Literature DB >> 30124869

Variation in animal performance explained by the rumen microbiome or by diet composition.

Claire B Gleason1, Robin R White1.   

Abstract

The central aim of this meta-analysis was to determine whether the rumen microbiome can serve as an accurate predictor of performance in beef and dairy cattle compared with predictions based on diet composition. To support this comparison, a set of models was derived and compared. Models predicted milk yield (MY), average daily gain (ADG), dry matter intake (DMI), dairy feed efficiency (FE), and beef FE using different sets of independent variables: diet (D), microbial (M), and experimental (E). Diet variables included dry matter, organic matter, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, crude protein, ether extract, nonfiber carbohydrate, starch, and forage percentages. Microbiome variables included relative abundance of 3 major rumen bacterial phyla, species richness, and species diversity. Experimental variables included publication year, breed type (dairy, beef, or Bos indicus), and rumen sampling fraction (fluid or solid). A second set of models used D and E variables as predictors for the microbiome. For both the production and microbiome model sets, predictor variable sets were used individually and in combination. Linear mixed-effects regression, weighted by 1/standard error of the mean, was used to derive models using data from 51 peer-reviewed publications. Models for the same response variable were compared on the basis of concordance correlation coefficient with study effects removed (uCCC), root-estimated variance associated with study and error, and corrected Akaike information criterion values, wherever appropriate. The MY model using D + M + E predictors outperformed all other MY models (uCCC = 0.71). ADG was most accurately predicted by D alone (uCCC = 0.92). Interestingly, M + E was more successful at predicting DMI than any model using D variables. Similarly, dairy FE was more accurately predicted by M + E than D, albeit only slightly (uCCC = 0.69 vs. 0.65). Beef FE could only be modeled using D variables. Overall, breed type proved a better predictor of relative abundances of most rumen bacterial phyla than D. Conversely, species richness and diversity indicators were unaffected by breed type, but could be predicted by D with moderate precision and accuracy (uCCC = 0.63 to 0.69). This analysis suggests that diet and the microbiome may exert independent effects on various aspects of performance. Further research is necessary to determine the reasons for these independent influences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30124869      PMCID: PMC6247856          DOI: 10.1093/jas/sky332

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  48 in total

1.  Efficiency of converting nutrient dry matter to milk in Holstein herds.

Authors:  J S Britt; R C Thomas; N C Speer; M B Hall
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 4.034

2.  Meta-analysis of postruminal microbial nitrogen flows in dairy cattle. II. Approaches to and implications of more mechanistic prediction.

Authors:  Robin R White; Yairanex Roman-Garcia; Jeffrey L Firkins
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 4.034

3.  A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility.

Authors:  L I Lin
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  An obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy harvest.

Authors:  Peter J Turnbaugh; Ruth E Ley; Michael A Mahowald; Vincent Magrini; Elaine R Mardis; Jeffrey I Gordon
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2006-12-21       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Effects of dietary crude protein concentration and degradability on milk production responses of early, mid, and late lactation diary cows.

Authors:  K F Kalscheur; J H Vandersall; R A Erdman; R A Kohn; E Russek-Cohen
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 4.034

6.  Metatranscriptomic Profiling Reveals Linkages between the Active Rumen Microbiome and Feed Efficiency in Beef Cattle.

Authors:  Fuyong Li; Le Luo Guan
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2017-04-17       Impact factor: 4.792

7.  High-fat diet determines the composition of the murine gut microbiome independently of obesity.

Authors:  Marie A Hildebrandt; Christian Hoffmann; Scott A Sherrill-Mix; Sue A Keilbaugh; Micah Hamady; Ying-Yu Chen; Rob Knight; Rexford S Ahima; Frederic Bushman; Gary D Wu
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2009-08-23       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Composition and similarity of bovine rumen microbiota across individual animals.

Authors:  Elie Jami; Itzhak Mizrahi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Effect of Dietary Forage to Concentrate Ratios on Dynamic Profile Changes and Interactions of Ruminal Microbiota and Metabolites in Holstein Heifers.

Authors:  Jun Zhang; Haitao Shi; Yajing Wang; Shengli Li; Zhijun Cao; Shoukun Ji; Yuan He; Hongtao Zhang
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 5.640

10.  Comparison of rumen bacterial communities in dairy herds of different production.

Authors:  Nagaraju Indugu; Bonnie Vecchiarelli; Linda D Baker; James D Ferguson; Jairam K P Vanamala; Dipti W Pitta
Journal:  BMC Microbiol       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 3.605

View more
  1 in total

1.  Rumen and lower gut microbiomes relationship with feed efficiency and production traits throughout the lactation of Holstein dairy cows.

Authors:  Hugo F Monteiro; Ziyao Zhou; Marilia S Gomes; Phillip M G Peixoto; Erika C R Bonsaglia; Igor F Canisso; Bart C Weimer; Fabio S Lima
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 4.379

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.