Acta Prataculturae Sinica ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (3): 100-109.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2020385
Previous Articles Next Articles
Jiang-wei LI(), Zhi-you WANG, Sheng-zhen HOU, Yun LEI, Jian-lei JIA, Li ZHOU, Lin-sheng GUI()
Received:
2020-08-10
Revised:
2020-10-26
Online:
2021-03-20
Published:
2021-03-09
Contact:
Lin-sheng GUI
Jiang-wei LI, Zhi-you WANG, Sheng-zhen HOU, Yun LEI, Jian-lei JIA, Li ZHOU, Lin-sheng GUI. Effects of dietary concentrate∶roughage ratio on rumen morphology and microbial flora in fattening Tibetan sheep[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(3): 100-109.
项目Project | 组成Composition | 营养Nutrient content | 含量Content |
---|---|---|---|
玉米Corn | 65.5 | 粗蛋白Crude protein | 15.15 |
豆粕Soybean meal | 8.0 | 粗脂肪Crude fat | 2.70 |
菜籽粕Rapeseed meal | 16.0 | 粗纤维Crude fiber | 3.83 |
棉粕Cotton meal | 4.0 | 钙Calcium | 0.55 |
食盐Salt | 0.5 | 有效磷Available phosphorus | 0.45 |
石粉Stone powder | 1.0 | 蛋氨酸Methionine | 0.37 |
预混料Premix1) | 5.0 | 赖氨酸Lysine | 0.95 |
合计Total | 100.0 |
Table 1 Composition and nutrition level of refined feed (%)
项目Project | 组成Composition | 营养Nutrient content | 含量Content |
---|---|---|---|
玉米Corn | 65.5 | 粗蛋白Crude protein | 15.15 |
豆粕Soybean meal | 8.0 | 粗脂肪Crude fat | 2.70 |
菜籽粕Rapeseed meal | 16.0 | 粗纤维Crude fiber | 3.83 |
棉粕Cotton meal | 4.0 | 钙Calcium | 0.55 |
食盐Salt | 0.5 | 有效磷Available phosphorus | 0.45 |
石粉Stone powder | 1.0 | 蛋氨酸Methionine | 0.37 |
预混料Premix1) | 5.0 | 赖氨酸Lysine | 0.95 |
合计Total | 100.0 |
组别 Group | 角化层 Keratinized layer (μm) | 肌肉层 Muscular layer (μm) | 乳头密度 Nipple density (piece·cm-2) | 乳头高度 Nipple height (μm) | 乳头宽度 Nipple width (μm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 24.64±6.34cd | 928.38±107.79bc | 62.50±11.50b | 2217.77±736.03ab | 1620.00±413.88c |
B | 31.07±4.75ab | 1764.06±240.83a | 70.80±15.71b | 1691.11±456.95b | 1666.66±403.60bc |
C | 29.22±6.24b | 1553.56±486.86ab | 68.40±8.50b | 2095.55±395.95ab | 1540.00±254.75c |
D | 33.08±8.53a | 1078.97±224.99bc | 87.80±21.72a | 2240.00±592.79ab | 1446.66±218.17c |
E | 26.62±4.84c | 1127.97±320.84abc | 55.50±6.92bc | 2597.77±506.27a | 1646.66±301.82bc |
F | 27.70±6.11bc | 932.42±329.59bc | 40.00±5.79c | 2424.44±575.30ab | 2302.22±437.20a |
G | 22.81±6.10d | 776.11±209.99c | 59.20±6.87b | 2742.22±592.99a | 1988.88±395.10ab |
Table 2 Effect of dietary concentrate to forage ratio on rumen morphology of Tibetan sheep
组别 Group | 角化层 Keratinized layer (μm) | 肌肉层 Muscular layer (μm) | 乳头密度 Nipple density (piece·cm-2) | 乳头高度 Nipple height (μm) | 乳头宽度 Nipple width (μm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 24.64±6.34cd | 928.38±107.79bc | 62.50±11.50b | 2217.77±736.03ab | 1620.00±413.88c |
B | 31.07±4.75ab | 1764.06±240.83a | 70.80±15.71b | 1691.11±456.95b | 1666.66±403.60bc |
C | 29.22±6.24b | 1553.56±486.86ab | 68.40±8.50b | 2095.55±395.95ab | 1540.00±254.75c |
D | 33.08±8.53a | 1078.97±224.99bc | 87.80±21.72a | 2240.00±592.79ab | 1446.66±218.17c |
E | 26.62±4.84c | 1127.97±320.84abc | 55.50±6.92bc | 2597.77±506.27a | 1646.66±301.82bc |
F | 27.70±6.11bc | 932.42±329.59bc | 40.00±5.79c | 2424.44±575.30ab | 2302.22±437.20a |
G | 22.81±6.10d | 776.11±209.99c | 59.20±6.87b | 2742.22±592.99a | 1988.88±395.10ab |
样本Sample | 样本标签Sample ID | 原始序列Raw tags | 除冗序列Clean tags | 覆盖率Coverage |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | A1 | 47409 | 42630 | 0.9976 |
A2 | 48409 | 43441 | 0.9964 | |
A3 | 49072 | 44882 | 0.9829 | |
B | B1 | 48760 | 44689 | 0.9965 |
B2 | 47926 | 43621 | 0.9980 | |
B3 | 49688 | 45363 | 0.9960 | |
C | C1 | 46850 | 41406 | 0.9961 |
C2 | 49319 | 45017 | 0.9971 | |
C3 | 49568 | 45481 | 0.9942 | |
D | D1 | 45952 | 40859 | 0.9970 |
D2 | 44801 | 40189 | 0.9972 | |
D3 | 44756 | 40678 | 0.9965 | |
E | E1 | 70611 | 66751 | 0.9954 |
E2 | 46891 | 42217 | 0.9960 | |
E3 | 67635 | 63718 | 0.9963 | |
F | F1 | 68837 | 65067 | 0.9970 |
F2 | 67831 | 64266 | 0.9966 | |
F3 | 68860 | 64864 | 0.9937 | |
G | G1 | 71046 | 67960 | 0.9974 |
G2 | 67437 | 63525 | 0.9971 | |
G3 | 45513 | 40926 | 0.9950 |
Table 3 Sequencing quality
样本Sample | 样本标签Sample ID | 原始序列Raw tags | 除冗序列Clean tags | 覆盖率Coverage |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | A1 | 47409 | 42630 | 0.9976 |
A2 | 48409 | 43441 | 0.9964 | |
A3 | 49072 | 44882 | 0.9829 | |
B | B1 | 48760 | 44689 | 0.9965 |
B2 | 47926 | 43621 | 0.9980 | |
B3 | 49688 | 45363 | 0.9960 | |
C | C1 | 46850 | 41406 | 0.9961 |
C2 | 49319 | 45017 | 0.9971 | |
C3 | 49568 | 45481 | 0.9942 | |
D | D1 | 45952 | 40859 | 0.9970 |
D2 | 44801 | 40189 | 0.9972 | |
D3 | 44756 | 40678 | 0.9965 | |
E | E1 | 70611 | 66751 | 0.9954 |
E2 | 46891 | 42217 | 0.9960 | |
E3 | 67635 | 63718 | 0.9963 | |
F | F1 | 68837 | 65067 | 0.9970 |
F2 | 67831 | 64266 | 0.9966 | |
F3 | 68860 | 64864 | 0.9937 | |
G | G1 | 71046 | 67960 | 0.9974 |
G2 | 67437 | 63525 | 0.9971 | |
G3 | 45513 | 40926 | 0.9950 |
组别 Group | 香农指数 Shannon index | 辛普森指数 Simpson index | Ace 指数 Ace index | Chaol 指数 Chaol index |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | 3.37±0.49c | 0.1061±0.0612a | 361.98±42.85c | 347.33±18.58c |
B | 3.97±0.14c | 0.0500±0.0072bc | 374.90±36.15c | 398.83±45.21bc |
C | 3.98±0.35c | 0.0662±0.0325ab | 372.86±40.92c | 385.95±57.62bc |
D | 4.94±0.65b | 0.0188±0.0106bc | 581.28±63.42bc | 595.64±43.95bc |
E | 5.30±0.67ab | 0.0116±0.0052c | 739.51±68.24bc | 765.13±87.05abc |
F | 5.98±0.11a | 0.0065±0.0003c | 1265.71±73.17a | 1295.09±75.07a |
G | 5.40±0.70ab | 0.0161±0.0115bc | 925.83±76.09ab | 945.64±64.36ab |
Table 4 Alpha diversity index
组别 Group | 香农指数 Shannon index | 辛普森指数 Simpson index | Ace 指数 Ace index | Chaol 指数 Chaol index |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | 3.37±0.49c | 0.1061±0.0612a | 361.98±42.85c | 347.33±18.58c |
B | 3.97±0.14c | 0.0500±0.0072bc | 374.90±36.15c | 398.83±45.21bc |
C | 3.98±0.35c | 0.0662±0.0325ab | 372.86±40.92c | 385.95±57.62bc |
D | 4.94±0.65b | 0.0188±0.0106bc | 581.28±63.42bc | 595.64±43.95bc |
E | 5.30±0.67ab | 0.0116±0.0052c | 739.51±68.24bc | 765.13±87.05abc |
F | 5.98±0.11a | 0.0065±0.0003c | 1265.71±73.17a | 1295.09±75.07a |
G | 5.40±0.70ab | 0.0161±0.0115bc | 925.83±76.09ab | 945.64±64.36ab |
项目 Project | 组别Group | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | |
厚壁菌门 Firmicutes | 0.8459±0.0411a | 0.7900±0.1073ab | 0.7532±0.2004ab | 0.3878±0.0932bc | 0.3111±0.2331c | 0.0368±0.0269c | 0.2511±0.1104c |
变形菌门 Proteobacteria | 0.0018±0.0005c | 0.0046±0.0032c | 0.0039±0.0021c | 0.1420±0.0725bc | 0.1692±0.0542bc | 0.5097±0.0199a | 0.3415±0.0905ab |
拟杆菌门 Bacteroidetes | 0.0752±0.0271ab | 0.0184±0.0066b | 0.1385±0.0352ab | 0.2347±0.0653ab | 0.3579±0.2276a | 0.0820±0.0115ab | 0.1062±0.0356ab |
酸杆菌门 Acidobacteria | 0.0006±0.0002b | 0.0003±0.0001b | 0.0003±0.0001b | 0.0823±0.0311ab | 0.0728±0.0402ab | 0.2342±0.0163a | 0.1621±0.0614ab |
放线菌门 Actinobacteria | 0.0540±0.0398 | 0.0071±0.0022 | 0.0228±0.0066 | 0.0533±0.0239 | 0.0211±0.0045 | 0.0501±0.0062 | 0.0552±0.0157 |
Table 5 Relative content of bacterial at phylum level
项目 Project | 组别Group | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | |
厚壁菌门 Firmicutes | 0.8459±0.0411a | 0.7900±0.1073ab | 0.7532±0.2004ab | 0.3878±0.0932bc | 0.3111±0.2331c | 0.0368±0.0269c | 0.2511±0.1104c |
变形菌门 Proteobacteria | 0.0018±0.0005c | 0.0046±0.0032c | 0.0039±0.0021c | 0.1420±0.0725bc | 0.1692±0.0542bc | 0.5097±0.0199a | 0.3415±0.0905ab |
拟杆菌门 Bacteroidetes | 0.0752±0.0271ab | 0.0184±0.0066b | 0.1385±0.0352ab | 0.2347±0.0653ab | 0.3579±0.2276a | 0.0820±0.0115ab | 0.1062±0.0356ab |
酸杆菌门 Acidobacteria | 0.0006±0.0002b | 0.0003±0.0001b | 0.0003±0.0001b | 0.0823±0.0311ab | 0.0728±0.0402ab | 0.2342±0.0163a | 0.1621±0.0614ab |
放线菌门 Actinobacteria | 0.0540±0.0398 | 0.0071±0.0022 | 0.0228±0.0066 | 0.0533±0.0239 | 0.0211±0.0045 | 0.0501±0.0062 | 0.0552±0.0157 |
细菌种类 Bacteria | 组别Group | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | |
毛螺菌科 Lachnospiraceae | 0.3019± 0.0881a | 0.2776± 0.0664a | 0.1820± 0.0811ab | 0.0929± 0.0231bc | 0.0487± 0.0366bc | 0.0073± 0.0059c | 0.0610± 0.0251bc |
瘤胃球菌科 Ruminococcaceae | 0.1820± 0.0871 | 0.1759± 0.0517 | 0.2219± 0.1627 | 0.0624± 0.0165 | 0.0683± 0.0103 | 0.0072± 0.0046 | 0.0410± 0.0231 |
韦荣氏球菌科 Veillonellaceae | 0.1443± 0.0412 | 0.1135± 0.0386 | 0.1720± 0.0466 | 0.1586± 0.0256 | 0.0947± 0.0310 | 0.0099± 0.0021 | 0.0540± 0.0112 |
克里斯滕森菌科 Christensenellaceae | 0.0644± 0.0432b | 0.2138± 0.0106a | 0.1063± 0.0514ab | 0.0549± 0.0124b | 0.0698± 0.0552b | 0.0083± 0.0023b | 0.0857± 0.0102b |
普雷沃氏菌科 Prevotellaceae | 0.0164± 0.0101b | 0.0020± 0.0014b | 0.0706± 0.0507ab | 0.0335± 0.0026ab | 0.1564± 0.0412a | 0.0132± 0.0072ab | 0.0275± 0.0036ab |
Table 6 Relative content of bacterial at family level
细菌种类 Bacteria | 组别Group | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | |
毛螺菌科 Lachnospiraceae | 0.3019± 0.0881a | 0.2776± 0.0664a | 0.1820± 0.0811ab | 0.0929± 0.0231bc | 0.0487± 0.0366bc | 0.0073± 0.0059c | 0.0610± 0.0251bc |
瘤胃球菌科 Ruminococcaceae | 0.1820± 0.0871 | 0.1759± 0.0517 | 0.2219± 0.1627 | 0.0624± 0.0165 | 0.0683± 0.0103 | 0.0072± 0.0046 | 0.0410± 0.0231 |
韦荣氏球菌科 Veillonellaceae | 0.1443± 0.0412 | 0.1135± 0.0386 | 0.1720± 0.0466 | 0.1586± 0.0256 | 0.0947± 0.0310 | 0.0099± 0.0021 | 0.0540± 0.0112 |
克里斯滕森菌科 Christensenellaceae | 0.0644± 0.0432b | 0.2138± 0.0106a | 0.1063± 0.0514ab | 0.0549± 0.0124b | 0.0698± 0.0552b | 0.0083± 0.0023b | 0.0857± 0.0102b |
普雷沃氏菌科 Prevotellaceae | 0.0164± 0.0101b | 0.0020± 0.0014b | 0.0706± 0.0507ab | 0.0335± 0.0026ab | 0.1564± 0.0412a | 0.0132± 0.0072ab | 0.0275± 0.0036ab |
1 | Akin D E, Borneman W S, Lyon C E. Degradation of leaf blades and stems by monocentric and polycentric isolates of ruminal fungi. Animal Feed Science Technology, 1990, 31: 205. |
2 | Zhang H T. Effects of different corn silage levels on rumen microflora and metabonomics of Holstein reserve cattle. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2017. |
张红涛. 不同玉米青贮水平对荷斯坦后备牛瘤胃液微生物组及其代谢组的影响. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2017. | |
3 | Hu H L. Study on nutritional physiological mechanism of subacute rumen acidosis in dairy goats. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2008. |
胡红莲. 奶山羊亚急性瘤胃酸中毒营养生理机制的研究. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2008. | |
4 | Liu D C. Effects of different quality roughage diets and yeast culture on rumen fermentation and cellulolytic bacteria in sheep. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2007. |
刘大程. 不同品质粗饲料日粮及添加酵母培养物对绵羊瘤胃发酵及纤维分解菌的影响. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2007. | |
5 | Mackie R I, White B A, Isaacson R E. Gastrointesrinal microbiology. New York: Chapman & Hall, 1997: 658-680. |
6 | Wang H R. Effects of dietary concentrate to roughage ratio and nitrogen sources on rumen fiber degrading bacteria and fiber degradation in sheep. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2006. |
王海荣. 不同日粮精粗比及氮源对绵羊瘤胃纤维降解菌群和纤维物质降解的影响. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2006. | |
7 | Xu X F, Hu D D, Guo T T, et al. Structure changes of rumen bacterial flora of dairy cows under different concentrate to roughage ratio diets. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2019, 31(12): 5541-5550. |
徐晓锋, 胡丹丹, 郭婷婷, 等. 不同精粗比饲粮条件下奶牛瘤胃细菌菌群结构变化的研究. 动物营养学报, 2019, 31(12): 5541-5550. | |
8 | Wang J Q, Lu D X, Yang H J, et al. Feeding standard of meat-producing sheep and goats, NY-T 816-2004. Beijing: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, 2004. |
王加启, 卢德勋, 杨红建, 等. 肉羊饲养标准, NY-T 816-2004. 北京: 中华人民共和国农业部, 2004. | |
9 | Suárez B J, Van Reenen C G, Gerrits W J, et al. Effects of supplementing concentrates differing in carbohydrate composition in veal calf diets: Animal performance and rumen fermentation characteristics. Journal of Dairy Science, 2006, 89(11): 4365-4375. |
10 | Feng Y L. Ruminant nutrition. Beijing: Science Press, 2004. |
冯仰廉. 反刍动物营养学. 北京: 科学出版社, 2004. | |
11 | Zeng Y, Gao Y H, Peng Z L, et al. Effects of yeast culture supplementation in diets on rumen fermentation parameters and microflora of house-feeding yak. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2020, 32(4): 1721-1733. |
曾钰, 高彦华, 彭忠利, 等. 饲粮中添加酵母培养物对舍饲牦牛瘤胃发酵参数及微生物区系的影响. 动物营养学报, 2020, 32(4): 1721-1733. | |
12 | Zhan J S, Yang Q, Hu Y, et al. Effects of dietary concentration∶roughage ratio on rumen fermentation and flora population structure in Hu sheep. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(7): 122-130. |
占今舜, 杨群, 胡耀, 等. 日粮精粗比对湖羊瘤胃发酵和菌群结构的影响. 草业学报, 2020, 29(7): 122-130. | |
13 | Bai J, Cong Y Y. Effect of dietary forage-to-concentrate ratios on rumen internal environment and rumen microbial flora. Modern Journal of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2014(12): 26-28, 33. |
白健, 丛玉艳. 日粮精粗比对瘤胃内环境及微生物区系影响的研究. 现代畜牧兽医, 2014(12): 26-28, 33. | |
14 | Paengkoum P, Chen S, Paengkoum S. Effects of crude protein and undegradable intake protein on growth performance, nutrient utilization, and rumen fermentation in growing Thai-indigenous beef cattle. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 2019, 51(5): 1151-1159. |
15 | Liu G X, Zhang H, Cong L X. Rumen microflora and research technology progress of deer and other ruminants. Feed Industry, 2015, 36(5): 47-50. |
刘国兴, 张辉, 丛立新. 鹿等反刍动物瘤胃微生物区系及研究技术进展. 饲料工业, 2015, 36(5): 47-50. | |
16 | Hua J L, Shi Q C, Yu F Y, et al. Construction and analysis of fosmid library of rumen microbiota of Huanghuai white goat. Journal of Northeast Agricultural University, 2019. |
17 | Li Y S, Han Z Q, Jin T H, et al. Effects of milk replacer on growth performance and rumen microflora in early weaning yimeng black lambs. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2019, 31(8): 3600-3611. |
李永洙, 韩照清, 金太花, 等. 代乳粉对沂蒙黑山羊羔羊早期生长性能及其瘤胃微生物区系的影响. 动物营养学报, 2019, 31(8): 3600-3611. | |
18 | Han X F. Study on the influence of day age and dietary concentrate to forage ratio on the rumen microflora of Shaanbei white cashmere goats. Yangling: Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University, 2015. |
韩旭峰. 日龄、日粮精粗比对陕北白绒山羊瘤胃微生物区系影响的研究. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2015. | |
19 | Wang L J, Li Y G, Zhang Y G, et al. The effects of different concentrate-to-forage ratio diets on rumen bacterial microbiota and the structures of holstein cows during the feeding cycle. Animals: An Open Access Journal from MDPI, 2020, 10(6): 957. |
20 | Heinritz S N, Mosenthin R, Weiss E. Use of pigs as a potential model for research into dietary modulation of the human gut microbiota. Nutrition Research Reviews, 2013, 26(2): 191-209. |
21 | Kim M, Kim J, Kuehn L A, et al. Investigation of bacterial diversity in the feces of cattle fed different diets1. Journal of Animal Science, 2014, 92(2): 683-694. |
22 | Zhang J, Zhang L L, Xu X F. Research progress of Prevotella in the rumen of ruminants. China Feed, 2020(7): 17-21. |
张洁, 张力莉, 徐晓锋. 反刍动物瘤胃内普雷沃氏菌的研究进展. 中国饲料, 2020(7): 17-21. | |
23 | Rosenberg E. The family prevotellaceae. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014: 825-827. |
24 | Wu S, Wang G, Angert E R, et al. Composition, diversity, and origin of the bacterial community in grass carp intestine. PLoS One, 2012, 7(2): e30440. |
[1] | JIAO Ting, WU Tie-cheng, WU Jian-ping, ZHAO Sheng-guo, LEI Zhao-min, LIANG Jian-yong, RAN Fu, JIU MAI Zha-xi, LIU Zhen-heng. A comparative study on digestibility and feed intake of Tibetan sheep of different types [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(5): 100-108. |
[2] | KANG Jing-peng, WANG Wen-ji, GUO Ya-min, JING Xiao-ping, ZHONG Chong-liang, GUO Wei, LONG Rui-jun, ZHOU Jian-wei. Effects of different dietary energy levels on apparent digestibility, nitrogen metabolism and growth performance of Tibetan sheep under low nitrogen conditions [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(9): 166-174. |
[3] | XIAO Hong, XU Chang-Lin, ZHANG De-Gang, ZHANG Jian-Wen, YANG Hai-Lei, CHAI Jin-Long, PAN Tao-Tao, WANG Yan, YU Xiao-Jun. Short-term photosynthetic responses of Medicago ruthenia var. inschanicus to simulated yak and Tibetan sheep trampling and rainfall [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(2): 43-52. |
[4] | HE Wei, GUO Lin-Wei, FAN Peng-Hui, GUO Bin, FU Yan-Ping, WEI Ya-Hui. Allelopathy and the rhizospere bacterial community structure of Oxytropis ochrocephala [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2015, 24(7): 21-29. |
[5] | PAN Ming-hong,LING Yao,JING Wen,MA Hong-ping,PENG Yan. Genetic diversity and phylogeny of rhizobia isolated from white clover in Sichuan Province [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(5): 143-152. |
[6] | WANG Ying,WANG Yu-qin,YANG Cheng-de,YAO Yu-ling,CHEN Xiu-rong,XUE Li. Screening, identification and biological function evaluation of endophytic bacteria against potato storage disease [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(3): 269-275. |
[7] |
GAO Xiao-xing, MAN Bai-ying, CHEN Xiu-rong, YANG Cheng-de.
Identification and determination of biological characteristics of Kobresia capillifolia endophytic bacteria X4 in the East Qilian Mountain Alpine grasslands [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(4): 137-146. |
[8] | LV He-ping, WEI Hui, QI Yong-hong, ZHANG Yan-mei, CAO Su-fang, YANG Fa-rong, LI Min-quan, SHEN Hui-min. Pathogen identification from soft rot disease of onion bulbs in Jiayuguan, Gansu province [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(4): 153-159. |
[9] | ZHAO Ling,CHAI Zhao-xiang,LI Jin-hua,WANG Di. Isolation and identification of four new Erwinia carotovora subsp. carotovora strains [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(4): 244-251. |
[10] | DAN Rui-fang, ZHANG Hai-tao, LONG Rui-jun, DING Xue-zhi, ZHANG Xin. Seasonal shift of rumen bacteria quantity of grazing Tibetan sheep and forage nutrition by grazing sheep [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(1): 100-104. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||