| Literature DB >> 29869736 |
Thomas W Buford1, Christy S Carter2, William J VanDerPol3, Dongquan Chen3, Elliot J Lefkowitz3,4, Peter Eipers5, Casey D Morrow5, Marcas M Bamman5.
Abstract
Advanced age has been associated with alterations to the microbiome within the intestinal tract as well as intestinal permeability (i.e., "leaky gut"). Prior studies suggest that intestinal permeability may contribute to increases in systemic inflammation-an aging hallmark-possibly via microorganisms entering the circulation. Yet, no studies exist describing the state of the circulating microbiome among older persons. To compare microbiota profiles in serum between healthy young (20-35 years, n = 24) and older adults (60-75 years, n = 24) as well as associations between differential microbial populations and prominent indices of age-related inflammation. Unweighted Unifrac analysis, a measure of β-diversity, revealed that microbial communities clustered differently between young and older adults. Several measures of α-diversity, including chao1 (p = 0.001), observed species (p = 0.001), and phylogenetic diversity (p = 0.002) differed between young and older adults. After correction for false discovery rate (FDR), age groups differed (all p values ≤ 0.016) in the relative abundance of the phyla Bacteroidetes, SR1, Spirochaetes, Bacteria_Other, TM7, and Tenericutes. Significant positive correlations (p values ≤ 0.017 after FDR correction) were observed between IGF1 and Bacteroidetes (ρ = 0.380), Spirochaetes (ρ = 0.528), SR1 (ρ = 0.410), and TM7 (ρ = 0.399). Significant inverse correlations were observed for IL6 with Bacteroidetes (ρ = - 0.398) and TM7 (ρ = - 0.423), as well as for TNFα with Bacteroidetes (ρ = - 0.344). Similar findings were observed at the class taxon. These data are the first to demonstrate that the richness and composition of the serum microbiome differ between young and older adults and that these factors are linked to indices of age-related inflammation.Entities:
Keywords: Aging; Inflammation; Leaky gut; Microbiome; Microbiota
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29869736 PMCID: PMC6060185 DOI: 10.1007/s11357-018-0026-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Geroscience ISSN: 2509-2723 Impact factor: 7.713
Participant demographic characteristics and inflammatory parameters
| Young adults | Older adults | |
|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 27.8 ± 4.0 | 63.9 ± 3.2** |
| Female, | 14 (58.3%) | 14 (58.3%) |
| Height, cm | 170.2 ± 11.0 | 169.1 ± 10.9 |
| Body mass, kg | 72.7 ± 12.9 | 74.9 ± 15.0 |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 | 25.0 ± 3.0 | 25.9 ± 3.2 |
| Body fat, % | 30.1 ± 10.4 | 35.9 ± 6.4* |
| VO2max, mL/O2/min | 37.5 ± 8.4 | 27.0 ± 4.8** |
| Dietary intake | ||
| Total intake, kcal/day | 2003 ± 779 | 1767 ± 625 |
| Carbohydrate, g/day | 253.9 ± 103.6 | 210.2 ± 75.5* |
| Fiber, g/day | 20.4 ± 8.3 | 16.2 ± 8.7 |
| Fat, g/day | 76.5 ± 41.2 | 67.8 ± 36.4 |
| Protein, g/day | 75.4 ± 33.9 | 73.1 ± 30.1* |
| Serum inflammatory parameters | ||
| Interleukin 6, pg/mL | 0.38 ± 0.19 | 0.52 ± 0.20* |
| Tumor necrosis factor α, pg/mL | 2.02 ± 0.60 | 2.20 ± 0.44 |
| Insulin-like growth factor 1, μg/L | 365.4 ± 129.2 | 188.4 ± 82.3** |
VO2max maximal respiratory capacity (i.e., fitness); *p < 0.05, **p < 0.0001
All values (mean ± SD)
Fig. 1Taxonomic distribution of serum microbiome of healthy young and older adults by phylum (a) and class (b). c Comparison of serum microbiome β-diversity (Unweighted UniFrac) between healthy young (blue) and older (red) adults
Fig. 2Comparison of α-diversity of the serum microbiome between healthy young (blue) and older adults (red). Five indices were used to represent the richness (chao1, observed species), phylogenetic diversity, and sample diversity (shannon and simpson indices). Box whiskers indicate the range of observed values
Fig. 3Microbial DNA populations differentially expressed between young (blue) and older (red) adults at the phylum level. Asterisk indicates statistical significance after correcting for multiple comparisons via false discovery rate. Box whiskers represent the range of observed values
Serum microbiome composition at the class level (25 most common OTUs)
| Young adults | Older adults | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Firmicutes_Clostridia | 34.8 ± 14.3 | 34.5 ± 15.4 | 0.932 |
| Bacteroidetes_Bacteroidia | 18.2 ± 4.7 | 13.6 ± 5.0 | 0.003* |
| Firmicutes_Bacilli | 12.5 ± 7.0 | 11.4 ± 4.7 | 0.831 |
| Proteobacteria_Gammaproteobacteria | 9.6 ± 6.3 | 7.7 ± 3.2 | 0.580 |
| Actinobacteria_Actinobacteria | 4.9 ± 6.4 | 7.6 ± 7.4 | 0.093 |
| Firmicutes_Erysipelotrichi | 2.3 ± 1.6 | 8.6 ± 13.4 | 0.023 |
| Fusobacteria_Fusobacteriia | 5.9 ± 4.6 | 3.4 ± 3.6 | 0.035 |
| Proteobacteria_Betaproteobacteria | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 3.4 ± 2.3 | 0.496 |
| Proteobacteria_Alphaproteobacteria | 2.3 ± 2.3 | 2.4 ± 1.8 | 0.702 |
| Verrucomicrobia_Verrucomicrobiae | 1.9 ± 0.8 | 2.3 ± 1.3 | 0.217 |
| Proteobacteria_Epsilonproteobacteria | 0.8 ± 0.4 | 0.6 ± 0.4 | 0.085 |
| Actinobacteria_Coriobacteriia | 0.5 ± 0.2 | 0.6 ± 0.3 | 0.120 |
| Bacteroidetes_Flavobacteriia | 0.5 ± 0.2 | 0.6 ± 0.7 | 0.898 |
| Cyanobacteria_Chloroplast | 0.5 ± 0.4 | 0.7 ± 0.5 | 0.173 |
| Tenericutes_Mollicutes | 0.7 ± 0.5 | 0.5 ± 0.4 | 0.003* |
| Proteobacteria_Deltaproteobacteria | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 0.865 |
| Bacteria_Other_Other | 0.3 ± 0.2 | 0.2 ± 0.2 | 0.004* |
| Bacteria_SR1_unknown | 0.2 ± 0.2 | 0.1 ± 0.2 | 0.016 |
| Bacteroidetes_Cytophagia | 0.04 ± 0.04 | 0.25 ± 0.49 | 0.003* |
| Cyanobacteria_Synechococcophycideae | 0.07 ± 0.04 | 0.16 ± 0.22 | 0.328 |
| Deferribacteres_Deferribacteres | 0.10 ± 0.10 | 0.10 ± 0.08 | 0.686 |
| Firmicutes_Other | 0.11 ± 0.07 | 0.06 ± 0.05 | 0.011* |
| Spirochaetes_Leptospirae | 0.10 ± 0.08 | 0.04 ± 0.06 | 0.001* |
| Actinobacteria_Acidimicrobiia | 0.03 ± 0.03 | 0.04 ± 0.06 | 0.045 |
| Cyanobacteria_Oscillatoriophycideae | 0.02 ± 0.03 | 0.10 ± 0.20 | 0.034 |
All values (mean ± SD) indicate relative abundance (%)
*Statistically significant after correction for false discovery rate
Fig. 4Microbial DNA populations at the phylum level significantly differing in abundance between young and older adults and correlated with indices of inflammation. Correlation coefficients reflect the Spearman rho comparison. Asterisk indicates statistical significance after correcting for multiple comparisons via false discovery rate. Data points are colored separately to indicate young (blue) and older (red) adults
Fig. 5Microbial DNA populations at the class level significantly differing in abundance between young and older adults and correlated with indices of inflammation. Correlation coefficients reflect the Spearman rho comparison. Asterisk indicates statistical significance after correcting for multiple comparisons via false discovery rate. Data points are colored separately to indicate young (blue) and older (red) adults