| Literature DB >> 24282619 |
Renee J Smith1, Thomas C Jeffries, Eric M Adetutu, Peter G Fairweather, James G Mitchell.
Abstract
The functional dynamics of microbial communities are largely responsible for the clean-up of hydrocarbons in the environment. However, knowledge of the distinguishing functional genes, known as the metabolic footprint, present in hydrocarbon-impacted sites is still scarcely understood. Here, we conducted several multivariate analyses to characterise the metabolic footprints present in a variety of hydrocarbon-impacted and non-impacted sediments. Non-metric multi-dimensional scaling (NMDS) and canonical analysis of principal coordinates (CAP) showed a clear distinction between the two groups. A high relative abundance of genes associated with cofactors, virulence, phages and fatty acids were present in the non-impacted sediments, accounting for 45.7% of the overall dissimilarity. In the hydrocarbon-impacted sites, a high relative abundance of genes associated with iron acquisition and metabolism, dormancy and sporulation, motility, metabolism of aromatic compounds and cell signalling were observed, accounting for 22.3% of the overall dissimilarity. These results suggest a major shift in functionality has occurred with pathways essential to the degradation of hydrocarbons becoming overrepresented at the expense of other, less essential metabolisms.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24282619 PMCID: PMC3839897 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081910
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Comparison of hydrocarbon-impacted samples (green) and non-impacted samples (blue).
This NMDS ordination is derived from a Bray-Curtis similarity matrix calculated from the square-root transformed abundance of DNA fragments matching the subsystems database, level hierarchical system 1 (BLASTX E-value < E<1×10-5). The light green polygons depict significantly different groupings (P < 0.05) as calculated by similarity profile (SIMPROF) analysis in PRIMER v6. See Table S1 in File S1 for the provenance of samples included in this analysis.
Figure 2Comparison of hydrocarbon-impacted samples (green) and non-hydrocarbon-impacted samples (blue).
CAP analysis (using m = 1 principal coordinate axes) is derived from the sum of squared correlations of DNA fragments matching the subsystems database, level hierarchical system 1 (BLASTX E-value < E<1×10-5). Significance P = 0.008 and the first axis explained δ2 = 0.83 of the total variation. See Table S1 in File S1 for the provenance of samples included in this analysis.
Contribution of metabolic hierarchical system level 1 to the dissimilarity of the hydrocarbon-impacted and non-hydrocarbon-impacted metagenomes.
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Cofactors, Vitamins, Prosthetic Groups, Pigments | 0.1 |
| 2.24 | 11.43 |
| Virulence, Disease and Defence | 0.1 |
| 2.24 | 22.86 |
| Phages, Prophages, Transposable elements, Plasmids | 0.1 |
| 2.24 | 34.29 |
| Fatty Acids, Lipids, and Isoprenoids | 0.1 |
| 2.24 | 45.71 |
| Iron acquisition and metabolism |
| 0.79 | 1.63 | 52.68 |
| Dormancy and Sporulation |
| 0.68 | 1.49 | 57.48 |
| Motility and Chemotaxis |
| 0.81 | 1.58 | 61.17 |
| Metabolism of Aromatic Compounds |
| 0.85 | 1.73 | 64.81 |
| Secondary Metabolism |
| 0.75 | 1.16 | 68.32 |
| Regulation and Cell signalling |
| 0.83 | 1.86 | 71.55 |
| Protein Metabolism | 0.94 |
| 3.42 | 74.53 |
| Carbohydrates | 0.97 |
| 3.5 | 77.49 |
| Nitrogen Metabolism |
| 0.82 | 1.74 | 80.17 |
| Photosynthesis | 0.69 | 0.69 | 1.3 | 82.75 |
| Amino Acids and Derivatives | 0.96 |
| 2.89 | 85.24 |
| Clustering-based subsystems | 0.98 |
| 1.96 | 87.06 |
| Miscellaneous | 0.94 |
| 3.14 | 88.7 |
Hydrocarbon-impacted samples include a hydrocarbon-impacted foreshore and a biopile from Australia [40; Smith et al., unpublished data], and 2 biopiles from the Arctic region [40], while the non- impacted samples included 2 marine sediment samples from Australia and 3 sediment samples from the Coorong [50]. Average dissimilarity between the two groups is 1.78 % (Table S1 in File S1). Only metabolisms that were consistent (i.e. Diss/SD > 1.4) are shown here. The larger value in each case (i.e. the potential indicator of that condition) is shown in bold.
Cut-off percentage = 90% of the total dissimilarity, Diss=dissimilarity; SD=Standard Deviation; Cum %=cumulative percentage of contribution to overall dissimilarity, Avg. Abundance values are reported for square-root transformed data
Figure 3Metabolic comparison of a variety of impacted environments
(Table S1 in File S1).
CAP analysis (using m = 2 principal coordinate axes) is derived from the sum of squared correlations of DNA fragments matching the subsystems database, level hierarchical system 1 (BLASTX E-value < E<1×10-5). Significance P = 0.0005 and the first axis explained δ2 = 0.88 of the total variation.
Results of CAP analysis (using m = 2 principal coordinate axes, explaining 88 % of total variation) testing the hypothesis that contaminant types differ for Level 1 metabolisms associated with impacted metagenomes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
| 75 | 100 | 0 | 50 | 79 |
|
| 3:4 | 7:7 | 0:1 | 1:2 | 11:14 |
|
| Wastewater | NA | Hydrocarbon | Wastewater | |
Hydrocarbon-impacted samples include a hydrocarbon-impacted foreshore and a biopile from Australia [40; Smith et al., unpublished data], and 2 biopiles from the Arctic region [40], while the non- impacted samples included 2 marine sediment samples from Australia and 3 sediment samples from the Coorong [50]. Average dissimilarity between the two groups is 1.78 % (Table S1 in File S1). Only metabolisms that were consistent (i.e. Diss/SD > 1.4) are shown here. The larger value in each case (i.e. the potential indicator of that condition) is shown in bold.
Cut-off percentage = 90% of the total dissimilarity, Diss=dissimilarity; SD=Standard Deviation; Cum %=cumulative percentage of contribution to overall dissimilarity, Avg. Abundance values are reported for square-root transformed data
Significance of trace and delta statistics was P = 0.0005 and first canonical axis alone explained 80 % of total variation. NA = not applicable because of no mis-classifications.
Contribution of metabolic hierarchical system 1 to the dissimilarity of the hydrocarbon and agricultural impacted environments.
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Cofactors, Vitamins, Prosthetic Groups, Pigments | 0.08 |
| 1.67 | 12.09 |
| Virulence, Disease and Defence | 0.08 |
| 1.67 | 24.19 |
| Phages, Prophages, Transposable elements, Plasmids | 0.08 |
| 1.67 | 36.28 |
| Fatty Acids, Lipids, and Isoprenoids | 0.08 |
| 1.67 | 48.38 |
| Iron acquisition and metabolism |
| 0.79 | 1.76 | 54.29 |
| Dormancy and Sporulation |
| 0.67 | 1.4 | 58.92 |
| Metabolism of Aromatic Compounds |
| 0.84 | 1.82 | 62.37 |
| Motility and Chemotaxis |
| 0.8 | 1.67 | 71.84 |
| Protein Metabolism | 0.93 |
| 3.27 | 74.59 |
| Carbohydrates | 0.97 |
| 3.44 | 77.27 |
| Nitrogen Metabolism |
| 0.81 | 1.84 | 82.37 |
| Regulation and Cell signalling |
| 0.83 | 1.81 | 84.78 |
| Amino Acids and Derivatives | 0.96 |
| 2.35 | 86.73 |
| Clustering-based subsystems | 0.97 |
| 1.75 | 88.4 |
Average dissimilarity between the two groups is 2.08 %. Only metabolisms that were consistent (i.e. Diss/SD > 1.4) are shown here. The larger value in each case (i.e. the potential indicator of that condition) is shown in bold.
Cut-off percentage = 90% of total dissimilarity, Diss=dissimilarity; SD=Standard Deviation; Cum %=cumulative percentage of contribution to overall dissimilarity, Avg. Abundance values are reported for square-root transformed data