Eating patterns contribute to shaping the gut microbiota in the mucosal simulator of the human intestinal microbial ecosystem

Eating patterns, i.e. meal frequency and circadian timing of meals, are often modified in weight loss and metabolic healing strategies. However, in-depth research into the effects on the gut microbiome remains scarce, particularly across various colon regions and niches. We identified eating patterns to contribute in shaping the in vitro gut biomass production, metabolism, and microbial community compositions by subjecting four faecal microbiomes to a pattern that is standardized for a dynamic gut model (feeding at 09, 17, and 01 h), a typical Western (breakfast, lunch, and dinner at 09, 13, and 19 h, respectively), and a time-restricted pattern (single meal at 09 h). While eating patterns moderately affected the microbiome (2.4% and 1.8% significant variation in proportional and quantitative microbial compositions, respectively), significant changes were noted in the time-restricted pattern, including increased Bacteroides, Butyricicoccus, Dialister, and Faecalibacterium abundances. Sampling every 4 h revealed no significant circadian fluctuations in biomass production, microbial community compositions, or functionality. Longer fasting times favoured the growth of slower-growing species, such as Akkermansia, Dialister, and Parasutterella over faster-growers, such as Pseudomonas and Stenotrophomonas. Our findings illustrate the importance of recording and considering eating patterns as a gut microbiome determinant in in vivo and in vitro dietary intervention studies.

Drosophila melanogaster and worker honeybees (Apis mellifera) do not require olfaction to be susceptible to honeybee queen mandibular pheromone

Eusociality is characterised by the reproductive division of labour; a dominant female (queen) or females are responsible for the majority of reproduction, and subordinate females are reproductively constrained. Reproductive constraint can be due to behavioural aggression and/or chemical cues, so-called queen pheromones, produced by the dominant females. In the honeybee, Apis mellifera, this repressive queen pheromone is queen mandibular pheromone (QMP). The mechanism by which honeybee workers are susceptible to QMP is not yet completely understood, however it is thought to be through olfaction via the antennae and/or gustation via trophallaxis. We have investigated whether olfaction is key to sensing of QMP, using both Drosophila melanogaster- a tractable non-eusocial insect which is also reproductively repressed by QMP- and the target species, A. mellifera worker honeybees. D. melanogaster are still capable of sensing and responding to QMP without their antenna and maxillary palps, and therefore without olfactory receptors. When worker honeybees were exposed to QMP but unable to physically interact with it, therefore required to use olfaction, they were similarly not reproductively repressed. Combined, these findings support either a non-olfactory based mechanism for the repression of reproduction via QMP, or redundancy via non-olfactory mechanisms in both D. melanogaster and A. mellifera. This study furthers our understanding of how species are susceptible to QMP, and provides insight into the mechanisms governing QMP responsiveness in these diverse species.

Ancestral hymenopteran queen pheromones do not share the broad phylogenetic repressive effects of honeybee queen mandibular pheromone

Queen pheromones effect the reproductive division of labour, a defining feature of eusociality. Reproductive division of labour ensures that one, or a small number of, females are responsible for the majority of reproduction within a colony. Much work on the evolution and function of these pheromones has focussed on Queen Mandibular Pheromone (QMP) which is produced by the Western or European honeybee (Apis mellifera). QMP has phylogenetically broad effects, repressing reproduction in a variety of arthropods, including those distantly related to the honeybee such as the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. QMP is highly derived and has little chemical similarity to the majority of hymenopteran queen pheromones which are derived from cuticular hydrocarbons. This raises the question of whether the phylogenetically widespread repression of reproduction by QMP also occurs with more basal saturated hydrocarbon-based queen-pheromones. Using D. melanogaster we show that saturated hydrocarbons are incapable of repressing reproduction, unlike QMP. We also show no interaction between the four saturated hydrocarbons tested or between the saturated hydrocarbons and QMP, implying that there is no conservation in the mechanism of detection or action between these compounds. We propose that the phylogenetically broad reproductive repression seen in response to QMP is not a feature of all queen pheromones, but unique to QMP itself, which has implications for our understanding of how queen pheromones act and evolve.