Yan Wei, Sun Congjiao, Zheng Jiangxia, Wen Chaoliang, Ji Congliang, Zhang Dexiang, Chen Yonghua, Hou Zhuocheng, Yang Ning
National Engineering Laboratory for Animal Breeding and MOA Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics and Breeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Wen's sNanfang Poultry Breeding Co. Ltd., Yunfu, China.
Front Microbiol. 2019 Sep 13;10:2126. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02126. eCollection 2019.
Despite the convenience and non-invasiveness of fecal sampling, the fecal microbiota does not fully represent that of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, and the efficacy of fecal sampling to accurately represent the gut microbiota in birds is poorly understood. In this study, we aim to identify the efficacy of feces as a gut proxy in birds using chickens as a model. We collected 1,026 samples from 206 chickens, including duodenum, jejunum, ileum, cecum, and feces samples, for 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing analyses. In this study, the efficacy of feces as a gut proxy was partitioned to microbial community membership and community structure. Most taxa in the small intestine (84.11-87.28%) and ceca (99.39%) could be identified in feces. Microbial community membership was reflected with a gut anatomic feature, but community structure was not. Excluding shared microbes, the small intestine and ceca contributed 34.12 and 5.83% of the total fecal members, respectively. The composition of Firmicutes members in the small intestine and that of Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria members in the ceca could be well mirrored by the observations in fecal samples (ρ = 0.54-0.71 and 0.71-0.78, respectively, < 0.001). However, there were few significant correlations for each genus between feces and each of the four gut segments, and these correlations were not high (ρ = -0.2-0.4, < 0.05) for most genera. Our results suggest that fecal microbial community has a good potential to identify most taxa in the chicken gut and could moderately mirror the microbial structure in the intestine at the microbial population level with phylum specificity. However, it should be interpreted with caution by using feces as a proxy to study associations for microbial structure at individual microorganism level.
尽管粪便采样具有便利性和非侵入性,但粪便微生物群并不能完全代表胃肠道(GI)的微生物群,而且粪便采样在准确反映鸟类肠道微生物群方面的功效还鲜为人知。在本研究中,我们旨在以鸡为模型,确定粪便作为鸟类肠道替代物的功效。我们从206只鸡身上收集了1026个样本,包括十二指肠、空肠、回肠、盲肠和粪便样本,用于16S rRNA扩增子测序分析。在本研究中,粪便作为肠道替代物的功效被划分为微生物群落成员和群落结构。小肠(84.11 - 87.28%)和盲肠(99.39%)中的大多数分类群都可以在粪便中被识别出来。微生物群落成员与肠道解剖特征有关,但群落结构并非如此。排除共享微生物后,小肠和盲肠分别占粪便总成员的34.12%和5.83%。粪便样本中的观察结果可以很好地反映小肠中厚壁菌门成员的组成以及盲肠中放线菌门、拟杆菌门、厚壁菌门和变形菌门成员的组成(ρ分别为0.54 - 0.71和0.71 - 0.78,均<0.001)。然而,粪便与四个肠道节段中每个节段的各属之间几乎没有显著相关性,而且大多数属的相关性都不高(ρ = -0.2 - 0.4,<0.05)。我们的结果表明,粪便微生物群落有很大潜力识别鸡肠道中的大多数分类群,并且在微生物种群水平上能够以门特异性适度反映肠道中的微生物结构。然而,在将粪便用作替代物来研究个体微生物水平上的微生物结构关联时,应谨慎解读。