| Literature DB >> 33100142 |
Biwei Jiang1,2, Tian Wang1, Yuxiang Zhou1, Fei Li1.
Abstract
In this study, the effects of enzyme +bacteria treatment of buckwheat straw and alfalfa on growth performance and rumen bacterial diversity was investigated, 20 three-month-old Ningxia Tan sheep with similar body weights were selected and randomly divided into two groups, 10 sheep in each group. The control group was fed with basal diet + untreated buckwheat straw and alfalfa (the ratio of buckwheat to alfalfa was 2:8), and the experimental group was fed with basic diet + cellulase (enzyme activity ≥ 10,000 U/g) + compound probiotics (enzyme to bacteria ratio 8:20). 1) The total weight gain and average daily gain of Tan sheep in the experimental group were extremely significantly higher than those in the control group (P < 0.01). 2). The proportion of Firmicutes in the experimental group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P < 0.05). 3). In the KEGG pathway B level, 15 genes were significantly higher than in the control group (P < 0.05). 4). In the CAZy level B, 12 genes were upregulated in the experimental group compared with the control group (P < 0.05),3 genes were downregulated (P < 0.05).Feeding Tan sheep with buckwheat straw and alfalfa treated with enzyme and bacteria can improve the weight gain effect, change the rumen bacterial diversity, and increase the some functional genes in the rumen. The conditions of this experiment would be beneficial to the healthy breeding of Tan sheep, and thus the methods can be used in commercial production.Entities:
Keywords: Cellulase; Tan sheep; compound probiotics; growth performance; metagenome; rumen bacteria
Year: 2020 PMID: 33100142 PMCID: PMC8291824 DOI: 10.1080/21655979.2020.1837459
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioengineered ISSN: 2165-5979 Impact factor: 3.269
Composition and nutrient levels of diets (DM basis)%
| Raw material | Diet composition | |
|---|---|---|
| Control group | Trial group | |
| Alfalfa | 56 | 56 |
| Buckwheat straw | 14 | 14 |
| Corn | 15 | 15 |
| Soybean meal | 10 | 10 |
| Wheat bran | 1 | 1 |
| Jute cake | 2 | 2 |
| NaCl | 1 | 1 |
| Premix1) | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 100 | 100 |
| Nutrient levels2)2 | ||
| ME MJ/kg | 9.39 | 9.83 |
| CP | 11.81 | 12.82 |
| Ca | 0.92 | 1.32 |
| P | 0.24 | 0.48 |
1)Each kg of premix contains: va 200,000–400,000 iu, ve 500,000–2,000,000 iu, vd330000-80,000 iu, copper 400–600 mg, manganese 800–1600 mg, zinc 1200–2400 mg, iodine 6–80 mg, cobalt 5–40 mg, selenium 10–25 mg, calcium 20–300 g, phosphorus 20–150 g, sodium chloride ≥ 15%, water ≤ 10%.
2)ME was a calculated value,while the others are measured values.
Effect of compound bacteria treatment of buckwheat straw and alfalfa on growth performance of Tan sheep
| Items | Control group | Trial group |
|---|---|---|
| Initial body weight (kg) | 33.34 ± 1.85 | 32.12 ± 1.65 |
| Final body weight (kg) | 38.48 ± 2.58 | 39.76 ± 1.36 |
| Total gain (kg) | 5.15 ± 1.23A | 7.63 ± 1.43B |
| ADG (g/d) | 90.12 ± 0.02A | 130.25 ± 0.03B |
| DMI (g/d) | 665.09 ± 0.02 | 634.32 ± 0.02 |
| F/G | 7.38 ± 3.50A | 4.87 ± 1.89B |
The same letter or no letter in shoulder mark of peer data shows no significant difference (P > 0.05), different letters show significant difference (P < 0.05), and different capital letters show significant difference (P < 0.01).The same as blow
Number of OTUs and species in each group
| Items | Control group | Trial group |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | 0.986 ± 0.00B | 0.988 ± 0.00A |
| observed species | 1722.00 ± 86.42 | 1567.33 ± 146.00 |
| OTUs | 1722.00 ± 86.42 | 1657.33 ± 146.00 |
The same letter or no letter in shoulder mark of peer data shows no significant difference (P > 0.05), different letters show significant difference (P < 0.05), and different capital letters show significant difference (P < 0.01).The same as blow.
Alpha diversity detected by 16srDNA
| Items | Control group | Trial group |
|---|---|---|
| Chao | 2787.80 ± 138.34A | 2457.44 ± 188.74B |
| ACE | 2898.43 ± 94.54A | 2543.55 ± 202.80B |
| Shannon | 5.90 ± 0.48 | 5.81 ± 0.45 |
| Simpson | 0.93 ± 0.02 | 0.93 ± 0.02 |
The same letter or no letter in shoulder mark of peer data shows no significant difference (P > 0.05), different letters show significant difference (P < 0.05), and different capital letters show significant difference (P < 0.01).The same as blow.
Figure 1.Principal coordinate analysis of OTUs of rumen bacteria
Abundance of dominant bacteria in the whole sample(%)
| Phylum | Control group | Trial group |
|---|---|---|
| 34.02 ± 2.07 | 31.72 ± 6.00 | |
| 35.87 ± 4.01b | 53.19 ± 0.07a | |
| 26.59 ± 5.21A | 12.99 ± 5.18B |
The same letter or no letter in shoulder mark of peer data shows no significant difference (P > 0.05), different letters show significant difference (P < 0.05), and different capital letters show significant difference (P < 0.01).The same as blow.
Figure 2.Difference between species via Welch’s t test
Abundance of dominant bacteria in the whole sample(%)
| Genus | Control group | Trial group |
|---|---|---|
| 15.44 ± 8.38 | 20.95 ± 7.72 | |
| 19.65 ± 3.81A | 7.73 ± 3.77B | |
| 14.37 ± 7.74 | 9.24 ± 3.05 | |
| 12.39 ± 1.71 | 7.24 ± 3.75 | |
| 12.63 ± 3.64B | 26.04 ± 9.26A |
The same letter or no letter in shoulder mark of peer data shows no significant difference (P > 0.05), different letters show significant difference (P < 0.05), and different capital letters show significant difference (P < 0.01).The same as blow.
Figure 3.Differences among species via Welch’s t test
Figure 4.KEGG annotation(level A)
Ratio of high abundance families of reads to KEGG (level B)
| Pathway | Control group | Trial group |
|---|---|---|
| Purine metabolism | 16302.34 ± 218.68B | 17140.08 ± 53.88A |
| Pyrimidine metabolism | 14464.11 ± 188.29B | 15473.46 ± 88.33A |
| Two-component system | 13005.87 ± 159.65B | 13411.08 ± 67.78A |
| ABC transporters | 11432.27 ± 477.79B | 13429.50 ± 277.15A |
| Ribosome | 11868.33 ± 171.02B | 12570.48 ± 25.35A |
| Quorum sensing | 9730.45 ± 304.23B | 10476.79 ± 240.40A |
| Starch and sucrose metabolism | 10132.83 ± 63.73 | 10134.92 ± 81.93 |
| Amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolism | 9924.84 ± 87.16 | 9913.34 ± 42.73 |
| Homologous recombination | 8281.83 ± 73.53 | 8530.82 ± 34.55 |
| Aminoacyl-tRNA biosynthesis | 7869.20 ± 191.02B | 8739.45 ± 61.82A |
| Glycolysis/gluconeogenesis | 7650.30 ± 121.05 | 7737.06 ± 51.01 |
| Alanine,aspartate and glutamate metabolism | 7336.03 ± 76.75 | 7210.78 ± 86.93 |
| Mismatch repair | 6809.54 ± 102.13 | 6950.78 ± 3.33 |
| Galactose metabolism | 6839.14 ± 57.18A | 6457.29 ± 51.34B |
| DNA replication | 6239.30 ± 22.03 | 6233.71 ± 26.58 |
| Cysteine and methionine metabolism | 6484.43 ± 104.75B | 6702.27 ± 38.39A |
| Peptidoglycan biosynthesis | 6101.20 ± 107.23B | 6479.57 ± 36.86A |
| Pyrimidine metabolism | 5676.18 ± 134.75B | 6095.63 ± 53.77A |
| Glycine,serine, and threonine metabolism | 5619.56 ± 136.77B | 5765.88 ± 60.25A |
| Fructose and mannose metabolism | 5471.47 ± 26.79A | 4947.29 ± 8.74B |
| Oxidative phosphorylation | 5110.35 ± 67.54B | 5187.79 ± 19.71A |
| Phenylalanine,tyrosine and tryptophan biosynthesis | 4863.86 ± 31.32A | 4688.70 ± 72.82B |
| Pentose phosphate pathway | 4587.27 ± 119.61B | 5060.22 ± 3.96A |
| Glyoxylate and dicarboxylate metabolism | 4900.22 ± 72.16B | 5011.26 ± 34.89A |
| Methane metabolism | 4112.53 ± 92.70B | 4611.81 ± 48.42A |
The same letter or no letter in shoulder mark of peer data shows no significant difference (P > 0.05), different letters show significant difference (P < 0.05), and different capital letters show significant difference (P < 0.01).The same as blow.
Figure 5.CAZy annotation(level A)
Ratios of high abundance families of reads to CAZy (level B)
| LevelA | Lever B | Control group | Trial group |
|---|---|---|---|
| GHs | GH13 | 234522.33 ± 38501.27 | 298726.33 ± 44494.17 |
| GH43 | 206457.00 ± 33966.33 | 205827.67 ± 30207.29 | |
| GH35 | 213555.67 ± 37592.17 | 160965.67 ± 26533.15 | |
| GH3 | 158770.33 ± 22828.70 | 200406.00 ± 29957.74 | |
| GH2 | 168750.67 ± 26648.80 | 185595.00 ± 27565.72 | |
| GTs | GT2 | 2161276.00 ± 2500701.36 | 1056991.33 ± 160265.16 |
| GT4 | 1050591.75 ± 1249907.22 | 548267.67 ± 80354.93 | |
| GT51 | 256062.00 ± 303796.92 | 132761.33 ± 19784.53 | |
| GT0 | 167363.00 ± 194928.96 | 83135.33 ± 12818.98 | |
| GT68 | 150532.00 ± 177063.56 | 76488.67 ± 10768.53 | |
| CBMs | CBM50 | 258514.33 ± 42836.47 | 318397.67 ± 47961.44 |
| CBM13 | 99698.00 ± 16243.93 | 117958.00 ± 17240.03 | |
| CBM32 | 81680.33 ± 13184.67 | 107784.00 ± 17255.26 | |
| CBM6 | 75331.33 ± 11870.31 | 92017.00 ± 14040.68 | |
| CBM2 | 59042.33 ± 9750.56 | 72814.33 ± 11243.32 |
The same letter or no letter in shoulder mark of peer data shows no significant difference (P > 0.05), different letters show significant difference (P < 0.05), and different capital letters show significant difference (P < 0.01).The same as blow.
Figure 6.Analysis of CAZy abundance of Deseq2 between the control group and the experimental group
Differences in CAZy abundance of DEseq2 between groups
| Change | Control group vs Trial group |
|---|---|
| Upregulation | CBM83,CBM60,PL15,GH52,PL24,GH152,CBM53,GT95,CBM8,GT97,GH124,GT72. |
| Downregulation | AA1,GH126,AA12. ( |