| Literature DB >> 26714477 |
Neelam M Nathani1,2, Amrutlal K Patel3, Chandra Shekar Mootapally4, Bhaskar Reddy5, Shailesh V Shah6, Pravin M Lunagaria7, Ramesh K Kothari8, Chaitanya G Joshi9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rumen microbiota functions as an effective system for conversion of dietary feed to microbial proteins and volatile fatty acids. In the present study, metagenomic approach was applied to elucidate the buffalo rumen microbiome of Jaffrabadi buffalo adapted to varied dietary treatments with the hypothesis that the microbial diversity and subsequent in the functional capacity will alter with diet change and enhance our knowledge of effect of microbe on host physiology. Eight adult animals were gradually adapted to an increasing roughage diet (4 animals each with green and dry roughage) containing 50:50 (J1), 75:25 (J2) and 100:0 (J3) roughage to concentrate proportion for 6 weeks. Metagenomic sequences of solid (fiber adherent microbiota) and liquid (fiber free microbiota) fractions obtained using Ion Torrent PGM platform were analyzed using MG-RAST server and CAZymes approach.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26714477 PMCID: PMC4696265 DOI: 10.1186/s12864-015-2340-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Sequence details of 48 metagenomic samples
| Sample ID | MG-RAST Accession No. | Initial Reads | QC Passed Reads | rRNA Reads | Reads with predicted CDS | Post QC bp Count | α Diversity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J1GL1 | 4604206.3 | 1,424,078 | 1,173,142 | 1,066 | 1,005,811 | 229 MB | 278.47 |
| J2GL2 | 4604108.3 | 928,450 | 742,323 | 638 | 619,505 | 127 MB | 322.03 |
| J1GL3 | 4604092.3 | 512,016 | 423,203 | 390 | 368,554 | 77 MB | 330.86 |
| J1GL4 | 4571939.3 | 412,187 | 336,762 | 1,541 | 283,379 | 52 MB | 422.45 |
| J1GS1 | 4604096.3 | 498,599 | 412,088 | 535 | 353,673 | 74 MB | 305.85 |
| J1GS2 | 4604097.3 | 549,260 | 465,291 | 815 | 414,950 | 93 MB | 226.21 |
| J1GS3 | 4604098.3 | 677,970 | 562,220 | 820 | 494,011 | 111 MB | 267.64 |
| J1GS4 | 4604100.3 | 703,240 | 571,552 | 624 | 490,396 | 105 mb | 293.22 |
| J1DL1 | 4575792.3 | 949,870 | 636,956 | 5,020 | 516,485 | 106 MB | 236.28 |
| J1DL2 | 4575793.3 | 774,918 | 559,938 | 4,449 | 454,942 | 96 MB | 215 |
| J1DL3 | 4575794.3 | 918,259 | 673,358 | 5,722 | 546,797 | 115 MB | 192.89 |
| J1DL4 | 4575795.3 | 845,121 | 589,649 | 5,080 | 480,019 | 98 MB | 238.12 |
| J1DS1 | 4575901.3 | 708,081 | 451,811 | 2,716 | 355,948 | 72 MB | 295.41 |
| J1DS2 | 4575796.3 | 951,833 | 680,197 | 4,127 | 549,267 | 115 MB | 309.42 |
| J1DS3 | 4575797.3 | 641,328 | 463,939 | 2,576 | 386,658 | 79 MB | 265.89 |
| J1DS4 | 4575798.3 | 700,602 | 505,592 | 3,066 | 414,480 | 87 MB | 271.48 |
| J2GL1 | 4575799.3 | 505,950 | 311,420 | 1,779 | 250,659 | 47 MB | 246.79 |
| J2GL2 | 4575800.3 | 622,310 | 363,544 | 2,924 | 283,594 | 52 MB | 272.56 |
| J2GL3 | 4575801.3 | 1,029,049 | 580,314 | 3,600 | 449,782 | 84 MB | 216.72 |
| J2GL4 | 4575802.3 | 752,725 | 428,414 | 2,834 | 330,438 | 62 MB | 249.28 |
| J2GS1 | 4575803.3 | 632,004 | 364,726 | 2,382 | 287,106 | 53 MB | 198.09 |
| J2GS2 | 4575804.3 | 723,939 | 405,675 | 2,573 | 315,656 | 59 MB | 187.26 |
| J2GS3 | 4575805.3 | 672,315 | 386,374 | 2,586 | 302,656 | 56 MB | 188.61 |
| J2GS4 | 4575806.3 | 625,425 | 359,933 | 2,566 | 278,956 | 53 MB | 179.03 |
| J2DL1 | 4575807.3 | 1,051,264 | 753,416 | 10,146 | 631,726 | 148 MB | 282.88 |
| J2DL2 | 4603329.3 | 713,045 | 597,496 | 678 | 528,928 | 145 MB | 343 |
| J2DL3 | 4575809.3 | 986,698 | 722,822 | 9,061 | 609,515 | 144 MB | 210.54 |
| J2DL4 | 4575810.3 | 850,672 | 603,721 | 8,710 | 504,032 | 116 MB | 320.17 |
| J2DS1 | 4575811.3 | 840,552 | 588,345 | 9,514 | 473,773 | 108 MB | 257.68 |
| J2DS2 | 4575812.3 | 477,350 | 295,723 | 5,475 | 231,448 | 48 MB | 314.28 |
| J2DS3 | 4575813.3 | 615,868 | 389,436 | 7,503 | 302,586 | 62 MB | 330.97 |
| J2DS4 | 4618633.3 | 659,273 | 522,750 | 506 | 450,497 | 111 MB | 347.89 |
| J3GL1 | 4604101.3 | 652,383 | 552,242 | 603 | 490,170 | 55 MB | 324.08 |
| J3GL2 | 4575822.3 | 1,110,839 | 796,087 | 8,867 | 621,768 | 140 MB | 302.69 |
| J3GL3 | 4575823.3 | 635,610 | 456,220 | 3,733 | 376,693 | 82 MB | 261.99 |
| J3GL4 | 4575824.3 | 730,149 | 533,490 | 3,910 | 439,428 | 97 MB | 296.69 |
| J3GS1 | 4575825.3 | 626,583 | 392,629 | 3,997 | 313,489 | 66 MB | 244.66 |
| J3GS2 | 4575826.3 | 669,967 | 456,754 | 3,937 | 375,022 | 81 MB | 239.68 |
| J3GS3 | 4575902.3 | 774,116 | 497,294 | 5,187 | 391,485 | 85 MB | 276.19 |
| J3GS4 | 4575897.3 | 715,753 | 470,224 | 4,152 | 385,107 | 83 MB | 257.78 |
| J3DL1 | 4575814.3 | 886,334 | 609,043 | 6,891 | 504,556 | 107 MB | 332.67 |
| J3DL2 | 4575815.3 | 703,305 | 512,015 | 5,212 | 437,145 | 90 MB | 399.25 |
| J3DL3 | 4575816.3 | 703,848 | 511,130 | 5,656 | 432,451 | 89 MB | 386.36 |
| J3DL4 | 4575817.3 | 1,072,487 | 735,953 | 7,679 | 607,004 | 124 MB | 373.05 |
| J3DS1 | 4604102.3 | 3,651,797 | 2,657,826 | 2,473 | 1,941,947 | 530 MB | 217.07 |
| J3DS2 | 4575818.3 | 503,637 | 309,631 | 4,059 | 236,682 | 47 MB | 171.43 |
| J3DS3 | 4575819.3 | 512,538 | 334,694 | 4,934 | 266,702 | 54 MB | 218.68 |
| J3DS4 | 4575820.3 | 762,281 | 443,019 | 8,521 | 328,072 | 60 MB | 318.59 |
Fig. 1a Taxonomic distribution of bacterial phyla based on predicted proteins and rRNA in the samples [Treatment vs Abundance in percentage] b Statistical analysis using STAMP based on genus level taxonomic assignments between treatments c Statistical analysis using STAMP based on genus level taxonomic assignments between liquid and solid fraction (*indicates p < 0.05, **indicate p < 0.01, ***indicate p < 0.001)
Fig. 2Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio during the three treatments
Correlation between various phyla using PAleontologicalSTatistical analysis among Green Roughage fed animals
| Dry | Bacteroidetes | Fibrobacter | Firmicutes | Proteobacteria | Spirochaetes | Tenericutes | Verrucomicrobia |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Green | |||||||
| Bacteroidetes | -- | −0.876** | −0.437 | 0.369 | −0.552 | 0.386 | 0.429 |
| Fibrobacter | −0.569 | -- | 0.586 | −0.378 | 0.727 | −0.477 | −0.519 |
| Firmicutes | 0.404 | 0.022 | -- | 0.318 | 0.772* | 0.151 | 0.165 |
| Proteobacteria | 0.897* | −0.258 | 0.244 | -- | 0.334 | 0.945*** | 0.978*** |
| Spirochaetes | 0.661 | 0.087 | 0.591 | 0.810 | -- | 0.162 | 0.165 |
| Tenericutes | 0.865* | −0.540 | −0.047 | 0.912** | 0.568 | -- | 0.966*** |
| Verrucomicrobia | 0.809 | −0.315 | −0.039 | 0.932 | 0.647 | 0.953** | -- |
Note: *indicates p < 0.05, **indicate p < 0.01, ***indicate p < 0.001
Fig. 3a Statistical analysis using STAMP based on functional assignments at subsystem level 1 between treatments (p < 0.05) b Statistical analysis using STAMP based on functional assignments at subsystem level 1 between treatments (p < 0.05) between liquid and solid fraction (p < 0.05) c Distribution of Protein Metabolism subsystem at level 2 between treatments, diet and fractions [Sample type vs Abundance of categories in percentage] d Distribution of Carbohydrate Metabolism subsystem at level 2 between treatments, diet and fractions Metabolism [Sample type vs Abundance of categories in percentage]
Fig. 4Principal component analysis based on taxonomic (phylum level) and functional distribution in each sample using PAST
Analysis of variance showing the effect of diet on various metabolites
| Dietary | J1(50R:50C) | J2(75R:25C) | J3 (100R:0C) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metabolite | Dry | Green | Dry | Green | Dry | Green | |
| Nitrogen Content | Total N | 77.7aA ± 5.8 | 147.7b ± 14.01 | 63.49B ± 6.63 | 64.75 ± 6.12 | 25.55cC ± 1.55 | 48.55d ± 9.36 |
| Ammonia N | 8.22aA ± 0.25 | 20.75b ± 1.05 | 7.21B ± 1.23 | 10.61 ± 1.84 | 3.08aC ± 0.37 | 11.62b ± 1.12 | |
| Soluble N | 21.98A ± 0.54 | 37.24C ± 1.39 | 14.42B ± 1.38 | 14.07D ± 0.83 | 11.26 ± 0.49 | 12.67 ± 0.7 | |
| NPN | 42.42aA ± 0.77 | 53.2bD ± 2.93 | 25.2cB ± 2.54 | 29.12dE ± 2.71 | 14.7eC ± 1.24 | 23.1fF ± 1.2 | |
| Total VFA | 4.48 ± 0.51 | 4.67 ± 0.29 | 4.34 ± 0.4 | 4.55 ± 0.72 | 5.33 ± 0.3 | 5.5 ± 0.17 | |
Mean values in the same row with different superscripts (Capital case for between treatment; small case for between Dry/Green) differed significantly (P < 0.05)
Fig. 5Glycosyl Hydrolase family distribution (Pooled de novo assembly of 4 animals maintained under same diet treatment was considered)
Fig. 6Taxonomic distribution at genus level of microbes encoding genes for predicted CAZyme [Treatment vs Abundance in percentage] (a) Green roughage fed animals (b) Dry roughage fed animals