Abstract
The intestinal microbiota is important for the nutrient metabolism of fish and is significantly influenced by the host's diet. The effect of ryegrass and commercial diets on the intestinal microbiota of grass carp was compared in this study. In comparison to ryegrass, artificial feed significantly reduced the microbial diversity in the intestine, which was measured by a decrease in the observed OTUs, ACE, Shannon, and the InvSimpson index. Although grass carp fed with ryegrass and artificial feed shared a dominant phyla Firmicutes and Proteobacteria, the microbial composition was clearly distinguishable between the two groups. In grass carp fed with ryegrass, Alphaproteobacteria, Gammaproteobacteria, and Actinobacteria predominated, whereas Bacilli was significantly higher in the artificial feed group due to an increase in Weissella and an unassigned Bacillales bacteria, as well as a significant increase in a potential pathogen: Aeromonas australiensis. Grass carp fed with ryegrass exhibited a more complex ecological network performed by the intestinal bacterial community, which was dominated by cooperative interactions; this was also observed in grass carp fed with artificial feed. Despite this, the increase in A. australiensis increased the competitive interaction within this ecological network, which contributed to the vulnerable perturbation of the intestinal microbiota. The alteration of the microbial composition through diet can further affect microbial function. The intestinal microbial function in grass carp fed with ryegrass was rich in amino acids and exhibited an increased energy metabolism in order to compensate for a low-nutrient diet intake, while the artificial feed elevated the microbial lipid metabolism through the promotion of its synthesis in the primary and secondary bile acids, together with a notable enhancement of fatty acid biosynthesis. These results indicated that diet can affect the homeostasis of the intestinal microbiota by altering the microbial composition and the interspecific interactions, whilst microbial function can respond to a variation in diet.