| Literature DB >> 30423588 |
Jinjin Tong1, Hua Zhang1, Delian Yang1, Yonghong Zhang1, Benhai Xiong2, Linshu Jiang1.
Abstract
In this study, differences in the ruminal bacterial community between high-yield and low-yield lactating dairy cows under the same dietary conditions were investigated. Sixteen lactating dairy cows with similar parity and days in milk were divided into high-yield (HY) and low-yield (LY) groups based on their milk yield. On day 21, rumen content samples were collected, and their microbiota compositions were determined using high-throughput sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene by the Illumina MiSeq platform. During the study period, dry matter intake (DMI) and milk yield were measured daily, and milk composition was assessed 3 times per week. The results showed that the milk of the LY group tended to have higher fat (P = 0.08), protein (P = 0.01) and total solid contents (P = 0.04) than that of the HY group, while the HY group had higher ruminal propionate (P = 0.08) proportion and volatile fatty acid (VFA) (P = 0.02) concentrations. Principal coordinate analysis indicated significant differences in ruminal bacterial community compositions and structures between the HY group and LY group. The abundances of Ruminococcus 2, Lachnospiraceae and Eubacterium coprostanoligenes were significantly higher in the HY group than in the LY group. In addition, Bacteroides, Ruminococcus 2 and Candidatus-Saccharimonas were positively correlated with ruminal propionate proportion (r>0.4, P<0.05). These findings enhance the understanding of bacterial synthesis within the rumen and reveal an important mechanism underlying differences in milk production in dairy cows.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30423588 PMCID: PMC6234037 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198225
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Ingredients and nutrient composition (% of DM) of the basal diet.
| Item | Content |
|---|---|
| 6.90 | |
| 46.32 | |
| 2.40 | |
| 9.88 | |
| 5.10 | |
| 4.40 | |
| 4.40 | |
| 3.70 | |
| 3.00 | |
| 2.66 | |
| 2.66 | |
| 2.40 | |
| 1.50 | |
| 1.07 | |
| 1.07 | |
| 0.90 | |
| 0.59 | |
| 0.48 | |
| 0.27 | |
| 0.30 | |
| 17.4 | |
| 31.1 | |
| 16.6 | |
| 5.00 | |
| 0.78 | |
| 0.44 | |
| 1.76 |
1DDGS = dried distillers’ grain with solubles.
2Church and Dwight Co. Inc., Princeton, NJ.
3Formulated to provide (per kg of DM) 4,560 mg of Cu, 3,000 mg of Fe, 12,100 mg of Zn, 4,590 mg of Mn, 60 mg of Co, 200 mg of Se, 270 mg of I, 10,000 IU of vitamin E, 450,000 IU of vitamin D, 2,000,000 IU of vitamin A, and 3,000 mg of nicotinic acid.
4Chemical composition is based on chemical analysis of the total mixed ration (TMR), as described.
Milk and ECM from high-yielding and low-yielding dairy cows during the entire sampling period.
| Items | LY | HY | SEM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23.4 | 25.6 | 0.43 | 0.0347 | |
| 19.3 | 31.9 | 1.76 | <0.0001 | |
| 18.95 | 29.20 | 1.73 | <0.0001 | |
| 21.07 | 32.09 | 1.93 | <0.0001 | |
| 4.02 | 3.48 | 0.28 | 0.0788 | |
| 0.75 | 1.10 | 0.07 | 0.0004 | |
| 3.50 | 3.07 | 0.11 | 0.0023 | |
| 0.66 | 0.98 | 0.06 | 0.0002 | |
| 4.87 | 5.05 | 0.14 | 0.2127 | |
| 0.92 | 1.61 | 0.10 | <0.0001 | |
| 13.15 | 12.30 | 0.38 | 0.0417 | |
| 2.46 | 3.10 | 2.78 | 0.1339 |
1Data are presented as least squares means.
SCC = somatic cell count.
Effects of differences between high-yielding and low-yielding dairy cows on metabolites in the rumen.
| Items | LY | HY | SEM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.73 | 6.71 | 0.02 | 0.69 | |
| 7.99 | 13.28 | 1.03 | 0.01 | |
| 62.38 | 60.72 | 0.45 | 0.06 | |
| 21.95 | 23.14 | 0.34 | 0.08 | |
| 0.83 | 0.74 | 0.03 | 0.13 | |
| 12.06 | 12.55 | 0.22 | 0.27 | |
| 1.21 | 1.31 | 0.05 | 0.34 | |
| 1.58 | 1.55 | 0.04 | 0.74 | |
| 2.85 | 2.64 | 0.06 | 0.06 | |
| 99.76 | 113.63 | 3.14 | 0.02 |
*P<0. 05
Values within a sampling day followed by superscripted asterisks differ.
SEM = standard error of the mean.
Alpha diversity index of rumen bacteria.
| Item | LY | HY | SEM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1196.13 | 1214.88 | 17.21 | 0.60 | |
| 5.41 | 5.49 | 0.04 | 0.42 | |
| 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.74 | |
| 1375.65 | 1360.65 | 18.75 | 0.70 | |
| 1378.64 | 1376.82 | 20.10 | 0.97 | |
| 0.992 | 0.994 | 0.00 | 0.001 |
*P<0. 05
**P<0. 01:
Values within a sampling day followed by superscript asterisks differ. SEM = standard error of the mean
Fig 1Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of bacterial community structures of the ruminal microbiota in the high-yielding group (red circles) and the low-yielding group (blue triangles).
PCoA plots were constructed using the unweighted UniFrac method.
Fig 2Percent composition of predominant phyla in the rumen fluid.
Fig 3Percent composition of genera in the rumen fluid.
Fig 4Percent composition and significance of genera in the rumen fluid.
Fig 5Correlation analyses between the relative abundances of bacteria genera and ruminal fermentation parameters.
Only genera with abundances significantly associated with ruminal VFA, propionate and acetate concentrations are presented. Green represents a negative correlation between the abundance of the species and the ratio (r<−0.4), and red represents a positive correlation (r>0.4, 0.01