| Literature DB >> 32168729 |
Hristo Todorov1,2, Bettina Kollar3, Franziska Bayer3, Inês Brandão3,4, Amrit Mann3, Julia Mohr3, Giulia Pontarollo3, Henning Formes3, Roland Stauber5, Jens M Kittner6, Kristina Endres7, Bernhard Watzer8, Wolfgang Andreas Nockher9, Felix Sommer10, Susanne Gerber1, Christoph Reinhardt3,11.
Abstract
α-Linolenic acid (ALA) is well-known for its anti-inflammatory activity. In contrast, the influence of an ALA-rich diet on intestinal microbiota composition and its impact on small intestine morphology are not fully understood. In the current study, we kept adult C57BL/6J mice for 4 weeks on an ALA-rich or control diet. Characterization of the microbial composition of the small intestine revealed that the ALA diet was associated with an enrichment in Prevotella and Parabacteroides. In contrast, taxa belonging to the Firmicutes phylum, including Lactobacillus, Clostridium cluster XIVa, Lachnospiraceae and Streptococcus, had significantly lower abundance compared to control diet. Metagenome prediction indicated an enrichment in functional pathways such as bacterial secretion system in the ALA group, whereas the two-component system and ALA metabolism pathways were downregulated. We also observed increased levels of ALA and its metabolites eicosapentanoic and docosahexanoic acid, but reduced levels of arachidonic acid in the intestinal tissue of ALA-fed mice. Furthermore, intestinal morphology in the ALA group was characterized by elongated villus structures with increased counts of epithelial cells and reduced epithelial proliferation rate. Interestingly, the ALA diet reduced relative goblet and Paneth cell counts. Of note, high-fat Western-type diet feeding resulted in a comparable adaptation of the small intestine. Collectively, our study demonstrates the impact of ALA on the gut microbiome and reveals the nutritional regulation of gut morphology.Entities:
Keywords: Paneth cells; epithelial renewal; goblet cells; microbiota; villus morphology; α-linolenic acid
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32168729 PMCID: PMC7146139 DOI: 10.3390/nu12030732
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Composition and fatty acid profile of the standard Altromin 1814 laboratory chow and ALA-rich diet.
|
|
|
|
| Proteins | 17.61% | ~14.1% |
| Fat | 5.1% | ~24% |
| Fiber | 4.05% | ~3.24% |
| Disaccharides | 11.1% | ~8.88% |
| Polysaccharides | 47.2% | ~37.76% |
|
|
|
|
| Palmitic acid C-16:0 | 0.36% | 4.1% |
| Stearic acid C-18:0 | 0.35% | 5.55% |
| Oleic acid C-18:1 cis | 0.93% | 1.61% |
| Linoleic acid C-18:2 cis | 3.3%% | 2.96% |
|
| 0.03% | 9.27% |
| γ-Linolenic acid C18:3 n6 | 0.0002% | 0.05% |
| Arachidic acid C-20:0 | 0.04% | 0.21% |
| Eicosanoic acid C-20:1 | 0.01% | 0.04% |
| Behenic acid C-22:0 | 0.04% | 0.04% |
| Erucic acid C-22:1 | 0.02% | 0.14% |
| Lignoceric acid C-24:0 | 0.01% | 0.02% |
| Metabolizable energy | 3518 kcal/kg | ~4582 kcal/kg |
Composition and fatty acid profile of the pro-inflammatory TD.88137 high-fat Western diet.
|
|
|
| Proteins | 17.3% |
| Carbohydrates | 48.5% |
| Fat | 21.2% |
|
|
|
| Saturated fat | 13.1% |
| C-16:1 | 0.323% |
| Oleic acid C-18:1 cis | 4.43% |
| C-18:1 isomers | 0.85% |
| Linoleic acid C-18:2 cis | 0.49% |
| C-18:2 isomers | 0.28% |
|
| 0.15% |
| Metabolizable energy | 4500 kcal/kg |
Figure 1Schematic representation of measurements of intestinal morphology parameters. The vertical red lines correspond to mucosal thickness, blue lines indicate villus length, black lines indicate crypt depth and horizontal green lines demonstrate how villus spacing was determined.
Figure 2Microbial composition of the small intestine. (a) Bar plots show the relative abundance of bacterial phyla of individual animals in the control chow (CTR) or α-linolenic acid-rich diet group (ALA). (b) Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio of CTR compared to ALA animals. α-diversity was investigated by estimating (c) the observed richness or (d) the Shannon index. Bar plots show mean + standard deviation for each measure per group. β-diversity was visualized using Canonical analysis of principle coordinates (CAP) based on (e) the Bray–Curtis dissimilarity or (f) binary Jaccard distance. P-values for the constrained axis from CAP were obtained using permutational analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) with 999 permutations. Since the treatment variable has only two levels (CTR or ALA), CAP produced only one constrained multivariate dimension. The percentage of the total inertia captured by each multivariate dimension is shown in brackets on the plots.
Figure 3Univariate analysis of differentially abundant genera in the mid small intestine. (a) The plot shows the estimated log2 fold change (FC) of operational taxonomic unit (OTU) abundance in animals receiving an α-linolenic acid rich diet (ALA) relative to animals in the control chow group (CTR). The adjusted p-value for each FC is given as the negative decadic logarithm. More significant results appear as higher values on the y axis. Black dots indicate OTUs with non-significant FC whereas differentially abundant OTUs appear as colored dots. Negative FCs correspond to OTUs with a significantly reduced abundance in the ALA group compared to CTR animals. Positive FCs indicate OTUs with significantly increased abundance following ALA diet. Specific values for the log2 FC together with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) and the raw and adjusted p-value are shown in (b).
Figure 4PICRUSt prediction of Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) orthology pathways predicted to be significantly different between the control group and animals receiving ALA-rich diet. Bar plots show the average proportion of sequences, which were predicted to be associated with the respective pathway. Circles correspond to the difference in mean proportions together with the 95% confidence interval. Red circles show pathways, which were enriched in the ALA group. Groups were compared statistically with an unpaired t-test. ALA: α-linolenic acid; CTR: control.
Figure 5Impact of the ALA-rich diet on fatty acid composition of the mouse small intestine. Bar plots show mean values + standard error of the mean (SEM). n = 9 in control group, n =10 in ALA group for (a) ALA, (b) EPA, (c) DHA and (d) AA. n = 5 per group for (e) LA and (f) GLA. #### p < 0.0001, Mann-Whitney test; *** p < 0.001, * p < 0.05, unpaired t-test. ALA: α-linolenic acid; AA: arachidonic acid; CTR: control diet; DHA: docosahexanoic acid; EPA: eicosapentanoic acid; GLA: γ-linolenic acid; LA: linoleic acid.
Figure 6Impact of ALA-rich diet and Western-type high-fat diet (HFD) on villus morphology of the mid small intestine. Morphometric analysis of (a) mucosal thickness, (b) villus length, (c) crypt depth, and (d) villus spacing. Counts of (e) epithelial cells, (f) goblet cells, (g) Paneth cells. Based on Ki67 stained cells the proliferation rate was calculated (h). Bar plots show mean values + standard error of the mean (SEM). n = 6 in the CTR group, n = 6–7 in the ALA group and n = 7 in the HFD group. *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05, ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post-hoc test. ALA: α-linolenic acid; CTR: control diet; HFD: Western-type high-fat diet.
Figure 7Representative images of Periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) staining of goblet and Paneth cells under different dietary conditions. Panel (a) shows PAS-stained goblet cells indicated by black arrows/arrow heads. PAS-stained Paneth cells in intestinal crypts are indicated with black arrows in panel (b). ALA: α-linolenic acid-rich diet; CTR: control diet; HFD: Western-type high-fat diet.