Social networks predict gut microbiome composition in wild baboons

  1. Jenny Tung
  2. Luis B Barreiro
  3. Michael B Burns
  4. Jean-Christophe Grenier
  5. Josh Lynch
  6. Laura E Grieneisen
  7. Jeanne Altmann
  8. Susan C Alberts
  9. Ran Blekhman
  10. Elizabeth A Archie  Is a corresponding author
  1. Duke University, United States
  2. University of Montreal, Canada
  3. University of Minnesota, United States
  4. University of Notre Dame, United States
  5. National Museums of Kenya, Kenya

Abstract

Social relationships have profound effects on health in humans and other primates, but the mechanisms that explain this relationship are not well understood. Using shotgun metagenomic data from wild baboons, we found that social group membership and social network relationships predicted both the taxonomic structure of the gut microbiome and the structure of genes encoded by gut microbial species. Rates of interaction directly explained variation in the gut microbiome, even after controlling for diet, kinship, and shared environments. They therefore strongly implicate direct physical contact among social partners in the transmission of gut microbial species. We identified 51 socially structured taxa, which were significantly enriched for anaerobic and non-spore-forming lifestyles. Our results argue that social interactions are an important determinant of gut microbiome composition in natural animal populations-a relationship with important ramifications for understanding how social relationships influence health, as well as the evolution of group living.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Jenny Tung

    Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, Duke University, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Luis B Barreiro

    Department of Pediatrics, Sainte-Justine Hospital Research Centre, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Michael B Burns

    Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jean-Christophe Grenier

    Department of Pediatrics, Sainte-Justine Hospital Research Centre, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Josh Lynch

    Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development; Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Laura E Grieneisen

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jeanne Altmann

    Institute of Primate Research, National Museums of Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Susan C Alberts

    Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Ran Blekhman

    Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Elizabeth A Archie

    Institute of Primate Research, National Museums of Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
    For correspondence
    earchie@nd.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2015, Tung et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 11,284
    views
  • 2,117
    downloads
  • 367
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Jenny Tung
  2. Luis B Barreiro
  3. Michael B Burns
  4. Jean-Christophe Grenier
  5. Josh Lynch
  6. Laura E Grieneisen
  7. Jeanne Altmann
  8. Susan C Alberts
  9. Ran Blekhman
  10. Elizabeth A Archie
(2015)
Social networks predict gut microbiome composition in wild baboons
eLife 4:e05224.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05224

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05224

Further reading

    1. Ecology
    Chao Wen, Yuyi Lu ... Lars Chittka
    Research Article

    Bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) have been shown to engage in string-pulling behavior to access rewards. The objective of this study was to elucidate whether bumblebees display means-end comprehension in a string-pulling task. We presented bumblebees with two options: one where a string was connected to an artificial flower containing a reward and the other presenting an interrupted string. Bumblebees displayed a consistent preference for pulling connected strings over interrupted ones after training with a stepwise pulling technique. When exposed to novel string colors, bees continued to exhibit a bias towards pulling the connected string. This suggests that bumblebees engage in featural generalization of the visual display of the string connected to the flower in this task. If the view of the string connected to the flower was restricted during the training phase, the proportion of bumblebees choosing the connected strings significantly decreased. Similarly, when the bumblebees were confronted with coiled connected strings during the testing phase, they failed to identify and reject the interrupted strings. This finding underscores the significance of visual consistency in enabling the bumblebees to perform the task successfully. Our results suggest that bumblebees’ ability to distinguish between continuous strings and interrupted strings relies on a combination of image matching and associative learning, rather than means-end understanding. These insights contribute to a deeper understanding of the cognitive processes employed by bumblebees when tackling complex spatial tasks.

    1. Ecology
    Mathilde Delacoux, Fumihiro Kano
    Research Article

    During collective vigilance, it is commonly assumed that individual animals compromise their feeding time to be vigilant against predators, benefiting the entire group. One notable issue with this assumption concerns the unclear nature of predator ‘detection’, particularly in terms of vision. It remains uncertain how a vigilant individual utilizes its high-acuity vision (such as the fovea) to detect a predator cue and subsequently guide individual and collective escape responses. Using fine-scale motion-capture technologies, we tracked the head and body orientations of pigeons (hence reconstructed their visual fields and foveal projections) foraging in a flock during simulated predator attacks. Pigeons used their fovea to inspect predator cues. Earlier foveation on a predator cue was linked to preceding behaviors related to vigilance and feeding, such as head-up or down positions, head-scanning, and food-pecking. Moreover, earlier foveation predicted earlier evasion flights at both the individual and collective levels. However, we also found that relatively long delay between their foveation and escape responses in individuals obscured the relationship between these two responses. While our results largely support the existing assumptions about vigilance, they also underscore the importance of considering vision and addressing the disparity between detection and escape responses in future research.