Screening the Rumen of Balochi Camel (Camelus dromedarius) and Cashmere Goat (Capra hircus) to Isolate Enzyme-Producing Bacteria as Potential Additives for Animal Feed
Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Trang 1-11 - 2024
Tóm tắt
Rumen microbiology has made a significant contribution to the discovery of biodegradation processes, which convert nutrients into energy for ruminants. Therefore, understanding the enzymatic potential in the rumen of different animal species is essential for developing efficient microbial feed additives. The aim of this study was to isolate enzyme-producing bacteria (EPBs) from the rumen of the Balochi camel (Camelus dromedarius) and Cashmere goat (Capra hircus) as potential additives for animal feed. The EPBs were screened based on the hydrolysis of carboxyl methyl cellulose, tannin, starch, and bovine serum albumin. The isolates were then subjected to enzyme activity assays and molecular characterization. Additionally, they were evaluated for their antagonistic effects, antibiotic susceptibility, and growth in acidic, bile, and saline media. Thirteen enzyme-producing strains were identified in the rumen of the camels and goats, belonging to the genera Klebsiella, Escherichia, Raoultella, Enterobacter and Pectobacterium. The highest and lowest tannase activities were recorded for Escherichia coli GHMGHE41 (10.46 Um/l−1) and Raoultella planticola GHMGHE15 (1.83 Um/l−1), respectively. Enterobacter cloacae GHMGHE18 (2.03 U/ml) was the most effective cellulolytic isolate, compared to Klebsiella strains (1.05 Um/l−1). The highest protease producer was Klebsiella pneumoniae GHMGHE13 (3.00 U/ml−1), while Escherichia coli GHMGHE17 (1.13 U/ml−1) had the lowest activity. Klebsiella pneumoniae GHMGHE13 (1.55 U/ml−1) and Enterobacter cloacae GHMGHE19 (1.26 U/ml−1) were the highest and lowest producers of amylase, respectively. The strains exhibited mixed responses to antibiotics and remained stable under stressful conditions. These findings indicate that ruminal EPBs have the potential to be used in animal feed, pending further in vivo studies.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Setyati WA, Pringgenies D, Soenardjo N, Pramesti R (2023) Enzyme-producing symbiotic bacteria in gastropods and bivalves molluscs: candidates for bioindustry materials. Biodivers J Biol Divers. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d240103
Al Jassim R (2022) Foregut microbiology of the Arabian camel (Camelus dromedarius). Anim Front 12:46–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/af/vfac049
Sari WN, Safika D, Fahrimal Y (2017) Isolation and identification of a cellulolytic Enterobacter from rumen of Aceh cattle. Vet World 10:1515. https://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2017.1515-1520
Ladha G, Jeevaratnam K (2021) A novel antibacterial compound produced by Lactobacillus plantarum LJR13 isolated from rumen liquor of goat effectively controls multi-drug resistant human pathogens. Microbiol Res 241:126563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2020.126563
Hinsu AT, Tulsani NJ, Panchal KJ, Pandit RJ, Jyotsana B, Dafale NA, Patil VP, Purohit HJ, Joshi CG, Jakhesara SJ (2021) Characterizing rumen microbiota and CAZyme profile of Indian dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) in response to different roughages. Sci rep 11:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88943-9
Rabee AE, Forster R, Sabra EA (2021) Lignocelluloytic activities and composition of bacterial community in the camel rumen. AIMS microbiol 7:354. https://doi.org/10.3934/microbiol.2021022
Sarteshnizi FR, Seifdavati J, Abdi-Benema H, Salem AZ, Sharifi RS, Mlambo V (2018) The potential of rumen fluid waste from slaughterhouses as an environmentally friendly source of enzyme additives for ruminant feedstuffs. J Clean Prod 195:1026–1031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.268
Goel G, Puniya AK, Aguilar CN, Singh K (2005) Interaction of gut microflora with tannins in feeds. Naturwissenschaften 92:497–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-005-0040-7
Tasripin DS, Yuniarti E, Mutaqin BK (2022) Isolation of indigenous microorganisms from the liquid produced by the bioprocess of corn straw as direct fed microbials. Biodivers J Biol Divers. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d230718
Pourbayramian R, Abdi-Benemar H, Seifdavati J, Greiner R, Elghandour MMMY, Salem AZM (2021) Bioconversion of potato waste by rumen fluid from slaughterhouses to produce a potential feed additive rich in volatile fatty acids for farm animals. J Clean Prod 280:124411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124411
Selormey GK, Barnes B, Kemausuor F, Darkwah L (2021) A review of anaerobic digestion of slaughterhouse waste: effect of selected operational and environmental parameters on anaerobic biodegradability. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 20:1073–1086. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-021-09596-8
Fasake V, Dashora K (2021) A sustainable potential source of ruminant animal waste material (dung fiber) for various industrial applications: a review. Bioresour Technol Rep. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2021.100693
Srivastava S, Dafale NA, Jakhesara SJ, Joshi CG, Patil NV, Purohit HJ (2021) Unraveling the camel rumen microbiome through metaculturomics approach for agriculture waste hydrolytic potential. Arch Microbiol 203:107–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-020-02010-x
Takizawa S, Abe K, Fukuda Y, Feng M, Baba Y, Tada C, Nakai Y (2020) Recovery of the fibrolytic microorganisms from rumen fluid by flocculation for simultaneous treatment of lignocellulosic biomass and volatile fatty acid production. J Clean Prod 257:120626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120626
Ephraim E, Odenyo A, Ashenafi M (2005) Isolation and characterization of tannin-degrading bacteria from faecal samples of some wild ruminants in Ethiopia. Anim Feed Sci Technol 118:243–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2004.10.015
Ghazanfar S, Qubtia M, Ahmed I, Hasan F, Anjum FMI, Imran M (2018) Effect of indigenously isolated saccharomyces cerevisiae probiotics on milk production, nutrient digestibility, blood chemistry and fecal microbiota in lactating dairy cows. J Anim Plant Sci 28:407–420
Yumnam S, Prasanna B, Oriabinsk LB, Khrokalo LA, Dugan OM (2014) Optimization of tannase positive probiotic production by surface response methodology. Biotechnol Acta. https://doi.org/10.15407/biotech7.05.062
Miller GL (1959) Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. Anal Chem 31:426–428. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60147a030
Pallavi P, Reddy K, Reddy R (2015) Alkaline protease bioprocess optimization through response surface methodology for alkaliphilic Bacillus subtilis SHmIIIa mutant strain from Warangal-Telangana. Am J Curr Microbiol 3:35–45
Li D, Ni K, Pang H, Wang Y, Cai Y, Jin Q (2015) Identification and antimicrobial activity detection of lactic Acid bacteria isolated from corn stover silage. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 28:620–631. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.14.0439
Cappuccino JC, Sherman N (2004) Microbiology—a laboratory manual, 7th ed. Pearson Education Publication, India, pp 1–195
Ausubel FM, Brent R, Kingstone RE, Moore DD, Seidman JG, Smith JA, Struhl K (1992) Short protocols in molecular biology, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-007-1000-2
Weisburg WG, Borns SM, Pelltier DA, Lane DJ (1991) 16S Ribosomal DNA amplification for phylogenetic study. J Bacteriol 173:697–703. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.173.2.697-703.1991
Valencia CA, Pervaiz MA, Husami A, Qian Y, Zhang K, Valencia CA et al (2013) Sanger sequencing principles, history, and landmarks. Next Gen Sequenc Technol Med Genet 6:3–11
Rosenberg E, DeLong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E, Thompson F (2014) The Prokaryotes: Gammaproteobacteria. Springer, Berlin
Saitou N, Nei M (1987) The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 4:406–425. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040454
SAS (2009) SAS users guide. Version 9.2. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary
Ridwan R, Ariga BW, Dwi AW, Rohmatussolihat R, Fitri SN, Fidriyanto R, Jayanegara A, Wijayanti I, Widyastuti Y (2018) The use of lactic acid bacteria as ruminant probiotic candidates based on in vitro rumen fermentation characteristics. Buletin Peternakan 42: 31–36. https://doi.org/10.21059/buletinpeternak.v42i1.23317
Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783–791. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb00420.x
Tamura K, Nei M, Kumar S (2004) Prospects for inferring very large phylogenies by using the neighbor-joining method. Proc Natl Acad Sci 101:11030–11035. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0404206101
Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K (2018) MEGA X: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Mol Biol Evol 35:1547–1549. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msy096
Leparmarai PT, Kunz C, Mwangi DM, Gluecks I, Kreuzer M, Marquardt S (2021) Camels and cattle respond differently in milk phenol excretion and milk fatty acid profile to free ranging conditions in East-African rangelands. Sci Afr 13:e00896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2021.e00896
Min BR, Solaiman S (2018) Comparative aspects of plant tannins on digestive physiology, nutrition and microbial community changes in sheep and goats: a review. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr 102:1181–1193. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.12938
Gheibipour M (2017) Isolation of tannin-degrading bacteria from the gastrointestinal tract of deer and using for improving the nutritional value of tannin rich feeds (M.Sc. thesis). Khuzestan Ramin Agriculture and Natural Resource University, Molasani (Iran)
Gheibipour M, Ghiasi SE, Bashtani M, Torbati MBM, Motamedi H (2022) The potential of tannin degrading bacteria isolated from rumen of Iranian Urial ram as silage additives. Bioresour Technol Rep. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2022.101024
De Las RB, Rodríguez H, Anguita J, Muñoz R (2019) Bacterial tannases: classification and biochemical properties. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 103:603–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-018-9519-y
Kohl KD, Stengel A, Dearing MD (2016) Inoculation of tannin-degrading bacteria into novel hosts increases performance on tannin-rich diets. Environ Microbiol 18:1720–1729. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12841
Li J, Zhang Z, Wu ZB, Qu SY, Wang GX, Wei DD, Li PF, Ling F (2023) Enterobacter asburiae E7, a novel potential probiotic, enhances resistance to aeromonas veronii infection via stimulating the immune response in common carp (Cyprinus carpio). Microbiol Spectr. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.04273-22
Karpiński TM, Szkaradkiewicz AK (2016) Bacteriocins. Encycl Food Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384947-2.00053-2
Khalil T, Okla MK, Al-Qahtani WH, Ali F, Zahra M, Shakeela Q, Ghazanfar S (2022) Tracing probiotic producing bacterial species from gut of buffalo (Bubalus bubalis), South-East-Asia. Brazil J Biol. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.259094
Ban Y, Guan LL (2021) Implication and challenges of direct-fed microbial supplementation to improve ruminant production and health. J Anim Sci Biotechnol 12:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-021-00630-x
Hu S, Zhao L, Hu L, Xi X, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Chen J, Chen J, Kang Z (2022) Engineering the probiotic bacterium Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 as an efficient cell factory for heparosan biosynthesis. Enzyme Microb Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enzmictec.2022.110038
Kandasamy S, Vlasova AN, Fischer DD, Chattha KS, Shao L, Kumar A, Saif LJ (2017) Unraveling the differences between Gram-positive and Gram-negative probiotics in modulating protective immunity to enteric infections. Front Immunol 8:334. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2017.00334
Halder D, Mandal M, Chatterjee SS, Pal NK, Mandal S (2017) Indigenous probiotic Lactobacillus isolates presenting antibiotic like activity against human pathogenic bacteria. Biomedicines 5:31. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines5020031
FAO (2016) Probiotics in animal nutrition; production, impact and regulation by Yadav S. Bajagai, Athol V. Klieve, Peter J. Dart and Wayne L. Bryden. Editor Harinder P.S. Makkar. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper No. 179. Rome
Jose NM, Bunt CR, Hussain MA (2015) Comparison of microbiological and probiotic characteristics of Lactobacilli isolates from dairy food products and animal rumen contents. Microorganisms 3:198–212. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms3020198
Zhang LU, Chung J, Jiang Q, Sun R, Zhang J, Zhong Y, Ren N (2017) Characteristics of rumen microorganisms involved in anaerobic degradation of cellulose at various pH values. RSC Adv 7:40303–40310. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RA06588D
Rodríguez-González S, González-Dávalos L, Robles-Rodríguez C, Lozano-Flores C, Varela-Echavarría A, Shimada A, Mora-Izaguirre O (2023) Isolation of bacterial consortia with probiotic potential from the rumen of tropical calves. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr 107:62–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.13699