| Literature DB >> 31363155 |
Xing Li1, Zhenhui Cao1, Yuting Yang1, Liang Chen2, Jianping Liu3, Qiuye Lin4, Yingying Qiao1, Zhiyong Zhao5, Qingcong An1, Chunyong Zhang1, Qihua Li1, Qiaoping Ji6, Hongfu Zhang7, Hongbin Pan8.
Abstract
Temperature, which is an important environmental factor in broiler farming, can significantly influence the deposition of fatty acids in muscle. 300 one-day-old broiler chicks were randomly divided into three groups and reared at high, medium and low temperatures (HJ, MJ and LJ), respectively. Breast muscle and jejunal chyme samples were collected and subjected to analyses of fatty acid composition and 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Through spearman's rank correlation coefficient, the data were used to characterize the correlation between jejunal microbial diversity and muscle fatty acid deposition in the broilers. The results showed that Achromobacter, Stenotrophomonas, Pandoraea, Brevundimonas, Petrobacter and Variovorax were significantly enriched in the MJ group, and all of them were positively correlated with the fatty acid profiling of muscle and multiple lipid metabolism signaling pathways. Lactobacillus was significantly enriched in the HJ group and exhibited a positive correlation with fatty acid deposition. Pyramidobacter, Dialister, Bacteroides and Selenomonas were significantly enriched in the LJ group and displayed negative correlation with fatty acid deposition. Taken together, this study demonstrated that the jejunal microflora manifested considerable changes at high and low ambient temperatures and that jejunal microbiota changes were correlated with fatty acid deposition of muscle in broilers.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31363155 PMCID: PMC6667446 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-47323-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Effects of High and Low Ambient Temperatures on Fatty Acids in Broilers Muscle.
| Item | HJ | MJ | LJ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C14:0 (C14H28O2) | 1.79 ± 0.90AB | 2.43 ± 1.29A | 1.46 ± 1.08B | 0.018 |
| C14:1 (C14H26O2) | 0.58 ± 0.30 | 0.63 ± 0.38 | 0.13 ± 0.13 | 0.084 |
| C15:0 (C15H30O2) | 0.27 ± 0.24 | 0.48 ± 0.26 | 0.16 ± 0.17 | 0.766 |
| C16:0 (C16H32O2) | 67.03 ± 24.62AB | 127.37 ± 72.59A | 54.63 ± 18.58B | 0.011 |
| C16:1 (C16H30O2) | 19.83 ± 12.70A | 25.19 ± 17.89A | 7.78 ± 3.74B | 0.002 |
| C17:0 (C17H34O2) | 0.09 ± 0.21b | 0.74 ± 0.42ab | 0.27 ± 0.28a | 0.021 |
| C18:0 (C18H36O2) | 26.17 ± 12.15b | 45.10 ± 22.64a | 29.86 ± 15.09b | 0.019 |
| C18:ln9c (C18H34O2) | 101.32 ± 66.10ab | 149.39 ± 100.93a | 64.16 ± 23.32b | 0.059 |
| C18:2n6c (C18H32O2) | 48.13 ± 15.90b | 96.86 ± 55.11a | 46.74 ± 17.96b | 0.02 |
| C20:0 (C20H40O2) | 0.21 ± 0.28 | 0.40 ± 0.35 | 0.26 ± 0.22 | 0.057 |
| C18:3n6 (C18H30O2) | 0.83 ± 0.65b | 1.20 ± 0.62a | 0.44 ± 0.39b | 0.033 |
| C20:1 (C20H38O2) | 2.74 ± 1.72AB | 3.73 ± 2.36A | 1.53 ± 0.61B | 0.01 |
| C18:3n3 (C18H30O2) | 1.04 ± 0.41ab | 1.55 ± 0.85a | 0.85 ± 0.23b | 0.047 |
| C20:2 (C20H36O2) | 1.45 ± 0.53Bb | 2.42 ± 1.03Aa | 1.08 ± 0.34Bc | <0.001 |
| C20:3n6 (C20H34O2) | 3.63 ± 0.99B | 5.93 ± 1.99A | 2.85 ± 0.78B | <0.001 |
| C20:3n3 (C20H36O6) | 10.32 ± 2.48B | 22.73 ± 8.91A | 10.42 ± 2.50B | <0.001 |
| C22:6n3 (C22H32O2) | 1.21 ± 1.18B | 3.55 ± 1.46A | 2.10 ± 0.68B | 0.006 |
| Total SFA | 114.92 ± 63.91 | 176.54 ± 96.77 | 105.64 ± 70.82 | 0.17 |
| Total PUFA | 64.35 ± 20.38B | 134.86 ± 67.68A | 64.11 ± 23.03B | 0.003 |
| Total MUFA | 125.28 ± 83.03ab | 178.82 ± 121.67a | 73.62 ± 27.32b | 0.044 |
| PUFA:SFA ratio | 0.71 ± 0.03 | 0.79 ± 0.05 | 0.76 ± 0.10 | 0.056 |
| n-3 PUFA | 12.80 ± 4.24B | 27.92 ± 11.10A | 13.45 ± 3.91B | <0.001 |
| n-6 PUFA | 52.03 ± 17.03B | 103.99 ± 57.60A | 49.83 ± 18.72B | 0.003 |
| n-6:n-3 ratio | 4.70 ± 0.80 | 3.58 ± 1.00 | 4.67 ± 2.01 | 0.14 |
A,BMeans in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different. (P < 0.01); a,bMeans in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different. (P < 0.05); n = 8 per treatment group; SFA - saturated fatty acid, PUFA - polyunsaturated fatty acid, MUFA - monounsaturated fatty acid.
Figure 1Venn diagram of OTUs clustered at 97% sequence identity across HJ, MJ and LJ groups.
Figure 2Diversity estimation of the 16 S rRNA gene libraries of the chicken jejunum.(A): Shannon index; (B):Simpson index; (C): PD whole tree index; (D): observed species; (E): Goods coverage index; (F): Chao1 index.
Figure 3Composition of the dominant microbiome at phylum level (Mean ± MSE). A, B Means in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different. (P < 0.01); a, b Means in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different. (P < 0.05).
Figure 4Boxplot of the top 30 most differentially abundant genus in the HJ, MJ and LJ groups.
Figure 5LEfSe identified the most differentially abundant species between HJ (Red), MJ (Blue) and LJ (Green) groups. Only species meeting an LDA significant threshold > 2 are shown.
Figure 6KEGG analysis of enriched signal pathways in the HJ (Red), MJ (Blue) and LJ (Green) groups at L2 hierarchy (LDA > 2).
Figure 7Heatmap analysis of the correlation between microbial changes and fat acid deposition, the values in the figure are Spearman’s correlation coefficient. (P-value < 0.05).
Figure 8Heatmap analysis of the correlation between microbial changes and pathways, the values in the figure are Spearman’s correlation coefficient. (P-value < 0.01).