| Literature DB >> 27876778 |
Qiangchuan Hou1, Lai-Yu Kwok1, Yi Zheng1, Lifeng Wang1, Zhuang Guo1, Jiachao Zhang1, Weiqiang Huang1, Yuxiang Wang2, Li Leng2, Hui Li2, Heping Zhang1.
Abstract
Our study combined 16S rRNA-pyrosequencing and whole genome sequencing to analyze the fecal metagenomes of the divergently selected lean (LL) and fat (FL) line chickens. Significant structural differences existed in both the phylogenic and functional metagenomes between the two chicken lines. At phylum level, the FL group had significantly less Bacteroidetes. At genus level, fourteen genera of different relative abundance were identified, with some known short-chain fatty acid producers (including Subdoligranulum, Butyricicoccus, Eubacterium, Bacteroides, Blautia) and a potentially pathogenic genus (Enterococcus). Redundancy analysis identified 190 key responsive operational taxonomic units (OTUs) that accounted for the structural differences between the phylogenic metagenome of the two groups. Four Cluster of Orthologous Group (COG) categories (Amino acid transport and metabolism, E; Nucleotide transport and metabolism, F; Coenzyme transport and metabolism, H; and Lipid transport and metabolism, I) were overrepresented in LL samples. Fifteen differential metabolic pathways (Biosynthesis of amino acids, Pyruvate metabolism, Nitrotoluene degradation, Lipopolysaccharide biosynthesis, Peptidoglycan biosynthesis, Pantothenate and CoA biosynthesis, Glycosaminoglycan degradation, Thiamine metabolism, Phosphotransferase system, Two-component system, Bacterial secretion system, Flagellar assembly, Bacterial chemotaxis, Ribosome, Sulfur relay system) were identified. Our data highlighted interesting variations between the gut metagenomes of these two chicken lines.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27876778 PMCID: PMC5120256 DOI: 10.1038/srep37376
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
The nutritive value of chicken feed.
| Nutritive value | |
|---|---|
| Crude protein (%) | 14.2 |
| Metabolic energy (ME) (kcal/kg) | 2745 |
| Lysine | 0.61 |
| Methionine & cystine | 0.45 |
| Methionine | 0.57 |
| Threonine | 0.27 |
| Valine | 0.51 |
| Isoleucine | 0.41 |
| Arginine | 0.13 |
| Tryptophan | 0.48 |
Figure 1The dominant and subdominant phyla and genera (i.e. >1% relative abundance) in lean (A) and fat (B) line chickens.
‘*’ Represents the significant differing phyla and genera between the two groups (P-values of less than 0.05).
Figure 2Principal coordinate analysis based on (A) weighted and (B) unweighted UniFrac metric distance.
Figure 3Biplot of redundancy analysis (RDA) on the basis of OTU relative abundance at 98% similarity level.
‘’ and ‘’ represent the constrained explanatory variables, fat (F) and lean (L) lines. Blue arrows represent response variables with the first ordination axis explaining for at least 9.8% of the variability. A p-value of 0.002 was generated from Monte Carlo Permutation Test.
Figure 4Heatmap showing the relative abundances of the 190 key variables differentiating the microbiota of lean and obese chickens.
Significantly different bacterial groups are shown at the right side of the heatmap. Phylogenetic tree built based on the 190 OTUs is at the left side.
The relative abundance of archaea of the two chicken lines.
| Genus | p-value | Average (%) | Median, range (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LL | FL | LL | FL | ||
| 0.255 | 25.19 | 47.82 | 6.82, 0.12–73.43 | 56.58, 0.04–97.41 | |
| 0.310 | 71.88 | 48.64 | 89.46, 24.57–97.96 | 37.91, 2.30–99.72 | |
Figure 5Comparison of the structure of lean and fat chicken gut metagenomes.
(A) Differential abundance of COG functional categories of the two chicken lines. COG category codes are as follows: A, RNA processing and modification; B, Chromatin structure and dynamics; C, Energy production and conversion; D, Cell cycle control, cell division, chromosome partitioning; E, Amino acid transport and metabolism; F, Nucleotide transport and metabolism; G, Carbohydrate transport and metabolism; H, Coenzyme transport and metabolism; I, Lipid transport and metabolism; J, Translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis; K, Transcription; L, Replication, recombination and repair; M, Cell wall/membrane/envelope biogenesis; N, Cell motility; O, Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones; P, Inorganic ion transport and metabolism; Q, Secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism; R, General function prediction only; S, Function unknown; T, Signal transduction mechanisms; U, Intracellular trafficking, secretion, and vesicular transport; V, Defense mechanisms; W, Extracellular structures; Y, Nuclear structure; Z, Cytoskeleton. P-values of <0.01 and <0.05 are represented by ‘**’ and ‘*’, respectively.
Figure 6Principal component analysis (A) and multivariate analysis of variance (B) of the gut metagenomes of lean and fat line chickens based on KEGG orthology distribution.
Significant differential KEGG modules in lean or fat chicken lines.
| Modules | Final reporter score | Proportion of KO with gene abundance of lean>fat line | Identity of the differential module |
|---|---|---|---|
| Modules that were enriched in lean line chicken | |||
| M00207 | 1.64 | 80% | Environmental information processing | Saccharide, polyol, and lipid transport system | Putative multiple sugar transport system |
| M00002 | 1.67 | 91% | Carbohydrate and lipid metabolism | Central carbohydrate metabolism | Glycolysis, core module involving three-carbon compounds |
| M00050 | 1.72 | 83% | Nucleotide and amino acid metabolism | Purine metabolism | Guanine ribonucleotide biosynthesis IMP = >GDP, GTP |
| M00323 | 1.73 | 100% | Environmental information processing | Phosphate and amino acid transport system | Urea transport system |
| M00491 | 1.74 | 80% | Environmental information processing | Saccharide, polyol, and lipid transport system | arabinogalactan oligomer/maltooligosaccharide transport system |
| M00237 | 1.76 | 100% | Environmental information processing | Phosphate and amino acid transport system | Branched-chain amino acid transport system |
| M00061 | 1.81 | 86% | Carbohydrate and lipid metabolism | Other carbohydrate metabolism | D-Glucuronate degradation |
| M00260 | 1.86 | 80% | Genetic information processing | DNA polymerase | DNA polymerase III complex, bacteria |
| M00016 | 1.94 | 83% | Nucleotide and amino acid metabolism | Lysine metabolism | Lysine biosynthesis, succinyl-DAP pathway, aspartate => lysine |
| M00096 | 2.10 | 89% | Carbohydrate and lipid metabolism | Terpenoid backbone biosynthesis | C5 isoprenoid biosynthesis, non-mevalonate pathway |
| M00525 | 2.10 | 100% | Nucleotide and amino acid metabolism | Lysine metabolism | Lysine biosynthesis, acetyl-DAP pathway, aspartate = >lysine |
| M00360 | 3.39 | 90% | Metabolism | Aminoacyl tRNA | Aminoacyl-tRNA biosynthesis, prokaryotes |
| M00359 | 3.54 | 100% | Metabolism | Aminoacyl tRNA | Aminoacyl-tRNA biosynthesis, eukaryotes |
| M00178 | 5.22 | 96% | Genetic information processing | Ribosome | Ribosome, bacteria |
| Modules that were enriched in fat line chicken | |||
| M00210 | 1.63 | 20% | Environmental information processing | Saccharide, polyol, and lipid transport system | Phospholipid transport system |
| M00194 | 1.76 | 20% | Environmental information processing | Saccharide, polyol, and lipid transport system | Maltose/maltodextrin transport system |
| M00331 | 1.80 | 20% | Environmental information processing | Bacterial secretion system | Type II general secretion system |
| M00357 | 2.15 | 16% | Energy metabolism | Methane metabolism | Methanogenesis, acetate = >methane |
| M00567 | 2.49 | 4% | Energy metabolism | Methane metabolism | Methanogenesis, CO2 = >methane |
Remarks: The table only includes modules that have a high (≥ 80%) or a low (≤ 20%) proportion of KO of gene abundance of lean>fat line, indicating that these modules are either enriched in the lean or fat line chickens, respectively. The complete list of significant differential modules is provided in Supplementary Table 8.