粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊瘤胃微生物区系及肌肉脂肪酸组成的影响

董春晓; 吕佳颖; 牛骁麟; 马万浩; 李飞; 李发弟

doi:10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2019-0092

粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊瘤胃微生物区系及肌肉脂肪酸组成的影响

1.
兰州大学草地农业生态系统国家重点实验室 / 兰州大学农业农村部草牧业创新重点实验室 / 兰州大学草地农业科技学院，甘肃兰州 730020
2.
甘肃省肉羊繁育生物技术工程实验室，甘肃民勤 733300

基金项目: 公益性行业(农业)科研专项经费(201503134、2015-2019)；兰州大学中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(lzujbky-2017-48)

摘要: 为评价日粮粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊瘤胃发酵、瘤胃菌群结构及肌肉脂肪酸的影响，选择2月龄健康湖羊公羔(22.9 ± 1.2 kg)120只，根据体重相近原则随机分成4组，每组5个栏位，每个栏位6只羊，分别以玉米(Zea mays)秸秆(CS组)、玉米芯(CC组)、葵花籽壳(SH组)和油菜(Brassica napus)秸秆(RS组)作为粗饲料来源，添加比例均为20%，4组精料配比一致，预试期7 d，正试期70 d。正试期结束后每个栏位选择接近该栏平均体重的3只羊屠宰，测定瘤胃发酵、瘤胃菌群结构和肌肉脂肪酸的相关指标。结果显示，1) SH组和RS组湖羊瘤胃中戊酸和异戊酸的比例显著高于CS组和CC组(P < 0.05)；CC组乙酸比例显著高于CS组和RS组(P < 0.05)。2) RS组湖羊瘤胃细菌群落丰富度和多样性水平最高，各组瘤胃菌群相似性较低；4组试验羊均以厚壁菌门、拟杆菌门、螺旋菌门和纤维杆菌门等为瘤胃优势菌门，其中RS组厚壁菌门相对丰度显著高于CC组(P < 0.05)；CC组螺旋菌门相对丰度显著高于SH组和RS组(P < 0.05)；RS组纤维杆菌门相对丰度显著低于其他3组(P < 0.05)。3) SH组肌肉中多不饱和脂肪酸(PUFA)含量显著高于CS组(P < 0.05)，其他组间差异不显著(P > 0.05)。研究得出，玉米芯日粮会改变羔羊瘤胃发酵模式，提高瘤胃中乙酸的比例，有利于纤维分解菌的增殖，适于作为湖羊粗饲料来源。

关键词:

English

Effects of dietary roughage sources on the rumen microflora and muscle fatty acids in finishing Hu lambs

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 730020, Gansu, China
2.
Engineering Laboratory of Mutton Sheep Breeding and Reproduction Biotechnology in Gansu Province, Minqin 733300, Gansu, China

Received Date: 2018-02-07
Accepted Date: 2019-06-16
Available Online: 2019-11-06
Publish Date: 2019-10-31

Abstract: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effects of dietary roughage sources on the rumen microflora and muscle fatty acids in finishing Hu lambs. According to the principle of similar weight, 120 male Hu lambs (22.9 ± 1.2 kg) of age 60 days were randomly divided into four groups (each comprising of five fences of six lambs). Four dietary roughage sources of corn stalk (CS), corn cob (CC), sunflower seed hull (SH) and rapeseed straw (RS) were fed to the four groups. For all the four groups, the proportion of roughage was 20%, and the ingredient concentration was the same. The period of the pre-test was seven days, while the period of the formal test was 70 days. At the end of the trial period, from each fence, three sheep of average weight were selected for slaughter. The rumen fermentation, rumen flora structure, and muscle fatty acid-related indicators were determined. The results showed that: 1) the ratio of valerate and isovalerate in the rumen of the SH and RS groups was significantly higher than that of the CS and CC groups (P < 0.05). The proportion of acetate in the CC group was significantly higher than that in the CS and the RS groups (P < 0.05). 2) The abundance and diversity of the rumen bacterial community in the RS group were the highest, and the similarity of the rumen flora among each group was low. Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Spirochaetaes, and Fibrobacteres were the dominant bacteria in the rumen of all the four groups of sheep. The relative abundance of Firmicutes in the RS group was significantly higher than that in the CC group (P < 0.05). The relative abundance of the Spirochaetae in the CC group was significantly higher than that in the SH and RS groups (P < 0.05). The relative abundance of Fibrobacteres in the RS group was significantly lower than the other three groups (P < 0.05). 3) The content of polyunsaturated fatty acids in the SH group was significantly higher than that in the CS group (P < 0.05), and the difference between the other groups was not significant (P > 0.05). The results showed that corn cob diet changes the rumen fermentation process of lambs and increases the proportion of acetate in the rumen. This is beneficial for the proliferation of cellulolytic bacteria and is also suitable as a source of roughage for Hu sheep.

Keywords:

HTML全文

图 1 不同粗饲料来源组湖羊瘤胃群落PCoA分析图

Figure 1. PCoA analysis of the rumen community in Hu lamb following disposition to different forms of roughage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 日粮配方及营养水平(饲喂基础)

Table 1 Formula and nutritional value of diets (per feed basis)

项目 Item	组别 Group
项目 Item	CS	CC	SH	RS
饲料配方 Dietary formula
玉米秸秆 Corn stalk (CS)	20	0	0	0
玉米芯 Corn cob (CC)	0	20	0	0
葵花籽壳 Sunflower seed hull (SH)	0	0	20	0
油菜秸秆 Rape straw (RS)	0	0	0	20
玉米 Corn	40	40	40	40
蛋白质补充料 Protein supplement	39	39	39	39
预混料 Premix	1	1	1	1
营养水平 Nutritional level
干物质 Dry matter (DM)/%	90.82	90.89	90.01	90.99
有机物质 Organic matter (OM)/%	91.61	93.23	92.97	91.44
粗蛋白 Crude protein (CP)/%	17.11	17.04	17.12	18.15
酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber (ADF)/%	16.09	14.40	18.27	16.51
中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber (NDF)/%	29.10	28.32	28.65	27.92
C16:0/(mg·g^–1)	3.13	2.60	2.89	2.50
cis-C18:1n-9/(mg·g^–1)	2.05	1.63	2.53	1.37
cis-10c,trans-15C18:1/(mg·g^–1)	1.17	1.21	1.42	1.64
C18:2n-6/(mg·g^–1)	1.66	2.61	4.44	1.65
矿物质维生素预混料组：铁69.63 mg·kg^–1；铜7.41 mg·kg^–1；锰23.7 mg·kg^–1；锌55 mg·kg^–1；碘0.67 mg·kg^–1；硒0.3；钴0.3 mg·kg^–1；维生素A 2 500 IU；维生素E 23 IU。CS: 玉米秸秆; CC, 玉米芯; SH, 葵花籽壳; RS, 油菜秸秆。下同。　Mineral and vitamin premix: Fe, 69.63 mg·kg^–1; Cu, 7.41 mg·kg^–1; Mn, 23.7 mg·kg^–1; Zn, 55 mg·kg^–1; I, 0.67 mg·kg^–1; Co, 0.3; VA, 2 500 IU; and VE, 2 3 IU. CS, corn stalk; CC, corn cob; SH, sunflowerseed hull; RS, rapeseed straw; similarly for the following tables and figures.

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 不同粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊瘤胃VFA比例的影响

Table 2 Effect of roughage sources on rumen VFA proportion of finishing Hu lamb

指标 Parameter	处理 Treatment				标准误 SEM	P
指标 Parameter	CS	CC	SH	RS	标准误 SEM	P
总挥发性脂肪酸TVFA/(mmol·L^–1)	18.11ab	22.73a	19.55ab	15.29b	1.01	0.008
乙酸 Acetate/%	61.72b	65.45a	55.25c	59.59b	0.93	< 0.001
丙酸 Propionate/%	24.98a	24.03a	23.15a	19.52b	0.71	0.019
乙酸/丙酸 Acetate/Propionate	2.47b	2.77ab	2.40b	2.98a	0.08	0.044
异丁酸 Isobutyrate/%	2.72b	1.52c	3.49b	4.69a	0.29	< 0.001
丁酸 Butyrate/%	6.08bc	5.24c	9.20a	8.27ab	0.57	0.033
异戊酸 Isovalerate/%	3.50c	1.72d	6.23b	7.58a	0.56	< 0.001
戊酸 Valerate/%	1.15b	0.87b	1.90a	1.84a	0.11	< 0.001
同行不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P < 0.05)；下表同。　Different lowercase letters within the same row indicate significant difference between different treatments at the 0.05 level; similarly for the following tables.

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 不同粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊瘤胃微生物α多样性的影响

Table 3 Effect of roughage sources on alpha diversity of the rumen microbes in finishing Hu lamb

指标 Parameter	处理 Treatment				标准误 SEM	P
指标 Parameter	CS	CC	SH	RS	标准误 SEM	P
分类操作单元数目 Operational taxonomic unit	640.400b	613.800b	604.000b	721.000a	14.380	0.005
物种丰富度指数 Ace index	709.179b	687.612b	658.263b	783.081a	15.016	0.010
物种丰富度指数 Chao1 index	722.884b	708.071b	665.878b	803.469a	16.041	0.009
辛普森指数 Simpson index	0.037a	0.034ab	0.022b	0.029ab	0.002	0.027
香农指数 Shannon index	4.278b	4.313b	4.705a	4.674a	0.065	0.013

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊瘤胃中主要菌门(相对丰度 > 1%)水平的影响

Table 4 Effect of roughage sources on the main phyla (relative abundance of > 1%) of rumen microbial in finishing Hu lamb

%
门 Phylum	处理 Treatment				标准误 SEM	P
门 Phylum	CS	CC	SH	RS	标准误 SEM	P
厚壁菌门 Firmicutes	45.87ab	43.32b	48.24ab	53.14a	1.49	0.020
拟杆菌门 Bacteroidetes	33.88	34.11	35.39	33.59	1.34	0.694
Firmicute:Bacteroidetes	1.37	1.30	1.46	1.65	0.09	0.549
螺旋菌门 Spirochaetae	10.16ab	14.13a	7.46bc	2.97c	1.24	0.003
放线菌门 Actinobacteria	1.59	2.29	2.21	1.81	0.26	0.424
纤维杆菌门 Fibrobacteres	2.33a	2.44a	3.53a	0.52b	0.33	0.004
软壁菌门 Tenericutes	1.04	1.19	1.33	2.00	0.23	0.196
变形菌门 Proteobacteria	3.92	1.82	0.69	4.05	0.65	0.089

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊瘤胃中主要菌属(相对丰度 > 1%)水平的影响

Table 5 Effect of roughage sources on the main genus (relative abundance of > 1%) of rumen microbial in finishing Hu lamb

%
属 Genus	处理 Treatment				标准误 SEM	P
属 Genus	CS	CC	SH	RS	标准误 SEM	P
Prevotella_1	17.03ab	15.02ab	11.63b	18.16a	1.02	0.036
Treponema_2	9.82ab	13.96a	7.32bc	2.77c	1.26	0.007
Ruminococcaceae_UCG-014	8.36	8.98	4.96	6.37	0.99	0.174
Rumen_bacterium	4.62	3.23	6.90	4.91	0.78	0.146
Saccharofermentans	6.53	4.98	3.97	3.54	0.80	0.255
Prevotella_7	3.72	5.31	4.49	3.27	0.89	0.496
Ruminococcus_1	3.96ab	7.50a	2.86b	1.83b	0.75	0.005
Rikenellaceae_RC9	3.27	3.06	4.93	3.76	0.59	0.340
Christensenellaceae_R-7	2.25ab	1.29b	5.06ab	5.82a	0.73	0.023
Lachnospiraceae_NK3A20	3.32	2.00	3.05	2.48	0.48	0.415
Fibrobacter	2.33a	2.44a	3.53a	0.52b	0.33	0.004
Ruminococcaceae_NK4A214	1.60ab	1.00b	2.43ab	3.22a	0.35	0.026
Succiniclasticum	1.86	1.68	1.85	2.63	0.40	0.475
Bacterium	1.28ab	1.89ab	3.10a	1.07b	0.32	0.026
Eubacterium	2.15	1.99	0.65	1.02	0.28	0.078
Olsenella	1.31ab	1.90a	1.15ab	0.83b	0.17	0.027
Roseburia	1.69a	1.59a	0.90ab	0.59b	0.18	0.021
Candidatus_Saccharimonas	1.04ab	0.31b	0.78ab	1.58a	0.19	0.015

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊肌肉脂肪酸含量的影响

Table 6 Effect of roughage sources on muscle fatty acids quantity in finishing Hu lamb

mg·g^–1
脂肪酸 Fatty acids	处理 Treatment				标准误 SEM	P
脂肪酸 Fatty acids	CS	CC	SH	RS	标准误 SEM	P
C10:0	0.12ab	0.11b	0.16a	0.14ab	0.01	0.032
C12:0	0.50	0.51	0.47	0.44	0.02	0.259
iso-C14:0	0.23	0.24	0.22	0.20	0.01	0.308
C14:0	2.22	2.23	2.62	2.96	0.17	0.168
C16:0	22.36	22.60	22.84	26.06	1.29	0.377
anteiso-C17:0	2.86	3.10	2.96	3.40	0.18	0.359
C17:0	1.31	1.23	1.16	1.45	0.08	0.241
iso-C18:0	0.13	0.14	0.16	0.18	0.02	0.426
C17:1	0.77	0.76	0.71	0.83	0.04	0.396
C18:0	12.14	12.08	11.85	14.19	0.62	0.243
cis-13c,trans-14C18:1	0.13	0.13	0.13	0.11	0.01	0.204
C18:1n-9	2.69	3.21	3.53	3.61	0.20	0.139
cis-C18:1n-9	36.68	38.91	35.38	39.21	1.98	0.554
cis-10c,trans-15C18:1	1.67	1.76	1.53	1.71	0.07	0.337
cis-9,trans-13CLA	0.14	0.13	0.15	0.15	0.01	0.405
cis-9,trans-12CLA	0.14	0.12	0.14	0.14	0.01	0.380
cis-12,trans-9CLA	0.09	0.09	0.12	0.10	0.01	0.141
C18:2n-6	7.40b	8.31ab	9.62a	8.71ab	0.33	0.025
C22:1n-9	4.11ab	3.67b	4.66a	4.16ab	0.15	0.026
饱和脂肪酸 SFA	41.87	42.27	42.46	49.01	2.27	0.330
单不饱和脂肪酸 MUFA	46.04	48.43	45.93	49.63	2.29	0.622
多不饱和脂肪酸 PUFA	7.77b	8.67ab	10.04a	9.10ab	0.33	0.010
共轭亚油酸 CLA	0.37	0.36	0.42	0.39	0.02	0.415

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(33)

[1]	吴天佑, 赵睿, 罗阳, 王洪荣. 不同粗饲料来源饲粮对湖羊生长性能、瘤胃发酵及血清生化指标的影响. 动物营养学报, 2016, 28(6): 1907-1915. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2016.06.034 WU T Y, ZHAO R, LUO Y, WANG H R. Effects of different dietary sources of roughage on performance, ruminal fermentation and serum biochemical parameters of Hu sheep. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2016, 28(6): 1907-1915. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2016.06.034
[2]	刁其玉, 国春艳. 提高粗饲料利用率的途径. 粮食与饲料工业, 2005, 10(10): 34-36. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6202.2005.10.016 DIAO Q Y, GUO C Y. Ways to improve utilization rate of coarse feeds. Cereal and Feed Industry, 2005, 10(10): 34-36. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6202.2005.10.016
[3]	PENNER G B, STEELE M A, ASCHENBACH J R, MCBRIDE B W. Ruminant nutrition symposium: Molecular adaptation of ruminal epithelia to highly fermentable diets. Journal of Animal Science, 2011, 89(4): 1108-1119. doi: 10.2527/jas.2010-3378
[4]	张莹莹, 王聪, 刘强, 白元生, 师周戈, 刘晓妮, 高书文. 不同精粗比饲粮对晋南牛瘤胃发酵特性和养分消化代谢的影响. 动物营养学报, 2014, 26(8): 2365-2372. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2014.08.043 ZHANG Y Y, WANG C, LIU Q, BAI Y S, SHI Z G, LIU X N, GAO S W. Effects of different roughage to concentrate ratios on ruminal fermentation characteristics, hutrients digestion and metabolism of Jinnan cattle. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2014, 26(8): 2365-2372. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2014.08.043
[5]	张勇, 郭海明, 汤志宏, 曹凯, 王雁坡, 叶均安. 油菜秆颗粒料对湖羊生产性能、瘤胃发酵参数及血液生化指标的影响. 草业学报, 2016, 25(10): 171-179. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2015548 ZHANG Y, GUO H M, TANG Z H, CAO K, WANG Y P, YE J A. Effects of pelleted rape straw feed on productive performance, rumen fermentation parameters, and blood biochemical indexes of Hu sheep. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(10): 171-179. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2015548
[6]	PITTA D W, PINCHAK W E, DOWD S E, OSTERSTOCK J, GONTCHAROVA V, YOUN E, DORTON K, YOON I, MIN B R, FULFORD J D, WICKERSHAM T A, MALINOWSKI D P. Rumen bacterial diversity dynamics associated with changing from bermudagrass hay to grazed winter wheat diets. Microbial Ecology, 2010, 59(3): 511-522. doi: 10.1007/s00248-009-9609-6
[7]	胡小丽. 不同粗饲料和蛋白质类型日粮对奶牛瘤胃功能细菌数量的影响. 北京: 中国农业科学院硕士学位论文, 2013. HU X L. Effects of different forage and protein sources of diet on the quantity of functional bacteria in the rumen of dairy cows. Master Thesis. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2013.
[8]	李艺. 不同比例的谷草与玉米秸秆黄贮日粮对肉牛育肥性能、瘤胃发酵及微生物菌群影响的研究. 保定: 河北农业大学硕士学位论文, 2018. LI Y. The effects of different ratios of millet straw and corn straw silage diets on fattening performance, rumen fermentation and rumen microbial flora in beef cattle. Master Thesis. Baoding: Hebei Agricultural University, 2018.
[9]	李岚捷, 成述儒, 刁其玉, 屠焰. 日粮碳水化合物对幼龄反刍动物生长发育的影响. 畜牧与兽医, 2017, 49(12): 145-149. LI L J, CHENG S R, DIAO Q Y, TU Y. Effect of dietary carbohydrate on growth and development of young ruminant animals. Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2017, 49(12): 145-149.
[10]	IMANI M, MIRZAEI M, BAGHBANZADEHNOBARI B, GHAFFARI M H. Effects of forage provision to dairy calves on growth performance and rumen fermentation: A meta-analysis and meta-regression. Journal of Dairy Science, 2017, 100(2): 1136-1150. doi: 10.3168/jds.2016-11561
[11]	LIANG Y S, LI G Z, LI X Y, LYU J Y, LI F D, TANG D F, DENG Y, ZHANG H, WANG Z L, WENG X X. Growth performance, rumen fermentation, bacteria composition, and gene expressions involved in intracellular pH regulation of rumen epithelium in finishing Hu lambs differing in residual feed intake phenotype. Journal of Animal Science, 2017, 95(4): 1727-1738.
[12]	田华勤. 葡萄渣提取物和亚麻籽油对湖羊羔羊生产性能和养分消化代谢的影响. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学硕士学位论文, 2016. TIAN H Q. Effects of grape pomace extract and linseed oil on growth performance and nutrient digestibility of Hu lambs. Master Thesis. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2016.
[13]	李旺. 瘤胃挥发性脂肪酸的作用及影响因素. 中国畜牧杂志, 2012, 48(7): 63-66. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-7033.2012.07.017 LI W. Effects of betaine and rumen-protected fat onfinishing production performance and regulation of digestion and metabolismin Hu sheep. Pratacultural Science, 2012, 48(7): 63-66. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-7033.2012.07.017
[14]	刘婷, 郑琛, 李发弟, 马友记, 袁玖, 汪晓娟, 郭江鹏, 郝正里, 李冲. 茴香秸秆和茴香秕壳对绵羊营养价值的评定. 草业学报, 2012, 21(5): 55-62. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20120507 LIU T, ZHENG C, LI F D, MA Y J, YUAN J, WANG X J, GUO J P, HAO Z L, LI C. Nutritional evaluation of fennel straw and shell on sheep. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(5): 55-62. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20120507
[15]	沈美英. 日粮内不同粗饲料品质对绵羊瘤胃发酵功能和微生物区系的影响. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学硕士学位论文, 2006. SHEN M Y. The effect of different forage quality on rumen fermentation and microflora of sheep. Master Thesis. Huhhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2006.
[16]	张毕阳, 赵桂琴, 焦婷, 苟智强, 许兴泽, 闫车太. 燕麦干草与全株玉米青贮不同组合对绵羊瘤胃发酵的影响. 动物营养学报, 2017, 29(10): 3563-3573. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267X.2017.10.017 ZHANG B Y, ZHAO G Q, JIAO T, GOU Z Q, XU X Z, YAN C T. Effects of different combinations of oat hay and whole corn silage on ruminal fermentation of sheep. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2017, 29(10): 3563-3573. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267X.2017.10.017
[17]	LII R N C, MURPHY M R. An in vitro technique for measuring the production rate of volatile fatty acids in the rumen under dynamic conditions. Small Ruminant Research, 2004, 54(3): 219-225. doi: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2003.11.009
[18]	华金玲, 郭亮, 王立克, 戴四发. 不同精粗比日粮对黄淮白山羊瘤胃挥发性脂肪酸影响. 东北农业大学学报, 2013, 44(6): 58-62. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-9369.2013.06.011 HUA J L, GUO L, WANG L K, DAI S F. Effect of different forage to foncentrate ratios on VFA of Huanghuai white goat. Journal of Northeast Agricultural University, 2013, 44(6): 58-62. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-9369.2013.06.011
[19]	刘大程, 卢德勋, 侯先志, 高民, 孙海洲. 不同品质粗饲料日粮对瘤胃发酵及主要纤维分解菌的影响. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(4): 1199-1206. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2008.04.033 LIU D C, LU D X, HOU X Z, GAO M, SUN H Z. Effect of dietary forage of different qualities on rumen fermentation and predominant fibrolytic bacterial populations. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2008, 41(4): 1199-1206. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2008.04.033
[20]	NASROLLAHI S M, ZALI A, GHORBANI G R, SHAHRBABAK M M, ABADI H S. Variability in susceptibility to acidosis among high producing mid-lactation dairy cows is associated with rumen pH, fermentation, feed intake, sorting activity, and milk fat percentage. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2017, 228: 72-82. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2017.03.007
[21]	FERNANDO S C, PURVIS H T, NAJAR F Z, SUKHARNIKOV L O, KREHBIEL C R, NAGARAJA T G, ROE B A, DESILVA U. Rumen microbial population dynamics during adaptation to a high-grain diet. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2010, 76(22): 7482-7490. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00388-10
[22]	CLINE J H, HERSHBERGER T V, BENTLEY O G. Utilization and/or synthesis of valeric acid during the digestion of glucose, starch and cellulose by rumen micro-organisms. Journal of Animal Science, 1958, 2(17): 284-292.
[23]	ALEXADRE B, DE M, EVA L, MICHAEL D, BRENDAN F O, NICHOLAS C, EVELYN M D. Microbiome analysis of dairy cows fed pasture or total mixed ration diets. Fems Microbiology Ecology, 2011, 78(2): 256-265. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2011.01151.x
[24]	KIM M, MORRISON M, YU Z. Status of the phylogenetic diversity census of ruminal microbiomes. Fems Microbiology Ecology, 2011, 76(1): 49-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2010.01029.x
[25]	刘开朗, 王加启, 卜登攀. 2008-2009年反刍动物营养研究进展Ⅰ. 瘤胃微生物多样性与功能. 中国畜牧兽医, 2010, 37(2): 5-14. LIU K L, WANG J Q, BU D P. Annual review of ruminant nutrition in 2008-2009Ⅰ. diversity and functionality of rumen microflora. China Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Medicine, 2010, 37(2): 5-14.
[26]	PITTA D W, PINCHAK W E, DOWS S, DORTON K, YOON I, MIN B R, FULFORD J D, WICKERSHAM T A, MALINOWSKI D P. Longitudinal shifts in bacterial diversity and fermentation pattern in the rumen of steers grazing wheat pasture. Anaerobe, 2014, 30: 11-17. doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2014.07.008
[27]	MEYER M, STENZEL U, HOFREITER M. Parallel tagged sequencing on the 454 platform. Nature Protocols, 2008, 3(2): 267-278. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2007.520
[28]	刘晶. 饲料果胶对瘤胃微生物菌群结构和微生物蛋白合成影响的研究. 杭州: 浙江大学博士学位论文, 2014. LIU J. Effects of dietary pectin on microbial structure and microbial protein synthesis in the rumen. PhD Thesis. Hangzhou: Zhejang University, 2014.
[29]	STANTON T B, CANALEPAROLA E. Treponema bryantii sp. nov. a rumen spirochete that interacts with cellulolytic bacteria. Archives of Microbiology, 1980, 127(2): 145-156. doi: 10.1007/BF00428018
[30]	CUNHA I S, BARRETO C C, COSTA O Y, BOMFIM M A, CASTRO A P, KRUGER R H, QUIRINO B F. Bacteria and Archaea community structure in the rumen microbiome of goats (Capra hircus) from the semiarid region of brazil. Anaerobe, 2011, 17(3): 118-124. doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2011.04.018
[31]	双金, 敖力格日玛, 敖长金. 苏尼特羊体脂脂肪酸组成的研究. 畜牧兽医学报, 2015, 46(8): 1363-1374. doi: 10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2015.08.012 Shuangjin, Aoligerima, Aochangjin. Study on composition of sunit sheep body fatty acid. Acta Veterinaria Et Zootechnica Sinica, 2015, 46(8): 1363-1374. doi: 10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2015.08.012
[32]	RAES K, SMET S D, DEMEYER D. Effect of dietary fatty acids on incorporation of long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid in lamb, beef and pork meat: A review. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2004, 113(1/4): 199-221.
[33]	MAIA M R, CHAUDHARY L C, WALLACE R. Metabolism of polyunsaturated fatty acids and their toxicity to the microflora of the rumen. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek, 2007, 91(4): 303-314. doi: 10.1007/s10482-006-9118-2

资源附件(0)

图(1) / 表(6)

计量

PDF下载量: 41
文章访问数: 1427
HTML全文浏览量: 182
被引次数: 0

粗饲料来源对育肥湖羊瘤胃微生物区系及肌肉脂肪酸组成的影响

English

Effects of dietary roughage sources on the rumen microflora and muscle fatty acids in finishing Hu lambs

计量

文章相关

目录