| Literature DB >> 31132993 |
Wu Enqi1,2, Zhao Huanhu1,2, Wu Ritu1,2, Xie Dan1, Lin Han1, Wang Baili3, Shen Gangyi4,5, Li Shuchun6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gut bacteria are an important component of the microbiota ecosystem in humans and other animals, and they play important roles in human health. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between gut microbiota and multiple demographical-, behavioral-, or biochemical-related factors in subjects with chronic disease. Subjects with a very wide age range who participated in community-based chronic disease prevention and screening programs in China were enrolled. We analyzed the intestinal microbiota composition using 16S rRNA-based high-throughput sequencing of fecal samples, analyzed the association between gut microbiota structure and multiple demographical, behavioral, and biochemical factors, and compared the differences in microbiota composition in age-stratified groups with different blood glucose levels.Entities:
Keywords: 16S rRNA-based high-throughput sequencing; Age; Blood glucose level; Gut microbiota
Year: 2019 PMID: 31132993 PMCID: PMC6537452 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-019-1466-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Demographic, biochemical and behavior characteristics of the participants
| Two Categorical | Three Categorical | Overall | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GLU normal ( | GLU high ( | NGR( | IFG( | DM( | |||
| Numerical Variables | |||||||
| Age (year) | 69.08 ± 10.14 | 69.22 ± 10.04 | 69.08 ± 10.14 | 67.55 ± 10.80 | 70.33 ± 9.51 | 69.14 ± 10.06 | |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 25.5 ± 3.31 | 26.25 ± 3.02 | 25.5 ± 3.31 | 26.35 ± 3.04 | 26.18 ± 3.05 | 25.82 ± 3.2 | |
| WHR | 0.85 ± 0.07 | 0.88 ± 0.07 | 0.85 ± 0.07 | 0.87 ± 0.07 | 0.88 ± 0.07 | 0.87 ± 0.07 | |
| GLU (mmol/L) | 5.37 ± 0.42 | 7.76 ± 1.66 | 5.37 ± 0.42 | 6.47 ± 0.23 | 8.62 ± 1.65 | 6.36 ± 1.62 | |
| CHO (mmol/L) | 5.21 ± 1.05 | 5.17 ± 1.15 | 5.21 ± 1.05 | 5.04 ± 1.22 | 5.25 ± 1.10 | 5.19 ± 1.08 | |
| HDLC (mmol/L) | 1.48 ± 0.38 | 1.36 ± 0.27 | 1.48 ± 0.38 | 1.36 ± 0.23 | 1.36 ± 0.30 | 1.43 ± 0.34 | |
| LDLC (mmol/L) | 3.23 ± 0.78 | 3.31 ± 0.99 | 3.23 ± 0.78 | 3.17 ± 1.08 | 3.4 ± 0.94 | 3.26 ± 0.87 | |
| TG (mmol/L) | 1.91 ± 1.12 | 1.9 ± 1.38 | 1.91 ± 1.12 | 2.03 ± 1.70 | 1.82 ± 1.14 | 1.91 ± 1.23 | |
| SBP (mmHg) | 80.77 ± 10.95 | 78.16 ± 10.07 | 80.77 ± 10.95 | 79.23 ± 11.32 | 77.45 ± 9.26 | 79.69 ± 10.63 | |
| DBP (mmHg) | 140.24 ± 20.17 | 135.64 ± 17.22 | 140.24 ± 20.17 | 140.55 ± 20.63 | 132.36 ± 13.91 | 138.34 ± 19.08 | |
| Categorical Variables | |||||||
| Gender( | male | 27 | 28 | 27 | 10 | 18 | 55 |
| female | 51 | 27 | 51 | 12 | 15 | 78 | |
| Edu3 ( | lower than college | 25 | 15 | 25 | 8 | 7 | 40 |
| college or higher | 46 | 37 | 46 | 13 | 24 | 83 | |
| Exercise ( | more than once a week | 38 | 34 | 38 | 12 | 22 | 72 |
| less than once a week | 16 | 11 | 16 | 6 | 5 | 27 | |
| Meat ( | not prefer | 37 | 21 | 37 | 10 | 11 | 58 |
| normal or prefer | 38 | 32 | 38 | 12 | 20 | 70 | |
| Fruit ( | not prefer | 27 | 23 | 27 | 9 | 14 | 50 |
| normal or prefer | 47 | 30 | 47 | 13 | 17 | 77 | |
| Vegetable ( | not prefer | 9 | 4 | 9 | 1 | 3 | 13 |
| normal or prefer | 64 | 49 | 64 | 21 | 28 | 113 | |
| Alcohol ( | more than 4 days a week | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
| 1–3 days a week | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5 | |
| less than ones a week | 69 | 47 | 69 | 18 | 29 | 116 | |
| Smoke ( | not exposed | 49 | 29 | 49 | 13 | 16 | 78 |
| exposed 4 or more days a week | 13 | 20 | 13 | 8 | 12 | 33 | |
| exposed 1–3 days a week | 6 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 3 | 10 | |
| Sleeping ( | less than 6 h a day | 18 | 18 | 18 | 7 | 11 | 36 |
| more than 6 h a day | 55 | 33 | 55 | 13 | 20 | 88 | |
| Sleepless ( | more than 3 days a week | 8 | 5 | 8 | 1 | 4 | 13 |
| 1–3 days a week | 7 | 10 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 17 | |
| less than once a week | 51 | 34 | 51 | 13 | 21 | 85 | |
| Stress ( | happy | 44 | 33 | 44 | 13 | 20 | 77 |
| normal | 29 | 18 | 29 | 7 | 11 | 47 | |
| unhappy | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 7 | |
Analysis of the association of demographic, biochemical and behavior characteristics variants and the microbiota based on db-RDA and Partial db-RDA on Bray-Curtis distance matrix
| db-RDA | Partial db-RDA | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adjusted R2 |
| Adjusted R2 |
| |
| Gender | 0.000786 | 0.286 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Edu3 | 0.000428 | 0.362 | ||
| Exercise | 0.001449 | 0.248 | ||
| Meat | −0.00074 | 0.583 | ||
| Fruit | −0.00051 | 0.534 | ||
| Vegetable | 0.001639 | 0.214 | ||
| Alcohol | −0.0008 | 0.54 | ||
| Smoke | 0.001909 | 0.249 | ||
| Sleeping | −0.00198 | 0.809 | ||
| Sleepless | 0.001241 | 0.293 | ||
| Stress | −0.00141 | 0.668 | ||
| SBP | 0.001487 | 0.181 | ||
| DBP | −0.00023 | 0.494 | ||
| BMI | −0.00147 | 0.834 | ||
| WHR | 0.000624 | 0.281 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CHO | 0.003007 | 0.057 | ||
| HDLC | 0.002124 | 0.11 | ||
| LDLC | 0.000757 | 0.272 | ||
| TG | −0.00045 | 0.561 | ||
Boldface indicate P< 0.05
Fig. 1The 2D PCoA plots of the stool microbiota of people from two age group and different glucose levels based on Bray-Curtis distance matrix. (a) Comparison between the ≥ 76 y age group and ≤ 75 y age group. (b) Comparison between the GLU normal group and GLU high group
Fig. 2Clustering of the microbiota data supervised by the age based on MRT (multivariate regression trees) analysis and the result of variation partitioning analysis exploring explanatory power of numerical and categorial variant of age in relation to the microbiota data matrix. (a) The MRT analysis indicates that supervised by the age variant, the microbiota data could be stratified as 75 and younger group and 76 and older group. (b) The variation partitioning analysis indicates that the most part of the explanatory power of the numerical variant of age in relation to the microbiota data matrix could be explained by the two categorial variant of age (age of ≤75 or ≥ 76)
Comparison of the alpha diversity indexes across different group of samples
| Overall comparison | ||||||||||||
| Two Categorical GLU group | Three Categorical GLU group | Age group | Total ( | |||||||||
| GLU normal ( | GLU high ( | NGR ( | IFG ( | DM ( | 76 or older ( | 75 or younger ( | min | median | max | mean | sd | |
| PD_whole_tree | 16.4 ± 4 | 16.2 ± 4.6 | 16.4 ± 4 | 16 ± 3.5 | 16.3 ± 5.3 | 16.6 ± 3.8 | 16.2 ± 4.5 | 9 | 15.8 | 30.7 | 16.3 | 4.2 |
| Chao1 | 290.3 ± 82.7 | 286.2 ± 98.3 | 290.3 ± 82.7 | 278.6 ± 92 | 291.3 ± 103.4 | 291.4 ± 81.9 | 287.2 ± 93 | 154.5 | 272.2 | 576.5 | 288.6 | 89.1 |
| Goods_coverage | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Shannon | 4.5 ± 0.8 | 4.4 ± 0.9 | 4.5 ± 0.8 | 4.4 ± 0.6 | 4.4 ± 1 | 4.4 ± 0.9 | 4.5 ± 0.8 | 2.7 | 4.5 | 6.1 | 4.4 | 0.8 |
| Simpson | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 1 | 0.9 | 0.1 |
| Comparison among 76 ages and older subgroup | ||||||||||||
| Two Categorical GLU group | Three Categorical GLU group | Total ( | ||||||||||
| GLU normal ( | GLU abnormal ( | NGR ( | IFG ( | DM ( | min | median | max | mean | sd | |||
| PD_whole_tree | 17.2 ± 3.9 | 15.8 ± 3.7 | 17.2 ± 3.9 | 15.8 ± 3.7 | 15.8 ± 3.9 | 9.0 | 16.3 | 25.2 | 16.6 | 3.8 | ||
| Chao1 | 301.3 ± 81.9 | 278 ± 82.1 | 301.3 ± 81.9 | 262.7 ± 110.6 | 285 ± 69.7 | 162.3 | 272.1 | 479.5 | 291.4 | 81.9 | ||
| Goods_coverage | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | ||
| Shannon | 4.6 ± 0.8 | 4.2 ± 0.9 | 4.6 ± 0.8 | 4.2 ± 0.8 | 4.2 ± 1 | 2.7 | 4.6 | 5.7 | 4.4 | 0.9 | ||
| Simpson | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.1 | ||
| Comparison among 75 ages and younger subgroup | ||||||||||||
| Two Categorical GLU group | Three Categorical GLU group | Total ( | ||||||||||
| GLU normal ( | GLU abnormal ( | NGR ( | IFG ( | DM ( | min | median | max | mean | sd | |||
| PD_whole_tree | 16 ± 4 | 16.4 ± 5.1 | 16 ± 4 | 16.1 ± 3.6 | 16.6 ± 6.1 | 9.9 | 15.6 | 30.7 | 16.2 | 4.5 | ||
| Chao1 | 284.8 ± 83.3 | 290.6 ± 106.7 | 284.8 ± 83.3 | 284.6 ± 87.3 | 295.4 ± 122 | 154.5 | 274.2 | 576.5 | 287.2 | 93.0 | ||
| Goods_coverage | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | ||
| Shannon | 4.4 ± 0.7 | 4.5 ± 0.8 | 4.4 ± 0.7 | 4.5 ± 0.5 | 4.5 ± 1 | 2.7 | 4.5 | 6.1 | 4.4 | 0.8 | ||
| Simpson | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.9 ± 0 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.1 | ||
Fig. 3Comparison the alpha diversity between different groups of glucose levels and age levels
Adonis analysis on the association of microbiota and different glucose levels based on Bray-Curtis distance matrixes
| GLU normal VS GLU high | NGR VS IGF VS DM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Aged 75 and younger group | 0.01955 | 0.117 | 0.03661 | 0.091 |
Boldface indicate P< 0.05
Fig. 4Comparison of inter-individual variation within group among samples from different groups of glucose levels stratified by age
Differences in stool microbiota taxon between different groups of glucose levels
| Overall comparison | ||||||||||||
| Taxon | GLU normal (Mean ± SD) | GLU high (Mean ± SD) | Wilcoxon rank-sum test | Discriminatory power | GLU normal (Mean ± SD) | DM (Mean ± SD) | Wilcoxon rank-sum test | Discriminatory power | ||||
| AUC value | sig. | AUC value | sig. | |||||||||
| p__Actinobacteria | 0.0253 ± 0.0363 | 0.0761 ± 0.0921 | 0.0003 | 0.018 | 0.6848 | 0.0004 | 0.0253 ± 0.0363 | 0.0846 ± 0.088 | 0 | 0.0028 | 0.7463 | 0.0003 |
| p__Actinobacteria.c__Actinobacteria | 0.0253 ± 0.0363 | 0.0761 ± 0.0921 | 0.0003 | 0.018 | 0.6848 | 0.0004 | 0.0253 ± 0.0363 | 0.0846 ± 0.088 | 0 | 0.0028 | 0.7463 | 0.0003 |
| p__Actinobacteria.c__Actinobacteria.o__Bifidobacteriales | 0.0161 ± 0.026 | 0.0631 ± 0.0815 | 0.0001 | 0.0099 | 0.6976 | 0.0003 | 0.0161 ± 0.026 | 0.0714 ± 0.0855 | 0 | 0.0028 | 0.7475 | 0.0004 |
| p__Actinobacteria.c__Actinobacteria.o__Bifidobacteriales.f__Bifidobacteriaceae | 0.0161 ± 0.026 | 0.0631 ± 0.0815 | 0.0001 | 0.0099 | 0.6976 | 0.0003 | 0.0161 ± 0.026 | 0.0714 ± 0.0855 | 0 | 0.0028 | 0.7475 | 0.0004 |
| p__Actinobacteria.c__Actinobacteria.o__Bifidobacteriales.f__Bifidobacteriaceae.g__Bifidobacterium | 0.0161 ± 0.026 | 0.062 ± 0.0803 | 0.0001 | 0.0099 | 0.6969 | 0.0003 | 0.0161 ± 0.026 | 0.0696 ± 0.084 | 0 | 0.0028 | 0.7457 | 0.0004 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Bacilli | 0.0033 ± 0.0069 | 0.0357 ± 0.0942 | 0.0008 | 0.042 | 0.6714 | 0.0021 | 0.0033 ± 0.0069 | 0.0315 ± 0.0799 | 0.001 | 0.0476 | 0.6981 | 0.0028 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Bacilli.o__Lactobacillales | 0.0032 ± 0.0069 | 0.0353 ± 0.0923 | 0.0009 | 0.0444 | 0.669 | 0.0021 | 0.0032 ± 0.0069 | 0.0315 ± 0.0799 | 0.001 | 0.0476 | 0.6985 | 0.0027 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Bacilli.o__Lactobacillales.f__Lactobacillaceae | 0.0011 ± 0.0053 | 0.0271 ± 0.0812 | 0 | 0.0099 | 0.7064 | 0.0155 | 0.0011 ± 0.0053 | 0.0238 ± 0.0752 | 0 | 0.0028 | 0.7479 | 0.0268 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Bacilli.o__Lactobacillales.f__Lactobacillaceae.g__Lactobacillus | 0.0011 ± 0.0053 | 0.0271 ± 0.0812 | 0 | 0.0099 | 0.7064 | 0.0155 | 0.0011 ± 0.0053 | 0.0238 ± 0.0752 | 0 | 0.0028 | 0.7479 | 0.0268 |
| Comparison among 76 ages and older subgroup | ||||||||||||
| Taxon | GLU normal (Mean ± SD) | GLU high (Mean ± SD) | Wilcoxon rank-sum test | Discriminatory power | GLU normal (Mean ± SD) | DM (Mean ± SD) | Wilcoxon rank-sum test | Discriminatory power | ||||
| AUC value | sig. | AUC value | sig. | |||||||||
| p__Actinobacteria | 0.0293 ± 0.0363 | 0.1322 ± 0.0917 | 0 | 0.0004 | 0.8725 | 0.0011 | 0.0293 ± 0.0363 | 0.1581 ± 0.0934 | 0 | 0.0002 | 0.926 | 0.0017 |
| p__Actinobacteria.c__Actinobacteria | 0.0293 ± 0.0363 | 0.1322 ± 0.0917 | 0 | 0.0004 | 0.8725 | 0.0011 | 0.0293 ± 0.0363 | 0.1581 ± 0.0934 | 0 | 0.0002 | 0.926 | 0.0017 |
| p__Actinobacteria.c__Actinobacteria.o__Bifidobacteriales | 0.0231 ± 0.0348 | 0.1169 ± 0.0907 | 0 | 0.0004 | 0.8725 | 0.0015 | 0.0231 ± 0.0348 | 0.1384 ± 0.0959 | 0 | 0.0002 | 0.9201 | 0.0023 |
| p__Actinobacteria.c__Actinobacteria.o__Bifidobacteriales.f__Bifidobacteriaceae | 0.0231 ± 0.0348 | 0.1169 ± 0.0907 | 0 | 0.0004 | 0.8725 | 0.0015 | 0.0231 ± 0.0348 | 0.1384 ± 0.0959 | 0 | 0.0002 | 0.9201 | 0.0023 |
| p__Actinobacteria.c__Actinobacteria.o__Bifidobacteriales.f__Bifidobacteriaceae.g__Bifidobacterium | 0.0231 ± 0.0348 | 0.1164 ± 0.09 | 0 | 0.0004 | 0.8745 | 0.0015 | 0.0231 ± 0.0348 | 0.1378 ± 0.0951 | 0 | 0.0002 | 0.9201 | 0.0022 |
| p__Bacteroidetes.c__Bacteroidia.o__Bacteroidales.f__Bacteroidaceae | 0.29 ± 0.1638 | 0.1333 ± 0.1286 | 0.0015 | 0.0464 | 0.7733 | 0.0052 | 0.29 ± 0.1638 | 0.1249 ± 0.1186 | 0.0028 | 0.0867 | 0.7899 | 0.0094 |
| p__Bacteroidetes.c__Bacteroidia.o__Bacteroidales.f__Bacteroidaceae.g__Bacteroides | 0.29 ± 0.1638 | 0.1333 ± 0.1286 | 0.0015 | 0.0464 | 0.7733 | 0.0052 | 0.29 ± 0.1638 | 0.1249 ± 0.1186 | 0.0028 | 0.0867 | 0.7899 | 0.0094 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Bacilli | 0.0032 ± 0.0053 | 0.0822 ± 0.1438 | 0.0001 | 0.0042 | 0.834 | 0.0047 | 0.0032 ± 0.0053 | 0.068 ± 0.1172 | 0.0002 | 0.0091 | 0.8491 | 0.0048 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Bacilli.o__Lactobacillales | 0.0032 ± 0.0053 | 0.0811 ± 0.1406 | 0.0001 | 0.0042 | 0.832 | 0.0047 | 0.0032 ± 0.0053 | 0.0679 ± 0.1171 | 0.0002 | 0.0091 | 0.8491 | 0.0048 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Bacilli.o__Lactobacillales.f__Lactobacillaceae | 0.0012 ± 0.0037 | 0.0647 ± 0.1244 | 0 | 0.0001 | 0.9069 | 0.0259 | 0.0012 ± 0.0037 | 0.0574 ± 0.1116 | 0 | 0.0002 | 0.9201 | 0.0262 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Bacilli.o__Lactobacillales.f__Lactobacillaceae.g__Lactobacillus | 0.0012 ± 0.0037 | 0.0647 ± 0.1244 | 0 | 0.0001 | 0.9069 | 0.0259 | 0.0012 ± 0.0037 | 0.0574 ± 0.1116 | 0 | 0.0002 | 0.9201 | 0.0262 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Clostridia.o__Clostridiales.f__Lachnospiraceae | 0.233 ± 0.12 | 0.1087 ± 0.0799 | 0.0003 | 0.0153 | 0.8057 | 0.0031 | 0.233 ± 0.12 | 0.0925 ± 0.0574 | 0.0002 | 0.0091 | 0.855 | 0.0048 |
| p__Firmicutes.c__Clostridia.o__Clostridiales.f__Lachnospiraceae.g__Lachnospiracea_incertae_sedis | 0.0305 ± 0.026 | 0.0107 ± 0.0099 | 0.0014 | 0.0464 | 0.7753 | 0.0147 | 0.0305 ± 0.026 | 0.01 ± 0.0094 | 0.0028 | 0.0867 | 0.7899 | 0.0303 |