Advertisement

Molecular Biology Reports

, Volume 39, Issue 12, pp 10595–10602 | Cite as

High through put 16S rRNA gene-based pyrosequencing analysis of the fecal microbiota of high FCR and low FCR broiler growers

  • K. M. Singh
  • T. Shah
  • S. Deshpande
  • S. J. Jakhesara
  • P. G. Koringa
  • D. N. Rank
  • C. G. Joshi
Article

Abstract

The performance of birds appears to vary among the flock of growing broilers which may in part be due to variation in their gut microbiota. In the view of poultry industry, it is desirable to minimise such variation. We investigated metagenomic profile of fecal bacteria in birds with high and low feed conversion ratio (FCR) to identify microbial community linked to low and high FCR by employing high throughput pyrosequencing of 16S rRNA genomic targets. Therefore feeding trial was investigated in order to identify fecal bacteria consistently linked with better feed conversion ratio in bird performance as measured by body weight gain. High-throughput 16S rRNA gene based pyrosequencing was used to provide a comparative analysis of fecal microbial diversity. The fecal microbial community of birds was predominated by Proteobacteria (48.04 % in high FCR and 49.98 % in low FCR), Firmicutes (26.17 % in high FCR and 36.23 % in low FCR), Bacteroidetes (18.62 % in high FCR and 11.66 % in low FCR), as well as unclassified bacteria (15.77 % in high FCR and 14.29 % in low FCR), suggesting that a large portion of fecal microbiota is novel and could be involved in currently unknown functions. The most prevalent bacterial classes in high FCR and low FCR were Gammaproteobacteria, Clostridia and Bacteroidia. However in low FCR birds Phascolarctobacterium, Faecalibacterium and Clostridium predominated among the Clostridia. In FCR comparison of fecal bacteria, about 36 genera were differentially abundant between high and low FCR birds. This information could be used to formulate effective strategies to improve feed efficiency and feed formulation for optimal gut health.

Keywords

Feed conversion ratio Pyrosequencing 16S r RNA Microbiota 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Government of India and Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) Government of Gujarat, for their financial support for this study. Support provided by the Chairman, Marshall Breeders Pvt Limited, Nasik-422001, Maharashtra to conduct the study reported here is also acknowledged with respect and gratitude. Authors wish to thank Dr. A.E. Nivsarkar, Ex-Director, National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources Karnal for critical reading of the manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Aggrey SE, Karnuah AB, Sebastian B, Anthony NB (2010) Genetic properties of feed efficiency parameters in meat-type chickens. Genet Sel Evol 42:25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Engberg RM, Hedemann MS, Steenfeldt S, Jensen BB (2004) Influence of whole wheat and xylanase on broiler performance and microbial composition and activity in the digestive tract. Poult Sci 83(6):925–938PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Havenstein GB, Ferket PR, Qureshi MA (2003) Growth, livability, and feed conversion of 1957 versus 2001 broilers when fed representative 1957 and 2001 broiler diets. Poult Sci 82(10):1500–1508PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pedroso AA, Menten JF, Lambais MR, Racanicci AM, Longo FA, Sorbara JO (2006) Intestinal bacterial community and growth performance of chickens fed diets containing antibiotics. Poult Sci 85(4):747–752PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu J, Idris U, Harmon B, Hofacre C, Maurer JJ, Lee MD (2003) Diversity and succession of the intestinal bacterial community of the maturing broiler chicken. Appl Environ Microbiol 69(11):6816–6824PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Torok VA, Hughes RJ, Ophel-Keller K, Ali M, Macalpine R (2009) Influence of different litter materials on cecal microbiota colonization in broiler chickens. Poult Sci 88(12):2474–2481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Torok VA, Ophel-Keller K, Loo M, Hughes RJ (2008) Application of methods for identifying broiler chicken gut bacterial species linked with increased energy metabolism. Appl Environ Microbiol 74(3):783–791PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lumpkins BS, Batal AB, Lee MD (2010) Evaluation of the bacterial community and intestinal development of different genetic lines of chickens. Poult Sci 89(8):1614–1621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Apajalahti JH, Sarkilahti LK, Maki BR, Heikkinen JP, Nurminen PH, Holben WE (1998) Effective recovery of bacterial DNA and percent-guanine-plus-cytosine-based analysis of community structure in the gastrointestinal tract of broiler chickens. Appl Environ Microbiol 64(10):4084–4088PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hill JE, Seipp RP, Betts M, Hawkins L, Van Kessel AG, Crosby WL, Hemmingsen SM (2002) Extensive profiling of a complex microbial community by high-throughput sequencing. Appl Environ Microbiol 68(6):3055–3066PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hume ME, Kubena LF, Edrington TS, Donskey CJ, Moore RW, Ricke SC, Nisbet DJ (2003) Poultry digestive microflora biodiversity as indicated by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis. Poult Sci 82(7):1100–1107PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oviedo-Rondon EO, Hume ME, Hernandez C, Clemente-Hernandez S (2006) Intestinal microbial ecology of broilers vaccinated and challenged with mixed Eimeria species, and supplemented with essential oil blends. Poult Sci 85(5):854–860PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Parker J, Oviedo-Rondon EO, Clack BA, Clemente-Hernandez S, Osborne J, Remus JC, Kettunen H, Makivuokko H, Pierson EM (2007) Enzymes as feed additive to aid in responses against Eimeria species in coccidia-vaccinated broilers fed corn-soybean meal diets with different protein levels. Poult Sci 86(4):643–653PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Apajalahti J, Kettunen A, Graham H (2004) Characteristics of the gastrointestinal microbial communities, with special reference to the chicken. World Poultry Sci J 60(2):223–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Barnes EM (1979) The intestinal microflora of poultry and game birds during life and after storage. Address of the president of the Society for Applied Bacteriology delivered at a meeting of the society on 10 January 1979. J Appl Bacteriol 46(3):407–419PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bjerrum L, Engberg RM, Leser TD, Jensen BB, Finster K, Pedersen K (2006) Microbial community composition of the ileum and cecum of broiler chickens as revealed by molecular and culture-based techniques. Poult Sci 85(7):1151–1164PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hubener K, Vahjen W, Simon O (2002) Bacterial responses to different dietary cereal types and xylanase supplementation in the intestine of broiler chicken. Arch Tierernahr 56(3):167–187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Torok VA, Allison GE, Percy NJ, Ophel-Keller K, Hughes RJ (2011) Influence of antimicrobial feed additives on broiler commensal posthatch gut microbiota development and performance. Appl Environ Microbiol 77(10):3380–3390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yin Y, Lei F, Zhu L, Li S, Wu Z, Zhang R, Gao GF, Zhu B, Wang X (2010) Exposure of different bacterial inocula to newborn chicken affects gut microbiota development and ileum gene expression. ISME J 4(3):367–376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang Q, Garrity GM, Tiedje JM, Cole JR (2007) Naive Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl Environ Microbiol 73(16):5261–5526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Coates ME, Fuller R, Harrison GF, Lev M, Suffolk SF (1963) A comparison of the growth of chicks in the Gustafsson germ-free apparatus and in a conventional environment, with and without dietary supplements of penicillin. Br J Nutr 17:141–150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rebel JM, Van Hemert S, Hoekman AJ, Balk FR, Stockhofe-Zurwieden N, Bakker D, Smits MA (2006) Maternal diet influences gene expression in intestine of offspring in chicken (Gallus gallus). Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 145(4):502–508PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brown KH (2003) Diarrhea and malnutrition. J Nutr 133(1):328S–332SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tiihonen K, Kettunen H, Bento MH, Saarinen M, Lahtinen S, Ouwehand AC, Schulze H, Rautonen N (2010) The effect of feeding essential oils on broiler performance and gut microbiota. Br Poult Sci 51(3):381–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Clemens J, Albert MJ, Rao M, Qadri F, Huda S, Kay B, van Loon FP, Sack D, Pradhan BA, Sack RB (1995) Impact of infection by Helicobacter pylori on the risk and severity of endemic cholera. J Infect Dis 171(6):1653–1656PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shahinian ML, Passaro DJ, Swerdlow DL, Mintz ED, Rodriguez M, Parsonnel J (2000) Helicobacter pylori and epidemic Vibrio cholerae O1 infection in Peru. Lancet 355(9201):377–378PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Benson AK, Kelly SA, Legge R, Ma F, Low SJ, Kim J, Zhang M, Oh PL, Nehrenberg D, Hua K, Kachman SD, Moriyama EN, Walter J, Peterson DA, Pomp D (2010) Individuality in gut microbiota composition is a complex polygenic trait shaped by multiple environmental and host genetic factors. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 107(44):18933–18938PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Buhnik-Rosenblau K, Danin-Poleg Y, Kashi Y (2011) Predominant effect of host genetics on levels of Lactobacillus johnsonii bacteria in the mouse gut. Appl Environ Microbiol 77(18):6531–6538. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00324-11 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gupta SS, Mohammed MH, Ghosh TS, Kanungo S, Nair GB, Mande SS (2011) Metagenome of the gut of a malnourished child. Gut Pathog 3:7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Orcutt B, Bailey B, Staudigel H, Tebo BM, Edwards KJ (2009) An interlaboratory comparison of 16S rRNA gene-based terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism and sequencing methods for assessing microbial diversity of seafloor basalts. Environ Microbiol 11(7):1728–1735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turnbaugh PJ, Ley RE, Mahowald MA, Magrini V, Mardis ER, Gordon JI (2006) An obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy harvest. Nature 444(7122):1027–1031PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhang H, DiBaise JK, Zuccolo A, Kudrna D, Braidotti M, Yu Y, Parameswaran P, Crowell MD, Wing R, Rittmann BE, Krajmalnik-Brown R (2009) Human gut microbiota in obesity and after gastric bypass. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106(7):2365–2370PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Torok VA, Hughes RJ, Mikkelsen LL, Perez-Maldonado R, Balding K, MacAlpine R, Percy NJ, Ophel-Keller K (2011) Identification and characterization of potential performance-related gut microbiotas in broiler chickens across various feeding trials. Appl Environ Microbiol 77(17):5868–5878PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Beckmann L, Simon O, Vahjen W (2006) Isolation and identification of mixed linked beta -glucan degrading bacteria in the intestine of broiler chickens and partial characterization of respective 1,3–1,4-beta -glucanase activities. J Basic Microbiol 46(3):175–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Collier CT, van der Klis JD, Deplancke B, Anderson DB, Gaskins HR (2003) Effects of tylosin on bacterial mucolysis, Clostridium perfringens colonization, and intestinal barrier function in a chick model of necrotic enteritis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 47(10):3311–3317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Knarreborg A, Engberg RM, Jensen SK, Jensen BB (2002) Quantitative determination of bile salt hydrolase activity in bacteria isolated from the small intestine of chickens. Appl Environ Microbiol 68(12):6425–6428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. M. Singh
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
  • T. Shah
    • 1
  • S. Deshpande
    • 3
  • S. J. Jakhesara
    • 1
  • P. G. Koringa
    • 1
  • D. N. Rank
    • 2
  • C. G. Joshi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Animal BiotechnologyAnand Agriculture UniversityAnandIndia
  2. 2.Department of Animal Genetics and BreedingAnand Agriculture UniversityAnandIndia
  3. 3.Marshall Breeders Private LimitedNasikIndia
  4. 4.Department of GeneticsARIBASAnandIndia

Personalised recommendations