Highlighted Text:
Show |
Hide
Full text loading...
Chapter 1 : The Fecal Environment, the Gut
Authors:
Denis O. Krause1,
Ehsan Khafipour2
VIEW AFFILIATIONS
HIDE AFFILIATIONS
Affiliations:
1: Department of Animal Science and Department of Medical Microbiology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada R3T 2N2;
2: Department of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada R3T 2N2
Content Type: Monograph
Publication Year:
2011
Category: Applied and Industrial Microbiology; Environmental Microbiology
Book DOI:
10.1128/9781555816865
Chapter DOI:
10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
Preview this chapter:
The Fecal Environment, the Gut, Page 1 of 2
< Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555816865/9781555816087_Chap01-1.gif /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555816865/9781555816087_Chap01-2.gif
Abstract:
This chapter examines the ecology of the digestive tract of humans and animals with particular reference to the association between anatomical structures, their related physiologies, the mode of feeding, and the functional association of specific microbial communities in different gut compartments of the digestive tract. A section provides the reader who is not familiar with the digestive tract, a brief, nonexhaustive summary of the major features of the digestive tract. The combination model is one in which the inefficiencies of foregut fermentation are translocated to the hindgut. In the competition model, exemplified by the meat eater, there is little hindgut fermentation but, in the combination model (exemplified by the horse, rabbit, and dugong), extensive fermentation in the cecum and colon is possible. The development of pregastric fermentation in herbivores is a very successful adaptation for animals consuming diets dominated by forages. In the golden hamster (Mesocricetus auratus), the esophagus joins the pregastric chamber in close proximity to a sphincter-like muscular ring and most of the ingested food is deposited in this pregastric chamber. The rock hyrax (Procavia habessinica) is unique in that it has three fermentation compartments that are completely separated from one another anatomically. In humans, the consumption of plant cell walls is not nearly as common as in herbivores, but complex carbohydrates in the form of starches are consumed and, in fact, encouraged because of the benefit to gut heath.
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
Figures
The Fecal Environment, the Gut
[com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/author/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-1,webId=/content/author/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-1,properties={foaf_givenname=Denis O., foaf_name=Denis O. Krause, foaf_surname=Krause, pub_isAffiliatedWith=[com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/affiliation/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-aff1]]}], com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/author/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-2,webId=/content/author/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-2,properties={foaf_givenname=Ehsan, foaf_name=Ehsan Khafipour, foaf_surname=Khafipour, pub_isAffiliatedWith=[com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/affiliation/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-aff2]]}]]
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01fig01
FIGURE 1
(A) Sequence of digestion in nonruminants. The simplest case (little or no cecal digestion) occurs in most carnivores and in humans. Cecal digestion occurs in large herbivores but is secondary to colon digestion (Stevens and Hume, 1988). (B) Sequence of digestion in rodents, most of which practice coprophagy; cecal fermentation is dominant over secondary colonic fermentation. Some rodents (hamsters and voles) exhibit pregastric digestion (see
Fig. 2
). Reprinted from Van Soest (
1994
) with permission from Cornell University Press.
10.1128/9781555816865/f0002-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816865/f0002-01.gif
FIGURE 1
(A) Sequence of digestion in nonruminants. The simplest case (little or no cecal digestion) occurs in most carnivores and in humans. Cecal digestion occurs in large herbivores but is secondary to colon digestion (Stevens and Hume, 1988). (B) Sequence of digestion in rodents, most of which practice coprophagy; cecal fermentation is dominant over secondary colonic fermentation. Some rodents (hamsters and voles) exhibit pregastric digestion (see Fig. 2 ). Reprinted from Van Soest ( 1994 ) with permission from Cornell University Press.
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01fig02
FIGURE 2
(A) Sequence of digestion in nonruminants with pregastric digestion. (B) Sequence of digestion in ruminants. The sieving system of the omasum is much more developed in grazing species. Reprinted from Van Soest (
1994
) with permission from Cornell University Press.
10.1128/9781555816865/f0006-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816865/f0006-01.gif
FIGURE 2
(A) Sequence of digestion in nonruminants with pregastric digestion. (B) Sequence of digestion in ruminants. The sieving system of the omasum is much more developed in grazing species. Reprinted from Van Soest ( 1994 ) with permission from Cornell University Press.
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01fig03
FIGURE 3
Schematic showing the major pathways of carbohydrate fermentation by ruminal bacteria. “X” denotes alternative electron carrier (e.g., ferredoxin). In some ruminal bacteria, pyruvate decarboxylation is coupled to formate production, but most of this formate is converted to hydrogen and carbon dioxide by hydrogen formate lyase. The dashed lines show pathways that occur in other organisms. Reprinted from Russell and Rychlik (
2001
) with permission from AAAS.
10.1128/9781555816865/f0008-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816865/f0008-01.gif
FIGURE 3
Schematic showing the major pathways of carbohydrate fermentation by ruminal bacteria. “X” denotes alternative electron carrier (e.g., ferredoxin). In some ruminal bacteria, pyruvate decarboxylation is coupled to formate production, but most of this formate is converted to hydrogen and carbon dioxide by hydrogen formate lyase. The dashed lines show pathways that occur in other organisms. Reprinted from Russell and Rychlik ( 2001 ) with permission from AAAS.
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01fig04
FIGURE 4
The amount of microbial protein produced per unit of feed fermented in the rumen affects the rate of fermentation. Reprinted with permission from Van Soest et al. (1991).
10.1128/9781555816865/f0009-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816865/f0009-01.gif
FIGURE 4
The amount of microbial protein produced per unit of feed fermented in the rumen affects the rate of fermentation. Reprinted with permission from Van Soest et al. (1991).
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01fig05
FIGURE 5
Model relation in which release of nitrogen fractions parallels fermentation curves for respective fast-and slow-degrading carbohydrates and optimizes microbial protein output. Peptide production, which is important for the fast pool, depends on the presence of degradable true protein. Ammonia can come from the nonprotein nitrogen pool and from peptide degradation. The ammonia level does not rise much because it is competitively recycled into microbial protein. A: Nonprotein nitrogen and peptides; B1: true soluble protein; B2: neutral detergent soluble protein. Reprinted from Van Soest (
1994
) with permission from Cornell University Press.
10.1128/9781555816865/f0017-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816865/f0017-01.gif
FIGURE 5
Model relation in which release of nitrogen fractions parallels fermentation curves for respective fast-and slow-degrading carbohydrates and optimizes microbial protein output. Peptide production, which is important for the fast pool, depends on the presence of degradable true protein. Ammonia can come from the nonprotein nitrogen pool and from peptide degradation. The ammonia level does not rise much because it is competitively recycled into microbial protein. A: Nonprotein nitrogen and peptides; B1: true soluble protein; B2: neutral detergent soluble protein. Reprinted from Van Soest ( 1994 ) with permission from Cornell University Press.
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
References
/content/book/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01
1.
Allen, M. S. 1997. Relationship between fermentation acid production in the rumen and the requirement for physically effective fiber. J. Dairy Sci. 80: 1447– 1462.
2.
Argenzio, R. A.,, J.E. Lowe,, D.W. Pickard,, and C. E. Stevens. 1974. Digesta passage and water exchange in equine large-intestine. Am. J. Physiol. 226: 1035– 1042.
3.
Barboza, P. S. 1993. Digestive strategies of the wombats - feed-intake, fiber digestion, and digesta passage in two grazing marsupials with hindgut fermentation. Physiol. Zool. 66: 983– 999.
4.
Barboza, P. S., and, I.D. Hume. 1992. Digestive-tract morphology and digestion in the wombats (Marsupialia, Vombatidae). J. Comp. Physiol. B-Biochem. Syst. Environ. Physiol. 162: 552– 560.
5.
Bauchop, T. 1977. Foregut fermentation, p. 223–250. In R. T. J. Clarke, and T. Bauchop (ed.), Microbial Ecology of the Gut. Academic Press, London.
6.
Bauchop, T. 1978. The significance of microorganisms in the stomach of non-human primates. World Rev. Nutr. Diet 32: 198– 212.
7.
Bauchop, T., and, R. W. Martucci. 1968. Ruminantlike digestion of the langur monkey. Science 161: 698– 700.
8.
Beauchemin, K. A. 1991. Ingestion and mastication of feed by dairy cattle. Vet. Clin. North. Am. Food Anim. Pract. 7: 439– 463.
9.
Bjornhag, G. 1987. Comparative aspects of digestion in the hindgut of mammals - the colonic separation mechanism (CSM) (A review). Dtsch. Tierarztl. Wsschr. 94: 33– 36.
10.
Black, J. L. 1970. Nutritional significance of the reticular groove (sulcis reticuli). Aus. J. Sci. 32: 332– 334.
11.
Black, J. L., and, M. J. Sharkey. 1970. Reticular groove (sulcis reticuli): an obligatory adaptation in ruminant-like herbivores. Mammalia 34: 294– 302.
12.
Camain, R.,, A. Quenum, J. Kerrest,, and S. Goueffon. 1960. Considerations sur l’estomac de Cricetomys gambianus. Bull. Mem. Ecole. Natl. Med. Pharm. Dakar 8: 134– 142.
13.
Chilcott, M. J., and, I. D. Hume. 1985. Coprophagy and selective retention of fluid digesta -their role in the nutrition of the common ringtail possum, Pseudocheirus-peregrinus. Aust. J. Zool. 33: 1– 15.
14.
Church, D. C. 1976. Digestive Physiology and Nutrition of Ruminants, 2nd ed., vol. I. O&B Books, Corvallis, OR.
15.
Clauss, W. 1984. Circadian rhythms in Na transport, p. 273–283. In E. Skadhauge, and K. Heintze (ed.), Intestinal Absorption and Secretion. MTP Press, Lancaster, UK.
16.
Cole, J. R.,, Q. Wang,, E. Cardenas,, J. Fish,, B. Chai,, R.J. Farris, A. S. Kulam-Syed-Mohideen,, D.M. McGarrell, T. Marsh,, G. M. Garrity,, and J. M. Tiedje. 2009. The Ribosomal Database Project: improved alignments and new tools for rRNA analysis. Nucl. Acids Res. 37:D 141– 145.
17.
Dellow, D. W. 1979. Physiology of digestion in the macropodine marsupials. PhD thesis, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.
18.
Dinalo, J. E.,, and D. A. Relman. 2009. Cross-talk in the gut. Genome Biol. 10: 203.
19.
Dukes, H. H.,, and W.O. Reece. 2004. Dukes’ Physiology of Domestic Animals, 12th ed. Comstock Pub. Associates, Ithaca, NY.
20.
Ehle, F. R.,, and R. G. Warner. 1978. Nutritional implications of the hamster forestomach. J. Nutr. 108: 1047– 1053.
21.
Engelhardt, W. V.,, G. Rechkemmer, L., Luciano,, and E. Reale. 1983. The hindgut: lessons for man from other species, p. 3– 17. In L. Barbara,, M. Miglioli,, and S. F. Phillips (ed.), New Trends in Pathophysiology and Therapy of the Large Bowel. Elsvier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
22.
Fahey, G. C., Jr.,, K. A. Barry,, and K.S Swanson. 2008. Age-related changes in nutrient utilization by companion animals. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 28: 425– 445.
23.
Flint, H. J.,, E. A. Bayer, M. T. Rincon, R. Lamed,, and B. A. White. 2008. Polysaccharide utilization by gut bacteria: potential for new insights from genomic analysis. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 6: 121– 131.
24.
Foley, W. J.,, and I.D. Hume. 1987. Passage of digesta markers in two species of arboreal folivorous marsupials - the greater glider (Petauroides, volans) and the brushtail possum (Trichosurus, vulpecula). Physiol. Zool. 60: 103– 113.
25.
Foose, T. J. 1982. Trophic strategies of ruminants versus nonruminants ungulates. PhD thesis, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
26.
Griffiths, M.,, and D. Davies. 1963. The role of the soft pellets in the production of lactic acid in the rabbit stomach. J. Nutr. 80: 171– 180.
27.
Groschwitz, K. R.,, and S.P. Hogan. 2009. Intestinal barrier function: molecular regulation and disease pathogenesis. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 124: 3– 20.
28.
Grzimek, B. 1974. Animal Life Encyclopedia, vol. 13 (Mammals IV). Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY.
29.
Hackstein, J. H. P.,, and C.K. Stumm. 1994. Methane production in terrestrial arthropods. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 91: 5441– 5445.
30.
Hauck, A. L.,, K. S. Swanson, P. J. Kenis,, D.E. Leckband, H. R. Gaskins,, and L.B. Schook. 2005. Twists and turns in the development and maintenance of the mammalian small intestine epithelium. Birth Defects Res. C. Embryo. Today Rev. 75: 58– 71.
31.
Herwig, R. P.,, J. T. Staley, M. K. Nerini,, and H.W. Braham. 1984. Baleen whales: preliminary evidence for forestomach microbial fermentation. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 47: 421– 423.
32.
Hill, W. C. O. 1952. The external and visceral anatomy of the olive colobus monkey (Procolobus verus). Proc. Zool. Soc. London 122: 127– 186.
33.
Hoffman, R. R. 1988a. Anatomy of the gastrointestinal tract, p. 14–43. In D. C. Church (ed.), The Ruminant Animal, Digestive Physiology and Nutrition. Prentice Hall, Englewood, NJ.
34.
Hoffman, R. R. 1988b. Morphophysiological evolutionary adaptations of the ruminant digestive system, p. 1–20. In A. Dobson, and M. J. Dobson (ed.), Aspects of Digestive Physiology in Ruminants: Proceedings of a Satellite Symposium of the 30th International Congress of the International Union of Physiological Sciences. Comstock Publishing, Ithaca, NY.
35.
Hooper, L. V.,, T., Midvedt,, and J.I. Gordon. 2002. How host-microbial interactions shape the nutrient environment of the mammalian intestine. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 22: 283– 307.
36.
Hoover, W. H.,, C. L. Mannings,, and H.E. Sheerin. 1969. Observations on digestion in the golden hamster. J. Anim. Sci. 28: 349– 352.
37.
Hume, I. D. 1982. Digestive Physiology and Nutrition of Marsupials. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
38.
Hume, I. D.,, and A.C.I. Warner. 1980. Evolution of microbial digestion in mammals, p. 665–684. In Y. Ruckebusch, and P. Thivend (ed.), Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants. MTP Press, Lancaster, UK.
39.
Hume, I. D.,, and E. Sakaguchi. 1991. Patterns of digesta flow and digestion in foregut and hindgut fermenters, p. 427– 452. In T. Tsuda,, Y. Sasaki,, and R. Kawashima (ed.), Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants: Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Ruminant Physiology, Sendai, Japan, August 28-September 1, 1989, Academic Press Inc., San Diego, CA; London, UK.
40.
Hungate, R. E. 1966. The Rumen and Its Microbes. Academic Press, New York, NY.
41.
Hungate, R. E. 1976. Microbial activities related to mammalian digestion and absorption of food, p. 131– 149. In G. A. Spiller, and R. J. Amen (ed.), Fiber in Human Nutrition. Plenum Press, New York, NY.
42.
Hungate, R. E. 1984. Microbes of nutritional importance in the alimentary tract. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 43: 1– 11.
43.
Janis, C. 1976. Evolutionary strategy of Equidae and origins of rumen and cecal digestion. Evolution 30: 757– 774.
44.
Khafipour, E., S. Li, J. C. Plaizier,, and D.O. Krause. 2009. Rumen microbiome composition using two nutritional models of subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA). Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 75: 7115– 7124.
45.
Kuhn, H. J. 1964. Zur kenntnis von bau und funktion des magens der schlankaffen (Colobinae). Folia Primatol. 2: 193– 221.
46.
Langer, P. 1974. Stomach evolution in the Artiodactyla. Mammalia 38: 295– 314.
47.
Langer, P. 1980. Anatomy of the stomach in three species of Potoroinae (Marsupialia, Macropodidae). Aust. J. Zool. 28: 19– 31.
48.
Ley, R. E.,, C. A. Lozupone, M. Hamady, R. Knight,, and J.I. Gordon. 2008. Worlds within worlds: evolution of the vertebrate gut microbiota. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 6: 776– 788.
49.
MacFarlane, G. T., and, Englyst, H. N. 1986. Starch utilization by the human large intestinal microflora. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 60: 195– 201.
50.
Mackie, R. I. 2002. Mutualistic fermentative digestion in the gastrointestinal tract: diversity and evolution. Integr. Comp. Biol. 42: 319– 326.
51.
Moir, R. 1965. The comparative physiology of ruminant-like animals, p. 1–14. In R. Dougherty (ed.), Physiology of Digestion in the Ruminant. Butterworths, Washington, DC.
52.
Moir, R. 1968. Ruminant digestion and evolution, p. 2673–2694. In C. F. Code (ed.), Handbook of Physiology, vol. 5. American Physiological Society, Washington, DC.
53.
Morii, H. 1972. Bacteria in the stomach of marine little toothed whales. Bull. Jpn. Soc. Sci. Fish. 38: 1177– 1183.
54.
Morii, H. 1979. The viable counts of microorganisms, pH values, amino acid contents, ammonia contents and volatile fatty acid contents in the stomach fluid of marine little toothed-whales. Bull. Fac. Fish. Nagasaki Univ. 47: 55– 60.
55.
Morii, H.,, and R. Kanazu. 1972. The free volatile fatty acids in the blood and stomach fluid from porpoise, Neomeris phocaenoides. Bull. Jpn. Soc. Sci. Fish. 38: 1035– 1039.
56.
Morrison, M.,, and J. Miron. 2000. Adhesion to cellulose by Ruminococcus albus: a combination of cellulosomes and Pil-proteins. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 185: 109– 115.
57.
Ohwaki, K.,, R. E. Hungate, L. Lotter, R. R. Hofmann,, and G. Maloiy. 1974. Stomach fermentation in east-african colobus monkeys in their natural state. Appl. Microbiol. 27: 713– 723.
58.
Orpin, C. G.,, and K.N. Joblin. 1997. The rumen anaerobic fungi, p. 140–195. In P. N. Hobson, and C. S. Stewart (ed.), The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem, 2nd ed. Elsevier Applied Science, London, UK.
59.
Orton, R. K., I. D. Hume,, and R.A. Leng. 1985. Effects of exercise and level of dietary-protein on digestive function in horses. Equine Vet. J. 17: 386– 390.
60.
Parahitiyawa, N. B.,, C. Scully, W. K. Leung, W. C. Yam, L. J. Jin,, and L.P. Samaranayake. 2010. Exploring the oral bacterial flora: current status and future directions. Oral Dis. 16: 136– 145.
61.
Pedersen, A. M.,, A. Bardow, S. B. Jensen,, and B. Nauntofte. 2002. Saliva and gastrointestinal functions of taste, mastication, swallowing and digestion. Oral Dis. 8: 117– 129.
62.
Pegden, R. S.,, M. A. Larson, R. J. Grant,, and M.A. Morrison. 1998. Adherence of the gram-positive bacterium Ruminococcus albus to cellulose and identification of a novel form of cellulose-binding protein which belongs to the Pil family of proteins. J. Bacteriol. 180: 5921– 5927.
63.
Rappé, M. S.,, and S.J. Giovannoni. 2003. The uncultured microbial majority. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 57: 369– 394.
64.
Raybould, H. E. 2008. Nutrient sensing in the gastrointestinal tract: possible role for nutrient transporters. J. Physiol. Biochem. 64: 349– 356.
65.
Rincon, M. T.,, T. Cepeljnik, J. C. Martin, R. Lamed, Y. Barak, E. A. Bayer,, and H.J. Flint. 2005. Unconventional mode of attachment of the Ruminococcus flavefaciens cellulosome to the cell surface. J. Bacteriol. 187: 7569– 7578.
66.
Romer, A. S. 1966. Vertebrate Paleontology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
67.
Russell, J. B.,, and H.J. Strobel. 1989. Effect of ionophores on ruminal fermentation. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 55: 1– 6.
68.
Russell, J. B.,, and J.E. Wells. 1997. The ability of 2-deoxyglucose to promote the lysis of Streptococcus bovis JB 1 via a mechanism involving cell wall stability. Curr. Microbiol. 35: 299– 304.
69.
Russell, J. B.,, and J.L. Rychlik. 2001. Factors that alter rumen microbial ecology. Science 292: 1119– 1122.
70.
Sakaguchi, E.,, H. Itoh, S. Uchida,, and T. Horigome. 1987. Comparison of fiber digestion and digesta retention time between rabbits, guinea-pigs, rats and hamsters. Brit. J. Nutr. 58: 149– 158.
71.
Saulnier, D. M., S. Kolida,, and G.R. Gibson. 2009. Microbiology of the human intestinal tract and approaches for its dietary modulation. Curr. Pharm. Des. 15: 1403– 1414.
72.
Sellers, A. F.,, J. E. Lowe, C. J. Drost,, V.T. Rendano, J. R. Georgi,, and M.C. Roberts. 1982. Retropulsion-propulsion in equine large colon. Am. J. Vet. Res. 43: 390– 396.
73.
Sheng, H.,, J. Y. Lim,, H., J. Knecht,, J. Li,, and C.J. Hovde. 2006. Role of Escherichia coli O157:H7 virulence factors in colonization at the bovine terminal rectal mucosa. Infect. Immun. 74: 4685– 4693.
74.
Singh, V.,, K. Singh,, S. Amdekar,, D. D. Singh,, P. Tripathi,, G. L. Sharma,, and H. Yadav. 2009. Innate and specific gut-associated immunity and microbial interference. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 55: 6– 12.
75.
Staley, J. T. 2006. The bacterial species dilemma and the genomic-phylogenetic species concept. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 361: 1899– 1909.
76.
Stevens, C. E.,, and I.D. Hume. 1998. Contributions of microbes in vertebrate gastrointestinal tract to production and conservation of nutrients. Physiol. Rev. 78: 393– 427.
77.
Stewart, C. S., H. J. Flint,, and M.P. Bryant. 1997. The rumen bacteria, p. 10–72. In P. N. Hobson, and C. S. Stewart (ed.), The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem, 2nd ed. Elsevier Applied Science, London, UK.
78.
Tuohy, K. M.,, C. Gougoulias,, Q. Shen,, G. Walton,, F. Fava,, and P. Ramnani. 2009. Studying the human gut microbiota in the transomics era-focus on metagenomics and metabonomics. Curr. Pharm. Des. 15: 1415– 1427.
79.
Vallenas, A.,, and C.E. Stevens. 1971. Volatile fatty acid concentrations and pH of llama and quanaco forestomach digesta. Cornell Vet. 61: 239– 252.
80.
Vallenas, A., J. F. Cummings,, and J.F. Munnell. 1971. A gross study of the compartmentalized stomach of two new-world camelids the llama and guanaco. J. Morphol. 134: 399– 424.
81.
Van Soest, P. J. 1994. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant, 2nd ed. Comstock Pub., Ithaca, NY.
82.
Walker, E. P. 1964. Mammals of the World, vol. I & II. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
83.
Wei, G.,, H. Lu,, Z. Zhou,, H. Xie,, A. Wang,, K. Nelson,, and L. Zhao. 2007. The microbial community in the feces of the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) as determined by PCR-TGGE profiling and clone library analysis. Microb. Ecol. 54: 194– 202.
84.
Williams, A. G.,, and G.S. Coleman. 1997. The rumen protozoa, p. 73–139. In P. N. Hobson, and C. S. Stewart (ed.), The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem, 2nd ed. Elsevier Applied Science, London, UK.
85.
Williams, D. L. 2009. Minireview: finding the sweet spot: peripheral versus central glucagon-like pep-tide 1 action in feeding and glucose homeostasis. Endocrinology 150: 2997– 3001.
86.
Yilmaz, O. 2008. The chronicles of Porphyromonas gingivalis: the microbium, the human oral epithelium and their interplay. Microbiology 154: 2897– 2903.
Tables
The Fecal Environment, the Gut
[com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/author/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-1,webId=/content/author/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-1,properties={foaf_givenname=Denis O., foaf_name=Denis O. Krause, foaf_surname=Krause, pub_isAffiliatedWith=[com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/affiliation/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-aff1]]}], com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/author/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-2,webId=/content/author/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-2,properties={foaf_givenname=Ehsan, foaf_name=Ehsan Khafipour, foaf_surname=Khafipour, pub_isAffiliatedWith=[com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/affiliation/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01-aff2]]}]]
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01tab01
Table 1
Mammals classified by gastrointestinal anatomy
a
Table 1
Mammals classified by gastrointestinal anatomy a
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01tab02
Table 2
Gastrointestinal volume of mammal species
Table 2
Gastrointestinal volume of mammal species
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01tab03
Table 3
Characteristics of predominant bacteria in human large intestine and in the rumen
a
,
b
Table 3
Characteristics of predominant bacteria in human large intestine and in the rumen a , b
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1
/content/10.1128/9781555816865.ch01.ch01tab04
Table 4
Genome sequences concerned with plant polysaccharide breakdown in four species of gut bacteria
Table 4
Genome sequences concerned with plant polysaccharide breakdown in four species of gut bacteria
Citation:
Krause D, Khafipour E.
2011.
The Fecal Environment, the Gut,
p 1-21.
In
Sadowsky M, Whitman R (ed),
The Fecal Bacteria.
ASM Press, Washington, DC.
doi: 10.1128/9781555816865.ch1