| Literature DB >> 35432240 |
Jiyeon Si1,2,3, Yongbin Choi2,3, Jeroen Raes4,5, Gwangpyo Ko2,3,6,7, Hyun Ju You2,3,6,8.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Cluster-based analysis, or community typing, has been attempted as a method for studying the human microbiome in various body niches with the aim of reducing variations in the bacterial composition and linking the defined communities to host health and disease. In this study, we have presented the bacterial subcommunities in the healthy and the diseased population cohorts and have assessed whether these subcommunities can distinguish different host health conditions.Entities:
Keywords: COPD metacommunity in sputum microbiome; Prevotella; community typing; inflammation; metacommunity; network; sputum microbiome
Year: 2022 PMID: 35432240 PMCID: PMC9008356 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.719541
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
FIGURE 1Variations in the microbiota in sputum samples collected from a healthy Korean cohort. (A) Heatmap showing the top 10 most abundant bacteria in the sputum microbiota. (B) A non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) plot in which metacommunities are assigned a color. Arrows indicate the top 10 bacteria contributing to community variation. (C) Metacommunity diversity at the genus level. (D) Different inferred functional characteristics of the sputum microbiome among metacommunities. A principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) plot showing the distribution of functional features of metacommunity. *q < 0.001.
Demographic and clinical metadata in a metacommunity.
| Metacommunity (mean ± s.d.) | |||||
| Total | N1 | N2 |
| ||
| Sex | |||||
| Male | 101 | 11 | 42 | 48 | |
| Female | 101 | 23 | 49 | 29 | |
| Total | 202 | 34 | 91 | 77 | |
| Age | 45.56 ± 10.19 | 46.68 ± 10.44 | 44.23 ± 8.82 | 46.64 ± 11.45 | |
| BMI | 23.68 ± 3.17 | 22.86 ± 2.15 | 23.38 ± 3.12 | 24.39 ± 3.47 | |
| FBS (mg/dL) | 100.10 ± 33.88 | 95.97 ± 16.97 | 95.20 ± 20.62 | 107.71 ± 48.09 | |
| HDL (mg/dL) | 49.89 ± 12.76 | 52.79 ± 13.11 | 50.68 ± 13.62 | 47.68 ± 11.26 | |
| TG (mg/dL) | 135.20 ± 92.51 | 119.15 ± 53.03 | 121.75 ± 88.25 | 158.19 ± 106.40 |
|
| Waist (cm) | 81.34 ± 9.51 | 78.76 ± 6.47 | 80.01 ± 9.07 | 84.04 ± 10.55 |
|
| hsCRP (mg/L) | 1.56 ± 4.56 | 0.87 ± 1.31 | 0.94 ± 2.12 | 2.58 ± 6.87 |
|
| SBP (mm Hg) | 114.31 ± 15.02 | 114.06 ± 16.85 | 112.41 ± 13.54 | 116.68 ± 15.68 | |
| DBP(mm Hg) | 71.54 ± 10.41 | 73.12 ± 8.79 | 70.00 ± 10.10 | 72.68 ± 11.27 | |
s.d., standard deviation. FBS, fasting blood sugar; HDL, High-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; Waist, waist circumference; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure.
*q < 0.1.
FIGURE 2Association between the host health status and metacommunity. (A) Subdivision of a metacommunity and the association between each subcommunity and host smoking experience. (B) A box plot and a whisker plot showing the 25th percentile, the median, the 75th percentile, and minimum and maximum data points. *q < 0.01.
FIGURE 3Bacterial cluster analysis in the sputum microbiota. (A) Microbial network at the genus level. Different colors represent different microbial clusters. (B) The Pearson correlation analysis of eigenvectors between each cluster and host clinical variables. Cluster colors (red, blue, and green) correspond with those shown in panels (A,B). FBS, fasting blood sugar; HDL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG, triglycerides; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; PY, pack-years. *p < 0.05, **q < 0.1.
FIGURE 4Metacommunities in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) cohort (Haldar et al.). (A) A stack bar graph showing the most abundant genera in each metacommunity. (B) Metacommunity diversity at the genus level. *q < 0.1. (C) A principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) plot showing the distribution of functional features between metacommunities. (D) The interaction of inflammatory bacteria with COPD-related taxa in CS metacommunities. Red and blue edges indicate negative and positive correlations, respectively. Edge width reflects the strength of the correlation.