Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The impact of diet on the composition and relative abundance of rumen microbes in goat

  • Liu, Kaizhen (Institute of Animal Nutrition, Sichuan Agricultural University) ;
  • Xu, Qin (Institute of Animal Nutrition, Sichuan Agricultural University) ;
  • Wang, Lizhi (Institute of Animal Nutrition, Sichuan Agricultural University) ;
  • Wang, Jiwen (Institute of Animal Nutrition, Sichuan Agricultural University) ;
  • Guo, Wei (Institute of Animal Nutrition, Sichuan Agricultural University) ;
  • Zhou, Meili (Institute of Animal Nutrition, Sichuan Agricultural University)
  • Received : 2016.05.05
  • Accepted : 2016.08.08
  • Published : 2017.04.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This experiment was conducted to explore the impact of diet on the ruminal microbial community in goats. Methods: Twelve goats were divided into two groups and fed complete feed (CF) or all forage (AF) diet. The total microbial DNAs in the rumen liquid were extracted. The V4 region of microbial 16S rRNA genes was amplified and sequenced using high-throughput. Information of sequences was mainly analyzed by QIIME 1.8.0. Results: The results showed that Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes were the most predominant microbial phyla in the rumen of all goats. At genus level, the abundance of fiber-digesting bacteria such as Ruminococcus and Lachnospiracea incertae sedis was significantly higher in AF than that in CF, while the levels of fat-degrading bacterium Anaerovibrio and protein-degrading bacterium Pseudomonas were opposite. The core shared genera, Prevotella and Butyrivibrio were widespread in the rumen of goats and no significant difference was observed in relative abundance between groups. Conclusion: We concluded that the richness of fiber-, protein-, and fat-digesting bacteria was affected by diet and tended to increase with the rise of their corresponding substrate contents in the ration; some bacteria shared by all goats maintained stable despite the difference in the ration, and they might be essential in maintaining the normal function of rumen.

Keywords

References

  1. Flint HJ, Bayer EA, Rincon MT, Lamed R, White BW. Polysaccharide utilization by gut bacteria: Potential for new insights from genomic analysis. Nat Rev Microbiol 2008;6:121-31. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro1817
  2. Jami E, Israel A, Kotser A, Mizrahi I. Exploring the bovine rumen bacterial community from birth to adulthood. ISME J 2013;7:1069-79. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2013.2
  3. Bekele AZ, Koike S, Kobayashi Y. Genetic diversity and diet specificity of ruminal prevotella revealed by 16s rrna gene-based analysis. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2010;305:49-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2010.01911.x
  4. Pitta D, Pinchak W, Dowd S, et al. Longitudinal shifts in bacterial diversity and fermentation pattern in the rumen of steers grazing wheat pasture. Anaerobe 2014;30:11-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2014.07.008
  5. Menezes AB, Lewis E, O'Donovan M, et al. Microbiome analysis of dairy cows fed pasture or total mixed ration diets. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2011;78:256-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2011.01151.x
  6. Wanapat M, Cherdthong A. Use of real-time pcr technique in studying rumen cellulolytic bacteria population as affected by level of roughage in swamp buffalo. Curr Microbiol 2009;58:294-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-008-9322-6
  7. Huang XD, Tan HY, Long R, Liang JB, Wright ADG. Comparison of methanogen diversity of yak (bos grunniens) and cattle (bos taurus) from the qinghai-tibetan plateau, china. BMC Microbiol 2012;12:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2180-12-1
  8. Sun Y, Mao S, Zhu W. Rumen chemical and bacterial changes during stepwise adaptation to a high-concentrate diet in goats. Animal 2010;4:210-7. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175173110999111X
  9. Mohammadzadeh H, Yanez-Ruiz DR, Martinez-Fernandez G, Abecia L. Molecular comparative assessment of the microbial ecosystem in rumen and faeces of goats fed alfalfa hay alone or combined with oats. Anaerobe 2014;29:52-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2013.11.012
  10. Highlander SK. High throughput sequencing methods for microbiome profiling: Application to food animal systems. Anim Health Res Rev 2012;13:40-53. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1466252312000126
  11. Caporaso JG, Lauber CL, Walters WA, et al. Global patterns of 16s rRNA diversity at a depth of millions of sequences per sample. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2011;108:4516-22. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1000080107
  12. Walters WA, Caporaso JG, Lauber CL, et al. Primerprospector: De novo design and taxonomic analysis of barcoded polymerase chain reaction primers. Bioinformatics 2011;27:1159-61. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr087
  13. Caporaso JG, Lauber CL, Walters WA et al. Ultra-high-throughput microbial community analysis on the illumina hiseq and miseq platforms. ISME J 2012;6:1621-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2012.8
  14. Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R. Uchime improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 2011;27:2194-200. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr381
  15. Caporaso JG, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, et al. Pynast: A flexible tool for aligning sequences to a template alignment. Bioinformatics 2010;26:266-267. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp636
  16. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, et al. Qiime allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 2010;7:335-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.303
  17. Benson AK, Kelly SA, Legge R, et al. Individuality in gut microbiota composition is a complex polygenic trait shaped by multiple environmental and host genetic factors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010;107:18933-8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1007028107
  18. Hong PY, Wheeler E, Cann IK, Mackie RI. 2011. Phylogenetic analysis of the fecal microbial community in herbivorous land and marine iguanas of the galapagos islands using 16s rRNA-based pyrosequencing. ISME J 5:1461-70. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2011.33
  19. Shanks OC, Kelty CA, Archibeque S, et al. Community structures of fecal bacteria in cattle from different animal feeding operations. Appl Environ Microbiol 2011;77:2992-3001. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02988-10
  20. Jami E, Mizrahi I. Similarity of the ruminal bacteria across individual lactating cows. Anaerobe 2012;18:338-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2012.04.003
  21. Doerner KC, White, BA. Assessment of the endo-1, 4-beta-glucanase components of ruminococcus flavefaciens fd-1. Appl Environ Microbiol 1990;56:1844-50.
  22. Shinkai T, Ueki T, Koike S, Kobayashi Y. Determination of bacteria constituting ruminal fibrolytic consortia developed on orchard grass hay stem. J Anim Sci 2014;85:254-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12145
  23. Huws SA, Lee MR, Muetzel SM, et al. Forage type and fish oil cause shifts in rumen bacterial diversity. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2010;73:396-407.
  24. Lin HH, Yin LJ, Jiang ST. Cloning, expression, and purification of Pseudomonas aeruginosa keratinase in Escherichia coli AD494 (DE3) plyss expression system. J Agric Food Chem 2009;57:3506-11. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf803752j
  25. Huo W, Zhu W, Mao S. Impact of subacute ruminal acidosis on the diversity of liquid and solid-associated bacteria in the rumen of goats. J Microbiol Biotechn 2014;30:669-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-013-1489-8
  26. Koike S, Yoshitani S, Kobayashi Y, Tanaka K. Phylogenetic analysis of fiber-associated rumen bacterial community and PCR detection of uncultured bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2003;229:23-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1097(03)00760-2
  27. Huws SA, Kim EJ, Lee MR, et al. As yet uncultured bacteria phylogenetically classified as Prevotella, Lachnospiraceae incertae sedis and unclassified Bacteroidales, Clostridiales, and Ruminococcaceae may play a predominant role in ruminal biohydrogenation. Environ Microbiol 2011;13:1500-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2011.02452.x
  28. Taguchi H, Koike S, Kobayashi Y, Cann IK, Karita S. Partial characterization of structure and function of a xylanase gene from the rumen hemicellulolytic bacterium Eubacterium ruminantium. J Anim Sci 2004;75:325-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-0929.2004.00193.x
  29. Tajima K, Aminov R, Nagamine T, et al. Diet-dependent shifts in the bacterial population of the rumen revealed with real-time PCR. Appl Environ Microbiol 2001;67:2766-74. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.67.6.2766-2774.2001

Cited by

  1. Changes in the ruminal fermentation and bacterial community structure by a sudden change to a high-concentrate diet in Korean domestic ruminants vol.32, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.18.0262
  2. Effects of particle size of ground alfalfa hay on caecal bacteria and archaea populations of rabbits vol.7, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7910
  3. Rumen bacterial diversity of Tibetan sheep (Ovis aries) associated with different forage types on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau vol.65, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1139/cjm-2019-0154
  4. Comparative Analysis of Soil Microbiome Profiles in the Companion Planting of White Clover and Orchard Grass Using 16S rRNA Gene Sequencing Data vol.11, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.538311
  5. Comparative analysis of the metabolically active microbial communities in the rumen of dromedary camels under different feeding systems using total rRNA sequencing vol.8, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10184
  6. Comparison of MicroRNA Transcriptomes Reveals the Association between MiR-148a-3p Expression and Rumen Development in Goats vol.10, pp.11, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10111951
  7. Lignocelluloytic activities and composition of bacterial community in the camel rumen vol.7, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3934/microbiol.2021022
  8. The Effect of a High-Grain Diet on the Rumen Microbiome of Goats with a Special Focus on Anaerobic Fungi vol.9, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9010157
  9. Rumen bacterial community profile and fermentation in Barki sheep fed olive cake and date palm byproducts vol.9, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12447
  10. Ruminal microbiota-host interaction and its effect on nutrient metabolism vol.7, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2020.12.001