Cargando…

Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences

BACKGROUND: The majority of chicken microbiota studies have used the ceca as a sampling site due to the specific role of ceca in chicken productivity, health and wellbeing. However, sampling from ceca and other gastrointestinal tract sections requires the bird to be sacrificed. In contrast, fecal sa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stanley, Dragana, Geier, Mark S, Chen, Honglei, Hughes, Robert J, Moore, Robert J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25887695
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-015-0388-6
_version_ 1782367378458279936
author Stanley, Dragana
Geier, Mark S
Chen, Honglei
Hughes, Robert J
Moore, Robert J
author_facet Stanley, Dragana
Geier, Mark S
Chen, Honglei
Hughes, Robert J
Moore, Robert J
author_sort Stanley, Dragana
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The majority of chicken microbiota studies have used the ceca as a sampling site due to the specific role of ceca in chicken productivity, health and wellbeing. However, sampling from ceca and other gastrointestinal tract sections requires the bird to be sacrificed. In contrast, fecal sampling does not require sacrifice and thus allows the same bird to be sampled repeatedly over time. This is a more meaningful and preferred way of sampling as the same animals can be monitored and tracked for temporal studies. The commonly used practice of selecting a subset of birds at each time-point for sacrifice and sampling introduces added variability due to the known animal to animal variation in microbiota. RESULTS: Cecal samples and fecal samples via cloacal swab were collected from 163 birds across 3 replicate trials. DNA was extracted and 16S rRNA gene sequences amplified and pyrosequenced to determine and compare the phylogenetic profile of the microbiota within each sample. The fecal and cecal samples were investigated to determine to what extent the microbiota found in fecal samples represented the microbiota of the ceca. It was found that 88.55% of all operational taxonomic units (OTUs), containing 99.25% of all sequences, were shared between the two sample types, with OTUs unique for each sample type found to be very rare. There was a positive correlation between cecal and fecal abundance in the shared sequences, however the two communities differed significantly in community structure, represented as either alpha or beta diversity. The microbial populations present within the paired ceca of individual birds were also compared and shown to be similar. CONCLUSIONS: Fecal sample analysis captures a large percentage of the microbial diversity present in the ceca. However, the qualitative similarities in OTU presence are not a good representation of the proportions of OTUs within the microbiota from each sampling site. The fecal microbiota is qualitatively similar to cecal microbiota but quantitatively different. Fecal samples can be effectively used to detect some shifts and responses of cecal microbiota.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4403768
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44037682015-04-21 Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences Stanley, Dragana Geier, Mark S Chen, Honglei Hughes, Robert J Moore, Robert J BMC Microbiol Research Article BACKGROUND: The majority of chicken microbiota studies have used the ceca as a sampling site due to the specific role of ceca in chicken productivity, health and wellbeing. However, sampling from ceca and other gastrointestinal tract sections requires the bird to be sacrificed. In contrast, fecal sampling does not require sacrifice and thus allows the same bird to be sampled repeatedly over time. This is a more meaningful and preferred way of sampling as the same animals can be monitored and tracked for temporal studies. The commonly used practice of selecting a subset of birds at each time-point for sacrifice and sampling introduces added variability due to the known animal to animal variation in microbiota. RESULTS: Cecal samples and fecal samples via cloacal swab were collected from 163 birds across 3 replicate trials. DNA was extracted and 16S rRNA gene sequences amplified and pyrosequenced to determine and compare the phylogenetic profile of the microbiota within each sample. The fecal and cecal samples were investigated to determine to what extent the microbiota found in fecal samples represented the microbiota of the ceca. It was found that 88.55% of all operational taxonomic units (OTUs), containing 99.25% of all sequences, were shared between the two sample types, with OTUs unique for each sample type found to be very rare. There was a positive correlation between cecal and fecal abundance in the shared sequences, however the two communities differed significantly in community structure, represented as either alpha or beta diversity. The microbial populations present within the paired ceca of individual birds were also compared and shown to be similar. CONCLUSIONS: Fecal sample analysis captures a large percentage of the microbial diversity present in the ceca. However, the qualitative similarities in OTU presence are not a good representation of the proportions of OTUs within the microbiota from each sampling site. The fecal microbiota is qualitatively similar to cecal microbiota but quantitatively different. Fecal samples can be effectively used to detect some shifts and responses of cecal microbiota. BioMed Central 2015-02-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4403768/ /pubmed/25887695 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-015-0388-6 Text en © Stanley et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Stanley, Dragana
Geier, Mark S
Chen, Honglei
Hughes, Robert J
Moore, Robert J
Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences
title Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences
title_full Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences
title_fullStr Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences
title_short Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences
title_sort comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25887695
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-015-0388-6
work_keys_str_mv AT stanleydragana comparisonoffecalandcecalmicrobiotasrevealsqualitativesimilaritiesbutquantitativedifferences
AT geiermarks comparisonoffecalandcecalmicrobiotasrevealsqualitativesimilaritiesbutquantitativedifferences
AT chenhonglei comparisonoffecalandcecalmicrobiotasrevealsqualitativesimilaritiesbutquantitativedifferences
AT hughesrobertj comparisonoffecalandcecalmicrobiotasrevealsqualitativesimilaritiesbutquantitativedifferences
AT moorerobertj comparisonoffecalandcecalmicrobiotasrevealsqualitativesimilaritiesbutquantitativedifferences