Literature DB >> 33085024

Comparative methods for fecal sample storage to preserve gut microbial structure and function in an in vitro model of the human colon.

Charlotte Deschamps1, Elora Fournier1, Ophélie Uriot1, Frédérique Lajoie2, Cécile Verdier1, Sophie Comtet-Marre1, Muriel Thomas3, Nathalie Kapel4,5, Claire Cherbuy3, Monique Alric1, Mathieu Almeida6, Lucie Etienne-Mesmin1, Stéphanie Blanquet-Diot7.   

Abstract

In vitro gut models, such as the mucosal artificial colon (M-ARCOL), provide timely and cost-efficient alternatives to in vivo assays allowing mechanistic studies to better understand the role of human microbiome in health and disease. Using such models inoculated with human fecal samples may require a critical step of stool storage. The effects of preservation methods on microbial structure and function in in vitro gut models have been poorly investigated. This study aimed to assess the impact of three commonly used preserving methods, compared with fresh fecal samples used as a control, on the kinetics of lumen and mucus-associated microbiota colonization in the M-ARCOL model. Feces from two healthy donors were frozen 48 h at - 80 °C with or without cryoprotectant (10% glycerol) or lyophilized with maltodextrin and trehalose prior to inoculation of four parallel bioreactors (e.g., fresh stool, raw stool stored at - 80 °C, stool stored at - 80 °C with glycerol and lyophilized stool). Microbiota composition and diversity (qPCR and 16S metabarcoding) as well as metabolic activity (gases and short chain fatty acids) were monitored throughout the fermentation process (9 days). All the preservative treatments allowed the maintaining inside the M-ARCOL of a complex and functional microbiota, but considering stabilization time of microbial profiles and activities (and not technical constraints associated with the supply of frozen material), our results highlighted 48 h freezing at - 80 °C without cryoprotectant as the most efficient method. These results will help scientists to determine the most accurate method for fecal storage prior to inoculation of in vitro gut microbiome models. KEY POINTS: • In vitro ARCOL model reproduces luminal and mucosal human microbiome. • Short-term storage of fecal sample influences microbial stabilization and activity. • 48 h freezing at - 80°C: most efficient method to preserve microbial ecosystem. • Scientific and technical requirements: influencers of preservation method.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fecal sample; Human gut microbiota; In vitro M-ARCOL model; Preservation method

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33085024     DOI: 10.1007/s00253-020-10959-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol        ISSN: 0175-7598            Impact factor:   4.813


  47 in total

1.  Evaluation of an optimal preparation of human standardized fecal inocula for in vitro fermentation studies.

Authors:  Marisol Aguirre; Anat Eck; Marjorie E Koenen; Paul H M Savelkoul; Andries E Budding; Koen Venema
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 2.363

2.  Use of artificial digestive systems to investigate the biopharmaceutical factors influencing the survival of probiotic yeast during gastrointestinal transit in humans.

Authors:  Stéphanie Blanquet-Diot; Sylvain Denis; Sandrine Chalancon; Fehd Chaira; Jean-Michel Cardot; Monique Alric
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 4.200

3.  Improvement of phylum- and class-specific primers for real-time PCR quantification of bacterial taxa.

Authors:  Tristano Bacchetti De Gregoris; Nick Aldred; Anthony S Clare; J Grant Burgess
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2011-06-17       Impact factor: 2.363

4.  To pool or not to pool? Impact of the use of individual and pooled fecal samples for in vitro fermentation studies.

Authors:  Marisol Aguirre; Javier Ramiro-Garcia; Marjorie E Koenen; Koen Venema
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 2.363

5.  Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2.

Authors:  Evan Bolyen; Jai Ram Rideout; Matthew R Dillon; Nicholas A Bokulich; Christian C Abnet; Gabriel A Al-Ghalith; Harriet Alexander; Eric J Alm; Manimozhiyan Arumugam; Francesco Asnicar; Yang Bai; Jordan E Bisanz; Kyle Bittinger; Asker Brejnrod; Colin J Brislawn; C Titus Brown; Benjamin J Callahan; Andrés Mauricio Caraballo-Rodríguez; John Chase; Emily K Cope; Ricardo Da Silva; Christian Diener; Pieter C Dorrestein; Gavin M Douglas; Daniel M Durall; Claire Duvallet; Christian F Edwardson; Madeleine Ernst; Mehrbod Estaki; Jennifer Fouquier; Julia M Gauglitz; Sean M Gibbons; Deanna L Gibson; Antonio Gonzalez; Kestrel Gorlick; Jiarong Guo; Benjamin Hillmann; Susan Holmes; Hannes Holste; Curtis Huttenhower; Gavin A Huttley; Stefan Janssen; Alan K Jarmusch; Lingjing Jiang; Benjamin D Kaehler; Kyo Bin Kang; Christopher R Keefe; Paul Keim; Scott T Kelley; Dan Knights; Irina Koester; Tomasz Kosciolek; Jorden Kreps; Morgan G I Langille; Joslynn Lee; Ruth Ley; Yong-Xin Liu; Erikka Loftfield; Catherine Lozupone; Massoud Maher; Clarisse Marotz; Bryan D Martin; Daniel McDonald; Lauren J McIver; Alexey V Melnik; Jessica L Metcalf; Sydney C Morgan; Jamie T Morton; Ahmad Turan Naimey; Jose A Navas-Molina; Louis Felix Nothias; Stephanie B Orchanian; Talima Pearson; Samuel L Peoples; Daniel Petras; Mary Lai Preuss; Elmar Pruesse; Lasse Buur Rasmussen; Adam Rivers; Michael S Robeson; Patrick Rosenthal; Nicola Segata; Michael Shaffer; Arron Shiffer; Rashmi Sinha; Se Jin Song; John R Spear; Austin D Swafford; Luke R Thompson; Pedro J Torres; Pauline Trinh; Anupriya Tripathi; Peter J Turnbaugh; Sabah Ul-Hasan; Justin J J van der Hooft; Fernando Vargas; Yoshiki Vázquez-Baeza; Emily Vogtmann; Max von Hippel; William Walters; Yunhu Wan; Mingxun Wang; Jonathan Warren; Kyle C Weber; Charles H D Williamson; Amy D Willis; Zhenjiang Zech Xu; Jesse R Zaneveld; Yilong Zhang; Qiyun Zhu; Rob Knight; J Gregory Caporaso
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 6.  Physiological Role of Gut Microbiota for Maintaining Human Health.

Authors:  Akira Andoh
Journal:  Digestion       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 3.216

7.  Evaluation of sampling and storage procedures on preserving the community structure of stool microbiota: A simple at-home toilet-paper collection method.

Authors:  Kait F Al; Jordan E Bisanz; Gregory B Gloor; Gregor Reid; Jeremy P Burton
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 2.363

8.  Comparison of stool versus rectal swab samples and storage conditions on bacterial community profiles.

Authors:  Christine M Bassis; Nicholas M Moore; Karen Lolans; Anna M Seekatz; Robert A Weinstein; Vincent B Young; Mary K Hayden
Journal:  BMC Microbiol       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 3.605

9.  A Guide for Ex Vivo Handling and Storage of Stool Samples Intended for Fecal Microbiota Transplantation.

Authors:  Sebastian D Burz; Anne-Laure Abraham; Fernanda Fonseca; Olivier David; Audrey Chapron; Fabienne Béguet-Crespel; Stéphanie Cénard; Karine Le Roux; Orlane Patrascu; Florence Levenez; Carole Schwintner; Hervé M Blottière; Christel Béra-Maillet; Patricia Lepage; Joël Doré; Catherine Juste
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 10.  International consensus conference on stool banking for faecal microbiota transplantation in clinical practice.

Authors:  Giovanni Cammarota; Gianluca Ianiro; Colleen R Kelly; Benjamin H Mullish; Jessica R Allegretti; Zain Kassam; Lorenza Putignani; Monika Fischer; Josbert J Keller; Samuel Paul Costello; Harry Sokol; Patrizia Kump; Reetta Satokari; Stacy A Kahn; Dina Kao; Perttu Arkkila; Ed J Kuijper; Maria J Gt Vehreschild; Cristina Pintus; Loris Lopetuso; Luca Masucci; Franco Scaldaferri; E M Terveer; Max Nieuwdorp; Antonio López-Sanromán; Juozas Kupcinskas; Ailsa Hart; Herbert Tilg; Antonio Gasbarrini
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2019-09-28       Impact factor: 23.059

View more
  5 in total

1.  A child is not an adult: development of a new in vitro model of the toddler colon.

Authors:  Elora Fournier; Sylvain Denis; Alessandra Dominicis; Tom Van de Wiele; Monique Alric; Muriel Mercier-Bonin; Lucie Etienne-Mesmin; Stéphanie Blanquet-Diot
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2022-10-07       Impact factor: 5.560

2.  Role of mucus-bacteria interactions in Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) H10407 virulence and interplay with human microbiome.

Authors:  Lucie Etienne-Mesmin; Stéphanie Blanquet-Diot; Thomas Sauvaitre; Josefien Van Landuyt; Claude Durif; Charlène Roussel; Adeline Sivignon; Sandrine Chalancon; Ophélie Uriot; Florence Van Herreweghen; Tom Van de Wiele
Journal:  NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes       Date:  2022-10-20       Impact factor: 8.462

3.  Lentils and Yeast Fibers: A New Strategy to Mitigate Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) Strain H10407 Virulence?

Authors:  Thomas Sauvaitre; Florence Van Herreweghen; Karen Delbaere; Claude Durif; Josefien Van Landuyt; Khaled Fadhlaoui; Ségolène Huille; Frédérique Chaucheyras-Durand; Lucie Etienne-Mesmin; Stéphanie Blanquet-Diot; Tom Van de Wiele
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 6.706

4.  Effect of Intramuscularly Administered Oxytetracycline or Enrofloxacin on Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci, Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase- and Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae in Pigs.

Authors:  Elena González-Fandos; Alba Martínez-Laorden; Ana Abad-Fau; Eloisa Sevilla; Rosa Bolea; María Jesús Serrano; Olga Mitjana; Cristina Bonastre; Alicia Laborda; María Victoria Falceto; Rafael Pagán
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 2.752

5.  Effect of Freezing on Gut Microbiota Composition and Functionality for In Vitro Fermentation Experiments.

Authors:  Sergio Pérez-Burillo; Daniel Hinojosa-Nogueira; Beatriz Navajas-Porras; Telmo Blasco; Francesco Balzerani; Alberto Lerma-Aguilera; Daniel León; Silvia Pastoriza; Iñigo Apaolaza; Francisco J Planes; Maria Pilar Francino; José Ángel Rufián-Henares
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-06-27       Impact factor: 5.717

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.