The intestinal microbial composition in Greylag geese differs with steatosis induction mode: spontaneous or induced by overfeeding.
Anser anser
Fatty liver
Gut microbiota
Migratory bird
Journal
Animal microbiome
ISSN: 2524-4671
Titre abrégé: Anim Microbiome
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101759457
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Jan 2021
06 Jan 2021
Historique:
received:
17
06
2020
accepted:
08
12
2020
entrez:
27
1
2021
pubmed:
28
1
2021
medline:
28
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Relationships between microbial composition and steatosis are being extensively studied in mammals, and causal relations have been evidenced. In migratory birds the liver can transiently store lipids during pre-migratory and migratory phases, but little is known about the implications of the digestive microbiota in those mechanisms. The Landaise greylag goose (Anser anser) is a good model to study steatosis in migratory birds as it is domesticated, but is still, from a genetic point of view, close to its wild migratory ancestor. It also has a great ingestion capacity and a good predisposition for hepatic steatosis, whether spontaneous or induced by conventional overfeeding. The conventional (overfeeding) and alternative (spontaneous steatosis induction) systems differ considerably in duration and feed intake level and previous studies have shown that aptitudes to spontaneous steatosis are very variable. The present study thus aimed to address two issues: (i) evaluate whether microbial composition differs with steatosis-inducing mode; (ii) elucidate whether a digestive microbial signature could be associated with variable aptitudes to spontaneous liver steatosis. Performances, biochemical composition of the livers and microbiota differed considerably in response to steatosis stimulation. We namely identified the genus Romboutsia to be overrepresented in birds developing a spontaneous steatosis in comparison to those submitted to conventional overfeeding while the genera Ralstonia, Variovorax and Sphingomonas were underrepresented only in birds that did not develop a spontaneous steatosis compared to conventionally overfed ones, birds developing a spontaneous steatosis having intermediate values. Secondly, no overall differences in microbial composition were evidenced in association with variable aptitudes to spontaneous steatosis, although one OTU, belonging to the Lactobacillus genus, was overrepresented in birds having developed a spontaneous steatosis compared to those that had not. Our study is the first to evaluate the intestinal microbial composition in association with steatosis, whether spontaneous or induced by overfeeding, in geese. Steatosis induction modes were associated with distinct digestive microbial compositions. However, unlike what can be observed in mammals, no clear microbial signature associated with spontaneous steatosis level was identified.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Relationships between microbial composition and steatosis are being extensively studied in mammals, and causal relations have been evidenced. In migratory birds the liver can transiently store lipids during pre-migratory and migratory phases, but little is known about the implications of the digestive microbiota in those mechanisms. The Landaise greylag goose (Anser anser) is a good model to study steatosis in migratory birds as it is domesticated, but is still, from a genetic point of view, close to its wild migratory ancestor. It also has a great ingestion capacity and a good predisposition for hepatic steatosis, whether spontaneous or induced by conventional overfeeding. The conventional (overfeeding) and alternative (spontaneous steatosis induction) systems differ considerably in duration and feed intake level and previous studies have shown that aptitudes to spontaneous steatosis are very variable. The present study thus aimed to address two issues: (i) evaluate whether microbial composition differs with steatosis-inducing mode; (ii) elucidate whether a digestive microbial signature could be associated with variable aptitudes to spontaneous liver steatosis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Performances, biochemical composition of the livers and microbiota differed considerably in response to steatosis stimulation. We namely identified the genus Romboutsia to be overrepresented in birds developing a spontaneous steatosis in comparison to those submitted to conventional overfeeding while the genera Ralstonia, Variovorax and Sphingomonas were underrepresented only in birds that did not develop a spontaneous steatosis compared to conventionally overfed ones, birds developing a spontaneous steatosis having intermediate values. Secondly, no overall differences in microbial composition were evidenced in association with variable aptitudes to spontaneous steatosis, although one OTU, belonging to the Lactobacillus genus, was overrepresented in birds having developed a spontaneous steatosis compared to those that had not.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our study is the first to evaluate the intestinal microbial composition in association with steatosis, whether spontaneous or induced by overfeeding, in geese. Steatosis induction modes were associated with distinct digestive microbial compositions. However, unlike what can be observed in mammals, no clear microbial signature associated with spontaneous steatosis level was identified.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33499980
doi: 10.1186/s42523-020-00067-z
pii: 10.1186/s42523-020-00067-z
pmc: PMC7934468
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
6Références
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2003 Nov;69(11):6816-24
pubmed: 14602645
Poult Sci. 2019 Jun 1;98(6):2509-2521
pubmed: 30690636
Physiol Behav. 2019 Oct 15;210:112658
pubmed: 31430443
J Anim Sci. 2018 Apr 14;96(4):1405-1418
pubmed: 29669075
Poult Sci. 2018 Apr 1;97(4):1420-1428
pubmed: 29365165
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 22;12(11):e0181693
pubmed: 29166392
Poult Sci. 2019 Nov 1;98(11):5724-5733
pubmed: 31347676
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 3;12(10):e0185590
pubmed: 28972993
Poult Sci. 2012 Aug;91(8):2063-71
pubmed: 22802205
Open Microbiol J. 2018 Apr 23;12:71-93
pubmed: 29755604
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 22;8(4):e61217
pubmed: 23630581
Annu Rev Nutr. 1994;14:187-215
pubmed: 7946517
Poult Sci. 2017 Sep 1;96(11):3928-3937
pubmed: 29050415
Nutrients. 2020 Jan 22;12(2):
pubmed: 31979147
Sci Rep. 2019 Sep 17;9(1):13424
pubmed: 31530820
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2014 Jan;87(1):204-16
pubmed: 24102552
Front Microbiol. 2014 May 16;5:223
pubmed: 24904538
Anim Genet. 2015 Oct;46(5):485-97
pubmed: 26096191
Sci Rep. 2017 Mar 28;7:45308
pubmed: 28349946
J Biol Chem. 1957 May;226(1):497-509
pubmed: 13428781
Poult Sci. 2019 Nov 1;98(11):6149-6160
pubmed: 31162617
Sci Rep. 2016 Aug 23;6:31763
pubmed: 27550859
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1965 Oct 8;131(1):422-40
pubmed: 5216979
Hepatology. 2016 Dec;64(6):2015-2027
pubmed: 27639192
Free Radic Res. 2013 Mar;47(3):146-53
pubmed: 23205728
Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Jan;41(Database issue):D590-6
pubmed: 23193283
Poult Sci. 2019 Mar 1;98(3):1390-1402
pubmed: 30285149
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016 Apr 04;82(8):2399-2410
pubmed: 26873323
Sci Rep. 2016 Sep 09;6:32961
pubmed: 27608918
Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2000 May;126(1):91-9
pubmed: 10908856
Front Microbiol. 2020 Mar 26;11:512
pubmed: 32273874
Poult Sci. 2014 Apr;93(4):916-25
pubmed: 24706969
Cell Mol Life Sci. 2019 Apr;76(8):1541-1558
pubmed: 30683985
PLoS Comput Biol. 2017 Nov 3;13(11):e1005752
pubmed: 29099853
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2017 Jul 17;83(15):
pubmed: 28526795
Nat Methods. 2013 Jan;10(1):57-9
pubmed: 23202435
Gut. 2013 Dec;62(12):1787-94
pubmed: 23197411
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 25;14(10):e0223445
pubmed: 31652267
Animal. 2014 Oct;8(10):1632-42
pubmed: 24963640
J Anim Sci. 2013 Jan;91(1):455-64
pubmed: 23097395
Front Microbiol. 2017 Sep 14;8:1764
pubmed: 28959247
Animal. 2016 Aug;10(8):1288-95
pubmed: 26915402
Bioinformatics. 2018 Apr 15;34(8):1287-1294
pubmed: 29228191
Animal. 2017 May;11(5):854-863
pubmed: 27745563
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 May;17(5):279-297
pubmed: 32152478
Front Microbiol. 2018 Nov 19;9:2698
pubmed: 30510543
Poult Sci. 2018 Nov 1;97(11):3899-3909
pubmed: 29982682