Literature DB >> 19673857

The integration of digestion and osmoregulation in the avian gut.

Todd J McWhorter1, Enrique Caviedes-Vidal, William H Karasov.   

Abstract

We review digestion and osmoregulation in the avian gut, with an emphasis on the ways these different functions might interact to support or constrain each other and the ways they support the functioning of the whole animal in its natural environment. Differences between birds and other vertebrates are highlighted because these differences may make birds excellent models for study and may suggest interesting directions for future research. At a given body size birds, compared with mammals, tend to eat more food but have less small intestine and retain food in their gastrointestinal tract (GIT) for shorter periods of time, despite generally higher mass-specific energy demands. On most foods, however, they are not less efficient at digestion, which begs the question how they compensate. Intestinal tissue-specific rates of enzymatic breakdown of substrates and rates of active transport do not appear higher in birds than in mammals, nor is there a demonstrated difference in the extent to which those rates can be modulated during acclimation to different feeding regimes (e.g. diet, relative intake level). One compensation appears to be more extensive reliance on passive nutrient absorption by the paracellular pathway, because the avian species studied so far exceed the mammalian species by a factor of at least two- to threefold in this regard. Undigested residues reach the hindgut, but there is little evidence that most wild birds recover microbial metabolites of nutritional significance (essential amino acids and vitamins) by re-ingestion of faeces, in contrast to many hindgut fermenting mammals and possibly poultry. In birds, there is some evidence for hindgut capacity to breakdown either microbial protein or protein that escapes the small intestine intact, freeing up essential amino acids, and there is considerable evidence for an amino acid absorptive capacity in the hindgut of both avian and mammalian hindgut fermenters. Birds, unlike mammals, do not excrete hyperosmotic urine (i.e. more than five times plasma osmotic concentration). Urine is mixed with digesta rather than directly eliminated, and so the avian gut plays a relatively more important role in water and salt regulation than in mammals. Responses to dehydration and high- and low-salt loads are reviewed. Intestinal absorption of ingested water is modulated to help achieve water balance in one species studied (a nectar-feeding sunbird), the first demonstration of this in any terrestrial vertebrate. In many wild avian species the size and digestive capacity of the GIT is increased or decreased by as much as 50% in response to nutritional challenges such as hyperphagia, food restriction or fasting. The coincident impacts of these changes on osmoregulatory or immune function of the gut are poorly understood.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19673857     DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00086.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc        ISSN: 0006-3231


  21 in total

Review 1.  Comparative digestive physiology.

Authors:  William H Karasov; Angela E Douglas
Journal:  Compr Physiol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 9.090

Review 2.  A pharm-ecological perspective of terrestrial and aquatic plant-herbivore interactions.

Authors:  Jennifer Sorensen Forbey; M Denise Dearing; Elisabeth M Gross; Colin M Orians; Erik E Sotka; William J Foley
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 2.626

3.  Monoterpenes as inhibitors of digestive enzymes and counter-adaptations in a specialist avian herbivore.

Authors:  Kevin D Kohl; Elizabeth Pitman; Brecken C Robb; John W Connelly; M Denise Dearing; Jennifer Sorensen Forbey
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 2.200

4.  Modulation of digestive enzyme activities in the avian digestive tract in relation to diet composition and quality.

Authors:  Kevin D Kohl; M Eugenia Ciminari; Juan G Chediack; James O Leafloor; William H Karasov; Scott R McWilliams; Enrique Caviedes-Vidal
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 2.200

5.  Diet-induced microbiome shifts of sympatric overwintering birds.

Authors:  Chao Li; Yan Liu; Minghao Gong; Changming Zheng; Chenglin Zhang; Huixin Li; Wanyu Wen; Yuhang Wang; Gang Liu
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2021-07-17       Impact factor: 4.813

6.  Capacity for absorption of water-soluble secondary metabolites greater in birds than in rodents.

Authors:  William H Karasov; Enrique Caviedes-Vidal; Bradley Hartman Bakken; Ido Izhaki; Michal Samuni-Blank; Zeev Arad
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Temporal Stability and the Effect of Transgenerational Transfer on Fecal Microbiota Structure in a Long Distance Migratory Bird.

Authors:  Jakub Kreisinger; Lucie Kropáčková; Adéla Petrželková; Marie Adámková; Oldřich Tomášek; Jean-François Martin; Romana Michálková; Tomáš Albrecht
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 5.640

8.  Effect of age and diet composition on activity of pancreatic enzymes in birds.

Authors:  Paweł Brzęk; M Eugenia Ciminari; Kevin D Kohl; Krista Lessner; William H Karasov; Enrique Caviedes-Vidal
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 2.200

9.  Extensive microbial and functional diversity within the chicken cecal microbiome.

Authors:  Martin J Sergeant; Chrystala Constantinidou; Tristan A Cogan; Michael R Bedford; Charles W Penn; Mark J Pallen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Parallel adaptations to nectarivory in parrots, key innovations and the diversification of the Loriinae.

Authors:  Manuel Schweizer; Marcel Güntert; Ole Seehausen; Christoph Leuenberger; Stefan T Hertwig
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 2.912

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.