| Literature DB >> 31575902 |
Shalome A Bassett1,2, Wayne Young1,2,3, Karl Fraser1,2,3, Julie E Dalziel4,5, Jim Webster6, Leigh Ryan1, Patrick Fitzgerald7, Catherine Stanton8,9, Timothy G Dinan7,8, John F Cryan7,10, Gerard Clarke7,8, Niall Hyland7,11, Nicole C Roy1,2,3.
Abstract
Stress negatively impacts gut and brain health. Individual differences in response to stress have been linked to genetic and environmental factors and more recently, a role for the gut microbiota in the regulation of stress-related changes has been demonstrated. However, the mechanisms by which these factors influence each other are poorly understood, and there are currently no established robust biomarkers of stress susceptibility. To determine the metabolic and microbial signatures underpinning physiological stress responses, we compared stress-sensitive Wistar Kyoto (WKY) rats to the normo-anxious Sprague Dawley (SD) strain. Here we report that acute stress-induced strain-specific changes in brain lipid metabolites were a prominent feature in WKY rats. The relative abundance of Lactococcus correlated with the relative proportions of many brain lipids. In contrast, plasma lipids were significantly elevated in response to stress in SD rats, but not in WKY rats. Supporting these findings, we found that the greatest difference between the SD and WKY microbiomes were the predicted relative abundance of microbial genes involved in lipid and energy metabolism. Our results provide potential insights for developing novel biomarkers of stress vulnerability, some of which appear genotype specific.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31575902 PMCID: PMC6773725 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-50593-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Number of features (and annotated components) from each analytical stream used for statistical analysis.
| Analysis mode | Plasma | Brain |
|---|---|---|
| Polar positive | 657 (22) | 496 (22) |
| Polar negative | 552 (16) | 310 (21) |
| Lipid positive | 1017 (143) | 624 (166) |
| Lipid negative | 821 (40) | 621 (96) |
Figure 1Score plots of OPLS-DA models for plasma (A) and brain (B) polar metabolites, and plasma (C) and brain (D) lipids. SD_C = Sprague Dawley (Control), SD_S = Sprague Dawley (Stressed), WK_C = Wistar Kyoto (Control), WK_S = Wistar Kyoto (Stressed).
Brain metabolites significantly differing in abundance between stressed and control animals. S = stressed; C = control; FDR = false discovery rate; where FDR < 0.1 for HILIC (polar) and FDR < 0.05 for lipid analysis were considered significant.
| Rat Stain | Metabolite | FDR | Log2FC (T/NT) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Creatine | 0.017 | 0.682 | 1.7732 |
| L-glutamine | 0.008 | 0.457 | 0.1753 | ||
| Tyrosine | 0.006 | 0.457 | 0.2034 | ||
| DHA (fragment) | 0.009 | 0.457 | −0.4265 | ||
|
|
| Creatine | 0.0005 | 0.222 | 0.288 |
|
| SM(d34:1) | 0.021 | 0.063 | 0.267 | |
| SM(d36:1) | 0.004 | 0.063 | 0.015 | ||
| SM(d38:1) | 0.001 | 0.063 | 0.122 | ||
| SM(d40:0) | 0.058 | 0.241 | 0.258 | ||
| SM(d42:0) | 0.019 | 0.241 | 0.019 | ||
| SM(d42:2) | 0.018 | 0.063 | 0.041 | ||
| CerG1(d40:2) | 0.017 | 0.241 | −0.060 | ||
| CerG1(d41:0) | 0.016 | 0.241 | 0.113 | ||
| CerG1(d42:2) | 0.017 | 0.241 | −0.100 | ||
| LPE(16:0) | 0.076 | 0.122 | −0.233 | ||
| LPE(20:1) | 0.084 | 0.132 | −0.072 | ||
| LPC(18:0) | 0.016 | 0.241 | −0.335 | ||
| DG(34:1) | 0.036 | 0.241 | −0.038 | ||
| DG(36:1) | 0.020 | 0.241 | −0.053 | ||
| DG(36:2) | 0.061 | 0.241 | −0.118 | ||
| DG(38:6) | 0.017 | 0.241 | −0.084 | ||
| PI(40:6) | 0.047 | 0.241 | 0.318 | ||
| PE(34:1) | 0.018 | 0.063 | −0.128 | ||
| PE(36:1) | 0.015 | 0.063 | −0.178 | ||
| PE(36:2) | 0.008 | 0.063 | −0.033 | ||
| PE(36:3) | 0.003 | 0.063 | −0.253 | ||
| PE(38:1) | 0.011 | 0.063 | −0.171 | ||
| PE(38:2) | 0.018 | 0.063 | −0.162 | ||
| PE(38:5) | 0.028 | 0.067 | −0.165 | ||
| PE(38:6) | 0.017 | 0.063 | −0.152 | ||
| PE(39:0) | 0.019 | 0.063 | −0.045 | ||
| PE(40:6) | 0.032 | 0.072 | −0.198 | ||
| PE(40:8) | 0.041 | 0.083 | −0.678 | ||
| PE(42:1) | 0.011 | 0.063 | −0.029 | ||
| PE(42:2) | 0.018 | 0.063 | −0.006 | ||
| PE(42:10) | 0.018 | 0.063 | −0.242 | ||
| PE(44:1) | 0.012 | 0.063 | −0.029 | ||
| PE(44:2) | 0.019 | 0.063 | −0.075 | ||
| PE(44:10) | 0.012 | 0.063 | −0.116 | ||
| PS(36:1) | 0.034 | 0.075 | −0.126 | ||
| PS(36:2) | 0.020 | 0.063 | −0.126 | ||
| PS(38:1) | 0.030 | 0.068 | −0.010 | ||
| PS(38:3) | 0.035 | 0.075 | −0.123 | ||
| PS(40:2) | 0.035 | 0.075 | −0.056 | ||
| PS(41:5) | 0.017 | 0.063 | −0.245 | ||
| PS(43:5) | 0.012 | 0.063 | −0.169 | ||
| PS(43:6) | 0.012 | 0.063 | −0.159 | ||
| PS(44:10) | 0.023 | 0.063 | −0.116 | ||
| PC(38:1) | 0.055 | 0.241 | −0.091 | ||
| PC(40:2) | 0.049 | 0.241 | −0.045 | ||
| PC(42:2) | 0.064 | 0.241 | −0.093 | ||
| PC(42:7) | 0.032 | 0.241 | −0.127 | ||
| PC(44:2) | 0.058 | 0.241 | −0.063 | ||
| PC(44:12) | 0.022 | 0.241 | −0.069 | ||
Plasma metabolites significantly differing in abundance between stressed and control animals.
| Rat strain | Metabolite | FDR | Log2 FC (S/C) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Glutamic acid | 0.0045 | 0.245 | −0.710 |
| 3-Methoxytyrosine | 0.0004 | 0.185 | −0.674 | ||
| Tyrosine | 0.003 | 0.185 | 0.450 | ||
| GABA | 0.001 | 0.206 | −0.777 | ||
|
| TG(62:4) | 0.0008 | 0.101 | 1.077 | |
| TG(58:1) | 0.001 | 0.101 | 1.203 | ||
| TG(60:2) | 0.0015 | 0.101 | 1.194 | ||
| TG(55:0) | 0.0019 | 0.108 | 1.039 | ||
| TG(59:2) | 0.0025 | 0.108 | 1.178 | ||
| TG(64:3) | 0.0028 | 0.108 | 1.092 | ||
| TG(57:1) | 0.0028 | 0.108 | 1.181 | ||
| TG(60:4) | 0.0039 | 0.141 | 0.900 | ||
| Palmitic acid | 0.0004 | 0.231 | 0.673 | ||
| Vaccenic acid | 0.0012 | 0.231 | 0.850 | ||
| Linoleic acid | 0.0017 | 0.231 | 0.781 | ||
|
|
| Glutamic acid | 1.94e-4 | 0.0191 | −0.861 |
| 3-Methoxytyrosine | 1.86e-7 | 9.17e-5 | −0.870 | ||
| GABA | 0.0004 | 0.032 | −0.801 | ||
| Cytosine | 0.0023 | 0.096 | −0.264 | ||
| Methionine DL- | 0.0032 | 0.105 | 0.159 | ||
S = stressed; C = control; FDR = false discovery rate; where FDR < 0.1 for HILIC (polar) and FDR < 0.05 for lipid analysis were considered significant.
Figure 2Caecal Microbiota. (A) PCoA biplot of unweighted Unifrac phylogenetic distances of the caecal communities in SD and WKY rats. Grey circles show the nine most relatively abundant genera where diameter is proportional to the mean relative abundance across all samples, with distance from origin (X0, Y0, Z0) indicating contribution to the variation along the principal components. (B) Bar plot of the mean relative abundance of the 25 most prevalent bacterial genera across all samples. Codes in parentheses indicate phylum; Ve = Verrucomicrobia, Pr = Proteobacteria, Fi = Firmicutes, Ba = Bacteroidetes, Un = Unclassified.
Figure 3Heat map showing hierarchical clustering of predicted metagenome KEGG level 2 functions in the caecal microbiome of SD and WKY rats exposed to acute stress or non-stressed controls. The colour ribbon beneath the upper dendrogram indicates rat strain; WKY (red), SD (green).
Figure 4Network analysis showing canonical correlations between taxa and brain lipids for combined WKY and SD rat data. Positive correlations are shown in red and negative correlations in blue.