Table 1.
Administrated bacterial strains and bacteriocins.
Fig 1.
Average weights of mice in the same treatment cage over time.
‘(+)’ represents bacteriocin producer cage while ‘(-)’ represents bacteriocin non-producer cage. Significance degree is represented with stars; p<0.05 with one star (*); p <0.01 with two stars (**); p <0.001 with three stars (***).
Fig 2.
Bacteriocin-producing LAB in the fecal samples of mice at the end of the treatment period.
Representative plates from bacteriocin activity assay were shown for each treatment. ‘(+)’ represents bacteriocin producer treatment, while ‘(-)’ represents isogenic non-producer treatment. The clear zones around the colonies indicate bacteriocin production. The indicator strains used in the assay are: E. faecium P21 (LMG 2783) for SakA and PedPA-1, P. damnosus (LMG 3397) for enterocins, L. plantarum 965 (LMG 2003) for plantaricins, and L. lactis IL1403 (LMG2705) for GarML treatments.
Fig 3.
Comparison of bacteria composition of treatments.
Principle coordinate analysis (PCoA) plot was generated based on the calculated distances in an unweighted UniFrac matrix. Samples were grouped by color in terms of treatment group they belong to (see legend). (For statistics see S4 Table).
Fig 4.
Relative abundances of bacterial phyla in every sample.
Different colored bars represent different phyla with size showing relative abundance of this phylum. Labels contain name of treatments and time with day numbers: 0 (day 0), 7 (day 7), 14 (day 14), 21 (day 21) and 28 (day 28).
Fig 5.
Changes in relative abundance of LAB and bacteriocin-targeted bacterial groups at genus level during treatment and post-treatment periods.
Changes in relative abundances of genera in treatments, obtained with respect to time 0, were compared to that in CON. Significance degree is represented as following: P < 0.1 with dot (.); P < 0.05 with one star (*); P < 0.01 with two stars (**).
Table 2.
Significant modifications of the relative abundance of LAB and bacteriocin-targeted bacterial groups in response to the treatments.
Fig 6.
Significant serum level modifications by Garvicin ML.
The pairwise comparisons between bacteriocin positive and negative treatments were performed using Student’s t-test. The boxplot shows the significant comparison with P < 0.05. GarML: Garvicin ML, (+): bacteriocin producing strain, (-): bacteriocin non-producing isogenic strain treatments.
Fig 7.
Correlation network of relative abundances of OTUs at day 14 and serum levels.
The correlations were calculated using Pearson’s correlation in CoNet and the significant ones (P < 0.05) were shown on the network. All serum values are shown by one color (grey) while OTUs belonging to different families are represented by different colors (see legend). Positive correlations are displayed with green edges and negative correlations with red edges. OTUs on the nodes were represented with OTU numbers or genus names they belong to and serum values were labelled as Trig: triglycerides, HDL: high-density lipoprotein, Chol: total cholesterol and LDL: low-density lipoprotein.