Skip to main content
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses

New Research In

Physical Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Applied Physical Sciences
  • Astronomy
  • Computer Sciences
  • Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences
  • Engineering
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Mathematics
  • Statistics

Social Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Economic Sciences
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Political Sciences
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Social Sciences

Biological Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Anthropology
  • Applied Biological Sciences
  • Biochemistry
  • Biophysics and Computational Biology
  • Cell Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Evolution
  • Genetics
  • Immunology and Inflammation
  • Medical Sciences
  • Microbiology
  • Neuroscience
  • Pharmacology
  • Physiology
  • Plant Biology
  • Population Biology
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Sustainability Science
  • Systems Biology
Research Article

Patterned progression of bacterial populations in the premature infant gut

Patricio S. La Rosa, Barbara B. Warner, Yanjiao Zhou, George M. Weinstock, Erica Sodergren, Carla M. Hall-Moore, Harold J. Stevens, William E. Bennett Jr., Nurmohammad Shaikh, Laura A. Linneman, Julie A. Hoffmann, Aaron Hamvas, Elena Deych, Berkley A. Shands, William D. Shannon, and Phillip I. Tarr
PNAS August 26, 2014 111 (34) 12522-12527; first published August 11, 2014; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1409497111
Patricio S. La Rosa
Departments of aMedicine and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Barbara B. Warner
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yanjiao Zhou
cThe Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
George M. Weinstock
cThe Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Erica Sodergren
cThe Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carla M. Hall-Moore
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Harold J. Stevens
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William E. Bennett Jr.
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nurmohammad Shaikh
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laura A. Linneman
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julie A. Hoffmann
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aaron Hamvas
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elena Deych
Departments of aMedicine and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Berkley A. Shands
Departments of aMedicine and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William D. Shannon
Departments of aMedicine and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: tarr@wustl.edu wshannon@dom.wustl.edu
Phillip I. Tarr
bPediatrics and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: tarr@wustl.edu wshannon@dom.wustl.edu
  1. Edited by E. Peter Greenberg, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, and approved July 15, 2014 (received for review May 22, 2014)

This article has a Correction. Please see:

  • Correction for La Rosa et al., Patterned progression of bacterial populations in the premature infant gut - November 10, 2014
  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Significance

It is increasingly apparent that bacteria in the gut are important determinants of health and disease in humans. However, we know remarkably little about how this organ transitions from a sterile/near-sterile state at birth to one that soon harbors a highly diverse biomass. We show in premature infants a patterned progression of the gut bacterial community that is only minimally influenced by mode of delivery, antibiotics, or feeds. The pace of this progression is most strongly influenced by gestational age, with the microbial population assembling slowest for infants born most prematurely. These data raise the possibility that host biology, more than exogenous factors such as antibiotics, feeds, and route of delivery, drives bacterial populations in the premature newborn infant gut.

Abstract

In the weeks after birth, the gut acquires a nascent microbiome, and starts its transition to bacterial population equilibrium. This early-in-life microbial population quite likely influences later-in-life host biology. However, we know little about the governance of community development: does the gut serve as a passive incubator where the first organisms randomly encountered gain entry and predominate, or is there an orderly progression of members joining the community of bacteria? We used fine interval enumeration of microbes in stools from multiple subjects to answer this question. We demonstrate via 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing of 922 specimens from 58 subjects that the gut microbiota of premature infants residing in a tightly controlled microbial environment progresses through a choreographed succession of bacterial classes from Bacilli to Gammaproteobacteria to Clostridia, interrupted by abrupt population changes. As infants approach 33–36 wk postconceptional age (corresponding to the third to the twelfth weeks of life depending on gestational age at birth), the gut is well colonized by anaerobes. Antibiotics, vaginal vs. Caesarian birth, diet, and age of the infants when sampled influence the pace, but not the sequence, of progression. Our results suggest that in infants in a microbiologically constrained ecosphere of a neonatal intensive care unit, gut bacterial communities have an overall nonrandom assembly that is punctuated by microbial population abruptions. The possibility that the pace of this assembly depends more on host biology (chiefly gestational age at birth) than identifiable exogenous factors warrants further consideration.

  • mixed model regression analysis
  • necrotizing enterocolitis
  • nonmetric multidimensional scaling
  • prematurity

The vertebrate digestive system hosts a profound transition from a state of complete or near-sterility in utero to dense bacterial colonization within weeks of birth. This event has lasting effects on the host (1), influencing health and development (2⇓–4), infection resistance (5, 6), predisposition to inflammatory (7) and metabolic disorders (8), and immune function (9), but remarkably little is known about this process. Gut colonization has been partly characterized in term infants (10⇓–12) who reside in open venues, and who will, therefore, experience many exposures (e.g., contact with older children, adults, and pets, varying diets, oral antibiotics) that could drive microbial population assembly (1, 11⇓–13).

A delineation of the dynamics of the natural de novo assembly of this microbial community would form a basis for better understanding how the gut acquires its founding microbiome, and how the bacteria in the gut start their transition to population equilibrium (1, 14, 15). In view of the importance of bacterial gut colonization, we sought to determine if the initial assembly of host intestinal microbial populations follows discernible patterns, and if interventions such as antibiotics or nutrition alter this progression. A discernibly patterned progression would suggest that host biology influences bacterial community assembly more than do random encounters of individuals with microbes, whereas stochastic assembly would suggest that random encounters sculpt population structure. In this latter scenario, the gut serves as a passive culture chamber. Fine interval enumeration of gut contents from multiple subjects in as controlled an environment as possible is needed to answer this question.

Here, we demonstrate that the gut microbiota of premature infants residing in a tightly controlled environment of a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) progresses through a choreographed succession of bacterial classes from Bacilli to Gammaproteobacteria to Clostridia interrupted by abrupt population changes. The rate of assembly is slowest for the most premature of these infants.

Results

To characterize the bacterial in-population of the human gut, we collected all stools from an informative cohort of 58 premature infants weighing ≤1,500 g at birth who resided in the St. Louis Children’s Hospital NICU (Table 1) (16). This is an environment in which staff and protocols attempt to limit exposure to microbes to the extent possible. Infants leave the NICU only for brief therapeutic or diagnostic excursions. Staff and visitors (restricted to immediate family) are drilled in assiduous hygienic techniques, and enteral nutrition is limited to breast milk or sterilized formula. Registered nurses record each major event and handle all stools, and electronic records retain extensive clinical metadata. Antibiotic use, although common, consists overwhelmingly of beta-lactams, aminoglycosides, and vancomycin infused intravenously. Intraintestinal concentrations of such antimicrobials administered via this route are low (17), although it is possible that these agents affect gut microbes by altering host physiology independent of their antibacterial effects (18, 19).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Details of subject groups

We sequenced 922 specimens from these 58 infants, none of whom experienced serious prematurity-related intraabdominal pathology such as necrotizing enterocolitis (although seven subjects had one or more positive blood culture). On any one study day, there was a median of one enrolled subject [interquartile range (IQR) 0–3 subjects]. Sequencing generated a median (IQR) of 7,183 (5,243–9,314) reads per specimen, and 400–450 nucleotides per read. Bacilli (19.3%), Gammaproteobacteria (54.0%), and Clostridia (18.4%) represented 91.7% of all bacterial sequences (Dataset S1) and together account for >90% of the sequences generated in 85% of all specimens. Within these three classes, there are 34, 52, and 40 different genera, respectively. Only two infants produced stools where these three classes did not predominate. In these two subjects, each of whom had unremarkable clinical courses, stool bacteria were largely Bacteroidia (Fig. S1).

Within almost all specimens, one or two classes predominate (a single subject example is shown Fig. 1). There are frequent abrupt shifts in bacterial composition (Movie S1). The abrupt shifts are unpredictable in direction and magnitude: some are saltatory changes aligned with the progression from Bacilli to Gammaproteobacteria to Clostridia abundance, and others are random short-lived deviations from the directional progression pattern.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Bacterial taxa composition at class level as function of day of life of a single subject. These samples are from subject 32 who was born after 29 wk gestation. Each bar represents the bacterial proportions within single samples. From left to right, bars correspond to stools obtained on days of life 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 14, 16, 17, 19, 25, and 39, respectively. The predominant classes are Bacilli (dark blue), Gammaproteobacteria (red), and Clostridia (green). Eleven additional classes (light blue) were also present, mostly in stools obtained on days of life 3 and 4.

In multidimensional scaling plots related to day of life, Bacilli are found chiefly in the earliest samples (blue dots surrounding the arrowhead labeled “Bacilli” in Fig. S2A). Clostridia are in greatest abundance in stools from older infants (green dots near Clostridia arrowhead; Fig. S2A), but blue and red dots representing stools from younger children are also well represented in this region of the plot. However, infants in this cohort were born after a wide range of gestational duration (23–33 wk). Therefore, we were concerned that by using day of life as the independent variable, we obscured associations between bacterial content and day of sampling. For this reason, we reportrayed the data by categorizing specimens according to postconceptional age, which is the biologically relevant sum of gestational age at birth plus chronological age (also termed postmenstrual age; ref. 20). In this second portrayal (Fig. S2B), specimens retain their coordinates on the scaling plot reflecting bacterial content, but the dots in the vicinity of the Clostridia arrowhead are more monochromatic (i.e., green). These green symbols represent samples from infants who had attained postconceptional ages between 33 and 36 wk, even though their age since birth varied by up to 11 wk.

This observation prompted us to compare bacterial composition in alternate formats in Table 2. This portrayal demonstrates the trend inferred in Fig. 1 and Fig. S2; i.e., Bacilli are best represented in the earliest in life samples, and Clostridia are most abundant in samples obtained in the 33–36 wk postconceptional age interval. This table also demonstrates that depicting bacterial population distribution by age postconception differs from depicting these populations by day of life.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Distributions of sequences by class and intervals of sampling

The central tendencies of Bacilli to decrease, Clostridia to slowly increase, and Gammaproteobacteria to flourish soon after birth and remain abundant as infants age are shown with even greater clarity among infants in the three individual gestational age subcohorts (Fig. 2 and Dataset S1). The progression to Clostridial abundance is most gradual for children born most prematurely, but Clostridia are well represented by the time infants are between 33 and 36 wk postconceptional age, independent of gestational age at birth.

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Percent bacterial class abundance. Proportion of each bacterial class is represented in y axes in each graph. The x axes represent samples obtained at various postconceptional ages (weeks). The columns represent class proportions, as indicated. (A–C) All infants in cohort (n = 58 subjects). (D–F) Infants in <26 wk gestational age subcohort (n = 15 subjects). (G–I) Infants in 26–28 wk gestational age subcohort (n = 20 subjects). (J–L) Infants in >28 wk gestational age subcohort (n = 23 subjects). To reduce the effect of random fluctuations in the data (noise), the lines were produced by fitting a cubic smooth spline (thick black line) to the data with 95% confidence bands (thinner lines) generated using a nonparametric bootstrap method.

Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways putatively encoded by the gut microbial populations do not differ significantly between the three subcohorts when comparing the first or the last stools. In contrast, 23 of the 328 KEGG pathways differed in abundance within subcohorts, when comparing the first and the last specimen’s sequences (q values ≤ 0.1) (Table S1). Several intracohort shifts in these pathways are potentially relevant to the newborn digestive system. There is decreasing capacity to degrade bisphenols in all three subcohorts, and to synthesize carotenoids in two subcohorts, and increasing capacity to synthesize lipopolysaccharide, isoquinoline alkaloids, and N glycans in the subcohort born most prematurely.

In each gestational age subcohort, day of life is significantly associated with decreasing proportions of Bacilli and increasing proportions of Clostridia (Table 3), abrupt shifts in population structure notwithstanding. The slope (beta coefficients) of the progression to a state of Clostridial abundance accelerates as gestational age increases (0.007 → 0.009 → 0.010), as suggested in Fig. 2. There were no other consistently significant changes across subcohorts: Antibiotic use was associated with increased proportions of Gammaproteobacteria, but only for infants born after gestational intervals ≥26 wk, and decreased percentages of Clostridia in stools, but only for infants born after ≤28 wk gestation. Breast feeds were associated with increasing proportions of Gammaproteobacteria but not for infants born after 28 wk gestation. However, importantly, these potential exogenous drivers of gut microbial content did not fundamentally alter the trend in population evolution, only its pace. Also, housing of subjects in single vs. open rooms distributed throughout the 75-bed, 4,580 m2 NICU did not affect microbial composition.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Relationship of clinical factors to predominant taxa (class level)

Discussion

Our findings have three major elements. First, convergence of infant gut bacterial populations to Clostridial abundance is a nonrandom process, but not strongly correlated with mode of birth, antibiotics used, or feeds administered. Second, the overall bacterial composition is largely limited to three classes, and their distribution contrasts markedly with gut bacterial composition in older children and adults. Specifically, Bacilli, Gammaproteobacteria, and Clostridia represent 1–5%, <1%, and 45–80%, of all classes, respectively (21, 22), in later life compared with the corresponding proportions (19.3%, 54.0%, and 18.5%, respectively) in study infants. Third, maturation of the gut bacterial population structure is punctuated by abrupt shifts in microbial composition.

Our data prompt many avenues of future inquiry. First, it is important to determine where gut bacteria originate. Possibilities include an autochthonous source, especially if the fetus is colonized in utero (23) by viable progenitors of the organisms whose sequences we identified, and/or exogenous origins including nonpasteurized maternal breast milk, family or staff handlers, or fomites (24). Indeed, we recently demonstrated the simultaneous presence of specific pathogens in the stools of premature infants in proximity to each other, so patient-to-patient transmission is certainly a component (16).

It will also be important to compare data from our cohort to community infants born at term. Based on some community data, it appears that Gammaproteobacteria are found in greater proportions in the stools of these premature infants than in the stools of term infants (11, 25, 26), although one study of infants residing at home has reported a relative abundance of this taxon similar to the proportions we identified (12). Certainly, premature infants differ from term infants in kinds of exposures; whereas the NICU controls exposures to microbes to the extent possible, in the community the microbial environment is much less constrained. However, such fine interval and intense sampling of children in the community early in life, which might provide such information, has not yet been performed.

It is not known what drives this patterned progression of bacterial communities. The developing host immune system might shape the bacterial populations (27), or, alternatively, one pioneer group of bacteria (11) might metabolically prime the environment for replacement by a particular successor. Gut bacterial content is associated with term infant B-cell memory differentiation (25), and it will be informative to dissect the roles of, and interaction between, hosts and microbes, as the immune system and the gut bacterial community equilibrate in the first weeks of life.

Studies of gut bacteria in preterm infants have been limited in subject and/or sample numbers (24, 28, 29), have used cross-sectional comparisons (30), or did not stratify extensively by gestational age at birth or age postconception (30⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–36). Our intensive and extensive dataset suggests that limited sampling in premature neonates is problematic because of very frequent alterations in population structure. These abruptions also occur in adult and older infant gut microbial populations, although with lower frequencies (12, 37⇓⇓–40). Also, our data suggest that neonatal bacterial populations are more appropriately related to age postconception than to day of life.

Current data do not permit a predictive model of microbial gut colonization based on specific variables, but models proposed in future studies must account for dynamism in microbial populations, which obligates serial sampling of as many specimens as possible in future efforts to relate the premature infant intestinal biomass to various host diseases and phenotypes (41). These properties also provide an argument for very intensive and extensive sampling of control populations in this age group, and for the incorporation of computational analyses that address community changes over time (42) in dynamic microbial populations (43).

In summary, genera belonging to only three classes represent the preponderance of gut bacteria in almost all infants who spend their earliest weeks of life in a microbiologically controlled environment. Despite frequent abruptions in the relative ratios of these classes, Clostridia proportions begin to resemble those of older individuals (21, 22) by 33–36 wk postconceptional age, even if complete stability is not achieved until several years of age (1). Shifts in KEGG pathways represented by the shifting microbiota suggest ontological aspects of the maturing gut bacterial population as premature infants grow. When attempting to relate bacterial populations to outcomes or events in premature infants, trajectories of bacterial populations, rather than specific content on specific days, might be the most appropriate independent variables to enter into analysis.

Materials and Methods

This prospective observational case-cohort study was approved by the Human Research Protection Office of Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Infants were enrolled after parents provided informed consent. All premature infants admitted to the St. Louis Children’s Hospital Neonatal Intensive Care Unit who weighed ≤1,500 g at birth and were expected to live beyond the first week of life were eligible. Clinical data were collected and managed using the REDCap electronic data capture tools at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis (44). All infant stools were collected, stored briefly (4 °C), and frozen (−80 °C) until analyzed.

The V3-5 region of the 16S rRNA gene was sequenced on the Roche-454 platform to define the composition of the bacterial community. Sample preparation, DNA isolation, sequencing, data processing followed standardized protocols developed by the Human Microbiome Project consortium (39). The minimal sequence length was 200 bp, and chimeric sequences were removed by Chimera-Slayer (45). Average quality of scores of <35 were used as the minimum to remove low-quality reads. Sequences meeting the above criteria were further classified by the Ribosomal Database Project (RDP) Naive Bayesian Classifier version 2.5 using training set 9 (46) from phylum to genus level. Phylogenetic investigation of communities by reconstruction of unobserved states was used to characterize the metabolic capacities of the microbial communities (47).

To portray specimen composition as a function of day of life and of age postconception, we performed nonmetric multidimensional scaling (Figs. S3 and S4). To attempt to associate host variables with bacterial population content, we performed a post hoc mixed-model regression analysis based on patterns discovered visually using nonmetric multidimensional analysis. The mixed model was used to adjust for repeated measures in individual subjects. All analyses used SAS (version 9.3) and R (version 3.0.1).

Detailed materials and methods are supplied in Supporting Information.

Acknowledgments

We thank families and clinical staff in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit for their cooperation with our study; Kathie Mihindukulasuriya, Brandi Herter, Catherine Hoffmann, Brittany Kurowski, Alisa Moyer, I. Malick Ndao, Robert Cristel, and The Genome Institute production team for technical assistance; Joanne Nelson and Ally McClure for data deposition; Ariana Jasarevic and Maida Redzic for manuscript preparation; and Alexander Mellmann and Thad Stappenbeck for critical comments on our manuscript. This work was supported by the US National Institutes of Health Grants UH3AI083265, U54HG004968, and P30DK052574 (Biobank Core), along with funding from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (made possible by support from the Gerber Foundation), and a Melvin E. Carnahan Professorship (P.I.T.).

Footnotes

  • ↵1P.S.L.R. and B.B.W. contributed equally to this work.

  • ↵2Present address: Technology Pipeline Solutions, Monsanto Company, MO 63117.

  • ↵3Present address: Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110.

  • ↵4Present address: The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT 06030.

  • ↵5Present address: Boulder Brands, Denver, CO 80238.

  • ↵6Present address: Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202.

  • ↵7Present address: Department of Pediatrics, Lurie Children’s Hospital, Chicago, IL 60611.

  • ↵8To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: tarr{at}wustl.edu or wshannon{at}dom.wustl.edu.
  • Author contributions: B.B.W., G.M.W., E.S., W.D.S., and P.I.T. designed research; C.M.H.-M., H.J.S., W.E.B., N.S., L.A.L., J.A.H., and A.H. performed research; P.S.L.R., B.B.W., Y.Z., E.D., B.A.S., W.D.S., and P.I.T. analyzed data; P.S.L.R., B.B.W., Y.Z., H.J.S., W.E.B., and N.S. contributed new reagents/analytic tools; and P.S.L.R., B.B.W., Y.Z., W.D.S., and P.I.T. wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no conflict of interest.

  • This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.

  • Data deposition: The data reported in this paper have been deposited in the NCBI dbGap and BioProject, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (accession nos. phs000247 and PRJNA74943, respectively).

  • This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1409497111/-/DCSupplemental.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Yatsunenko T,
    2. et al.
    (2012) Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography. Nature 486(7402):222–227.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Bäckhed F
    (2012) Host responses to the human microbiome. Nutr Rev 70(Suppl 1):S14–S17.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. ↵
    1. Turnbaugh PJ,
    2. et al.
    (2009) A core gut microbiome in obese and lean twins. Nature 457(7228):480–484.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. White RA,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Novel developmental analyses identify longitudinal patterns of early gut microbiota that affect infant growth. PLOS Comput Biol 9(5):e1003042.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Gill N,
    2. et al.
    (2012) Neutrophil elastase alters the murine gut microbiota resulting in enhanced Salmonella colonization. PLoS ONE 7(11):e49646.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Britton RA,
    2. Young VB
    (2012) Interaction between the intestinal microbiota and host in Clostridium difficile colonization resistance. Trends Microbiol 20(7):313–319.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Frank DN,
    2. et al.
    (2011) Disease phenotype and genotype are associated with shifts in intestinal-associated microbiota in inflammatory bowel diseases. Inflamm Bowel Dis 17(1):179–184.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Nieuwdorp M,
    2. Gilijamse PW,
    3. Pai N,
    4. Kaplan LM
    (2014) Role of the microbiome in energy regulation and metabolism. Gastroenterology 146(6):1525–1533.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Olszak T,
    2. et al.
    (2012) Microbial exposure during early life has persistent effects on natural killer T cell function. Science 336(6080):489–493.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Koenig JE,
    2. et al.
    (2011) Succession of microbial consortia in the developing infant gut microbiome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(Suppl 1):4578–4585.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Jost T,
    2. Lacroix C,
    3. Braegger CP,
    4. Chassard C
    (2012) New insights in gut microbiota establishment in healthy breast fed neonates. PLoS ONE 7(8):e44595.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Palmer C,
    2. Bik EM,
    3. DiGiulio DB,
    4. Relman DA,
    5. Brown PO
    (2007) Development of the human infant intestinal microbiota. PLoS Biol 5(7):e177.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Song SJ,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Cohabiting family members share microbiota with one another and with their dogs. eLife 2:e00458.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Faith JJ,
    2. et al.
    (2013) The long-term stability of the human gut microbiota. Science 341(6141):1237439.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Zhou Y,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Biogeography of the ecosystems of the healthy human body. Genome Biol 14(1):R1.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Carl MA,
    2. et al.
    (2014) Sepsis from the gut: The enteric habitat of bacteria that cause late-onset neonatal bloodstream infections. Clin Infect Dis 58(9):1211–1218.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Sullivan A,
    2. Edlund C,
    3. Nord CE
    (2001) Effect of antimicrobial agents on the ecological balance of human microflora. Lancet Infect Dis 1(2):101–114.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Al-Banna NA,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Acute administration of antibiotics modulates intestinal capillary perfusion and leukocyte adherence during experimental sepsis. Int J Antimicrob Agents 41(6):536–543.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Richter J,
    2. et al.
    (2010) Vancomycin and to lesser extent tobramycin have vasomodulatory effects in experimental endotoxemia in the rat. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 46(1):37–49.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Engle WA,
    2. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Fetus and Newborn
    (2004) Age terminology during the perinatal period. Pediatrics 114(5):1362–1364.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. Zhang H,
    2. et al.
    (2009) Human gut microbiota in obesity and after gastric bypass. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(7):2365–2370.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Saulnier DM,
    2. et al.
    (2011) Gastrointestinal microbiome signatures of pediatric patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 141(5):1782–1791.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Aagaard K,
    2. et al.
    (2014) The placenta harbors a unique microbiome. Sci Transl Med 6(237):237ra265.
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. Brooks B,
    2. et al.
    (2014) Microbes in the neonatal intensive care unit resemble those found in the gut of premature infants. Microbiome 2(1):1.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Lundell AC,
    2. et al.
    (2012) Infant B cell memory differentiation and early gut bacterial colonization. J Immunol 188(9):4315–4322.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. ↵
    1. Azad MB,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Gut microbiota of healthy Canadian infants: Profiles by mode of delivery and infant diet at 4 months. Can Med Assoc J 185(5):385–394.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    1. Stockinger S,
    2. Hornef MW,
    3. Chassin C
    (2011) Establishment of intestinal homeostasis during the neonatal period. Cell Mol Life Sci 68(22):3699–3712.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Mai V,
    2. et al.
    (2011) Fecal microbiota in premature infants prior to necrotizing enterocolitis. PLoS ONE 6(6):e20647.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Morrow AL,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Early microbial and metabolomic signatures predict later onset of necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm infants. Microbiome 1(1):13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. LaTuga MS,
    2. et al.
    (2011) Beyond bacteria: A study of the enteric microbial consortium in extremely low birth weight infants. PLoS ONE 6(12):e27858.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Chang JY,
    2. Shin SM,
    3. Chun J,
    4. Lee JH,
    5. Seo JK
    (2011) Pyrosequencing-based molecular monitoring of the intestinal bacterial colonization in preterm infants. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 53(5):512–519.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Morowitz MJ,
    2. et al.
    (2011) Strain-resolved community genomic analysis of gut microbial colonization in a premature infant. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(3):1128–1133.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. ↵
    1. Jacquot A,
    2. et al.
    (2011) Dynamics and clinical evolution of bacterial gut microflora in extremely premature patients. J Pediatr 158(3):390–396.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Claud EC,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Bacterial community structure and functional contributions to emergence of health or necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm infants. Microbiome 1(1):20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Sharon I,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Time series community genomics analysis reveals rapid shifts in bacterial species, strains, and phage during infant gut colonization. Genome Res 23(1):111–120.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. ↵
    1. Stewart CJ,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Development of the preterm gut microbiome in twins at risk of necrotising enterocolitis and sepsis. PLoS ONE 8(8):e73465.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Costello EK,
    2. et al.
    (2009) Bacterial community variation in human body habitats across space and time. Science 326(5960):1694–1697.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    1. Zoetendal EG,
    2. Akkermans AD,
    3. De Vos WM
    (1998) Temperature gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of 16S rRNA from human fecal samples reveals stable and host-specific communities of active bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 64(10):3854–3859.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. ↵
    1. Human Microbiome Project Consortium
    (2012) Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome. Nature 486(7402):207–214.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Caporaso JG,
    2. et al.
    (2011) Moving pictures of the human microbiome. Genome Biol 12(5):R50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Murgas Torrazza R,
    2. Neu J
    (2011) The developing intestinal microbiome and its relationship to health and disease in the neonate. J Perinatol 31(Suppl 1):S29–34.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Stein RR,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Ecological modeling from time-series inference: Insight into dynamics and stability of intestinal microbiota. PLOS Comput Biol 9(12):e1003388.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. ↵
    1. Marino S,
    2. Baxter NT,
    3. Huffnagle GB,
    4. Petrosino JF,
    5. Schloss PD
    (2014) Mathematical modeling of primary succession of murine intestinal microbiota. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111(1):439–444.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. ↵
    1. Harris PA,
    2. et al.
    (2009) Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 42(2):377–381.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Haas BJ,
    2. et al.,
    3. Human Microbiome Consortium
    (2011) Chimeric 16S rRNA sequence formation and detection in Sanger and 454-pyrosequenced PCR amplicons. Genome Res 21(3):494–504.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. ↵
    1. Cole JR,
    2. et al.
    (2009) The Ribosomal Database Project: Improved alignments and new tools for rRNA analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 37(Database issue):D141–D145.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. ↵
    1. Langille MG,
    2. et al.
    (2013) Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences. Nat Biotechnol 31(9):814–821.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Patterned progression of bacterial populations in the premature infant gut
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Human neonatal microbiome
Patricio S. La Rosa, Barbara B. Warner, Yanjiao Zhou, George M. Weinstock, Erica Sodergren, Carla M. Hall-Moore, Harold J. Stevens, William E. Bennett, Nurmohammad Shaikh, Laura A. Linneman, Julie A. Hoffmann, Aaron Hamvas, Elena Deych, Berkley A. Shands, William D. Shannon, Phillip I. Tarr
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Aug 2014, 111 (34) 12522-12527; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1409497111

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Human neonatal microbiome
Patricio S. La Rosa, Barbara B. Warner, Yanjiao Zhou, George M. Weinstock, Erica Sodergren, Carla M. Hall-Moore, Harold J. Stevens, William E. Bennett, Nurmohammad Shaikh, Laura A. Linneman, Julie A. Hoffmann, Aaron Hamvas, Elena Deych, Berkley A. Shands, William D. Shannon, Phillip I. Tarr
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Aug 2014, 111 (34) 12522-12527; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1409497111
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 111 (34)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Article Classifications

  • Biological Sciences
  • Microbiology

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Materials and Methods
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Surgeons hands during surgery
Inner Workings: Advances in infectious disease treatment promise to expand the pool of donor organs
Despite myriad challenges, clinicians see room for progress.
Image credit: Shutterstock/David Tadevosian.
Setting sun over a sun-baked dirt landscape
Core Concept: Popular integrated assessment climate policy models have key caveats
Better explicating the strengths and shortcomings of these models will help refine projections and improve transparency in the years ahead.
Image credit: Witsawat.S.
Double helix
Journal Club: Noncoding DNA shown to underlie function, cause limb malformations
Using CRISPR, researchers showed that a region some used to label “junk DNA” has a major role in a rare genetic disorder.
Image credit: Nathan Devery.
Steamboat Geyser eruption.
Eruption of Steamboat Geyser
Mara Reed and Michael Manga explore why Yellowstone's Steamboat Geyser resumed erupting in 2018.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Birds nestling on tree branches
Parent–offspring conflict in songbird fledging
Some songbird parents might improve their own fitness by manipulating their offspring into leaving the nest early, at the cost of fledgling survival, a study finds.
Image credit: Gil Eckrich (photographer).

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490