Advertisement

Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 96, Issue 5, pp 1361–1369 | Cite as

Intestinal microbiota associated with differential feed conversion efficiency in chickens

  • Dragana StanleyEmail author
  • Stuart E. Denman
  • Robert J. Hughes
  • Mark S. Geier
  • Tamsyn M. Crowley
  • Honglei Chen
  • Volker R. Haring
  • Robert J. Moore
Environmental biotechnology

Abstract

Analysis of model systems, for example in mice, has shown that the microbiota in the gastrointestinal tract can play an important role in the efficiency of energy extraction from diets. The study reported here aimed to determine whether there are correlations between gastrointestinal tract microbiota population structure and energy use in chickens. Efficiency in converting food into muscle mass has a significant impact on the intensive animal production industries, where feed represents the major portion of production costs. Despite extensive breeding and selection efforts, there are still large differences in the growth performance of animals fed identical diets and reared under the same conditions. Variability in growth performance presents management difficulties and causes economic loss. An understanding of possible microbiota drivers of these differences has potentially important benefits for industry. In this study, differences in cecal and jejunal microbiota between broiler chickens with extreme feed conversion capabilities were analysed in order to identify candidate bacteria that may influence growth performance. The jejunal microbiota was largely dominated by lactobacilli (over 99% of jejunal sequences) and showed no difference between the birds with high and low feed conversion ratios. The cecal microbial community displayed higher diversity, and 24 unclassified bacterial species were found to be significantly (<0.05) differentially abundant between high and low performing birds. Such differentially abundant bacteria represent target populations that could potentially be modified with prebiotics and probiotics in order to improve animal growth performance.

Keywords

16S rRNA gene Chicken Feed conversion ratio Gut Microbiota 

Notes

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Anthony Keyburn and Mark Tizard for the comments on the manuscript. We would also like to thank Derek Schultz, Evelyn Daniels and Kylee Swanson for the assistance with animal experimentation. This research was conducted within the Australian Poultry Cooperative Research Center, established and supported under the Australian Government's Cooperative Research Centers Program. High-performance computing infrastructure and support was provided by the Queensland Facility for Advanced Bioinformatics (QFAB).

Supplementary material

253_2011_3847_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (525 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 524 kb)

References

  1. Aggrey SE, Karnuah AB, Sebastian B, Anthony NB (2010) Genetic properties of feed efficiency parameters in meat-type chickens. Genet Sel Evol 42:25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Sheikhly F, Al-Saieg A (1980) Role of Coccidia in the occurrence of necrotic enteritis of chickens. Avian Dis 24(2):324–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schaffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ (1997) Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 25(17):3389–3402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ani AO, Okorie AU (2009) Response of broiler finishers to diets containing graded levels of processed castor oil bean (Ricinus communis L) meal. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl) 93(2):157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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
  6. Ashelford KE, Chuzhanova NA, Fry JC, Jones AJ, Weightman AJ (2005) At least 1 in 20 16S rRNA sequence records currently held in public repositories is estimated to contain substantial anomalies. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(12):7724–7736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brake J, Faust MA, Stein J (2003) Evaluation of transgenic event Bt11 hybrid corn in broiler chickens. Poult Sci 82(4):551–559Google Scholar
  8. Brisbin JT, Gong J, Sharif S (2008) Interactions between commensal bacteria and the gut-associated immune system of the chicken. Anim Health Res Rev 9(1):101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Callaway TR, Dowd SE, Wolcott RD, Sun Y, McReynolds JL, Edrington TS, Byrd JA, Anderson RC, Krueger N, Nisbet DJ (2009) Evaluation of the bacterial diversity in cecal contents of laying hens fed various molting diets by using bacterial tag-encoded FLX amplicon pyrosequencing. Poult Sci 88(2):298–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caporaso JG, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, DeSantis TZ, Andersen GL, Knight R (2010a) PyNAST: a flexible tool for aligning sequences to a template alignment. Bioinformatics 26(2):266–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Pena AG, Goodrich JK, Gordon JI, Huttley GA, Kelley ST, Knights D, Koenig JE, Ley RE, Lozupone CA, McDonald D, Muegge BD, Pirrung M, Reeder J, Sevinsky JR, Turnbaugh PJ, Walters WA, Widmann J, Yatsunenko T, Zaneveld J, Knight R (2010b) QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7(5):335–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chansiripornchai N, Sasipreeyajan J (2002) Efficacy of sarafloxacin in broilers after experimental infection with Escherichia coli. Vet Res Commun 26(4):255–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Choct M, Hughes RJ, Wang J, Bedford MR, Morgan AJ, Annison G (1996) Increased small intestinal fermentation is partly responsible for the anti-nutritive activity of non-starch polysaccharides in chickens. Br Poult Sci 37(3):609–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Collier CT, Hofacre CL, Payne AM, Anderson DB, Kaiser P, Mackie RI, Gaskins HR (2008) Coccidia-induced mucogenesis promotes the onset of necrotic enteritis by supporting Clostridium perfringens growth. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 122(1–2):104–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooper MA, Washburn KW (1998) The relationships of body temperature to weight gain, feed consumption, and feed utilization in broilers under heat stress. Poult Sci 77(2):237–242Google Scholar
  16. Costa EF, Miller BR, Pesti GM, Bakalli RI, Ewing HP (2001) Studies on feeding peanut meal as a protein source for broiler chickens. Poult Sci 80(3):306–313Google Scholar
  17. Cowieson AJ, Singh DN, Adeola O (2006) Prediction of ingredient quality and the effect of a combination of xylanase, amylase, protease and phytase in the diets of broiler chicks. 1. Growth performance and digestible nutrient intake. Br Poult Sci 47(4):477–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cressman MD, Yu Z, Nelson MC, Moeller SJ, Lilburn MS, Zerby HN (2010) Interrelations between the microbiotas in the litter and in the intestines of commercial broiler chickens. Appl Environ Microbiol 76(19):6572–6582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Delzenne NM, Cani PD (2010) Interaction between obesity and the gut microbiota: relevance in nutrition. Annu Rev Nutr 21(31):15–31Google Scholar
  20. Dethlefsen L, McFall-Ngai M, Relman DA (2007) An ecological and evolutionary perspective on human-microbe mutualism and disease. Nature 449(7164):811–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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):925–938Google Scholar
  22. Felske A, Rheims H, Wolterink A, Stackebrandt E, Akkermans AD (1997) Ribosome analysis reveals prominent activity of an uncultured member of the class Actinobacteria in grassland soils. Microbiology 143(Pt 9):2983–2989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Feng Y, Gong J, Yu H, Jin Y, Zhu J, Han Y (2010) Identification of changes in the composition of ileal bacterial microbiota of broiler chickens infected with Clostridium perfringens. Vet Microbiol 140(1–2):116–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fujimura KE, Slusher NA, Cabana MD, Lynch SV (2010) Role of the gut microbiota in defining human health. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 8(4):435–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Giannenas I, Tontis D, Tsalie E, Chronis EF, Doukas D, Kyriazakis I (2010) Influence of dietary mushroom Agaricus bisporus on intestinal morphology and microflora composition in broiler chickens. Res Vet Sci 89(1):78–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gong J, Si W, Forster RJ, Huang R, Yu H, Yin Y, Yang C, Han Y (2007) 16S rRNA gene-based analysis of mucosa-associated bacterial community and phylogeny in the chicken gastrointestinal tracts: from crops to ceca. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 59(1):147–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gonzalez A, Piqueres P, Moreno Y, Canigral I, Owen RJ, Hernandez J, Ferrus MA (2008) A novel real-time PCR assay for the detection of Helicobacter pullorum-like organisms in chicken products. Int Microbiol 11(3):203–208Google Scholar
  28. Greiner T, Backhed F (2011) Effects of the gut microbiota on obesity and glucose homeostasis. Trends Endocrinol Metab 22(4):117–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Henriksen M, Bisgaard M, Francesch M, Gabriel I, Christensen H (2009) Evaluation of PCR and DNA sequencing for direct detection of Clostridium perfringens in the intestinal tract of broilers. Avian Dis 53(3):441–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hoffmann C, Hill DA, Minkah N, Kirn T, Troy A, Artis D, Bushman F (2009) Community-wide response of the gut microbiota to enteropathogenic Citrobacter rodentium infection revealed by deep sequencing. Infect Immun 77(10):4668–4678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Iqbal MF, Zhu WY (2009) Characterization of newly isolated Lactobacillus delbrueckii-like strain MF-07 isolated from chicken and its role in isoflavone biotransformation. FEMS Microbiol Lett 291(2):180–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jia W, Slominski BA (2010) Means to improve the nutritive value of flaxseed for broiler chickens: the effect of particle size, enzyme addition, and feed pelleting. Poult Sci 89(2):261–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jia W, Slominski BA, Bruce HL, Blank G, Crow G, Jones O (2009) Effects of diet type and enzyme addition on growth performance and gut health of broiler chickens during subclinical Clostridium perfringens challenge. Poult Sci 88(1):132–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Karimi Torshizi MA, Moghaddam AR, Rahimi S, Mojgani N (2010) Assessing the effect of administering probiotics in water or as a feed supplement on broiler performance and immune response. Br Poult Sci 51(2):178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kelly D, Conway S (2005) Bacterial modulation of mucosal innate immunity. Mol Immunol 42(8):895–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Korver DR, Zuidhof MJ, Lawes KR (2004) Performance characteristics and economic comparison of broiler chickens fed wheat- and triticale-based diets. Poult Sci 83(5):716–725Google Scholar
  37. Lane DJ (ed) (1991) 16S and 23S rRNA sequencing. Nucleic acid techniques in bacterial systematics. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  38. Li W, Godzik A (2006) Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 22(13):1658–1659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lovanh N, Cook KL, Rothrock MJ, Miles DM, Sistani K (2007) Spatial shifts in microbial population structure within poultry litter associated with physicochemical properties. Poult Sci 86(9):1840–1849Google Scholar
  40. Lozupone C, Knight R (2005) UniFrac: a new phylogenetic method for comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(12):8228–8235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lumpkins BS, Batal AB, Lee M (2008) The effect of gender on the bacterial community in the gastrointestinal tract of broilers. Poult Sci 87(5):964–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lund M, Bjerrum L, Pedersen K (2010) Quantification of Faecalibacterium prausnitzii- and Subdoligranulum variabile-like bacteria in the cecum of chickens by real-time PCR. Poult Sci 89(6):1217–1224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Martin E, Fallschissel K, Kämpfer P, Jäckel U (2010) Detection of Jeotgalicoccus spp. in poultry house air. Syst Appl Microbiol 33(4):188–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. NRC (1994) Nutrient requirements of poultry 9th rev. ed. National Research Council. Natl. Acad. Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  45. Nurmi E, Nuotio L, Schneitz C (1992) The competitive exclusion concept: development and future. Int J Food Microbiol 15(3–4):237–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pentimalli D, Pegels N, Garcia T, Martin R, Gonzalez I (2009) Specific PCR detection of Arcobacter butzleri, Arcobacter cryaerophilus, Arcobacter skirrowii, and Arcobacter cibarius in chicken meat. J Food Prot 72(7):1491–1495Google Scholar
  47. Quinlan AR, Stewart DA, Stromberg MP, Marth GT (2008) Pyrobayes: an improved base caller for SNP discovery in pyrosequences. Nat Methods 5(2):179–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schloss PD, Westcott SL, Ryabin T, Hall JR, Hartmann M, Hollister EB, Lesniewski RA, Oakley BB, Parks DH, Robinson CJ, Sahl JW, Stres B, Thallinger GG, Van Horn DJ, Weber CF (2009) Introducing mothur: open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 75(23):7537–7541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shane SM, Gyimah JE, Harrington KS, Snider TGr (1985) Etiology and pathogenesis of necrotic enteritis. Vet Res Commun 9(4):269–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stamatakis A, Hoover P, Rougemont J (2008) A rapid bootstrap algorithm for the RAxML Web servers. Syst Biol 57(5):758–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 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):783–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Torok VA, Hughes RJ, Mikkelsen LL, Perez-Maldonado R, Balding K, McAlpine R, Percy NJ, Ophel-Keller K (2011) Identification and characterization of potential performance related gut microbiota in broiler chickens across various feeding trials. Appl Environ Microbiol 77(17):5868–5878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Umesaki Y, Setoyama H, Matsumoto S, Imaoka A, Itoh K (1999) Differential roles of segmented filamentous bacteria and clostridia in development of the intestinal immune system. Infect Immun 67(7):3504–3511Google Scholar
  54. Williams RB (2005) Intercurrent coccidiosis and necrotic enteritis of chickens: rational, integrated disease management by maintenance of gut integrity. Avian Pathol 34(3):159–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 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):367–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Yu Z, Morrison M (2004) Improved extraction of PCR-quality community DNA from digesta and fecal samples. Biotechniques 36(5):808–812Google Scholar
  57. Yu H, Zhou T, Gong J, Young C, Su X, Li XZ, Zhu H, Tsao R, Yang R (2010) Isolation of deoxynivalenol-transforming bacteria from the chicken intestines using the approach of PCR-DGGE guided microbial selection. BMC Microbiol 10:182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dragana Stanley
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  • Stuart E. Denman
    • 2
  • Robert J. Hughes
    • 3
    • 4
    • 6
  • Mark S. Geier
    • 3
    • 4
    • 6
  • Tamsyn M. Crowley
    • 1
    • 4
    • 5
  • Honglei Chen
    • 1
  • Volker R. Haring
    • 1
  • Robert J. Moore
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.CSIRO Livestock IndustriesAustralian Animal Health LaboratoriesGeelongAustralia
  2. 2.CSIRO Livestock IndustriesSt LuciaAustralia
  3. 3.South Australian Research and Development InstitutePig and Poultry Production InstituteRoseworthyAustralia
  4. 4.Australian Poultry Cooperative Research CentreUniversity of New EnglandArmidaleAustralia
  5. 5.Institute for Technology Research and InnovationDeakin UniversityGeelongAustralia
  6. 6.School of Animal and Veterinary SciencesThe University of AdelaideRoseworthyAustralia

Personalised recommendations