Table 1.
Least square means (± standard errors) of feed and digestive efficiency, body weight and feed intake in the high (FCR_H) and poor (FCR_L) feed efficiency groups.
Table 2.
Least square means (± standard errors) of cecal microbiota counts (qPCR) in group with low (FCR_L) or high (FCR_H) feed conversion ratio.
Table 3.
Results of multiple correspondence analysis between cecal microbiota composition and digestive efficiency.
Fig 1.
Multiple correspondence analysis of digestive microbiota in cecal contents and digestive efficiency traits.
AMEn: metabolisable energy corrected to zero nitrogen retention; CDUDM, CDUL, CDUP, CDUS: coefficients of fecal digestive use of dry matter, lipids, proteins, and starch; Lacto.: Lactobacillus count; L. saliv.: L. salivarius count in cecal content; L. crisp.: L. crispatus count in cecal content; C. lept.: C. leptum count in cecal content; C. cocco.: C. coccoides count in cecal content; H, M, L: third of individuals with the highest, medium, and lowest values within a trait. The size of the squares is proportional to the relative contribution of the category of active variables to the axes. The size of the circles is proportional to the cos² between the axes and the category of the illustrative variable.
Table 4.
Heritability (± standard errors) of microbiota composition and genetic correlations (± standard errors) between microbiota composition and digestive efficiency.
Table 5.
QTL detected for microbiota composition.