野生树鼩实验动物化过程中粪便菌群的多样性及组成  

Microbial community and diversity in the feces of wild tree shrew as laboratory animal

作　　者：张飞燕 金洁 马玉华[1] 陈佳琪[1] 谢丽分 张晓迪[1] 邬继文[1] 吕龙宝[1,2] ZHANG Feiyan;JIN Jie;MA Yuhua;CHEN Jiaqi;XIE Lifen;ZHANG Xiaodi;WU Jiwen;LYU Longbao(Kunming Institute of Zoology,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Kunming,Yunnan 650000,China;Kunming Primate Research Center,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Kunming,Yunnan 650223,China)

机构地区：[1]中国科学院昆明动物研究所,云南昆明650000 [2]中国科学院昆明灵长类研究中心,云南昆明650223

出　　处：《湖南农业大学学报（自然科学版）》2020年第4期449-455,共7页Journal of Hunan Agricultural University(Natural Sciences)

摘　　要：从云南昆明西郊野外捕捉6只成年野生树鼩,于中国科学院昆明灵长类研究中心人工驯养6个月。于刚捕捉回(野生组)和人工驯养6个月(驯养组)时,收集新鲜粪便样本,共12份,运用IlluminaMiSeq测序平台,以16S rRNA的V3–V4区域为目标进行高通量测序,比较分析树鼩在人工驯养前后粪便菌群的多样性及组成。结果表明:树鼩粪便菌群的OTU多样性Shannon指数和Simpson指数组间的差异均无统计学意义,野生组树鼩粪便菌群的OTU丰富度Chao指数、Ace指数、Sobs指数均显著高于驯养组的;PCo A主成分分析结果显示,野生树鼩与人工驯养树鼩的粪便菌群具有明显的差异,但同组内个体间的菌群差异不明显;在门水平上,树鼩粪便的优势菌门主要有厚壁菌门、拟杆菌门、变形菌门,但其在不同组树鼩粪便菌群的相对丰度不同;在纲水平上,野生组菌群主要有芽孢杆菌纲和拟杆菌纲,驯养组菌群主要有拟杆菌纲、梭菌纲和厌氧菌纲,γ–变形菌纲、厌氧菌纲相对丰度在2组间的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);在目水平上,野生组菌目主要有乳杆菌目和拟杆菌目,驯养组菌目主要有拟杆菌目和梭菌目,驯养组的Selenomonadales相对丰度显著高于野生组的(P<0.05);在科水平上,野生组菌科主要有链球菌科和普雷沃氏菌科,驯养组菌科主要有普雷沃氏菌科和韦荣氏球菌科,驯养组的韦荣氏球菌科相对丰度显著高于野生组的(P<0.05);在属水平上,野生组菌属主要有链球菌属和乳球菌属,驯养组菌属主要有普雷沃菌属和巨单胞菌属,野生组的链球菌属相对丰度极显著高于驯养组的(P<0.01),驯养组的巨单胞菌属相对丰度显著高于野生组的(P<0.05)。可见,野生树鼩经过人工驯养后,粪便微生物区系中的一些菌群发生了变化,菌群结构与野生组有差异,但不显著,粪便菌群结构变化呈简单化的趋势。To analyze the feces microbial diversity differences between the tree shrews captured from the wild in Kunming and those after six months of feeding at Kunming Primate Research Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Twelve fresh samples of feces were collected to extract total bacterial DNA and used Illumina Miseq platform. The α diversity index analysis showed that there Shannon and Simpson index were no significant difference between the wild and the captive groups(P>0.05), while the Chao and Ace index were significant different. The PCoA analysis could distinguish the wild group from the captive group, bacterial populations were similar among six tree shrews. At phylum level, the wild tree shrew possessed similar community structure to the captive tree shrews. Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes and Proteobacteria were dominant. At class level, Bacilli and Bacteroidia were dominant in the wild groups, while Bacteroidia, Clostridia and Negativicutes were dominant in the captive groups. Gammaproteobacteria and Negativicutes were found significantly different between two groups(P<0.05). At order level, Lactobacillales and Bacteroidales were dominant in the wild groups, Bacteroidales and Clostridiales were dominant in the captive groups. Selenomonadales was found significantly differnte between two groups(P<0.05). At family level, Streptococcaceae and Prevotellaceae were dominant in the wild groups, Prevotellaceae and Veillonellaceae were dominant in the captive groups. Veillonellaceae was found significantly different between two groups. At genus level, Lactococcus and Streptococcus were dominant in the wild groups, Prevotella and Megamonas were dominant in the captive groups. Streptococcus was found significantly different between two groups(P<0.01), Megamonas was found significantly different between two groups(P<0.05). Lactococcus in the wild tree shrews was significantly higher than the captive tree shrews. Bacterial populations were similar among the 6 tree shrews. The results prove that the feace flora structure was d

关 键 词：树鼩 人工驯养 粪便 菌群组成 

分 类 号：S852.61[农业科学—基础兽医学]