4.7 Article

Changes of poultry faecal microbiota associated with Clostridium difficile colonisation

期刊

VETERINARY MICROBIOLOGY
卷 165, 期 3-4, 页码 416-424

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2013.04.014

关键词

Microbiota; Fungi; Archaea; DHPLC; Animals; Clostridium difficile

资金

  1. Slovenian research Agency [1000-10-310160, J3-4298, P2-0103, J2-2285]
  2. EU Grant [223585]
  3. European Regional Development Fund [OP13.1.1.2.02.0005]
  4. Slovenian Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology
  5. European Commission [ICT-2010-266722, ICT-2011-287713]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacterial, fungal and archaeal microbiota was analysed in 143 chicken faecal samples from a single poultry farm. After DHPLC (denaturing high performance liquid chromatography) 15 bacterial groups, 10 fungal groups and a single archaeal species were differentiated. Samples were grouped into two clusters with significantly different frequencies of C. difficile positive and negative samples in each cluster. Acidaminococcus intestini, described here for the first time as a part of poultry faecal microbiota, was significantly more likely present in C. difficile negative samples, while presence/absence of some other microorganisms (Enterococcus cecorum, Lactobacillus galinarum, Moniliella sp. and Trichosporon asahii) was close to significance. Two other groups not reported previously for poultry, Coprobacillus sp. and Turicibacter sp. did not differ significantly between C. difficile positive and negative samples. Differences in microbiota diversity depend on animal age, but not on the presence of C. difficile. With machine learning (WEKA J48) we have defined specific combinations of microbial groups predictive for C. difficile colonisation. Microbial groups associated with C. difficile colonisation in poultry are different than those reported for humans and include bacteria as well as fungi. Also with this approach A. intestini was found to be most strongly related to C. difficile negative samples. (c) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据