nihms686514.pdf

Control of Brain Development, Function, and Behavior by the

Microbiome

Timothy R. Sampson

and

Sarkis K. Mazmanian

1,*

Division of Biology & Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena,

California, 91125, USA

Abstract

Animals share an intimate and life-long partnership with a myriad of resident microbial species,

collectively referred to as the microbiota. Symbiotic microbes have been shown to regulate

nutrition and metabolism, and are critical for the development and function of the immune system.

More recently, studies have suggested that gut bacteria can impact neurological outcomes –

altering behavior and potentially affecting the onset and/or severity of nervous system disorders.

In this review, we highlight emerging evidence that the microbiome extends its influence to the

brain via various pathways connecting the gut to the central nervous system. While understanding

and appreciation of a gut microbial impact on neurological function is nascent, unraveling gut-

microbiome-brain connections holds the promise of transforming the neurosciences and revealing

potentially novel etiologies for psychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders.

Introduction

Metazoans evolved in a world dominated by microbial life. Despite the long evolutionary

history that has forged elaborate host-microbial symbioses over many millennia, it is only

recently that science and society have begun to appreciate the inextricable connection

between microbes and mammals. We are witnessing a groundswell of research that is

describing and defining how gut bacteria (known as the microbiota) influence critical

aspects of our physiology. The last decade of research has illuminated numerous complex

interactions between the microbiota and the immune and metabolic systems, many of which

have significant implications on human health. While the fascinating and profound

mechanisms by which gut bacteria control immunity and metabolism has led to a modern

renaissance in biomedical research, regulation of the nervous system by the microbiota had

remained relatively unexplored until very recently (

Mayer et al., 2014

;

Mayer et al., 2015

;

Stilling et al., 2014b

). How could simple gut microbes influence a complex and distant

organ such as the brain? This seemingly improbable concept that specific microbes

influence the behavior and neurological function of their hosts had, in fact, already been

Correspondence: sarkis@caltech.edu.

Publisher's Disclaimer:

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our

customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of

the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be

discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

HHS Public Access

Author manuscript

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Published in final edited form as:

Cell Host Microbe

. 2015 May 13; 17(5): 565–576. doi:10.1016/j.chom.2015.04.011.

Author Manuscript

established. One prime example of “microbial mind control” is the development of

aggression and hydrophobia in mammals infected with the rabies virus (

Driver, 2014

Another well-known example of behavior modification occurs by

Toxoplasma gondii

, which

alters the host rodents’ fear response. Infected rodents lose their defensive behavior in the

presence of feline predators, and instead actually become sexually attracted to feline odors

(

House et al., 2011

). This results in infected rodents being preyed upon more readily by cats,

and allows

Toxoplasma

to continue its lifecycle in the feline host (

House et al., 2011

Further, a variety of parasitic microbes are capable of altering the locomotive behavior and

environmental preferences of their hosts to the benefit of the microbe. For instance, the

Spinochordodes tellinii

parasite causes infected grasshopper hosts to not only jump more

frequently, but also seek an aquatic environment where the parasite emerges to mate and

produce eggs (

Biron et al., 2005

). Temperature preference of the host can even be altered,

such as observed during infection of stickleback fish by

Schistocephalus solidus

, which

changes the hosts’ preference from cooler waters to warmer waters where the parasite can

grow more readily (

Macnab and Barber, 2012

). Other microbes can even alter host behavior

to seek higher elevations, believed to allow the infected host to be noticed more easily by

predators or to eventually fall and disperse onto susceptible hosts below (

Maitland, 1994

More coercively still, microbes can influence the social behavior of their hosts, causing

insects, such as ants, to become more or less social to the benefit of the parasite (

Hughes,

2005

). In fact, the sexually transmitted virus IIV-6/CrIV causes its cricket host (

Gryllus

texensis

) to increase its desire to mate, causing its rate of mating to be significantly elevated

and allowing for transmission between individual hosts (

Adamo et al., 2014

While all of the above examples most certainly represent pathogenic and/or parasitic

relationships, they nonetheless raise the possibility that the indigenous microbes, which are

in constant, life-long interaction with their human and animal hosts, could influence

neurological function and behavior during development, or within health and disease states.

It is becoming increasingly recognized that psychiatric and neurological illnesses are often

co-morbid with gastrointestinal (GI) pathology (

Vandvik et al., 2004

), including

schizophrenia, autism, neurodegenerative diseases and depression. Furthermore, recent

observations have indicated that the commensal microbiota of the intestine do indeed alter

aspects of their hosts’ neurological function, leading to effects on mood and behavior,

including depression, anxiety, social behavior, and mate choice (Table 1) (

Bravo et al.,

2011

;

Desbonnet et al., 2010

;

Foster and McVey Neufeld, 2013

;

Hsiao et al., 2013

;

Neufeld

et al., 2011

;

Sharon et al., 2010

). The intestinal microbiota are, however, well established to

have an profound impact in shaping the host immune system, which itself may subsequently

influence host behavior (

Dantzer et al., 2008

), and indirectly have effects on

neurodegeneration and repair during the process of aging, neurological trauma, and disease.

The precise mechanisms of how the intestinal microbes impact neurological function and

behavior remain largely unknown, but are likely vast, varied, and complex.

Interactions between a host and the microbiome are decidedly intricate. Intestinal microbiota

influence numerous aspects of metabolism, producing metabolic precursors to hormones and

neurotransmitters, or directly producing the active metabolites themselves (

Lyte, 2014

;

Sharon et al., 2014

) (Figure 1). Symbiotic bacteria additionally have the capability to

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 2

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

influence the status of the systemic immune system, which may alter how the immune

system subsequently interacts with the nervous system (

Belkaid and Hand, 2014

;

Hooper et

al., 2012

;

Round and Mazmanian, 2009

) (Figure 1). Furthermore, the enteric nervous system

(ENS) is directly connected to the central nervous system (CNS) through the vagus nerve,

providing a direct neurochemical pathway for microbial-promoted signaling in the GI tract

to be propagated to the brain (

Forsythe et al., 2014

) (Figure 1). Herein, we review the

current understanding of how the intestinal microbiota influence behavior and neurological

function during both health and disease. First, we will focus on how indigenous microbes

shape mood and cognitive behaviors, as well as social behaviors. We will next discuss the

physiological aspects that are modulated by signals derived from the microbiota. In

particular, we will focus on how the commensal microbes directly and indirectly shape

neurochemical and immunologic responses that can subsequently affect behaviors and other

neurological functions (Table 1). With well-documented evidence that the microbiota shape

immunity and metabolism, the impact of gut microbes on the nervous system represents an

exciting new frontier for research with vast translational implications.

Role of the Microbiota in Mood and Individual Behaviors

One of the seminal studies on the influence of the commensal microbiota on neurological

function observed that germ-free (GF) mice display an elevated response to restraint stress,

the stress that occurs during forced immobilization (

Sudo et al., 2004

). In the absence of the

microbiota, mice have substantially higher concentrations of corticosterone, a stress

hormone in the hypothalamus, as well as reduced levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor

(BDNF; a protein which stimulates neurogenesis and synaptic growth, and modulates

synaptic plasticity and transmission) (

Lu et al., 2013

;

Sudo et al., 2004

). Interestingly, this

phenomenon can be partially reversed by re-colonization with a diverse microbiota in

adulthood, suggesting that active signals from the microbiota play a critical role in brain

development. In fact, colonization with a specific bacterial species,

Bifidobacterium infantis

restores the defect (compared to monocolonization with

Esherichia coli

), demonstrating that

rather than the general sensing of the bacteria within the population of indigenous microbes,

signals from specific bacteria drive normal behavior (

Sudo et al., 2004

). This rigorous

demonstration that the microbiota affects the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis (HPA

axis) revealed bi-directional communication between the gut and the brain, with a significant

effect on host behavior.

Conversely, in the absence of restraint stress, some strains of GF mice (Swiss Webster, NIH

Swiss, NMRI) display decreased anxiety-like behavior, in the form of increased exploration

compared to specific pathogen free (SPF) mice, which are colonized with a diverse

microbial population. For instance, GF mice spend more time in the lighted section of a

light-dark box, as well as the open arms of an elevated plus-maze than their colonized

counterparts, evidence of decreased anxiety-like behavior, as mice typically desire to be in a

closed, dark area (

Clarke et al., 2013

;

Diaz Heijtz et al., 2011

;

Neufeld et al., 2011

;

Selkrig

et al., 2014

). Importantly, these behavioral effects can be restored to levels similar to

conventionally raised mice, by recolonizing the GF mice with a complete SPF microbiota.

The effect of the microbiota is not necessarily consistent across all strains of mice. For

instance, SPF BALB/c and C57Bl6 mice display increased anxiety behavior compared to

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 3

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

other strains, such as NIH Swiss mice (

Bercik et al., 2011

;

Selkrig et al., 2014

). The

microbiome present in BALB/c mice is significantly different than that present in NIH Swiss

mice. When fecal microbiota from either strain is transplanted into GF mice of the

counterpart strain, the behavior of the parent strain is transferred (

Bercik et al., 2011

). This

interesting finding implicates that signals derived from the microbiota can drive behaviors in

the host. Further, phenotypic changes following fecal microbiota transplants in adult mice

reveal that anxiety can be actively modulated by the microbial population, and are not

necessarily developmental in origin. It is therefore interesting to contemplate that active

modulation of the population or function of the gut microbiota, such as through probiotic

supplementation, may act to modify host stress and anxiety behaviors as well. In fact, there

is an active and growing line of observations of the effect of probiotic species on the

behavior of the host.

In one such probiotic supplementation study, it was observed that mice given the probiotic

bacterium

Lactobacillus rhamnosus

(JB-1) over a 28 day period displayed decreased

anxiety-like behavior in the elevated plus maze and open field test (

Bravo et al., 2011

Additionally, the effect of

L. rhamnosus

on anxiety behavior is ameliorated in mice that

have been vagotomized, and lack connectivity of the vagus nerve between the ENS and the

CNS (

Bravo et al., 2011

). This would suggest that microbial signals can be directed by the

vagus nerve to alter CNS outputs (such as behavior), further implicating an active role by

the microbiota in mediating neurological functions. In a similar fashion, treatment with

longum

1714 and

B. breve

1205 was observed to decrease anxiety-like behaviors to the same

extent as the pharmaceutical anti-anxiety medication escitalopram (

Savignac et al., 2014

Other studies in rats utilizing a probiotic cocktail of

Lactobacillus helveticus

R0052 and

Bifidobacterium longum

R0175 found that treatment with these microbes over a 30 day

period resulted in decreased anxiety in an electric shock model, further suggesting that the

functionality of the gut microbiota influences anxiety-like behaviors (

Messaoudi et al.,

2011

). Together, these studies provide credence to the intriguing hypothesis that active

modulation of the intestinal microbiota, through probiotic supplementation, can have drastic

effects on behavior, perhaps with therapeutic potential.

Anxiety is not the only behavior that is modulated by signals from symbiotic bacteria. The

same study that utilized the probiotic

L. rhamnosus

(JB-1) to treat mice also observed that

these mice displayed decreased depression-like behaviors, particularly in the forced swim

test (

Bravo et al., 2011

). Probiotic treatment resulted in animals spending less time

immobilized when introduced into a water filled cylinder, rather than attempt to swim. In a

similar fashion, a separate study utilized the maternal separation model of depression in rats,

in which pups are removed from their mothers for a period of time each day until weaning

(

Vetulani, 2013

). This study noted that the depression-like behaviors induced in this model

could be reduced upon treatment with

Bifidiobacterium infantis

(

Desbonnet et al., 2010

Strikingly,

B. infantis

treatment resulted in a similar reduction in depression-like behavior in

the forced swim test as was observed upon treatment with the pharmaceutical antidepressant

citalopram, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) (

Desbonnet et al., 2010

;

Savignac

et al., 2014

;

Savignac et al., 2015

). These surprising findings further suggest that the

composition and/or function of the microbiota actively modulates behavior in adult animals.

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 4

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

Intriguingly, probiotic supplementation, or even diet alone, are observed to have an impact

on both anxiety and depressive behavior in mice, as well as on learning and memory (

Li et

al., 2009

;

Pyndt Jorgensen et al., 2014

;

Savignac et al., 2015

). While some studies have also

demonstrated that specific diets alter the composition of the microbiome and have effects on

behaviors, whether the microbial composition itself is causative for the observed depressive-

behavior and learning deficits observed in these studies is not clear (

Li et al., 2009

;

Pyndt

Jorgensen et al., 2014

). Functional studies utilizing transplantation of diet-altered

microbiomes would be essential to establish a microbial role. Nonetheless, such

observations serve to pave the way toward understanding the role that the composition and

functionality of indigenous microbes may play in shaping mood and behavior in the host.

While most studies have utilized animal models, work is being performed to understand

whether the microbiota have similar roles in shaping human neurological function. A recent

human study was performed to address whether the consumption of a fermented, probiotic

milk product (containing

Bifidobacterium animalis

subsp

Lactis, Streptococcus

thermophilus, Lactobacillus bulgaricus, and Lactococcus lactis

subsp

Lactis

.) could have an

effect on the brain response to emotional stimuli. Using functional magnetic resonance

imaging (fMRI), Mayer and colleagues found that probiotic consumption over the span of

four weeks could affect the processing of emotion (

Tillisch et al., 2013

). Specifically, those

regions of the brain involved in emotional processing, including the primary interoceptive

and somatosensory regions were less activated following emotional stimulation (emotional

faces task) in those individuals who had consumed this probiotic product (

Tillisch et al.,

2013

). Similarly, a separate study observed that probiotic consumption reduced self-reported

feelings of sadness and aggressive thoughts (

Steenbergen et al., 2015

). Importantly, while

these particular studies were small and did not address exactly how the bacterial cocktail

mediated changes in functional brain activity and mood, they are nonetheless strongly

suggestive that the microbiota can actively alter some functional aspects of mood in humans.

A larger human study of fifty-five individuals examined whether probiotic consumption

could influence anxiety (through self-assessment questionnaires) (

Messaoudi et al., 2011

Administration of

L. helveticus

R0052 and

B. longum

R0175 resulted in decreased self-

reported anxiety, and notably, also resulted in decreased urinary cortisol (

Messaoudi et al.,

2011

). Together these studies further the concept that the microbiota effects neurological

function in humans, and ultimately influences mood and behavior. However, additional

work with increased cohort sizes, using a crossover study design and clinical assessment, are

needed to validate these seminal observations for a gut-microbiome-brain connection in

humans.

Interestingly, it has been observed in both humans and mice that probiotic supplementation

with fermented dairy products does not necessarily alter the composition of the gut

microbiome (

McNulty et al., 2011

). Instead, the transcriptional state and metabolic activity

of the microbiota is altered (

McNulty et al., 2011

). It is therefore interesting to consider that

these behavioral and neurological changes may not necessarily be a direct function of the

specific species of bacteria within the probiotic treatment; rather, microbial-mediated effects

on emotion may be due to broader functionality of the symbiotic bacteria within the gut.

Continued study of how the presence of specific bacterial species, particularly low

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 5

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

abundance niche species, influences physiology but does not alter the overall population of

gut microbes, will be critical to understanding the function of the microbiota and how they

can be effectively harnessed and developed as a potential therapeutic modality for

behavioral disorders.

One well-established physiological function of the microbiota is the generation of essential

nutrients for host physiology, such as vitamins and other cofactors (

Gordon et al., 2012

Therefore, it is tempting to speculate that perhaps these microbes could subsequently alter

satiety, influencing how much food the host ingests. While there is no unequivocal evidence

demonstrating that the microbiota directly influence appetite and satiety, there are intriguing

indirect observations. Upon ingestion of fermentable, complex carbohydrates, the

microbiota metabolize fiber into short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) such as acetate, butyrate,

and propionate (

Miller and Wolin, 1979

). Interestingly, SCFAs produced in the GI tract are

trafficked not only into the serum, but also are capable of crossing the blood-brain barrier

(BBB) (

Conn et al., 1983

;

Mitchell et al., 2011

). Once in the brain, one particular SCFA,

acetate, has been observed to enact physiological changes in the hypothalamus. Here, acetate

alters the level of the neurotransmitters glutamate, glutamine, and gamma-aminobutyric acid

(GABA), as well as increases anorectic neuropeptide expression (

Frost et al., 2014

), which

together act as hormone signals to reduce appetite (

Sobrino Crespo et al., 2014

). In total,

production of acetate, leads to suppression of appetite. In fact, a small study in humans

found that fermentation of complex carbohydrates to SCFAs by the microbiota was directly

correlated with the sensation of satiety (

Cani et al., 2009

), providing a basis for the

hypothesis that the symbiotic microbes may be capable of modulating host appetite. Indeed,

changes to the microbiome, due to a specific genetic mutation in mice, induce a metabolic

syndrome, likely through changes in feeding behaviors rather than alterations to metabolism

(

Vijay-Kumar et al., 2010

Microbiota Shape Social Behaviors

Numerous facets of social behavior are also altered by the presence, composition, and

functionality of the microbiota (

Mayer et al., 2015

;

Stilling et al., 2014b

). GF mice are

significantly socially impaired compared to SPF colonized counterparts (

Desbonnet et al.,

2014

). GF mice do not seek out other mice (both new and familiar) as readily as mice

harboring a diverse microbial consortium (

Desbonnet et al., 2014

), suggesting that the

microbiota affect these social behaviors. Surprisingly, social avoidance could be restored

through recolonizing adult mice with a complete microbiota. Conversely, the defect in social

cognition (that is, the ability to recognize familiar versus unfamiliar mice) was not restored

following colonization. Thus, gut bacteria have differential effects on both developmental

aspects, as well as active processes that occur in adulthood, which ultimately shape long-

term behavioral traits (

Desbonnet et al., 2014

One particularly interesting example of microbiome-controlled social behavior is that of

sexual mate preference in the fruit fly,

Drosophila melanogaster

. Flies that have been

colonized with

Lactobacillus plantarum

prefer to mate only with similarly colonized flies,

and not with flies colonized by other bacterial species (

Sharon et al., 2010

). This is due to

the increased production of certain pheromones whose precursors are produced by

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 6

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

plantarum

within these flies. As such, this provides a strong, mechanistic example to begin

to understand how the microbiome can influence the extremely complex social behavior of

mate preference (

Sharon et al., 2010

). Building on this, an interesting study of social

behaviors in hyenas found that individual social groups of these animals harbored distinct

microbiota within their scent glands (

Theis et al., 2012

;

Theis et al., 2013

). Scent-gland

dwelling symbiotic bacteria are known to produce volatile compounds, and each unique

microbial community produces different ratios of these compounds (

Theis et al., 2012

;

Theis

et al., 2013

). As distinct social groups had similar microbiomes, individuals likely are

recognized as belonging to a particular social group directly due to the composition of the

microbes within their glands. These studies provide support for the notion that symbiotic

bacteria affect how a host interacts in social settings, modulating how the host perceives

novel versus familiar individuals for both mate choice and social grouping. The

ramifications of this microbial influence on social behaviors has not gone unnoticed by

evolutionary biologists (

Montiel et al., 2014

;

Rosenberg et al., 2010

;

Stilling et al., 2014a

If gut bacteria modulate neurological function leading to the choice of mate, the microbiome

may therefore play a significant role in driving the evolution of their hosts. By influencing

how individuals interact and undergo vertical genetic transfer, the microbiota could

ultimately be a critical contributing factor in the evolution of metazoan species.

The Link between Gut Bacteria and Disorders Involving Social Impairment

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) comprises a set of complex neurodevelopmental

disabilities characterized by repetitive/stereotypic behaviors and deficits in communication

and social interaction. Intriguingly, a significant subset of ASD children exhibit GI

complications, including constipation, increased intestinal permeability and altered

composition of the intestinal microbiome (

Kang et al., 2013

;

Mulle et al., 2013

;

Rosenfeld,

2015

). Mice displaying autism-like behaviors have a significantly altered microbiome

compared to neurotypical controls, and have an increase in the permeability of the colon,

and correlatively, display differences in serum metabolites (

Hsiao et al., 2013

). Surprisingly,

treatment with a single organism,

Bacteroides fragilis

, was able to restore the intestinal

permeability defects in a mouse model of ASD (

Hsiao et al., 2013

). While treatment with

this probiotic did not restore the overall composition of the microbial population,

B. fragilis

treatment could restore levels of a small number of specific species (

Hsiao et al., 2013

Notably,

B. fragilis

treatment rescued some behavioral defects, including stereotyped

behavior (compulsive marble burying), communication deficits (ultrasonic vocalizations),

and anxiety-behaviors (open-field exploration)(

Hsiao et al., 2013

B. fragilis

has been shown to augment the development and function of the immune system

(

Mazmanian et al., 2008

;

Ochoa-Reparaz et al., 2010

;

Round and Mazmanian, 2010

);

however, treatment with

B. fragilis

did not restore several aspects of immune dysfunction in

an animal model of autism (

Hsiao et al., 2012

;

Hsiao et al., 2013

). Instead, levels of serum

metabolites found to be altered in mice with ASD-related behaviors were restored to normal

levels. Administration to healthy animals of a specific serum metabolite that was elevated in

mice with behavioral deficits, namely 4-ethylphenyl sulfate (4EPS), was sufficient to induce

anxiety-like behavior. As 4EPS is predicted to be of microbial origin, this remarkably

demonstrates that defined molecules from the microbiome can impact behavior in mammals.

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 7

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

Similarly, another study demonstrated that mice with features of ASD display a significantly

altered microbiome and increased intestinal inflammation (

de Theije et al., 2014

). Although

still correlative, these data together suggest that certain neurodevelopmental disorders such

as autism may have microbial etiologies, a hypothesis that will require further validation in

both animal models and human trials. The notion that the gut microbiome constitutes an

environmental risk factor for autism is supported by epidemiologic studies showing a rapid

increase in ASD diagnoses over the past few decades, suggesting that genetics alone cannot

explain many cases of disease. If true, targeted repair of an altered microbiome through

interventions including probiotics, prebiotics or diet may represent natural, safe and

effective treatments for neurological disorders such as autism.

Microbiome-Mediated Alterations to Neurophysiology

The observation that GF or probiotic-treated mice have altered behavior raises numerous

interesting questions related to gut-brain communication. Do microbially-derived signals act

directly on the nervous system, via the immune or metabolic or endocrine systems, and/or

other pathways? Is the influence of the microbiome due to developmental effects, or is the

microbiome-brain axis an actively modulated process? What are the neurophysiological

changes in the brain that arise due to alterations to the microbiome, which may underlie

behavioral effects? Mechanisms and consequences for long distance interoceptive

communication between gut bacteria and the brain are likely to be context-specific and not

mutually exclusive.

In some cases, there is evidence that microbiota-mediated outcomes are required to occur

during a specific time frame of development, and subsequently have irreversible

downstream neurological affects (

Borre et al., 2014

). In other examples, neurological

function can be actively modulated by signals from the microbiome. For example,

recolonizing adult GF mice with a complete microbiota restores their anxiety-like behavior

to that of SPF mice, demonstrating that control of anxiety behavior can occur through an

active and constant process between signals from the microbiome and the CNS (

Clarke et

al., 2013

). However, GF mice also display lower levels of BDNF, serotonin (5-HT; 5-

hydroxytryptamine), and specific 5-HT receptors (for instance, 5HT

) in regions such as

the amygdala and hippocampus (

Bercik et al., 2011

;

Clarke et al., 2013

;

Diaz Heijtz et al.,

2011

;

Neufeld et al., 2011

). The levels of these host molecules are not restored upon re-

colonization of adult mice, suggesting that certain phenotypes are likely programmed by the

microbiota during fetal development or in adolescence (

Clarke et al., 2013

Other processes are more actively modulated by the microbiome. It has also been observed

that GF mice display an increased rate of turnover of noradrenaline, dopamine, and 5-HT in

the striatum region of the brain (

Diaz Heijtz et al., 2011

). A high rate of turnover may

subsequently have an effect on steady-state levels of these neurotransmitters. Turnover of

norepinephrine and dopamine specifically may be responsible for the increase in motor

activity that is well documented in GF mice (

Diaz Heijtz et al., 2011

), as these

neurotransmitters have roles in increasing blood flow to muscle and central motor control,

respectively.

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 8

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

While alterations to the population or function of the microbiome may result in differential

production of metabolites that enter the periphery, it is unknown if these molecules could

cross the BBB and influence neurological function. Intriguingly, GF mice have significantly

increased permeability of the BBB, both during fetal development and in adulthood

(

Braniste et al., 2014

) (Figure 2). This increase in permeability is due to lowered expression

of endothelial tight junction proteins, specifically occludin and claudin-5, in the absence of

the microbiota. Interestingly, mono-colonization with either

Clostridium tyrobutyricum

Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron

could restore BBB integrity (and tight junction expression),

even in adult mice. As these species produce SCFAs from fermentation of complex

carbohydrates in the gut, it was subsequently observed that the SCFA butyrate was sufficient

to restore BBB integrity (

Braniste et al., 2014

) (Figure 2). This suggests that metabolic

signals that are derived from the gut microbiota actively and constantly influence the

physiological status of the BBB, a site quite distant from their origin. However, it is

unknown whether other SCFAs or microbial-derived signals, or even microbial species may

also play a role in influencing BBB permeability. This finding has important implications in

other physiological processes: it indicates that serum metabolites that normally do not cross

into the brain parenchyma, may potentially cross the BBB based on the status of the

microbiota, providing a mechanism for gut microbes to control concentrations of numerous

metabolites that can act directly on neurological systems (Figure 2).

Regulation of Neurotransmitter Levels by the Gut Microbiota

While it has been observed that changes to neurophysiology can be mediated by the

microbiome, the precise mechanism by which this influence occurs is still unclear. Although

altering the permeability of the BBB would change the flux of serum metabolites into and

out of the brain, there are potentially more direct ways in which the microbiome can alter

neurological function. One of the most direct mechanisms could be through controlling the

concentration of various neurotransmitters, both in the brain and in the periphery. For

example, 5-HT levels in peripheral serum are decreased in the absence of the gut microbiota

(

Wikoff et al., 2009

;

Yano et al., 2015

). This decrease corresponds to lower levels of 5-HT

metabolites and precursors in the intestinal luminal contents and urine (

Marcobal et al.,

2013

;

Matsumoto et al., 2012

). The vast majority of 5-HT in the body (~90%) is produced

by enterochromaffin cells in the gut (

Gershon, 2013

). Release of 5-HT by enterochromaffin

cells is necessary for modulating colonic motility (

Fukumoto et al., 2003

). It has recently

been demonstrated that microbial-derived SCFAs are capable of inducing 5-HT production

by enterochromaffin cells,

in vitro

and in animals (

Reigstad et al., 2014

;

Yano et al., 2015

Additionally, 5-HT is not known to cross the blood-brain barrier, and therefore the

microbiome control of 5-HT turnover in the brain may instead occur through alterations in

5-HT precursor levels (

O'Mahony et al., 2015

;

Sharon et al., 2014

In particular, the essential amino acid tryptophan is a central precursor to 5-HT synthesis.

Tryptophan itself is generated by the intestinal microbiota, and tryptophan present in the

periphery is capable of crossing the BBB where it can then participate in 5-HT synthesis

(

O'Mahony et al., 2015

;

Sharon et al., 2014

). Nonetheless, even local stimulation and

production of 5-HT in the GI tract would have important effects on host physiology, since 5-

HT modulates gastrointestinal motility (

Berger et al., 2009

). Intriguingly, 5-HT levels in the

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 9

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

gut can be restored in GF mice following colonization with a defined cocktail of spore

forming gut bacteria (

Yano et al., 2015

), a process that regulates platelet aggregation and

blood clotting. Non-SCFA metabolites produced by this microbial community stimulate gut

enterochromafin cells to produce 5-HT, compensating for a defect in platelet activity and

coagulation (a process known to be regulated by 5-HT). Consequences of 5-HT regulation

by bacteria in the intestine on the concentration of 5-HT in the brain and on behavior in mice

remain unknown; however, the prevalent usage of SSRIs, which increase the concentration

of 5-HT (serotonin) at the synapse, warrants interest in the potential of developing probiotic

therapies as an alternative treatment for major depressive disorder and anxiety.

5-HT is not the only neurotransmitter whose concentrations are influenced by the

microbiome. Serum levels of other neurotransmitters are also decreased in the absence of the

gut microbiota. Dopamine and GABA are decreased in the serum of GF mice, and specific

precursors and metabolites of these are also altered in the intestine (

Matsumoto et al., 2012

;

Velagapudi et al., 2010

). Exactly how gut bacteria alter the levels of these neurotransmitters

remains to be determined. Direct signals from the microbiota to neurotransmitter-producing

cells, such as the enterochromaffin cells or even to enteric neurons and glia may trigger

neurotransmitter production. While such signaling to neurotransmitter producing cells is one

way in which the microbiota may influence neurotransmitter concentrations, gut dwelling

bacteria also directly produce small molecules with potential to act as neurotransmitters. In

turn, these may act as signals to gastrointestinal cells, or make their way to the periphery and

potentially the brain, and ultimately influence neurological function.

It has been known for many years that specific species of gut bacteria are capable of

producing small molecules such as serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine, epinephrine,

GABA and acetylcholine, possible bioactive neuropeptides (

Wall et al., 2014

). However, it

is unknown whether the microbially-derived molecules can act directly on host receptors as

neurotransmitters. Recently, it has been observed that the specific human gut microbes

Clostridium sporogenes

and

Ruminococcus gnavus

are capable of producing the

neurotransmitter tryptamine through decarboxylation of tryptophan (

Williams et al., 2014

In the brain, tryptamine plays a role in the inhibitory response to 5-HT, through its action on

the trace amine-associated receptor, and may modulate mood and appetite (

Zucchi et al.,

2006

). In the gut, tryptamine can also induce enterochromaffin cells to release 5-HT. While

tryptamine can in fact cross the blood-brain barrier from serum, it is yet unknown whether

gut microbiota-produced tryptamine is trafficked from the GI tract to the CNS, and

subsequently influences neurological function.

Another potential neurotransmitter that is produced by bacteria present in the gut is

tyramine. Multiple microorganisms, including

Lactobacillus brevis

and

Enterococcus

species, are capable of decarboxylating tyrosine to tyramine (

Lucas et al., 2003

). Since

tyramine has been shown to modulate motor function in worms, as well as trace amine-

associated receptors in mammals (

Zucchi et al., 2006

), it raises the possibility that gut

microbiota-produced tyramine may act as a modulator of neurological function as well.

Similarly, 5-HT is produced by a number of gut microbes

in vitro

, specifically many lactic

acid bacteria (

Ozogul et al., 2012

), and other human intestinal bacteria have been shown to

produce GABA (

Minuk, 1986

). While GABA and 5-HT are not known to cross the BBB,

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 10

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

intestinally-derived (and therefore likely microbiota-derived) production of these molecules

may instead act locally on the vagus nerve, or through signaling via the periphery (

Barrett et

al., 2012

). In the intestine, GABA is important for modulating motility, emptying and

secretion in the intestine; in the periphery, it controls aspects of stress and thermoregulation

(

Hyland and Cryan, 2010

;

Li et al., 2012

;

Paredes and Agmo, 1992

), suggesting that signals

from the microbiota may contribute to these diverse neurophysiological functions.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, most neurotransmitters are found in the gut at levels equal

to or exceeding those in the brain. Furthermore, the proportion of total body levels of

various neurotransmitters is greater in the gut than the brain. While most of the current data

for microbiota-modulation of neurotransmitter production and/or levels is available for the

gut and periphery, local neurotransmitter regulation by gut bacteria may have long distance

effects on the brain. Neurotransmitters or other molecules derived from gut microbes have

the potential to modulate activity of the vagus nerve, the primary nerve connecting the ENS

to the CNS, and subsequently influence brain function (

Bravo et al., 2011

;

Goehler et al.,

2005

). It is also possible that microbially-derived metabolites which can act as precursors to

neurotransmitter production (such as tryptophan) and may cross through the intestinal

barrier and the BBB, could subsequently influence both systemic and CNS neurotransmitter

concentrations. It is important to note, however, that many of these studies describing

neurotransmitter production by intestinal bacteria have been performed

in vitro

, and thus it

is not known precisely whether these bacteria utilize such metabolic pathways

in vivo

, and if

so, when these specific gut microbes produce these compounds. Nevertheless, it is an

interesting prospect that the intestinal microbiota act to produce neurotransmitters and

directly modulate the nervous system (

Lyte, 2013

). Such findings open up exciting

possibilities in understanding how the microbiome may affect function of the nervous

system, through the creation of bioactive metabolites that are capable of modulating CNS

activity via several modes of gut-brain connection.

Microbial Control of Neurological Function by the Immune System

Interactions between the microbiota and the nervous system may be indirect. Growing data

indicate that the peripheral immune system can influence neurological function and

behavior. In fact, immune signaling has been shown to cause or allow progression of certain

neurological disorders, including neurodegenerative diseases and psychological illness such

as anxiety and depression. One of the better-known examples of immune-mediated effects

on neurological function is sickness behavior (Figure 3). This behavior is characterized by

appetite suppression, decreased motor activity, loss of social interaction and reduced

cognition (

Dantzer et al., 2008

). Microbial-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs), such as

lipopolysaccharide (LPS), bacterial lipoprotein (BLP), flagellin, CpG DNA, among others,

activate various cells immune system, particularly innate immune cells such as

macrophages, neutrophils, and dendritic cells. Once activated, these cells produce numerous

pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-1

, IL-1

, TNF

, and IL-6, which make their way

to the brain by crossing the BBB via both diffusion and cytokine transporters. Once in the

brain, these cytokines act on receptors expressed by neurons and glial cells, particularly

microglia (brain-resident, innate immune phagocytes), altering their activation status and

physiology (

Dantzer et al., 2000

) (Figure 3). In the periphery, these cytokines are capable of

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 11

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

acting on receptors in afferent nerves, promoting alterations in the signals leading from

distant, peripheral body sites to the CNS. Introduction of purified IL-1

and TNF

into the

brain or the periphery, as well as systemic treatment with LPS (which induces pro-

inflammatory gene expression in the brain and periphery) is sufficient to mediate sickness

behavior, while IL-6 treatment is only capable of promoting fever, but not behavioral

attributes (

Breder et al., 1994

;

van Dam et al., 1992

) (Figure 3). In further support of pro-

inflammatory cytokines mediating the onset of this behavior, treatment with anti-

inflammatory mediators, such as IGF-1 and IL-10, prevents sickness behavior (

Bluthe et al.,

1999

;

Bluthe et al., 2006

). In fact, the role of pro-inflammatory cytokines in modulating

human behavior is exemplified by the finding that one-third of patients who have been

treated with IL-2 and IFN

(used as immunotherapy against cancer and certain viral

infections) develop major depressive disorder (

Raison et al., 2006

Additionally, immune dysregulation is observed in both human cases and animal-models of

ASD (

Ashwood et al., 2006

;

Hsiao, 2013

;

Hsiao et al., 2012

;

Mead and Ashwood, 2015

). In

the maternal immune activation (MIA) model of autism, a decrease in regulatory T cells and

an increase in pro-inflammatory innate monocytes are observed in mice that display ASD

symptoms. Bone marrow transplantation from healthy donors (and subsequent restoration of

immune function) is capable of rescuing behavioral defects in this model (

Hsiao et al.,

2012

). However, given the role of the microbiota in modulating behaviors in this model

(

Hsiao et al., 2013

), it is interesting to consider that irradiation itself may have also restored

behavioral functions due to an effect on the composition of the microbiome and/or by

‘resetting’ the immune system. Nonetheless, these data provide evidence for a link between

immune dysfunction and complex social and behavioral disorders.

Exactly how pro-inflammatory cytokine signaling can mediate alterations in neurological

functions that affect behavior and behavioral disorders is beginning to be revealed. Sickness

behavior and depressive disorders, for instance, are linked to alterations in 5-HT signaling.

In this vein, IL-1

or TNF

treatment stimulate 5-HT uptake through upregulation of the

serotonin transporter (SERT), decreasing the concentration of 5-HT available to signal in the

synapase (

Zhu et al., 2006

). At the same time, these cytokines decrease the level of 5-HT

receptor (5-HT

) present on neurons, escalating the loss of 5-HT signaling, and likely

mediating the alterations to behavior (

Cai et al., 2005

) (Figure 3).

While pro-inflammatory cytokine signaling can be driven by pathogenic microbes, some

microbiota-derived signals induce non-inflammatory cytokine pathways. For instance, in the

absence of a complete microbiota, mice exhibit a lower plasma concentration of the cytokine

granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) (

Deshmukh et al., 2014

). Plasma G-CSF is

capable of crossing the BBB and acts to stimulate neurogenesis in the brain (

Zhao et al.,

2007

). Thus, through stimulation of G-CSF production, the microbiota may influence the

rate of neurogenesis. This could have effects not only on normal neurodevelopmental

processes where G-CSF signaling plays a role, but also in injury and neurodegenerative

disease. G-CSF is a protective factor following ischemic injury (

Shyu et al., 2004

) as well as

protective and therapeutic in certain models of both Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases

(

Meuer et al., 2006

;

Prakash et al., 2013

). Therefore, it is exciting to think that this may be

one way in which alterations to the microbiome could modulate the outcome of these

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 12

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

neurodegenerative diseases. Or more intriguingly, introduction of microbes that specifically

promote G-CSF production may represent a future avenue of microbiota-mediated therapy

to combat neurodegenerative illnesses.

Future Directions and Conclusions

While the role of the microbiome in influencing numerous aspects of metabolic and

immunologic aspects is well established, how indigenous microbes modulate neurological

function during health and disease is only now becoming appreciated. Here, we have

described emerging evidence for the behavioral and neurophysiological conditions in animal

models and human studies that have been linked to the microbiome. Rapid and sustained

growth of research on the gut-microbiome-brain connection may lead to discoveries that

prompt a reconsideration of potential environmental influences on numerous neurological

diseases whose cause(s) has remained enigmatic, and where treatment options are limited.

Several seminal reports now show that animals lacking microbiota have significantly altered

brain development and behavior compared to colonized counterparts, highlighting the stark

importance of host-microbial symbiosis. Germ-free animals provide a valuable model to

determine not only the precise physiological processes that the microbiota influence, but

also the extent of the effects. Along with probiotic or antibiotic treatment of colonized

animals, germ-free models provide an experimental platform to reconstitute biological

systems with defined communities or single microbial species, and from a variety of donor

sources (e.g., genetically engineered mice, humans,

etc.

) allowing for the discovery and

functional characterization of organisms and molecules that impact the nervous system.

Identification of microbes (either single species or consortia) that modulate these systems

will advance efforts to explore the nature of the microbial-derived signals and host pathways

that influence specific neurophysiological function. Genomic and genetic approaches to

study newly discovered organisms, alongside metabolomic analyses to identify products or

compounds from symbiotic bacteria, may provide critical insight into how particular

microbial molecules alter host neurophysiology. Accordingly, identification of bioactive

microbial signals may serve as a tool for the discovery of currently unidentified host

pathways or novel activities of known pathways that influence behavior and neurological

function, similar to how the study of bacterial pathogenesis has uncovered the intricacies of

host immune system pathways by first identifying those microbial signals that modulate

them.

It will be critical to differentiate whether the influence of the microbiome on a host process

is developmental or active in nature. That is, are the signals from the microbiota that alter

neurological function important at a specific time during development (

Borre et al., 2014

or can phenotypes be actively modulated in fully developed animals? Are certain aspects of

behavior mediated by signals that are derived from the maternal microbiome, or instead, can

fluctuations to the composition and function of an adult microbiome also contribute to

neurological function? Given that the majority of brain development occurs

in utero

maternal signals are likely to play a significant role. While the womb was believed to be

sterile, recent controversial observations have called this into question, and suggest

microbially-derived products may interact directly with the developing fetus (

Aagaard et al.,

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 13

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

2014

;

Borre et al., 2014

;

Funkhouser and Bordenstein, 2013

;

Jimenez et al., 2008

Furthermore, the physiological influence on maternal systems may have indirect effects on

fetal development, such as through metabolic and/or immune pathways (

PrabhuDas et al.,

2015

). Several studies have recently shed light on the relevance of the maternal-fetal

interaction and the important contribution of microbiome dynamics in the first few years of

life. There is likely not a single answer and specific processes will likely have distinct roles

for the microbiome in different contexts.

Perhaps one of the most pressing areas of research in the field is understanding the

physiological consequences of altered microbiome populations that correlate with certain

disease states. Do these changed populations enact a physiological effect that drives the

disease they are correlated with? In other words, are alterations to the microbiome causal to

a given condition? Or instead, are changes to gut bacterial composition simply a

consequence of the disease state? For many neurological diseases that lack a strong genetic

component, environmental factors are thought to play a critical role. Further study may

uncover the microbiome as an important environmental factor that may be an etiological

agent of disease, instigating effects that have lasting consequences on the initiation and/or

progression of neurological illness. Future studies addressing these questions will add

critical relevance to correlative associations described to date between the microbiome and

disease of the nervous system.

As we begin to understand how microbial-derived processes influence the brain and

behavior during health and disease, we may perhaps begin to rationally design microbiota-

based therapeutics for neurological disorders. For example, understanding the signals that

drive neurotransmitter production by intestinal bacteria (either directly or indirectly through

the production of precursors) may provide a foundation for therapies in diseases that are

currently treated by pharmacological alteration of neurotransmitter levels. This could

include a range of disorders, from neurodegenerative diseases like Parkinson’s disease,

which is treated with oral L-DOPA to stimulate dopamine levels, to depression which is

commonly treated with SSRIs, that increase the concentration of 5-HT available to signal in

the synapse. Additionally, understanding how the microbiota modulate immune responses at

distal sites may lead to understanding how we can specifically alter gut microbes to

influence immune-mediated pathologies in the brain, such as those that occur during stroke,

seizures and neurodegenerative diseases.

While microbiologists have understood for decades that microbes can alter the hosts’

behavior in various invertebrate and vertebrate systems, it is only in the last five years that

other scientific communities have begun to appreciate the potential scale and depth by which

commensal microbes affect complex neurological function in mammals. A handful of

molecular mechanisms that control these interactions have been identified; however the field

is poised to make great strides in understanding this new paradigm based on growing

awareness of the gut-microbiome-brain axis. Multi-disciplinary collaborations between

microbiologists, immunologists, neuroscientists and bioinformaticians will continue to drive

discovery into how symbiotic microbes function to shape our brains and behaviors, and how

we may exploit these organisms to combat neurological diseases. Neurodevelopmental,

psychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders represent some of the most serious medical and

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 14

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

societal burdens of our time; yet the etiology of most disorders of the brain remain unknown

and therapies are largely either ineffective or have severe side effects. New concepts and

therapeutic modalities are desperately needed to explain and address many neurological

conditions. It appears that future discoveries in the neurosciences will not solely rely on

studying the brain, but surprisingly through exploration of a forgotten organ with similar

size and complexity—the human microbiome.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We apologize to those authors whose work we have failed to mention due to space constraints. We would like to

thank Hannah Ratner, Catherine Schretter, Dr. Gil Sharon, and Dr. Wei-Li Wu for helpful discussions and critical

review of this manuscript. Research in the Mazmanian laboratory is funded by grants from the National Institutes of

Health (MH100556, DK078938, NS085910), the Heritage Medical Research Institute, the Emerald Foundation,

Autism Speaks and the Simons Foundation.

REFERENCES

Aagaard K, Ma J, Antony KM, Ganu R, Petrosino J, Versalovic J. The placenta harbors a unique

microbiome. Science translational medicine. 2014; 6:237ra265.

Adamo SA, Kovalko I, Easy RH, Stoltz D. A viral aphrodisiac in the cricket Gryllus texensis. The

Journal of experimental biology. 2014; 217:1970–1976. [PubMed: 24625650]

Ashwood P, Wills S, Van de Water J. The immune response in autism: a new frontier for autism

research. Journal of leukocyte biology. 2006; 80:1–15. [PubMed: 16698940]

Barrett E, Ross RP, O'Toole PW, Fitzgerald GF, Stanton C. gamma-Aminobutyric acid production by

culturable bacteria from the human intestine. Journal of applied microbiology. 2012; 113:411–417.

[PubMed: 22612585]

Belkaid Y, Hand TW. Role of the microbiota in immunity and inflammation. Cell. 2014; 157:121–141.

[PubMed: 24679531]

Bercik P, Denou E, Collins J, Jackson W, Lu J, Jury J, Deng Y, Blennerhassett P, Macri J, McCoy KD,

et al. The intestinal microbiota affect central levels of brain-derived neurotropic factor and behavior

in mice. Gastroenterology. 2011; 141:599–609. 609 e591–609 e593. [PubMed: 21683077]

Berger M, Gray JA, Roth BL. The expanded biology of serotonin. Annual review of medicine. 2009;

60:355–366.

Biron DG, Marche L, Ponton F, Loxdale HD, Galeotti N, Renault L, Joly C, Thomas F. Behavioural

manipulation in a grasshopper harbouring hairworm: a proteomics approach. Proceedings

Biological sciences / The Royal Society. 2005; 272:2117–2126. [PubMed: 16191624]

Bluthe RM, Castanon N, Pousset F, Bristow A, Ball C, Lestage J, Michaud B, Kelley KW, Dantzer R.

Central injection of IL-10 antagonizes the behavioural effects of lipopolysaccharide in rats.

Psychoneuroendocrinology. 1999; 24:301–311. [PubMed: 10101735]

Bluthe RM, Kelley KW, Dantzer R. Effects of insulin-like growth factor-I on cytokine-induced

sickness behavior in mice. Brain, behavior, and immunity. 2006; 20:57–63.

Borre YE, O'Keeffe GW, Clarke G, Stanton C, Dinan TG, Cryan JF. Microbiota and

neurodevelopmental windows: implications for brain disorders. Trends in molecular medicine.

2014; 20:509–518. [PubMed: 24956966]

Braniste V, Al-Asmakh M, Kowal C, Anuar F, Abbaspour A, Toth M, Korecka A, Bakocevic N, Guan

NL, Kundu P, et al. The gut microbiota influences bloodbrain barrier permeability in mice.

Science translational medicine. 2014; 6:263ra158.

Bravo JA, Forsythe P, Chew MV, Escaravage E, Savignac HM, Dinan TG, Bienenstock J, Cryan JF.

Ingestion of Lactobacillus strain regulates emotional behavior and central GABA receptor

expression in a mouse via the vagus nerve. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of

the United States of America. 2011; 108:16050–16055. [PubMed: 21876150]

Breder CD, Hazuka C, Ghayur T, Klug C, Huginin M, Yasuda K, Teng M, Saper CB. Regional

induction of tumor necrosis factor alpha expression in the mouse brain after systemic

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 15

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

lipopolysaccharide administration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United

States of America. 1994; 91:11393–11397. [PubMed: 7972071]

Cai W, Khaoustov VI, Xie Q, Pan T, Le W, Yoffe B. Interferon-alpha-induced modulation of

glucocorticoid and serotonin receptors as a mechanism of depression. Journal of hepatology. 2005;

42:880–887. [PubMed: 15885359]

Cani PD, Lecourt E, Dewulf EM, Sohet FM, Pachikian BD, Naslain D, De Backer F, Neyrinck AM,

Delzenne NM. Gut microbiota fermentation of prebiotics increases satietogenic and incretin gut

peptide production with consequences for appetite sensation and glucose response after a meal.

The American journal of clinical nutrition. 2009; 90:1236–1243. [PubMed: 19776140]

Clarke G, Grenham S, Scully P, Fitzgerald P, Moloney RD, Shanahan F, Dinan TG, Cryan JF. The

microbiome-gut-brain axis during early life regulates the hippocampal serotonergic system in a

sex-dependent manner. Molecular psychiatry. 2013; 18:666–673. [PubMed: 22688187]

Conn AR, Fell DI, Steele RD. Characterization of alpha-keto acid transport across blood-brain barrier

in rats. The American journal of physiology. 1983; 245:E253–E260. [PubMed: 6614164]

Dantzer R, Konsman JP, Bluthe RM, Kelley KW. Neural and humoral pathways of communication

from the immune system to the brain: parallel or convergent? Autonomic neuroscience : basic &

clinical. 2000; 85:60–65. [PubMed: 11189027]

Dantzer R, O'Connor JC, Freund GG, Johnson RW, Kelley KW. From inflammation to sickness and

depression: when the immune system subjugates the brain. Nature reviews Neuroscience. 2008;

9:46–56.

de Theije CG, Wopereis H, Ramadan M, van Eijndthoven T, Lambert J, Knol J, Garssen J, Kraneveld

AD, Oozeer R. Altered gut microbiota and activity in a murine model of autism spectrum

disorders. Brain, behavior, and immunity. 2014; 37:197–206.

Desbonnet L, Clarke G, Shanahan F, Dinan TG, Cryan JF. Microbiota is essential for social

development in the mouse. Molecular psychiatry. 2014; 19:146–148. [PubMed: 23689536]

Desbonnet L, Garrett L, Clarke G, Kiely B, Cryan JF, Dinan TG. Effects of the probiotic

Bifidobacterium infantis in the maternal separation model of depression. Neuroscience. 2010;

170:1179–1188. [PubMed: 20696216]

Deshmukh HS, Liu Y, Menkiti OR, Mei J, Dai N, O'Leary CE, Oliver PM, Kolls JK, Weiser JN,

Worthen GS. The microbiota regulates neutrophil homeostasis and host resistance to Escherichia

coli K1 sepsis in neonatal mice. Nature medicine. 2014; 20:524–530.

Diaz Heijtz R, Wang S, Anuar F, Qian Y, Bjorkholm B, Samuelsson A, Hibberd ML, Forssberg H,

Pettersson S. Normal gut microbiota modulates brain development and behavior. Proceedings of

the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2011; 108:3047–3052.

[PubMed: 21282636]

Driver C. Rabies: risk, prognosis and prevention. Nursing times. 2014; 110:16–18. [PubMed:

24772797]

Forsythe P, Bienenstock J, Kunze WA. Vagal pathways for microbiome-brain-gut axis

communication. Advances in experimental medicine and biology. 2014; 817:115–133. [PubMed:

24997031]

Foster JA, McVey Neufeld KA. Gut-brain axis: how the microbiome influences anxiety and

depression. Trends in neurosciences. 2013; 36:305–312. [PubMed: 23384445]

Frost G, Sleeth ML, Sahuri-Arisoylu M, Lizarbe B, Cerdan S, Brody L, Anastasovska J, Ghourab S,

Hankir M, Zhang S, et al. The short-chain fatty acid acetate reduces appetite via a central

homeostatic mechanism. Nature communications. 2014; 5:3611.

Fukumoto S, Tatewaki M, Yamada T, Fujimiya M, Mantyh C, Voss M, Eubanks S, Harris M, Pappas

TN, Takahashi T. Short-chain fatty acids stimulate colonic transit via intraluminal 5-HT release in

rats. American journal of physiology Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology. 2003;

284:R1269–R1276.

Funkhouser LJ, Bordenstein SR. Mom knows best: the universality of maternal microbial

transmission. PLoS biology. 2013; 11:e1001631. [PubMed: 23976878]

Gershon MD. 5-Hydroxytryptamine (serotonin) in the gastrointestinal tract. Current opinion in

endocrinology, diabetes, and obesity. 2013; 20:14–21.

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 16

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript

Goehler LE, Gaykema RP, Opitz N, Reddaway R, Badr N, Lyte M. Activation in vagal afferents and

central autonomic pathways: early responses to intestinal infection with Campylobacter jejuni.

Brain, behavior, and immunity. 2005; 19:334–344.

Gordon JI, Dewey KG, Mills DA, Medzhitov RM. The human gut microbiota and undernutrition.

Science translational medicine. 2012; 4:137ps112.

Hooper LV, Littman DR, Macpherson AJ. Interactions between the microbiota and the immune

system. Science. 2012; 336:1268–1273. [PubMed: 22674334]

House PK, Vyas A, Sapolsky R. Predator cat odors activate sexual arousal pathways in brains of

Toxoplasma gondii infected rats. PloS one. 2011; 6:e23277. [PubMed: 21858053]

Hsiao EY. Immune dysregulation in autism spectrum disorder. International review of neurobiology.

2013; 113:269–302. [PubMed: 24290389]

Hsiao EY, McBride SW, Chow J, Mazmanian SK, Patterson PH. Modeling an autism risk factor in

mice leads to permanent immune dysregulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

of the United States of America. 2012; 109:12776–12781. [PubMed: 22802640]

Hsiao EY, McBride SW, Hsien S, Sharon G, Hyde ER, McCue T, Codelli JA, Chow J, Reisman SE,

Petrosino JF, et al. Microbiota modulate behavioral and physiological abnormalities associated

with neurodevelopmental disorders. Cell. 2013; 155:1451–1463. [PubMed: 24315484]

Hughes DP. Parasitic manipulation: a social context. Behavioural processes. 2005; 68:263–266.

[PubMed: 15792704]

Hyland NP, Cryan JF. A Gut Feeling about GABA: Focus on GABA(B) Receptors. Front Pharmacol.

2010; 1:124. [PubMed: 21833169]

Jimenez E, Marin ML, Martin R, Odriozola JM, Olivares M, Xaus J, Fernandez L, Rodriguez JM. Is

meconium from healthy newborns actually sterile? Res Microbiol. 2008; 159:187–193. [PubMed:

18281199]

Kang DW, Park JG, Ilhan ZE, Wallstrom G, Labaer J, Adams JB, Krajmalnik-Brown R. Reduced

incidence of Prevotella and other fermenters in intestinal microflora of autistic children. PloS one.

2013; 8:e68322. [PubMed: 23844187]

Li W, Dowd SE, Scurlock B, Acosta-Martinez V, Lyte M. Memory and learning behavior in mice is

temporally associated with diet-induced alterations in gut bacteria. Physiology & behavior. 2009;

96:557–567. [PubMed: 19135464]

Li Y, Xiang YY, Lu WY, Liu C, Li J. A novel role of intestine epithelial GABAergic signaling in

regulating intestinal fluid secretion. American journal of physiology Gastrointestinal and liver

physiology. 2012; 303:G453–G460. [PubMed: 22700823]

Lu B, Nagappan G, Guan X, Nathan PJ, Wren P. BDNF-based synaptic repair as a disease-modifying

strategy for neurodegenerative diseases. Nature reviews Neuroscience. 2013; 14:401–416.

Lucas P, Landete J, Coton M, Coton E, Lonvaud-Funel A. The tyrosine decarboxylase operon of

Lactobacillus brevis IOEB 9809: characterization and conservation in tyramine-producing

bacteria. FEMS microbiology letters. 2003; 229:65–71. [PubMed: 14659544]

Lyte M. Microbial endocrinology in the microbiome-gut-brain axis: how bacterial production and

utilization of neurochemicals influence behavior. PLoS pathogens. 2013; 9:e1003726. [PubMed:

24244158]

Lyte M. Microbial endocrinology and the microbiota-gut-brain axis. Advances in experimental

medicine and biology. 2014; 817:3–24. [PubMed: 24997027]

Macnab V, Barber I. Some (worms) like it hot: fish parasites grow faster in warmer water, and alter

host thermal preferences. Global Change Biol. 2012; 18:1540–1548.

Maitland DP. A Parasitic Fungus Infecting Yellow Dungflies Manipulates Host Perching Behavior. P

Roy Soc B-Biol Sci. 1994; 258:187–193.

Marcobal A, Kashyap PC, Nelson TA, Aronov PA, Donia MS, Spormann A, Fischbach MA,

Sonnenburg JL. A metabolomic view of how the human gut microbiota impacts the host

metabolome using humanized and gnotobiotic mice. The ISME journal. 2013; 7:1933–1943.

[PubMed: 23739052]

Matsumoto M, Kibe R, Ooga T, Aiba Y, Kurihara S, Sawaki E, Koga Y, Benno Y. Impact of intestinal

microbiota on intestinal luminal metabolome. Scientific reports. 2012; 2:233. [PubMed:

22724057]

Sampson and Mazmanian

Page 17

Cell Host Microbe

. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 13.

Author Manuscript