Cargando…

Structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources

Bat gut microbiomes are adapted to the specific diets of their hosts. Despite diet variation has been associated with differences in bat microbiome diversity, the influence of diet on microbial community assembly have not been fully elucidated. In the present study, we used available data on bat gut...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Corduneanu, Alexandra, Wu-Chuang, Alejandra, Maitre, Apolline, Obregon, Dasiel, Sándor, Attila D., Cabezas-Cruz, Alejandro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10067309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37005589
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-023-02836-7
_version_ 1785018436571627520
author Corduneanu, Alexandra
Wu-Chuang, Alejandra
Maitre, Apolline
Obregon, Dasiel
Sándor, Attila D.
Cabezas-Cruz, Alejandro
author_facet Corduneanu, Alexandra
Wu-Chuang, Alejandra
Maitre, Apolline
Obregon, Dasiel
Sándor, Attila D.
Cabezas-Cruz, Alejandro
author_sort Corduneanu, Alexandra
collection PubMed
description Bat gut microbiomes are adapted to the specific diets of their hosts. Despite diet variation has been associated with differences in bat microbiome diversity, the influence of diet on microbial community assembly have not been fully elucidated. In the present study, we used available data on bat gut microbiome to characterize the microbial community assembly of five selected bat species (i.e., Miniopterus schreibersii, Myotis capaccinii, Myotis myotis, Myotis pilosus, and Myotis vivesi), using network analysis. These bat species with contrasting habitat and food preferences (i.e., My. capaccinii and My. pilosus can be piscivorous and/or insectivorous; Mi. schreibersii and My. myotis are exclusively insectivorous; while My. vivesi is a marine predator) offer an invaluable opportunity to test the impact of diet on bat gut microbiome assembly. The results showed that My. myotis showed the most complex network, with the highest number of nodes, while My. vivesi has the least complex structured microbiome, with lowest number of nodes in its network. No common nodes were observed in the networks of the five bat species, with My. myotis possessing the highest number of unique nodes. Only three bat species, My. myotis, My. pilosus and My. vivesi, presented a core microbiome and the distribution of local centrality measures of nodes was different in the five networks. Taxa removal followed by measurement of network connectivity revealed that My. myotis had the most robust network, while the network of My. vivesi presented the lowest tolerance to taxa removal. Prediction of metabolic pathways using PICRUSt2 revealed that Mi. schreibersii had significantly higher functional pathway’s richness compared to the other bat species. Most of predicted pathways (82%, total 435) were shared between all bat species, while My. capaccinii, My. myotis and My. vivesi, but no Mi. schreibersii or My. pilosus, showed specific pathways. We concluded that despite similar feeding habits, microbial community assembly can differ between bat species. Other factors beyond diet may play a major role in bat microbial community assembly, with host ecology, sociality and overlap in roosts likely providing additional predictors governing gut microbiome of insectivorous bats. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12866-023-02836-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10067309
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100673092023-04-03 Structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources Corduneanu, Alexandra Wu-Chuang, Alejandra Maitre, Apolline Obregon, Dasiel Sándor, Attila D. Cabezas-Cruz, Alejandro BMC Microbiol Research Bat gut microbiomes are adapted to the specific diets of their hosts. Despite diet variation has been associated with differences in bat microbiome diversity, the influence of diet on microbial community assembly have not been fully elucidated. In the present study, we used available data on bat gut microbiome to characterize the microbial community assembly of five selected bat species (i.e., Miniopterus schreibersii, Myotis capaccinii, Myotis myotis, Myotis pilosus, and Myotis vivesi), using network analysis. These bat species with contrasting habitat and food preferences (i.e., My. capaccinii and My. pilosus can be piscivorous and/or insectivorous; Mi. schreibersii and My. myotis are exclusively insectivorous; while My. vivesi is a marine predator) offer an invaluable opportunity to test the impact of diet on bat gut microbiome assembly. The results showed that My. myotis showed the most complex network, with the highest number of nodes, while My. vivesi has the least complex structured microbiome, with lowest number of nodes in its network. No common nodes were observed in the networks of the five bat species, with My. myotis possessing the highest number of unique nodes. Only three bat species, My. myotis, My. pilosus and My. vivesi, presented a core microbiome and the distribution of local centrality measures of nodes was different in the five networks. Taxa removal followed by measurement of network connectivity revealed that My. myotis had the most robust network, while the network of My. vivesi presented the lowest tolerance to taxa removal. Prediction of metabolic pathways using PICRUSt2 revealed that Mi. schreibersii had significantly higher functional pathway’s richness compared to the other bat species. Most of predicted pathways (82%, total 435) were shared between all bat species, while My. capaccinii, My. myotis and My. vivesi, but no Mi. schreibersii or My. pilosus, showed specific pathways. We concluded that despite similar feeding habits, microbial community assembly can differ between bat species. Other factors beyond diet may play a major role in bat microbial community assembly, with host ecology, sociality and overlap in roosts likely providing additional predictors governing gut microbiome of insectivorous bats. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12866-023-02836-7. BioMed Central 2023-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10067309/ /pubmed/37005589 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-023-02836-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Corduneanu, Alexandra
Wu-Chuang, Alejandra
Maitre, Apolline
Obregon, Dasiel
Sándor, Attila D.
Cabezas-Cruz, Alejandro
Structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources
title Structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources
title_full Structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources
title_fullStr Structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources
title_full_unstemmed Structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources
title_short Structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources
title_sort structural differences in the gut microbiome of bats using terrestrial vs. aquatic feeding resources
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10067309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37005589
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-023-02836-7
work_keys_str_mv AT corduneanualexandra structuraldifferencesinthegutmicrobiomeofbatsusingterrestrialvsaquaticfeedingresources
AT wuchuangalejandra structuraldifferencesinthegutmicrobiomeofbatsusingterrestrialvsaquaticfeedingresources
AT maitreapolline structuraldifferencesinthegutmicrobiomeofbatsusingterrestrialvsaquaticfeedingresources
AT obregondasiel structuraldifferencesinthegutmicrobiomeofbatsusingterrestrialvsaquaticfeedingresources
AT sandorattilad structuraldifferencesinthegutmicrobiomeofbatsusingterrestrialvsaquaticfeedingresources
AT cabezascruzalejandro structuraldifferencesinthegutmicrobiomeofbatsusingterrestrialvsaquaticfeedingresources