Key bacterial families (Clostridiaceae, Erysipelotrichaceae and Bacteroidaceae) are related to the digestion of protein and energy in dogs

Abstract

BackgroundMuch of the recent research in companion animal nutrition has focussed on understanding the role of diet on faecal microbiota composition. To date, diet-induced changes in faecal microbiota observed in humans and rodents have been extrapolated to pets in spite of their very different dietary and metabolic requirements. This lack of direct evidence means that the mechanisms by which microbiota influences health in dogs are poorly understood. We hypothesised that changes in faecal microbiota correlate with physiological parameters including apparent macronutrient digestibility.MethodsFifteen adult dogs were assigned to two diet groups, exclusively fed either a premium kibbled diet (kibble; K; n = 8) or a raw red meat diet (meat; M; n = 7) for nine weeks. Apparent digestibility of macronutrients (protein, fat, gross energy and dry matter), faecal weight, faecal health scores, faecal VFA concentrations and faecal microbial composition were determined. Datasets were integrated using mixOmics in R.ResultsFaecal weight and VFA levels were lower and the apparent digestibility of protein and energy were higher in dogs on the meat diet. Diet significantly affected 27 microbial families and 53 genera in the faeces. In particular, the abundances of Bacteriodes, Prevotella, Peptostreptococcus and Faecalibacterium were lower in dogs fed the meat diet, whereas Fusobacterium, Lactobacillus and Clostridium were all more abundant.DiscussionOur results show clear associations of specific microbial taxa with diet composition. For example, Clostridiaceae, Erysipelotrichaceae and Bacteroidaceae were highly correlated to parameters such as protein and fat digestibility in the dog. By understanding the relationship between faecal microbiota and physiological parameters we will gain better insights into the effects of diet on the nutrition of our pets.

Evaluation of microRNA stability in feces from healthy dogs

“…Fecal matter is a complex and heterogeneous matrix with great diversity in both general composition and microbiota, and it can vary greatly depending on genetics and lifestyle conditions including age, breed, and diet . The complexity of the fecal samples generated concern that unwarranted noise and interference with the RNA extraction process would occur, and therefore, 2 kits commonly used for RNA isolation from feces were tested.…”

“…Fecal matter is a complex and heterogeneous matrix with great diversity in both general composition and microbiota, and it can vary greatly depending on genetics and lifestyle conditions including age, breed, and diet. 30,31 The complexity of the fecal samples generated concern that unwarranted noise and interference with the RNA extraction process would occur, and therefore, 2 kits commonly used for RNA isolation from feces were tested. Although both kits succeeded in isolating miRNA, a statistically significant difference was found between the amounts of the 4 miRNAs that were isolated with the 2 kits, which highlights the importance of choosing a good RNA extraction method, and then, using the same method for all the samples.…”

The Role of the Canine Gut Microbiome and Metabolome in Health and Gastrointestinal Disease

“…Interestingly, in humans Fusobacterium is associated with gastrointestinal disease, indicating Fusobacterium plays a different role in the GI tract of dogs (8). Fusobacterium abundance is increased in dogs with access to the outdoors (16), and higher levels of Fusobacterium are also seen in other carnivore species (17)(18)(19).…”

Pre- and Post-Race Intestinal Microbiota in Long-Distance Sled Dogs and Associations with Performance

“…More detailed information on some aspects, such as the concentration of energy, nutrients, and antioxidants in the diet, should have been obtained in order to address the effects of feed properly. Feed certainly also interacts with the gut microbiota, so, without detailed knowledge about feeding regimes, we cannot rule out that our results reflect the effects of feed [27]. However, since we do not have detailed information about the types of feed, it is difficult to compare our study with other studies focusing on feed effects [28].…”