Abstract
To explain differences in gut microbial communities we must determine how processes regulating microbial community assembly (colonization, persistence) differ among hosts and affect microbiota composition. We surveyed the gut microbiota of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) from 10 geographically clustered populations and sequenced environmental samples to track potential colonizing microbes and quantify the effects of host environment and genotype. Gut microbiota composition and diversity varied among populations. These among-population differences were associated with multiple covarying ecological variables: habitat type (lake, stream, estuary), lake geomorphology and food- (but not water-) associated microbiota. Fish genotype also covaried with gut microbiota composition; more genetically divergent populations exhibited more divergent gut microbiota. Our results suggest that population level differences in stickleback gut microbiota may depend more on internal sorting processes (host genotype) than on colonization processes (transient environmental effects).
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 2515-2526 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | ISME Journal |
| Volume | 9 |
| Issue number | 11 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Nov 1 2015 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Microbiology
Cite this
Dietary input of microbes and host genetic variation shape among-population differences in stickleback gut microbiota. / Smith, Chris C R; Snowberg, Lisa K.; Caporaso, James G; Knight, Rob; Bolnick, Daniel I.
In: ISME Journal, Vol. 9, No. 11, 01.11.2015, p. 2515-2526.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Dietary input of microbes and host genetic variation shape among-population differences in stickleback gut microbiota
AU - Smith, Chris C R
AU - Snowberg, Lisa K.
AU - Caporaso, James G
AU - Knight, Rob
AU - Bolnick, Daniel I.
PY - 2015/11/1
Y1 - 2015/11/1
N2 - To explain differences in gut microbial communities we must determine how processes regulating microbial community assembly (colonization, persistence) differ among hosts and affect microbiota composition. We surveyed the gut microbiota of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) from 10 geographically clustered populations and sequenced environmental samples to track potential colonizing microbes and quantify the effects of host environment and genotype. Gut microbiota composition and diversity varied among populations. These among-population differences were associated with multiple covarying ecological variables: habitat type (lake, stream, estuary), lake geomorphology and food- (but not water-) associated microbiota. Fish genotype also covaried with gut microbiota composition; more genetically divergent populations exhibited more divergent gut microbiota. Our results suggest that population level differences in stickleback gut microbiota may depend more on internal sorting processes (host genotype) than on colonization processes (transient environmental effects).
AB - To explain differences in gut microbial communities we must determine how processes regulating microbial community assembly (colonization, persistence) differ among hosts and affect microbiota composition. We surveyed the gut microbiota of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) from 10 geographically clustered populations and sequenced environmental samples to track potential colonizing microbes and quantify the effects of host environment and genotype. Gut microbiota composition and diversity varied among populations. These among-population differences were associated with multiple covarying ecological variables: habitat type (lake, stream, estuary), lake geomorphology and food- (but not water-) associated microbiota. Fish genotype also covaried with gut microbiota composition; more genetically divergent populations exhibited more divergent gut microbiota. Our results suggest that population level differences in stickleback gut microbiota may depend more on internal sorting processes (host genotype) than on colonization processes (transient environmental effects).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945480703&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84945480703&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/ismej.2015.64
DO - 10.1038/ismej.2015.64
M3 - Article
VL - 9
SP - 2515
EP - 2526
JO - ISME Journal
JF - ISME Journal
SN - 1751-7362
IS - 11
ER -