1
SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE LEGENDS
2
Figure S1: Consumption of Lactobacillus reuteri 100-23 for the synbiotic experiment. CFU:
3
colony-forming units. N=4 and 5 cages of two mice, respectively.
4
5
Figure S2: C26 mice display cachectic features. (A) Tumor weight. (B) Adipose tissue weight.
6
(C) Muscle weight. (D-E) mRNA expression of atrophy markers in the gastrocnemius muscle.
7
CT: controls. N=6-8, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001.
8
9
Figure S3: Microbial changes in the BaF and C26 models, as determined by qPCR. Bacteria
10
levels in the caecal content of BaF mice versus control (CT) and C26 mice versus control (CT).
11
AU: arbitrary units. N=6-8. ***p<0.001 vs CT.
12
13
Figure S4: Evaluation of the contribution of the decreased food intake to the microbial
14
signature of the BaF model. (A) Daily food intake, expressed in proportions of the initial food
15
intake. N=4-5 cages of two mice. (B-D) Bacteria levels in the caecal content of BaF mice versus
16
control (CT) and dietary restricted mice (DR) versus control (CT). AU: arbitrary units. N=8-10.
17
(A) *p<0.05 vs CT(BaF), #p<0.01 vs CT(DR), (B-C) *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001.
18
Lactobacillus results were previously published (Bindels et al, 2012a).
19
20
Figure S5: Energy intake, caecal content and tissue weights and indexes of alpha-diversity
21
in leukemic mice fed or not the synbiotic approach. (A) Daily energy intake, in
22
kcal/mouse/day in the survival experiment. N=5 cages of two mouse. #p<0.05 vs BaF, (B)
23
Caecal content and tissue weight in the main experiment. N=7-8, *p<0.05 vs control (CT),
1
24
#p<0.05 vs BaF. (C-D) Alpha-diversity indexes in the main experiment. The observed species
25
represent an index of richness, and the Shannon index takes into account the richness and
26
evenness. N=7-8, *p<0.05, **p<0.01.
27
28
Figure S6: Synbiotic approach impacts the composition of the gut microbiota. (A) LDA
29
scores, in red for the taxa enriched in BaF mice, and in green for taxa enriched in control mice.
30
(B) LDA score, in red for the taxa enriched in BaF mice, and in green for taxa enriched in
31
BaFLrI mice. N=8.
32
33
Figure S7: Synbiotic approach impacts the composition of the gut microbiota. Heatmap
34
representation of the log fold change for BaF and synbiotic-treated BaF (BaF-LrI) mice
35
compared to the control ones, for significantly affected phylotypes. Mean of the control values
36
were set at one, and relative changes were calculated, and then log-transformed. When for a
37
specific sample, an OTU was below the level of detection, a white square was indicated for this
38
sample. Closest known taxon is indicated, with the OTU number within brackets. Only the
39
phylotypes identified as significantly affected by one-way ANOVA with FDR correction and
40
Huber estimation were plotted here.
41
42
Figure S8: The microbial signature was observed in two additional BaF experiments (A
43
and B) performed 18 months apart. Bacteria levels in the caecal content of BaF mice fed or
44
not the synbiotic. AU: arbitrary units. N=7-10. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001. Lactobacillus
45
results from experiment B were previously published (Bindels et al, 2012a).
46
2
47
Figure S9: Plasma lipoproteins were negatively associated with the presence of some micro-
48
organisms. Plasma metabolic profiles were used to perform OPLS regressions on (A) OTU 88
49
(unclassified Porphyromonadaceae) and (B) the Enterobacteriaceae family, as quantified using
50
qPCR.
51
3
52
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLE LEGENDS
53
54
Table S1: primer sequences
55
56
Table S2: Significantly affected phylotypes in the C26 model. Relative abundances expressed
57
as a fraction of 1 of the total number of sequences (n=6-7).
58
59
Table S3: Significantly affected taxa in BaF mice fed or not the synbiotic approach.
60
Relative abundances expressed in percentage of the total number of sequences (n=8). *p<0.05 vs
61
control, #p<0.05 vs BaF, Tukey post test.
62
63
Table S4: Significantly affected OTUs in BaF mice fed or not the synbiotic approach.
64
Relative abundances expressed in percentage of the total number of sequences (n=8). *p<0.05 vs
65
control, #p<0.05 vs BaF, Tukey post test.
66
67
Table S5: Correlations between intestinal biomarkers and significantly affected phylotypes
68
in BaF mice fed or not the synbiotic approach (r values). Pearson correlations (r) between
69
significantly affected OTUs and biomarkers in the intestine. Adjusted p-values of the Pearson
70
correlations between significantly affected OTUs and biomarkers in the intestine. Only OTUs
71
with at least one significant correlation are shown (n=24). r values were visualized through a
72
heatmap, see Fig 8.
4