研究论文

嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬营养物质消化代谢的影响

  • 毛爱鹏 , 1, 2 ,
  • 孙皓然 2 ,
  • 周宁 2 ,
  • 郭肖兰 2 ,
  • 南韦肖 2 ,
  • 李梦杰 2 ,
  • 陈淼 2 ,
  • 张海华 , 1, * ,
  • 徐超 , 2, *
展开
  • 1 河北科技师范学院动物科技学院,河北省特色动物种质资源挖掘与创新实验室,秦皇岛 066004
  • 2 中国农业科学院特产研究所,长春 130112
* 张海华,教授,硕士生导师,E-mail:
徐超,研究员,硕士生导师,E-mail:

毛爱鹏(1996—),男,甘肃定西人,硕士研究生,从事特种动物饲养研究。E-mail:

Copy editor: 田艳明

收稿日期: 2022-07-27

  网络出版日期: 2023-02-13

基金资助

河北省青年拔尖人才项目(180443)

中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项(1610342021006)

中国农业科学院科技创新工程

Effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus Isolated Components on Nutrient Digestion and Metabolism of Chinese Rural Dogs

  • MAO Aipeng , 1, 2 ,
  • SUN Haoran 2 ,
  • ZHOU Ning 2 ,
  • GUO Xiaolan 2 ,
  • NAN Weixiao 2 ,
  • LI Mengjie 2 ,
  • CHEN Miao 2 ,
  • ZHANG Haihua , 1, * ,
  • XU Chao , 2, *
Expand
  • 1 Hebei Key Laboratory of Specialty Animal Germplasm Resources Exploration and Innovation, College of Animal Science and Technology, Hebei Normal University of Science and Technology, Qinhuangdao 066004,China
  • 2 Institute of Special Animal and Plant Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Changchun 130112, China
* ZHANG Haihua, professor, E-mail:
XU Chao, professor, E-mail:

Received date: 2022-07-27

  Online published: 2023-02-13

摘要

本试验旨在探究嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬体重、营养物质表观消化率、血清生化指标和粪便短链脂肪酸(SCFA)含量的影响。选择24只初始体重为(4.80±0.91) kg的中华田园犬,随机分为4组,每组6个重复,每个重复1只。在采食基础饲粮后,4组犬分别经口灌服等体积生理盐水(Ⅰ组,对照组)、嗜酸乳杆菌菌体(Ⅱ组)、嗜酸乳杆菌无细胞上清液(CFS)(Ⅲ组)和嗜酸乳杆菌菌液(Ⅳ组)。预试期3 d,正试期28 d。结果表明:1)各组犬各阶段体重之间均无显著差异(P>0.05),Ⅲ组平均日增重、增重率和总增重最高,但与其他组相比,差异均不显著(P>0.05)。2)Ⅱ组粗脂肪表观消化率显著低于其他3组(P<0.05),且其他3组之间无显著差异(P>0.05)。3)Ⅲ组血清总蛋白(TP)含量显著高于Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组(P<0.05),血清甘油三酯(TG)含量显著高于其他各组(P<0.05);Ⅳ组血清胆固醇(CHO)和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)含量显著低于其他各组(P<0.05)。4)与Ⅰ组相比,Ⅲ组粪便中乙酸含量显著提高(P<0.05),Ⅲ组和Ⅳ组粪便中丁酸和异戊酸含量均显著降低(P<0.05)。结果提示,嗜酸乳杆菌CFS有助于增强中华田园犬机体对蛋白质的消化吸收,而嗜酸乳杆菌菌液对机体脂质代谢有一定的促进作用。

本文引用格式

毛爱鹏 , 孙皓然 , 周宁 , 郭肖兰 , 南韦肖 , 李梦杰 , 陈淼 , 张海华 , 徐超 . 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬营养物质消化代谢的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2023 , 35(2) : 1241 -1249 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2023.116

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus isolated components on body weight, nutrient apparent digestibility, serum biochemical indices and fecal short chain fatty acid (SCFA) content of Chinese rural dogs. Twenty-four Chinese rural dogs with an initial body weight of (4.80±0.91) kg were randomly divided into 4 groups with 6 replicates per group and 1 dog per replicate. After eating the basal diet, the dogs in the 4 groups were orally given equal volume normal saline (group Ⅰ, control group), Lactobacillus acidophilus (group Ⅱ), Lactobacillus acidophilus cell free supernatant (CFS)(group Ⅲ) and Lactobacillus acidophilus bacterial solution (group Ⅳ), respectively. The pre-trial period lasted for 3 days and the experimental period lasted for 28 days. The results showed as follows: 1) there were no significant differences in the body weight of dogs in every period among all groups (P>0.05), and the average daily gain, weight gain rate and total weight gain in group Ⅲ were the highest, but there were no significant differences compared with the other groups (P>0.05). 2) The ether extract apparent digestibility in group Ⅱ was significantly lower than that in the other three groups (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference among the other three groups (P>0.05). 3) The serum total protein (TP) content in group Ⅲ was significantly higher than that in groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ (P<0.05), and the serum triglyceride (TG) content was significantly higher than that in the other groups (P<0.05). The contents of serum cholesterol (CHO) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in group Ⅳ were significantly lower than those in the other groups (P<0.05). 4) Compared with group Ⅰ, the fecal acetic acid content in group Ⅲ was significantly increased (P<0.05), and the fecal contents of butyric acid and isovaleric acid in groups Ⅲ and Ⅳ were significantly decreased (P<0.05). The results suggest that Lactobacillus acidophilus CFS can enhance the digestion and absorption of protein in Chinese rural dogs, and Lactobacillus acidophilus bacteria solution can promote the metabolism of lipid to a certain extent.

犬是人们生活中常见的伴侣动物,与人类有着共同的生活环境,甚至相似的饮食结构和习惯[1]。益生菌、益生元和合生元等作为宠物功能性食品添加剂使用,不仅可满足宠物的基本营养需求,还可为不同生命阶段或特定生理、病理状态下的宠物提供营养需要[2]。嗜酸乳杆菌(Lactobacillus acidophilus)属于革兰氏阳性菌,具有降低胆固醇[3]及抵抗致病菌等作用[4],可促进幼犬的生长发育[5]。研究表明,嗜酸乳杆菌活菌体和热灭活菌体均能很好地抑制大肠杆菌对猪小肠上皮细胞(IPEC-J2)的黏附和入侵[6];在无抗饲粮中添加嗜酸乳杆菌菌体及其代谢产物可显著提高断奶仔猪的生长性能,并改善肠道菌群结构[7]。活菌分泌或细菌裂解后可产生多糖、蛋白质和有机酸等活性物质,无活力的微生物细胞、细菌裂解物或无细菌提取物具有降低胆固醇、抗炎、抗高血压和抗氧化等作用[8-9]。无细胞上清液(cell free supernatant,CFS)中含有微生物生长产生的代谢物和培养基中剩余的营养物质,来自乳酸菌的CFS因含有机酸、脂肪酸和蛋白质等化合物而具有抗菌活性[10]。嗜酸乳杆菌ATCC 4356及其CFS均可抑制空肠弯曲杆菌的生长,并能够减少空肠弯曲杆菌菌株对Caco-2细胞的黏附和侵袭[11]。与干酪乳杆菌相比,嗜酸乳杆菌CFS表现出更强的抗菌和生物膜消除作用,对常见的肠道致病菌(致病性大肠埃希菌、伤寒沙门菌和痢疾志贺菌)及其L型菌均有不同程度的抑制作用[12],适用于控制食源性致病菌的生长[13]
由此可知,嗜酸乳杆菌菌体及其代谢产物中存在多种活性物质,且在菌株灭活后,无生命的菌体及其组成成分、代谢产物等仍具有一定的生物活性[14-15],可抑制大肠杆菌、金黄色葡萄球菌和铜绿假单胞菌等致病菌的生长,因此被广泛应用于医药及功能性食品中[16-17]。本研究基于以往的相关报道,将实验室从蓝狐肠道中分离且具有优良体外益生潜能的嗜酸乳杆菌菌株ZJBF003[18]经离心过滤后,分为菌体、上清液及未离心的菌液3种不同的成分,通过探讨嗜酸乳杆菌不同成分对幼年期中华田园犬体重变化、营养物质表观消化率、血清生化指标以及粪便短链脂肪酸(short chain fatty acid,SCFA)含量的影响,旨在比较嗜酸乳杆菌不同成分对中华田园犬营养物质消化吸收的异同,并为其在宠物饲粮中的合理应用提供参考。

1 材料与方法

1.1 试验设计

试验选取24只4~6月龄健康的中华田园犬,初始体重为(4.80±0.91) kg,随机分为4组,每组6个重复,每个重复1只,公母比例相同,单笼饲养。所有动物在试验前注射犬用四联疫苗,并根据粪便检查和体质情况进行驱虫。试验犬每天饲喂2次基础饲粮,自由饮水,饲喂后4组犬分别经口灌服等体积生理盐水(Ⅰ组,对照组)、嗜酸乳杆菌菌体(Ⅱ组)、嗜酸乳杆菌CFS(Ⅲ组)和嗜酸乳杆菌菌液(Ⅳ组)。菌液的处理参照文献[19],经平板计数确定菌液活菌数量为1×108 CFU/mL,添加剂量为2×108 CFU/d。基础饲粮组成及营养水平见表1。预试期3 d,正试期28 d。
表1 基础饲粮组成及营养水平(风干基础)

Table 1 Composition and nutrient levels of the basal diet (air-dry basis)%

项目 Items 含量 Content
原料 Ingredients
玉米 Corn 19.00
豆粕 Soybean meal 8.00
牛肉粉 Beef powder 4.00
红薯颗粒 Sweet potato granules 4.00
大米碎米 Broken rice 13.00
甜菜粕 Beet pulp 8.00
破壁血球蛋白粉
Broken wall hemoglobulin powder
2.50
鱼粉 Fish meal 1.00
牛肉骨粉 Bovine meat and bone meal 5.00
鸡肉粉 Chicken powder 10.00
啤酒酵母 Saccharomyces cerevisiae 5.00
豌豆粉 Peameal 3.00
鸡油 Chicken oil 11.00
口味增强剂 Taste enhancer 1.70
蛋氨酸 Methionine 0.30
鸡肝粉 Chicken liver powder 2.50
预混料 Premix1) 2.00
合计 Total 100.00
营养水平 Nutrient levels2)
粗蛋白质 CP 28.88
粗脂肪 EE 8.85
粗灰分 Ash 6.24
碳水化合物 Carbohydrate 56.03
钙 Ca 0.89
磷 P 0.66

1)每千克预混料含有 One kilogram of premix contained the following:VA 625 000 IU,VD3 100 000 IU,VE 6 000 IU,VK3 200 mg,VB1 1 250 mg,VB2 900 mg,VB6 750 mg,VB12 2.25 mg,生物素 biotin 10 mg,叶酸 folic acid 150 mg,烟酸 nicotinic acid 2 500 mg,泛酸钙 calcium pantothenate 1 750 mg,VC 10 050 mg,胆碱 choline 240 000 mg,Fe 9 600 mg,Cu 18 000 mg,Zn 7 800 mg,Mn 4 800 mg,I 144 mg,Co 24 mg,Se 30 mg。

2)营养水平为实测值。Nutrient levels were measured values.

1.2 试验仪器

沛欧全自动凯氏定氮仪,全自动生化分析仪(日立7020,日本),气相色谱仪(Agilent 7890A,美国)

1.3 样品采集

正试期第20天,通过全收粪法收集连续4 d的粪便样本,喷洒10%的硫酸进行固氮,混合均匀并烘干至恒重,粉碎过40目筛,用于各营养成分的检测。试验结束时,使用一次性负压采血管(分离胶促凝剂)空腹采集血液10 mL,用全自动生化分析仪测定血清生化指标。无菌采集新鲜粪便,用于SCFA含量的测定。

1.4 检测指标及方法

1.4.1 体重

正试期第1、7、14、21和28天早晨空腹称量动物体重,并计算平均日增重(average daily weight,ADG)、增重率(weight gain rate,WGR)和总增重(total weight gain,TWG)。

1.4.2 饲粮和粪样中营养物质含量

分别参照GB/T 6435—2014、GB/T 6438—2007、GB/T 6432—2018和GB/T 6433—2006测定饲粮和粪样中干物质(DM)、粗灰分(Ash)、粗蛋白质(CP)和粗脂肪(EE)含量。采用以下公式计算碳水化合物含量和营养物质表观消化率:
碳水化合物含量(%)=干物质含量-粗蛋白质含量-粗脂肪含量-粗灰分含量;
营养物质表观消化率(%)=100×(营养物质摄入量-粪样中营养物质排出量)/营养物质摄入量。

1.4.3 血清生化指标

血清总蛋白(TP)、白蛋白(ALB)、甘油三酯(TG)、胆固醇(CHO)、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)含量以及谷丙转氨酶(ALT)、谷草转氨酶(AST)活性等指标的检测试剂盒均采购于中生北控生物科技股份有限公司。

1.4.4 粪便SCFA含量

在5 mL离心管中加入0.1 g粪便和3 mL超纯水,冰中静置6 h后,低温高速离心,取上清液按照5∶1(体积比)加入含有内标物2-乙基丁酸的25%(质量体积分数)偏磷酸溶液,冰中静置30 min后离心,过0.22 μm滤膜后上机测定。采用气相色谱法(Agilent 7890A气相色谱仪,美国)测定粪便中SCFA含量。色谱柱为30 m×0.32 mm×0.32 μm,载气为高纯氮气,载气流量为2.2 mL/min,进样口为250 ℃。程序升温条件为:初始温度为60 ℃,10 ℃/min升温到170 ℃,8 ℃/min升温到212 ℃。

1.5 数据统计分析

试验数据经Excel 2019整理后,使用SPSS 26.0软件进行统计,采用单因素方差分析(one-way ANOVA)进行差异显著性检验,并采用LSD法进行组间多重比较,以P<0.05为差异显著性判断标准,结果用平均值和均值标准误表示。

2 结果与分析

2.1 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬体重的影响

表2可知,与Ⅰ组(对照组)相比,试验组(Ⅱ~Ⅳ组)第7、14、21和28天的体重均无显著差异(P>0.05);试验组ADG和TWG均高于对照组,但差异均不显著(P>0.05),其中Ⅲ组ADG、WGR和TWG最高,表明嗜酸乳杆菌CFS有提高中华田园犬体增重的趋势,但差异不显著(P>0.05)。
表2 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬体重的影响

Table 2 Effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus isolated components on body weight of Chinese rural dogs

项目
Items
组别 Groups 均值标准误
SEM
P
P-value
初始体重 Initial body weight/kg 4.59 4.89 4.96 4.77 0.19 0.917
第7天体重 Body weight on day 7/kg 4.97 5.43 5.32 5.23 0.19 0.869
第14天体重 Body weight on day 14/kg 5.03 5.53 5.53 5.38 0.20 0.810
第21天体重 Body weight on day 21/kg 4.89 5.24 5.41 5.22 0.24 0.905
第28天体重 Body weight on day 28/kg 5.46 5.84 6.04 5.73 0.20 0.805
平均日增重 ADG/(g/d) 30.95 33.93 38.69 34.23 0.00 0.870
增重率 WGR 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.20 0.02 0.975
总增重 TWG/kg 0.87 0.95 1.08 0.96 0.09 0.870

同行数据肩标无字母或相同字母表示差异不显著(P>0.05),不同小写字母表示差异显著(P<0.05)。下表同。

In the same row, values with no letter or the same letter superscripts mean no significant difference (P>0.05), while with different small letter superscripts mean significant difference (P<0.05). The same as below.

2.2 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬营养物质表观消化率的影响

表3可知,与Ⅰ组相比,Ⅱ~Ⅳ组干物质、粗蛋白质和碳水化合物的表观消化率均无显著差异(P>0.05),其中Ⅲ组干物质、粗蛋白质和碳水化合物表观消化率均最低,但与其余3组相比,差异均不显著(P>0.05);Ⅱ组粗脂肪表观消化率显著低于其他3组(P<0.05),且其他3组之间无显著差异(P>0.05)。
表3 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬营养物质表观消化率的影响

Table 3 Effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus isolated components on nutrient apparent digestibility of Chinese rural dogs%

项目
Items
组别 Groups 均值标准误
SEM
P
P-value
干物质 DM 77.69 78.09 76.97 78.60 0.44 0.689
粗蛋白质 CP 72.46 73.68 70.31 72.24 0.84 0.588
粗脂肪 EE 95.95b 94.48a 95.82b 95.97b 0.21 0.018
碳水化合物 Carbohydrate 83.31 83.50 82.99 84.21 0.35 0.799

2.3 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬血清生化指标的影响

表4可知,Ⅲ组血清TP含量显著高于Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组(P<0.05);Ⅲ组血清ALB含量最高,但与其他组相比,差异不显著(P>0.05);Ⅲ组血清TG含量显著高于其他各组(P<0.05),表明嗜酸乳杆菌CFS可显著提高中华田园犬血清TP和TG含量。Ⅳ组血清CHO和LDL-C含量显著低于其他各组(P<0.05),表明嗜酸乳杆菌菌液可显著降低中华田园犬血清CHO和LDL-C含量。各组血清ALB、HDL-C含量以及ALT、AST活性之间差异均不显著(P>0.05)。
表4 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬血清生化指标的影响

Table 4 Effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus isolated components on serum biochemical indices of Chinese rural dogs

项目
Items
组别 Groups 均值标准误
SEM
P
P-value
总蛋白 TP(g/L) 60.46a 58.17a 68.52b 62.78ab 1.41 0.041
白蛋白 ALB(g/L) 32.71 30.24 34.31 33.80 0.89 0.401
甘油三酯 TG/(mmol/L) 0.68a 0.64a 0.91b 0.57a 0.04 0.017
胆固醇 CHO/(mmol/L) 6.81b 6.23b 6.77b 5.23a 0.21 0.016
高密度脂蛋白胆固醇 HDL-C/(mmol/L) 3.09 3.52 3.98 3.33 0.11 0.069
低密度脂蛋白胆固醇 LDL-C/(mmol/L) 0.61b 0.60b 0.60b 0.41a 0.03 0.014
谷丙转氨酶 ALT/(U/L) 22.88 24.89 24.27 27.45 1.09 0.589
谷草转氨酶 AST/(U/L) 22.78 26.85 27.05 28.88 1.46 0.614

2.4 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬粪便SCFA含量的影响

表5可知,与Ⅰ组相比,Ⅲ组粪便中乙酸含量显著提高(P<0.05),且Ⅱ组和Ⅲ组粪便中乙酸含量显著高于Ⅳ组(P<0.05),表明嗜酸乳杆菌CFS可显著提高中华田园犬粪便中乙酸含量。与Ⅰ组相比,Ⅲ组和Ⅳ组粪便中丁酸和异戊酸含量均显著降低(P<0.05),表明嗜酸乳杆菌CFS和菌液均可降低中华田园犬粪便中丁酸和异戊酸含量。各组粪便中丙酸和异丁酸含量之间均无显著差异(P>0.05)。
表5 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬粪便SCFA含量的影响

Table 5 Effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus isolated components on SCFA contents in feces of Chinese rural dogsμmol/g

项目
Items
组别 Groups 均值标准误
SEM
P
P-value
乙酸 Acetic acid 3.49ab 4.11bc 4.24c 3.45a 0.13 0.033
丙酸 Propionic acid 2.09 2.34 2.17 2.05 0.08 0.623
丁酸 Butyric acid 0.99b 0.86ab 0.59a 0.66a 0.06 0.037
异丁酸 Isobutyric acid 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.01 0.163
异戊酸 Isovaleric acid 0.30b 0.23ab 0.20a 0.18a 0.02 0.011

3 讨论

3.1 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬体重的影响

益生菌不仅可以增强肠道消化酶活性,促进机体对营养物质的消化吸收,进而提高幼犬的ADG[20-21];还可以通过调节肠道菌群影响动物的体重变化,这与菌株的不同、益生菌剂量和干预时间不同有关[22]。本研究中,嗜酸乳杆菌不同分离成分对中华田园犬各阶段的体重并无显著影响,其中Ⅲ组的ADG、WGR和TWG均较对照组有所提高,但差异不显著。其可能是由于嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对肠道pH改变较小,消化酶未能充分分
解肠道中的营养物质;也可能是本研究中试验动物遗传及生理上存在较大差异,未能表现出显著差异,从ADG、WGR和TWG等的结果表明,Ⅲ组的体重增幅最高,这表明嗜酸乳杆菌CFS对中华田园犬的体增重有一定的影响。

3.2 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬营养物质表观消化率的影响

营养物质表观消化率通过测定机体摄入和排出营养物质的差异,可反映饲粮养分的可消化性及动物对饲粮养分的消化能力。本试验中,在幼犬进食后,经口灌服的嗜酸乳杆菌菌体及其代谢产物对干物质、粗蛋白质和碳水化合物的表观消化率均无显著影响,但嗜酸乳杆菌菌体组(Ⅱ组)粗脂肪表观消化率显著低于其余各组,嗜酸乳杆菌CFS组(Ⅲ组)的干物质、粗蛋白质和碳水化合物表观消化率最低。研究表明,在犬饲粮中添加有活性的嗜酸乳杆菌对干物质、有机物和粗蛋白质的表观消化率均无显著影响[23],单独添加无活性的嗜酸乳杆菌对干物质、粗蛋白质和粗脂肪的表观消化率也无显著影响[24]。结肠中SCFA含量的升高会刺激不同器官和组织部位的大量激素和神经信号,从而累积抑制短期食欲和能量的摄入,乙酸可直接调节食欲中枢,丙酸可通过刺激肝脏迷走神经抑制进食行为[25],而动物体重下降及脂肪含量的减少与产生SCFA的肠道菌群结构有密切联系[26]。本研究中,嗜酸乳杆菌菌体和CFS组营养物质表观消化率的降低可能与肠道中产生SCFA的微生物相关。

3.3 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬血清生化指标的影响

血清生化指标不仅可以反映血液系统本身的状态,还可以揭示机体各组织器官潜在的生理变化。研究表明,连续14 d以不同剂量饲喂犬源发酵乳杆菌CCM7421可导致血红蛋白和TP含量升高,ALT活性下降,但与益生菌的剂量或持续时间无关[27]。本研究中,在犬采食后,经口灌服1×108 CFU/mL的嗜酸乳杆菌28 d,结果表明,嗜酸乳杆菌CFS可显著提高幼犬血清中TP和TG含量,嗜酸乳杆菌菌液可显著降低血清CHO和LDL-C含量。TP是机体主要的蛋白质来源,可在一定程度上反映机体对蛋白质的消化吸收,血液系统中TP和ALB含量升高,表明嗜酸乳杆菌CFS可有效促进机体对蛋白质的消化吸收。TG是机体储量最大和产能最多的能源物质,食物中的脂肪在胆汁酸和酯酶的作用下被肠黏膜吸收,并在黏膜上皮细胞内合成TG,肝脏来源的极低密度脂蛋白和肠道来源的乳糜微粒可形成富含TG的脂蛋白(triglycerides lipoprotein,TGL)[28],CHO和TG可反映机体脂质代谢状况,是决定血脂水平的重要因素。本研究中,嗜酸乳杆菌菌液可显著降低血清中CHO和LDL-C的含量,这与其他关于嗜酸乳杆菌对动物机体的研究结果[29-32]一致。CHO和LDL-C含量的降低可有效促进机体脂质代谢,可能是由于乳酸菌通过吸收、共沉淀和酶解转化等途径降低CHO的含量[33],也可能是由于乳酸菌通过调控机体的3-羟基-3-甲基戊二酰辅酶A(HMG-CoA)还原酶及胆固醇7α-羟化酶(CYP7A1)的合成和表达、降低重吸收等方式降低机体CHO含量[34],具体机制有待进一步验证。

3.4 嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对中华田园犬粪便SCFA含量的影响

肠道微生物是消化系统的重要组成部分,在结肠近端,微生物可将复杂的碳水化合物、蛋白质及部分脂肪代谢为SCFA等物质[35]。SCFA不仅可直接激活G蛋白偶联受体,抑制组蛋白去乙酰化酶[36-37],还可供给结肠细胞高达70%的能量需求[38],在维持结肠细胞代谢稳态和保护结肠细胞免受外界伤害方面发挥重要作用[39],进而影响宿主的生理机能[40]
当肠道中的内容物向结肠远端蠕动时,SCFA会迅速被结肠上皮细胞吸收,只有不到10%会随粪便排出体外[41-42]。本研究结果表明,嗜酸乳杆菌CFS显著提高了犬粪便中的乙酸含量,并降低了粪便中丁酸和异戊酸的含量;嗜酸乳杆菌菌液也可显著降低粪便中丁酸和异戊酸的含量。有研究表明,SCFA含量的提高可显著降低饥饿素含量,本研究中嗜酸乳杆菌CFS组体重增加不显著,可能是由于粪便中乙酸含量提高,导致血浆中饥饿素含量降低引起[43]。丁酸是肠道上皮细胞的重要能量来源,可抑制核因子-κB(NF-κB)的活化和组蛋白去乙酰化,在抑制肠炎、结肠癌和改善结肠防御屏障功能等多方面被广泛研究[44-45]。与热灭活的嗜酸乳杆菌及其上清液相比,有活性的嗜酸乳杆菌可显著提高结肠炎大鼠粪便中乙酸、丙酸和丁酸的含量,从而改善肠道屏障功能[46]。本研究中,单独添加嗜酸乳杆菌分离成分对犬肠道健康的影响较小,嗜酸乳杆菌CFS及菌液通过调节肠道中SCFA比例,对机体蛋白质的消化吸收及脂质代谢有一定的促进作用,具体的机制有待进一步探讨。

4 结论

① 嗜酸乳杆菌CFS可增强中华田园犬机体对蛋白质的消化吸收,这与其对体增重的影响具有一致性,但与其对干物质、粗蛋白质和碳水化合物表观消化率的影响并不一致。
② 嗜酸乳杆菌菌液可有效促进中华田园犬机体脂质代谢,有助于降低血脂水平。
[1]
SONG S J, LAUBER C, COSTELLO E K, et al. Cohabiting family members share microbiota with one another and with their dogs[J]. eLife, 2013, 2:e00458.

DOI

[2]
毛爱鹏, 孙皓然, 张海华, 等. 益生菌、益生元、合生元与犬猫肠道健康的研究进展[J]. 动物营养学报, 2022, 34(4):2140-2147.

MAO A P, SUN H R, ZHANG H H, et al. Research progress of probiotics,prebiotics,synbiotics and intestinal health in canine and feline[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2022, 34(4):2140-2147. (in Chinese)

[3]
LEE N Y, SHIN M J, YOUN G S, et al. Lactobacillus attenuates progression of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by lowering cholesterol and steatosis[J]. Clinical and Molecular Hepatology, 2021, 27(1):110-124.

DOI

[4]
MITALL B K, GARG S K. Anticarcinogenic,hypocholesterolemic,and antagonistic activities of Lactobacillus acidophilus[J]. Critical Reviews in Microbiology, 1995, 21(3):175-214.

DOI

[5]
PASUPATHY K, SAHOO A, PATHAK N N. Effect of Lactobacillus supplementation on growth and nutrient utilization in mongrel pups[J]. Archiv für Tierernaehrung, 2001, 55(3):243-253.

DOI

[6]
俞涵丽, 方华, 蔡旋, 等. 嗜酸乳杆菌活菌体和热灭活菌体对IPEC-J2细胞的黏附和黏附拮抗效应[J]. 动物营养学报, 2014, 26(6):1601-1607.

YU H L, FANG H, CAI X, et al. Adhesion and adhesion antagonistic effect of live and heat-killed Lactobacillus acidophilus on IPEC-J2 cells[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2014, 26(6):1601-1607. (in Chinese)

[7]
吴飞, 刘虎, 马树良, 等. 无抗日粮中添加后生元对断奶仔猪生长性能及肠道菌群结构的影响[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2021, 57(S1):253-256.

WU F, LIU H, MA S L, et al. Effects of supplementing postbiotics in antibiotic-free diet on growth performance and intestinal microflora structure of weaned piglets[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2021, 57(S1):253-256. (in Chinese)

[8]
AGUILAR-TOALÁ J E, GARCIA-VARELA R, GARCIA H S, et al. Postbiotics:an evolving term within the functional foods field[J]. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2018, 75:105-114.

[9]
VALLEJO-CORDOBA B, CASTRO-LÓPEZ C, GARCÍA H S, et al. Postbiotics and paraprobiotics:a review of current evidence and emerging trends[J]. Advances in Food and Nutrition Research, 2020, 94:1-34.

[10]
MANI-LÓPEZ E, ARRIOJA-BRETÓN D, LÓPEZ-MALO A. The impacts of antimicrobial and antifungal activity of cell-free supernatants from lactic acid bacteria in vitro and foods[J]. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 2022, 21(1):604-641.

DOI

[11]
CAMPANA R, FEDERICI S, CIANDRINI E, et al. Antagonistic activity of Lactobacillus acidophilus ATCC 4356 on the growth and adhesion/invasion characteristics of human Campylobacter jejuni[J]. Current Microbiology, 2012, 64(4):371-378.

DOI

[12]
刘鑫, 王杰, 赵曼, 等. 嗜酸乳杆菌发酵上清液对常见肠道致病菌及其L型抑菌作用的实验研究[J]. 中国微生态学杂志, 2017, 29(11):1257-1260.

LIU X, WANG J, ZHAO M, et al. The inhibitory effect of L. acidophilus on common intestinal pathogens and their L-forms[J]. Chinese Journal of Microecology, 2017, 29(11):1257-1260. (in Chinese)

[13]
KOOHESTANI M, MORADI M, TAJIK H, et al. Effects of cell-free supernatant of Lactobacillus acidophilus LA5 and Lactobacillus casei 431 against planktonic form and biofilm of Staphylococcus aureus[J]. Veterinary Research Forum, 2018, 9(4):301-306.

[14]
ŻÓŁKIEWICZ J, MARZEC A, RUSZCZYÑSKI M, et al. Postbiotics-a step beyond pre- and probiotics[J]. Nutrients, 2020, 12(8):2189.

DOI

[15]
NATARAJ B H, ALI S A, BEHARE P V, et al. Postbiotics-parabiotics:the new horizons in microbial biotherapy and functional foods[J]. Microbial Cell Factories, 2020, 19(1):168.

DOI

[16]
ANJUM N, MAQSOOD S, MASUD T, et al. Lactobacillus acidophilus:characterization of the species and application in food production[J]. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 2014, 54(9):1241-1251.

DOI

[17]
BULL M, PLUMMER S, MARCHESI J, et al. The life history of Lactobacillus acidophilus as a probiotic:a tale of revisionary taxonomy,misidentification and commercial success[J]. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 2013, 349(2):77-87.

DOI

[18]
蔡熙姮, 朱翔宇, 张如春, 等. 蓝狐源嗜酸乳杆菌ZJBF003株的分离鉴定及其体外益生潜能的评价[J]. 中国兽医科学, 2020, 50(8):1001-1011.

CAI X H, ZHU X Y, ZHANG R C, et al. Isolation and identification of Lactobacillus acidophilus ZJBF004 from Alopex lagopus and evaluation of its probiotic potential in vitro[J]. Chinese Veterinary Science, 2020, 50(8):1001-1011. (in Chinese)

[19]
DE LIMA MARQUES J, DA SILVA DANNENBERG G, et al. Bacteriocin-like substances of Lactobacillus curvatus P99:characterization and application in biodegradable films for control of Listeria monocytogenes in cheese[J]. Food Microbiology, 2017, 63:159-163.

DOI

[20]
徐函, 吴艳萍, 梅小强, 等. 益生菌影响动物营养物质消化吸收及肝脏代谢的研究进展[J]. 动物营养学报, 2018, 30(10):3850-3856.

XU H, WU Y P, MEI X Q, et al. Research progress of probiotics effects on animal digestion,absorption and liver metabolism of nutrients[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2018, 30(10):3850-3856. (in Chinese)

[21]
陆江, 朱道仙, 卢鹏飞, 等. 补喂复合益生菌制剂对幼犬生长性能、肠道动力及肠道屏障功能的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2019, 31(9):4242-4250.

LU J, ZHU D X, LU P F, et al. Effects of supplementary feeding complex probiotic preparation on growth performance,intestinal motility and intestinal barrier function of puppies[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2019, 31(9):4242-4250. (in Chinese)

[22]
CROVESY L, OSTROWSKI M, FERREIRA D M T P, et al. Effect of Lactobacillus on body weight and body fat in overweight subjects:a systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials[J]. International Journal of Obesity, 2017, 41(11):1607-1614.

DOI

[23]
SWANSON K S, GRIESHOP C M, FLICKINGER E A, et al. Fructooligosaccharides and Lactobacillus acidophilus modify gut microbial populations,total tract nutrient digestibilities and fecal protein catabolite concentrations in healthy adult dogs[J]. The Journal of Nutrition, 2002, 132(12):3721-3731.

DOI

[24]
PANASEVICH M R, DARISTOTLE L, QUESNELL R, et al. Altered fecal microbiota,IgA,and fermentative end-products in adult dogs fed prebiotics and a nonviable Lactobacillus acidophilus[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2021, 99(12):skab347.

[25]
CHAMBERS E S, MORRISON D J, FROST G. Control of appetite and energy intake by SCFA:what are the potential underlying mechanisms?[J]. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 2015, 74(3):328-336.

DOI

[26]
LIOU A P, PAZIUK M, LUEVANO J M,Jr, et al. Conserved shifts in the gut microbiota due to gastric bypass reduce host weight and adiposity[J]. Science Translational Medicine, 2013, 5(178):178ra41.

[27]
STROMPFOVÁ V, KUBAŠOVÁ I, LAUKOVÁ A. Health benefits observed after probiotic Lactobacillus fermentum CCM 7421 application in dogs[J]. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2017, 101(16):6309-6319.

DOI

[28]
SANDESARA P B, VIRANI S S, FAZIO S, et al. The forgotten lipids: triglycerides,remnant cholesterol,and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk[J]. Endocrine Reviews, 2019, 40(2):537-557.

DOI

[29]
SONG M, PARK S, LEE H, et al. Effect of Lactobacillus acidophilus NS1 on plasma cholesterol levels in diet-induced obese mice[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2015, 98(3):1492-1501.

DOI

[30]
WANG L J, ZHOU B H, ZHOU X, et al. Combined lowering effects of rosuvastatin and L. acidophilus on cholesterol levels in rat[J]. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2019, 29(3):473-481.

DOI

[31]
ALONSO L, FONTECHA J, CUESTA P. Combined effect of Lactobacillus acidophilus and β-cyclodextrin on serum cholesterol in pigs[J]. The British Journal of Nutrition, 2016, 115(1):1-5.

DOI

[32]
ALAQIL A A, ABBAS A O, EL-BELTAGI H S, et al. Dietary supplementation of probiotic Lactobacillus acidophilus modulates cholesterol levels,immune response,and productive performance of laying hens[J]. Animals, 2020, 10(9):1588.

DOI

[33]
宋明鑫, 许丽, 王文梅, 等. 乳酸菌降解胆固醇的作用机理及其在动物中的研究现状[J]. 饲料工业, 2011, 32(22):48-51.

SONG M X, XU L, WANG W M, et al. The mechanism of cholesterol degradation by lactic acid bacteria and its research status in animals[J]. Feed Industry, 2011, 32(22):48-51. (in Chinese)

[34]
王文梅, 许丽. 乳酸菌体外和体内降解胆固醇的机理及其应用[J]. 动物营养学报, 2014, 26(2):295-303.

WANG W M, XU L. Lactic acid bacteria:mechanisms for cholesterol degradation in vitro and in vivo and its application[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2014, 26(2):295-303. (in Chinese)

[35]
OLIPHANT K, ALLEN-VERCOE E. Macronutrient metabolism by the human gut microbiome:major fermentation by-products and their impact on host health[J]. Microbiome, 2019, 7(1):91.

DOI

[36]
KOH A, DE VADDER F, KOVATCHEVA-DATCHARY P, et al. From dietary fiber to host physiology:short-chain fatty acids as key bacterial metabolites[J]. Cell, 2016, 165(6):1332-1345.

DOI

[37]
SANDERSON I R. Short chain fatty acid regulation of signaling genes expressed by the intestinal epithelium[J]. The Journal of Nutrition, 2004, 134(9):2450S-2454 S.

[38]
ROEDIGER W E. Role of anaerobic bacteria in the metabolic welfare of the colonic mucosa in man[J]. Gut, 1980, 21(9):793-798.

DOI PMID

[39]
VAN DER BEEK C M, DEJONG C H C, TROOST F J, et al. Role of short-chain fatty acids in colonic inflammation,carcinogenesis,and mucosal protection and healing[J]. Nutrition Reviews, 2017, 75(4):286-305.

DOI

[40]
RÍOS-COVIÁN D, RUAS-MADIEDO P, MARGOLLES A, et al. Intestinal short chain fatty acids and their link with diet and human health[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2016, 7:185.

[41]
CUMMINGS J H, POMARE E W, BRANCH W J, et al. Short chain fatty acids in human large intestine,portal,hepatic and venous blood[J]. Gut, 1987, 28(10):1221-1227.

DOI

[42]
BOETS E, DEROOVER L, HOUBEN E, et al. Quantification of in vivo colonic short chain fatty acid production from inulin[J]. Nutrients, 2015, 7(11):8916-8929.

DOI

[43]
FUKUMORI R, SUGINO T, HASEGAWA Y, et al. Plasma ghrelin concentration is decreased by short chain fatty acids in wethers[J]. Domestic Animal Endocrinology, 2011, 41(1):50-55.

DOI PMID

[44]
HAMER H M, JONKERS D, VENEMA K, et al. Review article:the role of butyrate on colonic function[J]. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 2008, 27(2):104-119.

[45]
LEONEL A J, ALVAREZ-LEITE J I. Butyrate:implications for intestinal function[J]. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care, 2012, 15(5):474-479.

DOI

[46]
LI P, CHEN G P, ZHANG J X, et al. Live Lactobacillus acidophilus alleviates ulcerative colitis via the SCFAs/mitophagy/NLRP3 inflammasome axis[J]. Food & Function, 2022, 13(5):2985-2997.

文章导航

/