| Literature DB >> 30190564 |
Yueni Wu1,2, Yuzhan Yang1, Lei Cao2,3, Huaqun Yin4, Meiying Xu5, Zhujun Wang1,2, Yangying Liu1,2, Xin Wang2,3, Ye Deng6,7.
Abstract
The gut microbime plays an important role in the health of wild animals. This microbial community could be altered by habitat pollution and other human activities that threaten the host organisms. Here, we satellite-tracked a flock of swan geese (Anser cygnoides) migrating from their breeding area (Khukh Lake, Mongolia), with low levels of human activity, to their wintering area (Poyang Lake, China) which has been heavily impacted by human activities. Twenty fecal samples were collected from each site. High-throughput sequencing of 16S and ITS was employed to explore bacterial and fungal composition and diversity of their gut microbiome. Although general composition, alpha-diversity, functional prediction, and the central taxa in the phylogenetic networks showed some similarities between the two habitats, significant divergences were detected in terms of beta-diversity, species abundances, and interaction network topologies. In addition, disease-related and xenobiotic biodegradation pathways, and pathogenic bacteria were significantly increased in bacterial communities from samples at Poyang Lake. Our results reveal that the gut microbiome of swan geese, while somewhat altered after long-distance migration, still maintained a core group of species. We also show that habitat environmental stress could impact these gut microbial communities, suggesting that habitat pollution could indirectly threaten wild animals by altering their gut microbiome.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30190564 PMCID: PMC6127342 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-31731-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Basic information of swan geese and their habitat (A) Physical characteristic of swan geese. (B) Migration route of swan geese. (C) Surrounding environment of breeding area. (D) Surrounding environment of wintering area. All the maps (Fig. 1B,C and D) were generated by Google Earth. Map data ©2018 Google.
Figure 2Phylum-level gut microbiome composition of herbivorous geese. (A) 16S phyla in all samples. (B) ITS phyla in all samples. Samples are grouped according to sampling location and species.
Figure 3Variations in alpha diversity of herbivorous geese gut microbiome. (A) Comparison of 16S Chao1 value between 2 geese species in 2 lakes. (B) Comparison of 16S Shannon index between 2 geese species in 2 lakes. (C) Comparison of ITS Chao1 value of swan geese between 2 lakes. (D) Comparisons of ITS Shannon index of swan geese between 2 lakes. ***P < 0.01.
Figure 4Differential gut microbial communities across all samples. (A) Principal coordinates analysis plot of 16S weighted UniFrac distances for three geese species sampled from two lakes. (B) Principal coordinates analysis plot of ITS weighted UniFrac distances for swan geese sampled from two lakes. Each point represents the gut microbiome community of an individual geese.
Dissimilarity tests of herbivorous geese fecal microbial communities using ANOSIM and PERMANOVA based on Bray-Curtis distance.
| Dissimilarity tests | ANOSIM | PERMANOVA | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R | Significance | R2 | Significance | |
| SG_N-SG_S(16S) | 0.07 | 0.034* | 0.057 | 0.016* |
| SG_S-GWFG(16S) | 0.414 | 0.001*** | 0.162 | 0.001*** |
| SG_N-GWFG(16S) | 0.482 | 0.001*** | 0.196 | 0.001*** |
| SG_N-SG_S(ITS) | 0.491 | 0.001*** | 0.308 | 0.001*** |
*Difference is significant at 0.05 level; **Difference is significant at 0.01 level; ***Difference is significant at 0.001 level.
Basic information of pMENs.
| Network Indexes | Total nodes | Total links | R square of power-law | Average degree | Average path distance | Nodes with max degree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SG_N_network | 105 | 223 | 0.832 | 4.248 | 1.569 | OTU_21939 |
| SG_S_network | 145 | 386 | 0.822 | 5.324 | 2.877 | OTU_21939 |
Figure 5Functional predictions of all samples using PICRUSt. (A) Using PICRUSt as a predictive exploratory tool, comparing overall 41 level 2 KEGG Orthology groups (KOs) represented in data set between swan geese samples from two sites. (B) 3 xenobiotics biodegradation and 17 disease-related pathways between two sites. The x-axis represent relative abundance taking logarithm. **0.01 < P < 0.05, ***P < 0.01.
Figure 6Phylogenetic Molecular ecology networks (pMENs) of swan geese bacterial species. (A) The pMEN of swan geese bacterial committee from Khukh Lake. (B) The pMEN of swan geese bacterial committee from Poyang Lake. (C) The nodes with max degrees in both (A) and (B) are identical. Its neighbors in (A) were plotted on the left and neighbors in (B) were on the right. The shared neighbors were linked with the dotted lines in the middle. The networks were constructed using RMT-based model and visualized by Cytoscape 3.3.0. Nodes represented OTUs, and lines connecting nodes (edges) represented positive (blue) and negative (red) interactions defined by Pearson’s correlation coefficient.