反刍动物营养 Ruminant Nutrition

饲粮精粗比对泌乳水牛瘤胃细菌和甲烷菌区系的影响

  • 林波 ,
  • 梁辛 ,
  • 李丽莉 ,
  • 韦升菊 ,
  • 李萍 ,
  • 邹彩霞
展开
  • 1. 广西大学动物科技学院, 南宁 530004;
    2. 中国农业科学院广西水牛研究所, 农业部水牛遗传繁育重点实验室, 广西水牛遗传繁育重点实验室, 南宁 530001

收稿日期: 2016-03-28

  网络出版日期: 2016-10-17

基金资助

国家自然科学基金(31160470);广西自然科学基金(2013GXNSFBA019114)

Dietary Forage to Concentrate Ratio Affects Ruminal Bacterial and Methanogen Community Composition of Water Buffaloes

  • LIN Bo ,
  • LIANG Xin ,
  • LI Lili ,
  • WEI Shengju ,
  • LI Ping ,
  • ZOU Caixia
Expand
  • 1. College of Animal Science, Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, China;
    2. Key Laboratory of Buffalo Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction of Ministry of Agriculture, Key Laboratory of Buffalo Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction of Guangxi, Buffalo Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanning 530001, China

Received date: 2016-03-28

  Online published: 2016-10-17

摘要

本试验旨在研究饲粮精粗比对泌乳水牛瘤胃细菌和甲烷菌区系的影响。选取15头健康杂交后备泌乳水牛,按体重、采食量等相近原则随机分为3组,每组5头,分别饲喂精粗比为0:100(全粗料组)、35:65(低精料组)、50:50(中等精料组)的混合饲粮。试验为期40 d,其中前10 d为预试期。在试验结束后第1天,经口腔抽取瘤胃液抽提微生物DNA,采用Illumina Miseq PE250平台研究瘤胃细菌和甲烷菌区系组成。结果表明:1)在门水平上,水牛瘤胃内拟杆菌门(45%~65%)、厚壁菌门(13%~27%)和变形菌门(13%~18%)为主要细菌类别,与低精料组和中等精料组相比,全粗料组提高了拟杆菌门、黄杆菌门和SR1细菌的比例,降低了厚壁菌门、疣微菌门、放线菌门和绿弯菌门细菌的比例;在科水平上,普雷沃氏科(15%~32%)和黄杆菌科(8%~21%)为主要细菌类别,与中等精料组相比,全粗料组、低精料组提高了普雷沃氏科细菌的比例,降低了黄杆菌科、毛螺菌科、瘤胃球菌科、红蝽杆菌科和双歧杆菌科细菌的比例;中等精料组瘤胃细菌相比全粗料组有更高的多样性。2)水牛瘤胃内,90%以上的甲烷菌为甲烷短杆菌属,其次为热原体属,饲粮精粗比的改变并未影响甲烷短杆菌属在瘤胃内的优势地位。综合得出,全粗料饲粮有提高水牛瘤胃内纤维降解相关细菌比例的趋势,却降低了瘤胃细菌的多样性;饲粮精粗比的差异对水牛瘤胃甲烷菌在属水平上的组成并无显著影响。

本文引用格式

林波 , 梁辛 , 李丽莉 , 韦升菊 , 李萍 , 邹彩霞 . 饲粮精粗比对泌乳水牛瘤胃细菌和甲烷菌区系的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2016 , 28(10) : 3101 -3109 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2016.10.012

Abstract

This study was conducted to study the effects of dietary forage to concentrate ratio on ruminal bacterial and methanogen community composition of water buffaloes. Fifteen healthy similar hybrid water buffaloes were selected and divided into three groups with 5 heads per group according to body weight and feed intake. The three groups were fed diets with concentrate to forage ratio at 0:100 (all forage group), 35:65 (low concentrate group) and 50:50 (medium concentrate group), respectively. The total experimental period was 40 days, including 10 days of advanced experiment feeding period. On day 1 after the experiment, rumen fluid sample was taken from rumen through mouth, and ruminal fluid DNA was extracted to research ruminal bacterial and methanogen community by Illumina Miseq 250PE. The results showed as follows:1) at phyla level, ruminal bacterial community of buffaloes was dominated by Bacteroidetes (45% to 65%) and Firmicutes (13% to 27%) and Proteinobacter (13% to 18%); compared with low concentrate group and medium concentrate group, all forage group increased the proportions of Bacteroidetes, Fibrobacter and SR1, but decreased the proportions of Firmicutes, Verrucomicrobia, Actinobacteria and Chloroflexi; at the family level, the dominant bacteria were Prevotellaceae (15% to 32%) and Fibrobacteraceae (8% to 21%); compared with medium concentrate group, all forage group and low concentrate group increased the proportions of Prevotellaceae, while decreased the proportions of Fibrobacteraceae, Lachnospiraceae, Ruminococcaceae, Coriobacteriaceae and Bifidobacteriaceae; additionally, the bacterial community in medium concentrate group was more diverse than that in all forage group. 2) Ruminal methanogen community of water buffaloes was dominated by Methanobrevibacter (over 90%), followed by Thermoplasma; dietary concentrate to forage ratio had no influence on ruminal methanogen community of water buffaloes. In conclusion, bacteria related with fiber digestion tends to be increased by all forge diet, but ruminal bacterial diversity is decreased by all forage diet; there is no influence of concentrate to forage ratio on ruminal methanogen composition of water buffaloes at genus level.

参考文献

[1] 娜仁花,董红敏,陈永杏,等.日粮精粗比对瘤胃发酵特性的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2011,47(9):49-54.
[2] PETRI R M,FORSTER R J,YANG W,et al.Characterization of rumen bacterial diversity and fermentation parameters in concentrate fed cattle with and without forage[J].Journal of Applied Microbiology,2012,112(6):1152-1162. 
[3] MAO S Y,ZHANG R Y,WANG D S,et al.Impact of subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) adaptation on rumen microbiota in dairy cattle using pyrosequencing[J].Anaerobe,2013,24:12-19.
[4] PITTA D W,KUMAR S,VEICCHARELLI B,et al.Bacterial diversity associated with feeding dry forage at different dietary concentrations in the rumen contents of Mehshana buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) using 16S pyrotags[J].Anaerobe,2014,25:31-41.
[5] 李萍,梁辛,韦升菊,等.饲粮精粗比对后备母水牛瘤胃发酵参数和纤维降解菌数的影响[J].畜牧与兽医,2015,47(7):36-40.
[6] 易学武,张石蕊.奶牛日粮精粗比应用研究进展[J].中国草食动物,2006,26(3):51-55.
[7] 孙云章,毛胜勇,姚文,等.不同精粗比底物下瘤胃真菌和纤维降解细菌共培养发酵特性及菌群变化[J].微生物学报,2006,46(3):422-426.
[8] RIUS A G,KITTELMANN S,MACDONALD K A,et al.Nitrogen metabolism and rumen microbial enumeration in lactating cows with divergent residual feed intake fed high-digestibility pasture[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2012,95(9):5024-5034. 
[9] KITTELMANN S,SEEDORF H,WALTERS W A,et al.Simultaneous amplicon sequencing to explore co-occurrence patterns of bacterial,archaeal and eukaryotic microorganisms in rumen microbial communities[J].PLoS One,2013,8(2):e47879.
[10] CAPORASO J G,KUCZYNSKI J,STOMBAUGH J,et al.QⅡME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data[J].Nature Methods,2010,7(5):335-336. 
[11] 王海荣.不同日粮精粗比及氮源对绵羊瘤胃纤维降解菌群和纤维物质降解的影响[D].博士学位论文.呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2006:2-3.
[12] KOCHERGINSKAYA S A, AMINOV R I,WHITE B A.Analysis of the rumen bacterial diversity under two different diet conditions using denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis,random sequencing,and statistical ecology approaches[J].Anaerobe,2001,7(3):119-134. 
[13] WETZELS S U,MANN E,METZLER-ZEBELI B U,et al.Pyrosequencing reveals shifts in the bacterial epimural community relative to dietary concentrate amount in goats[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2015,98(8):5572-5587. 
[14] MATSUI H,OGATA K,TAJIMA K,et a1.Phenotypic characterization of polysaccharidases produced by four Prevotella type strains[J].Current Microbiology,2000,41(1):45-49. 
[15] 孙云章.不同底物下瘤胃微生物的发酵特性及细菌菌群变化的分子描述[D].博士学位论文.南京:南京农业大学,2005:6-9.
[16] ST-PIERRE B,WRIGHT A D G.Diversity of gut methanogens in herbivorous animals[J].Animal,2013,7(Suppl.1):49-56.
[17] CHAUDHARY P P,SIROHI S K.Dominance of Methanomicrobium phylotype in methanogen population present in Murrah buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis)[J].Letters in Applied Microbiology,2009,49(2):274-277. 
[18] SINGH K M,PANDYA P R,PARNERKAR S,et al.Molecular identification of methanogenic archaea from Surti buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis),reveals more hydrogenotrophic methanogens phylotypes[J].Brazilian Journal of Microbiology,2011,42(1):132-139. 
[19] SINGH K M,AHIR V B,TRIPATHI A K,et al.Metagenomic analysis of Surti buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) rumen:a preliminary study[J].Molecular Biology Reports,2012,39(4):4841-4848. 
[20] FRANZOLIN R,ST-PIERRE B,NORTHWOOD K,et al.Analysis of rumen methanogen diversity in water buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) under three different diets[J].Microbial Ecology,2012,64(1):131-139. 
[21] WRIGHT A D G,AUCKLAND C H,LYNN D H.Molecular diversity of methanogens in feedlot cattle from Ontario and Prince Edward Island,Canada[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2007,73(13):4206-42107. 
[22] CHENG Y F,MAO S Y,LIU J X,et al.Molecular diversity analysis of rumen methanogenic Archaea from goat in eastern China by DGGE methods using different primer pairs[J].Letters in Applied Microbiology,2009,48(5):585-592. 
[23] ZHOU M,HÜNERBERG M,BEAUCHEMIN K A,et al.Individuality of ruminal methanogen/protozoa populations in beef cattle fed diets containing dried distillers' grain with solubles[J].Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica,Section A:Animal Science,2012,62(4):273-288. 
文章导航

/