| Literature DB >> 35250914 |
Yang Jing1,2,3, Yuqi Yuan4, Melissa Monson5, Peng Wang4, Fang Mu1,2,3, Qi Zhang1,2,3, Wei Na1,2,3, Ke Zhang1,2,3, Yuxiang Wang1,2,3, Li Leng1,2,3, Yumao Li1,2,3, Peng Luan1,2,3, Ning Wang1,2,3, Rongjun Guo4, Susan J Lamont5, Hui Li1,2,3, Hui Yuan1,2,3.
Abstract
Growing evidence indicates that gut microbiota factors cannot be viewed as independent in the occurrence of obesity. Because the gut microbiome is highly dimensional and complex, studies on interactions between gut microbiome and host in obesity are still rare. To explore the relationship of gut microbiome-host interactions with obesity, we performed multi-omics associations of gut metagenome, intestinal transcriptome, and host obesity phenotypes in divergently selected obese-lean broiler lines. Metagenomic shotgun sequencing generated a total of 450 gigabases of clean data from 80 intestinal segment contents of 20 broilers (10 of each line). The microbiome comparison showed that microbial diversity and composition in the duodenum, jejunum, ileum, and ceca were altered variously between the lean- and fat-line broilers. We identified two jejunal microbes (Escherichia coli and Candidatus Acetothermia bacterium) and four cecal microbes (Alistipes sp. CHKCI003, Ruminococcaceae bacterium CPB6, Clostridiales bacterium, and Anaeromassilibacillus sp. An200), which were significantly different between the two lines (FDR < 0.05). When comparing functional metagenome, the fat-line broilers had an intensive microbial metabolism in the duodenum and jejunum but degenerative microbial activities in the ileum and ceca. mRNA-sequencing identified a total of 1,667 differentially expressed genes (DEG) in the four intestinal compartments between the two lines (| log2FC| > 1.5 and FDR < 0.05). Multi-omics associations showed that the 14 microbial species with abundances that were significantly related with abdominal fat relevant traits (AFRT) also have significant correlations with 155 AFRT-correlated DEG (p < 0.05). These DEG were mainly involved in lipid metabolism, immune system, transport and catabolism, and cell growth-related pathways. The present study constructed a gut microbial gene catalog of the obese-lean broiler lines. Intestinal transcriptome and metagenome comparison between the two lines identified candidate DEG and differential microbes for obesity, respectively. Multi-omics associations suggest that abdominal fat deposition may be influenced by the interactions of specific gut microbiota abundance and the expression of host genes in the intestinal compartments in which the microbes reside. Our study explored the interactions between gut microbiome and host intestinal gene expression in lean and obese broilers, which may expand knowledge on the relationships between obesity and gut microbiome.Entities:
Keywords: broiler; mRNA sequencing; multi-omics associations; obesity; whole metagenome sequencing
Year: 2022 PMID: 35250914 PMCID: PMC8892104 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.815538
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
The comparison of phenotypes between the lean and fat lines.
| Phenotype | Lean line ( | Fat line ( | |
| BW/kg | 2.218 ± 0.015 | 2.189 ± 0.129 | 0.370 |
| AFW/g | 14.319 ± 1.127 | 117.869 ± 4.306 | 1.037 × 10–13 |
| AFP/% | 0.646 ± 0.050 | 5.401 ± 0.210 | 3.507 × 10–13 |
| TG (mmol/L) | 0.322 ± 0.023 | 0.378 ± 0.029 | 0.835 |
| CHO (mmol/L) | 3.051 ± 0.091 | 3.271 ± 0.111 | 0.425 |
| HDL-C (mmol/L) | 2.164 ± 0.071 | 2.573 ± 0.094 | 0.002 |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) | 0.649 ± 0.036 | 0.591 ± 0.039 | 0.282 |
| HDL-C/LDL-C (%) | 3.173 ± 0.303 | 4.658 ± 0.432 | 0.017 |
| TBA (μmol/L) | 2.743 ± 0.484 | 2.943 ± 0.610 | 0.799 |
| TP (g/L) | 29.607 ± 0.653 | 36.657 ± 1.369 | 8.5 × 10–5 |
| ALB (g/L) | 13.143 ± 0.310 | 15.157 ± 0.494 | 0.002 |
| GLU (mmol/L) | 12.174 ± 0.132 | 10.761 ± 0.225 | 1.1 × 10–5 |
| AST (U/L) | 288.786 ± 12.894 | 265.000 ± 13.903 | 0.221 |
| ALT (U/L) | 2.500 ± 0.272 | 2.286 ± 0.194 | 0.527 |
| AST/ALT (%) | 143.232 ± 25.858 | 132.357 ± 16.592 | 0.726 |
| CREA (μmol/L) | 3.157 ± 0.329 | 3.750 ± 0.379 | 0.248 |
| GGT (U/L) | 14.357 ± 0.862 | 19.071 ± 0.863 | 0.001 |
| UA (μmol/L) | 162.743 ± 17.384 | 284.350 ± 39.886 | 0.010 |
FIGURE 1The difference of microbial diversity and composition between the lean- and fat-line broilers. (A) The comparison of non-redundant gene numbers and Shannon index in four intestinal compartments between the two lines. Mann–Whitney U test was performed to verify the difference, in which p < 0.05 indicated a significant difference. (B) Partial least squares discriminant analysis of microbial species composition in the four intestinal compartments, which showed a clear isolation of the ceca and some extent of separation in the small intestine (duodenum, jejunum, and ileum) between the two lines. (C) The relative abundance of the top 10 microbial species in the four intestinal compartments of the two lines of broilers. The blue boxes and points represent lean-line broilers, while the red boxes and points are fat-line broilers.
FIGURE 2The difference in species abundance between the lean- and fat-line broilers. Microbial species identified in all samples of at least one group with relative abundance over 0.1% were used to perform the differential comparison between the two lines. Metastats software was used, and species with FDR < 0.1 are shown in the figure. No differential species between the two broiler lines were identified in the duodenum and ileum. The green and orange columns stand for lean line and fat line, respectively. The green boxes stand for lean-line broilers, while the orange boxes stand for fat-line broilers. *FDR < 0.05; +0.05 ≤ FDR < 0.1.
FIGURE 3Variations of the gut microbiome functions between the lean- and fat-line broilers. The functional categories of KEGG pathways (A), carbohydrate-active enZYmes families (B), and eggNOG ortholog groups (C) were compared between the lean and fat lines through non-parametric Mann–Whitney U test, in which p-values less than 0.05 were shown in the figure. These functional categories that participated in the comparison existed in all samples of at least one line with relative abundances that were over 0.1%. The color scale represents the row Z score. The blue and orange patterns in the upper bound of each heatmap are the individuals of lean line and fat line, respectively. The yellow, pink, green, and gray patterns in the left part of each heatmap represent the duodenum, jejunum, ileum, and ceca, respectively.
FIGURE 4KEGG pathway enrichment analysis of DEG between the two lines in four different intestinal compartments. The y-axis shows the name of the pathway, and the x-axis shows the Rich factor. The pathways with significant enrichment were shown in the KEGG scatter plot. The dot size represents the number of different genes, and the color indicates the p-value. The Rich factor is the proportion of the number of differentially expressed genes and the number of all annotated genes in a given pathway. The greater the Rich factor, the higher the degree of enrichment. (A) Duodenum; (B) jejunum; (C) ileum; (D) ceca.
FIGURE 5Multi-omics correlation analysis reveals the interactions between microbiome and host. Each heat map contains two parts: the correlations between gene expression and abdominal fat relevant traits (left part of each panel) and correlations between gene expression and microbial relative abundance (right part of each panel). For each tissue compartment, the genes shown had significant correlations and were DEG in the transcriptome analysis. The upper histogram shows the log2FC of microbial relative abundance between the two lines, while the right histogram displays the log2FC of gene expression [lean line (LL) vs. fat line (FL)]. In the histograms, the light blue and orange columns represent genes or microbes significantly enriched in the lean- and fat-line broilers, respectively. The significance p-value threshold was set to 0.05 in the small intestine (A–C) and 0.01 in the ceca (D). ALB, albumin; CHO, total cholesterol; GGT, γ-glutamyl transpeptidase; GLU, glucose; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TP, total protein; UA, uric acid. +p-value < 0.1; *p-value < 0.05; **p-value < 0.01. AFW, abdominal fat weight; AFP, abdominal fat percentage. (A) Duodenum; (B) jejunum; (C) ileum; (D) ceca.
FIGURE 6The potential model of how varied microbes impacted by host genetic selection regulate intestinal functions to promote abdominal fat deposition. The up and down arrows (black) indicate increased and decreased intestinal functions or microbial abundances in the fat-line broilers compared to the lean-line broilers. The dotted arrows (blue) designate those changes that are predicted by intestinal transcriptome–microbiome interactions. The solid arrows (blue) represent the regulatory effects of the microbes and functions.