Hui-Zeng Sun1, Ke-Lan Peng1, Ming-Yuan Xue1, Jian-Xin Liu2. 1. Institute of Dairy Science, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Molecular Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China. 2. Institute of Dairy Science, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Molecular Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China. liujx@zju.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance poses super challenges in both human health and livestock production. Rumen microbiota is a large reservoir of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs), which show significant varations in different host species and lifestyles. To compare the microbiome and resistome between dairy cows and dairy buffaloes, the microbial composition, functions and harbored ARGs of rumen microbiota were explored between 16 dairy cows (3.93 ± 1.34 years old) and 15 dairy buffaloes (4.80 ± 3.49 years old) using metagenomics. RESULTS: Dairy buffaloes showed significantly different bacterial species (LDA > 3.5 & P < 0.01), enriched KEGG pathways and CAZymes encoded genes (FDR < 0.01 & Fold Change > 2) in the rumen compared with dairy cows. Distinct resistive profiles were identified between dairy cows and dairy buffaloes. Among the total 505 ARGs discovered in the resistome of dairy cows and dairy buffaloes, 18 ARGs conferring resistance to 16 antibiotic classes were uniquely detected in dairy buffaloes. Gene tcmA (resistance to tetracenomycin C) presented high prevalence and age effect in dairy buffaloes, and was also highly positively correlated with 93 co-expressed ARGs in the rumen (R = 0.98 & P = 5E-11). In addition, 44 bacterial species under Lactobacillus genus were found to be associated with tcmA (R > 0.95 & P < 0.001). L. amylovorus and L. acidophilus showed greatest potential of harboring tcmA based on co-occurrence analysis and tcmA-containing contigs taxonomic alignment. CONCLUSIONS: The current study revealed distinctive microbiome and unique ARGs in dairy buffaloes compared to dairy cattle. Our results provide novel understanding on the microbiome and resistome of dairy buffaloes, the unique ARGs and associated bacteria will help develop strategies to prevent the transmission of ARGs.
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance poses super challenges in both human health and livestock production. Rumen microbiota is a large reservoir of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs), which show significant varations in different host species and lifestyles. To compare the microbiome and resistome between dairy cows and dairy buffaloes, the microbial composition, functions and harbored ARGs of rumen microbiota were explored between 16 dairy cows (3.93 ± 1.34 years old) and 15 dairy buffaloes (4.80 ± 3.49 years old) using metagenomics. RESULTS: Dairy buffaloes showed significantly different bacterial species (LDA > 3.5 & P < 0.01), enriched KEGG pathways and CAZymes encoded genes (FDR < 0.01 & Fold Change > 2) in the rumen compared with dairy cows. Distinct resistive profiles were identified between dairy cows and dairy buffaloes. Among the total 505 ARGs discovered in the resistome of dairy cows and dairy buffaloes, 18 ARGs conferring resistance to 16 antibiotic classes were uniquely detected in dairy buffaloes. Gene tcmA (resistance to tetracenomycin C) presented high prevalence and age effect in dairy buffaloes, and was also highly positively correlated with 93 co-expressed ARGs in the rumen (R = 0.98 & P = 5E-11). In addition, 44 bacterial species under Lactobacillus genus were found to be associated with tcmA (R > 0.95 & P < 0.001). L. amylovorus and L. acidophilus showed greatest potential of harboring tcmA based on co-occurrence analysis and tcmA-containing contigs taxonomic alignment. CONCLUSIONS: The current study revealed distinctive microbiome and unique ARGs in dairy buffaloes compared to dairy cattle. Our results provide novel understanding on the microbiome and resistome of dairy buffaloes, the unique ARGs and associated bacteria will help develop strategies to prevent the transmission of ARGs.
Authors: Patrick Munk; Berith Elkær Knudsen; Oksana Lukjancenko; Ana Sofia Ribeiro Duarte; Liese Van Gompel; Roosmarijn E C Luiken; Lidwien A M Smit; Heike Schmitt; Alejandro Dorado Garcia; Rasmus Borup Hansen; Thomas Nordahl Petersen; Alex Bossers; Etienne Ruppé; Ole Lund; Tine Hald; Sünje Johanna Pamp; Håkan Vigre; Dick Heederik; Jaap A Wagenaar; Dik Mevius; Frank M Aarestrup Journal: Nat Microbiol Date: 2018-07-23 Impact factor: 17.745
Authors: Kevin J Forsberg; Sanket Patel; Molly K Gibson; Christian L Lauber; Rob Knight; Noah Fierer; Gautam Dantas Journal: Nature Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Marc D Auffret; Richard J Dewhurst; Carol-Anne Duthie; John A Rooke; R John Wallace; Tom C Freeman; Robert Stewart; Mick Watson; Rainer Roehe Journal: Microbiome Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 14.650
Authors: Jinxin Liu; Diana H Taft; Maria X Maldonado-Gomez; Daisy Johnson; Michelle L Treiber; Danielle G Lemay; Edward J DePeters; David A Mills Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2019-09-27 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: C Anil Kumar; D Srinivas Kumar; K Raja Kishore; Ch Venkata Seshaiah; D Narendranath; P Ravikanth Reddy Journal: Trop Anim Health Prod Date: 2022-05-10 Impact factor: 1.559