The changing microflora of bacteria in the lungs

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Any part of the human body that is open to the outside world it available for the colonisation of bacteria. While this blog has covered bacteria in the gut, the vagina and the throat, one area I've neglected to cover is the bacteria that get into the lungs. As the company I currently work for is involved in respiratory research I was rather excited to find a PLoS One paper that looked at how the population of lung bacteria changes in respiratory disease.

The respiratory disease in question is COPD, which stands for chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder. It's caused primarily by smoke getting into the lungs, from tobacco or industrial processes, and leads to narrowed airways and overproduction of mucus. It's not really curable, although many medications exist to help people live with it, and to slow down the progression of the disease.

In order to explore which bacteria were present in healthy smokers, COPD patients, and people who had never smoked, researchers used massively parallel pyrosequencing. This technique allows the bacteria to be identified by their DNA without the need for producing bacterial cultures, so even 'unculturable' bacteria can be identified.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In the smokers, never-smoked, and patients with mild COPD a far wider range of bacterial diversity was found than in patients with severe COPD who tended to have a much smaller number of different bacterial species. There were no specific bacterial species common for each group, the major difference appeared to be in diversity. The most commonly found bacteria in the healthy subjects included Pseudomonas, Streptococcus, Prevotella and Fusobacterium which the researchers suggested may make up a core lung microbiome.

As a secondary analysis, the researchers also looked at bacterial populations in very specific areas of the lung, and found that there was no homology of bacterial species throughout the whole lung. In some cases one small microenvironment in the lung could be exclusively populated by one form of bacteria. Samples from different places in the lungs could therefore result in a very different view of the bacterial microflora in the lungs.

Although this research is fascinating, it is important to note that despite differences seen the microflora cannot be used as a diagnostic for COPD as there were no exclusive differences seen in this small sample size between diseased and healthy lung flora. The small patches of different microflora may suggest areas that are more prone to developing COPD and other respiratory diseases, in the same way that patches of different skin bacterial flora can be more prone to dermatitis and skin diseases.

---

Credit link for image 1

Credit link for image 2

Reference: Erb-Downward JR, Thompson DL, Han MK, Freeman CM, McCloskey L, et al. (2011) Analysis of the Lung Microbiome in the “Healthy” Smoker and in COPD. PLoS ONE 6(2): e16384. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016384

About S.E. Gould

A biochemist with a love of microbiology, the Lab Rat enjoys exploring, reading about and writing about bacteria. Having finally managed to tear herself away from university, she now works for a small company in Cambridge where she turns data into manageable words and awesome graphs.

More by S.E. Gould

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe