4.5 Article

Changes to the gut microbiota in mice induced by infection with Toxoplasma gondii

期刊

ACTA TROPICA
卷 203, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2019.105301

关键词

Toxoplasma gondii; Gut microbiota; 16S rRNA; Host-parasite interaction

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFD0502202, 2017YFD0501302, 2017YFC1601206]
  2. Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Development Project [20180520042JH]
  3. Health and Family Planning Commission of Wuxi [Q201640]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, JLU

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) is a common parasite worldwide, which can cause encephalitis, enteritis and miscarriage in abortion women. This study examined the cecal microbiome of mice infected with T. gondii through analysis of 16S rRNA genes determined by Illumina sequencing. BALB/c mice were orally infected with sporulated T. gondii oocysts. Mice were killed after 13-days- and 21-days- post infection, respectively, then their cecal contents were extracted and examined to determine the composition of gut microflora by illumina sequencing of the V3 +V4 region of the 16S rRNA genes. Our results showed the alterations in the gut microbes of BALB/c mice infected with T. gondii infection, where we observed a significant shift in the relative abundance of cecal bacteria. In mice at 13 days post-infection, the relative abundance of Proteobacteria increased, along with that of harmful bacteria, such as Bilopha and Desulfovibrio. However, the abundance of Lactobacillus decreased. At 21 days post-infection, the abundance of Lactobacillus was more than that observed for the uninfected control, with harmful bacteria, such as Bilopha and Desulfovibrio being reduced. The mice at 21-days post-infection had more beneficial intestinal bacteria than the control group. Our results suggested that the gut microbiota play an important role in disease progression from acute infection to chronic infection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据