FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Anim Microbiome / Understanding the microbial fibre degrading communities &amp...
Animal microbiome2023; 5(1); 3; doi: 10.1186/s42523-022-00224-6

Understanding the microbial fibre degrading communities & processes in the equine gut.

Abstract: The equine gastrointestinal tract is a self-sufficient fermentation system, housing a complex microbial consortium that acts synergistically and independently to break down complex lignocellulolytic material that enters the equine gut. Despite being strict herbivores, equids such as horses and zebras lack the diversity of enzymes needed to completely break down plant tissue, instead relying on their resident microbes to carry out fibrolysis to yield vital energy sources such as short chain fatty acids. The bulk of equine digestion occurs in the large intestine, where digesta is fermented for 36-48 h through the synergistic activities of bacteria, fungi, and methanogenic archaea. Anaerobic gut dwelling bacteria and fungi break down complex plant polysaccharides through combined mechanical and enzymatic strategies, and notably possess some of the greatest diversity and repertoire of carbohydrate active enzymes among characterized microbes. In addition to the production of enzymes, some equid-isolated anaerobic fungi and bacteria have been shown to possess cellulosomes, powerful multi-enzyme complexes that further enhance break down. The activities of both anaerobic fungi and bacteria are further facilitated by facultatively aerobic yeasts and methanogenic archaea, who maintain an optimal environment for fibrolytic organisms, ultimately leading to increased fibrolytic microbial counts and heightened enzymatic activity. The unique interactions within the equine gut as well as the novel species and powerful mechanisms employed by these microbes makes the equine gut a valuable ecosystem to study fibrolytic functions within complex communities. This review outlines the primary taxa involved in fibre break down within the equine gut and further illuminates the enzymatic strategies and metabolic pathways used by these microbes. We discuss current methods used in analysing fibrolytic functions in complex microbial communities and propose a shift towards the development of functional assays to deepen our understanding of this unique ecosystem.
© 2023. The Author(s).
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-01-12 PubMed ID: 36635784PubMed Central: PMC9837927DOI: 10.1186/s42523-022-00224-6Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Review

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article discusses the complex microbial system within the gastrointestinal tract of horses and similar animals, which allows them to digest plant materials despite their own limited digestive enzymes. They house microorganisms in their gut that synergistically break down these hard-to-digest materials, providing vital energy sources for the equid.

Microbial Community in the Equine Gut

  • The equine gut, or the digestive system in horses and similar animals, is home to a complex microbial community that plays a vital role in breaking down complex plant materials that the equids cannot do on their own.
  • These animals are herbivores, consuming only plant materials, but their systems lack the diverse enzymes necessary to fully break down these materials. Their gut microorganisms, however, can break down these materials in a process called fibrolysis to produce vital energy sources for the host animal.
  • This fibrolytic process involves multiple microorganisms, including bacteria, fungi, and archaea, which interact to break down the plant materials. This happens primarily in the large intestine, where digestion occurs over 36 to 48 hours.

Equine Gut Microbe Functions

  • These gut dwelling microorganisms break down the plant polysaccharides (complex carbohydrates) through both mechanical and enzymatic strategies.
  • Some of these anaerobic bacteria and fungi possess what are known as cellulosomes, or multi-enzyme complexes, which enhance their ability to break down plant materials. Their activities are also facilitated by yeasts and methanogenic archaea, organisms that help maintain an optimal environment for these fibrolytic microbes, increasing their numbers and their enzymatic activity.

Significance of the Equine Gut Ecosystem

  • The researchers emphasize that the unique interactions in the equine gut among the microbial species, and the mechanisms they employ, make this ecosystem valuable for studying fibrolytic processes within complex microbial communities.
  • This rich ecosystem holds many opportunities for discovery of unique species and metabolic pathways which could potentially be harnessed for human advantage.

Research Approaches and Proposals

  • In addition to providing an overview of the current understanding of the equine gut ecosystem, the researchers discuss the methodologies currently used to analyze these processes.
  • They propose developing functional assays, or tests to measure the activities of these organisms and enzymes, to deepen our understanding of this complex ecosystem and the fibrolytic process.
  • These innovative approaches could aid in advancing our understanding of gut microbiomes not only in horses but potentially in other herbivores as well and how they might be applied beneficially elsewhere.

Cite This Article

APA
Wunderlich G, Bull M, Ross T, Rose M, Chapman B. (2023). Understanding the microbial fibre degrading communities & processes in the equine gut. Anim Microbiome, 5(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42523-022-00224-6

Publication

Animal microbiome
ISSN: 2524-4671
NlmUniqueID: 101759457
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 5
Issue: 1
Pages: 3
PII: 3

Researcher Affiliations

Wunderlich, Georgia
  • Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia. georgia.wunderlich@quantalbioscience.com.
  • Quantal Bioscience Pty Ltd, Castle Hill, Australia. georgia.wunderlich@quantalbioscience.com.
Bull, Michelle
  • Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
  • Quantal Bioscience Pty Ltd, Castle Hill, Australia.
Ross, Tom
  • Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
Rose, Michael
  • Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
Chapman, Belinda
  • Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
  • Quantal Bioscience Pty Ltd, Castle Hill, Australia.

Conflict of Interest Statement

BC, MB and GW declare their involvement in the brand equiGI, a commercial microbiome testing service provided by Quantal Bioscience. TR and MR declare no competing financial or non-financial interests.

References

This article includes 182 references
  1. Trinci APJ, Davies DR, Gull K, Lawrence MI, Bonde Nielsen B, Rickers A. Anaerobic fungi in herbivorous animals.. Mycol Res 1994;98(2):129–152.
    doi: 10.1016/S0953-7562(09)80178-0google scholar: lookup
  2. Vermorel M, Martin-Rosset W. Concepts, scientific bases, structure and validation of the French horse net energy system (UFC). Livest Prod Sci 1997;47(3):261–275.
    doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(96)01410-8google scholar: lookup
  3. Julliand V, de Vaux A, Millet L, Fonty G. Identification of Ruminococcus flavefaciens as the predominant cellulolytic bacterial species of the equine cecum.. Appl Environ Microbiol 1999 Aug;65(8):3738-41.
    doi: 10.1128/AEM.65.8.3738-3741.1999pmc: PMC91562pubmed: 10427077google scholar: lookup
  4. Willing B, Vörös A, Roos S, Jones C, Jansson A, Lindberg JE. Changes in faecal bacteria associated with concentrate and forage-only diets fed to horses in training.. Equine Vet J 2009 Dec;41(9):908-14.
    doi: 10.2746/042516409X447806pubmed: 20383990google scholar: lookup
  5. Al Jassim RAM, Scott PT, Krause D, Denman S, McSweeney CS. Cellulolytic and lactic acid bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract of the horse.. Recent Adv Anim Nutr Aust 2005;15:155–163.
  6. Wahyudi A, Cahyanto MN, Soejono M, Bachruddin Z. Potency of lignocellulose degrading bacteria isolated from buffalo and horse gastrointestinal tract and elephant dung for feed fiber degradation.. J Indones Trop Anim Agric 2010;35(1):34–41.
    doi: 10.14710/jitaa.35.1.34-41google scholar: lookup
  7. Shakarami MH, Mohammadabadi T, Motamedi H, Sari M, Teimouri Yansari A. Isolation and identification of cellulolytic bacteria from gastrointestinal tract of Arabian horse and investigation of their effect on the nutritional value of wheat straw.. J Appl Microbiol 2019 Aug;127(2):344-353.
    doi: 10.1111/jam.14251pubmed: 30873704google scholar: lookup
  8. Harlow BE, Lawrence LM, Flythe MD. Diarrhea-associated pathogens, lactobacilli and cellulolytic bacteria in equine feces: responses to antibiotic challenge.. Vet Microbiol 2013 Sep 27;166(1-2):225-32.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2013.05.003pubmed: 23769300google scholar: lookup
  9. Julliand V, Grimm P. HORSE SPECIES SYMPOSIUM: The microbiome of the horse hindgut: History and current knowledge.. J Anim Sci 2016 Jun;94(6):2262-74.
    doi: 10.2527/jas.2015-0198pubmed: 27285903google scholar: lookup
  10. Blackmore TM, Dugdale A, Argo CM, Curtis G, Pinloche E, Harris PA, Worgan HJ, Girdwood SE, Dougal K, Newbold CJ, McEwan NR. Strong stability and host specific bacterial community in faeces of ponies.. PLoS One 2013;8(9):e75079.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075079pmc: PMC3770578pubmed: 24040388google scholar: lookup
  11. Dicks LMT, Botha M, Dicks E, Botes M. The equine gastro-intestinal tract: an overview of the microbiota, disease and treatment.. Livest Sci 2014;1(160):69–81.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2013.11.025google scholar: lookup
  12. Santos AS, Rodrigues MA, Bessa RJ, Ferreira LM, Martin-Rosset W. Understanding the equine cecum-colon ecosystem: current knowledge and future perspectives.. Animal 2011 Jan;5(1):48-56.
    doi: 10.1017/S1751731110001588pubmed: 22440701google scholar: lookup
  13. Simon JC, Marchesi JR, Mougel C, Selosse MA. Host-microbiota interactions: from holobiont theory to analysis.. Microbiome 2019 Jan 11;7(1):5.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-019-0619-4pmc: PMC6330386pubmed: 30635058google scholar: lookup
  14. Julliand V, Grimm P. The impact of diet on the hindgut microbiome.. J Equine Vet 2017;1(52):23–28.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2017.03.002google scholar: lookup
  15. Crowell-Davis SL, Houpt KA. Coprophagy by foals: effect of age and possible functions.. Equine Vet J 1985 Jan;17(1):17-9.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1985.tb02030.xpubmed: 4038939google scholar: lookup
  16. Garber A, Hastie P, Murray JA. Factors Influencing Equine Gut Microbiota: Current Knowledge.. J Equine Vet Sci 2020 May;88:102943.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2020.102943pubmed: 32303307google scholar: lookup
  17. Quercia S, Freccero F, Castagnetti C, Soverini M, Turroni S, Biagi E, Rampelli S, Lanci A, Mariella J, Chinellato E, Brigidi P, Candela M. Early colonisation and temporal dynamics of the gut microbial ecosystem in Standardbred foals.. Equine Vet J 2019 Mar;51(2):231-237.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12983pubmed: 29931762google scholar: lookup
  18. Lindenberg F, Krych L, Kot W, Fielden J, Frøkiær H, van Galen G, Nielsen DS, Hansen AK. Development of the equine gut microbiota.. Sci Rep 2019 Oct 8;9(1):14427.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-50563-9pmc: PMC6783416pubmed: 31594971google scholar: lookup
  19. Xu Y, Lei B, Zhang Q, Lei Y, Li C, Li X, Yao R, Hu R, Liu K, Wang Y, Cui Y, Wang L, Dai J, Li L, Ni W, Zhou P, Liu ZX, Hu S. ADDAGMA: A database for domestic animal gut microbiome atlas.. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 2022;20:891-898.
    doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2022.02.003pmc: PMC8858777pubmed: 35222847google scholar: lookup
  20. Argenzio RA, Southworth M, Stevens CE. Sites of organic acid production and absorption in the equine gastrointestinal tract.. Am J Physiol 1974 May;226(5):1043-50.
    doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1974.226.5.1043pubmed: 4824856google scholar: lookup
  21. Hackstein JHP, Baker SE, van Hellemond JJ, Tielens AGM. Hydrogenosomes of anaerobic fungi: an alternative way to adapt to anaerobic environments.. 2019. pp. 159–175.
  22. Edwards JE. Equine anaerobic fungi: key taxa of central importance to dietary fibre degradation.. 2019. pp. 23–31.
  23. Bonhomme-Florentin A. Essais de culture in vitro des Cycloposthiidae, ciliés commensaux de l’intestin du cheval. Rôle de ces ciliés dans la dégradation de la cellulose.. Protistologica (Paris) 1969;5:519–522.
  24. Bonhomme-Florentin A. [Attachment of horse cecum Ciliata to plant fragments. Degradation of chloroplasts. Attachment of bacteria to cecal Ciliata].. Reprod Nutr Dev (1980) 1985;25(1A):127-39.
    pubmed: 3919432
  25. Bonhomme-Florentin A. Degradation of hemicellulose and pectin by horse caecum contents.. Br J Nutr 1988 Jul;60(1):185-92.
    doi: 10.1079/BJN19880087pubmed: 3408701google scholar: lookup
  26. Gilbert RA, Dagar SS, Kittelmann S, Edwards JE. Editorial: Advances in the Understanding of the Commensal Eukaryota and Viruses of the Herbivore Gut.. Front Microbiol 2021;12:619287.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.619287pmc: PMC7960656pubmed: 33737917google scholar: lookup
  27. Makhuvele R, Ncube I, Jansen van Rensburg EL, La Grange DC. Isolation of fungi from dung of wild herbivores for application in bioethanol production.. Braz J Microbiol 2017 Oct-Dec;48(4):648-655.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bjm.2016.11.013pmc: PMC5628305pubmed: 28629967google scholar: lookup
  28. Houfani AA, Anders N, Spiess AC, Baldrian P, Benallaoua S. Insights from enzymatic degradation of cellulose and hemicellulose to fermentable sugars—a review.. Biomass Bioenerg 2020;1(134):105481.
    doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105481google scholar: lookup
  29. Kosheleva IuP, Trofimov SIa. [Characteristics of the biochemical composition of plant litter at different stages of decomposition (according to thermal analysis data)].. Izv Akad Nauk Ser Biol 2008 Jan-Feb;(1):77-83.
    doi: 10.1134/S106235900801010Xpubmed: 18491564google scholar: lookup
  30. Pérez J, Muñoz-Dorado J, de la Rubia T, Martínez J. Biodegradation and biological treatments of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin: an overview.. Int Microbiol 2002 Jun;5(2):53-63.
    doi: 10.1007/s10123-002-0062-3pubmed: 12180781google scholar: lookup
  31. Moore BE, Dehority BA. Effects of diet and hindgut defaunation on diet digestibility and microbial concentrations in the cecum and colon of the horse.. J Anim Sci 1993 Dec;71(12):3350-8.
    doi: 10.2527/1993.71123350xpubmed: 8294287google scholar: lookup
  32. Muhonen S, Sadet-Bourgeteau S, Julliand V. Effects of Differences in Fibre Composition and Maturity of Forage-Based Diets on the Microbial Ecosystem and Its Activity in Equine Caecum and Colon Digesta and Faeces.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Aug 8;11(8).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11082337pmc: PMC8388671pubmed: 34438794google scholar: lookup
  33. Grenet E, Breton A, Barry P, Fonty G. Rumen anaerobic fungi and plant substrate colonization as affected by diet composition.. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1989;26(1–2):55–70.
    doi: 10.1016/0377-8401(89)90006-0google scholar: lookup
  34. Bulmer LS, Murray JA, Burns NM, Garber A, Wemelsfelder F, McEwan NR, Hastie PM. High-starch diets alter equine faecal microbiota and increase behavioural reactivity.. Sci Rep 2019 Dec 9;9(1):18621.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-54039-8pmc: PMC6901590pubmed: 31819069google scholar: lookup
  35. Detmann E, Paulino MF, Mantovani HC, de Filho SCV, Sampaio CB, de Souza MA. Parameterization of ruminal fibre degradation in low-quality tropical forage using Michaelis-Menten kinetics.. Livest Sci 2009;126(1):136–146.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2009.06.013google scholar: lookup
  36. Warzecha CM, Coverdale JA, Janecka JE, Leatherwood JL, Pinchak WE, Wickersham TA, McCann JC. Influence of short-term dietary starch inclusion on the equine cecal microbiome.. J Anim Sci 2017 Nov;95(11):5077-5090.
    doi: 10.2527/jas2017.1754pmc: PMC6095290pubmed: 29293739google scholar: lookup
  37. Harlow BE, Donley TM, Lawrence LM, Flythe MD. Effect of starch source (corn, oats or wheat) and concentration on fermentation by equine faecal microbiota in vitro.. J Appl Microbiol 2015 Nov;119(5):1234-44.
    doi: 10.1111/jam.12927pubmed: 26255645google scholar: lookup
  38. Julliand V, de Fombelle A, Drogoul C, Jacotot E. Feeding and microbial disorders in horses: Part 3—effects of three hay:grain ratios on microbial profile and activities.. J Equine Vet 2001;21(11):543–546.
    doi: 10.1016/S0737-0806(01)70159-1google scholar: lookup
  39. Garner HE, Moore JN, Johnson JH, Clark L, Amend JF, Tritschler LG, Coffmann JR, Sprouse RF, Hutcheson DP, Salem CA. Changes in the caecal flora associated with the onset of laminitis.. Equine Vet J 1978 Oct;10(4):249-52.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1978.tb02273.xpubmed: 738266google scholar: lookup
  40. Weese JS, Rousseau J. Evaluation of Lactobacillus pentosus WE7 for prevention of diarrhea in neonatal foals.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005 Jun 15;226(12):2031-4.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.2005.226.2031pubmed: 15989186google scholar: lookup
  41. Dougal K, de la Fuente G, Harris PA, Girdwood SE, Pinloche E, Geor RJ, Nielsen BD, Schott HC 2nd, Elzinga S, Newbold CJ. Characterisation of the faecal bacterial community in adult and elderly horses fed a high fibre, high oil or high starch diet using 454 pyrosequencing.. PLoS One 2014;9(2):e87424.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087424pmc: PMC3913607pubmed: 24504261google scholar: lookup
  42. Gomez A, Sharma AK, Grev A, Sheaffer C, Martinson K. The Horse Gut Microbiome Responds in a Highly Individualized Manner to Forage Lignification.. J Equine Vet Sci 2021 Jan;96:103306.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2020.103306pubmed: 33349409google scholar: lookup
  43. Wardman JF, Bains RK, Rahfeld P, Withers SG. Carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZymes) in the gut microbiome.. Nat Rev Microbiol 2022 Sep;20(9):542-556.
    doi: 10.1038/s41579-022-00712-1pubmed: 35347288google scholar: lookup
  44. Barrett K, Jensen K, Meyer AS, Frisvad JC, Lange L. Fungal secretome profile categorization of CAZymes by function and family corresponds to fungal phylogeny and taxonomy: Example Aspergillus and Penicillium.. Sci Rep 2020 Mar 20;10(1):5158.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-61907-1pmc: PMC7083838pubmed: 32198418google scholar: lookup
  45. Drula E, Garron ML, Dogan S, Lombard V, Henrissat B, Terrapon N. The carbohydrate-active enzyme database: functions and literature.. Nucleic Acids Res 2022 Jan 7;50(D1):D571-D577.
    doi: 10.1093/nar/gkab1045pmc: PMC8728194pubmed: 34850161google scholar: lookup
  46. Sharma A, Tewari R, Rana SS, Soni R, Soni SK. Cellulases: Classification, Methods of Determination and Industrial Applications.. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2016 Aug;179(8):1346-80.
    doi: 10.1007/s12010-016-2070-3pubmed: 27068832google scholar: lookup
  47. Ndlovu TM, Van Wyk JPH. Isolation of cellulase enzyme from brown garden snail (Cornu aspersum) for the saccharification of waste paper materials.. MethodsX 2019;6:1030-1035.
    doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2019.04.019pmc: PMC6517372pubmed: 31193059google scholar: lookup
  48. Xue XM, Anderson AJ, Richardson NA, Anderson AJ, Xue GP, Mather PB. Characterisation of cellulase activity in the digestive system of the redclaw crayfish (Cherax quadricarinatus). Aquaculture 1999;180(3):373–386.
    doi: 10.1016/S0044-8486(99)00213-6google scholar: lookup
  49. Tokuda G, Watanabe H. Hidden cellulases in termites: revision of an old hypothesis.. Biol Lett 2007 Jun 22;3(3):336-9.
    doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2007.0073pmc: PMC2464699pubmed: 17374589google scholar: lookup
  50. Jakeer S, Varma M, Sharma J, Mattoo F, Gupta D, Singh J. Metagenomic analysis of the fecal microbiome of an adult elephant reveals the diversity of CAZymes related to lignocellulosic biomass degradation.. Symbiosis 2020;81(3):209–222.
    doi: 10.1007/s13199-020-00695-8google scholar: lookup
  51. Yi Y. Tiny bugs play big role: Microorganisms’ contribution to biofuel production.. 2021. pp. 113–136.
  52. Cragg SM, Beckham GT, Bruce NC, Bugg TD, Distel DL, Dupree P, Etxabe AG, Goodell BS, Jellison J, McGeehan JE, McQueen-Mason SJ, Schnorr K, Walton PH, Watts JE, Zimmer M. Lignocellulose degradation mechanisms across the Tree of Life.. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2015 Dec;29:108-19.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2015.10.018pmc: PMC7571853pubmed: 26583519google scholar: lookup
  53. Janusz G, Pawlik A, Sulej J, Swiderska-Burek U, Jarosz-Wilkolazka A, Paszczynski A. Lignin degradation: microorganisms, enzymes involved, genomes analysis and evolution.. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2017 Nov 1;41(6):941-962.
    doi: 10.1093/femsre/fux049pmc: PMC5812493pubmed: 29088355google scholar: lookup
  54. Ufarté L, Potocki-Veronese G, Cecchini D, Tauzin AS, Rizzo A, Morgavi DP, Cathala B, Moreau C, Cleret M, Robe P, Klopp C, Laville E. Highly Promiscuous Oxidases Discovered in the Bovine Rumen Microbiome.. Front Microbiol 2018;9:861.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00861pmc: PMC5945886pubmed: 29780372google scholar: lookup
  55. Lillington SP, Leggieri PA, Heom KA, O'Malley MA. Nature's recyclers: anaerobic microbial communities drive crude biomass deconstruction.. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2020 Apr;62:38-47.
    doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2019.08.015pubmed: 31593910google scholar: lookup
  56. Solomon KV, Haitjema CH, Henske JK, Gilmore SP, Borges-Rivera D, Lipzen A, Brewer HM, Purvine SO, Wright AT, Theodorou MK, Grigoriev IV, Regev A, Thompson DA, O'Malley MA. Early-branching gut fungi possess a large, comprehensive array of biomass-degrading enzymes.. Science 2016 Mar 11;351(6278):1192-5.
    doi: 10.1126/science.aad1431pmc: PMC5098331pubmed: 26912365google scholar: lookup
  57. Park T, Wijeratne S, Meulia T, Firkins JL, Yu Z. The macronuclear genome of anaerobic ciliate Entodinium caudatum reveals its biological features adapted to the distinct rumen environment.. Genomics 2021 May;113(3):1416-1427.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ygeno.2021.03.014pubmed: 33722656google scholar: lookup
  58. Mach N, Midoux C, Leclercq S, Pennarun S, Le Moyec L, Rué O, Robert C, Sallé G, Barrey E. Mining the equine gut metagenome: poorly-characterized taxa associated with cardiovascular fitness in endurance athletes.. Commun Biol 2022 Oct 3;5(1):1032.
    doi: 10.1038/s42003-022-03977-7pmc: PMC9529974pubmed: 36192523google scholar: lookup
  59. Lillington SP, Chrisler W, Haitjema CH, Gilmore SP, Smallwood CR, Shutthanandan V, Evans JE, O'Malley MA. Cellulosome Localization Patterns Vary across Life Stages of Anaerobic Fungi.. mBio 2021 Jun 29;12(3):e0083221.
    doi: 10.1128/mBio.00832-21pmc: PMC8262932pubmed: 34061594google scholar: lookup
  60. Doi RH. Cellulases of mesophilic microorganisms: cellulosome and noncellulosome producers.. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2008 Mar;1125:267-79.
    doi: 10.1196/annals.1419.002pubmed: 18096849google scholar: lookup
  61. Fontes CM, Gilbert HJ. Cellulosomes: highly efficient nanomachines designed to deconstruct plant cell wall complex carbohydrates.. Annu Rev Biochem 2010;79:655-81.
    doi: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-091208-085603pubmed: 20373916google scholar: lookup
  62. Hess M, Paul SS, Puniya AK, van der Giezen M, Shaw C, Edwards JE, Fliegerová K. Anaerobic Fungi: Past, Present, and Future.. Front Microbiol 2020;11:584893.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.584893pmc: PMC7609409pubmed: 33193229google scholar: lookup
  63. Boxma B, Voncken F, Jannink S, van Alen T, Akhmanova A, van Weelden SW, van Hellemond JJ, Ricard G, Huynen M, Tielens AG, Hackstein JH. The anaerobic chytridiomycete fungus Piromyces sp. E2 produces ethanol via pyruvate:formate lyase and an alcohol dehydrogenase E.. Mol Microbiol 2004 Mar;51(5):1389-99.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03912.xpubmed: 14982632google scholar: lookup
  64. Gruninger RJ, Puniya AK, Callaghan TM, Edwards JE, Youssef N, Dagar SS, Fliegerova K, Griffith GW, Forster R, Tsang A, McAllister T, Elshahed MS. Anaerobic fungi (phylum Neocallimastigomycota): advances in understanding their taxonomy, life cycle, ecology, role and biotechnological potential.. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2014 Oct;90(1):1-17.
    doi: 10.1111/1574-6941.12383pubmed: 25046344google scholar: lookup
  65. Gold JJ, Heath IB, Bauchop T. Ultrastructural description of a new chytrid genus of caecum anaerobe, Caecomyces equi gen. nov., sp. nov., assigned to the Neocallimasticaceae.. Biosystems 1988;21(3-4):403-15.
    doi: 10.1016/0303-2647(88)90039-1pubmed: 3395694google scholar: lookup
  66. Hooker CA, Lee KZ, Solomon KV. Leveraging anaerobic fungi for biotechnology.. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2019 Oct;59:103-110.
    doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2019.03.013pubmed: 31005803google scholar: lookup
  67. Drake H, Ivarsson M. The role of anaerobic fungi in fundamental biogeochemical cycles in the deep biosphere.. Fungal Biol Rev 2018;32(1):20–25.
    doi: 10.1016/j.fbr.2017.10.001google scholar: lookup
  68. Hanafy RA, Lanjekar VB, Dhakephalkar PK, Callaghan TM, Dagar SS, Griffith GW, Elshahed MS, Youssef NH. Seven new Neocallimastigomycota genera from wild, zoo-housed, and domesticated herbivores greatly expand the taxonomic diversity of the phylum.. Mycologia 2020 Nov-Dec;112(6):1212-1239.
    doi: 10.1080/00275514.2019.1696619pubmed: 32057282google scholar: lookup
  69. Hanafy RA, Elshahed MS, Liggenstoffer AS, Griffith GW, Youssef NH. Pecoramyces ruminantium, gen. nov., sp. nov., an anaerobic gut fungus from the feces of cattle and sheep.. Mycologia 2017;109(2):231-243.
    doi: 10.1080/00275514.2017.1317190pubmed: 28494211google scholar: lookup
  70. Joshi A, Lanjekar VB, Dhakephalkar PK, Callaghan TM, Griffith GW, Dagar SS. Liebetanzomycespolymorphus gen. et sp. nov., a new anaerobic fungus (Neocallimastigomycota) isolated from the rumen of a goat.. MycoKeys 2018;(40):89-110.
    doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.40.28337pmc: PMC6198248pubmed: 30364831google scholar: lookup
  71. Stabel M, Hanafy RA, Schweitzer T, Greif M, Aliyu H, Flad V, Young D, Lebuhn M, Elshahed MS, Ochsenreither K, Youssef NH. Aestipascuomyces dupliciliberans gen. nov, sp. nov., the First Cultured Representative of the Uncultured SK4 Clade from Aoudad Sheep and Alpaca.. Microorganisms 2020 Nov 5;8(11).
    doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8111734pmc: PMC7694369pubmed: 33167420google scholar: lookup
  72. Chang J, Park H. Nucleotide and protein researches on anaerobic fungi during four decades.. J Anim Sci Technol 2020 Mar;62(2):121-140.
    doi: 10.5187/jast.2020.62.2.121pmc: PMC7142291pubmed: 32292921google scholar: lookup
  73. Edwards JE, Shetty SA, van den Berg P, Burden F, van Doorn DA, Pellikaan WF, Dijkstra J, Smidt H. Multi-kingdom characterization of the core equine fecal microbiota based on multiple equine (sub)species.. Anim Microbiome 2020 Feb 12;2(1):6.
    pmc: PMC7807809pubmed: 33499982doi: 10.1186/s42523-020-0023-1google scholar: lookup
  74. Liggenstoffer AS, Youssef NH, Couger MB, Elshahed MS. Phylogenetic diversity and community structure of anaerobic gut fungi (phylum Neocallimastigomycota) in ruminant and non-ruminant herbivores.. ISME J 2010 Oct;4(10):1225-35.
    doi: 10.1038/ismej.2010.49pubmed: 20410935google scholar: lookup
  75. Seppälä S, Solomon KV, Gilmore SP, Henske JK, O'Malley MA. Mapping the membrane proteome of anaerobic gut fungi identifies a wealth of carbohydrate binding proteins and transporters.. Microb Cell Fact 2016 Dec 20;15(1):212.
    doi: 10.1186/s12934-016-0611-7pmc: PMC5168858pubmed: 27998268google scholar: lookup
  76. Li J, Heath IB, Bauchop T. Piromyces mae and Piromyces dumbonica, two new species of uniflagellate anaerobic chytridiomycete fungi from the hindgut of the horse and elephant.. Can J Bot 1990;68(5):1021–1033.
    doi: 10.1139/b90-129google scholar: lookup
  77. Orpin CG. Isolation of cellulolytic phycomycete fungi from the caecum of the horse.. J Gen Microbiol 1981 Apr;123(2):287-96.
    doi: 10.1099/00221287-123-2-287pubmed: 7033458google scholar: lookup
  78. Breton A, Dusser M, Gaillard-Martinie B, Guillot J, Millet L, Prensier G. Piromyces rhizinflata nov. sp., a strictly anaerobic fungus from faeces of the Saharian ass: a morphological, metabolic and ultrastructural study.. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1991 Jul 15;66(1):1-8.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1991.tb04830.xpubmed: 1936931google scholar: lookup
  79. Breton A, Dusser M, Gaillard-Martinie B, Guillot J, Millet L, Prensier G. Piromyces rhizinflata nov. sp., a strictly anaerobic fungus from faeces of the Saharian ass: a morphological, metabolic and ultrastructural study.. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1991 Jul 15;66(1):1-8.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1995.tb07738.xpubmed: 1936931google scholar: lookup
  80. Mura E, Edwards J, Kittelmann S, Kaerger K, Voigt K, Mrázek J, Moniello G, Fliegerova K. Anaerobic fungal communities differ along the horse digestive tract.. Fungal Biol 2019 Mar;123(3):240-246.
    doi: 10.1016/j.funbio.2018.12.004pubmed: 30798879google scholar: lookup
  81. Haitjema CH, Gilmore SP, Henske JK, Solomon KV, de Groot R, Kuo A, Mondo SJ, Salamov AA, LaButti K, Zhao Z, Chiniquy J, Barry K, Brewer HM, Purvine SO, Wright AT, Hainaut M, Boxma B, van Alen T, Hackstein JHP, Henrissat B, Baker SE, Grigoriev IV, O'Malley MA. A parts list for fungal cellulosomes revealed by comparative genomics.. Nat Microbiol 2017 May 30;2:17087.
    doi: 10.1038/nmicrobiol.2017.87pubmed: 28555641google scholar: lookup
  82. Seppälä S, Wilken SE, Knop D, Solomon KV, O'Malley MA. The importance of sourcing enzymes from non-conventional fungi for metabolic engineering and biomass breakdown.. Metab Eng 2017 Nov;44:45-59.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ymben.2017.09.008pubmed: 28943461google scholar: lookup
  83. Joblin KN, Naylor GE. Fermentation of woods by rumen anaerobic fungi.. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1989;65(1–2):119–122.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1989.tb03608.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  84. Orpin CG. The rumen flagellate Piromonas communis: its life-history and invasion of plant material in the rumen.. J Gen Microbiol 1977 Mar;99(1):107-17.
    doi: 10.1099/00221287-99-1-107pubmed: 16983google scholar: lookup
  85. Youssef NH, Couger MB, Struchtemeyer CG, Liggenstoffer AS, Prade RA, Najar FZ, Atiyeh HK, Wilkins MR, Elshahed MS. The genome of the anaerobic fungus Orpinomyces sp. strain C1A reveals the unique evolutionary history of a remarkable plant biomass degrader.. Appl Environ Microbiol 2013 Aug;79(15):4620-34.
    pmc: PMC3719515pubmed: 23709508doi: 10.1128/aem.00821-13google scholar: lookup
  86. Theodorou MK, Mennim G, Davies DR, Zhu WY, Trinci AP, Brookman JL. Anaerobic fungi in the digestive tract of mammalian herbivores and their potential for exploitation.. Proc Nutr Soc 1996 Nov;55(3):913-26.
    doi: 10.1079/PNS19960088pubmed: 9004333google scholar: lookup
  87. Gordon GLR, Phillips MW. Removal of anaerobic fungi from the rumen of sheep by chemical treatment and the effect on feed consumption and in vivo fibre digestion.. Lett Appl Microbiol 1993;17(5):220–223.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.1993.tb01451.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  88. Tielens AG, Hellemond JJV. Anaerobic mitochondria: properties and origins.. 2007. p. 85–103.
  89. Hackstein JH, Tjaden J, Huynen M. Mitochondria, hydrogenosomes and mitosomes: products of evolutionary tinkering!. Curr Genet 2006 Oct;50(4):225-45.
    doi: 10.1007/s00294-006-0088-8pubmed: 16897087google scholar: lookup
  90. Cí·¯ord D, Pearson RA, Archibald RF, Muirhead RH. Digestibility and gastro-intestinal transit time of diets containing different proportions of alfalfa and oat straw given to Thoroughbreds, Shetland ponies, Highland ponies and donkeys.. Anim Sci 1995;61(2):407–417.
    doi: 10.1017/S1357729800013953google scholar: lookup
  91. Julliand V, Riondet C, de Vaux A, Alcaraz G, Fonty G. Comparison of metabolic activities between Piromyces citronii, an equine fungal species, and Piromyces communis, a ruminal species.. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1998;70(1–2):161–168.
    doi: 10.1016/S0377-8401(97)00043-6google scholar: lookup
  92. Harhangi HR, Freelove AC, Ubhayasekera W, van Dinther M, Steenbakkers PJ, Akhmanova A, van der Drift C, Jetten MS, Mowbray SL, Gilbert HJ, Op den Camp HJ. Cel6A, a major exoglucanase from the cellulosome of the anaerobic fungi Piromyces sp. E2 and Piromyces equi.. Biochim Biophys Acta 2003 Jul 9;1628(1):30-9.
    doi: 10.1016/S0167-4781(03)00112-Xpubmed: 12850270google scholar: lookup
  93. Koivula A, Ruohonen L, Wohlfahrt G, Reinikainen T, Teeri TT, Piens K, Claeyssens M, Weber M, Vasella A, Becker D, Sinnott ML, Zou JY, Kleywegt GJ, Szardenings M, Ståhlberg J, Jones TA. The active site of cellobiohydrolase Cel6A from Trichoderma reesei: the roles of aspartic acids D221 and D175.. J Am Chem Soc 2002 Aug 28;124(34):10015-24.
    doi: 10.1021/ja012659qpubmed: 12188666google scholar: lookup
  94. Edwards JE, Forster RJ, Callaghan TM, Dollhofer V, Dagar SS, Cheng Y, Chang J, Kittelmann S, Fliegerova K, Puniya AK, Henske JK, Gilmore SP, O'Malley MA, Griffith GW, Smidt H. PCR and Omics Based Techniques to Study the Diversity, Ecology and Biology of Anaerobic Fungi: Insights, Challenges and Opportunities.. Front Microbiol 2017;8:1657.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01657pmc: PMC5622200pubmed: 28993761google scholar: lookup
  95. Liu N, Yu W, Guo X, Chen J, Xia D, Yu J, Li D. Oxidative cleavage of cellulose in the horse gut.. Microb Cell Fact 2022 Mar 12;21(1):38.
    doi: 10.1186/s12934-022-01767-8pmc: PMC8917663pubmed: 35279161google scholar: lookup
  96. Hutchinson MI, Powell AJ, Herrera J, Natvig DO. New perspectives on the distribution and roles of thermophilic fungi.. 2019. pp. 59–80.
  97. Takai K, Nakamura K, Toki T, Tsunogai U, Miyazaki M, Miyazaki J, Hirayama H, Nakagawa S, Nunoura T, Horikoshi K. Cell proliferation at 122 degrees C and isotopically heavy CH4 production by a hyperthermophilic methanogen under high-pressure cultivation.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008 Aug 5;105(31):10949-54.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.0712334105pmc: PMC2490668pubmed: 18664583google scholar: lookup
  98. Tansey MR, Brock TD. The upper temperature limit for eukaryotic organisms.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1972 Sep;69(9):2426-8.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.69.9.2426pmc: PMC426956pubmed: 4506763google scholar: lookup
  99. Li DC, Lu M, Li YL, Lu J. Purification and characterization of an endocellulase from the thermophilic fungus Chaetomium thermophilum CT2.. Enzyme Microb Technol 2003;33(7):932–937.
    doi: 10.1016/S0141-0229(03)00245-Xgoogle scholar: lookup
  100. Li AN, Yu K, Liu HQ, Zhang J, Li H, Li DC. Two novel thermostable chitinase genes from thermophilic fungi: cloning, expression and characterization.. Bioresour Technol 2010 Jul;101(14):5546-51.
    doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2010.02.058pubmed: 20223653google scholar: lookup
  101. Vaaje-Kolstad G, Forsberg Z, Loose JS, Bissaro B, Eijsink VG. Structural diversity of lytic polysaccharide monooxygenases.. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2017 Jun;44:67-76.
    doi: 10.1016/j.sbi.2016.12.012pubmed: 28086105google scholar: lookup
  102. Dujon BA, Louis EJ. Genome Diversity and Evolution in the Budding Yeasts (Saccharomycotina).. Genetics 2017 Jun;206(2):717-750.
    doi: 10.1534/genetics.116.199216pmc: PMC5499181pubmed: 28592505google scholar: lookup
  103. Yurkov A. Temporal and geographic patterns in yeast distribution.. 2017. p. 101–30.
  104. Gabaldón T, Naranjo-Ortíz MA, Marcet-Houben M. Evolutionary genomics of yeast pathogens in the Saccharomycotina.. FEMS Yeast Res 2016 Sep;16(6).
    doi: 10.1093/femsyr/fow064pmc: PMC5815160pubmed: 27493146google scholar: lookup
  105. VAN UDEN N, DO SOUSA LC, FARINHA M. On the intestinal yeast flora of horses, sheep, goats and swine.. J Gen Microbiol 1958 Dec;19(3):435-45.
    pubmed: 13611185doi: 10.1099/00221287-19-3-435google scholar: lookup
  106. Contamine V, Picard M. Maintenance and integrity of the mitochondrial genome: a plethora of nuclear genes in the budding yeast.. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2000 Jun;64(2):281-315.
    doi: 10.1128/MMBR.64.2.281-315.2000pmc: PMC98995pubmed: 10839818google scholar: lookup
  107. Lorliam W, Akaracharanya A, Jindamorakot S, Suwannarangsee S, Tanasupawat S. Characterization of xylose-utilizing yeasts isolated from herbivore faeces in Thailand.. ScienceAsia 2013;39(1):26.
    doi: 10.2306/scienceasia1513-1874.2013.39.026google scholar: lookup
  108. Schäfer A, Konrad R, Kuhnigk T, Kämpfer P, Hertel H, König H. Hemicellulose-degrading bacteria and yeasts from the termite gut.. J Appl Bacteriol 1996 May;80(5):471-8.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.1996.tb03245.xpubmed: 9072518google scholar: lookup
  109. Suh SO, Marshall CJ, McHugh JV, Blackwell M. Wood ingestion by passalid beetles in the presence of xylose-fermenting gut yeasts.. Mol Ecol 2003 Nov;12(11):3137-45.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2003.01973.xpubmed: 14629392google scholar: lookup
  110. Molnár O, Wuczkowski M, Prillinger H. Yeast biodiversity in the guts of several pests on maize; comparison of three methods: classical isolation, cloning and DGGE.. Mycol Prog 2008;7(2):111–123.
    doi: 10.1007/s11557-008-0558-0google scholar: lookup
  111. Gilroy R, Leng J, Ravi A, Adriaenssens EM, Oren A, Baker D, La Ragione RM, Proudman C, Pallen MJ. Metagenomic investigation of the equine faecal microbiome reveals extensive taxonomic diversity.. PeerJ 2022;10:e13084.
    doi: 10.7717/peerj.13084pmc: PMC8957277pubmed: 35345588google scholar: lookup
  112. Quigley EM. Gut bacteria in health and disease.. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 2013 Sep;9(9):560-9.
    pmc: PMC3983973pubmed: 24729765
  113. Koike S, Kobayashi Y. Fibrolytic rumen bacteria: their ecology and functions.. Asian Australas J Anim Sci 2009;22(1):131–138.
    doi: 10.5713/ajas.2009.r.01google scholar: lookup
  114. Varel VH, Jung HJ. Influence of forage phenolics on ruminal fibrolytic bacteria and in vitro fiber degradation.. Appl Environ Microbiol 1986 Aug;52(2):275-80.
    doi: 10.1128/aem.52.2.275-280.1986pmc: PMC203515pubmed: 16347127google scholar: lookup
  115. Michalet-Doreau B, Fernandez I, Peyron C, Millet L, Fonty G. Fibrolytic activities and cellulolytic bacterial community structure in the solid and liquid phases of rumen contents.. Reprod Nutr Dev 2001 Mar-Apr;41(2):187-94.
    doi: 10.1051/rnd:2001122pubmed: 11434522google scholar: lookup
  116. Koike S, Pan J, Kobayashi Y, Tanaka K. Kinetics of in sacco fiber-attachment of representative ruminal cellulolytic bacteria monitored by competitive PCR.. J Dairy Sci 2003 Apr;86(4):1429-35.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73726-6pubmed: 12741567google scholar: lookup
  117. Kobayashi Y, Shinkai T, Koike S. Ecological and physiological characterization shows that Fibrobacter succinogenes is important in rumen fiber digestion - review.. Folia Microbiol (Praha) 2008;53(3):195-200.
    doi: 10.1007/s12223-008-0024-zpubmed: 18661290google scholar: lookup
  118. Xie X, Yang C, Guan LL, Wang J, Xue M, Liu JX. Persistence of Cellulolytic Bacteria Fibrobacter and Treponema After Short-Term Corn Stover-Based Dietary Intervention Reveals the Potential to Improve Rumen Fibrolytic Function.. Front Microbiol 2018;9:1363.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01363pmc: PMC6029512pubmed: 29997589google scholar: lookup
  119. Shinkai T, Ueki T, Kobayashi Y. Detection and identification of rumen bacteria constituting a fibrolytic consortium dominated by Fibrobacter succinogenes.. Anim Sci J 2010 Feb;81(1):72-9.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-0929.2009.00698.xpubmed: 20163675google scholar: lookup
  120. Shinkai T, Kobayashi Y. Localization of ruminal cellulolytic bacteria on plant fibrous materials as determined by fluorescence in situ hybridization and real-time PCR.. Appl Environ Microbiol 2007 Mar;73(5):1646-52.
    doi: 10.1128/AEM.01896-06pmc: PMC1828787pubmed: 17209077google scholar: lookup
  121. Miron J, Ben-Ghedalia D, Morrison M. Invited review: adhesion mechanisms of rumen cellulolytic bacteria.. J Dairy Sci 2001 Jun;84(6):1294-309.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)70159-2pubmed: 11417686google scholar: lookup
  122. Russell JB, Muck RE, Weimer PJ. Quantitative analysis of cellulose degradation and growth of cellulolytic bacteria in the rumen.. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2009 Feb;67(2):183-97.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2008.00633.xpubmed: 19120465google scholar: lookup
  123. Castillo-González A, Burrola-Barraza M, Domínguez-Viveros J, Chávez-Martínez A. Rumen microorganisms and fermentation.. Arch Med Vet 2014;46(3):349–361.
    doi: 10.4067/S0301-732X2014000300003google scholar: lookup
  124. Liu L, Huang WC, Liu Y, Li M. Diversity of cellulolytic microorganisms and microbial cellulases.. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 2021;1(163):105277.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2021.105277google scholar: lookup
  125. McDonald JE, Rooks DJ, McCarthy AJ. Methods for the isolation of cellulose-degrading microorganisms.. Methods Enzymol 2012;510:349-74.
    doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-415931-0.00019-7pubmed: 22608736google scholar: lookup
  126. Sadet-Bourgeteau S, Julliand V. La diversité de l’écosystème microbien du tractus digestif équin.. INRAE Product Anim 2012;25(5):407–418.
    doi: 10.20870/productions-animales.2012.25.5.3228google scholar: lookup
  127. Tringe SG, Rubin EM. Metagenomics: DNA sequencing of environmental samples.. Nat Rev Genet 2005 Nov;6(11):805-14.
    doi: 10.1038/nrg1709pubmed: 16304596google scholar: lookup
  128. Tedersoo L, Anslan S, Bahram M, Kõljalg U, Abarenkov K. Identifying the ‘unidentified’ fungi: a global-scale long-read third-generation sequencing approach.. Fungal Diversity 2020;103(1):273–293.
    doi: 10.1007/s13225-020-00456-4google scholar: lookup
  129. Nielsen HB, Almeida M, Juncker AS, Rasmussen S, Li J, Sunagawa S, Plichta DR, Gautier L, Pedersen AG, Le Chatelier E, Pelletier E, Bonde I, Nielsen T, Manichanh C, Arumugam M, Batto JM, Quintanilha Dos Santos MB, Blom N, Borruel N, Burgdorf KS, Boumezbeur F, Casellas F, Doré J, Dworzynski P, Guarner F, Hansen T, Hildebrand F, Kaas RS, Kennedy S, Kristiansen K, Kultima JR, Léonard P, Levenez F, Lund O, Moumen B, Le Paslier D, Pons N, Pedersen O, Prifti E, Qin J, Raes J, Sørensen S, Tap J, Tims S, Ussery DW, Yamada T, Renault P, Sicheritz-Ponten T, Bork P, Wang J, Brunak S, Ehrlich SD. Identification and assembly of genomes and genetic elements in complex metagenomic samples without using reference genomes.. Nat Biotechnol 2014 Aug;32(8):822-8.
    doi: 10.1038/nbt.2939pubmed: 24997787google scholar: lookup
  130. Ijaq J, Chandrasekharan M, Poddar R, Bethi N, Sundararajan VS. Annotation and curation of uncharacterized proteins- challenges.. Front Genet 2015;6:119.
    doi: 10.3389/fgene.2015.00119pmc: PMC4379932pubmed: 25873935google scholar: lookup
  131. Hagen LH, Brooke CG, Shaw CA, Norbeck AD, Piao H, Arntzen MØ, Olson HM, Copeland A, Isern N, Shukla A, Roux S, Lombard V, Henrissat B, O'Malley MA, Grigoriev IV, Tringe SG, Mackie RI, Pasa-Tolic L, Pope PB, Hess M. Proteome specialization of anaerobic fungi during ruminal degradation of recalcitrant plant fiber.. ISME J 2021 Feb;15(2):421-434.
    doi: 10.1038/s41396-020-00769-xpmc: PMC8026616pubmed: 32929206google scholar: lookup
  132. Kauter A, Epping L, Semmler T, Antao EM, Kannapin D, Stoeckle SD, Gehlen H, Lübke-Becker A, Günther S, Wieler LH, Walther B. The gut microbiome of horses: current research on equine enteral microbiota and future perspectives.. Anim Microbiome 2019 Nov 13;1(1):14.
    pmc: PMC7807895pubmed: 33499951doi: 10.1186/s42523-019-0013-3google scholar: lookup
  133. Vacca M, Celano G, Calabrese FM, Portincasa P, Gobbetti M, De Angelis M. The Controversial Role of Human Gut Lachnospiraceae.. Microorganisms 2020 Apr 15;8(4).
    doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8040573pmc: PMC7232163pubmed: 32326636google scholar: lookup
  134. Anderson CJ, Koester LR, Schmitz-Esser S. Rumen Epithelial Communities Share a Core Bacterial Microbiota: A Meta-Analysis of 16S rRNA Gene Illumina MiSeq Sequencing Datasets.. Front Microbiol 2021;12:625400.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.625400pmc: PMC8005654pubmed: 33790876google scholar: lookup
  135. Cotta M, Forster R. The family Lachnospiraceae, including the genera Butyrivibrio,Lachnospira and Roseburia.. 2006; p. 1002–21.
  136. Boutard M, Cerisy T, Nogue PY, Alberti A, Weissenbach J, Salanoubat M, Tolonen AC. Functional diversity of carbohydrate-active enzymes enabling a bacterium to ferment plant biomass.. PLoS Genet 2014 Nov;10(11):e1004773.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1004773pmc: PMC4230839pubmed: 25393313google scholar: lookup
  137. Roediger WE. Utilization of nutrients by isolated epithelial cells of the rat colon.. Gastroenterology 1982 Aug;83(2):424-9.
    doi: 10.1016/S0016-5085(82)80339-9pubmed: 7084619google scholar: lookup
  138. Ze X, Le Mougen F, Duncan SH, Louis P, Flint HJ. Some are more equal than others: the role of "keystone" species in the degradation of recalcitrant substrates.. Gut Microbes 2013 May-Jun;4(3):236-40.
    doi: 10.4161/gmic.23998pmc: PMC3669169pubmed: 23549436google scholar: lookup
  139. Flint HJ, Scott KP, Duncan SH, Louis P, Forano E. Microbial degradation of complex carbohydrates in the gut.. Gut Microbes 2012 Jul-Aug;3(4):289-306.
    doi: 10.4161/gmic.19897pmc: PMC3463488pubmed: 22572875google scholar: lookup
  140. Bule P, Alves VD, Israeli-Ruimy V, Carvalho AL, Ferreira LMA, Smith SP, Gilbert HJ, Najmudin S, Bayer EA, Fontes CMGA. Assembly of Ruminococcus flavefaciens cellulosome revealed by structures of two cohesin-dockerin complexes.. Sci Rep 2017 Apr 7;7(1):759.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-00919-wpmc: PMC5429695pubmed: 28389644google scholar: lookup
  141. Hastie PM, Mitchell K, Murray JA. Semi-quantitative analysis of Ruminococcus flavefaciens, Fibrobacter succinogenes and Streptococcus bovis in the equine large intestine using real-time polymerase chain reaction.. Br J Nutr 2008 Sep;100(3):561-8.
    doi: 10.1017/S0007114508968227pubmed: 18377691google scholar: lookup
  142. Bule P, Alves VD, Leitão A, Ferreira LM, Bayer EA, Smith SP, Gilbert HJ, Najmudin S, Fontes CM. Single Binding Mode Integration of Hemicellulose-degrading Enzymes via Adaptor Scaffoldins in Ruminococcus flavefaciens Cellulosome.. J Biol Chem 2016 Dec 23;291(52):26658-26669.
    doi: 10.1074/jbc.M116.761643pmc: PMC5207176pubmed: 27875311google scholar: lookup
  143. Liu Z, Liu H, Vera AM, Bernardi RC, Tinnefeld P, Nash MA. High force catch bond mechanism of bacterial adhesion in the human gut.. Nat Commun 2020 Aug 28;11(1):4321.
    doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-18063-xpmc: PMC7456326pubmed: 32859904google scholar: lookup
  144. Fujimori S. Humans have intestinal bacteria that degrade the plant cell walls in herbivores.. World J Gastroenterol 2021 Dec 7;27(45):7784-7791.
    doi: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i45.7784pmc: PMC8661373pubmed: 34963741google scholar: lookup
  145. Dehority BA. Effects of microbial synergism on fibre digestion in the rumen.. Proc Nutr Soc 1991 Aug;50(2):149-59.
    doi: 10.1079/PNS19910026pubmed: 1661009google scholar: lookup
  146. Schink B. Synergistic interactions in the microbial world.. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 2002 Aug;81(1-4):257-61.
    doi: 10.1023/A:1020579004534pubmed: 12448724google scholar: lookup
  147. Miura H, Horiguchi M, Ogimoto K, Matsumoto T. Nutritional interdependence among rumen bacteria during cellulose digestion in vitro.. Appl Environ Microbiol 1983 Feb;45(2):726-9.
    doi: 10.1128/aem.45.2.726-729.1983pmc: PMC242355pubmed: 16346223google scholar: lookup
  148. Wolin MJ, Miller TL, Stewart CS. Microbe-microbe interactions.. 1997. pp. 467–91.
  149. Paul SS, Deb SM, Punia BS, Singh D, Kumar R. Fibrolytic potential of anaerobic fungi (Piromyces sp.) isolated from wild cattle and blue bulls in pure culture and effect of their addition on in vitro fermentation of wheat straw and methane emission by rumen fluid of buffaloes.. J Sci Food Agric 2010 May;90(7):1218-26.
    doi: 10.1002/jsfa.3952pubmed: 20394004google scholar: lookup
  150. Paul SS, Kamra DN, Sastry VRB, Sahu NP, Agarwal N. Effect of administration of an anaerobic gut fungus isolated from wild blue bull (Boselaphus tragocamelus) to buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) on in vivo ruminal fermentation and digestion of nutrients.. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2004;115(1):143–157.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2004.01.010google scholar: lookup
  151. Arambel MJ, Wiedmeier RD, Walters JL. Influence of donor animal adaptation to added yeast culture and/or Aspergillus oryzae fermentation extract on in vitro rumen fermentation.. Nutr Rep Int 1987;35(3):433–437.
  152. Lee SS, Ha JK, Cheng KJ. Influence of an anaerobic fungal culture administration on in vivo ruminal fermentation and nutrient digestion.. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2000;88(3):201–217.
    doi: 10.1016/S0377-8401(00)00216-9google scholar: lookup
  153. Moya D, Ferret A, Blanch M, Fuentes MC, Fandiño JI, Calsamiglia S. Effects of live yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and type of cereal on rumen microbial fermentation in a dual flow continuous culture fermentation system.. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl) 2018 Dec;102(6):1488-1496.
    doi: 10.1111/jpn.12975pubmed: 30101541google scholar: lookup
  154. Elghandour MMY, Tan ZL, Abu Hafsa SH, Adegbeye MJ, Greiner R, Ugbogu EA, Cedillo Monroy J, Salem AZM. Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a probiotic feed additive to non and pseudo-ruminant feeding: a review.. J Appl Microbiol 2020 Mar;128(3):658-674.
    doi: 10.1111/jam.14416pubmed: 31429174google scholar: lookup
  155. Taran FMP, Gobesso A, Gonzaga IVF, Françoso R, Centini TN, Moreira CG. Effects of different amounts of Saccharomyces cerevisiae supplementation on apparent digestibility and faecal parameters in horses fed high-roughage and high-concentrate diets.. Livest Sci 2015;1:186.
  156. Jouany JP, Medina B, Bertin G, Julliand V. Effect of live yeast culture supplementation on hindgut microbial communities and their polysaccharidase and glycoside hydrolase activities in horses fed a high-fiber or high-starch diet.. J Anim Sci 2009 Sep;87(9):2844-52.
    doi: 10.2527/jas.2008-1602pubmed: 19465499google scholar: lookup
  157. Gobesso AAO, Pombo GV, Costa RL, Pereira YS, Feltre K. Effect of yeast supplementation on digestibility, fecal microbiota and serum endotoxin levels in non-exercising and exercising horses.. Livest Sci 2018;215:21–24.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2017.10.023google scholar: lookup
  158. Medina B, Girard ID, Jacotot E, Julliand V. Effect of a preparation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on microbial profiles and fermentation patterns in the large intestine of horses fed a high fiber or a high starch diet.. J Anim Sci 2002 Oct;80(10):2600-9.
    pubmed: 12413082doi: 10.2527/2002.80102600xgoogle scholar: lookup
  159. Murray JAMD, Brown S, O’Shaughnessy P, Monteiro A, Warren H, Hastie PM. Effect of live yeast culture supplementation on fibrolytic and saccharolytic bacterial populations in the feces of horses fed a high-fiber or high-starch diet.. J Equine Vet 2017;51:41–45.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2016.12.009google scholar: lookup
  160. St-Pierre B, Wright AD. Diversity of gut methanogens in herbivorous animals.. Animal 2013 Mar;7 Suppl 1:49-56.
    doi: 10.1017/S1751731112000912pubmed: 22717175google scholar: lookup
  161. Morvan B, Rieu-Lesme F, Fonty G, Gouet P. In vitro Interactions between rumen H2-producing cellulolytic microorganisms and H2-utilizing acetogenic and sulfate-reducing bacteria.. Anaerobe 1996;2(3):175–180.
    doi: 10.1006/anae.1996.0023google scholar: lookup
  162. Murru F, Fliegerova K, Mura E, Mrázek J, Kopečný J, Moniello G. A comparison of methanogens of different regions of the equine hindgut.. Anaerobe 2018 Dec;54:104-110.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2018.08.009pubmed: 30142409google scholar: lookup
  163. Evans PN, Boyd JA, Leu AO, Woodcroft BJ, Parks DH, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. An evolving view of methane metabolism in the Archaea.. Nat Rev Microbiol 2019 Apr;17(4):219-232.
    doi: 10.1038/s41579-018-0136-7pubmed: 30664670google scholar: lookup
  164. Jensen BB. Methanogenesis in monogastric animals.. Environ Monit Assess 1996 Sep;42(1-2):99-112.
    doi: 10.1007/BF00394044pubmed: 24193495google scholar: lookup
  165. Li Y, Meng Z, Xu Y, Shi Q, Ma Y, Aung M, Cheng Y, Zhu W. Interactions between Anaerobic Fungi and Methanogens in the Rumen and Their Biotechnological Potential in Biogas Production from Lignocellulosic Materials.. Microorganisms 2021 Jan 17;9(1).
    doi: 10.3390/microorganisms9010190pmc: PMC7830786pubmed: 33477342google scholar: lookup
  166. Brown JL, Swift CL, Mondo SJ, Seppala S, Salamov A, Singan V, Henrissat B, Drula E, Henske JK, Lee S, LaButti K, He G, Yan M, Barry K, Grigoriev IV, O'Malley MA. Co‑cultivation of the anaerobic fungus Caecomyces churrovis with Methanobacterium bryantii enhances transcription of carbohydrate binding modules, dockerins, and pyruvate formate lyases on specific substrates.. Biotechnol Biofuels 2021 Dec 10;14(1):234.
    doi: 10.1186/s13068-021-02083-wpmc: PMC8665504pubmed: 34893091google scholar: lookup
  167. Moore LD, Le T, Fan G. DNA methylation and its basic function.. Neuropsychopharmacology 2013 Jan;38(1):23-38.
    doi: 10.1038/npp.2012.112pmc: PMC3521964pubmed: 22781841google scholar: lookup
  168. Várnai A, Mäkelä MR, Djajadi DT, Rahikainen J, Hatakka A, Viikari L. Carbohydrate-binding modules of fungal cellulases: occurrence in nature, function, and relevance in industrial biomass conversion.. Adv Appl Microbiol 2014;88:103-65.
    pubmed: 24767427doi: 10.1016/b978-0-12-800260-5.00004-8google scholar: lookup
  169. Ståhlberg J, Johansson G, Pettersson G. A new model for enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose based on the two-domain structure of cellobiohydrolase I.. Bio/Technology 1991;9(3):286–290.
  170. Tomme P, Van Tilbeurgh H, Pettersson G, Van Damme J, Vandekerckhove J, Knowles J, Teeri T, Claeyssens M. Studies of the cellulolytic system of Trichoderma reesei QM 9414. Analysis of domain function in two cellobiohydrolases by limited proteolysis.. Eur J Biochem 1988 Jan 4;170(3):575-81.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1988.tb13736.xpubmed: 3338453google scholar: lookup
  171. Van Tilbeurgh H, Tomme P, Claeyssens M, Bhikhabhai R, Pettersson G. Limited proteolysis of the cellobiohydrolase I from Trichoderma reesei: separation of functional domains.. FEBS Lett 1986;204(2):223–227.
    doi: 10.1016/0014-5793(86)80816-Xgoogle scholar: lookup
  172. Reinikainen T, Ruohonen L, Nevanen T, Laaksonen L, Kraulis P, Jones TA, Knowles JK, Teeri TT. Investigation of the function of mutated cellulose-binding domains of Trichoderma reesei cellobiohydrolase I.. Proteins 1992 Dec;14(4):475-82.
    doi: 10.1002/prot.340140408pubmed: 1438185google scholar: lookup
  173. Limón MC, Margolles-Clark E, Benítez T, Penttilä M. Addition of substrate-binding domains increases substrate-binding capacity and specific activity of a chitinase from Trichoderma harzianum.. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2001 Apr 20;198(1):57-63.
    doi: 10.1016/S0378-1097(01)00124-0pubmed: 11325554google scholar: lookup
  174. Dougal K, de la Fuente G, Harris PA, Girdwood SE, Pinloche E, Newbold CJ. Identification of a core bacterial community within the large intestine of the horse.. PLoS One 2013;8(10):e77660.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077660pmc: PMC3812009pubmed: 24204908google scholar: lookup
  175. Edwards JE, Hermes GDA, Kittelmann S, Nijsse B, Smidt H. Assessment of the Accuracy of High-Throughput Sequencing of the ITS1 Region of Neocallimastigomycota for Community Composition Analysis.. Front Microbiol 2019;10:2370.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02370pmc: PMC6813465pubmed: 31681229google scholar: lookup
  176. Peng X, Wilken SE, Lankiewicz TS, Gilmore SP, Brown JL, Henske JK, Swift CL, Salamov A, Barry K, Grigoriev IV, Theodorou MK, Valentine DL, O'Malley MA. Genomic and functional analyses of fungal and bacterial consortia that enable lignocellulose breakdown in goat gut microbiomes.. Nat Microbiol 2021 Apr;6(4):499-511.
    doi: 10.1038/s41564-020-00861-0pmc: PMC8007473pubmed: 33526884google scholar: lookup
  177. Navarro D, Chaduli D, Taussac S, Lesage-Meessen L, Grisel S, Haon M, Callac P, Courtecuisse R, Decock C, Dupont J, Richard-Forget F, Fournier J, Guinberteau J, Lechat C, Moreau PA, Pinson-Gadais L, Rivoire B, Sage L, Welti S, Rosso MN, Berrin JG, Bissaro B, Favel A. Large-scale phenotyping of 1,000 fungal strains for the degradation of non-natural, industrial compounds.. Commun Biol 2021 Jul 15;4(1):871.
    doi: 10.1038/s42003-021-02401-wpmc: PMC8282864pubmed: 34267314google scholar: lookup
  178. Comtet-Marre S, Chaucheyras-Durand F, Bouzid O, Mosoni P, Bayat AR, Peyret P, Forano E. FibroChip, a Functional DNA Microarray to Monitor Cellulolytic and Hemicellulolytic Activities of Rumen Microbiota.. Front Microbiol 2018;9:215.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00215pmc: PMC5816793pubmed: 29487591google scholar: lookup
  179. Rhoads A, Au KF. PacBio Sequencing and Its Applications.. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics 2015 Oct;13(5):278-89.
    doi: 10.1016/j.gpb.2015.08.002pmc: PMC4678779pubmed: 26542840google scholar: lookup
  180. Kono N, Arakawa K. Nanopore sequencing: Review of potential applications in functional genomics.. Dev Growth Differ 2019 Jun;61(5):316-326.
    doi: 10.1111/dgd.12608pubmed: 31037722google scholar: lookup
  181. Wang Y, Zhao Y, Bollas A, Wang Y, Au KF. Nanopore sequencing technology, bioinformatics and applications.. Nat Biotechnol 2021 Nov;39(11):1348-1365.
    doi: 10.1038/s41587-021-01108-xpmc: PMC8988251pubmed: 34750572google scholar: lookup
  182. Loit K, Adamson K, Bahram M, Puusepp R, Anslan S, Kiiker R, Drenkhan R, Tedersoo L. Relative Performance of MinION (Oxford Nanopore Technologies) versus Sequel (Pacific Biosciences) Third-Generation Sequencing Instruments in Identification of Agricultural and Forest Fungal Pathogens.. Appl Environ Microbiol 2019 Nov 1;85(21).
    doi: 10.1128/AEM.01368-19pmc: PMC6803294pubmed: 31444199google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,109 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.