glucuronide | Liver | 617 | 289/245 |
| 31 | ECG sulphate glucuronide | Liver | 697 | 135 |
| 32 | Methyl ECG | Liver | 464 | 289/219/193 |
| 33 | Methyl ECG sulphate | Liver | 535 | 135 |
| 34 | 3,4-diHPP-2-ol glucuronide | Liver | 467 | 291/207/175/167/135/125 |
| 35 | Methyl 3,4-diHPP-2-ol | Liver | 305 | 149/135/125/108 |
| 36 | Methyl 3-HPP-2-ol sulphate | Liver | 369 | 217/173/151/125 |
| 37 | M4 disulphates | Liver | 383 | 303/221/203 |
| 38 | Methyl M6/M6' | Liver | 221 | 163/147/85/73 |
| 39 | Methyl M6/M6' glucuronide | Liver | 397 | 163/147/73 |
| 40 | 5-(3,4-Dihydroxyphenyl)-valeric acid sulphate glucuronide | Liver | 165 | 135 |
| 41 | 3-Hydroxyphenylacetic acid sulphate | Liver | 231 | 151/107/93 |
| 42 | Hydroxyphenyl propionic acid | Liver | 165 | 121/77 |
* ECG, epicatechin gallate; EGC, epigallocatechin; EGCG, epigallocatechin gallate; 3,4-diHPP-2-ol, 1-(3',4'-dihydroxyphenyl)-3-(2'',4'',6''-trihydroxyphenyl)-propan-2-ol; 3-HPP-2-ol, 1-(3'-hydoxyphenyl)-3-(2'',4'',6''-trihydroxyphenyl)-propan-2-ol; M4, 5-(3',4',5-trihydroxyphenyl)-γ-valerolactone; M6, 5-(3'4'-dihyroxyphenyl)-γ-valerolactone; M6', 5-(3'5'-dihydroxyphenyl)-γ-valerolactone; EC, epicatechin
Fig 4Proposed catechin exogenous metabolism pathway using preliminarily identified various transformed green tea catechins in the large intestine and the liver.
Blue text indicates exogenous catechin metabolites found in the large intestinal contents; Red text indicates exogenous catechin metabolites found in the liver; Purple text indicates exogenous catechin metabolites found in both the large intestinal contents and the liver. Numbers on metabolites were identical on Table 2.