| Literature DB >> 29495256 |
Lee James Opdahl1, Michael G Gonda2, Benoit St-Pierre3.
Abstract
The ability of ruminants to utilize cellulosic biomass is a result of the metabolic activities of symbiotic microbial communities that reside in the rumen. To gain further insight into this complex microbial ecosystem, a selection-based batch culturing approach was used to identify candidate cellulose-utilizing bacterial consortia. Prior to culturing with cellulose, rumen contents sampled from three beef cows maintained on a forage diet shared 252 Operational Taxonomic Units (OTUs), accounting for 41.6-50.0% of bacterial 16S rRNA gene sequences in their respective samples. Despite this high level of overlap, only one OTU was enriched in cellulose-supplemented cultures from all rumen samples. Otherwise, each set of replicate cellulose supplemented cultures originating from a sampled rumen environment was found to have a distinct bacterial composition. Two of the seven most enriched OTUs were closely matched to well-established rumen cellulose utilizers (Ruminococcusflavefaciens and Fibrobactersuccinogenes), while the others did not show high nucleotide sequence identity to currently defined bacterial species. The latter were affiliated to Prevotella (1 OTU), Ruminococcaceae (3 OTUs), and the candidate phylum Saccharibacteria (1 OTU), respectively. While further investigations will be necessary to elucidate the metabolic function(s) of each enriched OTU, these results together further support cellulose utilization as a ruminal metabolic trait shared across vast phylogenetic distances, and that the rumen is an environment conducive to the selection of a broad range of microbial adaptations for the digestion of plant structural polysaccharides.Entities:
Keywords: Bacteroidetes; Firmicutes; Saccharibacteria; bacteria; cattle; cellulose; microbiome; rumen
Year: 2018 PMID: 29495256 PMCID: PMC5874631 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms6010017
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Taxonomic profile of rumen bacteria from three beef cows on a forage-based diet. For each sample, relative abundances (%) are shown for all Operational Taxonomic Units (OTUs) as well as for the 252 OTUs shared among animals. Phyla are highlighted in bold, with most highly represented lower taxa shown for Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes.
| Taxonomic Affiliation | All OTUs | Shared OTUs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cow A | Cow B | Cow C | Cow A | Cow B | Cow C | |
| Bacteroidetes | 48.0 | 47.3 | 60.5 | 18.0 | 22.4 | 25.9 |
| Prevotellaceae | 27.4 | 19.2 | 40.5 | 11.3 | 10.6 | 18.3 |
| Porphyromonadaceae | 0.5 | 7.4 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 3.7 | 0.2 |
| unc. Bacteroidales | 14.2 | 14.2 | 14.7 | 3.6 | 5.2 | 5.7 |
| other Bacteroidetes | 5.9 | 6.5 | 4.8 | 2.7 | 3.0 | 1.6 |
| Firmicutes | 32.6 | 21.7 | 31.4 | 11.3 | 10.0 | 11.5 |
| Ruminococcaceae | 10.3 | 5.9 | 12.4 | 3.6 | 2.8 | 4.3 |
| Lachnospiraceae | 10.5 | 8.3 | 9.2 | 4.4 | 3.5 | 3.7 |
| unc. Clostridiales | 10.0 | 5.2 | 8.4 | 2.9 | 2.5 | 3.1 |
| other Firmicutes | 1.8 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 0.4 |
| Fibrobacteres | 2.6 | 8.2 | 2.4 | 2.5 | 7.8 | 1.9 |
| Plantomycetes | 0.4 | 3.9 | 0.09 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cand. Saccha. | 0.2 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.08 | 0.6 | 0.09 |
| Proteobacteria | 1.1 | 0.03 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 0.1 |
| other phyla | 5.1 | 7.1 | 1.8 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 1.1 |
| unc. Bacteria | 9.9 | 10.8 | 3.2 | 5.7 | 6.4 | 1.4 |
| Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 41.6 | 50.0 | 41.9 |
Abbreviations: Cand. Saccha.: Canditatus Saccharibacteria; unc.: unclassified.
Figure 1Venn diagram showing the number of shared rumen bacterial OTUs amongst three beef cows maintained under a forage diet. Also shown is the proportion of sequence reads from each rumen sample that were assigned to shared OTUs.
Most abundant a rumen bacterial OTUs from three beef cows maintained on a forage diet. Representation is shown for each animal (cow A, cow B, cow C) as relative abundance, with corresponding taxonomic assignments and closest taxon also presented.
| OTU | A | B | C | Taxonomic Affiliation b | Closest Valid Taxon (id% c) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SD_Bt-00007 | 4.8 | 5.0 | 0.9 | unc. Bacteria | |
| SD_Bt-00012 | 1.6 | 5.6 | 1.4 | ||
| SD_Bt-00022 | 0 | 2.1 | 0.1 | ||
| SD_Bt-00024 | 0.2 | 2.9 | 0.1 | unc. Porphyromonadaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00027 | 0 | 1.5 | 0 | unc. Planctomycetaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00030 | 0.9 | 1.4 | 1.4 | ||
| SD_Bt-00033 | 0.2 | 1.3 | 0.1 | unc. Bacteria | |
| SD_Bt-00039 | 0.1 | 1.5 | 0 | unc. Planctomycetaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00040 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 0 | unc. Bacteroidales | |
| SD_Bt-00051 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 0.8 | unc. Bacteroidetes | |
| SD_Bt-00057 | 2.2 | 0.2 | 0.6 | SR1 | |
| SD_Bt-00062 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 2.5 | unc. Bacteroidales | |
| SD_Bt-00074 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 1.9 | ||
| SD_Bt-00084 | 1.3 | 0.3 | 0.5 | ||
| SD_Bt-00087 | 1.4 | 1.0 | 0.7 |
| |
| SD_Bt-00108 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 0 | ||
| SD_Bt-00112 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 0 | unc. Bacteroidales | |
| SD_Bt-00118 | 0.8 | 0 | 1.3 | ||
| SD_Bt-00119 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 1.1 | ||
| SD_Bt-00142 | 0.5 | 1.2 | 0 | ||
| SD_Bt-00160 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 1.0 | unc. Bacteroidales | |
| SD_Bt-10002 | 0 | 1.0 | 0 | unc. Bacteroidales | |
| SD_Bt-10017 | 0 | 1.0 | 0.1 | ||
| SD_Bt-10023 | 0 | 1.4 | 0 | ||
| Total | 17.8 | 33.2 | 14.5 |
a OTUs representing at least 1% of sequence reads in at least one of the rumen samples; b As determined by RDP classifier [23], at an 80% bootstrap cutoff; c Search result and nucleotide sequence identity as determined by BLAST [22]. Abbreviation: unc.: unclassified.
Figure 2Composition of bacterial consortia in response to cellulose, presented as relative abundance (%). OTUs enriched in the presence of cellulose with a relative abundance of at least 1% from at least one time point are indicated. OTUs found to be statistically higher in cellulose supplemented cultures compared to their corresponding non supplemented controls are indicated (*). Cow A: (A) rumen sample (D0); (B) D7 cultures and (C) D14 cultures. Cow B: (D) rumen sample (D0); (E) D7 cultures and (F) D14 cultures. Cow C: (G) rumen sample (D0); (H) D7 cultures and (I) D14 cultures. OTU abundances at D7 and D14 are the average of three replicate cultures at the indicated time point. Distinct OTUs assigned to the same phylum are shown in shades of the same color: Bacteroidetes (blue), Firmicutes (green), Candidatus Saccharibacteria (red), Proteobacteria (purple), Fibrobacteres (yellow), Planctomycetes (orange), and unclassified Bacteria (brown). The remaining OTUs from each sample were grouped in the same category (grey). Relative abundances of OTUs in Control cultures are presented in Supplementary Tables S2–S4.
Taxonomic affiliation of the most abundant a OTUs from selection with cellulose.
| OTUs | Taxonomic Affiliation b | Closest Valid Taxon (id% c) |
|---|---|---|
| SD_Bt-00001 | ||
| SD_Bt-00002 | ||
| SD_Bt-00003 | unc. Ruminococcaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00004 | unc. Ruminococcaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00005 | ||
| SD_Bt-00008 | ||
| SD_Bt-00009 | unc. Lachnospiraceae | |
| SD_Bt-00010 | ||
| SD_Bt-00012 | ||
| SD_Bt-00013 | unc. Ruminococcaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00014 | unc. Bacteria | |
| SD_Bt-00015 | unc. Ruminococcaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00019 | unc. Ruminococcaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00022 | ||
| SD_Bt-00024 | unc. Porphyromonadaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00027 | unc. Planctomycetaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00030 | ||
| SD_Bt-00044 | ||
| SD_Bt-00048 | unc. Ruminococcaceae | |
| SD_Bt-00058 | ||
| SD_Bt-00075 | unc. Proteobacteria |
a OTUs representing at least 1% of sequence reads in cellulose-enriched cultures; b As determined by RDP classifier [23], at an 80% bootstrap cutoff; c Nucleotide sequence identity as determined by BLAST [22]; d Genome CP011211.1. Abbreviations: Cand.: Canditatus; gen. inc. sed.: genera incertae sedis; unc.: unclassified.
Short Chain Fatty Acids (SCFA) profile (mM) from the rumen sample (D0) and cultures derived from cow C.
| D0 | Con a D7 | Cell b D7 | Con a D14 | Cell b D14 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acetate | 50.18 | 90.55 ± 11.06 | 95.48 ± 7.57 | 76.50 ± 9.92 | 90.73 ± 10.90 |
| Propionate | 12.46 | 20.35 ± 2.72 | 23.01 ± 0.78 | 18.75 ± 2.47 | 22.13 ± 2.57 |
| Butyrate | 8.18 | 11.22 ± 1.03 | 12.20 ±0.33 | 10.40 ± 0.75 | 12.45 ± 0.94 |
| Iso-butyrate | 0.79 | 1.77 ± 0.22 | 1.51 ± 0.06 | 1.73 ± 0.15 | 1.55 ± 0.12 |
| Valerate | 0.98 | 1.82 ± 0.20 | 1.86 ± 0.05 | 1.73 ± 0.11 | 2.19 ± 0.25 |
| Iso-valerate | 1.13 | 3.12 * ± 0.33 | 2.47 * ± 0.09 | 3.10 ± 0.23 | 2.57 ± 0.19 |
* Control—Cellulose pairs for the same time point that are statistically different (unpaired t-test, p < 0.05); a Control: average and standard deviation of duplicate cultures; b Cellulose supplementation: average and standard deviation of triplicate cultures.