| Literature DB >> 32708278 |
Francesca Gallè1, Federica Valeriani2, Maria Sofia Cattaruzza3, Gianluca Gianfranceschi2, Renato Liguori4, Martina Antinozzi3, Beatriz Mederer5, Giorgio Liguori1, Vincenzo Romano Spica2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This cross-sectional study aimed to explore the microbial composition of the gut and its possible association with the Mediterranean diet (MD) after adjusting for demographic and anthropometric characteristics in a sample of healthy young Italian adults.Entities:
Keywords: Bacteroidetes; Firmicutes; Mediterranean diet; body mass index; gut microbiome; physical activity
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32708278 PMCID: PMC7401267 DOI: 10.3390/nu12072164
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1CONSORT diagram for the sample generation.
Main characteristics of the total samples.
| Participants | |
|---|---|
| Age | |
| mean value ± SD (range) | 22.5 ± 2.9 (18–36) |
| Gender | |
|
| |
| males | 68 (48.6) |
| females | 72 (51.4) |
| BMI kg/m2 | |
| mean value ± SD (range) | 22.4 ± 2.8 (15.2–33.8) |
| BMI category | |
|
| |
| under weight | 7 (5.0) |
| normal weight | 106 (75.7) |
| over weight | 24 (17.1) |
| obese | 3 (2.2) |
| MD adherence score | |
| mean value ± SD (median; range) | 5.3 ± 1.6 (5; 2–9) |
| MD adherence level | |
|
| |
| ≤median | 73 (52.1) |
| >median | 67 (47.9) |
| Habitual PA | |
| MET-minutes/week | |
| mean value ± SD (range) | 3006.2 ± 2973.6 (148–21,090) |
| PA level | |
|
| |
| low | 17 (12.1) |
| moderate | 57 (40.7) |
| high | 66 (47.1) |
BMI, Body Mass Index, PA, physical activity, MD, Mediterranean diet, and MET, metabolic equivalent.
Figure 2Box plot showing the relative abundance for the dominant phyla determined by the Global Alignment Sequence Taxonomy assignments. The boundary of the box closest to zero indicates the 25th percentile, the line within the box represents the median, and the boundary of the box farthest from zero indicates the 75th percentile. Whiskers above and below the box indicate the 10th and 90th percentiles. The arithmetic mean is indicated by x. Phyla less than 1% of the sequences were not reported.
Comparisons of the Shannon index, Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes (F/B) ratio of the BMI, MD score, and PA level groups, with corresponding p-values.
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||
| Shannon Index | 2.5 ± 0.2 | 2.5 ± 0.2 | 0.77 | ||
| Firmicutes | 58.9 ± 13.1 | 61.1 ± 8.7 | 0.47 | ||
| Bacteroidetes | 33.4 ± 10.4 | 31.8 ± 8.9 | 0.54 | ||
| F/B ratio | 2.1 ± 1.1 | 2.2 ± 1.3 | 0.56 | ||
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
| |||
| Shannon Index | 2.6 ± 0.2 | 2.6 ± 0.2 | 0.96 | ||
| Firmicutes | 58.9 ± 13.0 | 59.8 ± 11.9 | 0.68 | ||
| Bacteroidetes | 33.6 ± 11.1 | 32.6 ± 9.1 | 0.58 | ||
| F/B ratio | 2.1 ± 1.2 | 2.1 ± 1.0 | 0.94 | ||
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
| |||
| Shannon Index | 2.6 ± 0.1 | 2.6 ± 0.2 | 2.5 ± 0.2 | 0.46 | |
| Firmicutes | 58.3 ± 16.0 | 58.1 ± 12.0 | 60.6 ± 11.8 | 0.55 | |
| Bacteroidetes | 32.7 ± 14.8 | 34.6 ± 9.4 | 31.9 ± 9.4 | 0.38 | |
| F/B ratio | 2.3 ± 1.5 | 1.9 ± 0.9 | 2.2 ± 1.1 | 0.27 | |
a Student’s t-test and b ANOVA.
Figure 3Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) of the weighted Bray–Curtis for 16S rDNA data related to (a) the Mediterranean diet (MD) score: 1: low adherence (score ranging from 0 to 5) and 2: higher adherence to MD (score > 5) and (b) habitual physical activity (PA) level: 1: low, 2: moderate, and 3: high. Percentages on the axes represent the proportion of the variation explained by the 2 first components of the PCoA.
Comparisons of the Shannon Index, Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and F/B ratio of the subgroups categorized on the basis of MD adherence and PA levels, with corresponding p-values.
| Habitual PA Level | MD Adherence Score |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–5 | 6–9 | |||
| Shannon Index | low active | 2.6 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.2 | |
| moderately active | 2.6 ± 0.2 | 2.6 ± 0.2 | 0.47 | |
| highly active | 2.5 ± 0.2 | 2.6 ± 0.2 | ||
| Firmicutes | low active | 57.1 ± 17.1 | 63.8 ± 9.1 | |
| moderately active | 59.0 ± 11.5 | 56.6 ± 12.9 | 0.51 | |
| highly active | 59.7 ± 12.6 | 61.1 ± 11.5 | ||
| Bacteroidetes | low active | 32.8 ± 16.1 | 31.8 ± 8.4 | |
| moderately active | 33.9 ± 9.1 | 35.6 ± 9.9 | 0.61 | |
| highly active | 33.4 ± 10.6 | 31.1 ± 8.6 | ||
| F/B ratio | low active | 2.3 ± 1.6 | 2.1 ± 0.7 | |
| moderately active | 1.9 ± 1.0 | 1.8 ± 0.9 | 0.81 | |
| highly active | 2.1 ± 1.3 | 2.1 ± 1.0 | ||
Figure 4Heatmap and clustering of individual gut microbiota samples for taxonomic composition (genus level) in relation to the MD adherence. Clustering was based on Pearson distances and Ward’s linkage method. Only the genera above 2% abundance in at least one sample are depicted.
Relative abundance of significantly different genera in BMI, MD score, and PA groups.
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
| |||
|
| 0.23 ± 0.38 | 0.38 ± 1.30 | 0.02 | |
|
| 0.12 ± 0.29 | 0.32 ± 0.87 | 0.001 | |
|
| 1.66 ± 2.08 | 4.02 ± 6.69 | 0.001 | |
|
| 1.16 ± 2.29 | 2.44 ± 4.25 | 0.001 | |
|
| 0.27 ± 0.74 | 0.68 ± 2.43 | 0.007 | |
|
| 0.19 ± 0.31 | 0.27 ± 0.50 | 0.02 | |
|
| 0.35 ± 0.76 | 1.07 ± 2.34 | 0.001 | |
|
| 0.71 ± 2.19 | 1.61 ± 3.42 | 0.01 | |
|
| 0.19 ± 0.30 | 0.08 ± 0.13 | 0.01 | |
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
| ||
|
| 0.37 ± 1.20 | 0.75 ± 2.28 | 0.02 | |
|
| 2.18 ± 1.90 | 1.73 ± 1.25 | 0.03 | |
|
| 0.29 ± 0.52 | 1.26 ± 4.52 | 0.002 | |
|
| 9.51 ± 6.69 | 7.63 ± 4.90 | 0.002 | |
|
| 0.22 ± 0.53 | 0.52 ± 1.30 | 0.01 | |
|
| 0.09 ± 0.05 | 0.14 ± 0.17 | 0.001 | |
|
| 0.23 ± 0.38 | 0.13 ± 0.22 | 0.008 | |
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 0.55 ± 1.08 1 | 0.12 ± 0.24 | 0.11 ± 0.37 | 0.002 |
|
| 1.30 ± 3.20 1 | 0.25 ± 0.41 | 0.17 ± 0.25 | 0.001 |
|
| 1.53 ± 2.69 1 | 0.40 ± 0.80 | 0.24 ± 0.58 | 0.001 |
|
| 0.32 ± 0.49 2 | 0.21 ± 0.29 | 0.12 ± 0.25 | 0.037 |
a Student’s t-test and b ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test: 1 significantly different from moderate and high PA groups and 2 significantly different from the high PA group.