不同GI与CBI组合饲粮对牦牛瘤胃和直肠细菌区系的影响

doi:10.16431/j.cnki.1671-7236.2022.05.013

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 【目的】本研究通过探讨不同粗饲料分级指数(GI)与碳水化合物平衡指数(CBI)组合饲粮对牦牛瘤胃和直肠细菌区系的影响，旨在为舍饲牦牛营养物质消化吸收的调控以及饲粮合理配制提供参考。【方法】选取3.5岁健康、体重相近的公牦牛12头分为3组，即玉米青贮-苜蓿干草-精料组(CAC组)、玉米青贮-小麦秸秆-精料组(CWC组)、玉米青贮-燕麦干草-精料组(COC组)。3组试验牛均采用全混合饲粮方式进行饲喂，试验期为28 d。试验结束时采集瘤胃液和直肠粪样，应用16S rRNA测序技术分析瘤胃和直肠细菌区系变化情况。【结果】对于瘤胃，①3组牦牛瘤胃细菌区系的Chao1指数、Ace指数、Simpson指数和Shannon指数差异均不显著(P>0.05);②PCoA分析结果显示，CAC与COC组的瘤胃细菌区系有明显的PC1差异(P<0.05);③在门水平上，CWC组牦牛瘤胃放线菌门与CAC、COC组存在显著差异(P<0.05);在属水平上，3组牦牛瘤胃细菌区系差异不显著(P>0.05);④瘤胃细菌基因功能预测结果显示，复制与修复、原核细胞群体、细胞信号传递、环境适应等KEGG二级代谢通路在CAC与COC组存在显著差异(P<0.05);复制与修复、转录、核苷酸代谢、脂质代谢、原核细胞群体和老化等KEGG二级代谢通路在CAC与CWC组存在显著差异(P<0.05);脂质代谢、其他氨基酸代谢和老化等KEGG二级代谢通路在CWC组和COC组存在显著差异(P<0.05)。对于直肠，①3组牦牛直肠细菌区系的Chao1指数、Ace指数、Simpson指数和Shannon指数差异均不显著(P>0.05);②PCoA分析结果显示，3组牦牛直肠细菌区系差异不显著(P>0.05);③在门水平上和属水平上3组牦牛直肠细菌区系差异均不显著(P>0.05);④直肠细菌基因功能预测结果显示，与能量代谢有关的KEGG二级代谢通路在CAC与COC组存在显著差异(P<0.05);膜转运、能量代谢、聚糖生物合成和代谢、辅助因子和维生素的新陈代谢、细胞运动、折叠降解、翻译和环境适应等KEGG二级代谢通路在CAC与CWC组存在显著差异(P<0.05);脂质代谢通路在CWC和COC组存在显著差异(P<0.05)。【结论】不同GI与CBI组合饲粮改变了牦牛瘤胃细菌区系，但是直肠细菌区系组成多样性却不受其影响。随着GI的降低，瘤胃细菌群落丰富度有增加的趋势，且GI越高越有利于牦牛脂肪沉积。

关键词: 粗饲料分级指数(GI); 碳水化合物平衡指数(CBI); 牦牛; 细菌区系

Abstract: 【Objective】 The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different forage grade index (GI) and carbohydrate balance index (CBI) combined diets on rumen and rectal bacterial flora of yaks,and to provide theoretical reference value for the regulation of nutrient digestion and absorption and rational dietary allocation of yaks.【Method】 Twelve healthy 3.5-year-old male yaks with similar weight were divided into three groups equally,which were corn silage-alfalfa hay-concentrate group (CAC),corn silage-wheat straw-concentrate group (CWC),and corn silage-oat hay-concentrate group (COC).All three groups of experimental yaks were fed with total mixed diet for 28 days.At the end of the experiment,rumen fluid and rectal stool samples were collected,and 16S rRNA sequencing technology was used to analyze the changes of rumen and rectum bacterial flora.【Result】 For rumen,①The Chao1 index,Ace index,Simpson index and Shannon index of the rumen bacterial flora in the three groups were not significantly different (P>0.05).②PCoA analysis showed that there was significant PC1 difference in rumen flora between CAC and COC groups (P<0.05).③At the phylum level,the Actinobacteria in rumen of CWC group were significantly different from those in CAC and COC groups (P<0.05).At the genus level,there was no significant difference in rumen bacterial flora among the three groups (P>0.05).④Rumen bacterial gene function prediction showed that:The secondary differential KEGG metabolic pathways including replication and repair,cellular community-prokaryotes,cellular processes and signaling and environmental adaptation were significantly different in the rumen bacterial flora between CAC and COC groups (P<0.05),replication and repair,transcription,nucleotide metabolism,lipid metabolism,cellular community-prokaryotes and aging were significantly different between CAC and CWC groups (P<0.05),and lipid metabolism,metabolism of other amino acid and aging were significantly different between CWC and COC groups (P<0.05).For rectum,①The Chao1 index,Ace index,Simpson index and Shannon index of the rectal bacterial flora in three groups were not significantly different (P>0.05).②PCoA analysis showed that there was no significant difference in rectal bacterial flora among three groups (P>0.05).③There was no significant difference in rectal bacterial flora among three groups at phylum and genus levels (P>0.05).④Rectum bacterial gene function prediction showed that:Energy metabolism pathway was significantly different in the rectal bacterial flora between CAC and COC groups (P<0.05),membrane transport,energy metabolism,glycan biosynthesis and metabolism,metabolism of cofactors and vitamins,cell motility,folding,sorting and degradation,transcription and environmental adaptation were significantly different between CAC and CWC groups (P<0.05),and lipid metabolism was significantly different between CWC and COC groups (P<0.05).【Conclusion】 Different GI and CBI diet combinations changed rumen bacterial flora,but rectal bacterial flora diversity was not affected.With the decrease of GI,there was a tendency to increase the abundance of rumen bacterial community,and the higher GI,the more likely it was to cause fat accumulation.

Key words: roughage grading index(GI); carbohydrate balance index(CBI); yak; bacterial flora

中图分类号:

S816.31

郝文君, 夏洪泽, 焦洋, 崔占鸿, 刘书杰, 周磊, 周玉青. 不同GI与CBI组合饲粮对牦牛瘤胃和直肠细菌区系的影响[J]. 中国畜牧兽医, 2022, 49(5): 1715-1726.

HAO Wenjun, XIA Hongze, JIAO Yang, CUI Zhanhong, LIU Shujie, ZHOU Lei, ZHOU Yuqing. Effects of Different Roughage Grading Index and Carbohydrate Balance Index Combinations Diets on Bacterial Flora in the Rumen and Rectum of Yaks[J]. China Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2022, 49(5): 1715-1726.

参考文献

[1] 李铸.牦牛饲养投入品安全分析与潜在危害点控制[D].成都:西南民族大学,2017. LI Z.Safety analysis and potential hazard point control on inputs of stall-feeding yak[D].Chengdu:Southwest Minzu University,2017.(in Chinese)
[2] 董利锋,杨修竹,高彦华,等.饲粮不同NDF/NFC水平对周岁后荷斯坦奶牛生产性能、营养物质消化率、瘤胃发酵特征和甲烷排放的影响[J].草业学报,2021,30(2):156-165. DONG L F,YANG X Z,GAO Y H,et al.Effects of dietary NDF:NFC ratio on growth performance,nutrient digestibility,rumen fermentation characteristics and methane emission of Holstein heifers[J].Acta Prataculture Sinica,2021,30(2):156-165.(in Chinese)
[3] 姚军虎.反刍动物碳水化合物高效利用的综合调控[J].饲料工业,2013,34(17):1-12. YAO J H.Comprehensive regulation of efficient utilization of carbohydrates in ruminants[J].Feed Industry,2013,34(17):1-12.(in Chinese)
[4] 雒国彬,孙凯晶,王馨影,等.饲喂高淀粉饲粮时不同瘤胃降解淀粉水平对奶牛泌乳性能、营养物质表观消化率和氮平衡的影响[J].动物营养学报,2017,29(10):3541-3550. LUO G B,SUN K J,WANG X Y,et al.Effects of different ruminally degradable starch levels on lactation performance,nutrient apparent digestibility and nitrogen balance of dairy cows fed high starch diets[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2017,29(10):3541-3550.(in Chinese)
[5] 王东升,张露露.粗饲料分级指数在反刍动物营养方面的应用研究进展[J].江西饲料,2016,6:4-6. WANG D S,ZHANG L L.Research progress on the application of roughage grading index in ruminant nutrition[J].Jiangxi Feed,2016,6,4-6.(in Chinese)
[6] 卢德勋.乳牛营养技术精要[A].动物营养学术研讨会论文集[C].2001. LU D X.Technical essentials of dairy cattle nutrition[A].Proceedings of the Symposium on Animal Nutrition[C].2001.(in Chinese)
[7] 叶明,张爱忠,姜宁,等.不同GI与CBI组合饲粮对奶牛咀嚼和养分消化率的影响[J].黑龙江畜牧兽医,2017,23:140-144. YE M,ZHANG A Z,JIANG N,et al.Effects of different GI and CBI diets on chewing and nutrient digestibility of dairy cows[J].Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine,2017,23:140-144.(in Chinese)
[8] 管鹏宇,叶明,姜宁,等.不同粗饲料分级指数与碳水化合物平衡指数组合饲粮对泌乳中期奶牛产奶性能及血清生化指标的影响[J].动物营养学报,2019,31(3):1152-1162. GUAN P Y,YE M,JIANG N,et al.Effects of different roughage grading index and carbohydrate balance index combinational diets on milk performance and serum biochemical indexes of mid-lactating dairy cows[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2019,31(3):1152-1162.(in Chinese)
[9] EDWARDS J E,FORSTER J E,CALLAGHAN T M,et al.PCR and omics based techniques to study the diversity,ecology and biology of anaerobic fungi:Insights,challenges and opportunities[J].Frontiers in Microbiology,2017,8:1657.
[10] INDUGU N,VECCHIARELI B,BAKER L D,et al.Comparison of rumen bacterial communities in dairy herds of different production[J].BMC Microbiology,2017,17(1):190.
[11] 崔浩然,郭雪峰,金巍.反刍动物瘤胃微生物菌群结构影响因素的研究进展[J].中国畜牧杂志,2021,57(11):6-11. CUI H R,GUO X F,JIN W.Research progress on factors affecting rumen microbial flora structure[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Science,2021,57(11):6-11.(in Chinese)
[12] 夏洪泽,张琳琳,王银梦,等.不同分级指数粗饲料组合对牦牛瘤胃体外发酵特性的影响[J].动物营养学报,2020,32(6):2710-2721. XIA H Z,ZHANG L L,WANG Y M,et al.Effects of different grade indexes combined forage on yak rumen fermentation characteristics in vitro[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2020,32(6):2710-2721.(in Chinese)
[13] 夏洪泽,张琳琳,王银梦,等.体外产气法评价不同分级指数玉米青贮-苜蓿干草组合发酵特性[J].草地学报,2020,28(4):1136-1144. XIA H Z,ZHANG L L,WANG Y M,et al.Evaluation of fermentation characteristics of different grading indexes corn silage and alfalfa hay combination using in vitro gas production[J].Chinese Journal of Grassland,2020,28(4):1136-1144.(in Chinese)
[14] 于满满,张美美,孙悠然,等.氨化秸秆与苜蓿组合对其营养成分及瘤胃微生物区系的影响[J].中国饲料,2019,21:19-25. YU M M,ZHANG M M,SUN Y R,et al.Effects of the combination of ammoniated straw and trifoliate on nutrients and rumen microflora[J].China Feed,2019,21:19-25.(in Chinese)
[15] BUTEL M J.Probiotics,gut microbiota and health[J].Medicine et Maladies Infectieusses,2014,44(1):1-8.
[16] 郑玮才,郝小燕,张宏祥,等.饲粮添加酿酒酵母和地衣芽孢杆菌对绵羊生长性能与瘤胃发酵的影响[J].中国农业科学,2020,53(16):3385-3393. ZHENG W C,HAO X Y,ZHANG H X,et al.Effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Bacillus licheniformis on growth performance and rumen fermentation of sheep[J].Chinese Journal of Agricultural Science,2020,53(16):3385-3393.(in Chinese)
[17] 白萨茹拉,杨红建,李胜利.不同粗饲料组合全混合饲粮对泌乳奶牛体外瘤胃挥发性脂肪酸生成动力学特性的影响[J].动物营养学报,2013,25(12):2920-2927. BAI S R L,YANG H J,LI S L.Different roughage combinations in total mixed rations:Effects on kinetic characteristics of in vitro ruminal volatile fatty acid production of lactating dairy cows[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2013,25(12):2920-2927.(in Chinese)
[18] BELANCHE A,DOREAU M,EDWARDS J M,et al.Shifts in the rumen microbiota due to the type of carbohydrate and level of protein ingested by dairy cattle are associated with changes in rumen fermentation[J].The Journal of Nutrition,2012,142(9):1684-1692.
[19] 林波,梁辛,李丽莉,等.饲粮精粗比对泌乳水牛瘤胃细菌和甲烷菌区系的影响[J].动物营养学报,2016,28(10):3101-3109. LIN B,LIANG X,LI L L,et al.Dietary forage to concentrate ratio affects ruminal bacterial and community composition of water buffaloes[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2016,28(10):3101-3109.(in Chinese)
[20] LIU J H,ZHANG M L,ZHANG R Y,et al.Comparative studies of the composition of bacterial microbiota associated with the ruminal content,ruminal epithelium and in the faeces of lactating dairy cows[J].Microbial Biotechnology,2016,9(2):257-268.
[21] 韩飞,韩阳阳,赵建新,等.4种杂粮对大鼠肠道菌群组成及短链脂肪酸的影响[J/OL].食品科学,1-14[2021-10-12]. HAN F,HAN Y Y,ZHAO J X,et al.Effect of four cereals on composition of gut microbiota and short-chain fatty acids in rats[J/OL].Food Science,1-14[2021-10-12].(in Chinese)
[22] SHANKS O C,KELTY C A,ARCHIBEQUE S,et al.Community structures of fecal bacteria in cattle from different animal feeding operations[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2011,77(9):2992-3001.
[23] 钟港,陈东,田科雄,等.发酵菌糠替代白酒糟对育肥牛瘤胃发酵参数、微生物菌群结构和功能的影响[J].动物营养学报,2021,33(11):1-14. ZHONG G,CHEN D,TIAN K X,et al.Effects of replacing distiller's grains with fermented spent mushroom substrate on rumen fermentation parameters,microbial community structure and function of fattening cattle[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2021,33(11):1-14 (in Chinese)
[24] POKUSAEVA K,FITZEGERA G F,VAN SINDEREN D.Carbohydrate metabolism in bifidobacteria[J].Genes and Nutrition,2011,6(3):285-306.
[25] KOVATCHEVA-DATCHARY P,NILSSON A,AKRAMI R,et al.Dietary fiber-induced improvement in glucose metabolism is associated with increased abundance of Prevotella[J].Cell Metabolism,2015,22(6):971-982.
[26] 杜梅,梁泽毅,张剑搏,等.反刍动物肠道菌群与宿主肠道黏膜免疫互作及其调控研究进展[J].动物营养学报,2021,33(5):2483-2494. DU M,LIANG Z Y,ZHANG J B,et al.Recent advance on interaction and regulation between intestinal microflora and host mucosal immune system of ruminants[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2021,33(5):2483-2494.(in Chinese)
[27] DA SILVA S T,DOS SANTOS C A,BRESSAN J.Intestinal microbiota:Relevance to obesity and modulation by prebiotics and probiotics[J].Nutricion Hospitalaria,2013,28(4):1039-1048.
[28] 杨玉芬,卢德勋,许梓荣.饲粮纤维对仔猪生长性能和消化生理功能的影响[J].动物营养学报,2009,21(6):816-821. YANG Y F,LU D X,XU Z R.Effects of dietary fiber on growth performance and digestive physiological function of piglets[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2009,21(6):816-821.(in Chinese)
[29] 李蒋伟,侯生珍,王志有,等.饲粮精粗比对早期断奶藏羔羊小肠细菌多样性的影响[J].西南农业学报,2021,34(9):2025-2031. LI J W,HOU S Z,WANG Z Y.et al.Effects of dietary concentrate to forage ratio on intestinal bacterial diversity of early weaned Tibetan lambs[J].Southwest Agricultural Journal,2021,34(9):2025-2031.(in Chinese)
[30] LIU J H,ZHANG M L,ZHANG R Y,et al.Comparative studies of the composition of bacterial microbiota associated with the ruminal content,ruminal epithelium and in the faeces of lactating dairy cows[J].Microbial Biotechnology,2016,9(2):257-268.
[31] EVANS N J,BROWN J M,Murray R D,et al.Characterization of novel bovine gastrointestinal tract Treponema isolates and comparison with bovine digital dermatitis treponemes[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2011,77(1):138-147.
[32] DOERNER K C,WHITE B A.Assessment of the en-do-1,4-beta-glucanase components of Ruminococcus flavefaciens FD-1[J].Applied and Environmental Microbiology,1990,56(6):1844-1850.
[33] WANG J,FAN H,HAN Y,et al.Characterization of the microbial communities along the gastrointestinal tract of sheep by 454 pyrosequencing analysis[J].Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences,2017,30(1):100-110.
[34] 程新东,辛国省,伍修锟,等.反刍动物肠道菌群对饲料利用效率调节效应的研究进展[J].动物营养学报,2021,33(5):2474-2482. CHENG X D,XIN G X,WU X K,et al.Research progress on effects of gut microbiota on regulation of feed efficiency in ruminant[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition,2021,33(5):2474-2482.(in Chinese)
[35] VASTA V,DAGHIO M,CAPPUCCI A,et al.Plant polyphenols and rumen microbiota responsible for fatty acid biohydrogenation,fiber digestion,and methane emission:Experimental evidence and methodological approaches[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2019,102(5):3781-3804.
[36] MAO S Y,ZHANG M L,LIU J H,et al.Characterising the bacterial microbiota across the gastrointestinal tracts of dairy cattle:Membership and potential function[J].Scientific Reports,2015,5:16116.