The human body is home to trillions of bacterial cells, outnumbering human cells in some estimates¹². These microbes form complex ecosystems within us, shaping our health, development, and overall physiology. The combined genetic material of the microbiome surpasses the human genome by two orders of magnitude, encompassing over five million genes³. Rather than standalone organisms, humans are deeply interconnected superorganisms, shaped by the symbiotic relationships with our microbes.
From Association to Causation in Microbiome Research
Advancements in metagenomic sequencing have enabled researchers to profile the microbiome in various health and disease states⁴. For example, reductions in butyrate-producing bacteria have been linked to both type 2 diabetes and major depression 5,6,7. Meanwhile, the guts of healthy centenarians show an enrichment in pathological bacteria that are normally kept at bay but thrive in inflamed environment8,9.
Though these studies may establish links between host and microbiota phenotypes, they don’t address whether microbiome changes are the cause or the result of a specific condition. To answer this question, researchers turn to gnotobiotic models, where microbial composition can be tightly controlled.
Gnotobiotic Mice: The Traditional Approach
Traditionally, host-microbe interactions have been studied using gnotobiotic mice. First, mouse pups are delivered via aseptic caesarean, preventing maternal microbial transmission. These germ-free (GF) mice are then raised in sterile conditions before being inoculated with specific microbes to assess their impact.
GF and gnotobiotic mice have greatly advanced our understanding of the microbiome’s role in maintaining host homeostasis, as well as the synergistic/antagonistic interactions that occur between microbes10.
However, the model is not without its limitations.
To overcome these challenges, researchers are increasingly turning to alternative models that are scalable, genetically tractable, and capable of surviving on simplified microbial communities.
C. elegans: An Alternative Model
With low-cost husbandry, a short three-week lifecycle, and unparalleled genetic accessibility, C. elegans has emerged as a powerful alternative for microbiome research.
Simple microbial ecosystem – Unlike mammals, where the microbiome consists of complex consortia, C. elegans can be grown on a single bacterial species, enabling precise, controlled studies of host-microbe interactions.
Manipulating microbial genes – In the lab, C. elegans is typically fed a strain of E. coli (OP50), a well-characterised bacterial species with extensive genetic tools. The Keio deletion collection, for example, includes 4,000 knockout strains covering 93% of E. coli genes¹⁶. By feeding nematodes bacterial deletion mutants, researchers can pinpoint specific bacterial pathways that influence host physiology.
Proven translational insights – This approach has already led to key microbiome discoveries, such as the finding that inhibiting bacterial folate synthesis extends nematode lifespan¹⁷¹⁸ – a critical insight into host-microbiome metabolic interactions.
Genetically tractable – C. elegans is easily genetically modified using RNA interference (RNAi), transgenics, CRISPR-Cas9, and other tools. Incredibly, around 50% of C. elegans genes have human orthologues, making the nematode a compelling model for dissecting pathways central to human biology19.
Why C. elegans is a Game-Changer for Microbiome Research
The combination of nematode and microbiota offers unique advantages. Unlike mammalian models, C. elegans enables researchers to systematically manipulate both host and microbial genetics, dissecting causal mechanisms underlying microbiome-driven effects – rather than merely observing associations.
For biotech and nutraceutical companies, C. elegans provides a rapid, cost-effective way to assess bacterial strain functionality before moving to more complex models. This de-risks early-stage development, offering valuable in vivo insights weeks rather than months.
Join Us at the Microbiome Times Partnering Forum
Prof David Weinkove, our CSO, will be speaking on the Longevity & Healthspan track, exploring how C. elegans enables researchers to untangle cause-and-effect in microbiome studies – one strain at a time.
If you’re developing a probiotic, postbiotic, or microbiome-targeted therapy, we’d love to discuss how our models can help you validate functional effects efficiently – without the delays of traditional animal models.
Want to chat? Jess and Mireya will be at the event – you can contact them at jess@magnitudebiosciences.com or mireya@magnitudebiosciences.com to arrange a meeting.
References:
1 Sender, R., Fuchs, S. & Milo, R. Revised Estimates for the Number of Human and Bacteria Cells in the Body. PLoS Biol 14, e1002533 (2016).
2 Lloyd-Price, J., Abu-Ali, G. & Huttenhower, C. The healthy human microbiome. Genome Med 8, 51 (2016).
3 Consortium HMP. Data Analysis and Coordination Center (DACC). Human Microbiome Project (HMP) (2012).
4 Sommer, F. & Bäckhed, F. The gut microbiota — masters of host development and physiology. Nat Rev Microbiol 11, 227–238 (2013).
5 Valles-Colomer, M. et al. The neuroactive potential of the human gut microbiota in quality of life and depression. Nat Microbiol 4, 623–632 (2019).
6 Wu, X. et al. Molecular Characterisation of the Faecal Microbiota in Patients with Type II Diabetes. Curr Microbiol 61, 69–78 (2010).
7 Qin, J. et al. A metagenome-wide association study of gut microbiota in type 2 diabetes. Nature 490, 55–60 (2012).
8 Biagi, E. et al. Through Ageing, and Beyond: Gut Microbiota and Inflammatory Status in Seniors and Centenarians. PLoS One 5, e10667 (2010).
9 Pédron, T. & Sansonetti, P. Commensals, Bacterial Pathogens and Intestinal Inflammation: An Intriguing Ménage à Trois. Cell Host Microbe 3, 344–347 (2008).
10 Martín, R., Bermúdez-Humarán, L. G. & Langella, P. Gnotobiotic Rodents: An In Vivo Model for the Study of Microbe–Microbe Interactions. Front Microbiol 7, (2016).
11 Cho, I. & Blaser, M. J. The human microbiome: at the interface of health and disease. Nat Rev Genet 13, 260–270 (2012).
12 Round, J. L. & Mazmanian, S. K. The gut microbiota shapes intestinal immune responses during health and disease. Nat Rev Immunol 9, 313–323 (2009).
13 Tang, W. H. W., Kitai, T. & Hazen, S. L. Gut Microbiota in Cardiovascular Health and Disease. Circ Res 120, 1183–1196 (2017).
14 Cryan, J. F. & Dinan, T. G. Mind-altering microorganisms: the impact of the gut microbiota on brain and behaviour. Nat Rev Neurosci 13, 701–712 (2012).
15 Shimizu, K. et al. Normalization of Reproductive Function in Germfree Mice Following Bacterial Contamination. Exp Anim 47, 151–158 (1998)
16 Baba, T. et al. Construction of Escherichia coli K‐12 in‐frame, single‐gene knockout mutants: the Keio collection. Mol Systems Biol. (2006).
17 Cabreiro F. et al. Metformin retards aging in C. elegans by altering microbial folate and methionine metabolism. Cell. (2013).
18 Virk, B. et al. Folate Acts in E. coli to Accelerate C. elegans Aging Independently of Bacterial Biosynthesis. Cell Rep. (2016).
19 C. elegans Sequencing Consortium. Genome sequence of the nematode C. elegans: a platform for investigating biology. (1998).
Sign up to our newsletter today, to get access to the latest company and industry news