Intake of Meat Proteins Substantially Increased the Relative Abundance of Genus Lactobacillus in Rat Feces

PLoS One. 2016 Apr 4;11(4):e0152678. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152678. eCollection 2016.

Abstract

Diet has been shown to have a critical influence on gut bacteria and host health, and high levels of red meat in diet have been shown to increase colonic DNA damage and thus be harmful to gut health. However, previous studies focused more on the effects of meat than of meat proteins. In order to investigate whether intake of meat proteins affects the composition and metabolic activities of gut microbiota, feces were collected from growing rats that were fed with either meat proteins (from beef, pork or fish) or non-meat proteins (casein or soy) for 14 days. The resulting composition of gut microbiota was profiled by sequencing the V4-V5 region of the 16S ribosomal RNA genes and the short chain fatty acids (SCFAs) were analyzed using gas chromatography. The composition of gut microbiota and SCFA levels were significantly different between the five diet groups. At a recommended dose of 20% protein in the diet, meat protein-fed rats had a higher relative abundance of the beneficial genus Lactobacillus, but lower levels of SCFAs and SCFA-producing bacteria including Fusobacterium, Bacteroides and Prevotella, compared with the soy protein-fed group. Further work is needed on the regulatory pathways linking dietary protein intake to gut microbiota.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • Colon / microbiology*
  • Dietary Proteins / pharmacology*
  • Feces / microbiology*
  • Gastrointestinal Microbiome*
  • Lactobacillus* / classification
  • Lactobacillus* / isolation & purification
  • Male
  • Meat*
  • Rats
  • Rats, Sprague-Dawley

Substances

  • Dietary Proteins

Grants and funding

The work was supported by grant of 31471600 and 31530054 (National Natural Science Foundation of China; http://www.nsfc.gov.cn/), 20110097110024 and NCET-11-0668 (Ministry of Education of China; http://www.moe.edu.cn/). Authors GZ and CL received the funding. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.