CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 299Gut microbiota and healthGastrointestinal motility and disordersStress Responses and Cortisol

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gut Microbiota Composition Is Correlated to Grid Floor Induced Stress and Behavior in the BALB/c Mouse

Open access
Bangsgaard Bendtsen, Katja Maria, Krych, Lukasz, Sørensen, Dorte Bratbo, Pang, Wanyong, Nielsen, Dennis Sandris, Josefsen, Knud, Hansen, Lars H., Sørensen, Søren J., Hansen, Axel Kornerup·2012·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0046231PMC PMC3462757
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Stress has profound influence on the gastro-intestinal tract, the immune system and the behavior of the animal. In this study, the correlation between gut microbiota composition determined by Denaturing Grade Gel Electrophoresis (DGGE) and tag-encoded 16S rRNA gene amplicon pyrosequencing (454/FLX) and behavior in the Tripletest (Elevated Plus Maze, Light/Dark Box, and Open Field combined), the Tail Suspension Test, and Burrowing in 28 female BALB/c mice exposed to two weeks of grid floor induced stress was investigated. Cytokine and glucose levels were measured at baseline, during and after exposure to grid floor. Stressing the mice clearly changed the cecal microbiota as determined by both DGGE and pyrosequencing. Odoribacter, Alistipes and an unclassified genus from the Coriobacteriaceae family increased significantly in the grid floor housed mice. Compared to baseline, the mice exposed to grid floor housing changed the amount of time spent in the Elevated Plus Maze, in the Light/Dark Box, and burrowing behavior. The grid floor housed mice had significantly longer immobility duration in the Tail Suspension Test and increased their number of immobility episodes from baseline. Significant correlations were found between GM composition and IL-1α, IFN-γ, closed arm entries of Elevated Plus Maze, total time in Elevated Plus Maze, time spent in Light/Dark Box, and time spent in the inner zone of the Open Field as well as total time in the Open Field. Significant correlations were found to the levels of Firmicutes, e.g. various species of Ruminococccaceae and Lachnospiraceae. No significant difference was found for the evaluated cytokines, except an overall decrease in levels from baseline to end. A significant lower level of blood glucose was found in the grid floor housed mice, whereas the HbA1c level was significantly higher. It is concluded that grid floor housing changes the GM composition, which seems to influence certain anxiety-related parameters.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0046231

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Blood glucose measurements during the study. For both groups measurements were taken at baseline, on day −5, +2, +9 of grid floor exposure for the test group and at the end of the study (mmol/L, mean and SD).
Figure 1 Blood glucose measurements during the study. For both groups measurements were taken at baseline, on day −5, +2, +9 of grid floor exposure for the test group and at the end of the study (mmol/L, mean and SD).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 GM composition. (Blue: control mice, Red: grid floor housed mice). A. DGGE-profile cluster analysis similarity tree from end fecal samples. The mice clustered strongly after gel (green, yellow and purple lines) and after cage allocation (rounded squares). There was no clear clustering according to housing. Overall similarity was 59.61%±4.68. B. DGGE-profile cluster analysis similarity tree from end cecal samples. The mice clustered according to housing (circles) independent of gel (green and yellow) and cage allocation (rounded squares). The overall similarity was 64.07%±5.64. C. Scatter plot of the y-component of similarity-based cecal PCA-plot (mean and SD). Difference between control mice (−107563±108957) and grid floor housed mice (107563±84155) is significant (p<0.01).
Figure 2 GM composition. (Blue: control mice, Red: grid floor housed mice). A. DGGE-profile cluster analysis similarity tree from end fecal samples. The mice clustered strongly after gel (green, yellow and purple lines) and after cage allocation (rounded squares). There was no clear clustering according to housing. Overall similarity was 59.61%±4.68. B. DGGE-profile cluster analysis similarity tree from end cecal samples. The mice clustered according to housing (circles) independent of gel (green and yellow) and cage allocation (rounded squares). The overall similarity was 64.07%±5.64. C. Scatter plot of the y-component of similarity-based cecal PCA-plot (mean and SD). Difference between control mice (−107563±108957) and grid floor housed mice (107563±84155) is significant (p<0.01).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 16S rRNA gene 454/FLX based pyrosequencing of cecal content. (Blue: control mice, Red: grid floor housed mice). A. Jackknifed replicate PCA plot. The plot is based on the phylogenetic distance matrix showing clustering of mice according to the floor type. B. Whisker plot of the 2nd principal component values. The significant difference between the two groups observed in the DGGE-based PCA-plot is confirmed (p<0.01***).
Figure 3 16S rRNA gene 454/FLX based pyrosequencing of cecal content. (Blue: control mice, Red: grid floor housed mice). A. Jackknifed replicate PCA plot. The plot is based on the phylogenetic distance matrix showing clustering of mice according to the floor type. B. Whisker plot of the 2nd principal component values. The significant difference between the two groups observed in the DGGE-based PCA-plot is confirmed (p<0.01***).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Time spent in each of the three Tripletest compartments and risk assessments. No significant differences were observed between control mice and grid floor housed mice in the overall time spent in the three compartments. Some significant changes were observed within each group. ”IZ”: time spent in IZ of total test time, “DC”: time spent in DC of total test time, “Entries CA”: number of entries into CA from OF, LDB or CA, “RAOA”: risk assessment OA, “RAOF”: risk assessment OF. “OF/total test time”: time spent in Open Field of total test time, “EPM”/total test time”: time spent in Elevated Plus Maze of total test time, “LDC/total test time”: time spent in Light (LC) or Dark Compartment (DC) of total test time, “RAOA, RAL, RAOF”: time spent risk assessing Open Arms, Light Compartment and Open Field, respectively.
Figure 4 Time spent in each of the three Tripletest compartments and risk assessments. No significant differences were observed between control mice and grid floor housed mice in the overall time spent in the three compartments. Some significant changes were observed within each group. ”IZ”: time spent in IZ of total test time, “DC”: time spent in DC of total test time, “Entries CA”: number of entries into CA from OF, LDB or CA, “RAOA”: risk assessment OA, “RAOF”: risk assessment OF. “OF/total test time”: time spent in Open Field of total test time, “EPM”/total test time”: time spent in Elevated Plus Maze of total test time, “LDC/total test time”: time spent in Light (LC) or Dark Compartment (DC) of total test time, “RAOA, RAL, RAOF”: time spent risk assessing Open Arms, Light Compartment and Open Field, respectively.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Burrowing. Scatter plots of amount for control mice (A) and mice housed on grid floor (B) (g, mean and SD). No significant difference was found between the groups. Within the groups, there was a significant difference from baseline to end, which differed between the groups with a mean of 10.77 g removed wood chips for the control mice (p<0.05) compared to 19.64 g for grid floor housed mice (p<0.01).
Figure 5 Burrowing. Scatter plots of amount for control mice (A) and mice housed on grid floor (B) (g, mean and SD). No significant difference was found between the groups. Within the groups, there was a significant difference from baseline to end, which differed between the groups with a mean of 10.77 g removed wood chips for the control mice (p<0.05) compared to 19.64 g for grid floor housed mice (p<0.01).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 TST results. End results from three mice were not obtained, as they learned to master tail climbing. A. End results for immobility duration for control mice and grid floor housed mice. There was a significant difference between the groups in total duration of immobility (p<0.05) (s, mean and SD). B. Within-group comparison from baseline to end of grid floor housed mice. There was a significant increase in the number of immobility episodes (p<0.05) (number of episodes, mean and SD).
Figure 6 TST results. End results from three mice were not obtained, as they learned to master tail climbing. A. End results for immobility duration for control mice and grid floor housed mice. There was a significant difference between the groups in total duration of immobility (p<0.05) (s, mean and SD). B. Within-group comparison from baseline to end of grid floor housed mice. There was a significant increase in the number of immobility episodes (p<0.05) (number of episodes, mean and SD).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 Overview of Tripletest construction. The Open Field is connected to the closed arm of the Elevated Plus Maze with a 7×7 cm opening and a similar passage connects the other closed arm of the Elevated Plus Maze to the Light/Dark Box. The whole system is elevated 45 cm from the floor.
Figure 7 Overview of Tripletest construction. The Open Field is connected to the closed arm of the Elevated Plus Maze with a 7×7 cm opening and a similar passage connects the other closed arm of the Elevated Plus Maze to the Light/Dark Box. The whole system is elevated 45 cm from the floor.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 69 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [21]Stub C, Sorensen DB, Jegstrup IM, Ritskes-Hoitinga M, Hansen AK (2002) Fluctuating asymmetry of teeth is not a reliable indicator for assessing stress in rats. Scandinavian Journal of Laboratory Animal Science 29: 149– 153.
  2. [37]Hansen CHF, Nielsen DS, Kverka M, Zakostelka Z, Klimesova K, et al. (2012) Customizing laboratory mice by modifying gut microbiota and immune system development in the early postnatal period. PLoS One (In Press).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–299 of 299

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bangsgaard Bendtsen, K. M., Krych, L., Sørensen, D. B., Pang, W., Nielsen, D. S., Josefsen, K., Hansen, L. H., Sørensen, S. J., & Hansen, A. K.
Affiliations
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Rigshospitalet (DK)
ORCID
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2012-10-02
Volume
7
Issue
10
Pages
e46231
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0046231
PMC
PMC3462757
OpenAlex
W2041032345
Cited by
299
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 10
FWCI
6.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Villum Fonden
  • Copenhagen Graduate School for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
gut microbiota, housing stress, anxiety-like behavior, cecal microbiota, cytokines, blood glucose, HbA1c, elevated plus maze, light-dark box, open field, tail suspension test, burrowing behavior, Odoribacter, Alistipes, Coriobacteriaceae, Firmicutes, Ruminococcaceae, Lachnospiraceae, BALB/c mice
MeSH terms
Animals, Behavior, Animal, Blood Glucose, Female, Hemoglobins, Intestines, Mice, Inbred BALB C, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Stress, Physiological, Cytokines, Maze Learning, Mice, Metagenome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review