| Literature DB >> 35953939 |
Yan Wu1, Xiaolan Guo1, Dehui Zhao1,2, Chao Xu1, Haoran Sun1, Qianlong Yang1, Qianqian Wei1, Huazhe Si3, Kaiying Wang1,4, Tietao Zhang1.
Abstract
Methionine is the first or second limiting amino acid for ruminants, such as sika deer, and has a variety of biological functions such as antioxidant activity, immune response, and protein synthesis. This study aimed to investigate the effects of methionine supplementation on antler growth, serum biochemistry, rumen fermentation, and the bacterial community of sika deer during the antler-growing period. Twelve 4-year-old male sika deer were randomly assigned to three dietary groups supplemented with 0 g/day (n = 4, CON), 4.0 g/day (n = 4, LMet), and 6.0 g/day (n = 4, HMet) methionine. No significant difference (p > 0.05) was found in the production performance between the three groups, but antler weight was higher in both the LMet and HMet groups than in the CON group. Methionine supplementation significantly increased the serum glutathione peroxidase activity (p < 0.05). The serum immunoglobulin G level was significantly higher in the HMet group than in the other two groups (p < 0.05). No significant effect was found on the apparent amino acid digestibility of the three groups, but cysteine and methionine digestibility were higher in the LMet group. The serum hydroxylysine level was significantly lower in the LMet and HMet groups, whereas the serum lysine level was significantly lower in the HMet group compared with the CON group (p < 0.05). The LMet group had the highest but a nonsignificant total volatile fatty acid content and significantly higher microbial protein content in the rumen than the CON group (p < 0.05). The phyla Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria were dominant in the rumen of the sika deer. The principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) and analysis of similarities (ANOSIM) results showed a significant change in the bacterial composition of the three groups (p < 0.05). The relative abundance of Prevotella and Rikenellaceae-RC9 was significantly higher in the LMet group compared with the CON group and CON and HMet groups, respectively. These results revealed that methionine supplementation improved the antioxidant activity and immune status, affecting amino acid metabolism and rumen microbial composition of the sika deer.Entities:
Keywords: glutathione peroxidase; methionine; rumen bacteria; ruminal fermentation; sika deer
Year: 2022 PMID: 35953939 PMCID: PMC9367550 DOI: 10.3390/ani12151950
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 3.231
Basic dietary composition and nutrient levels (dry matter basis).
| Ingredients | (g/100 g) | Nutrient Levels | (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corn | 15.8 | GE (MJ/kg) | 16.94 |
| Soybean meal | 28 | DM% | 89.62 |
| Wheat bran | 6.5 | CP% | 22.42 |
| Corn gluten feed | 4.5 | EE% | 3.07 |
| DDGS | 2.3 | NDF% | 52.42 |
| Sunflower seed meal | 4.6 | ADF% | 16.71 |
| Expanded urea | 0.5 | Methionine | 0.27 |
| Soybean Oil | 0.5 | ||
| Bone meal | 0.6 | ||
| NaCl | 0.7 | ||
| Premix1 | 1 | ||
| Corn stage | 35 | ||
| Total | 100 |
ADF, acid detergent fiber; CP, crude protein; DM, dry matter; EE, ether extract; ME, metabolic energy; NDF, neutral detergent fiber. ME was a calculated value, while the others were measured values. Premix1: 1 kg of premix contained the following: MgO, 0.076 g; ZnSO4.H2O, 0.036 g; MnSO4.H2O, 0.043 g; FeSO4.H2O, 0.053 g; NaSeO3, 0.031 g; vitamin A, 2484 IU; vitamin D, 3496.8 IU; vitamin E, 0.828 IU; vitamin K, 0.23 mg; vitamin B1, 0.092 mg; vitamin B2, 0.69 mg; vitamin B12, 0.00138 mg; folic acid, 0.023 mg; nicotinic acid, 1.62 mg; calcium pantothenate, 1.15 mg; CaHPO4, 5.17 g; and CaCO3, 4.57 g.
Effect of methionine supplementation on productive performance and antioxidant and immune levels in sika deer.
| Item | CON | LMet | HMet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antler weight (g) | 1503.0 ± 381.7 | 1717.5 ± 132.7 | 1797.3 ± 183.4 | 0.29 |
| Average daily gain of antler (g/d) | 42.9 ± 10.9 | 49.1 ± 3.8 | 51.4 ± 5.2 | 0.29 |
| IgA (ug/mL) | 555.7 ± 13.1 | 580.7 ± 20.8 | 539.6 ± 54.2 | 0.28 |
| IgG (mg/mL) | 4.02 a ± 0.19 | 4.01 a ± 0.22 | 4.59 b ± 0.45 | 0.04 |
| IgM (ug/mL) | 103.7 ± 7.1 | 107.8 ± 4.1 | 114.3 ± 6.2 | 0.09 |
| CAT (U/mL) | 3.07 ± 0.76 | 2.76 ± 0.72 | 3.24 ± 0.34 | 0.58 |
| GSH-PX (U/mL) | 160.7 a ± 16.5 | 255.2 c ± 39.6 | 209.0 b ± 17.2 | 0.02 |
| T-SOD (U/mL) | 108.3 ± 10.0 | 104.6 ± 4.7 | 103.9 ± 9.4 | 0.74 |
| T-AOC (U/mL) | 0.90 ± 0.27 | 1.28 ± 0.43 | 1.65 ± 0.63 | 0.13 |
CAT, catalase; GSH-PX, glutathione peroxidase; IgA, immunoglobulin A; IgG, immunoglobulin G; IgM, immunoglobulin M; T-AOC, total antioxidant capacity; T-SOD, total superoxide dismutase. The values were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). Means with different lowercase superscripts were significantly different at p < 0.05.
Effect of methionine supplementation on serum biochemical indexes in sika deer.
| Item | CON | LMet | HMet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TG (mmol/L) | 0.14 ± 0.07 | 0.16 ± 0.09 | 0.16 ± 0.09 | 0.91 |
| CHO (mmol/L) | 1.96 ± 0.32 | 1.89 ± 0.19 | 1.89 ± 0.26 | 0.92 |
| HDL-C (mmol/L) | 1.58 ± 0.27 | 1.58 ± 0.04 | 1.66 ± 0.16 | 0.80 |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) | 0.29 ± 0.06 | 0.33 ± 0.03 | 0.30 ± 0.02 | 0.34 |
| Glucose (mmol/L) | 8.8 ± 1.6 | 7.4 ± 0.5 | 8.7 ± 1.3 | 0.21 |
| TP (g/L) | 60.9 ± 2.2 | 62.7 ± 4.2 | 60.4 ± 2.3 | 0.55 |
| ALB (g/L) | 22.1 ± 5.2 | 21.0 ± 3.9 | 21.3 ± 5.3 | 0.95 |
| GLB (g/L) | 38.8 ± 3.7 | 41.7 ± 2.9 | 39.1 ± 3.0 | 0.42 |
| ALP (U/L) | 451.9 ± 150.7 | 410.6 ± 122.6 | 402.3 ± 45.2 | 0.81 |
| AST (U/L) | 50.8 ± 7.6 | 51.7 ± 3.7 | 57.1 ± 13.1 | 0.59 |
ALB, albumin; ALP, alkaline phosphatase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; CHO, cholesterol; GLB, globulin; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG, triglycerides; TP, total protein. The values were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD).
Effect of methionine supplementation on apparent amino acid digestibility in sika deer.
| Item (nmol/mL) | CON | LMet | HMet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aspartic acid | 81.1 ± 6.1 | 81.3 ± 4.3 | 80.9 ± 4.1 | 0.99 |
| Threonine | 76.0 ± 7.4 | 77.4 ± 7.1 | 75.8 ± 5.1 | 0.95 |
| Serine | 82.5 ± 5.5 | 83.3 ± 5.2 | 82.4 ± 4.0 | 0.97 |
| Glutamic acid | 87.2 ± 4.1 | 88.5 ± 4.4 | 87.2 ± 3.0 | 0.90 |
| Glycine | 77.8 ± 7.5 | 79.1 ± 6.7 | 77.6 ± 5.0 | 0.95 |
| Alanine | 79.9 ± 6.4 | 79.8 ± 4.0 | 79.4 ± 4.4 | 0.99 |
| Cysteine | 73.6 ± 8.2 | 77.6 ± 9.1 | 73.3 ± 5.5 | 0.76 |
| Valine | 80.6 ± 6.5 | 80.9 ± 4.1 | 80.5 ± 4.2 | 1.00 |
| Methionine | 74.2 ± 6.5 | 77.9 ± 9.4 | 72.5 ± 4.4 | 0.66 |
| Isoleucine | 81.1 ± 6.2 | 81.5 ± 4.3 | 81.1 ± 4.0 | 0.99 |
| Leucine | 86.5 ± 4.4 | 87.2 ± 3.1 | 86.5 ± 3.1 | 0.96 |
| Tyrosine | 82.5 ± 5.3 | 82.7 ± 3.9 | 82.2 ± 3.9 | 0.99 |
| Phenylalanine | 84.3 ± 5.2 | 84.5 ± 3.2 | 84.2 ± 3.5 | 1.00 |
| Lysine | 78.1 ± 7.0 | 77.9 ± 4.9 | 78.0 ± 4.6 | 1.00 |
| NH3 | 83.5 ± 6.1 | 84.6 ± 2.6 | 84.1 ± 2.1 | 0.94 |
| Histidine | 85.8 ± 4.7 | 86.6 ± 3.6 | 86.2 ± 3.2 | 0.97 |
| Arginine | 87.8 ± 3.6 | 88.1 ± 2.8 | 87.8 ± 2.7 | 0.99 |
| Proline | 83.3 ± 5.4 | 83.6 ± 3.4 | 83.2 ± 3.9 | 0.99 |
Comparing the concentration of amino acids in the serum of sika deer among the three groups.
| Item (nmol/mL) | CON | LMet | HMet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phosphoserine | 0.36 ± 0.04 | 0.36 ± 0.04 | 0.38 ± 0.06 | 0.75 |
| Taurine | 3.2 ± 0.6 | 3.2 ± 0.6 | 3.1 ± 0.8 | 0.94 |
| Urea | 169.6 ± 6.9 | 188.6 ± 35.2 | 219.6 ± 50.7 | 0.19 |
| Aspartic acid | 0.59 ± 0.16 | 0.53 ± 0.04 | 0.57 ± 0.10 | 0.78 |
| Threonine | 1.5 ± 0.4 | 1.4 ± 0.2 | 1.3 ± 0.2 | 0.57 |
| Serine | 1.8 ± 0.3 | 2.0 ± 0.2 | 1.9 ± 0.3 | 0.49 |
| Glutamate | 2.2 ± 0.3 | 2.0 ± 0.2 | 2.2 ± 0.2 | 0.65 |
| Alpha-aminoadipate | 0.23 ± 0.11 | 0.21 ± 0.09 | 0.21 ± 0.09 | 0.94 |
| Glycine | 9.2 ± 0.9 | 8.5 ± 0.1 | 9.8 ± 1.4 | 0.21 |
| Alanine | 4.4 ± 0.5 | 4.8 ± 0.4 | 4.9 ± 0.3 | 0.35 |
| Citrulline | 2.3 ± 0.2 | 1.9 ± 0.2 | 2.1 ± 0.3 | 0.20 |
| α-Aminobutyric acid | 0.19 ± 0.04 | 0.17 ± 0.04 | 0.19 ± 0.08 | 0.78 |
| Valine | 5.9 ± 0.9 | 5.3 ± 0.6 | 5.7 ± 0.9 | 0.56 |
| Methionine | 0.87 ± 0.13 | 0.87 ± 0.11 | 0.90 ± 0.04 | 0.91 |
| Cystathionine | 0.24 ± 0.03 | 0.22 ± 0.02 | 0.24 ± 0.02 | 0.40 |
| Isoleucine | 1.9 ± 0.4 | 1.9 ± 0.3 | 1.8 ± 0.3 | 0.90 |
| Leucine | 3.2 ± 0.4 | 3.2 ± 0.5 | 3.4 ± 0.4 | 0.84 |
| Tyrosine | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 1.0 ± 0.2 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 0.58 |
| Phenylalanine | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 0.43 |
| Beta alanine | 0.37 ± 0.05 | 0.37 ± 0.06 | 0.38 ± 0.06 | 0.96 |
| NH3 | 3.4 ± 0.5 | 3.4 ± 0.5 | 3.8 ± 0.7 | 0.66 |
| Hydroxylysine | 1.03 a ± 0.15 | 0.83 b ± 0.05 | 0.74 b ± 0.08 | 0.01 |
| Ornithine | 2.1 ± 0.5 | 2.0 ± 0.3 | 2.3 ± 1.0 | 0.74 |
| Lysine | 2.3 a ± 0.4 | 2.1 ab ± 0.1 | 1.8 b ± 0.1 | 0.03 |
| 1-methylhistidine | 0.49 ± 0.06 | 0.43 ± 0.04 | 0.41 ± 0.02 | 0.09 |
| Histidine | 1.3 ± 0.2 | 1.4 ± 0.1 | 1.3 ± 0.2 | 0.50 |
| 3-methylhistidine | 2.0 ± 0.2 | 1.8 ± 0.2 | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 0.10 |
| Carnosine | 0.30 ± 0.05 | 0.28 ± 0.05 | 0.24 ± 0.07 | 0.37 |
| Arginine | 3.6 ± 0.8 | 3.8 ± 0.7 | 3.8 ± 0.7 | 0.94 |
| Proline | 2.0 ± 0.5 | 2.0 ± 0.2 | 2.2 ± 0.2 | 0.57 |
The values were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). Means with different lowercase superscripts were significantly different at p < 0.05.
Effect of methionine supplementation on rumen fermentation.
| Item | CON | LMet | HMet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acetate (mmol/L) | 57.7 ± 4.0 | 61.9 ± 2.0 | 57.1 ± 6.5 | 0.63 |
| Propionate (mmol/L) | 17.0 ± 3.5 | 15.8 ± 3.2 | 15.7 ± 1.4 | 0.77 |
| Isobutyrate (mmol/L) | 1.3 ± 0.3 | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 1.2 ± 0.3 | 0.58 |
| Butyrate (mmol/L) | 6.9 ± 1.2 | 8.1 ± 2.3 | 6.7 ± 2.0 | 0.57 |
| Isovalerate (mmol/L) | 1.3 ± 0.4 | 1.6 ± 0.4 | 1.3 ± 0.4 | 0.52 |
| Valerate (mmol/L) | 0.45 ± 0.15 | 0.48 ± 0.13 | 0.44 ± 0.10 | 0.88 |
| TVFAs (mmol/L) | 84.7 ± 6.4 | 89.3 ± 16.7 | 82.3 ± 10.0 | 0.71 |
| Ammonia (mg/dL) | 11.1 ± 2.4 | 11.0 ± 2.6 | 10.7 ± 1.7 | 0.97 |
| Microbial proteins (mg/mL) | 1.8 a ± 0.2 | 2.6 b ± 0.4 | 2.1 ab ± 0.3 | 0.02 |
| Rumen fluid pH | 6.6 ± 0.1 | 6.8 ± 0.2 | 6.9 ± 0.2 | 0.07 |
TVFA, total volatile fatty acids. The values were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). Means with different lowercase superscripts were significantly different at p < 0.05.
Figure 1Bacterial composition in the rumen of sika deer at the phylum (A) and genus (B) levels.
Figure 2Comparisons of the alpha diversity of the bacteria in the rumen of sika deer.
Figure 3Comparisons of the bacterial communities in the rumen of sika deer. Principal coordinate analyses based on unweighted UniFrac distances (A), Bray–Curtis distance (B), and weighted UniFrac distance (C).
Adonis analysis of the bacterial communities in the rumen of sika deer.
| Group | Unweighted UniFrac | Bray–Curtis | Weighted UniFrac | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 | R2 | R2 | ||||
| CON vs. LMet | 0.33 | 0.03 | 0.29 | 0.02 | 0.47 | 0.02 |
| CON vs. HMet | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.13 | 0.53 | 0.10 | 0.62 |
| LMet vs. HMet | 0.25 | 0.03 | 0.21 | 0.03 | 0.32 | 0.02 |
Figure 4Bacterial analysis in genus-level differences in sika deer (* indicates p < 0.05).