The difference in the composition of gut microbiota is greater among bats of different phylogenies than among those with different dietary habits.

Min Guo, Siwei Xie, Junhua Wang, Yuzhi Zhang, Xiangyang He, Pengfei Luo, Jin Deng, Chunhui Zhou, Jiao Qin, Chen Huang, Libiao Zhang
Author Information
  1. Min Guo: Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Conservation and Resource Utilization, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Wild Animal Conservation and Utilization, Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
  2. Siwei Xie: College of Mathematics and Informatics, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, China.
  3. Junhua Wang: Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Conservation and Resource Utilization, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Wild Animal Conservation and Utilization, Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
  4. Yuzhi Zhang: Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Conservation and Resource Utilization, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Wild Animal Conservation and Utilization, Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
  5. Xiangyang He: Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Conservation and Resource Utilization, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Wild Animal Conservation and Utilization, Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
  6. Pengfei Luo: Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Conservation and Resource Utilization, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Wild Animal Conservation and Utilization, Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
  7. Jin Deng: Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Conservation and Resource Utilization, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Wild Animal Conservation and Utilization, Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
  8. Chunhui Zhou: Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Conservation and Resource Utilization, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Wild Animal Conservation and Utilization, Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
  9. Jiao Qin: Institute of Plant Protection, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
  10. Chen Huang: Dr. Neher's Biophysics Laboratory for Innovative Drug Discovery, State Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Macau University of Science and Technology, Taipa, Macao SAR, China.
  11. Libiao Zhang: Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Conservation and Resource Utilization, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Wild Animal Conservation and Utilization, Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.

Abstract

Bats have a very long evolutionary history and are highly differentiated in their physiological functions. Results of recent studies suggest effects of some host factors (e.g., phylogeny and dietary habit) on their gut microbiota. In this study, we examined the gut microbial compositions of 18 different species of bats. Results showed that Firmicutes, Gammaproteobacteria, and Actinobacteria were dominant in all fecal samples of bats. However, the difference in the diversity of gut microbiota among bats of different phylogenies was notable ( = 0.06). Various species of Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, and Gammaproteobacteria were found to contribute to the majority of variations in gut microbiota of all bats examined, and species were much more abundant in bats that feed on both insects and fish than in those of insectivores. The abundance of various species of , , and ancient bacterial phyla was found to vary among bats of different phylogenies, and various species of varied significantly among bats with different dietary habits. No significant difference in the number of genes involved in various metabolic pathways was detected among bats of different phylogenies, but the abundance of genes involved in 5 metabolic pathways, including transcription; replication, recombination, and repair; amino acid transport and metabolism; and signal transduction mechanisms, was different among bats with different dietary habits. The abundance of genes in 3 metabolic pathways, including those involved in stilbenoid, diarylheptanoid, and gingerol biosynthesis, was found to be different between insectivorous bats and bats that feed on both insects and fish. Results of this study suggest a weak association between dietary habit and gut microbiota in most bats but a notable difference in gut microbiota among bats of different phylogenies.

Keywords

References

  1. PLoS Comput Biol. 2009 Apr;5(4):e1000352 [PMID: 19360128]
  2. Nat Genet. 2021 Feb;53(2):156-165 [PMID: 33462485]
  3. Nat Ecol Evol. 2018 Apr;2(4):659-668 [PMID: 29459707]
  4. Front Microbiol. 2015 May 19;6:447 [PMID: 26042099]
  5. J Agric Food Chem. 2021 Oct 27;69(42):12385-12401 [PMID: 34649432]
  6. mBio. 2020 Jan 7;11(1): [PMID: 31911491]
  7. Science. 2013 Jan 25;339(6118):456-60 [PMID: 23258410]
  8. J Virol. 2007 Feb;81(3):1110-8 [PMID: 17108029]
  9. Evolution. 2012 Feb;66(2):349-62 [PMID: 22276533]
  10. Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 9;11(1):14252 [PMID: 34244613]
  11. Mol Ecol. 2014 Mar;23(6):1268-1283 [PMID: 24304129]
  12. Int J Food Microbiol. 1997 Jan;34(1):17-26 [PMID: 9029253]
  13. mSystems. 2019 Nov 12;4(6): [PMID: 31719140]
  14. Nature. 2020 Jul;583(7817):578-584 [PMID: 32699395]
  15. Front Microbiol. 2022 Nov 15;13:1062763 [PMID: 36458196]
  16. BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Dec 15;10:421 [PMID: 20003500]
  17. PeerJ. 2020 May 12;8:e9003 [PMID: 32435532]
  18. Front Microbiol. 2020 Jun 03;11:1040 [PMID: 32582057]
  19. Bioinformatics. 2006 Jul 1;22(13):1658-9 [PMID: 16731699]
  20. Nat Ecol Evol. 2019 Jan;3(1):18-19 [PMID: 30532041]
  21. Mol Ecol. 2019 Jun;28(11):2944-2954 [PMID: 31063664]
  22. Bioinformatics. 2015 May 15;31(10):1674-6 [PMID: 25609793]
  23. Immunity. 2018 Jun 19;48(6):1074-1076 [PMID: 29924972]
  24. Nat Med. 2015 Oct;21(10):1228-34 [PMID: 26366711]
  25. Microbiome. 2014 Sep 05;2:33 [PMID: 25225611]
  26. PLoS Biol. 2016 Nov 18;14(11):e2000225 [PMID: 27861590]
  27. Front Microbiol. 2014 Oct 17;5:532 [PMID: 25368606]
  28. Mol Ecol. 2012 Jun;21(11):2617-27 [PMID: 22519571]
  29. Mol Biol Evol. 2022 Aug 06;: [PMID: 35932227]
  30. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020 Dec;9(1):1554-1566 [PMID: 32573334]
  31. Gigascience. 2018 Jan 1;7(1):1-6 [PMID: 29220494]
  32. Anim Microbiome. 2021 Dec 14;3(1):82 [PMID: 34906258]
  33. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Nov 2;107(44):18933-8 [PMID: 20937875]
  34. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010 Jul;38(12):e132 [PMID: 20403810]
  35. Nat Methods. 2012 Mar 04;9(4):357-9 [PMID: 22388286]
  36. Gut Microbes. 2020 May 3;11(3):603-609 [PMID: 31964203]
  37. Microbiol Res. 2013 Oct 1;168(8):485-96 [PMID: 23706760]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0batsdifferentgutamongdietarymicrobiotaspeciesphylogeniesdifferenceResultshabitfoundabundancevarioushabitsgenesinvolvedmetabolicpathwayssuggestphylogenystudyexaminedFirmicutesGammaproteobacteriaActinobacterianotablefeedinsectsfishincludingBatslongevolutionaryhistoryhighlydifferentiatedphysiologicalfunctionsrecentstudieseffectshostfactorsegmicrobialcompositions18showeddominantfecalsamplesHoweverdiversity = 006Variouscontributemajorityvariationsmuchabundantinsectivoresancientbacterialphylavaryvariedsignificantlysignificantnumberdetected5transcriptionreplicationrecombinationrepairaminoacidtransportmetabolismsignaltransductionmechanisms3stilbenoiddiarylheptanoidgingerolbiosynthesisinsectivorousweakassociationcompositiongreaterbatshift

Similar Articles

Cited By