4.7 Article

Colonization of the gut microbiota of honey bee (Apis mellifera) workers at different developmental stages

期刊

MICROBIOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 231, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.micres.2019.126370

关键词

Apis mellifera workers; Colonization; Bifidobacterium; Lactobacillus kunkeei; Core microbiota

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31660695]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The role of the gut microbiome in animal health has become increasingly evident. Although the structure of the gut microbiome of A. mellifera is well known, little is known about the dynamic change across different developmental stages. In this study, we explored the dynamic changes of the gut microbiota of A. mellifera at different developmental stages covering the whole life cycle using high-throughput 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The results indicated that the core (shared) gut microbiota changes significantly among different developmental stages. The diversity of the bacterial community in workers among different ages was significantly different. In addition, by comparing the core gut microbiota among different-aged workers, we found that newly emerged workers had fewer core microbiota. Three genera, Gilliamella, Frischella, and Snodgrassella, were significantly colonized at 1 day poste mergence (dpe); Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Commensalibacter were significantly colonized at 3 dpe and significantly reduced with Gilliamella. Lactobacillus kunkeei and Bartonella were significantly colonized at 12 dpe and were significantly decreased with Lactobacillus helsingborgensis. Commensalibacter and Bifidobacterium were significantly decreased at 25 dpe, and Bacteroides, Escherichia-Shigella, and Porphyromonadaceae were significantly decreased between 19 and 25 dpe. Our results reveal the succession of the gut microbiota of workers from birth to senescence, which provides a theoretical basis for further exploring the roles of gut microbiota during different developmental stages.

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