Page 25 - Read Online
P. 25

Yakovleva et al. Microbiome Res Rep 2024;3:19  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/mrr.2023.56  Page 11 of 18

               Table 2. The coefficient of biocenotic similarity for the flies and the corresponding substrate
                NaCl concentration,  Fly and substrate   Coefficient of biocenotic similarity.   Coefficient of biocenotic similarity.
                %               samples          Bacteria                     Yeasts *
                0               0b and s0b       0.48                         0
                                0c and s0c       0.26                         0
                2               2a and s2a       0.32                         0.74
                4               4a and s4a       0.98                         0.33
                7               7a and s7a       0.25                         0.09

               *                                    [44]
                Estimated based on data from the paper of Dmitrieva et al.  .

               Table 3. Pairwise Spearman correlations calculated for 11 fly samples
                Variables     Salt concentration  Bacterial abundance  Yeast abundance  Bacterial diversity  Yeast diversity
                Salt concentration  1
                Bacterial abundance  +0.30    1
                Yeast abundance  +0.33        -0.25            1
                Bacterial diversity  -0.20    +0.04            -0.66 *        1
                Yeast diversity  +0.69 *      -0.32            +0.47          -0.47          1

               *
                5% significance level.



























                Figure 3. Diversity assessment (Shannon index) for the bacterial (diamonds) and yeast (triangles) components of microbial
                communities: (A) flies; (B) flies and corresponding substrates. Designation of the fly lines is the same as in Figure 1.

               Considering that the microbiomes of the flies reared on the substrate with 7% NaCl concentration (7a-7b)
               were contrastingly different from all the others, the calculations were repeated for 9 samples, excluding
               these two. In this case, five pairwise correlations out of 10 possible were significant at the 5% significance
               level: salt concentration - yeast diversity (positive correlation) as in the case with 11 samples; salt
               concentration - yeast abundance (positive correlation), salt concentration - bacterial diversity (negative
               correlation), yeast abundance - yeast diversity (positive correlation), bacterial diversity - yeast diversity
               (negative correlation). The pair yeast abundance - bacteria diversity (negative correlation), which was
               significant at a 5% significance level on a set of 11 samples, became nonsignificant (significant only at a 10%
               significance level) on a set of 9 samples [Table 4].
   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30