| Literature DB >> 34178446 |
Anum Ali Ahmad1,2, Jian Bo Zhang2, Zeyi Liang2, Chao Yang3, Qudratullah Kalwar2, Tariq Shah1, Mei Du2, Ishaq Muhammad1, Juanshan Zheng2, Ping Yan2, Xue-Zhi Ding2,4, Ruijun Long1.
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the rumen bacterial community of yak in response to dietary supplements during the cold season. In addition, the rumen fermentation products were also analyzed. Twenty-one female domestic yaks were randomly divided into three groups i.e., pure grazing (GG) group, grazing plus oats hay supplement (OG) group, and grazing plus concentrate supplement group (CG). Rumen contents were collected after 90 days to assess rumen fermentation parameters and bacterial community. The GC group presented higher concentrations of ammonia nitrogen (P < 0.001), and total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) (P < 0.001), and lower rumen pH (P < 0.001) compared to other experimental groups. The CG group displayed higher proportions of propionate, butyrate, isobutyrate, and isovalerate while lower A/P ratio compared to other experimental groups. Shannon, Chao1, and ACE values were significantly lower in the OG group compared to GG and CG groups. Anosim test showed significant differences in bacterial community structure between groups but the PCA plot was not very informative to see these differences. Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria, and Firmicutes were the three dominant phyla in all groups. The genera Oscillospira was more abundant in GG and OG groups. Higher relative abundance of Ruminococcus and Clostridium was observed in the GG group, while Ruminobacter, Corynebacterium, and Selenomonas were more abundant in the CG group. These findings will help in improving our understanding of rumen bacteria in yaks in response to changes in diet. ©2021 Ahmad et al.Entities:
Keywords: Dietary supplement; Grazing; Rumen fermentation; Rumen microbiota; Yak
Year: 2021 PMID: 34178446 PMCID: PMC8216167 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11520
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Nutrient composition of pasture herbage and supplements used during the experiment.
| Nutrient composition (g/kg DM) | Pasture herbage | Oats hay | Concentrate |
|---|---|---|---|
| CP | 48.2 | 83.4 | 118.4 |
| NDF | 678.2 | 595.2 | 456.1 |
| ADF | 423.5 | 367.3 | 250.4 |
| DE (MJ/kg DM) | 5.25 | 10.4 | 18.9 |
Notes.
DE was calculated according to Tables of Feed Composition and Nutritive Values in China (Chinese Feed Database, 2010).
crude protein
neutral detergent fiber
acid detergent fiber
digestible energy
Total dry matter intake and rumen fermentation parameters of yak supplemented with oat hays and concentrate during the cold season.
| Items | Treatments | SEM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GG | OG | CG | |||
| TDMI (kg/d) | 3.32a | 3.57b | 4.51c | 0.124 | <0.001 |
| Rumen pH | 7.02a | 6.91b | 6.76c | 0.026 | <0.001 |
| NH3-N (mg/mL) | 5.86a | 8.61b | 10.9c | 0.486 | <0.001 |
| TVFA (mM) | 52.43a | 59.41b | 63.75c | 1.108 | <0.001 |
| Molar proportion of VFA (%) | |||||
| Acetate | 78.24a | 76.71ab | 75.24b | 0.578 | 0.031 |
| Propionate | 15.13a | 15.87a | 17.23b | 0.302 | 0.001 |
| Butyrate | 4.84a | 5.56a | 6.74b | 0.254 | 0.001 |
| Isobutyrate | 0.85a | 0.88a | 0.95b | 0.012 | <0.001 |
| Isovalerate | 0.90a | 0.93a | 1.25b | 0.039 | <0.001 |
| A/P | 5.18a | 4.84a | 4.3b | 0.103 | <0.001 |
Notes.
Values are presented as mean ± SEM. Means in a row with different small letter superscripts differ significantly (P > 0.05), same letter superscripts present no difference (P < 0.05).
grazing group
oats hay supplement group
concentrate supplement group
total dry matter intake
ammonia nitrogen
total volaile fatty acids
acetate/propionate ratio
volatile fatty acids
standard error of the mean
Figure 1Venn diagram showing operational taxonomic units shared between the three experimental groups (full grazing group (GG); group supplemented with oats hay (OG) and group supplemented with concentrate (CG)).
GG, grazing group; OG, oats hay supplement group; CG, concentrate supplement group.
The alpha diversity indices of yak supplemented with oat hays and concentrate during the cold season.
| Item | Treatments | SEM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GG | OG | CG | |||
| Shannon | 9.22a | 7.96b | 8.34a | 0.183 | 0.008 |
| Simpson | 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 0.0072 | 0.21 |
| chao1 | 2682.89a | 2067.27b | 2658.97a | 89.844 | 0.002 |
| ACE | 2779.28a | 2142.96b | 2767.94a | 93.522 | 0.002 |
Notes.
Values are presented as mean ± SEM. Means in a row with different small letter superscripts differ significantly (P < 0.05), same letter superscripts present no difference (P > 0.05).
grazing group
oats hay supplement group
concentrate supplement group
Figure 2Principal component analysis (PCA) of bacterial community at OTU level of yak supplemented with oats hay and concentrate during cold season.
PC1, 1st principal component PC1, 2nd principal component and PC3, 3rd principal component. The percentage of variation explained by each principal coordinate is indicated on the axes. A dot represents each sample and different colors represent different groups. GG, grazing group; OG, oats hay supplement group; CG, concentrate supplement group.
Relative abundance of bacteria at the phylum level in yak rumen supplemented with oat hays and concentrate during the cold season.
| Taxonomy | Log transformed values | SEM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GG | OG | CG | |||
| Bacteroidetes | 1.64 | 1.61 | 1.57 | 0.022 | 0.408 |
| Firmicutes | 0.93 | 1.02 | 1.22 | 0.065 | 0.169 |
| Proteobacteria | 1.25 | 1.14 | 1.17 | 0.207 | 0.063 |
| Verrucomicrobia | 0.84 | 0.83 | 0.77 | 0.036 | 0.733 |
| Fibrobacteres | 0.59 | 0.61 | 0.65 | 0.054 | 0.914 |
| Tenericutes | 0.72a | 0.52b | 0.55a | 0.034 | 0.023 |
| Cyanobacteria | 0.086ab | −0.004a | 0.26b | 0.046 | 0.048 |
| Actinobacteria | −0.081 | −0.34 | −0.029 | 0.0649 | 0.094 |
| Acidobacteria | −0.27 | −0.74 | −0.53 | 0.095 | 0.144 |
| Lentisphaerae | −0.069 | −0.009 | −0.048 | 0.0220 | 0.552 |
Notes.
Values are presented as mean ± SEM. Means in a row with different small letter superscripts differ significantly (P < 0.05), same letter superscripts present no difference (P > 0.05).
grazing group
oats hay supplement group
concentrate supplement group
Relative abundance of the 20 more representative genera in yak rumen supplemented with oat hays and concentrate during the cold season.
| Taxonomy | Log transformed values | SEM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GG | OG | CG | |||
| 1.21 | 1.14 | 1.18 | 0.038 | 0.769 | |
| 0.59 | 0.61 | 0.65 | 0.544 | 0.914 | |
| −0.22a | 0.25b | 0.36b | 0.091 | 0.009 | |
| 0.23 | 0.20 | 0.14 | 0.024 | 0.342 | |
| 0.14 | 0.001 | 0.066 | 0.0359 | 0.291 | |
| 0.047 | −0.097 | −0.12 | 0.0341 | 0.226 | |
| 0.029 | −0.090 | −0.17 | 0.0556 | 0.327 | |
| −0.16 | −0.41 | −0.023 | 0.0826 | 0.156 | |
| −0.97 | −1.25 | −0.85 | 0.134 | 0.497 | |
| −0.153 | −1.20 | −0.85 | 0.1369 | 0.128 | |
| −0.49a | −0.58ab | −0.77b | 0.042 | 0.014 | |
| −0.0067a | −0.16b | −0.11ab | 0.02721 | 0.042 | |
| −0.22a | −0.37b | −0.39b | 0.026 | 0.007 | |
| −0.26 | −0.35 | −0.34 | 0.025 | 0.347 | |
| −0.25 | −0.24 | −014 | 0.025 | 0.143 | |
| −0.58 | −0.87 | −0.34 | 0.095 | 0.065 | |
| −0.53a | −0.58a | −0.28b | 0.041 | 0.014 | |
| −1.54a | −1.39a | −0.78b | 0.136 | 0.043 | |
| −0.45 | −0.59 | −0.36 | 0.053 | 0.233 | |
| −0.77 | −0.81 | −0.68 | 0.044 | 0.529 | |
Notes.
Values are presented as mean ± SEM. Means in a row with different small letter superscripts differ significantly (P < 0.05), same letter superscripts present no difference (P > 0.05).
grazing group
oats hay supplement group
concentrate supplement group
Figure 3The heat map displaying the correlation of rumen fermentation parameters with relative abundance of bacterial genera.
Spearman’s correlation coefficients were calculated and the values between −1 and 1 in the color key indicate negative (red) and positive (blue) correlations. GG, grazing group; OG, oats hay supplement group; CG, concentrate supplement group; TVFA, total volatile fatty acids; A/P, acetate/propionate ratio. * = P < 0.05, ** = P < 0.01 and *** = P < 0.001.