| Literature DB >> 35953930 |
Zhian Zhang1, Fei Li1, Xiaowen Ma1, Fadi Li1, Zongli Wang1.
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the effects of different levels of barley starch instead of corn starch on the rumen fermentation and microflora when feeding a corn-based diet to Hu sheep. Thirty-two male Hu sheep equipped with permanent rumen fistulas were selected and fed in individual metabolic cages. All sheep were randomly divided into four groups (eight sheep in each group) and fed with four diets containing a similar starch content, but from different starch sources, including 100% of starch derived from corn (CS), 33% of starch derived from barley + 67% of starch derived from corn (33 BS), 67% of starch derived from barley + 33% of starch derived from corn (67 BS) and 100% of starch derived from barley (100 BS). The experimental period included a 14 d adaptation period and a 2 d continuous data collection period. The results showed that the molar proportions of acetate, isobutyrate, butyrate and isovalerate and the ratio of acetate to propionate in the 67 BS and 100 BS groups decreased compared with the CS and 33 BS groups (p < 0.001), while the molar proportions of propionate and valerate increased (p < 0.001). The combination of 33% barley starch and 67% corn starch in the diet improved the production of TVFAs (p = 0.007). The OTUs and Shannon indexes of the CS and 33 BS groups were higher than the 67 BS and 100 BS groups (p < 0.001), and the Chao1 and Ace indexes were higher than the 100 BS group (p < 0.05). In addition, the 33 BS group had increased the relative abundances of Bacteroidetes, Prevotella and Ruminococcus and the abundances of Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus flavefaciens, Streptococcus bovis, Selenomonas ruminantium and Prevotella brevis relative to the CS group (p < 0.05). These results indicate that the substitution of 33% of the CS with BS did not change the rumen fermentation pattern relative to the CS group, and increased the richness and diversity of the rumen microbes in Hu sheep compared with other two starch substitute groups.Entities:
Keywords: Hu sheep; microflora; rumen fermentation; starch source
Year: 2022 PMID: 35953930 PMCID: PMC9367498 DOI: 10.3390/ani12151941
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 3.231
Ingredients and chemical composition of diets.
| Items | Barley 1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CS | 33 BS | 67 BS | 100 BS | |
| Ingredients (% air-dried form) | ||||
| Barley straw | 15.00 | 15.00 | 15.00 | 15.00 |
| Corn | 37.00 | 22.00 | 12.00 | 0.00 |
| Barley | 0.00 | 16.20 | 32.00 | 48.00 |
| Corn bran | 24.00 | 17.50 | 16.80 | 15.50 |
| Cottonseed meal | 7.50 | 6.00 | 6.60 | 6.00 |
| Soybean meal | 9.00 | 7.00 | 8.00 | 8.00 |
| Corn gluten feed | 0.00 | 8.80 | 2.10 | 0.00 |
| Molasses | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 |
| Sodium bicarbonate | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.60 |
| Limestone | 1.20 | 1.20 | 1.20 | 1.20 |
| Salt | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.70 |
| Premix 2 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Total | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
| Nutrient content (% DM) | ||||
| DM | 91.48 | 91.40 | 91.32 | 91.81 |
| CP | 13.72 | 13.57 | 13.81 | 13.69 |
| NDF | 30.59 | 30.96 | 30.75 | 31.25 |
| ADF | 14.94 | 14.48 | 14.35 | 14.28 |
| Starch | 23.99 | 23.90 | 24.15 | 24.02 |
| Ca | 0.87 | 0.85 | 0.84 | 0.83 |
| P | 0.26 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.31 |
| Metabolizable energy (MJ/kg) | 9.81 | 9.84 | 9.69 | 9.57 |
1 Dietary barley levels defined by the proportion of barley starch in diets: CS, 100% of starch derived from corn; 33 BS, 33% of starch derived from barley + 67% of starch derived from corn; 67 BS, 67% of starch derived from barley + 33% of starch derived from corn; 100 BS, 100% of starch derived from barley. 2 The premix provided the following per kg of diet: Fe, 25 mg; Mn, 40 mg; Zn, 40 mg; Cu, 8 mg; I, 0.3 mg; Se, 0.2 mg; Co, 0.1 mg; VA, 940 IU; VD, 111 IU; VE, 20 IU.
Rumen microorganism quantitative real-time PCR amplification primers.
| Species | Primer Sequence (5′-3′) 1 |
|---|---|
|
| F 2: GGTATGGGATGAGCTTGC |
| R 3: GCCTGCCCCTGAACTATC | |
|
| F: TGTTAACAGAGGGAAGCAAAGCA |
| R: TGCAGCCTACAATCCGAACTAA | |
|
| F: CGAACGGAGATAATTTGAGTTTACTTAGG |
| R: CGGTCTCTGTATGTTATGAGGTATTACC | |
|
| F: GCCTCAGCGTCAGTAATCG |
| R: GGAGCGTAGGCGGTTTTAC | |
|
| F: TTCCTAGAGATAGGAAGTTTCTTCGG |
| R: ATGATGGCAACTAACAATAGGGGT | |
|
| F: GGTTCTGAGAGGAAGGTCCCC |
| R: TCCTGCACGCTACTTGGCTG | |
|
| F: CAATAAGCATTCCGCCTGGG |
| R: TTCACTCAATGTCAAGCCCTGG |
1 The primer sequences are referenced from Zhang et al. [16]; 2 F means forward primers; 3 R means reverse primers.
Effects of different barley ratios in diets on volatile fatty acids in the rumen of Hu sheep.
| Items | Time/h | Treatment | SEM | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CS | 33 BS | 67 BS | 100 BS | Treatment | Time | Interaction | |||
| TVFA, mmol/L | 0 | 83.68 | 91.00 | 55.43 | 71.31 | 2.122 | 0.007 | 0.071 | 0.599 |
| 2 | 89.91 | 100.86 | 107.16 | 89.44 | |||||
| 4 | 72.22 | 97.93 | 77.41 | 92.45 | |||||
| 6 | 90.93 | 109.24 | 81.79 | 88.90 | |||||
| 8 | 86.14 | 99.60 | 66.77 | 97.29 | |||||
| 10 | 96.28 | 101.65 | 88.85 | 80.34 | |||||
| Acetate, % | 0 | 66.11 | 66.35 | 66.79 | 65.62 | 0.498 | <0.001 | 0.007 | 0.692 |
| 2 | 64.52 | 65.26 | 58.41 | 53.05 | |||||
| 4 | 61.47 | 64.04 | 60.10 | 55.01 | |||||
| 6 | 63.62 | 64.39 | 59.17 | 61.18 | |||||
| 8 | 63.59 | 63.86 | 58.11 | 59.02 | |||||
| 10 | 63.72 | 64.36 | 59.45 | 61.21 | |||||
| Propionate, % | 0 | 20.84 | 20.08 | 22.12 | 22.56 | 0.620 | <0.001 | 0.159 | 0.877 |
| 2 | 21.37 | 18.75 | 29.81 | 33.27 | |||||
| 4 | 23.12 | 20.68 | 28.25 | 34.53 | |||||
| 6 | 23.24 | 20.43 | 28.68 | 26.96 | |||||
| 8 | 23.13 | 21.12 | 30.62 | 30.02 | |||||
| 10 | 22.77 | 20.18 | 28.52 | 26.99 | |||||
| Isobutyrate, % | 0 | 0.74 | 0.88 | 1.15 | 1.36 | 0.036 | 0.073 | <0.001 | 0.631 |
| 2 | 0.90 | 0.51 | 0.67 | 1.16 | |||||
| 4 | 0.59 | 0.43 | 0.58 | 0.41 | |||||
| 6 | 0.56 | 0.30 | 0.77 | 0.57 | |||||
| 8 | 0.54 | 0.39 | 0.41 | 0.38 | |||||
| 10 | 0.61 | 0.35 | 0.49 | 0.57 | |||||
| Butyrate, % | 0 | 10.03 | 10.69 | 7.48 | 7.88 | 0.247 | <0.001 | 0.200 | 0.997 |
| 2 | 10.78 | 13.78 | 8.93 | 10.12 | |||||
| 4 | 12.56 | 13.26 | 9.12 | 8.29 | |||||
| 6 | 10.61 | 13.48 | 9.10 | 9.00 | |||||
| 8 | 10.71 | 13.16 | 8.93 | 8.82 | |||||
| 10 | 10.88 | 13.50 | 9.65 | 9.11 | |||||
| Isovalerate, % | 0 | 1.39 | 1.11 | 1.55 | 1.55 | 0.036 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.834 |
| 2 | 1.41 | 0.77 | 0.97 | 1.07 | |||||
| 4 | 1.07 | 0.58 | 0.79 | 0.64 | |||||
| 6 | 1.00 | 0.46 | 1.04 | 1.08 | |||||
| 8 | 1.01 | 0.56 | 0.62 | 0.71 | |||||
| 10 | 1.05 | 0.57 | 0.80 | 1.01 | |||||
| Valerate, % | 0 | 0.89 | 0.88 | 0.92 | 1.03 | 0.027 | 0.035 | 0.429 | 0.975 |
| 2 | 1.02 | 0.93 | 1.22 | 1.33 | |||||
| 4 | 1.20 | 1.00 | 1.15 | 1.12 | |||||
| 6 | 0.98 | 0.94 | 1.23 | 1.20 | |||||
| 8 | 1.01 | 0.91 | 1.30 | 1.05 | |||||
| 10 | 0.97 | 1.04 | 1.09 | 1.11 | |||||
| Acetate:Propionate | 0 | 3.55 | 3.79 | 3.24 | 3.04 | 0.079 | <0.001 | 0.110 | 0.996 |
| 2 | 3.32 | 3.75 | 2.27 | 2.00 | |||||
| 4 | 2.97 | 3.27 | 2.57 | 1.83 | |||||
| 6 | 2.91 | 3.38 | 2.56 | 2.55 | |||||
| 8 | 2.98 | 3.20 | 2.26 | 2.29 | |||||
| 10 | 2.92 | 3.40 | 2.39 | 2.42 | |||||
| pH | 0 | 6.12 | 6.24 | 6.56 | 6.43 | 0.032 | 0.026 | <0.001 | 0.418 |
| 2 | 5.83 | 5.79 | 5.79 | 5.50 | |||||
| 4 | 5.92 | 5.61 | 5.54 | 5.37 | |||||
| 6 | 5.62 | 5.45 | 5.72 | 5.45 | |||||
| 8 | 5.85 | 5.75 | 5.83 | 5.49 | |||||
| 10 | 5.70 | 5.66 | 5.85 | 5.63 | |||||
| DMI, kg/d | - | 1.14 | 1.41 | 0.87 | 1.06 | 0.112 | 0.386 | - | - |
Dietary barley levels defined by the proportion of barley starch in diets: CS, 100% of starch derived from corn; 33 BS, 33% of starch derived from barley + 67% of starch derived from corn; 67 BS, 67% of starch derived from barley + 33% of starch derived from corn; 100 BS, 100% of starch derived from barley.
Analysis of α-diversity at 2 h after morning feeding among different treatment groups.
| Items | Treatments 1 | SEM | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CS | 33 BS | 67 BS | 100 BS | Treatment | Linear | Quadratic | ||
| OTUs | 740.83 a | 699.00 a | 555.50 b | 475.50 b | 31.550 | 0.003 | <0.001 | 0.694 |
| Chao1 | 872.94 a | 845.61 ab | 704.07 bc | 585.94 c | 34.831 | 0.004 | <0.001 | 0.411 |
| Ace | 861.46 a | 845.40 a | 703.74 ab | 581.49 b | 34.098 | 0.003 | <0.001 | 0.323 |
| Shannon | 4.57 a | 4.13 a | 3.43 b | 3.38 b | 0.137 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.314 |
| Simpson | 0.03 b | 0.06 b | 0.12 a | 0.11 a | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.001 | 0.340 |
| Coverage | 0.996 | 0.996 | 0.997 | 0.997 | 0.000 | 0.063 | 0.015 | 0.246 |
1 Dietary barley levels defined by the proportion of barley starch in diets: CS, 100% of starch derived from corn; 33 BS, 33% of starch derived from barley + 67% of starch derived from corn; 67 BS, 67% of starch derived from barley + 33% of starch derived from corn; 100 BS, 100% of starch derived from barley. a–c Values within a row with uncommon letters differ significantly among the four groups (p < 0.05).
Figure 1Analysis of β−diversity at 2 h after morning feeding among different treatment groups. “A” represents the CS group, with 100% of starch derived from corn; “B” represents the 33 BS group, with 33% of starch derived from barley + 67% of starch derived from corn; “C” represents the 67 BS group, with 67% of starch derived from barley + 33% of starch derived from corn; “D” represents the 100 BS group, with 100% of starch derived from barley.
Effects of dietary barley starch levels on relative abundances of dominant phyla at 2 h after morning feeding in the rumen of Hu sheep.
| Items | Treatments 1 | SEM | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CS | 33 BS | 67 BS | 100 BS | Treatment | Linear | Quadratic | ||
|
| 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.005 | 0.591 | 0.264 | 0.459 |
|
| 53.59 b | 71.44 a | 61.48 ab | 51.44 b | 2.565 | 0.013 | 0.397 | 0.004 |
|
| 0.49 a | 0.35 ab | 0.14 bc | 0.03 c | 0.057 | 0.009 | 0.001 | 0.854 |
|
| 0.40 | 1.64 | 0.69 | 0.61 | 0.210 | 0.128 | 0.966 | 0.092 |
|
| 29.18 a | 16.36 b | 10.78 b | 10.24 b | 1.843 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.009 |
|
| 3.01 b | 3.44 b | 28.30 a | 35.33 a | 4.092 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.533 |
|
| 1.45 | 0.70 | 0.63 | 0.54 | 0.141 | 0.055 | 0.017 | 0.209 |
|
| 0.61 b | 3.27 a | 0.15 b | 0.08 b | 0.406 | 0.006 | 0.119 | 0.046 |
| Unclassified | 3.48 a | 1.47 b | 0.71 bc | 0.29 c | 0.311 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.032 |
|
| 1.58 a | 1.58 a | 0.47 b | 0.07 c | 0.231 | 0.025 | 0.005 | 0.615 |
1 Dietary barley levels defined by the proportion of barley starch in diets: CS, 100% of starch derived from corn; 33 BS, 33% of starch derived from barley + 67% of starch derived from corn; 67 BS, 67% of starch derived from barley + 33% of starch derived from corn; 100 BS, 100% of starch derived from barley. a–c Values within a row with uncommon letters differ significantly among the four groups (p < 0.05).
Effects of dietary barley starch levels on relative abundances of dominant genera at 2 h after morning feeding in the rumen of Hu sheep.
| Items | Treatments 1 | SEM | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CS | 33 BS | 67 BS | 100 BS | Treatment | Linear | Quadratic | ||
|
| 0.46 a | 0.39 a | 0.27 ab | 0.02 b | 0.055 | 0.013 | 0.002 | 0.298 |
|
| 0.38 a | 0.42 a | 0.30 ab | 0.15 b | 0.038 | 0.037 | 0.011 | 0.165 |
|
| 6.51 | 2.34 | 0.29 | 2.22 | 0.889 | 0.067 | 0.042 | 0.073 |
|
| 1.09 a | 0.70 ab | 0.27 b | 0.29 b | 0.097 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.160 |
|
| 0.68 | 1.46 | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.228 | 0.092 | 0.122 | 0.282 |
|
| 0.32 | 0.11 | 0.34 | 0.046 | 0.052 | 0.090 | 0.171 | 0.664 |
|
| 0.24 a | 0.15 ab | 0.06 bc | 0.03 c | 0.025 | 0.005 | 0.001 | 0.487 |
|
| 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.13 | 0.03 | 0.031 | 0.136 | 0.026 | 0.502 |
|
| 0.40 | 1.64 | 0.69 | 0.61 | 0.210 | 0.128 | 0.966 | 0.092 |
|
| 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.07 | 0.13 | 0.029 | 0.535 | 0.395 | 0.701 |
|
| 0.07 a | 0.02 b | 0.01c | 0.01c | 0.006 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.006 |
|
| 0.29 a | 0.07 b | 0.02 b | 0.07 b | 0.034 | 0.019 | 0.017 | 0.027 |
|
| 31.39 b | 55.82 a | 46.07 a | 44.44 ab | 2.795 | 0.011 | 0.165 | 0.010 |
|
| 0.46 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 0.01 | 0.062 | 0.069 | 0.019 | 0.619 |
|
| 0.01 b | 0.02 b | 0.04 b | 0.08 a | 0.009 | 0.012 | 0.002 | 0.218 |
|
| 0.34 a | 0.33 a | 0.13 b | 0.04 b | 0.038 | 0.004 | 0.001 | 0.519 |
|
| 0.49 a | 0.35 ab | 0.14 bc | 0.03 c | 0.057 | 0.009 | 0.001 | 0.854 |
|
| 0.33 ab | 0.35 a | 0.14 b | 0.14 b | 0.037 | 0.049 | 0.015 | 0.972 |
|
| 0.57 | 0.73 | 2.07 | 0.83 | 0.241 | 0.093 | 0.297 | 0.127 |
|
| 0.03 b | 0.06 b | 0.56 a | 0.07 b | 0.073 | 0.020 | 0.283 | 0.049 |
|
| 0.30 a | 0.13 b | 0.02c | 0.03c | 0.028 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.020 |
|
| 1.14 | 0.62 | 0.55 | 0.87 | 0.120 | 0.287 | 0.409 | 0.083 |
|
| 1.14 | 2.40 | 0.80 | 1.07 | 0.310 | 0.230 | 0.393 | 0.410 |
|
| 1.41 a | 0.63 b | 0.60 b | 0.46 b | 0.133 | 0.037 | 0.012 | 0.180 |
| Unclassified | 42.20 | 24.60 | 39.49 | 41.28 | 2.917 | 0.101 | 0.619 | 0.086 |
1 Dietary barley levels defined by the proportion of barley starch in diets: CS, 100% of starch derived from corn; 33 BS, 33% of starch derived from barley + 67% of starch derived from corn; 67 BS, 67% of starch derived from barley + 33% of starch derived from corn; 100 BS, 100% of starch derived from barley. a–c Values within a row with uncommon letters differ significantly among the four groups (p < 0.05).
Effects of dietary barley starch levels on the rumen microbial content at 2 h after morning feeding of Hu sheep (Log10 16S rRNA copy number/mL rumen fluid).
| Items | Treatments 1 | SEM | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CS | 33 BS | 67 BS | 100 BS | Treatment | Linear | Quadratic | ||
|
| 8.22 | 8.21 | 8.75 | 9.22 | 0.17 | 0.100 | 0.020 | 0.457 |
|
| 7.01 b | 8.58 a | 7.72 ab | 8.00 ab | 0.18 | 0.020 | 0.122 | 0.044 |
|
| 8.93 b | 10.30 a | 9.30 b | 9.15 b | 0.17 | 0.009 | 0.789 | 0.011 |
|
| 9.20 | 9.14 | 9.03 | 8.32 | 0.17 | 0.215 | 0.069 | 0.323 |
|
| 5.47 b | 6.11 a | 5.90 a | 5.44 b | 0.09 | 0.009 | 0.663 | 0.001 |
|
| 8.74 b | 9.37 a | 9.08 ab | 9.37 a | 0.09 | 0.022 | 0.028 | 0.270 |
|
| 11.70 b | 12.25 a | 12.15 a | 12.37 a | 0.07 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.148 |
| Total bacteria | 13.34 b | 14.51 a | 14.12 ab | 14.84 a | 0.19 | 0.026 | 0.011 | 0.508 |
1 Dietary barley levels defined by the proportion of barley starch in diets: CS, 100% of starch derived from corn; 33 BS, 33% of starch derived from barley + 67% of starch derived from corn; 67 BS, 67% of starch derived from barley + 33% of starch derived from corn; 100 BS, 100% of starch derived from barley. a,b Values within a row with uncommon letters differ significantly among the four groups (p < 0.05).