Effects of Rearing Conditions and Sex on Cecal Microbiota in Ducks

Zhu, Chunhong; Xu, Wenjuan; Zhang, Tao; Song, Wenming; Liu, Hongxiang; Zhang, Shuangjie; Li, Huifang

doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.565367

Cited by 22 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data for all carcass traits, including LW, CW, SEW, EW, BMW, TMW, GW, and AFW, were normal, with a carcass yield, semi-eviscerated yield, and eviscerated yield of >82%, 77%, and 70%, respectively. As shown in Table 3 , the rearing method did not significantly affect slaughter performance, including carcass yield, semi-eviscerated yield, eviscerated yield, breast muscle yield, thigh muscle yield, and lean meat yield ( P > 0.05), which is consistent with the results of Zhu et al. (2020) .…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Research Note: Effects of cage and floor rearing systems on growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality in small-sized meat ducks

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was performed to evaluate the effects of different rearing methods on the growth performance, carcass yield, and meat quality of small-sized meat ducks. A total of 420 healthy 21-day-old birds was randomly allocated to 2 treatment groups (6 replicates per treatment, sex ratio 1/1) and subjected to 2 rearing methods (furnished cage and plastic wire-floor) until d 63. Growth performance was measured in all birds. Three males and 3 females from each replicate were randomly selected and evaluated to determine the carcass yield and meat quality. In terms of growth performance, the rearing method affected the final body weight, average daily feed intake, and average daily gain, which were higher in the cage group ( P < 0.05) than in the floor group, with a similar feed/gain in both groups. For slaughter performance, ducks in the cage group showed a higher abdominal fat yield and lower gizzard yield than those in the floor group ( P < 0.05). For meat quality, the L* value of the breast muscle was higher in the cage group than in the floor group ( P < 0.05). The pH recorded at 1 h was lower and pH recorded at 24 h was higher in the cage group ( P < 0.05). The shear force and water loss rate were both lower in the cage group ( P < 0.05). Additionally, the moisture content was lower and intramuscular fat content was higher in ducks fed in cages ( P < 0.05). Our results indicate that the cage rearing system improved the growth performance and meat quality of ducks, which is appropriate for small-sized meat ducks.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Thus, the cage pattern may be more efficient and can improve the growth performance of small-sized meat ducks compared with the floor rearing system. Similarly, Zhu et al. (2020) found that the final BW of both male and female Gaoyou ducks was higher in the cage group than in the floor group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Research Note: Effects of cage and floor rearing systems on growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality in small-sized meat ducks

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This means that the meat production performance of the goose in CR is higher than in FR. This contradicts other studies, they found that ducks in FR had better meat production performance than CR ( Zhu et al, 2020 ). The differences may be caused by the change in feed intake of geese.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 66%

“…Compared with the traditional rearing system, the dryland rearing on netting floors ( DRNF ) system changed intestinal microbial abundance and enhanced the immune ability of Shaoxing ducks ( Zhao et al, 2019 ). Compared with floor rearing, cage rearing changed the cecal microbial abundance of ducks and affected cecal mucosa gene expression ( Zhu et al, 2020 ). Therefore, we hypothesized that the rearing systems might also alter geese's physiological functions and production performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of cage versus floor rearing system on goose intestinal histomorphology and cecal microbial composition

Wang³

et al. 2022

Poultry Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The most common class of Cyanobacteria detected in Kirtland's Warblers, Oxyphotobacteria , is an oxygenic phototroph (Shih et al, 2017). Oxyphotobacteria has previously been described in an avian host but is unlikely to provide a host associated function, suggesting the presence of this class is transient and the result of environmental sourcing (Zhu et al, 2020). In addition to Oxyphotobacteria , we detected several common environmental, soil‐associated bacterial genera, including Acitomycetospora , Aureimonas , Solirubrobacter and Nocardioides , as more abundant in birds in The Bahamas (Janssen, 2006; Topp et al, 2000).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeated sampling of individuals reveals impact of tropical and temperate habitats on microbiota of a migratory bird

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Migratory animals experiencing substantial change in diet and habitat across the annual cycle may have corresponding shifts in host‐associated microbial diversity. Using automated telemetry and radio tags to recapture birds, we examined gut microbiota structure in the same population and often same individual of Kirtland's Warblers (Setophaga kirtlandii) initially sampled on their wintering grounds in The Bahamas and subsequently resampled within their breeding territories in Michigan, USA. Initial sampling occurred in March and April and resampling occurred in May, June and early July. The composition of the most abundant phyla and classes of the warblers’ microbiota is similar to that of other migratory birds. However, we detected notable variation in abundance and diversity of numerous bacterial taxa, including a decrease in microbial richness and significant differences in microbial communities when comparing the microbiota of birds first captured in The Bahamas to that of birds recaptured in Michigan. This is observed at the individual and population level. Furthermore, we found that 22 bacterial genera exhibit heightened abundance within specific sampling periods and are probably associated with diet and environmental change. Finally, we described a small, species‐specific shared microbial profile that spans multiple time periods and environments within the migratory cycle. Our research highlights that the avian gut microbiota is dynamic over time, most significantly impacted by changing environments associated with migration. These results support the need for full annual cycle monitoring of migratory bird microbiota to improve understanding of seasonal host movement ecologies and response to recurrent physiological stressors.

show abstract

Effects of Rearing Conditions and Sex on Cecal Microbiota in Ducks

Cited by 22 publications

References 61 publications

Research Note: Effects of cage and floor rearing systems on growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality in small-sized meat ducks

Research Note: Effects of cage and floor rearing systems on growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality in small-sized meat ducks

Effects of cage versus floor rearing system on goose intestinal histomorphology and cecal microbial composition

Repeated sampling of individuals reveals impact of tropical and temperate habitats on microbiota of a migratory bird

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About