4.3 Review

The infant pharyngeal microbiomes: origin, impact and manipulation

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 33, Issue 6, Pages 548-555

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000691

Keywords

infant; microbiota; pharynx; respiratory

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [MR/N013204/1, MR/N026993/1, MR/V002015/1] Funding Source: Medline
  2. MRC [MR/N026993/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of review There has been an exponential increase in research into infant microbiome evolution, and it appears that pharyngeal microbiota are associated with clinical phenotypes (e.g. infection and asthma). Although broad consensus views are emerging, significant challenges and uncertainties remain. Recent findings Infant pharyngeal microbiome research is limited by low biomass, high temporal diversity and lack of agreed standards for sampling, DNA sequencing and taxonomic reporting. Analysis of amplicon sequence variants and improved cost and availability of whole-genome sequencing are promising options for improving taxonomic resolution of such studies. Infant respiratory microbiomes arise, at least in part, from maternal flora (e.g. the respiratory tract and breastmilk), and are associated with environmental and clinical factors (e.g. mode of feeding and delivery, siblings, daycare attendance, birth season and antibiotic usage). Interventional research to modify the infant pharyngeal microbiota has recently been reported, using dietary supplements. Further work is needed to improve characterization of the infant pharyngeal microbiomes, including routes of bacterial acquisition, role of environmental factors and associations with disease phenotypes. Methodological standards are desirable to facilitate more reproducible, comparable research. Improved understanding may enable manipulation of infant pharyngeal microbiota to improve clinical outcomes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available