| Literature DB >> 29636742 |
Lore Dewanckele1, Bruno Vlaeminck1, Emma Hernandez-Sanabria2, Alexis Ruiz-González1, Sieglinde Debruyne1,3, Jeyamalar Jeyanathan1, Veerle Fievez1.
Abstract
Dietary supplementation of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)-enriched products inhibits the final step of biohydrogenation in the adult rumen, resulting in the accumulation of 18:1 isomers, particularly of trans(t)-11 18:1. Occasionally, a shift toward the formation of t10 intermediates at the expense of t11 intermediates can be triggered. However, whether similar impact would occur when supplementing DHA-enriched products during pregnancy or early life remains unknown. Therefore, the current in vivo study aimed to investigate the effect of a nutritional intervention with DHA in the early life of goat kids on rumen biohydrogenation and microbial community. Delivery of DHA was achieved by supplementing DHA-enriched microalgae (DHA Gold) either to the maternal diet during pregnancy (prenatal) or to the diet of the young offspring (postnatal). At the age of 12 weeks, rumen fluid was sampled for analysis of long-chain fatty acids and microbial community based on bacterial 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing. Postnatal supplementation with DHA-enriched microalgae inhibited the final biohydrogenation step, as observed in adult animals. This resulted particularly in increased ruminal proportions of t11 18:1 rather than a shift to t10 intermediates, suggesting that both young and adult goats might be less prone to dietary induced shifts toward the formation of t10 intermediates, in comparison with cows. Although Butyrivibrio species have been identified as the most important biohydrogenating bacteria, this genus was more abundant when complete biohydrogenation, i.e. 18:0 formation, was inhibited. Blautia abundance was positively correlated with 18:0 accumulation, whereas Lactobacillus spp. Dialister spp. and Bifidobacterium spp. were more abundant in situations with greater t10 accumulation. Extensive comparisons made between current results and literature data indicate that current associations between biohydrogenation intermediates and rumen bacteria in young goats align with former observations in adult ruminants.Entities:
Keywords: docosahexaenoic acid; early life; goat; microalgae; rumen biohydrogenation; rumen microbiome
Year: 2018 PMID: 29636742 PMCID: PMC5880937 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00573
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Ingredients and fatty acid composition (g/kg of fresh product) of concentrates of does.
| Soybean meal | 260 | |
| Rapeseed (D−) or DHA Gold (D+) | 18.2 | |
| Maize | 231.8 | |
| Beet pulp | 200 | |
| Wheat | 150 | |
| Molasses | 50 | |
| Lignosulphonate | 20 | |
| Vitamin premix AD | 16 | |
| Vitamin E | 1 | |
| Feed phosphate | 16 | |
| Trace elements | 16 | |
| Salt | 10 | |
| MgO 93% | 7 | |
| Calcium carbonate | 4 | |
| DVE | 155 | |
| VEM | 920 | |
| Fatty acid composition | D− | D+ |
| 14:0 | n.d. | 0.9 |
| 16:0 | 3.3 | 5.1 |
| 18:0 | 0.6 | 0.5 |
| 18:1 | 8.9 | 3.8 |
| 18:2 | 9.6 | 8.3 |
| 22:5 | n.d. | 1.1 |
| 22:6 | < 0.1 | 2.8 |
n.d.: not detected.
D, doe; .
VIT A, D and E (UI/g): A (312), D (62.5), and E (6,000).
Premix of trace elements and minerals (mg/g): Fe (281), Cu (62.5), Mn (116), Co (1.4), Zn (175), I (4.8), Ca (244.3), P (157), K (248), Mg (73.8), and Na (8.1).
DVE, true protein digested in the small intestine (Tamminga et al., .
VEM, feed unit milk (1,000 VEM = 6.9 MJ; Van Es, .
Figure 1Experimental groups. D, doe; K, kid; +, supplemented with DHA Gold (0.28 g per kg BW); −, no DHA Gold supplementation.
Effect of prenatal and/or postnatal treatment of goat kids with DHA Gold on proportions of long-chain fatty acids (g/100 g fatty acids) in rumen fluid.
| 14:0 | 1.58 | 3.33 | 2.59 | 3.35 | 0.478 | 0.203 | 0.003 | 0.178 |
| 16:0 | 15.31 | 17.59 | 16.01 | 17.38 | 0.667 | 0.570 | <0.001 | 0.247 |
| 18:0 | 43.46 | 32.05 | 40.43 | 32.32 | 2.710 | 0.633 | 0.001 | 0.503 |
| 0.21 | 0.51 | 0.16 | 0.38 | 0.089 | 0.132 | 0.002 | 0.474 | |
| 0.05 | 0.31 | 0.06 | 0.23 | 0.046 | 0.489 | <0.001 | 0.356 | |
| 0.70 | 1.09 | 0.56 | 1.61 | 0.597 | 0.403 | 0.320 | 0.731 | |
| 0.64 | 1.62 | 0.81 | 1.37 | 0.323 | 0.921 | 0.002 | 0.232 | |
| 0.15 | 0.54 | 0.10 | 0.32 | 0.078 | 0.106 | 0.002 | 0.272 | |
| 2.39 | 2.85 | 2.37 | 2.43 | 0.335 | 0.476 | 0.372 | 0.493 | |
| 1.23 | 2.03 | 1.58 | 1.59 | 0.246 | 0.850 | 0.123 | 0.131 | |
| 0.41 | 0.29 | 0.39 | 0.27 | 0.054 | 0.706 | 0.037 | 0.968 | |
| 0.10 | 0.32 | 0.27 | 0.38 | 0.207 | 0.430 | 0.015 | 0.334 | |
| 0.33 | 0.49 | 0.13 | 0.25 | 0.181 | 0.174 | 0.059 | 0.801 | |
| Sum 18:1 | 6.31 | 10.14 | 6.35 | 8.74 | 1.271 | 0.380 | 0.018 | 0.372 |
| 0.07 | 0.19 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.058 | 0.873 | 0.164 | 0.574 | |
| 0.01 | 0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.010 | 0.179 | 0.969 | 0.969 | |
| 18:2 | 2.67 | 1.97 | 2.57 | 1.71 | 0.347 | 0.615 | 0.028 | 0.812 |
| 0.72 | 1.81 | 0.92 | 1.53 | 0.334 | 0.980 | 0.003 | 0.227 | |
| 0.71 | 1.11 | 0.56 | 1.61 | 0.597 | 0.363 | 0.312 | 0.719 | |
| 18:3 | 0.59 | 0.43 | 0.70 | 0.56 | 0.075 | 0.157 | 0.038 | 0.884 |
| 0.09 | 0.15 | 0.10 | 0.06 | 0.034 | 0.350 | 0.673 | 0.058 | |
| 22:5 | <0.01 | 1.43 | 0.12 | 1.75 | 0.293 | 0.140 | <0.001 | 0.654 |
| 22:6 | <0.01 | 3.81 | 0.34 | 4.63 | 0.817 | 0.137 | <0.001 | 0.716 |
D, doe; K, kid; .
SEM, standard error of the mean.
t, trans; c, cis; CLA, conjugated linoleic acid; CLnA, conjugated linolenic acid.
Reported P-values are the P-values from the logarithm.
Figure 2Bacterial community composition on family level in the rumen of the different experimental groups: (A) D−K−, (B) D−K+, (C) D+K−, and (D) D+K+ (n = 8). D, doe; K, kid; +, supplemented with DHA Gold (0.28 g per kg BW); −, no DHA Gold supplementation.
Average relative abundance (%) of different bacterial taxa in the rumen of goat kids supplemented pre- and/or postnatally with DHA Gold.
| Aeromonadales/Succinivibrionaceae | 2.28 | 3.59 | 3.44 | 2.93 | 0.506 | 0.624 | 0.449 | 0.093 |
| Anaerolineales/Anaerolinaceae/SHD-231 | <0.01 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.032 | 0.334 | 0.060 | 0.910 |
| Bacteroidales/Bacteroidaceae/BF311 | 0.48 | 0.28 | 0.34 | 0.21 | 0.069 | 0.147 | 0.033 | 0.608 |
| Bacteroidales/BS11 | 0.87 | 2.13 | 1.94 | 3.01 | 0.508 | 0.075 | 0.038 | 0.854 |
| Bacteroidales/Paraprevotellaceae/YRC22 | 0.37 | 0.72 | 0.55 | 0.45 | 0.147 | 0.654 | 0.189 | 0.027 |
| Bacteroidales/RF16 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.18 | 0.16 | 0.060 | 0.020 | 0.233 | 0.632 |
| Bacteroidales/S24-7 | 0.28 | 0.49 | 0.39 | 0.72 | 0.111 | 0.111 | 0.006 | 0.490 |
| Clostridiales | 0.40 | 0.49 | 0.30 | 0.41 | 0.054 | 0.138 | 0.091 | 0.876 |
| Clostridiales/Clostridiaceae/ | 0.03 | <0.01 | 0.18 | 0.21 | 0.152 | 0.009 | 0.836 | 0.538 |
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | 0.45 | 0.21 | 0.37 | 0.27 | 0.071 | 0.862 | 0.028 | 0.368 |
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | 1.88 | 2.67 | 2.38 | 3.17 | 0.258 | 0.079 | 0.007 | 0.996 |
| Clostridiales/Ruminococcaceae | 15.70 | 13.85 | 13.71 | 14.12 | 0.664 | 0.075 | 0.089 | 0.013 |
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae | 2.15 | 3.26 | 2.02 | 2.21 | 0.323 | 0.168 | 0.011 | 0.055 |
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | 0.31 | 0.17 | 0.13 | 0.18 | 0.059 | 0.210 | 0.082 | 0.004 |
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | 0.02 | 0.12 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.019 | 0.135 | <!0.001 | 0.048 |
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | 0.79 | 1.25 | 1.17 | 1.02 | 0.098 | 0.462 | 0.127 | 0.007 |
| Desulfovibrionales/Desulfovibrionaceae | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.022 | 0.795 | 0.079 | 0.862 |
| Enterobacteriales/Enterobacteriaceae/NA | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.05 | <0.01 | 0.011 | 0.435 | 0.100 | 0.023 |
| Erysipelotrichales/Erysipelotrichaceae/L7A_E11 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.037 | 0.504 | 0.041 | 0.042 |
| Pirellulales/Pirellulaceae | 0.43 | 0.32 | 0.32 | 0.40 | 0.047 | 0.717 | 0.540 | 0.067 |
| RF39 | 1.73 | 1.08 | 1.33 | 1.15 | 0.186 | 0.388 | 0.016 | 0.141 |
| Synergistales/Synergistaceae/NA | 0.09 | 0.04 | 0.02 | <0.01 | 0.028 | 0.191 | 0.031 | 0.296 |
| YS2 | 0.35 | 0.21 | 0.39 | 0.17 | 0.073 | 0.984 | 0.025 | 0.567 |
Only taxa with significant differences (P < 0.05) or with a trend toward significance (0.05 ≤ P < 0.10) are shown.
D, doe; K, kid; .
SEM, standard error of the mean.
NA, not assigned.
Means annotated with a different letter differ (P < 0.05) between experimental groups.
Means annotated with a different capital letter tend to differ (0.05 ≤ P < 0.10) between experimental groups.
Ruminal bacterial taxa (97% sequence similarity) correlated with 18:2n-6, 18:3n-3 or related biohydrogenation intermediates.
| Aeromonadales/Succinivibrionaceae | 0.33 | 0.54 | |||||||
| Aeromonadales/Succinivibrionaceae/ | 0.31 | ||||||||
| Bacteroidales | 0.37 | −0.38 | −0.39 | ||||||
| Bacteroidales/Bacteroidaceae/ | 0.31 | 0.35 | 0.35 | ||||||
| Bacteroidales/Bacteroidaceae/BF311 | 0.44 | 0.42 | −0.53 | −0.31 | −0.45 | ||||
| Bacteroidales/BS11 | −0.49 | −0.51 | |||||||
| Bacteroidales/Odoribacteraceae/ | 0.42 | 0.38 | |||||||
| Bacteroidales/Porphyromonadaceae/ | 0.32 | 0.40 | 0.30 | 0.40 | |||||
| Bacteroidales/Paraprevotellaceae | −0.49 | ||||||||
| Bacteroidales/Paraprevotellaceae/CF231 | −0.33 | ||||||||
| Bacteroidales/Paraprevotellaceae/ | 0.43 | ||||||||
| Bacteroidales/Paraprevotellaceae/YRC22 | 0.30 | ||||||||
| Bacteroidales/Prevotellaceae | −0.49 | 0.35 | |||||||
| Bacteroidales/Prevotellaceae/ | 0.37 | ||||||||
| Bacteroidales/RF16 | −0.51 | ||||||||
| Bacteroidales/Rikenellaceae | 0.36 | ||||||||
| Bacteroidales/S24-7 | −0.50 | 0.38 | |||||||
| Bifidobacteriales/Bifidobacteriaceae/ | 0.47 | 0.50 | 0.43 | 0.41 | |||||
| Clostridiales | −0.35 | ||||||||
| Clostridiales/Christensenellaceae | 0.47 | −0.31 | |||||||
| Clostridiales/Christensenellaceae/ | 0.41 | ||||||||
| Clostridiales/Clostridiaceae/ | 0.31 | ||||||||
| Clostridiales/Eubacteriaceae/ | −0.42 | −0.30 | 0.47 | 0.47 | |||||
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae | 0.34 | ||||||||
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | 0.44 | 0.44 | |||||||
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | −0.31 | 0.42 | |||||||
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | 0.41 | −0.57 | |||||||
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | −0.43 | ||||||||
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | 0.34 | 0.35 | |||||||
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | −0.32 | −0.44 | 0.33 | 0.43 | 0.35 | 0.47 | 0.49 | ||
| Clostridiales/Lachnospiraceae/ | |||||||||
| Clostridiales/Mogibacteriaceae | −0.37 | 0.36 | |||||||
| Clostridiales/NA/NA | −0.36 | 0.44 | |||||||
| Clostridiales/Ruminococcaceae | 0.32 | −0.34 | −0.58 | 0.32 | |||||
| Clostridiales/Ruminococcaceae/NA | 0.31 | ||||||||
| Clostridiales/Ruminococcaceae/ | −0.34 | ||||||||
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae | 0.45 | 0.37 | |||||||
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/NA | −0.33 | 0.41 | 0.44 | 0.42 | 0.36 | ||||
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | 0.53 | 0.43 | 0.32 | ||||||
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | 0.35 | 0.63 | 0.56 | 0.38 | |||||
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | −0.31 | 0.45 | 0.34 | 0.48 | 0.51 | 0.49 | |||
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | 0.47 | 0.34 | 0.33 | 0.44 | |||||
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | 0.40 | ||||||||
| Clostridiales/Veillonellaceae/ | −0.39 | 0.32 | |||||||
| Coriobacteriales/Coriobacteriaceae | 0.48 | 0.65 | |||||||
| CW040/F16 | 0.34 | −0.32 | |||||||
| Desulfovibrionales/Desulfovibrionaceae/ | −0.31 | ||||||||
| Elusimicrobiales/Elusimicrobiaceae | −0.30 | ||||||||
| Enterobacteriales/Enterobacteriaceae | 0.38 | ||||||||
| Erysipelotrichales/Erysipelotrichaceae/ | 0.38 | 0.32 | 0.31 | −0.32 | |||||
| Erysipelotrichales/Erysipelotrichaceae/ | −0.39 | 0.32 | 0.51 | ||||||
| Erysipelotrichales/Erysipelotrichaceae/ | 0.30 | ||||||||
| Erysipelotrichales/Erysipelotrichaceae/ | −0.45 | 0.45 | 0.45 | ||||||
| Erysipelotrichales/Erysipelotrichaceae/L7A_E11 | 0.30 | ||||||||
| Erysipelotrichales/Erysipelotrichaceae/p-75-a5 | −0.43 | −0.46 | |||||||
| Erysipelotrichales/Erysipelotrichaceae/ | 0.31 | 0.34 | |||||||
| Lactobacillales/Lactobacillaceae/ | 0.33 | 0.50 | 0.57 | ||||||
| Lactobacillales/Streptococcaceae/ | |||||||||
| Pedosphaerales/R4-41B | −0.43 | −0.41 | −0.45 | −0.32 | −0.41 | ||||
| Pirellulales/Pirellulaceae | −0.49 | −0.54 | −0.49 | −0.45 | |||||
| RF32 | 0.34 | ||||||||
| RF39 | −0.43 | −0.36 | 0.34 | ||||||
| Rickettsiales | −0.51 | ||||||||
| Synergistales/Synergistaceae/NA | |||||||||
| YS2 | 0.30 | ||||||||
Significances are based on Spearman P-values.
P < 0.05;
,0.05 ≤ P < 0.10; gray fields, P ≥ 0.10.
t, trans; c, cis; CLA, conjugated linoleic acid; CLnA, conjugated linolenic acid.
NA, not assigned.
Figure 3Relationships among clusters of bacterial genera and 18-carbon fatty acids irrespective of experimental group. This bipartite network was based on the regularized canonical correlations between relative bacterial abundances and relative concentrations of 18-carbon fatty acids. Interactions have been filtered for an absolute correlation above 0.4 and are colored following the key shown. This representation uncovers potentially functional populations. LA, 18:2n-6; c9t11CLA, cis-9, trans-11 conjugated linoleic acid; t11C18:1, trans-11 18:1; t11, total trans-11 fatty acids; C18.1, total 18:1 fatty acids; t10, total trans-10 fatty acids; t10C18:1, trans-10 18:1; t10.t11, ratio of trans-10 to trans-11 intermediates; C18.0, 18:0. Acida, Acidaminococcus, Butyri, Butyrivibrio, Eub, Eubacterium, Lactobac, Lactobacillus, Phascolarcto, Phascolarctobacterium, Pseudo_Eub, Pseudoramibacter eubacterium. No correlations were found with 18:3n-3 and cis-9, trans-11, cis-15 conjugated linolenic acid.