Evolution of rumen and oral microbiota in calves is influenced by age and time of weaning.

Buccal swab Calves Non-invasive Rumen Stomach tubing Weaning

Journal

Animal microbiome
ISSN: 2524-4671
Titre abrégé: Anim Microbiome
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101759457

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
21 Apr 2021
Historique:
received: 03 12 2020
accepted: 04 04 2021
entrez: 22 4 2021
pubmed: 23 4 2021
medline: 23 4 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The rumen bacterial communities are changing dynamically throughout the first year of calf's life including the weaning period as a critical event. Rumen microbiome analysis is often limited to invasive rumen sampling procedures but the oral cavity of ruminants is expected to harbour rumen microbes due to regurgitation activity. The present study used buccal swab samples to define the rumen core microbiome and characterize the shifts in rumen and oral microbial communities occurring as result of calf's age as well as time of weaning. Buccal swab samples of 59 calves were collected along the first 140 days of life and compared to stomach tubing sample of the rumen at day 140. Animals were randomly divided into two weaning groups. Microbiota of saliva and rumen content was analysed by 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. Our study showed that most rumen-specific bacterial taxa were equally observed in rumen samples as well as in the buccal swabs, though relative abundance varied. The occurrence of rumen-specific OTUs in buccal swab samples increased approximately 1.7 times from day 70 to day 140, indicating the gradual development of rumen as calf aged. The rumen-specific bacterial taxa diversity increased, and inter-animal variations decreased with age. Early weaning (7 weeks of age) rapidly increased the rumen microbial diversity from pre- to post-weaned state. Rumen microbiota of early-weaned calves seemed to have a suppressed growth of starch- and carbohydrate-utilizing bacteria and increased fibre degraders. Whereas, in late-weaned calves (17 weeks of age) no impact of dietary modifications on rumen microbiota composition was observed after weaning. Oral-specific bacterial community composition was significantly affected by calf's age and time of weaning. The present study showed the significant impact of calf's age and weaning on the establishment of rumen- and oral-specific bacterial communities utilizing buccal swab samples. The results emphasize the possibility of using buccal swab samples as a replacement of complex stomach tube method for large-scale predictive studies on ruminants. For in-depth rumen microbiome studies, the time of sampling should be carefully considered using an active phase of regurgitation.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The rumen bacterial communities are changing dynamically throughout the first year of calf's life including the weaning period as a critical event. Rumen microbiome analysis is often limited to invasive rumen sampling procedures but the oral cavity of ruminants is expected to harbour rumen microbes due to regurgitation activity. The present study used buccal swab samples to define the rumen core microbiome and characterize the shifts in rumen and oral microbial communities occurring as result of calf's age as well as time of weaning.
RESULTS RESULTS
Buccal swab samples of 59 calves were collected along the first 140 days of life and compared to stomach tubing sample of the rumen at day 140. Animals were randomly divided into two weaning groups. Microbiota of saliva and rumen content was analysed by 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. Our study showed that most rumen-specific bacterial taxa were equally observed in rumen samples as well as in the buccal swabs, though relative abundance varied. The occurrence of rumen-specific OTUs in buccal swab samples increased approximately 1.7 times from day 70 to day 140, indicating the gradual development of rumen as calf aged. The rumen-specific bacterial taxa diversity increased, and inter-animal variations decreased with age. Early weaning (7 weeks of age) rapidly increased the rumen microbial diversity from pre- to post-weaned state. Rumen microbiota of early-weaned calves seemed to have a suppressed growth of starch- and carbohydrate-utilizing bacteria and increased fibre degraders. Whereas, in late-weaned calves (17 weeks of age) no impact of dietary modifications on rumen microbiota composition was observed after weaning. Oral-specific bacterial community composition was significantly affected by calf's age and time of weaning.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The present study showed the significant impact of calf's age and weaning on the establishment of rumen- and oral-specific bacterial communities utilizing buccal swab samples. The results emphasize the possibility of using buccal swab samples as a replacement of complex stomach tube method for large-scale predictive studies on ruminants. For in-depth rumen microbiome studies, the time of sampling should be carefully considered using an active phase of regurgitation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33883031
doi: 10.1186/s42523-021-00095-3
pii: 10.1186/s42523-021-00095-3
pmc: PMC8059317
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

31

Références

Vet J. 2016 Mar;209:87-92
pubmed: 26831159
Front Microbiol. 2016 Aug 03;7:1206
pubmed: 27536291
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 17;11(3):e0151220
pubmed: 26986467
J Microbiol Methods. 2015 Sep;116:60-5
pubmed: 26149625
Anaerobe. 2008 Apr;14(2):78-86
pubmed: 18272412
Front Microbiol. 2016 Oct 21;7:1575
pubmed: 27818645
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 13;15(4):e0231533
pubmed: 32282837
Sci Rep. 2016 Aug 31;6:32479
pubmed: 27576848
Curr Microbiol. 2013 Nov;67(5):537-42
pubmed: 23743597
ISME J. 2016 Dec;10(12):2958-2972
pubmed: 27152936
J Dairy Sci. 2004 Jan;87(1):59-66
pubmed: 14765811
J Dairy Sci. 2017 Jul;100(7):5984-5995
pubmed: 28527800
J Dairy Sci. 2015 Sep;98(9):6315-26
pubmed: 26142851
Nat Methods. 2016 Jul;13(7):581-3
pubmed: 27214047
Sci Rep. 2017 Jan 18;7:40864
pubmed: 28098248
J Bacteriol. 1965 May;89:1244-9
pubmed: 14292993
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2011 Apr;61(Pt 4):795-803
pubmed: 20435744
Anim Microbiome. 2020 Sep 7;2(1):31
pubmed: 33499967
Bioinformatics. 2017 Mar 1;33(5):782-783
pubmed: 28025202
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Aug;73(16):5261-7
pubmed: 17586664
Animals (Basel). 2019 Dec 12;9(12):
pubmed: 31842480
ISME J. 2013 Jun;7(6):1069-79
pubmed: 23426008
Sci Rep. 2018 Jul 11;8(1):10437
pubmed: 29993024
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2014 May 27;64(9):2932-2938
pubmed: 24867175
J Periodontal Res. 2002 Feb;37(1):75-8
pubmed: 11842941
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2014 Sep;12(9):635-45
pubmed: 25118885
Microbiologyopen. 2016 Feb;5(1):70-82
pubmed: 26541370
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2013 Feb;83(2):504-14
pubmed: 22974422
Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1996 Jul;46(3):782-91
pubmed: 8782690
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2004 Mar;54(Pt 2):583-592
pubmed: 15023979
J Dairy Sci. 2010 Jan;93(1):148-52
pubmed: 20059913
Microbiol Spectr. 2017 Jun;5(3):
pubmed: 28643623
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015 Nov;81(21):7470-83
pubmed: 26276109
Nucleic Acids Res. 2014 Jan;42(Database issue):D633-42
pubmed: 24288368
Vet Microbiol. 2012 Feb 24;155(1):72-80
pubmed: 21890283
Front Microbiol. 2017 Aug 24;8:1605
pubmed: 28883813
J Appl Microbiol. 2009 Dec 1;107(6):1924-34
pubmed: 19508296
Front Microbiol. 2016 May 03;7:582
pubmed: 27199916
Microb Ecol. 2012 Feb;63(2):267-81
pubmed: 22213055
J Dairy Sci. 2012 Oct;95(10):5978-84
pubmed: 22921624
Asian-Australas J Anim Sci. 2017 Nov;30(11):1557-1562
pubmed: 28423879
Microbiome. 2018 May 17;6(1):90
pubmed: 29773078
Sci Rep. 2017 Mar 15;7(1):198
pubmed: 28298634
J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Feb;27(2):231-5
pubmed: 2915017
J Anim Sci. 2012 Dec;90 Suppl 4:421-9
pubmed: 23365399
J Appl Microbiol. 2012 Jun;112(6):1152-62
pubmed: 22533638
J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2017 May 1;8:37
pubmed: 28469845
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2019 Jan 9;85(2):
pubmed: 30367001
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013 Jun;79(12):3744-55
pubmed: 23584771
Front Microbiol. 2017 Aug 15;8:1553
pubmed: 28861065
Nat Biotechnol. 2019 Aug;37(8):852-857
pubmed: 31341288
PLoS One. 2013 Sep 11;8(9):e74787
pubmed: 24040342
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2008 Mar;24(1):55-86
pubmed: 18299032

Auteurs

Nida Amin (N)

Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 6-10, 70593, Stuttgart, Germany.

Sarah Schwarzkopf (S)

Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 6-10, 70593, Stuttgart, Germany.

Asako Kinoshita (A)

Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 6-10, 70593, Stuttgart, Germany.
Institute of Animal Nutrition, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Bundesallee 37, 38116, Braunschweig, Germany.

Johanna Tröscher-Mußotter (J)

Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 6-10, 70593, Stuttgart, Germany.

Sven Dänicke (S)

Institute of Animal Nutrition, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Bundesallee 37, 38116, Braunschweig, Germany.

Amélia Camarinha-Silva (A)

Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 6-10, 70593, Stuttgart, Germany.

Korinna Huber (K)

Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 6-10, 70593, Stuttgart, Germany.

Jana Frahm (J)

Institute of Animal Nutrition, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Bundesallee 37, 38116, Braunschweig, Germany.

Jana Seifert (J)

Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 6-10, 70593, Stuttgart, Germany. jseifert@uni-hohenheim.de.

Classifications MeSH