不同饲养模式下略阳乌鸡生长性能、免疫、肠道结构及盲肠菌群的对比分析

doi:10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2024.09.024

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

旨在研究三种饲养模式对略阳乌鸡生长性能、免疫功能、肠道结构及盲肠菌群的影响。本研究选取同批次70日龄健康略阳乌鸡90只，随机分为3组，分别为笼养组、网上平养组和散养组，每组5个重复，每个重复6只(公母各半)。预试验1周，所有试验鸡饲喂相同基础日粮，自由采食和饮水，饲养至119日龄。每隔7 d测定体重，试验期间记录耗料量，计算平均日采食量、平均日增重和料重比。样本收集包括血清、小肠和肠黏膜(十二指肠、空肠和回肠)以及盲肠内容物。结果表明：网上平养组、笼养组公母鸡的体重均显著高于散养组(P < 0.01)，试验后期(105~119日龄)笼养组母鸡体重显著高于网上平养和散养组(P < 0.01)；网上平养和笼养组的平均日采食量(ADFI)和平均日增重(ADG)均高于散养组(P < 0.001、P=0.005)，散养组料重比(F/G)显著高于笼养和平养组(P=0.002)；采用ELISA试剂盒对血清免疫指标检测发现，网上平养组、笼养组和散养组公鸡免疫球蛋白G(IgG)、免疫球蛋白A(IgA)、免疫球蛋白M(IgM)和分泌型免疫球蛋白A(sIgA)均无显著差异(P>0.05)，网上平养母鸡免疫球蛋白A(IgA)含量显著高于笼养和散养母鸡(P < 0.05)；肠道形态切片结果显示，网上平养组和笼养组的十二指肠、空肠和回肠绒毛高度以及绒毛高度与隐窝深度之比值均显著高于散养组(P < 0.05)；各组盲肠内容物16S测序结果表明，在门水平分析，散养组增加了变形菌门、ε变形菌门和螺旋体的相对丰度，减少了拟杆菌门和厚壁菌门的相对丰度；网上平养组放线菌、疣微菌和绿弯菌的相对丰度增加，笼养组拟杆菌门和厚壁菌门相对丰度增加。在属水平上，散养组大肠杆菌、幽门螺杆菌、肠球菌和弯曲杆菌的相对丰度增加，粪杆菌、拟杆菌和阿克曼菌的相对丰度降低。笼养组中拟杆菌和理研菌科的相对丰度升高。综上所述，网上平养和笼养模式下的略阳乌鸡生长性能更优及肠道更加健康，网上平养模式可以改善母鸡免疫能力；因此，在本试验条件下，网上平养模式是更合适略阳乌鸡的饲养方式。

关键词: 略阳乌鸡, 饲养模式, 生长性能, 免疫, 盲肠微生物

Abstract:

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of three rearing systems on the growth performance, immune function, intestinal morphology, and cecal microbiota of Lueyang black-bone chickens. In this study, ninety 70-day-old healthy Lueyang black-bone chickens from the same batch of chicken flocks were randomly divided into 3 groups: cage rearing (CR), net-flat rearing (NF), and free-range rearing (FR) groups, each group had 5 replicates with 6 chickens per replicate (half of male and female). A one-week pre-experiment was conducted, and all experimental chickens were fed the same basic diet and had free access to feed and water. The body weight was collected every 7 days, the experimental chickens were raised to 119 days old, total feed consumption was recorded to calculate the average daily feed intake (ADFI), average daily gain (ADG) and feed to gain raito (F/G). Samples including serum, small intestine and intestinal mucosa (duodenum, jejunum, and ileum), and cecal contents were collected. The results showed that the average body weight of male and female chickens in NF and CR groups was significantly higher than FR groups (P < 0.01), the body weight of CR hens in the later stage of the experiment (105 to 119 day-old) was significantly higher than NF and FR groups (P < 0.01). The average daily feed intake (ADFI) and average daily gain (ADG) of NF and CR chickens were higher than FR chickens (P < 0.001, P=0.005), and the ratio of feed to gain (F/G) of FR chickens is significantly higher than CR and NF groups (P=0.002). The results of immune performance testing using ELISA kits showed that there was no significant difference in immunoglobulin A (IgA), immunoglobulin M (IgM), immunoglobulin G (IgG) and secretory immunoglobulin A (sIgA) among the roosters under the three rearing systems (P>0.05), while serum IgA of NF hens was significantly higher than CR and FR hens (P < 0.05). The results of intestinal morphology showed that the villus height of duodenum, jejunum, and ileum, as well as the ratio of villus height to crypt depth, were significantly higher in the NF and CR groups than FR group (P < 0.05). The 16S sequencing results of cecal contents indicated that the FR group increased the relative abundance of Proteobacteria, Epsilonbacteraeota, and Spirochaetes and decreased Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes at the phylum level. The NF group increased the relative abundance of Actinobacteria, Verrucomicrobia, and Chloroflexi. The CR group increased the relative abundance of Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes. At the genus level, the relative abundance of Escherichia-Shigella, Helicobacter, Enterococcus and Campylobacter increased, while Faecalibacterium, Bacteroides, and Akkermansia decreased in the FR group. The CR group increased the relative abundance of Bacteroides and Rikenellaceae_RC9_gut_group. In summary, the growth performance and intestine of Lueyang black-bone chickens were better under cage rearing and net-flat rearing, and net-flat rearing can improve immune performance. Therefore, net-flat rearing is a more proper rearing system for Lueyang black-bone chickens.

Key words: Lueyang black-bone chicken, rearing systems, growth performance, immune, cecal microbiota

中图分类号:

S831.5

张纪桥, 蔡瑛婕, 李雨笑, 曹敞, 李涛, 鲍秀瑜, 张建勤. 不同饲养模式下略阳乌鸡生长性能、免疫、肠道结构及盲肠菌群的对比分析[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2024, 55(9): 4001-4011.

Jiqiao ZHANG, Yingjie CAI, Yuxiao LI, Chang CAO, Tao LI, Xiuyu BAO, Jianqin ZHANG. Comparative Analysis of Growth Performance, Immune, Intestinal Morphology, and Cecal Microbiota of Lueyang Black-bone Chickens under Different Rearing Systems[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2024, 55(9): 4001-4011.

图/表 12

表 1

表 2

表 3

表 4

表 5

表 6

图 1

表 7

图 2

图 3

图 4

图 5

参考文献 27

1	林伟峰, 杨生福, 李涛. 略阳乌鸡发展现状与研究进展[J]. 兽医导刊, 2020, (5): 90- 91.
	LIN W F , YANG S F , LI T . Development status and research progress of Lueyang black chicken[J]. Veterinary Orientation, 2020, (5): 90- 91.
2	ZHANG J Q , LIU F Z , CAO J T , et al. Skin transcriptome profiles associated with skin color in chickens[J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10 (6): e0127301. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127301
3	QI Y Y , ZHANG K Y , TIAN G , et al. Effects of dietary corn germ meal levels on growth performance, serum biochemical parameters, meat quality, and standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids in Pekin ducks[J]. Poult Sci, 2022, 101 (5): 101779. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2022.101779
4	罗彩萍. 农村散养鸡存在问题及解决方案[J]. 中国动物保健, 2020, 22 (11): 3, 5.
	LUO C P . The problems and solutions of rural free-range chicken farming[J]. China Animal Health, 2020, 22 (11): 3, 5.
5	张会丰, 高广亮, 王海威, 等. 品种和饲养模式对鸡肉风味性状及其候选基因mRNA表达水平的影响[J]. 农业生物技术学报, 2014, 22 (8): 1018- 1026.
	ZHANG H F , GAO G L , WANG H W , et al. Effects of different breeds and raising modes on meat flavors and candidate genes expression levels[J]. Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology, 2014, 22 (8): 1018- 1026.
6	秦黎梅, 韦凤英, 廖玉英, 等. 优质鸡放养技术要点分析[J]. 中国家禽, 2012, 34 (24): 54- 55.
	QIN L M , WEI F Y , LIAO Y Y , et al. Analysis of key techniques for high quality chicken release[J]. China Poultry, 2012, 34 (24): 54- 55.
7	兰娉, 潘德超. 放养肉鸡的饲养管理技术[J]. 国外畜牧学－猪与禽, 2013, 33 (9): 70- 73.
	LAN P , PAN D C . Management techniques for free range broilers[J]. Animal Science Abroad (Pigs and Poultry), 2013, 33 (9): 70- 73.
8	秦鑫, 卢营杰, 苗志强, 等. 饲养方式和密度对爱拔益加肉鸡生产性能、肉品质及应激的影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2018, 23 (12): 66- 74.
	QIN X , LU Y J , MIAO Z Q , et al. Effects of rearing system and stocking density on the growth performance, meat quality and stress response of Arbor Acres broilers[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2018, 23 (12): 66- 74.
9	李彬, 古长松, 黄李蓉, 等. 饲养模式对肉鸡生长性能及肉品质的影响[J]. 饲料工业, 2022, 43 (23): 24- 28.
	LI B , GU C S , HUANG L R , et al. Effects of the rearing systems on growth performance, and meat quality of broiler chickens[J]. Feed Industry, 2022, 43 (23): 24- 28.
10	马玉勇, 陈凯, 胡小爱, 等. 不同饲养模式对湘黄母鸡生长性能、屠宰性能及肉品质的影响[J]. 饲料工业, 2023, 44 (21): 47- 51.
	MA Y Y , CHEN K , HU X A , et al. Effects of different feeding modes on growth performance, slaughter performance and meat quality of Hunan yellow hens[J]. Feed Industry, 2023, 44 (21): 47- 51.
11	张建英, 李未博, 陈泽林. 不同饲养模式对乌蒙黄鸡生长性能的影响[J]. 上海畜牧兽医通讯, 2022, (5): 17-18, 26.
	ZHANG J Y , LI W B , CHEN Z L . Effect of different feeding modes on the growth performance of Wumeng yellow chickens[J]. Shanghai Journal of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2022, (5): 17-18, 26.
12	王东升, 张露露. 不同饲养模式对肉鸡生产性能和养殖效益的影响[J]. 饲料广角, 2016, (4): 47- 48.
	WANG D S , ZHANG L L . Impact of different feeding modes on the production performance and breeding efficiency of broiler chickens[J]. Feed China, 2016, (4): 47- 48.
13	BALAN P , SIK-HAN K , MOUGHAN P J . Impact of oral immunoglobulins on animal health-a review[J]. Anim Sci J, 2019, 90 (9): 1099- 1110. doi: 10.1111/asj.13258
14	RUSSELL S L , GOLD M J , HARTMANN M , et al. Early life antibiotic-driven changes in microbiota enhance susceptibility to allergic asthma[J]. EMBO Rep, 2012, 13 (5): 440- 447. doi: 10.1038/embor.2012.32
15	张立永, 吕向聪, 尹秀玲, 等. 饲养模式对坝上长尾鸡免疫水平及盲肠菌群的影响[J]. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2021, (3): 63- 66.
	ZHANG L Y , LV X C , YIN X L , et al. Effects of feeding mode on cecum flora and immune level in Bashang long-tail chicken[J]. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2021, (3): 63- 66.
16	龚争, 吴学壮, 李文超, 等. 不同饲养模式下产蛋前期海兰褐蛋鸡生产性能、蛋品质和免疫功能比较研究[J]. 畜牧与兽医, 2022, 54 (7): 43- 46.
	GONG Z , WU X Z , LI W C , et al. Effects of different feeding methods on performance, egg quality, immune function and serum biochemical indexes of Hy-Line brown hens in the early laying stage[J]. Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Medicine, 2022, 54 (7): 43- 46.
17	BAI K W , FENG C C , JIANG L Y , et al. Dietary effects of Bacillus subtilis fmbj on growth performance, small intestinal morphology, and its antioxidant capacity of broilers[J]. Poult Sci, 2018, 97 (7): 2312- 2321. doi: 10.3382/ps/pey116
18	林谦, 戴求仲, 宾石玉, 等. 饲粮添加益生菌与酶制剂对黄羽肉鸡生长性能的影响及相关机理[J]. 动物营养学报, 2012, 24 (10): 1955- 1965.
	LIN Q , DAI Q Z , BIN S Y , et al. Probiotics and enzyme preparation: effects on growth performance of Yellow-Feathered broilers and its mechanism[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2012, 24 (10): 1955- 1965.
19	王剑龙, 徐廷生, 雷雪芹, 等. 饲养方式对卢氏绿壳蛋鸡肠道组织形态和免疫器官发育的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2015, 24 (12): 46- 51.
	WANG J L , XU T S , LEI X Q , et al. Effect of different rearing methods on intestinal tissue morphology and development of immune organs of Lushi chicken[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2015, 24 (12): 46- 51.
20	胡兵, 龚炎长, 俸艳萍, 等. 放养对不同品系景阳鸡生产性能、蛋品质及肠道微生物的影响[J]. 中国家禽, 2018, 40 (1): 30- 35.
	HU B , GONG Y Z , FENG Y P , et al. Effects of free range on production performance, egg quality and intestinal bacteria of different strains of Jingyang chicken[J]. China Poultry, 2018, 40 (1): 30- 35.
21	XU Y H , YANG H X , ZHANG L L , et al. High-throughput sequencing technology to reveal the composition and function of cecal microbiota in Dagu chicken[J]. BMC Microbiol, 2016, 16 (1): 259. doi: 10.1186/s12866-016-0877-2
22	王亚玲, 孟双双, 陈肇铭, 等. 饲养模式对肉鸡盲肠菌群、短链脂肪酸、单胺类物质含量及其代谢的影响[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2023, 59 (1): 302- 309.
	WANG Y L , MENG S S , CHEN Z M , et al. Effect of feeding mode on the content and metabolism of cecal microbiota, short chain fatty acids, monoamine substances in broiler chickens[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 59 (1): 302- 309.
23	SUN J , WANG Y , LI N Z , et al. Comparative analysis of the gut microbial composition and meat flavor of two chicken breeds in different rearing patterns[J]. BioMed Res Int, 2018, 2018, 4343196.
24	WEI S , MORRISON M , YU Z . Bacterial census of poultry intestinal microbiome[J]. Poult Sci, 2013, 92 (3): 671- 683. doi: 10.3382/ps.2012-02822
25	SHIN N R , WHON T W , BAE J W . Proteobacteria: microbial signature of dysbiosis in gut microbiota[J]. Trends Biotechnol, 2015, 33 (9): 496- 503. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2015.06.011
26	ZHAO Y , LI K , LUO H Q , et al. Comparison of the intestinal microbial community in ducks reared differently through high-throughput sequencing[J]. BioMed Res Int, 2019, 2019, 9015054.
27	KHAN S , MOORE R J , STANLEY D , et al. The gut microbiota of laying hens and its manipulation with prebiotics and probiotics to enhance gut health and food safety[J]. Appl Environ Microbiol, 2020, 86 (13): e00600- 20.

日粮组成 Feed ingredient	1~70日龄 1~70 day-old	71~119日龄 71~119 day-old	营养水平² Nutrient level	1~70日龄 1~70 day-old	71~119日龄 71~119 day-old
玉米 Corn	65.75	71.23	代谢能/(MJ·kg^-1) ME	12.52	12.16
麦麸 Wheat bran	6.60	2.47	粗蛋白质 Crude protein	19.00	17.27
豆粕 Soybean meal	19.00	18.00	粗纤维 Crude fiber	8.00	10.00
玉米蛋白粉	5.30	4.58	有效磷 Effective phosphorus	0.50	0.41
Corn gluten meal			钙 Calcium	0.80	0.62
磷酸氢钙 CaHPO₄	1.10	1.58	蛋氨酸 Methionine	0.45	0.36
石粉 Stone powder	1.30	0.59
食盐 Salt	0.35	0.37
预混料¹ Premix ¹	0.50	1.00
L-赖氨酸 L-lysine	0.05	0.10
DL-蛋氨酸 DL-methionine	0.05	0.08
合计 Total	100	100

项目 Item	组别 Group			标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
项目 Item	网上平养组 Net-flat rearing	笼养组 Cage rearing	林下散养组 Free-range rearing	标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
70日龄体重 Body weight at 70-day-old	1 466.35	1 471.24	1 484.31	9.881	0.699
77日龄体重 Body weight at 77-day-old	1 541.31	1 558.74	1 523.42	6.667	0.082
84日龄体重 Body weight at 84-day-old	1 649.40^a	1 694.58^a	1 537.58^b	18.624	0.004
91日龄体重 Body weight at 91-day-old	1 763.93^a	1 819.96^a	1 519.57^b	28.354	0.002
98日龄体重 Body weight at 98-day-old	1 931.33^a	1 936.00^a	1 520.82^b	36.722	< 0.001
105日龄体重 Body weight at 105-day-old	2 041.83^a	2 039.83^a	1 523.73^b	39.856	< 0.001
112日龄体重 Body weight at 112-day-old	2 180.25^a	2 181.00^a	1 589.00^b	42.641	< 0.001
119日龄体重 Body weight at 119-day-old	2 292.92^a	2 271.75^a	1 600.64^b	52.183	< 0.001

项目 Item	组别 Group			标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
项目 Item	网上平养组 Net-flat rearing	笼养组 Cage rearing	林下散养组 Free-range rearing	标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
70日龄体重 Body weight at 70-day-old	1 121.25	1 110.75	1 094.32	6.248	0.813
77日龄体重 Body weight at 77-day-old	1 146.93	1 132.64	1 092.43	14.829	0.055
84日龄体重 Body weight at 84-day-old	1 226.61^a	1 254.33^a	1 083.44^b	32.961	0.006
91日龄体重 Body weight at 91-day-old	1 272.24^a	1 319.90^a	1 126.93^b	46.363	0.003
98日龄体重 Body weight at 98-day-old	1 353.50^a	1 413.75^a	1 134.50^b	69.311	< 0.001
105日龄体重 Body weight at 105-day-old	1 398.42^b	1 485.58^a	1 159.42^c	52.287	< 0.001
112日龄体重 Body weight at 112-day-old	1 476.92^b	1 611.75^a	1 220.67^c	57.112	< 0.001
119日龄体重 Body weight at 119-day-old	1 548.08^b	1 702.00^a	1 249.42^c	68.921	< 0.001

项目 Item	组别 Group			标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
项目 Item	网上平养组 Net-flat rearing	笼养组 Cage rearing	林下散养组 Free-range rearing	标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
平均日采食量/(g·d^-1) Average daily feed intake	49.29^a	47.51^a	42.28^b	1.065	< 0.001
平均日增重/(g·d^-1) Average daily gain	11.55^a	12.20^a	7.12^b	0.774	0.005
料重比 The ratio of feed to gain	4.27^b	3.75^b	6.43^a	0.476	0.002

项目 Item	组别 Group			标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
项目 Item	网上平养组 Net-flat rearing	笼养组 Cage rearing	林下散养组 Free-range rearing	标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
血清IgG/(mg·dL^－1) Serum IgG	88.25	82.96	83.38	1.180	0.348
血清IgA/(mg·dL^－1) Serum IgA	68.01	64.39	70.63	1.822	0.427
血清IgM/(mg·dL^－1) Serum IgM	51.18	48.68	49.47	0.982	0.299
十二指肠sIgA/(ng·g^－1) Duodenum sIgA	167.23	169.44	175.92	5.466	0.514
空肠sIgA/(ng·g^－1) Jejunum sIgA	153.51	152.18	147.32	2.162	0.341
回肠sIgA/(ng·g^－1) Ileum sIgA	131.34	132.21	136.74	3.634	0.625