| Literature DB >> 29321642 |
X S Guo1,2, W C Ke3,4, W R Ding3,4, L M Ding3,4, D M Xu3,4, W W Wang3, P Zhang3,4, F Y Yang5.
Abstract
Using gas chromatography mass spectrometry and the PacBio single molecule with real-time sequencing technology (SMRT), we analyzed the detailed metabolomic profiles and microbial community dynamics involved in ensiled Medicago sativa (alfalfa) inoculated without or with the homofermenter Lactobacillus plantarum or heterofermenter Lactobacillus buchneri. Our results revealed that 280 substances and 102 different metabolites were present in ensiled alfalfa. Inoculation of L. buchneri led to remarkable up-accumulation in concentrations of 4-aminobutyric acid, some free amino acids, and polyols in ensiled alfalfa, whereas considerable down-accumulation in cadaverine and succinic acid were observed in L. plantarum-inoculated silages. Completely different microbial flora and their successions during ensiling were observed in the control and two types of inoculant-treated silages. Inoculation of the L. plantarum or L. buchneri alters the microbial composition dynamics of the ensiled forage in very different manners. Our study demonstrates that metabolomic profiling analysis provides a deep insight in metabolites in silage. Moreover, the PacBio SMRT method revealed the microbial composition and its succession during the ensiling process at the species level. This provides information regarding the microbial processes underlying silage formation and may contribute to target-based regulation methods to achieve high-quality silage production.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29321642 PMCID: PMC5762819 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-18348-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Fermentation, chemical and microbial compositions of ensiled alfalfa inoculated without or with L. plantarum or L. buchneri after 90 days of fermentation.
| Item1 | Alfalfa silage2 | SEM |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | LP | LB | |||
| DM, g/kg | 403a | 400a | 414b | 2.3 | 0.005 |
| CP, g/kg DM | 198 | 198 | 199 | 0.8 | 0.92 |
| NDF, g/kg DM | 448 | 427 | 401 | 12.0 | 0.35 |
| ADF, g/kg DM | 280 | 266 | 282 | 5.37 | 0.46 |
| NH3-N, g/kg total N | 153c | 93a | 111b | 10.0 | <0.0001 |
| WSC, g/kg DM | 5.4c | 3.9a | 4.4b | 0.26 | <0.0001 |
| pH | 5.2b | 4.9a | 5.2b | 0.06 | 0.001 |
| Lactate, g/kg DM | 38.6a | 68.4c | 52.6b | 6.01 | 0.016 |
| Acetate, g/kg DM | 11.6a | 15.8ab | 17.6b | 1.26 | 0.092 |
| Lactic acid bacteria, log10 cfu/g | 7.7b | 7.4a | 7.9c | 0.07 | 0.005 |
| Yeasts, log10 cfu/g | 2.8 | 2.8 < | 2.7 < | 0.06 | 0.907 |
| Molds, log10 cfu/g | 2.3 | <2.0 | <2.0 | — | — |
a–cWithin a row, means without a common superscript letter differ (P < 0.05). SEM, standard error of means. 1DM, dry matter; CP, crude protein; NDF, neutral detergent fiber; ADF, acid detergent fiber; WSC, water soluble carbohydrate.
2LP, Lactobacillus plantarum treatment; LB, Lactobacillus buchneri treatment.
Figure 1Principal component analysis (PCA) of metabolic profiles in alfalfa silage inoculated without (control) or with L. plantarum or L. buchneri (n = 3). Input data were the total mass of the signal integration area of each sample, and the signal integration area was normalized to 10,000 for each sample.
Relative concentration and fold-changes in major metabolites in alfalfa silages without or with inoculation of L. plantarum or L. buchneri after 90 days of ensiling.
| Metabolite name | Relative concentration1 | Fold-changes2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control |
|
| log2 (P/C) | log2 (B/C) | log2 (P/B) | |
| 2,3-Butandiol | 86.59 | 170.9 | 340.38 | 0.981* | 1.975* | 0.993* |
| 2-Aminobutyric acid | 61.5 | 12.54 | 25.14 | −2.294* | −1.291* | 1.003* |
| 4-Aminobutyric acid | 112.41 | 169.14 | 272.19 | 0.589 | 1.276* | −0.686 |
| Benzoic acid | 43.86 | 56.89 | 55.81 | 0.375* | 0.347 | −0.027 |
| Adenine | 2.57 | 26.16 | 21.02 | 3.344* | 3.029* | 0.315 |
| α–Hydroxyisobutyric acid | 3.51 | 0.77 | 1.03 | −2.188* | −1.762* | −0.423 |
| Aminomalonic acid | 5.39 | 8.81 | 10.33 | 0.709 | 0.938* | −0.228 |
| Arabitol | 4.36 | 6.21 | 21.43 | 0.511 | 2.298* | 1.786* |
| Cadaverine | 191.86 | 22.14 | 101.16 | −3.11* | −0.924* | 2.190* |
| Erythritol | 10.44 | 10.49 | 39.07 | 0.006 | 1.902* | 1.879* |
| Glycerol | 190.26 | 184.08 | 301.31 | −0.047 | 0.663* | 0.711* |
| Inositol | 31.74 | 42.04 | 40.93 | 0.406* | 0.366 | 0.038 |
| Ketomalonic acid | 0.46 | 4.05 | 1.77 | 3.112* | 1.925* | −1.188* |
| Malonic acid | 2.15 | 10.89 | 7.68 | 2.337* | 1.832* | −0.505* |
| Mannitol | 0.43 | 0.47 | 3.94 | 0.103 | 3.184* | 3.081* |
| Phenethylamine | 3.62 | 0.27 | 1.16 | −3.724* | 0.762* | 2.079* |
| Threitol | 1.51 | 1.99 | 3.24 | 0.400* | 1.101* | 0.701* |
| Lactic acid | 132 | 167 | 120 | 0.339* | −0.134 | −0.473* |
| Succinic acid | 158.28 | 82.96 | 111.72 | −0.932* | −0.502* | 0.429* |
| trans-Ferulic acid | 3.91 | 1.69 | 5.34 | −1.21 | 0.448 | 1.659* |
| Threonine | 41.28 | 64.59 | 73.96 | 0.645* | 0.841* | −0.195* |
| Tyrosine | 3.23 | 16.76 | 98.42 | 4.774* | 4.930* | −0.155* |
| Valine | 162.1 | 172.45 | 219.74 | 0.089 | 0.439* | −0.349* |
| Ornithine | 28.83 | 44.39 | 65.84 | 0.623 | 1.192* | −0.568 |
| Lysine | 12.15 | 38.26 | 50.24 | 1.654* | 2.047* | −0.393* |
| β-Alanine | 1.65 | 2.12 | 4.04 | 0.359 | 1.292* | −0.932 |
| Aspartic acid | 139.71 | 289.55 | 310.62 | 1.051* | 1.153* | −0.101 |
| Glutamic acid | 76.86 | 39.42 | 28.59 | −0.963* | −1.426* | 0.463 |
1The relative concentration of each metabolite is an average of data from three biological replicates using GC-MS. 2The fold-changes were calculated using the formula log2 (X/Y). X and Y refer different treatments: C, control; B, Lactobacillus buchneri treatment; P, Lactobacillus plantarum treatment; * indicate significant (P < 0.05). The major metabolites were selected based on at least one of Fold- changes (log2 (P/C), log2 (B/C), log2 (P/B)) contrast was statistically significant.
Sequence and bacterial diversity of fresh forage and experimental treatment groups1. 1C, the control groups with different fermentation days; LB, L. buchneri inoculated groups with different fermentation days; LP, L. plantarum inoculated groups with different fermentation days. 2Good’s coverage: coverage is calculated as C = 1 − (s/n), where s is the number of unique OTUs and n is the number of individuals in the sample. This index gives a relative measure of how well the sample represents the larger environment.
| Number of reads | Average read length | Number of OTUs | Chao1 index | Shannon index | Simpson index | Observed species | Good’s coverage2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh | 783 | 1240 | 41 | 49.7 | 3.203 | 0.78 | 40.8 | 0.96 |
| C-14 | 220 | 1242 | 10 | 11.5 | 2.57 | 0.78 | 8.5 | 0.96 |
| C-30 | 124 | 1248 | 14 | 92 | 1.64 | 0.40 | 5.4 | 0.77 |
| C-60 | 382 | 1249 | 21 | 27 | 2.33 | 0.59 | 19.8 | 0.95 |
| C-90 | 636 | 1246 | 24 | 35 | 1.96 | 0.51 | 23.6 | 0.96 |
| LB-14 | 726 | 1252 | 42 | 96.2 | 3.22 | 0.81 | 41.4 | 0.91 |
| LB-30 | 969 | 1251 | 57 | 117.5 | 3.15 | 0.78 | 50.1 | 0.92 |
| LB-60 | 1052 | 1247 | 45 | 138.5 | 1.16 | 0.24 | 28.5 | 0.94 |
| LB-90 | 1418 | 1245 | 71 | 106.1 | 2.19 | 0.47 | 42.3 | 0.95 |
| LP-14 | 1564 | 1246 | 45 | 68.0 | 0.93 | 0.19 | 21.7 | 0.98 |
| LP-30 | 1431 | 1252 | 68 | 135.6 | 1.55 | 0.31 | 36.8 | 0.95 |
| LP-60 | 1052 | 1247 | 61 | 147.1 | 2.12 | 0.49 | 44.3 | 0.93 |
| LP-90 | 601 | 1247 | 36 | 91.2 | 2.68 | 0.69 | 33.3 | 0.92 |
Figure 2Epiphytic bacteria composition in fresh alfalfa before ensiling.
Figure 3Comparison of taxonomic profiles of ensiling microbial communities of control, L. plantarum-inoculated and L. buchneri-inoculated silages after 14, 30, 60, and 90 days of fermentation. Metagenomic reads were taxonomically assigned based on the Ribosomal Database Project II database with a minimum bootstrap threshold of 80% and visualization by Krona.
Figure 4UniFrac weighted principle coordinate analysis scores plot based on PC1 and PC2. (A) Treatment (different shapes represent treatments, and one shape with different colors represent ensiling days); (B) Ensiling day (different colors represent ensiling days, and one color with different shapes represent treatments).