MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3008353900 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz047.049

A50 TRANSFER OF DEPRESSIVE-LIKE PHENOTYPE TO GNOTOBIOTIC MICE DEPENDS ON MICROBIAL FEATURES SPECIFIC TO INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS

2020· article· en· W3008353900 on OpenAlexaff
J Hanuschak, Marc Louis-Auguste, Giada De Palma, Elena F. Verdú, Rebecca Anglin, Matthew D. Surette, Stephen M. Collins, Přemysl Berčík

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFecesMajor depressive disorderPopulationBiologyGut floraIrritable bowel syndromePhenotypePhysiologyMedicineInternal medicineImmunologyClinical psychologyGeneticsGeneMicrobiologyMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Major depressive disorder (MDD) affects approximately 4.4% of the global population. Despite its high prevalence, little is known about the mechanisms underlying this disorder. Recent studies in both humans and rodents have suggested that the intestinal microbiota may play a role in depression. Altered microbiota composition has been found in a subset of MDD patients. Preclinical studies have suggested that fecal microbiota transplant using pooled MDD patient samples can induce depressive-like behaviour in rodents. We have previously shown that the use of different microbiota donors with irritable bowel syndrome results in the induction of different phenotypes in recipient mice. Thus, we have hypothesized that pooling microbiota samples abrogates features that are unique to individual donors. Aims (1) Investigate whether the transfer of individual MDD patient microbiota can induce depressive-like behaviour in germ-free (GF) mice (2) Identify features of individual MDD patient microbiota that are associated with the depressive-like phenotype Methods GF NIH Swiss mice of both sexes (min. n=10 per group, total n=110) were colonized with either fecal microbiota from a single donor, MDD patient (MDD1-4) or matched healthy control (HC1-4), or pooled fecal microbiota from MDD1-4 or HC1-4. Mouse behaviour was assessed, using the open field test, three chamber sociability assay, tail suspension test, and sucrose preference test. Stool samples were collected throughout the experiment for 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Results Mice colonized with microbiota from patient MDD1 exhibited depressive-like behaviour, as assessed by the sucrose preference test and sociability assay, when compared to mice colonized with HC1 microbiota. This was not true for mice colonized with individual microbiota from the other three patients (MDD2-4) or with pooled MDD microbiota. Comparative analysis of the 16S data revealed a significant difference in Faith’s Phylogenetic Diversity between MDD1 microbiota and pooled MDD microbiota. Four bacterial species were found to be significantly associated with the depressive-like phenotype in mice: Bacteroides acidifaciens, Bacteroides ovatus, unclassified species of Phascolarctobacterium (Veillonellacae family), and Eggerthella lenta. The relative abundances of these species did not differ significantly between the two pooled groups. Conclusions Microbiota from some, but not all, MDD patients can induce a depressive-like phenotype in GF mice. The ability to induce depressive-like behaviour in GF mice is lost when microbiota from multiple patients is pooled. Specific bacterial species may be responsible for the successful transfer of the depressive-like phenotype to mice. Funding Agencies NIH

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicGut microbiota and health→French-language works237,207→