| Literature DB >> 36245526 |
Jie Li1,2,3, Shu Zhang1,2,3, Xin Gu1,2,3, Jintang Xie4, Xiaodong Zhu4, Yizhen Wang1,2,3, Tizhong Shan1,2,3.
Abstract
Recent years have witnessed a dramatic increase in the demand for healthy and high-quality pork. Alfalfa, one of the most popular perennial forages, is considered a rich source of highly nutritional forage for livestock feed, as it contains over 90% insoluble dietary fiber. Nevertheless, there is a paucity of data confirming the effects of adding alfalfa on pork quality, amino acid composition, and intestinal microbiota composition. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the effects of different dietary levels of alfalfa on carcass traits, meat quality, amino acid and fatty acid composition, and the intestinal microbiota of Heigai pigs. A total of 72 finishing Heigai pigs were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 36), with six replicate groups and six pigs per replication. The two experimental diets were formulated to include graded levels of alfalfa, 20% (AM20) and 30% (AM30). The results showed that adding 30% alfalfa meal did not affect the growth performance of Heigai pigs but significantly reduced backfat thickness (P < 0.05), pH (P < 0.05), increased the a* value, b* value, and flavor amino acid and essential amino acid contents in longissimus dorsi muscle (LDM). In addition, AM30 didn't affect colonic microbiota abundance but significantly reduced the relative abundances of three phyla, such as Verrucomicrobia, and 43 genera, such as Akkermansia, and significantly increased the relative abundances of 47 genera, such as Prevotella-2. Overall, these results advocate for a diet containing 30% alfalfa to improve meat quality by changing the intestinal microflora composition without affecting the growth performance of Heigai pigs, which provides compelling evidence for the use of alfalfa to relieve the pressure on corn and soybean meal demand and produce high-quality pork.Entities:
Keywords: Heigai pig; alfalfa meal; dietary fiber; growth performance; gut microbiota; meat quality
Year: 2022 PMID: 36245526 PMCID: PMC9566568 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.975455
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Effects of different levels of alfalfa meal on growth performance of Heigai pigs.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| Initial BW (kg) | 77.64 ± 6.52 | 77.93 ± 7.93 |
| Final BW (kg) | 111.21 ± 11.52 | 113.93 ± 10.14 |
| Total weight gain (kg) | 33.57 ± 7.84 | 36.00 ± 3.06 |
| ADG (g/d) | 460 ± 120 | 480 ± 100 |
| F:G ratio | 5.75 ± 1.41 | 5.31 ± 1.57 |
Values are mean ± SEM (n = 10).
AM20, 20% alfalfa meal diet; AM30, 30% alfalfa meal diet.
BW, body weight; ADG, average daily gain; F:G ratio, ratio of feed to gain.
Effects of different levels of alfalfa meal on carcass traits of Heigai pigs.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| Carcass weight (kg) | 80.29 ± 11.60 | 83.09 ± 8.59 |
| Dressing percentage (%) | 73.13 ± 2.28 | 72.52 ± 1.35 |
| BFT1 (mm) | 45.36 ± 6.21 | 40.19 ± 4.40 |
| BFT2 (mm) | 32.72 ± 6.40 | 29.72 ± 4.87 |
| BFT3 (mm) | 24.82 ± 5.61 | 15.91 ± 6.68 |
| ABFT (mm) | 34.30 ± 3.76 | 28.61 ± 3.82 |
Means in rows with different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05). Values are mean ± SEM (n = 6). Dressing percentage (%) = Carcass weight/Slaughter weight × 100%. Lean percentage (%) = Lean weight/Carcass weight × 100%.
AM 20, 20% alfalfa meal diet; AM 30, 30% alfalfa meal diet.
BFT1, back fat thickness at the shoulder; BFT2, back fat thickness between the 6 and 7 ribs; BFT3, back fat thickness at last rib; ABFT, average backfat thickness, average (BFT1 + BFT2 + BFT3).
Effects of different levels of alfalfa meal on the meat quality of Heigai pigs.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| IMF (g/100 g) | 3.57 ± 0.48 | 3.74 ± 0.80 |
| Inosinic acid (mg/kg) | 1730.90 ± 97.12 | 1640.17 ± 230.01 |
| Marbling score | 1.57 ± 0.53 | 2.00 ± 0.58 |
| Drip loss (%) | 1.87 ± 0.49 | 1.96 ± 0.55 |
| pH45min | 6.60 ± 0.20 | 5.97 ± 0.26 |
| pH24h | 5.66 ± 0.07 | 5.67 ± 0.13 |
| ΔpH | 0.94 ± 0.18 | 0.32 ± 0.18 |
| L* value | 35.34 ± 3.47 | 37.76 ± 1.69 |
| a* value | 11.67 ± 0.31 | 12.78 ± 1.14 |
| b* value | 6.95 ± 1.04 | 8.14 ± 0.66 |
| L* value24h | 46.41 ± 2.13 | 45.73 ± 2.06 |
| a* value24h | 9.28 ± 1.16 | 16.39 ± 2.36 |
| b* value24h | 13.27 ± 1.48 | 13.81 ± 1.90 |
Means in rows with different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Means in rows with different letters are significantly different (P < 0.01). Values are mean ± SEM (n = 6).
AM 20, 20% alfalfa meal diet; AM 30, 30% alfalfa meal diet.
IMF, intramuscular fat content; ΔpH = pH45 – pH24.
Amino acid composition in LDM of Heigai pigs.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| Arginine | 1.52 ± 0.06A | 0.53 ± 0.09B |
| Threonine | 1.23 ± 0.19 | 1.55 ± 0.23 |
| Serine | 0.92 ± 0.11 | 1.08 ± 0.13 |
| Glutamate | 2.71 ± 0.52 | 3.54 ± 0.51 |
| Proline | 0.30 ± 0.28 | 0.22 ± 0.25 |
| Glycine | 0.91 ± 0.13 | 0.85 ± 0.11 |
| Alanine | 1.25 ± 0.18 | 1.3 ± 0.19 |
| Cysteine | 0.13 ± 0.05 | 0.1 ± 0.04 |
| Valine | 0.59 ± 0.5 | 0.63 ± 0.27 |
| Methionine | 0.67 ± 0.05 | 1.08 ± 0.18 |
| Isoleucine | 1.00 ± 0.14 | 0.92 ± 0.11 |
| Leucine | 1.48 ± 0.12 | 1.85 ± 0.24 |
| Tyrosine | 0.75 ± 0.07 | 2.15 ± 0.28 |
| Phenylalanine | 0.91 ± 0.06 | 0.99 ± 0.12 |
| Lysine | 1.15 ± 0.23 | 1.67 ± 0.13 |
| Histidine | 1.58 ± 0.34 | 1.34 ± 0.22 |
| Aspartate | 1.97 ± 0.36 | 2.89 ± 0.76 |
| FAA | 14.46 ± 1.59 | 16.57 ± 1.87 |
| EAA | 9.09 ± 0.92 | 10.35 ± 1.1 |
| Total | 19.07 ± 1.56 | 22.83 ± 2.48 |
Means in rows with different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05). Values are mean ± standard error (n = 6).
AM 20 = 20% alfalfa meal diet; AM 30 = 30% alfalfa meal diet.
FAA, flavor amino acids, FAA = ∑(Serine, Glutamate, Proline, Glycine, Alanine, Valine, Methionine, Isoleucine, Leucine, Lysine, Arginine, Aspartate); EAA, essential amino acids, EAA = ∑(Threonine, Valine, Methionine, Isoleucine, Leucine, Phenylalanine, Lysine).
Figure 1Morphological structure, the contents of triglyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TCHO), and relative mRNA levels of genes related to glycolysis myofiber in LDM of Heigai pigs. (A) Histological images (10x) of Hematoxylin-Eosin staining. Scale bar = 100 μm. (B) The TG and TCHO contents. (C) Relative mRNA expression of genes related to glycolysis (PFKM, PKF, HK2). (D) Relative mRNA expression of myosin heavy-chain (MyHC) isoform genes (MyHCI, MyHCIIa, MyHCIIb, and MyHCIIx). The mRNA expression was normalized to GAPDH gene expression. The data is shown as the mean ± standard error (n = 6). *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.
Figure 2Effects of AM20 and AM30 on gut microbiota in Heigai pigs. (A) Unweighted UniFrac PCoA analysis. Each symbol represents a sample. (B) Stacked bar chart at phylum level in colonic samples. Different colors indicate different species, different columns represent different subgroups, and the abundance of each subgroup is the average of all biological replicates within that group. (C) Significant differences in relative abundance of genera between AM20 and AM30 (Mann-Whitney U test). The box presented the 95% CIs; the line inside denotes the median. (D) Spearman's r correlation heat map between significantly different gut microbiota and significantly different carcass indexes, meat quality traits, and amino acid profiles for different levels of alfalfa meal treatment. ABFT, average backfat thickness; FAA, flavor amino acids; EAA, essential amino acid. Significance and correlation coefficient was analyzed by Spearman's correlation analysis. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.
Figure 3Working model of the effect of alfalfa levels on Heigai pigs.