Analysis of the microbial community diversity in various regions of the healthy oral cavity.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Microbiomics offers new methods for conducting epidemiological surveys of oral microbiota in large populations. Compared to curette sampling, swab sampling is more convenient and less technically sensitive, making it more suitable for such surveys. To verify the feasibility of using swabs for buccal mucosa sampling in large-scale studies, we collected samples from the buccal mucosa and tooth surfaces of healthy individuals using both swabs and curettes. Microbiomics was employed to analyze and compare microbial abundance and diversity between these two methods. METHODS: Four sites were assessed the buccal mucosa on both sides and the buccal surfaces of the left and right mandibular first molars. Two sampling methods, swab and curette, were used to collect bacterial communities from healthy individuals. Specifically, buccal mucosa samples (n = 10) and tooth surface samples (n = 20) were analyzed using 16 S rDNA gene sequencing. Bacterial signals were detected through fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), targeting the bacterial 16 S rDNA gene. Metastats analysis and Wilcoxon test were used. RESULTS: A total of 383 OTUs were detected in the 30 samples, which belonged to 1 kingdom (bacteria), 11 phyla, 23 classes, 40 orders, 75 families, 143 genus, and 312 species. Among them, 223 OTUs were found on both the buccal mucosa and tooth surfaces. The statistics suggest that although there were no significant differences in colony composition, there were differences in the abundance and distribution of colonies on the dental and buccal mucosal surfaces. When detecting oral disease-causing pathogens such as Enterococcus faecalis and Porphyromonas gingivalis, the efficiency of detection is higher when using curette sampling. Compared to right tooth sampling with a curette, the swab sampling group had higher levels of Firmicutes, while Fusobacteria and Bacteroidetes were more prevalent in the curette tissues. CONCLUSIONS: In oral health individuals, there is no difference in the bacterial composition of the oral buccal mucosa and the dental surface, differing only in abundance. Thus, the buccal mucosa can act as a substitute for the teeth in epidemiological investigations exploring the bacterial composition of the oral cavity.