Back

Dietary intervention in captive-bred hares fails to enrich gut microbiomes with wild-like functions

Aizpurua, O.; Martin-Bideguren, G.; Gaun, N.; Alberdi, A.

2024-12-07 ecology
10.1101/2024.12.03.626655 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Reintroducing captive-bred animals into the wild often faces limited success, with the underlying causes frequently unclear. One emerging hypothesis is that maladapted gut microbiota may play a significant role in these challenges. To investigate this possibility, we employed genome-resolved metagenomics to analyse the taxonomic and functional differences in the gut microbiota of wild and captive European hares (Lepus europaeus), as well as to assess the impact of a dietary switch to grass aimed at pre-adapting captive hares to wild conditions. Our analyses recovered 860 metagenome-assembled genomes, with 87% of them representing novel species. We found significant taxonomic and functional differences between the gut microbiota of wild and captive hares, notably the absence of Spirochaetota in captive animals and differences in amino acid and sugar degradation capacities. While the dietary switch to grass induced some minor changes in the gut microbiota, it did not result in a shift towards a more wild-like microbial community. The increased capacity for degrading amino acids and specific sugars observed in wild hares suggest that, instead of bulk grass, dietary interventions tailored to their specific dietary preferences might be necessary for pre-adapting hare gut microbiota to wild conditions. ImportanceThis study sheds light on the critical role of gut microbiota in the success of reintroducing captive-bred animals into the wild. By comparing the gut microbiota of wild and captive European hares, we identified significant taxonomic and functional differences, including the absence of key microbial groups in captive hares. Dietary interventions, such as switching to grass, showed limited success in restoring a wild-like microbiota, highlighting the need for tailored approaches to mimic natural diets. With 87% of recovered microbial genomes representing novel species, this research also enriches our understanding of microbial diversity in wildlife. These findings emphasise that maladapted gut microbiota may hinder the survival and adaptation of reintroduced animals, suggesting that microbiome-targeted strategies could improve conservation efforts and the success of animal rewilding programs.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
32.8%
2
Animal Microbiome
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.3%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 24%
4.8%
4
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 35%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
5
Microbiome
139 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.3%
6
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.6%
7
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 28%
3.2%
8
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.1%
9
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
10
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
11
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
12
Nature Ecology & Evolution
113 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
13
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.7%
14
mSystems
361 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
15
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 36%
1.3%
16
The ISME Journal
194 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
17
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.2%
18
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
19
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.1%
20
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.9%
21
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
22
Journal of Animal Ecology
63 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
23
Environmental Microbiology
119 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
24
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%