The Influence of Increasing Roughage Content in the Diet on the Growth Performance and Intestinal Flora of Jinwu and Duroc × Landrace × Yorkshire Pigs

Abstract

The Jinwu pig (JW) is a hybrid breed originating from the Chinese indigenous Jinhua pig and Duroc pig, boasting excellent meat quality and fast growth rates. This study aimed to verify the tolerance of JW to roughage, similar to most Chinese indigenous pigs. In this research, two types of feed were provided to JW and Duroc × Landrace × Yorkshire pigs (DLY): a basal diet and a roughage diet (increasing the rice bran and wheat bran content in the basal diet from 23% to 40%) for a 65-day experimental period. The roughage diet showed an increasing trend in the feed conversion ratio (F/G), with a 17.61% increase in feed consumption per unit weight gain for DLY, while the increase for JW was only 4.26%. A 16S rRNA sequencing analysis revealed that the roughage diet increased the relative abundance of beneficial bacteria, such as Lactobacillus and Clostridium, while reducing the relative abundance of some potential pathogens, thus improving the gut microbiota environment. After being fed with the roughage diet, the abundance of bacterial genera, such as Treponema, Terrisporobacter, Coprococcus, and Ruminococcaceae, which aid in the digestion and utilization of dietary fiber, were significantly higher in Jinwu compared to DLY, indicating that these bacterial genera confer Jinwu with a higher tolerance to roughage than DLY.

Keywords: Duroc × Landrace × Yorkshire pig; Jinwu pig; gut microbiota; roughage diet; roughage tolerance.

Figure 1

Rarefaction curves. (A) The Sobs index curve tends to flatten out, indicating that the sequencing data volume for the four groups is reasonable. (B) The Shannon index curve also tends to flatten out, indicating that the sequencing data volume for the four groups is reasonable.

Figure 2

Changes in Sobs index of bacterial communities in pig feces with roughage feeding. (A) The species richness within the community of the RJW was significantly lower than that of the CJW (p < 0.05). (B) There was no significant change in the species richness within the community of the RDLY. *: There is a significant difference between the two groups.

Figure 3

Changes in Shannon index of bacterial communities in pig feces with roughage feeding. (A) The species richness and evenness within the community of the RJW are significantly lower than those of the CJW (p < 0.05). (B) The species richness and evenness within the community of the RDLY are significantly lower than those of the CDLY (p < 0.05). *: There is a significant difference between the two groups.

Figure 4

The impact of roughage feeding on the beta diversity of bacterial communities in pig feces. (A) There are significant differences in the bacterial communities between the RJW and the CJW (p < 0.05). (B) There are significant differences in the bacterial communities between the RDLY and the CDLY (p < 0.05).

Figure 5

The influence of roughage feeding on the bacterial flora at the phylum level in JW and DLY (A) The relative abundance of Firmicutes and Actinobacteria in the RJW significantly increased compared to the CJW (p < 0.05). (B) The relative abundance of Actinobacteria in the RDLY significantly increased compared to the CDLY (p < 0.05).

Figure 6

The influence of roughage feeding on the bacterial flora at the genus level in JW and DLY (A) The relative abundance of bacterial genera such as Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1, Christensenellaceae_R-7_group, and Prevotellaceae_UCG-001 in the RJW significantly increased compared to the CJW (p < 0.05). (B) The relative abundance of bacterial genera such as Streptococcus and Lactobacillus in the RDLY significantly increased compared to the CDLY (p < 0.05).

Figure 7

Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) Plots for Four Groups (A) In the RJW compared to the CJW, the microbiota such as Firmicutes, Clostridia, Lactobacillales, and Clostridiales were significantly enriched. (B) In the RDLY compared to the CDLY, the microbiota such as Lactobacillales, Bacilli, and Streptococcus were significantly enriched. (C) In RJW compared to RDLY, the microbiota such as Treponema, Terrisporobacter, Coprococcus, and Ruminococcaceae were significantly enriched.

Figure 7

Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) Plots for Four Groups (A) In the RJW compared to the CJW, the microbiota such as Firmicutes, Clostridia, Lactobacillales, and Clostridiales were significantly enriched. (B) In the RDLY compared to the CDLY, the microbiota such as Lactobacillales, Bacilli, and Streptococcus were significantly enriched. (C) In RJW compared to RDLY, the microbiota such as Treponema, Terrisporobacter, Coprococcus, and Ruminococcaceae were significantly enriched.

Figure 7

Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) Plots for Four Groups (A) In the RJW compared to the CJW, the microbiota such as Firmicutes, Clostridia, Lactobacillales, and Clostridiales were significantly enriched. (B) In the RDLY compared to the CDLY, the microbiota such as Lactobacillales, Bacilli, and Streptococcus were significantly enriched. (C) In RJW compared to RDLY, the microbiota such as Treponema, Terrisporobacter, Coprococcus, and Ruminococcaceae were significantly enriched.