研究论文 RESEARCHPAPER

微生物饲料添加剂对固原黄牛生长性能和瘤胃微生物区系的影响

  • 李茂龙 ,
  • 谢建亮 ,
  • 常娟 ,
  • 王平 ,
  • 刘超齐 ,
  • 王利军 ,
  • 尹清强 ,
  • 党晓伟
展开
  • 1. 河南农业大学动物科技学院, 郑州 450046;
    2. 固原市畜牧技术推广服务中心, 固原 756000;
    3. 河南德邻生物制品有限公司, 新乡 453000
李茂龙(1988—),男,河南濮阳人,硕士研究生,动物营养与饲料科学专业。E-mail:limaolong2012@163.com

收稿日期: 2021-11-22

  网络出版日期: 2022-06-14

基金资助

河南省创新示范专项(201111311100);新乡市重大科技专项(ZD19005)

Effects of Microbial Feed Additives on Growth Performance and Rumen Microflora of Guyuan Yellow Cattle

  • LI Maolong ,
  • XIE Jianliang ,
  • CHANG Juan ,
  • WANG Ping ,
  • LIU Chaoqi ,
  • WANG Lijun ,
  • YIN Qingqiang ,
  • DANG Xiaowei
Expand
  • 1. College of Animal Science and Technology, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450046, China;
    2. Guyuan Animal Husbandry Technology Extension and Service Center, Guyuan 756000, China;
    3. Henan Delin Biological Products Co., Ltd., Xinxiang 453000, China

Received date: 2021-11-22

  Online published: 2022-06-14

摘要

本试验旨在研究微生物饲料添加剂对固原黄牛生长性能和瘤胃微生物区系的影响。本研究选取12月龄固原黄牛56头(公母各占1/2),随机分为对照组和试验组,每组公母牛各2个重复,每个重复7头公(母)牛。对照组饲喂不含微生物饲料添加剂的全混合日粮(TMR),试验组在对照组饲粮的基础上添加2 g/kg微生物饲料添加剂。预试期7 d,正试期60 d。结果表明:1)虽然试验组全期(第1~60天)平均日增重(ADG)与对照组差异不显著(P>0.05),但在试验后期(第31~60天)试验组ADG较对照组显著提高了19.05%(P<0.05)。2)试验组中性洗涤纤维(NDF)和酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)的表观消化率分别比对照组显著提高了4.00%和12.11%(P<0.05)。3)试验组瘤胃液中乙酸(AA)、丙酸(PA)、丁酸(BA)含量较对照组分别极显著提高了56.36%、200.00%、150.00%(P<0.01),pH较对照组显著提高了2.71%(P<0.05),而异丁酸(IA)含量则较对照组显著降低了20.00%(P<0.05)。4)对瘤胃液中微生物区系的分析表明,与对照组相比,试验组厚壁菌门(Firmicutes)的相对丰度有升高趋势,而拟杆菌门(Bacteroidetes)的相对丰度有降低趋势;试验组不动杆菌属(Acinetobacter)、嗜冷杆菌属(Psychrobacter)、乳球菌属(Lactococcus)、束毛球菌属(Trichococcus)和类芽孢杆菌属(Paenibacillus)的相对丰度有升高趋势,而假单胞菌属(Pseudomonas)、土壤芽孢杆菌属(Solibacillus)、丛毛单胞菌属(Comamonas)和沃氏黄杆菌属(Wautersiella)的相对丰度有降低趋势。这些瘤胃菌属与ADG、ADF和NDF表观消化率及瘤胃液中AA、PA、IA、BA含量和pH均存在一定的相关性。由此可见,在固原黄牛TMR中添加2 g/kg微生物饲料添加剂可通过调控瘤胃微生物区系提高其生长性能及NDF和ADF的表观消化率。

本文引用格式

李茂龙 , 谢建亮 , 常娟 , 王平 , 刘超齐 , 王利军 , 尹清强 , 党晓伟 . 微生物饲料添加剂对固原黄牛生长性能和瘤胃微生物区系的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2022 , 34(6) : 3758 -3767 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2022.06.036

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to study the effects of microbial feed additives on growth performance and rumen microflora of Guyuan yellow cattle. Fifty-six 12-month-old Guyuan yellow cattle (half male and half female) were selected and randomly divided into control and experimental groups. Each group had 4 replications, and 7 male or female cattle in each replication. The cattle in the control group were fed a total mixed ration (TMR) without microbial feed additives, and those in the experimental group were fed the TMR supplemented with 2 g/kg microbial feed additives. The pre-experimental period was 7 d, and the formal experimental period was 60 d. The results showed as follows:1) even though average daily gain (ADG) was insignificantly different between control and experimental groups during the whole experimental period (days 1 to 60) (P>0.05), the ADG in the experimental group was 19.05% higher than that in the control group during the later period of experiment (days 31 to 60) (P<0.05). 2) Compared with the control group, the neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) apparent digestibility in the experimental group was significantly increased by 4.00% and 12.11% (P<0.05), respectively. 3) Compared with the control group, the acetic acid (AA), propionic acid (PA) and butyric acid (BA) contents in rumen fluid in the experimental group were extremely significantly increased by 56.36%, 200.00% and 150.00% (P<0.01), respectively, and the pH was significantly increased by 2.71% (P<0.05), but the isobutyric acid (IA) content was significantly decreased by 20.00% (P<0.05). 4) The analysis of microflora in rumen fluid showed that the relative abundance of Firmicutes in the experimental group was increased, while the relative abundance of Bacteroidetes was decreased compared with the control group. The relative abundances of Acinetobacter, Psychrobacter, Lactococcus, Trichococcus and Paenibacillus in the experimental group were increased; while the relative abundances of Pseudomonas, Solibacillus, Comamonas and Wautersiella were decreased compared with the control group. The relative abundance of those rumen bacterial genus had some correlations with ADG, ADF and NDF apparent digestibility, and AA, PA, IA, BA contents and pH in rumen fluid. It is concluded that adding 2 g/kg microbial feed additives to TMR for Guyuan yellow cattle can improve growth performance and increase NDF and ADF apparent digestibility through regulating rumen microflora.

参考文献

[1] 熊偲皓, 王东阳, 胡志全.我国牛肉供需及国际竞争力研究[J].中国农业资源与区划, 2020, 41(10):89-100. XIONG S H, WANG D Y, HU Z Q.Research on China's beef supply, demand and international competitiveness[J].Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2020, 41(10):89-100.(in Chinese)
[2] 高雪.中国肉牛种业整体发展现状与趋势[J].畜牧产业, 2021(5):15-16. GAO X.The overall development status and trend of China's beef cattle seed industry[J].Animal Agriculture, 2021(5):15-16.(in Chinese)
[3] UPADHAYA S D, KIM S C, VALIENTES R A, et al.The effect of Bacillus-based feed additive on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, fecal gas emission, and pen cleanup characteristics of growing-finishing pigs[J].Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2015, 28(7):999-1005.  
[4] 李宗凯, 陆扬, 刘家俊, 等.益生菌对生长育肥猪生长性能、肉品质和结肠菌群的影响[J].南京农业大学学报, 2020, 43(3):523-528. LI Z K, LU Y, LIU J J, et al.Effects of probiotics on the growth performance, meat quality and colonic microflora of growing and finishing pigs[J].Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University, 2020, 43(3):523-528.(in Chinese)
[5] 赵永玉.微生态制剂对肉鸡生长性能、免疫功能、肠道菌群及血清生化指标的影响[J].饲料研究, 2021, 44(2):50-53. ZHAO Y Y.Effects of microecological preparations on growth performance, immune function, intestinal flora and serum biochemical index of broilers[J].Feed Research, 2021, 44(2):50-53.(in Chinese)
[6] 王瑞, 蔡文涛, 王喜亮, 等.畜禽中药-益生菌复合微生态制剂的研究进展[J].生物工程学报, 2019, 35(6):972-987. WANG R, CAI W T, WANG X L, et al.Progress in Chinese medicine-probiotics compound microecological preparations for livestock and poultry[J].Chinese Journal of Biotechnology, 2019, 35(6):972-987.(in Chinese)
[7] 亓鹏, 张菊, 王小伟, 等.微生态制剂对杜泊羊生长性能、屠宰性能和血液生化指标的影响[J].饲料研究, 2021, 44(5):23-25. QI P, ZHANG J, WANG X W, et al.Effects of probiotics on growth performance, slaughter performance and blood biochemical indexes of Dorper sheep[J].Feed Research, 2021, 44(5):23-25.(in Chinese)
[8] 张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].4版.北京:中国农业大学出版社, 2016. ZHANG L Y.Feed analysis and quality test technology[M].4th ed.Beijing:China Agricultural University Press, 2016.(in Chinese)
[9] VAN SOEST P J, ROBERTSON J B, LEWIS B A.Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 1991, 74(10):3583-3597.  
[10] 冯宗慈, 高民.通过比色测定瘤胃液氨氮含量方法的改进[J].畜牧与饲料科学, 2010, 31(Z1):37. FENG Z C, GAO M.Improvement of the method for determination of ammonia nitrogen in rumen juice by colorimetry[J].Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2010, 31(Z1):37.(in Chinese)
[11] CALLAHAN B J, MCMURDIE P J, ROSEN M J, et al.DADA2:high-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data[J].Nature Methods, 2016, 13(7):581-583.  
[12] BOKULICH N A, KAEHLER B D, RIDEOUT J R, et al.Optimizing taxonomic classification of marker-gene amplicon sequences with QIIME 2's q2-feature-classifier plugin[J].Microbiome, 2018, 6(1):90.
[13] DESANTIS T Z, HUGENHOLTZ P, LARSEN N, et al.Greengenes, a chimera-checked 16S rRNA gene database and workbench compatible with ARB[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2006, 72(7):5069-5072.  
[14] 申红春.饲料中添加复合微生物制剂对肉牛生长性能及肉品质的影响[J].中国饲料, 2018(17):67-69. SHEN H C.Effects of compound microbial preparation in feed on growth performance and meat quality of beef cattle[J].China Feed, 2018(17):67-69.(in Chinese)
[15] KELSEY A J, COLPOYS J D.Effects of dietary probiotics on beef cattle performance and stress[J].Journal of Veterinary Behavior-Clinical Applications and Research, 2018, 27:8-14.
[16] ZHANG L Y, JIANG X, LIU X, et al.Growth, health, rumen fermentation, and bacterial community of Holstein calves fed Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG during the preweaning stage[J].Journal of Animal Science, 2019, 97(6):2598-2608.  
[17] YAO J, WANG L L, ZHANG W J, et al.Effects of Bacillus megaterium on growth performance, serum biochemical parameters, antioxidant capacity, and immune function in suckling calves[J].Open Life Sciences, 2020, 15(1):1033-1041.  
[18] DU R J, JIAO S Y, DAI Y, et al.Probiotic Bacillus amyloliquefaciens C-1 improves growth performance, stimulates GH/IGF-1, and regulates the gut microbiota of growth-retarded beef calves[J].Frontiers in Microbiology, 2018, 9:2006.
[19] VAZQUEZ-MENDOZA O, ELGHANDOUR M M Y, SALEM A Z M, et al.Effects of sodium butyrate and active Bacillus amyloliquefaciens supplemented to pasteurized waste milk on growth performance and health condition of Holstein dairy calves[J].Animal Biotechnology, 2020, 31(3):209-216.  
[20] 徐子萱, 李冬芳, 于春微, 等.微生物发酵饲料对奶牛瘤胃发酵功能及饲粮营养物质体外消化率的影响[J].动物营养学报, 2021, 33(3):1513-1522. XU Z X, LI D F, YU C W, et al.Effects of microbial fermented feed on rumen fermentation function of dairy cows and nutrient in vitro digestibilities of diets[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(3):1513-1522.(in Chinese)
[21] MONTEIRO H F, FACIOLA A P.Ruminal acidosis, bacterial changes, and lipopolysaccharides[J].Journal of Animal Science, 2020, 98(8):skaa248.
[22] 谢亮, 龙江松, 伍志武, 等.硒源和微生态制剂对肉牛营养物质消化率、瘤胃发酵及瘤胃微生物区系的影响[J].动物营养学报, 2021, 33(12):6864-6875. XIE L, LONG J S, WU Z W, et al.Effects of selenium source and microecological agent on nutrient digestibility, rumen fermentation and rumen microflora of beef cattle[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(12):6864-6875.(in Chinese)
[23] 汪成, 马健, 胡瑞, 等.活性干酵母对西门塔尔杂交牛生长性能、营养物质表观消化率、瘤胃发酵参数及血清生化和抗氧化指标的影响[J].动物营养学报, 2021, 33(7):3925-3933. WANG C, MA J, HU R, et al.Effects of active dry yeast on growth performance, nutrient apparent digestibilities, rumen fermentation parameters and serum biochemical and antioxidant indexes of Simmental crossbred cattle[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(7):3925-3933.(in Chinese)
[24] MCCANN J C, LUAN S Y, CARDOSO F C, et al.Induction of subacute ruminal acidosis affects the ruminal microbiome and epithelium[J].Frontiers in Microbiology, 2016, 7:701.
[25] ERASMUS L J, BOTHA P M, KISTNER A.Effect of yeast culture supplement on production, rumen fermentation, and duodenal nitrogen flow in dairy cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science, 1992, 75(11):3056-3065.  
[26] ASAI K, LWIN K O, TANDANG A G, et al.Comparative analysis of rumen bacteria between water buffalo and cattle fed the same diet during their fattening period in the philippines[J].Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly, 2021, 55(1):69-75.  
[27] SHANKS O C, KELTY C A, ARCHIBEQUE S, et al.Community structures of fecal bacteria in cattle from different animal feeding operations[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2011, 77(9):2992-3001.  
[28] 吴婷婷.补喂绵羊瘤胃液、益生菌对28日龄羔羊胃肠道菌群及免疫的影响[D].博士学位论文.乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学, 2016. WU T T.The Effects of supplement with ruminal fluid, probiotics on the gastrointestinal microbiota and immunity of lambs aged 28 days[D].Ph.D.Thesis.Urumqi:Xinjiang Agricultural University, 2016.(in Chinese)
[29] BÄCKHED F, LEY R E, SONNENBURG J L, et al.Host-bacterial mutualism in the human intestine[J].Science, 2005, 307(5717):1915-1920.  
[30] XU J, BJURSELL M K, HIMROD J, et al.A genomic view of the human-Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron symbiosis[J].Science, 2003, 299(5615):2074-2076.  
[31] 张玉莹, 刘书杰, 冯宇哲, 等.基于16S rRNA测序分析正常与腹泻牦牛犊牛粪便细菌区系组成[J].中国畜牧兽医, 2021, 48(9):3293-3302. ZHANG Y Y, LIU S J, FENG Y Z, et al.Bacterial flora composition of normal and diarrhea yak calves based on 16S rRNA sequencing[J].China Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Medicine, 2021, 48(9):3293-3302.(in Chinese)
[32] KEGGI C, DORAN-PETERSON J.The homogalacturonan deconstruction system of Paenibacillus amylolyticus 27C64 requires no extracellular pectin methylesterase and has significant industrial potential[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2020, 86(12):e02275-19.
[33] YADAV S, DUBEY S K.Cellulose degradation potential of Paenibacillus lautus strain BHU3 and its whole genome sequence[J].Bioresource Technology, 2018, 262:124-131.
[34] STREPIS N, SÁNCHEZ-ANDREA I, VAN GELDER A H, et al.Description of Trichococcus ilyis sp. nov. by combined physiological and in silico genome hybridization analyses[J].International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 2016, 66(10):3957-3963.  
[35] GAO Z M, XU X, RUAN L W.Enrichment and characterization of an anaerobic cellulolytic microbial consortium SQD-1.1 from mangrove soil[J].Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2014, 98(1):465-474.  
[36] DAI Y M, ZHANG L L, LI Y, et al.Corrigendum:characterization of Trichococcus paludicola sp. nov. and Trichococcus alkaliphilus sp. nov., isolated from a high-elevation wetland, by phenotypic and genomic analyses[J].International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 2018, 68(6):2115.
文章导航

/