Bacterial Community Structure at the Microscale in Two Different Soils

. 2016 Oct ; 72 (3) : 717-24. [epub] 20160714

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/pmid27418177
Odkazy

PubMed 27418177
DOI 10.1007/s00248-016-0810-0
PII: 10.1007/s00248-016-0810-0
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje

The spatial distributions of bacteria in the soil matrix have a role in ecosystem function, for example, at the small scale, through gene transfer or xenobiotic degradation. Soil bacterial biogeography has been evidenced at the large scale, but data are scarce at the small scale. The objective of this work was to determine the spatial pattern of bacterial diversity, in spatially referenced microsamples, in order to define bacterial community spatial traits. Two soils with different physical structures, moderately aggregated (La Côte St André (LCSA)) or poorly aggregated (La Dombes (LD)), were studied. The spatial distribution of bacteria was studied in microsamples (diameter 3 mm) along 10- and 20-cm transects, with a taxonomic microarray. 16S rRNA gene sequencing was used to further study the spatial characteristics of the microbial communities in LD soil. The frequency-occupancy plot, in the LCSA and LD soils, using microarray and sequencing data, followed Hanski's core-satellite theory. The frequency-occupancy distribution plots obtained in two different soils showed bimodality and indicated that the microscale spatial distributions were different, particularly core taxa percentage. Core taxa are widespread and abundant, while satellite taxa are restricted in their distribution. The spread of satellite taxa was at a distance range larger than 5 cm, whereas the core taxa were distributed in a distance range less than 3 mm. Besides, there was a positive abundancy-occupancy relationship at this fine scale. It may be interesting to further evaluate the role of the different bacterial spatial distributions at the fine scale on soil function.

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006 Jul;72(7):5069-72 PubMed

Environ Microbiol. 2009 Dec;11(12):3096-104 PubMed

Environ Pollut. 2011 May;159(5):1085-91 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1997 Sep;63(9):3367-73 PubMed

Oecologia. 2007 Mar;151(2):313-21 PubMed

FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2003 May 1;44(2):203-15 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006 Jun;72(6):4302-12 PubMed

ISME J. 2009 Oct;3(10):1127-38 PubMed

Science. 1997 Jan 17;275(5298):397-400 PubMed

J Bacteriol. 2009 Mar;191(6):1756-64 PubMed

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Jan 17;103(3):626-31 PubMed

Microb Ecol. 2006 Feb;51(2):220-31 PubMed

PLoS One. 2010 Aug 26;5(8):e12414 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002 Mar;68(3):1414-24 PubMed

Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006 Feb;4(2):102-12 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004 May;70(5):2709-16 PubMed

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Aug 8;103(32):12115-20 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000 Dec;66(12):5448-56 PubMed

FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2000 Oct 1;34(1):57-62 PubMed

Environ Microbiol. 2006 Feb;8(2):289-307 PubMed

Lett Appl Microbiol. 2001 Jul;33(1):17-20 PubMed

ISME J. 2007 Aug;1(4):283-90 PubMed

FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2004 May 1;48(2):119-27 PubMed

Ecol Lett. 2007 May;10(5):347-54 PubMed

FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2002 Oct;42(1):71-80 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2003 Sep;69(9):5186-91 PubMed

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Pouze přihlášení uživatelé

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...