Maternal influence on the fetal microbiome in a population-based study of the first-pass meconium
From BugSigDB
Jump to:navigation, search
Study information
-
Quality control
- Retracted paper
- Contamination issues suspected
- Batch effect issues suspected
- Uncontrolled confounding suspected
- Results are suspect (various reasons)
- Tags applied
study design
Citation
PMID PubMed identifier for scientific articles.
DOI Digital object identifier for electronic documents.
URI
Authors
Tapiainen T, Paalanne N, Tejesvi MV, Koivusaari P, Korpela K, Pokka T, Salo J, Kaukola T, Pirttilä AM, Uhari M, Renko M
Journal
Pediatric research
Year
2018
BACKGROUND: Meconium is formed before birth and may reflect the microbiome of the fetus. To test our hypothesis, we investigated whether maternal factors during pregnancy, such as biodiversity of the living environment, influence the microbiome of the first stool more than immediate perinatal factors. METHODS: We recruited 218 consecutive newborn infants from one hospital. Regions of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene were sequenced to characterize the microbiomes of the first-pass meconium samples (N=212). We used a multivariate model to determine both the prenatal and perinatal factors affecting the microbiome. RESULTS: The number of operational taxonomic units ranged from 0 to 448 per newborn. The most abundant phyla were Firmicutes, with a relative abundance of 44%, Proteobacteria, 28%, and Bacteroidetes, 15%. By a multivariate analysis, the biodiversity of the home environment increased the diversity of microbiomes, whereas perinatal factors, such as the delivery mode or exposure to antimicrobials during labor did not have an effect. CONCLUSION: The microbiome of the first-pass meconium was not altered by immediate perinatal factors, but was affected by maternal factors during pregnancy, implying the in utero transfer of microbes and the development of the gut microbiota niche in fetal life.
Experiment 1
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Subjects
- Location of subjects
- Finland
- Host species Species from which microbiome was sampled. Contact us to have more species added.
- Homo sapiens
- Body site Anatomical site where microbial samples were extracted from according to the Uber Anatomy Ontology
- Meconium Meconium,meconium
- Condition The experimental condition / phenotype studied according to the Experimental Factor Ontology
- Cesarean section caesarean section,Cesarean section,cesarean section
- Group 0 name Corresponds to the control (unexposed) group for case-control studies
- vaginal delivery
- Group 1 name Corresponds to the case (exposed) group for case-control studies
- C-section
- Group 1 definition Diagnostic criteria applied to define the specific condition / phenotype represented in the case (exposed) group
- Delivery via cesarean section
- Group 0 sample size Number of subjects in the control (unexposed) group
- 172
- Group 1 sample size Number of subjects in the case (exposed) group
- 40
- Antibiotics exclusion Number of days without antibiotics usage (if applicable) and other antibiotics-related criteria used to exclude participants (if any)
- None
Lab analysis
- Sequencing type
- 16S
- 16S variable region One or more hypervariable region(s) of the bacterial 16S gene
- V4-V5
- Sequencing platform Manufacturer and experimental platform used for quantifying microbial abundance
- Ion Torrent
Statistical Analysis
- Data transformation Data transformation applied to microbial abundance measurements prior to differential abundance testing (if any).
- relative abundances
- Statistical test
- Mann-Whitney (Wilcoxon)
- Significance threshold p-value or FDR threshold used for differential abundance testing (if any)
- 0.05
- MHT correction Have statistical tests be corrected for multiple hypothesis testing (MHT)?
- No
Alpha Diversity
- Shannon Estimator of species richness and species evenness: more weight on species richness
- unchanged
- Richness Number of species
- unchanged
Signature 1
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Source: Table 3
Description: Effect of delivery mode on the microbiome in the CS group compared to the vaginal delivery group
Abundance in Group 1: decreased abundance in C-section
| NCBI | Quality Control | Links |
|---|---|---|
| Staphylococcus |
Revision editor(s): WikiWorks, ChiomaBlessing
Experiment 2
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Differences from previous experiment shown
Subjects
- Group 0 name Corresponds to the control (unexposed) group for case-control studies
- Antimicrobials use during delivery (no)
- Group 1 name Corresponds to the case (exposed) group for case-control studies
- Antimicrobials use during delivery (yes)
- Group 1 definition Diagnostic criteria applied to define the specific condition / phenotype represented in the case (exposed) group
- Mothers who used antimicrobials during delivery (Cefuroxime (n= 31), penicillin (n= 28), piperacillin-tazobactam (n=2))
- Group 0 sample size Number of subjects in the control (unexposed) group
- 151
- Group 1 sample size Number of subjects in the case (exposed) group
- 61
- Antibiotics exclusion Number of days without antibiotics usage (if applicable) and other antibiotics-related criteria used to exclude participants (if any)
- None.
Lab analysis
Statistical Analysis
Alpha Diversity
- Shannon Estimator of species richness and species evenness: more weight on species richness
- unchanged
- Richness Number of species
- unchanged
Signature 1
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Source: Table 3
Description: Effect of antimicrobial use on the microbiome of the first stool in the group who received antimicrobials (YES) compared to those did not (NO)
Abundance in Group 1: increased abundance in Antimicrobials use during delivery (yes)
| NCBI | Quality Control | Links |
|---|---|---|
| Bifidobacterium |
Revision editor(s): WikiWorks, ChiomaBlessing
Experiment 3
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Differences from previous experiment shown
Subjects
- Group 0 name Corresponds to the control (unexposed) group for case-control studies
- Maternal consumption of probiotics (NO)
- Group 1 name Corresponds to the case (exposed) group for case-control studies
- Maternal consumption of probiotics (YES)
- Group 1 definition Diagnostic criteria applied to define the specific condition / phenotype represented in the case (exposed) group
- Mothers who consumed probiotics (lactobacilli) during pregnancy
Lab analysis
Statistical Analysis
Alpha Diversity
- Shannon Estimator of species richness and species evenness: more weight on species richness
- unchanged
- Richness Number of species
- unchanged
Signature 1
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Source: Table 3
Description: Effect of probiotics on the microbiome in the group who consumed lactobacilli (YES) compared to the group who did not (NO)
Abundance in Group 1: increased abundance in Maternal consumption of probiotics (YES)
| NCBI | Quality Control | Links |
|---|---|---|
| Lactobacillus |
Revision editor(s): WikiWorks, ChiomaBlessing
Experiment 4
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Differences from previous experiment shown
Subjects
- Group 0 name Corresponds to the control (unexposed) group for case-control studies
- Furry pets at home (NO)
- Group 1 name Corresponds to the case (exposed) group for case-control studies
- Furry pets at home (YES)
- Group 1 definition Diagnostic criteria applied to define the specific condition / phenotype represented in the case (exposed) group
- Mothers who have furry pets at home during pregnancy
- Group 0 sample size Number of subjects in the control (unexposed) group
- 108
- Group 1 sample size Number of subjects in the case (exposed) group
- 104
Lab analysis
Statistical Analysis
- Confounders controlled for Confounding factors that have been accounted for by stratification or model adjustment
- antimicrobial agent during labor, delivery procedure, probiotics during pregnancy
Alpha Diversity
- Shannon Estimator of species richness and species evenness: more weight on species richness
- increased
- Richness Number of species
- increased
Signature 1
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Source: Table 4
Description: Effect of furry pets at home on the microbiome in the group who have furry pets at home (YES) compared to the group who don't have (NO)
Abundance in Group 1: increased abundance in Furry pets at home (YES)
| NCBI | Quality Control | Links |
|---|---|---|
| Bacteroidota | ||
| Faecalibacterium |
Revision editor(s): WikiWorks, ChiomaBlessing
Signature 2
Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09
Source: Table 4
Description: Effect of furry pets at home on the microbiome in the group who have furry pets at home (YES) compared to the group who don't have (NO)
Abundance in Group 1: decreased abundance in Furry pets at home (YES)
| NCBI | Quality Control | Links |
|---|---|---|
| Bacillota | ||
| Staphylococcus |
Revision editor(s): WikiWorks, ChiomaBlessing
Retrieved from "https://bugsigdb.org/w/index.php?title=Study_93&oldid=82608"
Hidden category:
