» Articles » PMID: 38029196

Comparative Analysis of Rumen Metagenome, Metatranscriptome, Fermentation and Methane Yield in Cattle and Buffaloes Fed on the Same Diet

Overview
Journal Front Microbiol
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2023 Nov 29
PMID 38029196
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A study to compare the rumen microbial community composition, functional potential of the microbiota, methane (CH) yield, and rumen fermentation was conducted in adult male cattle and buffaloes fed on the same diet. A total of 41 phyla, 169 orders, 374 families, and 1,376 microbial genera were identified in the study. and were the two most dominant bacterial phyla in both cattle and buffaloes. However, there was no difference in the abundance of and in the rumen metagenome of cattle and buffaloes. Based on the abundance, the was the 3rd largest phylum in the metagenome, constituting 18-20% in both host species. was the most abundant phylum of the methanogens, whereas and were the most abundant orders and genera in both species. The methanogen abundances were not different between the two host species. Like the metagenome, the difference between the compositional and functional abundances (metagenome vs. metatranscriptome) of the and was not significant, whereas the proteobacteria were functionally less active than their metagenomic composition. Contrary to the metagenome, the was the 3rd most functional phylum in the rumen and constituted ~15% of the metatranscriptome. were the most functional methanogens, accounting for more than 2/3rd of the total archaeal functionality. These results indicated that the methanogens from were functionally more active as compared to their compositional abundance. The CH yield (g/kg DMI), CH emission (g/kg DDM), dry matter (DM) intake, and rumen fermentation did not vary between the two host species. Overall, the study established a substantial difference between the compositional abundances and metabolic functionality of the rumen microbiota; however, feeding cattle and buffaloes on the same diet resulted in similar microbiota composition, metabolic functionality, and CH yield. Further studies are warranted to investigate the effect of different diets and environments on the composition and metabolic functionality of the rumen microbiota.

Citing Articles

Anti-Methanogenic Potential of Seaweeds and Impact on Feed Fermentation and Rumen Microbiome In Vitro.

Malik P, Kolte A, Trivedi S, Tamilmani G, Mohapatra A, Vaswani S Microorganisms. 2025; 13(1).

PMID: 39858891 PMC: 11767398. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms13010123.


Rumen-Degradable Starch Improves Rumen Fermentation, Function, and Growth Performance by Altering Bacteria and Its Metabolome in Sheep Fed Alfalfa Hay or Silage.

Guo W, Na M, Liu S, Li K, Du H, Zhang J Animals (Basel). 2025; 15(1).

PMID: 39794977 PMC: 11870059. DOI: 10.3390/ani15010034.


Oat Brewery Waste Decreased Methane Production and Alters Rumen Fermentation, Microbiota Composition, and CAZymes Profiles.

Malik P, Trivedi S, Mohapatra A, Kolte A, Mech A, Victor T Microorganisms. 2024; 12(7).

PMID: 39065243 PMC: 11279122. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms12071475.


Effect of biowaste inclusion on methane production, feed fermentation, and microbial diversity.

Mohapatra A, Trivedi S, Kolte A, Tejpal C, Elavarasan K, Vaswani S Front Microbiol. 2024; 15:1431131.

PMID: 39027100 PMC: 11254855. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1431131.


Analysis of differences in the rumen microbiome and metabolic function in prepartum dairy cows with different body condition scores.

Du D, Wang Y, Gao Y, Feng L, Zhang Z, Hu Z Anim Microbiome. 2024; 6(1):35.

PMID: 38915057 PMC: 11194928. DOI: 10.1186/s42523-024-00324-5.


References
1.
. Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome. Nature. 2012; 486(7402):207-14. PMC: 3564958. DOI: 10.1038/nature11234. View

2.
Dai X, Kalscheur K, Huhtanen P, Faciola A . Effects of ruminal protozoa on methane emissions in ruminants-A meta-analysis. J Dairy Sci. 2022; 105(9):7482-7491. DOI: 10.3168/jds.2021-21139. View

3.
Friedman N, Jami E, Mizrahi I . Compositional and functional dynamics of the bovine rumen methanogenic community across different developmental stages. Environ Microbiol. 2017; 19(8):3365-3373. PMC: 6488025. DOI: 10.1111/1462-2920.13846. View

4.
Wood D, Lu J, Langmead B . Improved metagenomic analysis with Kraken 2. Genome Biol. 2019; 20(1):257. PMC: 6883579. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-019-1891-0. View

5.
Wang L, Zhang G, Xu H, Xin H, Zhang Y . Metagenomic Analyses of Microbial and Carbohydrate-Active Enzymes in the Rumen of Holstein Cows Fed Different Forage-to-Concentrate Ratios. Front Microbiol. 2019; 10:649. PMC: 6449447. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00649. View