Abstract
This study aims to compare rumen microbiome and metabolites between second lactation dairy cows in the 75th percentile (n = 12; 57.2 ± 5.08 kg/d) of production according to genomic predicted transmitting ability for milk (GPTAM) and their counterparts in the 25th percentile (n = 12; 47.2 ± 8.61 kg/d). It was hypothesized that the metagenome and metabolome would differ between production levels. Cows were matched by days in milk (DIM), sire, occurrence of disease, and days open in previous lactation. For an additional comparison, the cows were also divided by phenotype into high (n = 6; 61.3 ± 2.8 kg/d), medium (n = 10; 55 ± 1.2 kg/d), and low (n = 8; 41.9 ± 5.6 kg/d) based on their milk production. Samples were collected 65 ± 14 DIM. Rumen content was collected using an oro-gastric tube and serum samples were collected from the coccygeal vessels. High-resolution liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) was used for rumen and serum metabolite profiling. Shotgun metagenomics was used for rumen microbiome profiling. Microbiome sample richness and diversity were used to determine alpha and Bray-Curtis dissimilarity index was used to estimate beta diversity. Differences in metabolites were determined using t-tests or ANOVA. Pearson correlations were used to consider associations between serum metabolites and milk production. There was no evidence of a difference in rumen metabolites or microbial communities by GPTAM or phenotype. Cows in the phenotypic low group had greater serum acetate to propionate ratio and acetate proportion compared to the cows in the phenotypic medium group. Likewise, serum propionate proportion was greater in the medium compared to the low phenotypic group. Serum acetate, butyrate, and propionate concentrations had a weak positive correlation with milk production. When investigating associations between rumen environment and milk production, future studies must consider the impact of the ruminal epithelium absorption and post-absorption processes in relation to milk production.
Funder
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)