Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Comparison of demographic features between the deteriorated and stable groups.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Prediction of worsening of UPDRS scores using gut microbiota at year 0.

(A) Geometric plot of the counts of Bifidobacterium at year 0 in the deteriorated and stable groups. P-value was corrected by the Benjamini and Hochberg method to calculate the false discovery rate (FDR) (q-value). (B) A stepwise linear regression analysis for predicting a change of UPDRS scores in 2 years using the counts of 10 bacterial groups/genera/species at year 0 yielded the plotted prediction model, which is comprised of the counts of Bifidobacterium (standardized β = -0.45, p < 0.05) and Atopobium cluster (standardized β = 0.50, p < 0.01). (C, D) Correlation between a change of UPDRS I scores in 2 years and the count of Bifidobacterium at year 0 (C) and the count of B. fragilis group at year 0 (D). (E) Correlation between a change of thought disorder scores (Item 2 in UPDRS I) in 2 years and the count of Bifidobacterium at year 0. (F) Correlation between a change of motivation/initiative scores (Item 4 in UPDRS I) in 2 years and the count of B. fragilis group at year 0. (G, H) Correlation between a change of LBP concentrations in 2 years and the count of L. brevis at year 0 (G) and the count of L. plantarum at year 0 (H). (B, C, D, E, and F) Pearson’s correlation coefficients (r) are indicated with respective p-values.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 2.

Difference of bacterial counts between years 0 and 2.

More »

Table 2 Expand