Skip to main content
. 2017 Nov;137(11):2427–2436. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2017.05.029

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Wound microbiome dysbiosis in Nod2-deficient mice. (a) Representative wounds (day 3) histology showed significantly delayed healing in Nod2–/– versus WT (arrows denote wound margins). (b) Nod2–/– mice had significantly increased total eubacterial abundance (16S quantititave real-time PCR) in their wounds at postwounding day 3 compared with WT, which was visualized with FISH (c) using a total eubacterial FISH probe (red). (d) UPGMA dendrogram of wound tissue DGGE fingerprints showed 60% or less interstrain similarity in the Nod–/– wound microbiome profile versus 40% or less in WT controls. (e) Real-time PCR (16S region) confirmed bacterial species-specific differences between WT and Nod2–/– wounds. All data are representative of two independent experiments with n = 5 mice/group (a–e). ∗P < 0.05. Mean + standard error of the mean. Scale bar in a = 200 μm, scale bar in c = 100 μm. D, day; FISH, fluorescence in situ hybridization; NS, normal skin; UPGMA, unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean; WT, wild type.