| Literature DB >> 33330722 |
Zengqiao Yang1, Chunhua Zhang2, Jianping Wang1, Pietro Celi3, Xuemei Ding1, Shiping Bai1, Qiufeng Zeng1, Xiangbing Mao1, Yong Zhuo1, Shengyu Xu1, Hui Yan1, Keying Zhang1, Zhiguo Shan2.
Abstract
The gastrointestinal microbiota plays a pivotal role in maintaining animal health, immunity and reproductive performances. However, literature about the relationship between microbiota and reproductive performance is limited. The aim of the present study was to determine differences in the intestinal microbiota of broiler breeders with different egg laying rate. A total of 200 AA+ parent broiler breeders (41-week-old) were separated into two groups according to their different egg laying rate [average egg laying rate group (AR: 78.57 ± 0.20%) and high egg laying rate group (HR: 90.79 ± 0.43%). Feed conversion ratio (FCR), ovary cell apoptosis rate (ApoCR) and relative abdominal fat weight were lower (p = 0.01), while the hatchability rate of qualified egg was higher (p = 0.04) in HR group than that in AR group. Phascolarctobacterium abundance were lower (p = 0.012) in ileum of HR birds. Romboutsia (genus) in ileum was negatively related to the feed efficiency (r = -0.58, p < 0.05), Firmicutes (phylum) and Lactobacillus (genus) abundances in cecum were positively related to the egg laying rate (ELR) (r = 0.35 and 0.48, p < 0.05), feed efficiency (r = 0.42 and 0.43, p < 0.05), while Spirochaetes (phylum) and Sphaerochaeta (genus) abundances in cecum were negatively related to the ELR (r = -0.43 and -0.70, p < 0.05), feed efficiency (r = 0.54 and 0.48, p < 0.05), and positively related to ApoCR (r = 0.46 and 0.47, p < 0.05). Our results suggested that microbiota, such as Firmicutes (phylum) and Lactobacillus (genus) have positive relationship, while Spirochaetes (phylum) and Romboutsia (genus) abundances exert negative relationship with broiler breeders' reproductive performances.Entities:
Keywords: broiler breeder; intestinal microbiota; laying rate; ovary function; reproduction performance
Year: 2020 PMID: 33330722 PMCID: PMC7732610 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.599337
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Figure 1Differences in ovary apoptosis rate (A) between AR and HR broiler breeders. Ovary of AR (B) and HR (C) birds; apoptotic cells are marked with red circle (n = 10); ** indicted significant difference between two groups (P < 0.01).
Figure 2Differences in richness (A,B), diversity (C,D) index in the duodenum (AR.D), jejunum (AR.J), ileum (AR.I), cecum (AR.C) of AR and the duodenum (HR.D), jejunum (HR.J), ileum (HR.I), and cecum (HR.C) of HR (n = 8).
Differences in the relative abundance of dominant microbiota (phylum) ratio in different intestinal segments between different egg laying rate broiler breeders (%) (n = 8).
| Duodenum | AR | 70.97 | 0.85 | 0.09 | 19.73 | 7.96 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.38 |
| HR | 73.92 | 0.57 | 0.08 | 14.78 | 10.28 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.35 | |
| 0.71 | 0.50 | 0.44 | 0.55 | 0.65 | 0.86 | 0.88 | 0.54 | ||
| Jejunum | AR | 71.12 | 0.48 | 0.05 | 6.08 | 21.73 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.51 |
| HR | 73.30 | 0.38 | 0.04å | 9.42 | 16.34 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.50 | |
| 0.79 | 0.76 | 0.25 | 0.49 | 0.63 | 0.93 | 0.20 | 0.90 | ||
| Ileum | AR | 75.58 | 6.12 | 0.15 | 5.88 | 11.73 | 0.14 | 0.01 | 0.36 |
| HR | 72.28 | 3.24 | 0.57 | 5.43 | 16.07 | 1.72 | 0.06 | 0.52 | |
| 0.68 | 0.58 | 0.69 | 0.46 | 0.38 | 0.29 | 0.27 | 0.27 | ||
| Cecum | AR | 38.79 | 48.44 | 2.90 | 4.02 | 0.61 | 1.21 | 0.74 | 3.23 |
| HR | 41.76 | 45.09 | 2.15 | 4.85 | 0.68 | 0.99 | 1.42 | 1.35 | |
| 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.12 | 0.82 | 0.48 | 0.54 | 0.37 | 0.62 |
Each mean represents 10 replicates, with one layer/replicate. Abbreviation represents: AR, average egg laying rate; HR, high egg laying rate.
Differences in the relative abundance of dominant microbiota (genus) ratio in different intestinal segments between different egg laying rate broiler breeders (%) (n = 8).
| Duodenum | AR | 64.93 | 0.08 | 7.95 | 9.38 | 0.48 | 9.15 | 0.23 | 7.80 |
| HR | 70.22 | 0.08 | 10.28 | 7.95 | 0.33 | 5.08 | 0.09 | 5.98 | |
| 0.50 | 0.55 | 0.81 | 0.53 | 0.16 | 0.86 | 0.12 | 0.40 | ||
| Jejunum | AR | 63.37 | 0.05 | 21.72 | 1.37 | 0.27 | 1.62 | 0.17 | 11.44 |
| HR | 69.22 | 0.05 | 16.34 | 5.17 | 0.23 | 1.70 | 0.09 | 7.21 | |
| 0.49 | 0.49 | 0.22 | 0.82 | 0.88 | 0.92 | 0.21 | 0.07 | ||
| Ileum | AR | 61.54 | 0.15 | 11.72 | 1.05 | 3.82 | 2.60 | 0.82 | 18.30 |
| HR | 56.54 | 0.57 | 16.05 | 0.97 | 2.19 | 0.65 | 1.31 | 21.73 | |
| 0.67 | 0.46 | 0.84 | 0.63 | 0.00 | 0.29 | 0.65 | 0.67 | ||
| Cecum | AR | 0.41 | 2.90 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 25.65 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 70.86 |
| HR | 5.00 | 2.15 | 0.20 | 0.25 | 23.64 | 0.43 | 0.13 | 68.20 | |
| 0.17 | 0.22 | 0.15 | 0.45 | 0.18 | 0.54 | 0.57 | 0.57 |
Each mean represents 10 replicates, with one layer/replicate. Abbreviation represents: AR, average egg laying rate; HR, high egg laying rate.
Figure 3Differnces in relative abundance levels of the bacterial phyla (A) and genera (B) in the duodenum (AR.D), jejunum (AR.J), ileum (AR.I), cecum (AR.C) of AR and the duodenum (HR.D), jejunum (HR.J), ileum (HR.I), cecum (HR.C) of HR. T-test based on the relative abundance levels of the bacterial. T-test on ileal bacteria (C), caecal bacteria (D) at genus level (n = 8); ** indicted significant difference between two groups (P < 0.01).
Figure 4Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of microbial comunities in the duodenum (A), jejunum (B), ileum (C), cecum (D), of AR and HR broiler breeders (n = 8).
The correlation between dominant bacteria in the ileum with broiler breeders' reproductive performance (r).
| Phylum | Firmicutes | 0.12 | −0.29 | 0.10 | −0.23 |
| Cyanobacteria | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.22 | −0.10 | |
| Bacteroidetes | −0.28 | 0.33 | −0.26 | 0.41 | |
| Spirochaetes | −0.33 | 0.33 | −0.35 | 0.27 | |
| Proteobacteria | −0.26 | 0.28 | 0.01 | 0.25 | |
| Fusobacteria | −0.35 | 0.26 | −0.28 | 0.48 | |
| Deferribacteres | −0.27 | 0.35 | −0.22 | 0.30 | |
| Tenericutes | −0.20 | 0.37 | −0.39 | 0.13 | |
| Verrucomicrobia | 0.04 | −0.03 | 0.17 | 0.02 | |
| Euryarchaeota | −0.61* | 0.58* | −0.37 | 0.73* | |
| Genus | −0.02 | −0.11 | 0.23 | −0.19 | |
| 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.22 | −0.10 | ||
| −0.25 | 0.28 | −0.26 | 0.39 | ||
| −0.08 | 0.18 | −0.30 | 0.08 | ||
| −0.46 | 0.58* | −0.25 | 0.41 | ||
| −0.77 | 0.62 | −0.38 | 0.33 | ||
| Rikenellaceae_RC9_gut_group | −0.32 | 0.43 | −0.21 | 0.45 | |
| 0.36 | −0.13 | 0.15 | −0.31 | ||
| −0.35 | 0.26 | −0.28 | 0.48 | ||
| −0.50 | 0.28 | −0.09 | 0.24 | ||
The correlation between dominant bacteria in the cecum with broiler breeders' reproductive performance (r).
| Phylum | Bacteroidetes | −0.34 | 0.29 | −0.15 | 0.23 |
| Firmicutes | 0.35* | −0.42* | 0.05 | −0.24 | |
| Fusobacteria | −0.15 | −0.05 | 0.14 | 0.16 | |
| Proteobacteria | 0.06 | −0.01 | 0.29 | −0.02 | |
| Verrucomicrobia | −0.09 | 0.18 | −0.07 | 0.09 | |
| Spirochaetes | −0.43* | 0.54* | −0.08 | 0.46* | |
| Euryarchaeota | 0.03 | −0.05 | −0.02 | 0.03 | |
| Tenericutes | −0.01 | −0.09 | −0.18 | −0.22 | |
| Cyanobacteria | 0.13 | −0.04 | −0.10 | −0.01 | |
| Planctomycetes | −0.25 | 0.31 | −0.62 | 0.42 | |
| Genus | −0.32 | 0.00 | −0.34 | 0.20 | |
| 0.48* | −0.43* | 0.04 | −0.33* | ||
| −0.15 | −0.05 | 0.14 | 0.16 | ||
| 0.16 | −0.21 | 0.01 | 0.02 | ||
| −0.08 | < 0.01 | −0.48 | 0.01 | ||
| 0.07 | −0.02 | 0.04 | −0.08 | ||
| Ruminococcaceae_NK4A214_group | −0.44 | 0.38 | −0.17 | 0.07 | |
| 0.32 | −0.14 | 0.02 | −0.18 | ||
| −0.70* | 0.48* | −0.35* | 0.47* | ||
| −0.45 | 0.30 | −0.21 | 0.32 | ||
Abbreviation represents: ELR, egg laying rate; FCR, feed conversion ratio; ApoCR, ovary apoptosis cell rate.