4.8 Article

Effects of the captive and wild environment on diversity of the gut microbiome of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus)

Journal

ISME JOURNAL
Volume 13, Issue 5, Pages 1293-1305

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41396-019-0345-8

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. Canadian Foundation of Innovation (CFI)-Leaders Opportunity Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Vertebrate gastrointestinal tracts have co-existed with microbes over millennia. These microbial communities provide their host with numerous benefits. However, the extent to which different environmental factors contribute to the assemblage of gut microbial communities is not fully understood. The purpose of this study was to determine how the external environment influences the development of gut microbiome communities (GMCs). Faecal samples were collected from deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) born and raised in captivity and the wild at approximately 3-5 weeks of age. Additional samples were collected 2 weeks later, with a subset of individuals being translocated between captive and wild environments. Microbial data were analysed using 16S rRNA next-generation Illumina HiSeq sequencing methods. GMCs of deer mice were more similar between neighbours who shared the same environment, regardless of where an individual was born, demonstrating that GMCs are significantly influenced by the surrounding environment and can rapidly change over time. Mice in natural environments contained more diverse GMCs with higher relative abundances of Ruminoccocaceae, Helicobacteraceae and Lachnospiraceae spp. Future studies should examine the fitness consequences associated with the presence/absence of microbes that are characteristic of GMCs of wild populations to gain a better understanding of environment-microbe-host evolutionary and ecological relationships.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available