| Literature DB >> 35898713 |
Lin Guo1, Qijie Guan2,3, Wenhui Duan1, Yilin Ren4,5, Xiao-Juan Zhang2,3, Hong-Yu Xu2,3, Jin-Song Shi4, Fang-Zhou Wang6, Ran Lu6, Hui-Ling Zhang7, Zheng-Hong Xu1,2,3, Huazhong Li1, Yan Geng4.
Abstract
Diet is a major driver of the structure and function of the gut microbiota, which influences the host physiology. Alcohol abuse can induce liver disease and gut microbiota dysbiosis. Here, we aim to elucidate whether the well-known traditional health food Goji berry targets gut microbiota to prevent liver injury induced by acute alcohol intake. The results showed that Goji supplementation for 14 days alleviated acute liver injury as indicated by lowering serum aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, pro-inflammatory cytokines, as well as lipopolysaccharide content in the liver tissue. Goji maintained the integrity of the epithelial barrier and increased the levels of butyric acid in cecum contents. Furthermore, we established the causal relationship between gut microbiota and liver protection effects of Goji with the help of antibiotics treatment and fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) experiments. Both Goji and FMT-Goji increased glutathione (GSH) in the liver and selectively enriched the butyric acid-producing gut bacterium Akkermansia and Ruminococcaceae by using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Metabolomics analysis of cecum samples revealed that Goji and its trained microbiota could regulate retinoyl β-glucuronide, vanillic acid, and increase the level of glutamate and pyroglutamic acid, which are involved in GSH metabolism. Our study highlights the communication among Goji, gut microbiota, and liver homeostasis.Entities:
Keywords: Lycium barbarum L.; acute liver injury; fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT); gut microbiota; metabolomics
Year: 2022 PMID: 35898713 PMCID: PMC9309278 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.929776
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Figure 1Dietary Goji prevented acute alcohol-induced liver injury in mice. (A) Experiment design. (B) AST level in serum. (C) ALT level in serum. (D) the representative sections of liver stained with hematoxylin and eosin (100× , 200× ). Scale bars, 50 μm. (E) The concentration of LPS in the liver. (F) the concentration of GSH in the liver. (G) the level of IL-1β in serum. (H) the level of IL-2 in serum. n = 6–8 for B–F; n = 3–4 for G and H. Data are shown as mean ± SEM, and statistical significance is assessed by one-way ANOVA corrected for multiple comparison by Tukey's test. *p-value < 0.05.
Figure 4The liver protective effect of Goji is dependent on gut microbiota. (A) ABX treatment experiment design. (B) the content of ALT in serum. (C) the content of AST in serum. (D) the content of GSH in liver tissue. (E) experiment design. Fecal samples from the CTRL group were transplanted to the pseudo-germ-free mice by antibiotics pretreatment and divided into groups: FMT-CTRL and FMT-ALD. The FMT-Goji group transplanted the fecal samples from the Goji pretreated mice. Both FMT-ALD and FMT-Goji groups were gavaged alcohol to induce alcohol liver injury. (F) the content of AST in serum. (G) the content of AST in serum. (H) the content of GSH in liver tissue. (I) quantification of cecal butyric acid. (J) relative abundance of Akkermansia. (K) significantly different taxa between FMT-ALD and FMT-Goji group analyzed by LEfSe analysis. Data are shown as mean ± SEM, and statistical significance is assessed by one-way ANOVA corrected for multiple comparison by Tukey's test. *p-value < 0.05.
Figure 2Goji maintained the gut microenvironment and modulated the overall structure of gut microbiota. (A) AB–PAS staining and immunohistochemical analysis of the expression of MUC2 of colon section. Scale bars, 100 μm. (B) The relative expression of Claudin1 in the colon. (C) quantification of cecal acetic acid. (D) quantification of butyric acid. (E) quantification of isovaleric acid. (F) Shannon index of microbiota; (G) Simpson index of microbiota. (H) principal-coordinate analysis (PCoA) plot at D0 based on unweighted UniFrac distance. Each point represents each sample. (I) PCoA plot at D14. (J) PCoA plot at D15. F–J, n = 8. Data are shown as mean ± SEM, and statistical significance is assessed by one-way ANOVA corrected for multiple comparison by Tukey's test. *p-value < 0.05.
Figure 3Significantly different taxa between experimental groups and prediction of metabolic function. (A) LEfSe taxonomic cladograms are processed to identify specific taxa at different levels after Goji pretreatment for 14 days (D14). (B) specific taxa between CTRL, ALD, and Goji groups after alcohol shock at D15. Significantly discriminant taxon nodes are colored, and branch areas are shaded according to the effect size of taxa. Green taxa enriched in CTRL group; Red taxa enriched in ALD group; Blue taxa enriched in Goji group. Only the taxon whose LDA score >3 is displayed. The species with no significant difference were colored yellow. Prefixes represent abbreviations for a taxonomic rank of each taxon, with phylum (p), class (c), order (o), family (f), and genus (g). (C) relative abundance of Akkermansia. (D) relative abundance of Ruminococcaceae_UCG_014. Data are shown as mean ± SEM (n = 7–8), and statistical significance assessed by one-way ANOVA corrected for multiple comparison by Tukey's test. (E) significant differences in metabolism pathway between ALD and Goji at Day 15. P-values were calculated using Welch's test. (F) the Spearman's correlation between the liver-related index and the relative abundance of significantly different genera. The scale represents the correlation coefficients. *p-value < 0.05, **p-value < 0.01.
Figure 5Metabolic patterns in Goji vs. ALD and FMT-Goji vs. FMT-ALD mice. (A) The orthogonal partial least-squares discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) of Goji vs. ALD. (B) OPLS-DA of FMT-Goji vs. FMT-ALD. (C) Venn diagrams of differential metabolites between Goji vs. ALD, and FMT-Goji vs. FMT-ALD. (D) heatmap of 16 upregulated and 2 downregulated metabolites in Goji and FMT-Goji group compared with ALD and FMT-ALD groups. (E) correlation network of metabolites and ASV. (F) KEGG enrichment pathways based on the differential metabolites in Goji vs. ALD. (G) KEGG enrichment pathways based on the differential metabolites in FMT-Goji vs. FMT-ALD. (H) the 10 metabolites in hub-network of DEMs between Goji and ALD. (I) the 10 metabolites in hub-network of DEMs between Goji and ALD.