» Articles » PMID: 23626688

Shedding Light on the Microbial Community of the Macropod Foregut Using 454-amplicon Pyrosequencing

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2013 Apr 30
PMID 23626688
Citations 23
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Twenty macropods from five locations in Queensland, Australia, grazing on a variety of native pastures were surveyed and the bacterial community of the foregut was examined using 454-amplicon pyrosequencing. Specifically, the V3/V4 region of 16S rRNA gene was examined. A total of 5040 OTUs were identified in the data set (post filtering). Thirty-two OTUs were identified as 'shared' OTUS (i.e. present in all samples) belonging to either Firmicutes or Bacteroidetes (Clostridiales/Bacteroidales). These phyla predominated the general microbial community in all macropods. Genera represented within the shared OTUs included: unclassified Ruminococcaceae, unclassified Lachnospiraceae, unclassified Clostridiales, Peptococcus sp. Coprococcus spp., Streptococcus spp., Blautia sp., Ruminoccocus sp., Eubacterium sp., Dorea sp., Oscillospira sp. and Butyrivibrio sp. The composition of the bacterial community of the foregut samples of each the host species (Macropus rufus, Macropus giganteus and Macropus robustus) was significantly different allowing differentiation between the host species based on alpha and beta diversity measures. Specifically, eleven dominant OTUs that separated the three host species were identified and classified as: unclassified Ruminococcaceae, unclassified Bacteroidales, Prevotella spp. and a Syntrophococcus sucromutans. Putative reductive acetogens and fibrolytic bacteria were also identified in samples. Future work will investigate the presence and role of fibrolytics and acetogens in these ecosystems. Ideally, the isolation and characterization of these organisms will be used for enhanced feed efficiency in cattle, methane mitigation and potentially for other industries such as the biofuel industry.

Citing Articles

Comparative Analysis of Gut Bacterial Diversity in Wild and Domestic Yaks on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau.

Shah T, Guo X, Song Y, Fang Y, Ding L Animals (Basel). 2024; 14(16).

PMID: 39199914 PMC: 11350814. DOI: 10.3390/ani14162380.


Anaerobic gut fungal communities in marsupial hosts.

Jones A, Pratt C, Meili C, Soo R, Hugenholtz P, Elshahed M mBio. 2024; 15(2):e0337023.

PMID: 38259066 PMC: 10865811. DOI: 10.1128/mbio.03370-23.


Gut Microbiome Profiling of the Endangered Southern Greater Glider () after the 2019-2020 Australian Megafire.

Clough J, Schwab S, Mikac K Animals (Basel). 2023; 13(22).

PMID: 38003202 PMC: 10668662. DOI: 10.3390/ani13223583.


Microbiota and Serum Metabolic Profile Changes in Korean Native Hanwoo Steer in Response to Diet Feeding Systems.

Jung J, Soundharrajan I, Kim D, Baik M, Ha S, Choi K Int J Mol Sci. 2022; 23(20).

PMID: 36293247 PMC: 9604148. DOI: 10.3390/ijms232012391.


Differential Effects of Natural Grazing and Feedlot Feeding on Yak Fecal Microbiota.

Shah T, Ding L, Din A, Hassan F, Ahmad A, Wei H Front Vet Sci. 2022; 9:791245.

PMID: 35529830 PMC: 9074760. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.791245.


References
1.
Godoy-Vitorino F, Goldfarb K, Karaoz U, Leal S, Garcia-Amado M, Hugenholtz P . Comparative analyses of foregut and hindgut bacterial communities in hoatzins and cows. ISME J. 2011; 6(3):531-41. PMC: 3280141. DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2011.131. View

2.
Hess M, Sczyrba A, Egan R, Kim T, Chokhawala H, Schroth G . Metagenomic discovery of biomass-degrading genes and genomes from cow rumen. Science. 2011; 331(6016):463-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.1200387. View

3.
Avgustin G, Wallace R, Flint H . Phenotypic diversity among ruminal isolates of Prevotella ruminicola: proposal of Prevotella brevis sp. nov., Prevotella bryantii sp. nov., and Prevotella albensis sp. nov. and redefinition of Prevotella ruminicola. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1997; 47(2):284-8. DOI: 10.1099/00207713-47-2-284. View

4.
Kong Y, Teather R, Forster R . Composition, spatial distribution, and diversity of the bacterial communities in the rumen of cows fed different forages. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2010; 74(3):612-22. DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2010.00977.x. View

5.
Selinger L, Forsberg C, Cheng K . The rumen: a unique source of enzymes for enhancing livestock production. Anaerobe. 1996; 2(5):263-84. DOI: 10.1006/anae.1996.0036. View