Back

Human and bacterial genetic variation shape oral microbiomes and health

Kamitaki, N.; Handsaker, R. E.; Hujoel, M. L.; Mukamel, R. E.; Usher, C. L.; McCarroll, S. A.; Loh, P.-R.

2025-04-01 genetic and genomic medicine
10.1101/2025.03.31.25324952 medRxiv
Show abstract

Summary ParagraphHuman genetic variation influences all aspects of our biology, including the oral cavity1-3, through which nutrients and microbes enter the body. Yet it is largely unknown which human genetic variants shape a persons oral microbiome and potentially promote its dysbiosis3-5. We characterized the oral microbiomes of 12,519 people by re-analyzing whole-genome sequencing reads from previously sequenced saliva-derived DNA. Human genetic variation at 11 loci (10 novel) associated with variation in oral microbiome composition. Several of these related to carbohydrate availability; the strongest association (p=3.0x10-188) involved the common FUT2 W154X loss-of-function variant, which associated with the abundances of 58 bacterial species. Human host genetics also appeared to powerfully shape genetic variation within oral bacterial species: these 11 host genetic variants also associated with variation of gene dosages in 68 regions of bacterial genomes. Common, multi-allelic copy-number variation of AMY1, which encodes salivary amylase, associated with oral microbiome composition (p=1.5x10-53) and with dentures use in UK Biobank (p=5.9x10-35, n=418,039) but not with body mass index (p=0.85), suggesting that amylase abundance impacts health by influencing the oral microbiome. Two other microbiome composition-associated loci, FUT2 and PITX1, also significantly associated with dentures risk, collectively nominating numerous host-microbial interactions that contribute to tooth decay.

Published in Nature (predicted rank #1) · training set

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.