动物营养学报 >

2018 , Vol. 30 >Issue 1: 180 - 190

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2018.01.023

饲料营养 Feed science and technology

酸化剂和抗生素对黄羽肉鸡回肠黏膜菌群的影响

展开
  • 1. 广东省农业科学院动物科学研究所, 畜禽育种国家重点实验室, 广东省动物育种与营养公共实验室, 广东省 畜禽育种与营养研究重点实验室, 广州 510640;
    2. 广东省农业科学院, 广州 510640
容庭(1983-),男,海南乐东人,高级畜牧师,硕士,从事动物肠道微生态研究。E-mail:blueskyrt@163.com

收稿日期: 2017-06-21

  网络出版日期: 2018-01-04

基金资助

广东省农业科学院院长基金项目（201621）；广东省科技计划项目（2009B020307001）

收起

Effects of Acidifiers and Antibiotics on Ileal Mucosa Microbiota of Yellow-Feathered Broilers

Expand
  • 1. Institute of Animal Science, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, State Key Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Breeding, Guangdong Public Laboratory of Animal Breeding and Nutrition, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Breeding and Nutrition, Guangzhou 510640, China;
    2. Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou 510640, China

Received date: 2017-06-21

  Online published: 2018-01-04

Fold

摘要

本试验旨在研究饲粮中长期添加酸化剂和亚剂量硫酸新霉素对黄羽肉鸡回肠黏膜菌群动态变化和组成的影响。选择800只1日龄健康岭南黄羽肉鸡，随机分为4个组，每组5个重复，每个重复40只鸡。对照组（A组）饲喂基础饲粮，B、C和D组饲粮分别在基础饲粮中添加0.2%酸化剂Ⅰ、0.3%酸化剂Ⅱ和50 mg/kg硫酸新霉素。试验期42 d。分别于1、7、14、21、28、35和42日龄时，采集肉鸡回肠黏膜并提取细菌DNA，采用聚合酶链式反应（PCR）-变性梯度凝胶电泳（DGGE）技术分析肉鸡回肠黏膜菌群结构，同时应用16S rDNA基因序列技术，建立42日龄肉鸡回肠黏膜细菌16S rDNA的随机克隆文库。动态变化趋势分析发现，4组肉鸡回肠黏膜菌群结构发生变化的程度不同，1~28日龄时4组的动态变化值分别为9%~33%、8%~90%、8%~56%和17%~45%。回肠黏膜细菌随机克隆文库分析发现，A组文库有94个序列，共产生16个OTUs （operational taxonomic units）；B组有87个序列，共产生7个OTUs；C组有98个序列，共产生5个OTUs；D组有94个序列，共产生9个OTUs。A和D组乳酸杆菌属（Lactobacillus）所占克隆总数的比例分别为39.36%和50.00%，极显著高于B （6.90%）和C组（10.20%）（P<0.01）；A组与其他各组其他菌属的种类与组成比例存在差异，且均未发现与埃希氏菌属（Escherichia）相关序列。由此可知，饲粮中长期添加酸化剂和亚剂量硫酸新霉素会使1~28日龄岭南黄羽肉鸡回肠黏膜菌群结构发生剧烈变化，42日龄肉鸡回肠黏膜菌群的多样性下降，乳酸杆菌属的组成发生改变，这种变化与差异可能是酸化剂与抗生素持续压力的影响所致。

关键词： 酸化剂; 硫酸新霉素; 岭南黄羽肉鸡; 肠道黏膜菌群; PCR-DGGE; 16S rDNA克隆文库

本文引用格式

容庭, 陈庄, 刘志昌, 王刚, 马现永, 张洁, 邓盾 . 酸化剂和抗生素对黄羽肉鸡回肠黏膜菌群的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2018 , 30(1) : 180 -190 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2018.01.023

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to study the effects of dietary long-term supplemented with acidifiers and subclinical doses of neomycin sulfate on the ileal mucosa microbiota composition and dynamic changes of yellow-feathered broilers. Eight hundred 1-day-old healthy Lingnan yellow-feathered broilers were randomly divided into 4 groups with 5 replicates per group and 40 broilers per replicate. Broilers in control group (group A) were fed a basal diet, and the others in groups B, C and D were fed the basal diets supplemented with 0.2% acidifier Ⅰ, 0.3% acidifier Ⅱ and 50 mg/kg neomycin sulfate, respectively. The experiment lasted for 42 days. Ileal mucosa of broilers were collected and microbiota DNA were extracted at 1, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35 and 42 days of age, respectively. Ileal mucosa microbiota structure of broilers were analyzed by polymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE), and the random clone library of 16S rDNA of ileal mucosa microbiota of broilers at 42 days of age were established by 16S rDNA gene sequences technology. The results of dynamic change trend analysis showed that the change degree of ileal mucosa microbiota structure of broilers in 4 groups was different, the dynamic change value at 1 to 28 days of age in 4 groups were 9% to 33%, 8% to 90%, 8% to 56% and 17% to 45%, respectively. The results of the random clone library of ileum mucosa microbiota analysis showed that 16 operational taxonomic units (OTUs) (form 94 sequences) were detected in group A, 7 OTUs (form 87 sequences) in group B, 5 OTUs (form 98 sequences) in group C and 9 OTUs (form 94 sequences) in group D. The proportion of Lactobacillus in the total number of clones in groups A and D was 39.36% and 50.00%, which was significantly higher than that in groups B (6.90%) and C (10.20%) (P<0.01). The type and composition proportion of other species were different between groups A and the others. In addition, sequence related to Escherichia were not detected in all groups. These results indicate that dietary long-term supplemented with acidifiers and subclinical doses of neomycin sulfate can cause remarkably change of the ileal mucosa microbiota structure of Lingnan yellow-feathered broilers at 1 to 28 days of age, decreasing of the diversity of ileal mucosa microbiota of broilers at 42 days of age, change of the composition of Lactobacillus, and the changes and differences may be caused by the acidifier and antibiotic continuous pressure.

Key words： acidifier; neomycin sulfate; Lingnan yellow-feathered broilers; intestinal mucosa microbiota; PCR-DGGE; 16S rDNA clone library

参考文献

[1] SAVAGE D C.Microbial ecology of the gastrointestinal tract[J].Annual Review of Microbiology,1977,31(1):107-133.  

[2] ZOETENDAL E G,COLLIER C T,KOIKE S,et al.Molecular ecological analysis of the gastrointestinal microbiota:a review[J].The Journal of Nutrtion,2004,134(2):465-472.

[3] MANZANILLA E G,PEREZ J F,MARTIN M,et al.Effect of plant extracts and formic acid on the intestinal equilibrium of early-weaned pigs[J].Journal of Animal Science,2004,82(11):3210-3218.  

[4] ABDEL-FATTAH S A,EL-SANHOURY M H,EL-MEDNAY N M,et al.Thyroid activity,some blood constituents,organs morphology and performance of broiler chicks fed supplemental organic acids[J].International Journal of Poultry Science,2008,7(3):215-222.  

[5] GARCÍA V,CATALÁ-GREGORI P,HERNANDEZ F,et al.Effect of formic acid and plant extracts on growth nutrient digestibility,intestine mucosa morphology,and meat yield of broilers[J].The Journal of Applied Poultry Research,2007,16(4):555-562.  

[6] HEMÁNDEZ F,GARCÍA V,MADRID J,et al.Effect of formic acid on performance,digestibility,intestinal histomorphology and plasma metabolite levels of broiler chickens[J].British Poultry Science,2006,47(1):50-56.  

[7] JUNIOR P C M,BEIRÃO B C B,FILHO T F,et al.Use of blends of organic acids and oregano extracts in feed and water of broiler chickens to control Salmonella enteritidis persistence in the crop and ceca of experimentally infected birds[J].The Journal of Applied Poultry Research,2014,23(4):671-682.  

[8] PAUL S K,SAMANATA G,HALDER G,et al.Effect of a combination of organic acid salts as antibiotic replacer on the performance and gut health of broiler chickens[J].Livestock Research for Rural Development,2007,19(11):1-11.

[9] LI M,GONG J H,COTTRILL M,et al.Evaluation of QIAampR@DNA stool mini kit for ecological studies of gut microbiota[J].Journal of Microbiological Methods,2002,54(1):13-20.

[10] 张洁,容庭,刘志昌,等.两纯系鸡胃肠道黏膜细菌l6S rDNA的PCR-DGGE分析比较[J].畜牧兽医学报,2013,44(2):204-210.

[11] MUYZER G,DE WAAL E C,UITTERLINDEN A G.Profiling of complex microbial populations by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of polymerase chain reaction-amplified genes coding for 16S rRna[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology,1993,59(3):695-700.

[12] MARZORATI M,WITTEBOLLE L,BOON N,et al.How to get more out of molecular fingerprints:practical tools for microbial ecology[J].Environmental Microbiology,2008,10(6):1571-1581.  

[13] 容庭,张洁,王刚,等.16S rDNA克隆文库方法分析两纯系鸡回肠及盲肠黏膜细菌的组成[J].畜牧兽医学报,2014,45(8):1218-1227.

[14] PEDROSO A A,MENTEN J F M,LAMBAIS M R,et al.Intestinal bacterial community and growth performance of chickens fed diets containing antibiotics[J].Poultry Science,2006,85(4):747-752.  

[15] LUMPKINGS B S,BATAL A B,LEE M D.Evaluation of the bacterial community and intestinal development of different genetic lines of chickens[J].Poultry Science,2010,89(8):1614-1621.  

[16] 刘艳利,辛洪亮,黄铁军,等.酸化剂对蛋鸡生产性能、蛋品质及肠道相关指标的影响[J].动物营养学报,2015,27(2):526-534.

[17] GUNAL M,YAYLI G,KAYA O,et al.The effects of antibiotic growth promoter,probictic or organic acid supplemmtation on performance,intestinal microflora and tissue of broilers[J].International Journal of Poultry Science,2006,5(2):149-155.  

[18] ENGBERG R M,HEDEMANN M S,JENSEN B B.The influence of grinding and pelleting of feed on the microbial composition and activity in the digestive tract of broiler chickens[J].British Poultry Science,2002,43(4):569-579.  

[19] 罗四维.复合酸化剂对肉仔鸡生产性能和消化道内环境的影响[D].硕士学位论文.扬州:扬州大学,2010.

[20] 许丽惠,樊倩,张杰,等.包被酸化剂对黄羽肉鸡生长性能、消化道内环境及血清生化指标的影响[J].动物营养学报,2016,28(2):585-592.

[21] 赵旭,沈一茹,陈杰,等.不同种类酸化剂对肉鸡肠道发育、消化酶活性以及微生物数量的影响[J].动物营养学报,2015,27(11):3509-3515.

[22] AL-KASSI A G,MOHSSEN M A.Comparative study between single organic acid effect and synergistic organic acid effect on broiler performance[J].Pakistan Journal of Nutrition,2009,8(6):896-899.  

[23] KNARREBORG A,SIMON M A,ENGBERG RMJENSEN B B,et al.Effects of dietary fat source and subtherapeutic levels of antibiotic on the bacterial community in the ileum of broiler chickens at various ages[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2002,68(12):5918-5924.  

[24] SMIRNOV A,PEREZ R,AMIT-ROMACH E,et al.Mucin dynamics and microbial populations in chicken small intestine are changed by dietary probiotic and antibiotic growth promoter supplementation[J].The Journal of Nutrition,2005,135(2):187-192.

[25] DUMONCEAUX T J,HILL J E,SEAN M,et al.Characterization of intestinal microbiota and response to dietary virginiamycin supplementation in the broiler chicken[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2006,72(4):2815-2823.  

[26] ZHOU H,GONG J,BRISBIN J T,et al.Appropriate chicken sample size for identifying the composition of broiler intestinal microbiota affected by dietary antibiotics,using the polymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis technique[J].Poultry Science,2007,86(12):2541-2549.  

[27] JOHANSEN C H,BJERRUM L,PEDERSEN K.Impact of salinomycin on the intestinal microflora of broiler chickens[J].Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica,2007,49(30):1-8.

[28] 晏家友.缓释复合酸化剂对断奶仔猪消化道酸度及肠道形态和功能的影响[D].硕士学位论文.雅安:四川农业大学,2009:25-30.

[29] GONG J H,FORSTER R J,YU H,et al.Molecular analysis of bacterial populations in the ileum of broiler chickens and comparison with bacteria in the cecum[J].FEMS Microbiology Ecology,2002,41(3):171-179.  

[30] GONG J H,SI W D,FORSTER R J,et al.16S rRNA gene-based analysis of mucosa-associated bacterial community and phylogeny in the chicken gastrointestinal tracts:from crops to ceca[J].FEMS Microbiology Ecology,2007,59(2):147-157.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉

    联系我们

  • 地址：北京市海淀区圆明园西路2号
    　　　中国农业大学动科动医大楼153室
  • 邮编：100193
  • 电话：010－62817823
  • 网址：http://www.chinajan.com
  • E-mail：cjan@chinajan.com
京公网安备 11010802041926号    京ICP备17050989号-2