(B) Dendrogram of the DGGE profiles shown in panel A. Pearson correlation was used to calculate the PXD101 nmr Similarity in DGGE profiles. DGGE band profiles displayed a relatively low complexity for both probiotic (P) and control (C) groups, as NVP-HSP990 mouse assessed by the richness index. Mean values of the richness index were 6.6 at both W33 and W37 for C group and shifted

from 8.4 (W33) to 7.4 (W37) for P group without significant variations between W33 and W37. Pearson correlation was used to calculate the similarity index (SI) between DGGE patterns related to the time points W33 and W37 for each pregnant woman (Table 1). The SI median values of P group and C group were 73% and 79%, respectively. In particular, 3 women belonging to P group (N. 2, 9 and 10) and only one woman belonging to C group (N. 24) showed SI values lower that 50%. For each woman, significant differences between DGGE profiles related to W33 and W37 were searched by Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. No significant variations were detected between W33 and W37 in control women. Significant differences (P < 0.05) were found for 5/15 (33%) women belonging to P group (N. 4, 5, 9, 10, 11). Interestingly, women N. 9 and 10 were the same presenting SIs < 50%. These data suggested a potential role of the probiotic formula in modulating the vaginal bacterial communities. The peak heights of the DGGE densitometric curves were analyzed using the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test in order to search for

significant differences in single species abundances between W33 and W37. No significant changes in species abundance were found for both P and C groups, even in women AZD9291 nmr N. 4, 5, 9, 10, 11. Table 1 Similarity index (SI) of DGGE profiles related to W33 and W37 obtained with universal (HDA1/HDA2) and Lactobacillus-specific

(Lac1/Lac2) primers Woman N HDA1-GC/HDA2 SI (%) Lac1/Lac2-GC SI (%) Probiotic (P)     1 55.2 21.6 2 28.4 62.0 3 84.0 84.0 4 87.7 84.1 5 78.0 87.8 6 64.5 68.1 7 77.2 85.6 8 88.5 95.5 9 37.5 86.2 10 41.3 91.9 11 95.3 96.6 12 94.5 93.3 13 84.7 96.9 14 94.3 94.3 15 81.1 44.5 Control (C)     16 91.2 90.9 17 87.8 93.7 18 81.6 76.9 19 83.7 91.5 20 67.7 81.3 21 87.1 94.3 22 94.6 74.4 23 85.3 74.1 24 25.4 46.0 25 84.7 84.2 26 78.3 68.1 27 84.5 86.3 Cluster analysis showed that the DGGE profiles related to the time points Ureohydrolase W33 and W37 clustered together for all the control women, except for the woman N. 24 (Figure 1). Four supplemented women (N. 2, 9, 10 and 15) showed W33 and W37 DGGE profiles not closely related. However, the DGGE patterns of the majority of the women administered with VSL#3 grouped according to the subject and not to the time point, revealing that the inter-individual variability was higher than the variability induced by the probiotic supplementation.