| Literature DB >> 36136668 |
Francesca Bennato1, Camillo Martino2, Marco Di Domenico3, Andrea Ianni1, Benli Chai4, Lisa Di Marcantonio3, Cesare Cammà3, Giuseppe Martino1.
Abstract
The accumulation and disposal of by-products deriving from the agro-food industry represents a problem both from an economic and environmental point of view. The use of these matrices in zootechnical nutrition could represent a feasible solution. The aim of the study was to examine the effect of a diet containing olive leaves (OL), a by-product of the olive industry, on the ruminal microbial community of Saanen goat kids and on volatile organic compounds (VOCs) produced during the digestion. Twenty goat kids were randomly divided into two groups of ten goat kids each. The control group (CTR) was fed with a standard diet, while the experimental group (OL+) received a custom-formulated diet containing 10 % OL on a dry matter (DM) basis. After 30 days of trial, genomic DNA was extracted from the rumen liquor and prepared for 16S rRNA-gene sequencing to characterize the rumen microbiota; furthermore, rumen VOCs were also characterized by solid-phase microextraction coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The Shannon's alpha index was not significantly different between the two groups, on the contrary, Bray-Curtis (p < 0.01) and Jaccard (p < 0.01) distances evidenced that feed affected microbial community. Eleven genera were influenced by OL supplementation, with a significant increase (p < 0.05) in Paludibacter, Fibrobacter, Sphaerochaeta Christensenella, Rikenella, Oligosphaera, Candidatus Endomicrobium, Anaerovorax, and Atopobium was observed, while the percentages of Bacteroides and Selenomonas were reduced (p < 0.05). Differences were also observed between the two groups at the family level (p < 0.004). Fibrobacteriaceae, Christensenellaceae, Coriobacteriaceae, Oligosphaeraceae, Candidatus Endomicrobium, and Planctomycetaceae were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in goat kids fed OL diet compared to CTR, while the levels of other identified families, Succinivibrionaceae and Bifidobacteriaceae, were opposite (p < 0.05). Finally, results showed that the main phyla in both groups were Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes; however, no significant differences in the relative abundance of any phyla were observed between the two groups. In addition to what has been reported, the analysis of VOCs at the rumen level showed the ability of the OL integration to induce an increase in hexanoic acid and a parallel decrease in decanal. Furthermore, only in OL+ samples there was the accumulation of α-terpineol to which a wide range of interesting biological properties is attributed. The presence of VOCs associated with health status suggests a favorable role of OL in preserving and improving animal welfare.Entities:
Keywords: 16s rRNA; goat; olive leaves; rumen microbiota; volatile profile
Year: 2022 PMID: 36136668 PMCID: PMC9505022 DOI: 10.3390/vetsci9090452
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vet Sci ISSN: 2306-7381
Ingredient and chemical composition of the concentrate for control group (CTR) and experimental group (OL+).
| CTR | OL+ | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Soybean, meal | 17.50 | 15.50 |
| Wheat, bran | 20.00 | 20.00 |
| Barley, meal | 32.00 | 27.00 |
| Corn, meal | 28.50 | 25.50 |
| Olive leaves | - | 10.00 |
| Vitamin and mineral | 2.00 | 2.00 |
|
| ||
| Dry matter (DM) | 89.10 | 88.50 |
| Ash 1, % | 5.10 | 5.26 |
| Ether extract (EE) 1, % | 3.25 | 3.36 |
| Crude protein (CP) 1, % | 18.20 | 17.95 |
| Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) 1, % | 12.55 | 13.32 |
| Acid detergent fiber (ADF) 1, % | 5.44 | 5.95 |
| Acid detergent lignin (ADL) 1, % | 1.16 | 1.39 |
| Starch 1, % | 48.59 | 43.88 |
| ME 1, MJ/kg | 7.47 | 7.18 |
1 on a DM basis.
Data acquisition for control group (CTR) and experimental group (OL+).
| CTR | OL+ | |
|---|---|---|
| Starting reads | 236,831 ± 114,396 | 277,576 ± 48,923 |
| Trimmed | 220,392 ± 110,678 | 257,589 ± 47,028 |
| Filtered | 219,302 ± 110,140 | 256,299 ± 46,772 |
| Denoised R1 | 218,575 ± 109,722 | 255,226 ± 46,491 |
| Denoised R2 | 218,290 ± 109,463 | 254,648 ± 46,359 |
| Merged | 217,631 ± 109,077 | 253,679 ± 46,116 |
| Non-chimera | 1,955,481 ± 91,487 | 221,149 ± 42,834 |
| Reads for analysis (%) | 83 | 80 |
Data are reported as the mean of the ten records per group ± standard deviation.
Figure 1Alpha diversity between control group (CTR—red) and experimental group (OL+—green).
SIMPER-generated genus list ordered by percentage contribution to Bray-Curtis dissimilarity and genera of which abundances significantly differ (OL+ vs CTR) based on Kruskal–Wallis tests.
| Genus | Average | S.D. | Ratio | CTR | OL+ | Cumulative Sum | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.0691659 | 0.0399527 | 1.7312 | 9207.3 | 8482.8 | 0.1828 | 0.290 | |
|
| 0.0490198 | 0.0492473 | 0.9954 | 1759 | 3719.2 | 0.3124 | 0.023 | |
|
| 0.040015 | 0.0494914 | 0.8085 | 2459.2 | 790.5 | 0.4182 | 0.019 | |
|
| 0.0256097 | 0.0256221 | 0.9995 | 937.6 | 1385.1 | 0.4859 | 0.070 | |
|
| 0.0248105 | 0.0331442 | 0.7486 | 1207.4 | 326 | 0.5515 | 0.050 | |
|
| 0.022674 | 0.0263719 | 0.8598 | 1033.3 | 33 | 0.6115 | 0.041 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.0131868 | 0.0117324 | 1.124 | 728 | 204.9 | 0.7439 | 0.082 | |
|
| 0.0122287 | 0.0090614 | 1.3495 | 584.9 | 991.6 | 0.7762 | 0.034 | |
|
| 0.0096275 | 0.0118004 | 0.8159 | 453.2 | 270.3 | 0.8016 | 0.384 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.0067165 | 0.0040503 | 1.6583 | 574.2 | 623.6 | 0.8375 | 0.705 | |
|
| 0.0059045 | 0.0060017 | 0.9838 | 373.7 | 266.2 | 0.8531 | 0.677 | |
|
| 0.0053678 | 0.0087699 | 0.6121 | 38.4 | 224.9 | 0.8673 | 0.249 | |
|
| 0.0048374 | 0.0052325 | 0.9245 | 260.9 | 132.2 | 0.8801 | 0.406 | |
|
| 0.0044499 | 0.0049431 | 0.9002 | 129 | 268.9 | 0.8919 | 0.112 | |
|
| 0.003994 | 0.0029685 | 1.3454 | 313.7 | 298 | 0.9024 | 0.520 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.0036021 | 0.0045189 | 0.7971 | 174.2 | 56.6 | 0.9223 | 0.173 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.0029331 | 0.0024578 | 1.1934 | 106.9 | 170.3 | 0.9379 | 0.151 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.0022393 | 0.0020527 | 1.0909 | 29.3 | 118.9 | 0.9515 | 0.07 | |
|
| 0.0021554 | 0.0012938 | 1.6659 | 121.8 | 168.3 | 0.9572 | 0.034 | |
|
| 0.0020747 | 0.0014231 | 1.4579 | 128.9 | 60.7 | 0.9627 | 0.082 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.0018624 | 0.001527 | 1.2196 | 83.4 | 69.8 | 0.9729 | 0.733 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.0011188 | 0.0006048 | 1.8497 | 44.4 | 75.4 | 0.9839 | 0.29 | |
|
| 0.0010989 | 0.0014461 | 0.7599 | 49.7 | 0.8 | 0.9868 | 0.49 | |
|
| 0.0010159 | 0.001484 | 0.6846 | 19.2 | 58.8 | 0.9895 | 0.069 | |
|
| 0.0008977 | 0.0006995 | 1.2833 | 46.5 | 29.8 | 0.9918 | 0.650 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.000696 | 0.0004842 | 1.4373 | 33.8 | 51.5 | 0.9974 | 0.211 | |
|
| 0.0005036 | 0.0003512 | 1.434 | 21.6 | 33.7 | 0.9987 | 0.211 | |
|
| 0.0004819 | 0.0004932 | 0.9772 | 14.2 | 32.8 | 1 | 0.017 |
In bold: genus for which the abundance significantly differed (p < 0.05) between the two groups based on Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric ANOVA tests.
Figure 2Boxplots showing the Bray-Curtis dissimilarities at genera level. The boxes in the plot represent the interquartile ranges, the horizontal lines give the position of the medians, the vertical bars indicate the range. The dots indicate outliers.
SIMPER-generated family list ordered by percentage contribution to Bray-Curtis dissimilarity and families of which abundances significantly differ between two groups (OL+ vs CTR) based on Kruskal–Wallis tests.
| Families | Average | S.D. | Ratio | CTR | OL+ | Cumulative Sum | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prevotellaceae | 0.058200 | 0.035000 | 1.6624 | 10449 | 8134.1 | 0.2359 | 0.096 | |
| Subdivision5_genera_incertae_sedis | 0.031800 | 0.031900 | 0.9972 | 1563.9 | 3041.7 | 0.3648 | 0.023 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ruminococcaceae | 0.024600 | 0.017300 | 1.4234 | 4425.6 | 5237.3 | 0.5724 | 0.290 | |
| Porphyromonadaceae | 0.024500 | 0.021900 | 1.118 | 3670.3 | 4806.1 | 0.6716 | 0.112 | |
| Rikenellaceae | 0.017900 | 0.017000 | 1.057 | 1068.7 | 268.6 | 0.7443 | 0.140 | |
| Lachnospiraceae | 0.015400 | 0.010000 | 1.5428 | 1983 | 2245.7 | 0.8069 | 0.650 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Spirochaetaceae | 0.007300 | 0.005480 | 1.3321 | 754.7 | 934.7 | 0.8819 | 0.290 | |
| Anaeroplasmataceae | 0.006220 | 0.007280 | 0.8532 | 383.9 | 248.8 | 0.9071 | 0.910 | |
| Acidaminococcaceae | 0.003170 | 0.005220 | 0.6065 | 191.6 | 50.5 | 0.9199 | 0.174 | |
| Clostridiales_Incertae Sedis XIII | 0.003160 | 0.002490 | 1.2672 | 115.1 | 223.9 | 0.9328 | 0.034 | |
| Saccharibacteria_genera_incertae_sedis | 0.003000 | 0.002850 | 1.0543 | 195.8 | 109.4 | 0.9449 | 0.571 | |
| Bacteroidaceae | 0.002530 | 0.001650 | 1.5293 | 185.7 | 72.6 | 0.9552 | 0.015 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Erysipelotrichaceae | 0.000655 | 0.000820 | 0.7987 | 25.5 | 54.2 | 0.9835 | 0.363 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Victivallaceae | 0.000624 | 0.000857 | 0.7283 | 18.9 | 46.4 | 0.9886 | 0.272 | |
| Bdellovibrionaceae | 0.000541 | 0.000460 | 1.1771 | 28.8 | 25.7 | 0.9908 | 0.597 | |
| Elusimicrobiaceae | 0.000535 | 0.000386 | 1.3869 | 31.9 | 44.5 | 0.993 | 0.427 | |
| Veillonellaceae | 0.000431 | 0.000313 | 1.379 | 50.5 | 32.2 | 0.9947 | 0.064 | |
| Verrucomicrobiaceae | 0.000252 | 0.000760 | 0.3317 | 0 | 14 | 0.9957 | 0.317 | |
| Eubacteriaceae | 0.000240 | 0.000217 | 1.1074 | 10.6 | 20.8 | 0.9967 | 0.120 | |
| Rhodospirillaceae | 0.000170 | 0.000255 | 0.6662 | 9.3 | 5.5 | 0.9974 | 0.85 | |
| Acholeplasmataceae | 0.000152 | 0.000160 | 0.952 | 7.6 | 3.8 | 0.998 | 0.831 | |
| Sutterellaceae | 0.000151 | 0.000169 | 0.8924 | 2.1 | 9.6 | 0.9986 | 0.029 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Streptococcaceae | 0.000126 | 0.000089 | 1.4141 | 7.3 | 6.4 | 0.9997 | 0.210 | |
| Anaerolineaceae | 0.000083 | 0.000073 | 1.1437 | 3 | 6.7 | 1 | 0.207 |
In bold: families for which the abundance significantly differed (p < 0.05) between the two feed groups based on Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric ANOVA tests.
Figure 3Boxplots showing the Bray-Curtis dissimilarities at family level. The boxes in the plot represent the interquartile ranges, the horizontal lines give the position of the medians, the vertical bars indicate the range. The dots indicate outliers.
Figure 4Phyla-level relative abundance. A color-coded bar plot showing the average bacterial phyla distribution across the control group (CTR) and experimental group (OL+).
Volatile compounds (VOCs) detected in rumen samples obtained from goat kids fed a standard diet (CTR) and animals fed a dietary supplementation with olive leaves (OL+).
| VOCs 1 | CTR | OL+ | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Acetic acid | 3.58 ± 0.49 | 3.12 ± 0.45 | ns |
| Butanoic acid | 40.83 ± 3.94 | 36.03 ± 3.79 | ns |
| Butanoic acid, 3-methyl | 4.02 ± 0.32 | 4.24 ± 0.35 | ns |
| Pentanoic acid | 0.81 ± 0.09 | 0.91 ± 0.11 | ns |
| Hexanoic acid | 7.07 ± 0.76 | 9.35 ± 0.89 | * |
| Eicosanoic acid | 0.41 ± 0.05 | 0.40 ± 0.06 | ns |
|
| |||
| Pentanal, 2-methyl | 6.17 ± 0.57 | 6.21 ± 0.76 | ns |
| Decanal | 1.89 ± 0.17 | 0.85 ± 0.10 | ** |
| Undecanal | 0.39 ± 0.05 | 0.33 ± 0.04 | ns |
| Tridecanal | 0.24 ± 0.04 | 0.22 ± 0.03 | ns |
| Hexadecanal | 1.44 ± 0.13 | 1.33 ± 0.16 | ns |
| Pentadecanal | 1.08 ± 0.14 | 1.00 ± 0.12 | ns |
|
| |||
| 2-hexanol | 1.00 ± 0.09 | 0.88 ± 0.09 | ns |
| α-terpineol | nd | 3.06 ± 0.26 | ** |
|
| |||
| 2-nonanone | 5.47 ± 0.47 | 5.57 ± 0.53 | ns |
| 2-hexanone, 5-methyl | 0.26 ± 0.03 | 0.27 ± 0.03 | ns |
| 2-heptadecanone | 0.23 ± 0.02 | 0.31 ± 0.04 | ns |
|
| |||
| Pentanoic acid, ethyl ester | 8.82 ± 0.95 | 10.31 ± 0.93 | ns |
| Heptanoic acid, ethyl ester | 1.27 ± 0.11 | 1.11 ± 0.10 | ns |
| Octadecanoic acid, phenylmethyl ester | 0.80 ± 0.08 | 0.71 ± 0.08 | ns |
| Eicosanoic acid, phenylmethyl ester | 0.46 ± 0.05 | 0.48 ± 0.04 | ns |
| Oxalic acid, allyl octadecyl ester | 0.21 ± 0.03 | 0.19 ± 0.02 | ns |
|
| |||
| Octadecane, 3-ethyl-5-(2-ethylbutyl) | 2.06 ± 0.23 | 1.82 ± 0.17 | ns |
| Octanoic acid | 1.04 ± 0.13 | 1.09 ± 0.08 | ns |
1 Volatile compounds (VOCs) are expressed as relative mean percentages (%) of total detected compounds ± standard deviation (SD). nd = not detectable; ns = not significant; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.