METHODS OF PROMOTING WEIGHT LOSS AND ASSOCIATED ARRAYS

Information

  • Patent Application
  • 20140128289
  • Publication Number
    20140128289
  • Date Filed
    January 03, 2014
    11 years ago
  • Date Published
    May 08, 2014
    10 years ago
Abstract
The invention encompasses methods of modulating body fat or weight loss. In addition, the invention encompasses arrays that comprise biomolecules associated with an obese host microbiome or a lean host microbiome.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention encompasses methods and arrays associated with body fat and/or weight loss.


REFERENCE TO SEQUENCE LISTING

A paper copy of the sequence listing and a computer readable form of the same sequence listing are appended below and herein incorporated by reference. Additionally, the sequence listing filed with the provisional application is also hereby incorporated by reference.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), over sixty percent of the United States population is overweight, and greater than thirty percent are obese. This translates into more than 50 million adults in the United States with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 30 or above. Obesity is also a worldwide health problem with an estimated 500 million overweight adult humans [body mass index (BMI) of 25.0-29.9 kg/m2] and 250 million obese adults (Bouchard, C (2000) N Engl J Med. 343, 1888-9). This epidemic of obesity is leading to worldwide increases in the prevalence of obesity-related disorders, such as diabetes, hypertension, cardiac pathology, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD; Wanless, and Lentz (1990) Hepatology 12, 1106-1110. Silverman, et al, (1990). Am. J. Gastroenterol. 85, 1349-1355; Neuschwander-Tetri and, Caldwell (2003) Hepatology 37, 1202-1219). According to the National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) approximately 280,000 deaths annually are directly related to obesity. The NIDDK further estimated that the direct cost of healthcare in the U.S. associated with obesity is $51 billion. In addition, Americans spend $33 billion per year on weight loss products. In spite of this economic cost and consumer commitment, the prevalence of obesity continues to rise at alarming rates. From 1991 to 2000, obesity in the U.S. grew by 61%.


Although the physiologic mechanisms that support development of obesity are complex, the medical consensus is that the root cause relates to an excess intake of calories compared to caloric expenditure. While the treatment seems quite intuitive, dieting is not an adequate long-term solution for most people; about 90 to 95 percent of persons who lose weight subsequently regain it. Although surgical intervention has had some measured success, the various types of surgeries have relatively high rates of morbidity and mortality.


Pharmacotherapeutic principles are limited. In addition, because of undesirable side effects, the FDA has had to recall several obesity drugs from the market. Those that are approved also have side effects. Currently, two FDA-approved anti-obesity drugs are orlistat, a lipase inhibitor, and sibutramine, a serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Orlistat acts by blocking the absorption of fat into the body. An unpleasant side effect with orlistat, however, is the passage of undigested oily fat from the body. Sibutramine is an appetite suppressant that acts by altering brain levels of serotonin. In the process, it also causes elevation of blood pressure and an increase in heart rate. Other appetite suppressants, such as amphetamine derivatives, are highly addictive and have the potential for abuse. Moreover, different subjects respond differently and unpredictably to weight-loss medications.


Because surgical and pharmacotherapy treatments are problematic, new non-cognitive strategies are needed to prevent and treat obesity and obesity-related disorders.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

One aspect of the present invention encompasses an array comprising a substrate. The substrate has disposed thereon at least one nucleic acid indicative of, or modulated in, an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome. Alternatively, the substrate has disposed thereon at least one nucleic acid indicative of, or modulated in, a lean host microbiome compared to an obese host microbiome.


Another aspect of the present invention encompasses an array comprising a substrate. The substrate has disposed thereon at least one polypeptide indicative of, or modulated in, an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome. Alternatively, the substrate has disposed thereon at least one polypeptide indicative of, or modulated in, a lean host microbiome compared to an obese host microbiome.


Yet another aspect of the invention encompasses a method for modulating body fat or for modulating weight loss in a subject. The method typically comprises altering the microbiota population in the subject's gastrointestinal tract by modulating the relative abundance of Actinobacteria. In some embodiments, the relative abundance is increased, in other embodiments, the relative abundance is decreased.


Still another aspect of the invention encompasses a composition. The composition usually comprises an antibiotic having efficacy against Actinobacteria but not against Bacteroidetes; and a probiotic comprising Bacteroidetes.


Other aspects and iterations of the invention are described more thoroughly below.


REFERENCE TO COLOR FIGURES

The application file contains at least one photograph executed in color. Copies of this patent application publication with color photographs will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES


FIG. 1 depicts the technical replicates (analyzed at four different sequencing centers) cluster. Fecal DNA samples were split and sequenced separately at four different sequencing centers. Abbreviations: usc, Environmental Genomics Core Facility, University of South Carolina; ok, Advanced Center for Genome Technology, University of Oklahoma, ct; 454 Life Sciences Branford, Conn.; and ma, Josephine Bay Paul Center, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole Mass. Unweighted UniFrac-based clustering was performed on the combined dataset. Colored boxes enclose samples from the same individual (also indicated by identical IDs followed by the number 1 or 2. The location of the sequencing facility follows each sample ID.) Randomly selected sequences were analyzed (≦500 per replicate). FIGS. 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 show details from FIG. 1.



FIG. 2 depicts 16S rRNA gene surveys revealing familial similarity and reduced diversity of the gut microbiota in obese individuals. (A) Comparison of the average UniFrac distance (a measure of differences in bacterial community structure) between individuals over time (self), twin-pairs, twins and their mother, and unrelated individuals. Briefly, 1,000 sequences were randomly sampled from each V2/3 dataset, OTUs were chosen, a UniFrac tree was built from representative sequences, and random permutations were done on the resulting UniFrac distance matrix. Asterisks indicate significant differences between the indicated categories [Student's t-test with Monte Carlo (1,000 permutations); *p<10−5; **p<10−14; ***p<10−41]. (B) Evidence of reduced diversity in the fecal microbiota of obese individuals. Phylogenetic diversity curves were generated by randomly sampling 1 to 10,000 sequences from each V6 16S rRNA dataset, and then calculating the total branch length leading to the sampled sequences (mean±95% CI shown).



FIG. 3 depicts 16S rRNA gene surveys revealing evidence for familial aggregation and reduced diversity in the obese gut microbiome. (A,B) Comparison of the average UniFrac distance (a measure of differences in bacterial community structure) between related and unrelated individuals. Briefly, 10,000 sequences were randomly sampled from each V6 dataset (Panel A) and 200 sequences were randomly sampled from each full-length dataset (Panel B), OTUs were chosen, a UniFrac tree was built from representative sequences, and random permutations were done on the resulting UniFrac distance matrix. Asterisks indicate significant differences between related and unrelated individuals [Student's t-test with Monte Carlo (1,000 permutations); *p<0.001]. (C,D) Phylogenetic diversity curves for the obese and lean gut microbiome. Briefly, 1 to 1,000 sequences were randomly sampled from each V2/3 dataset (Panel C), and 1 to 200 sequences were randomly sampled from each full-length dataset (Panel D), and the average branch length leading to the sampled sequences was calculated. (E,F) Rarefaction curves for the obese and lean fecal microbiota. Briefly, 1 to 10,000 sequences were randomly sampled from each V6 dataset (Panel E), and 1 to 200 sequences were randomly sampled from each full-length dataset (Panel F). The average number of OTUs in each sample was then calculated (mean±95% CI shown).



FIG. 4 depicts a graph illustrating the stratification of related and unrelated individuals concordant for physiological states of obesity versus leanness confirms familial similarity. (A,B) Comparison of the average UniFrac distance (a measure of differences in bacterial community structure) between related and unrelated individuals concordant for leanness (Panel A) or obesity (Panel B). Briefly, 1,000 sequences were randomly sampled from each V2/3 dataset, OTUs were chosen, a UniFrac tree was built from representative sequences, and random permutations were done on the resulting UniFrac distance matrix. Asterisks indicate significant differences between related and unrelated individuals [Student's t-test with Monte Carlo (1,000 permutations); *p<10−5].



FIG. 5 depicts clustering of the fecal microbiotas of monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins and their mothers sampled at the beginning of the study and two months later. Unweighted UniFrac-based clustering. Colored boxes link samples from the same individual (also indicated by identical IDs followed by the number 1 or 2). 34 of the individuals were only sampled once. 1,000 randomly V2/3 16S rRNA gene sequences were analyzed per sample. FIGS. 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6 show details from FIG. 5.



FIG. 6 depicts the relative abundance of the major gut bacterial phyla across 120 gut samples obtained at two different timepoints. Fecal samples were collected at the initial and second timepoints (average interval between sample collection: 57±4 days). The relative abundance of the major gut bacterial phyla is based on analysis of V2/3 16S rRNA gene sequences. Samples are organized based on the rank order abundance of Firmicutes in the initial timepoint.



FIG. 7 depicts the number of shared phylotypes (OTUs) as a function of the number of sequences per sample. 50-3,000 sequences were randomly selected from each sample, obtained from 93 different individuals. All sequences were binned into ‘species’-level phylotypes using a 97% identity threshold. Less stringent parameters were used for OTU binning at all levels of coverage to allow for analysis of 3,000 sequences per sample (density cutoff=0.65, maximum of 3000 nodes).



FIG. 8 depicts the validation of annotation parameters using control datasets. (A-C) Percent of randomly fragmented annotated genes (KEGG v44) assigned to the correct KEGG orthologous group as a function of the (A) e-value, (B) identity, or (C) bit-score cutoff used. (D-F) Sensitivity [true positives (TP) divided by true positives plus false negatives (FN)] as a function of the (D) e-value, (E) % identity, or (F) bit-score cutoff used. (G-I) Precision [true positives divided by true positives plus false positives (FP)] as a function of the (G) e-value, (H) % identity, or (I) bit-score cutoff used. The vertical gray line and circle indicates the cutoff values used in this analysis.



FIG. 9 depicts the taxonomic profiles of microbial gene content in the human gut (fecal) microbiome. Full-length 16S sequences were obtained for each reference genome, likelihood parameters were determined using Modeltest, and a maximum-likelihood tree was generated using PAUP. Bootstrap values represent nodes found in >70 of 100 repetitions. Branches and distributions are colored by phylum: Bacteroidetes (orange), Firmicutes (blue), and Actinobacteria (green). Proteobacteria (E. coli) and Archaea (M. smithii and M. stadtmanae) are uncolored. The relative abundance of sequences homologous to each genome is depicted on a scale of 0 to 30% (BLASTX comparisons of microbiome datasets to reference genomes). Sample ID nomenclature: Family number, Twin number or mom, and BMI category (Le=lean, Ov=overweight, Ob=obese; e.g. F1T1Le stands for family 1, twin 1, lean).



FIG. 10 depicts the assignment of fecal microbiome reads to sequenced reference human gut-derived Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes genomes. Histogram of the percent identity (mean±SEM) obtained from sequence alignments between gut microbiome reads (n=18 datasets) and Firmicutes or Bacteroidetes reference genomes.



FIG. 11 depicts the percent identity plots of the fecal microbiomes versus reference genomes. Each row (x-axis) represents a different genome. The y-axis shows the percent identity to microbiome sequences (red dots). The combined data from lean/overweight individuals are in the left column while the combined data from obese individuals are displayed in the right column. Supercontigs were used for draft genomes; the assembly version (v) can be found after the strain name. The lines found at 10% identity on each plot depict the sum of all sequences mapped across each genome.



FIG. 12 depicts the dependence of percentage (A), quality (B), and accuracy (C-D) of sequence assignments on read-length. Two fecal samples were processed using extra-long read pyrosequencing (454 FLX Titanium kit; samples TS28 and TS29). 10,000 sequences from the maximum of each read-length distribution (between 490 and 505 nt) were randomly selected from each sample. Simulated reads were created by sampling the first 50-500 nt of each of these 10,000 sequences, and each simulated read was compared using NCBI-BLASTX against our custom gut genome database. Multiple BLAST thresholds were used (see key in panel A). (A) Percent of sequences assigned to the reference genomes as a function of read-length. (B) Average BLAST bit score as a function of read-length. (C) Percent of gene assignments (from the gut genome database) identical to full-length sequence as a function of read-length. (D) Percent of group assignments (same assigned COG as the full-length sequence) as a function of read-length.



FIG. 13 depicts the relative abundance of bacterial phyla in 18 human gut microbiomes. (A-C) PCR-based 16S rRNA gene sequences [(A) full-length, (B) V2/3 region, and (C) V6]. (D-E) Microbiome data analyzed by BLAST comparisons [(D) NCBI non-redundant database and (E) a custom 42 gut genome database]. (F) Analysis of 16S rRNA gene fragments identified in each microbiome. (G) Correlation matrix based on all pairwise comparisons (R2) of the relative abundance of the four major phyla (Actinobacteria, Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and Proteobacteria) across all six methods.



FIG. 14 depicts the metabolic pathway-based clustering and analysis of the human gut microbiome of MZ twins. (A) Metabolic pathways were tallied using the KEGG database and annotation scheme. Functional profiles were clustered using a single-linkage hierarchical clustering with a Pearson's distance metric. All pairwise comparisons were made of the profiles by calculating each R2 value. (B) A linear regression of the relative abundance of Bacteroidetes versus the first principal component derived from a PCA analysis of KEGG metabolic profiles. (C) Comparisons of functional similarity between twin pairs, between twins and their mother, and between unrelated individuals. Asterisks indicate significant differences (Student's t-test with Monte Carlo; p<0.01) and bars represent mean±SEM.



FIG. 15 depicts the functional profiles of MZ fecal microbiomes, based on the relative abundance of KEGG pathways, which stabilize after ˜20,000 sequences are collected for a given sample. Datasets were randomly subsampled between 500 and 25,000 sequences. The average functional similarity (R2) between the subsampled dataset and the full dataset is shown as a function of sequencing effort.



FIG. 16 depicts the KEGG pathways and Carbohydrate Active Enzymes (CAZy) families whose representation is significantly different between Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes bins. Sequences from each of the 18 fecal microbiomes were binned based on sequence homology to the custom 42-member reference human gut genome database. (A) The frequency of each KEGG pathway was tallied for each bin and significantly different pathways were identified using a bootstrap re-sampling analysis (Xipe v2.4). Significantly different pathways reaching at least 0.6% relative abundance in at least two microbiomes were clustered using single-linkage hierarchical clustering and the Pearson's correlation distance metric. (B) The relative abundance of CAZy families in the Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes sequence bins. Asterisks indicate significant differences (Mann-Whitney test, p<0.0001).



FIG. 17 depicts the functional clustering of phylum-wide sequence bins and reference genomes from 36 human gut-derived Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes. The frequency of each KEGG pathway in phylum-wide sequence bins, and in 10,000 ‘simulated reads’ generated from each of the reference genomes (Readsim v0.10; ref. 56), was tallied and pathways reaching at least 0.6% relative abundance in at least two fecal microbiomes were clustered using principal components analysis (PCA). An ‘average’ Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes genome was generated by pooling all reads generated from genomes within each phylum.



FIG. 18 depicts the comparison of taxonomic and functional variations in the human gut microbiome. (A) Relative abundance of major phyla across 18 fecal microbiomes from MZ twins and their mothers, based on BLASTX comparisons of microbiomes and the NCBI non-redundant database. (B) Relative abundance of COG categories across each sampled gut microbiome.



FIG. 19 depicts the relative abundance of KEGG pathways and COG categories in the gut microbiomes of 18 individuals (6 MZ twin pairs and their mothers), plus 9 previously published adult microbiomes. ‘Simulated reads’ were generated from each of the 9 previously published microbiomes datasets obtained by capillary sequencing to mimic pyrosequencing reads, then re-annotated using the KEGG and STRING-extended COG databases. (A) The average relative abundance of KEGG pathways in MZ twin pairs and their mothers graphed as a function of the average relative abundance of KEGG pathways in the 9 previously published adult gut microbiome datasets. (B) The distribution of COG categories across all 27 datasets.



FIG. 20 depicts the relative abundance of COG categories in 36 sequenced reference human gut-derived Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes genomes. 10,000 ‘simulated reads’, generated from each of the reference genomes (Readsim v0.10), were annotated using the STRING-extended COG database.



FIG. 21 depicts the average functional diversity and evenness of ‘simulated reads’ generated from reference genomes from gut Firmicutes or Bacteroidetes. (A) Functional diversity was calculated in EstimateS (v8.0), based on the abundance of each metabolic pathway across 10,000 ‘simulated reads’ generated from each of the 36 reference genomes (Readsim v0.10). (B) Shannon evenness. Asterisks indicate significant differences (Mann-Whitney test, p<0.01).



FIG. 22 depicts the ‘enzyme’-level functional groups shared between all or a subset of the sampled gut microbiomes. Sequences from each of the 18 microbiomes characterized in this study were assigned to (A) KEGG groups, (B) CAZy families, and (C) STRING annotations. Functional groups (inner circle), and the sequences assigned to each group (outer circle) were then tallied based on their co-occurrence in any combination of 1 to 18 microbiomes. For example, the outer aqua-colored segment in Panel A demonstrates that 96.2% of the total sequences generated from all 18 samples were assigned to functional groups that were common to all 18 microbiomes. (D) KEGG categories enriched or depleted in the core versus variable components of the gut microbiome. Sequences from each of the 18 fecal microbiomes were binned into the ‘core’ or ‘variable’ microbiome-based on the co-occurrence of KEGG orthologous groups (core groups were found in all 18 microbiomes while variable groups were present in fewer (<18) microbiomes; see FIG. 20A). General categories are shown. Asterisks indicate significant differences (Student's t-test, *p<0.05, **p<0.001, ***p<10−5).



FIG. 23 depicts the KEGG categories enriched or depleted in the core versus variable components of the gut microbiome. Sequences from each of the 18 fecal microbiomes were binned into the ‘core’ or ‘variable’ microbiome based on the co-occurrence of KEGG orthologous groups (core groups were found in all 18 microbiomes while variable groups were present in fewer (<18) microbiomes; see FIG. 20A). General categories are shown. Asterisks indicate significant differences (Student's t-test, *p<0.05, **p<0.001, ***p<10−5).



FIG. 24 depicts the clustering of pathways enriched or depleted in the core microbiome. Sequences from each of the 18 distal gut microbiomes were binned into the ‘core’ or ‘variable’ microbiome based on the co-occurrence of KEGG orthologous groups [core groups were found in all 18 microbiomes while variable groups were present in fewer (<18) microbiomes; see FIG. 20A]. The frequency of each KEGG pathway was tallied for each bin and significantly different pathways were identified using a bootstrap re-sampling analysis (Xipe v2.4). Pathways significantly enriched (yellow) or depleted (blue), reaching at least 0.6% relative abundance in at least two microbiomes, were clustered using single-linkage hierarchical clustering and the Pearson's correlation distance metric.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

It has been discovered, as demonstrated in the Examples, that there is a relationship between the human gut microbiota and obesity. In particular, an obese human subject typically has fewer Bacteroidetes and more Actinobacteria compared to a lean subject. In some embodiments, an obese human subject has proportionately fewer Bacteroidetes and more Actinobacteria and Firmicutes compared to a lean subject. Taking advantage of these discoveries, the present invention provides compositions and methods to regulate energy balance in a subject. In particular, the invention provides nucleic acid sequences that are associated with obesity in humans. These sequences may be used as diagnostic or prognostic biomarkers for obesity risk, biomarkers for drug discovery, biomarkers for the discovery of therapeutic targets involved in the regulation of energy balance, and biomarkers for the efficacy of a weight loss program.


I. Modulation of Energy Balance in a Subject

The energy balance of a subject may be modulated by altering the subject's gut microbiota population. Generally speaking, to decrease energy harvesting, decrease body fat, or promote weight loss, the relative abundance of bacteria within the Bacteroidetes phylum (phylum is also known as a ‘division’) is increased and optionally, the relative abundance of bacteria within the Actinobacteria and/or Firmicutes phylum is decreased. Alternatively, to increase energy harvesting, to increase body fat, or promote weight gain, the relative abundance of Bacteroidetes is decreased and optionally, the relative abundance of Actinobacteria and/or Firmicutes is increased. Additional agents may also be utilized to achieve either weight loss or weight gain. Examples of these agents are detailed in section I(d).


(a) Altering the Abundance of Bacteroides

The relative abundance of Bacteroidetes may be altered by increasing or decreasing the presence of one or more Bacteroidetes species that reside in the gut. Additionally, non-limiting examples of species may include B. thetaiotaomicron, B. vulgatus, B. ovatus, P. distasonis, B. uniformis, B. stercoris, B. eggerthii, B. merdae, and B. caccae. In one embodiment, the population of B. thetaiotaomicron is altered. In still another embodiment, the population of B. vulgatus is altered. In an additional embodiment, the population of B. ovatus is altered. In another embodiment, the population of P. distasonis is altered. In yet another embodiment, the population of B. uniformis is altered. In an additional embodiment, the population of B. stercoris is altered. In a further embodiment, the population of B. eggerthii is altered. In still another embodiment, the population of B. merdae is altered. In another embodiment, the population of B. caccae is altered. In a further embodiment, the species within the Bacteroidetes phylum may be as of yet unnamed.


The present invention also includes altering various combinations of Bacteroidetes species, such as at least two species, at least three species, at least four species, at least five species, at least six species, at least seven species, at least eight species, at least nine species, at least ten Bacteroidetes species, or more than ten species of Bacteroidetes. For example, the combination of B. thetaiotaomicron, B. vulgatus, B. ovatus, P. distasonis, and B. uniformis may be altered.


In an exemplary embodiment, the relative abundance of Bacteroidetes is increased to decrease energy harvesting, decrease body fat, or promote weight loss in a subject. Increased abundance of Bacteroidetes in the gut may be accomplished by several suitable means generally known in the art. In one embodiment, a food supplement that increases the abundance of Bacteroidetes may be administered to the subject. By way of example, one such food supplement is psyllium husks as described in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0229905, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. In an exemplary embodiment, a probiotic comprising one or more Bacteroidetes species or strains may be administered to the subject. The amount of probiotic administered to the subject can and will vary depending upon the embodiment. The probiotic may comprise from about one thousand to about ten billion cfu/g (colony forming units per gram) of the total composition, or of the part of the composition comprising the probiotic. In one embodiment, the probiotic may comprise from about one hundred million to about 10 billion organisms. The probiotic microorganism may be in any suitable form, for example in a powdered dry form. In addition, the probiotic microorganism may have undergone processing in order for it to increase its survival. For example, the microorganism may be coated or encapsulated in a polysaccharide, fat, starch, protein or in a sugar matrix. Standard encapsulation techniques known in the art can be used. For example, techniques discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,190,591, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, may be used.


Alternatively, the relative abundance of Bacteroidetes is decreased to increase energy harvesting, increase body fat, or promote weight gain in a subject. Decreased abundance of Bacteroidetes in the gut may be accomplished by several suitable means generally known in the art. In one embodiment, an antibiotic having efficacy against Bacteroidetes may be administered. Generally speaking, antimicrobial agents may target several areas of bacterial physiology: protein translation, nucleic acid synthesis, cell wall synthesis or potentially, the polysaccharide acquisition machinery. In an exemplary embodiment, the antibiotic will have efficacy against Bacteriodetes but not against Firmicutes. The susceptibility of the targeted species to the selected antibiotics may be determined based on culture methods or genome screening.


It is contemplated that the abundance of gut Bacteroidetes within an individual subject may be altered (i.e., increased or decreased) from about a couple fold difference to about a hundred fold difference or more, depending on the desired result (i.e., increased energy harvesting (weight gain) or decreased energy harvesting (weight loss)) and the individual subject. A method for determining the relative abundance of gut Bacteroidetes is described in the examples, alternatively, an array of the invention, described below, may be used to determine the relative abundance.


Stated another way, it is contemplated that the abundance of gut Bacteroidetes within an individual subject may be altered (i.e., increased or decreased) from about 1% to about 100% or more depending on the desired result (i.e., increased energy harvesting (weight gain) or decreased energy harvesting (weight loss)) and the individual subject. For weight loss, the abundance may be altered by an increase of from about 20% to about 100%, from about 30% to about 100%, from about 40% to about 100%, from about 50% to about 100%, from about 60% to about 100%, from about 70% to about 100%, from about 80% to about 100%, or from about 90% to 100%. A method for determining the relative abundance of gut Bacteroidetes is described in the examples, alternatively, an array of the invention, described below, may be used to determine the relative abundance.


(b) Altering the Abundance of Actinobacteria

The relative abundance of Actinobacteria may be altered by increasing or decreasing the presence of one or more species that reside in the gut. Representative, non-limiting species include B. longum, B. breve, B. catenulatum, B. dentium, B. gallicum, B. pseudocatenulatum, C. aerofaciens, C. stercoris, C. intestinalis, and S. variabile.


In an exemplary embodiment, the relative abundance of Actinobacteria is decreased to decrease energy harvesting, decrease body fat, or promote weight loss in a subject. Decreased abundance of Actinobacteria in the gut may be accomplished by several suitable means generally known in the art. In one embodiment, an antibiotic having efficacy against Actinobacteria may be administered. In an exemplary embodiment, the antibiotic will have efficacy against Actinobacteria but not against Bacteriodetes. The susceptibility of the targeted species to the selected antibiotics may be determined based on culture methods or genome screening.


Alternatively, the relative abundance of Actinobacteria is increased to increase energy harvesting, increase body fat, or promote weight gain in a subject. Increased abundance of Actinobacteria in the gut may be accomplished by several suitable means generally known in the art. In an exemplary embodiment, a probiotic comprising one or more Actinobacteria strains or species may be administered to the subject.


It is contemplated that the abundance of gut Actinobacteria may be altered (i.e., increased or decreased) from about a couple fold difference to about a hundred fold difference or more, depending on the desired result (i.e., increased energy harvesting (weight gain) or decreased energy harvesting (weight loss)). A method for determining the relative abundance of gut Actinobacteria is described in the examples.


Stated another way, it is contemplated that the abundance of gut Actinobacteria may be altered (i.e., increased or decreased) from about 1% to about 100% or more depending on the desired result (i.e., increased energy harvesting (weight gain) or decreased energy harvesting (weight loss)). For weight loss, the abundance may be altered by a decrease of from about 20% to about 100%, from about 30% to about 100%, from about 40% to about 100%, from about 50% to about 100%, from about 60% to about 100%, from about 70% to about 100%, from about 80% to about 100%, or from about 90% to 100%. A method for determining the relative abundance of gut Actinobacteria is described in the examples.


(c) Altering the Abundance of Firmicutes

The relative abundance of Firmicutes may be altered by increasing or decreasing the presence of one or more species that reside in the gut. Representative species include species from Clostridia, Bacilli, and Mollicutes. In one embodiment, the relative abundance of one or more Clostridia species is altered. In another embodiment, the relative abundance of one or more Bacilli species is altered. In yet another embodiment, the relative abundance of one or more Mollicutes species is altered. It is also contemplated that the relative abundance of several species of Firmicutes may be altered without departing from the scope of the invention. By way of non-limiting examples, a combination of one or more Clostridia species, one or more Bacilli species, and one or more Mollicutes species may be altered. In a further embodiment, the species within the Firmicutes phylum may be as of yet unnamed.


In some embodiments, the Mollicutes class is altered. For instance, E. dolichum, E. cylindroides, E. biforme, or C. innocuum may be altered. In one embodiment, the species of the Mollicutes class may possess the genetic information to create a cell wall. In another embodiment, the species of the Mollicutes class may produce a cell wall. In a further embodiment, the species within the class Mollicutes may be as of yet unnamed.


In an exemplary embodiment, the relative abundance of Firmicutes is decreased to decrease energy harvesting, decrease body fat, or promote weight loss in a subject. Decreased abundance of Firmicutes in the gut may be accomplished by several suitable means generally known in the art. In one embodiment, an antibiotic having efficacy against Firmicutes may be administered. In an exemplary embodiment, the antibiotic will have efficacy against Firmicutes but not against Bacteriodetes. In another exemplary embodiment, the antibiotic will have efficacy against Mollicutes, but not Bacteriodetes. The susceptibility of the targeted species to the selected antibiotics may be determined based on culture methods or genome screening.


Alternatively, the relative abundance of Firmicutes is increased to increase energy harvesting, increase body fat, or promote weight gain in a subject. Increased abundance of Firmicutes in the gut may be accomplished by several suitable means generally known in the art. In an exemplary embodiment, a probiotic comprising Firmicutes may be administered to the subject.


It is contemplated that the abundance of gut Firmicutes may be altered (i.e., increased or decreased) from about a about a couple fold difference to about a hundred fold difference or more, depending on the desired result (i.e., increased energy harvesting (weight gain) or decreased energy harvesting (weight loss)). A method for determining the relative abundance of gut Firmicutes is described in the examples.


Stated another way, it is contemplated that the abundance of gut Firmicutes may be altered (i.e., increased or decreased) from about 1% to about 100% or more depending on the desired result (i.e., increased energy harvesting (weight gain) or decreased energy harvesting (weight loss)). For weight loss, the abundance may be altered by a decrease of from about 20% to about 100%, from about 30% to about 100%, from about 40% to about 100%, from about 50% to about 100%, from about 60% to about 100%, from about 70% to about 100%, from about 80% to about 100%, or from about 90% to 100%. A method for determining the relative abundance of gut Firmicutes is described in the examples.


(d) Additional Weight Modulating Agents

Another aspect of the invention encompasses a combination therapy to regulate fat storage, energy harvesting, and/or weight loss or gain in a subject. In an exemplary embodiment, a combination for decreasing energy harvesting, decreasing body fat or for promoting weight loss is provided. For this embodiment, a composition comprising an antibiotic having efficacy against Firmicutes and/or Actinobacteria but not against Bacteroidetes; and a probiotic comprising Bacteroidetes may be administered to the subject. Additionally, an anti-archaeal compound may be included in the aforementioned composition to reduce the representation of gut methanogens and the efficiency of methanogenesis, thereby reducing the efficiency of fermentation of dietary polysaccharides by saccharolytic bacteria, such as Bacteroidetes. Other agents that may be included with the aforementioned composition are detailed below.


The compositions utilized in this invention may be administered by any number of routes including, but not limited to, oral, intravenous, intramuscular, intraarterial, intramedullary, intrathecal, intraventricular, pulmonary, transdermal, subcutaneous, intraperitoneal, intranasal, enteral, topical, sublingual, or rectal means. The actual effective amounts of compounds comprising a weight loss composition of the invention can and will vary according to the specific compounds being utilized, the mode of administration, and the age, weight and condition of the subject. Dosages for a particular individual subject can be determined by one of ordinary skill in the art using conventional considerations. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that dosages may also be determined with guidance from Goodman & Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, Ninth Edition (1996), Appendix II, pp. 1707-1711 and from Goodman & Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, Tenth Edition (2001), Appendix II, pp. 475-493.


i. Fiaf Polypeptide


A composition of the invention for promoting weight loss may optionally include either increasing the amount of a Fiaf polypeptide or the activity of a Fiaf polypeptide. Typically, a suitable Fiaf polypeptide is one that can substantially inhibit LPL when administered to the subject. Several Fiaf polypeptides known in the art are suitable for use in the present invention. Generally speaking, the Fiaf polypeptide is from a mammal. By way of non-limiting example, suitable Fiaf polypeptides and nucleotides are delineated in Table A.











TABLE A






Species
PubMed Ref.









Homo sapiens

NM_139314




NM_016109




Mus musculus

NM_020581




Rattus norvegicus

NM_199115




Sus scrofa

AY307772




Bos taurus

AY192008




Pan troglodytes

AY411895









In certain aspects, a polypeptide that is a homolog, ortholog, mimic or degenerative variant of a Fiaf polypeptide is also suitable for use in the present invention. In particular, the subject polypeptide will typically inhibit LPL when administered to the subject. A variety of methods may be employed to determine whether a particular homolog, mimic or degenerative variant possesses substantially similar biological activity relative to a Fiaf polypeptide. Specific activity or function may be determined by convenient in vitro, cell-based, or in vivo assays, such as measurement of LPL activity in white adipose tissue. In order to determine whether a particular Fiaf polypeptide inhibits LPL, the procedure detailed in the examples of U.S. Patent Application No. 20050239706, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, may be followed.


Fiaf polypeptides suitable for use in the invention are typically isolated or pure and are generally administered as a composition in conjunction with a suitable pharmaceutical carrier, as detailed below. A pure polypeptide constitutes at least about 90%, preferably, 95% and even more preferably, at least about 99% by weight of the total polypeptide in a given sample.


The Fiaf polypeptide may be synthesized, produced by recombinant technology, or purified from cells using any of the molecular and biochemical methods known in the art that are available for biochemical synthesis, molecular expression and purification of the Fiaf polypeptides [see e.g., Molecular Cloning, A Laboratory Manual (Sambrook, et al. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), Current Protocols in Molecular Biology (Eds. Ausubel, et al., Greene Publ. Assoc., Wiley-Interscience, New York)].


The invention also contemplates use of an agent that increases Fiaf transcription or its activity. For example, an agent may be delivered that specifically activates Fiaf expression: this agent may be a natural or synthetic compound that directly activates Fiaf gene transcription, or indirectly activates expression through interactions with components of host regulatory networks that control Fiaf transcription. Suitable agents may be identified by methods generally known in the art, such as by screening natural product and/or chemical libraries using the gnotobiotic zebrafish model described in the examples of U.S. Patent Application No. 20050239706. In another embodiment, a chemical entity may be used that interacts with Fiaf targets, such as LPL, to reproduce the effects of Fiaf (e.g., in this case inhibition of LPL activity). In an alternative of this embodiment, administering a Fiaf agonist to the subject may increase Fiaf expression and/or activity. In one embodiment, the Fiaf agonist is a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPARs) agonist. Suitable PPARs include PPARα, PPARβ/δ, and PPARγ. Fenofibrate is another suitable example of a Fiaf agonist. Additional suitable Fiaf agonists and methods of administration are further described in Manards, et al., J. Biol Chem, 279, 34411 (2004), and U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0220373, which are both hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.


ii. Other Compounds


The compositions of the invention that decrease energy harvesting, decrease body fat, or promote weight loss may also include several additional agents suitable for use in weight loss regimes. Generally speaking, exemplary combinations of therapeutic agents may act synergistically to decrease energy harvesting, decrease body fat, or promote weight loss. Using this approach, one may be able to achieve therapeutic efficacy with lower dosages of each agent, thus reducing the potential for adverse side effects. In one embodiment, acarbose may be administered with a composition of the invention. Acarbose is an inhibitor of α-glucosidases and is required to break down carbohydrates into simple sugars within the gastrointestinal tract of the subject. In another embodiment, an appetite suppressant, such as an amphetamine, or a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, such as sibutramine, may be administered with a composition of the invention. In still another embodiment, a lipase inhibitor such as orlistat, or an inhibitor of lipid absorption such as Xenical, may be administered with a composition of the invention.


iii. Restricted Calorie Diet


Optionally, in addition to administration of a composition of the invention for weight loss, a subject may also be placed on a restricted calorie diet. Restricted calorie diets maybe helpful for increasing the relative abundance of Bacteroidetes and decreasing the relative abundance of Firmicutes and/or Actinobacteria. Several restricted calorie diets known in the art are suitable for use in combination with the compositions of the invention. Representative diets include a reduced fat diet, reduced protein, or a reduced carbohydrate diet.


iv. Alteration of the Gastrointestinal Archaeon Population


An anti-archaeal compound may be included in a composition of the invention to decrease energy harvesting, decrease fat storage, and/or decrease weight gain. To promote weight loss in a subject, the gut archaeon population is altered such that microbial-mediated carbohydrate metabolism or its efficiency is decreased in the subject, whereby decreasing microbial-mediated carbohydrate metabolism or its efficiency promotes weight loss in the subject.


Accordingly, in one embodiment, the subject's gastrointestinal archaeal population is altered so as to promote weight loss in the subject. Typically, the presence of at least one genera of archaeon that resides in the gastrointestinal tract of the subject is decreased. In most embodiments, the archaeon is generally a mesophilic methanogenic archaea. In one alternative of this embodiment, the presence of at least one species from the genera Methanobrevibacter or Methanosphaera is decreased. In another alternative embodiment, the presence of Methanobrevibacter smithii is decreased. In still another embodiment, the presence of Methanosphaera stadtmanae is decreased. In yet another embodiment, the presence of a combination of archaeon genera or species is decreased. By way of non-limiting example, the presence of Methanobrevibacter smithii and Methanosphaera stadtmanae is decreased.


To decrease the presence of any of the archaeon detailed above, methods generally known in the art may be utilized. In one embodiment, a compound having anti-microbial activities against the archaeon is administered to the subject. Non-limiting examples of suitable anti-microbial compounds include metronidzaole, clindamycin, tinidazole, macrolides, and fluoroquinolones. In another embodiment, a compound that inhibits methanogenesis by the archaeon is administered to the subject. Non-limiting examples include 2-bromoethanesulfonate (inhibitor of methyl-coenzyme M reductase), N-alkyl derivatives of para-aminobenzoic acid (inhibitor of tetrahydromethanopterin biosynthesis), ionophore monensin, nitroethane, lumazine, propynoic acid and ethyl 2-butynoate. In yet another embodiment, a hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitor is administered to the subject. Non-limiting examples of suitable hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitors include lovastatin, atorvastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin, simvastatin, and rosuvastatin. Alternatively, the diet of the subject may be formulated by changing the composition of glycans (e.g., polyfructose-containing oligosaccharides) in the diet that are preferred by polysaccharide degrading bacterial components of the microbiota (e.g., Bacteroides spp) when in the presence of mesophilic methanogenic archaeal species such as Methanobrevibacter smithii.


Generally speaking, when the archaeal population in the subject's gastrointestinal tract is decreased in accordance with the methods described above, the polysaccharide degrading properties of the subject's gastrointestinal microbiota is altered such that microbial-mediated carbohydrate metabolism or its efficiency is decreased. Typically, depending upon the embodiment, the transcriptome and the metabolome of the gastrointestinal microbiota is altered. In one embodiment, the microbe is a saccharolytic bacterium. In one alternative of this embodiment, the saccharolytic bacterium is a Bacteroides species. In a further alternative embodiment, the bacterium is Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron. Typically, the carbohydrate will be a plant polysaccharide or dietary fiber. Plant polysaccharides may include starch, fructan, cellulose, hemicellulose, and pectin.


The compounds utilized in this invention to alter the archaeon population may be administered by any number of routes including, but not limited to, oral, intravenous, intramuscular, intra-arterial, intramedullary, intrathecal, intraventricular, pulmonary, transdermal, subcutaneous, intraperitoneal, intranasal, enteral, topical, sublingual, or rectal means.


The actual effective amounts of compound described herein can and will vary according to the specific composition being utilized, the mode of administration and the age, weight and condition of the subject. Dosages for a particular individual subject can be determined by one of ordinary skill in the art using conventional considerations. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that dosages may also be determined with guidance from Goodman & Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, Ninth Edition (1996), Appendix II, pp. 1707-1711 and from Goodman & Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, Tenth Edition (2001), Appendix II, pp. 475-493.


By way of non-limiting example, weight loss may be promoted by administering an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor to a subject. In an exemplary embodiment, the inhibitor will selectively inhibit the HMG-CoA reductase expressed by M. smithii and not the HMG-CoA reductase expressed by the subject. In another embodiment, a second HMG CoA-reductase inhibitor may be administered that selectively inhibits the HMG CoA-reductase expressed by the subject in lieu of the HMG-CoA reductase expressed by M. smithii. In yet another embodiment, an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor that selectively inhibits the HMG-CoA reductase expressed by the subject may be administered in combination with an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor that selectively inhibits the HMG-CoA reducase expressed by M. smithii. One means that may be utilized to achieve such selectivity is via the use of time-release formulations as discussed below or by otherwise altering the properties of the compounds so that they will not, or will, be efficiently absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract. Alternatively, the compound that selectively inhibits the HMG-CoA reductase expressed by M. smithii may be poorly absorbed by gastrointestinal tract of the subject. Compounds that inhibit HMG-CoA reductase are well known in the art. For instance, non-limiting examples include atorvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, and other statins.


These compounds, for example HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, may be formulated into pharmaceutical compositions and administered to subjects to promote weight loss. According to the present invention, a pharmaceutical composition includes, but is not limited to, pharmaceutically acceptable salts, esters, salts of such esters, or any other adduct or derivative which upon administration to a subject in need is capable of providing, directly or indirectly, a composition as otherwise described herein, or a metabolite or residue thereof, e.g., a prodrug.


The pharmaceutical compositions maybe administered by several different means that will deliver a therapeutically effective dose. Such compositions can be administered orally, parenterally, by inhalation spray, rectally, intradermally, intracisternally, intraperitoneally, transdermally, bucally, as an oral or nasal spray, or topically (i.e. powders, ointments or drops) in dosage unit formulations containing conventional nontoxic pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, adjuvants, and vehicles as desired. Topical administration may also involve the use of transdermal administration such as transdermal patches or iontophoresis devices. The term parenteral as used herein includes subcutaneous, intravenous, intramuscular, or intrasternal injection, or infusion techniques. In an exemplary embodiment, the pharmaceutical composition will be administered in an oral dosage form. Formulation of drugs is discussed in, for example, Hoover, John E., Remington's Pharmaceutical Sciences, Mack Publishing Co., Easton, Pa. (1975), and Liberman, H. A. and Lachman, L., Eds., Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms, Marcel Decker, New York, N.Y. (1980).


The amount of an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor that constitutes an “effective amount” can and will vary. The amount will depend upon a variety of factors, including whether the administration is in single or multiple doses, and individual subject parameters including age, physical condition, size, and weight. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that dosages may also be determined with guidance from Goodman & Goldman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, Ninth Edition (1996), Appendix II, pp. 1707-1711 and from Goodman & Goldman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, Tenth Edition (2001), Appendix II, pp. 475-493.


As described above, an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor may be specific for the M. smithii enzyme, or for the subject's enzyme, depending, in part, on the selectivity of the particular inhibitor and the area the inhibitor is targeted for release in the subject. For example, an inhibitor may be targeted for release in the upper portion of the gastrointestinal tract of a subject to substantially inhibit the subject's enzyme. In contrast, the inhibitor may be targeted for release in the lower portion of the gastrointestinal tract of a subject, i.e., where M. smithii resides, then the inhibitor may substantially inhibit M. smithii's enzyme.


In order to selectively control the release of an inhibitor to a particular region of the gastrointestinal tract for release, the pharmaceutical compositions of the invention may be manufactured into one or several dosage forms for the controlled, sustained or timed release of one or more of the ingredients. In this context, typically one or more of the ingredients forming the pharmaceutical composition is microencapsulated or dry coated prior to being formulated into one of the above forms. By varying the amount and type of coating and its thickness, the timing and location of release of a given ingredient or several ingredients (in either the same dosage form, such as a multi-layered capsule, or different dosage forms) may be varied.


In an exemplary embodiment, the coating may be an enteric coating. The enteric coating generally will provide for controlled release of the ingredient, such that drug release can be accomplished at some generally predictable location in the lower intestinal tract below the point at which drug release would occur without the enteric coating. In certain embodiments, multiple enteric coatings may be utilized. Multiple enteric coatings, in certain embodiments, may be selected to release the ingredient or combination of ingredients at various regions in the lower gastrointestinal tract and at various times.


As will be appreciated by a skilled artisan, the encapsulation or coating method can and will vary depending upon the ingredients used to form the pharmaceutical composition and coating, and the desired physical characteristics of the microcapsules themselves. Additionally, more than one encapsulation method may be employed so as to create a multi-layered microcapsule, or the same encapsulation method may be employed sequentially so as to create a multi-layered microcapsule. Suitable methods of microencapsulation may include spray drying, spinning disk encapsulation (also known as rotational suspension separation encapsulation), supercritical fluid encapsulation, air suspension microencapsulation, fluidized bed encapsulation, spray cooling/chilling (including matrix encapsulation), extrusion encapsulation, centrifugal extrusion, coacervation, alginate beads, liposome encapsulation, inclusion encapsulation, colloidosome encapsulation, sol-gel microencapsulation, and other methods of microencapsulation known in the art. Detailed information concerning materials, equipment and processes for preparing coated dosage forms may be found in Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms: Tablets, eds. Lieberman et al. (New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1989), and in Ansel et al., Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms and Drug Delivery Systems, 6th Ed. (Media, Pa.: Williams & Wilkins, 1995).


II. Biomarkers Comprising the Gut Microbiome

Another aspect of the invention encompasses use of the gut microbiome as a biomarker for obesity. The biomarker may be utilized to construct arrays that may be used for several applications including as a diagnostic or prognostic tool to determine obesity risk, judge the efficacy of existing weight loss regimes, aid in drug discovery, identify additional biomarkers involved in obesity or an obesity related disorder, and aid in the discovery of therapeutic targets involved in the regulation of energy balance, including but not limited to those that may directly affect the composition of the gut microbiome. Generally speaking, the array may comprise biomolecules modulated in an obese host microbiome or a lean host microbiome.


(a) Array

The array may be comprised of a substrate having disposed thereon at least one biomolecule that is modulated in an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome. Several substrates suitable for the construction of arrays are known in the art, and one skilled in the art will appreciate that other substrates may become available as the art progresses. The substrate may be a material that may be modified to contain discrete individual sites appropriate for the attachment or association of the biomolecules and is amenable to at least one detection method. Non-limiting examples of substrate materials include glass, modified or functionalized glass, plastics (including acrylics, polystyrene and copolymers of styrene and other materials, polypropylene, polyethylene, polybutylene, polyurethanes, TeflonJ, etc.), nylon or nitrocellulose, polysaccharides, nylon, resins, silica or silica-based materials including silicon and modified silicon, carbon, metals, inorganic glasses and plastics. In an exemplary embodiment, the substrates may allow optical detection without appreciably fluorescing.


A substrate may be planar, a substrate may be a well, i.e. a 364 well plate, or alternatively, a substrate may be a bead. Additionally, the substrate may be the inner surface of a tube for flow-through sample analysis to minimize sample volume. Similarly, the substrate may be flexible, such as a flexible foam, including closed cell foams made of particular plastics.


The biomolecule or biomolecules may be attached to the substrate in a wide variety of ways, as will be appreciated by those in the art. The biomolecule may either be synthesized first, with subsequent attachment to the substrate, or may be directly synthesized on the substrate. The substrate and the biomolecule may be derivatized with chemical functional groups for subsequent attachment of the two. For example, the substrate may be derivatized with a chemical functional group including, but not limited to, amino groups, carboxyl groups, oxo groups or thiol groups. Using these functional groups, the biomolecule may be attached using functional groups on the biomolecule either directly or indirectly using linkers.


The biomolecule may also be attached to the substrate non-covalently. For example, a biotinylated biomolecule can be prepared, which may bind to surfaces covalently coated with streptavidin, resulting in attachment. Alternatively, a biomolecule or biomolecules may be synthesized on the surface using techniques such as photopolymerization and photolithography. Additional methods of attaching biomolecules to arrays and methods of synthesizing biomolecules on substrates are well known in the art, i.e. VLSIPS technology from Affymetrix (e.g., see U.S. Pat. No. 6,566,495, and Rockett and Dix, “DNA arrays: technology, options and toxicological applications,” Xenobiotica 30(2):155-177, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety).


In one embodiment, the biomolecule or biomolecules attached to the substrate are located at a spatially defined address of the array. Arrays may comprise from about 1 to about several hundred thousand addresses or more. In one embodiment, the array may be comprised of less than 10,000 addresses. In another alternative embodiment, the array may be comprised of at least 10,000 addresses. In yet another alternative embodiment, the array may be comprised of less than 5,000 addresses. In still another alternative embodiment, the array may be comprised of at least 5,000 addresses. In a further embodiment, the array may be comprised of less than 500 addresses. In yet a further embodiment, the array may be comprised of at least 500 addresses.


A biomolecule may be represented more than once on a given array. In other words, more than one address of an array may be comprised of the same biomolecule. In some embodiments, two, three, or more than three addresses of the array may be comprised of the same biomolecule. In certain embodiments, the array may comprise control biomolecules and/or control addresses. The controls may be internal controls, positive controls, negative controls, or background controls.


The array may be comprised of biomolecules indicative of an obese host microbiome (e.g. the nucleic acid sequences listed in Table 13). Alternatively, the array may be comprised of biomolecules indicative of a lean host microbiome (e.g. the nucleic acid sequences listed in Table 14). A biomolecule is “indicative” of an obese or lean microbiome if it tends to appear more often in one type of microbiome compared to the other. Additionally, the array may be comprised of biomolecules that are modulated in the obese host microbiome compared to the lean host microbiome. As used herein, “modulated” may refer to a biomolecule whose representation or activity is different in an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome. For instance, modulated may refer to a biomolecule that is enriched, depleted, up-regulated, down-regulated, degraded, or stabilized in the obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome. In one embodiment, the array may be comprised of a biomolecule enriched in the obese host microbiome compared to the lean host microbiome. In another embodiment, the array may be comprised of a biomolecule depleted in the obese host microbiome compared to the lean host microbiome. In yet another embodiment, the array may be comprised of a biomolecule up-regulated in the obese host microbiome compared to the lean host microbiome. In still another embodiment, the array may be comprised of a biomolecule down-regulated in the obese host microbiome compared to the lean host microbiome. In still yet another embodiment, the array may be comprised of a biomolecule degraded in the obese host microbiome compared to the lean host microbiome. In an alternative embodiment, the array may be comprised of a biomolecule stabilized in the obese host microbiome compared to the lean host microbiome.


Generally speaking, an array of the invention may comprise at least one biomolecule indicative of, or modulated in, an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome. In one embodiment, the array may comprise at least 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 105, 110, 115, 120, 125, 130, 135, 140, 145, 150, 155, 160, 165, 170, 175, 180, 185, 190, 195, 200, 205, 210, 215, 220, 225, 230, 235, 240, 245, 250, 255, 260, 275, 280, 285, 290, 295, 300, 305, 310, 315, 320, 325, 330, 335, 340, 345, 350, 355, 360, 365, 370, 375, 380, 385, 390, 395, or 400 biomolecules indicative of, or modulated in, an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome. In another embodiment, the array may comprise at least 200, at least 300, at least 400, at least 500, at least 600, at least 700, at least 800, or at least 900 biomolecules indicative of, or modulated in, an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome.


As used herein, “biomolecule” may refer to a nucleic acid, an oligonucleic acid, an amino acid, a peptide, a polypeptide, a protein, a lipid, a carbohydrate, a metabolite, or a fragment thereof. Nucleic acids may include RNA, DNA, and naturally occurring or synthetically created derivatives. A biomolecule may be present in, produced by, or modified by a microorganism within the gut.


In one embodiment, the biomolecules of the array may be selected from the biomolecules listed in Table 13. For instance, the biomolecules of the array may be selected from the group comprising nucleic acids corresponding to SEQ ID NO:1 through SEQ ID NO:273. In another embodiment, the biomolecules of the array may be selected from the biomolecules listed in Table 14. For instance, the biomolecules of the array may be selected from the group comprising nucleic acids corresponding to SEQ ID NO:274 through SEQ ID NO:383. In yet another embodiment, the biomolecules of the array may be selected from the biomolecules listed in Table 13 and Table 14, for instance, the nucleic acids corresponding to SEQ ID NO:1 through SEQ ID NO:383.


Additionally, the biomolecule may be at least 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, or 95% homologous to a biomolecule listed in Table 13 or Table 14 above. In one embodiment, the biomolecule may be at least 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, or 89% homologous to a biomolecule derived from an accession number detailed above. In another embodiment, the biomolecule may be at least 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, or 99% homologous to a biomolecule derived from an accession number detailed above.


In determining whether a biomolecule is substantially homologous or shares a certain percentage of sequence identity with a sequence of the invention, sequence similarity may be defined by conventional algorithms, which typically allow introduction of a small number of gaps in order to achieve the best fit. In particular, “percent identity” of two polypeptides or two nucleic acid sequences is determined using the algorithm of Karlin and Altschul (Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 87:2264-2268, 1993). Such an algorithm is incorporated into the BLASTN and BLASTX programs of Altschul et al. (J. Mol. Biol. 215:403-410, 1990). BLAST nucleotide searches may be performed with the BLASTN program to obtain nucleotide sequences homologous to a nucleic acid molecule of the invention. Equally, BLAST protein searches may be performed with the BLASTX program to obtain amino acid sequences that are homologous to a polypeptide of the invention. To obtain gapped alignments for comparison purposes, Gapped BLAST is utilized as described in Altschul et al. (Nucleic Acids Res. 25:3389-3402, 1997). When utilizing BLAST and Gapped BLAST programs, the default parameters of the respective programs (e.g., BLASTX and BLASTN) are employed. See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov for more details.


For each of the above embodiments, methods of determining biomolecules that are indicative of, or modulated in, an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome may be determined using methods detailed in the Examples.


The arrays may be utilized in several suitable applications. For example, the arrays may be used in methods for detecting association between two or more biomolecules. This method typically comprises incubating a sample with the array under conditions such that the biomolecules comprising the sample may associate with the biomolecules attached to the array. The association is then detected, using means commonly known in the art, such as fluorescence. “Association,” as used in this context, may refer to hybridization, covalent binding, or ionic binding. A skilled artisan will appreciate that conditions under which association may occur will vary depending on the biomolecules, the substrate, and the detection method utilized. As such, suitable conditions may have to be optimized for each individual array created.


In yet another embodiment, the array may be used as a tool in a method to determine whether a compound has efficacy for treatment of obesity or an obesity-related disorder in a host. Alternatively, the array may be used as a tool in a method to determine whether a compound increases or decreases the relative abundance of Bacteriodes, Actinobacteria, or Firmicutes in a subject. Typically, such methods comprise comparing a plurality of biomolecules of the host's microbiome before and after administration of a compound, such that if the abundance of biomolecules associated with obesity decreased after treatment, or the abundance of biomolecules indicative of Bacteroides increases, or the abundance of biomolecules indicative of Firmicutes and/or Actinobacteria decreases, the compound may be efficacious in treating obesity in a host.


The array may also be used to quantitate the plurality of biomolecules of the host microbiome before and after administration of a compound. The abundance of each biomolecule in the plurality may then be compared to determine if there is a decrease in the abundance of biomolecules associated with obesity after treatment.


In some embodiments, the array may be used as a diagnostic or prognostic tool to identify subjects that are susceptible to more efficient energy harvesting, and therefore, more susceptible to weight gain and/or obesity. Such a method may generally comprise incubating the array with biomolecules derived from the subject's gut microbiome to determine the relative abundance of nucleic acids or nucleic acid products associated with Bacteroidetes, Actinobacteria, or Firmictues. In some embodiments, the array may be used to determine the relative abundance of Mollicutes, Mollicute-associated nucleic acids, or Mollicute-associated nucleic acid products in a subject's gut microbiome. Methods to collect, isolate, and/or purify biomolecules from the gut microbiome of a subject to be used in the above methods are known in the art, and are detailed in the examples.


(b) Microbiome Profiles

The present invention also encompasses use of the microbiome as a biomarker to construct microbiome profiles. Generally speaking, a microbiome profile is comprised of a plurality of values with each value representing the abundance of a microbiome biomolecule. The abundance of a microbiome biomolecule may be determined, for instance, by sequencing the nucleic acids of the microbiome as detailed in the examples. This sequencing data may then be analyzed by known software, as detailed in the examples, to determine the abundance of a microbiome biomolecule in the analyzed sample. The abundance of a microbiome biomolecule may also be determined using an array described above. For instance, by detecting the association between a biomolecules comprising a microbiome sample and the biomolecules comprising the array, the abundance of a microbiome biomolecule in the sample may be determined.


A profile may be digitally-encoded on a computer-readable medium. The term “computer-readable medium” as used herein refers to any medium that participates in providing instructions to a processor for execution. Such a medium may take many forms, including but not limited to non-volatile media, volatile media, and transmission media. Non-volatile media may include, for example, optical or magnetic disks. Volatile media may include dynamic memory. Transmission media may include coaxial cables, copper wire and fiber optics. Transmission media may also take the form of acoustic, optical, or electromagnetic waves, such as those generated during radio frequency (RF) and infrared (IR) data communications. Common forms of computer-readable media include, for example, a floppy disk, a flexible disk, hard disk, magnetic tape, or other magnetic medium, a CD-ROM, CDRW, DVD, or other optical medium, punch cards, paper tape, optical mark sheets, or other physical medium with patterns of holes or other optically recognizable indicia, a RAM, a PROM, and EPROM, a FLASH-EPROM, or other memory chip or cartridge, a carrier wave, or other medium from which a computer can read.


A particular profile may be coupled with additional data about that profile on a computer readable medium. For instance, a profile may be coupled with data about what therapeutics, compounds, or drugs may be efficacious for that profile, or about other features of the subject's digestive health when consuming a given diet or set of diets. Conversely, a profile may be coupled with data about what therapeutics, compounds, or drugs may not be efficacious for that profile. Alternatively, a profile may be coupled with known risks associated with that profile. Non-limiting examples of the type of risks that might be coupled with a profile include disease or disorder risks associated with a profile. The computer readable medium may also comprise a database of at least two distinct profiles.


Such a profile may be used, for instance, in a method of selecting a compound for treating obesity or an obesity-related disorder in a host. Generally speaking, such a method would comprise providing a microbiome profile from the host and providing a plurality of reference microbiome profiles, each associated with a compound, and selecting the reference profile most similar to the host microbiome profile, to thereby select a compound for treating obesity or an obesity-related disorder in the host. The host profile and each reference profile may comprise a plurality of values, each value representing the abundance of a microbiome biomolecule.


The microbiome profiles may be utilized in a variety of applications. For example, the microbiome profiles may be used in a method for predicting risk for obesity or an obesity-related disorder in a host. The method comprises, in part, providing a microbiome profile from a host, and providing a plurality of reference microbiome profiles, then selecting the reference profile most similar to the host microbiome profile, such that if the host's microbiome is most similar to a reference obese microbiome, the host is at risk for obesity or an obesity-related disorder. The microbiome profile from the host may be determined using an array of the invention. The reference profiles may be stored on a computer-readable medium such that software known in the art and detailed in the examples may be used to compare the microbiome profile and the reference profiles.


The host microbiome may be derived from a subject that is a rodent, a human, a livestock animal, a companion animal, or a zoological animal. In one embodiment, the host microbiome is derived from a rodent, i.e. a mouse, a rat, a guinea pig, etc. In another embodiment, the host microbiome is derived from a human. In a yet another embodiment the host microbiome is derived from a livestock animal. Non-limiting examples of livestock animals include pigs, cows, horses, goats, sheep, llamas and alpacas. In still another embodiment, the host microbiome is derived from a companion animal. Non-limiting examples of companion animals include pets, such as dogs, cats, rabbits, and birds. In still yet another embodiment, the host microbiome is derived from a zoological animal. As used herein, a “zoological animal” refers to an animal that may be found in a zoo. Such animals may include non-human primates, large cats, wolves, and bears.


III. Kits

The present invention also encompasses a kit for evaluating a compound, therapeutic, or drug. Typically, the kit comprises an array and a computer-readable medium. The array may comprise a substrate, the substrate having disposed thereon at least one biomolecule that is modulated in an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome. The computer-readable medium may have a plurality of digitally-encoded profiles wherein each profile of the plurality has a plurality of values, each value representing the abundance of a biomolecule in a host microbiome detected by the array. The array may be used to determine a profile for a particular host under particular conditions, and then the computer-readable medium may be used to determine if the profile is similar to known profile stored on the computer-readable medium. Non-limiting examples of possible known profiles include obese and lean profiles for several different hosts, for example, rodents, humans, livestock animals, companion animals, or zoological animals.


Definitions

The term “abundance” refers to the representation of a given taxonomic group (e.g. phylum, order, family, genera, or species) of microorganism present in the gastrointestinal tract of a subject.


The term “activity of the microbiota population” refers to the microbiome's ability to harvest energy and nutrients.


The term “antagonist” refers to a molecule that inhibits or attenuates the biological activity of a Fiaf polypeptide and in particular, the ability of Fiaf to inhibit LPL, and/or the ability of the microbiota to regulate Fiaf. Antagonists may include proteins such as antibodies, nucleic acids, carbohydrates, small molecules, or other compounds or compositions that modulate the activity of a Fiaf polypeptide either by directly interacting with the polypeptide or by acting on components of the biological pathway in which Fiaf participates.


The term “agonist” refers to a molecule that enhances or increases the biological activity of a Fiaf polypeptide and in particular, the ability of Fiaf to inhibit LPL. Agonists may include proteins, peptides, nucleic acids, carbohydrates, small molecules (e.g., such as metabolites), or other compounds or compositions that modulate the activity of a Fiaf polypeptide either by directly interacting with the polypeptide or by acting on components of the biological pathway in which Fiaf participates.


The term “altering” as used in the phrase “altering the microbiota population” is to be construed in its broadest interpretation to mean a change in the representation of microbes or the functions/activities of microbial communities in the gastrointestinal tract of a subject. The change may be a decrease or an increase in the presence of a particular microbial species, genus, family, order, or class, or change in the expression of microbial community associated nucleic acids or a change in the protein and metabolic products produced by members of the community.


“BMI” as used herein is defined as a human subject's weight (in kilograms) divided by height (in meters) squared.


An “effective amount” is a therapeutically-effective amount that is intended to qualify the amount of agent that will achieve the goal of a decrease in body fat, or in promoting weight loss.


Fas stands for fatty acid synthase.


Fiaf stands for fasting-induced adipocyte factor, also known as angiopoietin like protein 4 (Angpltl4).


LPL stands for lipoprotein lipase.


The term “obesity-related disorder” includes disorders resulting from, at least in part, obesity. Representative disorders include metabolic syndrome, type II diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.


The term “metagenomics” refers to the application of modern genomic techniques to the study of the composition and operations of communities of microbial organisms sampled directly in their natural environments, by passing the need for isolation and lab cultivation of individual species.


PPAR stands for peroxisome proliferator-activator receptor.


A “subject in need of treatment for obesity” generally will have at least one of three criteria: (i) BMI over 30; (ii) 100 pounds overweight; or (iii) 100% above an “ideal” body weight as determined by generally recognized weight charts.


As various changes could be made in the above compounds, products and methods without departing from the scope of the invention, it is intended that all matter contained in the above description and in the examples given below, shall be interpreted as illustrative and not in a limiting sense.


The following examples are included to demonstrate preferred embodiments of the invention. It should be appreciated by those of skill in the art that the techniques disclosed in the examples that follow represent techniques discovered by the inventors to function well in the practice of the invention. Those of skill in the art should, however, in light of the present disclosure, appreciate that many changes can be made in the specific embodiments that are disclosed and still obtain a like or similar result without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Therefore all matter set forth or shown in the accompanying drawings is to be interpreted as illustrative and not in a limiting sense.


EXAMPLES

The following examples illustrate various iterations of the invention.


Example 1
The Gut Microbiota is Linked to Family and BMI

The bacterial lineages of the human gut microbiota are largely unexplored. In this study, the lineages of gut microbiota of 31 monozygotic (MZ) twin pairs, 23 dizygotic (DZ) twin pairs, and where available their mothers (n=46), were characterized. (Tables 1-5). MZ and DZ co-twins and parent-offspring pairs provide an attractive paradigm for assessing the impact of genotype and shared early environment exposures on the gut microbiome. Moreover, genetically ‘identical’ MZ twin pairs gain weight in response to overfeeding in a more reproducible way than do unrelated individuals and are more concordant for body mass index (BMI) than dizygotic twin pairs, suggesting shared features of their energy balance influenced by host genotype.









TABLE 1







V2/31 165 rRNA gene sequencing statistics
















Data










ID





Months



time-
Family
Twin/


BMI
without
Total


Subject ID
point
number
Mom
Ancestry
Zygosity
category
Antibiotics
sequences


















F1T1Le1
TS1
1
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
6415


F1T1Le2
TS1.2
1
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
1627


F1T2Le1
TS2
1
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
NA
15495


F1T2Le2
TS2.2
1
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
1957


F1MOv1
TS3
1
Mom
EA
NA
Overweight
>6
7870


F1MOv2
TS3.2
1
Mom
EA
NA
Overweight
>6
1799


F2T1Le1
TS4
2
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
9343


F2T1Le2
TS4.2
2
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
2886


F2T2Le1
TS5
2
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
13991


F2T2Le2
TS5.2
2
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
3606


F2MOb1
TS6
2
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
7717


F2MOb2
TS6.2
2
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
4325


F3T1Le1
TS7
3
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
11808


F3T1Le2
TS7.2
3
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
2962


F3T2Le1
TS8
3
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
16793


F3T2Le2
TS8.2
3
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
632


F3Mov1
TS9
3
Mom
EA
NA
Overweight
>6
11291


F3MOb2
TS9.2
3
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
2965


F4T1Ob1
TS10
4
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2280


F4T1Ob2
TS10.2
4
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
979


F4T2Ob1
TS11
4
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2458


F4T2Ob2
TS11.2
4
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2437


F4MOb1
TS12
4
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>1
2086


F4MOb2
TS12.2
4
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>2
1692


F5T1Le1
TS13
5
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
8509


F5T1Le2
TS13.2
5
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
1689


F5T2Le1
TS14
5
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
15903


F5MOv1
TS15
5
Mom
EA
NA
Overweight
>6
15690


F5MOv2
TS15.2
5
Mom
EA
NA
Overweight
>6
3967


F5T1Le1
TS16
6
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
NA
5975


F5T2Le1
TS17
6
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
1182


F7T1Ob1
TS19
7
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
21459


F7T1Ob2
TS19.2
7
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
3953


F7T2Ob1
TS20
7
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
32871


F7T2Ob2
TS20.2
7
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
5045


F7MOb1
TS21
7
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
26781


F7MOb2
TS21.2
7
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
4752


F8T1Le1
TS22
8
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
5110


F8T2Le1
TS23
8
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
1978


F9T1Le1
TS25
9
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
10017


F9T1Le2
TS25.2
9
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
4626


F9T2Le1
TS26
9
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
16757


F9T2Le2
TS26.2
9
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
5111


F9MOb1
TS27
9
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
11885


F9MOb2
TS27.2
9
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
2068


F10T1Ob1
TS28
10
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
6694


F10T2Ob1
TS29
10
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
2411


F10MOv1
TS30
10
Mom
EA
NA
Overweight
>6
8273


F10MLe2
TS30.2
10
Mom
EA
NA
Lean
>6
3280


F11T1Le1
TS31
11
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
18941


F11T1Le2
TS31.2
11
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
5842


F11T2Le1
TS32
11
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
9773


F11T2Le2
TS32.2
11
Twin
EA
MZ
Lean
>6
6178


F11MOv1
TS33
11
Mom
EA
NA
Overweight
>6
18037


F11MOv2
TS33.2
11
Mom
EA
NA
Overweight
>6
1593


F12T1Ob1
TS34
12
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
1730


F12T2Ob1
TS35
12
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
3887


F13T1Ob1
TS37
13
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
3534


F13T1Ob2
TS37.2
13
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
4458


F13T2Ov1
TS38
13
Twin
EA
MZ
Overweight
>6
3043


F13T2Ov2
TS38.2
13
Twin
EA
MZ
Overweight
>6
2566


F13MOb1
TS39
13
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
5848


F13MOb2
TS39.2
13
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
2146


F14T1Ob1
TS43
14
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
2905


F14T2Ob1
TS44
14
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
1621


F15T1Ob1
TS49
15
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
11936


F15T1Ob2
TS49.2
15
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
4220


F15T2Ob1
TS50
15
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
12672


F15T2Ob2
TS50.2
15
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
4603


F15MOb1
TS51
15
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
13789


F15MOb2
TS51.2
15
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
3284


F16T1Ob1
TS55
16
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
3817


F16T1Ob2
TS55.2
16
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
5210


F16T2Ob1
TS56
16
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
5147


F16T2Ob2
TS56.2
16
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
4490


F16MOb1
TS57
16
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>0
8440


F16MOb2
TS57.2
16
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>1
2365


F17T1Ob1
TS61
17
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
672


F17T1Ob2
TS61.2
17
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
3738


F17T2Ob1
TS62
17
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2311


F17T2Ob2
TS62.2
17
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
3821


F17MOb1
TS63
17
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
2132


F17MOb2
TS63.2
17
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
1853


F18T1Ov1
TS64
18
Twin
EA
MZ
Overweight
>6
4571


F18T1Ov2
TS64.2
18
Twin
EA
MZ
Overweight
>6
4523


F18T2Ob1
TS65
18
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
2502


F18T2Ob2
TS65.2
18
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
3943


F18MOb1
TS66
18
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
3491


F18MOb2
TS66.2
18
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
6187


F19T1Ob1
TS67
19
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
NA
988


F19T1Ob2
TS67.2
19
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
NA
1861


F19T2Ob1
TS68
19
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
3870


F19T2Ob2
TS68.2
19
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2242


F19MOb1
TS69
19
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
5290


F19MOb2
TS69.2
19
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>0
2305


F20T1Obt
TS70
20
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2139


F20T1Ob2
TS70.2
20
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2166


F20T2Ob1
TS71
20
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
3130


F20T2Ob2
TS71.2
20
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2293


F20MOb1
TS72
20
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
1674


F20MOb2
TS72.2
20
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
376


F21T1Ob1
TS73
21
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2963


F21T2Ob1
TS74
21
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2177


F21T2Ob2
TS74.2
21
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
1791


F21MOb1
TS75
21
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
1434


F21MOb2
TS75.2
21
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
1887


F22T1Ob1
TS76
22
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2977


F22T1Ob2
TS76.2
22
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
1962


F22T2Ov1
TS77
22
Twin
AA
MZ
Overweight
>6
2168


F22MOb1
TS78
22
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
1460


F22MOb2
TS78.2
22
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2482


F23T1Ob1
TS82
23
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
1628


F23T1Ob2
TS82.2
23
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
1673


F23T2Ob1
TS83
23
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
1572


F23T2Ob2
TS83.2
23
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
3349


F23MOb1
TS84
23
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2215


F23MOb2
TS84.2
23
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2033


F24T1Ob1
TS85
24
Twin
EA
DZ
Overweight
>3
2385


F24T1Ov2
TS85.2
24
Twin
EA
DZ
Overweight
>6
2122


F24T1Ob1
TS86
24
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>1
4107


F24T2Ob2
TS86.2
24
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>3
1704


F24MOb1
TS87
24
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
2605


F24MOb1
TS87.2
24
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
1587


F25T1Ob1
TS88
25
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>4
2497


F25T1Ob2
TS88.2
25
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2129


F25T2Ob1
TS89
25
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
2108


F25T2Ob2
TS89.2
25
Twin
EA
DZ
Obese
>6
3549


F25MOb1
TS90
25
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
2615


F25MOb2
TS90.2
25
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
2725


F26TtOb1
TS91
26
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>5
675


F26TtOb2
TS91.2
26
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2307


F26T2Ob1
TS92
26
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2036


F26T2Ob2
TS92.2
26
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2335


F27T1Ob1
TS94
27
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
1861


F27T1Ob2
TS94.2
27
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2511


F27T2Ob1
TS95
27
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2842


F27T2Ob2
TS95.2
27
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2550


F27MOb1
TS96
27
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
1516


F27MOb2
TS96.2
27
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2909


F28T1Ob1
TS97
28
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2326


F28T1Ob2
TS97.2
28
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2944


F28T2Ob1
TS98
28
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2970


F28T2Ob2
TS98.2
28
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2851


F28MOv2
TS99.2
28
Mom
AA
NA
Overweight
>6
3136


F29T1Ob1
TS100
29
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
3504


F29T1Ob2
TS100.2
29
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2616


F29T2Ob2
TS101.2
29
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2387


F30T1Ob1
TS103
30
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
1473


F30T1Ob2
TS103.2
30
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
3012


F30T2Ob1
TS104
30
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
1970


F30T2Ob2
TS104.2
30
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2895


F30MOb1
TS105
30
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
1864


F30MOb2
TS105.2
30
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2096


F31T1Ob1
TS106
31
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2698


F31T1Ob2
TS106.2
31
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2250


F31T2Ob1
TS107
31
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
3132


F31T2Ob2
TS107.2
31
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
4521


F32T1Le1
TS109
32
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
2583


F32T1Le2
TS109.2
32
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
1682


F32T2Le1
TS110
32
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
2286


F32T2Le2
TS110.2
32
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
4408


F32MLe1
TS111
32
Mom
EA
NA
Lean
>6
3822


F32MLe2
TS111.2
32
Mom
EA
NA
Lean
>6
2597


F33T1Ob1
TS115
33
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2619


F33T1Ob2
TS115.2
33
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2017


F33T2Ob1
TS116
33
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
5558


F33T2Ob2
TS116.2
33
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2440


F33MOb1
TS117
33
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
3430


F33MOb2
TS117.2
33
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2932


F34T1Ob1
TS118
34
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>0
2209


F34T1Ob2
TS118.2
34
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3030


F34T2Ob1
TS119
34
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2791


F34T2Ob2
TS119.2
34
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>0
3828


F34MOb1
TS120
34
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
97


F34MOb2
TS120.2
34
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
3015


F35T1Le1
TS124
35
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
2336


F35T1Le2
TS124.2
35
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
2102


F35T2Ov1
TS125
35
Twin
EA
DZ
Overweight
>6
2381


F35T2Ov2
TS125.2
35
Twin
EA
DZ
Overweight
>6
1889


F35MOb1
TS126
35
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
1733


F35MOb2
TS126.2
35
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
2676


F36T1Le1
TS127
36
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
4119


F36T1Le2
TS127.2
36
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
1929


F36T2Le1
TS128
36
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
4698


F36T2Le2
TS128.2
36
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
2857


F36MLe1
TS129
36
Mom
EA
NA
Lean
>6
2628


F36MLe2
TS129.2
36
Mom
EA
NA
Lean
>6
2247


F37T1Ob1
TS130
37
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
3121


F37T1Ob2
TS130.2
37
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>1
3391


F37T2Ob1
TS131
37
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
3338


F37T2Ob2
TS131.2
37
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
NA
3168


F37MOb1
TS132
37
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>1
2586


F37MOb2
TS132.2
37
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
NA
4130


F38T1Ob1
TS133
38
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2355


F38T1Ob2
TS133.2
38
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
3902


F38T2Ob1
TS134
38
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>3
1378


F38T2Ob2
TS134.2
38
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>5
2656


F38MOb1
TS135
38
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
3068


F38MOb2
TS135.2
38
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2436


F39T1Ov1
TS136
39
Twin
AA
DZ
Overweight
>6
2962


F39T1Ob2
TS136.2
39
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
4164


F39T2Ob1
TS137
39
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3748


F39T2Ob2
TS137.2
39
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>0
2902


F39MOb1
TS138
39
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
3289


F39MOb2
TS138.2
39
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
1369


F40T1Ob1
TS139
40
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2756


F40T1Ob2
TS139.2
40
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3195


F40T2Ob1
TS140
40
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2698


F40T2Ob2
TS140.2
40
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2851


F40MOb1
TS141
40
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2083


F40MOb2
TS141.2
40
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
3125


F41T1Ob1
TS142
41
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2432


F41T1Ob2
TS142.2
41
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>0
3466


F41T2Ob1
TS143
41
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3944


F41T2Ob2
TS143.2
41
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3721


F41MOb1
TS144
41
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2804


F41MOb2
TS144.2
41
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
4354


F42T1Ob1
TS145
42
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>0
2738


F42T1Ob2
TS145.2
42
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>1
3633


F42T2Ob1
TS146
42
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>0
3214


F42T2Ob2
TS146.2
42
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>1
3380


F42Mob1
TS147
42
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>2
3513


F42Mov2
TS147.2
42
Mom
AA
NA
Overweight
>4
4957


F43T1Ob1
TS148
43
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>6
6128


F43T2Ob1
TS149
43
Twin
EA
MZ
Obese
>5
11555


F43MOb1
TS150
43
Mom
EA
NA
Obese
>6
8045


F44T1Ob1
TS151
44
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3800


F44T1Ob2
TS151.2
44
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3210


F44T2Ob1
TS152
44
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3326


F44T2Ob2
TS152.2
44
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2742


F44Mov1
TS153
44
Mom
AA
NA
Overweight
>6
4118


F45T1Le2
TS154.2
45
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>6
1466


F45T2Le1
TS155
45
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>6
2267


F45T2Le2
TS155.2
45
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>6
2361


F45MOb1
TS156
45
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>2
1694


F45MOb2
TS156.2
45
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
1906


F46T1Ob1
TS160
46
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2367


F46T1Ob2
TS160.2
46
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2049


F46T2Ob1
TS161
46
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2185


F46MOb1
TS162
46
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
3564


F46MOb2
TS162.2
46
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
4041


F47T1Le1
TS163
47
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>2
1624


F47T1Le2
TS163.2
47
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>3
2495


F47T2Le1
TS164
47
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>6
2651


F47T2Le2
TS164.2
47
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>6
3018


F47MLe1
TS165
47
Mom
AA
NA
Lean
>6
2767


F47MLe2
TS165.2
47
Mom
AA
NA
Lean
>6
2839


F48T1Ob1
TS166
48
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>2
3628


F48T1Ob2
TS166.2
48
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3252


F48T2Ob1
TS167
48
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2822


F48T2Ob2
TS167.2
48
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
4538


F48MOb1
TS168
48
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2882


F48MOb2
TS168.2
48
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
4569


F49T1Ob1
TS169
49
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
4217


F49T1Ob2
TS169.2
49
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3644


F49T2Ob1
TS170
49
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>3
2117


F49T2Ob2
TS170.2
49
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2785


F50T1Ob1
TS178
50
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2378


F50T1Ob2
TS178.2
50
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2894


F50T2Ob1
TS179
50
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2122


F50T2Ob2
TS179.2
50
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
3189


F50MLe1
TS180
50
Mom
AA
NA
Lean
>6
2132


F51T1Ob1
TS181
51
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>3
3455


F51T1Ob2
TS181.2
51
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
2812


F51T2Ov1
TS182
51
Twin
AA
DZ
Overweight
>6
7014


F51T2Ob2
TS182.2
51
Twin
AA
DZ
Obese
>6
6903


F51MOb1
TS183
51
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>2
3243


F51MOb2
TS183.2
51
Mom
AA
NA
Obese
>6
2884


F52T1Le1
TS184
52
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>6
1925


F52T2Le1
TS185
52
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>6
2545


F52T2Le2
TS185.2
52
Twin
AA
MZ
Lean
>2
2538


F52MOv1
TS186
52
Mom
AA
NA
Overweight
>6
1735


F53T1Ob1
TS190
53
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
NA
3165


F53T2Ob1
TS191
53
Twin
AA
MZ
Obese
>6
2720


F53MOv1
TS192
53
Mom
AA
NA
Overweight
>6
5067


F54T1Le1
TS193
54
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
1799


F54T1Le2
TS193.2
54
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
1739


F54T2Le1
TS194
54
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
2291


F54T2Le2
TS194.2
54
Twin
EA
DZ
Lean
>6
1612


F54MLe1
TS195
54
Mom
EA
NA
Lean
>6
2782


F54MLe2
TS195.2
54
Mom
EA
NA
Lean
>6
2462








TOTAL

119519
















TABLE 2







V6 16S rRNA gene sequencing statistics












Subject







IDa
Data ID
Twin/Mom
Family
BMI
Sequences















F1T1Le1
TS1
Twin
1
Lean
25,140


F1T2Le1
TS2
Twin
1
Lean
42,186


F1MOv1
TS3
Mom
1
Overweight
17,726


F2T1Le1
TS4
Twin
2
Lean
25,705


F2T2Le1
TS5
Twin
2
Lean
26,608


F2MOb1
TS6
Mom
2
Obese
27,007


F3T1Le1
TS7
Twin
3
Lean
17,469


F3T2Le1
TS8
Twin
3
Lean
17,170


F3MOv1
TS9
Mom
3
Overweight
14,787


F5T1Le1
TS13
Twin
5
Lean
15,296


F5T2Le1
TS14
Twin
5
Lean
14,220


F5MOv1
TS15
Mom
5
Overweight
14,244


F7T1Ob1
TS19
Twin
7
Obese
43,635


F7T2Ob1
TS20
Twin
7
Obese
13,476


F7MOb1
TS21
Mom
7
Obese
23,714


F9T1Le1
TS25
Twin
9
Lean
20,491


F9T2Le1
TS26
Twin
9
Lean
27,626


F9MOb1
TS27
Mom
9
Obese
25,494


F10T1Ob1
TS28
Twin
10
Obese
20,905


F10T2Ob1
TS29
Twin
10
Obese
15,698


F10MOv1
TS30
Mom
10
Overweight
32,083


F11T1Le1
TS31
Twin
11
Lean
16,530


F11T2Le1
TS32
Twin
11
Lean
31,690


F11MOv1
TS33
Mom
11
Overweight
28,962


F15T1Ob1
TS49
Twin
15
Obese
22,201


F15T2Ob1
TS50
Twin
15
Obese
30,498


F15MOb1
TS51
Mom
15
Obese
22,691


F16T1Ob1
TS55
Twin
16
Obese
37,027


F16T2Ob1
TS56
Twin
16
Obese
31,512


F16MOb1
TS57
Mom
16
Obese
30,392


F43T1Ob1
TS148
Twin
43
Obese
26,458


F43T2Ob1
TS149
Twin
43
Obese
35,838


F43MOb1
TS150
Mom
43
Obese
23,463






TOTAL
817,942






aID nomenclature: Family number, Twin number or mother, and BMI category (Le = lean; Ov = overweight, Ob = obese; e.g. F1T1Le stands for family 1, twin 1, lean)














TABLE 3







Full-length 16S rRNA gene sequencing statistics












Subject IDa
Data ID
Twin/Mom
Family
BMI
Sequences















F1T1Le1
TS1
Twin
1
Lean
349


F1T2Le1
TS2
Twin
1
Lean
351


F1MOv1
TS3
Mom
1
Overweight
331


F2T1Le1
TS4
Twin
2
Lean
351


F2T2Le1
TS5
Twin
2
Lean
345


F2MOb1
TS6
Mom
2
Obese
348


F3T1Le1
TS7
Twin
3
Lean
237


F3T2Le1
TS8
Twin
3
Lean
354


F3MOv1
TS9
Mom
3
Overweight
357


F5T1Le1
TS13
Twin
5
Lean
337


F5T2Le1
TS14
Twin
5
Lean
350


F5MOv1
TS15
Mom
5
Overweight
338


F7T1Ob1
TS19
Twin
7
Obese
333


F7T2Ob1
TS20
Twin
7
Obese
340


F7MOb1
TS21
Mom
7
Obese
332


F9T1Le1
TS25
Twin
9
Lean
351


F9T2Le1
TS26
Twin
9
Lean
252


F9MOb1
TS27
Mom
9
Obese
343


F10T1Ob1
TS28
Twin
10
Obese
344


F10T2Ob1
TS29
Twin
10
Obese
337


F10MOv1
TS30
Mom
10
Overweight
261


F15T1Ob1
TS49
Twin
15
Obese
338


F15T2Ob1
TS50
Twin
15
Obese
319


F15MOb1
TS51
Mom
15
Obese
331


F16T1Ob1
TS55
Twin
16
Obese
353


F16T2Ob1
TS56
Twin
16
Obese
278


F16MOb1
TS57
Mom
16
Obese
348


F43T1Ob1
TS148
Twin
43
Obese
323


F43T2Ob1
TS149
Twin
43
Obese
340


F43MOb1
TS150
Mom
43
Obese
349






TOTAL
9,920






aID nomenclature: Family number, Twin number or mother, and BMI category (Le = lean; Ov = overweight, Ob = obese; e.g. F1T1LE stands for family 1, twin 1, lean)














TABLE 4







Phytotypes shared across ≧70% of all individuals (V2/3 dataset: 1,000 random


sequences/individual)a

















Number
Highest
Lowest
Mean ± sem %





% of
of reads
relative
relative
of 16S rRNA



Individuals
individuals
grouped
abundance
abundance
gene sequences


Phylotype
with
with
into
across all
across all
across all
Taxonomic


ID
phylotype
phylotype
phylotype
individuals
individuals
individuals
classificationb

















1
151
98.1
7942
28.7
0
6.53 ± 0.41
Bacteria; Fimircutes;









Clostridia;










Faecalibacterium



2
151
98.1
5375
25.5
0
4.41 ± 0.34
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



3
144
93.5
2518
14.7
0
2.06 ± 0.16
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales


4
143
92.9
5606
30.5
0
4.56 ± 0.41
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Eubacterium rectale



5
140
90.9
1629
8.1
0
1.34 ± 0.11
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium











Clostridioforme



6
134
87.0
757
12.7
0
0.62 ± 0.09
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus;











Ruminococcus











schinkii



7
133
86.4
1485
12.2
0
1.23 ± 0.14
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Coprococcus



8
133
86.4
1392
6.5
0
1.14 ± 0.10
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales


9
133
86.4
1201
10.5
0
0.99 ± 0.12
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



10
128
83.1
819
5.2
0
0.68 ± 0.06
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales


11
127
82.5
747
3.7
0
0.62 ± 0.05
Bacteria; Fimircutes;









Clostridia;










Faecalibacterium



12
126
81.8
11598
51.6
0
9.39 ± 0.79
Bacteria;









Bacteroidetes;









Bacteroidales;









Bacteroidaceae


13
125
81.2
2585
34.3
0
2.15 ± 0.31
Bacteria; Fimircutes;









Clostridia;










Faecalibacterium



14
123
79.9
3512
15.3
0
2.89 ± 0.25
Bacteria; Fimircutes;









Clostridia;










Faecalibacterium



15
120
77.9
792
8.4
0
0.66 ± 0.08
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile



16
118
76.6
632
2.7
0
0.52 ± 0.05
Bacteria; Fimircutes;









Clostridia;










Faecalibacterium



17
115
74.7
3422
43.3
0
2.79 ± 0.41
Bacteria;









Bacteroidetes;









Bacteroidales;









Bacteroidaceae


18
113
73.4
441
2.3
0
0.37 ± 0.03
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile



19
112
72.7
1168
17.4
0
0.98 ± 0.16
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



20
111
72.1
749
5.2
0
0.61 ± 0.07
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales


21
108
70.1
640
3.5
0
0.53 ± 0.06
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus







a1,000 sequences were randomly sampled from a single timepoint for each individual




bBased on the consensus taxonomy of ≧90% sequences within each phylotype (best-BLAST-hit against the Greengenes database)














TABLE 5







Phylotypes shared across >90% of all individuals (V6 dataset: 10,000 random


sequences/individual)

















Number
Highest
Lowest
Mean ± sem %





% of
of reads
relative
relative
of 16S rRNA



Individuals
individuals
grouped
abundance
abundance
gene sequences


Phylotype
with
with
into
across all
across all
across all
Taxonomic


ID
phylotype
phylotype
phylotype
individuals
individuals
individuals
classificationa

















1
33
100.0
10400
9.7
0.011
3.40 ± 0.45
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile



2
33
100.0
5161
5.9
0.011
1.67 ± 0.23
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile;











Clostridium











fusiformis



3
33
100.0
6077
6.7
0.021
1.97 ± 0.32
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



4
33
100.0
16600
26.8
0.011
5.36 ± 1.02
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Eubacterium rectale



5
33
100.0
11654
12.5
0.011
3.78 ± 0.58
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



6
32
97.0
3113
5.8
0.000
1.01 ± 0.23
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile



7
32
97.0
2908
4.2
0.000
0.96 ± 0.21
Bacteria;









Bacteroidetes;









Bacteroidales;









Bacteroidaceae


8
32
97.0
2382
3.7
0.000
0.78 ± 0.13
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



9
32
97.0
1712
4.4
0.000
0.56 ± 0.14
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus;











Ruminococcus











schinkii



10
31
93.9
3940
6.6
0.000
1.29 ± 0.26
Bacteria; Fimircutes;









Clostridia:










Faecalibacterium



11
31
93.9
3729
4.9
0.000
1.21 ± 0.18
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile



12
30
90.9
454
0.7
0.000
0.15 ± 0.03
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



13
30
90.9
687
1.1
0.000
0.23 ± 0.04
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia


14
30
90.9
999
2.3
0.000
0.33 ± 0.08
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Preptostreptococaceae;









Peptostreptococcus_anaerobius;










Clostridium











bifermentans



15
30
90.9
1241
5.3
0.000
0.40 ± 0.16
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium bolteae



16
30
90.9
160
0.2
0.000
0.05 ± 0.01
Bacteria;









Actinobacteria;









Actinobacteridae;









Actinomycineae


17
30
90.9
1417
2.0
0.000
0.46 ± 0.09
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



18
30
90.9
1014
1.2
0.000
0.33 ± 0.06
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales


19
30
90.9
1353
1.6
0.000
0.44 ± 0.08
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus;











Ruminococcus luti



20
30
90.9
2686
6.0
0.000
0.88 ± 0.22
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;









Clostridium










clostridioforme



21
30
90.9
7454
12.2
0.000
2.43 ± 0.63
Bacteria; Fimircutes;









Clostridia;










Faecalibacterium







aBased on the consensus taxonomy of >90% sequences within each phylotype (best-BLAST-hit against the Greengenes database)














TABLE 6







Phylotypes shared across ≧70% of all individivals (Full-length dataset; 200 random


sequences/individual)




















Mean ± sem %






Number
Highest
Lowest
of 16S rRNA




% of
of reads
relative
relative
gene



Individuals
Individuals
grouped
abundance
abundance
sequences


Phylotype
with
with
into
across all
across all
across all
Taxonomic


ID
phylotype
phylotype
phylotype
individuals
individuals
individuals
Classificationsa

















1
28
93.3
378
17.9
0.0
7.81 ± 1.04
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;










Faecalibacterium



2
27
90.0
347
25.0
0.0
6.90 ± 1.20
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Ruminococcus



3
26
86.7
128
9.9
0.0
2.62 ± 0.47
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales


4
26
86.7
298
23.1
0.0
6.00 ± 1.14
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Eubacterium rectale



5
26
86.7
127
12.0
0.0
2.64 ± 0.49
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium











clostridioforme



6
22
73.3
110
10.9
0.0
2.33 ± 0.55
Bacteria;









Bacteroidetes;









Bacteroidales;









Bacteroidaceae


7
22
73.3
87
5.7
0.0
1.76 ± 0.29
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile;











Clostridium











fusiformis



8
21
70.0
112
11.9
0.0
2.32 ± 0.49
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Coprococcus



9
21
70.0
75
6.9
0.0
1.53 ± 0.32
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile



10
21
70.0
54
5.7
0.0
1.14 ± 0.23
Bacteria; Firmicutes;









Clostridia;









Clostridiales;










Clostridium nexile







aBased on the consensus taxonomy of >90% sequences within each phylotype (best-BLAST-hit against the Greengenes database)







Sample Characteristics

Twin pairs who had been enrolled in the Missouri Adolescent Female Twin Study (MOAFTS) were recruited for this study (mean period of enrollment, 11.7±1.2 years; range, 4.4-13.0 years). The MOAFTS twin cohort, comprised of female like-sex twin pairs, was identified from Missouri birth records over the period 1994-1999, when the twins were median age 15. A total of 350 twins from the larger MOAFTS cohort completed screening interviews for the present study. Pairs most likely to meet study criteria were identified at the wave five interview of the MOAFTS twin cohort (which has 90% retention of wave four participants). Eligibility was then confirmed at screening interview. All twins were 25-32 years old, of European or African ancestry (EA and AA, respectively), were generally concordant for obesity (BMI>30 kg/m2) or leanness (BMI=18.5-24.9 kg/m2) [1 twin pair was lean/overweight (overweight defined as BMI≧25 and <30) and 6 pairs were overweight/obese], and had not taken antibiotics for at least 5.49±0.09 months. Each participant completed a detailed medical, lifestyle, and dietary questionnaire. Participants were broadly representative of the overall Missouri population with respect to BMI, parity, education, and marital status. Although all were born in Missouri, they currently live throughout the USA: 29% live in the same house, but some live >800 km apart. Since fecal samples are readily attainable and representative of interpersonal differences in gut microbial ecology, they were collected from each individual and frozen immediately. The collection procedure was repeated again with an average interval between sample collections of 57±4 days.


Community DNA Preparation

Frozen de-identified fecal samples were stored at −80° C. before processing. In order to homogenize each sample, a 10-20 g aliquot of each sample was pulverized in liquid nitrogen with a mortar and pestle. An aliquot (˜500mg) of each sample was then suspended, while frozen, in a solution containing 500 μl of extraction buffer [200 mM Tris (pH 8.0), 200 mM NaCl, 20 mM EDTA], 210 μl of 20% SDS, 500 μl of a mixture of phenol:chloroform:isoamyl alcohol (25:24:1, pH 7.9), and 500 μl of a slurry of 0.1 mm-diameter zirconia/silica beads (BioSpec Products, Bartlesville, Okla.). Microbial cells were subsequently lysed by mechanical disruption with a bead beater (BioSpec Products) set on high for 2 min at room temperature, followed by extraction with phenol:chloroform:isoamyl alcohol, and precipitation with isopropanol. DNA obtained from three separate 10 mg frozen aliquots of each fecal sample were pooled (≧200 μg DNA) and used for pyrosequencing (see below).


Full-Length 16S rRNA Sequence-Based Surveys


Five replicate PCR reactions were performed for each fecal DNA sample. To generate full length or near full length bacterial 16S rRNA amplicons, each 25 μl reaction contained 100 ng of gel purified DNA (Qiaquick, Qiagen), 10 mM Tris (pH 8.3), 50 mM KCl, 2 mM MgSO4, 0.16 μM dNTPs, 0.4 μM of the bacteria-specific primer 8F (5′-AGAGTTTGATCCTGGCTCAG-3′), 0.4 μM of the universal primer 1391R (5′-GACGGGCGGTGWGTRCA-3′), 0.4 M betaine, and 3 units of Taq polymerase (Invitrogen). Cycling conditions were 94° C. for 2 min, followed by 25 cycles of 94° C. for 1 min, 55° C. for 45 sec, and 72° C. for 2 min. Replicate PCRs were pooled and concentrated (Millipore; Montage PCR filter columns). Full-length 16S rRNA gene amplicons (1.3kb) were then gel-purified using the Qiaquick kit (Qiagen), subcloned into TOPO TA pCR4.0 (Invitrogen), and the ligated DNA transformed into E. coli TOP10 (Invitrogen). For each sample, 384 colonies containing cloned 16S rRNA nucleic acid amplicons were processed for sequencing. Plasmid inserts were sequenced bi-directionally using vector-specific primers plus the internal primer 907R (5′-CCGTCAATTCCTTTRAGTTT-3′).


16S rRNA gene sequences were edited and assembled into consensus sequences using the PHRED and PHRAP software packages within the Xplorseq program. Sequences that did not assemble were discarded and bases with PHRED quality scores <20 were trimmed. Sequences were checked for chimeras using Bellerophon program version 3 with the default parameters (final dataset n=8,941 near full-length 16S rRNA gene sequences; for sequence designations see Table 1). Alignments for reference genome 16S rRNA gene sequences were manually edited in ARB.


V2/3 16S rRNA Sequence-Based Surveys


Four replicate PCR reactions targeting the V2/3 region of bacterial 16S rRNA genes were performed on the same fecal DNA samples used above. Each 20 μl reaction contained 100 ng of gel purified DNA (Qiaquick, Qiagen), 8 μl 2.5× HotMaster PCR Mix (Eppendorf), 0.3 μM of the primer 8F [5′-GCCTTGCCAGCCCGCTCAG-TCAGAGTTTGATCCTGGCTCAG-3′; composite of 454 primer B (underlined), linker nucleotides (TC), and the universal bacterial primer 8F (italics)], and 0.3 μM of the primer 338R [5′-GCCTCCCTCGCGCCATCAGNNNNNNNNCA-TGCTGCCTCCCGTAGGAGT-3′; 454 Life Sciences primer A (underlined), a unique 8 base barcode (Ns), linker nucleotides (CA), and the broad-range bacterial primer 338R (italics)]. Cycling conditions were 95° C. for 2 min, followed by 30 cycles of 95° C. for 20 sec, 52° C. for 20 sec, and 65° C. for 1 min. Replicate PCRs were pooled and purified with Ampure magnetic purification beads (Agencourt).


PCR products were quantified with the bisbenzimide H assay. An aliquot of each PCR product was incubated for 5 min at room temperature in THE reagent [10 mM Trizma HCl pH 8.1, 100 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, and 50 ng/ml freshly prepared bisbenzimide H (Sigma)]. Samples were read on a flurometer or plate reader (excitation at 365 nm, emission at 460 nm) relative to a standard curve constructed using E. coli DNA (Sigma). Multiple pools, each containing approximately equimolar amounts of PCR products, were assembled for 454 FLX amplicon pyrosequencing (n=33-100 barcoded samples/pool). Technical replicates were analyzed from selected representatives of each pool across four different sequencing centers; results were highly reproducible, discriminating between individuals and between samples from the same individual over time (FIG. 1).


V6 16S rRNA Sequence-Based Surveys


PCR reactions targeting the V6 region of bacterial 16S rRNA genes were performed on the same fecal DNA samples used above. Each 32 μl reaction contained 100 ng of gel purified DNA (Qiaquick, Qiagen), PCR buffer (PurePeak DNA polymerization mix, Thermo-Fisher), 0.625 mM PurePeak dNTPs (Thermo-Scientific), 0.625 μM Fusion Primer A, 0.625 μM Fusion Primer B, and 5U Pfu polymerase (Stratagene). The primer set included 5 forward primers (Fusion A) and 4 reverse primers (Fusion B) fused to the 454 Life Sciences adaptors A and B respectively. Cycling conditions were 94° C. for 3 min, followed by 30 cycles of 94° C. for 30 sec, 57° C. for 45 sec, and 72° C. for 1 min, with a final extension period of 72° C. for 2 min. PCR products were purified with MinElute columns (Qiagen), and DNA was quantified using a Bioanalyzer (Agilent) and the PicoGreen assay (Invitrogen). Two pools of PCR products were constructed for 454 FLX amplicon pyrosequencing, composed of 18 and 20 samples, respectively (the second run contained 3 samples from the V2/3 region and 3 technical replicates, one additional sample (TS30) was sequenced in a third run, bringing the total number of V6 samples processed to 33). Since technical replicates were highly reproducible (see above and FIG. 5), datasets for a given individual's biospecimen were pooled for all subsequent analyses. Any sequences that did not have an exact match to the proximal primer or that contained one or more ambiguous bases were removed as low quality. The proximal primer and any fuzzy matches (identified with BLAST and the fuzznuc program) to the distal primer were then trimmed from the sequences. Finally, any trimmed sequences shorter than 50 nucleotides were also removed as low quality.


Picking Operational Taxonomic Units (OTUs)

Pyrosequencing data was pre-processed to remove sequences with low quality scores, sequences with ambiguous characters, or sequences outside of the length bounds (V6<50 nt, V2/3<200 nt) and binned according to sample based on the error-correcting barcodes. Similar sequences were identified using the Megablast software and the following parameters: E-value 1−10; minimum coverage, 99%; and minimum pairwise identity, 97%. Candidate OTUs were identified as sets of sequences connected to each other at this level using the top 4000 hits per sequence. Each candidate OTU was considered valid if the average density of connection was above threshold; otherwise it was broken up into smaller connected components.


Tree Building and UniFrac Clustering for PCA Analysis

A relaxed neighbor-joining tree was built from one representative sequence per OTU using Clearcut, employing the Kimura correction (the PH lanemask was applied to V2/3 data), but otherwise with default comparisons. Unweighted UniFrac was run using the resulting tree and the counts of each sequence in each sample. Principle component analysis (PCA) was performed on the resulting matrix of distances between each pair of samples. To determine if the UniFrac distances were on average significantly different for pairs of samples (i.e. between twin-pairs, between twins and their mother, or between unrelated individuals), a t-test was performed on the UniFrac distance matrix, and a p-value was generated for the t-statistic by permutation of the rows and columns as in the Mantel test, regenerating the t-statistic for 1000 random samples, and using the distribution to obtain an empirical p-value.


Taxonomy Assignment

Taxonomy was assigned using the best-BLAST-hit against Greengenes (E-value cutoff of 1e−10, minimum 88% coverage, 88% percent identity) and the Hugenholtz taxomony, downloaded May 12, 2008, excluding sequences annotated as chimeric (http://greengenes.lbl.gov/Download/Sequence_Data/Greengenes_format/).


Rarefaction and Phylogenetic Diversity Measurements

To determine which individuals had the most diverse communities of gut bacteria, rarefaction plots and Phylogenetic Diversity (PD) measurements, as described by Faith (Biological Conservation 1992), were made for each sample. PD is the total amount of branch length in a phylogenetic tree constructed from the combined 16S rRNA dataset, leading to the sequences in a given sample. To account for differences in sampling effort between individuals, and to estimate the thoroughness of sampling of each individual, the accumulation of PD (branch length) with sampling effort was plotted in a manner analogous to rarefaction curves. The PD rarefaction curve for each individual was generated by applying custom python code that can be downloaded from http://bayes.colorado.edu/unifrac, to the Arb parsimony insertion tree.


Results

To characterize the bacterial lineages present in the fecal microbiotas of these 44 individuals, 16S rRNA sequencing was performed, targeting the full-length gene with an ABI 3730xl capillary sequencer. Additionally, multiplex sequencing with a 454 FLX pyrosequencer was used to survey the V2/3 variable region and the V6 hypervariable region (Tables 1, 2 and 3). Complementary phylogenetic and taxon-based methods were used to compare 16S rRNA sequences among fecal communities. Phylogenetic clustering with UniFrac is based on the principle that communities can be compared in terms of their shared evolutionary history, as measured by the degree to which they share branch length on a phylogenetic tree. This approach was complemented with taxon-based methods; these methods disregard some of the information contained in the phylogenetic tree of the taxa in question, but have the advantage that specific taxa unique to, or shared among, groups of samples can be identified (e.g., those from lean or obese individuals). Prior to both types of analyses, 16S rRNA gene sequences were grouped into Operational Taxonomic Units (OTUs/phylotypes) using the furthest-neighbor-like algorithm and a sequence identity threshold of 97%, which is commonly used to define ‘species’-level phylotypes. Taxonomic assignments were made using BLAST and Hugenholtz taxonomy annotations in the Greengenes database.


No matter which region of the 16S rRNA gene was examined (V2/3 or V6 pyrosequencing reads, or the near-complete gene from Sanger reads), individuals from the same family (a twin and her co-twin, or twins and their mother) had a more similar bacterial community structure than unrelated individuals (FIGS. 2A and 3A, B) and shared significantly more phylotypes [G=55.2, p<10−12 (V2/3); G=112.3, p<0.001 (V6); G=11.3, p<0.001 (full-length)]. No significant correlation was seen between the degree of physical separation of family members' current homes and the degree of similarity between their microbial communities (defined by UniFrac). The observed familial similarity was not due to an indirect effect of the physiologic states of obesity versus leanness; similar results were observed after stratifying twin-pairs and their mothers by BMI category (concordant lean or concordant obese individuals; FIG. 4). Surprisingly, there was no significant difference in the degree of similarity in the gut microbiotas of adult MZ versus DZ twin-pairs (FIG. 2A). However, in the present study it was not assessed whether MZ and DZ twin pairs had different degrees of similarities at earlier stages of their lives.


Multiplex pyrosequencing of V2/3 and V6 amplicons allowed higher levels of coverage of community diversity compared to what was feasible using Sanger sequencing, reaching on average 3,984±232 (V2/3) and 24,786±1,403 (V6) sequences per sample. To control for differences in coverage between samples, all analyses were performed on an equal number of randomly selected sequences [200 full-length, 1,000 V2/3, and 10,000 V6]. At this level of coverage, there was little overlap between the sampled fecal communities: only 2, 5, and 21 phylotypes were found in >90% of the individuals surveyed (full-length, V2/3, and V6 data respectively). Moreover, the number of 16S rRNA gene sequences belonging to these phylotypes varied greatly between fecal microbiotas (Tables 4, 5 and 6).


Samples taken from the same individual at the initial collection point and 57±4 days later were remarkably consistent with respect to the specific phylotypes found (FIGS. 1 and 5), but showed variations in the relative abundance of the major gut bacterial phyla (FIG. 6). There was no significant association between UniFrac distance and the time between sample collections. Overall, fecal samples from the same individual were much more similar to one another than samples from family members or unrelated individuals (FIG. 2A), demonstrating that short-term temporal changes in community structure within an individual are minor compared to inter-personal differences.


After assigning V2/3, V6 and full-length 16S rRNA gene sequences to bacterial taxa (see Example 3 below), it was found that obese individuals generally had a lower relative abundance of the Bacteroidetes and a higher relative abundance of the Firmicutes and Actinobacteria: the statistical significance of these observations varied depending upon the sequencing methods used (Table 7), likely due to differences in PCR conditions (for example, the 8F primer has a known bias against Actinobacteria).


In summary, across all methods, obesity was associated with a significant decrease in the level of diversity (FIG. 2B and FIGS. 3C-F). This reduced diversity suggests an analogy: the obese gut microbiota is not like a rainforest or reef, which are adapted to high energy flux and are highly diverse, but rather may be more like a fertilizer runoff where a reduced diversity microbial community blooms with abnormal energy input.









TABLE 7







Phylum-level taxonomic assignmentsa












lean

obese
















mean
sem
N
mean
sem
N
p-valueb



















V2/3 (EA)
% Bacteroidetes
26.76
2.46
26
24.39
1.89
42
0.22



% Firmicutes
71.48
2.50
26
72.57
1.92
42
0.36



% Actinobacteria
0.72
0.14
26
1.70
0.58
42
0.05


V2/3 (AA)C
% Bacteroidetes
37.52
3.05
8
29.41
1.49
62
0.02



% Firmicutes
60.74
3.04
8
68.14
1.42
62
0.03



% Actinobacteria
0.97
0.40
8
1.27
0.21
62
0.26


V6 (EA)
% Bacteroidetes
6.85
1.25
12
3.15
0.93
16
0.01



% Firmicutes
81.72
2.41
12
75.99
4.60
16
0.14



% Actinobacteria
7.14
1.76
12
17.91
5.01
16
0.03


Full-length
% Bacteroidetes
11.44
2.77
10
7.58
2.35
16
0.15


(EA)
% Firmicutes
83.50
2.28
10
84.60
3.03
16
0.39



% Actinobacteria
2.78
0.78
10
4.41
1.14
16
0.13


BLAST
% Bacteroidetes
42.60
8.75
6
34.69
8.16
9
0.26


(EA)d
% Firmicutes
51.54
8.35
6
51.25
5.47
9
0.49



% Actinobacteria
2.07
0.33
6
10.34
3.35
9
0.02






aA subset of each dataset was included in the analysis: 10,000 sequences/sample (V6), 1,000 sequences/sample (V2/3) and 200 sequences/sample (full-length). Sequences from the same individual across both timepoints were pooled.




bValues are from a Student's t-test of the obese versus lean distribution




cThe AA lean individuals surveyed have significantly more Bacteroidetes and less Firmicutes than the lean EA individuals (p < 0.05)




dBLASTX comparisons between microbiomes and NCBI non-redundant database







Example 2
Distribution of Phylotypes in Individuals

All hosts were searched for bacterial phylotypes present at high abundance using a sampling model based on a combination of standard Poisson and binomial sampling statistics.


Phylotype Sampling Model

A sampling model was developed that allows placement of bounds on the maximum abundance of any phylotype found across all samples. The principle here is that if a given phylotype made up not less than some proportion p of the microbiome of all humans, it is then possible to calculate (i) the number of samples of a given size expected to lack that phylotype due to sampling error, and (ii) the probability that an actual proportion p-hat as low as the minimum abundance would be observed in any sample.


The probability P of failing to observe a given microbe at proportion p in a sample of size n is given by Poisson statistics as simply e−pn. For equal sample sizes, the probability of observing the phylotype in at least k samples using binomial sampling with Pr(success)=(1−P) can therefore be calculated. Then, the inverse binomial can be used to ask what value of P, and therefore of p, gives a specified probability (say, 5%) of observing a given phylotype in as few samples as actually observed for the most abundant phylotype. This calculation yields an upper bound for p (i.e. the value of p at which we can reject the idea that we would have seen the phylotype in as few samples as actually observed at the 95% confidence level).


For unequal sizes, there is no analytical solution to the equivalent of the binomial in which Pr(success) differs for each trial. Therefore, numerical optimization must be used to solve for p. Because the function relating p and the probability of observing the phylotype in at least a given number of samples is monotonic, a bisection search (bounded by p=0 and p=1) can be used to find the appropriate value of p for a desired confidence level. In practice, P was calculated for each sample, a vector of random numbers between 0 and 1 was chosen, and the number of times the random number at a given position was less than P was counted. Repeating this procedure for a fixed number of iterations (100,000 for the reported values) gives sufficiently smooth values to approximate the monotonic function and to allow the bisection search to converge on the same value of p to three significant figures across repeated trials.


In the case where a phylotype was found in all samples, a similar procedure could be used to identify the maximum value of p consistent with the observed minimum abundance of the phylotype whose minimum abundance across all samples is highest. In this case, instead of calculating the fraction of samples in which the phylotype was absent, (i) binomial sampling could be used to randomly sample the number of observed counts of a phylotype given the parametric value of p and the sample size of each sample, (ii) the minimum abundance across all samples could be measured, and (iii) this minimum abundance compared to the minimum abundance actually observed. Again, an analytical solution using extreme-value statistics is possible if sample sizes are equal, but the solution must be obtained by numerical methods (in this case, the same type of bisection search used above). The sampling model was implemented in Python using PyCogent.


Results

Using this model the full-length 16S rRNA dataset described in Example 1 was first analyzed. The most abundant ‘species’-level phylotype in each sample made up 11% of that sample on average (range: 4.2%-22.0%), and the most abundant phylotype found across the combined dataset was found in 25 of the 27 fecal microbiotas (taxonomy assignment=Bacteria; Firmicutes; Clostridia; Clostridiales; Ruminococcus). These data are consistent with no phylotype being present at more than 1.3% abundance in all samples.


The deeper pyrosequencing data confirmed this result. In the V6 dataset, using even sampling of 10,000 sequences/sample, the most abundant phylotype in each sample made up 12% of that sample on average (range: 5.0%-36.6%). The overall most abundant phylotype was found in all 33 samples (Bacteria; Firmicutes; Clostridia; Clostridiales; Eubacterium rectale). However, in some samples, this phylotype was present in frequencies as low as 0.01%.


The sampling model allows one to ask what level of abundance in every individual the most abundant phylotype could have before its absence from, or limited representation in some samples becomes surprising. For example, with 1,000 sequences/samples, it would be very surprising if a species at 50% abundance across all samples in any out of 30 samples was missed, but it would not be surprising if a species at 0.00001% abundance were missed.


The sampling model (using 1000 random sequences per sample) indicated that this minimum observed abundance was consistent with a ‘true abundance’ of no more than 0.66%. In the V2/3 dataset, the most abundant phylotype in each sample made up 14.6% of that sample on average (range: 3.8%-47.1%). The overall most abundant phylotype was present in 270 of 274 samples at this depth of coverage (Bacteria;Bacteroidetes;Bacteroidales; Bacteroidaceae). The sampling model indicated that this frequency was consistent with a true abundance of no more than 0.53%. These results were confirmed, with excellent agreement, by the V6 data: at 1,000 sequences/sample, the maximum abundance OTU is found in 32 of 33 samples, consistent with an abundance of no more than 0.66%. However, at a coverage depth of 10,000 sequences/sample, this OTU is found in all 33 samples but at a minimum observed abundance of 0.02%, consistent with a true abundance of no more than 0.1%. Using all the V6 data without controlling for sampling effort, the minimum observed abundance is consistent with a true abundance of no more than 0.07% (the estimate of the true abundance falls with increased sample size because it is less likely that the low frequency would be observed due to sampling error when more total sequences contribute to the result). Thus, we conclude, with 95% confidence, based on the even sampling used for the other analyses in this study (i.e., 1,000 sequences/sample from V2/3, 10,000 sequences/sample for V6) that the maximum abundance of any OTU across all samples cannot exceed the V2/3 result of 0.53%, although the true maximum abundance might be as much as an order of magnitude lower than this based on the greater depth of coverage in the V6 samples.


In summary, the analysis showed that no phylotype is present at more than ˜0.5% abundance in all of the samples in this study, and that although individual microbiotas are dominated by a few abundant phylotypes, these groups vary dramatically in their proportional representation in the sampled gut communities. Also, no phylotypes were detectable in all individuals sampled within this range of coverage (FIG. 7).


Example 3
Taxonomic Assignments of Metagenomic Reads

The International Human Microbiome Project has emphasized the importance of sequencing the genomes of a panel of reference microbial strains. Therefore, shotgun pyrosequencing was used to sample the fecal microbiomes of 18 individuals representing 6 of the families described in Example 1.


Pyrosequencing of total community DNA


Shotgun sequencing runs were performed on the 454 FLX pyrosequencer from total community DNA of 3 lean European American MZ twin-pairs and their mothers plus 3 obese European American MZ twin pairs and their mothers, yielding 8,294,835 reads and 14,730 16S rRNA fragments. Two samples were also analyzed on a single run employing 454/Roche GS FLX Titanium extra long read sequencing technology (Tables 8 and 9). Sequencing reads with degenerate bases (“Ns”) were removed along with all duplicate sequences, as sequences of identical length and content are a common artifact of the pyrosequencing methodology. Finally, human sequences were removed by identifying sequences homologous to the H. sapiens reference genome (BLASTN e-value<10−5, % identity>75, and score>50).









TABLE 8







Microbiome sequencing statistics

























16S rRNA


Subject
Data
Twin/




Number
Filtered
gene


IDa
ID
Mom
Family
BMI
Platform
Total nt
Reads
Readsb
fragments



















F1T1Le1
TS1
Twin
1
Lean
FLX
60,016,519
254,044
217,386
439


F1T2Le1
TS2
Twin
1
Lean
FLX
90,271,969
514,022
443,640
512


F1MOv1
TS3
Mom
1
Overweight
FLX
113,506,401
571,301
510,972
723


F2T1Le1
TS4
Twin
2
Lean
FLX
107,008,761
472,154
414,754
626


F2T2Le1
TS5
Twin
2
Lean
FLX
112,835,879
553,142
490,776
928


F2MOb1
TS6
Mom
2
Obese
FLX
135,976,476
623,027
535,763
1,039


F3T1Le1
TS7
Twin
3
Lean
FLX
146,946,832
607,386
555,853
1,188


F3T2Le1
TS8
Twin
3
Lean
FLX
113,177,766
468,769
414,497
976


F3MOv1
TS9
Mom
3
Overweight
FLX
137,564,473
552,870
499,499
934


F7T1Ob1
TS19
Twin
7
Obese
FLX
95,538,760
583,989
498,880
569


F7T2Ob1
TS20
Twin
7
Obese
FLX
108,342,331
550,695
495,040
829


F7MOb1
TS21
Mom
7
Obese
FLX
95,960,723
451,177
413,772
774


F10T1Ob1
TS28
Twin
10
Obese
Titanium
138,364,927
399,717
302,780
652


F10T2Ob1
TS29
Twin
10
Obese
Titanium
239,971,702
672,196
502,399
1,190


F10MOv1
TS30
Mom
10
Overweight
FLX
105,932,316
564,184
495,865
791


F15T1Ob1
TS49
Twin
15
Obese
FLX
104,449,087
596,149
519,072
769


F15T2Ob1
TS50
Twin
15
Obese
FLX
129,037,456
642,191
549,700
1,209


F15MOb1
TS51
Mom
15
Obese
FLX
101,531,105
557,165
434,187
582







SUM
2,136,433,483
9,634,178
8,294,835
14,730






aID nomenclature: Family Number, Twin number or mom, and BMI category (Le = lean, Ov = overweight, Ob = Obese; e.g. F1T1Le Stands for family 1, twin 1, lean)




bSequences used after removing low quality, duplicate, and human sequences




c16S rRNA gene fragments identified in microbiome sequencing reads














TABLE 9







Microbiome BLAST statisticsa

























Mean








Subject
Data
Raw
Reads
% Sequences
Nucleotides
Read-
%
%
%
%
%
%


IDa
ID
Reads
Used
Used
Used
length
Hsa
RDP
KEGG
STRING
NR
Gut






















F1T1Le1
TS1
254,044
217,386
85.6
51,708,794
237.9
0.42
0.21
29.1
34.5
54.9
57.9


F1T2Le1
TS2
514,022
443,640
86.3
78,853,892
177.7
0.08
0.12
20.3
28.7
46.9
51.7


F1MOv1
TS3
571,301
510,972
89.4
102,717,417
201.0
0.16
0.15
23.8
33.6
56.5
61.2


F2T1Le1
TS4
472,154
414,754
87.8
95,003,113
229.1
0.14
0.15
26.2
44.5
72.3
74.9


F2T2Le1
TS5
553,142
490,776
88.7
100,599,979
205.0
0.22
0.19
23.0
27.8
54.1
62.1


F2MOb1
TS6
623,027
535,763
86.0
118,207,161
220.6
0.62
0.20
26.9
37.2
58.9
62.1


F3T1Le1
TS7
607,386
555,853
91.5
134,889,015
242.7
0.13
0.22
26.9
34.0
58.4
61.7


F3T2Le1
TS8
468,769
414,497
88.4
100,520,072
242.5
0.20
0.24
28.5
35.7
61.1
64.4


F3MOv1
TS9
552,870
499,499
90.3
124,768,172
249.8
0.14
0.19
26.8
36.6
63.2
66.3


F7T1Ob1
TS19
583,989
498,880
85.4
82,117,565
164.6
0.06
0.12
19.1
30.6
52.9
57.1


F7T2Ob1
TS20
550,695
495,040
89.9
98,053,098
198.1
0.32
0.17
22.3
29.3
47.2
49.9


F7MOb1
TS21
451,177
413,772
91.7
88,786,017
214.6
0.09
0.19
25.5
37.6
62.8
66.3


F10T1Ob1
TS28
399,717
302,780
75.7
101,434,082
335.0
0.06
0.36
24.5
28.4
53.2
55.5


F10T2Ob1
TS29
672,196
502,399
74.7
173,386,030
345.1
0.11
0.29
27.5
34.8
63.2
63.9


F10MOv1
TS30
564,184
495,865
87.9
94,405,318
190.4
0.21
0.16
22.4
32.0
54.7
60.7


F15T1Ob1
TS49
596,149
519,072
87.1
91,987,878
177.2
0.29
0.15
18.6
23.0
43.7
46.4


F15T2Ob1
TS50
642,191
549,700
85.6
111,999,603
203.7
0.24
0.22
24.6
29.4
51.9
57.9


F15MOb1
TS51
557,165
434,187
77.9
81,330,211
187.3
0.40
0.14
21.0
26.3
44.2
43.9


















Average
535,232
460,824
86.1
101,709,301
223.5
0.22
0.19
24.3
32.5
55.6
59.1


Sum
9,634,178
8,294,835

1,830,767,417













aKey: % sequences used = percentage of sequences remaining after removing low quality, duplicate, and human sequences; Hsa = reads matching the H. sapiens genome; % RDP = percentage of reads matching the RDP 16S rRNA database; % KEGG, % STRING, % NR = percentage of reads that were assignable to entries in these various databases; % Gut = percentage of reads assigned to the database of 42 reference genomes







Database Searches and Metabolic Reconstructions

The distributions of taxa, genes, orthologs, metabolic pathways, and high-level gene categories were tallied based on the corresponding annotation of the best-BLAST-hit sequence found in each reference database. For KEGG analysis, the closest matching gene with an annotation was used, since many genes in the database remain unannotated, including all KEGG orthologous groups (KOs) assigned to genes with an identical e-value (commands -e 0.00001 -m 9 -b 100 were used to run NCBI BLASTX). Custom Perl scripts were used for all KEGG, STRING, and NCBI NR analyses. Selected genes from recently sequenced reference genomes were manually annotated using NCBI-BLASTP searches against the KEGG, STRING, and NR database. The 42 reference genome database includes predicted proteins from draft or complete assemblies of Alistipes putredinis, Bacteroides WH2, Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron 3731, Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron 7330, Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron 5482, Bacteroides fragilis, Bacteroides caccae, Bacteroides distasonis, Bacteroides ovatus, Bacteroides stercoris, Bacteroides uniformis, Bacteroides vulgatus, Parabacteroides merdae, Anaerostipes caccae, Anaerotruncus colihominis, Anaerofustis stercorihominis, Bacteroides capillosus, Clostridium bartlettii, Clostridium bolteae, Clostridium eutactus, Clostridium leptum, Clostridium ramosum, Clostridium scindens, Clostridium sp. L2-50, Clostridium spiroforme, Dorea longicatena, Eubacterium dolichum, Eubacterium eligens, Eubacterium rectale, Eubacterium siraeum, Eubacterium ventriosum, Faecalibacterium prausnitzii M212, Peptostreptococcus micros, Ruminococcus gnavus, Ruminococcus obeum, Ruminococcus torques, Collinsella aerofaciens, Bifidobacterium adolescentis, Bifidobacterium longum, Escherichia coli K12, Methanobrevibacter smithii, and Methanobrevibacter stadtmanae (see http://genome.wustl.edu/pub/ and NCBI GenBank). Draft assemblies of Clostridium sp. SS2-1 and Clostridium symbiosum were also used for functional clustering and diversity analyses (http://genome.wustl.edu/pub/). Coverage plots (percent identity plots) were generated using nucmer and mummerplot (part of the MUMmer v3.19 package), and default parameters.


Annotations were validated with simulated datasets (FIG. 8). To do so, the frequency of annotated genes from the KEGG database (v44) was first tallied across the aggregate human gut microbiomes (n=18 datasets). The 1,000 most frequent microbial genes were then used to generate ‘simulated reads’ between 50 and 500 nt long. The simulated reads were subsequently annotated (BLASTX against the KEGG database), with self-hits excluded. This analysis revealed a low rate of false positives (i.e. high precision), but using very short sequences (e.g. 50-100 nt) increased the rate of false negatives (lower sensitivity) (FIG. 8). Given the increased read-length relative 454 GS20 pyrosequencing data, simulated reads with an average length comparable to our data (200-250 nt), demonstrated robust assignments with an e-value<10−5, % identity>50, and/or bit-score>50. Using all three cutoffs, sequences 200 nt in length returned 81.5% of the correct assignments, with a precision of 0.93 and sensitivity of 0.88, similar to what was observed by re-annotating the original full-length gene sequences after ignoring self-hits. The KEGG cutoff criteria were also applied to BLASTX analysis results for STRING-based predictions, given the similar size of the databases.


ABI 3730xl capillary sequencing reads from 9 previously published adult human gut microbiomes were obtained from the NCBI TraceArchive. The full dataset from each sample was annotated by BLASTX comparisons against the KEGG and STRING database (see above; BLASTX e-value<10−5, % identity>50, and score>50). To allow quantitative comparisons between these datasets and pyrosequencing data, all forward sequencing reads was first extracted and then one ‘simulated pyrosequencer read’ from each longer capillary read was generated. Nucleotides spanning positions 100 to 322 were used from all capillary reads of suitable length, to avoid low quality regions that commonly occur at the beginning and end of the reads. These simulated reads were then annotated as described above.


16S rRNA gene fragments were identified in each microbiome through BLASTN searches of the RDP database (version 9.33; e-value<10−5; Bit-score>50; % identity>50; alignment length≧00). Putative 16S rRNA gene fragments were then aligned using the NAST multi-aligner with a minimum template length of 100 bases and minimum % identity of 75%. Taxonomy was assessed after insertion into an ARB neighbor-joining tree.


Microbiomes were clustered based on their profiles after normalizing across all sampled communities (z-score), using the Pearson's correlation distance metric, followed by single-linkage hierarchical clustering in addition to Principal Components Analysis (Cluster3.0). Results were visualized using the Treeview Java applet. Functional diversity (Shannon index and evenness) was calculated using the number of assignements in each microbiome to each of the 254 pathways present in the KEGG database (EstimateS 8.0). The maximum possible index is the natural log of the total number of pathways: In (254) or 5.54. Shannon evenness was calculated by dividing the Shannon index for a given microbiome by the maximum possible index (scale of 0 to 1, with 1 representing a microbiome with all pathways found at an equal abundance). Results were compared to simulated metagenomic reads generated from 36 recently sequenced reference human gut-derived Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes genomes (http://genome.wustl.edu/pub/organism/). Reads were produced by Readsim v0.10, using the following options: -n 10000 -modlr normal -meanlr 223 -stdlr 0.3. The mean and standard deviation for length of the simulated reads was based on the observed read-length distribution of the 18 fecal microbiome datasets (Table 9).


Results

One fundamental parameter that governs the utility of reference genomes is the ability to accurately assign fragmentary reads from metagenomic datasets to these genomes. Therefore, the filtered pyrosequencing reads from the fecal microbiomes of 18 individuals from the 6 different families described in Example 1 (3 lean twin-pairs and their mothers; 3 obese twin pairs and their mothers; Tables 1 and 2) were compared to a custom database of 42 human gut associated bacterial and archaeal genomes (FIG. 7) using BLASTX, and validated these assignments independently against NCBI's non-redundant protein database. The relative abundance of sequences from the 18 individual microbiome datasets assigned to each reference genome was highly variable (see FIG. 9; R2=0.26±0.02 for all pairwise comparisons of taxonomic profiles), consistent with the considerable heterogeneity in microbial community structure among the fecal microbiomes observed from sequencing 16S rRNA gene amplicons.


The custom database of 42 reference genomes included 23 Firmicutes but only 13 Bacteroidetes. Since the Firmicutes dominate the gut microbiotas of subjects (FIG. 6) and the reference genome database, it might be expected that reads assigned to Firmicutes would match the reference genomes more closely than reads assigned to Bacteroidetes. The opposite was true: on average, 46.3±2.6% of the pyrosequencing reads assigned to Bacteroidetes matched the reference genomes at 100% identity, as compared to only 16.7±1.1% of the reads assigned to Firmicutes (p<10−4, Mann Whitney; FIGS. 10 and 11). This observation underscores the high level of phylogenetic and genomic diversity within the gut-associated Firmicutes, indicates that the readily culturable sequenced gut Firmicutes are not closely related to the abundant gut genomes present in the 18 gut microbiomes, and suggests that future reference microbial genome sequencing efforts should be directed towards representatives of this dominant phylum.


The effect of technical advances that produce longer reads on improving these assignments was also tested by sequencing fecal community samples from one twin pair using next-generation Titanium pyrosequencing methods [average read length of 341±134 nt (SD) versus 208±68 for the standard FLX platform]. FIG. 12 shows that the frequency and quality of sequence assignments is improved as read length increases from 200 to 350 nt.



FIG. 13 summarizes the relative abundance of the major bacterial phyla present in these 18 microbiomes, as defined by six different approaches (sequencing full-length, V2/3 and V6 amplicons; BLAST comparisons of shotgun pyrosequencer reads with the NCBI non-redundant and the custom 42 gut genome databases, plus analysis of 16S rRNA gene fragments). Pairwise comparisons of relative abundance data from 16S rRNA gene fragments generated from shotgun sequencing reads correlate most closely with V2/3 PCR data (FIG. 13 and Table 7).


Example 4
In Silico Functional Analysis of Gut Microbiomes

The filtered sequences obtained in Example 3 from the 18 microbiomes were used to conduct a functional analysis of gut microbiomes.


CAZyme Analysis

Metagenomic sequence reads described in Example 3 were searched against a library of modules derived from all entries in the Carbohydrate-Active enZymes (CAZy) database (www.cazy.org using FASTY, e-value<10−6). This library consists of ˜180,000 previously annotated modules (catalytic modules, carbohydrate binding modules (CBMs) and other non-catalytic modules or domains of unknown function) derived from 80,000 protein sequences. The number of sequencing reads matching each CAZy family was divided by the number of total sequences assigned to CAZymes and multiplied by 100 to calculate a relative abundance. An R2 value was calculated for each pair of CAZy profiles. The distribution of glycoside hydrolase similarity scores was then compared to the distribution of glycosyltransferase similarity scores.


Statistical Analyses

Xipe (version 2.4) was employed for bootstrap analyses of pathway enrichment and depletion, using the parameters sample size=10,000 and confidence level=0.95. Linear regressions were performed in Excel (version 11.0, Microsoft). Mann-Whitney and Student's t-tests were utilized to identify statistically significant differences between two groups (Prism v4.0, Graph Pad; Excel version 11.0, Microsoft). The Bonferroni correction was used to correct for multiple hypotheses. The Mantel test was used to compare distance matrices: the matrix of each pairwise comparison of the abundance of each reference genome, and the abundance of each metabolic pathway, were compared (Mantel program in Python using PyCogent; 10,000 replicates). Data are represented as mean±SEM unless otherwise indicated.


Odds ratios were used to identify ‘commonly-enriched’ genes in the gut microbiome. In short, all gut microbiome sequences were compared against the custom database of 42 gut genomes (BLASTX e-value<10−5, bitscore>50, and % identity>50). A gene by sample matrix was then screened to identify genes ‘commonly-enriched’ in either the obese or lean gut microbiome (defined by an odds ratio greater than 2 or less than 0.5 when comparing the pooled obese twin microbiomes to the pooled lean twin microbiomes and when comparing each individual obese twin microbiome to the aggregate lean twin microbiome, or vice versa). The statistical significance of enriched or depleted genes was then calculated using a modified t-test (q-value<0.05; calculated with code kindly supplied by Mihai Pop and J. R. White, University of Maryland). To search for genes that were consistently enriched or depleted in all six MZ twin-pairs, a gene-by-sample matrix was generated based on BLASTX comparisons of each microbiome with our custom 42-genome database, and an odds ratio was calculated by directly comparing the frequency of each gene in each twin versus the respective co-twin. The analysis revealed only 49 genes (odds ratio>2 or <0.5): they represent a variety of taxonomic groups, including Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and Actinobacteria and did not show any clear functional trends.


Results

Sequences matching 156 total CAZyme families were found within at least one human gut microbiome, including 77 glycoside hydrolase, 21 carbohydrate-binding module, 35 glycosyltransferase, 12 polysaccharide lyase, and 11 carbohydrate-esterase families (Table 10A and B). On average 2.62±0.13% of the gut microbiome could be assigned to CAZymes (a total of 217,615 sequences), a percentage that is greater than the most abundant KEGG pathway in the gut microbiome (‘Transporters’; 1.20±0.06%), and indicative of the abundant and diverse set of microbial genes in the distal gut microbiome directed towards accessing a wide range of polysaccharides.


Category-based clustering of the functions from each microbiome was performed using Principal Components Analysis (PCA) and hierarchical clustering. This analysis revealed two distinct clusters of gut microbiomes based on metabolic profile, corresponding to samples with an increased abundance of Firmicutes and Actinobacteria, and samples with a high abundance of Bacteroidetes (FIG. 14A). A linear regression of the first principal component (PC1, explaining 20% of the functional variance) and the relative abundance of the Bacteroidetes showed a highly significant correlation (R2=0.96, p<10-12; FIG. 14B). Functional profiles stabilized within each individual's microbiome after 20,000 sequences had been accumulated (FIG. 15). Family members had more similar functional profiles than unrelated individuals (FIG. 14C), suggesting that shared bacterial community structure (who's there based on 16S rRNA analyses) also translates into shared community-wide relative abundance of metabolic pathways. Accordingly, a direct comparison of functional and taxonomic similarity disclosed a significant association: individuals that share similar taxonomic profiles also share similar metabolic profiles (p<0.001; Mantel test).









TABLE 10A







Relative abundance of CAZymes across 9 gut microbiomes (% of sequence


assignments across all identified CAZymes)a
















Subject IDb
F1T1Le
F1T2Le
F1MOv
F2T1Le
F2T2Le
F2MOb
F3T1Le
F3T2Le
F3MOv



















Glycoside hydrolases
70.56
73.96
72.14
72.40
68.38
67.37
68.69
67.84
69.92


GH13
8.96
6.31
6.37
3.97
10.78
8.04
8.63
9.97
8.02


GH2
7.40
7.10
7.01
6.51
5.13
5.49
5.81
6.02
5.94


GH43
3.48
5.78
5.63
6.61
4.39
4.69
5.05
4.14
5.75


GH92
3.44
6.25
5.00
7.70
3.25
5.47
3.28
2.65
4.50


GH3
5.72
5.37
4.31
4.47
3.20
3.94
4.03
4.70
4.09


GH97
1.97
5.45
4.01
4.67
1.18
3.38
3.51
2.23
3.91


GH31
2.98
2.48
2.53
2.41
3.84
2.11
2.16
3.04
2.13


GH20
2.40
2.30
2.35
3.34
1.93
2.93
1.99
1.92
2.19


GH29
1.99
1.51
2.12
2.54
2.94
2.52
2.53
2.19
1.83


GH77
2.13
1.39
1.43
0.86
2.18
2.18
2.18
2.45
1.99


GH28
1.58
2.44
3.71
3.07
1.46
2.24
2.25
1.79
2.00


GH51
1.18
1.51
1.38
1.44
2.12
1.58
1.73
1.68
1.31


GH36
1.62
1.12
1.19
0.99
1.80
1.23
1.64
2.02
1.37


GH1
1.51
0.87
1.02
0.34
2.90
1.08
1.50
1.50
1.67


GH5
1.95
2.41
1.75
1.53
1.07
0.98
2.62
1.45
1.95


GH42
0.91
0.49
0.83
0.90
2.43
0.62
1.09
1.10
1.03


GH105
1.56
1.65
2.07
2.07
1.01
1.38
1.46
1.27
1.83


GHY95
1.56
1.18
1.36
1.24
0.91
1.21
1.22
1.04
0.99


GH32
0.91
0.61
0.70
0.75
2.12
1.18
1.05
0.91
0.84


GH78
1.91
1.09
1.22
1.61
0.60
0.70
1.05
0.89
1.25


Glycosyltransferases
20.25
17.20
17.49
16.26
23.34
21.64
22.09
22.78
19.66


GT2
5.66
6.26
6.31
5.58
7.68
7.91
7.14
7.48
7.39


GT4
3.55
3.76
3.96
4.44
4.93
4.43
4.64
4.60
4.20


GT35
4.75
2.47
2.07
1.62
4.75
2.85
3.58
3.91
2.90


GT28
1.51
0.85
0.89
0.53
1.51
1.00
1.34
1.48
1.00


GT5
1.74
0.77
0.79
0.33
1.72
0.81
1.38
1.62
1.15


GT51
0.77
0.78
0.75
0.74
0.99
1.08
0.92
1.17
0.80


Carbohydrate binding
1.76
2.40
2.15
2.02
2.05
2.22
2.38
2.25
2.11


molecules


Carbohydrate esterases
5.89
4.70
5.45
5.53
5.00
5.81
5.64
5.36
6.04


CE4
1.53
1.01
1.03
0.78
1.41
1.04
1.16
1.27
1.20


Polysaccharide lyases
1.55
1.74
2.77
3.79
1.22
2.95
1.20
1.78
2.27






aGroups found at an average relative abundance 1% are shown




bID nomenclature: Family number, Twin number or mother and BMI category (Le = lean, Ov = overweight, Ob = obese e.g. F1T1Le stands for family 1 twin 1 lean)














TABLE 10B







Relative abundance of CAZymes across 9 gut microbiomes (% of sequence assignments


across all identified CAZymes)a
















Subject IDb
F4T1Ob
F4T2Ob
F4MOb
F5T1Ob
F5T2Ob
F5MOv
F6T1Ob
F6T2Ob
F6MOb



















Glycoside hydrolases
73.46
70.45
71.57
64.19
69.11
69.96
68.15
69.61
71.50


GH13
4.68
8.36
6.37
11.17
11.80
7.05
12.34
16.84
11.19


GH2
6.43
6.53
6.53
5.52
5.40
5.93
5.69
5.64
6.21


GH43
5.80
6.49
5.00
4.34
6.57
5.04
5.05
5.59
4.56


GH92
7.66
4.36
6.72
1.71
1.73
5.70
1.93
0.60
3.59


GH3
3.46
3.77
4.27
3.89
5.07
3.75
3.75
4.29
3.41


GH97
4.06
3.95
3.62
0.96
1.25
3.96
1.22
0.28
1.87


GH31
2.67
2.06
2.49
2.86
3.37
2.52
2.81
3.99
2.79


GH20
3.33
2.45
3.32
1.09
1.17
3.12
1.66
0.92
3.18


GH29
3.93
1.53
3.31
1.80
1.47
2.59
1.51
0.93
1.81


GH77
1.32
1.95
1.49
2.87
2.95
1.62
2.64
3.47
2.04


GH28
2.63
1.99
2.49
1.64
1.01
2.31
1.44
0.54
1.11


GH51
1.73
2.29
1.51
1.80
2.74
1.40
1.71
2.34
1.60


GH36
1.24
1.79
1.39
1.52
1.92
1.28
2.20
2.63
2.37


GH1
0.72
0.79
0.71
2.01
2.50
1.35
3.74
2.29
2.25


GH5
1.37
2.56
1.30
1.29
1.37
0.90
0.84
1.22
0.95


GH42
0.94
0.44
0.98
1.80
2.82
0.93
2.26
3.87
2.06


GH105
1.77
0.83
1.63
0.95
0.50
1.65
0.98
0.39
0.83


GHY95
1.33
1.90
1.12
0.68
0.75
1.35
1.01
0.48
1.44


GH32
0.99
1.15
0.82
1.15
1.52
0.99
1.47
2.04
1.00


GH78
1.43
1.45
0.98
1.03
1.39
0.80
0.90
0.58
1.21


Glycosyltransferases
16.68
20.34
18.24
26.36
23.15
19.53
23.54
23.99
21.50


GT2
6.19
6.80
6.97
9.41
9.80
6.74
7.98
7.14
6.78


GT4
4.17
3.99
4.08
5.62
4.43
4.50
4.42
4.18
4.80


GT35
1.81
2.76
2.13
4.50
3.78
2.59
4.42
5.25
3.66


GT28
0.58
0.94
0.83
1.31
1.00
1.01
1.48
2.12
1.33


GT5
0.46
0.83
0.65
1.54
1.24
0.96
1.74
1.90
0.96


GT51
0.68
1.06
0.72
1.82
1.27
0.88
1.06
1.63
1.02


Carbohydrate binding
1.90
2.06
2.15
2.66
2.88
2.08
2.22
2.28
1.98


molecules


Carbohydrate esterases
5.19
5.19
5.02
5.24
3.94
6.01
4.68
3.84
4.15


CE4
0.73
0.84
0.92
1.35
0.96
1.04
1.31
1.51
0.91


Polysaccharide lyases
2.78
1.95
3.02
1.55
0.93
2.43
1.43
0.28
0.87






aGroups found at an average relative abundance 1% are shown




bID nomenclature: Family number, Twin number or mother and BMI category (Le = lean, Ov = overweight, Ob = obese e.g. F1T1Le stands for family 1 twin 1 lean)







Example 5
Different Functions for Bacteroides and Firmicutes

Functional clustering of phylum-wide sequence bins representing reads from the Firmicutes or the Bacteroidetes showed discrete clustering by phylum (FIG. 16A). A direct comparison of the Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes sequence bins to simulated reads generated from 36 reference Bacteroides and Firmicute genomes represented in the 42 member custom database described in Example 3, revealed that the metabolic profile of each microbiome was similar to the ‘average’ metabolic profile of each phylum (FIG. 17). Bootstrap analyses of the relative abundance of metabolic pathways in the Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes, disclosed 26 pathways with a significantly different relative abundance (FIG. 16A). The Bacteroidetes were enriched for a number of carbohydrate metabolism pathways, while the Firmicutes were enriched for transport systems. The finding is consistent with information gleaned from a number of sequenced Bacteroidetes genomes that demonstrate expansive families of genes involved in carbohydrate metabolism, as well as the CAZyme analysis in Example 3, which revealed a significantly higher relative abundance of glycoside hydrolases, carbohydrate-binding modules, glycosyltransferases, polysaccharide lyases, and carbohydrate esterases in the Bacteroidetes sequence bins (FIG. 16B).


Example 6
Identifying a Core Human Gut Microbiome

One of the major goals of the international human microbiome project is to determine whether there is an identifiable ‘core microbiome’ of shared organisms, genes, or functional capabilities found in a given body habitat of all or the vast majority of humans. Although all of the 18 gut microbiomes surveyed showed a high level of beta-diversity with respect to the relative abundance of bacterial phyla (FIG. 18A), analysis of the relative abundance of broad functional categories of genes (COG) and metabolic pathways (KEGG) revealed a generally consistent pattern regardless of the sample surveyed (FIG. 18B and Table 11): the pattern is also consistent with results obtained from a meta-analysis of previously published gut microbiome datasets from 9 adult individuals (FIG. 19). This consistency was not simply due to the broad level of these annotations, as a similar analysis of Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes reference genomes revealed substantial variation in the relative abundance of each category (FIG. 20). Furthermore, pair-wise comparisons of metabolic profiles revealed an average R2 of 0.97±0.0023 (FIG. 14A), indicating a high level of functional similarity between adult human gut microbiomes.









TABLE 11







Relative abundance of metabolic pathways in the gut microbiome


(% of KEGG assignments)a









Mean ± sem across


KEGG Metabolic Pathway
all 18 microbiomes





Transporters
4.93 ± 0.21


Other replication, recombination and repair proteins
3.35 ± 0.04


ABC transporters
3.24 ± 0.13


General function prediction only
2.60 ± 0.06


Purine metabolism
2.29 ± 0.02


Other enzymes
2.16 ± 0.03


Aminoacyl-tRNA biosynthesis
2.14 ± 0.05


Glutamate metabolism
1.98 ± 0.03


Starch and sucrose metabolism
1.92 ± 0.03


Pyruvate metabolism
1.73 ± 0.02


Pyrimidine metabolism
1.70 ± 0.02


Peptidases
1.69 ± 0.05


Alanine and aspartate metabolism
1.58 ± 0.02


Glycine, serine and threonine metabolism
1.53 ± 0.02


Other translation proteins
1.37 ± 0.02


Galactose metabolism
1.37 ± 0.03


Glycolysis/Gluconeogenesis
1.35 ± 0.02


Other ion-coupled transporters
1.34 ± 0.06


Fructose and mannose metabolism
1.31 ± 0.03


Two-component system
1.31 ± 0.03


Ribosome
1.27 ± 0.03


Replication complex
1.18 ± 0.02


Phenylalanine; tyrosine and tryptophan biosynthesis
1.17 ± 0.02


Valine, leucine and isoleucine biosynthesis
1.15 ± 0.02


Carbon fixation
1.15 ± 0.01


Nitrogen metabolism
1.13 ± 0.02


Glycerolipid metabolism
1.07 ± 0.02


Oxidative phosphorylation
1.07 ± 0.03


Butanoate metabolism
1.05 ± 0.02


Chaperones and folding catalysts
 .99 ± 0.01


Pentose phosphate pathway
 .95 ± 0.01


Tyrosine metabolism
 .95 ± 0.02


Histidine metabolism
 .92 ± 0.02


Cell division
 .91 ± 0.01


Aminosugars metabolism
 .89 ± 0.03


Arginine and proline metabolism
 .85 ± 0.01


Citrate cycle (TCA cycle)
 .84 ± 0.02


Methlionine metabolism
 .83 ± 0.02


Lysine biosynthesis
 .82 ± 0.01


RNA polymerase
 .81 ± 0.02


Reductive carboxylate cycle (CO2 fixation)
 .80 ± 0.03


Propanoate metabolism
 .80 ± 0.01


Peptidoglycan biosynthesis
 .79 ± 0.01


N-Glycan degradation
 .78 ± 0.05


Urea cycle and metabolism of amino groups
 .78 ± 0.01


Translation factors
 .78 ± 0.02


Selenoamino acid metabolism
 .77 ± 0.02


Glyoxylate and dicarboxylate metabolism
 .73 ± 0.01


DNA polymerase
 .72 ± 0.01


Pentose and glucuronate interconversions
 .70 ± 0.02


Cysteine metabolism
 .68 ± 0.02


Pantothenate and CoA biosynthesis
 .67 ± 0.01


Nucleotide sugars metabolism
 .67 ± 0.02


Glycosaminoglycan degradation
 .66 ± 0.04


Function unknown
 .66 ± 0.01


One carbon pool by folate
 .65 ± 0.01


Sphingolipid metabolism
 .64 ± 0.03


Protein export
 .62 ± 0.01






aPathways with an average relative abundance of >0.6% are shown







Overall functional diversity was compared using the Shannon index, a measurement that combines diversity (the number of different types of metabolic pathways) and evenness (the relative abundance of each pathway). The human gut microbiomes surveyed had a stable and high Shannon index value (4.63±0.01), close to the maximum possible level of functional diversity (5.54; See Example 4). Despite the presence of a small number of abundant metabolic pathways (listed in Table 11), the overall functional profile of each gut microbiome is quite even (Shannon evenness of 0.84±0.001 on a scale of 0 to 1), demonstrating that most metabolic pathways are found at a similar level of abundance. Interestingly, the level of functional diversity in each microbiome was significantly linked to the relative abundance of the Bacteroidetes (R2=0.81, p<10−6); microbiomes enriched for Firmicutes/Actinobacteria had a decreased level of functional diversity. This observation is consistent with an analysis of simulated metagenomic reads generated from each of 36 Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes genomes (FIG. 21): on average, the Bacteroidetes genomes have a significantly higher level of both functional diversity and evenness (Mann-Whitney, p<0.01).


At a finer level, 26-53% of ‘enzyme’-level functional groups were shared across all 18 microbiomes, while 8-22% of the groups were unique to a single microbiome (FIGS. 22A-C). The ‘core’ functional groups present in all microbiomes were also highly abundant, representing 93-98% of the sequences found in the gut (fecal) microbiome. Given the higher relative abundance of these ‘core’ groups, >95% were found after 26.11±2.02 Mb of sequence was collected from a given microbiome, whereas the ‘variable’ groups continue to increase substantially with each additional Mb sequence. Of course, any estimate of the total size of the core microbiome will be dependent upon sequencing effort, especially for functional groups found at a low abundance. On average, this survey achieved greater than 450,000 sequences per fecal sample, which, assuming an even distribution, would allow us to sample groups found at a relative abundance of 10−4. In order to estimate the total size of the core microbiome based on the 18 sampled individuals, each microbiome was randomly sub-sampled in 1,000 sequence intervals (FIG. 22D). Based on this analysis, the core microbiome is approaching a total of 2,142 total orthologous groups (one site binding hyperbola curve fit to the resulting rarefaction curve, R2=0.9966), indicating that 93% of functional groups (defined by STRING) found within the core microbiome, were already identified. Of these core groups, 64% (KEGG) and 56% (STRING) were also found in 9 previously published but much lower coverage datasets generated by capillary sequencing of adult fecal DNA (average of 78,413±2,044 bidirectional reads/sample).


Metabolic reconstructions of the ‘core’ microbiome revealed significant enrichment for a number of expected functional categories, including those involved in transcription, translation, and amino acid metabolism (FIG. 23). Metabolic profile-based clustering indicated that the representation of ‘core’ functional groups was highly consistent across samples (FIG. 24), and includes a number of pathways likely important for life in the gut, such as those for carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism (e.g. fructose/mannose metabolism, aminosugars metabolism, and N-Glycan degradation). Variably represented pathways and categories include cell motility (only a subset of Firmicutes produce flagella), secretion systems, and membrane transport such as phosphotransferase systems involved in the import of nutrients, including sugars (FIGS. 23 and 24).


CAZyme profiles of glycoside hydrolases and glycosyltransferases were compared by calculating the R2 value between each pair of microbiomes (see Table 10 for families with a relative abundance >1%). This analysis revealed that all individuals have a similar profile of glycosyltransferases (mean R2=0.96±0.003), while the profiles of glycoside hydrolases were significantly more variable, even between family members (mean R2=0.80±0.01; p<10-30, paired Student's t-test). This suggests that the number and spectrum of glycoside hydrolases is probably affected by external factors such as diet more than the glycosyltransferases.


Example 7
Obesity Associated Pathways

To identify metabolic pathways associated with obesity, only non-core associated (variable) functional groups were included in a comparison of the gut microbiomes of lean and obese twin pairs. A bootstrap analysis was used to identify metabolic pathways that were enriched or depleted in the variable obese gut microbiome. For example, similar to a mouse model of diet-induced obesity, the obese human gut microbiome was enriched for phosphotransferase systems involved in microbial processing of carbohydrates (Table 12). To identify specific genes that were significantly associated with obesity, all gut microbiome sequences were compared against the custom database of 42 gut genomes described in example 3. A gene-by-sample matrix was then screened to identify genes ‘commonly-enriched’ in either the obese or lean gut microbiome (defined by an odds ratio>2 or <0.5 when comparing all obese twin microbiomes to the aggregate lean twin microbiome or vice versa). The analysis yielded 383 genes that were significantly different between the obese and lean gut microbiome (q-value<0.05; 273 enriched and 110 depleted in the obese microbiome; see Tables 13 and 14). By contrast, only 49 genes were consistently enriched or depleted between all twin-pairs.


These obesity-associated genes were representative of the taxonomic differences described above: 75% of the obesity-enriched genes were from Actinobacteria (vs. 0% of lean-enriched genes; the other 25% are from Firmicutes) while 42% of the lean-enriched genes were from Bacteroidetes (vs. 0% of the obesity-enriched genes). Their functional annotation indicated that many are involved in carbohydrate, lipid, and amino acid metabolism (Tables 13-14). Together, they comprise an initial set of microbial biomarkers of the obese gut microbiome.









TABLE 12





Pathways enriched or depleted in obese gut microbiomesa


















Enriched
Fatty acid biosynthesis




Nicotinate and nicotinamide metabolism




Other ion-coupled transporters




Pentose and glucuronate interconversions




Phosphotransferase system (PTS)




Protein folding and associated processing




Signal transduction mechanisms




Transcription factors



Depleted
Bacterial chemotaxis




Bacterial motility proteins




Benzoate degradation via CoA ligation




Butanoate metabolism




Citrate cycle (TCA cycle)




Glycosaminoglycan degradation




Other enzymes




Oxidative phosphorylation




Pyruvate/Oxoglutarate oxidoreductases




Starch and sucrose metabolism




Tryptophan metabolism
















TABLE 13







Bacterial genes enriched in the gut microbiomes of obese MZ twins












SEQ. ID



COG
KEGG orthologous


No:
Genome and NCBI proteinID
Annotation
COG
Categories
groups















1
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486403
tRNA-ribosyltransferase
COG0343
J
K00773


2
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465114
Transcriptional regulators
COG1609
K



3
Bifidobacterium_longum_23466186
ABC-type sugar transport system,
COG1653
G





periplasmic component





4
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488903
Superfamily I DNA and RNA
COG3973
R





helicases





5
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486727
DNA polymerase IV
COG0389
L
K02346


6
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488882
peptide/nickel transport system ATP-
COG1123
R
K02031/2




binding protein





7
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488633
Trk-type K+ transport systems
COG0168
P



8
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488131
Asp-tRNAAsn/Glu-tRNAGln
COG0064
J
K02434




amidotransferase B subunit





9
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487571
Threonine dehydratase
COG1171
E
K01754


10
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486641
Glucose-6-phosphate isomerase
COG0166
G
K01810


11
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488790
ATP-dependent helicase Lhr and Lhr-
COG1201
R
K03724




like helicase





12
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025482
Predicted ATPase involved in cell
COG2884
D
K09812




division





13
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486531
Predicted phosphohydrolases
COG1409
R



14
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486606
tRNA-(guanine-N1)-methyltransferase
COG0336
J
K00554


15
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486895
IMP dehydrogenase/GMP reductase
COG0516/7
FR
K00088


16
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486720
Aspartate/tyrosine/aromatic
COG0436
E
K00812




aminotransferase





17
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026599
Cation transport ATPase
COG0474
P
K01529


18
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486334
hypothetical protein





19
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025743
NAD/NADP transhydrogenase alpha
COG3288
C
K00324




subunit





20
Bifidobacterium_longum_23336617
UspA and related nucleotide-binding
COG0589
T





proteins





21
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486937
ABC-type sugar transport system
COG1653
G
K02027


22
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465912
hypothetical protein





23
Bifidobacterium_longum_23335963
K+ transporter
COG3158
P
K03549


24
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025729
ABC-type transport system, Fe—S
COG0719
O





cluster assembly





25
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487396
Glutamine synthetase
COG1391
OT
K00982




adenylyltransferase





26
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488156
hypothetical protein





27
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486668
Acetyl/propionyl-CoA carboxylase
COG4770
I
K01946


28
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487299
Nuclease subunit of the excinuclease
COG0322
L
K03703




complex





29
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465540
Acetate kinase
COG0282
C
K00925


30
Clostridium_bartlettii_164687465
putative conjugative transposon
NOG13238






protein





31
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465037
Dipeptidase
COG4690
E
K08659


32
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488210
Predicted hydrolase of the metallo-
COG0595
R
K07021




beta-lactamase superfamily





33
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487598
tRNA/rRNA methyltransferase protein


K00599


34
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025149
hypothetical protein





35
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487052
hypothetical protein
NOG07592




36
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486554
PTS system, enzyme I


K00935


37
Bifidobacterium_longum_23335005
Selenocysteine lyase
COG0520
E
K01763


38
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465294
Branched-chain amino acid
COG1114
E
K03311




permeases





39
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025432
Acyl-CoA thioesterase
COG1946
I
K01076


40
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486528
Aspartate-semialdehyde
COG0136
E
K00133




dehydrogenase





41
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487076
Predicted ATPase with chaperone
COG0606
O
K07391




activity





42
Bifidobacterium_longum_23466221
Alcohol dehydrogenase, class IV
COG1454
C
K00048


43
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025541
Phosphoribosylformylglycinamidine
COG0046/7
F
K01952




synthase





44
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026031
Geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate
COG0142
H





synthase





45
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465502
Signal transduction histidine kinase
COG4585
T



46
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486631
Predicted metal-binding, possibly
COG1399
R





nucleic acid-binding protein





47
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488013
Sugar (pentulose and hexulose)
COG1070
G
K00853




kinases





48
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025777
Aspartate carbamoyltransferase
COG0540
F
K00609


49
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025510
Superfamily II DNA helicase
COG0514
L
K03654


50
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026360
Protease II
COG1770
E
K01354


51
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025672
Signal transduction histidine kinase
COG3920
T



52
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487392
Orotidine-5′-phosphate decarboxylase
COG0284
F
K01591


53
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487114
Permeases of the major facilitator
COG0477
GEPR





superfamily





54
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025804
Predicted Fe—S-cluster redox enzyme
COG0820
R
K06941


55
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465197
Permeases of the major facilitator
COG0477
GEPR





superfamily





56
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487064
Superfamily II RNA helicase
COG4581
L
K01529


57
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465727
ABC-type dipeptide transport system
COG0747
E
K02035


58
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486507
hypothetical protein





59
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465472
Predicted transcriptional regulator
COG2865
K



60
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486695
ABC-type phosphate transport system
COG0226
P
K02040


61
Bifidobacterium_longum_23466332
Dihydroxyacid
COG0129
EG
K01687




dehydratase/phosphogluconate







dehydratase





62
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154489143
Predicted
COG0637
R





phosphatase/phosphohexomutase





63
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486988
Phosphoribosylaminoimidazole
COG0026
F
K01589




carboxylase





64
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486732
glycoside hydrolase family 77
COG1640
G
K00705


65
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487590
Uncharacterized conserved protein
COG3247
S



66
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486669
Acetyl-CoA carboxylase
COG4799
I
K01966


67
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488016
Homoserine kinase
COG0083
E
K00872


68
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026221
glycoside hydrolase family 43





69
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025727
CTP synthase (UTP-ammonia lyase)
COG0504
F
K01937


70
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486325
Uncharacterized protein conserved in
COG3583
S





bacteria





71
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025371
Transcription elongation factor
COG0195
K
K02600


72
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486867
Sugar (pentulose and hexulose)
COG1070
G
K00854




kinases





73
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487511
putative cell division protein





74
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487124
hypothetical protein





75
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025212
hypothetical protein





76
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487481
hypothetical protein





77
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488824
putative two-component sensor







kinase





78
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488224
serine threonine protein kinase





79
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487149
carbohydrate esterase family 1





80
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488135
rRNA methylases
COG0566
J
K00599


81
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154489172
glycoside hydrolase family 77
COG1640
G
K00705


82
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487327
Superfamily II RNA helicase
COG4581
L
K03727


83
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025670
Transcription elongation factor
COG0782
K
K03624


84
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486326
Dimethyladenosine transferase
COG0030
J
K02528


85
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465077
glycosyl-transferase family 51
COG0744
M
K03693


86
Bifidobacterium_longum_23464647
hypothetical protein
NOG25707




87
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486363
hypothetical protein





88
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486438
Permeases of the major facilitator
COG0477
GEPR





superfamily





89
Bifidobacterium_longum_23335686
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG0577
V
K02004




transport system





90
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486327
4-diphosphocytidyl-2C-methyl-D-
COG1947
I
K00919




erythritol 2-phosphate synthase





91
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488959
twitching motility protein PilT


K02669


92
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486273
Leucyl-tRNA synthetase
COG0495
J
K01869


93
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486329
tRNA nucleotidyltransferase/poly(A)
COG0617
J
K00970




polymerase





94
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487191
putative phage protein





95
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486270
DNA polymerase III, delta subunit
COG1466
L
K02340


96
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486380
hypothetical protein





97
Anaerostipes_caccae_167747544
Non-ribosomal peptide synthetase
COG1020
Q





modules and related proteins





98
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486501
Predicted unusual protein kinase
COG0661
R



99
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486855
Lacl-family transcriptional regulator





100
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486358
Hemolysins and related proteins
COG1253
R
K03699


101
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486649
Acetylornithine deacetylase/Succinyl-
COG0624
E
K01439




diaminopimelate desuccinylase





102
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025555
Orotidine-5′-phosphate decarboxylase
COG0284
F
K01591


103
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465600
Gamma-glutamyl phosphate
COG0014
E
K00147




reductase





104
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486786
FAD synthase/riboflavin kinase/FMN
COG0196
H
K00861/0953




adenylyltransferase





105
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488712
Ribonuclease D
COG0349
J
K03684


106
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488649
N-acetylglutamate synthase (N-
COG1364
E
K00620/0642




acetylornithine aminotransferase)





107
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154489082
Ribonucleoside-triphosphate
COG1328
F
K00527




reductase





108
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487141
transcriptional regulator, AraC family





109
Bifidobacterium_longum_23335562
Acetyltransferase (isoleucine patch
COG0110
R
K00680




superfamily)





110
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025600
ABC-type amino acid transport
COG0765
E





system, permease component





111
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486349
Recombinational DNA repair ATPase
COG1195
L
K03629




(RecF pathway)





112
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487341
Succinyl-CoA synthetase
COG0045
C
K01903


113
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486419
Adenylosuccinate synthase
COG0104
F
K01939


114
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486323
transcriptional regulator, AraC family





115
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025197
3-isopropylmalate dehydratase large
COG0065
E
K01702/3




subunit





116
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154489094
Predicted dehydrogenases and
COG0673
R





related proteins





117
Bifidobacterium_longum_23336262
O-acetylhomoserine sulfhydrylase
COG2873
E
K01740


118
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465907
ABC-type
COG0601
EP
K02033




dipeptide/oligopeptide/nickel transport







systems





119
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487000
Threonine aldolase
COG2008
E
K01620


120
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487167
Sortase and related acyltransferases
COG1247
M
K03823


121
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465198
Thioredoxin reductase
COG0492/0526
OC
K00384


122
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488926
Arabinose efflux permease
COG2814
G



123
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465931
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG1136
V
K02003/4




transport system, ATPase component





124
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486352
Type IIA topoisomerase (DNA
COG0188
L
K01863/2469




gyrase/topo II, topoisomerase IV)





125
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026009
Pyruvate-formate lyase-activating
COG1180
O
K04069




enzyme





126
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487279
Methionine synthase II (cobalamin-
COG0620
E
K00549




independent)





127
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025238
Acetolactate synthase
COG0440
E
K01653


128
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025129
Signal recognition particle GTPase
COG0552
U
K03110


129
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488132
Asp-tRNAAsn/Glu-tRNAGln
COG0154
J
K02433




amidotransferase





130
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486940
ABC-type dipeptide transport system
COG0747
E
K02035


131
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488789
Type IIA topoisomerase (DNA
COG0188
L
K01863/2469




gyrase/topo II, topoisomerase IV)





132
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487377
Long-chain acyl-CoA synthetases
COG1022
I
K01897


133
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488794
DNA-directed RNA polymerase,
COG0568
K
K03086




sigma subunit





134
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488989
Superfamily I DNA and RNA
COG0210
L
K01529




helicases





135
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486903
Prolyl-tRNA synthetase
COG0442
J
K01881


136
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488684
putative helicase





137
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486399
Lysophospholipase
COG2267
I



138
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026611
ABC-type sugar transport systems,
COG3839
G
K05816




ATPase components





139
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486670
Putative fatty acid synthase/reductase
COG0304/0331/
IQ
K00059/209/





2030/4981/

665/666/680





4982




140
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488852
ABC-type oligopeptide transport
COG4166
E
K02035




system





141
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486664
putative ABC-type sugar transport







system





142
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025257
Ribonucleases G and E
COG1530
J
K01128


143
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486472
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG0577
V
K02004




transport system





144
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487036
hypothetical protein





145
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487636
glycoside hydrolase family 2
COG3250
G
K01190


146
Eubacterium_dolichum_160915695
glycoside hydrolase family 31





147
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154489092
Aspartate/tyrosine/aromatic
COG0436
E
K00812




aminotransferase





148
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026440
hypothetical protein
NOG21350




149
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025397
Myosin-crossreactive antigen
COG4716
S



150
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026143
Glutamine amidotransferase
COG0118
E
K02501


151
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487050
Universal stress protein UspA
COG0589
T



152
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486729
Phosphoglycerate dehydrogenase
COG0111
HE



153
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488261
Predicted hydrolases or
COG0596
R





acyltransferases





154
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154489101
hypothetical protein





155
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487476
Phosphotransacetylase
COG0280/0857
CR
K00625


156
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488788
Uncharacterized proteins of the AP
COG1524
R





superfamily





157
Ruminococcus_obeum_153809835
putative ketose-bisphosphate







aldolase





158
Clostridium_leptum_160933115
hypothetical protein





159
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026429
Ribulose-5-phosphate 4-epimerase
COG0235
G
K03080


160
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487579
glycoside hydrolase family 36
COG3345
G
K07407


161
Bifidobacterium_longum_23464678
hypothetical protein





162
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486391
Serine/threonine protein phosphatase
COG0631
T
K01090


163
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486962
ABC-type amino acid transport/signal
COG0834
ET
K02030




transduction systems





164
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486954
DNA primase
COG0358
L
K02316


165
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486993
Glutamine
COG0034
F
K00764




phosphoribosylpyrophosphate







amidotransferase





166
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488913
HrpA-like helicases
COG1643
L
K03578


167
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486787
Predicted ATP-dependent serine
COG1066
O
K04485




protease





168
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486493
Ammonia permease
COG0004
P
K03320


169
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487494
Methenyl tetrahydrofolate
COG0190
H
K00288/1491




cyclohydrolase





170
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025196
Transcriptional regulator
COG1414
K



171
Dorea_longicatena_153853202
hypothetical protein





172
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487329
putative transcriptional regulator





173
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487591
LacI-family transcriptional regulator





174
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486321
glycoside hydrolase family 3





175
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025741
GTPase
COG1159
R
K03595


176
Clostridium_scindens_167758922
dUTPase
COG0756
F
K01520


177
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025587
Signal transduction histidine kinase
COG0642
T



178
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486470
Predicted membrane protein
COG4393
S



179
Clostridium_scindens_167760262
putative sporulation protein





180
Bacteroides_stercoris_167763769
hypothetical protein





181
Anaerostipes_caccae_167746872
putative ABC transporter





182
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486920
ABC-type amino acid transport/signal
COG0834
ET
K02030




transduction systems





183
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487063
Uncharacterized conserved protein
COG2326
S



184
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025989
glycoside hydrolase family 13
COG0366
G
K01187


185
Clostridium_bartlettii_164687864
Lactoylglutathione lyase
COG0346
E
K01759


186
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486443
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG0577
V
K02004




transport system





187
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488245
NADH:flavin
COG1902
C
K00354




oxidoreductases/NADPH2







dehydrogenase





188
Bifidobacterium_longum_23465963
atypical histidine kinase sensor of
NOG21560






two-component system





189
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488949
hypothetical protein





190
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486865
maltose O-acetyltransferase





191
Clostridium_scindens_167759009
cytidylate kinase


K00945


192
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486901
ATP-dependent exoDNAse
COG0507
L



193
Ruminococcus_torques_153814251
hypothetical protein





194
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025327
Ribosomal protein L13
COG0102
J
K02871


195
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488916
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG1136
V





transport system





196
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025389
putative histidine kinase sensor of two







component system





197
Ruminococcus_gnavus_154504598
Translation elongation factor P (EF-
COG0231
J
K02356




P)/initiation factor 5A (eIF-5A)





198
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026648
ribonuclease P
NOG21633

K03536


199
Clostridium_scindens_167760715
hypothetical protein





200
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026098
Uncharacterized conserved protein
COG2606
S



201
Clostridium_scindens_167761320
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG1136
V
K02003




transport system





202
Bacteroides_stercoris_167762249
hypothetical protein





203
Anaerostipes_caccae_167746530
putative ion channel





204
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025057
Serine/threonine protein kinase
COG0515
RTKL



205
Clostridium_bartlettii_164686672
Molybdopterin biosynthesis enzymes
COG0521
H
K03638


206
Ruminococcus_obeum_153811887
hypothetical protein





207
Clostridium_spiroforme_169349879
protein-Np-phosphohistidine-sugar


K00890




phosphotransferase





208
Clostridium_ramosum_167756439
type I restriction enzyme, S subunit


K01154


209
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025640
Short-chain alcohol dehydrogenase of
COG4221
R





unknown specificity





210
Eubacterium_ventriosum_154483925
Uncharacterized conserved protein
COG2501
S



211
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487477
Phosphoketolase
COG3957
G
K01621/32/36


212
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154489149
Putative molecular chaperone
COG0443
O
K01529/4043/







8070


213
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025585
hypothetical protein





214
Clostridium_scindens_167759334
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG1136
V
K02003




transport system





215
Anaerostipes_caccae_167748732
Serine-pyruvate
COG0075
E
K03430




aminotransferase/archaeal aspartate







aminotransferase





216
Ruminococcus_gnavus_154505702
Putative phage replication protein
COG2946
L
K07467




RstA





217
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486389
Cell division protein FtsI
COG0768
M



218
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154488668
ABC-type cobalt transport system
COG1122
P
K02006


219
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486277
Fructose-2,6-
COG0406
G
K01834




bisphosphatase/phosphoglycerate







mutase





220
Clostridium_scindens_167758556
hypothetical protein





221
Dorea_longicatena_153855715
putative acetyltransferase





222
Eubacterium_dolichum_160915136
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG1136
V
K02003




transport system





223
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119026205
Isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase
COG0060
J
K01870


224
Ruminococcus_obeum_153810514
glycoside hydrolase family 23
COG0741/91
M



225
Eubacterium_eligens_Contig2011.538
putative phosphohydrolase





226
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154487387
Transcriptional regulator
COG0583
K



227
Ruminococcus_obeum_153812199
putative flavodoxin





228
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486996
Phosphoribosylformylglycinamidine
COG0046/7
F
K01952




(FGAM) synthase





229
Dorea_longicatena_153854194
Ornithine/acetylornithine
COG4992
E
K00818




aminotransferase





230
Ruminococcus_gnavus_154505209
Predicted GTPases
COG1160
R



231
Dorea_longicatena_153853531
Predicted transcriptional regulators
COG1695
K



232
Ruminococcus_torques_153814203
Acetyltransferases
COG0456
R
K03826


233
Clostridium_scindens_167761371
putative ABC-type transport system





234
Bifidobacterium_longum_38906105
F0F1-type ATP synthase
COG0055
C
K02112


235
Collinsella_aerofaciens_139439837
hypothetical protein





236
Clostridium_leptum_160933570
ABC-type antimicrobial peptide
COG0577/1136
V
K02003




transport system





237
Eubacterium_rectale_2731
putative sensor histidine kinase





238
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154489126
ABC-type multidrug transport system
COG1132
V
K06147


239
Ruminococcus_obeum_153812105
putative conjugative transposon
NOG05968






protein





240
Dorea_longicatena_153853999
hypothetical protein





241
Clostridium_bolteae_160937390
hypothetical protein





242
Ruminococcus_torques_153814809
cytidylate kinase


K00945


243
Ruminococcus_obeum_153810530
hypothetical protein





244
Clostridium_scindens_167758273
putative alanine racemase





245
Clostridium_scindens_167760222
putative ABC transporter





246
Dorea_longicatena_153854759
Sporulation protein
COG2088
M
K06412


247
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_119025414
glycosyl-transferase family 4





248
Ruminococcus_obeum_153813075
hypothetical protein





249
Eubacterium_ventriosum_154482695
Queuine/archaeosine tRNA-
COG0343
J
K00773




ribosyltransferase





250
Ruminococcus_obeum_153811892
hypothetical protein





251
Ruminococcus_obeum_153810246
Type IV secretory pathway, VirB4
COG3451
U





components





252
Dorea_longicatena_153854838
Ribosomal protein S16
COG0228
J
K02959


253
Dorea_longicatena_153855241
putative DNA gyrase, subunit A





254
Collinsella_aerofaciens_139438412
putative transcriptional regulator





255
Clostridium_leptum_160934853
putative ribosomal-protein-alanine







acetyltransferase





256
Eubacterium_rectale_3602
Type IV secretory pathway, VirD4
COG3505
U





components





257
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486460
ABC-type multidrug transport system
COG1132
V
K06147


258
Anaerostipes_caccae_167746203
exonuclease SbcC


K03546


259
Ruminococcus_obeum_153813732
hypothetical protein





260
Eubacterium_ventriosum_154484729
protein-Np-phosphohistidine-sugar


K00890




phosphotransferase





261
Eubacterium_rectale_3363
putative ABC transporter





262
Ruminococcus_obeum_153809913
hypothetical protein





263
Anaerostipes_caccae_167748861
putative arylsulfate sulfotransferase





264
Eubacterium_eligens_Contig2011.154
Uncharacterized conserved protein
COG4283
S



265
Clostridium_scindens_167759418
putative competence protein ComEA





266
Eubacterium_rectale_3439
putative RNA-directed DNA







polymerase





267
Clostridium_bolteae_160940954
SAM-dependent methyltransferases
COG0500
QR
K00599


268
Ruminococcus_obeum_153811726
putative DNA topoisomerase





269
Ruminococcus_obeum_153813044
putative transposase





270
Eubacterium_rectale_2410
type I restriction enzyme, R subunit


K01152/3


271
Clostridium_bolteae_160941795
putative recombination protein





272
Bifidobacterium_adolescentis_154486724
putative esterase





273
Collinsella_aerofaciens_139438485
putative amidohydrolase
















TABLE 14







Bacterial genes enriched in gut microbiomes of lean MZ twins

















KEGG


SEQ.



COG
orthologous


No.
Genome and NCBI proteinID
Annotation
COG
Categories
groups















274
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500567
putative amidohydrolase





275
Clostridium_leptum_160934848
putative acetyltransferase





276
Ruminococcus_obeum_153810033
phosphocarrier protein HPr


K02784


277
Eubacterium_siraeum_167749283
putative ABC transporter related







protein





278
Bacteroides_capillosus_154497054
Polyribonucleotide
COG1185
J
K00962




nucleotidyltransferase





279
Eubacterium_siraeum_167749675
Isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase
COG0060
J
K01870


280
Eubacterium_rectale_3617
hypothetical protein





281
Bacteroides_capillosus_154498345
putative sporulation protein





282
Parabacteroides_merdae_154490921
hypothetical protein





283
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500960
putative chromosome segregation







protein





284
Ruminococcus_torques_153814925
putative sporulation protein





285
Clostridium_scindens_167758815
glycosyl-transferase family 4





286
Clostridium_sp._L2_50_160893842
Protease subunit of ATP-dependent
COG0740
OU
K01358




Clp proteases





287
B_theta_WH2_000545
putative type I restriction enzyme







EcoAI specificity protein





288
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500843
trk system potassium uptake protein


K03499




TrkA





289
Clostridium_bolteae_160936948
putative two-component







transcriptional regulator





290
Bacteroides_capillosus_154498005
ATP-dependent serine
COG1066
O
K00567




protease/cysteine S-







methyltransferase





291
Parabacteroides_merdae_154492394
hypothetical protein





292
Bacteroides_capillosus_154498009
Fructose/tagatose bisphosphate
COG0191
G
K01622




aldolase





293
B_theta_3731_000845
hypothetical protein





294
Anaerotruncus_colihominis_167769594
Predicted ATPase (AAA+
COG1373
R





superfamily)





295
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500228
putative translation protein





296
Anaerofustis_stercorihominis_169334667
putative DNA recombinase





297
B_theta_3731_003400
hypothetical protein





298
Parabacteroides_distasonis_150008749
hypothetical protein





299
Bacteroides_fragilis_19068109
mobilization protein BmgA
NOG11714




300
Eubacterium_dolichum_160914154
glycoside hydrolase family 20
COG3525
G
K01207


301
Bacteroides_capillosus_154497125
RNA methyltransferase, TrmH family


K03218


302
Clostridium_sp._L2_50_160894658
NTP pyrophosphohydrolases
COG0494/3323
LRS
K03574


303
Parabacteroides_merdae_154494925
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate
COG0057
G
K00134




dehydrogenase





304
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496139
Type IIA topoisomerase (DNA
COG0188
L
K01863/2469




gyrase/topo II, topoisomerase IV)





305
Clostridium_ramosum_167755346
MoxR-like ATPase


K03924


306
Bacteroides_uniformis_160888848
hypothetical protein





307
Ruminococcus_gnavus_154504651
Putative translation initiation inhibitor
COG0251
J
K07567


308
Bacteroides_uniformis_160890270
putative phage protein





309
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500164
putative DNA recombinase





310
B_theta_WH2_000807
sulfotransferase/FAD synthetase
COG0175
EH
K00957


311
Bacteroides_uniformis_160892052
carbohydrate esterase family 4 and







12





312
Clostridium_sp._L2_50_160893671
hypothetical protein





313
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500952
hypothetical protein


K09710


314
Clostridium_scindens_167759293
putative ribonucleoside-triphosphate







reductase activating protein





315
Bacteroides_capillosus_154498134
Predicted GTPases
COG1160
R
K03977


316
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500412
ribosomal protein





317
Bacteroides_fragilis_60683403
Imidazolonepropionase and related
COG1228
Q
K01468




amidohydrolases





318
Peptostreptococcus_micros_160946111
hypothetical protein
NOG15344




319
B_theta_7330_001524
putative transposase





320
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500229
putative peptidase





321
Bacteroides_vulgatus_150006208
Integrase
COG0582
L



322
Bacteroides_capillosus_154501540
hypothetical protein





323
Bacteroides_stercoris_167762500
Site-specific recombinase XerD
COG4974
L



324
Bacteroides_fragilis_60679880
glycoside hydrolase family 38
COG0383
G
K01191


325
Bacteroides_capillosus_154497979
putative replication protein





326
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500160
putative helicase





327
Bacteroides_stercoris_167752230
Retron-type reverse transcriptase
COG3344
L



328
B_theta_WH2_003792
hypothetical protein
NOG14996




329
Bacteroides_capillosus_154497731
hypothetical protein





330
Parabacteroides_merdae_154494117
UDP-N-acetyl-D-mannosaminuronate
COG0677
M
K02472




dehydrogenase





331
Bacteroides_caccae_153807847
2-succinyl-6-hydroxy-2,4-
COG1165
H
K02551




cyclohexadiene-1-carboxylate







synthase





332
Anaerotruncus_colihominis_167771309
N-acetylglutamate synthase (N-
COG1364
E
K00618




acetylornithine aminotransferase)





333
B_theta_WH2_003808
putative outer membrane protein





334
Eubacterium_dolichum_160914195
putative copper-translocating P-type


K01529




ATPase





335
Bacteroides_fragilis_53715551
Predicted ATPase
COG1373
R



336
Clostridium_bolteae_160937654
putative phage protein





337
Bacteroides_fragilis_53712550
Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase
COG3634
O
K03387


338
Parabacteroides_merdae_154492101
hypothetical protein





339
Clostridium_bolteae_160936352
Uncharacterized conserved protein
COG2606
S



340
Bacteroides_uniformis_160889340
TraM





341
B_theta_7330_002089
Adenine-specific DNA methylase
COG0827/4646
KL



342
B_theta_WH2_003982
putative outer membrane protein





343
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496743
hypothetical protein





344
Clostridium_bolteae_160941240
putative citrate lyase





345
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496327
putative v-type ATPase





346
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496839
putative cobalamin biosynthesis







protein





347
Bacteroides_fragilis_60683742
Small-conductance mechanosensitive
COG0668
M





channel





348
Eubacterium_siraeum_167749611
putative transcriptional regulator





349
Parabacteroides_distasonis_150007998
Cobyric acid synthase
COG1492
H
K02232


350
Parabacteroides_distasonis_150008480
putative pyruvate formate-lyase 3







activating enzyme





351
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496329
Na+-transporting two-sector


K01549/50




ATPase/ATP synthase





352
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496850
hypothetical protein





353
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496749
putative spore maturation protein





354
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496148
putative spore protease





355
Clostridium_bolteae_160937655
DNA polymerase


K00961


356
Bacteroides_fragilis_60683107
Putative copper/silver efflux pump
COG3696
P
K07239/7787


357
Bacteroides_capillosus_154496295
putative short-chain







dehydrogenase/reductase





358
Anaerotruncus_colihominis_167771023
stage V sporulation protein AC


K06405


359
B_theta_WH2_004992
ABC-type multidrug transport system
COG0842
V
K09686


360
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500409
Transcription antiterminator
COG0250
K
K02601


361
B_theta_3731_003445
putative tyrosine type site-specific
NOG36763






recombinase





362
B_theta_WH2_003671
putative 3-oxoacyl-[acyl-carrier-







protein] synthase





363
Parabacteroides_distasonis_150010457
hypothetical protein





364
Bacteroides_fragilis_60681723
putative hydrolase lipoprotein
NOG09493




365
Clostridium_scindens_167758928
putative transcriptional regulator





366
Bacteroides_capillosus_154498046
Exonuclease VII small subunit
COG1722
L
K03602


367
Ruminococcus_gnavus_154504691
putative phage protein





368
Anaerotruncus_colihominis_167772969
hypothetical protein





369
Bacteroides_caccae_153808785
Predicted nucleoside-diphosphate
COG1086
MG





sugar epimerases





370
Alistipes_putredinis_167751920
phosphoglycolate phosphatase


K01091


371
Anaerotruncus_colihominis_167772790
hypothetical protein





372
Parabacteroides_merdae_154494124
putative transcriptional regulator





373
Bacteroides_caccae_153809523
glycoside hydrolase family 29
COG3669
G
K01206


374
Bacteroides_fragilis_46242778
TraO conjugation protein





375
Bacteroides_capillosus_154499075
putative site-specific recombinase





376
Anaerotruncus_colihominis_163816273
putative DNA helicase





377
Bacteroides_capillosus_154495881
Pentose-5-phosphate-3-epimerase
COG0036
G
K01783


378
Bacteroides_uniformis_160887913
hypothetical protein





379
Dorea_longicatena_153853397
putative phage protein





380
Bacteroides_vulgatus_150003721
putative outer membrane protein





381
B_theta_WH2_002145
putative outer membrane protein





382
Bacteroides_capillosus_154500525
hypothetical protein


Lean-


383
Alistipes_putredinis_167752229
putative DNA primase
NOG22337









Example 8
BMI Categorization by Ethnicity in Participants in Missouri Adolescent Female Twin Study

BMI category by ethnicity for the entire MOAFTS wave 5 cohort, based on 3326 twins with complete data on height and weight is summarized in Table 15. Dizygotic (DZ) twins had a significantly higher mean BMI than monozygotic (MZ) twins [25.8±6.5 vs. 24.8±5.9, p<0.001, mean±sd], and a higher prevalence of overweight (22.8 vs 20.9%) and obese (20.7 vs 16.1%; χ2=31.6, p<0.001). This may reflect a higher dizygotic twinning rate among obese women (MZ twinning occurs randomly39). BMI was more highly correlated in MZ twins than in DZ twins, both in EA pairs (rMZ=0.80, rDZ=0.48) and in AA pairs (rMZ=0.73, rDZ=0.26), and this remained true when analysis was restricted to pairs concordant for obesity (EA: rMZ=0.61, rDZ=0.27; AA rMZ=0.62, rDZ=−0.11) or concordant for leanness (EA: rMZ=0.43, rDZ=0.14; AA: rMZ=0.55, rDZ=0.39). After age-adjustment, quantitative genetic modeling yielded an estimated additive genetic variance for BMI of 68% (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 57-79%), shared environmental variance of 14% (95% CI: 2-24%), and non-shared environmental variance of 14% (95% CI: 17-21%). Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for Missouri women of comparable age in 2006 yield higher rates of overweight and obesity in EA women (23.8% overweight and 25% obese) compared to rates observed in MOAFTS (19.6% overweight EA, 14.8% obese EA).









TABLE 15







BMI category in the Missouri Adolescent Female Twin Studya


















Obese
Obese



Underweight
Lean
Overweight
Obese I
II
III



(n = 138)
(n = 1893)
(n = 711)
(n = 309)
(n = 174)
(n = 113)

















EA
4.79
60.87
19.58
8.08
4.27
2.41


(n = 2860)


AA
0.21
31.80
31.59
16.32
10.88
9.21


(n = 478)






aAll numbers are percentages. Underwight: , 18.5 kg/m2; Lean 18.5-24.9 kg/m2 25-29.9 kg/m2; Obese I: 30-34..9 kg/m2; Obese II: 35-39.9 kg/m2; Obese III: ≧40 kg/m2







Lean and obese women selected for inclusion in the biospecimen collection project were representative of the entire cohort of lean and obese MOAFTS twins in terms of parity (nulliparous/parous), educational attainment (more than high school education/high school education or less) and marital status (married or living with someone as married/not married; p>0.05 for all comparisons). Obese EA women providing biospecimens had a mean BMI at wave 5 of 36.9±4.7 compared with a mean among EA lean women of 21.4±1.5 (mean±sd). EA twins were selected as being stably lean across all waves of data collection (i.e., baseline at median age 15, one-year follow-up, 5-year follow-up and 7-year follow-up), with a self-reported BMI of 18.5-24.9 kg/m2.


Example 9
Comparison of Amplification Methods in Taxonomic Assignments

A frequently reported result from any 16S rRNA gene sequence-based survey is the relative abundance of bacterial phyla. Given the broad nature of these phyla and the fact that a relatively few phyla dominate the human distal gut microbiota, it might be expected that the relative abundance of each phylum be consistent regardless of the amplification and sequencing methods used. However, differences were observed between methods in this study (FIGS. 13A-E). Relative to the sampled gut microbiomes (defined by pyrosequencing of total community DNA), the full-length, V2/3, and V6 16S rRNA gene datasets were all significantly depleted for Bacteroidetes (paired Student's t-test, p<0.001), and significantly enriched for Firmicutes (p<0.01). One possible explanation for these differences is that the Bacteroidetes reference genomes are more closely related to those in the microbiomes than the Firmicutes reference genomes, thereby inflating estimates of the relative abundance of this phylum (FIG. 10). To address this potential confounding factor, 16S rRNA gene fragments from all 18 microbiome datasets were identified and classified them taxonomically. The results of this analysis confirmed that the three PCR-based methods underestimate the relative abundance of the Bacteroidetes (FIG. 13F). Moreover, results obtained from shotgun sequencing 16S rRNA gene fragments and PCR amplification of the V2/3 region showed the strongest correlation (FIG. 13G).

Claims
  • 1. An array comprising a substrate, the substrate having disposed thereon (a) at least one nucleic acid indicative of, or modulated in, an obese host microbiome compared to a lean host microbiome, or(b) at least one nucleic acid indicative of, or modulated in, a lean host microbiome compared to an obese host microbiome.
  • 2. The array of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid comprises a nucleic add sequence selected from the nucleic acid sequences listed in Table 13 or Table 14, or a nucleic acid sequence capable of hybridizing to a nucleic acid sequence listed in Table 13 or 14.
  • 3. The array of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid or nucleic acids are located at a spatially defined address of the array.
  • 4. The array of claim 3, wherein the array has no more than 500 spatially defined addresses.
  • 5. The array of claim 3, wherein the array has at least 500 spatially defined addresses.
  • 6. The array of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid sequence is selected from the group consisting of sequences encoded by SEQ ID NO:1-273.
  • 7. The array of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid sequence is selected from the group consisting of sequences encoded by SEQ ID NO:274-383.
  • 8. An array comprising a substrate, the substrate having disposed thereon (a) at least one polypeptide indicative of, or modulated in, an obese host microbiome compared to a can host microbiome, or(b) at least one polypeptide indicative of, or modulated in, a can host microbiome compared to an obese host microbiome.
  • 9. The array of claim 8, wherein the polypeptide is encoded by a nucleic acid sequence selected from the nucleic acid sequences listed in Table 13 or Table 14.
  • 10. The array of claim 8, wherein the polypeptide or polypeptides are located at a spatially defined address of the array.
  • 11. The array of claim 10, wherein the array has no more than 500 spatially defined addresses.
  • 12. The array of claim 10, wherein the array has at least 500 spatially defined addresses.
  • 13. The array of claim 9, wherein the nucleic acid sequence is selected from the group consisting of sequences encoded by SEQ ID NO:1-273.
  • 14. The array of claim 9, wherein the nucleic acid sequence is selected from the group consisting of sequences encoded by SEQ ID NO:274-383.
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims the priority of U.S. National application Ser. No. 13/002,137, filed Mar. 29, 2011; which claims the priority of PCT application number PCT/US2009/049253, filed Jun. 30, 2009; which claims the priority of U.S. provisional application No. 61/076,887, filed Jun. 30, 2008; and U.S. provisional application No. 61/101,011, filed Sep. 29, 2008, each of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.

GOVERNMENTAL RIGHTS

This invention was made in part with government support under grant DK078669 awarded by the National Institutes of Health. The government has certain rights in the invention.

Provisional Applications (2)
Number Date Country
61076887 Jun 2008 US
61101011 Sep 2008 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 13002137 Mar 2011 US
Child 14147163 US