4.2 Article

Bacterial communities in the small intestine respond differently to those in the caecum and colon in mice fed low- and high-fat diets

期刊

MICROBIOLOGY-SGM
卷 163, 期 8, 页码 1189-1197

出版社

MICROBIOLOGY SOC
DOI: 10.1099/mic.0.000496

关键词

gut microbiome; mouse diet-induced obesity model; 16S rRNA gene sequencing; high-fat diet; metabolic endotoxaemia

资金

  1. Center for Environmental Exposures and Disease [NIH-NIEHS P30 ES005022]
  2. New Jersey Institute for Food, Nutrition and Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacterial communities in the mouse caecum and faeces are known to be altered by changes in dietary fat. The microbiota of the mouse small intestine, by contrast, has not been extensively profiled and it is unclear whether small intestinal bacterial communities shift with dietary fat levels. We compared the microbiota in the small intestine, caecum and colon in mice fed a low-fat (LF) or high-fat (HF) diet using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The relative abundance of major phyla in the small intestine, Bacteriodetes, Firmicutes and Proteobacteria, was similar to that in the caecum and colon; the relative abundance of Verrucomicrobia was significantly reduced in the small intestine compared to the large intestine. Several genera were uniquely detected in the small intestine and included the aerotolerant anaerobe, Lactobacillus spp. The most abundant genera in the small intestine were accounted for by anaerobic bacteria and were identical to those identified in the large intestine. An HF diet was associated with significant weight gain and adiposity and with changes in the bacterial communities throughout the intestine, with changes in the small intestine differing from those in the caecum and colon. Prominent Gram-negative bacteria including genera of the phylum Bacteroidetes and a genus of Proteobacteria significantly changed in the large intestine. The mechanistic links between these changes and the development of obesity, perhaps involving metabolic endotoxemia, remain to be determined.

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

4.2
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