• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Impact of sugar beet pulp and wheat bran on serum biochemical profile,inflammatory responses and gut microbiota in sows during late gestation and lactation

    2021-12-17 11:53:36QinghuiShangSujieLiuHansuoLiuShadMahfuzandXiangshuPiao

    Qinghui Shang,Sujie Liu,Hansuo Liu,Shad Mahfuz and Xiangshu Piao

    Abstract

    Background:Sows are frequently subjected to various stresses during late gestation and lactation,which trigger inflammatory response and metabolic disorders.Dietary fiber can influence animal health by modulating gut microbiota and their by-products,with the effects depending upon the source of the dietary fiber.This study aimed to evaluate the impacts of different fiber sources on body condition,serum biochemical parameters,inflammatory responses and fecal microbiota in sows from late gestation to lactation.

    Methods:Forty-five multiparous sows(Yorkshire × Landrace;3–6 parity)were assigned to 1 of 3 dietary treatments from d 85 of gestation to the end of lactation(d 21 post-farrowing):a control diet(CON,a corn-soybean meal diet),a sugar beet pulp diet(SBP,20% SBP during gestation and 10% SBP during lactation),and a wheat bran diet(WB,30% WB during gestation and 15% WB during lactation).

    Results:Compared with CON,supplementation of SBP decreased(P<0.05)lactation BW loss,reduced(P<0.05)serum concentration of total cholesterol,non-esterified fatty acids,interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α,and increased(P<0.05)fecal water content on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation,while supplementation of WB reduced(P<0.05)serum concentration of total cholesterol on d 110 of gestation,increased(P<0.05)fecal water content and decreased(P<0.05)serum interleukin-6 concentration on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation.In addition,sows fed SBP had lower(P<0.01)abundance of Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1 and Terrisporobacter than those fed CON,but had greater(P<0.05)abundance of Christensenellaceae_R-7_group and Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002 than those fed the other two diets on d 110 of gestation.On d 21 of lactation,supplementation of SBP decreased(P<0.05)the abundance of Firmicutes and Lactobacillus,but enriched(P<0.05)the abundance of Christensenellaceae_R-7_group,Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group,Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002,Prevotellaceae_UCG_001 and unclassified_f__Lachnospiraceae compared with WB.Compared with CON,sows fed SBP had greater(P<0.05)fecal concentrations of acetate,butyrate and total SCFAs during gestation and lactation,while sows fed WB only had greater(P<0.05)fecal concentration of butyrate during lactation.

    Conclusions:Supplementation of dietary fiber during late gestation and lactation could improve sow metabolism and gut health,and SBP was more effective than WB.

    Keywords:Dietary fiber source,Gut microbiota,Inflammatory response,Serum biochemical profile,Sow

    Background

    Pregnant sows are frequently subjected to psychological and physiological stresses(e.g.rapid fetal development and feed restriction),which can result in oxidative stress and metabolic disorders,and consequently an imbalance inflammatory response[1,2].Furthermore,labor-induced injury of the birth canal and uterus can exacerbate oxidative stress and inflammatory responses at parturition[3].Moreover,even during lactation,the drastic catabolism and anabolism due to milk synthesis also can further contribute to metabolic disorders and inflammatory responses in sows[4,5].Long-term exposure to inflammation may,in turn,induce poor health status or even diseases[6].Therefore,it is necessary to develop strategies to alleviate inflammatory responses and metabolic disorders in sows,especially during late gestation and lactation.

    Recently,gut microbiota has been considered as an important factor of health due to its various effects on host[7].A well-balanced microbiota plays a critical role in maintaining metabolic homeostasis and simulating immune system development[8].In contrast,an imbalanced microbiota usually leads to poor performance,gut inflammation and metabolic disorders[9].Generally,whether gut microbiota is beneficial to host health mainly depend on its metabolites derived from fermentation of indigestible substances in diets[10].As a consequence,manipulation of gut microbiota and its metabolites by dietary modulation may be a potentially effective approach to improve sow health.

    Dietary fiber(DF)is a mixture of carbohydrates that are indigestible by host enzymes but subjected to microbial fermentation,generating short chain fatty acids(SCFAs),principally acetate,propionate,and butyrate[11].These SCFAs derived from DF fermentation,especially butyrate,have been demonstrated to have multiple health benefits,including increase insulin sensitivity,regulate immune system and reduce inflammation[10].Previous studies with sows primarily focused on the beneficial effects of DF from a welfare perspective[12,13].In addition,some other studies showed that high fiber diets could improve the reproductive performance of sows[14].However,the study[14]has not studied the influence of dietary fiber on gut health and the response to high-fiber diets may be variable due to different physiochemical properties of dietary fiber[15].Sugar beet pulp(SBP)is a pectin-rich soluble fiber source,which is highly fermentable and has been shown to prevent post-weaning diarrhea by modulating gut microbiota composition in weaned pigs in some studies[16,17].Wheat bran(WB)is a source of insoluble fiber,rich in arabinoxylan and cellulose,which also has been shown to alleviate gut inflammation and enhance gut barrier function by improving gut microbiota in mice and weaned pigs[18,19].Till now,research with WB and SBP as a source of DF on sow’s health status during late gestation and lactation are limited.We hypothesized that supplementation of WB or SBP during late gestation and lactation would have different impacts on sow’s health via differently influencing microbiota.Therefore,the present study aimed to investigate the effects of supplementing the two sources of DF to sow diets during late gestation and lactation on body condition,serum biochemical parameters,immune responses,fecal microbiota and SCFAs.

    Materials and methods

    Animals,diets and management

    Animal management and experimental procedures were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of China Agricultural University(Beijing,China).Forty-five healthy multiparous sows(Yorkshire×Landrace;3–6 parity)were assigned to 1 of 3 dietary treatments balancing for parity,body weight(BW)and backfat thickness from d 85 of gestation to the end of lactation(d 21 post-farrowing).Dietary treatments included a control diet(CON,a corn-soybean meal basal diet),a sugar beet pulp diet(SBP,20% sugar beet pulp during gestation and 10% sugar beet pulp during lactation),and a wheat bran diet(WB,30% wheat bran during gestation and 15% wheat bran during lactation).The experimental two fiber diets had almost similar content of total dietary fiber.All diets were formulated to meet or exceed the nutrients requirements for sows as recommended by NRC(2012)(Table 1)[20].The details nutrient composition of wheat bran(WB)and sugar beet pulp(SBP)are presented in the footnotes of Table 1.

    Table 1 Ingredients and nutrient composition of experimental diets(%,as-fed basis)

    During gestation,all sows were housed in individual gestation stalls(2.1 m×0.6m),and fed twice a day at 08:00 and 16:00 h.On d 106 of gestation,sows were transferred to the farrowing rooms where they were housed in individual farrowing crates(2.1 m×1.5m)on d 107 of gestation.During gestation,sows were,and water was freely available.To achieve the same digestible energy intake per day,sows were fed 3.00 kg/d of CON,3.09 kg/d of SBP,and 3.31 kg/d of WB,respectively.On the day of farrowing,sows were fed 0.5kg of lactation diets,and then feed allowance was gradually increased by 1.0kg/d until ad libitum feeding.All sows also had free access to water during lactation.Within 24 h after farrowing,the litter size was standardized to approximately 11 piglets by cross-fostering within treatment.

    Sample collection

    Individual body weight and backfat thickness at the last rib were recorded for sows on d 85 and 110 of gestation,within 24h after farrowing,and at weaning.On d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation,blood samples were collected from 6 sows each treatment via the ear vein before feeding.Serum was isolated by centrifugation at 3000×g and 4 °C for 10min,and frozen at ? 80 °C until analysis.On d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation,5 sows per treatment with same parity of 3 were selected and then fresh feces were collected directly by massaging the rectum,and immediately stored at?80°C until analysis.

    Fecal water content

    Approximately 200g of fecal samples were oven-dried at 103°C for 72h.The sample weight before and after ovendried was recorded to calculate fecal water content.

    Serum parameters

    Serum samples were thawed at 4°C and mixed thoroughly before analysis.Serum biochemical parameters including urea nitrogen(UN),total cholesterol(TC),triglyceride(TG),non-esterified fatty acids(NEFA)and glucose(GLU)were measured by the commercial kits(Beijing Sino-uk Institute of Biological Technology,Beijing,China)using an automatic biochemical analyzer(Hitachi 7160,Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation,Tokyo,Japan).

    Serum concentrations of immunoglobulins including IgA,IgG and IgM and inflammatory cytokines including interleukin-6(IL-6),interleukin-10(IL-10)and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α)were measured by enzymelinked immunosorbent assay kits according to the manufacturer’s instructions(Beijing Sino-uk Institute of Biological Technology,Beijing,China).

    DNA extraction and 16S RNA sequencing

    Bacterial DNA was extracted from fecal samples using a Stool DNA Kit(Omega Bio-tek,Norcross,GA,USA)following the manufacturer’s recommendations.The DNA concentration was quantified by NanoDrop 2000 UV-vis spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific,Wilmington,United States),and the integrity of DNA was checked by 1% agarose gel electrophoresis.The V3-V4 hypervariable region of 16S rRNA gene was amplified with primers F338(5′-ACTCCTACGGGAGGCAGCAG-3′)and R806(5′-GGACTACHVGGGTWTCTAAT-3′).Then Amplicons were extracted from 2% agarose gels,and purified using the AxyPrep DNA Gel Extraction Kit(Axygen Biosciences,Union City,CA,USA)and quantified with a QuantiFluor TM-ST fluorometer(Promega,USA).Purified amplicons were pooled in equimolar concentrations and paired-end sequenced(2×300)on an Illumina MiSeq platform according to the standard protocols.Demultiplexing and quality-filtering of raw sequences were performed by QIIME(version 1.17)with the following criteria:1)The 300bp reads were truncated at any site receiving an average quality score of<20 over a 50-bp sliding window,and the truncated reads shorter than 50bp were discarded,reads containing ambiguous characters were also discarded;2)Only overlapping sequences longer than 10bp were assembled according to their overlapped sequence.The maximum mismatch ratio of overlap region is 0.2.Reads that could not be assembled were discarded;3)Samples were distinguished according to the barcode and primers,and the sequence direction was adjusted,exact barcode matching,2 nucleotide mismatch in primer matching.Then the rest high-quality sequences were clustered into operational taxonomic units(OTU)at 97% similarity by UPARSE and chimeric sequences were identified and removed by UCHIME.Each 16S rRNA gene sequence was taxonomically allocated on the basis of the silva(SSU128)16S rRNA database by RDP Classifier(http://rdp.cme.msu.edu/) with a confidence threshold of 70%.

    Fecal short chain fatty acids

    Fecal concentrations of SCFAs were analyzed as previously described by Shang et al.[2].Briefly,approximately 0.5g of fecal samples were diluted in 8mL ultrapure water,homogenized by ultrasonic oscillation,and centrifuged at 12,000×g for 10 min.Then the supernatant was diluted 50 times,filtered through a 0.22-mm filter,and 1.5mL of supernatant was analyzed by a highperformance ion chromatography of ICS-3000(Dionex,United States).The concentrations of SCFAs were expressed as mg/g of feces.

    Statistical analysis

    Date were analyzed using SAS 9.2(SAS Inst.Inc.,Cary,NC,USA)with individual sow as an experimental unit.The relative abundance of gut microbial communities was analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test.Other date were analyzed using GLM procedures followed by Tukey’s tests.Significant difference was declared at P<0.05,and tendency was declared at 0.05≤P<0.10.

    Results

    Sow body condition

    Effects of fiber sources on sow body condition are presented in Table 2.No significant differences were observed in sow BW(d 85 and 110 of gestation,d 1 and 21 of lactation)and backfat thickness(d 85 of gestation,d 1 and 21 of lactation).However,the lactation BW loss wasdecreased(P<0.05)in sows fed SBP diets when compared with those fed CON diets,but similar with those fed WB diets.

    Table 2 Effects of fiber sources on sow body condition

    Fecal water content

    Effects of fiber sources on fecal water content in sows are presented in Fig.1.Both SBP and WB supplementation increased(P<0.05)fecal water content in sows on d 110 of gestation(Fig.1a).The same response was also observed on d 21 of lactation(Fig.1b).

    Fig.1 Effects of fiber sources on fecal water content in sows.(A-B)Fecal water content on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation.Date were presented as mean±SEM,n=6.Different letters mean significant differences(P<0.05).CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Serum biochemical parameters

    Effects of fiber sources on serum biochemical parameters in sows are presented in Fig.2.On d 110 of gestation,a significant decrease(P<0.05)in serum concentration of UN was observed in sows fed SBP when compared with those fed CON.Both sources of fiber supplementation significantly reduced(P<0.05)serum TC concentration.Moreover,sows fed SBP showed a lower(P<0.05)serum concentration of NEFA than those fed the other two diets.No significant differences were detected in serum concentrations of TG and GLU among treatments.On d 21 of lactation,serum concentration of UN was no longer changed by fiber supplementation.However,serum concentrations of TC and NEFA were still decreased(P<0.05)by SBP supplementation when compared with CON.There was still no change in serum concentrations of TG and GLU among treatments.

    Fig.2 Effects of fiber sources on serum biochemical parameters in sows.a-b Serum biochemical parameters on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation.Date were presented as mean±SEM,n=6.Different letters mean significant differences(P<0.05).UN,urea nitrogen;TC,total cholesterol;TG,total triglycerides;NEFA,non-esterified fatty acids;GLU,glucose;CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Serum immunoglobulins

    Effects of fiber sources on serum immunoglobulins in sows are presented in Fig.3.Dietary treatments did not alter serum concentrations of IgA,IgG and IgM on d 110 of gestation or on d 21 of lactation(Fig.3a and b).

    Fig.3 Effects of fiber sources on serum immunoglobulins in sows.a-b Serum immunoglobulins on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation.Date were presented as mean±SEM,n=6.Different letters mean significant differences(P<0.05).IgA,immunoglobulin A;IgG,immunoglobulin G;IgM,immunoglobulin M;CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Serum inflammatory cytokines

    Effects of fiber sources on serum inflammatory cytokines in sows are presented in Fig.4.On d 110 of gestation,supplementation of both sources of fiber decreased(P<0.05)serum concentration of IL-6 when compared with CON(Fig.4a).Sows fed SBP showed greater(P<0.05)serum concentration of IL-10 than those fed CON,but not different from those fed WB.In addition,the SBP supplementation decreased(P<0.05)serum TNF-α concentration compared with the other two treatments.On d 21 of lactation,the decreased serum IL-6 concentration was also observed in sows fed SBP and WB than those fed CON(P<0.05)(Fig.4b).But dietary treatments did not influence serum IL-10 concentration.Serum TNF-α concentration was lower(P<0.05)in sows fed SBP than those fed CON,but was similar to those fed WB.

    Fecal microbiota

    To understand the effects of fiber sources on gut microbiota,16S rRNA gene sequencing of fecal samples were performed.After quality control,a total of 538,051 and 825,315 high-quality sequences were generated from 15 fecal samples on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation,respectively.The average numbers of high-quality sequences generated per sample were 35,870 and 55,021 on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation,respectively.The Venn diagram showed that there were 771,767,and 710 OTUs obtained from sows fed CON,SBP and WB on d 110 of gestation,of which 630 OTUs were shared and 42 OTUs were unique(Fig.5a).There were 876,875,and 889 OTUs obtained from sows fed CON,SBP and WB on d 21 of lactation,of which 790 OTUs were shared and 42 OTUs were unique(Fig.5b).The bacterial alpha-diversity(Shannon index)was not significant different among treatments within each period(Fig.6a and b).Principal coordinate analysis(PCoA)based on Bray–Curtis dissimilarity revealed that there was a clear separation of the microbial community among three treatments on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation,indicating a shift in gut microbial communities(Fig.7a and b).

    Fig.5 Venn diagram of the operational taxonomic units(OTUs)in sow feces on d 110 of gestation(a)and d 21 of lactation(b).n=5.CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Fig.6 Alpha diversity of fecal microbial community determined by Shannon index on d 110 of gestation(a)and d 21 of lactation(b).n=5.CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Fig.7 Principal coordinate analysis(PCoA)at the operational taxonomic unit(OTU)level based on Bray-Curtis dissimilarity on d 110 of gestation(a)and d 21 of lactation(b).n=5.CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Subsequently,the effects of fiber sources on gut microbial composition in sows were investigated.At the phylum level,the dominant phyla during both periods were Firmicutes,Bacteroidetes,and Spirochaetes,accounting for more than 95%(Fig.8a and b).On d 110 of gestation,the top three genera in CON were Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1,norank_f__Bacteroidales_S24-7_group,and Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group;those in SBP were Treponema_2,Christensenellaceae_R-7_group and Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group;and those in WB were norank_f__Bacteroidales_S24-7_group,Lactobacillus and Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1(Fig.8c).On d 21 of lactation,the top three genera in CON were Treponema_2,norank_f__Bacteroidales_S24-7_group and Lactobacillus;those in SBP were Treponema_2,Lachnospiraceae_XPB1014_group,and Christensenellaceae_R-7_group;and those in WB were Lactobacillus,norank_f__Bacteroidales_S24-7_group and Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1(Fig.8d).

    Fig.8 Effects of fiber sources on fecal microbiota composition in sows.a-b Microbial community bar plot at the phylum level on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation.c-d Microbial community bar plot at the genus level on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation.n=5.CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Differential analysis of microbial composition among treatments were further explored.At the phylum level,sows fed SBP had greater(P<0.05)abundance of phyla Treponema than those fed WB on d 110 of gestation(Fig.9a),while supplementation of WB enriched(P<0.05)the abundance of Firmicutes compared with SBP on d 21 of lactation(Fig.9b).At the genus level,on d 110 of gestation,the SBP supplementation significantly decreased (P<0.01)the abundance of Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1 and Terrisporobacter compared with CON(Fig.10a).Sows fed SBP had greater(P<0.05)abundance of Christensenellaceae_R-7_group and Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002 than those fed the other two diets.In addition,supplementation of WB reduced(P<0.01) the abundance of Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002 when compared with CON.On d 21 of lactation,sows fed WB and CON had greater(P<0.05)abundance of Lactobacillus than those fed SBP(Fig.10b).Compared with WB,the SBP supplementation enriched(P<0.05)the abundance of Christensenellaceae_R-7_group,Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group, Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002,and Prevotellaceae_UCG_001.In addition,sows fed SBP had greater(P<0.05)abundance of unclassified_f__Lachnospiraceae than those fed the other two diets.

    Fig.9 Relative abundance of significantly different phyla on d 110 of gestation(a)and d 21 of lactation(b).n=5.CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Fig.10 Relative abundance of significantly different genera on d 110 of gestation(a)and d 21 of lactation(b).n=5.CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Fecal short chain fatty acids

    Effects of fiber sources on fecal short chain fatty acids in sows are presented in Fig.11.On d 110 of gestation,fecal concentrations of acetate,butyrate and total SCFAs were increased(P<0.05)in sows fed SBP diets compared with those fed CON diets,but not different from those fed WB diets(Fig.11a).There were no differences observed in fecal concentrations of propionate,isobutyrate,valerate and isovalerate among treatments.On d 21 of lactation,compared with sows fed CON diets,sows fed SBP diets had greater(P<0.05)fecal concentrations of acetate,butyrate and total SCFAs,while sows fed WB diets had greater(P<0.05)fecal concentration of butyrate(Fig.11b).There were also no differences in fecal concentrations of propionate,isobutyrate,valerate and isovalerate among treatments.

    Fig.11 Effects of fiber sources on fecal short chain fatty acids in sows.a-b Fecal short chain fatty acids on d 110 of gestation and d 21 of lactation.Date were presented as mean±SEM,n=5.Different letters mean significant differences(P<0.05).SCFAs,short chain fatty acids;CON,control diet;SBP,sugar beet pulp diet;WB,wheat bran diet

    Discussion

    During lactation,sows mobilize their body reserves to support milk synthesis,which generally leads to body loss at weaning[21].Sow body condition at weaning is known to be closely associated with its reproductive performance as a good body condition plays a vital role in maintaining a good reproductive performance,while in contrast,a poor body condition has adverse impacts on the subsequent reproduction performance by prolonging weaning-estrous interval and decreasing litter sizes[22].In the present study,sows fed SBP showed lower lactation weight loss than those fed CON,suggesting a better body condition.Similarly,Renteria-Flores et al.[23]also observed a lower lactation weight loss in sows fed high fiber diet compared with those fed the control diet.However,the results were not always consistent as some researches failed to detect positive effects of high fiber diets on lactation weight loss in sows[24].The discrepancies for the consistent results may be due to the sources,inclusion levels of fiber as well as feeding duration and stage of animals[13,25].

    It is well known that constipation is a common symptom for pregnant sows because gastrointestinal motility was decreased,and transit time was significantly prolonged during pregnancy,thereby resulting in increased water absorption and eventually low frequency and hard stools[26].Constipation can lead to a series of distressing symptoms,including abdominal distension,gut obstruction,perforation,and increased farrowing duration,thereby affecting health of sows[27].In this study,greater fecal water content was observed in sows fed SBP and WB diets when compared with those fed CON diets,suggesting that high fiber diets may alleviate the constipation severity in pregnant sows by retaining fecal water content.Our results were in consistent with previous studies,in which high fiber diets containing konjac flour or alfalfa meal increased fecal water content and relieved constipation in pregnant sows[28,29].Dietary fiber generally has great water-binding capacity,and also can reduce transit time and increase stools bulk,which may contribute to the alleviative constipation[30,31].

    Serum biochemical parameters are useful biomarkers for monitoring body health and physiological condition[32].Protein that escapes digestion in the foregut is fermented partly in the hindgut into ammonia,which is either used as nitrogen source for microbiota or absorbed into blood and transformed to urea in the liver[33,34].Therefore,blood urea nitrogen can reflect nitrogen utilization efficiency in various animal species[35].In this study,sows fed SBP diets showed lower serum urea nitrogen concentration compared with those fed CON diets during gestation,indicating greater nitrogen utilization efficiency in sows fed SBP.Similarly,previous studies also revealed that fermentable fiber could reduce plasma urea nitrogen in growing pigs and sows[25,36].One possible explanation is that as substrates for bacteria,fermentable fiber can increase bacterial mass,which,in turn,utilizes more ammonia as nitrogen for protein synthesis,thereby reducing urea nitrogen absorption into blood[36].Another possible explanation is that dietary fiber can suppress protein fermentation,thereby reducing ammonia production[37].However,a part of our results indicated that sows fed WB diets did not show lower serum urea nitrogen concentration compared with CON most likely because soluble fiber has a greater capacity to increase microbial mass and activity in comparison with insoluble fiber[38].

    An interesting finding in this study is that sows fed both SBP and WB had lower serum TC concentration compared with those fed CON during gestation.Our results were in consistent with Ndou et al.[39],in which both soluble fiber(flaxseed meal)and insoluble fiber(oat hulls)decreased serum total cholesterol concentration in pigs,showing hypocholesterolemic effects.As a source of soluble fiber,the SBP can increase the water holding capacity of digesta,and hence increase cholesterol and bile acid excretion,which may in turn influence hepatic cholesterol metabolism,and eventually result in decreased serum cholesterol concentration[40].While as a source of insoluble fiber,the lignin present in WB can increase cholesterol and bile acid excretion in the gastrointestinal tract[39].

    It is well known that NEFA are a product of fat metabolism and a good indicator of catabolism of fat reserves[41].In the current study,the decreased serum NEFA concentration observed in sows fed SBP might suggest reduced fat metabolism,and therefore better body reserve.Indeed,this study demonstrated that sows fed SBP had a lower body loss during lactation though no significant difference was observed in backfat loss among treatments.In contrast,the WB supplementation did not influence serum NEFA concentration when compared with CON.It has been shown that the SCFAs production was negatively correlation with serum NEFA concentration and fermentable fiber could decrease serum NEFA concentration by increasing SCFAs production[42].The SBP contains more soluble fibers(e.g.pectin)that are readily fermentable than WB,therefore,more SCFAs were produced in sows fed SBP as indicated by increased fecal concentration of total SCFAs.

    Pregnancy is generally associated with a systemic inflammatory response,which has adverse effects on both maternal and fetal health[1].In the current study,lower serum concentration of pro-inflammatory cytokine IL-6 was observed in sows fed SBP and WB during pregnancy and lactation,suggesting alleviative inflammatory responses by fiber supplementation.In addition,sows fed SBP also showed lower serum concentration of proinflammatory cytokine TNF-α and greater serum concentration of anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 than those fed CON,indicating that SBP may be more effective in reducing inflammation than WB.It is known that IL-10,an anti-inflammatory cytokine,can suppress proinflammatory responses by decreasing cytokine and chemokine production[43].Thereby,the SBP may relieve inflammation by increasing the production of antiinflammatory cytokine IL-10.Likewise,previous studies also found that higher intake of dietary fiber was closely related to decreased severity of inflammation,in contrast,dietary fiber deprivation resulted in inflammation and increased pathogen susceptibility[44–46].The positive effects of dietary fiber on inflammation observed in this study may be correlated to the changed gut microbiota and their by-products induced by the two sources of fiber supplementation[47].

    Intestinal microbiota plays a crucial role in maintaining host health by regulating metabolism and immune system[48].In the present study,even if there were no significant changes in α-diversity among three treatments within each period,principal coordinates analysis(PCoA)showed a distinct clustering for each dietary treatment at both periods,illustrating microbial composition changed differently in response to different fiber sources.Generally,Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes were the most dominant phyla in most mammals[49].In this study,Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes were indeed the most abundant phyla in all treatments regardless of the periods,which was consistent with previous studies[50,51].We further found that sows fed SBP showed an increased abundance in phyla Tenericutes compared with WB during gestation.Tenericutes has been reported to have the ability to improve lipid metabolism and blood lipid profiles[52,53].Therefore,the increased abundance of Tenericutes may be associated with the decreased serum concentrations of TC and NEFA in sows fed SBP.In addition,gut inflammation has been shown to result in a significant reduction in the abundance of Tenericutes[54,55].Thus,the high abundance of Tenericutes in SBP-fed sows may be positively correlated with the decreased serum concentrations of proinflammatory cytokines(IL-6 and TNF-α).Interestingly,supplementation of WB increased the abundance of Firmicutes compared with SBP during lactation.It has been shown that an increased abundance in Firmicutes is generally associated with a greater capacity of energy absorption from the diet and a greater feed conversion ratio[56,57].The increased abundance of Firmicutes during lactation would be thus desired because lactating sows need more energy to maintain the requirements of themselves and their offspring.But unexpectedly sows in SBP rather than those in WB had lower lactation BW loss compared with CON,indicating gut microbiota was not the only factor involved in regulating lactation BW loss.Lactation feed intake has been reported to be a critical factor to influence sow body condition,and increasing lactation feed intake could minimize weight loss[58].Soluble dietary fiber has been shown to be more effective than insoluble fiber in improving lactation feed intake,which may explain the lower lactation BW loss in sows fed SBP[59].

    Certain changes were also observed at the genus level in sows fed different fiber sources.During gestation,the SBP supplementation significantly decreased the abundance of Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1 compared with CON.Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1 is generally considered as pathogenic bacteria and growing evidence indicates that it is closely associated with inflammation[60].It has been shown that the mRNA expression of TNF-α and IL-1β was positively correlated with the enrichment of Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1,and this enrichment eventually resulted in colonic inflammation[61].Moreover,the increased abundance of Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1 was also observed in other inflammatory models(e.g.endometritis, necrotizing enterocolitis or lipopolysaccharide-induced gut inflammation)[62–64].As a result,the decreased abundance of Clostridium_sensu_stricto_1 may partly explain the lower serum concentrations of pro-inflammatory cytokines(IL-6 and TNF-α)in sows fed SBP.Our result also showed that sows fed SBP had lower abundance of Terrisporobacter and greater abundance of Christensenellaceae_R-7_group compared with CON.It has been reported that Terrisporobacter is an obesity-promoting bacteria and positively correlated with serum lipids[65].In contrast,Christensenellaceae has been shown to be negatively correlated with serum lipids[66].Therefore,the decreased abundance of Terrisporobacter and the increased abundance of Christensenellaceae_R-7_group may contribute to the improved serum lipid profile in sows fed SBP.Furthermore,the present study demonstrated that sows fed SBP showed greater abundance of Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002 than those fed the other two diets.Ruminococcaceae is known to produce short-chain fatty acids by degrading various polysaccharides and has shown to be negatively related to inflammation[67].As a consequence,the increased abundance of Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002 would be favourable for the reduced inflammatory responses in sows fed SBP.

    During lactation,the increased abundance of Christensenellaceae_R-7_group and Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002 was observed in sows fed SBP as well,which may be a contributing factor to the improved serum lipid profile and the reduced serum pro-inflammatory cytokines.In addition,the SBP supplementation also enriched the abundance of Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group and Prevotellaceae_UCG_001.Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group has been reported to be negatively correlated with serum concentrations of IL-6 and TNF-α,exhibiting antiinflammatory properties[68].Wang et al.[69]also reported that the increased abundance of Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group contributed to alleviate gut inflammation in weaned pigs challenged with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli K88.In addition,Prevotellaceae_UCG_001 also exerted anti-inflammatory function which has been shown to be positively associated with anti-inflammatory cytokines(e.g.IL-4 and IL-10)and inversely correlated with pro-inflammatory cytokines(e.g.IL-6 and TNF-α)[70].Therefore,these alterations in microbial composition induced by SBP supplementation may contribute to alleviate inflammatory responses by reducing serum concentrations of IL-6 and TNF-α.

    An important finding in this study was that sows fed WB had greater abundance of Lactobacillus than those fed SBP during lactation.Moreover,during gestation,sows fed WB also showed high abundance of Lactobacillus although no significant difference was observed among treatments.Lactobacillus species are well-known probiotics on account of their multiple health-promoting effects,including suppression of intestinal inflammation,enhancement of intestinal barrier function,modulation of immune responses,maintenance of microbial homeostasis and prevention of diseases[71–73].Therefore,the increased abundance of Lactobacillus in sows fed WB may be responsible for the decreased serum IL-6 concentration.These results,taken together,indicated that supplementation of SBP and WB could improve sow health by differently altering microbial composition.

    There is growing evidence that microbial metabolite shortchain fatty acids are key executors of diet-based microbial effect on the host[10].Changes in intestinal microbial composition are generally accompanied by changes in the production of SCFAs[74].The current study showed that fecal concentrations of acetate,butyrate and SCFAs were increased by SBP supplementation compared with CON during both gestation and lactation,suggesting greater microbial fermentation in the gut.Ruminococcaceae and Lachnospiraceae are well-known butyrate-producing bacteria[75].Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002 is reported to produce butyrate by fermenting indigestible carbohydrates,while Christensenellaceae has the ability to produce acetate and butyrate[66,76].Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group has been shown to be positively correlated with acetic acid production[77].Consequently,the increased concentrations of acetate and butyrate in sows fed SBP may be attributed to the increased abundance of Ruminococcaceae_UCG-002,Christensenellaceae_R-7_group,Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group and unclassified_f__Lachnospiraceae.The present study also showed that supplementation of WB increased fecal concentration of butyrate during lactation.It has been shown that lactic acid is used by some butyrate-producing bacteria for the production of butyrate[78],thus the increased abundance of Lactobacillus may be,at least in part,indirectly responsible for the significant increase of butyrate.The present study indicated that supplementation of both fiber sources significantly increased fecal concentration of butyrate.Butyrate is the most effective SCFA,which not only provides energy for colonocytes,but also maintain gut homeostasis by inhibiting inflammation and carcinogenesis,reinforcing barrier function and alleviating oxidative stress[79].As a result,the increased concentration of butyrate may alleviate inflammation and maintain gut health in sows fed either SBP or WB.

    Conclusions

    In conclusion,both SBP and WB supplementation could improve metabolism,immune responses and gut health in sows but by differently affecting microbiota.In addition,the SBP was more effective than WB in terms of these indexes.

    Abbreviations

    BW:Body weight;CON:Control diet;DF:Dietary fiber;GLU:Glucose;IgA:Immunoglobulins A;IgG:Immunoglobulins G;IgM:Immunoglobulins M;IL-6:Interleukin-6;IL-10:Interleukin-10;NEFA:Non-esterified fatty acids;OUT:Operational taxonomic units;PCoA:Principal coordinate analysis;SBP:Sugar beet pulp diet;SCFAs:Short chain fatty acids;TC:Total cholesterol;TG:Triglyceride;TNF-α:Tumor necrosis factor-α;UN:Urea nitrogen;WB:Wheat bran diet

    Acknowledgements

    Not applicable.

    Authors’contributions

    The experiment was designed by Qinghui Shang,and conducted by Qinghui Shang,Sujie Liu and Hansuo Liu.Experimental data were collected and analyzed by Qinghui Shang.The manuscript was written by Qinghui Shang,and revised by Shad Mahfuz and Xiangshu Piao.All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

    Funding

    This research was financially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China(31772612)and the Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation(6202019).

    Availability of data and materials

    All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

    Declarations

    Ethics approval and consent to participate

    Animal management and experimental procedures were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of China Agricultural University(Beijing,China).

    Consent for publication

    Not applicable.

    Competing interests

    There are no conflicts to declare.

    Received:21 October 2020 Accepted:21 February 2021

    考比视频在线观看| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 香蕉精品网在线| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| av卡一久久| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| xxx大片免费视频| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 国产精品.久久久| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀 | 大片免费播放器 马上看| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 熟女电影av网| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 久久久欧美国产精品| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频 | 十八禁网站网址无遮挡| 久久久久久久久久成人| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区 | 国精品久久久久久国模美| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 亚洲四区av| av不卡在线播放| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 久久久久精品性色| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 久久久久精品性色| 99热6这里只有精品| 国产一级毛片在线| 婷婷成人精品国产| 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 中文字幕制服av| 日本91视频免费播放| 一级爰片在线观看| 老女人水多毛片| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 男女午夜视频在线观看 | 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 亚洲综合色网址| 黑人高潮一二区| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| av.在线天堂| 秋霞伦理黄片| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 一本久久精品| 国产1区2区3区精品| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 国产精品 国内视频| 国产精品.久久久| 插逼视频在线观看| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 美女主播在线视频| 视频区图区小说| 草草在线视频免费看| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 国产激情久久老熟女| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 97在线视频观看| 观看美女的网站| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 美女福利国产在线| 亚洲综合精品二区| 嫩草影院入口| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 999精品在线视频| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 欧美+日韩+精品| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 成人综合一区亚洲| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 亚洲精品一二三| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 香蕉丝袜av| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 国产精品成人在线| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 丰满乱子伦码专区| av国产精品久久久久影院| 国产av国产精品国产| 精品国产国语对白av| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 少妇 在线观看| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 熟女av电影| 免费av不卡在线播放| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费| 成人手机av| 成人国产av品久久久| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 午夜免费观看性视频| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 精品亚洲成国产av| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| av在线观看视频网站免费| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 嫩草影院入口| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 午夜激情av网站| 三级国产精品片| 乱人伦中国视频| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 日韩成人伦理影院| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 免费观看av网站的网址| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 久久久久久久国产电影| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕 | 欧美精品一区二区大全| 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 97在线视频观看| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 日韩电影二区| 大香蕉久久网| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 午夜av观看不卡| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 免费观看性生交大片5| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区 | 两性夫妻黄色片 | 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 夜夜爽夜夜爽视频| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区 | 亚洲高清免费不卡视频| 午夜激情av网站| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 老司机影院毛片| 国产精品一国产av| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 久久毛片免费看一区二区三区| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 伊人久久国产一区二区| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 热re99久久国产66热| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 黄片播放在线免费| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 99国产综合亚洲精品| freevideosex欧美| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 久久久精品94久久精品| 黄片播放在线免费| 少妇 在线观看| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 国产精品 国内视频| 少妇人妻 视频| 夫妻午夜视频| 久久午夜福利片| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 免费观看在线日韩| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 久久久久久久久久人人人人人人| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| av国产精品久久久久影院| 性色av一级| 免费看不卡的av| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 欧美精品av麻豆av| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 亚洲四区av| 中文字幕制服av| 久久久精品免费免费高清| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 亚洲精品,欧美精品| 国产麻豆69| 精品第一国产精品| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 成人二区视频| 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 韩国精品一区二区三区 | 插逼视频在线观看| 成人国产麻豆网| 在线观看国产h片| 美国免费a级毛片| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 国产成人精品在线电影| 一级片免费观看大全| 七月丁香在线播放| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区 | 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 水蜜桃什么品种好| 香蕉精品网在线| 午夜免费观看性视频| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 国产 一区精品| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 在线天堂最新版资源| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 免费少妇av软件| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 久久免费观看电影| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 综合色丁香网| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 欧美97在线视频| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 欧美另类一区| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 国产精品国产三级专区第一集| 午夜久久久在线观看| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 亚洲国产色片| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 一区二区av电影网| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精 国产伦在线观看视频一区 | 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 9色porny在线观看| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 99九九在线精品视频| 成年av动漫网址| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 少妇的丰满在线观看| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 精品福利永久在线观看| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 少妇的逼好多水| videossex国产| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 日韩成人伦理影院| 男女免费视频国产| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 午夜老司机福利剧场| av在线app专区| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院 | 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 色网站视频免费| av片东京热男人的天堂| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 22中文网久久字幕| 国产男女内射视频| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 日日啪夜夜爽| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 国产精品一国产av| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看 | av国产精品久久久久影院| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区 | 免费日韩欧美在线观看| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 老司机影院成人| 欧美精品高潮呻吟av久久| 国产av精品麻豆| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 国产成人精品一,二区| 国产 一区精品| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 亚洲av男天堂| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 91精品三级在线观看| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 成人手机av| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 国产毛片在线视频| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| av免费在线看不卡| 成人影院久久| 国产一级毛片在线| 久久久久久久久久久免费av| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 9热在线视频观看99| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 1024视频免费在线观看| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 亚洲第一av免费看| 熟女电影av网| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 老熟女久久久| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 大码成人一级视频| 99热6这里只有精品| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 精品久久久久久电影网| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院 | 国产 一区精品| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 成人国产麻豆网| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲 | 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 少妇的逼水好多| av在线观看视频网站免费| 国产高清国产精品国产三级| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 亚洲综合色惰| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 9色porny在线观看| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 性色av一级| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 国产乱来视频区| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 99热6这里只有精品| 亚洲中文av在线| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 看免费成人av毛片| 亚洲av男天堂| a 毛片基地| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 免费观看a级毛片全部| 少妇的逼好多水| 在线观看人妻少妇| 国产黄频视频在线观看| av不卡在线播放| 蜜桃在线观看..| 777米奇影视久久| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 97在线视频观看| 99久久人妻综合| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看 | 欧美成人午夜精品| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区 | 青青草视频在线视频观看| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看 | www.av在线官网国产| 日本wwww免费看| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 国产 精品1| 免费av不卡在线播放| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 久久狼人影院| 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 亚洲av福利一区| 成人综合一区亚洲| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 观看美女的网站| av在线app专区| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 免费少妇av软件| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 亚洲综合精品二区| 免费人成在线观看视频色| 制服诱惑二区| 咕卡用的链子| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 日日撸夜夜添| 国产 精品1| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 丰满乱子伦码专区| av黄色大香蕉| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 99热国产这里只有精品6| 青春草国产在线视频| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 国产视频首页在线观看| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| av免费在线看不卡| 免费看av在线观看网站| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| av国产精品久久久久影院| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 美女中出高潮动态图| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久 | 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 午夜久久久在线观看| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| av在线观看视频网站免费| 欧美人与性动交α欧美软件 | 欧美bdsm另类| a级毛片黄视频| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 亚洲国产精品专区欧美| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| av福利片在线| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 22中文网久久字幕| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 精品视频人人做人人爽| xxx大片免费视频| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 亚洲高清免费不卡视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 91国产中文字幕| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 国产av精品麻豆| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 亚洲精品一二三| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| av在线app专区| 两性夫妻黄色片 | 国产精品免费大片| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 久久午夜福利片| 亚洲在久久综合| av天堂久久9| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 黄片无遮挡物在线观看| 久久精品夜色国产| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 久久免费观看电影| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 九九在线视频观看精品| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 熟女av电影| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 午夜免费观看性视频| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 国产一级毛片在线| 大香蕉久久成人网| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| av一本久久久久| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 少妇的逼好多水| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 精品午夜福利在线看| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线|