Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

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

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Gut microbiota features associated with Clostridioides difficile colonization in dairy calves

  • Laurel E. Redding ,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    lredding@vet.upenn.edu

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Studies-New Bolton Center, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, PA, United States of America

  • Alexander S. Berry,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliations Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America, Department of Pathobiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America

  • Nagaraju Indugu,

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Visualization

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Studies-New Bolton Center, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, PA, United States of America

  • Elizabeth Huang,

    Roles Investigation

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Studies-New Bolton Center, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, PA, United States of America

  • Daniel P. Beiting,

    Roles Conceptualization, Project administration

    Affiliation Department of Pathobiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America

  • Dipti Pitta

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Studies-New Bolton Center, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, PA, United States of America

Gut microbiota features associated with Clostridioides difficile colonization in dairy calves

  • Laurel E. Redding, 
  • Alexander S. Berry, 
  • Nagaraju Indugu, 
  • Elizabeth Huang, 
  • Daniel P. Beiting, 
  • Dipti Pitta
PLOS
x

Abstract

Diarrheal disease, a major cause of morbidity and mortality in dairy calves, is strongly associated with the health and composition of the gut microbiota. Clostridioides difficile is an opportunistic pathogen that proliferates and can produce enterotoxins when the host experiences gut dysbiosis. However, even asymptomatic colonization with C. difficile can be associated with differing degrees of microbiota disruption in a range of species, including people, swine, and dogs. Little is known about the interaction between C. difficile and the gut microbiota in dairy calves. In this study, we sought to define microbial features associated with C. difficile colonization in pre-weaned dairy calves less than 2 weeks of age. We characterized the fecal microbiota of 80 calves from 23 different farms using 16S rRNA sequencing and compared the microbiota of C. difficile-positive (n = 24) and C. difficile-negative calves (n = 56). Farm appeared to be the greatest source of variability in the gut microbiota. When controlling for calf age, diet, and farm location, there was no significant difference in Shannon alpha diversity (P = 0.50) or in weighted UniFrac beta diversity (P = 0.19) between C. difficile-positive and–negative calves. However, there was a significant difference in beta diversity as assessed using Bray-Curtiss diversity (P = 0.0077), and C. difficile-positive calves had significantly increased levels of Ruminococcus (gnavus group) (Adj. P = 0.052), Lachnoclostridium (Adj. P = 0.060), Butyricicoccus (Adj. P = 0.060), and Clostridium sensu stricto 2 compared to C. difficile-negative calves. Additionally, C. difficile-positive calves had fewer microbial co-occurrences than C. difficile–negative calves, indicating reduced bacterial synergies. Thus, while C. difficile colonization alone is not associated with dysbiosis and is therefore unlikely to result in an increased likelihood of diarrhea in dairy calves, it may be associated with a more disrupted microbiota.

Introduction

Infectious diarrheal disease is one of the main causes of mortality in dairy calves [1,2], and calves less than 30 days of age are at highest risk of developing diarrhea [3,4]. Studies have shown that gut microbial composition is associated with gut health and the likelihood of diarrhea: reductions in microbial diversity are associated with an increased incidence of diarrhea [5], and the colonization of the calf gut with beneficial bacteria along with the decreased colonization of potential pathogens decreases the likelihood of calf diarrhea [6].

Clostridioides difficile is a spore-forming anaerobic, Gram-positive bacillus that is a significant enteric pathogen in many species of animals. Colonization with C. difficile has been shown to be associated with reduced gut microbial diversity and increased colonization of pathogenic bacteria in people [7,8], and we recently demonstrated a similar association in puppies [9]. Dairy calves, like the neonates of other species, are colonized with C. difficile at high rates, with reported prevalences ranging from 28–56% [10,11]. While there is some evidence that infection with C. difficile can result in diarrhea in calves [12], the effect of the asymptomatic colonization of calves on the gut microbiota is unknown. Given the crucial role of the gut microbiota in providing colonization resistance against pathogens that cause diarrhea [13,14], a better understanding of the effect of pathogens such as C. difficile on the calf gut microbiota is needed. The goal of this cross-sectional study was thus to define the gut microbiota features associated with C. difficile colonization in dairy calves and to define the effects of calf age, diet, and farm on the risk of colonization.

Methods

Sample collection

Fecal samples were manually collected from up to five randomly selected healthy calves less than three weeks of age from each of 23 dairy farms in Pennsylvania, Maryland and Delaware. Healthy calves were defined as non-diarrheic animals that were bright and alert and not characterized as sick by the farmer. Briefly, gentle rectal palpation was performed to stimulate defecation in each calf, and approximately 10 g of fecal material was captured directly from the rectum into a testing tube. Fecal material was transported to the lab within 1 hour of the collection time and stored at -80˚C. Samples were thawed once for batch processing. The number of calves sampled was chosen to detect a minimum prevalence of C. difficile of 10% based on prevalences reported in the literature [12,15]. This study was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of Pennsylvania (Protocol 806386).

Detection of C. difficile

Individual fecal samples were tested for C. difficile using the Xpert C. difficile assay (Xpert CD assay; Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. This assay detects the cytotoxin gene (tcdB) and binary toxin genes (cdtA and cdtB). Additionally, the assay has a callout for ribotype NAP1/B1/027. While this assay has not been validated for use in bovine feces, the sensitivity and specificity of this assay in human stools are 93.5% (95% CI: 90.3–95.9%) and 94.0% (95% CI: 92.9–95.0%), respectively, according to the manufacturer, and 84.2% and 87.7%, respectively, in canine feces [16].

To rule out the possibility of colonization with non-toxigenic C. difficile, pooled fecal samples from each farm were also submitted for anaerobic culture as previously described [9,17]. Briefly, 0.5 g of formed fecal sample was mixed with 0.5 ml of 100% ethanol for 60 minutes at room temperature before being inoculated on Cycloserine-cefoxitin fructose modified agar (CCFA) (Remel™) or Clostridium difficile Selective Agar (BBL™) and Columbia CNA agar (Thermo Fisher Scientific Remel Products). Inoculated plates and broth were incubated in BD Gas-Pak™ EZ container systems with BD BBL™ CO2 generators and BD BBL™ Gas Pak™ anaerobic CO2 indicators (Franklin Lakes, NJ) at 36˚C ± 2˚C under anaerobic growth conditions for seven days and checked for growth every other day. Suspect colonies were identified and isolated. Isolates were confirmed to be C. difficile by Maldi-TOF identification and/or RapID ANA II System (Thermo Fisher Scientific Remel Products).

16S rRNA sequencing

DNA was extracted from fecal samples using Qiagen PowerSoil DNA extraction kit. 16S rRNA sequencing was performed as described previously [9,18]. Briefly, the V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene was amplified using PCR, which was performed using Accuprime Pfx Supermix and custom primers for 2 minutes at 95˚C, 30 cycles of: 20 seconds at 95˚C, 15 seconds at 55˚C, 5 minutes at 72˚C; and 10 minutes at 72˚C [18]. PicoGreen quantification was used to normalize post-PCR products and AMPureXP beads were used to clean the combined pools. Libraries were quantified and sized using a Qubit 2.0 and Tapestation 4200, respectively. 250bp paired-end sequencing was performed using an Illumina MiSeq. Sequence data are publically available (SRA accession number: PRJNA644943). Positive and negative controls were confirmed after sequencing.

Sequence data processing using QIIME2

The QIIME2 pipeline [19] was used to process and analyze 16S sequencing data. Samples were demultiplexed using q2-demux and denoised using Dada2 [20]. Sequences were aligned using maaft [21] and phylogenetic trees were reconstructed using fasttree [22]. Shannon alpha diversity, weighted UniFrac and Bray-Curtis beta diversity metrics were estimated using q2-core-metrics-diversity after samples were rarefied to 1941 reads per sample, and p-values were adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing using Benjamini-Hochberg (B-H) false discovery rate (FDR) corrections [23]. Taxonomy was assigned to sequences using q2-feature-classifier classify-sklearn [24] against the Silva reference database [25]. Taxa were collapsed to the genus level, when possible. OTUs with less than 1% average relative abundance across all samples were removed.

Correlation analysis and differential feature selection

The association between C. difficile colonization and calf age and feeding type was assessed by univariable logistic regression to rule out the possibility of confounding by these variables. The association between C. difficile culture status and microbial alpha diversity of the gut was then determined using a linear mixed effects model as implemented in the lme4 package [26] in R where age was controlled for as a fixed effect and with farm and diet as random effects. The correlation between C. difficile culture status on gut microbiota beta diversity was determined using PERMANOVA as implemented in the vegan package [27] in R controlling for age, farm, and diet. Principal coordinate analyses were performed using the phyloseq package in R [28]. Differentially-abundant taxa were determined using LDA Effect Size (LEfSe) [29] and Analysis of Composition of microbiomes (ANCOM), and p-values were adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing using B-H FDR corrections in R. The Dice index [30] was used to determine the co-occurrence of bacterial genera. Boxplots and LEfSe plots were visualized using ggplot2 [31] and ggthemes.

Results

Subject characteristics and C. difficile status

Fecal samples were collected from a total of 92 Holstein calves from 23 farms. All calves appeared systemically healthy at the time of sampling and none had received antimicrobial therapy. The mean (SD) age of the calves was 7.0 (5.0) days. Thirty-six (35.6%) calves were fed waste milk, while the remaining calves were fed either colostrum or whole milk.

C. difficile was detected by qPCR in 28 calves (30.4%, 95% CI 21.2–40.9%) (Fig 1). Of the 28 samples that were positive for C. difficile on qPCR, 1 (3.6%) was positive for Toxin B only, 14 (50%) were positive for binary toxin only, and 13 (46.4%) were positive for both Toxin B and the binary toxin. None of the organisms were identified as the NAP1/B1/027 ribotype. On 14 farms, there were both C. difficile-positive and C. difficile-negative calves, whereas on the remaining farms, all of the calves were C. difficile-negative. There were no farms where all samples were qPCR-negative and the pooled sample from the farm was culture-positive. Neither calf age nor feeding of waste milk were significantly associated with the likelihood of detecting C. difficile among the calves (OR = 1.01, p = 0.805 and OR = 0.71, p = 0.493, respectively) (Fig 1).

thumbnail
Fig 1. Distribution of age and C. difficile colonization status in 92 pre-weaned Holstein dairy calves.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251999.g001

Effect of C. difficile status on microbiota diversity

Sufficient fecal material was available for sequencing from 87 of the 92 calves. Microbiota community structure of the 87 calf fecal samples was assessed by sequencing and analyzing the V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene. Of the 87 that were sequenced, three were dropped from subsequent analyses because of low coverage and four were excluded because there was insufficient sample for qPCR analysis. Among the 80 remaining samples, 24 were positive for C. difficile by qPCR and 56 were negative.

The association between C. difficile status and Shannon alpha diversity was not significant (P = 0.50) when controlling for age, diet, and farm location (Fig 2). PERMANOVA was then used to test associations between C. difficile infection status and beta diversity of the gut microbiota. Farm location rather than C. difficile status explained most of the variation in gut microbiota composition across samples using both Bray-Curtis (P = 1e-4; R2 = 0.43) and weighted UniFrac (P = 1e-4; R2 = 0.46) beta diversity metrics (Fig 3A and 3B). Age and diet were not significantly associated with gut microbiota composition after controlling for farm (P>0.1). After controlling for farm, age, and diet, C. difficile status was significantly associated with Bray-Curtis beta diversity (P = 0.0077; R2 = 0.023), explaining 2.3% of the variation in gut microbiota composition. C. difficile status was not significantly associated with weighted UniFrac beta diversity (P = 0.1934; R2 = 0.013) after controlling for farm, age, and diet. Some clustering by farm and by C. difficile status within farms was apparent on principal coordinate analysis (Figs 4 and S1).

thumbnail
Fig 2. Alpha diversity of the gut microbiome in 806 pre-weaned Holstein dairy calves by C. difficile colonization status.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251999.g002

thumbnail
Fig 3. Beta diversity of the gut microbiome in 80 pre-weaned Holstein dairy calves by C. difficile colonization status.

A. Bray-Curtis beta diversity. B. Weighted UniFrac.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251999.g003

thumbnail
Fig 4. Bray-Curtis principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of fecal samples from 80 pre-weaned dairy calves by C. difficile colonization status and by farm.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251999.g004

Bacterial community composition

We next sought to determine the specific bacterial taxa associated with C. difficile colonization. At the phylum level, there were no significant differences between bacterial communities in C. difficile-positive and -negative samples (Fig 5). The Firmicutes phylum predominated (57.1% in C. difficile-positive samples and 51.4% in C. difficile-negative samples), followed by Proteobacteria (17.1% and 24.3%), Bacteroides (16.7% and 11.5%), and Actinobacteria (8.1% and 9.7%).

thumbnail
Fig 5. Distribution of bacterial phyla by C. difficile status in fecal samples from 80 pre-weaned dairy calves.

The nine most abundant phyla are displayed.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251999.g005

At the genus level, the only significant difference between C. difficile-positive and–negative samples by ANCOM occurred for Clostridioides. When considering LEFse analysis, there were four taxa among the 19 taxa with average relative abundance greater than 1% that were statistically significantly (Adj. P<0.1) associated with C. difficile status. Ruminococcus (gnavus group) (Adj. P = 0.052), Lachnoclostridium (Adj. P = 0.060), Butyricicoccus (Adj. P = 0.060), and Clostridium (sensu stricto 2) (Adj. P = 0.064) were all found in higher relative abundance among C. difficile-positive calves than in C. difficile-negative calves (Fig 6). While not statistically significantly different among the two groups, levels of Lactobacillus, Megasphaera, and Streptococcus were increased in C. difficile-positive samples, while levels of Blautia, Fusobacterium, Tyzzerella, Enterobacteriaceae, Fecalibacterium, Dorea, and Collinsella were decreased.

thumbnail
Fig 6. Distribution of bacterial taxa that were found at higher levels in C. difficile-positive calves by C. difficile colonization status in 86 pre-weaned Holstein dairy calves.

A. Butyricicoccus. B. Clostridium sensu stricto 2. C. Ruminococcus gnavus. D. Lachnoclostridium.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251999.g006

Co-occurrence analysis based on the Dice index showed that more co-occurrence of bacterial taxa appeared in the C. difficile-negative samples, with 1,488 (65.5%) highly (correlation coefficient>0.6) and significantly (p<0.01) correlated genera pairs. Most co-occurrences were among members of the Firmicutes phylum (1295, 55.0%). However, members of Firmicutes also showed high co-occurrence with Actinobacteria and Bacteroidetes. In the C. difficile-positive samples, there were fewer highly co-occurring genera, with 830 (73.3%) highly and significantly correlated genera pairs. When only considering taxa with levels of relative abundance greater than 1%, there were no significant differences in co-occurrence patterns (Fig 7).

thumbnail
Fig 7. Analysis of co-occurrence among microbial lineages scored using the Dice index by C. difficile-colonization status (positive and negative).

Dice indexes are shown as a heat map for all genera present at a level of relative abundance greater than 1% and with statistically significant (p<0.01) co-occurrence are shown as a heatmap. The degree of co-occurrence is shown by the color code at the bottom.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251999.g007

Discussion

In this study, we characterized microbial features associated with asymptomatic C. difficile colonization in dairy calves. While the role of C. difficile in calf diarrhea remains equivocal [12], exploring the association between this pathogen and the gut microbiota is important for understanding factors that affect gut health and enteric diseases. A number of studies have examined the epidemiology of C. difficile in animals of veterinary importance, but the association between the microbiota and C. difficile is only beginning to be explored in dogs [9], horses [32], and pigs [33]. Notably, in pigs, the presence of C. difficile is associated with significantly reduced microbial diversity and increased levels of enteropathogens associated with neonatal diarrhea [33].

Unsurprisingly, as in other studies [3436], we found that the farm was the source of most of the variation in gut microbiota composition. However, even among calves from the same farm, there was variability in both C. difficile colonization status and gut microbial diversity, suggesting, as have other studies [35,37], that the farm environment is only one of many competing influencers of the developing calf gut microbiota. Neither diet nor age were significantly associated with microbiota composition when controlling for farm, but this is almost certainly due to the small sample size within each farm and the lack of within-farm variability in factors such as diet. When controlling for age, diet, and farm, we noted a significant difference in beta diversity between C. difficile-positive and C. difficile-negative fecal samples when considering the Bray-Curtis metric but not the unweighted UniFrac metric. While both of these metrics are weighted by abundance, the latter metric weighs diversity by phylogenetic relationship. Thus the lack of a significant difference when considering the weighted UniFrac metric suggests that, while there may be a significant difference in the composition of microbial communities, the differentially-abundant microbes might be closely related to one another. Indeed, all four genera identified as differentially-abundant by LEfSe are members of the Clostridia class, with two belonging to the Clostrideaceae family.

While the lack of a consistent difference in alpha and beta diversity between C. difficile-positive and C. difficile-negative samples suggests that the effect of C. difficile colonization on the gut microbiota of calves is minimal, other findings suggest that C. difficile colonization is associated with a more disrupted (i.e., altered)–but not dysbiotic (i.e., imbalanced and impaired)–gut microbiota. C. difficile colonization was preferentially associated with certain bacterial taxa of the class Clostridia that do have associations with dysbiosis. Notably, the overrepresentation of Ruminococcus gnavus and Lachnoclostridia in C. difficile-positive calves point to the possibility of an underlying imbalance in the gut microbiota. R. gnavus, a Gram-positive anaerobe that is typically found in the gut of over 90% of healthy people at relative abundances less than 0.1%, has been robustly associated with inflammatory dysbiotic conditions such as Crohn’s disease [3840], allergic airway disease [41], eczema [42], and spondyloarthritis [43]. Dramatic blooms of R. gnavus occur in patients experiencing flares of inflammatory bowel disease, with relative abundance levels that can peak at 69% of the gut microbiota [40]. Notably, this association appears to occur across species, as the gut microbiomes of both infants [7] and piglets [33] colonized with C. difficile also had increased relative levels of Ruminococcus species, including R. gnavus. Additionally, Ruminococcus was one of six bacterial genera in the gut microbiota that predicted the occurrence of diarrhea in calves in another study [44]. The increased relative abundance of Clostridium sensu stricto and Lachnoclostridia in C. difficile-positive calves also points to the possibility of a less healthy gut environment. An increased relative abundance of Clostridium sensu stricto, which was also found in C. difficile-positive piglets [33], was associated with food allergies in infants [45] and diarrhea in piglets [46]. A tentative association between increased levels of Lachnoclostridia and neoplasia of the gastrointestinal tract has been identified in people [47,48]. While no such association has been explored in animals, the overrepresentation of this taxon in C. difficile-positive calves may be the result of a more disrupted gut microbiota. However, it is also important to note that the increased relative abundance of these taxa were only detected using LEfSe analysis and not ANCOM, which suggests that the association is likely relatively weak, as a stronger association would more likely have been consistently found across multiple metrics of differential relative abundance [49].

Certain bacterial taxa that predominate in healthy calves were found at lower (but not statistically significantly lower) levels in C. difficile-positive calves. Notably, Fecalibacterium, Dorea, Enterobacteriaceae and Collinsella are among the most abundant genera in healthy pre-weaned calves [5053], and some of these taxa provide colonization resistance against C. difficile [8,54]. Their decreased relative abundance in C. difficile-positive calves is also reflective of a more disrupted gut microbiota. The decreased co-occurrence of bacterial taxa in C. difficile-positive calves compared to C. difficile-negative calves when considering all levels of relative abundance may also corroborate the notion of a slightly more disrupted gut microbiota in colonized calves. However, because the difference occurred only in rare taxa (relative abundance < 1%), this difference appears unlikely to result in dysbiosis.

One finding that is in contradiction to the general trend of C. difficile colonization being associated with disrupted microbiota is the increased relative abundance of Butyricicoccus in C. difficile-positive calves. In people, Butyricicoccus species of bacteria are generally found in lower levels in people colonized with C. difficile [55] or diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease [56,57], and at higher levels in healthy dairy calves compared to calves with diarrhea [52,58]. It is unclear why the relative abundance of Butyricioccus occurred at higher levels in C. difficile-positive calves compared to C. difficile-negative calves. Butyricicoccus bacteria produce butyrate, an important nutrient source for gut colonocytes and a beneficial driver of the immunological maturation of the gut mucosa [59]. Moreover, this genus is one of the most abundant genera in dairy calves 7 days after birth [60]. The differential levels in calves compared to people with enteric disease may be due to species-specific patterns of development of the neonatal gut. Species-specific differences may also explain why C. difficile colonized calves had higher levels of Clostridial genera but colonized puppies had lower levels [9]. While rumen development is minimal in pre-weaned calves, they are nevertheless ruminants and thus have fundamentally different enteric physiologies and microbial ecologies compared to true monogastric species.

Some limitations apply to this study. Heterogeneity in farm location, age, and diet across all of the sampled calves may have obscured features of the microbiota that would otherwise have been associated with C. difficile colonization. The cross-sectional nature of the study also precludes the possibility of drawing any conclusions about the duration of colonization and its effect on an already rapidly evolving gut microbiota. Moreover, while in some species the fecal microbiota is similar to that of the rectal mucosa [6163], the fecal microbiota overall appears distinct from that of other parts of the GI tract, including the colon, where C. difficile resides [6466]. The use of a qPCR assay to detect C. difficile that has not been validated in bovids could have resulted in false negatives or false positives. However, we believe this possibility to be minimal, because we have shown that the performance of this assay is relatively high in other species [16], and because pooled samples underwent anaerobic culture, which would have ruled out false negatives. Finally, because the qPCR assay only detects toxigenic C. difficile, we were unable to detect non-toxigenic C. difficile. It is likely that toxigenic and non-toxigenic C. difficile occupy a similar ecological niche and compete for similar resources within the gut microbiota; thus the presence of non-toxigenic C. difficile could account for the lack of a significant difference in alpha diversity and microbial composition between C. difficile-positive and C. difficile-negative calves. However, we believe this possibility to be unlikely, as there were no samples that were negative on qPCR but came from a farm where the pooled sample was positive for C. difficile on anaerobic culture.

Conclusion

The greatest source of variability in the calf microbiota was the farm, and there were few or no statistically significant differences in alpha or beta diversity between C. difficile-positive and C. difficile-negative calves. C. difficile colonization thus does not appear to be associated with dysbiosis or with increased levels of enteropathogens that cause calf diarrhea. However, microbial community signatures–including increased relative abundance of bacterial taxa that that have been associated with dysbiotic states in other species and in people—suggest that the microbiota of C. difficile-colonized calves is more disrupted than that of non-colonized calves.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Bray-Curtis principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of fecal samples from 80 pre-weaned dairy calves.

Point shape identifies C. difficile colonization status and color denotes farm. 95% confidence intervals were drawn around samples collected in the same farm.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251999.s001

(TIF)

References

  1. 1. McGuirk SM. Disease management of dairy calves and heifers. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2008 Mar;24(1):139–53. pmid:18299036.
  2. 2. Foster DM, Smith GW. Pathophysiology of diarrhea in calves. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2009 Mar;25(1):13–36, xi. pmid:19174281.
  3. 3. Virtala AM, Mechor GD, Grohn YT, Erb HN. Morbidity from nonrespiratory diseases and mortality in dairy heifers during the first three months of life. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 1996 Jun 15;208(12):2043–6. pmid:8707681.
  4. 4. Gulliksen SM, Jor E, Lie KI, Hamnes IS, Loken T, Akerstedt J, et al. Enteropathogens and risk factors for diarrhea in Norwegian dairy calves. J Dairy Sci. 2009 Oct;92(10):5057–66. pmid:19762824.
  5. 5. Oikonomou G, Teixeira AG, Foditsch C, Bicalho ML, Machado VS, Bicalho RC. Fecal microbial diversity in pre-weaned dairy calves as described by pyrosequencing of metagenomic 16S rDNA. Associations of Faecalibacterium species with health and growth. PloS one. 2013;8(4):e63157. pmid:23646192. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3639981.
  6. 6. Malmuthuge N, Chen Y, Liang G, Goonewardene LA, Guan le L. Heat-treated colostrum feeding promotes beneficial bacteria colonization in the small intestine of neonatal calves. J Dairy Sci. 2015 Nov;98(11):8044–53. pmid:26342981.
  7. 7. Rousseau C, Levenez F, Fouqueray C, Dore J, Collignon A, Lepage P. Clostridium difficile colonization in early infancy is accompanied by changes in intestinal microbiota composition. J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Mar;49(3):858–65. pmid:21177896. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3067754.
  8. 8. Zhang L, Dong D, Jiang C, Li Z, Wang X, Peng Y. Insight into alteration of gut microbiota in Clostridium difficile infection and asymptomatic C. difficile colonization. Anaerobe. 2015 Aug;34:1–7. pmid:25817005.
  9. 9. Berry ASF, Kelly BJ, Barnhart D, Kelly DJ, Beiting DP, Baldassano RN, et al. Gut microbiota features associated with Clostridioides difficile colonization in puppies. PloS one. 2019;14(8):e0215497. pmid:31469837. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC6716646.
  10. 10. Houser BA, Soehnlen MK, Wolfgang DR, Lysczek HR, Burns CM, Jayarao BM. Prevalence of Clostridium difficile toxin genes in the feces of veal calves and incidence of ground veal contamination. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2012 Jan;9(1):32–6. pmid:21988399.
  11. 11. Knight DR, Thean S, Putsathit P, Fenwick S, Riley TV. Cross-sectional study reveals high prevalence of Clostridium difficile non-PCR ribotype 078 strains in Australian veal calves at slaughter. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013 Apr;79(8):2630–5. pmid:23396338. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3623178.
  12. 12. Hammitt MC, Bueschel DM, Keel MK, Glock RD, Cuneo P, DeYoung DW, et al. A possible role for Clostridium difficile in the etiology of calf enteritis. Veterinary microbiology. 2008 Mar 18;127(3–4):343–52. pmid:17964088.
  13. 13. Malmuthuge N, Griebel PJ, Guan le L. The Gut Microbiome and Its Potential Role in the Development and Function of Newborn Calf Gastrointestinal Tract. Front Vet Sci. 2015;2:36. pmid:26664965. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4672224.
  14. 14. Malmuthuge N, Guan LL. Understanding the gut microbiome of dairy calves: Opportunities to improve early-life gut health. J Dairy Sci. 2017 Jul;100(7):5996–6005. pmid:28501408.
  15. 15. Schneeberg A, Neubauer H, Schmoock G, Grossmann E, Seyboldt C. Presence of Clostridium difficile PCR ribotype clusters related to 033, 078 and 045 in diarrhoeic calves in Germany. Journal of medical microbiology. 2013 Aug;62(Pt 8):1190–8. pmid:23639987.
  16. 16. Anis E, Barnart D, Barnard A, Kelly DJ, Redding LE. Performance of commercial PCR assays to detect toxigenic Clostridioides difficile in the feces of puppies. Veterinary Medicine and Science. 2021. pmid:34216115
  17. 17. Redding L, Huang E, Ryave J, Webb T, Barnhart D, Baker L, et al. Clostridioides difficile on dairy farms and potential risk to dairy farm workers. Anaerobe. 2021 Jun;69:102353. pmid:33639290. Epub 2021/02/28. eng.
  18. 18. Kozich JJ, Westcott SL, Baxter NT, Highlander SK, Schloss PD. Development of a dual-index sequencing strategy and curation pipeline for analyzing amplicon sequence data on the MiSeq Illumina sequencing platform. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013 Sep;79(17):5112–20. pmid:23793624. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3753973.
  19. 19. Bolyen E, Rideout JR, Dillon MR, Bokulich NA, Abnet CC, Al-Ghalith GA, et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nature Biotechnology. 2019 2019/08/01;37(8):852–7. pmid:31341288
  20. 20. Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJ, Holmes SP. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods. 2016 Jul;13(7):581–3. pmid:27214047. Pubmed Central PMCID: 4927377.
  21. 21. Katoh K, Standley DM. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol. 2013 Apr;30(4):772–80. pmid:23329690. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3603318.
  22. 22. Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP. FastTree 2—approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PloS one. 2010 Mar 10;5(3):e9490. pmid:20224823. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2835736.
  23. 23. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological). 1995;57(1):289–300.
  24. 24. Bokulich NA, Kaehler BD, Rideout JR, Dillon M, Bolyen E, Knight R, et al. Optimizing taxonomic classification of marker-gene amplicon sequences with QIIME 2’s q2-feature-classifier plugin. Microbiome. 2018 2018/05/17;6(1):90. pmid:29773078
  25. 25. Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41(Database issue):D590–D6. pmid:23193283. Epub 11/28. eng.
  26. 26. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software. 2015;67(1):1–48.
  27. 27. Oksanen J, Blanchet F, Kindt R. Package, "vegan". 2015.
  28. 28. McMurdie PJ, Holmes S. phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PloS one. 2013;8(4):e61217. pmid:23630581. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3632530.
  29. 29. Segata N, Izard J, Waldron L, Gevers D, Miropolsky L, Garrett WS, et al. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biology. 2011 2011/06/24;12(6):R60. pmid:21702898
  30. 30. Dice LR. Measures of the Amount of Ecologic Association Between Species. Ecology. 1945;26(3):297–302.
  31. 31. Wickham H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2016.
  32. 32. Schoster A, Kunz T, Lauper M, Graubner C, Schmitt S, Weese JS. Prevalence of Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens in Swiss horses with and without gastrointestinal disease and microbiota composition in relation to Clostridium difficile shedding. Veterinary microbiology. 2019 Dec;239:108433. pmid:31767096.
  33. 33. Grześkowiak Ł, Dadi TH, Zentek J, Vahjen W. Developing Gut Microbiota Exerts Colonisation Resistance to Clostridium (syn. Clostridioides) difficile in Piglets. Microorganisms. 2019 Jul 26;7(8). pmid:31357520. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC6723027. Epub 2019/07/31. eng.
  34. 34. O’Hara E, Kenny DA, McGovern E, Byrne CJ, McCabe MS, Guan LL, et al. Investigating temporal microbial dynamics in the rumen of beef calves raised on two farms during early life. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. 2020;96(2). pmid:31917419
  35. 35. Haley BJ, Kim S-W, Salaheen S, Hovingh E, Van Kessel JAS. Differences in the Microbial Community and Resistome Structures of Feces from Preweaned Calves and Lactating Dairy Cows in Commercial Dairy Herds. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease. 2020 2020/08/01;17(8):494–503. pmid:32176535
  36. 36. Gomez DE, Arroyo LG, Costa MC, Viel L, Weese JS. Characterization of the Fecal Bacterial Microbiota of Healthy and Diarrheic Dairy Calves. J Vet Intern Med. 2017;31(3):928–39. pmid:28390070. Epub 04/07. eng.
  37. 37. Dill-McFarland KA, Breaker JD, Suen G. Microbial succession in the gastrointestinal tract of dairy cows from 2 weeks to first lactation. Sci Rep. 2017;7:40864–. pmid:28098248. eng.
  38. 38. Henke MT, Kenny DJ, Cassilly CD, Vlamakis H, Xavier RJ, Clardy J. Ruminococcus gnavus, a member of the human gut microbiome associated with Crohn’s disease, produces an inflammatory polysaccharide. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2019;116(26):12672. pmid:31182571
  39. 39. Joossens M, Huys G, Cnockaert M, De Preter V, Verbeke K, Rutgeerts P, et al. Dysbiosis of the faecal microbiota in patients with Crohn’s disease and their unaffected relatives. Gut. 2011 May;60(5):631–7. pmid:21209126. Epub 2011/01/07. eng.
  40. 40. Hall AB, Yassour M, Sauk J, Garner A, Jiang X, Arthur T, et al. A novel Ruminococcus gnavus clade enriched in inflammatory bowel disease patients. Genome Medicine. 2017 2017/11/28;9(1):103. pmid:29183332
  41. 41. Chua H-H, Chou H-C, Tung Y-L, Chiang B-L, Liao C-C, Liu H-H, et al. Intestinal Dysbiosis Featuring Abundance of Ruminococcus gnavus Associates With Allergic Diseases in Infants. Gastroenterology. 2018 2018/01/01/;154(1):154–67. pmid:28912020
  42. 42. Zheng H, Liang H, Wang Y, Miao M, Shi T, Yang F, et al. Altered Gut Microbiota Composition Associated with Eczema in Infants. PloS one. 2016;11(11):e0166026. pmid:27812181. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC5094743. Epub 2016/11/05. eng.
  43. 43. Breban M, Tap J, Leboime A, Said-Nahal R, Langella P, Chiocchia G, et al. Faecal microbiota study reveals specific dysbiosis in spondyloarthritis. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 2017 Sep;76(9):1614–22. pmid:28606969. Epub 2017/06/14. eng.
  44. 44. Ma T, Villot C, Renaud D, Skidmore A, Chevaux E, Steele M, et al. Linking perturbations to temporal changes in diversity, stability, and compositions of neonatal calf gut microbiota: prediction of diarrhea. The ISME Journal. 2020 2020/09/01;14(9):2223–35. pmid:32444812
  45. 45. Ling Z, Li Z, Liu X, Cheng Y, Luo Y, Tong X, et al. Altered Fecal Microbiota Composition Associated with Food Allergy in Infants. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2014;80(8):2546–54. pmid:24532064
  46. 46. Zhu JJ, Gao MX, Song XJ, Zhao L, Li YW, Hao ZH. Changes in bacterial diversity and composition in the faeces and colon of weaned piglets after feeding fermented soybean meal. Journal of medical microbiology. 2018 Aug;67(8):1181–90. pmid:29923819. Epub 2018/06/21. eng.
  47. 47. Youssef O, Lahti L, Kokkola A, Karla T, Tikkanen M, Ehsan H, et al. Stool Microbiota Composition Differs in Patients with Stomach, Colon, and Rectal Neoplasms. Digestive Diseases and Sciences. 2018 2018/11/01;63(11):2950–8. pmid:29995183
  48. 48. Liang JQ, Li T, Nakatsu G, Chen Y-X, Yau TO, Chu E, et al. A novel faecal Lachnoclostridium marker for the non-invasive diagnosis of colorectal adenoma and cancer. Gut. 2020;69(7):1248. pmid:31776231
  49. 49. Kleine Bardenhorst S, Berger T, Klawonn F, Vital M, Karch A, Rübsamen N. Data Analysis Strategies for Microbiome Studies in Human Populations-a Systematic Review of Current Practice. mSystems. 2021 Feb 23;6(1). pmid:33622856. Epub 2021/02/25. eng.
  50. 50. Klein-Jöbstl D, Schornsteiner E, Mann E, Wagner M, Drillich M, Schmitz-Esser S. Pyrosequencing reveals diverse fecal microbiota in Simmental calves during early development. Front Microbiol. 2014 2014-November-17;5(622). English. pmid:25452753
  51. 51. Malmuthuge N, Griebel PJ, Guan le L. Taxonomic identification of commensal bacteria associated with the mucosa and digesta throughout the gastrointestinal tracts of preweaned calves. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014 Mar;80(6):2021–8. pmid:24441166. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3957634.
  52. 52. Tomassini L. Rectal microbiota dynamics in pre-weaned dairy calves depending on colostrum intake, presence of diarrhea and antibiotic treatment: Washington State University; 2015.
  53. 53. Hennessy ML, Indugu N, Vecchiarelli B, Bender J, Pappalardo C, Leibstein M, et al. Temporal changes in the fecal bacterial community in Holstein dairy calves from birth through the transition to a solid diet. PloS one. 2020;15(9):e0238882. pmid:32898158
  54. 54. Han SH, Yi J, Kim JH, Lee S, Moon HW. Composition of gut microbiota in patients with toxigenic Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile: Comparison between subgroups according to clinical criteria and toxin gene load. PloS one. 2019;14(2):e0212626. pmid:30785932.
  55. 55. Pérez-Cobas AE, Artacho A, Ott SJ, Moya A, Gosalbes MJ, Latorre A. Structural and functional changes in the gut microbiota associated to Clostridium difficile infection. Front Microbiol. 2014;5:335–. pmid:25309515. eng.
  56. 56. Eeckhaut V, Machiels K, Perrier C, Romero C, Maes S, Flahou B, et al. Butyricicoccus pullicaecorum in inflammatory bowel disease. Gut. 2013;62(12):1745–52. pmid:23263527
  57. 57. Devriese S, Eeckhaut V, Geirnaert A, Van den Bossche L, Hindryckx P, Van de Wiele T, et al. Reduced Mucosa-associated Butyricicoccus Activity in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis Correlates with Aberrant Claudin-1 Expression. Journal of Crohn’s and Colitis. 2016;11(2):229–36. pmid:27484096
  58. 58. Hang BPT, Wredle E, Dicksved J. Analysis of the developing gut microbiota in young dairy calves—impact of colostrum microbiota and gut disturbances. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 2020 2020/12/28;53(1):50. pmid:33369699
  59. 59. Furusawa Y, Obata Y, Fukuda S, Endo TA, Nakato G, Takahashi D, et al. Commensal microbe-derived butyrate induces the differentiation of colonic regulatory T cells. Nature. 2013 2013/12/01;504(7480):446–50. pmid:24226770
  60. 60. Alipour MJ, Jalanka J, Pessa-Morikawa T, Kokkonen T, Satokari R, Hynönen U, et al. The composition of the perinatal intestinal microbiota in cattle. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):10437–. pmid:29993024. eng.
  61. 61. Lepage P, Seksik P, Sutren M, de la Cochetière MF, Jian R, Marteau P, et al. Biodiversity of the mucosa-associated microbiota is stable along the distal digestive tract in healthy individuals and patients with IBD. Inflammatory bowel diseases. 2005 May;11(5):473–80. pmid:15867587. Epub 2005/05/04. eng.
  62. 62. Eckburg PB, Bik EM, Bernstein CN, Purdom E, Dethlefsen L, Sargent M, et al. Diversity of the human intestinal microbial flora. Science. 2005;308(5728):1635–8. pmid:15831718. Epub 04/14. eng.
  63. 63. Grimm P, Philippeau C, Julliand V. Faecal parameters as biomarkers of the equine hindgut microbial ecosystem under dietary change. Animal: an international journal of animal bioscience. 2017 Jul;11(7):1136–45. pmid:28065211. Epub 2017/01/10. eng.
  64. 64. Hagey JV, Bhatnagar S, Heguy JM, Karle BM, Price PL, Meyer D, et al. Fecal Microbial Communities in a Large Representative Cohort of California Dairy Cows. Front Microbiol. 2019 2019-May-16;10(1093). English.
  65. 65. Lourenco JM, Kieran TJ, Seidel DS, Glenn TC, Silveira MFd, Callaway TR, et al. Comparison of the ruminal and fecal microbiotas in beef calves supplemented or not with concentrate. PloS one. 2020;15(4):e0231533. pmid:32282837
  66. 66. Sartor RB. Optimal sampling of the intestinal microbiota for research. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2015 2015/05/01;12(5):253–4. pmid:25802025