Comparative analysis reveals microbiota composition differences in quail gut, suggesting potential health implications.
The aim of the study is to comparatively investigate the microbiota isolated from the parietal and luminal microflora of quail. Bacteriological and proteomic methods were used to determine the structure of the intestinal microbiota of 30-day-old quail. The main bacterial taxa, such as Escherichia coli, Lactobacillus spp., and Bifidobacterium spp., as well as the opportunistic pathogens Staphylococcus aureus, Proteus vulgaris, and Enterococcus faecalis, were identified in the luminal and parietal microflora. Among the isolated microbial cultures, Escherichia coli (30.0 %) was capable of biofilm formation. In the luminal intestinal microflora, the highest population density and constancy coefficient were observed in Escherichia coli and Lactobacillus spp. and Bifidobacterium spp., exceeding 70 %, the lowest population density was found in Proteus vulgaris, Enterococcus faecalis and Citrobacter diversus. In the microbiocenosis of the parietal microflora of various biotopes of the quail intestine, the highest population density was observed in Lactobacillus spp. cultures, and the lowest in Escherichia coli, while 100 % constancy coefficient was observed in Bifidobacterium spp., Escherichia coli and Lactobacillus spp. When analyzing the associated relationships, one association of bacteria with a high Jaccard coefficient was established - Lactobacillus spp. and Bifidobacterium spp. (36.7 %) in the luminal microflora and five such associations in the parietal biotope, in particular Escherichia coli and Bifidobacterium spp. (35.3 %), Escherichia coli and Lactobacillus spp. (42.4 %), Bifidobacterium spp. and Enterococcus faecalis (31.7 %), Lactobacillus spp. and Enterococcus faecalis (33.6 %), and Lactobacillus spp. and Bifidobacterium spp. (33.1 %), indicating complex interactions within the microbiota. The data obtained expand our understanding of the composition of the intestinal microbiota of quail and can serve as a basis for assessing its condition during physiological disorders and infectious diseases, as well as for diagnosing and selecting preventive and therapeutic measures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lescheva et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: