4.4 Article

Altered Gut Microbiota Composition and Immune Response in Experimental Steatohepatitis Mouse Models

期刊

DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES
卷 62, 期 2, 页码 396-406

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-016-4393-x

关键词

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis; Gut microbiota; IL-17; Gut-liver axis

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16K09337] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although several types of diet have been used in experimental steatohepatitis models, comparison of gut microbiota and immunological alterations in the gut among diets has not yet been performed. We attempted to clarify the difference in the gut environment between mice administrated several experimental diets. Male wild-type mice were fed a high-fat (HF) diet, a choline-deficient amino acid-defined (CDAA) diet, and a methionine-choline-deficient (MCD) diet for 8 weeks. We compared the severity of steatohepatitis, the composition of gut microbiota, and the intestinal expression of interleukin (IL)-17, an immune modulator. Steatohepatitis was most severe in the mice fed the CDAA diet, followed by the MCD diet, and the HF diet. Analysis of gut microbiota showed that the composition of the Firmicutes phylum differed markedly at order level between the mice fed the CDAA and HF diet. The CDAA diet increased the abundance of Clostridiales, while the HF diet increased that of lactate-producing bacteria. In addition, the CDAA diet decreased the abundance of lactate-producing bacteria and antiinflammatory bacterium Parabacteroides goldsteinii in the phylum Bacteroidetes. In CDAA-fed mice, IL-17 levels were increased in ileum as well as portal vein. In addition, the CDAA diet also elevated hepatic expression of chemokines, downstream targets of IL-17. The composition of gut microbiota and IL-17 expression varied considerably between mice administrated different experimental diets to induce steatohepatitis.

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

4.4
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