| Literature DB >> 33800152 |
Miguel Rabelo-Ruiz1, Claudia Teso-Pérez1, Juan Manuel Peralta-Sánchez1, Juan José Ariza2, Antonio Manuel Martín-Platero1, Óscar Casabuena-Rincón3, Patricia Vázquez-Chas3, Enrique Guillamón2, María Arántzazu Aguinaga-Casañas2, Mercedes Maqueda1, Eva Valdivia1,4, Alberto Baños2, Manuel Martínez-Bueno1,4.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has risen as a global threat for human health. One of the leading factors for this emergence has been the massive use of antibiotics growth-promoter (AGPs) in livestock, enhancing the spread of AMR among human pathogenic bacteria. Thus, several alternatives such as probiotics, prebiotics, or phytobiotics have been proposed for using in animal feeding to maintain or improve productive levels while diminishing the negative effects of AGPs. Reducing the use of antibiotics is a key aspect in the pig rearing for production reasons, as well as for the production of high-quality pork, acceptable to consumers. Here we analyze the potential use of Allium extract as an alternative. In this study, weaned piglets were fed with Allium extract supplementation and compared with control and antibiotic (colistin and zinc oxide) treated piglets. The effects of Allium extract were tested by analyzing the gut microbiome and measuring different productive parameters. Alpha diversity indices decreased significantly in Allium extract group in caecum and colon. Regarding beta diversity, significant differences between treatments appeared only in caecum and colon. Allium extract and antibiotic piglets showed better values of body weight (BW), average daily weight gain (ADG), and feed conversion ratio (FCR) than control group. These results indicate that productive parameters can be implemented by modifying the gut microbiota through phytobiotics such as Allium extract, which will drive to drop the use of antibiotics in piglet diet.Entities:
Keywords: Allium extract; bacterial community; high-throughput sequencing; phytobiotic; piglet microbiome; productive parameters
Year: 2021 PMID: 33800152 PMCID: PMC8001633 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics10030269
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6382
Figure 1Microbial composition at class level of piglet gut microbiota grouped by gut region and treatment. Classes in the legend are sorted from most abundant to lowest abundant.
Figure 2Alpha diversity by gut region. Average ± standard error of the mean of the bacterial species richness (A) and Faith’s diversity index (B) of weaned piglets in different gut regions. Bars with different letter within the same gut region denote significant differences in treatment (LSD Posthoc test; p < 0.05).
General Linear Models exploring the effects of treatment (control, antibiotic and Allium extract) and gut region in the different alpha diversity indices of the bacterial community of weaned piglets. D.f. refers to degree of freedom. The first number is the degree of freedom of the independent variable and the second one for the error term. Significant p-values (p < 0.05) are shown in bold.
| Alpha Diversity Index | Control | Antibiotic | Explanatory Variables | D.f. | F |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species richness | 311.75 (27.38) | 243.77 (18.71) | 294.14 (41.60) | Treatment | 2.61 | 4.03 |
|
| Gut Region | 3.61 | 26.41 |
| ||||
| Gut Region × Treatment | 6.61 | 1.57 | 0.171 | ||||
| Faith’s diversity index | 24.53 (1.89) | 20.14 (1.31) | 22.59 (2.89) | Treatment | 2.61 | 3.25 |
|
| Gut Region | 3.61 | 22.11 |
| ||||
| Gut Region × Treatment | 6.61 | 1.46 | 0.208 |
General Linear Models exploring the effects of treatment, gut region, and their interaction in beta diversity indices of bacterial community of weaned piglets fed with control diet or supplemented with antibiotic or Allium extract. D.f. refers to degree of freedom. The first number is the degree of freedom of the independent variable and the second one for the error term. Significant p-values are shown in bold.
| β-Diversity | Explanatory | D.f. | Pseudo-F |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unweighted UniFrac | Treatment | 2.61 | 1.84 |
|
| Gut Region | 3.61 | 7.88 |
| |
| Gut Region × Treatment | 6.61 | 1.06 | 0.303 | |
| Weighted UniFrac | Treatment | 2.61 | 2.35 |
|
| Gut Region | 3.61 | 9.14 |
| |
| Gut Region × Treatment | 6.61 | 1.02 | 0.412 |
Figure 3Dimensional figures showing the first two axes of Principal Coordinate Analysis and representing bacterial communities of weaned piglets in all gut regions and taking into account only caecum and colon using Unweighted and Weighted UniFrac distance matrixes. Samples are colored by treatment (Control—yellow; Antibiotic—blue; Allium extract —red) and samples from each intestinal region are represented by different shapes (Duodenum—ring; Ileum—sphere; Caecum—cone; Colon—square). Proportion of explained variance by each PCo axes is shown.
General Linear Models exploring the effects of treatment in beta diversity indices of bacterial community of weaned piglets fed with control diet or supplemented with antibiotic or Allium extract. D.f. refers to degree of freedom. The first number is the degree of freedom of the independent variable and the second one for the error term. Significant p-values are shown in bold.
| β-Diversity Distance Matrix | D.f. | Pseudo-F |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duodenum | Unweighted UniFrac | 2.16 | 1.23 | 0.099 |
| Weighted UniFrac | 2.16 | 0.25 | 0.977 | |
| Ileum | Unweighted UniFrac | 2.15 | 0.93 | 0.502 |
| Weighted UniFrac | 2.15 | 1.08 | 0.377 | |
| Caecum | Unweighted UniFrac | 2.15 | 1.56 |
|
| Weighted UniFrac | 2.15 | 1.48 | 0.191 | |
| Colon | Unweighted UniFrac | 2.15 | 1.55 |
|
| Weighted UniFrac | 2.15 | 4.18 |
|
General Linear Models exploring the effects of treatment as factor, sex, and block as random factors and initial body weight as covariate, in weaned piglets fed with control diet or supplemented with antibiotic or Allium extract. BW refers to body weight, ADG to average daily gain, FCR to feed conversion rate, and ADFI to average daily feed intake. D.f. refers to degree of freedom. The first number is the degree of freedom of the independent variable and the second one for the error term. Significant p-values are shown in bold.
| Dependent Variable | Control | Antibiotic | Independent Variables | F | D.f. |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial BW (28 days), kg | 7.34 (0.35) | 7.34 (0.33) | 7.32 (0.37) | Treatment | <0.01 | 2.19 | 0.998 |
| Sex | 0.21 | 1.19 | 0.653 | ||||
| Room | 0.93 | 1.19 | 0.346 | ||||
| BW 42 days, kg | 10.50 (0.49) | 10.87 (0.57) | 11.40 (0.55) | Treatment | 5.69 | 2.18 |
|
| Sex | 4.98 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| Room | 29.67 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| Initial BW | 116.14 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| BW 70 days, kg | 21.01 (0.76) | 22.79 (0.98) | 23.76 (0.92) | Treatment | 14.59 | 2.18 |
|
| Sex | 8.96 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| Room | 2.46 | 1.18 | 0.134 | ||||
| Initial BW | 86.30 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| ADG 28–70 days, g/d | 325.25 (11.01) | 367.71 (16.84) | 391.53 (15.37) | Treatment | 14.59 | 2.18 |
|
| Sex | 8.96 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| Room | 2.46 | 1.18 | 0.134 | ||||
| Initial BW | 26.13 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| ADFI 28–70 days, g/d | 562.73 (30.24) | 566.26 (23.25) | 583.79 (19.97) | Treatment | 0.49 | 2.18 | 0.620 |
| Sex | 2.14 | 1.18 | 0.161 | ||||
| Room | 18.45 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| Initial BW | 11.22 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| FCR 28–70 days, g/g | 1.73 (0.06) | 1.55 (0.06) | 1.50 (0.04) | Treatment | 8.27 | 2.18 |
|
| Sex | 1.64 | 1.18 | 0.216 | ||||
| Room | 11.88 | 1.18 |
| ||||
| Initial BW | 1.26 | 1.18 | 0.277 | ||||
| Mortality 28–70 days, % | 5.00 (2.67) | 2.50 (1.64) | 1.25 (1.25) | Treatment | 0.90 | 2.18 | 0.423 |
| Sex | 0.08 | 1.18 | 0.787 | ||||
| Room | 1.52 | 1.18 | 0.233 | ||||
| Initial BW | 0.66 | 1.18 | 0.428 |
Figure 4Average ± standard error of the mean of the Body Weight (BW) at 70 days of life (A), Average Daily Gain (ADG) (B), and Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR) (C) from 28 to 70 days of life of weaned piglets fed with control diet or antibiotic or Allium extract supplemented diets. Bars with different letter denote significant differences in treatment (LSD Posthoc test; p < 0.05).