Patent Grant
11910808
The present disclosure relates to isolated and biologically pure microorganisms that have applications, inter alia, in dairy production. The disclosed microorganisms can be utilized in their isolated and biologically pure states, as well as being formulated into compositions. Furthermore, the disclosure provides microbial consortia, containing at least two members of the disclosed microorganisms, as well as methods of utilizing said consortia. Furthermore, the disclosure provides for methods of modulating the rumen microbiome.
The sequence listing associated with this application is provided in text format in lieu of a paper copy, and is hereby incorporated by reference into the specification. The name of the text file containing the sequence listing is ASBI_002_07US_ST25.txt. The text file is 914,780 bytes, was created on Dec. 3, 2018, and is being submitted electronically via EFS-Web.
The global population is predicted to increase to over 9 billion people by the year 2050 with a concurrent reduction in the quantity of land, water, and other natural resources available per capita. Projections indicate that the average domestic income will also increase, with the projected rise in the GDP of China and India. The desire for a diet richer in animal-source proteins rises in tandem with increasing income, thus the global livestock sector will be charged with the challenge of producing more milk using fewer resources. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations predict that 70% more food will have to be produced, yet the area of arable land available will decrease. It is clear that the food output per unit of resource input will have to increase considerably in order to support the rise in population.
Milk and milk components from lactating ruminants are predominantly utilized in the preparation of foodstuffs in many different forms. Nevertheless, milk and milk components find numerous alternative applications in non-food areas such as the manufacture of glues, textile fibers, plastic materials, or in the production of ethanol or methane. There have been many strategies to improve milk production and content in ruminants through nutritional modulations, hormone treatments, changes in animal management, and selective breeding; however, the need for more efficient production of milk and milk components per animal is required.
Identifying compositions and methods for sustainably increasing milk production and modulating milk components of interest while balancing animal health and wellbeing have become imperative to satisfy the needs of every day humans in an expanding population. Increasing the worldwide production of milk and further modulating desirable milk components by scaling up the total number of livestock on dairy farms would not only be economically infeasible for many parts of the world, but would further result in negative environmental consequences.
Thus, meeting global milk and milk component yield expectations, by simply scaling up current high-input agricultural systems—utilized in most of the developed world—is simply not feasible.
There is therefore an urgent need in the art for improved methods of increasing milk production and further increasing yield of desirable milk components.
In some aspects, the present disclosure provides isolated microbes, including novel strains of microbes, presented in Table 1 and/or Table 3.
In other aspects, the present disclosure provides isolated whole microbial cultures of the microbes identified in Table 1 and Table 3. These cultures may comprise microbes at various concentrations.
In some aspects, the disclosure provides for utilizing one or more microbes selected from Table 1 and/or Table 3 to increase a phenotypic trait of interest in a ruminant. Furthermore, the disclosure provides for methods of modulating the rumen microbiome by utilizing one or more microbes selected from Table 1 and/or Table 3.
In some embodiments, a microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains selected from Table 1 and/or Table 3. In some embodiments, a microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain selected from Table 1 and/or Table 3. In a further embodiment, a microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains, wherein each microbe comprise a 16S rRNA sequence encoded by a sequence selected from SEQ ID NOs:1-30 and 2045-2103 or an ITS sequence selected from SEQ ID NOs:31-60 and 2104-2107. In an additional embodiment, a microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain, wherein each microbe comprise a 16S rRNA sequence encoded by a sequence selected from SEQ ID NOs:1-30 and 2045-2103, or an ITS sequence selected from SEQ ID NOs:31-60 and 2104-2107.
In some embodiments, the microbial consortia of the present disclosure comprise at least two microbial strains, wherein each microbe comprises a 16S rRNA sequence encoded by a sequence selected from SEQ ID NOs:1-30, SEQ ID NOs:61-1988, or SEQ ID NOs:2045-2103; or an ITS sequences selected from SEQ ID NOs:31-60, SEQ ID NOs:1989-2044, or SEQ ID NOs:2104-2107.
In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_1801, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_1801, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_268, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_268, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_232, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_232, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_24. In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_249. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_249. In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_353. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_353. In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_23. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_7, Ascusb_32, Ascusf_45, and Ascusf_23. In one embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least two microbial strains comprising Ascusb_3138 and Ascusf_15. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium comprises at least one microbial strain comprising Ascusb_3138 and Ascusf_15. In one embodiment, the at least one microbial strain comprises Ascusb_3138. In another embodiment, the at least one microbial strain comprises Ascusf_15.
In one embodiment, a composition comprises a microbial consortium of the present disclosure and an acceptable carrier. In a further embodiment, a composition comprises a microbial consortium of the present disclosure and acceptable carrier. In a further embodiment, the microbial consortium is encapsulated. In a further embodiment, the encapsulated microbial consortium comprises a polymer. In a further embodiment, the polymer may be selected from a saccharide polymer, agar polymer, agarose polymer, protein polymer, sugar polymer, and lipid polymer.
In some embodiments, the acceptable carrier is selected from the group consisting of edible feed grade material, mineral mixture, water, glycol, molasses, and corn oil. In some embodiments, the at least two microbial strains forming the microbial consortium are present in the composition at 102 to 1015 cells per gram of said composition.
In some embodiments, the composition may be mixed with livestock feed.
In some embodiments, a method of imparting at least one improved trait upon an animal comprises administering the composition to the animal. In further embodiments, the animal is a ruminant, which may further be a cow.
In some embodiments, the composition is administered at least once per day. In a further embodiment, the composition is administered at least once per month. In a further embodiment, the composition is administered at least once per week. In a further embodiment, the composition is administered at least once per hour.
In some embodiments, the administration comprises injection of the composition into the rumen. In some embodiments, the composition is administered anally. In further embodiments, anal administration comprises inserting a suppository into the rectum. In some embodiments, the composition is administered orally. In some aspects, the oral administration comprises administering the composition in combination with the animal's feed, water, medicine, or vaccination. In some aspects, the oral administration comprises applying the composition in a gel or viscous solution to a body part of the animal, wherein the animal ingests the composition by licking. In some embodiments, the administration comprises spraying the composition onto the animal, and wherein the animal ingests the composition. In some embodiments, the administration occurs each time the animal is fed. In some embodiments, the oral administration comprises administering the composition in combination with the animal feed.
In some embodiments, the at least one improved trait is selected from the group consisting of: an increase of fat in milk, an increase of carbohydrates in milk, an increase of protein in milk, an increase of vitamins in milk, an increase of minerals in milk, an increase in milk volume, an improved efficiency in feed utilization and digestibility, an increase in polysaccharide and lignin degradation, an increase in fatty acid concentration in the rumen, pH balance in the rumen, a reduction in methane emissions, a reduction in manure production, improved dry matter intake, an increase in energy corrected milk (ECM) by weight and/or volume, an improved efficiency of nitrogen utilization, and any combination thereof; wherein said increase or reduction is determined by comparing against an animal not having been administered said composition.
In some embodiments, the increase in fat in milk is an increase in triglycerides, triacylglycerides, diacylglycerides, monoacylglycerides, phospholipids, cholesterol, glycolipids, and/or fatty acids. In some embodiments, an increase of carbohydrates is an increase in oligosaccharides, lactose, glucose, and/or glucose. In some embodiments, an increase in polysaccharide degradation is an increase in the degradation of cellulose, lignin, and/or hemicellulose. In some embodiments, an increase in fatty acid concentration is an increase in acetic acid, propionic acid, and/or butyric acid.
In some embodiments, the at least two microbial strains or the at least one microbial strain present in a composition, or consortia, of the disclosure exhibit an increased utility that is not exhibited when said strains occur alone or when said strains are present at a naturally occurring concentration. In some embodiments, compositions of the disclosure, comprising at least two microbial strains as taught herein, exhibit a synergistic effect on imparting at least one improved trait in an animal. In some embodiments, the compositions of the disclosure—comprising one or more isolated microbes as taught herein—exhibit markedly different characteristics/properties compared to their closest naturally occurring counterpart. That is, the compositions of the disclosure exhibit markedly different functional and/or structural characteristics/properties, as compared to their closest naturally occurring counterpart. For instance, the microbes of the disclosure are structurally different from a microbe as it naturally exists in a rumen, for at least the following reasons: said microbe can be isolated and purified, such that it is not found in the milieu of the rumen, said microbe can be present at concentrations that do not occur in the rumen, said microbe can be associated with acceptable carriers that do not occur in the rumen, said microbe can be formulated to be shelf-stable and exist outside the rumen environment, and said microbe can be combined with other microbes at concentrations that do not exist in the rumen. Further, the microbes of the disclosure are functionally different from a microbe as it naturally exists in a rumen, for at least the following reasons: said microbe when applied in an isolated and purified form can lead to modulation of the rumen microbiome, increased milk production, and/or improved milk compositional characteristics, said microbe can be formulated to be shelf-stable and able to exist outside the rumen environment, such that the microbe now has a new utility as a supplement capable of administration to a ruminant, wherein the microbe could not have such a utility in it's natural state in the rumen, as the microbe would be unable to survive outside the rumen without the intervention of the hand of man to formulate the microbe into a shelf-stable state and impart this new utility that has the aforementioned functional characteristics not possessed by the microbe in it's natural state of existence in the rumen.
In one embodiment, the disclosure provides for a ruminant feed supplement capable of increasing a desirable phenotypic trait in a ruminant. In a particular embodiment, the ruminant feed supplement comprises: a microbial consortium of the present disclosure at a concentration that does not occur naturally, and an acceptable carrier. In one aspect, the microbial consortium is encapsulated.
In one embodiment, an isolated microbial strain is selected from any one of the microbial strains in Table 1 and/or Table 3. In one embodiment, an isolated microbial strain is selected from the group consisting of: Ascusb_7 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612011; Ascusb_32 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612007; Ascusb_82 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612012; Ascusb_119 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612009; Ascusb_1801 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612009; Ascusf_206 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612003; Ascusf_23 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612014; Ascusf_24 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612004; Ascusf_45 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612002; Ascusf_208 deposited as Bigelow Accession Deposit No. Patent 201612003; Ascusb_3138 deposited as NRRL Accession Deposit No. B-67248; and Ascusf_15 deposited as NRRL Accession Deposit No. Y-67249.
In one embodiment, an isolated microbial strain of the present disclosure comprises a polynucleotide sequence sharing at least 90% sequence identity with any one of SEQ ID NOs:1-2107. In another embodiment, an isolated microbial strain of the present disclosure comprises a polynucleotide sequence sharing at least 90% sequence identity with any one of SEQ ID NOs:1-60 and 2045-2107.
In one embodiment, a substantially pure culture of an isolated microbial strain may comprise any one of the strains or microbes of the present disclosure.
In one embodiment, a method of modulating the microbiome of a ruminant comprises administering a composition of the present disclosure. In a further embodiment, the administration of the composition imparts at least one improved train upon the ruminant. In one embodiment, the at least one improved trait is selected from the group consisting of: an increase of fat in milk, an increase of carbohydrates in milk, an increase of protein in milk, an increase of vitamins in milk, an increase of minerals in milk, an increase in milk volume, an improved efficiency in feed utilization and digestibility, an increase in polysaccharide and lignin degradation, an increase in fatty acid concentration in the rumen, pH balance in the rumen, a reduction in methane emissions, a reduction in manure production, improved dry matter intake, an increase in energy corrected milk (ECM) by weight and/or volume, and an improved efficiency of nitrogen utilization; wherein said increase or reduction is determined by comparing against an animal not having been administered said composition. In an additional embodiment, the modulation of the microbiome is a decrease in the proportion of the microbial strains present in the microbiome prior to the administration of the composition, wherein the decrease is measured relative to the microbiome of the ruminant prior to the administration of the composition.
In one embodiment, the method of increasing fat in milk is an increase in triglycerides, triacylglycerides, diacylglycerides, monoacylglycerides, phospholipids, cholesterol, glycolipids, and/or fatty acids.
In one embodiment, the method of increasing carbohydrates is an increase in oligosaccharides, lactose, glucose, and/or galactose.
In one embodiment, the method of increasing polysaccharide degradation is an increase in the degradation of lignin, cellulose, pectin and/or hemicellulose.
In one embodiment, the method of increasing fatty acid concentration is an increase in acetic acid, propionic acid, and/or butyric acid.
In one embodiment, the method of modulation of the microbiome is an increase in the proportion of the at least one microbial strain of the microbiome, wherein the increase is measured relative to a ruminant that did not have the at least one microbial strain administered.
In one embodiment, the method of modulation of the microbiome is a decrease in the proportion of the microbial strains present in the microbiome prior to the administration of the composition, wherein the decrease is measured relative to the microbiome of the ruminant prior to the administration of the composition.
In one embodiment, a method of increasing resistance of cows to the colonization of pathogenic microbes comprises administering a composition of the present disclosure, resulting in the pathogenic microbes being unable to colonize the gastrointestinal tract of a cow. In another embodiment, a method for treating cows for the presence of at least one pathogenic microbe comprises the administration of a microbial consortium of the present disclosure and an acceptable carrier. In a further embodiment, the administration of the microbial consortium or microbial composition results in the relative abundance of the at least one pathogenic microbe to decrease to less than 5% relative abundance in the gastrointestinal tract. In another embodiment, the administration of the microbial consortium or microbial composition results in the relative abundance of the at least one pathogenic microbe to decrease to less than 1% relative abundance in the gastrointestinal tract. In another embodiment, the administration of the microbial consortium or microbial composition results in the pathogenic microbe being undetectable in the gastrointestinal tract.
In one embodiment, the microbial compositions and/or consortium comprise bacteria and/or fungi in spore form. In one embodiment, the microbial compositions and/or consortium of the disclosure comprise bacteria and/or fungi in whole cell form. In one embodiment, the microbial compositions and/or consortium of the disclosure comprise bacteria and/or fungi in lysed cell form. In some aspects of formulating microbes according to the disclosure, the microbes are: fermented→filtered→centrifuged→lyophilized or spray dried→and optionally coated (i.e. a “fluidized bed step”).
Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purpose of Patent Procedures
Some microorganisms described in this Application were deposited on Apr. 25, 20161, with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Culture Collection (NRRL®), located at 1815 N. University St., Peoria, IL 61604, USA. Some microorganisms described in this application were deposited with the Bigelow National Center for Marine Algae and Microbiota, located at 60 Bigelow Drive, East Boothbay, Maine 04544, USA. 1 ASC-01 (NRRL B-67248) and ASC-02 (NRRL Y-67249) were deposited on this date
The deposits were made under the terms of the Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent Procedure. The NRRL® and/or Bigelow National Center for Marine Algae and Microbiota accession numbers for the aforementioned Budapest Treaty deposits are provided in Table 3. The accession numbers and corresponding dates of deposit for the microorganisms described in this Application are separately provided in Table 25.
The strains designated in the below tables have been deposited in the labs of Ascus Biosciences, Inc. since at least Dec. 15, 2015.
In Table 1, the closest predicted hits for taxonomy of the microbes are listed in columns 2, and 5. Column 2 is the top taxonomic hit predicted by BLAST, and column 5 is the top taxonomic hit for genus+species predicted by BLAST. The strains designated in the below table have been deposited in the labs of Ascus Biosciences, Inc. since at least Dec. 15, 2015.
Ruminococcus
bromii
Ruminococcus
bromii
Intestinimonas
butyriciproducens
Pseudobutyrivibrio
ruminis
Roseburia
bacterium
inulinivorans
Eubacterium
Eubacterium
ventriosum
ventriosum
Faecalibacterium
prausnitzii
Saccharofermentans
Saccharofermentans
acetigenes
Clostridium sp.
Ruminococcus
flavefaciens
Clostridium
saccharolyticum
Clostridium
lentocellum
Ruminococcus
bacterium
flavefaciens
Faecalibacterium
Faecalibacterium
prausnitzii
Saccharofermentans
acetigenes
Blautia luti
Clostridium
lentocellum
Coprococcus catus
Anaeroplasma
Anaeroplasma
varium
varium
Clostridium
stercorarium
Aminiphilus
circumscriptus
Aminiphilus
circumscriptus
Bacteroides sp.
Alistipes shahii
Alistipes shahii
Alistipes shahii
Oscillibacter
valericigenes
Odoribacter
splanchnicus
Tannerella forsythia
Hydrogenoanaero-
bacterium
saccharovorans
Clostridium
Clostridium
butyricum
butyricum
Faecalibacterium
prausnitzii
Roseburia
Roseburia
intestinalis
intestinalis
Succinivibrio
Succinivibrio
dextrinosolvens
dextrinosolvens
Prevotella
ruminicola
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Ruminobacter sp.
Ruminobacter
amylophilus
Blautia producta
Blautia producta
Succinivibrio
Succinivibrio
dextrinosolvens
dextrinosolvens
Butyrivibrio
Butyrivibrio
fibrisolvens
fibrisolvens
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Prevotella albensis
Roseburia
inulinivorans
Ruminococcus
Ruminococcus
gnavus
gnavus
Ruminobacter sp.
Ruminobacter
amylophilus
Butyrivibrio sp.
Butyrivibrio
hungatei
Eubacterium
Eubacterium
oxidoreducens
oxidoreducens
Prevotella brevis
Prevotella sp.
Prevotella copri
Eubacterium
Eubacterium
ruminantium
ruminantium
xylanovorans
Lachnospira
Lachnospira
pectinoschiza
pectinoschiza
Butyrivibrio
Butyrivibrio
fibrisolvens
fibrisolvens
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Pseudobutyrivibrio
ruminis
Sinimarinibacterium
Sinimarinibacterium
flocculans
flocculans
Butyrivibrio
fibrisolvens
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Pseudobutyrivibrio
ruminis
ruminis
Anaerolinea
thermophila
Eubacterium rectale
Propionibacterium
Propionibacterium
acnes
acnes
Pseudobutyrivibrio
ruminis
Olsenella profusa
Streptococcus
Streptococcus
dentirousetti
dentirousetti
Butyrivibrio sp.
Butyrivibrio
proteoclasticus
Butyrivibrio
hungatei
Eubacterium
oxidoreducens
Ruminococcus
bromii
Clostridium
algidixylanolyticum
Eubacterium
ruminantium
Catenisphaera
Catenisphaera
adipataccumulans
adipataccumulans
Solobacterium
moorei
Eubacterium
Eubacterium
ruminantium
ruminantium
Butyrivibrio
Butyrivibrio
proteoclasticus
proteoclasticus
Ralstonia sp. 94
Ralsonia insidiosa
Butyrivibrio sp.
Butyrivibrio
proteoclasticus
Casaltella
massiliensis
Eubacterium
xylanophilum
Acholeplasma
Acholeplasma
brassicae
brassicae
Mitsuokella
Mitsuokella
jalaludinii
jalaludinii
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Butyrivibrio sp.
Butyrivibrio
fibrisolvens
Succinivibrio
Succinivibrio
dextrinosolvens
dextrinosolvens
Ruminobacter sp.
Ruminobacter
amylophilus
Sharpea azabuensis
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Prevotella sp. DJF
Prevotella
ruminicola
Prevotella
ruminicola
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Prevotella
Prevotella
ruminicola
ruminicola
Piromyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Pichia kudriavzevii
Pichia kudriavzevii
Orpinomyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Neocallimastix
Neocallimastix
frontalis
frontalis
Orpinomyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Candida apicola
Candida apicola
Candida
Candida
akabanensis
akabanensis
Neocallimastix sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Orpinomyces sp.
Orpinomyces
joyonii
Neocallimastix
Neocallimastix
frontalis
frontalis
Neocallimastix sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Neocallimastix
Neocallimastix
frontalis
frontalis
Sugiyamaella
lignohabitans
Caecomyces sp.
Cyllamyces
aberensis
Orpinomyces sp.
Orpinomyces
joyonii
Caecomyces sp.
Caecomyces
communis
Caecomyces sp.
Caecomyces
communis
Cyllamyces sp.
Cyllamyces
aberensis
Piromyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Caecomyces sp.
Cyllamyces
aberensis
Neocallimastix sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Piromyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Neocallimastix sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Candida ethanolica
Candida ethanolica
Piromyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Neocallimastix sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Piromyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Tremella giraffa
capitalensis (Genus +
Neocallimastix
Neocallimastix
frontalis
frontalis
Neocallimastix
Neocallimastix
frontalis
frontalis
Orpinomyces
joyonii
Piromyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Piromyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Piromyces sp.
Neocallimastix
frontalis
Clostridium IV
Streptococcus
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium IV
Clostridium_XIVa
Roseburia (Genus)
Roseburia (Genus)
Hydrogenoanaero-
Clostridium_IV
bacterium
Clostridium XIVa
Clostridium_XICa
Saccharofermentans
Saccharofermentans
Butyricicoccus
Solobacterium
Papillibacter
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Hydrogenoanaero-
Ralstonia (Genus)
bacterium
Pelotomaculum
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Eubacterium
Lachnobacterium
Butyricicoccus
Acholeplasma
Selenomonas
Anaeroplasma (Genus)
Prevotella (Genus)
Clostridium sensu
Clostridium_XIVa
Butyricicoccus
Succinivibrio
Butyricicoccus
Ruminobacter
Rikenella (Genus)
Sharpea (Genus)
Tannerella (Genus)
Prevotella (Genus)
Howardella (Genus)
Prevotella (Genus)
Prevotella (Genus)
Prevotella (Genus)
Butyricimonas
Prevotella (Genus)
Clostridium sensu
Prevotella (Genus)
Clostridium sensu
Piromyces (Genus)
Saccharofermentans
Candida xylopsoc
Orpinomyces
Succinivibrio
Orpinomycs
Prevotella (Genus)
Orpinomyces
Prevotella (Genus)
Candida apicol
Prevotella (Genus)
Candida rugosa
Ruminobacter (Genus)
Neocallimastix
Syntrophococcus
Orpinomyces
Succinivibrio
Orpinomyces
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Neocallimastix
Prevotella (Genus)
Neocallimastix
Prevotella (Genus)
Ascomycota
Prevotella (Genus)
Piromyces (Genus)
Prevotella (Genus)
Orpinomyces
Cyllamyces
Syntrophococcus
Piromyces (Genus)
Ruminobacter (Genus)
Cyllamyces
Butyrivibrio (Genus)
Piromyces (Genus)
Clostridium_XIVa
Piromyces (Genus)
Prevotella (Genus)
Neocallimastix
Prevotella (Genus)
Piromyces (Genus)
Neocallimastix
Roseburia (Genus)
Piromyces (Genus)
Butyrivibrio (Genus)
Orpinomyces
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Piromyces (Genus)
Turicibacter (Genus)
Phyllosticta
capitalensis
Orpinomyces
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Orpinomyces
Anaerolinea (Genus)
Orpinomyces
Roseburia (Genus)
Piromyces (Genus)
Propionibacterium
Piromyces (Genus)
Clostridium_XIVa
Piromyces (Genus)
Olsenella (Genus)
Corynebacterium
Prevotella
Comamonas
Clostridium_XIVa
Hippea
Anaerovorax
Clostridium_XIVa
Rummeliibacillus
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Anaerovorax
Pseudoflavonifractor
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Coprococcus
Pyramidobacter
Syntrophococcus
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Roseburia
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Acidothermus
Adlercreutzia
Prevotella
Proteiniclasticum
Anaerovorax
Prevotella
Bacteroides
Clostridium_III
Prevotella
Acinetobacter
Erysipelothrix
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Butyrivibrio
Eubacterium
Prevotella
Eubacterium
Prevotella
Coprococcus
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Catonella
Methanobrevibacter
Ruminococcus
Coprococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Anaerovorax
Asteroleplasma
Clostridium_XIVa
Caulobacter
Roseburia
Clostridium_XIVa
Acinetobacter
Bacteroides
Erysipelothrix
Coprococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Bacteroides
Coprococcus
Anaerovorax
Pseudoflavonifractor
Pseudoflavonifractor
Prevotella
Roseburia
Prevotella
Coprococcus
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Catonella
Methanobrevibacter
Ruminococcus
Coprococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Anaerovorax
Asteroleplasma
Clostridium_XIVa
Caulobacter
Roseburia
Clostridium_XIVa
Acinetobacter
Bacteroides
Erysipelothrix
Coprococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Bacteroides
Coprococcus
Anaerovorax
Pseudoflavonifractor
Pseudoflavonifractor
Prevotella
Roseburia
Prevotella
Ruminococcus
Atopobium
Eubacterium
Robinsoniella
Neisseria
Ruminococcus
Prevotella
Slackia
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Bacteroides
Anaerorhabdus
Bacteroides
Prevotella
Corynebacterium
Atopobium
Streptophyta
Prevotella
Roseburia
Prevotella
Prevotella
Eubacterium
Rhodocista
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Prevotella
Streptophyta
Ochrobactrum
Mogibacterium
Adlercreutzia
Prevotella
Riemerella
Prevotella
Roseburia
Slackia
Clostridium_IV
Syntrophococcus
Prevotella
Treponema
Prevotella
Anaerovorax
Prevotella
Methanobrevibacter
Corynebacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Alkaliphilus
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Eubacterium
Bacteroides
Roseburia
Lentisphaera
Eubacterium
Roseburia
Clostridium_IV
Hahella
Butyricicoccus
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Desulfovibrio
Sphingobacterium
Roseburia
Bacteroides
Ruminococcus
Prevotella
Asteroleplasma
Syntrophococcus
Victivallis
Lachnobacterium
Clostridium_IV
Anaerorhabdus
Altererythrobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Proteiniclasticum
Bifidobacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Desulfovibrio
Clostridium_XIVa
Nitrobacter
Enterorhabdus
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Oscillibacter
Nautilia
Corynebacterium
Ruminococcus
Coprococcus
Eubacterium
Rikenella
Clostridium_XIVa
Paenibacillus
Ruminococcus
Prevotella
Haematobacter
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Enterorhabdus
Blautia
Sporobacter
Oscillibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Atopobium
Sporobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Oscillibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Mogibacterium
Roseburia
Pelotomaculum
Pelotomaculum
Clostridium_XIVa
Robinsoniella
Coprococcus
Wautersiella
Planctomyces
Treponema
Coprococcus
Paracoccus
Ruminococcus
Atopobium
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Dethiosulfovibrio
Clostridium_XI
Clostridium_IV
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Roseburia
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Victivallis
Clostridium_IV
Pelotomaculum
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Coprococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVb
Papillibacter
Bartonella
Clostridium_IV
Eubacterium
Asaccharobacter
Clostridium_IV
Blautia
Prevotella
Ruminococcus
Selenomonas
Treponema
Adlercreutzia
Butyricicoccus
Pseudoflavonifractor
Corynebacterium
Adlercreutzia
Selenomonas
Coraliomargarita
Paraprevotella
Oscillibacter
Anaerovorax
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Erysipelothrix
Agaricicola
Denitrobacterium
Asaccharobacter
Anaeroplasma
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Streptococcus
Cellulosilyticum
Asaccharobacter
Enterorhabdus
Treponema
Roseburia
Victivallis
Prevotella
Roseburia
Ruminococcus
Mogibacterium
Prevotella
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Victivallis
Treponema
Stenotrophomonas
Clostridium_XIVa
Sphingobium
Oscillibacter
Methylobacterium
Zhangella
Oscillibacter
Clostridium_III
Coraliomargarita
Eubacterium
Enterorhabdus
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Victivallis
Coprococcus
Pseudoflavonifractor
Anaeroplasma
Anaeroplasma
Bacteroides
Acinetobacter
Victivallis
Victivallis
Mogibacterium
Oscillibacter
Butyricimonas
Dethiosulfovibrio
Pseudoflavonifractor
Clostridium_IV
Anaeroplasma
Oscillibacter
Herbiconiux
Eubacterium
Selenomonas
Clostridium_IV
Mogibacterium
Clostridium_IV
Roseburia
Anaerovibrio
Clostridium_III
Saccharofermentans
Saccharofermentans
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Robinsoniella
Brevundimonas
Anaerotruncus
Victivallis
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVb
Prevotella
Ruminococcus
Pelobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVb
Coprococcus
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Coprococcus
Victivallis
Clostridium_III
Anaerovibrio
Anaerovorax
Proteiniclasticum
Anaerovorax
Selenomonas
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Acetanaerobacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Asaccharobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Prevotella
Anaeroplasma
Spirochaeta
Alkaliphilus
Paraprevotella
Hippea
Prevotella
Prevotella
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Paraeggerthella
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_XIVa
Adhaeribacter
Syntrophococcus
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Coraliomargarita
Sharpea
Clostridium_IV
Anaerovorax
Blautia
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Anaerovorax
Coraliomargarita
Aquiflexum
Pedobacter
Robinsoniella
Pelomonas
Saccharofermentans
Paracoccus
Enterorhabdus
Beijerinckia
Sporobacter
Clostridium_IV
Bacillus
Saccharofermentans
Spirochaeta
Prevotella
Eubacterium
Herbiconiux
Brevundimonas
Mogibacterium
Anaerorhabdus
Victivallis
Prevotella
Anaerovorax
Aquiflexum
Oscillibacter
Altererythrobacter
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_XIVb
Saccharofermentans
Roseburia
Anaeroplasma
Planctomyces
Ruminococcus
Selenomonas
Anaeroplasma
Anaerovorax
Rummeliibacillus
Clostridium_XIVa
Anaeroplasma
Butyrivibrio
Anaerotruncus
Syntrophococcus
Paraeggerthella
Papillibacter
Prevotella
Papillibacter
Streptococcus
Methanobrevibacter
Prevotella
Prevotella
Prevotella
Coraliomargarita
Prevotella
Thermotalea
Clostridium_XIVa
Atopobium
Prevotella
Mogibacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Eggerthella
Blautia
Vampirovibrio
Papillibacter
Beijerinckia
Bacteroides
Desulfotomaculum
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Cryptanaerobacter
Prevotella
Syntrophomonas
Erysipelothrix
Selenomonas
Clostridium_III
Flavobacterium
Thermotalea
Mucilaginibacter
Bacteroides
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Asaccharobacter
Blautia
Mucilaginibacter
Coprococcus
Butyricimonas
Treponema
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Clostridium_XIVa
Anaerovorax
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_IV
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XI
Clostridium_XIVa
Eubacterium
Clostridium_IV
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_IV
Faecalibacterium
Anaerovibrio
Asaccharobacter
Pelotomaculum
Spirochaeta
Prevotella
Anaerovorax
Clostridium_IV
Victivallis
Syntrophococcus
Syntrophococcus
Desulfovibrio
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Victivallis
Clostridium_XIVa
Selenomonas
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Eggerthella
Selenomonas
Mogibacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Victivallis
Paraprevotella
Brevundimonas
Prevotella
Prevotella
Robinsoniella
Clostridium_III
Butyricimonas
Spirochaeta
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Proteiniclasticum
Roseburia
Clostridium_XIVa
Anaerofustis
Succiniclasticum
Anaeroplasma
Oscillibacter
Escherichia/Shigella
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_III
Prevotella
Coprococcus
Oscillibacter
Parabacteroides
Bacteroides
Mogibacterium
Solobacterium
Bacteroides
Clostridium_III
Victivallis
Saccharofermentans
Saccharofermentans
Olivibacter
Thermotalea
Proteiniclasticum
Clostridium_III
Anaeroplasma
Treponema
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_III
Desulfotomaculum
Bacillus
Anaerovorax
Ruminococcus
Agarivorans
Anaerotruncus
Papillibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_III
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Oscillibacter
Nitrobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Limibacter
Desulfovibrio
Coprococcus
Anaerovorax
Spirochaeta
Saccharofermentans
Anaeroplasma
Clostridium_III
Victivallis
Enterorhabdus
Clostridium_IV
Erysipelothrix
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Gelidibacter
Roseburia
Neisseria
Prevotella
Oscillibacter
Prevotella
Saccharofermentans
Spirochaeta
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVb
Clostridium_XIVa
Adlercreutzia
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Adlercreutzia
Prevotella
Syntrophococcus
Treponema
Prevotella
Clostridium_III
Pseudoflavonifractor
Clostridium_IV
Sharpea
Dongia
Eubacterium
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Parabacteroides
Brevundimonas
Clostridium_XIVa
Ruminococcus
Thermotalea
Victivallis
Anaeroplasma
Oscillibacter
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Roseburia
Eggerthella
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_XIVa
Lactobacillus
Bacteroides
Cellulosilyticum
Brevundimonas
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Helicobacter
Clostridium_IV
Proteiniclasticum
Brevundimonas
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Desulfovibrio
Coraliomargarita
Eubacterium
Sphingomonas
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Paraprevotella
Ruminococcus
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_III
Turicibacter
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Fusibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Rummeliibacillus
Mogibacterium
Bacteroides
Pelospora
Eggerthella
Eubacterium
Blautia
Clostridium_XIVb
Ehrlichia
Eubacterium
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Treponema
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Selenomonas
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Anaerovorax
Spirochaeta
Brevundimonas
Eubacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Anaerovorax
Ruminococcus
Papillibacter
Clostridium_IV
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Asaccharobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Rhodocista
Clostridium_XIVa
Beijerinckia
Lactobacillus
Cryptanaerobacter
Prevotella
Anaerovibrio
Anaerovorax
Enterorhabdus
Clostridium_XIVb
Selenomonas
Eubacterium
Thermotalea
Enterorhabdus
Clostridium_III
Acetanaerobacterium
Treponema
Clostridium_XIVa
Enterorhabdus
Prevotella
Desulfovibrio
Aminobacter
Clostridium_IV
Rikenella
Gordonibacter
Papillibacter
Syntrophococcus
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Hahella
Vampirovibrio
Coprococcus
Coraliomargarita
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_XIVa
Desulfotomaculum
Helicobacter
Syntrophococcus
Clostridium_IV
Paludibacter
Adhaeribacter
Clostridium_IV
Cryptanaerobacter
Idiomarina
Clostridium_IV
Selenomonas
Acetanaerobacterium
Bifidobacterium
Clostridium_XIVb
Asaccharobacter
Eubacterium
Anaeroplasma
Saccharofermentans
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_III
Acholeplasma
Pedobacter
Sphingomonas
Verrucomicrobia
Anaerovorax
Spirochaeta
Paraeggerthella
Bacteroides
Paenibacillus
Prevotella
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Roseburia
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_III
Pedobacter
Robinsoniella
Anaeroplasma
Clostridium_XIVa
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Turicibacter
Papillibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_XIVb
Sporobacter
Asaccharobacter
Bacteroides
Anaeroplasma
Sporobacter
Streptomyces
Arcobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Barnesiella
Lactobacillus
Flavobacterium
Victivallis
Clostridium_XIVa
Ureaplasma
Acetanaerobacterium
Slackia
Oscillibacter
Prevotella
Proteiniphilum
Spirochaeta
Ruminococcus
Prevotella
Butyricicoccus
Devosia
Anaeroplasma
Oscillibacter
Barnesiella
Atopobium
Clostridium_XIVa
Methanobrevibacter
Butyricimonas
Butyricimonas
Asaccharobacter
Enhydrobacter
Treponema
Clostridium_XIVa
Adlercreutzia
Prevotella
Pseudoflavonifractor
Syntrophococcus
Clostridium_IV
Demequina
Saccharofermentans
Sphaerisporangium
Anaeroplasma
Geobacillus
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Victivallis
Bacteroides
Demequina
Paraeggerthella
Paraprevotella
Pseudoflavonifractor
Roseburia
Gelidibacter
Clostridium_IV
Rhizobium
Acholeplasma
Clostridium_XIVa
Bacteroides
Bacteroides
Papillibacter
Fusibacter
Coraliomargarita
Papillibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Acholeplasma
Catenibacterium
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Nitrobacter
Victivallis
Selenomonas
Enterorhabdus
Eubacterium
Roseburia
Prevotella
Asaccharobacter
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Gelidibacter
Brevundimonas
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Oscillibacter
Asteroleplasma
Anaeroplasma
Oscillibacter
Bilophila
Oscillibacter
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Geosporobacter
Butyricimonas
Pseudoflavonifractor
Barnesiella
Selenomonas
Prevotella
Enterorhabdus
Oscillibacter
Pelotomaculum
Cellulosilyticum
Clostridium_IV
Parabacteroides
Papillibacter
Bacteroides
Prevotella
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Howardella
Slackia
Methylobacter
Treponema
Clostridium_XIVa
Devosia
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_III
Methanobrevibacter
Paraprevotella
Desulfobulbus
Butyricicoccus
Clostridium_XIVa
Dialister
Selenomonas
Spirochaeta
Clostridium_IV
Cellulosilyticum
Prevotella
Pseudoflavonifractor
Clostridium_III
Oscillibacter
Faecalibacterium
Clostridium_XIVb
Eubacterium
Clostridium_III
Prevotella
Paenibacillus
Pedobacter
Butyricicoccus
Clostridium_XIVa
Roseburia
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Adhaeribacter
Eubacterium
Bacteroides
Victivallis
Roseburia
Treponema
Prevotella
Prevotella
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Bacteroides
Bacteroides
Lactobacillus
Adlercreutzia
Dethiosulfovibrio
Lutispora
Turicibacter
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Bulleidia
Aquiflexum
Clostridium_III
Roseburia
Glaciecola
Clostridium_XIVa
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_IV
Sphaerobacter
Prevotella
Turicibacter
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_XIVb
Ruminococcus
Fibrobacter
Proteiniclasticum
Anaeroplasma
Algoriphagus
Clostridium_XIVa
Howardella
Clostridium_XIVa
Barnesiella
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Butyricimonas
Blautia
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Blautia
Clostridium_IV
Flavobacterium
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Eubacterium
Butyricicoccus
Fluviicola
Anaerovibrio
Blautia
Verrucomicrobia
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Spirochaeta
Clostridium_XI
Anaerovorax
Roseburia
Mucilaginibacter
Clostridium_XI
Prevotella
Clostridium_III
Coprococcus
Acholeplasma
Clostridium_III
Lactobacillus
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Bifidobacterium
Adhaeribacter
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Acetivibrio
Flammeovirga
Dethiosulfovibrio
Hippea
Faecalibacterium
Spirochaeta
Brevundimonas
Mucilaginibacter
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Asaccharobacter
Clostridium_IV
Mogibacterium
Clostridium_IV
Oscillibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Faecalibacterium
Altererythrobacter
Gelidibacter
Prevotella
Anaerovorax
Riemerella
Sphingobacterium
Syntrophococcus
Bacteroides
Papillibacter
Butyricicoccus
Clostridium_IV
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Marvinbryantia
Brevibacillus
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Aminobacter
Sporotomaculum
Clostridium_IV
Pedobacter
Victivallis
Gelidibacter
Prevotella
Wautersiella
Slackia
Pyramidobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Lentisphaera
Desulfoluna
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Prevotella
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Helicobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Coprococcus
Bradyrhizobium
Clostridium_IV
Sphingobacterium
Gelidibacter
Vasilyevaea
Eubacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Eubacterium
Syntrophococcus
Prevotella
Treponema
Anaerovorax
Sulfurovum
Clostridium_IV
Papillibacter
Paracoccus
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Adhaeribacter
Bacteroides
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Telmatospirillum
Clostridium_XIVa
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_IV
Vasilyevaea
Anaeroplasma
Sporotomaculum
Clostridium_IV
Enterorhabdus
Bacteroides
Anaerotruncus
Rhodopirellula
Clostridium_XIVa
Gelidibacter
Anaerofustis
Butyricicoccus
Butyricicoccus
Clostridium_XIVa
Cryptanaerobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Mogibacterium
Syntrophococcus
Bacteroides
Treponema
Coraliomargarita
Ruminococcus
Prevotella
Pseudaminobacter
Prevotella
Treponema
Syntrophococcus
Clostridium_IV
Tenacibaculum
Parabacteroides
Luteimonas
Eubacterium
Roseburia
Oscillibacter
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Treponema
Clostridium_IV
Victivallis
Clostridium_XIVa
Oscillibacter
Papillibacter
Cellulosilyticum
Treponema
Ruminococcus
Coraliomargarita
Butyricicoccus
Blautia
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_III
Neptunomonas
Clostridium_IV
Howardella
Clostridium_IV
Roseburia
Oscillibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Sporobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Butyricicoccus
Clostridium_XIVa
Filomicrobium
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Brevundimonas
Clostridium_IV
Paracoccus
Schlegelella
Clostridium_XI
Diaphorobacter
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Saccharopolyspora
Prevotella
Eggerthella
Gelidibacter
Prevotella
Pseudomonas
Prevotella
Prevotella
Prevotella
Brevundimonas
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Photobacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVb
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Anaeroplasma
Caldilinea
Clostridium_XIVa
Victivallis
Brevundimonas
Prevotella
Slackia
Pedobacter
Prevotella
Trueperella
Oscillibacter
Victivallis
Bacteroides
Micrococcus
Olivibacter
Anaerophaga
Selenomonas
Megasphaera
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Eubacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Treponema
Cryptanaerobacter
Xanthomonas
Asteroleplasma
Sporotomaculum
Bacteroides
Asaccharobacter
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_XIVa
Treponema
Prevotella
Turicibacter
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Oscillibacter
Deinococcus
Pedobacter
Anaerovorax
Clostridium_IV
Bacteroides
Clostridium_IV
Rhodococcus
Treponema
Mucilaginibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Olivibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Barnesiella
Clostridium_XIVb
Gelidibacter
Methanobrevibacter
Anaerotruncus
Mesorhizobium
Clostridium_XI
Planctomyces
Aerococcus
Victivallis
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XI
Clostridium_XIVa
Ruminococcus
Saccharofermentans
Oscillibacter
Fibrobacter
Kiloniella
Olivibacter
Clostridium_IV
Spirochaeta
Prevotella
Olivibacter
Prevotella
Parabacteroides
Prevotella
Leifsonia
Clostridium_IV
Victivallis
Treponema
Sporotomaculum
Spirochaeta
Clostridium_III
Clostridium_XIVa
Anaerovorax
Oscillibacter
Victivallis
Spirochaeta
Clostridium_XIVb
Oscillibacter
Prevotella
Anaeroplasma
Adlercreutzia
Clostridium_XIVa
Beijerinckia
Prevotella
Coprococcus
Lentisphaera
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Porphyrobacter
Rhodobacter
Oscillibacter
Roseburia
Prevotella
Aquiflexum
Rhodopirellula
Bacteroides
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Mogibacterium
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Capnocytophaga
Acholeplasma
Clostridium_IV
Succinivibrio
Pseudonocardia
Clostridium_XIVa
Butyricimonas
Anaerovorax
Prevotella
Butyricimonas
Parabacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVb
Bacteroides
Riemerella
Anaeroplasma
Ruminococcus
Verrucomicrobia
Syntrophococcus
Clostridium_IV
Barnesiella
Olivibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Cryptanaerobacter
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_IV
Coprococcus
Barnesiella
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_XIVb
Selenomonas
Prevotella
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Spirochaeta
Enterorhabdus
Thermoanaerobacter
Syntrophococcus
Sphingobium
Clostridium_XIVa
Geosporobacter
Enterorhabdus
Verrucomicrobia
Clostridium_XIVa
Parabacteroides
Cryptanaerobacter
Anaeroplasma
Spirochaeta
Prevotella
Roseburia
Pedobacter
Pedobacter
Eggerthella
Prevotella
Rikenella
Anaerophaga
Spirochaeta
Clostridium_IV
Weissella
Butyricicoccus
Hahella
Acholeplasma
Clostridium_XIVa
Cellulosilyticum
Verrucomicrobia
Clostridium_XIVa
Pseudoflavonifractor
Calditerricola
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Adlercreutzia
Bulleidia
Mucilaginibacter
Victivallis
Anaerovorax
Clostridium_XIVb
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Bacteroides
Schwartzia
Pyramidobacter
Eubacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Roseburia
Clostridium_XIVb
Enterorhabdus
Pedobacter
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_III
Desulfotomaculum
Clostridium_IV
Proteiniclasticum
Prevotella
Faecalibacterium
Microbacterium
Leucobacter
Prevotella
Sphingobacterium
Fusibacter
Howardella
Pedobacter
Caldilinea
Turicibacter
Clostridium_IV
Alistipes
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Butyricimonas
Anaerovibrio
Prevotella
Pseudoflavonifractor
Corynebacterium
Leucobacter
Kerstersia
Slackia
Lactococcus
Prevotella
Clostridium_IV
Prevotella
Bacteroides
Lactobacillus
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Syntrophococcus
Clostridium_XIVa
Victivallis
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Verrucomicrobia
Clostridium_XIVa
Treponema
Pyramidobacter
Robinsoniella
Clostridium_XI
Bifidobacterium
Bacteroides
Gordonibacter
Enterorhabdus
Lactobacillus
Bacteroides
Prevotella
Tannerella
Bacteroides
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVb
Gelidibacter
Rhodoplanes
Selenomonas
Escherichia/Shigella
Rikenella
Coprococcus
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Hyphomicrobium
Verrucomicrobia
Staphylococcus
Verrucomicrobia
Victivallis
Selenomonas
Desulfobulbus
Clostridium_III
Spirochaeta
Kordia
Bosea
Enterococcus
Clostridium_III
Xanthobacter
Lactobacillus
Prevotella
Acidaminococcus
Eubacterium
Bacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Lactobacillus
Devosia
Pedobacter
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_XIVa
Corynebacterium
Spirochaeta
Anaeroplasma
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Slackia
Limibacter
Sphingobium
Clostridium_XIVa
Riemerella
Saccharofermentans
Bacteroides
Prevotella
Selenomonas
Victivallis
Howardella
Pelospora
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Selenomonas
Fibrobacter
Clostridium_III
Sphingomonas
Selenomonas
Eggerthella
Treponema
Mogibacterium
Adlercreutzia
Selenomonas
Methylomicrobium
Leuconostoc
Pyramidobacter
Butyrivibrio
Bacteroides
Butyricimonas
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Butyrivibrio
Corynebacterium
Proteiniborus
Spirochaeta
Acetitomaculum
Selenomonas
Altererythrobacter
Atopobium
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_III
Desulfotomaculum
Pedobacter
Bacteroides
Asaccharobacter
Microbacterium
Treponema
Dethiosulfovibrio
Oscillibacter
Selenomonas
Eubacterium
Ruminococcus
Treponema
Spirochaeta
Roseburia
Ruminococcus
Butyricimonas
Pedobacter
Spirochaeta
Parabacteroides
Methylococcus
Enterorhabdus
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Gelidibacter
Sporobacter
Pedobacter
Syntrophococcus
Slackia
Mogibacterium
Prevotella
Pseudoflavonifractor
Veillonella
Clostridium_XIVa
Bacillus
Pedobacter
Clostridium_IV
Fibrobacter
Paenibacillus
Brevundimonas
Desulfovibrio
Clostridium_XI
Helicobacter
Prevotella
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Herbiconiux
Clostridium_IV
Rikenella
Clostridium_XIVa
Hippea
Lactobacillus
Eubacterium
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_III
Lactobacillus
Lactobacillus
Desulfotomaculum
Prevotella
Staphylococcus
Tenacibaculum
Parabacteroides
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Pedobacter
Helicobacter
Proteiniclasticum
Anaplasma
Bacteroides
Clostridium_IV
Mucilaginibacter
Verrucomicrobia
Selenomonas
Parabacteroides
Eubacterium
Coprococcus
Weissella
Pedobacter
Clostridium_XI
Sphingomonas
Treponema
Geobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Filomicrobium
Prevotella
Pedobacter
Pedobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Bifidobacterium
Saccharofermentans
Ruminococcus
Flavobacterium
Rhodopirellula
Roseburia
Prevotella
Limibacter
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Clostridium_III
Prevotella
Pseudoxanthomonas
Anaerorhabdus
Clostridium_III
Streptomyces
Pedobacter
Cellulomonas
Clostridium_XIVa
Olivibacter
Treponema
Gelidibacter
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_IV
Gemmatimonas
Prevotella
Ethanoligenens
Leucobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Eggerthella
Prevotella
Prevotella
Solobacterium
Xanthobacter
Verrucomicrobia
Desulfovibrio
Microbacterium
Oscillibacter
Blautia
Papillibacter
Prevotella
Lentisphaera
Ruminococcus
Bacteroides
Catonella
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Verrucomicrobia
Clostridium_XI
Prevotella
Mogibacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Ruminococcus
Eubacterium
Clostridium_IV
Rhodomicrobium
Butyricicoccus
Saccharofermentans
Prevotella
Mannheimia
Lactobacillus
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Adlercreutzia
Selenomonas
Paenibacillus
Clostridium_IV
Paenibacillus
Butyricimonas
Wandonia
Puniceicoccus
Lactonifactor
Selenomonas
Brevundimonas
Prevotella
Gelidibacter
Mogibacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Coprococcus
Verrucomicrobia
Barnesiella
Verrucomicrobia
Clostridium_XIVa
Anaerovorax
Bacteroides
Parasporobacterium
Prevotella
Parapedobacter
Streptomyces
Thermotalea
Alkaliflexus
Oscillibacter
Anaerotruncus
Spirochaeta
Clostridium_XI
Sporotomaculum
Sporacetigenium
Bulleidia
Clostridium_IV
Syntrophomonas
Desulfatiferula
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_XIVa
Mogibacterium
Spirochaeta
Prevotella
Treponema
Spiroplasma
Clostridium_XIVa
Bacteroides
Treponema
Selenomonas
Butyricicoccus
Gelidibacter
Acetitomaculum
Proteiniclasticum
Papillibacter
Prevotella
Elusimicrobium
Devosia
Roseburia
Mucilaginibacter
Mogibacterium
Saccharofermentans
Paenibacillus
Anaerotruncus
Leucobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Eubacterium
Beijerinckia
Prevotella
Clostridium_III
Pseudoflavonifractor
Butyrivibrio
Acholeplasma
Filomicrobium
Clostridium_III
Pseudoflavonifractor
Anaerophaga
Asaccharobacter
Kordia
Ruminococcus
Clostridium_III
Ethanoligenens
Clostridium_XIVa
Barnesiella
Eubacterium
Prevotella
Anaerophaga
Acetitomaculum
Prevotella
Clostridium_III
Marinoscillum
Pedobacter
Prevotella
Prevotella
Anaerovorax
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Lishizhenia
Pedobacter
Howardella
Roseburia
Clostridium_XIVa
Anaerovorax
Lentisphaera
Prevotella
Saccharofermentans
Proteiniphilum
Schwartzia
Anaerorhabdus
Robinsoniella
Clostridium_IV
Flavobacterium
Pedobacter
Clostridium_III
Selenomonas
Rhizobium
Victivallis
Butyricimonas
Parabacteroides
Adhaeribacter
Eubacterium
Treponema
Clostridium_XIVa
Clostridium_XIVa
Schwartzia
Prevotella
Selenomonas
Beijerinckia
Eubacterium
Adhaeribacter
Verrucomicrobia
Desulfobulbus
Bacteroides
Rummeliibacillus
Agarivorans
Clostridium_XIVa
Selenomonas
Verrucomicrobia
Prevotella
Spirochaeta
Selenomonas
Spiroplasma
Pedobacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Lactobacillus
Clostridium_XIVa
Prevotella
Prevotella
Marinobacter
Butyricimonas
Prevotella
Dongia
Anaerovorax
Butyricimonas
Cryptanaerobacter
Papillibacter
Clostridium_sensu_stricto
Escherichia/Shigella
Butyricicoccus
Prevotella
Thermotalea
Cohaesibacter
Clostridium_XVIII
Spirochaeta
Clostridium_XIVa
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Clostridium_IV
Papillibacter
Sporosarcina
Selenomonas
Papillibacter
Clostridium_XIVa
Saccharofermentans
Clostridium_IV
Clostridium_IV
Desulfotomaculum
Pedobacter
Anaeroplasma
Clostridium_IV
Treponema
Mogibacterium
While the following terms are believed to be well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, the following definitions are set forth to facilitate explanation of the presently disclosed subject matter.
The term “a” or “an” may refer to one or more of that entity, i.e. can refer to plural referents. As such, the terms “a” or “an”, “one or more” and “at least one” are used interchangeably herein. In addition, reference to “an element” by the indefinite article “a” or “an” does not exclude the possibility that more than one of the elements is present, unless the context clearly requires that there is one and only one of the elements.
Reference throughout this specification to “one embodiment”, “an embodiment”, “one aspect”, or “an aspect” means that a particular feature, structure or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the present disclosure. Thus, the appearances of the phrases “in one embodiment” or “in an embodiment” in various places throughout this specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment. Furthermore, the particular features, structures, or characteristics can be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments.
As used herein, in particular embodiments, the terms “about” or “approximately” when preceding a numerical value indicates the value plus or minus a range of 10%.
As used herein the terms “microorganism” or “microbe” should be taken broadly. These terms are used interchangeably and include, but are not limited to, the two prokaryotic domains, Bacteria and Archaea, eukaryotic fungi and protists, as well as viruses. In some embodiments, the disclosure refers to the “microbes” of Table 1 or Table 3, or the “microbes” incorporated by reference. This characterization can refer to not only the predicted taxonomic microbial identifiers of the table, but also the identified strains of the microbes listed in the table.
The term “microbial consortia” or “microbial consortium” refers to a subset of a microbial community of individual microbial species, or strains of a species, which can be described as carrying out a common function, or can be described as participating in, or leading to, or correlating with, a recognizable parameter, such as a phenotypic trait of interest (e.g. increased milk production in a ruminant). The community may comprise two or more species, or strains of a species, of microbes. In some instances, the microbes coexist within the community symbiotically.
The term “microbial community” means a group of microbes comprising two or more species or strains. Unlike microbial consortia, a microbial community does not have to be carrying out a common function, or does not have to be participating in, or leading to, or correlating with, a recognizable parameter, such as a phenotypic trait of interest (e.g. increased milk production in a ruminant).
As used herein, “isolate,” “isolated,” “isolated microbe,” and like terms, are intended to mean that the one or more microorganisms has been separated from at least one of the materials with which it is associated in a particular environment (for example soil, water, animal tissue).
Microbes of the present disclosure may include spores and/or vegetative cells. In some embodiments, microbes of the present disclosure include microbes in a viable but non-culturable (VBNC) state. See Liao and Zhao (US Publication US2015267163A1). In some embodiments, microbes of the present disclosure include microbes in a biofilm. See Merritt et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 7,427,408).
Thus, an “isolated microbe” does not exist in its naturally occurring environment; rather, it is through the various techniques described herein that the microbe has been removed from its natural setting and placed into a non-naturally occurring state of existence. Thus, the isolated strain or isolated microbe may exist as, for example, a biologically pure culture, or as spores (or other forms of the strain) in association with an acceptable carrier.
As used herein, “spore” or “spores” refer to structures produced by bacteria and fungi that are adapted for survival and dispersal. Spores are generally characterized as dormant structures, however spores are capable of differentiation through the process of germination. Germination is the differentiation of spores into vegetative cells that are capable of metabolic activity, growth, and reproduction. The germination of a single spore results in a single fungal or bacterial vegetative cell. Fungal spores are units of asexual reproduction, and in some cases are necessary structures in fungal life cycles. Bacterial spores are structures for surviving conditions that may ordinarily be nonconductive to the survival or growth of vegetative cells.
As used herein, “microbial composition” refers to a composition comprising one or more microbes of the present disclosure, wherein a microbial composition, in some embodiments, is administered to animals of the present disclosure.
As used herein, “carrier”, “acceptable carrier”, or “pharmaceutical carrier” refers to a diluent, adjuvant, excipient, or vehicle with which the compound is administered. Such carriers can be sterile liquids, such as water and oils, including those of petroleum, animal, vegetable, or synthetic origin; such as peanut oil, soybean oil, mineral oil, sesame oil, and the like. Water or aqueous solution saline solutions and aqueous dextrose and glycerol solutions are preferably employed as carriers, in some embodiments as injectable solutions. Alternatively, the carrier can be a solid dosage form carrier, including but not limited to one or more of a binder (for compressed pills), a glidant, an encapsulating agent, a flavorant, and a colorant. The choice of carrier can be selected with regard to the intended route of administration and standard pharmaceutical practice. See Hardee and Baggo (1998. Development and Formulation of Veterinary Dosage Forms. 2nd Ed. CRC Press. 504 pg.); E. W. Martin (1970. Remington's Pharmaceutical Sciences. 17th Ed. Mack Pub. Co.); and Blaser et al. (US Publication US20110280840A1).
In certain aspects of the disclosure, the isolated microbes exist as isolated and biologically pure cultures. It will be appreciated by one of skill in the art, that an isolated and biologically pure culture of a particular microbe, denotes that said culture is substantially free (within scientific reason) of other living organisms and contains only the individual microbe in question. The culture can contain varying concentrations of said microbe. The present disclosure notes that isolated and biologically pure microbes often “necessarily differ from less pure or impure materials.” See, e.g. In re Bergstrom, 427 F.2d 1394, (CCPA 1970)(discussing purified prostaglandins), see also, In re Bergy, 596 F.2d 952 (CCPA 1979) (discussing purified microbes), see also, Parke-Davis & Co. v. H. K. Mulford & Co., 189 F. 95 (S.D.N.Y. 1911) (Learned Hand discussing purified adrenaline), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 196 F. 496 (2d Cir. 1912), each of which are incorporated herein by reference. Furthermore, in some aspects, the disclosure provides for certain quantitative measures of the concentration, or purity limitations, that must be found within an isolated and biologically pure microbial culture. The presence of these purity values, in certain embodiments, is a further attribute that distinguishes the presently disclosed microbes from those microbes existing in a natural state. See, e.g., Merck & Co. v. Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., 253 F.2d 156 (4th Cir. 1958) (discussing purity limitations for vitamin B12 produced by microbes), incorporated herein by reference.
As used herein, “individual isolates” should be taken to mean a composition, or culture, comprising a predominance of a single genera, species, or strain, of microorganism, following separation from one or more other microorganisms. The phrase should not be taken to indicate the extent to which the microorganism has been isolated or purified. However, “individual isolates” can comprise substantially only one genus, species, or strain, of microorganism.
As used herein, “microbiome” refers to the collection of microorganisms that inhabit the digestive tract or gastrointestinal tract of an animal (including the rumen if said animal is a ruminant) and the microorgansims' physical environment (i.e. the microbiome has a biotic and physical component). The microbiome is fluid and may be modulated by numerous naturally occurring and artificial conditions (e.g., change in diet, disease, antimicrobial agents, influx of additional microorganisms, etc.). The modulation of the microbiome of a rumen that can be achieved via administration of the compositions of the disclosure, can take the form of: (a) increasing or decreasing a particular Family, Genus, Species, or functional grouping of microbe (i.e. alteration of the biotic component of the rumen microbiome) and/or (b) increasing or decreasing volatile fatty acids in the rumen, increasing or decreasing rumen pH, increasing or decreasing any other physical parameter important for rumen health (i.e. alteration of the abiotic component of the rumen mircrobiome).
As used herein, “probiotic” refers to a substantially pure microbe (i.e., a single isolate) or a mixture of desired microbes, and may also include any additional components that can be administered to a mammal for restoring microbiota. Probiotics or microbial inoculant compositions of the invention may be administered with an agent to allow the microbes to survive the environment of the gastrointestinal tract, i.e., to resist low pH and to grow in the gastrointestinal environment. In some embodiments, the present compositions (e.g., microbial compositions) are probiotics in some aspects.
As used herein, “prebiotic” refers to an agent that increases the number and/or activity of one or more desired microbes. Non-limiting examples of prebiotics that may be useful in the methods of the present disclosure include fructooligosaccharides (e.g., oligofructose, inulin, inulin-type fructans), galactooligosaccharides, amino acids, alcohols, and mixtures thereof. See Ramirez-Farias et al. (2008. Br. J. Nutr. 4:1-10) and Pool-Zobel and Sauer (2007. J. Nutr. 137:2580-2584 and supplemental).
The term “growth medium” as used herein, is any medium which is suitable to support growth of a microbe. By way of example, the media may be natural or artificial including gastrin supplemental agar, LB media, blood serum, and tissue culture gels. It should be appreciated that the media may be used alone or in combination with one or more other media. It may also be used with or without the addition of exogenous nutrients.
The medium may be amended or enriched with additional compounds or components, for example, a component which may assist in the interaction and/or selection of specific groups of microorganisms. For example, antibiotics (such as penicillin) or sterilants (for example, quaternary ammonium salts and oxidizing agents) could be present and/or the physical conditions (such as salinity, nutrients (for example organic and inorganic minerals (such as phosphorus, nitrogenous salts, ammonia, potassium and micronutrients such as cobalt and magnesium), pH, and/or temperature) could be amended.
As used herein, the term “ruminant” includes mammals that are capable of acquiring nutrients from plant-based food by fermenting it in a specialized stomach (rumen) prior to digestion, principally through microbial actions. Ruminants included cattle, goats, sheep, giraffes, yaks, deer, antelope, and others.
As used herein, the term “bovid” includes any member of family Bovidae, which include hoofed mammals such as antelope, sheep, goats, and cattle, among others.
As used herein, “energy-corrected milk” or “ECM” represents the amount of energy in milk based upon milk volume, milk fat, and milk protein. ECM adjusts the milk components to 3.5% fat and 3.2% protein, thus equalizing animal performance and allowing for comparison of production at the individual animal and herd levels over time. An equation used to calculate ECM, as related to the present disclosure, is:
ECM=(0.327×milk pounds)+(12.95×fat pounds)+(7.2×protein pounds)
As used herein, “improved” should be taken broadly to encompass improvement of a characteristic of interest, as compared to a control group, or as compared to a known average quantity associated with the characteristic in question. For example, “improved” milk production associated with application of a beneficial microbe, or consortia, of the disclosure can be demonstrated by comparing the milk produced by an ungulate treated by the microbes taught herein to the milk of an ungulate not treated. In the present disclosure, “improved” does not necessarily demand that the data be statistically significant (i.e. p<0.05); rather, any quantifiable difference demonstrating that one value (e.g. the average treatment value) is different from another (e.g. the average control value) can rise to the level of “improved.”
As used herein, “inhibiting and suppressing” and like terms should not be construed to require complete inhibition or suppression, although this may be desired in some embodiments.
The term “marker” or “unique marker” as used herein is an indicator of unique microorganism type, microorganism strain or activity of a microorganism strain. A marker can be measured in biological samples and includes without limitation, a nucleic acid-based marker such as a ribosomal RNA gene, a peptide- or protein-based marker, and/or a metabolite or other small molecule marker.
The term “metabolite” as used herein is an intermediate or product of metabolism. A metabolite in one embodiment is a small molecule. Metabolites have various functions, including in fuel, structural, signaling, stimulatory and inhibitory effects on enzymes, as a cofactor to an enzyme, in defense, and in interactions with other organisms (such as pigments, odorants and pheromones). A primary metabolite is directly involved in normal growth, development and reproduction. A secondary metabolite is not directly involved in these processes but usually has an important ecological function. Examples of metabolites include but are not limited to antibiotics and pigments such as resins and terpenes, etc. Some antibiotics use primary metabolites as precursors, such as actinomycin which is created from the primary metabolite, tryptophan. Metabolites, as used herein, include small, hydrophilic carbohydrates; large, hydrophobic lipids and complex natural compounds.
As used herein, the term “genotype” refers to the genetic makeup of an individual cell, cell culture, tissue, organism, or group of organisms.
As used herein, the term “allele(s)” means any of one or more alternative forms of a gene, all of which alleles relate to at least one trait or characteristic. In a diploid cell, the two alleles of a given gene occupy corresponding loci on a pair of homologous chromosomes. Since the present disclosure, in embodiments, relates to QTLs, i.e. genomic regions that may comprise one or more genes or regulatory sequences, it is in some instances more accurate to refer to “haplotype” (i.e. an allele of a chromosomal segment) instead of “allele”, however, in those instances, the term “allele” should be understood to comprise the term “haplotype”. Alleles are considered identical when they express a similar phenotype. Differences in sequence are possible but not important as long as they do not influence phenotype.
As used herein, the term “locus” (loci plural) means a specific place or places or a site on a chromosome where for example a gene or genetic marker is found.
As used herein, the term “genetically linked” refers to two or more traits that are co-inherited at a high rate during breeding such that they are difficult to separate through crossing.
A “recombination” or “recombination event” as used herein refers to a chromosomal crossing over or independent assortment. The term “recombinant” refers to an organism having a new genetic makeup arising as a result of a recombination event.
As used herein, the term “molecular marker” or “genetic marker” refers to an indicator that is used in methods for visualizing differences in characteristics of nucleic acid sequences. Examples of such indicators are restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) markers, amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), insertion mutations, microsatellite markers (SSRs), sequence-characterized amplified regions (SCARs), cleaved amplified polymorphic sequence (CAPS) markers or isozyme markers or combinations of the markers described herein which defines a specific genetic and chromosomal location. Markers further include polynucleotide sequences encoding 16S or 18S rRNA, and internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences, which are sequences found between small-subunit and large-subunit rRNA genes that have proven to be especially useful in elucidating relationships or distinctions among when compared against one another. Mapping of molecular markers in the vicinity of an allele is a procedure which can be performed by the average person skilled in molecular-biological techniques.
The primary structure of major rRNA subunit 16S comprise a particular combination of conserved, variable, and hypervariable regions that evolve at different rates and enable the resolution of both very ancient lineages such as domains, and more modern lineages such as genera. The secondary structure of the 16S subunit include approximately 50 helices which result in base pairing of about 67% of the residues. These highly conserved secondary structural features are of great functional importance and can be used to ensure positional homology in multiple sequence alignments and phylogenetic analysis. Over the previous few decades, the 16S rRNA gene has become the most sequenced taxonomic marker and is the cornerstone for the current systematic classification of bacteria and archaea (Yarza et al. 2014. Nature Rev. Micro. 12:635-45).
A sequence identity of 94.5% or lower for two 16S rRNA genes is strong evidence for distinct genera, 86.5% or lower is strong evidence for distinct families, 82% or lower is strong evidence for distinct orders, 78.5% is strong evidence for distinct classes, and 75% or lower is strong evidence for distinct phyla. The comparative analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequences enables the establishment of taxonomic thresholds that are useful not only for the classification of cultured microorganisms but also for the classification of the many environmental sequences. Yarza et al. 2014. Nature Rev. Micro. 12:635-45).
As used herein, the term “trait” refers to a characteristic or phenotype. For example, in the context of some embodiments of the present disclosure, quantity of milk fat produced relates to the amount of triglycerides, triacylglycerides, diacylglycerides, monoacylglycerides, phospholipids, cholesterol, glycolipids, and fatty acids present in milk. Desirable traits may also include other milk characteristics, including but not limited to: predominance of short chain fatty acids, medium chain fatty acids, and long chain fatty acids; quantity of carbohydrates such as lactose, glucose, galactose, and other oligosaccharides; quantity of proteins such as caseins and whey; quantity of vitamins, minerals, milk yield/volume; reductions in methane emissions or manure; improved efficiency of nitrogen utilization; improved dry matter intake; improved feed efficiency and digestibility; increased degradation of cellulose, lignin, and hemicellulose; increased rumen concentrations of fatty acids such as acetic acid, propionic acid, and butyric acid; etc.
A trait may be inherited in a dominant or recessive manner, or in a partial or incomplete-dominant manner. A trait may be monogenic (i.e. determined by a single locus) or polygenic (i.e. determined by more than one locus) or may also result from the interaction of one or more genes with the environment.
In the context of this disclosure, traits may also result from the interaction of one or more mammalian genes and one or more microorganism genes.
As used herein, the term “homozygous” means a genetic condition existing when two identical alleles reside at a specific locus, but are positioned individually on corresponding pairs of homologous chromosomes in the cell of a diploid organism. Conversely, as used herein, the term “heterozygous” means a genetic condition existing when two different alleles reside at a specific locus, but are positioned individually on corresponding pairs of homologous chromosomes in the cell of a diploid organism.
As used herein, the term “phenotype” refers to the observable characteristics of an individual cell, cell culture, organism (e.g., a ruminant), or group of organisms which results from the interaction between that individual's genetic makeup (i.e., genotype) and the environment.
As used herein, the term “chimeric” or “recombinant” when describing a nucleic acid sequence or a protein sequence refers to a nucleic acid, or a protein sequence, that links at least two heterologous polynucleotides, or two heterologous polypeptides, into a single macromolecule, or that re-arranges one or more elements of at least one natural nucleic acid or protein sequence. For example, the term “recombinant” can refer to an artificial combination of two otherwise separated segments of sequence, e.g., by chemical synthesis or by the manipulation of isolated segments of nucleic acids by genetic engineering techniques.
As used herein, a “synthetic nucleotide sequence” or “synthetic polynucleotide sequence” is a nucleotide sequence that is not known to occur in nature or that is not naturally occurring. Generally, such a synthetic nucleotide sequence will comprise at least one nucleotide difference when compared to any other naturally occurring nucleotide sequence.
As used herein, the term “nucleic acid” refers to a polymeric form of nucleotides of any length, either ribonucleotides or deoxyribonucleotides, or analogs thereof. This term refers to the primary structure of the molecule, and thus includes double- and single-stranded DNA, as well as double- and single-stranded RNA. It also includes modified nucleic acids such as methylated and/or capped nucleic acids, nucleic acids containing modified bases, backbone modifications, and the like. The terms “nucleic acid” and “nucleotide sequence” are used interchangeably.
As used herein, the term “gene” refers to any segment of DNA associated with a biological function. Thus, genes include, but are not limited to, coding sequences and/or the regulatory sequences required for their expression. Genes can also include non-expressed DNA segments that, for example, form recognition sequences for other proteins. Genes can be obtained from a variety of sources, including cloning from a source of interest or synthesizing from known or predicted sequence information, and may include sequences designed to have desired parameters.
As used herein, the term “homologous” or “homologue” or “ortholog” is known in the art and refers to related sequences that share a common ancestor or family member and are determined based on the degree of sequence identity. The terms “homology,” “homologous,” “substantially similar” and “corresponding substantially” are used interchangeably herein. They refer to nucleic acid fragments wherein changes in one or more nucleotide bases do not affect the ability of the nucleic acid fragment to mediate gene expression or produce a certain phenotype. These terms also refer to modifications of the nucleic acid fragments of the instant disclosure such as deletion or insertion of one or more nucleotides that do not substantially alter the functional properties of the resulting nucleic acid fragment relative to the initial, unmodified fragment. It is therefore understood, as those skilled in the art will appreciate, that the disclosure encompasses more than the specific exemplary sequences. These terms describe the relationship between a gene found in one species, subspecies, variety, cultivar or strain and the corresponding or equivalent gene in another species, subspecies, variety, cultivar or strain. For purposes of this disclosure homologous sequences are compared. “Homologous sequences” or “homologues” or “orthologs” are thought, believed, or known to be functionally related. A functional relationship may be indicated in any one of a number of ways, including, but not limited to: (a) degree of sequence identity and/or (b) the same or similar biological function. Preferably, both (a) and (b) are indicated. Homology can be determined using software programs readily available in the art, such as those discussed in Current Protocols in Molecular Biology (F. M. Ausubel et al., eds., 1987) Supplement 30, section 7.718, Table 7.71. Some alignment programs are MacVector (Oxford Molecular Ltd, Oxford, U.K.), ALIGN Plus (Scientific and Educational Software, Pennsylvania) and AlignX (Vector NTI, Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). Another alignment program is Sequencher (Gene Codes, Ann Arbor, Michigan), using default parameters.
As used herein, the term “nucleotide change” refers to, e.g., nucleotide substitution, deletion, and/or insertion, as is well understood in the art. For example, mutations contain alterations that produce silent substitutions, additions, or deletions, but do not alter the properties or activities of the encoded protein or how the proteins are made.
As used herein, the term “protein modification” refers to, e.g., amino acid substitution, amino acid modification, deletion, and/or insertion, as is well understood in the art.
As used herein, the term “at least a portion” or “fragment” of a nucleic acid or polypeptide means a portion having the minimal size characteristics of such sequences, or any larger fragment of the full length molecule, up to and including the full length molecule. A fragment of a polynucleotide of the disclosure may encode a biologically active portion of a genetic regulatory element. A biologically active portion of a genetic regulatory element can be prepared by isolating a portion of one of the polynucleotides of the disclosure that comprises the genetic regulatory element and assessing activity as described herein. Similarly, a portion of a polypeptide may be 4 amino acids, 5 amino acids, 6 amino acids, 7 amino acids, and so on, going up to the full length polypeptide. The length of the portion to be used will depend on the particular application. A portion of a nucleic acid useful as a hybridization probe may be as short as 12 nucleotides; in some embodiments, it is 20 nucleotides. A portion of a polypeptide useful as an epitope may be as short as 4 amino acids. A portion of a polypeptide that performs the function of the full-length polypeptide would generally be longer than 4 amino acids.
Variant polynucleotides also encompass sequences derived from a mutagenic and recombinogenic procedure such as DNA shuffling. Strategies for such DNA shuffling are known in the art. See, for example, Stemmer (1994) PNAS 91:10747-10751; Stemmer (1994) Nature 370:389-391; Crameri et al. (1997) Nature Biotech. 15:436-438; Moore et al. (1997) J. Mol. Biol. 272:336-347; Zhang et al. (1997) PNAS 94:4504-4509; Crameri et al. (1998) Nature 391:288-291; and U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,605,793 and 5,837,458. For PCR amplifications of the polynucleotides disclosed herein, oligonucleotide primers can be designed for use in PCR reactions to amplify corresponding DNA sequences from cDNA or genomic DNA extracted from any organism of interest. Methods for designing PCR primers and PCR cloning are generally known in the art and are disclosed in Sambrook et al. (1989) Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual (2nd ed., Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Plainview, New York). See also Innis et al., eds. (1990) PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications (Academic Press, New York); Innis and Gelfand, eds. (1995) PCR Strategies (Academic Press, New York); and Innis and Gelfand, eds. (1999) PCR Methods Manual (Academic Press, New York). Known methods of PCR include, but are not limited to, methods using paired primers, nested primers, single specific primers, degenerate primers, gene-specific primers, vector-specific primers, partially-mismatched primers, and the like.
The term “primer” as used herein refers to an oligonucleotide which is capable of annealing to the amplification target allowing a DNA polymerase to attach, thereby serving as a point of initiation of DNA synthesis when placed under conditions in which synthesis of primer extension product is induced, i.e., in the presence of nucleotides and an agent for polymerization such as DNA polymerase and at a suitable temperature and pH. The (amplification) primer is preferably single stranded for maximum efficiency in amplification. Preferably, the primer is an oligodeoxyribonucleotide. The primer must be sufficiently long to prime the synthesis of extension products in the presence of the agent for polymerization. The exact lengths of the primers will depend on many factors, including temperature and composition (A/T vs. G/C content) of primer. A pair of bi-directional primers consists of one forward and one reverse primer as commonly used in the art of DNA amplification such as in PCR amplification.
The terms “stringency” or “stringent hybridization conditions” refer to hybridization conditions that affect the stability of hybrids, e.g., temperature, salt concentration, pH, formamide concentration and the like. These conditions are empirically optimized to maximize specific binding and minimize non-specific binding of primer or probe to its target nucleic acid sequence. The terms as used include reference to conditions under which a probe or primer will hybridize to its target sequence, to a detectably greater degree than other sequences (e.g. at least 2-fold over background). Stringent conditions are sequence dependent and will be different in different circumstances. Longer sequences hybridize specifically at higher temperatures. Generally, stringent conditions are selected to be about 5° C. lower than the thermal melting point (Tm) for the specific sequence at a defined ionic strength and pH. The Tm is the temperature (under defined ionic strength and pH) at which 50% of a complementary target sequence hybridizes to a perfectly matched probe or primer. Typically, stringent conditions will be those in which the salt concentration is less than about 1.0 M Na+ ion, typically about 0.01 to 1.0 M Na+ ion concentration (or other salts) at pH 7.0 to 8.3 and the temperature is at least about 30° C. for short probes or primers (e.g. 10 to 50 nucleotides) and at least about 60° C. for long probes or primers (e.g. greater than 50 nucleotides). Stringent conditions may also be achieved with the addition of destabilizing agents such as formamide. Exemplary low stringent conditions or “conditions of reduced stringency” include hybridization with a buffer solution of 30% formamide, 1 M NaCl, 1% SDS at 37° C. and a wash in 2×SSC at 40° C. Exemplary high stringency conditions include hybridization in 50% formamide, 1M NaCl, 1% SDS at 37° C., and a wash in 0.1×SSC at 60° C. Hybridization procedures are well known in the art and are described by e.g. Ausubel et al., 1998 and Sambrook et al., 2001. In some embodiments, stringent conditions are hybridization in 0.25 M Na2HPO4 buffer (pH 7.2) containing 1 mM Na2EDTA, 0.5-20% sodium dodecyl sulfate at 45° C., such as 0.5%, 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%, 6%, 7%, 8%, 9%, 10%, 11%, 12%, 13%, 14%, 15%, 16%, 17%, 18%, 19% or 20%, followed by a wash in 5×SSC, containing 0.1% (w/v) sodium dodecyl sulfate, at 55° C. to 65° C.
As used herein, “promoter” refers to a DNA sequence capable of controlling the expression of a coding sequence or functional RNA. The promoter sequence consists of proximal and more distal upstream elements, the latter elements often referred to as enhancers. Accordingly, an “enhancer” is a DNA sequence that can stimulate promoter activity, and may be an innate element of the promoter or a heterologous element inserted to enhance the level or tissue specificity of a promoter. Promoters may be derived in their entirety from a native gene, or be composed of different elements derived from different promoters found in nature, or even comprise synthetic DNA segments. It is understood by those skilled in the art that different promoters may direct the expression of a gene in different tissues or cell types, or at different stages of development, or in response to different environmental conditions. It is further recognized that since in most cases the exact boundaries of regulatory sequences have not been completely defined, DNA fragments of some variation may have identical promoter activity.
As used herein, a “constitutive promoter” is a promoter which is active under most conditions and/or during most development stages. There are several advantages to using constitutive promoters in expression vectors used in biotechnology, such as: high level of production of proteins used to select transgenic cells or organisms; high level of expression of reporter proteins or scorable markers, allowing easy detection and quantification; high level of production of a transcription factor that is part of a regulatory transcription system; production of compounds that requires ubiquitous activity in the organism; and production of compounds that are required during all stages of development. Non-limiting exemplary constitutive promoters include, CaMV 35S promoter, opine promoters, ubiquitin promoter, alcohol dehydrogenase promoter, etc.
As used herein, a “non-constitutive promoter” is a promoter which is active under certain conditions, in certain types of cells, and/or during certain development stages. For example, tissue specific, tissue preferred, cell type specific, cell type preferred, inducible promoters, and promoters under development control are non-constitutive promoters. Examples of promoters under developmental control include promoters that preferentially initiate transcription in certain tissues.
As used herein, “inducible” or “repressible” promoter is a promoter which is under chemical or environmental factors control. Examples of environmental conditions that may affect transcription by inducible promoters include anaerobic conditions, certain chemicals, the presence of light, acidic or basic conditions, etc.
As used herein, a “tissue specific” promoter is a promoter that initiates transcription only in certain tissues. Unlike constitutive expression of genes, tissue-specific expression is the result of several interacting levels of gene regulation. As such, in the art sometimes it is preferable to use promoters from homologous or closely related species to achieve efficient and reliable expression of transgenes in particular tissues. This is one of the main reasons for the large amount of tissue-specific promoters isolated from particular tissues found in both scientific and patent literature.
As used herein, the term “operably linked” refers to the association of nucleic acid sequences on a single nucleic acid fragment so that the function of one is regulated by the other. For example, a promoter is operably linked with a coding sequence when it is capable of regulating the expression of that coding sequence (i.e., that the coding sequence is under the transcriptional control of the promoter). Coding sequences can be operably linked to regulatory sequences in a sense or antisense orientation. In another example, the complementary RNA regions of the disclosure can be operably linked, either directly or indirectly, 5′ to the target mRNA, or 3′ to the target mRNA, or within the target mRNA, or a first complementary region is 5′ and its complement is 3′ to the target mRNA.
As used herein, the phrases “recombinant construct”, “expression construct”, “chimeric construct”, “construct”, and “recombinant DNA construct” are used interchangeably herein. A recombinant construct comprises an artificial combination of nucleic acid fragments, e.g., regulatory and coding sequences that are not found together in nature. For example, a chimeric construct may comprise regulatory sequences and coding sequences that are derived from different sources, or regulatory sequences and coding sequences derived from the same source, but arranged in a manner different than that found in nature. Such construct may be used by itself or may be used in conjunction with a vector. If a vector is used then the choice of vector is dependent upon the method that will be used to transform host cells as is well known to those skilled in the art. For example, a plasmid vector can be used. The skilled artisan is well aware of the genetic elements that must be present on the vector in order to successfully transform, select and propagate host cells comprising any of the isolated nucleic acid fragments of the disclosure. The skilled artisan will also recognize that different independent transformation events will result in different levels and patterns of expression (Jones et al., (1985) EMBO J. 4:2411-2418; De Almeida et al., (1989) Mol. Gen. Genetics 218:78-86), and thus that multiple events must be screened in order to obtain lines displaying the desired expression level and pattern. Such screening may be accomplished by Southern analysis of DNA, Northern analysis of mRNA expression, immunoblotting analysis of protein expression, or phenotypic analysis, among others. Vectors can be plasmids, viruses, bacteriophages, pro-viruses, phagemids, transposons, artificial chromosomes, and the like, that replicate autonomously or can integrate into a chromosome of a host cell. A vector can also be a naked RNA polynucleotide, a naked DNA polynucleotide, a polynucleotide composed of both DNA and RNA within the same strand, a poly-lysine-conjugated DNA or RNA, a peptide-conjugated DNA or RNA, a liposome-conjugated DNA, or the like, that is not autonomously replicating. As used herein, the term “expression” refers to the production of a functional end-product e.g., an mRNA or a protein (precursor or mature).
In some embodiments, the cell or organism has at least one heterologous trait. As used herein, the term “heterologous trait” refers to a phenotype imparted to a transformed host cell or transgenic organism by an exogenous DNA segment, heterologous polynucleotide or heterologous nucleic acid. Various changes in phenotype are of interest to the present disclosure, including but not limited to modifying the fatty acid composition in milk, altering the carbohydrate content of milk, increasing an ungulate's yield of an economically important trait (e.g., milk, milk fat, milk proteins, etc.) and the like. These results can be achieved by providing expression of heterologous products or increased expression of endogenous products in organisms using the methods and compositions of the present disclosure.
As used herein, the term “MIC” means maximal information coefficient. MIC is a type of nonparamentric network analysis that identifies a score (MIC score) between active microbial strains of the present disclosure and at least one measured metadata (e.g., milk fat). Further, U.S. application Ser. No. 15/217,575, filed on Jul. 22, 2016 (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,540,676 on Jan. 10, 2017) is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
The maximal information coefficient (MIC) is then calculated between strains and metadata 3021a, and between strains 3021b; as seen in
Based on the output of the network analysis, active strains are selected 3025 for preparing products (e.g., ensembles, aggregates, and/or other synthetic groupings) containing the selected strains. The output of the network analysis can also be used to inform the selection of strains for further product composition testing.
The use of thresholds is discussed above for analyses and determinations. Thresholds can be, depending on the implementation and application: (1) empirically determined (e.g., based on distribution levels, setting a cutoff at a number that removes a specified or significant portion of low level reads); (2) any non-zero value; (3) percentage/percentile based; (4) only strains whose normalized second marker (i.e., activity) reads is greater than normalized first marker (cell count) reads; (5) log 2 fold change between activity and quantity or cell count; (6) normalized second marker (activity) reads is greater than mean second marker (activity) reads for entire sample (and/or sample set); and/or any magnitude threshold described above in addition to a statistical threshold (i.e., significance testing). The following example provides thresholding detail for distributions of RNA-based second marker measurements with respect to DNA-based first marker measurements, according to one embodiment.
As used herein “shelf-stable” refers to a functional attribute and new utility acquired by the microbes formulated according to the disclosure, which enable said microbes to exist in a useful/active state outside of their natural environment in the rumen (i.e. a markedly different characteristic). Thus, shelf-stable is a functional attribute created by the formulations/compositions of the disclosure and denoting that the microbe formulated into a shelf-stable composition can exist outside the rumen and under ambient conditions for a period of time that can be determined depending upon the particular formulation utilized, but in general means that the microbes can be formulated to exist in a composition that is stable under ambient conditions for at least a few days and generally at least one week. Accordingly, a “shelf-stable ruminant supplement” is a composition comprising one or more microbes of the disclosure, said microbes formulated in a composition, such that the composition is stable under ambient conditions for at least one week, meaning that the microbes comprised in the composition (e.g. whole cell, spore, or lysed cell) are able to impart one or more beneficial phenotypic properties to a ruminant when administered (e.g. increased milk yield, improved milk compositional characteristics, improved rumen health, and/or modulation of the rumen microbiome).
Isolated Microbes
In some aspects, the present disclosure provides isolated microbes, including novel strains of microbes, presented in Table 1 and Table 3.
In other aspects, the present disclosure provides isolated whole microbial cultures of the microbes identified in Table 1 and Table 3. These cultures may comprise microbes at various concentrations.
In some aspects, the disclosure provides for utilizing one or more microbes selected from Table 1 and Table 3 to increase a phenotypic trait of interest in a ruminant.
In some embodiments, the disclosure provides isolated microbial species belonging to taxonomic families of Clostridiaceae, Ruminococcaceae, Lachnospiraceae, Acidaminococcaceae, Peptococcaceae, Porphyromonadaceae, Prevotellaceae, Neocallimastigaceae, Saccharomycetaceae, Phaeosphaeriaceae, Erysipelotrichia, Anaerolinaeceae, Atopobiaceae, Botryosphaeriaceae, Eubacteriaceae, Acholeplasmataceae, Succinivibrionaceae, Lactobacillaceae, Selenomonadaceae, Burkholderiaceae, and Streptococcaceae.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Clostridiaceae, including Acetanaerobacterium, Acetivibrio, Acidaminobacter, Alkaliphilus, Anaerobacter, Anaerostipes, Anaerotruncus, Anoxynatronum, Bryantella, Butyricicoccus, Caldanaerocella, Caloramator, Caloranaerobacter, Caminicella, Candidatus arthromitus, Clostridium, Coprobacillus, Dorea, Ethanologenbacterium, Faecalibacterium, Garciella, Guggenheimella, Hespellia, Linmingia, Natronincola, Oxobacter, Parasporobacterium, Sarcina, Soehngenia, Sporobacter, Subdoligranulum, Tepidibacter, Tepidimicrobium, Thermobrachium, Thermohalobacter, and Tindallia.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Ruminococcaceae, including Ruminococcus, Acetivibrio, Sporobacter, Anaerofilium, Papillibacter, Oscillospira, Gemmiger, Faecalibacterium, Fastidiosipila, Anaerotruncus, Ethanolingenens, Acetanaerobacterium, Subdoligranulum, Hydrogenoanaerobacterium, and Candidadus soleaferrea.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Lachnospiraceae, including Butyrivibrio, Roseburia, Lachnospira, Acetitomaculum, Coprococcus, Johnsonella, Catonella, Pseudobutyrivibrio, Syntrophococcus, Sporobacterium, Parasporobacterium, Lachnobacterium, Shuttleworthia, Dorea, Anaerostipes, Hespellia, Marvinbryantia, Oribacterium, Moryella, Blautia, Robinsoniella, Cellulosilyticum, Lachnoanaerobaculum, Stomatobaculum, Fusicatenibacter, Acetatifactor, and Eisenbergiella.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Acidaminococcaceae, including Acidaminococcus, Phascolarctobacterium, Succiniclasticum, and Succinispira.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Peptococcaceae, including Desulfotomaculum, Peptococcus, Desulfitobacterium, Syntrophobotulus, Dehalobacter, Sporotomaculum, Desulfosporosinus, Desulfonispora, Pelotomaculum, Thermincola, Cryptanaerobacter, Desulfitibacter, Candidatus desulforudis, Desulfurispora, and Desulfitospora.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Porphyromonadaceae, including Porphyromonas, Dysgonomonas, Tannerella, Odoribacter, Proteiniphilum, Petrimonas, Paludibacter, Parabacteroides, Barnesiella, Candidatus vestibaculum, Butyricimonas, Macellibacteroides, and Coprobacter.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Anaerolinaeceae including Anaerolinea, Bellilinea, Leptolinea, Levilinea, Longilinea, Ornatilinea, and Pelolinea.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Atopobiaceae including Atopbium and Olsenella.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Eubacteriaceae including Acetobacterium, Alkalibacter, Alkalibaculum, Aminicella, Anaerofustis, Eubacterium, Garciella, and Pseudoramibacter.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Acholeplasmataceae including Acholeplasma.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Succinivibrionaceae including Anaerobiospirillum, Ruminobacter, Succinatimonas, Succinimonas, and Succinivibrio.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Lactobacillaceae including Lactobacillus, Paralactobacillus, Pediococcus, and Sharpea.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Selenomonadaceae including Anaerovibrio, Centipeda, Megamonas, Mitsuokella, Pectinatus, Propionispira, Schwartzia, Selenomonas, and Zymophilus.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Burkholderiaceae including Burkholderia, Chitinimonas, Cupriavidus, Lautropia, Limnobacter, Pandoraea, Paraburkholderia, Paucimonas, Polynucleobacter, Ralstonia, Thermothrix, and Wautersia.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Streptococcaceae including Lactococcus, Lactovum, and Streptococcus.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Anaerolinaeceae including Aestuariimicrobium, Arachnia, Auraticoccus, Brooklawnia, Friedmanniella, Granulicoccus, Luteococcus, Mariniluteicoccus, Microlunatus, Micropruina, Naumannella, Propionibacterium, Propionicicella, Propioniciclava, Propionferax, Propionimicrobium, and Tessaracoccus.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Prevotellaceae, including Paraprevotella, Prevotella, Hallella, Xylanibacter, and Alloprevotella.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Neocallimastigaceae, including Anaeromyces, Caecomyces, Cyllamyces, Neocallimastix, Orpinomyces, and Piromyces.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Saccharomycetaceae, including Brettanomyces, Candida, Citeromyces, Cyniclomyces, Debaryomyces, Issatchenkia, Kazachstania (syn. Arxiozyma), Kluyveromyces, Komagataella, Kuraishia, Lachancea, Lodderomyces, Nakaseomyces, Pachysolen, Pichia, Saccharomyces, Spathaspora, Tetrapisispora, Vanderwaltozyma, Torulaspora, Williopsis, Zygosaccharomyces, and Zygotorulaspora.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Erysipelotrichaceae, including Erysipelothrix, Solobacterium, Turicibacter, Faecalibaculum, Faecalicoccus, Faecalitalea, Holdemanella, Holdemania, Dielma, Eggerthia, Erysipelatoclostridium, Allobacterium, Breznakia, Bulleidia, Catenibacterium, Catenisphaera, and Coprobacillus.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Phaeosphaeriaceae, including Barria, Bricookea, Carinispora, Chaetoplea, Eudarluca, Hadrospora, Isthmosporella, Katumotoa, Lautitia, Metameris, Mixtura, Neophaeosphaeria, Nodulosphaeria, Ophiosphaerella, Phaeosphaeris, Phaeosphaeriopsis, Setomelanomma, Stagonospora, Teratosphaeria, and Wilmia.
In further embodiments, isolated microbial species may be selected from genera of family Botryosphaeriaceae, including Amarenomyces, Aplosporella, Auerswaldiella, Botryosphaeria, Dichomera, Diplodia, Discochora, Dothidothia, Dothiorella, Fusicoccum, Granulodiplodia, Guignardia, Lasiodiplodia, Leptodothiorella, Leptodothiorella, Leptoguignardia, Macrophoma, Macrophomina, Nattrassia, Neodeightonia, Neofusicocum, Neoscytalidium, Otthia, Phaeobotryosphaeria, Phomatosphaeropsis, Phyllosticta, Pseudofusicoccum, Saccharata, Sivanesania, and Thyrostroma.
In some embodiments, the disclosure provides isolated microbial species belonging to genera of: Clostridium, Ruminococcus, Roseburia, Hydrogenoanaerobacterium, Saccharofermentans, Papillibacter, Pelotomaculum, Butyricicoccus, Tannerella, Prevotella, Butyricimonas, Piromyces, Candida, Vrystaatia, Orpinomyces, Neocallimastix, and Phyllosticta.
In further embodiments, the disclosure provides isolated microbial species belonging to the family of Lachnospiraceae, and the order of Saccharomycetales. In further embodiments, the disclosure provides isolated microbial species of Candida xylopsoci, Vrystaatia aloeicola, and Phyllosticta capitalensis.
In some embodiments, a microbe from the taxa disclosed herein are utilized to impart one or more beneficial properties or improved traits to milk in ruminants.
In some embodiments, the disclosure provides isolated microbial species, selected from the group consisting of: Clostridium, Ruminococcus, Roseburia, Hydrogenoanaerobacterium, Saccharofermentans, Papillibacter, Pelotomaculum, Butyricicoccus, Tannerella, Prevotella, Butyricimonas, Piromyces, Pichia, Candida, Vrystaatia, Orpinomyces, Neocallimastix, and Phyllosticta.
In some embodiments, the disclosure provides novel isolated microbial strains of species, selected from the group consisting of: Clostridium, Ruminococcus, Roseburia, Hydrogenoanaerobacterium, Saccharofermentans, Papillibacter, Pelotomaculum, Butyricicoccus, Tannerella, Prevotella, Butyricimonas, Piromyces, Pichia, Candida, Vrystaatia, Orpinomyces, Neocallimastix, and Phyllosticta. Particular novel strains of these aforementioned taxonomic groups can be found in Table 1 and/or Table 3.
Furthermore, the disclosure relates to microbes having characteristics substantially similar to that of a microbe identified in Table 1 or Table 3.
The isolated microbial species, and novel strains of said species, identified in the present disclosure, are able to impart beneficial properties or traits to ruminant milk production.
For instance, the isolated microbes described in Table 1 and Table 3, or consortia of said microbes, are able to increase total milk fat in ruminant milk. The increase can be quantitatively measured, for example, by measuring the effect that said microbial application has upon the modulation of total milk fat.
In some embodiments, the isolated microbial strains are microbes of the present disclosure that have been genetically modified. In some embodiments, the genetically modified or recombinant microbes comprise polynucleotide sequences which do not naturally occur in said microbes. In some embodiments, the microbes may comprise heterologous polynucleotides. In further embodiments, the heterologous polynucleotides may be operably linked to one or more polynucleotides native to the microbes.
In some embodiments, the heterologous polynucleotides may be reporter genes or selectable markers. In some embodiments, reporter genes may be selected from any of the family of fluorescence proteins (e.g., GFP, RFP, YFP, and the like), β-galactosidase, luciferase. In some embodiments, selectable markers may be selected from neomycin phosphotransferase, hygromycin phosphotransferase, aminoglycoside adenyltransferase, dihydrofolate reductase, acetolactase synthase, bromoxynil nitrilase, β-glucuronidase, dihydrogolate reductase, and chloramphenicol acetyltransferase. In some embodiments, the heterologous polynucleotide may be operably linked to one or more promoter.
Intestinimonas
Anaerolinea
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Olsenella
Eubacterium
Catenisphaera
Faecalibacterium
Solobacterium
Blautia
Ralsonia
Coprococcus
Casaltella
Anaeroplasma
Acholeplasma
Aminiphilus
Mitsuokella
Alistipes
Sharpea
Oscillibacter
Neocallimastix
Odoribacter
Pichia
Tannerella
Candida
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Orpinomyces
Succinivibrio
Sugiyamaella
Ruminobacter
Cyllamyces
Lachnospira
Caecomyces
Sinimarinibacterium
Tremella
Hydrogenoanaerobacterium
Turicibacter
Clostridium XlVa
Anaerolinea
Saccharofermentans
Piromyces
Butyricicoccus
Olsenella
Papillibacter
Clostridium XICa
Pelotomaculum
Erysipelotrichaceae
Lachnospiracea
Solobacterium
Anaeroplasma
Ralstonia
Clostridium
Eubacterium
Rikenella
Lachnobacterium
Tannerella
Acholeplasma
Howardella
Selenomonas
Butyricimonas
Sharpea
Succinivibrio
Phyllosticta
Ruminobacter
Candida xylopsoc
Syntrophococcus
Candida apicol
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Saccharomycetales
Ascomycota
Candida rugos
Microbial Consortia
In some aspects, the disclosure provides microbial consortia comprising a combination of at least any two microbes selected from amongst the microbes identified in Table 1 and/or Table 3.
In certain embodiments, the consortia of the present disclosure comprise two microbes, or three microbes, or four microbes, or five microbes, or six microbes, or seven microbes, or eight microbes, or nine microbes, or ten or more microbes. Said microbes of the consortia are different microbial species, or different strains of a microbial species.
In some embodiments, the disclosure provides consortia, comprising: at least two isolated microbial species belonging to genera of: Clostridium, Ruminococcus, Roseburia, Hydrogenoanaerobacterium, Saccharofermentans, Papillibacter, Pelotomaculum, Butyricicoccus, Tannerella, Prevotella, Butyricimonas, Piromyces, Pichia, Candida, Vrystaatia, Orpinomyces, Neocallimastix, and Phyllosticta. Particular novel strains of species of these aforementioned genera can be found in Table 1 and/or Table 3.
In some embodiments, the disclosure provides consortia, comprising: at least two isolated microbial species, selected from the group consisting of species of the family of Lachnospiraceae, and the order of Saccharomycetales.
In particular aspects, the disclosure provides microbial consortia, comprising species as grouped in Tables 5-11. With respect to Tables 5-11, the letters A through I represent a non-limiting selection of microbes of the present disclosure, defined as:
In some embodiments, the microbial consortia may be selected from any member group from Tables 5-11.
Isolated Microbes—Source Material
The microbes of the present disclosure were obtained, among other places, at various locales in the United States from the gastrointestinal tract of cows.
Isolated Microbes—Microbial Culture Techniques
The microbes of Table 1 and Table 3 were matched to their nearest taxonomic groups by utilizing classification tools of the Ribosomal Database Project (RDP) for 16s rRNA sequences and the User-friendly Nordic ITS Ectomycorrhiza (UNITE) database for ITS rRNA sequences. Examples of matching microbes to their nearest taxa may be found in Lan et al. (2012. PLOS one. 7(3):e32491), Schloss and Westcott (2011. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 77(10):3219-3226), and Koljalg et al. (2005. New Phytologist. 166(3):1063-1068).
The isolation, identification, and culturing of the microbes of the present disclosure can be effected using standard microbiological techniques. Examples of such techniques may be found in Gerhardt, P. (ed.) Methods for General and Molecular Microbiology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C. (1994) and Lennette, E. H. (ed.) Manual of Clinical Microbiology, Third Edition. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C. (1980), each of which is incorporated by reference.
Isolation can be effected by streaking the specimen on a solid medium (e.g., nutrient agar plates) to obtain a single colony, which is characterized by the phenotypic traits described hereinabove (e.g., Gram positive/negative, capable of forming spores aerobically/anaerobically, cellular morphology, carbon source metabolism, acid/base production, enzyme secretion, metabolic secretions, etc.) and to reduce the likelihood of working with a culture which has become contaminated.
For example, for microbes of the disclosure, biologically pure isolates can be obtained through repeated subculture of biological samples, each subculture followed by streaking onto solid media to obtain individual colonies or colony forming units. Methods of preparing, thawing, and growing lyophilized bacteria are commonly known, for example, Gherna, R. L. and C. A. Reddy. 2007. Culture Preservation, p 1019-1033. In C. A. Reddy, T. J. Beveridge, J. A. Breznak, G. A. Marzluf, T. M. Schmidt, and L. R. Snyder, eds. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C., 1033 pages; herein incorporated by reference. Thus freeze dried liquid formulations and cultures stored long term at −70° C. in solutions containing glycerol are contemplated for use in providing formulations of the present disclosure.
The microbes of the disclosure can be propagated in a liquid medium under aerobic conditions, or alternatively anaerobic conditions. Medium for growing the bacterial strains of the present disclosure includes a carbon source, a nitrogen source, and inorganic salts, as well as specially required substances such as vitamins, amino acids, nucleic acids and the like. Examples of suitable carbon sources which can be used for growing the microbes include, but are not limited to, starch, peptone, yeast extract, amino acids, sugars such as glucose, arabinose, mannose, glucosamine, maltose, and the like; salts of organic acids such as acetic acid, fumaric acid, adipic acid, propionic acid, citric acid, gluconic acid, malic acid, pyruvic acid, malonic acid and the like; alcohols such as ethanol and glycerol and the like; oil or fat such as soybean oil, rice bran oil, olive oil, corn oil, sesame oil. The amount of the carbon source added varies according to the kind of carbon source and is typically between 1 to 100 gram(s) per liter of medium. Preferably, glucose, starch, and/or peptone is contained in the medium as a major carbon source, at a concentration of 0.1-5% (W/V). Examples of suitable nitrogen sources which can be used for growing the bacterial strains of the present disclosure include, but are not limited to, amino acids, yeast extract, tryptone, beef extract, peptone, potassium nitrate, ammonium nitrate, ammonium chloride, ammonium sulfate, ammonium phosphate, ammonia or combinations thereof. The amount of nitrogen source varies according to the type of nitrogen source, typically between 0.1 to 30 gram per liter of medium. The inorganic salts, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate, disodium hydrogen phosphate, magnesium sulfate, magnesium chloride, ferric sulfate, ferrous sulfate, ferric chloride, ferrous chloride, manganous sulfate, manganous chloride, zinc sulfate, zinc chloride, cupric sulfate, calcium chloride, sodium chloride, calcium carbonate, sodium carbonate can be used alone or in combination. The amount of inorganic acid varies according to the kind of the inorganic salt, typically between 0.001 to 10 gram per liter of medium. Examples of specially required substances include, but are not limited to, vitamins, nucleic acids, yeast extract, peptone, meat extract, malt extract, dried yeast and combinations thereof. Cultivation can be effected at a temperature, which allows the growth of the microbial strains, essentially, between 20° C. and 46° C. In some aspects, a temperature range is 30° C.-39° C. For optimal growth, in some embodiments, the medium can be adjusted to pH 6.0-7.4. It will be appreciated that commercially available media may also be used to culture the microbial strains, such as Nutrient Broth or Nutrient Agar available from Difco, Detroit, MI. It will be appreciated that cultivation time may differ depending on the type of culture medium used and the concentration of sugar as a major carbon source.
In some aspects, cultivation lasts between 24-96 hours. Microbial cells thus obtained are isolated using methods, which are well known in the art. Examples include, but are not limited to, membrane filtration and centrifugal separation. The pH may be adjusted using sodium hydroxide and the like and the culture may be dried using a freeze dryer, until the water content becomes equal to 4% or less. Microbial co-cultures may be obtained by propagating each strain as described hereinabove. In some aspects, microbial multi-strain cultures may be obtained by propagating two or more of the strains described hereinabove. It will be appreciated that the microbial strains may be cultured together when compatible culture conditions can be employed.
Isolated Microbes—Microbial Strains
Microbes can be distinguished into a genus based on polyphasic taxonomy, which incorporates all available phenotypic and genotypic data into a consensus classification (Vandamme et al. 1996. Polyphasic taxonomy, a consensus approach to bacterial systematics. Microbiol Rev 1996, 60:407-438). One accepted genotypic method for defining species is based on overall genomic relatedness, such that strains which share approximately 70% or more relatedness using DNA-DNA hybridization, with 5° C. or less ΔTm (the difference in the melting temperature between homologous and heterologous hybrids), under standard conditions, are considered to be members of the same species. Thus, populations that share greater than the aforementioned 70% threshold can be considered to be variants of the same species. Another accepted genotypic method for defining species is to isolate marker genes of the present disclosure, sequence these genes, and align these sequenced genes from multiple isolates or variants. The microbes are interpreted as belonging to the same species if one or more of the sequenced genes share at least 97% sequence identity.
The 16S or 18S rRNA sequences or ITS sequences are often used for making distinctions between species and strains, in that if one of the aforementioned sequences share less than a specified percent sequence identity from a reference sequence, then the two organisms from which the sequences were obtained are said to be of different species or strains.
Thus, one could consider microbes to be of the same species, if they share at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, 98%, or 99% sequence identity across the 16S or 18S rRNA sequence, or the ITS1 or ITS2 sequence.
Further, one could define microbial strains of a species, as those that share at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, 98%, or 99% sequence identity across the 16S or 18S rRNA sequence, or the ITS1 or ITS2 sequence.
In one embodiment, microbial strains of the present disclosure include those that comprise polynucleotide sequences that share at least 70%, 75%, 80%, 81%, 82%, 83%, 84%, 85%, 86%, 87%, 88%, 89%, 90%, 91%, 92%, 93%, 94%, 95%, 96%, 97%, 98%, 99% or 100% sequence identity with any one of SEQ ID NOs:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 39, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 2045, 2046, 2047, 2048, 2049, 2050, 2051, 2052, 2053, 2054, 2055, 2056, 2057, 2058, 2059, 2060, 2061, 2062, 2063, 2064, 2065, 2066, 2067, 2068, 2069, 2070, 2071, 2072, 2073, 2074, 2075, 2076, 2077, 2078, 2079, 2080, 2081, 2082, 2083, 2084, 2085, 2086, 2087, 2088, 2089, 2090, 2091, 2092, 2093, 2094, 2095, 2096, 2097, 2098, 2099, 2100, 2101, 2102, 2103, 2104, 2105, 2106, and 2107. In a further embodiment, microbial strains of the present disclosure include those that comprise polynucleotide sequences that share at least 70%, 75%, 80%, 81%, 82%, 83%, 84%, 85%, 86%, 87%, 88%, 89%, 90%, 91%, 92%, 93%, 94%, 95%, 96%, 97%, 98%, 99% or 100% sequence identity with any one of SEQ ID NOs:1-2107.
Comparisons may also be made with 23S rRNA sequences against reference sequences.
Unculturable microbes often cannot be assigned to a definite species in the absence of a phenotype determination, the microbes can be given a Candidatus designation within a genus provided their 16S or 18S rRNA sequences or ITS sequences subscribes to the principles of identity with known species.
One approach is to observe the distribution of a large number of strains of closely related species in sequence space and to identify clusters of strains that are well resolved from other clusters. This approach has been developed by using the concatenated sequences of multiple core (house-keeping) genes to assess clustering patterns, and has been called multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA) or multilocus sequence phylogenetic analysis. MLSA has been used successfully to explore clustering patterns among large numbers of strains assigned to very closely related species by current taxonomic methods, to look at the relationships between small numbers of strains within a genus, or within a broader taxonomic grouping, and to address specific taxonomic questions. More generally, the method can be used to ask whether bacterial species exist—that is, to observe whether large populations of similar strains invariably fall into well-resolved clusters, or whether in some cases there is a genetic continuum in which clear separation into clusters is not observed.
In order to more accurately make a determination of genera, a determination of phenotypic traits, such as morphological, biochemical, and physiological characteristics are made for comparison with a reference genus archetype. The colony morphology can include color, shape, pigmentation, production of slime, etc. Features of the cell are described as to shape, size, Gram reaction, extracellular material, presence of endospores, flagella presence and location, motility, and inclusion bodies. Biochemical and physiological features describe growth of the organism at different ranges of temperature, pH, salinity and atmospheric conditions, growth in presence of different sole carbon and nitrogen sources. One of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised as to the phenotypic traits that define the genera of the present disclosure.
In one embodiment, the microbes taught herein were identified utilizing 16S rRNA gene sequences and ITS sequences. It is known in the art that 16S rRNA contains hypervariable regions that can provide species/strain-specific signature sequences useful for bacterial identification, and that ITS sequences can also provide species/strain-specific signature sequences useful for fungal identification.
Phylogenetic analysis using the rRNA genes and/or ITS sequences are used to define “substantially similar” species belonging to common genera and also to define “substantially similar” strains of a given taxonomic species. Furthermore, physiological and/or biochemical properties of the isolates can be utilized to highlight both minor and significant differences between strains that could lead to advantageous behavior in ruminants.
Compositions of the present disclosure may include combinations of fungal spores and bacterial spores, fungal spores and bacterial vegetative cells, fungal vegetative cells and bacterial spores, fungal vegetative cells and bacterial vegetative cells. In some embodiments, compositions of the present disclosure comprise bacteria only in the form of spores. In some embodiments, compositions of the present disclosure comprise bacteria only in the form of vegetative cells. In some embodiments, compositions of the present disclosure comprise bacteria in the absence of fungi. In some embodiments, compositions of the present disclosure comprise fungi in the absence of bacteria.
Bacterial spores may include endospores and akinetes. Fungal spores may include statismospores, ballistospores, autospores, aplanospores, zoospores, mitospores, megaspores, microspores, meiospores, chlamydospores, urediniospores, teliospores, oospores, carpospores, tetraspores, sporangiospores, zygospores, ascospores, basidiospores, ascospores, and asciospores.
In some embodiments, spores of the composition germinate upon administration to animals of the present disclosure. In some embodiments, spores of the composition germinate only upon administration to animals of the present disclosure.
Microbial Compositions
In some embodiments, the microbes of the disclosure are combined into microbial compositions.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions include ruminant feed, such as cereals (barley, maize, oats, and the like); starches (tapioca and the like); oilseed cakes; and vegetable wastes. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions include vitamins, minerals, trace elements, emulsifiers, aromatizing products, binders, colorants, odorants, thickening agents, and the like.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are solid. Where solid compositions are used, it may be desired to include one or more carrier materials including, but not limited to: mineral earths such as silicas, talc, kaolin, limestone, chalk, clay, dolomite, diatomaceous earth; calcium sulfate; magnesium sulfate; magnesium oxide; products of vegetable origin such as cereal meals, tree bark meal, wood meal, and nutshell meal.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are liquid. In further embodiments, the liquid comprises a solvent that may include water or an alcohol, and other animal-safe solvents. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure include binders such as animal-safe polymers, carboxymethylcellulose, starch, polyvinyl alcohol, and the like.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure comprise thickening agents such as silica, clay, natural extracts of seeds or seaweed, synthetic derivatives of cellulose, guar gum, locust bean gum, alginates, and methylcelluloses. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions comprise anti-settling agents such as modified starches, polyvinyl alcohol, xanthan gum, and the like.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure comprise colorants including organic chromophores classified as nitroso; nitro; azo, including monoazo, bisazo and polyazo; acridine, anthraquinone, azine, diphenylmethane, indamine, indophenol, methine, oxazine, phthalocyanine, thiazine, thiazole, triarylmethane, xanthene. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure comprise trace nutrients such as salts of iron, manganese, boron, copper, cobalt, molybdenum and zinc.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure comprise an animal-safe virucide or nematicide.
In some embodiments, microbial compositions of the present disclosure comprise saccharides (e.g., monosaccharides, disaccharides, trisaccharides, polysaccharides, oligosaccharides, and the like), polymeric saccharides, lipids, polymeric lipids, lipopolysaccharides, proteins, polymeric proteins, lipoproteins, nucleic acids, nucleic acid polymers, silica, inorganic salts and combinations thereof. In a further embodiment, microbial compositions comprise polymers of agar, agarose, gelrite, gellan gumand the like. In some embodiments, microbial compositions comprise plastic capsules, emulsions (e.g., water and oil), membranes, and artificial membranes. In some embodiments, emulsions or linked polymer solutions may comprise microbial compositions of the present disclosure. See Harel and Bennett (U.S. Pat. No. 8,460,726B2).
In some embodiments, microbial compositions of the present disclosure occur in a solid form (e.g., dispersed lyophilized spores) or a liquid form (microbes interspersed in a storage medium).
In some embodiments, microbial compositions of the present disclosure comprise one or more preservatives. The preservatives may be in liquid or gas formulations. The preservatives may be selected from one or more of monosaccharide, disaccharide, trisaccharide, polysaccharide, acetic acid, ascorbic acid, calcium ascorbate, erythorbic acid, iso-ascorbic acid, erythrobic acid, potassium nitrate, sodium ascorbate, sodium erythorbate, sodium iso-ascorbate, sodium nitrate, sodium nitrite, nitrogen, benzoic acid, calcium sorbate, ethyl lauroyl arginate, methyl-p-hydroxy benzoate, methyl paraben, potassium acetate, potassium benzoiate, potassium bisulphite, potassium diacetate, potassium lactate, potassium metabisulphite, potassium sorbate, propyl-p-hydroxy benzoate, propyl paraben, sodium acetate, sodium benzoate, sodium bisulphite, sodium nitrite, sodium diacetate, sodium lactate, sodium metabisulphite, sodium salt of methyl-p-hydroxy benzoic acid, sodium salt of propyl-p-hydroxy benzoic acid, sodium sulphate, sodium sulfite, sodium dithionite, sulphurous acid, calcium propionate, dimethyl dicarbonate, natamycin, potassium sorbate, potassium bisulfite, potassium metabisulfite, propionic acid, sodium diacetate, sodium propionate, sodium sorbate, sorbic acid, ascorbic acid, ascorbyl palmitate, ascorbyl stearate, butylated hydro-xyanisole, butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), butylated hydroxyl anisole (BHA), citric acid, citric acid esters of mono- and/or diglycerides, L-cysteine, L-cysteine hydrochloride, gum guaiacum, gum guaiac, lecithin, lecithin citrate, monoglyceride citrate, monoisopropyl citrate, propyl gallate, sodium metabisulphite, tartaric acid, tertiary butyl hydroquinone, stannous chloride, thiodipropionic acid, dilauryl thiodipropionate, distearyl thiodipropionate, ethoxyquin, sulfur dioxide, formic acid, or tocopherol(s).
In some embodiments, microbial compositions of the present disclosure include bacterial and/or fungal cells in spore form, vegetative cell form, and/or lysed cell form. In one embodiment, the lysed cell form acts as a mycotoxin binder, e.g. mycotoxins binding to dead cells.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable in a refrigerator (35-40° F.) for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 days. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable in a refrigerator (35-40° F.) for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 weeks.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable at room temperature (68-72° F.) or between 50-77° F. for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 days. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable at room temperature (68-72° F.) or between 50-77° F. for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 weeks.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable at −23-35° F. for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 days. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable at −23-35° F. for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 weeks.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable at 77-100° F. for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 days. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable at 77-100° F. for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 weeks.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable at 101-213° F. for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 days. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are shelf stable at 101-213° F. for a period of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, or 60 weeks.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are shelf stable at refrigeration temperatures (35-40° F.), at room temperature (68-72° F.), between 50-77° F., between −23-35° F., between 70-100° F., or between 101-213° F. for a period of about 1 to 100, about 1 to 95, about 1 to 90, about 1 to 85, about 1 to 80, about 1 to 75, about 1 to 70, about 1 to 65, about 1 to 60, about 1 to 55, about 1 to 50, about 1 to 45, about 1 to 40, about 1 to 35, about 1 to 30, about 1 to 25, about 1 to 20, about 1 to 15, about 1 to 10, about 1 to 5, about 5 to 100, about 5 to 95, about 5 to 90, about 5 to 85, about 5 to 80, about 5 to 75, about 5 to 70, about 5 to 65, about 5 to 60, about 5 to 55, about 5 to 50, about 5 to 45, about 5 to 40, about 5 to 35, about 5 to 30, about 5 to 25, about 5 to 20, about 5 to 15, about 5 to 10, about 10 to 100, about 10 to 95, about 10 to 90, about 10 to 85, about 10 to 80, about 10 to 75, about 10 to 70, about 10 to 65, about 10 to 60, about 10 to 55, about 10 to 50, about 10 to 45, about 10 to 40, about 10 to 35, about 10 to 30, about 10 to 25, about 10 to 20, about 10 to 15, about 15 to 100, about 15 to 95, about 15 to 90, about 15 to 85, about 15 to 80, about 15 to 75, about 15 to 70, about 15 to 65, about 15 to 60, about 15 to 55, about 15 to 50, about 15 to 45, about 15 to 40, about 15 to 35, about 15 to 30, about 15 to 25, about 15 to 20, about 20 to 100, about 20 to 95, about 20 to 90, about 20 to 85, about 20 to 80, about 20 to 75, about 20 to 70, about 20 to 65, about 20 to 60, about 20 to 55, about 20 to 50, about 20 to 45, about 20 to 40, about 20 to 35, about 20 to 30, about 20 to 25, about 25 to 100, about 25 to 95, about 25 to 90, about 25 to 85, about 25 to 80, about 25 to 75, about 25 to 70, about 25 to 65, about 25 to 60, about 25 to 55, about 25 to 50, about 25 to 45, about 25 to 40, about 25 to 35, about 25 to 30, about 30 to 100, about 30 to 95, about 30 to 90, about 30 to 85, about 30 to 80, about 30 to 75, about 30 to 70, about 30 to 65, about 30 to 60, about 30 to 55, about 30 to 50, about 30 to 45, about 30 to 40, about 30 to 35, about 35 to 100, about 35 to 95, about 35 to 90, about 35 to 85, about 35 to 80, about 35 to 75, about 35 to 70, about 35 to 65, about 35 to 60, about 35 to 55, about 35 to 50, about 35 to 45, about 35 to 40, about 40 to 100, about 40 to 95, about 40 to 90, about 40 to 85, about 40 to 80, about 40 to 75, about 40 to 70, about 40 to 65, about 40 to 60, about 40 to 55, about 40 to 50, about 40 to 45, about 45 to 100, about 45 to 95, about 45 to 90, about 45 to 85, about 45 to 80, about 45 to 75, about 45 to 70, about 45 to 65, about 45 to 60, about 45 to 55, about 45 to 50, about 50 to 100, about 50 to 95, about 50 to 90, about 50 to 85, about 50 to 80, about 50 to 75, about 50 to 70, about 50 to 65, about 50 to 60, about 50 to 55, about 55 to 100, about 55 to 95, about 55 to 90, about 55 to 85, about 55 to 80, about 55 to 75, about 55 to 70, about 55 to 65, about 55 to 60, about 60 to 100, about 60 to 95, about 60 to 90, about 60 to 85, about 60 to 80, about 60 to 75, about 60 to 70, about 60 to 65, about 65 to 100, about 65 to 95, about 65 to 90, about 65 to 85, about 65 to 80, about 65 to 75, about 65 to 70, about 70 to 100, about 70 to 95, about 70 to 90, about 70 to 85, about 70 to 80, about 70 to 75, about 75 to 100, about 75 to 95, about 75 to 90, about 75 to 85, about 75 to 80, about 80 to 100, about 80 to 95, about 80 to 90, about 80 to 85, about 85 to 100, about 85 to 95, about 85 to 90, about 90 to 100, about 90 to 95, or 95 to 100 weeks
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are shelf stable at refrigeration temperatures (35-40° F.), at room temperature (68-72° F.), between 50-77° F., between −23-35° F., between 70-100° F., or between 101-213° F. for a period of 1 to 100, 1 to 95, 1 to 90, 1 to 85, 1 to 80, 1 to 75, 1 to 70, 1 to 65, 1 to 60, 1 to 55, 1 to 50, 1 to 45, 1 to 40, 1 to 35, 1 to 30, 1 to 25, 1 to 20, 1 to 15, 1 to 10, 1 to 5, 5 to 100, 5 to 95, 5 to 90, 5 to 85, 5 to 80, 5 to 75, 5 to 70, 5 to 65, 5 to 60, 5 to 55, 5 to 50, 5 to 45, 5 to 40, 5 to 35, 5 to 30, 5 to 25, 5 to 20, 5 to 15, 5 to 10, 10 to 100, 10 to 95, 10 to 90, 10 to 85, 10 to 80, 10 to 75, 10 to 70, 10 to 65, 10 to 60, 10 to 55, 10 to 50, 10 to 45, 10 to 40, 10 to 35, 10 to 30, 10 to 25, 10 to 20, 10 to 15, 15 to 100, 15 to 95, 15 to 90, 15 to 85, 15 to 80, 15 to 75, 15 to 70, 15 to 65, 15 to 60, 15 to 55, 15 to 50, 15 to 45, 15 to 40, 15 to 35, 15 to 30, 15 to 25, 15 to 20, 20 to 100, 20 to 95, 20 to 90, 20 to 85, 20 to 80, 20 to 75, 20 to 70, 20 to 65, 20 to 60, 20 to 55, 20 to 50, 20 to 45, 20 to 40, 20 to 35, 20 to 30, 20 to 25, 25 to 100, 25 to 95, 25 to 90, 25 to 85, 25 to 80, 25 to 75, 25 to 70, 25 to 65, 25 to 60, 25 to 55, 25 to 50, 25 to 45, 25 to 40, 25 to 35, 25 to 30, 30 to 100, 30 to 95, 30 to 90, 30 to 85, 30 to 80, 30 to 75, 30 to 70, 30 to 65, 30 to 60, 30 to 55, 30 to 50, 30 to 45, 30 to 40, 30 to 35, 35 to 100, 35 to 95, 35 to 90, 35 to 85, 35 to 80, 35 to 75, 35 to 70, 35 to 65, 35 to 60, 35 to 55, 35 to 50, 35 to 45, 35 to 40, 40 to 100, 40 to 95, 40 to 90, 40 to 85, 40 to 80, 40 to 75, 40 to 70, 40 to 65, 40 to 60, 40 to 55, 40 to 50, 40 to 45, 45 to 100, 45 to 95, 45 to 90, 45 to 85, 45 to 80, 45 to 75, 45 to 70, 45 to 65, 45 to 60, 45 to 55, 45 to 50, 50 to 100, 50 to 95, 50 to 90, 50 to 85, 50 to 80, 50 to 75, 50 to 70, 50 to 65, 50 to 60, 50 to 55, 55 to 100, 55 to 95, 55 to 90, 55 to 85, 55 to 80, 55 to 75, 55 to 70, 55 to 65, 55 to 60, 60 to 100, 60 to 95, 60 to 90, 60 to 85, 60 to 80, 60 to 75, 60 to 70, 60 to 65, 65 to 100, 65 to 95, 65 to 90, 65 to 85, 65 to 80, 65 to 75, 65 to 70, 70 to 100, 70 to 95, 70 to 90, 70 to 85, 70 to 80, 70 to 75, 75 to 100, 75 to 95, 75 to 90, 75 to 85, 75 to 80, 80 to 100, 80 to 95, 80 to 90, 80 to 85, 85 to 100, 85 to 95, 85 to 90, 90 to 100, 90 to 95, or 95 to 100 weeks.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are shelf stable at refrigeration temperatures (35-40° F.), at room temperature (68-72° F.), between 50-77° F., between −23-35° F., between 70-100° F., or between 101-213° F. for a period of about 1 to 36, about 1 to 34, about 1 to 32, about 1 to 30, about 1 to 28, about 1 to 26, about 1 to 24, about 1 to 22, about 1 to 20, about 1 to 18, about 1 to 16, about 1 to 14, about 1 to 12, about 1 to 10, about 1 to 8, about 1 to 6, about 1 one 4, about 1 to 2, about 4 to 36, about 4 to 34, about 4 to 32, about 4 to 30, about 4 to 28, about 4 to 26, about 4 to 24, about 4 to 22, about 4 to 20, about 4 to 18, about 4 to 16, about 4 to 14, about 4 to 12, about 4 to 10, about 4 to 8, about 4 to 6, about 6 to 36, about 6 to 34, about 6 to 32, about 6 to 30, about 6 to 28, about 6 to 26, about 6 to 24, about 6 to 22, about 6 to 20, about 6 to 18, about 6 to 16, about 6 to 14, about 6 to 12, about 6 to 10, about 6 to 8, about 8 to 36, about 8 to 34, about 8 to 32, about 8 to 30, about 8 to 28, about 8 to 26, about 8 to 24, about 8 to 22, about 8 to 20, about 8 to 18, about 8 to 16, about 8 to 14, about 8 to 12, about 8 to 10, about 10 to 36, about 10 to 34, about 10 to 32, about 10 to 30, about 10 to 28, about 10 to 26, about 10 to 24, about 10 to 22, about 10 to 20, about 10 to 18, about 10 to 16, about 10 to 14, about 10 to 12, about 12 to 36, about 12 to 34, about 12 to 32, about 12 to 30, about 12 to 28, about 12 to 26, about 12 to 24, about 12 to 22, about 12 to 20, about 12 to 18, about 12 to 16, about 12 to 14, about 14 to 36, about 14 to 34, about 14 to 32, about 14 to 30, about 14 to 28, about 14 to 26, about 14 to 24, about 14 to 22, about 14 to 20, about 14 to 18, about 14 to 16, about 16 to 36, about 16 to 34, about 16 to 32, about 16 to 30, about 16 to 28, about 16 to 26, about 16 to 24, about 16 to 22, about 16 to 20, about 16 to 18, about 18 to 36, about 18 to 34, about 18 to 32, about 18 to 30, about 18 to 28, about 18 to 26, about 18 to 24, about 18 to 22, about 18 to 20, about 20 to 36, about 20 to 34, about 20 to 32, about 20 to 30, about 20 to 28, about 20 to 26, about 20 to 24, about 20 to 22, about 22 to 36, about 22 to 34, about 22 to 32, about 22 to 30, about 22 to 28, about 22 to 26, about 22 to 24, about 24 to 36, about 24 to 34, about 24 to 32, about 24 to 30, about 24 to 28, about 24 to 26, about 26 to 36, about 26 to 34, about 26 to 32, about 26 to 30, about 26 to 28, about 28 to 36, about 28 to 34, about 28 to 32, about 28 to 30, about 30 to 36, about 30 to 34, about 30 to 32, about 32 to 36, about 32 to 34, or about 34 to 36 months.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are shelf stable at refrigeration temperatures (35-40° F.), at room temperature (68-72° F.), between 50-77° F., between −23-35° F., between 70-100° F., or between 101-213° F. for a period of 1 to 36 1 to 34 1 to 32 1 to 30 1 to 28 1 to 26 1 to 24 1 to 22 1 to 20 1 to 18 1 to 16 1 to 14 1 to 12 1 to 10 1 to 8 1 to 6 1 one 4 1 to 2 4 to 36 4 to 34 4 to 32 4 to 30 4 to 28 4 to 26 4 to 24 4 to 22 4 to 20 4 to 18 4 to 16 4 to 14 4 to 12 4 to 10 4 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 36 6 to 34 6 to 32 6 to 30 6 to 28 6 to 26 6 to 24 6 to 22 6 to 20 6 to 18 6 to 16 6 to 14 6 to 12 6 to 10 6 to 8 8 to 36 8 to 34 8 to 32 8 to 30 8 to 28 8 to 26 8 to 24 8 to 22 8 to 20 8 to 18 8 to 16 8 to 14 8 to 12 8 to 10 10 to 36 10 to 34 10 to 32 10 to 30 10 to 28 10 to 26 10 to 24 10 to 22 10 to 20 10 to 18 10 to 16 10 to 14 10 to 12 12 to 36 12 to 34 12 to 32 12 to 30 12 to 28 12 to 26 12 to 24 12 to 22 12 to 20 12 to 18 12 to 16 12 to 14 14 to 36 14 to 34 14 to 32 14 to 30 14 to 28 14 to 26 14 to 24 14 to 22 14 to 20 14 to 18 14 to 16 16 to 36 16 to 34 16 to 32 16 to 30 16 to 28 16 to 26 16 to 24 16 to 22 16 to 20 16 to 18 18 to 36 18 to 34 18 to 32 18 to 30 18 to 28 18 to 26 18 to 24 18 to 22 18 to 20 20 to 36 20 to 34 20 to 32 20 to 30 20 to 28 20 to 26 20 to 24 20 to 22 22 to 36 22 to 34 22 to 32 22 to 30 22 to 28 22 to 26 22 to 24 24 to 36 24 to 34 24 to 32 24 to 30 24 to 28 24 to 26 26 to 36 26 to 34 26 to 32 26 to 30 26 to 28 28 to 36 28 to 34 28 to 32 28 to 30 30 to 36 30 to 34 30 to 32 32 to 36 32 to 34, or about 34 to 36.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are shelf stable at any of the disclosed temperatures and/or temperature ranges and spans of time at a relative humidity of at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, or 98%
Encapsulation Compositions
In some embodiments, the microbes or microbial compositions of the disclosure are encapsulated in an encapsulating composition. An encapsulating composition protects the microbes from external stressors prior to entering the gastrointestinal tract of ungulates. Encapsulating compositions further create an environment that may be beneficial to the microbes, such as minimizing the oxidative stresses of an aerobic environment on anaerobic microbes. See Kalsta et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 5,104,662A), Ford (U.S. Pat. No. 5,733,568A), and Mosbach and Nilsson (U.S. Pat. No. 4,647,536A) for encapsulation compositions of microbes, and methods of encapsulating microbes.
In one embodiment, the encapsulating composition comprises microcapsules having a multiplicity of liquid cores encapsulated in a solid shell material. For purposes of the disclosure, a “multiplicity” of cores is defined as two or more.
A first category of useful fusible shell materials is that of normally solid fats, including fats which are already of suitable hardness and animal or vegetable fats and oils which are hydrogenated until their melting points are sufficiently high to serve the purposes of the present disclosure. Depending on the desired process and storage temperatures and the specific material selected, a particular fat can be either a normally solid or normally liquid material. The terms “normally solid” and “normally liquid” as used herein refer to the state of a material at desired temperatures for storing the resulting microcapsules. Since fats and hydrogenated oils do not, strictly speaking, have melting points, the term “melting point” is used herein to describe the minimum temperature at which the fusible material becomes sufficiently softened or liquid to be successfully emulsified and spray cooled, thus roughly corresponding to the maximum temperature at which the shell material has sufficient integrity to prevent release of the choline cores. “Melting point” is similarly defined herein for other materials which do not have a sharp melting point.
Specific examples of fats and oils useful herein (some of which require hardening) are as follows: animal oils and fats, such as beef tallow, mutton tallow, lamb tallow, lard or pork fat, fish oil, and sperm oil; vegetable oils, such as canola oil, cottonseed oil, peanut oil, corn oil, olive oil, soybean oil, sunflower oil, safflower oil, coconut oil, palm oil, linseed oil, tung oil, and castor oil; fatty acid monoglycerides and diglycerides; free fatty acids, such as stearic acid, palmitic acid, and oleic acid; and mixtures thereof. The above listing of oils and fats is not meant to be exhaustive, but only exemplary.
Specific examples of fatty acids include linoleic acid, γ-linoleic acid, dihomo-γ-linolenic acid, arachidonic acid, docosatetraenoic acid, vaccenic acid, nervonic acid, mead acid, erucic acid, gondoic acid, elaidic acid, oleic acid, palitoleic acid, stearidonic acid, eicosapentaenoic acid, valeric acid, caproic acid, enanthic acid, caprylic acid, pelargonic acid, capric acid, undecylic acid, lauric acid, tridecylic acid, myristic acid, pentadecylic acid, palmitic acid, margaric acid, stearic acid, nonadecyclic acid, arachidic acid, heneicosylic acid, behenic acid, tricosylic acid, lignoceric acid, pentacosylic acid, cerotic acid, heptacosylic acid, montanic acid, nonacosylic acid, melissic acid, henatriacontylic acid, lacceroic acid, psyllic acid, geddic acid, ceroplastic acid, hexatriacontylic acid, heptatriacontanoic acid, and octatriacontanoic acid.
Another category of fusible materials useful as encapsulating shell materials is that of waxes. Representative waxes contemplated for use herein are as follows: animal waxes, such as beeswax, lanolin, shell wax, and Chinese insect wax; vegetable waxes, such as carnauba, candelilla, bayberry, and sugar cane; mineral waxes, such as paraffin, microcrystalline petroleum, ozocerite, ceresin, and montan; synthetic waxes, such as low molecular weight polyolefin (e.g., CARBOWAX), and polyol ether-esters (e.g., sorbitol); Fischer-Tropsch process synthetic waxes; and mixtures thereof. Water-soluble waxes, such as CARBOWAX and sorbitol, are not contemplated herein if the core is aqueous.
Still other fusible compounds useful herein are fusible natural resins, such as rosin, balsam, shellac, and mixtures thereof.
Various adjunct materials are contemplated for incorporation in fusible materials according to the present disclosure. For example, antioxidants, light stabilizers, dyes and lakes, flavors, essential oils, anti-caking agents, fillers, pH stabilizers, sugars (monosaccharides, disaccharides, trisaccharides, and polysaccharides) and the like can be incorporated in the fusible material in amounts which do not diminish its utility for the present disclosure.
The core material contemplated herein constitutes from about 0.1% to about 50%, about 1% to about 35%. or about 5% to about 30% by weight of the microcapsules. In some embodiments, the core material contemplated herein constitutes no more than about 30% by weight of the microcapsules. In some embodiments, the core material contemplated herein constitutes about 5% by weight of the microcapsules. The core material is contemplated as either a liquid or solid at contemplated storage temperatures of the microcapsules.
The cores may include other additives well-known in the pharmaceutical art, including edible sugars, such as sucrose, glucose, maltose, fructose, lactose, cellobiose, monosaccharides, disaccharides, trisaccharides, polysaccharides, and mixtures thereof; artificial sweeteners, such as aspartame, saccharin, cyclamate salts, and mixtures thereof; edible acids, such as acetic acid (vinegar), citric acid, ascorbic acid, tartaric acid, and mixtures thereof; edible starches, such as corn starch; hydrolyzed vegetable protein; water-soluble vitamins, such as Vitamin C; water-soluble medicaments; water-soluble nutritional materials, such as ferrous sulfate; flavors; salts; monosodium glutamate; antimicrobial agents, such as sorbic acid; antimycotic agents, such as potassium sorbate, sorbic acid, sodium benzoate, and benzoic acid; food grade pigments and dyes; and mixtures thereof. Other potentially useful supplemental core materials will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art.
Emulsifying agents may be employed to assist in the formation of stable emulsions. Representative emulsifying agents include glyceryl monostearate, polysorbate esters, ethoxylated mono- and diglycerides, and mixtures thereof.
For ease of processing, and particularly to enable the successful formation of a reasonably stable emulsion, the viscosities of the core material and the shell material should be similar at the temperature at which the emulsion is formed. In particular, the ratio of the viscosity of the shell to the viscosity of the core, expressed in centipoise or comparable units, and both measured at the temperature of the emulsion, should be from about 22:1 to about 1:1, desirably from about 8:1 to about 1:1, and preferably from about 3:1 to about 1:1. A ratio of 1:1 would be ideal, but a viscosity ratio within the recited ranges is useful.
Encapsulating compositions are not limited to microcapsule compositions as disclosed above. In some embodiments encapsulating compositions encapsulate the microbial compositions in an adhesive polymer that can be natural or synthetic without toxic effect. In some embodiments, the encapsulating composition may be a matrix selected from sugar matrix, gelatin matrix, polymer matrix, silica matrix, starch matrix, foam matrix, etc. In some embodiments, the encapsulating composition may be selected from polyvinyl acetates; polyvinyl acetate copolymers; ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) copolymers; polyvinyl alcohols; polyvinyl alcohol copolymers; celluloses, including ethylcelluloses, methylcelluloses, hydroxymethylcelluloses, hydroxypropylcelluloses and carboxymethylcellulose; polyvinylpyrolidones; polysaccharides, including starch, modified starch, dextrins, maltodextrins, alginate and chitosans; monosaccharides; fats; fatty acids, including oils; proteins, including gelatin and zeins; gum arabics; shellacs; vinylidene chloride and vinylidene chloride copolymers; calcium lignosulfonates; acrylic copolymers; polyvinylacrylates; polyethylene oxide; acrylamide polymers and copolymers; polyhydroxyethyl acrylate, methylacrylamide monomers; and polychloroprene.
In some embodiments, the encapsulating shell of the present disclosure can be up to 10 μm, 20 μm, 30 μm, 40 μm, 50 μm, 60 μm, 70 μm, 80 μm, 90 μm, 100 μm, 110 μm, 120 μm, 130 μm, 140 μm, 150 μm, 160 μm, 170 μm, 180 μm, 190 μm, 200 μm, 210 μm, 220 μm, 230 μm, 240 μm, 250 μm, 260 μm, 270 μm, 280 μm, 290 μm, 300 μm, 310 μm, 320 μm, 330 μm, 340 μm, 350 μm, 360 μm, 370 μm, 380 μm, 390 μm, 400 μm, 410 μm, 420 μm, 430 μm, 440 μm, 450 μm, 460 μm, 470 μm, 480 μm, 490 μm, 500 μm, 510 μm, 520 μm, 530 μm, 540 μm, 550 μm, 560 μm, 570 μm, 580 μm, 590 μm, 600 μm, 610 μm, 620 μm, 630 μm, 640 μm, 650 μm, 660 μm, 670 μm, 680 μm, 690 μm, 700 μm, 710 μm, 720 μm, 730 μm, 740 μm, 750 μm, 760 μm, 770 μm, 780 μm, 790 μm, 800 μm, 810 μm, 820 μm, 830 μm, 840 μm, 850 μm, 860 μm, 870 μm, 880 μm, 890 μm, 900 μm, 910 μm, 920 μm, 930 μm, 940 μm, 950 μm, 960 μm, 970 μm, 980 μm, 990 μm, 1000 μm, 1010 μm, 1020 μm, 1030 μm, 1040 μm, 1050 μm, 1060 μm, 1070 μm, 1080 μm, 1090 μm, 1100 μm, 1110 μm, 1120 μm, 1130 μm, 1140 μm, 1150 μm, 1160 μm, 1170 μm, 1180 μm, 1190 μm, 1200 μm, 1210 μm, 1220 μm, 1230 μm, 1240 μm, 1250 μm, 1260 μm, 1270 μm, 1280 μm, 1290 μm, 1300 μm, 1310 μm, 1320 μm, 1330 μm, 1340 μm, 1350 μm, 1360 μm, 1370 μm, 1380 μm, 1390 μm, 1400 μm, 1410 μm, 1420 μm, 1430 μm, 1440 μm, 1450 μm, 1460 μm, 1470 μm, 1480 μm, 1490 μm, 1500 μm, 1510 μm, 1520 μm, 1530 μm, 1540 μm, 1550 μm, 1560 μm, 1570 μm, 1580 μm, 1590 μm, 1600 μm, 1610 μm, 1620 μm, 1630 μm, 1640 μm, 1650 μm, 1660 μm, 1670 μm, 1680 μm, 1690 μm, 1700 μm, 1710 μm, 1720 μm, 1730 μm, 1740 μm, 1750 μm, 1760 μm, 1770 μm, 1780 μm, 1790 μm, 1800 μm, 1810 μm, 1820 μm, 1830 μm, 1840 μm, 1850 μm, 1860 μm, 1870 μm, 1880 μm, 1890 μm, 1900 μm, 1910 μm, 1920 μm, 1930 μm, 1940 μm, 1950 μm, 1960 μm, 1970 μm, 1980 μm, 1990 μm, 2000 μm, 2010 μm, 2020 μm, 2030 μm, 2040 μm, 2050 μm, 2060 μm, 2070 μm, 2080 μm, 2090 μm, 2100 μm, 2110 μm, 2120 μm, 2130 μm, 2140 μm, 2150 μm, 2160 μm, 2170 μm, 2180 μm, 2190 μm, 2200 μm, 2210 μm, 2220 μm, 2230 μm, 2240 μm, 2250 μm, 2260 μm, 2270 μm, 2280 μm, 2290 μm, 2300 μm, 2310 μm, 2320 μm, 2330 μm, 2340 μm, 2350 μm, 2360 μm, 2370 μm, 2380 μm, 2390 μm, 2400 μm, 2410 μm, 2420 μm, 2430 μm, 2440 μm, 2450 μm, 2460 μm, 2470 μm, 2480 μm, 2490 μm, 2500 μm, 2510 μm, 2520 μm, 2530 μm, 2540 μm, 2550 μm, 2560 μm, 2570 μm, 2580 μm, 2590 μm, 2600 μm, 2610 μm, 2620 μm, 2630 μm, 2640 μm, 2650 μm, 2660 μm, 2670 μm, 2680 μm, 2690 μm, 2700 μm, 2710 μm, 2720 μm, 2730 μm, 2740 μm, 2750 μm, 2760 μm, 2770 μm, 2780 μm, 2790 μm, 2800 μm, 2810 μm, 2820 μm, 2830 μm, 2840 μm, 2850 μm, 2860 μm, 2870 μm, 2880 μm, 2890 μm, 2900 μm, 2910 μm, 2920 μm, 2930 μm, 2940 μm, 2950 μm, 2960 μm, 2970 μm, 2980 μm, 2990 μm, or 3000 μm thick.
Animal Feed
In some embodiments, compositions of the present disclosure are mixed with animal feed. In some embodiments, animal feed may be present in various forms such as pellets, capsules, granulated, powdered, liquid, or semi-liquid.
In some embodiments, compositions of the present disclosure are mixed into the premix at at the feed mill (e.g., Carghill or Western Millin), alone as a standalone premix, and/or alongside other feed additives such as MONENSIN, vitamins, etc. In one embodiment, the compositions of the present disclosure are mixed into the feed at the feed mill. In another embodiment, compositions of the present disclosure are mixed into the feed itself.
In some embodiments, feed of the present disclosure may be supplemented with water, premix or premixes, forage, fodder, beans (e.g., whole, cracked, or ground), grains (e.g., whole, cracked, or ground), bean- or grain-based oils, bean- or grain-based meals, bean- or grain-based haylage or silage, bean- or grain-based syrups, fatty acids, sugar alcohols (e.g., polyhydric alcohols), commercially available formula feeds, and mixtures thereof.
In some embodiments, forage encompasses hay, haylage, and silage. In some embodiments, hays include grass hays (e.g., sudangrass, orchardgrass, or the like), alfalfa hay, and clover hay. In some embodiments, haylages include grass haylages, sorghum haylage, and alfalfa haylage. In some embodiments, silages include maize, oat, wheat, alfalfa, clover, and the like.
In some embodiments, premix or premixes may be utilized in the feed. Premixes may comprise micro-ingredients such as vitamins, minerals, amino acids; chemical preservatives; pharmaceutical compositions such as antibiotics and other medicaments; fermentation products, and other ingredients. In some embodiments, premixes are blended into the feed.
In some embodiments, the feed may include feed concentrates such as soybean hulls, sugar beet pulp, molasses, high protein soybean meal, ground corn, shelled corn, wheat midds, distiller grain, cottonseed hulls, rumen-bypass protein, rumen-bypass fat, and grease. See Luhman (U.S. Publication US20150216817A1), Anderson et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 3,484,243) and Porter and Luhman (U.S. Pat. No. 9,179,694B2) for animal feed and animal feed supplements capable of use in the present compositions and methods.
In some embodiments, feed occurs as a compound, which includes, in a mixed composition capable of meeting the basic dietary needs, the feed itself, vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and other necessary components. Compound feed may further comprise premixes.
In some embodiments, microbial compositions of the present disclosure may be mixed with animal feed, premix, and/or compound feed. Individual components of the animal feed may be mixed with the microbial compositions prior to feeding to ruminants. The microbial compositions of the present disclosure may be applied into or on a premix, into or on a feed, and/or into or on a compound feed.
Administration of Microbial Compositions
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are administered to ruminants via the oral route. In some embodiments the microbial compositions are administered via a direct injection route into the gastrointestinal tract. In further embodiments, the direct injection administration delivers the microbial compositions directly to the rumen. In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure are administered to animals anally. In further embodiments, anal administration is in the form of an inserted suppository.
In some embodiments, the microbial composition is administered in a dose comprise a total of, or at least, 1 ml, 2 ml, 3 ml, 4 ml, 5 ml, 6 ml, 7 ml, 8 ml, 9 ml, 10 ml, 11 ml, 12 ml, 13 ml, 14 ml, 15 ml, 16 ml, 17 ml, 18 ml, 19 ml, 20 ml, 21 ml, 22 ml, 23 ml, 24 ml, 25 ml, 26 ml, 27 ml, 28 ml, 29 ml, 30 ml, 31 ml, 32 ml, 33 ml, 34 ml, 35 ml, 36 ml, 37 ml, 38 ml, 39 ml, 40 ml, 41 m, 42 ml, 43 ml, 44 ml, 45 ml, 46 ml, 47 ml, 48 ml, 49 ml, 50 ml, 60 ml, 70 ml, 80 ml, 90 ml, 100 ml, 200 ml, 300 ml, 400 ml, 500 ml, 600 ml, 700 ml, 800 ml, 900 ml, or 1,000 ml.
In some embodiments, the microbial composition is administered in a dose comprising a total of, or at least, 1018, 1017, 1016, 1015, 1014, 1013, 1012, 1011, 1010, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, or 102 microbial cells.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions are mixed with feed, and the administration occurs through the ingestion of the microbial compositions along with the feed. In some embodiments, the dose of the microbial composition is administered such that there exists 102 to 1012, 103 to 1012, 104 to 1012, 105 to 1012, 106 to 1012, 107 to 1012, 108 to 1012, 109 to 1012, 1010 to 1012, 1011 to 1012, 102 to 1011, 103 to 1011, 104 to 1011, 105 to 1011, 106 to 1011, 107 to 1011, 108 to 1011, 109 to 1011, 1010 to 1011, 102 to 1010, 103 to 1010, 104 to 1010, 105 to 1010, 106 to 1010, 107 to 1010, 108 to 1010, 109 to 1010, 102 to 109, 103 to 109, 104 to 109, 105 to 109, 106 to 109, 107 to 109, 108 to 109, 102 to 108, 103 to 108, 104 to 108, 105 to 108, 106 to 108, 107 to 108, 102 to 107, 103 to 107, 104 to 107, 105 to 107, 106 to 107, 102 to 106, 103 to 106, 104 to 106, 105 to 106, 102 to 105, 103 to 105, 104 to 105, 102 to 104, 103 to 104, 102 to 103, 1012, 1011, 1010, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, or 102 total microbial cells per gram or milliliter of the composition.
In some embodiments, the administered dose of the microbial composition comprises 102 to 1018, 103 to 1018, 104 to 1018, 105 to 1018, 106 to 1018, 107 to 1018, 108 to 1018, 109 to 1018, 1010 to 1018, 1011 to 1018, 1012 to 1018, 1013 to 1018, 1014 to 1018, 1015 to 1018, 1016 to 1018, 1017 to 1018, 102 to 1012, 103 to 1012, 104 to 1012, 105 to 1012, 106 to 1012, 107 to 1012, 108 to 1012, 109 to 1012, 1010 to 1012, 1011 to 1012, 102 to 1011, 103 to 1011, 104 to 1011, 105 to 1011, 106 to 1011, 107 to 1011, 108 to 1011, 109 to 1011, 1010 to 1011, 102 to 1010, 103 to 1010, 104 to 1010, 105 to 1010, 106 to 1010, 107 to 1010, 108 to 1010, 109 to 1010, 102 to 109, 103 to 109, 104 to 109, 105 to 109, 106 to 109, 107 to 109, 108 to 109, 102 to 108, 103 to 108, 104 to 108, 105 to 108, 106 to 108, 107 to 108, 102 to 107, 103 to 107, 104 to 107, 105 to 107, 106 to 107, 102 to 106, 103 to 106, 104 to 106, 105 to 106, 102 to 105, 103 to 105, 104 to 105, 102 to 104, 103 to 104, 102 to 103, 1018, 1017, 1016, 1015, 1014, 1013, 1012, 1011, 1010, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, or 102 total microbial cells.
In some embodiments, the composition is administered 1 or more times per day. In some aspects, the composition is administered with food each time the animal is fed. In some embodiments, the composition is administered 1 to 10, 1 to 9, 1 to 8, 1 to 7, 1 to 6, 1 to 5, 1 to 4, 1 to 3, 1 to 2, 2 to 10, 2 to 9, 2 to 8, 2 to 7, 2 to 6, 2 to 5, 2 to 4, 2 to 3, 3 to 10, 3 to 9, 3 to 8, 3 to 7, 3 to 6, 3 to 5, 3 to 4, 4 to 10, 4 to 9, 4 to 8, 4 to 7, 4 to 6, 4 to 5, 5 to 10, 5 to 9, 5 to 8, 5 to 7, 5 to 6, 6 to 10, 6 to 9, 6 to 8, 6 to 7, 7 to 10, 7 to 9, 7 to 8, 8 to 10, 8 to 9, 9 to 10, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 times per day.
In some embodiments, the microbial composition is administered 1 to 10, 1 to 9, 1 to 8, 1 to 7, 1 to 6, 1 to 5, 1 to 4, 1 to 3, 1 to 2, 2 to 10, 2 to 9, 2 to 8, 2 to 7, 2 to 6, 2 to 5, 2 to 4, 2 to 3, 3 to 10, 3 to 9, 3 to 8, 3 to 7, 3 to 6, 3 to 5, 3 to 4, 4 to 10, 4 to 9, 4 to 8, 4 to 7, 4 to 6, 4 to 5, 5 to 10, 5 to 9, 5 to 8, 5 to 7, 5 to 6, 6 to 10, 6 to 9, 6 to 8, 6 to 7, 7 to 10, 7 to 9, 7 to 8, 8 to 10, 8 to 9, 9 to 10, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 times per week.
In some embodiments, the microbial composition is administered 1 to 10, 1 to 9, 1 to 8, 1 to 7, 1 to 6, 1 to 5, 1 to 4, 1 to 3, 1 to 2, 2 to 10, 2 to 9, 2 to 8, 2 to 7, 2 to 6, 2 to 5, 2 to 4, 2 to 3, 3 to 10, 3 to 9, 3 to 8, 3 to 7, 3 to 6, 3 to 5, 3 to 4, 4 to 10, 4 to 9, 4 to 8, 4 to 7, 4 to 6, 4 to 5, 5 to 10, 5 to 9, 5 to 8, 5 to 7, 5 to 6, 6 to 10, 6 to 9, 6 to 8, 6 to 7, 7 to 10, 7 to 9, 7 to 8, 8 to 10, 8 to 9, 9 to 10, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 times per month.
In some embodiments, the microbial composition is administered 1 to 10, 1 to 9, 1 to 8, 1 to 7, 1 to 6, 1 to 5, 1 to 4, 1 to 3, 1 to 2, 2 to 10, 2 to 9, 2 to 8, 2 to 7, 2 to 6, 2 to 5, 2 to 4, 2 to 3, 3 to 10, 3 to 9, 3 to 8, 3 to 7, 3 to 6, 3 to 5, 3 to 4, 4 to 10, 4 to 9, 4 to 8, 4 to 7, 4 to 6, 4 to 5, 5 to 10, 5 to 9, 5 to 8, 5 to 7, 5 to 6, 6 to 10, 6 to 9, 6 to 8, 6 to 7, 7 to 10, 7 to 9, 7 to 8, 8 to 10, 8 to 9, 9 to 10, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 times per year.
In some embodiments, the feed can be uniformly coated with one or more layers of the microbes and/or microbial compositions disclosed herein, using conventional methods of mixing, spraying, or a combination thereof through the use of treatment application equipment that is specifically designed and manufactured to accurately, safely, and efficiently apply coatings. Such equipment uses various types of coating technology such as rotary coaters, drum coaters, fluidized bed techniques, spouted beds, rotary mists, or a combination thereof. Liquid treatments such as those of the present disclosure can be applied via either a spinning “atomizer” disk or a spray nozzle, which evenly distributes the microbial composition onto the feed as it moves though the spray pattern. In some aspects, the feed is then mixed or tumbled for an additional period of time to achieve additional treatment distribution and drying.
In some embodiments, the feed coats of the present disclosure can be up to 10 μm, 20 μm, 30 μm, 40 μm, 50 μm, 60 μm, 70 μm, 80 μm, 90 μm, 100 μm, 110 μm, 120 μm, 130 μm, 140 μm, 150 μm, 160 μm, 170 μm, 180 μm, 190 μm, 200 μm, 210 μm, 220 μm, 230 μm, 240 μm, 250 μm, 260 μm, 270 μm, 280 μm, 290 μm, 300 μm, 310 μm, 320 μm, 330 μm, 340 μm, 350 μm, 360 μm, 370 μm, 380 μm, 390 μm, 400 μm, 410 μm, 420 μm, 430 μm, 440 μm, 450 μm, 460 μm, 470 μm, 480 μm, 490 μm, 500 μm, 510 μm, 520 μm, 530 μm, 540 μm, 550 μm, 560 μm, 570 μm, 580 μm, 590 μm, 600 μm, 610 μm, 620 μm, 630 μm, 640 μm, 650 μm, 660 μm, 670 μm, 680 μm, 690 μm, 700 μm, 710 μm, 720 μm, 730 μm, 740 μm, 750 μm, 760 μm, 770 μm, 780 μm, 790 μm, 800 μm, 810 μm, 820 μm, 830 μm, 840 μm, 850 μm, 860 μm, 870 μm, 880 μm, 890 μm, 900 μm, 910 μm, 920 μm, 930 μm, 940 μm, 950 μm, 960 μm, 970 μm, 980 μm, 990 μm, 1000 μm, 1010 μm, 1020 μm, 1030 μm, 1040 μm, 1050 μm, 1060 μm, 1070 μm, 1080 μm, 1090 μm, 1100 μm, 1110 μm, 1120 μm, 1130 μm, 1140 μm, 1150 μm, 1160 μm, 1170 μm, 1180 μm, 1190 μm, 1200 μm, 1210 μm, 1220 μm, 1230 μm, 1240 μm, 1250 μm, 1260 μm, 1270 μm, 1280 μm, 1290 μm, 1300 μm, 1310 μm, 1320 μm, 1330 μm, 1340 μm, 1350 μm, 1360 μm, 1370 μm, 1380 μm, 1390 μm, 1400 μm, 1410 μm, 1420 μm, 1430 μm, 1440 μm, 1450 μm, 1460 μm, 1470 μm, 1480 μm, 1490 μm, 1500 μm, 1510 μm, 1520 μm, 1530 μm, 1540 μm, 1550 μm, 1560 μm, 1570 μm, 1580 μm, 1590 μm, 1600 μm, 1610 μm, 1620 μm, 1630 μm, 1640 μm, 1650 μm, 1660 μm, 1670 μm, 1680 μm, 1690 μm, 1700 μm, 1710 μm, 1720 μm, 1730 μm, 1740 μm, 1750 μm, 1760 μm, 1770 μm, 1780 μm, 1790 μm, 1800 μm, 1810 μm, 1820 μm, 1830 μm, 1840 μm, 1850 μm, 1860 μm, 1870 μm, 1880 μm, 1890 μm, 1900 μm, 1910 μm, 1920 μm, 1930 μm, 1940 μm, 1950 μm, 1960 μm, 1970 μm, 1980 μm, 1990 μm, 2000 μm, 2010 μm, 2020 μm, 2030 μm, 2040 μm, 2050 μm, 2060 μm, 2070 μm, 2080 μm, 2090 μm, 2100 μm, 2110 μm, 2120 μm, 2130 μm, 2140 μm, 2150 μm, 2160 μm, 2170 μm, 2180 μm, 2190 μm, 2200 μm, 2210 μm, 2220 μm, 2230 μm, 2240 μm, 2250 μm, 2260 μm, 2270 μm, 2280 μm, 2290 μm, 2300 μm, 2310 μm, 2320 μm, 2330 μm, 2340 μm, 2350 μm, 2360 μm, 2370 μm, 2380 μm, 2390 μm, 2400 μm, 2410 μm, 2420 μm, 2430 μm, 2440 μm, 2450 μm, 2460 μm, 2470 μm, 2480 μm, 2490 μm, 2500 μm, 2510 μm, 2520 μm, 2530 μm, 2540 μm, 2550 μm, 2560 μm, 2570 μm, 2580 μm, 2590 μm, 2600 μm, 2610 μm, 2620 μm, 2630 μm, 2640 μm, 2650 μm, 2660 μm, 2670 μm, 2680 μm, 2690 μm, 2700 μm, 2710 μm, 2720 μm, 2730 μm, 2740 μm, 2750 μm, 2760 μm, 2770 μm, 2780 μm, 2790 μm, 2800 μm, 2810 μm, 2820 μm, 2830 μm, 2840 μm, 2850 μm, 2860 μm, 2870 μm, 2880 μm, 2890 μm, 2900 μm, 2910 μm, 2920 μm, 2930 μm, 2940 μm, 2950 μm, 2960 μm, 2970 μm, 2980 μm, 2990 μm, or 3000 μm thick.
In some embodiments, the microbial cells can be coated freely onto any number of compositions or they can be formulated in a liquid or solid composition before being coated onto a composition. For example, a solid composition comprising the microorganisms can be prepared by mixing a solid carrier with a suspension of the spores until the solid carriers are impregnated with the spore or cell suspension. This mixture can then be dried to obtain the desired particles.
In some other embodiments, it is contemplated that the solid or liquid microbial compositions of the present disclosure further contain functional agents e.g., activated carbon, minerals, vitamins, and other agents capable of improving the quality of the products or a combination thereof.
Methods of coating and compositions in use of said methods that are known in the art can be particularly useful when they are modified by the addition of one of the embodiments of the present disclosure. Such coating methods and apparatus for their application are disclosed in, for example: U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,097,245, and 7,998,502; and PCT Pat. App. Publication Nos. WO 2008/076975, WO 2010/138522, WO 2011/094469, WO 2010/111347, and WO 2010/111565 each of which is incorporated by reference herein.
In some embodiments, the microbes or microbial consortia of the present disclosure exhibit a synergistic effect, on one or more of the traits described herein, in the presence of one or more of the microbes or consortia coming into contact with one another. The synergistic effect obtained by the taught methods can be quantified, for example, according to Colby's formula (i.e., (E)=X+Y−(X*Y/100)). See Colby, R. S., “Calculating Synergistic and Antagonistic Responses of Herbicide Combinations,” 1967. Weeds. Vol. 15, pp. 20-22, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. Thus, “synergistic” is intended to reflect an outcome/parameter/effect that has been increased by more than an additive amount.
In some embodiments, the microbes or microbial consortia of the present disclosure may be administered via bolus. In one embodiment, a bolus (e.g., capsule containing the composition) is inserted into a bolus gun, and the bolus gun is inserted into the buccal cavity and/or esophagus of the animal, followed by the release/injection of the bolus into the animal's digestive tract. In one embodiment, the bolus gun/applicator is a BOVIKALC bolus gun/applicator. In another embodiment, the bolus gun/applicator is a QUADRICAL gun/applicator.
In some embodiments, the microbes or microbial consortia of the present disclosure may be administered via drench. In one embodiment, the drench is an oral drench. A drench administration comprises utilizing a drench kit/applicator/syringe that injects/releases a liquid comprising the microbes or microbial consortia into the buccal cavity and/or esophagus of the animal.
In some embodiments, the microbes or microbial consortia of the present disclosure may be administered in a time-released fashion. The composition may be coated in a chemical composition, or may be contained in a mechanical device or capsule that releases the microbes or microbial consortia over a period of time instead all at once. In one embodiment, the microbes or microbial consortia are administered to an animal in a time-release capsule. In one embodiment, the composition may be coated in a chemical composition, or may be contained in a mechanical device or capsule that releases the microbes or microbial consortia all at once a period of time hours post ingestion.
In some embodiments, the microbes or microbial consortia are administered in a time-released fashion between 1 to 5, 1 to 10, 1 to 15, 1 to 20, 1 to 24, 1 to 25, 1 to 30, 1 to 35, 1 to 40, 1 to 45, 1 to 50, 1 to 55, 1 to 60, 1 to 65, 1 to 70, 1 to 75, 1 to 80, 1 to 85, 1 to 90, 1 to 95, or 1 to 100 hours.
In some embodiments, the microbes or microbial consortia are administered in a time-released fashion between 1 to 2, 1 to 3, 1 to 4, 1 to 5, 1 to 6, 1 to 7, 1 to 8, 1 to 9, 1 to 10, 1 to 11, 1 to 12, 1 to 13, 1 to 14, 1 to 15, 1 to 16, 1 to 17, 1 to 18, 1 to 19, 1 to 20, 1 to 21, 1 to 22, 1 to 23, 1 to 24, 1 to 25, 1 to 26, 1 to 27, 1 to 28, 1 to 29, or 1 to 30 days.
Microorganisms
As used herein the term “microorganism” should be taken broadly. It includes, but is not limited to, the two prokaryotic domains, Bacteria and Archaea, as well as eukaryotic fungi, protists, and viruses.
By way of example, the microorganisms may include species of the genera of: Clostridium, Ruminococcus, Roseburia, Hydrogenoanaerobacterium, Saccharofermentans, Papillibacter, Pelotomaculum, Butyricicoccus, Tannerella, Prevotella, Butyricimonas, Piromyces, Pichia, Candida, Vrystaatia, Orpinomyces, Neocallimastix, and Phyllosticta. The microorganisms may further include species belonging to the family of Lachnospiraceae, and the order of Saccharomycetales. In some embodiments, the microorganisms may include species of any genera disclosed herein.
In certain embodiments, the microorganism is unculturable. This should be taken to mean that the microorganism is not known to be culturable or is difficult to culture using methods known to one skilled in the art.
In one embodiment, the microbes are obtained from animals (e.g., mammals, reptiles, birds, and the like), soil (e.g., rhizosphere), air, water (e.g., marine, freshwater, wastewater sludge), sediment, oil, plants (e.g., roots, leaves, stems), agricultural products, and extreme environments (e.g., acid mine drainage or hydrothermal systems). In a further embodiment, microbes obtained from marine or freshwater environments such as an ocean, river, or lake. In a further embodiment, the microbes can be from the surface of the body of water, or any depth of the body of water (e.g., a deep sea sample).
The microorganisms of the disclosure may be isolated in substantially pure or mixed cultures. They may be concentrated, diluted, or provided in the natural concentrations in which they are found in the source material. For example, microorganisms from saline sediments may be isolated for use in this disclosure by suspending the sediment in fresh water and allowing the sediment to fall to the bottom. The water containing the bulk of the microorganisms may be removed by decantation after a suitable period of settling and either administered to the GI tract of an ungulate, or concentrated by filtering or centrifugation, diluted to an appropriate concentration and administered to the GI tract of an ungulate with the bulk of the salt removed. By way of further example, microorganisms from mineralized or toxic sources may be similarly treated to recover the microbes for application to the ungulate to minimize the potential for damage to the animal.
In another embodiment, the microorganisms are used in a crude form, in which they are not isolated from the source material in which they naturally reside. For example, the microorganisms are provided in combination with the source material in which they reside; for example, fecal matter, cud, or other composition found in the gastrointestinal tract. In this embodiment, the source material may include one or more species of microorganisms.
In some embodiments, a mixed population of microorganisms is used in the methods of the disclosure.
In embodiments of the disclosure where the microorganisms are isolated from a source material (for example, the material in which they naturally reside), any one or a combination of a number of standard techniques which will be readily known to skilled persons may be used. However, by way of example, these in general employ processes by which a solid or liquid culture of a single microorganism can be obtained in a substantially pure form, usually by physical separation on the surface of a solid microbial growth medium or by volumetric dilutive isolation into a liquid microbial growth medium. These processes may include isolation from dry material, liquid suspension, slurries or homogenates in which the material is spread in a thin layer over an appropriate solid gel growth medium, or serial dilutions of the material made into a sterile medium and inoculated into liquid or solid culture media.
Whilst not essential, in one embodiment, the material containing the microorganisms may be pre-treated prior to the isolation process in order to either multiply all microorganisms in the material. Microorganisms can then be isolated from the enriched materials as disclosed above.
In certain embodiments, as mentioned herein before, the microorganism(s) may be used in crude form and need not be isolated from an animal or a media. For example, cud, feces, or growth media which includes the microorganisms identified to be of benefit to increased milk production in ungulates may be obtained and used as a crude source of microorganisms for the next round of the method or as a crude source of microorganisms at the conclusion of the method. For example, fresh feces could be obtained and optionally processed.
Microbiome Shift and Abundance of Microbes
In some embodiments, the microbiome of a ruminant, including the rumen microbiome, comprises a diverse arrive of microbes with a wide variety of metabolic capabilities. The microbiome is influenced by a range of factors including diet, variations in animal metabolism, and breed, among others. Most bovine diets are plant-based and rich in complex polysaccharides that enrich the gastrointestinal microbial community for microbes capable of breaking down specific polymeric components in the diet. The end products of primary degradation sustains a chain of microbes that ultimately produce a range of organic acids together with hydrogen and carbon dioxide. Because of the complex and interlinked nature of the microbiome, changing the diet and thus substrates for primary degradation may have a cascading effect on rumen microbial metabolism, with changes in both the organic acid profiles and the methane levels produced, thus impacting the quality and quantity of animal production and or the products produced by the animal. See Menezes et al. (2011. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 78(2):256-265.)
In some aspects, the present disclosure is drawn to administering microbial compositions described herein to modulate or shift the microbiome of a ruminant.
In some embodiments, the microbiome is shifted through the administration of one or more microbes to the gastrointestinal tract. In further embodiments, the one or more microbes are those selected from Table 1 or Table 3. In some embodiments, the microbiome shift or modulation includes a decrease or loss of specific microbes that were present prior to the administration of one or more microbes of the present disclosure. In some embodiments, the microbiome shift or modulation includes an increase in microbes that were present prior to the administration of one or more microbes of the present disclosure. In some embodiments, the microbiome shift or modulation includes a gain of one or more microbes that were not present prior to the administration of one or more microbes of the present disclosure. In a further embodiment, the gain of one or more microbes is a microbe that was not specifically included in the administered microbial consortium.
In some embodiments, the administration of microbes of the present disclosure results in a sustained modulation of the microbiome such that the administered microbes are present in the microbiome for a period of at least 1 to 10, 1 to 9, 1 to 8, 1 to 7, 1 to 6, 1 to 5, 1 to 4, 1 to 3, 1 to 2, 2 to 10, 2 to 9, 2 to 8, 2 to 7, 2 to 6, 2 to 5, 2 to 4, 2 to 3, 3 to 10, 3 to 9, 3 to 8, 3 to 7, 3 to 6, 3 to 5, 3 to 4, 4 to 10, 4 to 9, 4 to 8, 4 to 7, 4 to 6, 4 to 5, 5 to 10, 5 to 9, 5 to 8, 5 to 7, 5 to 6, 6 to 10, 6 to 9, 6 to 8, 6 to 7, 7 to 10, 7 to 9, 7 to 8, 8 to 10, 8 to 9, 9 to 10, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 days.
In some embodiments, the administration of microbes of the present disclosure results in a sustained modulation of the microbiome such that the administered microbes are present in the microbiome for a period of at least 1 to 10, 1 to 9, 1 to 8, 1 to 7, 1 to 6, 1 to 5, 1 to 4, 1 to 3, 1 to 2, 2 to 10, 2 to 9, 2 to 8, 2 to 7, 2 to 6, 2 to 5, 2 to 4, 2 to 3, 3 to 10, 3 to 9, 3 to 8, 3 to 7, 3 to 6, 3 to 5, 3 to 4, 4 to 10, 4 to 9, 4 to 8, 4 to 7, 4 to 6, 4 to 5, 5 to 10, 5 to 9, 5 to 8, 5 to 7, 5 to 6, 6 to 10, 6 to 9, 6 to 8, 6 to 7, 7 to 10, 7 to 9, 7 to 8, 8 to 10, 8 to 9, 9 to 10, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 weeks.
In some embodiments, the administration of microbes of the present disclosure results in a sustained modulation of the microbiome such that the administered microbes are present in the microbiome for a period of at least 1 to 10, 1 to 9, 1 to 8, 1 to 7, 1 to 6, 1 to 5, 1 to 4, 1 to 3, 1 to 2, 2 to 10, 2 to 9, 2 to 8, 2 to 7, 2 to 6, 2 to 5, 2 to 4, 2 to 3, 3 to 10, 3 to 9, 3 to 8, 3 to 7, 3 to 6, 3 to 5, 3 to 4, 4 to 10, 4 to 9, 4 to 8, 4 to 7, 4 to 6, 4 to 5, 5 to 10, 5 to 9, 5 to 8, 5 to 7, 5 to 6, 6 to 10, 6 to 9, 6 to 8, 6 to 7, 7 to 10, 7 to 9, 7 to 8, 8 to 10, 8 to 9, 9 to 10, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, or 12 months.
In some embodiments, the presence of the administered microbes are detected by sampling the gastrointestinal tract and using primers to amplify the 16S or 18S rDNA sequences, or the ITS rDNA sequences of the administered microbes. In some embodiments, the administered microbes are one or more of those selected from Table 1 or Table 3, and the corresponding rDNA sequences are those selected from SEQ ID NOs:1-60, SEQ ID NOs:2045-2107 and the SEQ ID NOs identified in Table 3.
In some embodiments, the microbiome of a ruminant is measured by amplifying polynucleotides collected from gastrointestinal samples, wherein the polynucleotides may be 16S or 18S rDNA fragments, or ITS rDNA fragments of microbial rDNA. In one embodiment, the microbiome is fingerprinted by a method of denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) wherein the amplified rDNA fragments are sorted by where they denature, and form a unique banding pattern in a gel that may be used for comparing the microbiome of the same ruminant over time or the microbiomes of multiple ruminants. In another embodiment, the microbiome is fingerprinted by a method of terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP), wherein labelled PCR fragments are digested using a restriction enzyme and then sorted by size. In a further embodiment, the data collected from the T-RFLP method is evaluated by nonmetric multidimensional scaling (nMDS) ordination and PERMANOVA statistics identify differences in microbiomes, thus allowing for the identification and measurement of shifts in the microbiome. See also Shanks et al. (2011. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 77(9):2992-3001), Petri et al. (2013. PLOS one. 8(12):e83424), and Menezes et al. (2011. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 78(2):256-265.)
In some embodiments, the administration of microbes of the present disclosure results in a modulation or shift of the microbiome which further results in a desired phenotype or improved trait.
According to the methods provided herein, a sample is processed to detect the presence of one or more microorganism types in the sample (
In one embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to flow cytometry (FC) analysis to detect the presence and/or number of one or more microorganism types (
In one embodiment, a sample is stained with one or more fluorescent dyes wherein a fluorescent dye is specific to a particular microorganism type, to enable detection via a flow cytometer or some other detection and quantification method that harnesses fluorescence, such as fluorescence microscopy. The method can provide quantification of the number of cells and/or cell volume of a given organism type in a sample. In a further embodiment, as described herein, flow cytometry is harnessed to determine the presence and quantity of a unique first marker and/or unique second marker of the organism type, such as enzyme expression, cell surface protein expression, etc. Two- or three-variable histograms or contour plots of, for example, light scattering versus fluorescence from a cell membrane stain (versus fluorescence from a protein stain or DNA stain) may also be generated, and thus an impression may be gained of the distribution of a variety of properties of interest among the cells in the population as a whole. A number of displays of such multiparameter flow cytometric data are in common use and are amenable for use with the methods described herein.
In one embodiment of processing the sample to detect the presence and number of one or more microorganism types, a microscopy assay is employed (
In another embodiment of in order to detect the presence and number of one or more microorganism types, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to fluorescence microscopy. Different fluorescent dyes can be used to directly stain cells in samples and to quantify total cell counts using an epifluorescence microscope as well as flow cytometry, described above. Useful dyes to quantify microorganisms include but are not limited to acridine orange (AO), 4,6-di-amino-2 phenylindole (DAPI) and 5-cyano-2,3 Dytolyl Tetrazolium Chloride (CTC). Viable cells can be estimated by a viability staining method such as the LIVE/DEAD® Bacterial Viability Kit (Bac-Light™) which contains two nucleic acid stains: the green-fluorescent SYTO 9™ dye penetrates all membranes and the red-fluorescent propidium iodide (PI) dye penetrates cells with damaged membranes. Therefore, cells with compromised membranes will stain red, whereas cells with undamaged membranes will stain green. Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) extends epifluorescence microscopy, allowing for the fast detection and enumeration of specific organisms. FISH uses fluorescent labelled oligonucleotides probes (usually 15-25 basepairs) which bind specifically to organism DNA in the sample, allowing the visualization of the cells using an epifluorescence or confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM). Catalyzed reporter deposition fluorescence in situ hybridization (CARD-FISH) improves upon the FISH method by using oligonucleotide probes labelled with a horse radish peroxidase (HRP) to amplify the intensity of the signal obtained from the microorganisms being studied. FISH can be combined with other techniques to characterize microorganism communities. One combined technique is high affinity peptide nucleic acid (PNA)-FISH, where the probe has an enhanced capability to penetrate through the Extracellular Polymeric Substance (EPS) matrix. Another example is LIVE/DEAD-FISH which combines the cell viability kit with FISH and has been used to assess the efficiency of disinfection in drinking water distribution systems.
In another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to Raman micro-spectroscopy in order to determine the presence of a microorganism type and the absolute number of at least one microorganism type (
In yet another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to centrifugation in order to determine the presence of a microorganism type and the number of at least one microorganism type (
In another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to staining in order to determine the presence of a microorganism type and the number of at least one microorganism type (
In another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to mass spectrometry (MS) in order to determine the presence of a microorganism type and the number of at least one microorganism type (
In another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to lipid analysis in order to determine the presence of a microorganism type and the number of at least one microorganism type (
In the aspects of the methods provided herein, the number of unique first makers in the sample, or portion thereof (e.g., sample aliquot) is measured, as well as the abundance of each of the unique first markers (
Any marker that is unique to an organism strain can be employed herein. For example, markers can include, but are not limited to, small subunit ribosomal RNA genes (16S/18S rDNA), large subunit ribosomal RNA genes (23S/25S/28S rDNA), intercalary 5.8S gene, cytochrome c oxidase, beta-tubulin, elongation factor, RNA polymerase and internal transcribed spacer (ITS).
Ribosomal RNA genes (rDNA), especially the small subunit ribosomal RNA genes, i.e., 18S rRNA genes (18S rDNA) in the case of eukaryotes and 16S rRNA (16S rDNA) in the case of prokaryotes, have been the predominant target for the assessment of organism types and strains in a microbial community. However, the large subunit ribosomal RNA genes, 28S rDNAs, have been also targeted. rDNAs are suitable for taxonomic identification because: (i) they are ubiquitous in all known organisms; (ii) they possess both conserved and variable regions; (iii) there is an exponentially expanding database of their sequences available for comparison. In community analysis of samples, the conserved regions serve as annealing sites for the corresponding universal PCR and/or sequencing primers, whereas the variable regions can be used for phylogenetic differentiation. In addition, the high copy number of rDNA in the cells facilitates detection from environmental samples.
The internal transcribed spacer (ITS), located between the 18S rDNA and 28S rDNA, has also been targeted. The ITS is transcribed but spliced away before assembly of the ribosomes The ITS region is composed of two highly variable spacers, ITS1 and ITS2, and the intercalary 5.8S gene. This rDNA operon occurs in multiple copies in genomes. Because the ITS region does not code for ribosome components, it is highly variable.
In one embodiment, the unique RNA marker can be an mRNA marker, an siRNA marker or a ribosomal RNA marker.
Protein-coding functional genes can also be used herein as a unique first marker. Such markers include but are not limited to: the recombinase A gene family (bacterial RecA, archaea RadA and RadB, eukaryotic Rad51 and Rad57, phage UvsX); RNA polymerase β subunit (RpoB) gene, which is responsible for transcription initiation and elongation; chaperonins. Candidate marker genes have also been identified for bacteria plus archaea: ribosomal protein S2 (rpsB), ribosomal protein S10 (rpsJ), ribosomal protein L1 rplA), translation elongation factor EF-2, translation initiation factor IF-2, metalloendopeptidase, ribosomal protein L22, ffh signal recognition particle protein, ribosomal protein L4/L1e (rplD), ribosomal protein L2 (rplB), ribosomal protein S9 (rpsI), ribosomal protein L3 (rplC), phenylalanyl-tRNA synthetase beta subunit, ribosomal protein L14b/L23e (rplN), ribosomal protein S5, ribosomal protein S19 (rpsS), ribosomal protein S7, ribosomal protein L16/L10E (rplP), ribosomal protein S13 (rpsM), phenylalanyl-tRNA synthetase α subunit, ribosomal protein L15, ribosomal protein L25/L23, ribosomal protein L6 (rplF), ribosomal protein L11 (rplK), ribosomal protein L5 (rplE), ribosomal protein S12/S23, ribosomal protein L29, ribosomal protein S3 (rpsC), ribosomal protein S11 (rpsK), ribosomal protein L10, ribosomal protein S8, tRNA pseudouridine synthase B, ribosomal protein L18P/L5E, ribosomal protein S15P/S13e, Porphobilinogen deaminase, ribosomal protein S17, ribosomal protein L13 (rplM), phosphoribosylformylglycinamidine cyclo-ligase (rpsE), ribonuclease HII and ribosomal protein L24. Other candidate marker genes for bacteria include: transcription elongation protein NusA (nusA), rpoB DNA-directed RNA polymerase subunit beta (rpoB), GTP-binding protein EngA, rpoC DNA-directed RNA polymerase subunit beta′, priA primosome assembly protein, transcription-repair coupling factor, CTP synthase (pyrG), secY preprotein translocase subunit SecY, GTP-binding protein Obg/CgtA, DNA polymerase I, rpsF 30S ribosomal protein S6, poA DNA-directed RNA polymerase subunit alpha, peptide chain release factor 1, rplI 50S ribosomal protein L9, polyribonucleotide nucleotidyltransferase, tsf elongation factor Ts (tsf), rplQ 50S ribosomal protein L17, tRNA (guanine-N(1)-)-methyltransferase (rplS), rplY probable 50S ribosomal protein L25, DNA repair protein RadA, glucose-inhibited division protein A, ribosome-binding factor A, DNA mismatch repair protein MutL, smpB SsrA-binding protein (smpB), N-acetylglucosaminyl transferase, S-adenosyl-methyltransferase MraW, UDP-N-acetylmuramoylalanine-D-glutamate ligase, rplS 50S ribosomal protein L19, rplT 50S ribosomal protein L20 (rplT), ruvA Holliday junction DNA helicase, ruvB Holliday junction DNA helicase B, serS seryl-tRNA synthetase, rplU 50S ribosomal protein L21, rpsR 30S ribosomal protein S18, DNA mismatch repair protein MutS, rpsT 30S ribosomal protein S20, DNA repair protein RecN, frr ribosome recycling factor (frr), recombination protein RecR, protein of unknown function UPF0054, miaA tRNA isopentenyltransferase, GTP-binding protein YchF, chromosomal replication initiator protein DnaA, dephospho-CoA kinase, 16S rRNA processing protein RimM, ATP-cone domain protein, 1-deoxy-D-xylulose 5-phosphate reductoisomerase, 2C-methyl-D-erythritol 2,4-cyclodiphosphate synthase, fatty acid/phospholipid synthesis protein PlsX, tRNA(Ile)-lysidine synthetase, dnaG DNA primase (dnaG), ruvC Holliday junction resolvase, rpsP 30S ribosomal protein S16, Recombinase A recA, riboflavin biosynthesis protein RibF, glycyl-tRNA synthetase beta subunit, trmU tRNA (5-methylaminomethyl-2-thiouridylate)-methyltransferase, rpmI 50S ribosomal protein L35, hemE uroporphyrinogen decarboxylase, Rod shape-determining protein, rpmA 50S ribosomal protein L27 (rpmA), peptidyl-tRNA hydrolase, translation initiation factor IF-3 (infC), UDP-N-acetylmuramyl-tripeptide synthetase, rpmF 50S ribosomal protein L32, rpIL 50S ribosomal protein L7/L12 (rpIL), leuS leucyl-tRNA synthetase, ligA NAD-dependent DNA ligase, cell division protein FtsA, GTP-binding protein TypA, ATP-dependent Clp protease, ATP-binding subunit ClpX, DNA replication and repair protein RecF and UDP-N-acetylenolpyruvoylglucosamine reductase.
Phospholipid fatty acids (PLFAs) may also be used as unique first markers according to the methods described herein. Because PLFAs are rapidly synthesized during microbial growth, are not found in storage molecules and degrade rapidly during cell death, it provides an accurate census of the current living community. All cells contain fatty acids (FAs) that can be extracted and esterified to form fatty acid methyl esters (FAMEs). When the FAMEs are analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, the resulting profile constitutes a ‘fingerprint’ of the microorganisms in the sample. The chemical compositions of membranes for organisms in the domains Bacteria and Eukarya are comprised of fatty acids linked to the glycerol by an ester-type bond (phospholipid fatty acids (PLFAs)). In contrast, the membrane lipids of Archaea are composed of long and branched hydrocarbons that are joined to glycerol by an ether-type bond (phospholipid ether lipids (PLELs)). This is one of the most widely used non-genetic criteria to distinguish the three domains. In this context, the phospholipids derived from microbial cell membranes, characterized by different acyl chains, are excellent signature molecules, because such lipid structural diversity can be linked to specific microbial taxa.
As provided herein, in order to determine whether an organism strain is active, the level of expression of one or more unique second markers, which can be the same or different as the first marker, is measured (
In one embodiment, if the level of expression of the second marker is above a threshold level (e.g., a control level) or at a threshold level, the microorganism is considered to be active (
Second unique markers are measured, in one embodiment, at the protein, RNA or metabolite level. A unique second marker is the same or different as the first unique marker.
As provided above, a number of unique first markers and unique second markers can be detected according to the methods described herein. Moreover, the detection and quantification of a unique first marker is carried out according to methods known to those of ordinary skill in the art (
Nucleic acid sequencing (e.g., gDNA, cDNA, rRNA, mRNA) in one embodiment is used to determine absolute abundance of a unique first marker and/or unique second marker. Sequencing platforms include, but are not limited to, Sanger sequencing and high-throughput sequencing methods available from Roche/454 Life Sciences, Illumina/Solexa, Pacific Biosciences, Ion Torrent and Nanopore. The sequencing can be amplicon sequencing of particular DNA or RNA sequences or whole metagenome/transcriptome shotgun sequencing.
Traditional Sanger sequencing (Sanger et al. (1977) DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. Proc Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 74, pp. 5463-5467, incorporated by reference herein in its entirety) relies on the selective incorporation of chain-terminating dideoxynucleotides by DNA polymerase during in vitro DNA replication and is amenable for use with the methods described herein.
In another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to extraction of nucleic acids, amplification of DNA of interest (such as the rRNA gene) with suitable primers and the construction of clone libraries using sequencing vectors. Selected clones are then sequenced by Sanger sequencing and the nucleotide sequence of the DNA of interest is retrieved, allowing calculation of the number of unique microorganism strains in a sample.
454 pyrosequencing from Roche/454 Life Sciences yields long reads and can be harnessed in the methods described herein (Margulies et al. (2005) Nature, 437, pp. 376-380; U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,274,320; 6,258,568; 6,210,891, each of which is herein incorporated in its entirety for all purposes). Nucleic acid to be sequenced (e.g., amplicons or nebulized genomic/metagenomic DNA) have specific adapters affixed on either end by PCR or by ligation. The DNA with adapters is fixed to tiny beads (ideally, one bead will have one DNA fragment) that are suspended in a water-in-oil emulsion. An emulsion PCR step is then performed to make multiple copies of each DNA fragment, resulting in a set of beads in which each bead contains many cloned copies of the same DNA fragment. Each bead is then placed into a well of a fiber-optic chip that also contains enzymes necessary for the sequencing-by-synthesis reactions. The addition of bases (such as A, C, G, or T) trigger pyrophosphate release, which produces flashes of light that are recorded to infer the sequence of the DNA fragments in each well. About 1 million reads per run with reads up to 1,000 bases in length can be achieved. Paired-end sequencing can be done, which produces pairs of reads, each of which begins at one end of a given DNA fragment. A molecular barcode can be created and placed between the adapter sequence and the sequence of interest in multiplex reactions, allowing each sequence to be assigned to a sample bioinformatically.
Illumina/Solexa sequencing produces average read lengths of about 25 basepairs (bp) to about 300 bp (Bennett et al. (2005) Pharmacogenomics, 6:373-382; Lange et al. (2014). BMC Genomics 15, p. 63; Fadrosh et al. (2014) Microbiome 2, p. 6; Caporaso et al. (2012) ISME J, 6, p. 1621-1624; Bentley et al. (2008) Accurate whole human genome sequencing using reversible terminator chemistry. Nature, 456:53-59). This sequencing technology is also sequencing-by-synthesis but employs reversible dye terminators and a flow cell with a field of oligos attached. DNA fragments to be sequenced have specific adapters on either end and are washed over a flow cell filled with specific oligonucleotides that hybridize to the ends of the fragments. Each fragment is then replicated to make a cluster of identical fragments. Reversible dye-terminator nucleotides are then washed over the flow cell and given time to attach. The excess nucleotides are washed away, the flow cell is imaged, and the reversible terminators can be removed so that the process can repeat and nucleotides can continue to be added in subsequent cycles. Paired-end reads that are 300 bases in length each can be achieved. An Illumina platform can produce 4 billion fragments in a paired-end fashion with 125 bases for each read in a single run. Barcodes can also be used for sample multiplexing, but indexing primers are used.
The SOLiD (Sequencing by Oligonucleotide Ligation and Detection, Life Technologies) process is a “sequencing-by-ligation” approach, and can be used with the methods described herein for detecting the presence and abundance of a first marker and/or a second marker (
The Ion Torrent system, like 454 sequencing, is amenable for use with the methods described herein for detecting the presence and abundance of a first marker and/or a second marker (
Pacific Biosciences (PacBio) SMRT sequencing uses a single-molecule, real-time sequencing approach and in one embodiment, is used with the methods described herein for detecting the presence and abundance of a first marker and/or a second marker (
In one embodiment, where the first unique marker is the ITS genomic region, automated ribosomal intergenic spacer analysis (ARISA) is used in one embodiment to determine the number and identity of microorganism strains in a sample (
In another embodiment, fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) of PCR-amplified rDNA fragments, otherwise known as amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis (ARDRA), is used to characterize unique first markers and the abundance of the same in samples (
One fingerprinting technique used in detecting the presence and abundance of a unique first marker is single-stranded-conformation polymorphism (SSCP) (Lee et al. (1996). Appl Environ Microbiol 62, pp. 3112-3120; Scheinert et al. (1996). J. Microbiol. Methods 26, pp. 103-117; Schwieger and Tebbe (1998). Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 64, pp. 4870-4876, each of which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety). In this technique, DNA fragments such as PCR products obtained with primers specific for the 16S rRNA gene, are denatured and directly electrophoresed on a non-denaturing gel. Separation is based on differences in size and in the folded conformation of single-stranded DNA, which influences the electrophoretic mobility. Reannealing of DNA strands during electrophoresis can be prevented by a number of strategies, including the use of one phosphorylated primer in the PCR followed by specific digestion of the phosphorylated strands with lambda exonuclease and the use of one biotinylated primer to perform magnetic separation of one single strand after denaturation. To assess the identity of the predominant populations in a given consortium, in one embodiment, bands are excised and sequenced, or SSCP-patterns can be hybridized with specific probes. Electrophoretic conditions, such as gel matrix, temperature, and addition of glycerol to the gel, can influence the separation.
In addition to sequencing based methods, other methods for quantifying expression (e.g., gene, protein expression) of a second marker are amenable for use with the methods provided herein for determining the level of expression of one or more second markers (
In another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to a quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detecting the presence and abundance of a first marker and/or a second marker (
In another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to PCR-based fingerprinting techniques to detect the presence and abundance of a first marker and/or a second marker (
In another embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to a chip-based platform such as microarray or microfluidics to determine the abundance of a unique first marker and/or presence/abundance of a unique second marker (
A protein expression assay, in one embodiment, is used with the methods described herein for determining the level of expression of one or more second markers (
In one embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to Bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation to determine the level of a second unique marker (
In one embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to microautoradiography (MAR) combined with FISH to determine the level of a second unique marker (
In one embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to stable isotope Raman spectroscopy combined with FISH (Raman-FISH) to determine the level of a second unique marker (
In one embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to DNA/RNA stable isotope probing (SIP) to determine the level of a second unique marker (
In one embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to isotope array to determine the level of a second unique marker (
In one embodiment, the sample, or a portion thereof is subjected to a metabolomics assay to determine the level of a second unique marker (
According to the embodiments described herein, the presence and respective number of one or more active microorganism strains in a sample are determined (
The one or more microorganism strains are considered active, as described above, if the level of second unique marker expression at a threshold level, higher than a threshold value, e.g., higher than at least about 5%, at least about 10%, at least about 20% or at least about 30% over a control level.
In another aspect of the invention, a method for determining the absolute abundance of one or more microorganism strains is determined in a plurality of samples (
The absolute abundance values over samples are used in one embodiment to relate the one or more active microorganism strains, with an environmental parameter (
In one embodiment, determining the co-occurrence of one or more active microorganism strains with an environmental parameter comprises a network and/or cluster analysis method to measure connectivity of strains or a strain with an environmental parameter within a network, wherein the network is a collection of two or more samples that share a common or similar environmental parameter. In another embodiment, the network and/or cluster analysis method may be applied to determining the co-occurrence of two or more active microorganism strains in a sample (
In one embodiment, the cluster analysis method is a heuristic method based on modularity optimization. In a further embodiment, the cluster analysis method is the Louvain method. See, e.g., the method described by Blondel et al. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, Volume 2008, October 2008, incorporated by reference herein in its entirety for all purposes.
In another embodiment, the network analysis comprises predictive modeling of network through link mining and prediction, collective classification, link-based clustering, relational similarity, or a combination thereof. In another embodiment, the network analysis comprises differential equation based modeling of populations. In another embodiment, the network analysis comprises Lotka-Volterra modeling.
In one embodiment, relating the one or more active microorganism strains to an environmental parameter (e.g., determining the co-occurrence) in the sample comprises creating matrices populated with linkages denoting environmental parameter and microorganism strain associations.
In one embodiment, the multiple sample data obtained at step 2007 (e.g., over two or more samples which can be collected at two or more time points where each time point corresponds to an individual sample), is compiled. In a further embodiment, the number of cells of each of the one or more microorganism strains in each sample is stored in an association matrix (which can be in some embodiments, an abundance matrix). In one embodiment, the association matrix is used to identify associations between active microorganism strains in a specific time point sample using rule mining approaches weighted with association (e.g., abundance) data. Filters are applied in one embodiment to remove insignificant rules.
In one embodiment, the absolute abundance of one or more, or two or more active microorganism strains is related to one or more environmental parameters (
In some embodiments described herein, an environmental parameter is referred to as a metadata parameter.
Other examples of metadata parameters include but are not limited to genetic information from the host from which the sample was obtained (e.g., DNA mutation information), sample pH, sample temperature, expression of a particular protein or mRNA, nutrient conditions (e.g., level and/or identity of one or more nutrients) of the surrounding environment/ecosystem), susceptibility or resistance to disease, onset or progression of disease, susceptibility or resistance of the sample to toxins, efficacy of xenobiotic compounds (pharmaceutical drugs), biosynthesis of natural products, or a combination thereof.
For example, according to one embodiment, microorganism strain number changes are calculated over multiple samples according to the method of
In a further embodiment, microorganism strains are ranked according to importance by integrating cell number changes over time and strains present in target clusters, with the highest changes in cell number ranking the highest.
Network and/or cluster analysis method in one embodiment, is used to measure connectivity of the one or more strains within a network, wherein the network is a collection of two or more samples that share a common or similar environmental parameter. In one embodiment, network analysis comprises linkage analysis, modularity analysis, robustness measures, betweenness measures, connectivity measures, transitivity measures, centrality measures or a combination thereof. In another embodiment, network analysis comprises predictive modeling of network through link mining and prediction, social network theory, collective classification, link-based clustering, relational similarity, or a combination thereof. In another embodiment, network analysis comprises differential equation based modeling of populations. In yet another embodiment, network analysis comprises Lotka-Volterra modeling.
Cluster analysis method comprises building a connectivity model, subspace model, distribution model, density model, or a centroid model.
Network and cluster based analysis, for example, to carry out method step 2008 of
Bovine Pathogen Resistance and Clearance
In some aspects, the present disclosure is drawn to administering one or more microbial compositions described herein to cows to clear the gastrointestinal tract of pathogenic microbes. In some embodiments, the present disclosure is further drawn to administering microbial compositions described herein to prevent colonization of pathogenic microbes in the gastrointestinal tract. In some embodiments, the administration of microbial compositions described herein further clears pathogens from the integument and the respiratory tract of cows, and/or prevent colonization of pathogens on the integument and in the respiratory tract. In some embodiments, the administration of microbial compositions described herein reduce leaky gut/intestinal permeability, inflammation, and/or incidence of liver disease.
In some embodiments, the microbial compositions of the present disclosure comprise one or more microbes that are present in the gastrointestinal tract of cows at a relative abundance of less than 15%, 14%, 13%, 12%, 11%, 10%, 9%, 8%, 7%, 6%, 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 1%, 0.5%, 0.1%, or 0.01%.
In some embodiments, after administration of microbial compositions of the present disclosure the one or more microbes are present in the gastrointestinal tract of the cow at a relative abundance of at least 0.5%, 1%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85%, 90%, or 95%.
Pathogenic microbes of cows may include the following: Clostridium perfringens, Clostridium botulinum, Salmonella typi, Salmonella typhimurium, Salmonella enterica, Salmonella pullorum, Erysipelothrix insidiosa, Campylobacter jejuni, Campylobacter coli, Campylobacter lari, Listeria monocytogenes, Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus dysgalactiae, Corynebacterium bovis, Mycoplasma sp., Citrobacter sp., Enterobacter sp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Pasteurella sp., Bacillus cereus, Bacillus lichenformis, Streptococcus uberis, Staphylococcus aureus, and pathogenic strains of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. In some embodiments, the pathogenic microbes include viral pathogens. In some embodiments, the pathogenic microbes are pathogenic to both cows and humans. In some embodiments, the pathogenic microbes are pathogenic to either cows or humans.
In some embodiments, the administration of compositions of the present disclosure to cows modulate the makeup of the gastrointestinal microbiome such that the administered microbes outcompete microbial pathogens present in the gastrointestinal tract. In some embodiments, the administration of compositions of the present disclosure to cows harboring microbial pathogens outcompetes the pathogens and clears cows of the pathogens. In some embodiments, the administration of compositions of the present disclosure results in the stimulation of host immunity, and aid in clearance of the microbial pathogens. In some embodiments, the administration of compositions of the present disclosure introduce microbes that produce bacteriostatic and/or bactericidal components that decrease or clear the cows of the microbial pathogens. (U.S. Pat. No. 8,345,010).
In some embodiments, challenging cows with a microbial colonizer or microbial pathogen after administering one or more compositions of the present disclosure prevents the microbial colonizer or microbial pathogen from growing to a relative abundance of greater than 15%, 14%, 13%, 12%, 11%, 10%, 9% 8%, 7%, 6%, 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 1%, 0.5%, 0.1%, or 0.01%. In further embodiments, challenging cows with a microbial colonizer or microbial pathogen after administering one or more compositions of the present disclosure prevents the microbial colonizer or microbial pathogen from colonizing cows.
In some embodiments, clearance of the microbial colonizer or microbial pathogen occurs in less than 25 days, less than 24 days, less than 23 days, less than 22 days, less than 21 days, less than 20 days, less than 19 days, less than 18 days, less than 17 days, less than 16 days, less than 15 days, less than 14 days, less than 13 days, less than 12 days, less than 11 days, less than 10 days, less than 9 days, less than 8 days, less than 7 days, less than 6 days, less than 5 days, less than 4 days, less than 3 days, or less than 2 days post administration of the one or more compositions of the present disclosure.
In some embodiments, clearance of the microbial colonizer or microbial pathogen occurs within 1-30 days, 1-25 days, 1-20 day, 1-15 days, 1-10 days, 1-5 days, 5-30 days, 5-25 days, 5-20 days, 5-15 days, 5-10 days, 10-30 days, 10-25 days, 10-20 days, 10-15 days, 15-30 days, 15-25 days, 15-20 days, 20-30 days, 20-25 days, or 25-30 days post administration of the one or more compositions of the present disclosure.
Improved Traits
In some aspects, the present disclosure is drawn to administering microbial compositions described herein to ruminants to improve one or more traits through the modulation of aspects of milk production, milk quantity, milk quality, ruminant digestive chemistry, and efficiency of feed utilization and digestibility.
In some embodiments, improving the quantity of milk fat produced by a ruminant is desirable, wherein milk fat includes triglycerides, triacylglycerides, diacylglycerides, monoacylglycerides, phospholipids, cholesterol, glycolipids, and free fatty acids. In further embodiments, free fatty acids include short chain fatty acids (i.e., C4:0, C6:0, and C8:0), medium chain fatty acids (i.e., C10:0, C10:1, C12:0, C14:0, C14:1, and C15:0), and long chain fatty acids (i.e., C16:0, C16:1, C17:0, C17:1, C18:0, C18:1, C18:2, C18:3, and C20:0). In further embodiments, it is desirable to achieve an increase in milk fat efficiency, which is measured by the total weight of milk fat produced, divided by the weight of feed ingested. The weight of milk fat produced is calculated from the measured fat percentage multiplied by the weight of milk produced.
In some embodiments, improving the quantity of carbohydrates in milk produced by a ruminant is desirable, wherein carbohydrates include lactose, glucose, galactose, and oligosaccharides. Tao et al. (2009. J. Dairy Sci. 92:2991-3001) disclose numerous oligosaccharides that may be found in bovine milk.
In some embodiments, improving the quantity of proteins in milk produced by a ruminant, wherein proteins include caseins and whey. In some embodiments, proteins of interest are only those proteins produced in milk. In other embodiments, proteins of interest are not required to be produced only in milk. Whey proteins include immunoglobulins, serum albumin, beta-lactoglobulin, and alpha-lactoglobulin.
In some embodiments, improving the quantity of vitamins in milk produced by a ruminant is desirable. Vitamins found in milk include the fat-soluble vitamins of A, D, E, and K; as well as the B vitamins found in the aqueous phase of the milk.
In some embodiments, improving the quantity of minerals in milk produced by a ruminant is desirable. Minerals found in milk include iron, zinc, copper, cobalt, magnesium, manganese, molybdenum, calcium, phosphorous, potassium, sodium, chlorine, and citric acid. Trace amounts of the following may be found in milk: aluminum, arsenic, boron, bromine, cadmium, chromium, fluorine, iodine, lead, nickel, selenium, silicon, silver, strontium, and vanadium.
In some embodiments, improving the milk yield and milk volume produced by a ruminant is desirable. In some embodiments, it is further desirable if the increase in milk yield and volume is not accompanied by simply an increase in solute volume.
In some embodiments improving energy-corrected milk (ECM) is desirable. In further embodiments, improving ECM amounts to increasing the calculated ECM output. In some embodiments, the ECM is calculated as follows: ECM=(0.327×milk pounds)+(12.95×fat pounds)+(7.2×protein pounds).
In some embodiments, improving the efficiency and digestibility of animal feed is desirable. In some embodiments, increasing the degradation of lignocellulosic components from animal feed is desirable. Lignocellulosic components include lignin, cellulose, and hemicellulose.
In some embodiments, increasing the concentration of fatty acids in the rumen of ruminants is desirable. Fatty acids include acetic acid, propionic acid, and butyric acid. In some embodiments, maintaining the pH balance in the rumen to prevent lysis of beneficial microbial consortia is desirable. In some embodiments, maintaining the pH balance in the rumen to prevent a reduction of beneficial microbial consortia is desirable.
In some embodiments, decreasing the amount of methane and manure produced by ruminants is desirable.
In some embodiments, improving the dry matter intake is desirable. In some embodiments, improving the efficiency of nitrogen utilization of the feed and dry matter ingested by ruminants is desirable.
In some embodiments, the improved traits of the present disclosure are the result of the administration of the presently described microbial compositions. It is thought that the microbial compositions modulate the microbiome of the ruminants such that the biochemistry of the rumen is changed in such a way that the ruminal liquid and solid substratum are more efficiently and more completely degraded into subcomponents and metabolites than the rumens of ruminants not having been administered microbial compositions of the present disclosure.
In some embodiments, the increase in efficiency and the increase of degradation of the ruminal substratum result in an increase in improved traits of the present disclosure.
Mode of Action: Digestibility Improvement in Ruminants
The rumen is a specialized stomach dedicated to the digestion of feed components in ruminants. A diverse microbial population inhabits the rumen, where their primary function revolves around converting the fibrous and non-fibrous carbohydrate components into useable sources of energy and protein (
Individual fatty acids have been tested in ruminants in order to identify their impacts on varying aspects of production.
Acetate: Structural carbohydrates produce large amounts of acetate when degraded. An infusion of acetate directly into the rumen was shown to improve the yield of milk, as well as the amount of milk fat produced. Acetate represents at least 90% of acids in the peripheral blood—it is possible that acetate can be directly utilized by mammary tissue as a source of energy. See Rook and Balch. 1961. Brit. J. Nutr. 15:361-369.
Propionate: Propionate has been shown to increase milk protein production, but decrease milk yield. See Rook and Balch. 1961. Brit. J. Nutr. 15:361-369.
Butyrate: An infusion of butyrate directly into the rumen of dairy cows increases milk fat production without changing milk yield. See Huhtanen et al. 1993. J. Dairy Sci. 76:1114-1124.
Network Analysis
A network and/or cluster analysis method, in one embodiment, is used to measure connectivity of the one or more strains within a network, wherein the network is a collection of two or more samples that share a common or similar environmental parameter. In one embodiment, network analysis comprises linkage analysis, modularity analysis, robustness measures, betweenness measures, connectivity measures, transitivity measures, centrality measures or a combination thereof. In another embodiment, network analysis comprises predictive modeling of network through link mining and prediction, social network theory, collective classification, link-based clustering, relational similarity, or a combination thereof. In another embodiment, network analysis comprises mutual information, maximal information coefficient (MIC) calculations, or other nonparametric methods between variables to establish connectivity. In another embodiment, network analysis comprises differential equation based modeling of populations. In yet another embodiment, network analysis comprises Lotka-Volterra modeling.
The environmental parameter can be a parameter of the sample itself, e.g., pH, temperature, amount of protein in the sample. Alternatively, the environmental parameter is a parameter that affects a change in the identity of a microbial community (i.e., where the “identity” of a microbial community is characterized by the type of microorganism strains and/or number of particular microorganism strains in a community), or is affected by a change in the identity of a microbial community. For example, an environmental parameter in one embodiment, is the food intake of an animal or the amount of milk (or the protein or fat content of the milk) produced by a lactating ruminant In one embodiment, the environmental parameter is the presence, activity and/or abundance of a second microorganism strain in the microbial community, present in the same sample. In some embodiments, an environmental parameter is referred to as a metadata parameter.
Other examples of metadata parameters include but are not limited to genetic information from the host from which the sample was obtained (e.g., DNA mutation information), sample pH, sample temperature, expression of a particular protein or mRNA, nutrient conditions (e.g., level and/or identity of one or more nutrients) of the surrounding environment/ecosystem), susceptibility or resistance to disease, onset or progression of disease, susceptibility or resistance of the sample to toxins, efficacy of xenobiotic compounds (pharmaceutical drugs), biosynthesis of natural products, or a combination thereof.
The methods of Example I aim to increase the total amount of milk fat and milk protein produced by a lactating ruminant, and the calculated ECM.
The methodologies presented herein—based upon utilizing the disclosed isolated microbes, consortia, and compositions comprising the same—demonstrate an increase in the total amount of milk fat and milk protein produced by a lactating ruminant. These increases were realized without the need for further addition of hormones.
In this example, a microbial consortium comprising two isolated microbes, Ascusb_3138 (SEQ ID NO:28; deposited as NRRL Y-67248) and Ascusf_15 (SEQ ID NO:32; deposited as NRRL Y67249), was administered to Holstein cows in mid-stage lactation over a period of five weeks.
The cows were randomly assigned into 2 groups of 8, wherein one of the groups was a control group that received a buffer lacking a microbial consortium. The second group, the experimental group, was administered a microbial consortium comprising Ascusb_3138 (SEQ ID NO:28) and Ascusf_15 (SEQ ID NO:32) once per day for five weeks. Each of the cows were housed in individual pens and were given free access to feed and water. The diet was a high milk yield diet. Cows were fed ad libitum and the feed was weighed at the end of the day, and prior day refusals were weighed and discarded. Weighing was performed with a PS-2000 scale from Salter Brecknell (Fairmont, MN).
Cows were cannulated such that a cannula extended into the rumen of the cows. Cows were further provided at least 10 days of recovery post cannulation prior to administering control dosages or experimental dosages.
Each administration consisted of 20 ml of a neutral buffered saline, and each administration consisted of approximately 109 cells suspended in the saline. The control group received 20 ml of the saline once per day, while the experimental group received 20 ml of the saline further comprising 109 microbial cells of the described microbial consortium.
The rumen of every cow was sampled on days 0, 7, 14, 21, and 35, wherein day 0 was the day prior to microbial administration. Note that the experimental and control administrations were performed after the rumen was sampled on that day. Daily sampling of the rumen, beginning on day 0, with a pH meter from Hanna Instruments (Woonsocket, RI) was inserted into the collected rumen fluid for recordings. Rumen sampling included both particulate and fluid sampling from the center, dorsal, ventral, anterior, and posterior regions of the rumen through the cannula, and all five samples were pooled into 15 ml conical vials containing 1.5 ml of stop solution (95% ethanol, 5% phenol). A fecal sample was also collected on each sampling day, wherein feces were collected from the rectum with the use of a palpation sleeve. Cows were weighed at the time of each sampling.
Fecal samples were placed in a 2 ounce vial, stored frozen, and analyzed to determine values for apparent neutral detergent fibers (NDF) digestibility, apparent starch digestibility, and apparent protein digestibility. Rumen sampling consisted of sampling both fluid and particulate portions of the rumen, each of which was stored in a 15 ml conical tube. Cells were fixed with a 10% stop solution (5% phenol/95% ethanol mixture) and kept at 4° C. and shipped to Ascus Biosciences (Vista, California) on ice.
The milk yield was measured twice per day, once in the morning and once at night. Milk composition (% fats and % proteins, etc.) was measured twice per day, once in the morning and once at night. Milk samples were further analyzed with near-infrared spectroscopy for protein fats, solids, analysis for milk urea nitrogen (MUN), and somatic cell counts (SCC) at the Tulare Dairy Herd Improvement Association (DHIA) (Tulare, California). Feed intake of individual cows and rumen pH were determined once per day.
A sample of the total mixed ration (TMR) was collected the final day of the adaptation period, and then successively collected once per week. Sampling was performed with the quartering method, wherein the samples were stored in vacuum sealed bags which were shipped to Cumberland Valley Analytical Services (Hagerstown, MD) and analyzed with the NIR1 package.
The final day of administration of buffer and/or microbial bioconsortia was on day 35, however all other measurements and samplings continued as described until day 46.
Table 12 reveals the effects of daily administration of an Ascus microbial consortium on the performance of multiparous Holstein cows (between 60 and 120 days in milk). Marked differences between the control and inoculated treatments were observed. The inoculated group experienced increases in all parameters except FCM/DMI and rumen pH. The weekly values at the beginning of the intervention period when cows were still adapting to the treatment are included in the calculations.
In certain embodiments of the disclosure, the present methods aim to increase the total amount of milk fat and milk protein produced by a lactating ruminant.
The methodologies presented herein—based upon utilizing the disclosed isolated microbes, consortia, and compositions comprising the same—have the potential to increase the total amount of milk fat and milk protein produced by a lactating ruminant. These increases can be realized without the need for further addition of hormones.
In this example, seven microbial consortia comprising isolated microbes from Table 1 are administered to Holstein cows in mid-stage lactation over a period of six weeks. The consortia are as follows:
The cows are randomly assigned into 15 groups of 8, wherein one of the groups is a control group that receives a buffer lacking a microbial consortium. The remaining seven groups are experimental groups and will each be administered one of the thirteen microbial bioconsortia once per day for six weeks. Each of the cows are held in individual pens to mitigate cross-contamination and are given free access to feed and water. The diet is a high milk yield diet. Cows are fed twice per day and the feed will be weighed at each feeding, and prior day refusals will be weighed and discarded. Weighing is performed with a PS-2000 scale from Salter Brecknell (Fairmont, MN).
Cows are cannulated such that a cannula extends into the rumen of the cows. Cows are further provided at least 10 days of recovery post cannulation prior to administering control dosages or experimental dosages.
Each administration consists of 5 ml of a neutral buffered saline, and each administration consists of approximately 109 cells suspended in the saline. The control group receives 5 ml of the saline once per day, while the experimental groups receive 5 ml of the saline further comprising 109 microbial cells of the described consortia.
The rumen of every cow is sampled on days 0, 7, 14, 21, and 35, wherein day 0 is the day prior to microbial administration. Note that the experimental and control administrations are performed after the rumen has been sampled on that day. Daily sampling of the rumen, beginning on day 0, with a pH meter from Hanna Instruments (Woonsocket, RI) is inserted into the collected rumen fluid for recordings. Rumen sampling included both particulate and fluid sampling from the center, dorsal, ventral, anterior, and posterior regions of the rumen through the cannula, and all five samples were pooled into 15 ml conical vials containing 1.5 ml of stop solution (95% ethanol, 5% phenol). A fecal sample is also collected on each sampling day, wherein feces are collected from the rectum with the use of a palpation sleeve. Cows are weighed at the time of each sampling.
Fecal samples are placed in a 2 ounce vial, stored frozen, and analyzed to determine values for apparent NDF digestibility, apparent starch digestibility, and apparent protein digestibility. Rumen sampling consists of sampling both fluid and particulate portions of the rumen, each of which is stored in a 15 ml conical tube. Cells are fixed with a 10% stop solution (5% phenol/95% ethanol mixture) and kept at 4° C. and shipped to Ascus Biosciences (Vista, California) on ice.
The milk yield is measured twice per day, once in the morning and once at night. Milk composition (% fats and % proteins, etc.) is measured twice per day, once in the morning and once at night. Milk samples are further analyzed with near-infrared spectroscopy for protein fats, solids, analysis for milk urea nitrogen (MUN), and somatic cell counts (SCC) at the Tulare Dairy Herd Improvement Association (DHIA) (Tulare, California). Feed intake of individual cows and rumen pH are determined once per day.
A sample of the total mixed ration (TMR) is collected the final day of the adaptation period, and then successively collected once per week. Sampling is performed with the quartering method, wherein the samples are stored in vacuum sealed bags which are shipped to Cumberland Valley Analytical Services (Hagerstown, MD) and analyzed with the NIR1 package.
In some embodiments, the percent fats and percent protein of milk in each of the experimental cow groups is expected to demonstrate a statistically significant increase over the percent fats and percent protein of milk in the control cow group. In other embodiments, the increase is not expected to be statistically significant, but it is expected to be still quantifiable.
In certain embodiments of the disclosure, the present methods aim to modulate the microbiome of ruminants through the administration of one or more microbes to the gastrointestinal tract of ruminants.
The methodologies presented herein—based upon utilizing the disclosed isolated microbes, consortia, and compositions comprising the same—have the potential to modulate the microbiome of ruminants. The modulation of a ruminant's gastrointestinal microbiome may lead to an increase of desirable traits of the present disclosure.
In this example, the microbial consortia of Table 5 are administered to Holstein cows over a period of six weeks.
The cows are randomly assigned into 37 groups of 8, wherein one of the groups is a control group that receives a buffer lacking a microbial consortium. The remaining thirty-six groups are experimental groups and will each be administered one of the thirty-six microbial consortia once per day for six weeks. Each of the cows are held in individual pens to mitigate cross-contamination and are given free access to feed and water. The diet is a high milk yield diet. Cows are fed twice per day and the feed will be weighed at each feeding, and prior day refusals will be weighed and discarded. Weighing is performed with a PS-2000 scale from Salter Brecknell (Fairmont, MN).
Cows are cannulated such that a cannula extends into the rumen of the cows. Cows are further provided at least 10 days of recovery post cannulation prior to administering control dosages or experimental dosages.
Each administration consists of 5 ml of a neutral buffered saline, and each administration consists of approximately 109 cells suspended in the saline. The control group receives 5 ml of the saline once per day, while the experimental groups receive 5 ml of the saline further comprising 109 microbial cells of the described consortia.
The rumen of every cow is sampled on days 0, 7, 14, 21, and 35, wherein day 0 is the day prior to administration. Note that the experimental and control administrations are performed after the rumen has been sampled on that day. Daily sampling of the rumen, beginning on day 0, with a pH meter from Hanna Instruments (Woonsocket, RI) is inserted into the collected rumen fluid for recordings. Rumen sampling included both particulate and fluid sampling from the center, dorsal, ventral, anterior, and posterior regions of the rumen through the cannula, and all five samples were pooled into 15 ml conical vials containing 1.5 ml of stop solution (95% ethanol, 5% phenol). A fecal sample is also collected on each sampling day, wherein feces are collected from the rectum with the use of a palpation sleeve. Cows are weighed at the time of each sampling.
Fecal samples are placed in a 2 ounce vial, stored frozen, and analyzed to determine values for apparent NDF digestibility, apparent starch digestibility, and apparent protein digestibility. Rumen sampling consists of sampling both fluid and particulate portions of the rumen, each of which is stored in a 15 ml conical tube. Cells are fixed with a 10% stop solution (5% phenol/95% ethanol mixture) and kept at 4° C. and shipped to Ascus Biosciences (Vista, California) on ice.
The samples of fluid and particulate portions of the rumen, as well as the fecal samples are each evaluated for microbiome fingerprinting utilizing the T-RFLP method combined with nMDS ordination and PERMANOVA statistics.
In some embodiments, the ruminal and fecal microbiome in each of the experimental cow groups is expected to demonstrate a statistically significant change in the microbiomes over the microbiomes in the control cow group as well as the 0 day microbiome samples, wherein the change is a significant increase in the proportion of microbes administered in the experimental administrations. In other embodiments, the increase is not expected to be statistically significant, but it is expected to be still quantifiable.
Determine rumen microbial community constituents that impact the production of milk fat in dairy cows.
Eight lactating, ruminally cannulated, Holstein cows were housed in individual tie-stalls for use in the experiment. Cows were fed twice daily, milked twice a day, and had continuous access to fresh water. One cow (cow 4201) was removed from the study after the first dietary Milk Fat Depression due to complications arising from an abortion prior to the experiment.
Experimental Design and Treatment: The experiment used a crossover design with 2 groups and 1 experimental period. The experimental period lasted 38 days: 10 days for the covariate/wash-out period and 28 days for data collection and sampling. The data collection period consisted of 10 days of dietary Milk Fat Depression (MFD) and 18 days of recovery. After the first experimental period, all cows underwent a 10-day wash out period prior to the beginning of period 2.
Dietary MFD was induced with a total mixed ration (TMR) low in fiber (29% NDF) with high starch degradability (70% degradable) and high polyunsaturated fatty acid levels (PUFA, 3.7%). The Recovery phase included two diets variable in starch degradability. Four cows were randomly assigned to the recovery diet high in fiber (37% NDF), low in PUFA (2.6%), and high in starch degradability (70% degradable). The remaining four cows were fed a recovery diet high in fiber (37% NDF), low in PUFA (2.6%), but low in starch degradability (35%).
During the 10-day covariate and 10-day wash out periods, cows were fed the high fiber, low PUFA, and low starch degradability diet.
Samples and Measurements: Milk yield, dry matter intake, and feed efficiency were measured daily for each animal throughout the covariate, wash out, and sample collection periods. TMR samples were measured for nutrient composition. During the collection period, milk samples were collected and analyzed every 3 days. Samples were analyzed for milk component concentrations (milk fat, milk protein, lactose, milk urea nitrogen, somatic cell counts, and solids) and fatty acid compositions.
Rumen samples were collected and analyzed for microbial community composition and activity every 3 days during the collection period. The rumen was intensively sampled 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22 hours after feeding during day 0, day 7, and day 10 of the dietary MFD. Similarly, the rumen was intensively sampled 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22 hours after feeding on day 16 and day 28 of the sample collection period. Rumen contents were analyzed for pH, acetate concentration, butyrate concentration, propionate concentration, isoacid concentration, and long chain and CLA isomer concentrations. Rumen sampling included both particulate and fluid sampling from the center, dorsal, ventral, anterior, and posterior regions of the rumen through the cannula, and all five samples were pooled into 15 ml conical vials.
Rumen Sample Preparation and Sequencing: After collection, rumen samples were centrifuged at 4,000 rpm in a swing bucket centrifuge for 20 minutes at 4° C. The supernatant was decanted, and an aliquot of each rumen content sample (1-2 mg) was added to a sterile 1.7 mL tube prefilled with 0.1 mm glass beads. A second aliquot was collected and stored in an empty, sterile 1.7 mL tube for cell counting.
Rumen samples in empty tubes were stained and put through a flow cytometer to quantify the number of cells of each microorganism type in each sample. Rumen samples with glass beads were homogenized with bead beating to lyse microorganisms. DNA and RNA was extracted and purified from each sample and prepared for sequencing on an Illumina Miseq. Samples were sequenced using paired-end chemistry, with 300 base pairs sequenced on each end of the library.
Sequencing Read Processing and Data Analysis: Sequencing reads were quality trimmed and processed to identify bacterial species present in the rumen based on a marker gene, 16S rDNA, or ITS1 and/or ITS2. Count datasets and activity datasets were integrated with the sequencing reads to determine the absolute cell numbers of active microbial species within the rumen microbial community. Production characteristics of the cow over time, including pounds of milk produced, were linked to the distribution of active microorganisms within each sample over the course of the experiment using mutual information.
Tests cases to determine the impact of count data, activity data, and count and activity on the final output were run by omitting the appropriate datasets from the sequencing analysis. To assess the impact of using a linear correlation rather than the MIC on target selection, Pearson's coefficients were also calculated for pounds of milk fat produced as compared to the relative abundance of all microorganisms and the absolute abundance of active microorganisms.
Results
One component of the Ascus Biosciences technology utilized in this application leverages mutual information to rank the importance of native microbial strains residing in the gastrointestinal tract of the animal to specific animal traits. The maximal information coefficient (MIC) scores are calculated for all microorganisms and the desired animal trait. Relationships were scored on a scale of 0 to 1, with 1 representing a strong relationship between the microbial strain and the animal trait, and 0 representing no relationship. A cut-off based on this score is used to define useful and non-useful microorganisms with respect to the improvement of specific traits.
The MICs were calculated between pounds of milk fat produced and the absolute abundance of each active microorganism. Microorganisms were ranked by MIC score, and microorganisms with the highest MIC scores were selected as the target species most relevant to pounds of milk produced. MIC scores of the microbes of the present disclosure are recited in Table 1. The greater the MIC score, the greater the ability of the microbe to confer an increase in the weight of milk fat produced by a cow
Utilizing Ascus Biosciences' technology, the performance of currently available microbial feed additive products was predicted.
Direct-fed microbial products that claim to enhance dairy performance are openly available on the market. Some of these products contain microorganism strains that are native rumen microorganisms (Megasphaera elsdenii), or are within 97% sequence similarity of native rumen microorganisms. We have identified the species of microbes utilized in these products, and calculated their MIC score with respect to milk fat efficiency (
Lactobacillus plantarum: MIC 0.28402
The calculated MIC predicts that Lactobacillus plantarum is poorly associated with milk fat efficiency, and the art discloses that an inoculation of L. plantarum yields no increase in milk fat product, and at least one study discloses that some strains of L. plantarum create molecules that cause milk fat depression. See Lee et al. 2007. J. Appl. Microbiol. 103(4):1140-1146 and Mohammed et al. 2012. J. Dairy Sci. 95(1):328-339.
Lactobacillus acidophilus: MIC 0.30048
The calculated MIC predicts that Lactobacillus acidophilus is poorly associated with milk fat efficiency, and the art discloses that the administration of L. acidophilus to dairy cows/calves had no effect of various aspects of milk yield/milk component yield. See Higginbotham and Bath. 1993. J. Dairy Sci. 76(2):615-620; Abu-Tarboush et al. 1996. Animal Feed Sci. Tech. 57(1-2):39-49; McGilliard and Stallings. 1998. J. Dairy Sci. 81(5):1353-1357; and Raeth-Knight et al. 2007. J. Dairy Sci. 90(4):1802-1809; But see Boyd et al. 2011. 94(9):4616-4622 (discloses an increase in milk yield and milk protein yield). While Boyd et al. does disclose an increase in milk and milk protein yield, the controls of this single study do not appear to adequately isolate the the presence of L. acidophilus as the cause of the increase. The body of prior art contradicts the finding of Boyd et al.
Megasphaera elsdenii: MIC 0.32548
The calculated MIC predicts that Megasphaera elsdenii is poorly associated with milk fat efficiency, and the art provides substantial evidence to suggest that Megasphaera elsdenii has no positive effect upon milk fat efficiency, but multiple references provide evidence to suggest that it has a negative effect on milk fat efficiency. See Kim et al. 2002. J. Appl. Micro. 92(5):976-982; Hagg. 2008. Dissertation, University of Pretoria. 1-72; Hagg et al. 2010. S. African. J. Animal Sci. 40(2):101-112; Zebeli et al. 2011. J. Dairy Res. 79(1):16-25; Aikman et al. 2011. J. Dairy Sci. 94(6):2840-2849; Mohammed et al. 2012. J. Dairy Sci. 95(1):328-339; and Cacite and Weimer. 2016. J. Animal Sci. Poster Abstract. 94(sup. 5):784.
Prevotella bryantii: MIC 0.40161
The calculated MIC predicts that Prevotella bryantii is not highly associated with milk fat efficiency, and the art provides evidence that P. bryantii administered during subacute acidosis challenge in midlactation dairy cows has no apparent effect on milk yield, whereas administration of the microbe to dairy cows in early lactation yields improved milk fat concentrations. See Chiquette et al. 2012. J. Dairy Sci. 95(10):5985-5995, but see Chiquette et al. 2008. 91(9):3536-3543; respectively.
The methods of the instant example aim to increase the total amount of milk fat and milk protein produced by a lactating ruminant, and the calculated energy corrected milk (ECM).
The methodologies presented herein—based upon utilizing the disclosed isolated microbes, consortia, and compositions comprising the same—demonstrate an increase in the total amount of milk fat and milk protein produced by a lactating ruminant. These increases were realized without the need for further addition of hormones.
In this example, a microbial consortium comprising two isolated microbes, Ascusb_3138 (SEQ ID NO:28) and Ascusf_15 (SEQ ID NO:32), was administered to Holstein cows in mid-stage lactation over a period of five weeks.
The cows were randomly assigned into 2 groups of 8, in which one of the groups was a control group that received a buffer lacking a microbial consortium. The second group, the experimental group, was administered a microbial consortium comprising Ascusb_3138 (SEQ ID NO:28) and Ascusf_15 (SEQ ID NO:32) once per day for five weeks. Each cow was housed in an individual pen and was given free access to feed and water. The diet was a high milk yield diet. Cows were fed ad libitum and the feed was weighed at the end of each day, and prior day refusals were weighed and discarded. Weighing was performed with a PS-2000 scale from Salter Brecknell (Fairmont, MN).
Cows were cannulated such that a cannula extended into the rumen of the cows. Cows were further provided at least 10 days of recovery post cannulation prior to administering control dosages or experimental dosages.
Each administration consisted of 20 ml of a neutral buffered saline, and each administration consisted of approximately 109 cells suspended in the saline. The control group received 20 ml of the saline once per day, while the experimental group received 20 ml of the saline further comprising 109 microbial cells of the described microbial consortium.
The rumen of every cow was sampled on days 0, 7, 14, 21, and 35, wherein day 0 was the day prior to microbial administration. Note that the experimental and control administrations were performed after the rumen was sampled on that day. Daily sampling of the rumen, beginning on day 0, with a pH meter from Hanna Instruments (Woonsocket, RI) was inserted into the collected rumen fluid for recordings. Rumen sampling included both particulate and fluid sampling from the center, dorsal, ventral, anterior, and posterior regions of the rumen through the cannula, and all five samples were pooled into 15 ml conical vials containing 1.5 ml of stop solution (95% ethanol, 5% phenol) and stored at 4° C. and shipped to Ascus Biosciences (Vista, California) on ice.
A portion of each rumen sample was stained and put through a flow cytometer to quantify the number of cells of each microorganism type in each sample. A separate portion of the same rumen sample was homogenized with bead beating to lyse microorganisms. DNA and RNA was extracted and purified from each sample and prepared for sequencing on an Illumina Miseq. Samples were sequenced using paired-end chemistry, with 300 base pairs sequenced on each end of the library. The sequencing reads were used to quantify the number of cells of each active, microbial member present in each animal rumen in the control and experimental groups over the course of the experiment.
Ascusb_3138 and Ascusf_15 both colonized, and were active in the rumen after ˜3-5 days of daily administration, depending on the animal. This colonization was observed in the experimental group, but not in the control group. The rumen is a dynamic environment, where the chemistry of the cumulative rumen microbial population is highly intertwined. The artificial addition of Ascusb_3138 and Ascuf_15 could have effects on the overall structure of the community. To assess this potential impact, the entire microbial community was analyzed over the course of the experiment to identify higher level taxonomic shifts in microbial community population.
Distinct trends were not observed in the fungal populations over time, aside from the higher cell numbers of Ascusf_15 in the experimental animals. The bacterial populations, however, did change more predictably. To assess high level trends across individual animals over time, percent compositions of the microbial populations were calculated and compared. See [0448] Table 13. Only genera composing greater than 1% of the community were analyzed. The percent composition of genera containing known fiber-degrading bacteria, including Ruminococcus, was found to increase in experimental animals as compared to control animals. Volatile fatty acid-producing genera, including Clostridial cluster XIVa, Clostridium, Pseudobutyrivibrio, Butyricimonas, and Lachnospira were also found at higher abundances in the experimental animals. The greatest shift was observed in the genera Prevotella. Members of this genus have been shown to be involved in the digestion of cellobiose, pectin, and various other structural carbohydrates within the rumen. Prevotella sp. have further been implicated in the conversion of plant lignins into beneficial antioxidants (Schogor et al. PLOS One. 9(4):e87949 (10 p.)).
To more directly measure quantitative changes in the rumen over time, cell count data was integrated with sequencing data to identify bulk changes in the population at the cell level. Fold changes in cell numbers were determined by dividing the average number of cells of each genera in the experimental group by the average number of cells of each genera in the control group. See Table 13. The cell count analysis captured many genera that fell under the threshold in the previous analysis Promicromonospora, Rhodopirellula, Olivibacter, Victivallis, Nocardia, Lentisphaera, Eubacteiru, Pedobacter, Butyricimonas, Mogibacterium, and Desulfovibrio were all found to be at least 10 fold higher on average in the experimental animals. Prevotella, Lachnospira, Butyricicoccus, Clostridium XIVa, Roseburia, Clostridium_sensu_stricto, and Pseudobutyrivibrio were found to be ˜1.5 times higher in the experimental animals.
Prevotellaceae
Ruminococcaceae
Lachnospiraceae
Prevotella
Clostridium
—
XIVa
Lachnospiracea
—
incertae
—
sedis
Ruminococcus
Clostridium
—
IV
Butyricimonas
Clostridium
—
sensu
—
stricto
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Citrobacter
Selenomonas
Hydrogeno
anaerobacterium
Promicromonospora
Rhodopirellula
Olivibacter
Victivallis
Nocardia
Lentisphaera
Eubacterium
Pedobacter
Butyricimonas
Mogibacterium
Desulfovibrio
Anaeroplasma
Sharpea
Saccharofermentans
Parabacteroides
Papillibacter
Citrobacter
Prevotella
Butyricicoccus
Roseburia
Pseudobutyrivibrio
Selenomonas
Olsenella
A. Volatile Fatty Acid (VFA) Production
To assess the ability of the strains to produce volatile fatty acids, High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) was utilized to measure the concentrations of acetate, butyrate, and propionate in spent media. M2GSC media was used in an assay mimicking rumen conditions as closely as possibile.
For pure cultures, a single colony from each of the desired strains (from anaerobic agar plates) was inoculated into M2GSC media. A medium blank (control) was also prepared. Cultures and the medium blank were incubated at 37° C. until significant growth was visible. An optical density (OD600) was determined for each culture, and the strain ID was confirmed with Illumina sequencing. An aliquot of culture was subjected to sterile filtration into a washed glass 15 ml sample vial and analyzed by HPLC; HPLC assays were performed at Michigan State University. Enrichments that exhibited growth were also stained and cell counted to confirm that the individual strains within each enrichment grew. Strains often appeared in multiple enrichments, so the enrichment with the highest amount of growth for the strain (i.e. the highest increase in cell number of that strain) is reported in Table 15.
Due to the vast complexity of metabolisms and microbial lifestyles present in the rumen, many rumen microorganisms are incapable of axenic growth. In order to assay these organisms for desirable characteristics, enrichments cultures were established under a variety of conditions that mimicked particular features of the rumen environment. Diluted rumen fluid (1/100 dilution) was inoculated into M2GSC or M2 media supplemented with a variety of carbon sources including xylose (4 g/L), mannitol (4 g/L), glycerol (4 g/L), xylan (2 g/L), cellobiose (2 g/L), arabinose (4 g/L), mannose (4 g/L), rhaminose (2 g/L), maltose (2 g/L), maltose (2 g/L), and molasses. Rumen fluid was also sometimes omitted from the recipe. Additions including amino acids, volatile fatty acids, and antibiotics, were also varied across the enrichments. A medium blank (control) was also prepared. Cultures and the medium blank were incubated at 37° C. until significant growth was visible. An optical density (OD600) was determined for each culture, and the strain IDs were confirmed with Illumina sequencing. An aliquot of culture was subjected to sterile filtration into a washed glass 15 ml sample vial and analyzed by HPLC; HPLC assays were performed at Michigan State University. Enrichments that exhibited growth were also stained and cell counted to confirm that the individual strains within each enrichment grew. Strains often appeared in multiple enrichments, so the enrichment with the highest amount of growth for the strain (i.e, the highest increase in cell number of that strain) is reported in Table 15.
Concentrations of acetate, butyrate, and propionate were quantified for the medium blanks as well as the sterile filtered culture samples for both pure strain and enrichment experiments. HPLC parameters were as follows: Biorad Aminex HPX-87H column, 60° C., 0.5 ml/minute mobile phase 0.00325 N H2SO4, 500 psi, 35C RI detector, 45 minute run time, and 5 μL injection volume. Concentrations of acetate, butyrate, and propionate for both pure cultures and enrichments are reported in Table 15.
B. Soluble Carbon Source Assay
To assess the ability of the strains to degrade various carbon sources, an optical density (OD600) was used to measure growth of strains on multiple carbon sources over time.
For pure isolates, a single colony from each of the desired strains (from anaerobic agar plates) was inoculated into M2GSC media. A medium blank (control) was also prepared. Strains were inoculated into a carbon source assay anaerobically, wherein the assay was set up in a 2 mL sterile 96-well plate, with each well containing RAMM salts, vitamins, minerals, cysteine, and a single carbon source. Carbon sources included glucose, xylan, lactate, xylose, mannose, glycerol, pectin, molasses, and cellobiose. Cells were inoculated such that each well started at an OD600 of 0.01. Optican densities were read at 600 nm with the Synergy H4 hybrid plate reader. The strain IDs were confirmed with Illumina sequencing after all wells were in stationary phase.
As in the volatile fatty acid assay above, enrichments were also used to assay carbon source degradation. Diluted rumen fluid (1/100 dilution) was inoculated into M2GSC or M2 media supplemented with a variety of carbon sources including xylose (4 g/L), mannitol (4 g/L), glycerol (4 g/L), xylan (2 g/L), cellobiose (2 g/L), arabinose (4 g/L), mannose (4 g/L), rhaminose (2 g/L), maltose (2 g/L), maltose (2 g/L), and molasses. Rumen fluid was also sometimes omitted from the recipe. Additions including amino acids, volatile fatty acids, and antibiotics, were also varied across the enrichments. A medium blank (control) was also prepared. Cultures and the medium blank were incubated at 37° C. until significant growth was visible. An optical density (OD600) was determined for each culture, and the strain IDs were confirmed with Illumina sequencing. Enrichments that exhibited growth were also stained and cell counted to confirm that the individual strains within each enrichment grew.
C. Insoluble Carbon Source Assay
To assess the ability of the strains to degrade insoluble carbon sources, visual inspection was leveraged to qualitatively determine a strain's degradation capabilities.
For pure cultures, a single colony from each of the desired strains (from anaerobic agar plates) was inoculated into anaerobic Hungate tubes containing Lowe's semi defined media with cellulose paper, starch, or grass as the sole carbon source. (Lowe et al. 1985. J. Gen. Microbiol. 131:2225-2229). Enrichment cultures using a 1/100 dilution of rumen fluid were also set up using the same medium conditions. Cultures were checked visually for degradation of insoluble carbon sources (See
All media was prepared with anaerobic water (boiled DI H2O for 15 minutes then cooled to room temperature in a water bath while sparging with N2. All media was adjusted to a pH of 6.8 with 2M HCl. 10 mL of media was then aliquoted into 15 mL hungate tubs, and the tubes were then sparged with 80% N2 20% CO2 for 3 minutes.
After sterilization (autoclave) added: 2 mL of 250× modified Wolfe's vitamin mix, 10 mL of 50× modified Wolfe's mineral mix, 5 mL of 100 mM cysteine.
Experimental Design and Materials and Methods
Objective: Determine rumen microbial community constituents that impact the production of milk fat in dairy cows.
Animals: Eight lactating, ruminally cannulated, Holstein cows were housed in individual tie-stalls for use in the experiment. Cows were fed twice daily, milked twice a day, and had continuous access to fresh water. One cow (cow 1) was removed from the study after the first dietary Milk Fat Depression due to complications arising from an abortion prior to the experiment.
Experimental Design and Treatment: The experiment used a crossover design with 2 groups and 1 experimental period. The experimental period lasted 38 days: 10 days for the covariate/wash-out period and 28 days for data collection and sampling. The data collection period consisted of 10 days of dietary Milk Fat Depression (MFD) and 18 days of recovery. After the first experimental period, all cows underwent a 10-day wash out period prior to the beginning of period 2.
Dietary MFD was induced with a total mixed ration (TMR) low in fiber (29% NDF) with high starch degradability (70% degradable) and high polyunsaturated fatty acid levels (PUFA, 3.7%). The Recovery phase included two diets variable in starch degradability. Four cows were randomly assigned to the recovery diet high in fiber (37% NDF), low in PUFA (2.6%), and high in starch degradability (70% degradable). The remaining four cows were fed a recovery diet high in fiber (37% NDF), low in PUFA (2.6%), but low in starch degradability (35%).
During the 10-day covariate and 10-day wash out periods, cows were fed the high fiber, low PUFA, and low starch degradability diet.
Samples and Measurements: Milk yield, dry matter intake, and feed efficiency were measured daily for each animal throughout the covariate, wash out, and sample collection periods. TMR samples were measured for nutrient composition. During the collection period, milk samples were collected and analyzed every 3 days. Samples were analyzed for milk component concentrations (milk fat, milk protein, lactose, milk urea nitrogen, somatic cell counts, and solids) and fatty acid compositions.
Rumen samples were collected and analyzed for microbial community composition and activity every 3 days during the collection period. The rumen was intensively sampled 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22 hours after feeding during day 0, day 7, and day 10 of the dietary MFD. Similarly, the rumen was intensively sampled 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22 hours after feeding on day 16 and day 28 during the recovery period. Rumen contents were analyzed for pH, acetate concentration, butyrate concentration, propionate concentration, isoacid concentration, and long chain and CLA isomer concentrations.
Rumen Sample Preparation and Sequencing: After collection, rumen samples were centrifuged at 4,000 rpm in a swing bucket centrifuge for 20 minutes at 4° C. The supernatant was decanted, and an aliquot of each rumen content sample (1-2 mg) was added to a sterile 1.7 mL tube prefilled with 0.1 mm glass beads. A second aliquot was collected and stored in an empty, sterile 1.7 mL tube for cell counting.
Rumen samples with glass beads (1st aliquot) were homogenized with bead beating to lyse microorganisms. DNA and RNA was extracted and purified from each sample and prepared for sequencing on an Illumina Miseq. Samples were sequenced using paired-end chemistry, with 300 base pairs sequenced on each end of the library. Rumen samples in empty tubes (2nd aliquot) were stained and put through a flow cytometer to quantify the number of cells of each microorganism type in each sample.
Sequencing Read Processing and Data Analysis: Sequencing reads were quality trimmed and processed to identify bacterial species present in the rumen based on a marker gene. Count datasets and activity datasets were integrated with the sequencing reads to determine the absolute cell numbers of active microbial species within the rumen microbial community. Production characteristics of the cow over time, including pounds of milk produced, were linked to the distribution of active microorganisms within each sample over the course of the experiment using mutual information. Maximal information coefficient (MIC) scores were calculated between pounds of milk fat produced and the absolute cell count of each active microorganism. Microorganisms were ranked by MIC score, and microorganisms with the highest MIC scores were selected as the target species most relevant to pounds of milk produced.
Tests cases to determine the impact of count data, activity data, and count and activity on the final output were run by omitting the appropriate datasets from the sequencing analysis. To assess the impact of using a linear correlation rather than the MIC on target selection, Pearson's coefficients were also calculated for pounds of milk fat produced as compared to the relative abundance of all microorganisms and the absolute cell count of active microorganisms.
Results and Discussion
Relative Abundances vs. Absolute Cell Counts
The top 15 target species were identified for the dataset that included cell count data (absolute cell count, Table 21) and for the dataset that did not include cell count data (relative abundance, Table 20) based on MIC scores. Activity data was not used in this analysis in order to isolate the effect of cell count data on final target selection. Ultimately, the top 8 targets were the same between the two datasets. Of the remaining 7, 5 strains were present on both lists in varying order. Despite the differences in rank for these 5 strains, the calculated MIC score for each strain was the identical between the two lists. The two strains present on the absolute cell count list but not the relative abundance list, ascus_111 and ascus_288, were rank 91 and rank 16, respectively, on the relative abundance list. The two strains present on the relative abundance list but not the absolute cell count list, ascus_102 and ascus_252, were rank 50 and rank 19, respectively, on the absolute cell count list. These 4 strains did have different MIC scores on each list, thus explaining their shift in rank and subsequent impact on the other strains in the list.
Integration of cell count data did not always affect the final MIC score assigned to each strain. This may be attributed to the fact that although the microbial population did shift within the rumen daily and over the course of the 38-day experiment, it was always within 107-108 cells per milliliter. Much larger shifts in population numbers would undoubtedly have a broader impact on final MIC scores.
Inactive Species vs. Active Species
In order to assess the impact of filtering strains based on activity data, target species were identified from a dataset that leveraged relative abundance with (Table 22) and without (Table 20) activity data as well as a dataset that leveraged absolute cell counts with (Table 23) and without (Table 21) activity data.
For the relative abundance case, ascus_126, ascus_1366, ascus_1780, ascus_299, ascus_1139, ascus_127, ascus_341, and ascus_252 were deemed target strains prior to applying activity data. These eight strains (53% of the initial top 15 targets) fell below rank 15 after integrating activity data. A similar trend was observed for the absolute cell count case. Ascus_126, ascus_1366, ascus_1780, ascus_299, ascus_1139, ascus_127, and ascus_341 (46% of the initial top 15 targets) fell below rank 15 after activity dataset integration.
The activity datasets had a much more severe effect on target rank and selection than the cell count datasets. When integrating these datasets together, if a sample is found to be inactive it is essentially changed to a “0” and not considered to be part of the analysis. Because of this, the distribution of points within a sample can become heavily altered or skewed after integration, which in turn greatly impacts the final MIC score and thus the rank order of target microorganisms.
Relative Abundances and Inactive vs. Absolute Cell Counts and Active
Ultimately, the method defined here leverages both cell count data and activity data to identify microorganisms highly linked to relevant metadata characteristics. Within the top 15 targets selected using both methods (Table 23, Table 20), only 7 strains were found on both lists. Eight strains (53%) were unique to the absolute cell count and activity list. The top 3 targets on both lists matched in both strain as well as in rank. However, two of the three did not have the same MIC score on both lists, suggesting that they were influenced by activity dataset integration but not enough to upset their rank order.
Linear Correlations vs. Nonparametric Approaches
Pearson's coefficients and MIC scores were calculated between pounds of milk fat produced and the absolute cell count of active microorganisms within each sample (Table 24). Strains were ranked either by MIC (Table 24a) or Pearson coefficient (Table 24b) to select target strains most relevant to milk fat production. Both MIC score and Pearson coefficient are reported in each case. Six strains were found on both lists, meaning nine (60%) unique strains were identified using the MIC approach. The rank order of strains between lists did not match—the top 3 target strains identified by each method were also unique.
Like Pearson coefficients, the MIC score is reported over a range of 0 to 1, with 1 suggesting a very tight relationship between the two variables. Here, the top 15 targets exhibited MIC scores ranging from 0.97 to 0.74. The Pearson coefficients for the correlation test case, however, ranged from 0.53 to 0.45—substantially lower than the mutual information test case. This discrepancy may be due to the differences inherent to each analysis method. While correlations are a linear estimate that measures the dispersion of points around a line, mutual information leverages probability distributions and measures the similarity between two distributions. Over the course of the experiment, the pounds of milk fat produced changed nonlinearly (
The Present Method in Entirety vs. Conventional Approaches
The conventional approach of analyzing microbial communities relies on the use of relative abundance data with no incorporation of activity information, and ultimately ends with a simple correlation of microbial species to metadata (see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 9,206,680, which is herein incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes). Here, we have shown how the incorporation of each dataset incrementally influences the final list of targets. When applied in its entirety, the method described herein selected a completely different set of targets when compared to the conventional method (Table 24a and Table 24c). Ascus_3038, the top target strain selected using the conventional approach, was plotted against milk fat to visualize the strength of the correlation (
Subject matter contemplated by the present disclosure is set out in the following numbered embodiments:
The aforementioned compositions have markedly different characteristics and/or properties not possessed by any individual bacteria or fungi as they naturally exist in the rumen. The markedly different characteristics and/or properties possessed by the aforementioned compositions can be structural, functional, or both. For example, the compositions possess the markedly different functional property of being able to increase milk production or improve milk compositional characteristics, when administered to a ruminant, as taught herein. Furthermore, the compositions possess the markedly different functional property of being shelf-stable.
Subject matter contemplated by the present disclosure is set out in the following numbered embodiments:
The aforementioned compositions have markedly different characteristics and/or properties not possessed by any individual bacteria or fungi as they naturally exist in the rumen. The markedly different characteristics and/or properties possessed by the aforementioned compositions can be structural, functional, or both. For example, the compositions possess the markedly different functional property of being able to modulate the rumen microbiome, when administered to a ruminant, as taught herein.
Subject matter contemplated by the present disclosure is set out in the following numbered embodiments:
The aforementioned compositions, utilized in the described methods, have markedly different characteristics and/or properties not possessed by any individual bacteria or fungi as they naturally exist in the rumen. The markedly different characteristics and/or properties possessed by the aforementioned compositions, utilized in the described methods, can be structural, functional, or both. For example, the compositions, utilized in the described methods, possess the markedly different functional property of being able to increase milk production or improve milk compositional characteristics, when administered to a ruminant, as taught herein. Furthermore, the compositions, utilized in the described methods, possess the markedly different functional property of being shelf-stable.
In aspects, the aforementioned microbial species—that is, a purified microbial population that comprises a bacteria with a 16S nucleic acid sequence, and/or a fungi with an ITS nucleic acid sequence, which is at least about 97% identical to a nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of: SEQ ID NOs: 1-60 and 2045-2107—are members of a Markush group, as the present disclosure illustrates that the members belong to a class of microbes characterized by various physical and functional attributes, which can include any of the following: a) the ability to convert a carbon source into a volatile fatty acid such as acetate, butyrate, propionate, or combinations thereof; b) the ability to degrade a soluble or insoluble carbon source; c) the ability to impart an increase in milk production or improved milk compositional characteristics to a ruminant administered the microbe; d) the ability to modulate the microbiome of the rumen of a ruminant administered the microbe; e) the ability to be formulated into a shelf-stable composition; and/or f) possessing a MIC score of at least about 0.4 if a bacteria and possessing a MIC score of at least about 0.2 if a fungi. Thus, the members of the Markush group possess at least one property in common, which can be responsible for their function in the claimed relationship.
All references, articles, publications, patents, patent publications, and patent applications cited herein are incorporated by reference in their entireties for all purposes.
However, mention of any reference, article, publication, patent, patent publication, and patent application cited herein is not, and should not be taken as, an acknowledgment or any form of suggestion that they constitute valid prior art or form part of the common general knowledge in any country in the world.
This Application is a U.S. Utility Application under 35 U.S.C. § 111 that claims priority pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 120, as a Continuation Application, to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/655,776, filed on Oct. 17, 2019, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 10,701,955, which is a Continuation Application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/207,811, filed on Dec. 3, 2018, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 10,448,658, which is a Continuation Application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/029,398, filed Jul. 6, 2018, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 10,398,154, which is a Continuation Application of International Application No. PCT/US2017/012573, filed on Jan. 6, 2017, which itself claims the benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/276,142, filed Jan. 7, 2016; U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/276,531, filed Jan. 8, 2016; U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/334,816, filed May 11, 2016; and U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/415,908, filed Nov. 1, 2016; each of which is herein incorporated by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3484243 | Anderson et al. | Dec 1969 | A |
| 4559298 | Fahy | Dec 1985 | A |
| 4647536 | Mosbach et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
| 5104662 | Kalsta et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5290765 | Wettlaufer et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
| 5534271 | Ware et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5605793 | Stemmer | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5733568 | Ford | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5741508 | Katsumi et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5837458 | Minshull et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 6090416 | Iritani et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6210891 | Nyren et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6214337 | Hayen et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6258568 | Nyren | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6274320 | Rothberg et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6841168 | Worrall | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 7427408 | Merritt et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7488503 | Porzio et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
| 7998502 | Harel | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8071295 | Ashby | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8097245 | Harel et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8114396 | Horn et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
| 8345010 | Fitzgibbon et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8349252 | Elliot et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8449916 | Bellaire et al. | May 2013 | B1 |
| 8460726 | Harel et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8906668 | Henn et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 9011834 | Mckenzie et al. | Apr 2015 | B1 |
| 9028841 | Henn et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
| 9050358 | Borody | Jun 2015 | B2 |
| 9113636 | Von Maltzahn et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9179694 | Porter et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
| 9180147 | Mckenzie et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
| 9206680 | Ashby et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9288995 | Von Maltzahn et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9295263 | Von Maltzahn et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9404162 | Boileau et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
| 9446080 | Mckenzie et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
| 9469835 | Bronshtein | Oct 2016 | B2 |
| 9532572 | Mckenzie et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9532573 | Von Maltzahn et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9533014 | Henn et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9540676 | Zengler et al. | Jan 2017 | B1 |
| 9562271 | Neely | Feb 2017 | B2 |
| 9622485 | Von Maltzahn et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
| 9642881 | Honda et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
| 9649345 | Honda et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
| 9700586 | Bicalho et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
| 9901605 | Garner et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
| 9903002 | Zeng et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
| 9909180 | Quake et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
| 9938558 | Embree et al. | Apr 2018 | B2 |
| 9993507 | Embree et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
| 10293006 | Embree et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
| 10398154 | Embree et al. | Sep 2019 | B2 |
| 10448657 | Embree et al. | Oct 2019 | B2 |
| 10448658 | Embree et al. | Oct 2019 | B2 |
| 10645952 | Embree et al. | May 2020 | B2 |
| 10701955 | Embree et al. | Jul 2020 | B2 |
| 11044924 | Embree et al. | Jun 2021 | B2 |
| 11291219 | Embree et al. | Apr 2022 | B2 |
| 20050079244 | Giffard et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050106554 | Palecek et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050158699 | Kadkake et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050239706 | Backhed et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20060127530 | Axelrod | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20080299098 | Se et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090280098 | Tabata et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20110280840 | Blaser et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20120149584 | Olle et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120282675 | Kim et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20130330307 | Millan | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140171339 | Keku et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20150093360 | McKenzie et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150213193 | Apte et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150216817 | Luhman | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150218614 | Henderson et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150267163 | Liao et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
| 20150376609 | Hindson et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20160040119 | Hashman | Feb 2016 | A1 |
| 20160113974 | Jones et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| 20160143961 | Berry et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
| 20160376627 | Zengler et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
| 20170107557 | Embree et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
| 20170196921 | Embree et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170196922 | Embree et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170224745 | Dart | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20170260584 | Zheng et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
| 20170342457 | Embree et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
| 20180030516 | Nawana et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| 20180044712 | Embree et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| 20180051310 | Hallock et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| 20180051327 | Blainey et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| 20180070825 | Apte et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180080065 | Jain | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180223325 | Embree et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
| 20180310592 | Embree et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
| 20180325966 | Embree et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
| 20190200642 | Embree et al. | Jul 2019 | A1 |
| 20190281861 | Embree et al. | Sep 2019 | A1 |
| 20190357571 | Embree et al. | Nov 2019 | A1 |
| 20200037633 | Embree et al. | Feb 2020 | A1 |
| 20200123588 | Mizrahi | Apr 2020 | A1 |
| 20200275680 | Oh et al. | Sep 2020 | A1 |
| 20200305462 | Embree et al. | Oct 2020 | A1 |
| 20200315212 | Watson et al. | Oct 2020 | A1 |
| 20210177006 | Embree et al. | Jun 2021 | A1 |
| 20220287330 | Embree et al. | Sep 2022 | A1 |
| 20220386646 | Embree et al. | Dec 2022 | A1 |
| 20230139325 | Embree et al. | May 2023 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 7629098 | Jan 1999 | AU |
| 753327 | Oct 2002 | AU |
| 1703968 | Dec 2005 | CN |
| 101519638 | Sep 2009 | CN |
| 102533621 | Jul 2012 | CN |
| 103053860 | Mar 2014 | CN |
| 104814278 | Aug 2015 | CN |
| 107173587 | Sep 2017 | CN |
| 0553444 | Mar 1998 | EP |
| 0664671 | Sep 2002 | EP |
| 1020130127784 | Nov 2013 | KR |
| 1020110124976 | Nov 2018 | KR |
| 2 458 527 | Aug 2012 | RU |
| WO 1993025232 | Dec 1993 | WO |
| WO 2001012779 | Feb 2001 | WO |
| WO 2006117019 | Nov 2006 | WO |
| WO 2008076975 | Jun 2008 | WO |
| WO 2010015580 | Feb 2010 | WO |
| WO 2010062909 | Jun 2010 | WO |
| WO 2010111347 | Sep 2010 | WO |
| WO 2010111565 | Sep 2010 | WO |
| WO 2010138522 | Dec 2010 | WO |
| WO 2011075138 | Jun 2011 | WO |
| WO 2011094469 | Aug 2011 | WO |
| WO 2012077038 | Jun 2012 | WO |
| WO 2012122522 | Sep 2012 | WO |
| WO 2014141274 | Sep 2014 | WO |
| WO 2015023461 | Feb 2015 | WO |
| WO 2015068054 | May 2015 | WO |
| WO 2016007544 | Jan 2016 | WO |
| WO 2016127956 | Aug 2016 | WO |
| WO 2016153247 | Sep 2016 | WO |
| WO 2016210251 | Dec 2016 | WO |
| WO 2017120495 | Jul 2017 | WO |
| WO 2017131821 | Aug 2017 | WO |
| WO 2017181203 | Oct 2017 | WO |
| WO 2018126026 | Jul 2018 | WO |
| WO 2018126033 | Jul 2018 | WO |
| WO 2018126036 | Jul 2018 | WO |
| WO 2018201049 | Nov 2018 | WO |
| WO-2020176834 | Sep 2020 | WO |
| WO 2021202804 | Oct 2021 | WO |
| WO-2022081992 | Apr 2022 | WO |
| WO-2022226367 | Oct 2022 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Abu-Tarboush, et al., “Evaluation of diet containing lactobacilli on performance, fecal coliform, and lactobacilli of young dairy calves.” Animal Feed Science and Technology (1996); 57;1-2: 39-49. |
| Adams, Rachel: Incorporating quantity into microbiome analysis; (https://www.microbe.net/2017 /11/20/incorporating-quantity-into-microbiome-analysis/); printed Dec. 13, 2017, 6 pages. |
| Aikman, P.C., et al., “Rumen pH and fermentation characteristics in dairy cows supplemented with Megasphaera elsdenii NCIMB 41125 in early lactation.” Journal of Dairy Science (2011); 94.6: 2840-2849. |
| Almeida, Elionor RP, et al., “Transgenic expression of two marker genes under the control of anArabidopsis rbcS promoter: Sequences encoding the Rubisco transit peptide increase expression levels.” Molecular and General Genetics MGG (1989); 218.1: 78-86. |
| Anderson, et al., “Rumen bacterial communities can be acclimated faster to high concentrate dietsthan currently implemented feedlot programs.” Journal of Applied Microbiology (2016); 120 (3): 588-599. |
| Bauman, et al., “Nutrigenomics, Rumen-Derived Bioactive Fatty Acids, and the Regulation of Milk Fat Synthesis, ” Annual Review of Nutrition (2011); 31: 299-319. |
| Belk, et al., “Tissue-specific activity of pentose cycle oxidative enzymes during feeder lamb development” Journal of Animal Science (1993); 71: 1796-1804. |
| Bennett, et al., “Toward the $1000 human genome,” Pharmacogenomics (2005); 6(4):373-382. |
| Bentley, et al., “Accurate whole genome sequencing using reversible terminator chemistry,” Nature (2008); 456: 53-59. |
| Beye et al., “Careful use of 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity values for the identification of Mycobacterium species,” New Microbe and New Infect 2018; 22: 24-29. |
| Blondel, et al., “Fast unfolding of communities in large networks,” Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, (2008); P10008. |
| Borling, “Feed improvement by energy efficient storage using Pichia anomala inoculated ensiled cereal grain,” Master thesis 2010:1, Uppsala BioCenter Department of Microbiology Faculty of Natural Resources and Agriculture Sciences Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, ISSN 1101-8151, 25 pages. |
| Boyd, J., “Effects of the addition of direct-fed microbials and glycerol to the diet of lactating dairy cows on milk yield and apparent efficiency of yield.” Journal of Dairy Science (2011); 94.9: 4616-4622. |
| Breiman, L., “Random Forests.” Machine Learning (2001); 45 (1): 5-32. |
| Bremges et al., “Deeply sequenced metagenome and metatranscriptome of a biogas-producing microbial community from an agricultural production-scale biogas plant,” GigaScience (2015) 4:33, 6 pages. |
| Bretonnière, Cedric, et al. “MIC score, a new tool to compare bacterial susceptibility to antibiotics application to the comparison of susceptibility to different penems of clinical strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.” The Journal of Antibiotics 6911 (2016): 806-810. Published online Mar. 30, 2016. |
| Brown, et al., “Adaptation of beef cattle to high-concentrate diets: Performance and ruminal metabolism.” Journal of Animal Science (2006); 84 (E. Suppl): E25-E33. |
| Burgain, et al., “Encapsulation of probiotic living cells: From laboratory scale to industrial applications.” Journal of Food Engineering (2011); 104 (4): 467-483. |
| Cacite, F., and Weimer, P. J., “Ruminal dosing with Megasphaera elsdenii and strain persistence are associated with milk fat depression in Holstein cows.” J. Anim. Sci. 1611 (2016); 94, E-Suppl. 5/J. Dairy Sci. vol. 99, E-Suppl. 1, p. 784, 1 page. |
| Caporaso et al., “Ultra-high-throughput microbial community analysis on the Illumina HiSeq and MiSeq platforms,” The ISME Journal (2012); 6: 1621-1624. |
| Chambers, et al., “A cross-platform toolkit for mass spectrometry and proteomics.” Nat Biotechnol. (2012); 30 (10): 918-920. |
| Chi et al., “Increase in antioxidant enzyme activity, stress tolerance and biocontrol efficacy of Pichia kudriavzevii with the transition from a yeast-like to biofilm morphology.” Biological Control, 90: 113-119 (2015). |
| Chiquette, J., et al. “Prevotella bryantii 25A used as a probiotic in early-lactation dairy cows: effect on ruminal fermentation characteristics, milk production, and milk composition.” Journal of Dairy Science (2008); 91.9: 3536-3543. |
| Chiquette, J., et al. “Use of Prevotella bryantii 25A and a commercial probiotic during subacute acidosis challenge in midlactation dairy cows.” Journal of Dairy Science (2012); 95.10: 5985-5995. |
| Clarke, K.R., “Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure.” Australian Journal of Ecology (1993); 18 (1): 117-143. |
| Clasquin, et al., “LC-MS Data Processing with MAVEN: A Metabolomic Analysis and Visualization Engine.” Curr. Protoc. Bioinform. (2012); 37 (1): 14.11.1-14.11.23. |
| Colby, S. R. “Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations.” Weeds (1967); 15(1): 20-22. |
| Cole, et al., “Ribosomal Database Project: data and tools for high throughput rRNA analysis.” Nucleic Acids Research (2014); 42 (D1): D633-D642. |
| Cori, et al., “The role of glucose-1-phosphate in the formation of blood sugar and synthesis of glycogen in the liver.” Journal of Biological Chemistry (1939); 129: 629-639. |
| Coulon, Jean-Baptiste, et al. “Effect of mastitis and related-germ on milk yield and composition during naturally-occurring udder infections in dairy cows.” Animal Research (2002); 51.05: 383-393. |
| Count your blessings: Quantitative microbiome profiling; Vib (The Flanders Institute for Biotechnology); Public Release: Nov. 15, 2017 https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-11/vfi-cyb11417.php); printed Dec. 13, 2017, 1 page. |
| Crameri, Andreas, et al. “DNA shuffling of a family of genes from diverse species accelerates directed evolution.” Nature (1998); 391.6664: 288-291. |
| Crameri, Andreas, et al. “Molecular evolution of an arsenate detoxification pathway by DNA shuffling.” Nature Biotechnology (1997); 15.5: 436-438. |
| Dannemilier, K.C., et al., “Combining real-lime PCR and next-generation DNA sequencing to provide quantitative comparisons of fungal aerosol populations.” Atmospheric Environment (2014); 84: 113-121. |
| DDBJ Blast search results; using blastn program with default parameters; query Seq ID No. 28 from U.S. Appl. No. 16/655,776 specification; limited to bct database; conducted on Feb. 19, 2020, 831 pages. |
| De Almeida et al., “Aerobic fungi in the rumen fluid from dairy cattle fed different sources of forage,” R. Bras. Zootec., 2012, vol. 41, No. 11, pp. 2336-2342. |
| De Menezes, Alexandre B., et al. “Microbiome analysis of dairy cows fed pasture or total mixed ration diets.” FEMS Microbiology Ecology (2011); 78.2: 256-265. |
| Dosogne, Hilde, et al. “Differential leukocyte count method for bovine low somatic cell count milk.” Journal of Dairy Science (2003); 86.3: 828-834. |
| Doto and Liu, “Effects of direct-fed microbials and their combinations with yeast culture on in vitro rumen termentation characteristics,” Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences, 2011, 20, 259-271. |
| Edgar and Flyvberg, “Error filtering, pair assembly and error correction for next-generation sequencing reads.” Bioinformatics (2015); 31 (21): 3476-3482. |
| Edgar, “SINTAX: a simple non-Bayesian taxonomy classifier for 16S and ITS sequences.” BioRxiv (2016); 074161, 20 pages. |
| Edgar, R., “Updating the 97% identity threshold for 16S ribosomal RNA OTUs,” Bioinformatics, 34(14), 2018, 2371-2375. |
| Embree, Mallory, et al. “Networks of energetic and metabolic interactions define dynamics in microbial communities.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2015); 112.50: 15450- 15455. |
| Extended European Search Report for European Application No. 17736448.6 dated Aug. 21, 2019, 11 pages. |
| Fadrosh et al., “An improved dual-indexing approach for multiplexed 16S rRNA gene sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq platform,” Microbiome (2014); 2:6, 7 pages. |
| Falkowski et al., “Primary production of the biosphere: integrating terrestrial and oceanic components,” Science (1998); 281(5374): 237-240. |
| Fernando, et al., “Rumen Microbial Population Dynamics during Adaptation to a High-Grain Diet.” Applied and Environmental Microbiology (2010); 76 (22): 7482-7490. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,436, dated Jan. 28, 2019, 5 pages. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 16/029,398, dated Jun. 26, 2019, 8 pages. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/965,661 dated May 14, 2020, 12 pages. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,436, dated Dec. 13, 2017, 11 pages. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,484, dated Dec. 13, 2017, 8 pages. |
| Flores, et al., “Temporal variability is a personalized feature of the human microbiome.” Genome Biology (2014); 15: 531, 13 pages. |
| GenBank Accession No. EU556330 “Issatchenkia orientalis 18S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, complete sequence; and 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence” Apr. 5, 2008, 1 page. |
| GenBank Accession No. EU663567 “Issatchenkia orientalis 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and 28S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence” May 17, 2008, 1 page. |
| GenBank Accession No. JF629154 Uncultured bacterium clone GDIC21K01DL4MU 16S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence, Aug. 3, 2011 [online]. (Retrieved online Aug. 14, 2018], 1 page. |
| Gray, Nathan; A revolution in microbiome analysis? Novel method offers ‘true’ quantitative analysis of gut bacteria; Nov. 17, 2017; New methods to measure and accurately quantify the levels of gut bacteria in stool samples could be a revolution for researchers and companies looking to link our gut bacteria make up to specific issues of health and disease. 3 pages, (https://www.nutraingredients.com/Article/2017/11/17/A-revolution-inmicrobiome-analysis-Novel-method-offers-true-quantitative-analysis-of-gut-bacteria); printed Dec. 13, 2017. |
| Gröhn, Y. T., et al. “Effect of Pathogen-Specific Clinical Mastitis on Milk Yield in Dairy Cows.” Journal of Dairy Science (2004); 87.10: 3358-3374. |
| Hammer, et al., “Past: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis.” Palaeontologia Electronica (2001); 4 (1): 1-9. |
| Higginbotham, G. E., and Bath, D. L. “Evaluation of Lactobacillus Fermentation Cultures in Calf Feeding Systems.” Journal of Dairy Science (1993); 76.2: 615-620. |
| Huhtanen, Pekka, et al. “Effect of increasing ruminal butyrate on milk yield and blood constituents in dairy cows fed a grass silage-based diet.” Journal of Dairy Science (1993); 76.4: 1114-1124. |
| Human Microbiome Project Consortium. “Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome.” Nature (2012); 486(7402): 207-214. |
| Hungate, “The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics (1975); 6: 39-66. |
| Ingolia et al., “Genome-wide analysis in vivo of translation with nucleotide resolution using ribosome profiling,” Science (2009); 324(5924): 218-223. |
| Ingolia, N.T., “Ribosome profiling: new views of translation, from single codons to genome scale,” Nat Rev Genet. (2014); 15(3): 205-213. |
| International Patent Application No. PCT/US2016/039221, International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Dec. 26, 2017, 11 pages. |
| International Patent Application No. PCT/US2016/039221, International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Sep. 23, 2016, 14 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Feb. 28, 2018, for PCT International Application No. PCT/US2018/068753, 11 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Feb. 28, 2018, for PCT International Application No. PCT/US2018/068758, 9 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Jun. 7, 2017, for PCT International Application No. PCT/US2017/012573, 18 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Mar. 22, 2018, for PCT International Application No. PCT/US2017/068740, 16 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Sep. 6, 2018, for PCT International Application No. PCT/US2018/029953, 17 pages. |
| International Search Report for PCT/US2017/028015, dated Sep. 5, 2017, 7 pages. |
| Jewell et al., “Ruminal Bacterial Community Composition in Dairy Cows is Dynamic over the Course of Two Lactations and Correlates with Feed Efficiency,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology (2015); 81(14): 4697-4710. |
| Jin, G. L. et al., “Effect of Microbial Additives on Metabolic Characteristics in Sheep and Milking Performance of Lactating Dairy Cows,” J. Anim. Sci. & Technol. (Kor.), 2007, 49(6):819-828. (with English abstract). |
| Jones, Jonathan D.G., et al. “High level expression of introduced chimaeric genes in regenerated transformed plants.” The EMBO Journal (1985); 4.10:2411-2418. |
| Kamphorst, et al., “Liquid Chromatography-High Resolution Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Fatty Acid Metabolism.” Anal. Chem. (2011); 83 (23): 9114-9122. |
| Kim, Y. J., et al. “The enrichment of a ruminal bacterium (Megasphaera elsdenii YJ-4) that produces the trans-10, cis-12 isomer of conjugated linoleic acid.” Journal of Applied Microbiology (2002); 92.5: 976-982. |
| Koch, et al., “Efficiency of Feed Use in Beef Cattle.” Journal of Animal Science (1963); 22: 486-494. |
| Köljalg, Urmas, et al. “UNITE: a database providing web-based methods for the molecular identification of ectomycorrhizal fungi.” New Phytologist (2005); 166.3: 1063-1068. |
| Kozawa, M., “Probiotics for animal use in Japan,” Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 1989, 8(2), 517-531. |
| Krysl and Hess, “Influence of supplementation on behavior of grazing cattle.” Journal of Animal Science (1993); 71 (9): 2546-2555. |
| Laliotis, et al., “Cloning, characterization and computational analysis of the 5′ regulatory region of ovine glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase gene.” Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part B (2007); 147 (4): 627-634. |
| Lan, Yemin, et al. “Using the RDP classifier to predict taxonomic novelty and reduce the search space for finding novel organisms.” PLoS One (2012); 7.3: e32491, 15 pages. |
| Lane, et al., “16S/23S rRNA Sequencing,” Nucleic Acid Techniques in Bacterial Systematics, Chapter 6, pp. 115-175, 1991. |
| Lange et al., “Cost-efficient high-throughput HLA typing by MiSeq amplicon sequencing,” BMC Genomics (2014); 15:63, 11 pages. |
| Laporte-Uribe, J.A., “The role of dissolved carbon dioxide in both the decline in rumen pH and nutritional diseases in ruminants.” Animal Feed Science and Technology (2016); 219: 268-279. |
| Lee, Dong-Hun, et al., “Nonradioactive method to study genetic profiles of natural bacterial communities by PCR-single-strand-conformation polymorphism.” Applied and Environmental Microbiology (1996); 62.9: 3112-3120. |
| Lee, K., et al., “Antiobesity effect of trans-10, cis-12-conjugated linoleic acid-producing Lactobacillus plantarum PL62 on diet-induced obese mice.” Journal of Applied Microbiology (2007); 103.4: 1140-1146. |
| Li et al., “Quantifying absolute protein synthesis rates reveals principles underlying allocation of cellular resources,” Cell (2013); 157 (3): 624-635. |
| Li, M., et al. “Uncultured Bacterium Clone SJTU_A3_11_21 16S Ribosomal RNA Gene, Partial Sequence.” GenBank Accession No. EF403757.1. Submitted Jan. 26, 2007; downloaded from internet <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nucleotide/126114074?report=genbank&log$=nuclalign&blast_rank=1&RID=G57ADV19015> on Apr. 27, 2017, 1 page. |
| Lowe, Susan E., et al., “Growth of anaerobic rumen fungi on defined and semi-defined media lacking rumen fluid.” Journal of General Microbiology (1985); 131.9: 2225-2229. |
| Lu, et al., “Metabolomic Analysis via Reversed-Phase Ion-Pairing Liquid Chromatography Coupled to a Stand Alone Orbitrap Mass Spectrometer.” Analytical Chemistry (2010); 82 (8): 3212-3221. |
| Lund, A., “Yeasts and Moulds in the Bovine Rumen,” Journal of General Microbiology (1974), 81, 453-462. |
| Mardis, Elaine R., “Next Generation DNA Sequencing Methods,” Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. (2008); 9: 387-402. |
| Margulies et al., “Genome sequencing in microfabricated high-density picolitre reactors,” Nature (2005); 437: 376-380. |
| Massol-Deya, A.A. et al., “Bacterial community fingerprinting of amplified 16S and 16-23S ribosomal DNA gene sequences and restriction endonuclease analysis (ARDRA).” Molecular Microbial Ecology Manual, 1995, vol. 3.3.2. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 1-8. |
| Maurice et al., “Xenobiotics Shape the Physiology and Gene Expression of the Active Human Guy Microbiome,” Cell, 152, Jan. 17, 2013, pp. 39-50. |
| Mcgilliard, M. L., and Stallings, C.C. “Increase in milk yield of commercial dairy herds fed a microbial and enzyme supplement.” Journal of Dairy Science (1998); 81.5: 1353-1357. |
| Mitra et al., “Analysis of the intestinal microbiota using SOLiD 16S rRNA gene sequencing and SOLiD shotgun sequencing,” BMC Genomics (2013); 14(Suppl 5):S16, 11 pages. |
| Mohammed, R., et al., “Changes in ruminal bacterial community composition following feeding of alfalfa ensiled with a lactic acid bacterial inoculant.” Journal of Dairy Science (2012); 95.1: 328-339. |
| Moore, Jeffrey C., et al. “Strategies for the in vitro evolution of protein function: enzyme evolution by random recombination of improved sequences.” Journal of Molecular Biology (1997); 272.3: 336-347. |
| Morgante, et al., “Blood gas analyses, ruminal and blood pH, urine and faecal pH in dairy cows during subacute ruminal acidosis.” Comparative Clinical Pathology (2009); 18 (3): 229-232. |
| Muck, R., “Recent advances in silage microbiology,” Agricultural and Food Science (2013) 22:3-15. |
| Musselman, et al., “CoA protects against the deleterious effects of caloric overload in Drosophila.” Journal of Lipid Research (2016); 57: 380-387. |
| Muyzer, et al., “Profiling of complex microbial populations by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of polymerase chain reaction-amplified genes coding for 16S rRNA.” Applied and Environmental Microbiology (1993); 59 (3): 695-700. |
| Myer, et al., “Rumen Microbiome from Steers Differing in Feed Efficiency.” PLOS ONE (2015); 10 (6): e0129174, 17 pages. |
| NCBI Blast Nucleotide Sequence search results; using blastn program with default parameters; query Seq ID No. 28 from U.S. Appl. No. 16/655,776 specification; limited to Clostridium butyricum (taxid:1492); conducted on Feb. 19, 2020, 45 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/349,829 dated May 4, 2018, 13 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/392,913 dated Oct. 16, 2018, 16 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/948,965 dated Jan. 23, 2019, 13 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/948,965 dated Jun. 26, 2018, 25 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/965,661 dated Dec. 30, 2019, 36 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 16/029,398 dated Feb. 26, 2019, 9 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 16/206,098 dated Aug. 8, 2019, 35 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 16/207,811 dated Jul. 29, 2019, 32 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 16/655,776 dated Jan. 15, 2020, 22 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/217,575, dated Oct. 12, 2016, 11 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,436, dated Aug. 31, 2018, 9 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,436, dated Mar. 30, 2017, 9 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,436, dated May 18, 2017, 15 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,484, dated Apr. 4, 2017, 6 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,484, dated May 30, 2017, 16 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 16/534,481, dated Sep. 23, 2019, 13 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 16/871,290, dated Jun. 18, 2020, 13 pages. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/392,913 dated Apr. 19, 2018, 9 pages. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,484, dated Apr. 2, 2018, 4 pages. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,484, dated Apr. 27, 2018, 2 pages. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,484, dated Feb. 13, 2018, 4 pages. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,484, dated Jan. 16, 2018, 8 pages. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/400,484, dated Jan. 25, 2018, 2 pages. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/217,575, dated Nov. 8, 2016, 13 pages. |
| Okine and Mathison, “Effects of feed intake on particle distribution, passage of digesta, and extent of digestion in the gastrointestinal tract of cattle.” Journal of Animal Science (1991); 69 (8): 3435-3445. |
| Palmonari et al., “pH dynamics and bacterial community composition in the rumen of lactating dairy cows,” J. Dairy Sci. (2010); 93(1): 279-287. |
| Peckham et al., “SOLiD™ Sequencing and 2-Base Encoding,” San Diego, CA: American Society of Human Genetics, Poster No. 2624 (2007), 1 page. |
| Petrenko et al., “MetAnnotate: function-specific taxonomic profiling and comparison of metagenomes,” BMC Biology (2015) 13:92, 8 pages. |
| Petri, Renee M., et al., “Characterization of the core rumen microbiome in cattle during transitionfrom forage to concentrate as well as during and after an acidotic challenge.” PLoS One (2013); 8.12: e83424, 15 pages. |
| Pool-Zobel et al., “Overview of Experimental Data on Reduction of Colorectal Cancer Risk by Inulin-Type Fructans,” J. Nutr. (2007); 137: 2580S-2584S. |
| Qiu, Yu, et al., “Characterizing the interplay between multiple levels of organization within bacterial sigma factor regulatory networks.” Nature Communications (2013); 4: 1755 (pp. 1-10). |
| Raeth-Knight, M. L., et al., “Effect of direct-fed microbials on performance, diet digestibility, and rumen characteristics of Holstein dairy cows.” Journal of Dairy Science (2007); 90.4: 1802-1809. |
| Ragaller, et al., “Pantothenic acid in ruminant nutrition: a review.” Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition (2011); 95 (1): 6-16. |
| Ramirez- Farias et al., “Effect of inulin on the human gut microbiota: stimulation of Bifidobacterium adolescentis and Faecalibacterium prausnitzii,” Br J Nutr (2009); 101(4): 541-550. |
| Ranjard et al., “Sampling strategy in molecular microbial ecology: influence of soil sample size on DNA fingerprinting analysis of fungal and bacterial communities,” Environmental Microbiology 5(11); 1111-1120 (2003). |
| Restriction / Election Requirement in U.S. Appl. No. 16/029,398 dated Sep. 18, 2018, 9 pages. |
| Restriction / Election Requirement in U.S. Appl. No. 16/207,811 dated Feb. 12, 2019, 6 pages. |
| Rigobelo et al., “Protective Effect of Probiotics Strains in Ruminants,” Submitted: Jan. 26, 2012 Reviewed: May 22, 2012 Published: Oct. 3, 2012, published by INTEC Open source, 20 pages, downloaded from: https://www.intechopen.com/books/ probiotic-in-animals/protective-effect-of-probiotics-strains-in-ruminants. |
| Rook, J. A. F., and Balch, C.C. “The effects of intraruminal infusions of acetic, propionic and butyric acids on the yield and composition of the milk of the cow.” British Journal of Nutrition (1961); 15.03: 361-369. |
| Ross, et al., “High throughput whole rumen metagenome profiling using untargeted massively parallel sequencing.” BMC Genetics (2012); 13:53, 14 pages. |
| Rossi-Tamisier et al., “Cautionary tale of using 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity values in identification of human-associated bacterial species,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (2015), 65, 1929-1934. |
| Ruminobacter, MicrobeWiki, Aug. 6, 2010, 3 pages, retrieved from https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Ruminobacter. |
| San Miguel et al., “Effects of organochlorines on microbial diversity and community structure in Phragmites australis rhizosphere,” Appl Microbiol Biotechnol (2014); 98(9): 4257-4266. |
| Sandri et al., “Microbial biodiversity of the liquid fraction of rumen content from lactating cows,” Animal (2014); 8(4): 572-579. |
| Sanger et al., “DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors,” Proc Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (1977); 74(12): 5463-5467. |
| Santos and Thompson, “The Family Succinivibrionaceae,” The Prokaryotes—Gammaproteobacteria (Eds. E. Rosenberg et al.), 2014, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 639-648. |
| Scheinert et al., “Molecular differentiation of bacteria by PCR amplification of the 16-23S rRNA spacer,” J Microbiol Meth (1996); 26: 103-117. |
| Schloss, Patrick D., et al., “Assessing and improving methods used in operational taxonomic unit-based approaches for 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis.” Applied and Environmental Microbiology (2011); 77.10: 3219-3226. |
| Schogor, Ana L.B., et al., “Ruminal prevotella spp. may play an important role in the conversion of plant lignans into human health beneficial antioxidants.” PLoS One (2014); 9.4: e87949. 10 pages. |
| Schwieger et al.,“ A New Approach To Utilize PCR-Single-Strand-Conformation Polymorphism for the 16S rRNA Gene-Based Microbial Community Analysis,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology (1998); 64(12): 4870-4876. |
| Segata et al., “Computational meta'omics for microbial community studies,” Molecular Systems Biology 9:666 (2013), 15 pages. |
| Segata, Nicola, et al., “Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation.” Genome Biology (2011); 12:R60, 18 pages. |
| Seymour, et al., “Relationships between rumen volatile fatty acid concentrations and milk production in dairy cows: a literature study.” Animal Feed Science and Technology (2005); 119 (Issues 1-2): 155-169. |
| Shabat, et al., “Specific microbiome-dependent mechanisms underlie the energy harvest efficiency of ruminants.” The ISME Journal (2016); 10 (12): 2958-2972. |
| Shanks, Orin C., et al., “Community structures of fecal bacteria in cattle from different animal feeding operations.” Applied and Environmental Microbiology (2011); 77.9; 2992-3001. |
| Shi, et al., “Regression analysis for microbiome compositional data.” The Annals of Applied Statistics (2016); 10 (2): 1019-1040. |
| Shi, et al., Integrated metatranscriptomic and metagenomics analyses of stratified microbial assemblages in the open ocean, The ISME Journal (2011) 5, 999-1013. |
| Sirisan, V., et al. “Isolation, identification and growth determination of lactic acid-utilizing yeasts from the ruminal fluid of dairy cattle.” Letters in Applied Microbiology (2013); 57.2: 102-107. |
| Smith, et al., “The effect of pantothenate deficiency in mice on their metabolic response to fast and exercise.” Metabolism (1987); 36 (2): 115-121. |
| Song, et al., “Comparison of co-expression measures: mutual information, correlation, and model based indices.” BMC Bioinformatics (2012); 13: 328, pp. 1-21. |
| Stemmer, Willem P. “DNA shuffling by random fragmentation and reassembly: in vitro recombination for molecular evolution.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (1994); 91.22: 10747-10751. |
| Stemmer, Willem PC. “Rapid evolution of a protein in vitro by DNA shuffling.” Nature (1994); 370.6488: 389-391. |
| Stewart, R., et al., “Compendium of 4,941 rumen metagenome-assembled genomes for rumen microbiome biology and enzyme discovery,” Nature Biotechnology, Aug. 2019, vol. 37, pp. 953-961. |
| Tajima, et al., “Diet-Dependent Shifts in the Bacterial Population of the Rumen Revealed with Real-Time PCR.” Appl. Environ. Microbiol. (2001); 67 (6): 2766-2774. |
| Tao, N., et al. “Variations in bovine milk oligosaccharides during early and middle lactation stages analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography-chip/mass spectrometry.” Journal of Dairy Science (2009); 92.7: 2991-3001. |
| Tashiro, Yukihiro, et al. “High butanol production by Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonicum N1-4in fed-batch culture with pH-stat continuous butyric acid and glucose feeding method.” Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering (2004); 98.4: 263-268. |
| Van Houtert, M. F. J. “The production and metabolism of volatile fatty acids by ruminants fed roughages: A review.” Animal Feed Science and Technology (1993); 43(3): 189-225. |
| Vandamme, Peter, et al., “Polyphasic taxonomy, a consensus approach to bacterial systematics.” Microbiological Reviews (1996); 60.2: 407-438. |
| Vandeputte, D, et al., “Quantitative microbiome profiling links gut community variation to microbial load.” Nature (2017); 551 (7681): 507. |
| Vineetha, P. G., et al., “Screening of Lactobacillus isolates from gastrointestinal tract of guinea fowlfor probiotic qualities using in vitro tests to select species-specific probiotic candidates.” British poultry science 57.4 (2016): 474-482. |
| Wagg et al., “Soil biodiversity and soil community composition determine ecosystem multifunctionality.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2014); 111(14): 5266-5270. |
| Whittaker, “Evolution and Measurement of Species Diversity.” Taxon (May 1972), 21 (2/3): 213-251. |
| Written Opinion for PCT/US2017/028015, dated Sep. 5, 2017, 10 pages. |
| Yarza, Pablo, et al., “Uniting the classification of cultured and uncultured bacteria and archaea using 16S rRNA gene sequences.” Nature Reviews Microbiology (2014); 12.9: 635-645. |
| Zebeli, Qendrim, et al., “Intraruminal administration of Megasphaera elsdenii modulated rumen fermentation profile in mid-lactation dairy cows.” Journal of Dairy Research (2012); 79.01; 16-25. |
| Zhang, Ji-Hu, et al., “Directed evolution of a fucosidase from a galactosidase by DNA shuffling and screening.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA (1997); 94.9: 4504-4509. |
| Zhou et al., “High-Throughput Metagenomic Technologies for Complex Microbial Community Analysis: Open and Closed formats.” MBio (2015); 6(1): e02288-14, 17 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/354,306, dated Aug. 16, 2022, 13 pages. |
| GenBank Accession No. CP039381.1, Ruminococcus sp. JE7A12 chromosome, complete genome, May 22, 2019, 1 page. |
| GenBank Accession No. MK761171.1, Ruminococcus sp. JE7A12 16S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence, May 22, 2019, 1 page. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, dated Aug. 4, 2021, for PCT International Application No. PCT/US2021/025264, 13 pages. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 17/178,552 dated Oct. 18, 2021, 7 pages. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 17/354,306 dated Oct. 28, 2021, 15 pages. |
| Advisory Action in U.S. Appl. No. 17/354,306 dated Mar. 22, 2022, 4 pages. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 17/354,306 dated Feb. 15, 2022, 16 pages. |
| The Cattle Site, “When Dairy Cows Become Beef Cows”, The Cattle Site, Jun. 2014, 3 pages, retrieved from https://www. thecattlesite.com/articles/3941 /when-dairy-cows-become-beef-cows/. |
| Watanabe et al., “Vitamin B12 sources and microbial interaction,” Experimental Biology and Medicine 2018; 243: 148-158. |
| Wikipedia, Vitamin, Wikipedia, retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin (2022), 8 pages. |
| Wikipedia, Vitamin B6, Wikipedia, retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_B6 (2022), 8 pages. |
| Bandarupalli et al., “Identification of a Candidate Starch Utilizing Strain of Prevotella albensis from Bovine Rumen,” Microorganisms 2020, 8, 2005, 13 pages. |
| Chiquette, J. et al., “Repeated ruminal dosing of Ruminococcus flavefaciens NJ along with a probiotic mixture in forage or concentrate-fed dairy cows: Effect on ruminal fermentation, cellulolytic populations and in sacco digestibility,” Can. J. Anim. Sci. (2007) 87: 237-249. |
| Extended European Search Report for European Application No. 18792045.9 dated Jul. 30, 2021. |
| GenBank Accession No. AB507707.1, Uncultured bacterium gene for 16S rRNA, partial sequence, clone: CNSL-118, Apr. 3, 2013, 1 page. |
| GenBank Accession No. KY229916.1, Clostridiales bacterium JS109 16S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence, Apr. 1, 2017, 1 page. |
| Serna-Cock and Vallejo-Castillo, “Probiotic encapsulation,” African Journal of Microbiology Research, Oct. 2013, 7(40): 4743-4753. |
| S̆imůnek Jr, et al., “Characterization of a xylanolytic bacterial strain C10 isolated from the rumen of a red deer (Cervus elaphus) closely related of the recently described species Actinomyces succiniciruminis, A. glycerinitolerans, and A. ruminicola,” Folia Microbiologica (2018) 63:391-399. |
| Weimer et al., “Effect of Diet on Populations of Three Species of Ruminal Cellulolytic Bacteria in Lactating Dairy Cows,” J Dairy Sci, 1999, 82:122-134. |
| Whitford et al., “Phylogenetic Analysis of Rumen Bacteria by Comparative Sequence Analysis of Cloned 16S rRNA Genes8,” Anaerobe (1998) 4, 153-163, Article No. an980155. |
| Zigová and S̆turdik, “Advances in biotechnological production of butyric acid,” Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology (2000) 24, 153-160. |
| Gbassi et al. “Probiotic Encapsulation Technology: From Microencapsulation to Release into the Gut,” Pharmaceutics, 2012, 4, 149-163. |
| Japanese Office Action for Japanese Application No. 2018-535389 dated Oct. 7, 2020, 15 pages (with English translation). |
| Nissan Gosei Kogyo Co., Ltd., “Bovine Probiotics and Prebiotics,” Nissan News, Mar. 2011, Issue 73, pp. 1-2, retrieved from http://www.nissangosei.co.jp/nissan/073.pdf (with English translation). |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 15/965,661 dated Sep. 17, 2020, 12 pages. |
| Hippe et al., “Phylogenetic analysis of Formivibrio citricus, Propionivibrio dicarboxylicus, Anaerobiospirillum thomasii, Succinimonas amylolytica and Succinivibrio dextrinosolvens and proposal of Succinivibrionaceae fam. nov.,” International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology (1999), 49, 779-782. |
| Partial Supplementary European Search Report for European Application No. 18792045.9 dated Mar. 30, 2021, 15 pages. |
| Allen-Vercoe et al., “Anaerostipes hadrus comb. nov., a dominant species within the human colonic microbiota; reclassification of Eubacterium hadrum Moore et al. 1976.,” Anaerobe, Oct. 2012, 18(5):523-529. |
| Avgustin et al., “Phenotypic Diversity among Ruminai Isolates of Prevotella ruminicola: Proposal of Prevotella brevis sp. nov., Prevotella bryantii sp. nov., and Prevotella albensis sp. nov. and Redefinition of Prevotella ruminicola,” Int J Syst Bacteriol, Apr. 1997, vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 284-288. |
| Barco et al., A Genus Definition for Bacteria and Archaea Based on a Standard Genome Relatedness Index. MBio, Jan./Feb. 2020 vol. 11, Issue 1, e02475-19, 20 pages. |
| Biddle et al., “Untangling the Genetic Basis of Fibrolytic Specialization by Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcaceae in Diverse Gut Communities,” Diversity, 2013, 5, 627-640. |
| Cai and Dong, Cellulosilyticum ruminicola gen. nov., sp. nov., isolated from the rumen of yak, and reclassification of Clostridium lentocellum as Cellulosilyticum lentocellum comb. nov., International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (2010), 60, 845-849. |
| Chassard et al., “Ruminococcus champanellensis sp. nov., a cellulose-degrading bacterium from human gut microbiota,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (2012), 62, 138-143. |
| Creevey et al., “Determining the culturability of the rumen bacterial microbiome,” Microbial Biotechnology(2014)7(5), 467-479. |
| Deatherage and Barrick, “Identification of mutations in laboratory-evolved microbes from next-generation sequencing data using breseq,” Methods Mol. Biol. (2014) 1151: 165-188. |
| Dehority, Pectin-fermenting Bacteria Isolated from the Bovine Rumen, Journal of Bacteriology, Jul. 1969, vol. 99, No. 1, pp. 189-196. |
| Domingo et al., “Ruminococcus gauvreauii sp. nov., a glycopeptide-resistant species isolated from a human faecal specimen,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (2008), 58, 1393-1397. |
| Downes et al., “Shuttleworthia satelles gen. nov., sp. nov., isolated from the human oral cavity,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (2002), 52, 1469-1475. |
| Duncan et al., “Acetate Utilization and Butyryl Coenzyme A (CoA):Acetate-CoA Transferase in Butyrate-Producing Bacteria from the Human Large Intestine,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2002, vol. 68, No. 10, pp. 5186-5190. |
| Duncan et al. “Human colonic microbiota Associated with diet, obesity and weight loss,” International Journal of Obesity (2008) 32, 1720-1724. |
| Ezaki, T, “Ruminococcus,” Bergey's Manual of Systematics of Archaea and Bacteria, 2015, p. 1-5. |
| Frank, D. C., et al., “Molecular-phylogenetic characterization of microbial community imbalances in human inflammatory bowel diseases,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA., (2007), 104 (34): p. 13780-5. |
| Gagen et al., Hydrogenotrophic culture enrichment reveals rumen Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcaceae acetogens and hydrogen-responsive Bacteroidetes from pasture-fed cattle, FEMS Microbiology Letters, Jul. 2015, vol. 362, No. 14, fnv104, 8 pages. |
| GenBank Accession No. AB507640, Uncultured bacterium gene for 16S rRNA, partial sequence. clone: CNSL-51., Apr. 13, 2013, 2 pages. |
| Goris et al., “DNA-DNA hybridization values and their relationship to whole-genome sequence similarities,” Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. (2007), 57, 81-91. |
| Gosalbes et al., “Metatranscriptomic Approach to Analyze the Functional Human Gut Microbiota,” PLoS One, Mar. 2011, 6(3):e17447, 9 pages. |
| Henderson et al. Rumen microbial community composition varies with diet and host, but a core microbiome is found across a wide geographical range Scientific Reports (2015) vol. 5, Article 14567, 15 pages. |
| International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application No. PCT/US2021/055210 dated Apr. 27, 2023, 7 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2021/055210, dated Mar. 10, 2022, 11 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2022/026037, dated Sep. 16, 2022, 12 pages. |
| Jain, Miten, et al. “Nanopore sequencing and assembly of a human genome with ultra-long reads.” Nature Biotechnology 36.4 (2018): 338-345. |
| Jones et al., “Manual of Methods for General Bacteriology,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, 1981, vol. 34, p. 1069. |
| Kittelmann et al., “Simultaneous Amplicon Sequencing to Explore Co-Occurrence Patterns of Bacterial, Archaeal and Eukaryotic Microorganisms in Rumen Microbial Communities,” PLoS One. Feb. 2013, 8(2):e47879, 11 pages. |
| Kopec̆ný J, et al., “Butyrivibrio hungatei sp. nov. and seudobutyrivibrio xylanivorans sp. nov., butyrate-producing bacteria from the rumen,” Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. (2003) 53, 201-209. |
| Kumar et al., “MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across Computing Platforms,” Mol. Biol. Evol. 2018, 35(6): 1547-1549. |
| Langmead B., “Fast Gapped-Read Alignment with Bowtie 2,” Nature Methods, 2012, vol. 9(4), pp. 357-359. |
| Li and Guan, Metatranscriptomic Profiling Reveals Linkages between the Active Rumen Microbiome and Feed Efficiency in Beef Cattle. Appl Environ Microbiol (2017) 83(9):e00061-17, 16 pages. |
| Liu et al., “Reclassification of Clostridium coccoides, Ruminococcus hansenii, Ruminococcus hydrogenotrophicus, Ruminococcus luti, Ruminococcus productus and Ruminococcus schinkii as Blautia coccoides gen. nov., comb. nov., Blautia hansenii comb. nov., Blautia hydrogenotrophica comb. nov., Blautia luti comb. nov., Blautia producta comb. nov., Blautia schinkii comb. nov. and description of Blautia wexlerae sp. nov., isolated from human faeces,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 2008. p. 1896-1902. |
| Ludwig et al., “Revised road map to the phylum Firmicutes,” in: De Vos P et al. (editors). Bergey's Manual® of Systematic Bacteriology: vol. Three The Firmicutes. New York, NY: Springer New York; 2009. p. 1-13 (39 total pages). |
| Meehan and Beiko, A Phylogenomic View of Ecological Specialization in the Lachnospiraceae, a Family of Digestive Tract-Associated Bacteria, Genome Biol Evol. Mar. 2014;6(3):703-13. |
| Moon et al., “Reclassification of Clostridium proteoclasticum as Butyrivibrio proteoclasticus comb. nov., a butyrateproducing ruminal bacterium,” Int J Syst Evol Microbiol, 2008, 58, 2041-2045. |
| Mukhopadhya et al., “Sporulation capability and amylosome conservation among diverse human colonic and rumen isolates of the keystone starch-degrader Ruminococcus bromii,” Environmental Microbiology (2018) 20(1), 324-336. |
| Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/678,634 dated Jun. 14, 2023, 8 pages. |
| Qin et al., “A Proposed Genus Boundary for the Prokaryotes Based on Genomic Insights,” Journal of Bacteriology, Jun. 15, 2014, vol. 196, No. 12, 2210-2215. |
| Richter et al., “Shifting the genomic gold standard for the prokaryotic species definition,” PNAS, Nov. 10, 2009, vol. 10, No. 45, 19126-19131. |
| Rosero Ja, et al., “Reclassification of Eubacterium rectale (Hauduroy et al. 1937) Prevot 1938 in a new genus gathobacter gen. nov. as Agathobacter rectalis comb. nov., and description of Agathobacter ruminis sp. nov., isolated from the rumen contents of sheep and cows,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 2016, vol. 66, 768-773. |
| Sakamoto et al., Faecalimonas umbilicata gen. nov., sp. nov., isolated from human faeces, and reclassification of Eubacterium contortum, Eubacterium fissicatena and Clostridium oroticum as Faecalicatena contorta gen. nov., comb. nov., Faecalicatena fissicatena comb. nov. and Faecalicatena orotica comb. nov., Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2017;67:1219-1227. |
| Segata et al., “PhyloPhlAn is a new method for improved phylogenetic and taxonomic placement of microbes,” Nature Communications, (2013) 4:2304, 11 pages. |
| Seshadri et al., Cultivation and sequencing of rumen microbiome members from the Hungate1000 Collection, Nature Biotechnology, Apr. 2018, vol. 36, No. 4, 359-367. |
| Shetty et al., Reclassification of Eubacterium hallii as Anaerobutyricum hallii gen. nov., comb. nov., and description of Anaerobutyricum soehngenii sp. nov., a butyrate and propionate-producing bacterium from infant faeces, Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2018;68:3741-3746. |
| Sijpesteijn, A.K., “Cellulose-decomposing bacteria from the rumen of cattle,” Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1949) 15, 49-52. |
| Sijpesteijn, A.K., “On Ruminococcus flavefaciens, a Cellulose-decomposing Bacterium from the Rumen of Sheep and Cattle,” J Gen Microbiol. 1951, 5, 869-879. |
| Stackebrandt et al., “Phylogenetic basis for a taxonomic dissection of the genus Clostridium,” FEMS Immunol Med Microbial. (1999) 24:253-258. |
| Stackebrandt, “The Family Lachnospiraceae,” The Prokaryotes—Firmicutes and Tenericutes, E. Rosenberg et al. (eds.), 2014, pp. 197-201. |
| Tap et al., “Towards the human intestinal microbiota phylogenetic core,” Environ Microbiol. (2009) 11(10), 2574-2584. |
| Thoetkiattikul et al., “Comparative Analysis of Microbial Profiles in Cow Rumen Fed with Different Dietary Fiber by Tagged 16S rRNA Gene Pyrosequencing,” Current Microbiology, 2013, 67, 130-137. |
| Tong et al., Illumina sequencing analysis of the ruminal microbiota in high-yield and low-yield lactating dairy cows, PLoS One. (2018) 13(11):e0198225, 15 pages. |
| Turnbaugh et al., An obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy harvest, Nature, 2006, 444, 1027-1031. |
| Valldecabres et al., “Effects of rumen-native microbial feed supplementation on milk yield, composition, and feed efficiency in lactating dairy cows,” Journal of Animal Science, 2022, 100, 1-10. |
| Van Gylswyk et al., “Pseudobutyrivibrio ruminis gen. nov., sp. nov., a Butyrate-Producing Bacterium from the Rumen That Closely Resembles Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens in Phenotype,” Int J Syst Evol Microbiol., Apr. 1996, vol. 46, No. 2, pp. 559-563. |
| Whitford et al., “Lachnobacterium bovis gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel bacterium isolated from the rumen and faeces of cattle,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (2001), 51, 1977-1981. |
| Willems and Collins, Butyrivibrio, Bergey's Manual of Systematics of Archaea and Bacteria, 2015, 1-20 https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118960608.gbm00640. |
| Yang et al., “Alfalfa Intervention Alters Rumen Microbial Community Development in Hu Lambs During Early Life,” Frontiers in Microbiology, Mar. 2018, vol. 9, Article 574, 13 pages. |
| Yoon et al., “A large-scale evaluation of algorithms to calculate average nucleotide identity,” Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, (2017) vol. 110, pp. 1281-1286. |
| Yutin and Galperin, A genomic update on clostridial phylogeny: Gram-negative spore formers and other misplaced clostridia: Genomics update. Environmental Microbiology (2013)15(10), 2631-2641. |
| Zhang et al., “Corn oil supplementation enhances hydrogen use for biohydrogenation, inhibits methanogenesis, and alters fermentation pathways and the microbial community in the rumen of goats,” Journal of Animal Science, 2019, vol. 97, No. 12, 4999-5008. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20210037853 A1 | Feb 2021 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 62415908 | Nov 2016 | US | |
| 62334816 | May 2016 | US | |
| 62276531 | Jan 2016 | US | |
| 62276142 | Jan 2016 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 16655776 | Oct 2019 | US |
| Child | 16920997 | US | |
| Parent | 16207811 | Dec 2018 | US |
| Child | 16655776 | US | |
| Parent | 16029398 | Jul 2018 | US |
| Child | 16207811 | US | |
| Parent | PCT/US2017/012573 | Jan 2017 | US |
| Child | 16029398 | US |
