Methods for predicting overweight risk for pets and adult percent body fat

Patent metadata

Field	Value
Publication number	US-2016281142-A1
Application number	US-201615076866-A
Country	US
Kind code	A1
Filing date	Mar 22, 2016
Priority date	Mar 25, 2015
Publication date	Sep 29, 2016
Grant date	—

Abstract

The invention provides methods for determining overweight risk in a companion animal and to predict percent body fat in a young animal upon maturity. In one embodiment, a method for determining overweight risk in a companion animal can comprise measuring a relative abundance of bacteria from a microbiome of the companion animal; comparing the relative abundance of the bacteria to a relative abundance of the bacteria in a lean microbiome profile or in an overweight microbiome profile; and determining that the companion animal is at risk for being overweight if the relative abundance of bacteria is within the overweight microbiome profile or if the relative abundance of bacteria is outside the lean microbiome profile.

First claim

What is claimed is:

1 . A method for determining overweight risk in a companion animal, comprising:
measuring a relative abundance of bacteria from a microbiome of the companion animal including at least two bacterium selected from the group consisting of Bifidobacterium longum, Coriobacteriaceae, [Eubacterium] cylindroides, Bifidobacterium adolescentis, Megasphaera, Bulleidia, Collinsella spp, Bifidobacteriumceae, Collinsella stercoris, Butyrivibrio, Bulleidia p_1630_c5 , Dialister, Slackia spp, Prevotella copri, Catenibacterium, Megamonas, Lactobacillus ruminis, Clostridiaceae, Desulfovibrio, Clostridium, Streptococcus luteciae, Clostridium perfringens, Oscillospira, Clostridium hiranonis, Dorea spp, [ Paraprevotellaceae] [Prevotella], Prevotella, Parabacteroides distasonis, Coprococcus spp, Sediminibacterium, Comamonadaceae , SMB53 , Ruminococcus spp, S24_7_g, Bilophila, Parabacteroides , and Dorea formicigenerans; comparing the relative abundance of the bacteria to a relative abundance of the bacteria in a lean microbiome profile or in an overweight microbiome profile; and determining that the companion animal is at risk for being overweight if the relative abundance of bacteria is within the overweight microbiome profile or if the relative abundance of bacteria is outside the lean microbiome profile.

2 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the determining step is based on comparing to the lean microbiome profile.

3 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the lean microbiome profile includes at least two bacterium selected from the group consisting of: Clostridiaceae, Desulfovibrio, Clostridium, Streptococcus luteciae, Clostridium perfringens, Oscillospira, Clostridium hiranonis, Dorea spp, [ Paraprevotellaceae] [Prevotella], Prevotella, Parabacteroides distasonis, Coprococcus spp, Sediminibacterium, Comamonadaceae , SMB53 , Ruminococcus spp, S24_7_g, Bilophila, Parabacteroides , and Dorea formicigenerans.

4 . The method of claim 3 , wherein the relative abundance of Clostridiaceae in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.07% to 6.7%, the relative abundance of Desulfovibrio in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 0.75%, the relative abundance of Clostridium in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 7.7%, the relative abundance of Streptococcus luteciae in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 3%, the relative abundance of Clostridium perfringens in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 1.1%, the relative abundance of Oscillospira in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.02% to 0.77%, the relative abundance of Clostridium hiranonis in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.9% to 17%, the relative abundance of Dorea spp in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 1%, the relative abundance of [ Paraprevotellaceae] [Prevotella ] in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 6.5%, the relative abundance of Prevotella in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 0.6%, the relative abundance of Parabacteroides distasonis in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001 to 0.4%, the relative abundance of Coprococcus spp in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 1.6%, the relative abundance of Sediminibacterium in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 0.15%, the relative abundance of Comamonadaceae in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 0.31%, the relative abundance of SMB53 in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.03% to 0.8%, the relative abundance of Ruminococcus spp in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 1.6%, the relative abundance of S24_7_g in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 23%, the relative abundance of Bilophila in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 0.1%, the relative abundance of Parabacteroides in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 1.4%, and the relative abundance of Dorea formicigenerans in the lean microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 0.65%.

5 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the determining step is based on comparing to the overweight microbiome profile.

6 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the overweight microbiome profile includes at least two bacterium selected from the group consisting of: Bifidobacterium longum, Coriobacteriaceae, [Eubacterium] cylindroides, Bifidobacterium adolescentis, Megasphaera, Bulleidia, Collinsella spp, Bifidobacteriumceae, Collinsella stercoris, Butyrivibrio, Bulleidia p_1630_c5 , Dialister, Slackia spp, Prevotella copri, Catenibacterium, Megamonas , and Lactobacillus ruminis.

7 . The method of claim 6 , wherein the relative abundance of Bifidobacterium longum in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 1.61%, the relative abundance of Coriobacteriaceae in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 24.1%, the relative abundance of [ Eubacterium] cylindroides in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.06% to 1%, the relative abundance of Bifidobacterium adolescentis in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 17.3%, the relative abundance of Megasphaera in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 12.5%, the relative abundance of Bulleidia in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 3.4%, the relative abundance of Collinsella spp in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.44% to 6.5%, the relative abundance of Bifidobacteriumceae in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.065% to 0.95%, the relative abundance of Collinsella stercorin in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.28% to 2%, the relative abundance of Butyrivibrio in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 0.14%, the relative abundance of Bulleidia p_1630_c5 in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.4 to 1.9%, the relative abundance of Dialister in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 5.9%, the relative abundance of Slackia spp in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.01% to 0.32%, the relative abundance of Prevotella copri in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 2% to 18%, the relative abundance of Catenibacterium in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 3.5%, the relative abundance of Megamonas in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 0.19%, and the relative abundance of Lactobacillus ruminis in the overweight microbiome profile ranges from 0.001% to 4.3%.

8 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the bacteria are from different genuses.

9 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the bacteria are from different families.

10 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the bacteria are from different orders.

11 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the bacteria are from different classes.

12 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the bacteria are from different phyla.

13 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the bacteria include at least 3 bacterium.

14 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the bacteria include at least 4 bacterium.

15 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the bacteria include Megasphaera, Bifidobacterium , and Prevotella copri.

16 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the companion animal is a feline having an age of at least 6 months.

17 . A method of predicting percent of adult body fat for a companion animal having an age from 1 day to 6 months, comprising
measuring the relative abundance of bacteria from a microbiome of the companion animal including
Coprococcus spp, Candidatus Arthromitus spp,

Assignees

• Nestec Sa

Inventors

• Czarnecki-Maulden Gail
• Ramadan Ziad S
• Manuzon Michael Yabes

Classifications

• C12Q1/689 Primary

  for bacteria · CPC title

• C12Q2600/124

  Animal traits, i.e. production traits, including athletic performance or the like · CPC title

• C12Q1/6883

  for diseases caused by alterations of genetic material · CPC title

• C12Q1/06

  Quantitative determination · CPC title

• G01N2800/044

  Hyperlipemia or hypolipemia, e.g. dyslipidaemia, obesity · CPC title