| Literature DB >> 35142936 |
Hui Mi1,2, Ao Ren1,3, Jinjia Zhu1,3, Tao Ran4, Weijun Shen5, Chuanshe Zhou6,7, Bin Zhang8, Zhiliang Tan1,2.
Abstract
Scarce high-quality protein feed resources has limited the development of animal husbandry. In this study, we used a dual-flow continuous culture system to evaluate effects of difference dietary protein sources including soybean meal (SBM), cottonseed meal (CSM), and rapeseed meal (RSM), on nutrient disappearance, rumen fermentation, and microbiota of XiongDong black goats. Dietary proteins of either CSM, RSM or SBM had no effect on nutrient disappearance (P > 0.05). CSM or RSM significantly reduced (P < 0.01) the pH and enhanced (P < 0.01) the ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) concentration in fermentation liquid compared to SBM. The short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) contents were greater (P = 0.05) and acetate was lower (P < 0.01) in SBM than those in RSM and CSM, whereas propionate was greater (P < 0.01) in RSM than that in SBM, consequently reducing the acetate to propionate ratio (A/P) in RSM. Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria were detected as the dominant phyla, and the relative abundances of Spirochaetae (P < 0.01) and Chlorobi (P < 0.05) declined in the CSM and RSM groups as compared to those in the SBM group. At the genus level, Prevotella_1 was the dominant genus; as compared to SBM, its relative abundance was greater (P < 0.01) in CSM and RSM. The abundances of Prevotellaceae_Ga6A1 and Christensenellaceae_R7 were lower (P < 0.05) in CSM, whereas Eubacterium_oxidoreducens_group, and Treponema_2 were lower (P < 0.01) in both CSM and RSM, and other genera were not different (P > 0.10). Although the bacterial community changed with different dietary protein sources, the disappearances of nutrients were not affected, suggesting that CSM and RSM could be used by rumen bacteria, as in case with SBM, and are suitable protein sources for ruminant diets.Entities:
Keywords: Dual-flow continuous culture system; Microbiota; Nutrient disappearance; Protein sources; Rumen fermentation parameters
Year: 2022 PMID: 35142936 PMCID: PMC8831666 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-022-01358-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AMB Express ISSN: 2191-0855 Impact factor: 3.298
Composition and nutrient levels of basal diets (DM basis)
| Item | Treatments | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| SBM | RSM | CSM | |
| Feed ingredients, % of DM | |||
| Corn | 31.50 | 30.00 | 30.00 |
| Soybean meal | 16.00 | / | / |
| Rapeseed meal | / | 19.04 | / |
| Cottonseed meal | / | / | 16.50 |
| Maize straw | 50.00 | 50.0 | 50.00 |
| CaCO3 | 0.24 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Ca3(PO4)2 | 0.68 | 0.79 | 1.17 |
| NaCl | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.60 |
| Premixa | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Chemical composition (%) | |||
| ME (Mcal/kg) | 2.19 | 2.19 | 2.19 |
| CP | 12.26 | 12.26 | 12.26 |
| RUP | 7.10 | 7.96 | 7.52 |
| RDP | 6.98 | 3.96 | 3.89 |
| SC | 33.83 | 37.05 | 36.55 |
| NDF | 36.24 | 37.11 | 38.09 |
| ADF | 25.89 | 26.64 | 26.74 |
| Ca | 0.51 | 0.50 | 0.49 |
| P | 0.32 | 0.43 | 0.44 |
ME: Metabolic energy; CP: Crude protein; RUP, Rumen undegradable protein; SC: Structural carbohydrates; NDF: Neutral detergent fiber; ADF: Acid detergent fiber; Ca: Calcium; P: Phosphorus; RDP: Rumen degradable protein; SBM: Soybean meal; RSM: Rapeseed meal; CSM: Cottonseed meal
aThe premix provided (per kg of the diet): MgSO4·H2O 119 mg, FeSO4·H2O1.53 mg, CuSO4·5H2O 0.8 mg, MnSO4·H2O 3 mg, ZnSO4·H2O 5 mg, Na2SeO3 10 mg, KI 40 mg, CoCl2·6H2O 30 mg, VA 95 000 IU, VD17 500 IU and VE 18 000 IU
Nutrients digestibility affected by different protein source of diets
| Item | Treatments | SEM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBM | RSM | CSM | |||
| DMD (%) | 78.78 | 78.59 | 79.41 | 1.24 | 0.98 |
| CPD (%) | 77.89 | 70.37 | 75.71 | 2.01 | 0.25 |
| NDFD (%) | 63.52 | 63.03 | 61.98 | 2.40 | 0.98 |
| ADFD (%) | 73.47 | 71.85 | 74.31 | 1.79 | 0.93 |
DMD: Dry matter disappearance; CPD: Crude protein disappearance; NDFD: Neutral detergent fiber disappearance; ADFD: Acid detergent fiber disappearance; SBM: Soybean meal; RSM: Rapeseed meal; CSM: Cottonseed meal
Rumen fermentation parameters affected by different protein source of diets
| Item | Treatments | SEM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBM | RSM | CSM | |||
| pH | 6.84a | 6.68b | 6.62b | 0.03 | < 0.01 |
| NH3-N(mg/dL) | 3.10b | 4.63a | 5.46a | 0.38 | < 0.01 |
| Protozoa, × 103cells/mL | 19.04 | 15.19 | 14.01 | 0.98 | 0.09 |
| Acetate (%) | 68.14a | 65.19b | 68.06a | 0.80 | < 0.01 |
| Propionate (%) | 15.85b | 18.30a | 16.50b | 0.62 | < 0.01 |
| Butyrate (%) | 10.63b | 13.04a | 11.71b | 1.30 | < 0.01 |
| Valerate (%) | 2.18 | 1.80 | 1.84 | 0.12 | 0.33 |
| Branch-chained SCFAs | 2.38a | 2.25a | 1.88b | 0.06 | < 0.01 |
| Total SCFAs (mM) | 119.73a | 102.13b | 108.61b | 6.03 | 0.05 |
| Acetate/Propionate | 4.34a | 3.58b | 4.16a | 0.11 | < 0.01 |
SBM: Soybean meal; RSM: Rapeseed meal; CSM: Cottonseed meal
a, bMean values within a row with unlike superscript letters were significantly different (P < 0.05)
Fig. 1The rarefaction curve of species. (C1-C6 indicated samples in CSM, R1-R6 indicated samples in RSM, S1-S6 indicated samples in SBM.)
Species richness, diversity and evenness indices of rumen bacteria affected by different protein source of diets
| Treatments | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBM | RSM | CSM | |||
| OUTs number | 527.83b | 545.67a | 536.00ab | 2.94 | 0.03 |
| Chao | 566.53 | 587.82 | 572.80 | 5.91 | 0.07 |
| Shannon | 6.83 | 6.84 | 6.77 | 0.10 | 0.86 |
| Simpson | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.97 | < 0.01 | 0.75 |
| Coverage | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | < 0.01 | 0.80 |
| ACE observed species | 523.67 | 539.00 | 528.67 | 4.57 | 0.08 |
| PD_whole_tree | 22.14 | 22.69 | 22.06 | 0.23 | 0.14 |
SBM: Soybean meal; RSM: Rapeseed meal; CSM: Cottonseed meal
abMean values within a row with unlike superscript letters were significantly different (P < 0.05)
Fig. 2Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of the ruminal bacterial OTUs in different protein source diets. (Group C showed samples in CSM, Group R showed samples in RSM, Group S showed samples in SBM.)
Effects of different dietary protein source on the relative abundance (%) of the ruminal bacterial at phylum level
| Taxon | Treatments | SEM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBM | RSM | CSM | |||
| 57.53 | 58.60 | 62.00 | 1.58 | 0.44 | |
| 24.48 | 23.04 | 21.67 | 0.88 | 0.46 | |
| 8.71a | 4.14b | 4.27b | 0.64 | 0.01 | |
| 7.39 | 11.84 | 10.31 | 1.49 | 0.46 | |
| 1.01 | 1.50 | 0.98 | 0.12 | 0.14 | |
| 0.52 | 0.48 | 0.39 | 0.04 | 0.28 | |
| 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.01 | 0.81 | |
| 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.03 | 0.91 | |
| 0.04a | 0.01b | 0.01b | 0.01 | 0.02 | |
| 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.06 | |
| 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.55 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.14 | |
| 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.22 | |
SBM: Soybean meal; RSM: Rapeseed meal; CSM: Cottonseed meal
abMean values within a row with unlike superscript letters were significantly different (P < 0.05)
Relative abundance (%) of the most 30 abundant bacterial at genus level affected by different protein source of diets
| Taxon | Treatments | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phylum | Genus | SBM | RSM | CSM | ||
| 0.93c | 1.39b | 2.22a | 0.15 | < 0.01 | ||
| 18.72b | 24.88a | 26.62a | 1.16 | 0.01 | ||
| 1.20a | 1.13a | 0.47b | 0.13 | 0.03 | ||
| 0.96 | 0.82 | 1.25 | 0.08 | 0.14 | ||
| 0.25 | 0.47 | 0.27 | 0.05 | 0.17 | ||
| 0.82 | 0.97 | 1.19 | 0.14 | 0.50 | ||
| 7.40 | 7.61 | 7.93 | 0.50 | 0.83 | ||
| 1.30 | 1.59 | 1.24 | 0.21 | 0.85 | ||
| 0.85a | 0.18b | 0.31b | 0.10 | 0.01 | ||
| 0.75a | 0.85a | 0.41b | 0.07 | 0.03 | ||
| 0.37 | 0.58 | 0.46 | 0.04 | 0.09 | ||
| 1.77 | 2.28 | 2.07 | 0.11 | 0.13 | ||
| 1.32 | 1.11 | 0.65 | 0.14 | 0.16 | ||
| 0.89 | 0.66 | 0.69 | 0.05 | 0.19 | ||
| 0.43 | 0.39 | 0.35 | 0.02 | 0.24 | ||
| 0.82 | 0.65 | 0.67 | 0.05 | 0.31 | ||
| 0.88 | 0.94 | 0.92 | 0.06 | 0.33 | ||
| 0.31 | 0.37 | 0.30 | 0.04 | 0.50 | ||
| 3.24 | 3.64 | 3.98 | 0.26 | 0.53 | ||
| 0.54 | 0.54 | 0.83 | 0.20 | 0.63 | ||
| 0.79 | 0.68 | 0.77 | 0.06 | 0.83 | ||
| 0.78 | 0.68 | 0.77 | 0.11 | 0.75 | ||
| 0.51 | 0.56 | 0.61 | 0.04 | 0.88 | ||
| 0.72 | 0.74 | 0.73 | 0.05 | 0.96 | ||
| 0.90 | 0.83 | 0.60 | 0.10 | 0.28 | ||
| 0.34 | 0.20 | 0.57 | 0.15 | 0.35 | ||
| 4.98 | 8.61 | 7.73 | 1.42 | 0.57 | ||
| 0.27 | 0.57 | 0.22 | 0.12 | 0.70 | ||
| 8.14a | 3.68b | 3.83b | 0.62 | 0.01 | ||
| 0.99 | 1.48 | 0.95 | 0.12 | 0.14 | ||
SBM: Soybean meal; RSM: Rapeseed meal; CSM: Cottonseed meal
abMean values within a row with unlike superscript letters were significantly different(P < 0.05)