A recent article in Nature Communications demonstrated that a connection between changes to the gut microbiome which occur due to diet are different for different genders. These experiments were performed first on fish, then with humans. The gist of the experiments was that when new diets are introduced to humans, each individual's microbiome responds differently depending on gender.
This has interesting implications to the community moving forward. First, it demonstrates a direct link between genetics (gender) and microbiome populations, a link that, while self-evident, has been difficult to experimentally prove. Second, the authors suggest that links such as this may be the cause of certain diseases that are gender biased, such as IBD that appears to affect women more than men. On a final note, it highlights the need for future research to control for gender, and future microbiome therapeutics and probiotics to consider gender as important variable.
Why does the microbiome adjust differently for men and women when a new diet is introduced? That is currently unknown, but the authors mention gender-specific hormones and gender-specific immune functions as possible causes.
Please email blog@MicrobiomeInstitute.org for any comments, news, or ideas for new blog posts.
The views expressed in the blog are solely those of the author of the blog and not necessarily the American Microbiome Institute or any of our scientists, sponsors, donors, or affiliates.
A new study out in PNAS describes how gut bacteria in mice were responsible for protecting their host from peanut allergies. In the study gnotobiotic (germ-free) mice which were peanut-sensitive were inoculated with various bacterial strains. While some of the strains had no impact on the inflammation caused by peanuts, others, from the genus Clostridia (yeah, the same one as C. Difficile) actually prevented inflammation. The researchers are hoping to discover a metabolite created by Clostridia that was responsible. A nice longer form article about the paper was published by the BBC.
Please email blog@MicrobiomeInstitute.org for any comments, news, or ideas for new blog posts.
The views expressed in the blog are solely those of the author of the blog and not necessarily the American Microbiome Institute or any of our scientists, sponsors, donors, or affiliates.
On August 20th Nature published a piece asking readers to curb their collective enthusiasm over advancements in the microbiome field. This is a lesson that we at the AMI have heard over and over again from the scientists we talk to. When talking about linking diseases and phenotypes to the microbiome Owen White told us, and I am paraphrasing, "The way the science is currently performed by many researchers, I would be more surprised if an investigator DIDN'T find a connection between the microbiome and whatever he or she was studying!"
This is an important lesson to keep in mind, and it is the reason why so many of the leading microbiome scientists are supporting projects such as the MBQC standardization project and the HSPH microbiome core. These scientists realize that for the microbiome to make a true impact on human health the early stages are critical, and good science needs to be done. It also speaks to the need for high quality journals with rigorous reviewers.
These goals are shared by the AMI. We hope to support the MBQC as it continues to advance and grow. We also will start our own microbiome core (AMICAR) to help researchers ensure the quality of their studies from study design through data analysis.
Please email blog@MicrobiomeInstitute.org for any comments, news, or ideas for new blog posts.
The views expressed in the blog are solely those of the author of the blog and not necessarily the American Microbiome Institute or any of our scientists, sponsors, donors, or affiliates.
