动物营养学报 >

2022 , Vol. 34 >Issue 2: 1040 - 1049

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2022.02.035

研究论文 RESEARCH PAPER

酵母培养物和糖蜜对肉牛生长性能、营养物质表观消化率和粪便微生物区系组成的影响

  • 潘锋 ,
  • 朱彦宾 ,
  • 王之盛 ,
  • 巴桑旺堆 ,
  • 薛白 ,
  • 王立志 ,
  • 胡瑞 ,
  • 安添午 ,
  • 谭武 ,
  • 孙光明 ,
  • 田刚 ,
  • 彭全辉
展开
  • 1. 四川农业大学动物营养研究所, 牛低碳养殖与安全生产重点实验室, 成都 611130;
    2. 西藏自治区 农牧科学院畜牧兽医研究所, 拉萨 850009;
    3. 四川省草原科学研究院, 成都 611731;
    4. 四川省红原县刷经寺农业农村发展中心, 阿坝 624402
潘锋(1998-),男,四川内江人,硕士研究生,从事反刍动物营养与饲料科学研究。E-mail:2249945808@qq.com

收稿日期: 2021-07-29

  网络出版日期: 2022-02-15

基金资助

中央引导地方"藏北高原新型牦牛暖棚设计与母牦牛高效养殖技术集成示范"（YDZX20195400004383）

收起

Effects of Yeast Culture and Molasses on Growth Performance, Apparent Digestibility of Nutrients and Fecal Microflora Composition of Beef Cattle

  • PAN Feng ,
  • ZHU Yanbin ,
  • WANG Zhisheng ,
  • BASANG Wangdui ,
  • XUE Bai ,
  • WANG Lizhi ,
  • HU Rui ,
  • AN Tianwu ,
  • TAN Wu ,
  • SUN Guangming ,
  • TIAN Gang ,
  • PENG Quanhui
Expand
  • 1. Key Laboratory of University in Cattle Low Carbon Breeding and Safety Production in Sichuan Province, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China;
    2. Institute of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, Tibet Academy of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry Science, Lhasa 850009, China;
    3. Sichuan Academy of Grassland Science, Chengdu 611731, China;
    4. Hongyuan County, Sichuan Province Shuajingsi Center for Agricultural Rural Development, Aba 624402, China

Received date: 2021-07-29

  Online published: 2022-02-15

Fold

摘要

本试验旨在探究酵母培养物（YC）和糖蜜（MO）对肉牛生长性能、营养物质表观消化率以及粪便微生物区系组成的影响。将32头体重[（107.0±14.7） kg]和日龄相近的肉牛（牦牛×犏牛♀）随机分为4组，每组8头牛。对照组（CK组）饲喂基础饲粮，3个试验组分别饲喂基础饲粮＋YC （30 g/d）（YC组）、糖蜜饲粮（MO组）、糖蜜饲粮＋YC （30 g/d）（YM组）。试验期70 d。结果表明：1）3个试验组肉牛干物质采食量和酸性洗涤纤维（ADF）表观消化率显著高于CK组（P<0.05）。YC组和MO组中性洗涤纤维（NDF）表观消化率极显著高于CK组（P<0.01），YM组显著高于CK组（P<0.05）。2）与CK组相比，添加YC和MO可以提高肉牛粪便菌群微生物多样性，两者混合添加可以提高肉牛粪便菌群微生物丰度和多样性。3）厚壁菌门（Firmicutes）、拟杆菌门（Bacteroidetes）和变形菌门（Proteobacteria）是4个组共有的优势菌门。3个试验组拟杆菌门（Bacteroidetes）的相对丰度显著高于CK组（P<0.05），MO组和YM组厚壁菌门（Firmicutes）相对丰度极显著低于CK组（P<0.01），YC组显著低于CK组（P<0.05）。瘤胃球菌科UCG-013（Ruminococcaceae UCG-013）、瘤胃球菌科UCG-010（Ruminococcaceae UCG-010）和理研菌科dgA-11肠道群（Rikenellaceae dgA-11 gut group）等12种菌属是4个组共有的优势菌属。3个试验组普雷沃氏菌科UCG-004（Prevotellaceae UCG-004）相对丰度显著高于CK组（P<0.05）。YC组和YM组理研菌科RC9肠道群（Rikenellaceae RC9 gut group）和瘤胃球菌科UCG-005（Ruminococcaceae UCG-005）相对丰度极显著高于CK组（P<0.01），MO组显著高于CK组（P<0.05）。MO组和YM组鼠杆菌科未定义菌属（Unidentified-Muribaculaceae）和类杆菌真核菌群（[Eubacterium]coprostanoligenes group）相对丰度极显著高于CK组（P<0.01），YC组显著高于CK组（P<0.05）。综上所述，饲粮中添加YC和MO或两者混合添加均可改变肉牛肠道微生物组成，提高纤维降解能力，从而提高采食量。

关键词： 酵母培养物; 糖蜜; 采食量; 粪便微生物

本文引用格式

潘锋 , 朱彦宾 , 王之盛 , 巴桑旺堆 , 薛白 , 王立志 , 胡瑞 , 安添午 , 谭武 , 孙光明 , 田刚 , 彭全辉 . 酵母培养物和糖蜜对肉牛生长性能、营养物质表观消化率和粪便微生物区系组成的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2022 , 34(2) : 1040 -1049 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2022.02.035

Abstract

This experiment aimed to explore the effects of yeast culture (YC) and molasses (MO) on growth performance, apparent digestibility of nutrients and fecal microflora composition of beef cattle. A total of 32 beef cattle (yak×cattle-yak♀) with similar body weight[(107.0±14.7) kg] and age were randomly divided into 4 groups with 8 cattle in each group. The control group (CK group) was fed a basal diet, while the 3 experimental groups were fed with the basal diet+YC (30 g/d) (YC group), molasses diet (MO group) and molasses diet+YC (30 g/d) (YM group), respectively. The experimental period was 70 days. The results showed as follows:1) beef cattle dry matter intake and apparent digestibility of acid detergent fiber (ADF) in the three test groups were significantly higher than those in the CK group (P<0.05). The apparent digestibility of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) was significantly higher in YC group and MO group (P<0.01), and YM group was significantly higher than CK group (P<0.05). 2) Adding YC and MO could increase the microbial diversity of beef cattle manure flora, and the mixed addition of the two could increase the microbial abundance and diversity of beef cattle manure flora. 3) Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes and Proteobacteria were the dominant bacteria phyla shared by the 4 groups. The relative abundance of Bacteroidetes in the 3 test groups was significantly higher than that in the CK group (P<0.05). The relative abundance of Firmicutes in the MO group and YM group was significantly lower than that in the CK group (P<0.01), and the YC group was significantly lower than that CK group (P<0.05). Twelve genera including Ruminococcaceae UCG-013, Ruminococcaceae UCG-010 and Rikenellaceae dgA-11 gut group were the dominant genera shared by the 4 groups. The relative abundance of Prevotellaceae UCG-004 in 3 test groups were significantly higher than that in the CK group (P<0.05). The relative abundances of Rikenellaceae RC9 and Ruminococcaceae UCG-005 in the YC and YM groups were significantly higher than those in the CK group (P<0.01), and the MO group was significantly higher than CK group (P<0.05). The relative abundance of Unidentified-Muribaculaceae and[Eubacterium] coprostanoligenes group in MO group and YM group were significantly higher than those in CK group (P<0.01), and YC group was significantly higher than CK group (P<0.05). In conclusion, adding YC, MO or both can change the composition of gastrointestinal microflora composition, improve the fibrous substance digestibility and feed intake of beef cattle.

Key words： yeast culture; molasses; feed intake; fecal microorganisms

参考文献

[1] 张娇娇.饲用缓释尿素对后备奶牛和肉牛体外瘤胃发酵参数、生长性能和血液指标的影响[D].硕士学位论文.兰州:兰州大学, 2018. ZHANG J J.Effects of feeding slow-release urea on in vitro rumen fermentation parameters, growth performance and blood indexes of reserve dairy cows and beef cattle[D].Master's Thesis.Lanzhou:Lanzhou University, 2018.(in Chinese)
[2] DANN H M, DRACKLEY J K, MCCOY G C, et al.Effects of yeast culture (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on prepartum intake and postpartum intake and milk production of Jersey cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 2000, 83(1):123-127.  
[3] WAGNER J J, ENGLE T E, BELKNAP C R, et al.Meta-analysis examining the effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products on feedlot performance and carcass traits1, 2, 3[J].The Professional Animal Scientist, 2016, 32(2):172-182.  
[4] HAVEKES C D, DUFFIELD T F, CARPENTER A J, et al.Effects of molasses-based liquid feed supplementation to a high-straw dry cow diet on feed intake, health, and performance of dairy cows across the transition period[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 2020, 103(6):5070-5089.  
[5] MORDENTI A L, GIARETTA E, CAMPIDONICO L, et al.A review regarding the use of molasses in animal nutrition[J].Animals, 2021, 11(1):115.
[6] EASTRIDGE M L.Major advances in applied dairy cattle nutrition[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 2006, 89(4):1311-1323.  
[7] LESMEISTER K E, HEINRICHS A J, GABLER M T.Effects of supplemental yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) culture on rumen development, growth characteristics, and blood parameters in neonatal dairy calves[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 2004, 87(6):1832-1839.  
[8] 黄文明, 谭林, 王芬, 等.酵母培养物对育肥牛生长性能、屠宰性能及肉品质的影响[J].动物营养学报, 2019, 31(3):1317-1325. HUANG W M, TAN L, WANG F, et al.Effects of yeast culture on growth performance, slaughter performance and meat quality of finishing cattle[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2019, 31(3):1317-1325.(in Chinese)
[9] BØRSTING C F, BRASK M, HELLWING A L F, et al.Enteric methane emission and digestion in dairy cows fed wheat or molasses[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 2020, 103(2):1448-1462.  
[10] DEVRIES T J, GILL R M.Adding liquid feed to a total mixed ration reduces feed sorting behavior and improves productivity of lactating dairy cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 2012, 95(5):2648-2655.  
[11] ROBINSON P H.Effect of yeast culture (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on adaptation of cows to diets postpartum[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 1997, 80(6):1119-1125.  
[12] HADDAD S G, GOUSSOUS S N.Effect of yeast culture supplementation on nutrient intake, digestibility and growth performance of Awassi lambs[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2005, 118(3/4):343-348.
[13] ZALI A, EFTEKHARI M, FATEHI F, et al.Effect of vinasse (condensed molasses solubles) on performance and meat chemical composition of Holstein male calves[J].Italian Journal of Animal Science, 2017, 16(3):515-520.  
[14] STEINGOETTER A, BUETIKOFER S, CURCIC J, et al.The dynamics of gastric emptying and self-reported feelings of satiation are better predictors than gastrointestinal hormones of the effects of lipid emulsion structure on fat digestion in healthy adults-a Bayesian inference approach[J].The Journal of Nutrition, 2017, 147(4):706-714.  
[15] CHEN B, WANG C, WANG Y M, et al.Effect of biotin on milk performance of dairy cattle:a Meta-analysis[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 2011, 94(7):3537-3546.  
[16] MALMUTHUGE N, GUAN L L.Understanding host-microbial interactions in rumen:searching the best opportunity for microbiota manipulation[J].Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2017, 8(1):8.
[17] 马健, MUJTABA S A, 王之盛.瘤胃微生物区系的影响因素及其调控措施[J].动物营养学报, 2020, 32(5):1957-1964. MA J, MUJTABA S A, WANG Z S.Influencing factors and regulating measures of rumen microbial flora[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2020, 32(5):1957-1964.(in Chinese)
[18] HOOVER W H.Digestion and absorption in the hindgut of ruminants[J].Journal of Animal Science, 1978, 46(6):1789-1799.  
[19] DE OLIVEIRA M N V, JEWELL K A, FREITAS F S, et al.Characterizing the microbiota across the gastrointestinal tract of a Brazilian Nelore steer[J].Veterinary Microbiology, 2013, 164(3/4):307-314.
[20] OIKONOMOU G, TEIXEIRA A G V, FODITSCH C, et al.Fecal microbial diversity in pre-weaned dairy calves as described by pyrosequencing of metagenomic 16S rDNA. Associations of Faecalibacterium species with health and growth[J].PloS One, 2013, 8(4):e63157.
[21] 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].World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2014, 30(2):669-680.  
[22] ZITOMERSKY N L, COYNE M J, COMSTOCK L E.Longitudinal analysis of the prevalence, maintenance, and IgA response to species of the order Bacteroidales in the human gut[J].Infection and Immunity, 2011, 79(5):2012-2020.  
[23] MURPHY E F, COTTER P D, HEALY S, et al.Composition and energy harvesting capacity of the gut microbiota:relationship to diet, obesity and time in mouse models[J].Gut, 2010, 59(12):1635-1642.  
[24] RUIZ L, MARGOLLES A, SÁNCHEZ B.Bile resistance mechanisms in Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium[J].Frontiers in Microbiology, 2013, 4:396.
[25] ZHU Y X, WANG Z S, HU R, et al.Comparative study of the bacterial communities throughout the gastrointestinal tract in two beef cattle breeds[J].Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2021, 105(1):313-325.  
[26] COX L M, YAMANISHI S, SOHN J, et al.Altering the intestinal microbiota during a critical developmental window has lasting metabolic consequences[J].Cell, 2014, 158(4):705-721.  
[27] LI F Y, GUAN L L.Metatranscriptomic profiling reveals linkages between the active rumen microbiome and feed efficiency in beef cattle[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2017, 83(9):e00061-17.
[28] LI F, GUAN L L.Metatranscriptomic profiling reveals linkages between the active rumen microbiome and feed efficiency in beef cattle[J].Applied & Environmental Microbiology, 2017, 83(9):1-17.
[29] FORSYTH C B, SHANNON K M, KORDOWER J H, et al.Increased inte stinal permeability correlates with sigmoid mucosa alpha-synuclein staining and endotoxin exposure markers in early Parkinson's disease[J].Plos One, 2011, 6(12):e28032.
[30] BIDDLE A, STEWART L, BLANCHARD J, et al.Untangling the genetic basis of fibrolytic specialization by Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcaceae in diverse gut communities[J].Diversity, 2013, 5(3):627-640.  
[31] PATRA A K, YU Z T.Essential oils affect populations of some rumen bacteria in vitro as revealed by microarray (Rumen Bact Array) analysis[J].Frontiers in Microbiology, 2015, 6:297.
[32] ZHAO X H, CHEN Z D, ZHOU S, et al.Effects of daidzein on performance, serum metabolites, nutrient digestibility, and fecal bacterial community in bull calves[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2017, 225:87-96.
[33] MA J, ZHU Y X, WANG Z S, et al.Comparing the bacterial community in the gastrointestinal tracts between growth-retarded and normal yaks on the Qinghai-Tibetan plateau[J].Frontiers in Microbiology, 2020, 11:600516.
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