Short Communication: Morphological, biochemical, and molecular identification of cellulolytic bacteria isolated from feces of endemic tropical herbivores

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

SRI SUHARTI
NUR NOVRARIANI
KOMANG G. WIRYAWAN
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0593-9653

Abstract

Abstract. Suharti S, Novrariani N, Wiryawan KG. 2023. Short Communication: Morphological, biochemical, and molecular identification of cellulolytic bacteria isolated from feces of endemic tropical herbivores. Biodiversitas 24: 4046-4051. Indonesia has endemic herbivores that consume lignocellulose feedstuffs including grass, tree foliage, rice straw, and legume, indicating the presence of cellulolytic bacteria in their gastrointestinal tracts. Therefore, the aim of this study was to isolate and identify cellulolytic bacteria from the feces of tropical endemic herbivores, including anoa (Bubalus depressicornis), banteng (Bos javanicus), muntjak (Muntiacus muntjak), and timor deer (Rusa timorensis). Bacteria were isolated using the serial dilution technique and screened on Carboxy Methyl Cellulose (CMC) media. The selected isolates were identified based on their morphological and biochemical characteristics, cellulase enzyme activity, and molecular identification of 16S rDNA. The result showed that a total of five bacterial isolates were isolated from feces of anoa, banteng, muntjak, and timor deer. In addition, isolates exhibited characteristics of facultative anaerobes with gram-positive coccus, fermenting glucose, fructose, sucrose, starch, and cellulose. Based on cellulolytic index, isolates from anoa and banteng feces showed high cellulolytic activity with an index of about 1.2, indicating their potential as cellulose-degrading bacteria. Molecular identification and phylogeny analysis of cellulolytic bacteria isolates from anoa and banteng feces showed 100% similarities with Enterococcus faecium. Therefore, bacteria from feces of tropical endemic herbivores, especially anoa and banteng, possess cellulolytic activity and have potential as cellulolytic probiotic for ruminants that feed on forage-based diet. This is the first study to document the cellulolytic activity of anoa, and banteng feces.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

References
Sousa DO, Mesquita BS, Diniz-Magalhães J, Bueno IC, Mesquita LG, Silva LF. 2014. Effect of fiber digestibility and conservation method on feed intake and the ruminal ecosystem of growing steers. J Anim Sci.; 92(12):5622-34. doi: 10.2527/jas.2014-8016. PMID: 25414108.
Jayasekara S, Ratnayake R. 2019. Microbial cellulases: An overview and applications. In Cellulose; Pascual, A.R., Martín, M.E.E., Eds.; IntechOpen: London, UK, ; pp. 1–21. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.84531.
Chantarasiri A. 2014. Novel Halotolerant Cellulolytic Bacillus Methylotrophicus RYC01101 Isolated from Ruminant Feces in Thailand and Its Application for Bioethanol Production. KMUTNB Intern J Appl Sci Tech.; 7(3):63–68.
Wedekind KJ, Mansfield HR, Montgomery L. 1988. Enumeration and Isolation of Cellulolytic and Hemicellulolytic Bacteria from Human Feces. Appl Environ Microbiol.; 54(6):1530–35.
Ogimoto K, Imai S. 1981. Atlas of Rumen Microbiology. Japan. Scientific Societies Press. Tokyo.
Lo YC, Saratale GD, Chen WM, Bai MD, Changa JS. 2009. Isolation of Cellulose-Hydrolytic Bacteria and Applications of The Cellulolytic Enzymes For Cellulosic Biohydrogen Production. Enzyme Microbial Tech.; 44 417–425
Benson T. 2001. Microbiological Applications Laboratory Manual in General Microbiology. 8th Edition, The McGraw-Hill, New York.
Salunke M. 2012. Isolation and Screening of Cellulose Degrading Microorganisms from Fecal Matter of Herbivores. Intern J Sci Engineering Res.; 3 (10): 1-5.
Varel VH, Dehority BA. 1989. Ruminal cellulolytic bacteria and protozoa from bison, cattle-bison hybrids, and cattle fed three alfalfa-corn diets. Appl Environ Microbiol.; 55(1):148-53. doi: 10.1128/aem.55.1.148-153.1989. PMID: 2705767; PMCID: PMC184069.
Hua D, Hendriks WH, Xiong B, Pellikaan WF. 2022. Starch and Cellulose Degradation in the Rumen and Applications of Metagenomics on Ruminal Microorganism. Animals.;12(21): 3020. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12213020
Sari WN, Safika, Darmawi, Fahrimal Y. 2017. Isolation and identification of a cellulolytic Enterobacter from rumen of Aceh cattle. Vet World.;10(12):1515-1520. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2017.1515-1520.
Ramos S, Igrejas G, Capelo-Martinez JL, Poeta P. 2012. Antibiotic resistance and mechanisms implicated in fecal enterococci recovered from pigs, cattle and sheep in a Portuguese slaughterhouse. Ann Microbiol.; 62:1485–1494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13213-011-0402-7
Beukers AG, Zaheer R, Goji N, Amoako KK, Chaves AV, Ward MP, McAllister, AT. 2017. Comparative genomics of Enterococcus spp. isolated from bovine feces. BMC Microbiol.; 7 (52). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-017-0962-1
Zhao J, Shao T, Chen S, Tao X, Li J. 2021. Characterization and identification of cellulase-producing Enterococcus species isolated from Tibetan yak (Bos grunniens) rumen and their application in various forage silages. J Appl Microbiol.;131(3):1102-1112. doi: 10.1111/jam.15014. Epub 2021 Mar 9. PMID: 33484057.
Hanchi H, Mottawea W, Sebei K, Hammami R. 2018. The Genus Enterococcus: Between Probiotic Potential and Safety Concerns—An Update. Frontiers in Microbiol.; 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.01791
Lauková A, Kandri?áková A, Bu?ková L, Pleva P, Š?erbová J. 2017. Sensitivity to Enterocins of Biogenic Amine-Producing Faecal Enterococci from Ostriches and Pheasants. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins.; 9(4):483-491. doi: 10.1007/s12602-017-9272-z. PMID: 28342109.

Most read articles by the same author(s)