Table 2.
Microbiota profile comparison (based on Yakult intestinal flora-scan)
| No |
Log10 bacterial cells/g feces mean ± SD (detection rate %) |
||||
| Type of Bacteria |
Yogyakarta |
Bali |
|||
| Young | Elderly | Young | Elderly | ||
| Phylum Firmicutes | |||||
| 1 | Clostridium coccoides group | 9.9 ± 0.5 (100) | 9.3 ± 1.2a (100) | 9.9 ± 0.5 (100) | 9.4 ± 0.5c (100) |
| 2 | Clostridium leptum subgroup | 9.7 ± 0.4 (100) | 9.3 ± 1.1 (100) | 9.6 ± 0.5 (100) | 9.4 ± 0.6c (100) |
| 3 | Clostridium perfringens | 5.6 ± 0.9 (100) | 5.0 ± 1.1 (85) | 6.7 ± 1.2e (100) | 6.9 ± 1.4f (95) |
| 4 | Clostridium difficile | - (0) | - (0) | - (0) | - (0) |
| 5 | Total Lactobacillus | 6.7 ± 1.1 (95) | 7.2 ± 1.2 (95) | 6.8 ± 1.1 (100) | 7.1 ± 1.2 (100) |
| 6 | Lactobacillus plantarum subgroup | 5.0 ± 1.0 (100) | 4.1 ± 0.8a (85) | 5.1 ± 1.1 (100) | 4.8 ± 0.8f (100) |
| 7 | Lactobacillus gasseri subgroup | 5.4 ± 1.1 (100) | 6.4 ± 1.6a (90) | 5.5 ± 1.2 (100) | 5.6 ± 1.7 (90) |
| 8 | Lactobacillus reuteri subgroup | 4.6 ± 0.8 (95) | 5.3 ± 1.4a (90) | 4.5 ± 0.9 (90) | 4.9 ± 1.3 (100) |
| 9 | Lactobacillus ruminis subgroup | 6.8 ± 1.6 (45) | 7.6 ± 0.9 (35) | 6.4 ± 1.7 (80e) | 7.4 ± 1.3c (70f) |
| 10 | Lactobacillus casei subgroup | 3.7 ± 0.6 (40) | 4.9 ± 1.0a (25) | 3.8 ± 0.8 (40) | 3.6 ± 000.8f (35) |
| 11 | Lactobacillus sakei subgroup | 3.6 ± 0.5 (35) | 0b | 3.1 ± 0.6 (55) | 3.0 ± 0.6 (30f) |
| 12 | Lactobacillus fermentum | 5.3 ± 0.8 (75) | 5.9 ± 1.1 (80) | 5.3 ± 0.8 (55) | 5.1 ± 0.8f (60) |
| 13 | Lactobacillus brevis | 3.9 ± 0.8 (50) | 4.0 ± 0.9 (15a) | 4.7 ± 0.9 (35) | 3.7 ± 0.8 (40) |
| 14 | Lactobacillus fructivorans | - (0) | - (0) | - (0) | - (0) |
| 15 | Enterococcus | 7.4 ± 0.7 (90) | 7.1 ± 1.0 (90) | 7.4 ± 0.9 (95) | 7.9 ± 1.1f (95) |
| 16 | Streptococcus | 8.4 ± 0.5 (95) | 7.5 ± 1.6a (75) | 8.0 ± 0.7 (95) | 8.2 ± 0.7 (45d) |
| 17 | Staphylococcus | 5.3 ± 0.5 (100) | 5.1 ± 1.1 (90) | 5.0 ± 0.6 (100) | 5.2 ± 1.0 (100) |
| Phylum Bacteroidetes | |||||
| 18 | B. fragilis group | 8.9 ± 0.7 (100) | 8.3 ± 1.1 (100) | 9.3 ± 0.6 (100) | 7.9 ± 1.1c (100) |
| 19 | Prevotella | 10.0 ± 1.2 (85) | 9.1 ± 1.6a (75) | 9.4 ± 1.9 (80) | 9.0 ± 1.1c (85) |
| Phylum Actinobacteria | |||||
| 20 | Atopobium cluster | 9.1 ± 0.6 (100) | 8.9 ± 0.7 (100) | 8.9 ± 0.7 (100) | 9.0 ± 0.5 (100) |
| 21 | Bifidobacterium | 9.4 ± 0.6 (100) | 8.4 ± 1.3a (100) | 8.6 ± 0.9f (100) | 8.4 ± 1.2 (100) |
| Phylum Proteobacteria | |||||
| 22 | Enterobacteriaceae | 7.3 ± 0.8 (100) | 7.8 ± 1.6 (100) | 7.6 ± 0.9 (100) | 8.4 ± 0.8c (100) |
| 23 | Pseudomonas | 4.1 ± 0.6 (25) | 4.7 ± 1.0 (30) | 3.1 ± 0.0 (10) | 4.2 ± 0.8 (55d) |
| 24 | Total Bacteria | 10.6 ± 0.4 (100) | 10.0 ± 1.0a(100) | 10.5 ± 0.5 (100) | 10.1 ± 0.5c (100) |
a
P < 0.05 Yogyakarta Young vs Yogyakarta Elderly.
b
P < 0.01 Yogyakarta Young vs Yogyakarta Elderly.
c
P < 0.05 Bali Young vs Bali Elderly.
d
P < 0.01 Bali Young vs Bali Elderly.
e
P < 0.05 Yogyakarta Young vs Bali Young.
f
P < 0.05 Yogyakarta Elderly vs Bali Elderly.
Mann-Whitney U-test for bacterial cells/g feces, chi-square test for detection rate.