Median relative abundances, with absolute median deviation, of the ten predominant phyla from the fecal microbiota of four bat species.

<p>Median relative abundances, with absolute median deviation, of the ten predominant phyla from the fecal microbiota of four bat species.</p

Evaluation of the impact of dental prophylaxis on the oral microbiota of dogs - Fig 6

<p><b>Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of all time points for (a) plaque microbiota community structure, and (b) oral microbiota community membership (n = 10).</b> The plots denote 60% ellipsoid coverage and timepoints are represented by red (Pre), blue (1Week), green (2Weeks), and yellow (5Weeks).</p

Linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe) results.

<p>Linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe) results.</p

Pre-prophylaxis median percent relative abundances of bacterial phyla for plaque and oral microbiota samples (n = 30).

<p>Median relative abundance ≥ 0.5%.</p

Bat species collected from different caves in Slovenia.

<p>Bat species collected from different caves in Slovenia.</p

Evaluation of the impact of dental prophylaxis on the oral microbiota of dogs

<div><p>Periodontal disease is one of the most commonly diagnosed oral diseases in dogs and can result from undisturbed dental plaque. Dental prophylaxis is a routinely practiced veterinary procedure, but its effects on both the plaque and oral microbiota is not fully understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the impact of dental prophylaxis on the composition of the supragingival plaque and composite oral microbiota in clinically healthy dogs and to determine if composite sampling could be used in lieu of sampling the plaque microbiota directly. Thirty dogs received a dental prophylaxis. Supragingival plaque and composite oral samples were collected just prior to, and one week after dental prophylaxis. A subsample of 10 dogs was followed, and additional samples were collected two and five weeks post-prophylaxis. The V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene was used for Illumina MiSeq next-generation sequencing. Results demonstrate that decreases in <i>Treponema</i> as well as increases in <i>Moraxella</i> and <i>Neisseria</i> distinguished the plaque pre- and one week post-prophylaxis timepoints (all P<0.05). Within the oral microbiota, the initially dominant <i>Psychrobacter</i> (20% relative abundance) disappeared one week later (P<0.0001), and <i>Pseudomonas</i> became the dominant taxon one week after treatment (80% relative abundance, P<0.0001). A rapid transition back towards the pre-dental prophylaxis microbiota by five weeks post-treatment was seen for both niches, suggesting the canine oral microbiota is resilient. Direct comparison of the two environments yielded striking differences, with complete separation of groups. Firmicutes (40%) and Spirochaetes (22%) predominated in the plaque while Proteobacteria (58%) was predominant in the oral microbiota. Greater richness was also seen in the plaque microbiota. This study reveals that prophylaxis had a profound impact on both the plaque and oral microbiota, and the longitudinal results help elucidate the pathophysiology of periodontal disease. The results suggest that oral swabs are a poor proxy for plaque samples and highlight the need to study specific oral niches.</p></div

Comparison of family level data.

<p>Median relative abundances of predominant families in the fecal microbiota of <i>Myotis blythii</i> (n = 11), <i>M</i>. <i>emarginatus</i> (n = 29), <i>M</i>. <i>myotis</i> (n = 11) and <i>Rhinolophus hipposideros</i> (n = 29).</p

Cave sampling sites across Slovenia (SLO).

<p>Depiction of bat sampling sites in Slovenia.</p

Comparison of genus data.

<p>Median relative abundances of predominant genera in the fecal microbiota of <i>Barbastella barbastellus</i> (n = 4), <i>Miniopterus schreibersii</i> (n = 3), <i>Myotis bechsteinii</i> (n = 3), <i>Myotis blythii</i> (n = 11), <i>M</i>. <i>daubentonii</i> (n = 5), <i>M</i>. <i>emarginatus</i> (n = 29), <i>M</i>. <i>myotis</i> (n = 11), <i>M</i>. <i>natterii</i> (n = 3), <i>Pipistrellus pipistrellus</i> (n = 2), <i>Plecotus auritus</i> (n = 1) and <i>Rhinolophus ferrumequinum</i> (n = 1) and <i>R</i>. <i>hipposideros</i> (n = 29).</p

Comparison of predominate genera in adult bats.

<p>Comparison of the median relative abundances of three predominant genera in the fecal microbiota of adult <i>Myotis blythii</i> (n = 10), <i>M</i>. <i>emarginatus</i> (n = 18), <i>M</i>. <i>myotis</i> (n = 5) and <i>Rhinolophus hipposideros</i> (n = 10).</p