综述

水产动物肠道菌群与遗传基因、营养代谢和社会行为的关系

  • 高权新 , 1, 2 ,
  • 尹舜开 1, 2 ,
  • 周子琦 1, 2 ,
  • 夏正龙 , 1, 2, *
展开
  • 1 湖州师范大学生命科学学院, 湖州 313000
  • 2 江苏数丰水产种业有限公司, 高邮 225654
* 夏正龙,工程师,E-mail:

高权新(1982—),男,山东淄博人,研究员,博士,主要从事水产动物肠道菌群研究。E-mail:

Office editor: 菅景颖

收稿日期: 2025-12-15

  网络出版日期: 2026-07-13

基金资助

国家自然科学基金项目(32273121)

Relationship between Gut Microbiota and Host Genetics, Nutritional Metabolism and Social Behaviors in Aquatic Animals

  • GAO Quanxin , 1, 2 ,
  • YIN Shunkai 1, 2 ,
  • ZHOU Ziqi 1, 2 ,
  • XIA Zhenglong , 1, 2, *
Expand
  • 1 College of Life Science, Huzhou Normal University, Huzhou 313000, China
  • 2 Jiangsu Shufeng Prawn Breeding Co., Ltd., Gaoyou 225654, China
* engineer, E-mail:

Received date: 2025-12-15

  Online published: 2026-07-13

摘要

肠道菌群作为动物宿主不可或缺的“多功能器官”与“第二大基因组”,与宿主构成紧密互作的“生命共同体”。肠道菌群构建以宿主遗传调控为主导,同时受环境因素影响,兼具明确的遗传特性与肠菌力(即调控宿主表型性状的核心能力)。为系统解析水产动物肠道菌群的功能特征,本文阐述了肠道菌群与遗传基因、营养代谢、表型性状及社会行为的内在关联,梳理了定向遗传育种对肠道菌群结构与功能的重塑作用,并展望了其在水产养殖领域的潜在应用价值,旨在为肠道菌群的营养调控、遗传学研究及产业化应用提供科学支撑。

本文引用格式

高权新 , 尹舜开 , 周子琦 , 夏正龙 . 水产动物肠道菌群与遗传基因、营养代谢和社会行为的关系[J]. 动物营养学报, 2026 , 38(7) : 4741 -4747 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2026.379

Abstract

As an indispensable “multifunctional organ” and “second largest genome” of animal hosts, the gut microbiota forms a “community of life with close interactions” together with the host. The establishment of the gut microbiota is dominated by host genetic regulation, while also being influenced by environmental factors, and it exhibits distinct heritable characteristics and microbiability (i.e., the core ability to regulate the host’s phenotypic traits). To systematically clarify the functional characteristics of gut microbiota in aquatic animals, this paper elaborated on the intrinsic correlations between the gut microbiota and host genetics, nutritional metabolism, phenotypic traits, as well as social behaviors, summarized the remodeling effect of targeted genetic breeding on the structure and function of the gut microbiota, and outlined the prospects of its potential application value in the aquaculture field. This review aimed to provide scientific support for the nutritional regulation, genetic research, and industrial application of the gut microbiota.

动物是一个充满活力的多元化生命体系,其肠道内寄居了数量庞大、种类繁多的微生物群落。动物遗传基因会主导肠道菌群的构建,肠道菌群亦会赋予动物宿主更多的生理功能,因此肠道菌群是动物宿主不可或缺的“多功能器官”。肠道菌群与动物宿主已经进化成为了一个不可分割的“生命共同体”。肠道菌群会通过产生短链脂肪酸、维生素和氨基酸等向动物提供重要的营养物质,并协同宿主肠道免疫系统抑制外源病原微生物的侵入,以此回馈寄主提供的栖息地。动物宿主会优先选择特定的菌群入住,并通过宿主遗传基因组介导的遗传效应完成肠道菌群的构建。动物宿主的遗传基因主导了肠道菌群的构建,并决定了“宿主-微生物”共生模式的特性。肠道菌群具有遗传特性,所以肠道菌群亦被称为动物体的“第二大基因组”。共生总基因组(hologenome)的概念和理论已经在遗传学领域盛行,即所有动物都是由宿主和相关微生物构成的共生功能体(holobiont),宿主与微生物之间的共发育、共代谢、共进化的关系共同影响宿主性状。共生总基因组理论为水产遗传育种学科提供了一个全新视角和范式来理解生命体[1]
肠道菌群与宿主的遗传基因协同塑造动物的表型性状,可以通过“菌群-肠-脑轴”途径调控宿主的社会行为,并优化机体的代谢功能,因此肠道菌群在宿主的遗传进化与生长发育过程中发挥着重要的作用。肠道菌群享有“表型塑造器”之称,国内外学者将肠道菌群对宿主表型性状的调控特性命名为肠菌力(microbiability)[2]。肠道菌群广泛参与宿主的表型性状、营养代谢和社会行为等,然而在水产养殖领域,肠道菌群却很少被提及。为此,本文综述了水产动物肠道菌群的研究现状与进展,旨在系统梳理该领域的知识体系,为构建新型理论体系奠定基础,进而从新视角为水产产业的高质量发展提供科学支撑。

1 肠道菌群的构建受遗传基因与环境影响并具有遗传特性

国内外学者普遍认为动物的遗传基因主导着肠道菌群的构建,然而有学者提出质疑,认为环境条件在宿主遗传基因塑造肠道菌群结构的过程中起着重要作用[3]。早期的研究认为,不同个体间肠道菌群组成的差异源于宿主遗传基因的不同,也就是肠道菌群的组成是由宿主基因进行的先天主导,而非后天形成。大量研究证实,鱼类的物种与品种是肠道菌群组成的最主要的影响因素[4-5]。而虾类的相关研究表明,不同品种与生长环境对肠道菌群组成皆有影响,且遗传基因比环境条件具有更强的调控肠道菌群组成的能力[6]。然而,环境因子与食物来源对肠道菌群的结构亦有不可忽视的影响,有研究表明,同一循环水养殖系统中,饲喂商业饲料与天然饲料的刺鲷(Sparus aurata)在肠道菌群分类组成上表现出明显差异,部分菌群与代谢功能路径高度相关[7]。对于许多动物而言,最初的微生物源自上一代(父母代),这对于幼体肠道菌群的构建是至关重要的;之后,肠道菌群随着食物、环境和生长阶段的变化而发生改变,直至形成稳定的体系,这对于动物宿主形态表型的形成具有重要的作用[8-9]。宿主的遗传基因是肠道菌群整体框架的设计者,而食物和环境中的微生物提供了必要的“原材料”,二者相对贡献受物种、发育阶段、饲料种类与养殖条件影响。因此,宿主的遗传基因与其生存的环境因子共同完成了大规模肠道菌群的体系建设[10]
肠道菌群遗传力可解释为宿主遗传因素对肠道菌群的影响程度。截至目前,肠道微生物的遗传特性几乎在所有常见的物种中得到了充分的科学论证,包括虾类[6]、鸡[11]、鱼类[12]、牛[13]、蜂[14]、猪[15]和人类[16]等。随着测序技术的不断发展,基因组学技术已证实宿主遗传基因不仅能够主导肠道菌群的构建,并且可以主动调控和维持肠道菌群结构的动态平衡,现已发现大量与肠道菌群相关的单核苷酸多态性(SNP)位点信息和主效基因[17]。Grieneisen等[18]历时14年,对大量野生狒狒的肠道菌群样本进行连续分析发现,肠道菌群的遗传效应普遍存在。此外,宿主基因编码的多种功能蛋白质可以有效识别肠道微生物,并对特定的微生物群系进行选择性调节[19-20]。在畜禽领域,肠道菌群已经在遗传改良研究中发挥了积极作用。皮特兰母猪[21]、肉鸡[22]、奶牛[23]和肉牛[24]的肠道菌群皆发现具有遗传力(0.15~0.57),相关研究不仅明确了肠道菌群具有显著的遗传力,还开展了遗传力的精准估算与相关菌群筛选,这为遗传改良研究发挥了积极作用。总体而言,该领域已有的研究成果不仅为深入解析宿主遗传与肠道菌群的互作机制提供了重要参考,更有望为后续相关研究提供借鉴,进而带动对应领域遗传学的发展。
水产动物的遗传信息可以控制微生物在肠道内的定植,从而调控其肠道菌群结构的构建[25-27]。有关日本沼虾(Macrobrachium nipponense)[6]、斑节对虾(Penaeus monodon)[28]、凡纳滨对虾(Litopenaeus vannamei)[29]和绿虾(Neocaridina denticulata)[30]肠道菌群的研究显示,宿主的遗传背景信息对肠道菌群结构具有显著的影响。近年来,全基因组选育(GS)已被公认为水产动物育种领域最新一代的前沿技术。传统选育受限于性状测定的时间与成本,而全基因组选育虽需构建训练群体、承担分型投入并加强近交管理,但其育种效率远超传统选育,能够更早、更快地对难以测定的性状进行选择。值得注意的是,肠道菌群作为动物体的“第二大基因组”,有望在未来的育种研究中发挥关键作用。

2 肠道菌群具有肠菌力

鉴于肠道菌群对宿主生长发育的显著影响,研究者提出了肠菌力这一概念,用以衡量肠道菌群对宿主表型性状的贡献程度。宿主通过选择性地招募特定菌群定植肠道,为其繁殖与功能发挥提供适宜条件;作为回馈,肠道菌群则赋予宿主更为丰富的表型特征。例如,鞭毛虫(Salpingoeca rosetta)从单细胞到多细胞的转变必须有肠道细菌领鞭虫嗜冷菌(Algoriphagus machipongonensis)的参与;该细菌产生的代谢产物可以促使鞭毛虫多细胞生命体的形成,同时维系多细胞生命体的稳定[31]。大量研究证实,虾类的生长性能与肠道菌群结构呈现显著的相关性,虾类的遗传基因调控肠道菌群群系的组建[6,13,30,32]。在虾类的发育过程中,肠道菌群会根据虾体的发育特点做出调整,促使共生的动态平衡更加有利于双方,从而满足虾体生长的需要[33-35]。在凡纳滨对虾仔虾阶段,弧菌科(Vibrionaceae)在肠道菌群中占据绝对优势,但到了幼虾和成虾阶段,红杆菌科(Rhodobacteraceae)逐渐代替了弧菌科成为了优势菌。在罗氏沼虾的发育过程中,其肠道菌群发生显著变化,芽孢杆菌属(Bacillus)相对丰度减少,肠杆菌属(Enterobacter)相对丰度则增加,最后菌群结构趋于稳定[36]。在生长的特定阶段,虾类宿主的遗传基因会主动调控肠道菌群的结构,从而协同促进虾体的快速发育[36-37]
大量的研究证实,虾类生长性状与肠道菌群密切相关。正常生长与慢速生长的虾类的肠道菌群组成差异显著,如正常生长组凡纳滨对虾肠道中厚壁菌门/拟杆菌门比值为0.93,而慢生长组该比值仅为0.05[32];研究还发现,高生长率斑节对虾肠道富含以厚壁菌门为主的革兰氏阳性菌,低生长率个体肠道菌群结构则更复杂且竞争性更强[38]。此外,养殖环境会影响虾类肠道菌群与生长性状的关联,室外养殖斑节对虾肠道中变形菌门的相对丰度与生长性状成正比,室内养殖斑节对虾则相反,且室外养殖低生长率个体肠道优势菌为芽孢杆菌属,室外养殖高生长率个体则为弧菌属[39]。值得注意的是,凡纳滨对虾肠道菌群结构与生长发育显著相关,且该结构会随高产性能选育而发生改变。
有关肠道菌群与表型性状相关性的研究不仅仅局限在虾类物种,大量研究表明水产动物经济性状与肠道菌群呈现紧密的相关性,比如鱼的增重率[40]、大西洋鲑的肌肉色泽[41]、虹鳟的出肉率[42]等。

3 肠道菌群优化宿主的营养代谢

水产动物肠道菌群在营养代谢中发挥着关键作用,尤其是能合成宿主自身无法产生的必需营养物质。研究表明,肠道菌群通过降解外源性脂质和转化脂质分子,不仅促进脂质消化,还丰富了宿主脂质池的多样性。这一代谢能力对水产动物生长至关重要,因为脂质摄入失衡会直接导致生理紊乱[43]。此外,幼体阶段的水产动物消化系统发育尚不完善,需依赖从环境中招募的特定微生物协助营养吸收,这些肠道菌群能够生成短链脂肪酸(SCFAs)、维生素等宿主无法直接获取的能量物质与营养物质[44]
微生物产生的代谢产物对维持宿主健康具有多重作用。肠道菌群产生的SCFAs(如丁酸、丙酸、乙酸)不仅提供能量,还参与肠道屏障稳态的调节。在水产动物肠道中,核心微生物类群(如变形菌门和厚壁菌门)通过合成必需氨基酸(色氨酸、赖氨酸等)和B族维生素(维生素B12、叶酸等)弥补饲料营养缺陷[45]。肠道菌群可以编码纤维素酶、木聚糖酶等碳水化合物活性酶,帮助分解水产饲料中的抗营养因子,提高蛋白质利用率[46]。有研究表明,通过向养殖鲑鱼饲料中添加酵母细胞壁类益生元,可促进肠道中代谢相关的基因表达与消化酶的活性[47]。感染病原菌时,鲫鱼肠道菌群代谢谱会发生显著改变,而外源代谢物补充可调节这种失衡状态[48]。在营养缺乏环境下,这种功能尤为重要,如远洋海洋动物可能依赖微生物缓解营养限制[44]

4 肠道菌群调控宿主的社会行为

动物宿主与肠道菌群之间存在着复杂多样的专性互惠关系[49]。肠道菌群能够调控宿主的社会行为,包括摄食行为、防御行为和攻击行为等。例如,夏威夷短尾鱿鱼(Euprymna scolopes)与费氏弧菌(Vibrio fischeri)形成了一种独特的协作机制:费氏弧菌可以通过反照明的生物荧光伪装,为夏威夷短尾鱿鱼提供一种躲避捕食者的独特能力,而夏威夷短尾鱿鱼自身不具备这种能力[50]。肠道菌群还可以影响动物宿主的摄食行为。例如,水生大型蚤(Daphnia magna)在较高生物塑料暴露下出现摄食被抑制并伴随行为反应受损,同时肠道菌群的分类组成与功能特征发生改变[51]。此外,肠道菌群还可以影响鱼类的群游行为。研究发现,聚苯乙烯微塑料暴露下青鳉(Oryzias latipes)的群游行为降低,在清除掉微塑料颗粒后可部分恢复,同时肠道菌群组成发生变化,该研究结果表明肠道菌群的改变可能与社会行为变化相关[52]。从进化视角来看,宿主与肠道菌群之间的相互作用加速了宿主社会行为的进化进程[53]。研究发现,小鼠、果蝇和斑马鱼在缺乏自身内源肠道菌群的情况下,均表现出群体社交互动能力的缺失[54]。其作用机制在于,肠道菌群可通过其菌体抗原成分或代谢产物进入宿主体内,进而影响神经系统,实现对宿主社会行为的调控[54]
罗氏沼虾雄性个体的领地意识强,相互之间残杀严重,群体等级层次明显,共同组成了一个复杂的社会等级结构;罗氏沼虾不同雄性表型肠道菌群之间存在显著差异,并且表型性状与肠道菌群之间亦存在明显的相关性[55-56]。肠道菌群被称为宿主的“表型和行为调节器”,所以现代神经行为学已把肠道菌群纳入神经学领域。有专家提出,宿主的很多社会行为直接“外包”给了肠道菌群,由肠道菌群主导宿主有利社会行为的形成,这种“委托关系”导致宿主对肠道菌群的依赖性不断增加[46]。因此,深入研究肠道菌群调控水产动物表型性状和社会行为的机制,将有助于纠正不良表型和行为,进而为改良与肠道菌群相关的经济性状提供数据支持。

5 选育可以改变肠道菌群的组成结构

虾类生长性状与肠道菌群之间存在紧密的内在关联。以凡纳滨对虾为例,其肠道微生物群系与体重呈显著相关性,宿主遗传基因可通过精准调控肠道菌群结构,进而定向改善生长性能[32]。研究表明,针对增重性状的定向选育不仅会改变肠道菌群结构,还能调控其遗传特性,证实宿主遗传信息的改变可直接重塑肠道菌群的组成与功能[11]。除生长性能外,抗寒相关选育同样会驱动肠道菌群发生适应性演化:经抗寒能力系统选育的凡纳滨对虾,其肠道菌群的耐低温潜力显著提升,可在低温胁迫下有效缓解寒冷对机体的损伤,增强宿主环境适应性[29]。鱼类耐寒品种的选育过程中亦伴随肠道菌群的特异性改变,耐寒型个体的肠道菌群具备更强的耐寒性,且能通过代谢调控等方式协助宿主共同抵御低温环境胁迫[57]

6 小结与展望

肠道菌群因具有遗传特性并能调控宿主表型性状、营养代谢及社会行为,未来将成为水产领域研究热点。肠道菌群的功能呈现多层面、多领域的复杂特征,需借助多组学联合分析技术,将营养代谢、遗传基因与表型性状作为整体进行系统解析,方能有效揭示其功能机制与遗传基础。伴随共生总基因组理论与肠菌力概念的深化,水产动物肠道菌群研究迎来重要发展契机,未来可从理论探索与产业应用2个维度寻求突破。在理论层面,应聚焦“遗传基因-肠道菌群-营养代谢”的互作网络,深入挖掘宿主基因调控肠道菌群的分子机制,完善水产领域“宿主-微生物”共生理论体系;在产业应用层面,需强化营养调控与肠道菌群的协同效应:依据菌群代谢特征优化营养策略,精准匹配饲料组分与菌群需求;利用短链脂肪酸、必需氨基酸等菌源代谢产物提升营养吸收效率,同时降低抗营养因子对肠道菌群的负面干扰。此外,应将功能菌群纳入育种体系,培育兼具优良性状与稳定肠道菌群结构的新品种;开发靶向益生菌制剂,优化养殖环境与饲料配方,全面提升水产动物的营养利用水平与病害防控能力。
[1]
LEONARD A, ALBERDI A. A global initiative for ecological and evolutionary hologenomics[J]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2024, 39(7):616-620.

DOI

[2]
文超良, 孙从佼, 杨宁. 从遗传力到肠菌力:概念及研究进展[J]. 遗传, 2019, 41(11):1023-1040.

WEN C L, SUN C J, YANG N. The concepts and research progress:from heritability to microbiability[J]. Hereditas, 2019, 41(11):1023-1040. (in Chinese)

[3]
BLEDSOE J W, WALDBIESER G C, SWANSON K S, et al. Comparison of channel catfish and blue catfish gut microbiota assemblages shows minimal effects of host genetics on microbial structure and inferred function[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2018, 9:1073.

DOI PMID

[4]
LI X M, YU Y H, FENG W S, et al. Host species as a strong determinant of the intestinal microbiota of fish larvae[J]. Journal of Microbiology, 2012, 50(1):29-37.

DOI PMID

[5]
LIU H, GUO X W, GOONERATNE R, et al. The gut microbiome and degradation enzyme activity of wild freshwater fishes influenced by their trophic levels[J]. Scientific Reports, 2016, 6(1):24340.

DOI

[6]
TZENG T D, PAO Y Y, CHEN P C, et al. Effects of host phylogeny and habitats on gut microbiomes of oriental river prawn (Macrobrachium nipponense)[J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10(7):e0132860.

DOI

[7]
RUIZ A, ALÓS J, GISBERT E, et al. Long-term adaptation to dietary shifts of gut microbiota in gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata)[J]. Frontiers in Marine Science, 2024, 11:1498892.

DOI

[8]
TREICHEL N S, PREVORŠEK Z, MRAK V, et al. Effect of the nursing mother on the gut microbiome of the offspring during early mouse development[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2019, 78(2):517-527.

DOI PMID

[9]
HORNEF M W, TOROW N. ‘Layered immunity’ and the ‘neonatal window of opportunity’-timed succession of non-redundant phases to establish mucosal host-microbial homeostasis after birth[J]. Immunology, 2020, 159(1):15-25.

DOI

[10]
MUSHEGIAN A A, ARBORE R, WALSER J C, et al. Environmental sources of bacteria and genetic variation in behavior influence host-associated microbiota[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2019, 85(8):e01547-18.

[11]
MENG H, ZHANG Y, ZHAO L L, et al. Body weight selection affects quantitative genetic correlated responses in gut microbiota[J]. PLoS One, 2014, 9(3):e89862.

DOI

[12]
SMITH C C R, SNOWBERG L K, GREGORY CAPORASO J, et al. Dietary input of microbes and host genetic variation shape among-population differences in stickleback gut microbiota[J]. The ISME Journal, 2015, 9(11):2515-2526.

DOI

[13]
FAN P X, BIAN B L, TENG L, et al. Host genetic effects upon the early gut microbiota in a bovine model with graduated spectrum of genetic variation[J]. The ISME Journal, 2020, 14(1):302-317.

DOI

[14]
SAUERS L A, SADD B M. An interaction between host and microbe genotypes determines colonization success of a key bumble bee gut microbiota member[J]. Evolution, 2019, 73(11):2333-2342.

DOI PMID

[15]
SANGLARD L P, SCHMITZ-ESSER S, GRAY K A, et al. Investigating the relationship between vaginal microbiota and host genetics and their impact on immune response and farrowing traits in commercial gilts[J]. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 2020, 137(1):84-102.

DOI PMID

[16]
BLEKHMAN R, GOODRICH J K, HUANG K, et al. Host genetic variation impacts microbiome composition across human body sites[J]. Genome Biology, 2015, 16(1):191.

DOI

[17]
FULDE M, SOMMER F, CHASSAING B, et al. Neonatal selection by Toll-like receptor 5 influences long-term gut microbiota composition[J]. Nature, 2018, 560(7719):489-493.

DOI

[18]
GRIENEISEN L, DASARI M, GOULD T J, et al. Gut microbiome heritability is nearly universal but environmentally contingent[J]. Science, 2021, 373(6551):181-186.

DOI PMID

[19]
BUNKER J J, ERICKSON S A, FLYNN T M, et al. Natural polyreactive IgA antibodies coat the intestinal microbiota[J]. Science, 2017, 358(6361):eaan6619.

DOI

[20]
KAYA B, DOÑAS C, WUGGENIG P, et al. Lysophosphatidic acid-mediated GPR35 signaling in CX3CR1+ macrophages regulates intestinal homeostasis[J]. Cell Reports, 2020, 32(5):107979.

DOI

[21]
CAMARINHA-SILVA A, MAUSHAMMER M, WELLMANN R, et al. Host genome influence on gut microbial composition and microbial prediction of complex traits in pigs[J]. Genetics, 2017, 206(3):1637-1644.

DOI

[22]
WEN C L, YAN W, SUN C J, et al. The gut microbiota is largely independent of host genetics in regulating fat deposition in chickens[J]. The ISME Journal, 2019, 13(6):1422-1436.

DOI

[23]
DIFFORD G F, PLICHTA D R, LØVENDAHL P, et al. Host genetics and the rumen microbiome jointly associate with methane emissions in dairy cows[J]. PLoS Genetics, 2018, 14(10):e1007580.

DOI

[24]
LI F Y, LI C X, CHEN Y H, et al. Host genetics influence the rumen microbiota and heritable rumen microbial features associate with feed efficiency in cattle[J]. Microbiome, 2019, 7(1):92.

DOI

[25]
DALY K, KELLY J, MORAN A W, et al. Host selectively contributes to shaping intestinal microbiota of carnivorous and omnivorous fish[J]. The Journal of General and Applied Microbiology, 2019, 65(3):129-136.

DOI

[26]
LI X H, ZHOU L, YU Y H, et al. Composition of gut microbiota in the gibel carp (Carassius auratus gibelio) varies with host development[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2017, 74(1):239-249.

DOI PMID

[27]
NAVARRETE P, MAGNE F, ARANEDA C, et al. PCR-TTGE analysis of 16S rRNA from rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) gut microbiota reveals host-specific communities of active bacteria[J]. PLoS One, 2012, 7(2):e31335.

DOI

[28]
RUNGRASSAMEE W, KLANCHUI A, MAIBUNKAEW S, et al. Characterization of intestinal bacteria in wild and domesticated adult black tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon)[J]. PLoS One, 2014, 9(3):e91853.

DOI

[29]
LIU J J, WANG K, WANG Y T, et al. Strain-specific changes in the gut microbiota profiles of the white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei in response to cold stress[J]. Aquaculture, 2019, 503:357-366.

DOI

[30]
CHEUNG M K, YIP H Y, NONG W Y, et al. Rapid change of microbiota diversity in the gut but not the hepatopancreas during gonadal development of the new shrimp model Neocaridina denticulata[J]. Marine Biotechnology, 2015, 17(6):811-819.

DOI

[31]
WOZNICA A, CANTLEY A M, BEEMELMANNS C, et al. Bacterial lipids activate,synergize,and inhibit a developmental switch in choanoflagellates[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2016, 113(28):7894-7899.

DOI

[32]
FAN L F, LI Q X. Characteristics of intestinal microbiota in the pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei differing growth performances in the marine cultured environment[J]. Aquaculture, 2019, 505:450-461.

DOI

[33]
XIONG J B, ZHU J Y, DAI W F, et al. Integrating gut microbiota immaturity and disease-discriminatory taxa to diagnose the initiation and severity of shrimp disease[J]. Environmental Microbiology, 2017, 19(4):1490-1501.

DOI PMID

[34]
CICALA F, LAGO-LESTÓN A, GOMEZ-GIL B, et al. Gut microbiota shifts in the giant tiger shrimp,Penaeus monodon,during the postlarvae,juvenile,and adult stages[J]. Aquaculture International, 2020, 28(4):1421-1433.

DOI

[35]
WANG H L, HUANG J, WANG P, et al. Insights into the microbiota of larval and postlarval pacific white shrimp (Penaeus vannamei) along early developmental stages:a case in pond level[J]. Molecular Genetics and Genomics, 2020, 295(6):1517-1528.

DOI

[36]
MA R R, WANG Y, ZHAO S, et al. The composition of the microbial community associated with Macrobrachium rosenbergii zoeae varies throughout larval development[J]. Journal of Fish Diseases, 2020, 43(4):413-421.

DOI

[37]
GARIBAY-VALDEZ E, MARTÍNEZ-PORCHAS M, CALDERÓN K, et al. Taxonomic and functional changes in the microbiota of the white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) associated with postlarval ontogenetic development[J]. Aquaculture, 2020, 518:734842.

DOI

[38]
UENGWETWANIT T, UAWISETWATHANA U, ARAYAMETHAKORN S, et al. Multi-omics analysis to examine microbiota,host gene expression and metabolites in the intestine of black tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon) with different growth performance[J]. PeerJ, 2020, 8:e9646.

DOI

[39]
DUAN Y F, HUANG J H, WANG Y, et al. Characterization of bacterial community in intestinal and rearing water of Penaeus monodon differing growth performances in outdoor and indoor ponds[J]. Aquaculture Research, 2020, 51(10):4279-4289.

DOI

[40]
WANG S T, MENG X Z, ZHANG J H, et al. 16S rRNA sequencing analysis of the correlation between the intestinal microbiota and body-mass of grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella)[J]. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology-Part D:Genomics and Proteomics, 2020, 35:100699.

DOI

[41]
NGUYEN C D H, AMOROSO G, VENTURA T, et al. Assessing the pyloric caeca and distal gut microbiota correlation with flesh color in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.,1758)[J]. Microorganisms, 2020, 8(8):1244.

DOI

[42]
CHAPAGAIN P, WALKER D, LEEDS T, et al. Distinct microbial assemblages associated with genetic selection for high- and low- muscle yield in rainbow trout[J]. BMC Genomics, 2020, 21(1):820.

DOI PMID

[43]
YOON D S, KIM D H, KIM J H, et al. Interactions between lipid metabolism and the microbiome in aquatic organisms:a review[J]. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2024, 207:116858.

DOI

[44]
OU W H, YU G J, ZHANG Y J, et al. Recent progress in the understanding of the gut microbiota of marine fishes[J]. Marine Life Science & Technology, 2021, 3(4):434-448.

[45]
NIE Z J, XU X T, SHAO N L, et al. Integrative analysis of microbiome and metabolome reveals the linkage between gut microbiota and carp growth[J]. Environmental Research, 2023, 220:115133.

DOI

[46]
LYNCH J B, HSIAO E Y. Microbiomes as sources of emergent host phenotypes[J]. Science, 2019, 365(6460):1405-1409.

DOI PMID

[47]
WANG J, LI Y X, JARAMILLO-TORRES A, et al. Exploring gut microbiota in adult Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.):associations with gut health and dietary prebiotics[J]. Animal Microbiome, 2023, 5(1):47.

DOI

[48]
CAO Y C, KOU T S, PENG L T, et al. Fructose promotes crucian carp survival against Aeromonas hydrophila infection[J]. Frontiers in Immunology, 2022, 13:865560.

DOI

[49]
KIM S, KIM H, YIM Y S, et al. Maternal gut bacteria promote neurodevelopmental abnormalities in mouse offspring[J]. Nature, 2017, 549(7673):528-532.

DOI

[50]
MCFALL-NGAI M J. The importance of microbes in animal development:lessons from the squid-vibrio symbiosis[J]. Annual Review of Microbiology, 2014, 68:177-194.

DOI

[51]
CARRILLO M P, VILA-COSTA M, BARATA C. Micro-bioplastic impact on gut microbiome,cephalic transcription and cognitive function in the aquatic invertebrate Daphnia magna[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2025, 382:126690.

DOI

[52]
TAMURA Y, TAKAI Y, MIYAMOTO H, et al. Alteration of shoaling behavior and dysbiosis in the gut of medaka (Oryzias latipes) exposed to 2-μm polystyrene microplastics[J]. Chemosphere, 2024, 353:141643.

DOI

[53]
CULLY M. Microbiome therapeutics go small molecule[J]. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 2019, 18(8):569-572.

DOI PMID

[54]
VUONG H E, YANO J M, FUNG T C, et al. The microbiome and host behavior[J]. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 2017, 40:21-49.

DOI PMID

[55]
GAO Q X, LUO J P, LIU P M, et al. Characteristics of intestinal microbiota in male morphotypes of the giant freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii[J]. Aquaculture, 2022, 555:738200.

DOI

[56]
XUE H B, WU X J, LI Z H, et al. Correlation and causation between the intestinal microbiome and male morphotypes in the giant freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii[J]. Aquaculture, 2021, 531:735936.

DOI

[57]
KOKOU F, SASSON G, NITZAN T, et al. Host genetic selection for cold tolerance shapes microbiome composition and modulates its response to temperature[J]. eLife, 2018, 7:e36398.

DOI

文章导航

/