Skip to main content
eLife logoLink to eLife
. 2024 Oct 7;13:RP92994. doi: 10.7554/eLife.92994

Peptidoglycan-Chi3l1 interaction shapes gut microbiota in intestinal mucus layer

Yan Chen 1,, Ruizhi Yang 1,, Bin Qi 1,, Zhao Shan 1,
Editors: Huihui Li2, Bavesh D Kana3
PMCID: PMC11458176  PMID: 39373714

Abstract

The balanced gut microbiota in intestinal mucus layer plays an instrumental role in the health of the host. However, the mechanisms by which the host regulates microbial communities in the mucus layer remain largely unknown. Here, we discovered that the host regulates bacterial colonization in the gut mucus layer by producing a protein called Chitinase 3-like protein 1 (Chi3l1). Intestinal epithelial cells are stimulated by the gut microbiota to express Chi3l1. Once expressed, Chi3l1 is secreted into the mucus layer where it interacts with the gut microbiota, specifically through a component of bacterial cell walls called peptidoglycan. This interaction between Chi3l1 and bacteria is beneficial for the colonization of bacteria in the mucus, particularly for Gram-positive bacteria like Lactobacillus. Moreover, a deficiency of Chi3l1 leads to an imbalance in the gut microbiota, which exacerbates colitis induced by dextran sodium sulfate. By performing fecal microbiota transplantation from Villin-cre mice or replenishing Lactobacillus in IECChil1 mice, we were able to restore their colitis to the same level as that of Villin-cre mice. In summary, this study shows a ‘scaffold model’ for microbiota homeostasis by interaction between intestinal Chi3l1 and bacteria cell wall interaction, and it also highlights that an unbalanced gut microbiota in the intestinal mucus contributes to the development of colitis.

Research organism: E. coli, Mouse

Introduction

Intestinal homeostasis is crucial for maintaining human health (Lozupone et al., 2012). Alterations in gut microbiota composition have been linked to various diseases including cancer, obesity, and neurological disorders (Bäumler and Sperandio, 2016; Charbonneau et al., 2016; Honda and Littman, 2016; Sonnenburg and Bäckhed, 2016; Thaiss et al., 2016). Dysbiosis, which refers to an imbalance in gut microbiota, is characterized by decreased microbial diversity, the presence of harmful microbes, or absence of beneficial ones (Petersen and Round, 2014). Therefore, understanding the factors that influence gut microbiota is a fundamental goal in microbiome research (McDonald et al., 2020). Growing evidence suggests that colonization of the gut mucus layer can affect the susceptibility and progression of intestinal diseases like inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome, and celiac disease (Gordon, 2012). IBDs, such as Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are characterized by chronic inflammation of the intestinal mucosa. Although the cause of the IBD is unclear, mouse models lacking the key components of the mucus are predisposed to colitis, accompanied by dysbiosis in mucosa (Fu et al., 2011; Johansson et al., 2008), which is in accordance with increased epithelial-adherent microbial communities in biopsies from patients with IBD (Johansson et al., 2014; Swidsinski et al., 2005). Furthermore, there were significant differences in the gut microbiota of CD patients compared with healthy controls, and these differences were only present in mucus samples (not stool samples), suggesting that bacteria in the mucus layer may be more important for the development of IBD (Gevers et al., 2014). Donaldson et al. discovered that the intestinal flora utilizes host immunoglobulin A (IgA) for mucus colonization, indicating that the host may secrete certain factors to maintain intestinal flora homeostasis in the mucus (Donaldson et al., 2018). However, the mechanisms regulating gut microbiota colonization in the mucus layer remain largely unknown. We aim to investigate the regulation of microbial communities in gut mucus and its implications in intestinal diseases.

Chitinase 3-like protein 1 (Chi3l1, also known as YKL-40 in humans) is a secreted protein that belongs to the glycosylhydrolase 18 family (Lee et al., 2011). Despite its name, Chi3l1 can bind to chitin but does not have chitinase activity (Houston et al., 2003). In our investigation, we noticed that chitin and peptidoglycan (PGN), a major component of bacterial cell walls, have similar structures (Fulde et al., 2018). Based on this information, we speculate that Chi3l1 might also interact with PGN and, therefore, interact with bacteria. Interestingly, Chi3l1 is expressed in intestinal epithelial cells (IECs) and the lamina propria. We hypothesize that Chi3l1 may be secreted by IECs and regulate the gut microbiota through its interaction with PGN in the mucus layer. In our study, we discovered that gut microbiota induced the expression of Chi3l1 in epithelial cells. Once expressed, Chi3l1 is secreted into the mucosa and interacts with bacteria, particularly with the bacterial cell wall component PGN. This interaction promotes bacterial colonization, especially of beneficial bacteria such as Lactobacillus. As a result, mice with higher levels of Chi3l1 are less susceptible to colitis.

Results

Intestinal epithelial cells express Chi3l1 induced by gut microbiota

The gut microbiota’s composition is shaped by host factors, including IgA (Donaldson et al., 2018), RegIIIγ (Vaishnava et al., 2011), and TLR-5 (Fulde et al., 2018). Yet, specific host factors which maintain the homeostasis of the microbiota remain largely undefined. Drawing on the theory of co-evolution between the host and microbiota (Groussin et al., 2020), we propose that host factors, which are induced by bacteria in the gut, could play a pivotal role in regulating bacterial colonization and composition. In a previous study, it was observed that both live Escherichia coli and heat-killed E. coli treatment resulted in a significant increase in the expression of the gene encoding Chi3l1 in human intestinal organoids (Hill et al., 2017). To verify this finding, we conducted immunohistochemical staining on intestinal tissue sections of germ-free and specific pathogen free (SPF) C57BL/6J wildtype mice. We observed a substantial increase of Chi3l1 expression in SPF mice compared to germ-free mice (Figure 1A). The intestinal epithelium comprises various cell types, including intestinal cells, goblet cells, endoentercrine cells, Tuft cells, Paneth cells, M cells, and others (Johansson et al., 2014). To identify the cellular sources of Chi3l1, we performed co-staining with markers for specific cell types, including chromogranin A (ChgA) for enteroendocrine cells, Ulex europaeus Agglutinin I (UEA-1) for goblet cells and Paneth cells, and double cortin-like kinase 1 (DCLK1) for tuft cells. Our results revealed that Chi3l1 is primarily expressed in enteroendocrine cells in the ileum and goblet or Paneth cells in the colon (Figure 1B). However, Chi3l1 expression was not observed in tuft cells (Figure 1—figure supplement 1A).

Figure 1. Intestinal epithelial cells express Chi3l1 induced by gut microbiota.

(A) Immunohistochemical (IHC) staining to detect Chi3l1 in both ileum and colon from germ-free and wildtype mice. Ctrl (wildtype mice without application of first antibody), WT (wildtype C57B/6J mice). Red arrows indicate Chi3l1-expressing cells. Scale bars, 50 μm (Ctrl, Germ-free, WT). The number of Chi3l1-positive cells in each field of view (FOV) was analyzed. (B) Ileum and colon were collected from wildtype mice and stained with ChgA (green), Chi3l1(red), and nuclear DAPI (blue) in ileum and UEA-1 (green), Chi3l1 (red), and nuclear DAPI (blue) in colon. Scale bars, 50 μm. Ctrl (without application of first antibody), WT (wildtype C57BL/6J mice). (C) Western blot to detect Chi3l1 protein expression in DLD-1 cells after bacteria mix infection for 12 hr. Bacteria mix are total bacteria extracted from feces of wildtype mice. (D) Western blot to detect Chi3l1 protein expression in DLD-1 cells after Staphylococcus sciuri and E. coli infection for 12 hr. Staphylococcus sciuri and E. coli are isolated from bacteria mix and verified by 16S rRNA sequencing. Three independent experimental results are showed. (E) Western blot to detect Chi3l1 protein expression in DLD-1 cells after treatment with heat-killed E. coli for 12 hr. Three independent experimental results are showed. (F) Western blot to detect Chi3l1 protein expression in DLD-1 cells after treatment with 100 pg/mL lipopolysaccharides (LPS) for 12 hr. Three independent experimental results are showed. (G) Immunofluorescence to detect Chi3l1 protein expression in DLD-1 cells after treatment with 100 pg/mL LPS for 12 hr. Scale bars, 20 μm. The presence of cells in the untreated sample is annotated using white dashed lines based on the overexposure. All data above represent at least three independent experiments. Representative images are shown in (A, B), n = 3 mice/group. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001, ns: no significant difference, error bar indicates SEM.

Figure 1—source data 1. File containing original western blots for Figure 1C–F, indicating the relevant bands.
Figure 1—source data 2. Original files for western blot analysis displayed in Figure 1C–F.
Figure 1—source data 3. Numerical data of Figure 1A.

Figure 1.

Figure 1—figure supplement 1. Chi3l1 do not express in tuft cells.

Figure 1—figure supplement 1.

(A) Ileum and colon were collected from Chil1-EGFP reporter mice and stained with DCLK1 (red), Chi3l1 (green), and nuclear DAPI (blue). Scale bars, 20 μm. Representative images are shown, n = 3 mice/group. (B) The construction, genotyping strategy, and genotyping results of Chil1-EGFP reporter mice. P: positive control; Wt: wildtype control; Neg: Blank control (ddH2O); M: DNA Ladder.
Figure 1—figure supplement 1—source data 1. File containing original DNA gels for Figure 1—figure supplement 1B, indicating the relevant bands.
Figure 1—figure supplement 1—source data 2. Original files for DNA gels for Figure 1—figure supplement 1B.

Furthermore, we isolated total bacteria from wildtype mouse feces and treated DLD-1 cells (a colorectal adenocarcinoma cell line) with the bacterial extract for 12 hr. We found that the bacterial extract directly induced Chi3l1 expression in DLD-1 cells (Figure 1C). To examine whether the induction of Chi3l1 expression requires a specific bacteria strain, we further identified the bacterial extract using 16S rRNA sequencing. Our results revealed that E. coli specifically stimulated Chi3l1 expression in DLD-1 cells, while Staphylococcus sciuri did not have the same effect (Figure 1D). Although our data are limited to these two bacterial strains, it suggests that not all bacteria can induce the expression of Chi3l1. Next, we wondered what component of bacteria can induce Chi3l1 expression. We tried heat-killed E. coli, which maintains bacterial cell wall integrity. We found that treatment of DLD-1 cells with heat-killed E. coli also led to an induction of Chi3l1 expression (Figure 1E). These findings suggest that the induction of Chi3l1 expression does not necessarily require live bacteria and that bacterial components alone are sufficient to induce this response.

Given that E. coli is Gram-negative and S. sciuri is Gram-positive, we hypothesized that the difference in their ability to induce Chi3l1 expression might be due to variations between Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, such as the presence of lipopolysaccharides (LPS). To test this hypothesis, we used LPS to induce Chi3l1 expression. Consistent with our hypothesis, LPS successfully induced Chi3l1 expression (Figure 1F and G). Collectively, these findings provide evidence that the gut microbiota can induce Chi3l1 expression in IECs. Collectively, these findings provide evidence that the gut microbiota can induce Chi3l1 expression in IECs.

Chi3l1 interact with bacteria via peptidoglycan

Chi3l1 belongs to a group of proteins called non-enzymatic chitinase-like proteins, which are known to bind chitin. Chitin is a polysaccharide present in the exoskeleton of arthropods and the cell walls of fungi (Zhao et al., 2020). By comparing the structure of chitin with that of PGN, a component of bacterial cell walls, we observed that they have similar structures (Figure 2A). Based on this observation, we hypothesized that Chi3l1 may interact with gut bacteria through PGN. To test our hypothesis, we conducted co-incubation experiments where we mixed recombinant mouse Chi3l1 (rmChi3l1) with either Gram-positive or Gram-negative bacteria and then precipitated the bacteria through centrifugation. We found that rmChi3l1 was present in the pellet obtained from both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria (Figure 2B), suggesting that Chi3l1 can directly interact with bacteria.

Figure 2. Chi3l1 interact with bacteria via peptidoglycan (PGN).

Figure 2.

(A) Structural comparison between chitin and PGN. Both chitin and PGN contain N-acetylglucosamine (GlcNAc) and have β–1,4-glycosidic bonds in their structures. However, chitin is purely a polysaccharide, while PGN includes a peptide component that forms cross-links between chains (Zhou et al., 2022). (B) Gram-positive bacteria (E. faecalis, S. saprophyticus) and Gram-negative bacteria (E. coli) were incubated with 1 μg of recombinant mouse Chi3l1 protein (rmChi3l1), respectively. Proteins bound to indicated bacteria were precipitated by centrifugation. Western blot was used to detect rmChi3l1 in Pellet, Supernatant (unbound proteins) and Last Wash (last wash unbound proteins). (C) Insoluble PGN were incubated with either recombinant mouse Chi3l1 protein (rmChi3l1) or bovine serum albumin (BSA). Proteins bound to PGN were precipitated by centrifugation. Silver staining was used to detect rmChi3l1 in Input, Supernatant (unbound proteins), Pellet and Last Wash (last wash unbound proteins). (D) Insoluble PGN were incubated with recombinant human Chi3l1 protein (rhChi3l1). Proteins bound to PGN were precipitated by centrifugation. Silver staining was used to detect rhChi3l1 in Input, Supernatant (unbound proteins), Pellet and Last Wash (last wash unbound proteins). All data above represent at least three independent experiments. (E) Insoluble PGN or chitin was incubated with rmChi3l1. Chi3l1 bound to PGN (upper panel) and chitin (lower panel) was precipitated and detected by silver staining. The supernatant represents the last wash, and the pellet contains proteins precipitated by either PGN or chitin. (F) Relative DLD-1 bacterial binding preference after treatment with K12 or GlmM, a PGN synthesis-deficient mutant. Colony-forming units (CFU) were counted, and GlmM CFU were normalized to 1. (G) Relative K12 bacterial adhesion preference after DLD-1 cells were transfected without (Mock), or with scramble shRNA (shCK), or with shChil1. CFU were counted, and the Mock group were normalized to 1. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001, ns: no significant difference, error bar indicates SEM.

Figure 2—source data 1. File containing original western blots for Figure 2B and silver staining for Figure 2C–E, indicating the relevant bands.
Figure 2—source data 2. Original files for western blot analysis displayed in Figure 2B and silver staining for Figure 2C–E.
Figure 2—source data 3. Numerical data of Figure 2F and G.

To further investigate the interaction between Chi3l1 and PGN, we also co-incubated PGN with rmChi3l1 and precipitated the PGN through centrifugation. PGN is an insoluble substance and hence can be precipitated by centrifugation. Consistent with our previous results, we observed that rmChi3l1 was present in the pellet obtained from PGN but not in the pellet obtained from bovine serum albumin (BSA), which served as a negative control (Figure 2C). Furthermore, we also examined the interaction between PGN and recombinant human Chi3l1 (rhChi3l1) and obtained similar results (Figure 2D). These findings indicate that Chi3l1 interacts with bacteria through PGN.

To better characterize the binding between Chi3l1 and PGN, we compared the binding affinities of Chi3l1 to both PGN and chitin. We incubated chitin and PGN with rmChi3l1 in increasing doses (25, 50, 100 μg) and detected the precipitated rmChi3l1 by either chitin or PGN. Our results indicate that Chi3l1 interacts with PGN in a dose-dependent manner (Figure 2E). In contrast, the binding between Chi3l1 and chitin did not exhibit dose dependency (Figure 2E). These findings suggest a specific and distinct binding mechanism for Chi3l1 with PGN compared to chitin.

To investigate whether the Chi3l1-PGN interaction could facilitate the colonization of Gram-positive bacteria, we conducted adhesion experiments using DLD-1 cells and bacteria. We employed a GlmM mutant (PGN synthesis-deficient) and K12 bacteria (a wildtype E. coli strain used as a control) to assess their adhesion capabilities. The results showed that the adhesion ability of the GlmM mutant to cells significantly decreased (Figure 2F). Additionally, after knocking down Chi3l1 in DLD-1 cells (knockdown efficiency over 50%), we observed a decrease in bacterial adhesion (Figure 2G). These findings suggest that the Chi3l1-PGN interaction plays a crucial role in bacterial adhesion.

Intestinal bacteria are disordered in IECChil1 mice, especially Gram-positive bacteria

To gain initial insights into how the expression of Chi3l1 in IECs affects the colonization of gut microbiota, we created mice with a specific deficiency of Chi3l1 in IECs (referred to as IECΔChil1 mice) (Figure 3—figure supplement 1). We then conducted bacterial 16S rRNA sequencing analysis of the colon contents of both Villin-cre and IECΔChil1 littermates. Our analysis of alpha diversity revealed that the bacterial population was relatively lower in IECΔChil1 littermates compared to Villin-cre littermates (Figure 3A). This finding was further confirmed by conducting universal bacterial 16S rRNA qPCR analysis of the feces and ileum contents of IECΔChil1 and Villin-cre littermates, which also showed lower bacterial enrichment in IECΔChil1 mice (Figure 3B). Furthermore, principal component analysis demonstrated significant differences in bacterial diversity between Villin-cre and IECΔChil1 littermates (Figure 3C).

Figure 3. Intestinal bacteria are disordered in IECChil1 mice, especially Gram-positive bacteria.

(A, C, D, G) Female Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates continue to cage together after weaning for 8 weeks. Microbial communities in feces and intestinal lumen were characterized by 16S rRNA sequencing. n = 7 or 10/group. (A) Alpha diversity analysis of colon contents between Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates. (B) qPCR analysis of total bacteria in the feces and ileum, colon luminal microbial communities of Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates. Values for each bacterial group are expressed relative to total 16S rRNA levels. n = 5–10/group. (C) Principal component analysis of weighed UniFrac distances of 16S community profiles of Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates feces (binary-jaccard). (D) Relative abundance of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria in colon contents of Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates are shown. (E) Lipoteichoic acid (LTA) (green) was detected by immunofluorescence in colon sections of Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates. Nuclei were detected with DAPI. Scale bars, 50 μm. The average fluorescence intensity in each field of view (FOV) was analyzed. (F) Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) detection of Gram-positive bacteria (red) in the colon of Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates, nuclei were detected with DAPI (blue). Scale bars, 50 μm. The average fluorescence intensity in each FOV was analyzed. (G) Relative abundance of Gram-positive bacteria genera in colon lumen of Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates. (H) Female wildtype and Chil1-/- littermates continue to cage together after weaning for 8 weeks. Microbial communities in feces were characterized by 16S rRNA sequencing. n = 3 mice/group. Representative images are shown in (E, F), n = 4–5/3-6 mice/group. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001, ns: no significant difference, error bar indicates SEM.

Figure 3—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 3A–H.
elife-92994-fig3-data1.xlsx (108.6KB, xlsx)

Figure 3.

Figure 3—figure supplement 1. The construction and genotype of Chi3l1-/- and IECChil1 mice.

Figure 3—figure supplement 1.

(A) The construction, genotyping strategy and genotyping results of Chil1-/- mice. P: positive control; Wt: wildtype control; Neg: Blank control(ddH2O); M: DNA Ladder. (B) The construction, genotyping strategy and genotyping results of IECChil1 mice. P: positive control; Wt: wildtype control; Neg: Blank control (ddH2O); M: DNA Ladder. PCR① and ② implicated flox, ③implicated cre.
Figure 3—figure supplement 1—source data 1. File containing original DNA gels for Figure 3—figure supplement 1, indicating the relevant bands.
Figure 3—figure supplement 1—source data 2. Original files for DNA gels for Figure 3—figure supplement 1.
Figure 3—figure supplement 2. IECΔChil1 mice have more abundance of Turicibacter.

Figure 3—figure supplement 2.

(A) qPCR analysis of Turicibacter in the feces of Villin-cre and IECChil1 is shown. Values for each bacterial group are expressed relative to total 16S rRNA levels. p-Vaule is indicated, error bar indicates SEM.
Figure 3—figure supplement 2—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 3—figure supplement 2.

When we examined the relative abundance of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria between Villin-cre and IECΔChil1 littermates, we observed that Gram-positive bacteria were significantly reduced in IECΔChil1 mice, while there was no notable difference in Gram-negative bacteria (Figure 3D). This result was further validated by staining lipoteichoic acid (LTA), a component present on Gram-positive bacteria, which revealed a lower abundance of Gram-positive bacteria in IECΔChil1 compared to Villin-cre littermates (Figure 3E). Moreover, visualization of Firmicutes by bacteria fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) staining, a dominant group of Gram-positive bacteria in the gut, also showed reduced levels of Firmicutes in the colon lumen of IECΔChil1 mice compared to Villin-cre mice (Figure 3F). Analysis of the relative abundance of specific Gram-positive bacterial species demonstrated a significant reduction in Lactobacillus in IECΔChil1 mice compared to Villin-cre mice (Figure 3G). Similar results were observed in Chil1-/- mice compared to wildtype mice (Figure 3H). Consist with the 16S rRNA sequencing analysis data, qPCR results showed that Turicibacter was more abundant in IECΔChil1 mice than Villin-cre mice (Figure 3—figure supplement 2). These findings suggest that Chi3l1 plays a role in regulating the colonization of Gram-positive bacteria, particularly Lactobacillus, in the murine gut.

Chi3l1 promotes the colonization of Gram-positive bacteria in intestinal mucus

Chi3l1 was found in secretory cells like goblet cells and Paneth cells, suggesting that it may be secreted into the intestinal lumen (Figure 1B). Immunohistochemistry staining of Chi3l1 in the colon revealed a large amount of Chi3l1 signals in the mucus layer (Figure 4A). Immunofluorescence co-staining of Chi3l1 with UEA-1 in the colon yielded similar results (Figure 4B). Furthermore, Chi3l1 was also detected in the ileum and colonic tissues and mucus layer (Figure 4C and D). These findings indicate that mouse Chi3l1 is specifically expressed in intestinal secretory epithelial cells and secreted into the intestinal lumen. Since large amounts of Chi3l1 is secreted into the mucus and Chi3l1 interact with bacteria, we hypothesize that Chi3l1 may regulate the colonization of Gram-positive bacteria in the mucus layer. To test this hypothesis, we isolated bacterial DNA from the ileum and colon mucus of both wildtype and Chil1-/- mice. Quantification of Gram-positive bacteria and Lactobacillus using qPCR revealed that both the ileum and colon mucus of Chil1-/- mice had significantly lower levels of Gram-positive bacteria and Lactobacillus compared to that of wildtype mice (Figure 4E and F).

Figure 4. Chi3l1 promotes the colonization of Gram-positive bacteria in intestinal mucus layer.

(A) Immunohistochemical (IHC) staining to detect Chi3l1 in colon mucus layer from wildtype mice. Ctrl (without application of ant-Chi3l1 antibody), WT (wildtype C57BL/6J mice). Black dotted line outlines mucus layer. Scale bars, 50 μm (Ctrl, WT). (B) Colons were collected from wildtype mice and stained with UEA-1 (green), Chi3l1 (red), and nuclear DAPI (blue). Ctrl (without application of first antibody), WT (wildtype C57BL/6J mice). Scale bars, 50 μm (Ctrl, WT). (C) Stool, ileum, and colon tissues were collected from wildtype mice. Western blot was used to detect Chi3l1 expression in these samples. n = 3 mice/sample. (D) Both luminal and mucus-associated proteins of either ileum or colon were extracted. Western blot was used to detect Chi3l1 expression in these samples. lumen (luminal proteins), and mucus (mucus-associated proteins). n = 3 mice/sample. (E, F) qPCR analysis of specific bacteria in the ileum and colon mucus microbial communities of wildtype and Chil1-/- littermates. (E) qPCR analysis of Gram-positive bacteria is shown. (F) qPCR analysis of Gram-positive bacteria is shown. Values for each bacterial group are expressed relative to total 16S rRNA levels. WT (wildtype C57BL/6J mice). n = 6–8/group. (G) Rectal injection of both wildtype and Chil1-/- mice with FDAA-labeled E. faecalis (a Gram-positive bacteria strain) for 4 hr. Colon sections were collected and colonization of E. faecalis was examined under microscope. Nuclei were stained with DAPI. Scale bars, 50 μm (WT, Chil1-/-). Representative images are shown in (A, B, G), n = 3 mice/group. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001, ns: no significant difference, error bar indicates SEM.

Figure 4—source data 1. File containing original western blots for Figure 4C and D, indicating the relevant bands.
Figure 4—source data 2. Original files for western blot analysis displayed in Figure 4C and D.
Figure 4—source data 3. Numerical data of Figure 4E and F.

Figure 4.

Figure 4—figure supplement 1. Chil1-/- mice possess shortening mucus layer.

Figure 4—figure supplement 1.

(A) Rectal injection of both wildtype and Chil1-/- mice with mCherry-OP50 (a strain of E. coli expressing mCherry) for 4 hr. Colon sections were collected and colonization of OP50 was examined under microscope. Nuclei were stained with DAPI. n = 3–4 mice/group. The average fluorescence intensity in each field of view (FOV) was analyzed. (B) Periodic acid–Schiff and Alcian blue (AB-PAS) staining in the colons of WT and Chil1-/- littermates. Scale bars, 100 μm. The mean width of mucus layer in each FOV was analyzed. (C) Immunofluorescence staining to detect Mucin 2 (green) and nuclear DAPI (blue) in colon from WT and Chil1-/- littermates. Scale bars, 50 μm. Representative images are shown in (C, D), n = 4 mice/group. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001, ns: no significant difference, error bar indicates SEM.
Figure 4—figure supplement 1—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 4—figure supplement 1A and B.

To further validate these results, we labeled a Gram-positive bacteria strain, Enterococcus faecalis, with fluorescent D-amino acids (FDAA), which can metabolically label bacterial PGNs (Wang et al., 2019). We then performed rectal injection of both wildtype and Chil1-/- mice with FDAA-labeled E. faecalis. The data demonstrated that Chil1-/- mice had much lower colonization of E. faecalis compared to wildtype mice (Figure 4G). Besides Gram-positive bacteria, we also performed rectal injection of both wildtype and Chil1-/- mice with mCherry-OP50 (a strain of E. coli that expresses mCherry), we found Chil1-/- mice had much higher colonization of E. coli compared to wildtype mice (Figure 4—figure supplement 1A). Based on these findings, we conclude that Chi3l1 promotes the colonization of Gram-positive bacteria, particularly Lactobacillus, in the intestinal mucus. Additionally, we also observed that the deletion of Chi3l1 significantly reduced mucus layer thickness, which may be attributed to the disrupted colonization of Gram-positive bacteria in the intestinal mucus layer (Figure 4—figure supplement 1B and C).

Disordered intestinal bacteria in IECChil1 mice contribute to colitis

From the above data, it is evident that Chi3l1 is secreted into the intestinal mucus to influence the colonization of Gram-positive bacteria, particularly Lactobacillus. We are now interested in understanding the role of Chi3l1-regulated microbiota in a pathological condition. We observed a significant increase in Chil1 mRNA expression in the colon tissues of patients with either CD or UC compared to normal tissues (Figure 5A). To investigate further, we created a colitis mouse model by subjecting Villin-cre and IECChil1 mice to a 2% dextran sodium sulfate (DSS) diet for 7 days (Figure 5B). The severity of colitis was assessed based on weight loss, colon length, and tissue damage. Without the DSS challenge, the colon length and structure were similar between Villin-cre and IECChil1 mice (Figure 5D and E). However, upon DSS challenge, the IECChil1 mice showed significantly shorter colon length, faster body weight loss, and more severe inflammation compared to the Villin-cre mice (Figure 5C–E).

Figure 5. Disordered intestinal bacteria in IECChil1 mice contribute to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

(A) Chil1 mRNA relative expression in colon tissues of patients without gut disease (controls, n = 35) or with Crohn’s disease (CD, n = 40), ulcerative colitis (UC, n = 40) (GEO datasets: SRP303290). (B) Schematic model of the experimental design. Both Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates were fed with 2% dextran sodium sulfate (DSS) in drinking water to induce colitis. (C) Weight change of Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates during DSS feeding. Weight change (%) = Current weight/Initial weight. (D) Representative colonic length from Normal and DSS-treated Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates (left) and the statistics of colonic length (right). (E) H&E staining of mice colon from Normal and DSS-treated Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates. The inflamed areas are outlined by white dotted line, scale bars = 100 μm. (F) Schematic of the experimental design. First, antibiotics were used to eliminate gut microbiota for 10 days, and then either fecal microbiota from Villin-cre mice (FMT) or Lactobacillus reuteri were transplanted back to IECChil1 mice orally every day for 2 weeks. Finally, colitis mouse model was constructed by 2% DSS feeding in drinking water for another 7 days. (G–I) Villin-cre and IECChil1 were only fed with 2% DSS in drinking water for 7 days. IECChil1 + FMT(Villin-cre), and IECChil1 + Lactobacillus were constructed as described in (F). (G) Weight change of Villin-cre, IECChil1, IECChil1 + FMT(Villin-cre), and IECChil1 + Lactobacillus mice during DSS feeding. (H) Representative colonic length from Villin-cre, IECChil1, IECChil1 + FMT(Villin-cre), and IECChil1 + Lactobacillus mice (left) and the statistics of colonic length (right). n = 3–6/group. (I) H&E staining of mice colon from Villin-cre, IECChil1, IECChil1 + FMT(Villin-cre), and IECChil1 + Lactobacillus mice after DSS treatment. The inflamed area is outlined by black dotted line, scale bars = 100 μm. Representative images are shown in (C, E, H, I), n = 3–8 mice/group. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001, ns: no significant difference, error bar indicates SEM.

Figure 5—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 5A, C, D, G and H .
elife-92994-fig5-data1.xlsx (153.5KB, xlsx)

Figure 5.

Figure 5—figure supplement 1. Chi3l1-mediated bacteria, but not Chi3l1 itself affect more upon the development of colitis.

Figure 5—figure supplement 1.

(A) Schematic model of the experimental design. Both Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates were fed with 2% dextran sodium sulfate (DSS) in drinking water to induce colitis after elimination of gut microbiota by antibiotics for 10 days. (B) qPCR analysis of total bacteria in the feces of Villin-cre and IECChil1 littermates. Values for each bacterial group are expressed relative to total 16S rRNA levels. n = 3/group. (C) Weight change of Villin-cre and IECChil1 mice during DSS feeding. (D) Representative colonic length from colitis Villin-cre and IECChil1 mice (left) and the statistics of colonic length (right). (E) H&E staining of colitis mice colon from Villin-cre and IECChil1. The inflamed area is outlined by black dotted lines, scale bars = 100 μm. n = 4–6 mice/group. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001, ns: no significant difference, error bar indicates SEM.
Figure 5—figure supplement 1—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 5—figure supplement 1B.

To rule out the effects of Chi3l1 on the host contributed to colitis, we pretreated the mice with antibiotics to eliminate gut microbiota before inducing colitis (Figure 5—figure supplement 1A). The universal bacterial 16S rRNA qPCR data indicated that the majority of gut microbiota were eliminated after antibiotics treatment (Figure 5—figure supplement 1B). However, the IECChil1 mice exhibited a milder colitis phenotype, including slower body weight loss, longer colon length, and less inflammation compared to the Villin-cre mice (Figure 5—figure supplement 1C–E). We believe that this could be due to the relationship between Chi3l1 and inflammation. Based on these findings, it is apparent that Chi3l1’s effects on gut microbiota play a more significant role in colitis.

To further elucidate the role of Chi3l1-regulated gut microbiota in colitis, we conducted fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) and Lactobacillus reuteri transplantation experiments. We first eliminated gut microbiota through a 10-day course of antibiotics and then performed FMT from Villin-cre mice or administered oral gavage of L. reuteri to IECChil1 mice for 2 weeks, followed by a 7-day period of 2% DSS feeding (Figure 5F). FMT partially restored the colon length of IECChil1 mice to that of Villin-cre mice after the DSS challenge, but did not have an impact on body weight loss or the level of inflammation in the gut (Figure 5G–I). IECChil1 mice transplanted with Lactobacillus displayed a similar colitis phenotype as Villin-cre mice, characterized by similar weight loss, colon length reduction, and gut inflammation (Figure 5G–I). These findings further validate the notion that Chi3l1-regulated gut microbiota, especially Lactobacillus, offers protection against colitis.

Discussion

The intricate relationship between gut bacteria and their host organisms is crucial for health, maintained through co-evolution and co-speciation. Understanding how the host influences these bacterial communities is critical to understand the complex interplay between host and gut bacteria. In this study, we discovered that Chi3l1 interacts with gut microbiota via PGN, aiding the mucus colonization of beneficial bacteria like Lactobacillus, which protects against colitis (Figure 6). Our ‘scaffold model’ demonstrates that Chi3l1 binds to bacterial PGN, helping anchor and organize bacteria within the mucus layer. This interaction promotes the colonization of beneficial bacteria, enhancing gut health.

Figure 6. A schematic working model.

Figure 6.

Intestinal epithelial cells are stimulated by the gut microbiota to express Chi3l1. Once expressed, Chi3l1 is secreted into the mucus layer where it interacts with the gut microbiota, specifically through a component of bacterial cell walls called peptidoglycan. This interaction between Chi3l1 and bacteria is beneficial for the colonization of bacteria in the mucus, particularly for Gram-positive bacteria like Lactobacillus. Moreover, a deficiency of Chi3l1 leads to an imbalance in the gut microbiota, which exacerbates colitis induced by dextran sodium sulfate (DSS).

Several studies have suggested a potential correlation between Chi3l1 and bacteria. For instance, it has been demonstrated that Chi3l1 is produced by IECs in enteritis disease and aids in the elimination of pathogenic bacteria in the gut by neutrophils (Deutschmann et al., 2019). Another study observed an increase in Chi3l1 expression in mammary tissues of dairy cows infected with pathogenic E. coli, which promoted the recruitment of neutrophils (Breyne et al., 2018). Furthermore, Chi3l1 was found to be induced during Streptococcus pneumoniae infection, where it enhanced bacterial elimination by preventing the death of lung macrophages and improving host tolerance (Dela Cruz et al., 2012). One study demonstrated that Chi3l1 contributes to the pathogenesis of colitis, possibly by facilitating the adhesion and invasion of bacteria onto colonic epithelial cells. However, we observed the presence of the Gram-negative bacterium Salmonella typhimurium in the mice used in their study (Mizoguchi, 2006). According to standard for SPF-grade mice, Salmonella should not be present in laboratory mice, and it was also not detected by our 16S RNA sequencing. However, if mice are inadvertently infected with Salmonella in the context of IBD, it could likely exacerbate the development of IBD. Our data also demonstrate that Chi3l1 can bind to Gram-negative bacteria (Figure 2B). Therefore, the role of Chi3l1 on microbiota or IBD is heavily dependent on the environmental context. Another study found that caffeine treatment reduce Chi3l1 RNA expression levels, alleviate colitis, and decrease bacterial translocation (Lee et al., 2014). However, previous research suggested that caffeine can directly inhibit inflammasome activation by suppressing MAPK/NF-κB signaling pathways (Vargas-Pozada et al., 2022). Therefore, caffeine treatment may directly reduce colitis by inhibiting inflammation. Moreover, an additional control group of mice with Chi3l1 specifically knocked out in the gut is needed to examine the role of caffeine in the alleviation of colitis. However, the detailed mechanism of the interaction between Chi3l1 and the gut microbiota remains incompletely understood, partly due to the absence of Chi3l1-specific knockout mice and variations in mouse husbandry conditions. Here, by using intestinal Chi3l1-specific knockout mice, we demonstrated a new function of Chi3l1 in gut, which shapes bacterial colonization through direct interaction with bacterial cell wall component, PGN. Moreover, Chi3l1-regulated gut microbiota, especially Lactobacillus, offers protection against colitis.

The bacterial cell wall is a complex structure mainly composed of PGN, but it may also contain other components such as teichoic acids and LTA in Gram-positive bacteria, or an outer membrane containing various polysaccharides, lipids, and proteins in Gram-negative bacteria (Zhou et al., 2022). Our findings indicated that LPS, a component of the bacterial cell wall, can slightly increase Chi3l1 expression (Figure 1F and G), but higher levels of LPS do not further enhance Chi3l1 expression (data not shown). This suggests that there might be other components of the cell wall that can induce Chi3l1 expression in IECs. Given the structural similarity between chitin and PGN (Figure 2A), it is likely that Chi3l1 binds to the polysaccharide chains rather than the tetrapeptide in PGN. Previous studies have investigated the crystal structure of human Chi3l1 in complex with chitin, revealing a binding groove with different subsites for chitin fragments (Fusetti et al., 2003). Other studies have also identified specific amino acids in chitinases that play a key role in the interaction with chitin (Ferrandon et al., 2003; Ranok et al., 2015). Nevertheless, further investigation is necessary to better understand the binding sites in Chi3l1 for PGN.

In the colon, there are two distinct parts of the mucus layer. The inner layer is attached and has a low number of microbes, while the outer layer is looser and densely populated by microorganisms. (Johansson et al., 2011). The diversity of bacteria in the mucus layer is similar to that found in the gut lumen (Hu et al., 2021). It has to be noted that not all Gram-positive bacteria were reduced in Chil1-/- mice, as we found an increase in Turicibacter in the colon (Figure 3G) and feces (data not shown). We believe this may be due to a combined effect of the host and gut microbiota. Another important factor for microbial growth in the colon is the integrity of the mucus barrier (Johansson et al., 2008). We noticed a thinning of the mucus barrier in the mice lacking Chi3l1 compared to normal mice (Figure 4—figure supplement 1B and C). However, we did not observe an increase in mucin-degrading bacteria such as Bacteroides or Allobaculum (Glover et al., 2022; Raimondi et al., 2021) or a decrease in mucin-producing cells in these mice. We think that there may be bacteria that aid in the formation of the gut mucus, and these bacteria are decreased in mice lacking Chi3l1. Recent studies have introduced an ‘ncapsulation model’ regarding the nature of mucus in the colon. According to this model, the mucus in the proximal colon forms a primary encapsulation barrier around fecal material, while the mucus in the distal colon forms a secondary barrier (Bergstrom et al., 2020). Our findings indicate that Chi3l1 is expressed throughout the entire colon, including the proximal, middle, and distal sections (data not shown). This suggests that Chi3l1 likely promotes bacterial colonization across the entire colon. Despite most mucus being expelled with feces, the constant production of mucus and the minimal presence of Chi3l1 in feces (Figure 4C) indicate that Chi3l1 continuously plays a role in promoting the colonization of microbiota.

In patients with IBD, the density and diversity of the microbial community in the intestines are reduced. Specifically, there is a decrease in Firmicutes and an increase in Bacteroides and facultative anaerobic bacteria like Enterobacteriaceae (Qin et al., 2010). However, the cause of colitis in IBD is still a subject of debate. Our data suggest that disruptions in the gut microbiota contribute to colitis. In summary, our study demonstrates that bacterial challenge induces the expression of Chi3l1 in IECs. Once produced, Chi3l1 is released into the mucus layer where it interacts with the gut microbiota, particularly through PGN, a primary component of bacterial cell walls. This interaction is beneficial for the colonization of bacteria, especially Gram-positive bacteria like Lactobacillus, in the mucus layer. Dysbiosis resulting from a lack of Chi3l1 exacerbates DSS-induced colitis, highlighting the role of dysbiosis as a contributing factor to colitis.

Materials and methods

Key resources table.

Reagent type (species) or resource Designation Source or reference Identifiers Additional information
Cell line (Homo sapiens) DLD-1 cells ATCC CCL-221
Recombinant DNA reagent PLKO.1-Puro (plasmid) Addgene RRID:Addgene_10878 Pol III-based shRNA backbone
Transfected construct (human) shChil1 (constructed from pLKO.1 – TRC) This paper Constructed from RRID:Addgene_10878 Lentiviral construct to transfect and express the shRNA
Strain, strain background (Staphylococcus saprophyticus) Staphylococcus saprophyticus ATCC 15305
Strain, strain background (Enterococcus faecalis) E. faecalis ATCC 33186
Strain, strain background (Lactobacillus reuteri) Lactobacillus reuteri ATCC 23272
Strain, strain background (Escherichia coli) K12 Dharmacon Cat# OEC5042
Strain, strain background (E. coli) OP50 CGC RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969
Strain, strain background (E. coli) OP50-mCherry Provided by Bin Qi Lab; He et al., 2023
Strain, strain background (Staphylococcus sciuri) Staphylococcus sciuri Identified from C57BL/6J wildtype mice stools This paper This strain is used in Figure 1D
Strain, strain background (E. coli) E. coli Identified from C57BL/6J wildtype mice stools (this paper) This paper This strain is used in Figure 1D
Antibody Anti-Chi3l1 (rabbit polyclonal) Invitrogen PA5-95897
RRID:AB_2807699
IHC (1:200)
Antibody Anti-Chi3l1 (rabbit polyclonal) Abcam ab180569
RRID:AB_2891040
IF (1:400)
Antibody Anti-UEA-1-FITC (Ulex europaeus) GeneTeX GTX01512 IF (1:200)
Antibody Anti-Cha-A (mouse monoclonal) Santa Cruz sc-393941
RRID:AB_2801371
IF (1:200)
Antibody Anti-mouse Chi3l1 Purified Rat monoclonal IgG (rat monoclonal) R&D MAB2649
RRID:AB_2081263
WB (1:2000)
Antibody Anti-MUC2 (rabbit polyclonal) Invitrogen PA5-103083
RRID:AB_2852453
IF (1:50)
Antibody Gram-positive bacteria LTA (mouse monoclonal) Invitrogen MA1-7402
RRID:AB_1017302
IF (1:50)
Antibody 488-conjugated Affinipure Goat Anti-Rabbit (goat polyclonal) Jackson 111-545-003
RRID:AB_2338046
IF (1:1000)
Antibody Immunoresearch AlexaFluor 594 AffiniPure Goat Anti-Mouse IgG (H+L) (goat polyclonal) Jackson 115-585-003
RRID:AB_2338046
IF (1:1000)
Antibody Goat anti-Rabbit IgG (H+L) Secondary Antibody-Biotin (goat polyclonal) Invitrogen 65-6140
RRID:AB_2533969
IHC (1:2000)
Antibody Horseradish peroxidase conjugate antibody Invitrogen A2664
RRID:AB_2764530
IHC (1:2000)
Antibody Rabbit anti-Chi3l1 antibody Proteintech 12036-1-AP
RRID:AB_2877819
IF (1:200)
WB (1:2000)
Antibody Goat anti-Rabbit IgG (goat polyclonal) Jackson ImmunoResearch 111-035-0030 WB (1:10,000)
Antibody Anti-alpha-Actinin (mouse IgG1) Cell Signaling 69758S WB (1:1000)
Antibody Anti-Rat-IgG (goat) Cell Signaling 7077S WB (1:10,000)
Antibody Goat anti-mouse Invitrogen 62-6520
RRID:AB_2533947
WB (1:10,000)
Antibody Mouse anti-α-tubulin antibody (mouse monoclonal) Sigma T5168
RRID:AB_477579
WB (1:2000)
Chemical compound, drug Dextran sodium sulfate salt MP CAS:9011-18-1
Chemical compound, drug Hematoxylin Servicebio G1004
Chemical compound, drug Eosin Biosharp BL703b
Chemical compound, drug Tris Solarbio 77-86-1
Chemical compound, drug Sodium chloride Solarbio 7647-14-5
Chemical compound, drug Disodium salt dihydrate (EDTA) Sangon Biotech 6381-92-6
Chemical compound, drug Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) BBI A601336-0500
Chemical compound, drug Egtazic acid, glycol ether diamine tetraacetic acid (EGTA) BBI 67-42-5
Chemical compound, drug TritonX-100 BBI 9002-93-1
Chemical compound, drug Citric acid Sangon Biotech 77-92-9
Chemical compound, drug Vancomycin Solarbio V8050
Chemical compound, drug Ampicillin-sodium salt Solarbio A8180
Chemical compound, drug Metronidazole Solarbio M8060
Chemical compound, drug Neomyein sulfate Solarbio N8090
Chemical compound, drug MRS broth Solarbio M8540
Chemical compound, drug Goat serum Solarbio
Commercial assay or kit AB-PAS staining kit Solarbio G1285
Commercial assay or kit EIANamp stool DNA kit TIANGEN DP328-02
Commercial assay or kit PAGE Gel Fast Preparation Kit Shanghai Epizyme biotechnology PG113
Commercial assay or kit Gel extraction kit Omega D2500-02
Commercial assay or kit DAB Substrate Kit ZSGB-BIO zli-9018
Other SYBR Green kit Thermo Fisher A25742 Using for qPCR
Other FDAA 5TAMRA; CHINESE PEPTIDE CS-11-00433 Using for label E. faecalis
Other Antifade mounting medium Vectashield H-1000-10 Using for IF staining

Animal experiments and procedures

C57BL/6J (strain no. N000013), germ-free (strain no. N000295), Chil1fl/fl (strain no. T013652), and Chil1-/- (strain no. T014402) mice were purchased from GemPharmatech. Villin-cre mice were provided by Dr. Qun Lu (Yunnan University, China). All mouse colonies were maintained at the animal core facility of Yunnan University. C57BL/6J was used as wildtype control since Chil1-/- mice are on the C57BL/6J background, as determined by PCR (data not shown). The animal studies described have been approved by the Yunnan University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC, approval no. YNU20220256). Female mice aged 8–10 weeks old were used in most studies.

Genotyping

Tail clippings were placed in 1.5 mL tubes with 75 µL of master mix solution (60 µL H2O, 7.5 µL 250 mM NaOH, 7.5 µL 2 mM EDTA) and incubated at 98°C for 1 hr. After cooling to 15°C, 75 µL of neutralization buffer (40 mM Tris–HCl, pH 5.5) was added, and the samples were centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 3 min. A 1:10 dilution was prepared by mixing 2 µL of supernatant with 18 µL of water for genotyping PCR. A 25 µL PCR reaction mix was prepared with 12.5 µL of 2× Taq Master Mix (Dye Plus, Vazyme P112-03), 1 µL of each primer, 2 µL of template, and water. PCR was conducted using a Bio-Rad machine with the following program: 95°C for 5 min; 98°C for 30 s; 65°C with a 0.5°C decrement per cycle for 30 s; 72°C for 45 s, repeating steps 2–4 for 20 cycles; 98°C for 30 s; 55°C for 30 s; 72°C for 45 s, repeating steps 5–7 for 20 cycles; 72°C for 5 min; and hold at 10°C. Primer sequences are listed in Supplementary file 1.

Rectal administration of FDAA-labeled E. faecalis

For FDAA-labeled E. faecalis, E. faecalis were grown in LB media until reaching mid-exponential phase, approximately 4 hr. FDAA was then added to the culture media to a final concentration of about 17 µM. The E. faecalis continued to grow for 4 hr and were then harvested by centrifugation (5000 × g for 10 min), washed, and resuspended in PBS at a density of 5 × 109 CFU/mL. For rectal administration, wildtype and Chil1-/- mice were fasted overnight (5:00 pm to 9:00 am) before intraperitoneally (i.p.) injecting them with 400 mg/kg tribromoethanol (Nanjing AIBI BioTechnology, M2910), followed by rectal injection of 1 × 109 FDAA-labeled E. faecalis in 200 μL PBS via a flexible catheter. The catheter was inserted into the anus to a depth of 4.5 cm, and the E. faecalis were injected slowly to avoid overflow. The mice were then kept upside down for approximately 2 min. After 4 hr of rectal injection, the mice’s colons were collected and immediately embedded in OTC embedding medium for observation on 5-μm-thick frozen sections. OP50-mCherry (1 × 109 CFU/mice) were treated same as E. faecalis.

DSS-induced mouse colitis

Villin-cre and IECChil1 mice were fed a 2% DSS (MP, 9011-18-1) solution in their drinking water for 7 days. The mice’s body weight was monitored daily during the feeding period. After the 7-day DSS treatment, the mice were sacrificed. Colons were collected, and their length was measured from the cecum to the rectum. Colon paraffin sections were harvested, and H&E staining was performed to examine gut inflammation.

Antibiotics treatment

IECChil1 mice were fed an antibiotics mixture containing 0.5 mg/mL of metronidazole (Solarbio, M8060), 1 mg/mL of vancomycin (Solarbio, V8050), 1 mg/mL of ampicillin (Solarbio, A8180), and 0.5 mg/mL of neomycin sulfate (Solarbio, N8090) in their drinking water for 7 days (approximately 5 mL per mouse per day). After the 7-day antibiotics treatment, the mice were orally gavaged with 200 μL of the antibiotics mixture for another 3 days. Microbiota depletion was examined in feces using 16S rRNA qPCR on the tenth day of antibiotics feeding.

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT)

Fresh feces were collected from 8- to 10-week-old Villin-cre mice and immediately snap-frozen in liquid nitrogen. On the experimental day, feces were resuspended in PBS to a concentration of 200 mg/mL and centrifuged at 350 × g for 5 min to collect the supernatant. Antibiotics pre-treated IECChil1 mice were orally gavaged with 10 μL of the dissolved feces per gram of mouse weight for 14 days.

Oral gavage of Lactobacillus reuteri

L. reuteri was grown in MRS broth at 37°C for 48 hr under anaerobic conditions. The bacteria were harvested by centrifugation (5000 × g for 10 min), washed, and resuspended in PBS at a density of OD605 = 1.2–1.3/mL. Antibiotics pre-treated IECChil1 mice were orally gavaged with 200 μL of the dissolved L. reuteri per mouse for 14 days.

Bacterial speciesidentification

Fresh feces were collected from 8-week-old wildtype mice and dissolved in LB culture medium. The dissolved feces were then cultured at 37°C for 12 hr and plated onto LB agar plates. The grown colonies were picked using sterile pipette tips and resuspended in 20 μL of sterile water. A PCR reaction was performed using 2 μL of the bacterial suspension as template DNA and universal bacterial 16S rRNA primers (27F, 5’-AGAGTTTGATCCTGGCTCAG-3’ and 1492R, 5’-GGTTACCTTGTTACGACTT-3’) with reaction conditions: 95°C for 5 min followed by 35 cycles of 95°C for 30 s, 55°C for 30 s, 72°C for 2 min and then 72°C for 20 min. The amplicons were then sequenced, and the resulting sequences were analyzed using BLASTN and the NCBI database for species identification.

Treatment of DLD-1 cells with live, heat-killed bacteria or LPS

Bacteria harvested from mouse feces or specific strains were grown in LB medium at 37°C for 12 hr under aerobic conditions. The bacteria were then collected by centrifugation (5000 × g for 10 min), washed, and resuspended in PBS at a density of 1.2 × 1010 CFU/mL. Live bacteria were used directly, while heat-killed bacteria required further heating at 80°C for 30 min. DLD-1 cells were grown in DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS. Prior to treatment, the cells were replated and allowed to reach 80% confluency. Either live or heat-killed bacteria were added to the cells at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 20 each well, and 100 pg/mL LPS treatment (Sigma, L4392; diluted in PBS) was also performed. After 12 hr incubation, cellular proteins were extracted for western blot analysis or the cells were subjected to immunofluorescent staining.

Cell culture and bacterial adhesion assay

DLD-1 cells (ATCC CCL-221) were cultured in six-well plates until they reached approximately 80% confluency per well. The cells were then washed three times with PBS to remove any residual antibiotics. Fresh DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS (without antibiotics) was added to the cells. Absence of mycoplasma contamination was confirmed using PCR. E. coli strains were introduced to each well at an MOI of 20 and incubated for 2.5 hr at 37°C. After incubation, the cells were washed three times with PBS. For the adhesion assays, the cells were lysed with 1 mL of 1% Triton-X100 (BBI, 9002-93-1) in deionized water for 30 min. The cell lysates were then plated onto Luria broth (LB) agar plates at various dilutions and incubated overnight at 37°C. The following day, colonies were counted and calculated as CFU/mL.

shRNA lentivirus packaging and transfection

For the packaging of shRNA lentivirus, shRNA control and Chi3l1 shRNA1 lentiviruses were packaged in 293T cells. The cell culture medium containing the virus was collected and stored at –80°C. For transfection of DLD-1 cells, the cells were cultured in six-well plates until they reached approximately 80% confluency. The cell culture medium was then replaced with a mixture of culture medium containing the virus and fresh cell culture medium in a 1:1 ratio. Following transfection, the bacterial adhesion assay was performed as described above.

Bacterial or peptidoglycan binding assay

Different bacteria strains were grown in LB medium at 37°C for 12 hr under aerobic conditions. The bacteria were collected by centrifugation (5000 × g for 10 min), washed, and resuspended in MES buffer (25 mM MES, 25 mM NaCl, pH = 6.0) at a density of 5 × 109 CFU/mL. 1 μg recombinant mouse Chi3l1 (rmChi3l1) was added to the bacterial suspension and incubated at 4°C under rotation overnight. Supernatant, wash fractions, and bacterial-bound fractions were collected and analyzed using western blot analysis. For the PGN binding assay, 1 μg rmChi3l1 or recombinant human Chi3l1 (rhChi3l1) and BSA was incubated with 100 μg PGN. The incubation and wash procedure were similar to the bacterial binding assay, and the proteins in each fraction were analyzed using silver staining or western blot.

Hematoxylin/eosin (H&E) and Periodic acid–Schiff and Alcian blue (AB-PAS) staining

Tissues were fixed with buffered 10% paraformaldehyde (BI, E672001-0500) overnight at 4°C and embedded in paraffin. Ultra-thin tissue slices (5 μm) were prepared and deparaffinized. H&E staining was performed on the tissue sections, and slides were examined under a microscope (Leica). For AB-PAS staining, tissues were fixed in Carnoy’s solution (60% ethanol, 30% chloroform, 10% acetic acid) for 24 hr at 4°C and embedded in paraffin. AB-PAS staining (Solarbio, G1285) was performed according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The staining was visualized under the microscope (Leica).

Immunohistochemical (IHC) and immunofluorescent (IF) staining

Tissue paraffin sections were prepared as previously described for H&E staining. Antigen retrieval was performed by treating the sections with citric acid (pH 6.0) at 95°C for 15 min, followed by cooling to room temperature. The sections were then washed with PBS and ddH2O. To block any nonspecific binding, a blocking buffer containing 5% goat serum, 3% BSA, and 0.1% Triton X-100 in PBS was applied to the sections for 1 hr at room temperature in a humidity chamber. The sections were then incubated with anti-Chi3l1 primary antibodies (Invitrogen, PA5-95897, 1:200), followed by staining with Goat anti-Rabbit IgG (H+L) Secondary Antibody-Biotin (Invitrogen, 65-6140, 1:2000). Finally, the sections were stained with Horseradish Peroxidase conjugate antibody (Invitrogen, A2664, 1:2000) and developed with DAB for 10 min. The slides were examined under a microscope (Leica).

Immunofluorescent staining was also performed on paraffin sections using specific primary antibodies. These included anti-MUC2 (Invitrogen, PA5-103083, 1:50), anti-Chi3l1 (Abcam, ab180569, 1:400; antigen retrieval with Tris-EDTA at pH 9.0), anti-ChgA (Santa Cruz, sc-393941, 1:200; antigen retrieval with citrate at pH 6.0), anti-UEA-1-FITC (GeneTeX, GTX01512, 1:200; antigen retrieval with citrate at pH 6.0), and anti-LTA (Invitrogen, MA1-7402, 1:50). The secondary antibodies used were 488-conjugated Affinipure Goat Anti-Rabbit IgG(H+L) (Jackson ImmunoResearch, 111-545-003, 1:1000) and 594-conjugated Goat Anti-Mouse IgG (H+L) (Jackson ImmunoResearch, 115-585-003, 1:1000). Slides were washed and mounted with antifade medium (Vectashield, H-1000-10). Nuclei were stained with DAPI (Beyotime, c1006, prediluted). Images were captured using a fluorescence microscope (Leica, 2084 DP-80).

For immunofluorescent staining on DLD-1 cells, cells were seeded on coverslips in 12-well plate and challenged with 100 pg/mL LPS (Sigma, L4391; diluted in PBS) for 12 hr. Cells were washed with cold PBS twice gently, then fixed with 2% paraformaldehyde in PBS at room temperature for 10 min. After removal of fixation buffer and wash twice with cold PBS, cells were blocked with blocking buffer (3% BSA, 0.5% Triton-X-100 in PBS) for 1 hr in humidity chamber at room temperature. Rabbit anti-Chi3l1 antibody (Proteintech, 12036-1-AP; 1:200) was applied at room temperature for 1 hr. After wash with 1× TBST three times, secondary antibody AlexaFluor 488 (Jackson ImmunoResearch, 111-545-003, 1:1000) was applied for another 1 hr at room temperature in a humidified chamber under darkness. Finally, cells were counterstained with DAPI (Beyotime, C1006) and mounted onto slides. Images were captured using an Olympus BX53F2 microscope.

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)

Murine intestinal paraffin sections were prepared according to the previously described method for H&E staining. The tissues sections were rehydrated using a graded ethanol series and then washed with distilled water. The Gram-positive bacterial probe, consisting of three different sequences (/5Alex550N/TGGAAGATTCCCTACTGC/3AlexF550N/, /5Alex550N/CGGAAGATTCCCTACTGC/3AlexF550N/, /5Alex550N/CCGAAGATTCCCTACTGC/3AlexF550N/), or the control nonspecific probe (/5Alex550N/ACTCCTACGGGAGGCAGC/3AlexF550N/), was diluted to a concentration of 100 nM in FISH hybridization buffer (containing 20 mM Tris pH 7.2, 0.9 M NaCl, and 0.1% SDS) and applied to the slides. The slides were then incubated overnight at 56°C in a humidified chamber. Following incubation, the slides were washed and the nuclei were counterstained with DAPI. The images were captured using a fluorescence microscope (Leica, 2084 DP-80).

Immunoblot and silver staining

Protein extraction from cultured cells involved lysing the cells in 2% SDS lysis buffer, which is prepared by dissolving 2 g of SDS powder in 100 mL of sterilized ddH2O. Bacteria or PGN precipitates were resuspended in MES buffer, which contained 25 mM MES, 25 mM NaCl, and had a pH of 6.0. For protein extraction from mice ileum and colon tissues, 30 mg of snap-frozen tissues were homogenized in 1 mL of RIPA buffer, which contained 10 mM Tris–HCl (pH 8.0), 1 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM EGTA, 1% TritonX-100, 0.1% sodium deoxycholate, 0.1% SDS, 140 mM NaCl, 1 mM PMSF, and a proteinase inhibitor. The lysates were then supplemented with 5× SDS loading buffer to a final concentration of 1×. The resulting mixture was subsequently boiled at 100°C for 10 min and centrifuged at 4°C and 12,000 rpm for 10 min. The supernatants were collected for western blot analysis. The supernatants were separated using a 10% SDS-PAGE gel and then transferred to a polyvinylidene fluoride membrane. The membranes were blocked with 5% nonfat milk in TBST buffer (containing 0.1% Tween-20 in Tris-buffered saline) and sequentially incubated with primary antibodies and appropriate horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated secondary antibodies. Protein bands were detected using enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) reagent with a Minichemi Chemiluminescence Imaging System. The primary antibodies used included anti-Chi3l1 (RD, MAB2649, 1:2000), anti-alpha-Actinin (Cell Signaling, 69758S, 1:1000), rabbit anti-Chi3l1 antibody (Proteintech, 12036-1-AP, 1:2000), and mouse anti-α-tubulin antibody (Sigma, T5168, 1:2000). The secondary antibodies used were goat anti-Rat-IgG (Cell Signaling, 7077S, 1:10,000), goat anti-mouse (Invitrogen, 62-6520, 1:10,000) and Goat anti-Rabbit IgG (Jackson ImmunoResearch, 111-035-0030, 1:10,000). For silver staining, the PAGE gel was subjected to silver staining using a fast-silver staining kit (Beyotime, P0017S) following the manufacturer’s instructions.

DNA extraction for 16S rRNA analysis

For isolation of luminal contents from murine ileum and colon, a 9 cm section of ileum and 3 cm section of colon were cut open longitudinally, and luminal contents were scratched off into a pre-weighed 2 mL sterile freezing vial. The weight of the contents was recorded for further processing. For isolation of mucus from murine ileum and colon, tissues were flushed with 2 mL of ice-cold PBS into a pre-weighed 2 mL sterile freezing vial after removal of the liminal contents. The mucus was then pelleted by centrifugation at 10,000 × g for 10 min, and the supernatant was removed. For feces isolation, fresh murine feces were collected into a sterile freezing vial weighing 2 mL and immediately snap-frozen in liquid nitrogen. For bacterial DNA extraction, DNA was extracted and purified following the manufacture’s protocol using the EIANamp stool DNA kit (TIANGEN, DP328-02).

Microbiota 16S rRNA gene sequencing

Fecal samples, ileum contents, and colon contents were collected from wildtype, Chil1-/- littermates, or Villin-cre, IECChil1 littermates and immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen. The microbial genomic DNA was extracted and 16S rRNA sequencing was performed by Biomarker Technologies. The hypervariable regions V3 and V4 of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene were sequenced using universal primers that flank these regions V3 (338F 5'-ACTCCTACGGGAGGCAGCA-3') and V4 (806R 5'- GGACTACHVGGGTWTCTAAT-3’). The sequencing was done using the IIIumina Sequencing platform. The resulting 16S rRNA gene sequences were analyzed using scripts from the BMK Cloud platform (https://www.biocloud.net/). The microbial classification was performed using the SILVA138 and hierarchical clustering algorithms. The OTUs were determined by clustering the sequences with 97% similarity and were classified into different taxonomic ranks. The relative abundance of each bacterial species was visualized using R software. The raw 16S rRNA gene sequencing data can be accessed on the BMKCloud platform under the project ID Microbial_updateReport_20211221092022313.

16S qPCR analysis

Quantitative PCR was performed using SYBR green master mix (Thermo Fisher, A25742) in triplicates. This was done on a Real-Time PCR QuatStudio1 with accompanying software, following the instructions provided by the manufacturer (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY). The abundance of specific bacterial groups in the intestine was determined using qPCR with either universal or bacteria-specific 16S rRNA gene primers. Standard curves were constructed with E. coli OP50 16S rRNA gene, which was amplified using conserved 16S rRNA primers. It should be noted that qPCR measures the number of 16S gene copies per sample, not the actual bacterial numbers or colony forming units. Primer sequences are provided in Supplementary file 1.

Statistical analysis

Data were presented as mean ± SEM. Statistical analyses were carried out using GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software). Comparisons between two groups were carried out using unpaired Student’s t-test. Comparisons among multiple groups (n ≥ 3) were carried out using one-way or two-way ANOVA. Data are presented as mean ± SEM, and p<0.05 was considered a significant difference, *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001, ‘ns’ represents no significant difference.

Acknowledgements

We thank Qun Lu (Yunnan University) for providing Villin-cre mice. We thank Wenxiang Fu (Yunnan University) for imaging technical support. We thank Jianwei Sun (Yunnan University) for providing DLD-1 cell line. We thank Zehan Hu (Shanghai Jiao Tong University) for methods of bacteria 16S FISH staining. This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (2019YFA0803100, 2019YFA0802100 to BQ), National Natural Science Foundation of China (32071129 to ZS, 32170794 to BQ), Yunnan Fundamental Research Projects (202101AT070022, 202001AW070006 to ZS, 202201AT070196 to BQ), Science and Technological Talent Cultivation Plan of Yunnan Province (C619300A086 to ZS, K264202230211 to BQ), and Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Project at Southwest United Graduate School (202302AP370005 to BQ).

Funding Statement

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Contributor Information

Bin Qi, Email: qb@ynu.edu.cn.

Zhao Shan, Email: shanzhaolab@163.com.

Huihui Li, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, United States.

Bavesh D Kana, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa.

Funding Information

This paper was supported by the following grants:

  • Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China 2019YFA0803100 to Bin Qi.

  • National Natural Science Foundation of China 32071129 to Zhao Shan.

  • National Natural Science Foundation of China 32170794 to Bin Qi.

  • Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Department 202101AT070022 to Zhao Shan.

  • Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Department 202201AT070196 to Bin Qi.

  • Science and Technological Talent Cultivation Plan of Yunnan Province C619300A086 to Zhao Shan.

  • Science and Technological Talent Cultivation Plan of Yunnan Province K264202230211 to Bin Qi.

  • Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Project at Southwest United Graduate School 202302AP370005 to Bin Qi.

  • Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China 2019YFA0802100 to Bin Qi.

  • Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Department 202001AW070006 to Zhao Shan.

Additional information

Competing interests

No competing interests declared.

Author contributions

Resources, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Project administration.

Resources, Data curation, Formal analysis, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft.

Conceptualization, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Writing - review and editing.

Conceptualization, Resources, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Writing - review and editing.

Ethics

The animal studies described have been approved by the Yunnan University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC, Approval No. YNU20220256).

Additional files

MDAR checklist
Supplementary file 1. Genotyping and qPCR Primers.
elife-92994-supp1.xlsx (11.9KB, xlsx)

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in NCBI under accession codes PRJNA1155018 and PRJNA1157557. All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files; source data files have been provided for all figures.

The following datasets were generated:

Yan C. 2024. Identification of intestinal contents and fecal bacteria in mice. NCBI BioProject. PRJNA1155018

Rui Z. 2024. Bacterial microbial diversity in mouse stool. NCBI BioProject. PRJNA1157557

The following previously published dataset was used:

D'alessio S, Ungaro F, Massimino L, Lamparelli LA, Danese S. 2021. Characterization of the IL23-IL17 immune axis in IBD patients. NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus. GSE165512

References

  1. Bäumler AJ, Sperandio V. Interactions between the microbiota and pathogenic bacteria in the gut. Nature. 2016;535:85–93. doi: 10.1038/nature18849. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bergstrom K, Shan X, Casero D, Batushansky A, Lagishetty V, Jacobs JP, Hoover C, Kondo Y, Shao B, Gao L, Zandberg W, Noyovitz B, McDaniel JM, Gibson DL, Pakpour S, Kazemian N, McGee S, Houchen CW, Rao CV, Griffin TM, Sonnenburg JL, McEver RP, Braun J, Xia L. Proximal colon-derived O-glycosylated mucus encapsulates and modulates the microbiota. Science. 2020;370:467–472. doi: 10.1126/science.aay7367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Breyne K, Steenbrugge J, Demeyere K, Lee CG, Elias JA, Petzl W, Smith DGE, Germon P, Meyer E. Immunomodulation of host chitinase 3-Like 1 during a mammary pathogenic Escherichia coli infection. Frontiers in Immunology. 2018;9:1143. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Charbonneau MR, Blanton LV, DiGiulio DB, Relman DA, Lebrilla CB, Mills DA, Gordon JI. A microbial perspective of human developmental biology. Nature. 2016;535:48–55. doi: 10.1038/nature18845. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Dela Cruz CS, Liu W, He CH, Jacoby A, Gornitzky A, Ma B, Flavell R, Lee CG, Elias JA. Chitinase 3-like-1 promotes Streptococcus pneumoniae killing and augments host tolerance to lung antibacterial responses. Cell Host & Microbe. 2012;12:34–46. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2012.05.017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Deutschmann C, Sowa M, Murugaiyan J, Roesler U, Röber N, Conrad K, Laass MW, Bogdanos D, Sipeki N, Papp M, Rödiger S, Roggenbuck D, Schierack P. Identification of chitinase-3-Like Protein 1 as a novel neutrophil antigenic target in crohn’s disease. Journal of Crohn’s & Colitis. 2019;13:894–904. doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjz012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Donaldson GP, Ladinsky MS, Yu KB, Sanders JG, Yoo BB, Chou WC, Conner ME, Earl AM, Knight R, Bjorkman PJ, Mazmanian SK. Gut microbiota utilize immunoglobulin A for mucosal colonization. Science. 2018;360:795–800. doi: 10.1126/science.aaq0926. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Ferrandon S, Sterzenbach T, Mersha FB, Xu MQ. A single surface tryptophan in the chitin-binding domain from Bacillus circulans chitinase A1 plays A pivotal role in binding chitin and can be modified to create an elutable affinity tag. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta - General Subjects. 2003;1621:31–40. doi: 10.1016/S0304-4165(03)00029-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fu J, Wei B, Wen T, Johansson MEV, Liu X, Bradford E, Thomsson KA, McGee S, Mansour L, Tong M, McDaniel JM, Sferra TJ, Turner JR, Chen H, Hansson GC, Braun J, Xia L. Loss of intestinal core 1-derived O-glycans causes spontaneous colitis in mice. The Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2011;121:1657–1666. doi: 10.1172/JCI45538. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Fulde M, Sommer F, Chassaing B, van Vorst K, Dupont A, Hensel M, Basic M, Klopfleisch R, Rosenstiel P, Bleich A, Bäckhed F, Gewirtz AT, Hornef MW. Neonatal selection by Toll-like receptor 5 influences long-term gut microbiota composition. Nature. 2018;560:489–493. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0395-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Fusetti F, Pijning T, Kalk KH, Bos E, Dijkstra BW. Crystal structure and carbohydrate-binding properties of the human cartilage glycoprotein-39. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2003;278:37753–37760. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M303137200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Gevers D, Kugathasan S, Denson LA, Vázquez-Baeza Y, Van Treuren W, Ren B, Schwager E, Knights D, Song SJ, Yassour M, Morgan XC, Kostic AD, Luo C, González A, McDonald D, Haberman Y, Walters T, Baker S, Rosh J, Stephens M, Heyman M, Markowitz J, Baldassano R, Griffiths A, Sylvester F, Mack D, Kim S, Crandall W, Hyams J, Huttenhower C, Knight R, Xavier RJ. The treatment-naive microbiome in new-onset Crohn’s disease. Cell Host & Microbe. 2014;15:382–392. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2014.02.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Glover JS, Ticer TD, Engevik MA. Characterizing the mucin-degrading capacity of the human gut microbiota. Scientific Reports. 2022;12:8456. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-11819-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Gordon JI. Honor thy gut symbionts redux. Science. 2012;336:1251–1253. doi: 10.1126/science.1224686. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Groussin M, Mazel F, Alm EJ. Co-evolution and co-speciation of host-gut bacteria systems. Cell Host & Microbe. 2020;28:12–22. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2020.06.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. He YJ, Hao FR, Fu HR, Tian GJ, Zhang YY, Fu K, Qi B. N-glycosylated intestinal protein BCF-1 shapes microbial colonization by binding bacteria via its fimbrial protein. Cell Reports. 2023;42:111993. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.111993. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hill DR, Huang S, Nagy MS, Yadagiri VK, Fields C, Mukherjee D, Bons B, Dedhia PH, Chin AM, Tsai YH, Thodla S, Schmidt TM, Walk S, Young VB, Spence JR. Bacterial colonization stimulates a complex physiological response in the immature human intestinal epithelium. eLife. 2017;6:e29132. doi: 10.7554/eLife.29132. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Honda K, Littman DR. The microbiota in adaptive immune homeostasis and disease. Nature. 2016;535:75–84. doi: 10.1038/nature18848. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Houston DR, Recklies AD, Krupa JC, van Aalten DMF. Structure and ligand-induced conformational change of the 39-kDa glycoprotein from human articular chondrocytes. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2003;278:30206–30212. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M303371200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Hu Z, Zhang C, Sifuentes-Dominguez L, Zarek CM, Propheter DC, Kuang Z, Wang Y, Pendse M, Ruhn KA, Hassell B, Behrendt CL, Zhang B, Raj P, Harris-Tryon TA, Reese TA, Hooper LV. Small proline-rich protein 2A is a gut bactericidal protein deployed during helminth infection. Science. 2021;374:eabe6723. doi: 10.1126/science.abe6723. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Johansson MEV, Phillipson M, Petersson J, Velcich A, Holm L, Hansson GC. The inner of the two Muc2 mucin-dependent mucus layers in colon is devoid of bacteria. PNAS. 2008;105:15064–15069. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0803124105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Johansson MEV, Larsson JMH, Hansson GC. The two mucus layers of colon are organized by the MUC2 mucin, whereas the outer layer is a legislator of host-microbial interactions. PNAS. 2011;108 Suppl 1:4659–4665. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1006451107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Johansson MEV, Gustafsson JK, Holmén-Larsson J, Jabbar KS, Xia L, Xu H, Ghishan FK, Carvalho FA, Gewirtz AT, Sjövall H, Hansson GC. Bacteria penetrate the normally impenetrable inner colon mucus layer in both murine colitis models and patients with ulcerative colitis. Gut. 2014;63:281–291. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-303207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lee CG, Da Silva CA, Dela Cruz CS, Ahangari F, Ma B, Kang MJ, He CH, Takyar S, Elias JA. Role of chitin and chitinase/chitinase-like proteins in inflammation, tissue remodeling, and injury. Annual Review of Physiology. 2011;73:479–501. doi: 10.1146/annurev-physiol-012110-142250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lee IA, Low D, Kamba A, Llado V, Mizoguchi E. Oral caffeine administration ameliorates acute colitis by suppressing chitinase 3-like 1 expression in intestinal epithelial cells. Journal of Gastroenterology. 2014;49:1206–1216. doi: 10.1007/s00535-013-0865-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Lozupone CA, Stombaugh JI, Gordon JI, Jansson JK, Knight R. Diversity, stability and resilience of the human gut microbiota. Nature. 2012;489:220–230. doi: 10.1038/nature11550. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. McDonald JE, Marchesi JR, Koskella B. Application of ecological and evolutionary theory to microbiome community dynamics across systems. Proceedings. Biological Sciences. 2020;287:20202886. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2020.2886. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Mizoguchi E. Chitinase 3-like-1 exacerbates intestinal inflammation by enhancing bacterial adhesion and invasion in colonic epithelial cells. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:398–411. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.12.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Petersen C, Round JL. Defining dysbiosis and its influence on host immunity and disease. Cellular Microbiology. 2014;16:1024–1033. doi: 10.1111/cmi.12308. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Qin J, Li R, Raes J, Arumugam M, Burgdorf KS, Manichanh C, Nielsen T, Pons N, Levenez F, Yamada T, Mende DR, Li J, Xu J, Li S, Li D, Cao J, Wang B, Liang H, Zheng H, Xie Y, Tap J, Lepage P, Bertalan M, Batto J-M, Hansen T, Le Paslier D, Linneberg A, Nielsen HB, Pelletier E, Renault P, Sicheritz-Ponten T, Turner K, Zhu H, Yu C, Li S, Jian M, Zhou Y, Li Y, Zhang X, Li S, Qin N, Yang H, Wang J, Brunak S, Doré J, Guarner F, Kristiansen K, Pedersen O, Parkhill J, Weissenbach J, Bork P, Ehrlich SD, Wang J, MetaHIT Consortium A human gut microbial gene catalogue established by metagenomic sequencing. Nature. 2010;464:59–65. doi: 10.1038/nature08821. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Raimondi S, Musmeci E, Candeliere F, Amaretti A, Rossi M. Identification of mucin degraders of the human gut microbiota. Scientific Reports. 2021;11:11094. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-90553-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Ranok A, Wongsantichon J, Robinson RC, Suginta W. Structural and thermodynamic insights into chitooligosaccharide binding to human cartilage chitinase 3-like protein 2 (CHI3L2 or YKL-39) The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2015;290:2617–2629. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M114.588905. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Sonnenburg JL, Bäckhed F. Diet-microbiota interactions as moderators of human metabolism. Nature. 2016;535:56–64. doi: 10.1038/nature18846. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Swidsinski A, Weber J, Loening-Baucke V, Hale LP, Lochs H. Spatial organization and composition of the mucosal flora in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2005;43:3380–3389. doi: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3380-3389.2005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Thaiss CA, Zmora N, Levy M, Elinav E. The microbiome and innate immunity. Nature. 2016;535:65–74. doi: 10.1038/nature18847. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Vaishnava S, Yamamoto M, Severson KM, Ruhn KA, Yu X, Koren O, Ley R, Wakeland EK, Hooper LV. The antibacterial lectin RegIIIgamma promotes the spatial segregation of microbiota and host in the intestine. Science. 2011;334:255–258. doi: 10.1126/science.1209791. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Vargas-Pozada EE, Ramos-Tovar E, Rodriguez-Callejas JD, Cardoso-Lezama I, Galindo-Gómez S, Talamás-Lara D, Vásquez-Garzón VR, Arellanes-Robledo J, Tsutsumi V, Villa-Treviño S, Muriel P. Caffeine Inhibits NLRP3 Inflammasome Activation by Downregulating TLR4/MAPK/NF-κB Signaling Pathway in an Experimental NASH Model. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022;23:9954. doi: 10.3390/ijms23179954. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Wang W, Lin L, Du Y, Song Y, Peng X, Chen X, Yang CJ. Assessing the viability of transplanted gut microbiota by sequential tagging with D-amino acid-based metabolic probes. Nature Communications. 2019;10:1317. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09267-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhao T, Su Z, Li Y, Zhang X, You Q. Chitinase-3 like-protein-1 function and its role in diseases. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. 2020;5:201. doi: 10.1038/s41392-020-00303-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Zhou J, Cai Y, Liu Y, An H, Deng K, Ashraf MA, Zou L, Wang J. Breaking down the cell wall: Still an attractive antibacterial strategy. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2022;13:952633. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.952633. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

eLife assessment

Huihui Li 1

Supported by convincing data, this valuable study demonstrates that the Chitinase 3-like protein 1 (Chi3l1) interacts with gut microbiota and protects animals from intestinal injury in laboratory colitis model. The revised article sufficiently addressed the reviewers' comments. The work will be of interest to scientists studying crosstalk between gut microbiota and inflammatory diseases.

Reviewer #1 (Public review):

Anonymous

The manuscript by Chen et al. investigated the interaction between CHI3L1, a chitinase-like protein in the 18 glycosyl hydrolase family, and gut bacteria in the mucosal layers. The authors provided evidence to document the direct interaction between CHI3L1 and peptidoglycan, a major component of bacterial cell wall. Doing so, Chi3l1 produced by gut epithelial cells regulates the balance of gut microbiome and diminishes DSS-induced colitis, potentially through the colonization of protective gram-positive bacteria such as lactobacillus.

The study is the first to systemically document the interactions between Chi3L1 and microbiome. Convincing data were shown to characterize the imbalance of gram-positive bacteria in the newly generated gut epithelial-specific Chi3L1 deficient mice. Comprehensive FMT experiments were performed to demonstrate the contributions of gut microbiome using the mouse colitis model. The manuscript is strengthened by additional mechanistic studies concerning the binding between Chi3l1 and peptidoglycan, and discussions on existing body of literature demonstrating that detrimental roles of Chi3l1 in mouse IBD model, which conflict with the current study.

Reviewer #2 (Public review):

Anonymous

Chen et al. investigated the regulatory mechanism of bacterial colonization in the intestinal mucus layer in mice and its implications to intestinal diseases. They demonstrated that Chi3l1 is a protein produced and secreted by intestinal epithelial cells into the mucus layer upon response to the gut microbiota, which has a turnover effect on facilitating the colonization of gram-positive bacteria in the mucosa. The data also indicate that Chi3l1 interacts with the peptidoglycan of the bacteria cell wall, supporting the colonization of beneficial bacteria strains such as Lactobacillus, and that deficiency in Chi3l1 predisposes mice to colitis. The inclusion of a small but pertinent piece of human data added to solidify their findings in mice.

Overall, the experiments were appropriately designed and executed with precision. The revised manuscript represents a significant improvement over the initial version. The inclusion of new, higher-resolution images provides stronger support for the conclusions drawn. Additionally, statistical analyses of the imaging data, as recommended, have been integrated. The authors have effectively addressed the majority of the reviewers' suggestions and criticisms, making this version well-suited for publication.

eLife. 2024 Oct 7;13:RP92994. doi: 10.7554/eLife.92994.3.sa3

Author response

Yan Chen 1, Ruizhi Yang 2, Bin Qi 3, Zhao Shan 4

The following is the authors’ response to the original reviews.

Public Reviews:

Reviewer 1:

(1) In Figure 1, it is curious that the authors only chose E.coli and staphytlococcus sciuri to test the induction of Chi3l1. What about other bacteria? Why does only E. coli but not staphytlococcus sciuri induce chi3l1 production? It does not prove that the gut microbiome induces the expression of Chi3l1. If it is the effect of LPS, does it trigger a cell death response or inflammatory responses that are known to induce chi3l1 production? What is the role of peptidoglycan in this experiment? Also, it is recommended to change WT to SPF in the figure and text, as no genetic manipulation was involved in this figure.

Thank you for your valuable feedback and insightful suggestions. In our study, we tried to identify bacteria from murine gut contents and feces using 16S sequencing. However, only E. coli and Staphylococcus sciuri were identified (Figure 1D). Consequently, our experiments were limited to these two bacterial strains. While we have not tested other bacteria, our data suggest that not all bacteria can induce the expression of Chi3l1. Given that E. coli is Gram-negative and Staphylococcus sciuri is Gram-positive, we hypothesized that the difference in their ability to induce Chi3l1 expression might be due to variations between Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, such as the presence of lipopolysaccharides (LPS).

To test this hypothesis, we used LPS to induce Chi3l1 expression. Consistent with our hypothesis, LPS successfully induced Chi3l1 expression (Figure 1F&G). Additionally, we observed that Chi3l1 expression is significantly upregulated in specific pathogen-free (SPF) mice compared to germ-free mice (Figure 1A), demonstrating that the gut microbiome induces the expression of Chi3l1.

Although we have not examined cell death or inflammatory responses, the protective role of Chi3l1 shown in Figure 5 suggests that any such responses would be mild and negligible. Regarding the role of peptidoglycan in the induction of Chi3l1 expression in DLD-1 cells, we have not yet explored this aspect. However, we agree with your suggestion that it would be worthwhile to investigate this in future experiments.

We have also made the suggested modifications to the labeling (Figure 1A) and the clarification in the revised manuscript accordingly (page 3, Line 95-96; Line 102-106).

Thank you again for your constructive feedback.

(2) In Figure 2, the binding between Chi3l1 and PGN needs better characterization, regarding the affinity and how it compares with the binding between Chi3l1 and chitin. More importantly, it is unclear how this interaction could facilitate the colonization of gram-positive bacteria.

Thank you for your insightful suggestions and we have performed the suggested experiments and included the results in the revised manuscript (Figure 2E-G, page 3-4, Line 132-146).

Our results indicate that Chi3l1 interact with PGN in a dose-increase manner (Figure 2E). In contrast, the binding between Chi3l1 and chitin did not exhibit dose dependency (Figure 2E). These findings suggest a specific and distinct binding mechanism for Chi3l1 with PGN compared to chitin.

We conducted DLD-1 cell-bacteria adhesion experiments, using GlmM mutant (PGN synthesis mutant) and K12 (wild-type) bacteria to test their adhesion capabilities. The results showed that the adhesion ability of the GlmM mutant to cells significantly decreased (Figure 2F). Additionally, after knocking down Chi3l1 in DLD-1 cells, we observed a decreased bacterial adhesion (Figure 2G). These findings suggest that Chi3l1 and PGN interaction plays a crucial role in bacterial adhesion.

(3) In Figure 3, the abundance of furmicutes and other gram-positive species is lower in the knockout mice. What is the rationale for choosing lactobacillus in the following transfer experiments?

We appreciate your thorough review. Among the Gram-positive bacteria that we have sequenced and analyzed, Lactobacillus occupies the largest proportion. Given the significant presence and established benefits of Lactobacillus, we chose it for the subsequent transfer experiments to leverage its known properties and availability, thereby ensuring the robustness and reproducibility of our findings.This is supported by the study referenced below.

Lamas B, Richard ML, Leducq V, Pham HP, Michel ML, Da Costa G, Bridonneau C, Jegou S, Hoffmann TW, Natividad JM, Brot L, Taleb S, Couturier-Maillard A, Nion-Larmurier I, Merabtene F, Seksik P, Bourrier A, Cosnes J, Ryffel B, Beaugerie L, Launay JM, Langella P, Xavier RJ, Sokol H. CARD9 impacts colitis by altering gut microbiota metabolism of tryptophan into aryl hydrocarbon receptor ligands. Nat Med. 2016 Jun;22(6):598-605. doi: 10.1038/nm.4102. Epub 2016 May 9. PMID: 27158904; PMCID: PMC5087285.

(4) FDAA-labeled E. faecalis colonization is decreased in the knockouts. Is it specific for E. faecalis, or it is generally true for all gram-positive bacteria? What about the colonization of gram-negative bacteria?

Thank you for your insightful suggestions and we have investigated the colonization of gram-negative bacteria, OP50-mcherry (a strain of E.coli that express mCherry) and included the results in the updated manuscript (Supplementary Figure 3B, page 5, Line 197-200). We performed rectal injection of both wildtype and Chi11-/- mice with mCherry-OP50, and found that Chi11-/- mice had much higher colonization of E. coli compared to wildtype mice.

(5) In Figure 5, the fact that FMT did not completely rescue the phenotype may point to the role of host cells in the processes. The reason that lactobacillus transfer did completely rescue the phenotypes could be due to the overwhelming protective role of lactobacillus itself, as the experiments were missing villin-cre mice transferred with lactobacillus.

Thank you for your valuable feedback and thorough review. In our study, pretreatment with antibiotics in mice to eliminate gut microbiota demonstrated that IEC∆Chil1 mice exhibited a milder colitis phenotype (Supplementary Figure 4). This suggests that Chi3l1-expressing host cells are likely to play a detrimental role in colitis. Consequently, the failure of FMT to completely rescue the phenotype is likely due to the incomplete preservation of bacteria in the feces during the transfer experiment.

We agree with your assessment of the protective role of lactobacillus. This also explains the significant difference in colitis phenotype between Villin-cre and IEC∆Chil1 mice (Figure 5B-E), as lactobacillus levels are significantly lower in IEC∆Chil1 mice (Figure 4F). Given the severity of colitis in Villin-cre mice at 7 days post-DSS, even if lactobacillus were transferred back to these mice, it is unlikely to result in a significant improvement.

(6) Conflicting literature demonstrating the detrimental roles of Chi3l1 in mouse IBD model needs to be acknowledged and discussed.

Thank you for your insightful suggestions and we have included additional discussions in the revised manuscript (page 6-7, Line 258-274).

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

(1) Images are of great quality but lack proper quantification and statistical analysis. Statements such as "substantial increase of Chi3l1 expression in SPF mice" (Fig.1A), "reduced levels of Firmicutes in the colon lumen of IEC ∆ Chil1" (Fig.3F), "Chil1-/- had much lower colonization of E. faecalis" (Fig.4G), or "deletion of Chi3l1 significantly reduced mucus layer thickness" (Supplemental Figure 3A-B) are subjective. Since many conclusions were based on imaging data, the authors must provide reliable measures for comparison between conditions, as long as possible, such as fluorescence intensity, area, density, etc, as well as plots and statistical analysis.

Thank you for your insightful suggestions and we have performed the suggested statistical analysis on most of the figures and included the analysis in the revised manuscript (Figure 1A, Figure 3E&F, Supplementary Figure 3B&C).Given large quantity of dietary fiber intertwined with bacteria, it is challenging to make a reliable quantification of bacteria in Figure 4G. However, it is easy to distinguish bacteria from dietary fiber under the microscope. We have exclusively analyzed gut sections from six mice in each group, and the results are consistent between the two groups.

(2) In the fecal/Lactobacillus transplantation experiments, oral gavage of Lactobacillus to IECΔChil1 mice ameliorated the colitis phenotype, by preventing colon length reduction, weight loss, and colon inflammation. These findings seem to go against the notion that Chi3l1 is necessary for the colonization of Lactobacillus in the intestinal mucosa. The authors could speculate on how Lactobacillus administration is still beneficial in the absence of Chi3l1. Perhaps, additional data showing the localization of the orally administered bacteria in the gut of Chi3l1 deficient mice would clarify whether Lactobacillus are more successfully colonizing other regions of the gut, but not the mucus layer. Alternatively, later time points of 2% DSS challenge, after Lactobacillus transplantation, would suggest whether the gut colonization by Lactobacillus and therefore the milder colitis phenotype, is sustained for longer periods in the absence of Chi3l1.

Thank you for your thorough review and insightful suggestions. Since we pretreated mice with antibiotics, the intestinal mucus layer is likely damaged according to a previous study (PMID: 37097253). Therefore, gavaged Lactobacillus cannot colonize in the mucus layer. Moreover, existing studies have shown that the protective effect of Lactobacillus is mainly derived from its metabolites or thallus components, rather than the living bacteria itself (PMID: 36419205, PMID: 27516254).

Zhan M, Liang X, Chen J, Yang X, Han Y, Zhao C, Xiao J, Cao Y, Xiao H, Song M. Dietary 5-demethylnobiletin prevents antibiotic-associated dysbiosis of gut microbiota and damage to the colonic barrier. Food Funct. 2023 May 11;14(9):4414-4429. doi: 10.1039/d3fo00516j. PMID: 37097253.

Montgomery TL, Eckstrom K, Lile KH, Caldwell S, Heney ER, Lahue KG, D'Alessandro A, Wargo MJ, Krementsov DN. Lactobacillus reuteri tryptophan metabolism promotes host susceptibility to CNS autoimmunity. Microbiome. 2022 Nov 23;10(1):198. doi: 10.1186/s40168-022-01408-7. PMID: 36419205.

Piermaría J, Bengoechea C, Abraham AG, Guerrero A. Shear and extensional properties of kefiran. Carbohydr Polym. 2016 Nov 5;152:97-104. doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.06.067. Epub 2016 Jun 23. PMID: 27516254.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The claim that mucus-associated Ch3l1 controls colonization of beneficial Gram-positive species within the mucus is not conclusive. The study should take into account recent discoveries on the nature of mucus in the colon, namely its mobile fecal association and complex structure based on two distinct mucus barrier layers coming from proximal and distal parts of the colon (PMID:). This impacts the interpretation of how and where Ch3l1 is expressed and gets into the mucus to promote colonization. It also impacts their conclusions because the authors compare fecal vs. tissue mucus, but most of the mucus would be attached to the feces. Of the mucus that was claimed to be isolated from the WT and IEC Ch3l1 KO, this was not biochemically verified. Such verification (e.g. through Western blot) would increase confidence in the data presented. Further, the study relies upon relative microbial profiling, which can mask absolute numbers, making the claim of reduced overall Gram-positive species in mice lacking Ch3l1 unproven. It would be beneficial to show more quantitative approaches (e.g. Quantitative Microbial Profiling, QMP) to provide more definitive conclusions on the impact of Ch3l1 loss on Gram+ microbes.

You raise an excellent point about the data interpretation, and we appreciate your insightful suggestions. We have included the discussion regarding the recent discoveries in the revised manuscript (page 7-8, Line 304-312). According to the recent discovery, the mucus in the proximal colon forms a primary encapsulation barrier around fecal material, while the mucus in the distal colon forms a secondary barrier. Our findings indicate that Chi3l1 is expressed throughout the entire colon, including the proximal, middle, and distal sections (See Author response image 1 below, P.S. Chi3l1 detection in colon presented in the manuscript are from the middle section). This suggests that Chi3l1 likely promotes bacterial colonization across the entire colon. Despite most mucus being expelled with feces, the

constant production of mucus and the minimal presence of Chi3l1 in feces (Figure 4C) indicate that Chi3l1 continuously plays a role in promoting the colonization of microbiota.

Author response image 1. Chi3l1 express in the proximal and distal colon.

Author response image 1.

Immunofluoresence staining on proximal and distal colon sections to detect Chi3l1 (Red) expression. Nuclei were detected with DAPI (blue). Scale bars, 50 μm.

Given the isolation method of the mucus layer, we followed the paper titled "The Antibacterial Lectin RegIIIγ Promotes the Spatial Segregation of Microbiota and Host in the Intestine" (PMID: 21998396). Although we did not find a suitable marker representative of the mucus layer for western blotting, we performed protein mass spectrometry on the isolated mucus layers and analyzed the data by comparing it with established research ("Proteomic Analyses of the Two Mucus Layers of the Colon Barrier Reveal That Their Main Component, the Muc2 Mucin, Is Strongly Bound to the Fcgbp Protein," PMID: 19432394). Our data showed a high degree of overlap with the proteins identified in established studies (see Author response image 2 below).

Author response image 2. Comparison of mucus layer proteins identified by mass spectrometry between our team and the Hansson team.

Author response image 2.

Mucus layer proteins identified by mass spectrometry between our team and the Hansson team (PMID: 19432394) are compared.

Due to a lack of expertise, it has been challenging for us to perform reliable QMP experiments. However, since QMP involves qPCR combined with bacterial sequencing, we conducted 16S rRNA sequencing and confirmed the quantity of certain bacteria by qPCR (revised manuscript, Figure 3B, H, Figure 4E, F, Supplementary Figure 3A). Therefore, our data is reliable to some extent.

Other weaknesses lie in the execution of the aims, leaving many claims incompletely substantiated. For example, much of the imaging data is challenging for the reader to interpret due to it being unfocused, too low of magnification, not including the correct control, and not comparing the same regions of tissues among different in vivo study groups. Statistical rigor could be better demonstrated, particularly when making claims based on imaging data. These are often presented as single images without any statistics (i.e. analysis of multiple images and biological replicates). These images include the LTA signal differences, FISH images, Enterococcus colonization, and mucus thickness.

Thank you for your thorough review and insightful suggestions. We have performed the recommended statistical analysis on most of the figures and included the analysis in the revised manuscript (Figure 1A, Figure 3E&F, Supplementary Figure 3B&C). We have also added arrows in Figure 2B to make the figure easier to understand. Additionally, we repeated some key experiments to show the same regions of tissues among different groups. We will upload higher resolution figures during the revision. Thank you again for your constructive feedback.

Recommendations for the authors:

Reviewer #1 (Recommendations For The Authors):

It is recommended to change WT to SPF in the figure and text, as no genetic manipulation was involved in Figure 1.

Thank you for your insightful suggestion. We have also made the suggested modifications to the labeling (revised manuscript, Figure 1A).

Reviewer #2 (Recommendations For The Authors):

The manuscript is well-written, but it would benefit from a critical reading to correct some typos and small grammar issues. Histological and IF images would be more informative if they contained arrows and labels guiding the reader's attention to what the authors want to show. More details about the structures shown in the figures should be included in the legends.

Thank you for your thorough review and insightful suggestions. We have revised the manuscript to correct noticeable typos and grammar issues. Arrows have been added to Figure 2A&B to make the figures easier to understand. Additionally, we have included a detailed description of the structural similarities and differences between chitin and peptidoglycan in the figure legend (revised manuscript, page 19, line 730-733).

Minor points:

• Page 1, line 36: Please correct "mice models" to "mouse models".

Thank you for your insightful suggestion and we have made the suggested correction in the revised manuscript (page 1, line 41).

• Page 3, line 110: "by comparing the structure of chitin with that of peptidoglycan (PGN), a component of bacterial cells walls, we observed that they have similar structures (Fig.2A)". Although both structures are shown side-by-side, no similarities are mentioned or highlighted in the text, figure, or legend.

Thank you for your insightful suggestion and we have included a detailed description of the structural similarities and differences between chitin and peptidoglycan in the figure legend (revised manuscript, page 19, line 730-733).

• Fig.5C and Fig.5G: y axis brings "weight (%)". I believe the authors mean "weight change (%)"?

We agrees with your suggestion and has corrected the labeling according to your suggestion (revised manuscript, Figure 5C and G)

• Page 8: Genotyping method is described as a protocol. Please modify it.

Thank you for your constructive suggestion and we have modified the genotyping method in the revised manuscript (page 8, line 339-349)

• Please expand on the term "scaffold model" used in the abstract and discussion.

Thank you for your thorough review. In this model, Chi3l1 acts as a key component of the scaffold. By binding to bacterial cell wall components like peptidoglycan, Chi3l1 helps anchor and organize bacteria within the mucus layer. This interaction facilitates the colonization of beneficial bacteria such as Lactobacillus, which are important for gut health. We included more descriptions regarding scaffold model in the revised manuscript (page 6, line 248-250)

• Discussion session often recapitulates results description, which makes the text repetitive.

Thank you for your constructive suggestion and we have removed unnecessary results description in the discussion session in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer #3 (Recommendations For The Authors):

Major comments

(1) Figure 1A. The staining is very faint, and hard to see. The reader cannot be certain those are Ch311-positive cells. Higher Mag is needed.

Thank you for your insightful suggestion and we have included the higher resolution figures in the revised manuscript Figure 1A.

(2) The mucus is produced largely by the proximal colon, is adherent to the feces, and mobile with the feces (PMID: 33093110). Therefore it is important to determine where the Ch311 is being expressed to be released into the lumen. Further Ch3l1 expression studies are needed to be done in both proximal and distal colon.

Thank you for your thorough review and insightful suggestions. We have addressed this part in our public review. Additionally, we agree with your suggestions and will conduct further studies on Chi3l1 expression in both the proximal and distal colon.

(3) Figure 1B. The image is out of focus for the Ileum, and the DAPI signal needs to be brought up for the colon. Which part of the colon is this? The UEA1+ cells do not really look like goblet cells. A better image with clearer goblet cells is needed.

Thank you for your constructive suggestions. In the revised manuscript, we have included higher-resolution images (Figure 1B). The middle colon (approximately 3 to 4 cm distal from the cecum) was harvested for staining. In addition to UEA-1, we utilized anti-MUC2 antibody to label goblet cells in this colon segment (see Author response image 3 below). The patterns of goblet cells identified by UEA-1 or MUC2 antibodies are similar. The UEA-1-positive cells shown in Figure 1B are presumed to be goblet cells.

Author response image 3. Goblet Cell Distribution in the Middle Colon.

Author response image 3.

Goblet cells in the middle segment of the colon (approximately 3 to 4 cm distal from the cecum) were detected using immunofluorescence with antibodies against UEA-1 (green) and MUC2 (red). Scale bars = 50 μm. Representative images are shown from three mice individually stained for each antibody.

(4) Figure 1G. There needs to be some counterstain or contrast imaging to show evidence that cells are present in the untreated sample.

Thank you for your insightful suggestions. We have annotated the cells present in the untreated sample based on the overexposure in the revised manuscript (Figure 1G).

(5) Figure 3B. Is this absolute quantification? How were the data normalized to allow comparison of microbial loads?

Thank you for your thorough review. Figure 3B presents absolute quantification data based on the methodology described in the paper titled "The Antibacterial Lectin RegIIIγ Promotes the Spatial Segregation of Microbiota and Host in the Intestine" (PMID: 21998396). Briefly, we amplified a short segment (179 bp) of the 16S rRNA gene using conserved 16S rRNA-specific primers and OP50 (a strain of E. coli) as the template. After gel extraction and concentration measurement, the PCR products were diluted to gradient concentrations (0.16, 0.32, 0.64, 1.28, 2.56, 5.12, 10.24, 20.48 pg/µl). These gradient concentrations were used as templates for qPCR to generate a standard curve based on Ct values and bacterial concentration. The standard curve is used to calculate bacterial concentration in the samples. The data presented in Figure 3B represent the weight of bacteria/milligram sample, calculated as (bacterial concentration x bacterial volume) / (weight of feces or gut content).

(6) Figure 3D. The major case is made for a dramatic reduction in Gram+ species, but Figure 1D does not show a dramatic change. Is this difference significant?

Thank you for your thorough review. We don’t think we are clear about your question. However, there was no significant difference in Figure 3D. The dramatic reduction in Gram+ species are made based on the LTA, Firmicutes FISH, individual species comparison between WT and KO mice, bacterial QPCR results together (Figure 3E-H).

(7) Figures 3E and 3F. These stainings are alone not convincing of reduced Gram+ in the KOs. Some stats are required for these images. An independent complementary method is also needed to quantify these with statistics since this data is so central to the study's conclusions.

Thank you for your constructive suggestions. We have included statistical analysis in the revised manuscript (Figure 3E and F). Given large quantity of dietary fiber intertwined with bacteria, it is challenging to make a reliable quantification of bacteria in Figure 3E. However, it is easy to distinguish bacteria from dietary fiber under the microscope. We have exclusively analyzed gut sections from six mice in each group, and the results are consistent with the Firmicutes FISH results. Complementary method such as bacterial QPCR have been employed to quantify these (Figure 4E, F). Due to a lack of expertise, it has been challenging for us to perform reliable QMP experiments.

(8) Figure 3G. To make quantitative conclusions, the authors need to do quantitative microbial profiling (QMP) of the microbiota. Relative abundance masks absolute numbers, which could be increased. There are qPCR-based QMP platforms the authors could use (PMID: PMIDs: 31940382, 33763385).

Thank you for your constructive suggestions. Due to a lack of expertise, it has been challenging for us to perform reliable QMP experiments. However, since QMP involves qPCR combined with bacterial sequencing, we conducted 16S rRNA sequencing and confirmed the quantity of certain bacteria by qPCR (revised manuscript, Figure 3B, H, Figure 4E, F, Supplementary Figure 3A). In addition to the original bacterial qPCR data presented in the manuscript, we included another bacterial species, Turicibater. Consistent with the 16S rRNA sequencing analysis data, qPCR results showed that Turicibacter was more abundant in IECΔChil1 mice than Villin-cre mice (revised manuscript, supplementary Figure 3A, page 4, line 171-173) Therefore, our data is reliable to some extent.

(9) Figure 4B. The data nicely shows Ch3l1 in mucus. However, no data supports the authors' main claim Ch3h1 binds Gram-positive bacteria in situ. Dual staining of Ch3l1 with Firmicutes probe would be supportive to show this interaction is happening in vivo.

You raise an excellent point, and we agree with your suggestion that we should confirm Chi3l1 binding to Gram-positive bacteria in situ. During the study, we attempted dual staining of Chi3l1 with a universal bacterial 16S FISH probe several times, but we were unsuccessful. Despite various optimizations of the protocol, we were only able to detect bacteria, not Chi3l1. It appears that the antibody is not suitable for this method.

(10) Figures 4D - F. Because mucus is associated with feces (PMID:), the data with feces likely contains both Muc2/mucus and Feces. Therefore, it is unclear what the "mucus" is referring to in these figures. To support the authors' conclusions, there needs to be some validation that mucus was purified in the assays. This must be confirmed at a minimum by PAS staining on SDS PAGE gel (should be very high molecular weight) or Western blot with UEA lectin.

Thank you for your insightful suggestions. As mentioned in the public review, the mucus layer was isolated following the protocol described in the paper titled "The Antibacterial Lectin RegIIIγ Promotes the Spatial Segregation of Microbiota and Host in the Intestine" (PMID: 21998396). Briefly, after harvesting the middle colon from the mice, we cut open the colon longitudinally. After removing the gut contents, the lumen was vigorously rinsed in PBS while holding one end with forceps. The pellet obtained after centrifuging the rinsate was used as our mucus sample. Fresh feces were collected immediately after the mice defecated in a new, empty cage. We performed Western blot analysis to detect UEA lectin but were unsuccessful.

However, as noted in the public review, we conducted protein mass spectrometry on the isolated mucus layers and analyzed the data by comparing it with established research ("Proteomic Analyses of the Two Mucus Layers of the Colon Barrier Reveal That Their Main Component, the Muc2 Mucin, Is Strongly Bound to the Fcgbp Protein," PMID: 19432394). Our data showed a high degree of overlap with the proteins identified in these established studies.

(11) Figure 4E/F: The units of measurement are in pg/cm2, implying picogram per area. Can the authors please explain what this unit is referring to?

We are grateful for your thorough review. The unit pg/cm ² represents picograms per square centimeter. Figures 4E and 4F present absolute quantification data based on the methodology described in the paper titled "The Antibacterial Lectin RegIIIγ Promotes the Spatial Segregation of Microbiota and Host in the Intestine" (PMID: 21998396). Briefly, we harvested a 3x0.5 cm section of colon and a 9x0.4 cm section of ileum. And then we collected the mucus layer as previously described (responses to question 10). We measured bacterial concentration as described in response to question 5 using the equation (y = -1.53ln(x) + 13.581), where x represents the bacterial concentration and y represents the Ct value. After obtaining the bacterial concentration, we multiplied it by the volume of the rinsate and divided it by the area to obtain the values for pg/cm² used in the figures.

(12) Figure 5E. Normal tissues appear to be from different colon regions from colitis tissues: the "Normal" looks like the proximal colon, while "Colitis" looks like the Distal colon. They cannot be directly compared.

Thank you for your insightful suggestion. We have now included the updated image in the revised manuscript as Figure 5E to compare the same region of the colons.

(13) Similarly, in Figure 5I it appears different colon regions are being compared between groups: Proximal colon in the bottom panels, and distal in the top panels. Since the proximal colon is less damaged by DSS, this data could be misleading.

Thank you for your insightful suggestion. We have now included the updated image in the revised manuscript as Figure 5I to compare the same region of the colons.

(14) In the DSS studies, are the VillinCre and IEC Chit3l1 mice co-housed littermates?

Thank you for your insightful suggestion. In the DSS studies, the Villin-Cre and IECΔChil1 mice are not co-housed littermates. However, they are derived from the same lineage and are housed in the same rack within the same room of the animal facility.

(15) Supplementary Figure 3: Mucus thickness images; are they representative? Stats are needed on multiple mice to support the claim that the mucus is thinner.

Thank you for your insightful suggestion. The images are representative of 4 mice each group. We have now included the statistical analysis in the revised manuscript Supplementary Figure 3C&D.

Minor

(1) Introduction: Reference to "mucosal layer": "Mucosal" and "Mucus" are different things. "Mucosal" refers to the epithelium, lamina propria, and muscularis mucosa. "Mucus" refers to the secreted mucus gel, the focus of the authors' study. Therefore, the statement "mucosal layer" is not proper. "Mucosal layer" should be changed to "mucus layer."

Thank you for your constructive suggestions and we have learned a lot from it. We have made the replacement of “mucosal layer” to “mucus layer in the revised manuscript.

(2) Line 366 and related lines: Feces cannot be "dissolved". "Resuspended" is a better term.

Thank you for your constructive suggestion and we have made the changes of “dissolved” to “resuspended” in the revised manuscript.

(3) Lines 36-37 and 43-44 are redundant to each other.

Thank you for your constructive suggestion and we have removed the lines 36-37 in the revised manuscript.

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Data Citations

    1. Yan C. 2024. Identification of intestinal contents and fecal bacteria in mice. NCBI BioProject. PRJNA1155018
    2. Rui Z. 2024. Bacterial microbial diversity in mouse stool. NCBI BioProject. PRJNA1157557
    3. D'alessio S, Ungaro F, Massimino L, Lamparelli LA, Danese S. 2021. Characterization of the IL23-IL17 immune axis in IBD patients. NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus. GSE165512

    Supplementary Materials

    Figure 1—source data 1. File containing original western blots for Figure 1C–F, indicating the relevant bands.
    Figure 1—source data 2. Original files for western blot analysis displayed in Figure 1C–F.
    Figure 1—source data 3. Numerical data of Figure 1A.
    Figure 1—figure supplement 1—source data 1. File containing original DNA gels for Figure 1—figure supplement 1B, indicating the relevant bands.
    Figure 1—figure supplement 1—source data 2. Original files for DNA gels for Figure 1—figure supplement 1B.
    Figure 2—source data 1. File containing original western blots for Figure 2B and silver staining for Figure 2C–E, indicating the relevant bands.
    Figure 2—source data 2. Original files for western blot analysis displayed in Figure 2B and silver staining for Figure 2C–E.
    Figure 2—source data 3. Numerical data of Figure 2F and G.
    Figure 3—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 3A–H.
    elife-92994-fig3-data1.xlsx (108.6KB, xlsx)
    Figure 3—figure supplement 1—source data 1. File containing original DNA gels for Figure 3—figure supplement 1, indicating the relevant bands.
    Figure 3—figure supplement 1—source data 2. Original files for DNA gels for Figure 3—figure supplement 1.
    Figure 3—figure supplement 2—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 3—figure supplement 2.
    Figure 4—source data 1. File containing original western blots for Figure 4C and D, indicating the relevant bands.
    Figure 4—source data 2. Original files for western blot analysis displayed in Figure 4C and D.
    Figure 4—source data 3. Numerical data of Figure 4E and F.
    Figure 4—figure supplement 1—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 4—figure supplement 1A and B.
    Figure 5—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 5A, C, D, G and H .
    elife-92994-fig5-data1.xlsx (153.5KB, xlsx)
    Figure 5—figure supplement 1—source data 1. Numerical data of Figure 5—figure supplement 1B.
    MDAR checklist
    Supplementary file 1. Genotyping and qPCR Primers.
    elife-92994-supp1.xlsx (11.9KB, xlsx)

    Data Availability Statement

    Sequencing data have been deposited in NCBI under accession codes PRJNA1155018 and PRJNA1157557. All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files; source data files have been provided for all figures.

    The following datasets were generated:

    Yan C. 2024. Identification of intestinal contents and fecal bacteria in mice. NCBI BioProject. PRJNA1155018

    Rui Z. 2024. Bacterial microbial diversity in mouse stool. NCBI BioProject. PRJNA1157557

    The following previously published dataset was used:

    D'alessio S, Ungaro F, Massimino L, Lamparelli LA, Danese S. 2021. Characterization of the IL23-IL17 immune axis in IBD patients. NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus. GSE165512


    Articles from eLife are provided here courtesy of eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd

    RESOURCES