Conclusions The major proportion of oral microbiomes was common a

Conclusions The major proportion of oral microbiomes was common across three unrelated healthy

individuals, supporting the concept of a core-microbiome at health. The site specificity of the oral microbiome, especially between mucosal and dental sites and between saliva and dental sites, should be considered in future study designs. Sequencing large sub-populations in longitudinal clinical trials at defined intermediate stages from health to disease will provide oral health professionals with valuable information for future diagnostic and Savolitinib purchase treatment modalities. Methods Samples Three healthy Caucasian male adults (Table 1) with no antibiotic use in the past three months participated in the study after signed informed consent. The study was approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Free www.selleckchem.com/products/Cediranib.html University Amsterdam. Each individual had a full set of natural Ganetespib in vivo dentition and none of them wore any removable or fixed prosthetic appliances, they had no clinical signs of oral mucosal disease and did not suffer from

halitosis, did not have caries (white spot lesions of enamel or dentin lesions) or periodontal disease. The periodontal health was defined as no periodontal pockets deeper than 3 mm and no bleeding on probing at more than 10% of gingival sites. The sites that were sampled did not show any bleeding. In selecting healthy volunteers for experimental gingivitis studies, gingiva is considered healthy if bleeding on marginal probing is present at less than 20-25% of gingival sites [24, 25]. Samples were collected in the morning, 12 hr after tooth brushing and 2 hr after the last food and/or drink intake. Parafilm-chewing stimulated saliva was collected and mixed 1:2 with RNAProtect (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). For supragingival plaque Carbohydrate sampling, three intact dental surfaces around a single upper incisor (tooth 11 buccally, lingually, and approximal surfaces of teeth 11/12) and around an upper molar (tooth 16

buccally, lingually, and approximal surfaces of teeth 15/16) were selected. Mucosal swabs were collected from the cheek, hard palate and tongue surface. The mucosal and dental surface swabs were collected using a sterile microbrush (Microbrush International, Grafton, USA). To sample buccal and lingual dental surfaces, the microbrush was moved over the enamel from mesial to distal curvature of the tooth crown along the gingival margin and tooth-surface border. The cheek mucosa and hard palate were sampled by making a circular motion of the microbrush over the central part of cheek mucosa or hard palate while applying slight pressure. The tongue swab was collected by several strokes over the first two thirds of the tongue dorsum in anterior-posterior direction. After the sample was taken, the tip of the microbrush was placed into an Eppendorf vial with 0.2 ml RNAProtect solution and clipped off.

Comments are closed.