Differences in ureolytic bacterial composition between the rumen digesta and rumen wall based on ureC gene classification
Open accessAbstract
Ureolytic bacteria are key organisms in the rumen producing urease enzymes to catalyse the breakdown of urea to ammonia for the synthesis of microbial protein. However, little is known about the diversity and distribution of rumen ureolytic microorganisms. The urease gene (ureC) has been the target gene of choice for analysis of the urea-degrading microorganisms in various environments. In this study, we investigated the predominant ureC genes of the ureolytic bacteria in the rumen of dairy cows using high-throughput sequencing. Six dairy cows with rumen fistulas were assigned to a two-period cross-over trial. A control group (n = 3) were fed a total mixed ration without urea and the treatment group (n = 3) were fed rations plus 180 g urea per cow per day at three separate times. Rumen bacterial samples from liquid and solid digesta and rumen wall fractions were collected for ureC gene amplification and sequencing using Miseq. The wall-adherent bacteria (WAB) had a distinct ureolytic bacterial profile compared to the solid-adherent bacteria (SAB) and liquid-associated bacteria (LAB) but more than 55% of the ureC sequences did not affiliate with any known taxonomically assigned urease genes. Diversity analysis of the ureC genes showed that the Shannon and Chao1 indices for the rumen WAB was lower than those observed for the SAB and LAB (P < 0.01). The most abundant ureC genes were affiliated with Methylococcaceae, Clostridiaceae, Paenibacillaceae, Helicobacteraceae and Methylophilaceae families. Compared with the rumen LAB and SAB, relative abundance of the OTUs affiliated with Methylophilus and Marinobacter genera were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in the WAB. Supplementation with urea did not alter the composition of the detected ureolytic bacteria. This study has identified significant populations of ureolytic WAB representing genera that have not been recognized or studied previously in the rumen. The taxonomic classification of rumen ureC genes in the dairy cow indicates that the majority of ureolytic bacteria are yet to be identified. This survey has expanded our knowledge of ureC gene information relating to the rumen ureolytic microbial community, and provides a basis for obtaining regulatory targets of ureolytic bacteria to moderate urea
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Construction of rumen microbiome databases such as RIM-DB, the ureC database, and AF-RefSeq drastically improves ability to monitor rumen microbial diversity.
“Also the construction of rumen microbiome databases to aid accurate taxonomical assignment, such as RIM-DB (for methanogens; Seedorf et al., 2014), the ureC database (ureolytic bacteria; Jin et al., 2017), and AF-RefSeq (anaerobic fungi; Paul et al., 2018) drastically improve our ability to monitor rumen microbial diversity.”
From Addressing global ruminant agricultural challenges through understanding the rumen microbiome: past, present, and future (2018) · cites this paper as Jin et al., 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 60 · Cited by 80
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Lebzien P. (2006). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrition of cattle. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech. 128 342– 343. 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.01.027 · DOI
- Authors
- Jin, D., Zhao, S., Zheng, N., Bu, D., Beckers, Y., Denman, S. E., McSweeney, C. S., & Wang, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Liège (BE)
- Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CN)
- Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Wang, Jiaqi
- ORCID
- Venue
- Frontiers in Microbiology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2017-03-07
- Volume
- 8
- Pages
- 385-385
- ISSN
- 1664-302X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5339240
- OpenAlex
- W2592832464
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 9.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Frontiers in Microbiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (31430081, 31501981)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
- Keywords
- ureolytic bacteria, ureC gene, rumen bacterial community, rumen contents, urea supplementation, dairy cattle, Methylophilus, Marinobacter, Methylococcaceae, Clostridiaceae, Paenibacillaceae, Helicobacteraceae, Methylophilaceae, microbial protein synthesis, rumen fistula
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
