1
|
Wang S, Kong F, Liu J, Xia J, Du W, Li S, Wang W. Comparative Analysis of Rumen Microbiota Composition in Dairy Cows with Simple Indigestion and Healthy Cows. Microorganisms 2023; 11:2673. [PMID: 38004685 PMCID: PMC10672840 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms11112673] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2023] [Revised: 10/18/2023] [Accepted: 10/26/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple indigestion in cows leads to substantial economic losses in the dairy industry. Despite ongoing efforts, an effective treatment for this issue remains elusive. Previous studies have emphasized the vital role of rumen microbes in maintaining ruminant health. To deepen our comprehension of the intricate interplay between rumen microbiota and simple indigestion, we undertook a study involving the analysis of rumen fluid from eight cows with simple indigestion and ten healthy cows. Additionally, we collected data pertaining to milk production, rumination behavior, and rumen characteristics. The results showed that cows with simple indigestion displayed significantly lower milk yield, reduced rumination duration, and weakened rumen contraction when contrasted with the healthy cows (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference in microbiota α-diversity emerged (p > 0.05). Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) illuminated substantial variations in rumen microbial structure among the two groups (p < 0.05). Further analysis spotlighted distinctive bacteria in the rumen of the cows with indigestion, including Allisonella, Synergistes, Megasphaera, Clostridium_XIVb, Campylobacter, and Acidaminococcus. In contrast, Coraliomargarita, Syntrophococcus, and Coprococcus are the dominant bacterial genera in the rumen of healthy dairy cows. Importantly, these key bacterial genera also dominated the overarching microbial interaction network. The observation suggests that changes in the abundance of these dominant bacterial genera potentially underlie the principal etiology of cows with simple indigestion. The present findings can provide insights into simple indigestion prevention and treatment in dairy cows.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Wei Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China; (S.W.); (F.K.); (J.L.); (J.X.); (W.D.); (S.L.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pérez-Báez J, Risco CA, Chebel RC, Gomes GC, Greco LF, Tao S, Toledo IM, do Amaral BC, Zenobi MG, Martinez N, Dahl GE, Hernández JA, Prim JG, Santos JEP, Galvão KN. Investigating the Use of Dry Matter Intake and Energy Balance Prepartum as Predictors of Digestive Disorders Postpartum. Front Vet Sci 2021; 8:645252. [PMID: 34604365 PMCID: PMC8481776 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.645252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2020] [Accepted: 08/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
One objective was to evaluate the association of dry matter intake as a percentage of body weight (DMI%BW) and energy balance (EB) prepartum and postpartum, and energy-corrected milk (ECM) postpatum with digestive disorders postpartum. For this, ANOVA was used, and DMI%BW, EB, and ECM were the outcome variables, and left displaced abomasum (LDA), indigestion, and other digestive disorders (ODDZ) were the explanatory variables. The main objective was to evaluate prepartum DMI%BW and EB as predictors of digestive disorders. For this, logistic regression was used, and LDA, indigestion, and ODDZ were the outcome variables and DMI%BW and EB were the explanatory variables. Data from 689 cows from 11 experiments were compiled. Left displaced abomasum was not associated with prepartum DMI%BW or EB. Postpartum data were normalized to the day of the event (day 0). Cows that developed LDA had lesser postpartum DMI%BW on days −24, −23, −12, −7 to 0 and from days 1 to 8, 10 to 12, and 14 and 16, lesser postpartum EB from days −7 to −5, −3 to 0, and 12, and lesser postpartum energy-corrected milk on days −19, −2, −1, 0, 7, 9, 10, 15, and 17 relative to diagnosis than cows without LDA. Cows that developed indigestion had lesser prepartum DMI%BW and EB than cows without indigestion, and lesser postpartum DMI%BW on days −24, −1, 0, 1, and 2, and greater DMI%BW on day 26, lesser ECM on days −24, −2, −1, 0, 1, and 2 relative to diagnosis. Postpartum EB was not associated with indigestion postpartum. Cows that developed ODDZ had lesser prepartum DMI%BW on day −8 and from days −5 to −2, lesser prepartum EB on day −8 and from days −5 to −2, and lesser postpartum DMI%BW than cows without ODDZ. Each 0.1 percentage point decrease in the average DMI%BW and each Mcal decrease in the average EB in the last 3 days prepartum increased the odds of having indigestion by 9% each. Cutoffs for DMI%BW and EB during the last 3 days prepartum to predict indigestion were established and were ≤1.3%/day and ≤0.68 Mcal/day, respectively. In summary, measures of prepartum DMI%BW and EB were associated with indigestion and ODDZ postpartum and were predictors of indigestion postpartum, although the effect sizes were small.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johanny Pérez-Báez
- Escuela de Medicina Veterinaria, Facultad de Ciencias Agronómicas y Veterinarias, Universidad Autónoma de Santo Domingo, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
| | - Carlos A Risco
- Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, D. H. Barron Reproductive and Perinatal Biology Research Program, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Ricardo C Chebel
- Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, D. H. Barron Reproductive and Perinatal Biology Research Program, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Gabriel C Gomes
- Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, D. H. Barron Reproductive and Perinatal Biology Research Program, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Leandro F Greco
- Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Sha Tao
- Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Izabella M Toledo
- Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Bruno C do Amaral
- Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Marcos G Zenobi
- Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Natalia Martinez
- Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Geoffrey E Dahl
- Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Jorge A Hernández
- Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, D. H. Barron Reproductive and Perinatal Biology Research Program, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Jessica G Prim
- Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, D. H. Barron Reproductive and Perinatal Biology Research Program, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - José Eduardo P Santos
- Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.,D. H. Barron Reproductive and Perinatal Biology Research Program, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Klibs N Galvão
- Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, D. H. Barron Reproductive and Perinatal Biology Research Program, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.,D. H. Barron Reproductive and Perinatal Biology Research Program, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| |
Collapse
|