General characteristics and details of food and water consumption of elephants in each age group
All elephants (n = 134) in this study were categorized into 5 groups based on nutrition and growth pattern, including: 1) infant calves, 2) suckling calves, 3) weaned calves, 4) subadult and adult elephants, and 5) geriatric elephants. The demographic data are summarized in Table 1. The body condition scores in all groups were within the normal range without any significant differences between the groups. The information regarding food and water consumption in each group is presented in Table 1. For the first four months of their lives, maternal milk was the major source of nutrition for infant calves. Suckling calves were still consuming breast milk but also began to consume solid food. Weaned calves and subadult and adult elephants were fed with Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum) and corn stalks (Zea Mays L.) as their main roughage. Geriatric elephants were fed with roughage that had been chopped into small pieces and mixed with pellets. Elephant concentrate pellets (Erawan®, CPF, Thailand) were given as a daily supplement to the geriatric elephants and some suckling and weaned calves. Seasonal fruit supplements including banana, sugar cane, mango, tamarind, and watermelon were provided to all elephants except newborn calves. Elephants could access the water sources ad libitum or as given by the mahout, which was 3–4 times a day. Water was sourced from mountain streams, rivers, or ponds (Table 1).
Table 1
General characteristics and details of food and water consumption of healthy captive elephants in Northern Thailand categorized by age group
N = 134 | Infant calves | Suckling calves | Weaned calves | Subadult and adult elephant | Geriatric elephants |
General Information | | | | | |
N | 6 | 12 | 27 | 78 | 11 |
Age (years) (mean ± sd) | 0.20 ± 0.00b, c, d, e | 1.58 ± 0.50a, c, d, e | 5.70 ± 1.80a, b, d, e | 31.53 ± 11.70a, b, c, e | 58.90 ± 3.70a, b, c, d |
Male : Female | 4:2 | 6:6 | 12:15 | 14:64 | 0:11 |
Body condition score (mean ± sd) | 3.00 ± 0.00 | 3.08 ± 0.30 | 3.33 ± 0.60 | 3.62 ± 0.70 | 3.18 ± 0.40 |
Diet | | | | | |
Breast milk (%) | 100 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Roughage (%) | 0 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Napier grass (%) | 0 | 33.33 | 96.30 | 87.18 | 45.45 |
Corn stalk (%) | 0 | 16.67 | 48.15 | 67.95 | 100 |
Total amount per day (kg) (mean ± sd) | - | 85.00 ± 25.05 | 157.96 ± 32.56 | 163.91 ± 32.87 | 180.00 ± 21.21 |
Feeding frequency (time/day) (mean ± sd) | - | 3.67 ± 0.49 | 3.85 ± 0.82 | 4.12 ± 0.77 | 4.36 ± 0.50 |
Food pellets (%) | 0 | 41.67 | 9.52 | 0 | 63.64 |
Amount per day (kg) | 0 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Feeding frequency (time/day) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Supplementary (%) | 0 | 100 | 88.89 | 92.31 | 100 |
Banana (%) | 0 | 100 | 66.67 | 79.49 | 90.91 |
Sugar cane (%) | 0 | 100 | 66.67 | 79.49 | 90.91 |
Mango (%) | 0 | 33.33 | 33.33 | 16.67 | 0 |
Tamarind (%) | 0 | 100 | 51.85 | 51.28 | 54.55 |
Watermelon (%) | 0 | 25.00 | 3.70 | 12.82 | 54.55 |
Amount per week (kg) (mean ± sd) | 0 | 35.00 ± 30.90 | 26.67 ± 33.28 | 78.46 ± 62.15 | 63.64 ± 60.54 |
Feeding frequency (time/week) (mean ± sd) | 0 | 3.50 ± 3.09 | 1.5 ± 1.69 | 4.25 ± 3.01 | 3.18 ± 3.027 |
Water consumption | | | | | |
Source of water | | | | | |
River (%) | 0 | 58.33 | 70.37 | 50 | 63.64 |
Pond (%) | 0 | 33.33 | 59.26 | 57.69 | 36.36 |
Mountain water supply (%) | 100 | 50 | 88.89 | 80.78 | 63.63 |
Tap water (%) | 0 | 0 | 11.11 | 19.23 | 36.36 |
Frequency (time/day) (mean ± sd) | 3 | 3 | 3.11 ± 0.32 | 3.19 ± 0.40 | 3.36 ± 0.50 |
The data are presented as mean ± standard deviation or percentage as appropriate. ap<0.05 vs infant calves, bp<0.05 vs suckling calves, cp<0.05 vs weaned calves, dp<0.05 vs subadult and adult elephants, ep<0.05 vs geriatric elephants for Bonferroni multiple-comparison correction test |
Alpha diversity and beta diversity were significantly different among age groups.
The diversity of gut microbiota in each age group were determined and are presented in terms of alpha diversity in Fig. 1. Infant calves exhibited the lowest fecal microbial alpha diversity when compared to other groups (Fig. 1A-D). In addition, geriatric elephants showed a significant decrease in alpha diversity when compared to subadult and adult elephants, as evidenced by Pielou’s evenness (Fig. 1A) and Shannon’s index (Fig. 1D). Notably, the alpha diversity of weaned calves was significantly higher than those of subadult and adult elephants and geriatric elephants as shown in observed feature (Fig. 1B) and by Shannon’s index (Fig. 1D),
The similarities of the composition of gut microbiota between groups were calculated based on beta diversity and are presented as Principle coordinate analysis (PCoA) plots (Fig. 1.). PCoA plots based on Bray-Curtis, Jaccard, unweighted and weighted UniFrac revealed that the gut microbiome of the elephants showed distinct gut microbiotal composition across the different age ranges (p-value of pseudo-F in pairwise PERMANOVA test < 0.05 in pairwise comparison of all groups) (Fig. 1E-H).
The PCoA plots showed the patterns associated with the age group of elephants. The groups of elephants with adjacent ages had a closed distance between the groups in the PCoA plot, suggesting that there was a similar composition of the gut microbiota of the elephants across the adjacent ages. These patterns were observed in PCoA plots following analysis using Bray-Curtis, Jaccard, and unweighted UniFrac distances (Fig. 1E-G).
Taxonomic composition of bacterial populations in different age groups of elephants
The taxonomy of gut microbiota was identified based on the data of hypervariable region V3-V4 of the 16s rRNA gene. Forty-three phyla and 1,134 genera of gut microflora were identified within total elephant fecal samples. The relative abundance at the phylum level of gut microbiota in all age groups are shown in Fig. 2. The dominant bacterial phyla in fecal samples of all groups of elephants were Firmicutes followed by Bacteroidetes and Actinobacteria. In the infant calves, Bacteroidetes and Spirochete showed less relative abundance than those in other age groups. On the other hand, greater relative abundance of Actinobacteria and Euryarchaeota were detected in the infant calves. The composition of the elephant's gut microbiota changed markedly from infants to suckling calves, and from subadult and adult to geriatric elephants. The relative abundance of fecal microbiota at the phylum level was shown to be only slightly altered from suckling calves to weaned calves and subadult and adult elephants. According to the information from human guts, the microbiota is practically stable in healthy adults 19. This phenomenon was similar to Asian elephants, which reach maturity between 10–14 years of age 20. Therefore, in this study, we used subadult and adult elephants as reference for the composition of gut microbiota in healthy elephants for further analyses.
Infant elephants showed a distinctly different composition of gut microbiota, when compared with subadult and adult elephants
The analysis of differential abundance was conducted by using ANCOM-BC. The results of significantly different taxa of fecal microbiota among age groups with top 10 of log fold changes are presented in Fig. 3. All significantly different taxa are shown in Supplementary Table 1. We used subadult and adult elephants as a reference for each comparison.
In the infant calves, the abundance of the phyla Euryarchaeota, Actinobacteriota, Verrucomicrobiota, Proteobacteria, and Desulfobacterota were higher than that of subadult and adult elephants while the phyla Cyanobacteria, SAR324_clade (Marine_group_B), Spirochaetota, Armatimonadota, and Elusimicrobiota were found to be lower (Fig. 3). At the family and genus levels, the taxa from the families Bifidobacteriaceae, Akkermansiaceae, Villonellaceae, Bacteroidaceae, and Butyricioccaceae, together with the genus Bifidobacterium spp., UCG-008 spp., Olsenella spp., Akkermansia spp., and Bacteroides spp. in infant calves were higher than those of subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 3). On the other hand, the families Spirochaetaceae, p-251-o5, Paludibacteraceae, Planococcaceae, and Gastranaerophilales, and the genus Solibacillus, Agathobacter, XPB1014 group in the families Lachnospiraceae, and Treponema, and an uncultured genus in Paludibacteraceae were lower in infant calves when compared to subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 3).
Suckling and weaned elephants showed slightly different gut microbiota composition when compared with adult elephants
When compared to the differences between the infant calves and subadult and adult elephants, both the number of statistically distinct taxa and their magnitude were much smaller between the suckling and weaned calves and subadult and adult elephants. At the phylum level, only Euryarchaeota was higher in suckling calves and Planctomycetota, Euryarchaeota, and Desulfobacterota were higher in weaned calves when compared to subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 3). On the other hand, Synergistota and Fibrobacterota were lower in weaned calves while Cyanobacteria and SAR324_clade (Marine_group_B) were decreased in both suckling and weaned calves (Fig. 3).
At the family level, Bifidobacteriaceae, Veillonellaceae, and Bacterroidaceae were higher in both suckling and weaned calves whereas Tannerellaceae and Butyricicoccaceae were higher only in sucking calves, and Atopobiaceae and Micrococcaceae were higher only in weaned calves (Fig. 3). However, the families Paracaedibacteriaceae, Clostridiaceae, COB_P4-1_termite_group, Endomicrobiaceae, and Leuconostocaceae in suckling calves, and Nocardiaceae, Clostridiaceae, Leuconostocaceae, Desulfotomaculales, and MVP-15 in weaned calves were lower than in those subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 3).
At the genus level, Bifidobacterium, Olsenella, and Lachnospiraceae_NK3A20_group were higher in sucking and weaned calves while Bacteroides and UCG-008 were higher only in suckling calves, and the [Ruminococcus]_gauvreauii_group and Syntrophococcus were higher only in weaned calves (Fig. 3). Meanwhile, the genera Enterobacter, Endomicrobium, Weissella, Clostridium_sensu_stricto_13, and Sarcina in suckling calves, and [Eubacterium]_oxidoreducens_group, Terrisporobacter, Enterobacter, Weissella, and MVP-15 in weaned calves were lower those in subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 3).
Geriatric elephants showed distinct gut microbiota, when compared with adult elephants.
Geriatric elephants showed a distinct pattern of abundance within the gut microbiota when compared to infant, suckling, and weaned calves. At the phylum level, Chloroflexi, and Euryarchaeota were increased while Cyanobateria, Desulfobacteria, Fibrobacterota, and Bacteroidota were decreased when compared to subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 3).
At the family level, Lactobacillaceae, Xanthobacteraceae, Pseudomonadaceae, Caloramatoraceae, and Micrococcaceae were more abundant than in subadult and adult elephants. Meanwhile, the taxa from families Proteobacteria_Rickettsiales_uncultured, Desulfovibrionaceae, Bacteroidetes_BD2-2, Paludibacteraceae, and Planococcaceae were lower in composition when compared to those of subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 3).
At the genus level, Lactococcus, Lactobacillus, Garicola, Succinivibrio, and UBA1819 were higher in geriatric elephants while Schwartzia, Acinetobacter, Lysinibacillus, Solibacillus, and Bacteroidetes_BD2-2 were lower in geriatric elephants when compared to subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 3).
Major gut microbiota composition in subadult and adult elephants
The relative abundance of the taxa in the family and genus level of each elephant in the subadult and adult age group are shown in Fig. 4. At the family level of subadult and adult elephants, Lachnospiraceae was the most dominant family, followed by Oscillospiraceae, Clostridiaceae, Christrensenellacease, Anaerovoraceae, and Rikenellaceae (Fig. 4A). The beneficial bacteria were present in fecal samples of subadult and adult elephants, including the fiber-digesting taxa at Phylum level of Firmicutes, Bacteroides, Spirochaetota, and Actobacteriota, also including Lachnospiraceae; NA, Christrensenellacease_R-7_group, NK4A214_group, Sarcina, Lachnospiraceae_XPB1014_group, [Eubacterium]_coprostanoligunes_group, UCG-005, Planococcaceae; NA, Family_XIII_AD3011_group, Lachnospiraceae_AC2044_group, Ruminococcus, Solibacillus, and Saccharofermentans, Rikenellaceae_RC9_gut_group, p-251-o5, F082, and Prevotellaceae_UCG-003, Treponema, and Olsenella. In addition, Archaea Methanobrevibacter of class Methanobacteria were found to be present in subadult and adult elephants (Fig. 4B).
Blood parameters of subadult and adult elephant
To further understand the association between gut microbiota and the health of elephants, the associations between gut microbiota composition and blood parameters were determined. All blood parameters are presented in Table 2. The hematological and biochemical parameters of subadult and adult elephants were within the normal range. The serum lipid profiles including triglyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) were all determined to be within the normal range, when compared to the previous study by Norkaew, et al. 21. In these analyses, the blood parameters were used as the numerical outcome in the ANCOM-BC analysis, and the results with a log-fold change of gut microbiota greater than 0.5 are shown in Fig. 5. The results showed that several gut microbiota of subadult and adult elephants showed a correlation with blood parameters including RBC count, total protein, and serum albumin.
Table 2
Characteristics of blood parameters in subadult and adult elephants.
Parameters | Mean ± standard deviation |
Pack cell volume (%) | 35 ± 4 |
Hemoglobin (g/dl) | 12.69 ± 1.58 |
RBC count (×106 cells/µl) | 2.88 ± 0.4 |
MCV (fl) | 123 ± 6 |
MCHC (g/dl) | 35.9 ± 0.75 |
WBC count (cells/µl) | 12005 ± 2372 |
Segmented neutrophil (cells/µl) | 2690 ± 898 |
Lymphocyte (cells/µl) | 6193 ± 1805 |
Monocyte (cells/µl) | 2725 ± 1333 |
Eosinophil (cells/µl) | 339 ± 218 |
Basophil (cells/µl) | 202 ± 95 |
Platelet count (×103 cells/µl) | 353 ± 72 |
BUN (mg/dl) | 10 ± 3 |
Creatinine (mg/dl) | 1.47 ± 0.28 |
AST (U/L) | 17 ± 6 |
ALT (U/L) | 2 ± 1 |
ALP (U/L) | 97 ± 49 |
Total serum protein (g/dl) | 8.55 ± 0.63 |
Albumin (g/dl) | 3.24 ± 0.35 |
CK(U/L) | 166 ± 69 |
TC (mg/dl) | 45 ± 10 |
TG (mg/dl) | 23 ± 14 |
HDL (mg/dl) | 12 ± 2 |
LDL (mg/dl) | 29 ± 8 |
Abbreviations: ALT, Alanine transaminase; AST, Aspartate transaminase; BUN, Blood urea nitrogen; CK, Creatine kinase; HDL, High density lipoprotein; LDL, Low density lipoprotein; MCHC, Mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration; MCV, Mean corpuscular volume; RBC, Red blood cell; TC, Total cholesterol; TG, Triglyceride; WBC, White blood cell.
The number of RBC showed a positive association with orders Pedosphaerales and Victivallales, families Pedosphaeraceae and Muribaculaceae, and genera DEV114 from the family Pedosphaeraceae and UCG-004 from the family Erysipelatoclostridiaceae (Fig. 5). However, the phyla SAR324_clade(Marine_group_B) and Euryarchaeota, classes Methanobacteria, Desulfotomaculla, and SAR324_clade(Marine_group_B), and orders Methanobacteriales and Desulfotomaculales showed a negative association with RBC count (Fig. 5).
The total protein content showed a negative association with the genus Lactobacillus and the family Lactobacillaceae (Fig. 5). The genera Mycoplasma with corresponding family Mycoplasmataceae and order Mycoplasmatales, Mailhella with corresponding family Desulfovibrionaceae, order Desulfovibrionales, and class Desulfovibrionia, DEV114 with corresponding family Pedosphaeraceae, order Pedosphaerales, and class Verrucomicrobiae, Muribaculaceae with corresponding family Muribaculaceae, and Prevotella were negatively associated with the level of serum albumin (Fig. 5). The family p-251-o5, Atopobiaceae, Paludibacteraceae, and Methanomethylophilaceae from order Methanomassiliicoccales, class Thermoplasmata also showed a negative association with plasma albumin level (Fig. 5). However, at the phylum level, Chloroflexi showed a positive association with serum albumin (Fig. 5). The other blood parameters are listed in Table 2. The relationships of less significant association with the composition of gut microbiota and the details are shown in Supplementary Table 2.