Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2021 Feb 12;11:608279. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2020.608279

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

Copyright © 2021 Zhou, Shang, Li, Zhu, Qi, Zhao, Chen, Shi, Pan, Wang, Fan, Gao, Zhu and Feng.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

PMC Copyright notice

Combination treatment reversed the dysbiosis in GVHD mice on the species level. (A) The UPGMA tree of the top 10 species in abundance based on weighted UniFrac distances in the species level. The relative abundances of enteric bacteria at the species level in different groups of mice were assessed using 16S high-throughput sequencing after BMT on day 7. n = 4–6/group. (B) The statistical analysis of the abundance of top 35 species in gut microbiota between different groups of mice. n = 4–6/group. The heat map is color-based on row Z scores. The groups with the highest and lowest bacterial level are marked in red and blue, respectively. The combination treatment significantly down-regulated the relative abundance of E. coli and Enterococcus durans. (C–J) Cladograms (C,E,G,I) and LDA (linear discriminant analysis) score (D,F,H,J) generated by LEfSe (linear discriminant analysis effect size) indicating differences in bacterial taxa in different groups of mice 7 days after the BMT. n = 4–6/group. The central point represents the root of the tree (bacteria), and each ring represents the next lower taxonomic level (from phylum to genus). The diameter of each circle represents the relative abundance of the taxon. Only the taxa meeting a significant LDA threshold value of >2 are shown. The species in the non-transplant group (ATCON) and the combo treatment group (ATCOM) were indicated with a negative LDA score (D,J). (C,D) LEfSe analysis of the ATCON vs. the GVHD group. The potential biomarkers of the GVHD group: (1). Proteobacteria, Gammaproteobacteria, Enterobacteriales, Enterobacteriaceae, unidentified Enterobacteriaceae, E. coli; (2). Firmicutes, Bacilli, Lactobacillales, Enterococcaceae, Enterococcus, E. durans. The potential biomarkers of the ATCON group: (1). Bacteroidetes, Bacteroidia, Bacteroidales, Rikenellaceae, Alistipes; (2). Firmicutes, Clostridia, Clostridiales, Ruminococcaceae, unidentified Ruminococcaceae, Clostridium papyrosolvens; (3). Verrucomicrobia, Verrucomicrobiae, Verrucomicrobiales, Akkermansiaceae, Akkermansia. (E,F) The LEfSe analysis of the GVHD vs. the CSA group. (G,H) The LEfSe analysis of the GVHD vs. the 0.2 mL/kg XBJ-treated group. (I,J) The LEfSe analysis of the GVHD vs. COM group.