IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0173062.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative analysis of fecal microbial communities in cattle and Bactrian camels

Author

Listed:
  • Liang Ming
  • Li Yi
  • Siriguleng
  • Surong Hasi
  • Jing He
  • Le Hai
  • Zhaoxia Wang
  • Fucheng Guo
  • Xiangyu Qiao
  • Jirimutu

Abstract

Bactrian camels may have a unique gastrointestinal (GI) microbiome because of their distinctive digestive systems, unique eating habits and extreme living conditions. However, understanding of the microbial communities in the Bactrian camel GI tract is still limited. In this study, microbial communities were investigated by comparative analyses of 16S rRNA hypervariable region V4 sequences of fecal bacteria sampled from 94 animals in four population groups: Inner Mongolian cattle (IMG-Cattle), Inner Mongolian domestic Bactrian camels (IMG-DBC), Mongolian domestic Bactrian camels (MG-DBC), and Mongolian wild Bactrian camels (MG-WBC). A total of 2,097,985 high-quality reads were obtained and yielded 471,767,607 bases of sequence. Firmicutes was the predominant phylum in the population groups IMG-Cattle, IMG-DBC and MG-WBC, followed (except in the Inner Mongolian cattle) by Verrucomicrobia. Bacteroidetes were abundant in the IMG-DBC and MG-WBC populations. Hierarchical clustered heatmap analysis revealed that the microbial community composition within the three Bactrian camel groups was relatively similar, and somewhat distinct from that in the cattle. A similar result was determined by principal component analysis, in which the camels grouped together. We also found several species-specific differences in microbial communities at the genus level: for example, Desulfovibrio was abundant in the IMG-DBC and MG-WBC groups; Pseudomonas was abundant in the IMG-Cattle group; and Fibrobacter, Coprobacillus, and Paludibacter were scarce in the MG-WBC group. Such differences may be related to different eating habits and living conditions of the cattle and the various camel populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Liang Ming & Li Yi & Siriguleng & Surong Hasi & Jing He & Le Hai & Zhaoxia Wang & Fucheng Guo & Xiangyu Qiao & Jirimutu, 2017. "Comparative analysis of fecal microbial communities in cattle and Bactrian camels," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-11, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0173062
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0173062
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0173062&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0173062?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0173062. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.