| Literature DB >> 32334588 |
Liang Bai1, Mengxue Gao1, Xiaoming Cheng1, Guangbo Kang1, Xiaocang Cao2, He Huang3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Entities:
Keywords: Butyric acid; Engineered bacteria; Fecal metabolomics; High-fat diet; Obesity
Year: 2020 PMID: 32334588 PMCID: PMC7183672 DOI: 10.1186/s12934-020-01350-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microb Cell Fact ISSN: 1475-2859 Impact factor: 5.328
Fig. 1In vitro culture of B. subtilis SCK6 and BsS-RS06550. a BA production of SCK6 and BsS-RS06550. b Growth curves of B. subtilis SCK6 and BsS-RS06550 at OD600. Growth curve parameters, k is the maximum possible population size in particular environment or the carrying capacity; r is the intrinsic growth rate of the population and t-gen is doubling time or generation time of a population. c SCFAs production in microbial community co-culture with SCK6 and BsS-RS06550, respectively, including acetic acid (AA), propanoic acid (PA), and butyric acid (BA). Data are represented as mean ± SD, n = 5 repeats for (a, c). *p value < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001
Fig. 2Effects of BsS-RS06550 on physiology and lipid metabolism in blood. a Weekly body weight, b glucose tolerance test following intervention. c Insulin tests following intervention, d weekly food intake, lipid metabolism in blood, TC (e), TG (f), HDL-C (g) and LDL-C (h). Data represented as mean ± SD, n = 8 mice/group for (a–h). *p value < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001
Fig. 3Effects of BsS-RS06550 on HFD-induced hepatic steatosis. a Serum TBA level, b serum ALT level, c serum AST level, d hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and oil red O staining of and livers (×200). Data represented as mean ± SD, and n = 8 mice/group for (a–c). *p value < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001
Fig. 4Untargeted fecal metabolomics analysis. a Hierarchical clustering of differentially metabolites in all groups. b Tree analysis of samples. c PCA score plots of fecal metabolic profiles, normal diet group (C), a high-fat diet group (HFD), HFD + Bacillus subtilis SCK6 group (HS) and HFD + BsS-RE06550 (HE). d OPLS-DA score plots of fecal metabolic profiling of C, HFD, HS and HE
Significance metabolites in fecal samples of HFD, HS and HE
| Identification | Pathway | Content level | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Methionine metabolism | HFD > HE | 9.14 ± 0.151 vs 8.84 ± 0.236* | |
| Spermine | Glutathione metabolism | HFD > HE | 7.90 ± 0.254 vs 7.51 ± 0.228** |
| Pyroglutamic acid | Glutathione metabolism | HFD > HE | 7.61 ± 0.164 vs 7.37 ± 0.200** |
| HFD > HE | 7.39 ± 0.219 vs 7.18 ± 0.272* | ||
| Methionine metabolism | HFD > HE | 6.95 ± 0.168 vs 6.32 ± 0.4928* | |
| Tyrosine metabolism | HFD < HE | 6.73 ± 0.066 vs 6.99 ± 0.222** | |
| Homogentisic acid | Tyrosine metabolism | HFD < HE | 5.00 ± 0.350 vs 5.94 ± 0.320*** |
| Phenylalanine, tyrosine and tryptophan biosynthesis | HFD > HE HFD > HS | 7.55 ± 0.108 vs 7.33 ± 0.122** 7.55 ± 0.108 vs 7.29 ± 0.075## | |
| Phenylalanine metabolism | HFD > HE | 9.81 ± 0.108 vs 9.59 ± 0.251* | |
| Deoxycholic acid | Secondary bile acid biosynthesis | HFD > HE | 6.87 ± 0.117 vs 6.72 ± 0.118* |
| Pentadecanoic acid | HFD < HE | 7.48 ± 0.124 vs 7.81 ± 0.102*** | |
| Guanine | Purine metabolism | HFD > HE | 8.27 ± 0.216 vs 7.97 ± 0.469* |
| Adenine | Purine metabolism | HFD > HE | 8.97 ± 0.110 vs 8.88 ± 0.114** |
| Deoxyguanosine | Purine metabolism | HFD > HE | 7.86 ± 0.264 vs 7.64 ± 0.416* |
| Dihydrouracil | Pyrimidine metabolism | HFD > HE | 8.79 ± 0.111 vs 8.59 ± 0.263** |
| 5-Methyltetrahydrofolate | One carbon pool by folate, carbon fixation pathways in prokaryotes | HFD > HE | 5.78 ± 0.075 vs 5.38 ± 0.108** |
*HFD vs HE; #HFD vs HS. */#p value < 0.05, **/##p < 0.01 and ***/###p < 001
Fig. 5Box plots of relative abundance of significance metabolites in glutathione, methionine, tyrosine, phenylalanine metabolism, and C (control), HFD (high-fat diet), HFD + Bacillus subtilis SCK6 group (HS) and HFD + BsS-RS06550 (HE) groups (n = 8 for each group). Normalizing the intensity data with log function conversion (based on 10)
Fig. 6Box plots of relative abundance of significance metabolites in purine metabolism and secondary bile acid biosynthesis, and C (control), HFD (high-fat diet), HFD + Bacillus subtilis SCK6 group (HS) and HFD + BsS-RS06550 (HE) groups (n = 8 for each group). Normalizing the intensity data with log function conversion (based on 10)
Fig. 7Schematic diagram of proposed metabolic pathways in all fecal samples. Red and green represent up- and downregulated metabolites, respectively