Suppr超能文献

基于三种互补方法的粪便微生物群供体多模态评估方法

Multimodal Approach to Assessment of Fecal Microbiota Donors based on Three Complementary Methods.

作者信息

Bilinski Jaroslaw, Dziurzynski Mikolaj, Grzesiowski Pawel, Podsiadly Edyta, Stelmaszczyk-Emmel Anna, Dzieciatkowski Tomasz, Dziewit Lukasz, Basak Grzegorz W

机构信息

Department of Hematology, Oncology and Internal Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, 02-091 Warsaw, Poland.

Department of Environmental Microbiology and Biotechnology, Institute of Microbiology, Faculty of Biology, University of Warsaw, 02-096, Warsaw, Poland.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2020 Jun 29;9(7):2036. doi: 10.3390/jcm9072036.

Abstract

Methods of stool assessment are mostly focused on next-generation sequencing (NGS) or classical culturing, but only rarely both. We conducted a series of experiments using a multi-method approach to trace the stability of gut microbiota in various donors over time, to find the best method for the proper selection of fecal donors and to find "super-donor" indicators. Ten consecutive stools donated by each of three donors were used for the experiments (30 stools in total). The experiments assessed bacterial viability measured by flow cytometry, stool culturing on different media and in various conditions, and NGS (90 samples in total). There were no statistically significant differences between live and dead cell numbers; however, we found a group of cells classified as not-dead-not-alive, which may be possibly important in selection of "good" donors. Donor C, being a regular stool donor, was characterized by the largest number of cultivable species (64). Cultivable core microbiota (shared by all donors) was composed of only 16 species. ANCOM analysis of NGS data highlighted particular genera to be more abundant in one donor vs. the others. There was a correlation between the not-dead-not-alive group found in flow cytometry and found by NGS, and we could distinguish a regular stool donor from the others. In this work, we showed that combining various methods of microbiota assessment gives more information than each method separately.

摘要

粪便评估方法大多集中在下一代测序(NGS)或传统培养上,但很少同时采用这两种方法。我们采用多方法途径进行了一系列实验,以追踪不同供体肠道微生物群随时间的稳定性,找到选择粪便供体的最佳方法,并找出“超级供体”指标。三个供体每人连续捐赠的十份粪便用于实验(共30份粪便)。实验评估了通过流式细胞术测量的细菌活力、在不同培养基和各种条件下的粪便培养以及NGS(共90个样本)。活细胞数和死细胞数之间没有统计学上的显著差异;然而,我们发现了一组被归类为不死不活的细胞,这可能对选择“优质”供体很重要。供体C作为定期粪便供体,其可培养物种数量最多(64种)。可培养核心微生物群(所有供体共有的)仅由16种组成。对NGS数据的ANCOM分析突出显示了特定属在一个供体与其他供体相比中更为丰富。在流式细胞术中发现的不死不活组与通过NGS发现的不死不活组之间存在相关性,并且我们可以将定期粪便供体与其他供体区分开来。在这项工作中,我们表明,将各种微生物群评估方法结合起来比单独使用每种方法能提供更多信息。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验