MOESM1 of Microbial communities of the house fly Musca domestica vary with geographical location and habitat
Creators: name: Park, Rahel
name: Dzialo, Maria
name: Spaepen, Stijn
name: Nsabimana, Donat
name: Gielens, Kim
name: Devriese, Herman
name: Crauwels, Sam
name: Tito, Raul
name: Raes, Jeroen
name: Lievens, Bart
name: Verstrepen, Kevin
Publisher: name: figshare
Year: 2019
Subjects: subject: Microbiology
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: Genetics
subject: Molecular Biology
subject: Evolutionary Biology
subject: 59999 Environmental Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Earth and related environmental sciences
subject: FOS: Earth and related environmental sciences
subject: Ecology
subject: Immunology
subject: FOS: Clinical medicine
subject: FOS: Clinical medicine
subject: 69999 Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: 110309 Infectious Diseases
subject: FOS: Health sciences
subject: FOS: Health sciences

description: Additional file 1: Figure S1. House flies were collected from two geographically distinct locations and three different habitats. (A) Sampling locations were located near Brussels, Belgium and Butare, Rwanda (dotted box indicates zoomed in region in each panel). (B) Geographical coordinates of the sampling sites from each country. (C) Individual flies were washed with PBS-Tween80 (external sample) and subsequently homogenized (internal sample). Both samples were subjected to amplicon sequencing. Figure S2. Venn diagrams of ASVs shared between flies external and internal compartment (A), samples from Belgium and Rwanda (B), from different environments (C) and the two sexes (D). ASVs present in each category with prevalence of &gt;10% at detection threshold of 0.1% were included in the comparisons. Figure S3. Heatmap of 100 most abundant genera of the (A) internal bacterial (B) external bacterial (C) internal fungal and (D) external fungal microbiotas depicting the clustering of taxa based on PCoA ordination with Bray-Curtis distances and samples by habitat. Panel A (internal bacteria) does not show a clear clustering of species with the location where the flies were caught whereas Panel B (external bacteria) shows weak clustering and Panels C (internal fungi) and D (external fungi) show a clear separation of microbial genera isolated from flies caught at different locations. Figure S4. Relative abundance of bacterial (A) and fungal (B) classes, grouped by habitat. The classes with overall average relative abundance under 1% are grouped in “Other”. Figure S5. Comparison of average relative abundance for most abundant ASVs across internal and external house fly bacterial (A) and fungal (B) microbiota. Dashed lines indicate 1% of the average microbiota in external and internal compartments (log10 scale). The plots include the 1000 most abundant ASVs from internal and the 1000 most abundant ASVs from external samples. For bacteria, the ASVs above 1% in either internal or external compartment are labelled, as well as ASVs that are above 0.25% abundance in one compartment and less than 0.04% in the other compartment. For fungi, the ASVs above 2.5% in either internal or external compartment are labelled, as well as ASVs that are above 1% abundance in one compartment and less than 0.003% in the other compartment. Figure S6. The bacterial (A) and fungal (B) mock communities were sequenced along with fly samples in each sequencing run and juxtaposed with the true (‘Expected’) composition and abundance of the mock community.