4.8 Article

Changes in mouse gut bacterial community in response to different types of drinking water

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 132, 期 -, 页码 79-89

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2017.12.052

关键词

Mouse gut microbiota; Drinking water; 16s rRNA gene

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq) [306774/2016-0]
  2. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG) [APQ-01673-16]
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gut microbiota exerts a fundamental role on host physiology, and how extrinsic perturbations influence its composition has been increasingly examined. However, the effect of drinking water on gut microbiota is still poorly understood. In this study, we explored the response of mouse gut bacterial community (fecal and mucosa-adhered) to the ingestion of different types of drinking water. The experimental cohort was divided according to different water sources into four groups of mice that consumed autoclaved tap water (control group), water collected directly from a drinking water treatment plant, tap water, and commercial bottled mineral water. Differences among groups were observed, especially related to control group, which exhibited the smallest intra-group variation, and the largest distance from test groups on the last experimental day. Clinically important taxa, such as Acinetobacter and Staphylococcus, increased in feces of mice that drank tap water and in mucosa-adhered samples of animals from disinfected and tap water groups. Furthermore, statistical analyses showed that both time elapsed between samplings and water type significantly influenced the variation observed in the samples. Our results reveal that drinking water potentially affects gut microbiota composition. Additionally, the increase of typical drinking water clinically relevant and antibiotic resistance-associated bacteria in gut microbiota is a cause of concern. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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