| Literature DB >> 32330150 |
Jenna M Bowen1,2, Paul Cormican1, Susan J Lister2, Matthew S McCabe1, Carol-Anne Duthie3, Rainer Roehe3, Richard J Dewhurst3.
Abstract
Ruminant methane production is a significant energy loss to the animal and major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions. However, it also seems necessary for effective rumen function, so studies of anti-methanogenic treatments must also consider implications for feed efficiency. Between-animal variation in feed efficiency represents an alternative approach to reducing overall methane emissions intensity. Here we assess the effects of dietary additives designed to reduce methane emissions on the rumen microbiota, and explore relationships with feed efficiency within dietary treatment groups. Seventy-nine finishing steers were offered one of four diets (a forage/concentrate mixture supplemented with nitrate (NIT), lipid (MDDG) or a combination (COMB) compared to the control (CTL)). Rumen fluid samples were collected at the end of a 56 d feed efficiency measurement period. DNA was extracted, multiplexed 16s rRNA libraries sequenced (Illumina MiSeq) and taxonomic profiles were generated. The effect of dietary treatments and feed efficiency (within treatment groups) was conducted both overall (using non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) and diversity indexes) and for individual taxa. Diet affected overall microbial populations but no overall difference in beta-diversity was observed. The relative abundance of Methanobacteriales (Methanobrevibacter and Methanosphaera) increased in MDDG relative to CTL, whilst VadinCA11 (Methanomassiliicoccales) was decreased. Trimethylamine precursors from rapeseed meal (only present in CTL) probably explain the differences in relative abundance of Methanomassiliicoccales. There were no differences in Shannon indexes between nominal low or high feed efficiency groups (expressed as feed conversion ratio or residual feed intake) within treatment groups. Relationships between the relative abundance of individual taxa and feed efficiency measures were observed, but were not consistent across dietary treatments.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32330150 PMCID: PMC7182223 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231759
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Ingredient composition for each of the 4 experimental diets (g/kg DM)–Duthie et al. (2018) [14].
| Ingredient | CTL | MDDG | NIT | COMB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grass silage | 210 | 209 | 211 | 210 |
| Whole-crop barley silage | 347 | 346 | 347 | 346 |
| Barley | 336 | 289 | 388 | 263 |
| Rapeseed meal | 79 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Calcinit | 0 | 0 | 25 | 25 |
| Maize distillers grains | 0 | 128 | 0 | 127 |
| Molasses | 19 | 19 | 20 | 19 |
| Vitamins and minerals | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 |
Mean relative abundance (%) and standard error of phyla for the rumen microbiota from the 4 dietary treatments (CTL, MDDG, NIT, and COMB).
| Taxonomy (Phylum) | CTL | NIT | COMB | MDDG | Standard error mean (P-Value) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Rel Ab. (%) | Mean Rel Ab. (%) | Mean Rel Ab. (%) | Mean Rel Ab. (%) | ||
| Firmicutes | 36.7ab | 31.5b | 35.4ab | 38.4a | 1.001 (0.088) |
| Bacteroidetes | 34.0b | 42.0a | 33.5b | 33.7b | 1.169 (0.021) |
| Proteobacteria | 12.0a | 10.7a | 13.8a | 4.4b | 0.805 (<0.001) |
| Euryarchaeota | 7.3ab | 4.3c | 5.6b | 10.5a | 0.503 (<0.001) |
| Verrucomicrobia | 2.4 | 2.4 | 3.4 | 2.7 | 0.163 (0.619) |
| Spirochaetes | 1.9ab | 2.8a | 1.6b | 2.0ab | 0.126 (0.025) |
| Tenericutes | 1.9b | 2.3a | 2.2ab | 2.3ab | 0.100 (0.215) |
| Fibrobacteres | 1.1bc | 1.5ab | 1.1c | 2.6a | 0.140 (<0.001) |
| Actinobacteria | 1.1b | 1.4b | 1.8a | 1.3b | 0.095 (0.013) |
Different letters within column are significantly different at P < 0.05.
Fig 1Taxa summary plot across the 4 dietary treatments (CTL, NIT, COMB, MDDG).
Fig 2Difference in community structure between dietary treatments using NMDS plot showing the 95% confidence interval ellipse for each dietary treatment.
Mean relative abundance (standard deviation) as a fraction of total prokaryotic reads for each additive treatment (NIT, MDDG and COMB) and significance of genera associated with methane emissions for each diet group relative to the CTL diet.
P-Value corrected using Benjamini-Hochberg FDR.
| Taxonomy | CTL | NIT | COMB | MDDG | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RA (SD) | RA (SD) | P-Value | RA (SD) | P-Value | RA (SD) | P-Value | |
| 0.64 (0.18) | 0.30 (0.10) | <0.001 | 0.40 (0.18) | 0.004 | 0.27 (0.14) | <0.001 | |
| 0.10 (0.06) | 0.03 (0.03) | 0.003 | 0.08 (0.05) | 0.473 | 0.16 (0.08) | 0.139 | |
| 6.84 (3.45) | 4.13 (2.22) | 0.017 | 5.37 (2.38) | 0.333 | 9.76 (5.71) | 0.327 | |
| 0.14 (0.11) | 0.33 (0.21) | 0.018 | 0.29 (0.21) | 0.051 | 0.10 (0.10) | 0.470 | |
Fig 3Differences in diversity using the Shannon index (H).