6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Ruminal cellulolytic bacteria abundance leads to the variation in fatty acids in the rumen digesta and meat of fattening lambs

      1 , 2 , 1 , 2 , 1 , 2 , 1 , 2 , 1 , 2
      Journal of Animal Science
      Oxford University Press (OUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Ruminal cellulolytic bacteria could be a diagnostic tool for determining the subacute rumen acidosis (SARA) risk in individual ruminants; however, a limited number of studies have investigated the effects of the abundance of ruminal cellulolytic bacteria on the fatty acid (FA) composition of the rumen digesta and the muscle of sheep. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of the variation of rumen cellulolytic bacteria on the rumen fermentation, rumen digesta, and muscle FA composition of fattening lambs fed an identical diet. Forty-eight lambs were reared in individual units and fed a high-concentrate diet consisting of 20% forage and 80% concentrate. All lambs were adapted to diets and facilities for 14 d, and sampling was for 63 d. At the end of the experiment, the rumen fluid, rumen digesta, and longissimus dorsi were collected after slaughter for the measurement of volatile fatty acids, ruminal bacterial DNA, rumen digesta, and muscle FAs. The lambs were classified into the lower cellulolytic bacteria (LCB, n = 10) group and the higher cellulolytic bacteria (HCB, n = 10) group according to the abundance of pH-sensitive cellulolytic bacteria (Ruminococcus albus, Ruminococcus flavefaciens, Fibrobacter succinogenes, and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens) in the rumen. Ruminal acetate concentration was positively correlated with the number of R. flavefaciens, F. Succinogenes, and B. fibrisolvens (P < 0.05, r > 0.296), whereas propionate and valerate concentrations were negatively correlated with the amount of F. succinogenes and B. fibrisolvens (P < 0.05, r > 0.348). Compared with the LCB group, the acetate (P = 0.018) as well as acetate to propionate ratio (P = 0.012) in the HCB group was higher, but the valerate ratio was lower (P = 0.002). The proportions of even-chain FAs and odd- and branched-chain fatty acid in the rumen digesta of lambs with the HCB were higher (P < 0.05), while the polyunsaturated fatty acids decreased than those in the LCB lambs (P < 0.05), but those FA proportions in the meat were similar between the two groups. The proportion of C17:0 in the meat of lambs in the HCB group was lower than that of lambs in the LCB group (P = 0.033). The proportions of conjugated linoleic acid in rumen digesta and meat were both higher in the HCB group than that in the LCB group (P = 0.046). These results indicated that the ruminal cellulolytic bacteria can alter the FA compositions in rumen digesta and further influenced the FA compositions in the meat of sheep.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Development and use of competitive PCR assays for the rumen cellulolytic bacteria: Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens.

          Competitive PCR assays were developed for the enumeration of the rumen cellulolytic bacterial species: Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens. The assays, targeting species-specific regions of 16S rDNA, were evaluated using DNA from pure culture and rumen digesta spiked with the relevant cellulolytic species. Minimum detection levels for F. succinogenes, R. albus and R. flavefaciens were 1-10 cells in pure culture and 10(3-4) cells per ml in mixed culture. The assays were reproducible and 11-13% inter- and intra-assay variations were observed. Enumeration of the cellulolytic species in the rumen and alimentary tract of sheep found F. succinogenes dominant (10(7) per ml of rumen digesta) compared to the Ruminococcus spp. (10(4-6) per ml). The population size of the three species did not change after the proportion of dietary alfalfa hay was increased. All three species were detected in the rumen, omasum, caecum, colon and rectum. Numbers of the cellulolytic species at these sites varied within and between animals.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dominance of Prevotella and low abundance of classical ruminal bacterial species in the bovine rumen revealed by relative quantification real-time PCR.

            Relative quantification real-time PCR was used to quantify several bacterial species in ruminal samples from two lactating cows, each sampled 3 h after feeding on two successive days. Abundance of each target taxon was calculated as a fraction of the total 16S rRNA gene copies in the samples, using taxon-specific and eubacterial domain-level primers. Bacterial populations showed a clear predominance of members of the genus Prevotella, which comprised 42% to 60% of the bacterial rRNA gene copies in the samples. However, only 2% to 4% of the bacterial rRNA gene copies were represented by the classical ruminal Prevotella species Prevotella bryantii, Prevotella ruminicola and Prevotella brevis. The proportion of rRNA gene copies attributable to Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus flavefaciens, Selenomonas ruminantium and Succinivibrio dextrinosolvens were each generally in the 0.5% to 1% range. Proportions for Ruminobacter amylophilus and Eubacterium ruminantium were lower (0.1% to 0.2%), while Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens, Streptococcus bovis, Ruminococcus albus and Megasphaera elsdenii were even less abundant, each comprising <0.03% of the bacterial rRNA gene copies. The data suggest that the aggregate abundance of the most intensively studied ruminal bacterial species is relatively low and that a large fraction of the uncultured population represents a single bacterial genus.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Ruminal acidosis in beef cattle: the current microbiological and nutritional outlook.

              Ruminal acidosis continues to be a common ruminal digestive disorder in beef cattle and can lead to marked reductions in cattle performance. Ruminal acidosis or increased accumulation of organic acids in the rumen reflects imbalance between microbial production, microbial utilization, and ruminal absorption of organic acids. The severity of acidosis, generally related to the amount, frequency, and duration of grain feeding, varies from acute acidosis due to lactic acid accumulation, to subacute acidosis due to accumulation of volatile fatty acids in the rumen. Ruminal microbial changes associated with acidosis are reflective of increased availability of fermentable substrates and subsequent accumulation of organic acids. Microbial changes in the rumen associated with acute acidosis have been well documented. Microbial changes in subacute acidosis resemble those observed during adaptation to grain feeding and have not been well documented. The decrease in ciliated protozoal population is a common feature of both forms of acidosis and may be a good microbial indicator of an acidotic rumen. Other microbial factors, such as endotoxin and histamine, are thought to contribute to the systemic effects of acidosis. Various models have been developed to assess the effects of variation in feed intake, dietary roughage amount and source, dietary grain amount and processing, step-up regimen, dietary addition of fibrous byproducts, and feed additives. Models have been developed to study effects of management considerations on acidosis in cattle previously adapted to grain-based diets. Although these models have provided useful information related to ruminal acidosis, many are inadequate for detecting responses to treatment due to inadequate replication, low feed intakes by the experimental cattle that can limit the expression of acidosis, and the feeding of cattle individually, which reduces experimental variation but limits the ability of researchers to extrapolate the data to cattle performing at industry standards. Optimal model systems for assessing effects of various management and nutritional strategies on ruminal acidosis will require technologies that allow feed intake patterns, ruminal conditions, and animal health and performance to be measured simultaneously in a large number of cattle managed under conditions similar to commercial feed yards. Such data could provide valuable insight into the true extent to which acidosis affects cattle performance.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Animal Science
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0021-8812
                1525-3163
                July 2020
                July 01 2020
                July 20 2020
                July 2020
                July 01 2020
                July 20 2020
                : 98
                : 7
                Affiliations
                [1 ]State Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystems, Key Laboratory of Grassland Livestock Industry Innovation, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, College of Pastoral Agriculture Science and Technology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, P.R. China
                [2 ]Engineering Research Center of Grassland Industry, Ministry of Education, College of Pastoral Agriculture Science and Technology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, P.R. China
                Article
                10.1093/jas/skaa228
                32687154
                31fec3d9-eaec-491d-9b91-ab556d7a9bc9
                © 2020

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article