Abstract
Rumen microbiota play a key role in the digestion and utilization of plant materials by the ruminant species, which have important implications for greenhouse gas emission. Yet, little is known about the key taxa and potential gene functions involved in the digestion process. Here, we performed a genome-centric analysis of rumen microbiota attached to six different lignocellulosic biomasses in rumen-fistulated cattle. Our metagenome sequencing provided novel genomic insights into functional potential of 523 uncultured bacteria and 15 mostly uncultured archaea in the rumen. The assembled genomes belonged mainly to Bacteroidota, Firmicutes, Verrucomicrobiota, and Fibrobacterota and were enriched for genes related to the degradation of lignocellulosic polymers and the fermentation of degraded products into short chain volatile fatty acids. We also found a shift from copiotrophic to oligotrophic taxa during the course of rumen fermentation, potentially important for the digestion of recalcitrant lignocellulosic substrates in the physiochemically complex and varying environment of the rumen. Differential colonization of forages (the incubated lignocellulosic materials) by rumen microbiota suggests that taxonomic and metabolic diversification is an evolutionary adaptation to diverse lignocellulosic substrates constituting a major component of the cattle’s diet. Our data also provide novel insights into the key role of unique microbial diversity and associated gene functions in the degradation of recalcitrant lignocellulosic materials in the rumen.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
Data availability
The raw sequence data have been deposited in NCBI short read archive (SRA) under BioProject ID PRJNA631951. All metagenome assemblies including co-assembly and forage-specific assemblies and the sequences of RUGs have been deposited in NCBI under the same BioProject ID.
References
Morgavi DP, Kelly WJ, Janssen PH, Attwood GT. Rumen microbial (meta)genomics and its application to ruminant production. Animal. 2013;7 Suppl 1:184–201.
Gruninger RJ, Ribeiro GO, Cameron A, McAllister TA. Invited review: application of meta-omics to understand the dynamic nature of the rumen microbiome and how it responds to diet in ruminants. Animal. 2019;13:1843–54.
Seshadri R, Leahy SC, Attwood GT, Teh KH, Lambie SC, Cookson AL, et al. Cultivation and sequencing of rumen microbiome members from the Hungate1000 Collection. Nat Biotechnol. 2018;36:359–67.
Bule P, Pires VM, Fontes CM, Alves VD. Cellulosome assembly: paradigms are meant to be broken! Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2018;49:154–61.
Fontes CM, Gilbert HJ. Cellulosomes: highly efficient nanomachines designed to deconstruct plant cell wall complex carbohydrates. Annu Rev Biochem. 2010;79:655–81.
Terrapon N, Lombard V, Gilbert HJ, Henrissat B. Automatic prediction of polysaccharide utilization loci in Bacteroidetes species. Bioinformatics. 2015;31:647–55.
Grondin JM, Tamura K, Dejean G, Abbott DW, Brumer H. Polysaccharide utilization loci: fueling microbial communities. J Bacteriol. 2017;199:e00860–16.
Lapebie P, Lombard V, Drula E, Terrapon N, Henrissat B. Bacteroidetes use thousands of enzyme combinations to break down glycans. Nat Commun. 2019;10:2043.
McAllister TA, Bae HD, Jones GA, Cheng KJ. Microbial attachment and feed digestion in the rumen. J Anim Sci. 1994;72:3004–18.
Leng R. Interactions between microbial consortia in biofilms: a paradigm shift in rumen microbial ecology and enteric methane mitigation. Anim Prod Sci. 2014;54:519–43.
Wang Y, McAllister T. Rumen microbes, enzymes and feed digestion—a review. Asian Australas J Anim Sci. 2002;15:1659–76.
Huws SA, Mayorga OL, Theodorou MK, Onime LA, Kim EJ, Cookson AH, et al. Successional colonization of perennial ryegrass by rumen bacteria. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2013;56:186–96.
Liu J, Zhang M, Xue C, Zhu W, Mao S. Characterization and comparison of the temporal dynamics of ruminal bacterial microbiota colonizing rice straw and alfalfa hay within ruminants. J Dairy Sci. 2016;99:9668–81.
Huws SA, Edwards JE, Creevey CJ, Rees Stevens P, Lin W, Girdwood SE, et al. Temporal dynamics of the metabolically active rumen bacteria colonizing fresh perennial ryegrass. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2016;92:fiv137.
Gharechahi J, Vahidi MF, Ding XZ, Han JL, Salekdeh GH. Temporal changes in microbial communities attached to forages with different lignocellulosic compositions in cattle rumen. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2020;96:fiaa069.
Ellison MJ, Conant GC, Cockrum RR, Austin KJ, Truong H, Becchi M, et al. Diet alters both the structure and taxonomy of the ovine gut microbial ecosystem. DNA Res. 2014;21:115–25.
Petri RM, Schwaiger T, Penner GB, Beauchemin KA, Forster RJ, McKinnon JJ, et al. Characterization of the core rumen microbiome in cattle during transition from forage to concentrate as well as during and after an acidotic challenge. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e83424.
Li F, Hitch TCA, Chen Y, Creevey CJ, Guan LL. Comparative metagenomic and metatranscriptomic analyses reveal the breed effect on the rumen microbiome and its associations with feed efficiency in beef cattle. Microbiome. 2019;7:6.
Shabat SK, Sasson G, Doron-Faigenboim A, Durman T, Yaacoby S, Berg Miller ME, et al. Specific microbiome-dependent mechanisms underlie the energy harvest efficiency of ruminants. ISME J. 2016;10:2958–72.
Gharechahi J, Zahiri HS, Noghabi KA, Salekdeh GH. In-depth diversity analysis of the bacterial community resident in the camel rumen. Syst Appl Microbiol. 2015;38:67–76.
Koike S, Yoshitani S, Kobayashi Y, Tanaka K. Phylogenetic analysis of fiber-associated rumen bacterial community and PCR detection of uncultured bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2003;229:23–30.
Stewart RD, Auffret MD, Warr A, Walker AW, Roehe R, Watson M. Compendium of 4,941 rumen metagenome-assembled genomes for rumen microbiome biology and enzyme discovery. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;37:953–61.
Hess M, Sczyrba A, Egan R, Kim TW, Chokhawala H, Schroth G, et al. Metagenomic discovery of biomass-degrading genes and genomes from cow rumen. Science. 2011;331:463–7.
Stewart RD, Auffret MD, Warr A, Wiser AH, Press MO, Langford KW, et al. Assembly of 913 microbial genomes from metagenomic sequencing of the cow rumen. Nat Commun. 2018;9:870.
Svartstrom O, Alneberg J, Terrapon N, Lombard V, de Bruijn I, Malmsten J, et al. Ninety-nine de novo assembled genomes from the moose (Alces alces) rumen microbiome provide new insights into microbial plant biomass degradation. ISME J. 2017;11:2538–51.
Gharechahi J, Salekdeh GH. A metagenomic analysis of the camel rumen’s microbiome identifies the major microbes responsible for lignocellulose degradation and fermentation. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2018;11:216.
Khalili Ghadikolaei K, Gharechahi J, Haghbeen K, Akbari Noghabi K, Hosseini Salekdeh G, Shahbani, Zahiri H. A cold-adapted endoglucanase from camel rumen with high catalytic activity at moderate and low temperatures: an anomaly of truly cold-adapted evolution in a mesophilic environment. Extremophiles. 2018;22:315–26.
Pope PB, Denman SE, Jones M, Tringe SG, Barry K, Malfatti SA, et al. Adaptation to herbivory by the Tammar wallaby includes bacterial and glycoside hydrolase profiles different from other herbivores. PNAS. 2010;107:14793–8.
Li D, Liu CM, Luo R, Sadakane K, Lam TW. MEGAHIT: an ultra-fast single-node solution for large and complex metagenomics assembly via succinct de Bruijn graph. Bioinformatics. 2015;31:1674–6.
Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M, Kulikov AS, et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol. 2012;19:455–77.
Langmead B, Salzberg SL. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods. 2012;9:357–9.
Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, Fennell T, Ruan J, Homer N, et al. The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:2078–9.
Kang DD, Li F, Kirton E, Thomas A, Egan R, An H, et al. MetaBAT 2: an adaptive binning algorithm for robust and efficient genome reconstruction from metagenome assemblies. PeerJ. 2019;7:e7359.
Wu YW, Simmons BA, Singer SW. MaxBin 2.0: an automated binning algorithm to recover genomes from multiple metagenomic datasets. Bioinformatics. 2016;32:605–7.
Sieber CMK, Probst AJ, Sharrar A, Thomas BC, Hess M, Tringe SG, et al. Recovery of genomes from metagenomes via a dereplication, aggregation and scoring strategy. Nat Microbiol. 2018;3:836–43.
Olm MR, Brown CT, Brooks B, Banfield JF. dRep: a tool for fast and accurate genomic comparisons that enables improved genome recovery from metagenomes through de-replication. ISME J. 2017;11:2864–8.
Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res. 2015;25:1043–55.
Chaumeil PA, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the Genome Taxonomy Database. Bioinformatics. 2019;36:1925–7.
Segata N, Bornigen D, Morgan XC, Huttenhower C. PhyloPhlAn is a new method for improved phylogenetic and taxonomic placement of microbes. Nat Commun. 2013;4:2304.
Letunic I, Bork P. Interactive tree of life (iTOL) v3: an online tool for the display and annotation of phylogenetic and other trees. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44:W242–5.
Seemann T. Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:2068–9.
Chan PP, Lowe TM. tRNAscan-SE: Searching for tRNA Genes in Genomic Sequences. In: Kollmar M. (eds) Gene Prediction. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1962. Humana, New York, NY. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-9173-0_1.
Uritskiy GV, DiRuggiero J, Taylor J. MetaWRAP-a flexible pipeline for genome-resolved metagenomic data analysis. Microbiome. 2018;6:158.
Babicki S, Arndt D, Marcu A, Liang Y, Grant JR, Maciejewski A, et al. Heatmapper: web-enabled heat mapping for all. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44:W147–53.
Love MI, Huber W, Anders S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 2014;15:550.
Oksanen J, Kindt R, Legendre P, O’Hara B, Simpson GL, Solymos P, et al. Vegan: community ecology package. R package version 2007;1:8.
Hyatt D, LoCascio PF, Hauser LJ, Uberbacher EC. Gene and translation initiation site prediction in metagenomic sequences. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:2223–30.
Yin Y, Mao X, Yang J, Chen X, Mao F, Xu Y. dbCAN: a web resource for automated carbohydrate-active enzyme annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:W445–51.
Stewart RD, Auffret MD, Roehe R, Watson M. Open prediction of polysaccharide utilisation loci (PUL) in 5414 public Bacteroidetes genomes using PULpy. bioRxiv. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1101/421024.
Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990;215:403–10.
Petersen TN, Brunak S, von Heijne G, Nielsen H. SignalP 4.0: discriminating signal peptides from transmembrane regions. Nat Methods. 2011;8:785–6.
Bowers RM, Kyrpides NC, Stepanauskas R, Harmon-Smith M, Doud D, Reddy TBK, et al. Minimum information about a single amplified genome (MISAG) and a metagenome-assembled genome (MIMAG) of bacteria and archaea. Nat Biotechnol. 2017;35:725–31.
Tokuda G, Mikaelyan A, Fukui C, Matsuura Y, Watanabe H, Fujishima M, et al. Fiber-associated spirochetes are major agents of hemicellulose degradation in the hindgut of wood-feeding higher termites. PNAS 2018;115:E11996–2004.
Kelly WJ, Li D, Lambie SC, Jeyanathan J, Cox F, Li Y, et al. Complete Genome Sequence of Methanogenic Archaeon ISO4-G1, a Member of the Methanomassiliicoccales, Isolated from a Sheep Rumen. Genome Announc. 2016;4:e00221–16.
Yanagita K, Kamagata Y, Kawaharasaki M, Suzuki T, Nakamura Y, Minato H. Phylogenetic analysis of methanogens in sheep rumen ecosystem and detection of Methanomicrobium mobile By fluorescence in situ hybridization. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2000;64:1737–42.
Jarvis GN, Strompl C, Burgess DM, Skillman LC, Moore ER, Joblin KN. Isolation and identification of ruminal methanogens from grazing cattle. Curr Microbiol. 2000;40:327–32.
Li X, Guo J, Ji K, Zhang P. Bamboo shoot fiber prevents obesity in mice by modulating the gut microbiota. Sci Rep. 2016;6:32953.
Fierer N, Bradford MA, Jackson RB. Toward an ecological classification of soil bacteria. Ecology. 2007;88:1354–64.
Ho A, Di Lonardo DP, Bodelier PL. Revisiting life strategy concepts in environmental microbial ecology. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2017;93:fix006.
Nixon SL, Daly RA, Borton MA, Solden LM, Welch SA, Cole DR, et al. Genome-resolved metagenomics extends the environmental distribution of the verrucomicrobia phylum to the deep terrestrial subsurface. mSphere. 2019;4:e00613–19.
Martinez-Garcia M, Brazel DM, Swan BK, Arnosti C, Chain PS, Reitenga KG, et al. Capturing single cell genomes of active polysaccharide degraders: an unexpected contribution of Verrucomicrobia. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e35314.
Doi RH, Kosugi A. Cellulosomes: plant-cell-wall-degrading enzyme complexes. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004;2:541–51.
Galera-Prat A, Morais S, Vazana Y, Bayer EA, Carrion-Vazquez M. The cohesin module is a major determinant of cellulosome mechanical stability. J Biol Chem. 2018;293:7139–47.
Artzi L, Bayer EA, Morais S. Cellulosomes: bacterial nanomachines for dismantling plant polysaccharides. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2017;15:83–95.
Mechaly A, Fierobe HP, Belaich A, Belaich JP, Lamed R, Shoham Y, et al. Cohesin-dockerin interaction in cellulosome assembly: a single hydroxyl group of a dockerin domain distinguishes between nonrecognition and high affinity recognition. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:9883–8.
Mukhopadhya I, Morais S, Laverde-Gomez J, Sheridan PO, Walker AW, Kelly W, et al. Sporulation capability and amylosome conservation among diverse human colonic and rumen isolates of the keystone starch-degrader Ruminococcus bromii. Environ Microbiol. 2018;20:324–36.
Ze X, Ben David Y, Laverde-Gomez JA, Dassa B, Sheridan PO, Duncan SH, et al. Unique organization of extracellular amylases into amylosomes in the resistant starch-utilizing human colonic firmicutes bacterium ruminococcus bromii. mBio 2015;6:e01058–15.
Solden LM, Naas AE, Roux S, Daly RA, Collins WB, Nicora CD, et al. Interspecies cross-feeding orchestrates carbon degradation in the rumen ecosystem. Nat Microbiol. 2018;3:1274–84.
Liu N, Li H, Chevrette MG, Zhang L, Cao L, Zhou H, et al. Functional metagenomics reveals abundant polysaccharide-degrading gene clusters and cellobiose utilization pathways within gut microbiota of a wood-feeding higher termite. ISME J. 2019;13:104–17.
Liu J, Pu YY, Xie Q, Wang JK, Liu JX. Pectin induces an in vitro rumen microbial population shift attributed to the pectinolytic Treponema group. Curr Microbiol. 2015;70:67–74.
Etzold S, Juge N. Structural insights into bacterial recognition of intestinal mucins. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2014;28:23–31.
Solden LM, Hoyt DW, Collins WB, Plank JE, Daly RA, Hildebrand E, et al. New roles in hemicellulosic sugar fermentation for the uncultivated Bacteroidetes family BS11. ISME J. 2017;11:691–703.
Derrien M, Collado MC, Ben-Amor K, Salminen S, de Vos WM. The mucin degrader akkermansia muciniphila is an abundant resident of the human intestinal tract. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008;74:1646–8.
Wang Y, Huang JM, Zhou YL, Almeida A, Finn RD, Danchin A, et al. Phylogenomics of expanding uncultured environmental Tenericutes provides insights into their pathogenicity and evolutionary relationship with Bacilli. BMC Genom. 2020;21:408.
Ungerfeld EM. Shifts in metabolic hydrogen sinks in the methanogenesis-inhibited ruminal fermentation: a meta-analysis. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:37.
Buckel W, Thauer RK. Energy conservation via electron bifurcating ferredoxin reduction and proton/Na(+) translocating ferredoxin oxidation. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013;1827:94–113.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute of Iran (ABRII), the international cooperation and exchange program of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31461143020), and the Chinese government contribution to CAAS-ILRI Joint Laboratory on Livestock and Forage Genetic Resources in Beijing. The paper contributes to the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gharechahi, J., Vahidi, M.F., Bahram, M. et al. Metagenomic analysis reveals a dynamic microbiome with diversified adaptive functions to utilize high lignocellulosic forages in the cattle rumen. ISME J 15, 1108–1120 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-020-00837-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-020-00837-2
This article is cited by
-
Superior Probiotic Potential of Saccharomyces cerevisiae YH14: In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation for Animal Nutrition and Health
Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins (2026)
-
Revealing the adaptive metabolic differences of different sheep breeds in plateau areas based on the Gut-Cardiac axis
BMC Genomics (2025)
-
Transport stress alters serum biochemistry and gut microbiota in Tibetan sheep (ovis aries): a 30-day recovery assessment
BMC Microbiology (2025)
-
Dynamic changes in the gastrointestinal microbial communities of Gangba sheep and analysis of their functions in plant biomass degradation at high altitude
Microbiome (2025)
-
Strain-resolved comparison of beef and draft cattle rumen microbiomes using single-microbe genomics
Animal Microbiome (2025)
