Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Influence of early life exposure, host genetics and diet on the mouse gut microbiome and metabolome

This article has been updated


Although the gut microbiome plays important roles in host physiology, health and disease1, we lack understanding of the complex interplay between host genetics and early life environment on the microbial and metabolic composition of the gut. We used the genetically diverse Collaborative Cross mouse system2 to discover that early life history impacts the microbiome composition, whereas dietary changes have only a moderate effect. By contrast, the gut metabolome was shaped mostly by diet, with specific non-dietary metabolites explained by microbial metabolism. Quantitative trait analysis identified mouse genetic trait loci (QTL) that impact the abundances of specific microbes. Human orthologues of genes in the mouse QTL are implicated in gastrointestinal cancer. Additionally, genes located in mouse QTL for Lactobacillales abundance are implicated in arthritis, rheumatic disease and diabetes. Furthermore, Lactobacillales abundance was predictive of higher host T-helper cell counts, suggesting an important link between Lactobacillales and host adaptive immunity.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Early life environment determines gut microbiome structure.
Figure 2: A GWAS identifies host genetic loci that impact gut microbiome composition and abundances.
Figure 3: Association of microbial abundance with host phenotypes and their implications for human disease.
Figure 4: Dietary and microbial influences on metabolite profiles.

Change history

  • 14 July 2017

    In the PDF version of this article previously published, the year of publication provided in the footer of each page and in the 'How to cite' section was erroneously given as 2017, it should have been 2016. This error has now been corrected. The HTML version of the article was not affected.


  1. 1

    Clemente, J. C., Ursell, L. K., Parfrey, L. W. & Knight, R. The impact of the gut microbiota on human health: an integrative view. Cell 148, 1258–1270 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Collaborative Cross Consortium. The genome architecture of the Collaborative Cross mouse genetic reference population. Genetics 190, 389–401 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Kubinak, J. L. et al. MHC variation sculpts individualized microbial communities that control susceptibility to enteric infection. Nat. Commun. 6, 8642 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Goodrich, J. K. et al. Human genetics shape the gut microbiome. Cell 159, 789–799 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    McKnite, A. M. et al. Murine gut microbiota is defined by host genetics and modulates variation of metabolic traits. PLoS ONE 7, e39191 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Benson, A. K. et al. Individuality in gut microbiota composition is a complex polygenic trait shaped by multiple environmental and host genetic factors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 18933–18938 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Benson, A. K. Host genetic architecture and the landscape of microbiome composition: humans weigh in. Genome Biol. 16, 203 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Anukam, K. C., Osazuwa, E. O., Osadolor, H. B., Bruce, A. W. & Reid, G. Yogurt containing probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 and L. reuteri RC-14 helps resolve moderate diarrhea and increases CD4 count in HIV/AIDS patients. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 42, 239–243 (2008).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Trois, L., Cardoso, E. M. & Miura, E. Use of probiotics in HIV-infected children: a randomized double-blind controlled study. J. Trop. Pediatr. 54, 19–24 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Bravo, J. A. et al. Ingestion of Lactobacillus strain regulates emotional behavior and central GABA receptor expression in a mouse via the vagus nerve. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 16050–16055 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Mohamadzadeh, M. et al. Lactobacilli activate human dendritic cells that skew T cells toward T helper 1 polarization. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 2880–2885 (2005).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Replication, D. I. G. et al. Genome-wide trans-ancestry meta-analysis provides insight into the genetic architecture of type 2 diabetes susceptibility. Nat. Genet. 46, 234–244 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Gong, Y. et al. PROX1 gene variant is associated with fasting glucose change after antihypertensive treatment. Pharmacotherapy 34, 123–130 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Yu, B. et al. Genome-wide association study of a heart failure related metabolomic profile among African Americans in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Genet. Epidemiol. 37, 840–845 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Kim, H. J. et al. Combined linkage and association analyses identify a novel locus for obesity near PROX1 in Asians. Obesity 21, 2405–2412 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Manning, A. K. et al. A genome-wide approach accounting for body mass index identifies genetic variants influencing fasting glycemic traits and insulin resistance. Nat. Genet. 44, 659–669 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Alipour, B. et al. Effects of Lactobacillus casei supplementation on disease activity and inflammatory cytokines in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a randomized double-blind clinical trial. Int. J. Rheum. Dis. 17, 519–527 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Bordalo Tonucci, L. et al. Clinical application of probiotics in diabetes mellitus: therapeutics and new perspectives. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. (2015).

  19. 19

    Hindorff, L. et al. A Catalog of Published Genome-Wide Association Studies;

  20. 20

    Kind, T. et al. Fiehnlib: mass spectral and retention index libraries for metabolomics based on quadrupole and time-of-flight gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Anal. Chem. 81, 10038–10048 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Noecker, C. et al. Metabolic model-based integration of microbiome taxonomic and metabolomic profiles elucidates mechanistic links between ecological and metabolic variation. mSystems 1, e00013-15 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Welsh, C. E. et al. Status and access to the Collaborative Cross population. Mamm. Genome. 23, 706–712 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Iraqi, F. A., Churchill, G. & Mott, R. The Collaborative Cross, developing a resource for mammalian systems genetics: a status report of the Wellcome Trust cohort. Mamm. Genome 19, 379–381 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Morahan, G., Balmer, L. & Monley, D. Establishment of ‘The Gene Mine’: a resource for rapid identification of complex trait genes. Mamm. Genome. 19, 390–393 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Chesler, E. J. et al. The Collaborative Cross at Oak Ridge National Laboratory: developing a powerful resource for systems genetics. Mamm. Genome. 19, 382–389 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Caporaso, J. G. et al. Ultra-high-throughput microbial community analysis on the Illumina HiSeq and MiSeq platforms. ISME J. 6, 1621–1624 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Walters, W. et al. Improved bacterial 16S rRNA gene (V4 and V4–5) and fungal internal transcribed spacer marker gene primers for microbial community surveys. mSystems 1, e00009-15 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Caporaso, J. G. et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Methods 7, 335–336 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Aronesty, E. ea-utils: Command-Line Tools for Processing Biological Sequencing Data (Expression Analysis, 2011);

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Edgar, R. C. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26, 2460–2461 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Edgar, R. C., Haas, B. J., Clemente, J. C., Quince, C. & Knight, R. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27, 2194–2200 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Rognes, T., Flouri, T. & Mahe, F. vsearch: VSEARCH Version 1.1.3 (2015);

  33. 33

    McDonald, D. et al. An improved Greengenes taxonomy with explicit ranks for ecological and evolutionary analyses of bacteria and archaea. ISME J. 6, 610–618 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Caporaso, J. G. et al. PyNAST: a flexible tool for aligning sequences to a template alignment. Bioinformatics 26, 266–267 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Price, M. N., Dehal, P. S. & Arkin, A. P. Fasttree 2—approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS ONE 5, e9490 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Lozupone, C. & Knight, R. Unifrac: a new phylogenetic method for comparing microbial communities. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71, 8228–8235 (2005).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. Phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE 8, e61217 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    R-Core-Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2016);

  41. 41

    Mudge, J. M. & Harrow, J. Creating reference gene annotation for the mouse C57BL6/J genome assembly. Mamm. Genome 26, 366–378 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42

    Eppig, J. T. et al. The Mouse Genome Database (MGD): facilitating mouse as a model for human biology and disease. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, D726–D736 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43

    Yin, T., Cook, D. & Lawrence, M. Ggbio: an R package for extending the grammar of graphics for genomic data. Genome Biol. 13, R77 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44

    Krzywinski, M. et al. Circos: an information aesthetic for comparative genomics. Genome Res. 19, 1639–1645 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45

    Mao, J. H. et al. Identification of genetic factors that modify motor performance and body weight using Collaborative Cross mice. Sci. Rep. 5, 16247 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46

    Liaw, A. & Wiener, M. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2, 18–22 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47

    Walker, A. et al. Importance of sulfur-containing metabolites in discriminating fecal extracts between normal and type-2 diabetic mice. J. Proteome Res. 13, 4220–4231 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48

    Kim, Y. M. et al. Salmonella modulates metabolism during growth under conditions that induce expression of virulence genes. Mol. Biosyst. 9, 1522–1534 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49

    Hiller, K. et al. Metabolitedetector: comprehensive analysis tool for targeted and nontargeted GC/MS based metabolome analysis. Anal. Chem. 81, 3429–3439 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50

    Sumner, L. W. et al. Proposed minimum reporting standards for chemical analysis. Metabolomics 3, 211–221 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51

    Langille, M. G. et al. Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 814–821 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  52. 52

    Manor, O. & Borenstein, E. MUSiCC: a marker genes based framework for metagenomic normalization and accurate profiling of gene abundances in the microbiome. Genome Biol. 16, 27 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors thank S.E. Cates, N.N. Robinson and G.D. Shaw in the Systems Genetics Core at UNC for technical assistance and M.H. Stoiber for helpful discussions, especially regarding statistical analysis. This work was primarily supported by funding from the Office of Naval Research under ONR contract N0001415IP00021 (J.J., J.H.M. and A.M.S.). Additional support was provided by the Low Dose Scientific Focus Area, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, US Department of Energy (G.K., J.H.M. and A.M.S.) and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) program funding under the Microbes to Biomes (M2B) initiative (S.C., B.B., G.K., J.H.M. and A.M.S.). C.N. was supported by an NSF IGERT DGE-1258485 fellowship and in part by New Innovator Award DP2 AT007802-01 to E.B. Partial support was also provided under the Microbiomes in Transition (MinT) Initiative as part of the Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program at PNNL. Metabolomic measurements were performed in the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, a national scientific user facility sponsored by the US DOE OBER and located at PNNL in Richland, Washington. PNNL and LBNL are multi-program national laboratories operated by Battelle for the DOE under contract DE-AC05-76RLO 1830 and the University of California for the DOE under contract DE AC02-05CH11231, respectively.

Author information




A.M.S., J.-H.M. and J.K.J. conceived and designed the study. A.M.S. and J.-H.M. performed the mouse experiments, acquired the data, performed data analysis, interpreted results and co-wrote the manuscript. S.A.L. performed data analysis, interpreted results and co-wrote the manuscript. T.O.M. and Y.-M.K. performed metabolome data analysis, interpreted results and co-wrote the manuscript. C.J.B. performed microbiome data analysis and interpreted results. C.N. performed metabolic modelling-based taxonomic and metabolomics integration. E.M.Z. prepared microbiome samples and performed GC–MS-based metabolomics analysis. S.J.F. carried out microbiome sequencing. C.P.C. performed metabolome data analysis and interpreted results. D.R.M. acquired data. Y.H. performed in vivo experiments and collected data. G.H.K. and S.E.C. interpreted results and co-wrote the manuscript. J.B.B. supervised the integrative data analysis, interpreted results and co-wrote the manuscript. E.B. performed data analysis, interpreted results and co-wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Janet K. Jansson, Thomas O. Metz or Jian-Hua Mao.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figures 1-10, Supplementary Tables 1-12 (PDF 36706 kb)

Supplementary Table 2

Normalized amplicon abundance. (XLSX 4809 kb)

Supplementary Table 3

Differentially abundant fecal operational taxonomic units (OTUs) between animal facility built environments (BE1 vs BE2). (XLSX 320 kb)

Supplementary Table 4

P-values for each genetic locus obtained using Mann-Whitney U test for all OTUs. (XLSX 237480 kb)

Supplementary Table 5

Joint QTL intervals and candidate genes. (XLSX 88 kb)

Supplementary Table 6

Linkage analysis of microbial families. (XLSX 8304 kb)

Supplementary Table 7

Candidate genes in genetic loci associated with specific microbial families. (XLSX 167 kb)

Supplementary Table 10

Metabolomics data including original intensity of the detected metabolites from murine feces and their zscored transformed values in separate tabs. (XLSX 677 kb)

Supplementary Table 11

Metabolite profiles in fecal samples of four CC strains maintained on different diets. (XLSX 84 kb)

Supplementary Table 12

A list of all metabolites assayed and analyzed in terms of community metabolic potential for each subset of the data, detailing correlations between metabolomics data and community metabolic potential scores and potential taxonomic contributors. (XLSX 256 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Snijders, A., Langley, S., Kim, YM. et al. Influence of early life exposure, host genetics and diet on the mouse gut microbiome and metabolome. Nat Microbiol 2, 16221 (2017).

Download citation

Further reading


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing