| Literature DB >> 35174238 |
Fengjie Ji1, Lihong Gu2, Guang Rong1, Chengjun Hu1, Weiping Sun1, Dingfa Wang1, Weiqi Peng1, Dajie Lin2, Quanwei Liu2, Hongzhi Wu1, Haofu Dai3, Hanlin Zhou1, Tieshan Xu1.
Abstract
Yizhi (Alpiniae Oxyphyllae, A. oxyphylla) has been widely used as an important traditional Chinese medicinal herb for centuries. Existing studies have shown that A. oxyphylla has numerous benefits in human and animal health. We hypothesized that extract from the stems and leaves of A. oxyphylla (AOE) as a feed additive may have positive effects on animal health and products. Thus, this study was conducted to evaluate the effects of AOE as a feed additive on growth performance, serum biochemical parameters, intestinal morphology, microbial composition, and meat quality in Jiaji ducks. A total of 240 Jiaji ducks of 42 days old (1675.8 ± 44.2 g, male: female ratio = 1:1) were blocked based on body weight and randomly allocated into four dietary treatments with three replicates that each had 20 duck individuals. The dietary treatments included: basal diet, control group (CK); basal diet supplementation with 30 mg/kg (Y1), 80 mg/kg (Y2), and 130 mg/kg (Y3) AOE, respectively, and lasted for 49 days. The results showed that average daily feed intake from day 42 to day 60 was decreased with the increasing level of AOE (P < 0.05). Compared with the CK group, the groups with AOE supplementation decreased serum LDL-C level (P < 0.05), the addition of 30 mg/kg AOE increased total amino acids, essential amino acids, branched-chain amino acids, nonessential amino acids, and umami taste amino acids (P < 0.05), but decreased selenium and zinc concentrations in breast muscle (P < 0.05). In addition, the supplementation of 30 or 130 mg/kg AOE significantly increased jejunal villus height (P < 0.05) and tended to increase the ratio of villus height to crypt depth in the jejunum (P = 0.092) compared to the CK group. Moreover, the addition of 30 mg/kg AOE showed a higher abundance of genus unclassified Bacteroidales and genus unclassified Ruminococcaceae than the CK group (P < 0.05). Therefore, dietary supplementation with 30 mg/kg AOE increased meat nutrition profile and flavor through promoting amino acid contents in breast muscle, as well as maintained intestine integrity and modulated the microbial composition. In conclusion, AOE as an antibiotic alternative displayed potential in maintaining intestinal health and improving meat quality.Entities:
Keywords: Yizhi (Alpinia oxyphylla); antibiotic alternatives; ducks; intestinal health; meat quality
Year: 2022 PMID: 35174238 PMCID: PMC8841826 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.793698
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Composition and nutrition levels of the basal diet.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Corn | 70.53 | ME (MJ/kg) | 12.27 |
| Soybean meal | 23.50 | Crude protein | 16.79 |
| Wheat bran | 1.70 | Crude fat | 3.05 |
| CaHPO4 | 1.37 | Crude fiber | 2.63 |
| Limestone | 0.90 | Calcium | 0.46 |
| L-Lysine | 0.14 | Available P | 0.35 |
| DL-Methionine | 0.18 | L-Lysine | 0.95 |
| Premix | 1.68 | Methionine | 0.45 |
| Total | 100 |
One kilogram of multiple vitamin premix contained: vitamin A, 50,000,000 IU; vitamin B1, 10,000 mg; vitamin B2, 20,000 mg; vitamin B6, 10,000 mg; vitamin B12, 5,000 mg; vitamin C, 4,000 mg; vitamin D, 1,000,000 IU; vitamin E, 60,000 IU; vitamin K3, 8,000 mg; folic acid, 2,500 mg; niacin, 80,000 mg; pantothenic acid, 30,000 mg; biotin, 2,200 mg; Cu, 5 g; Fe, 50 g; Zn, 55 g; Mn, 55 g; I, 0.3 g; Se, 0.22 g.
Effects of dietary AOE on growth performance in ducks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D42 BW (g) | 1670.00 | 1720.00 | 1643.33 | 1670.00 | 12.76 | 0.192 |
| D60 BW (g) | 2576.67 | 2625.83 | 2586.67 | 2539.17 | 21.65 | 0.631 |
| D90 BW (g) | 3322.73 | 3332.54 | 3258.25 | 3300.37 | 15.27 | 0.355 |
|
| ||||||
| ADG (g/d) | 50.37 | 50.32 | 52.41 | 48.29 | 0.83 | 0.423 |
| ADFI (g/d) | 152.87 | 156.09 | 148.32 | 147.24 | 1.27 | 0.015 |
| F:G | 3.03 | 3.12 | 2.83 | 3.05 | 0.05 | 0.142 |
|
| ||||||
| ADG (g/d) | 24.87 | 23.56 | 22.39 | 25.37 | 0.76 | 0.569 |
| ADFI (g/d) | 145.25 | 145.08 | 140.26 | 137.08 | 1.96 | 0.425 |
| F:G | 5.84 | 6.27 | 6.37 | 5.44 | 0.24 | 0.565 |
|
| ||||||
| ADG (g/d) | 34.43 | 33.60 | 33.64 | 33.97 | 0.34 | 0.849 |
| ADFI (g/d) | 148.11 | 149.21 | 143.28 | 140.89 | 1.59 | 0.200 |
| F:G | 4.31 | 4.44 | 4.26 | 4.15 | 0.05 | 0.320 |
In the same row, values with different letters mean significant difference (P < 0.05).
ADG, average daily gain; ADFI, average daily feed intake; F:G, Feed intake / body weight gain. Y1: basal diet with 30 mg/kg AOE; Y2: basal diet with 80 mg/kg AOE; Y3: basal diet with 130 mg/kg AOE.
Figure 1Effects of dietary AOE on serum biochemical parameter in ducks.
Figure 2Effects of dietary AOE on intestinal morphology of ducks. (A) The images of the jejunum and ileum morphology, magnification 10 ×; Summarized data of villus height, crypt depth, and the ratio of villus height to crypt depth in jejunum (B–D) and ileum (E–G).
Figure 3Effects of dietary AOE on alpha diversity and beta diversity of cecal bacterial community of ducks. (A–D) Alpha diversity including observed otus, chao1, shannon, and simpson indexes. (E,F) Beta diversity including Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) and Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS).
Effects of dietary AOE on phylum-level relative abundances of the cecal microbiota in ducks (%).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 39.63 | 43.16 | 38.68 | 37.18 | 0.24 |
|
| 27.44 | 29.30 | 28.19 | 33.31 | 0.51 |
|
| 18.73 | 15.87 | 18.75 | 16.86 | 1.00 |
|
| 5.83 | 5.77 | 9.22 | 7.33 | 0.26 |
|
| 3.41 | 1.62 | 2.49 | 1.10 | 0.24 |
|
| 2.02 | 1.14 | 0.94 | 1.32 | 0.30 |
|
| 0.99 | 0.89 | 0.65 | 1.15 | 0.69 |
|
| 0.54 | 0.78 | 0.35 | 0.18 | 0.40 |
|
| 0.51 | 0.64 | 0.31 | 0.31 | 1.00 |
|
| 0.21 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.73 | 0.62 |
|
| 0.16 | 0.10 | 0.07 | 0.21 | 0.31 |
|
| 0.09 | 0.32 | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.91 |
|
| 0.23 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.71 |
|
| 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.13 | 0.10 | 0.64 |
|
| 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.58 |
Top 15 most abundant species are listed. The relative species abundances of gut microbial communities were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test, n = 9.
Figure 4Effect of dietary AOE on microbial composition in cecum feces of ducks. (A) The abundance of the top 15 bacteria at phylum level. (B) The abundance of the top 15 bacteria at the genus level. (C) LEfSe Analysis. LDA, linear discriminant analysis.
Effects of dietary AOE on genus-level relative abundances of the cecal microbiota in ducks (%).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 16.29 | 19.01 | 19.00 | 19.61 | 0.83 |
|
| 15.16 | 11.15 | 15.96 | 14.93 | 0.68 |
|
| 5.81 | 5.77 | 9.22 | 7.33 | 0.26 |
|
| 2.99 | 4.22 | 3.59 | 4.36 | 0.52 |
|
| 1.92 | 3.42 | 3.57 | 3.56 | 0.72 |
|
| 2.65 | 2.27 | 2.61 | 2.98 | 0.60 |
|
| 3.70 | 2.39 | 1.55 | 2.55 | 0.46 |
|
| 2.98 | 2.30 | 3.20 | 1.95 | 0.75 |
|
| 2.23 | 2.72 | 2.13 | 1.59 | 0.19 |
|
| 3.41 | 1.62 | 2.49 | 1.10 | 0.24 |
|
| 1.65 | 2.71 | 2.27 | 1.04 | 0.64 |
|
| 1.01 | 1.55 | 0.43 | 2.58 | 0.03 |
|
| 1.61 | 1.10 | 1.46 | 1.34 | 0.18 |
|
| 1.51 | 1.38 | 0.61 | 1.54 | 0.25 |
|
| 1.57 | 1.30 | 1.15 | 1.11 | 0.23 |
|
| 1.31 | 1.30 | 1.62 | 0.93 | 0.22 |
|
| 1.07 | 1.41 | 0.84 | 1.13 | 0.43 |
|
| 0.98 | 1.21 | 1.15 | 1.12 | 0.68 |
|
| 1.33 | 0.94 | 0.57 | 1.24 | 0.22 |
|
| 1.02 | 1.63 | 0.55 | 0.89 | 0.01 |
|
| 0.97 | 1.31 | 0.65 | 1.06 | 0.64 |
|
| 0.62 | 0.96 | 1.34 | 1.21 | 0.41 |
Genus with proportion under 1.00% are not listed. The relative species abundances of gut microbial communities were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test, n = 9.
In the same row, values with different letters mean significant difference (P < 0.05).
Figure 5Effects of dietary AOE on meat free amino acid composition in breast muscle of Jiaji ducks. EAA = lysine (Lys) + methionine (Met) + threonine (Thr) + phenylalanine (Phe) + histidine (His) + leucine (Leu) + isoleucine (Ile) + valine (Val). BCAA = Leu+ Ile+Val. NEAA = alanine (Ala) + aspartate (Asp) + arginine (Arg) + glutamate (Glu) + glycine (Gly) + proline (Pro) + Serine (Ser) + tyrosine (Tyr).
Effects of dietary AOE on meat fatty acid composition in breast muscle of ducks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C14:0 | 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.007 | 0.0004 | 0.946 |
| C16:0 | 0.31 | 0.27 | 0.25 | 0.31 | 0.0161 | 0.457 |
| C16:1 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.0018 | 0.370 |
| C18:0 | 0.13 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.0060 | 0.517 |
| C18:1n-9 | 0.44 | 0.36 | 0.39 | 0.42 | 0.029 | 0.794 |
| C18:2n-6 | 0.26 | 0.23 | 0.23 | 0.28 | 0.0106 | 0.265 |
| C18:3n-6 | 0.012 | 0.010 | 0.009 | 0.012 | 0.0006 | 0.125 |
| C20:3n-6 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.0004 | 0.640 |
| C20:4 | 0.090 | 0.092 | 0.084 | 0.104 | 0.0046 | 0.550 |
| C22:6ns | 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.009 | 0.0005 | 0.516 |
| C24:0 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.0010 | 0.386 |
| MUFA | 0.473 | 0.385 | 0.410 | 0.453 | 0.031 | 0.777 |
| PUFA | 0.370 | 0.335 | 0.330 | 0.378 | 0.014 | 0.556 |
| SFA | 0.475 | 0.415 | 0.403 | 0.488 | 0.023 | 0.498 |
| Total fatty acid | 1.325 | 1.1425 | 1.1488 | 1.3525 | 0.0662 | 0.587 |
SFA = C10:0 + C12:0 +C14:0 + C15:0 + C16:0 + C17:0 + C18:0 + C20:0 + C23:0.
MUFA = C14:1 + C16:1 + C17:1 + C18:1n9t + C18:1n9c + C20:1 + C24:1.
PUFA = C18:2n6t + C18:2n6c + C18:3n6 + C18:3n3 + C20:3n6 + C20:4n6 + C20:5n3 + C22:6n6.
Figure 6Effects of dietary AOE on meat trace elements in breast muscle of ducks.
Figure 7Spearman's correalation analysis of amino acid and dominant genus bacteria. The colors range from blue (negative correlation) to red (positive correlation). * Indicates significant difference (P < 0.05), ** indicates extremely significant difference (P < 0.01).