Literature DB >> 25989417

Metaproteomics reveals major microbial players and their biodegradation functions in a large-scale aerobic composting plant.

Dongming Liu1,2, Mingxiao Li2, Beidou Xi2, Yue Zhao1, Zimin Wei1, Caihong Song1,2, Chaowei Zhu2.   

Abstract

Composting is an appropriate management alternative for municipal solid waste; however, our knowledge about the microbial regulation of this process is still scare. We employed metaproteomics to elucidate the main biodegradation pathways in municipal solid waste composting system across the main phases in a large-scale composting plant. The investigation of microbial succession revealed that Bacillales, Actinobacteria and Saccharomyces increased significantly with respect to abundance in composting process. The key microbiologic population for cellulose degradation in different composting stages was different. Fungi were found to be the main producers of cellulase in earlier phase. However, the cellulolytic fungal communities were gradually replaced by a purely bacterial one in active phase, which did not support the concept that the thermophilic fungi are active through the thermophilic phase. The effective decomposition of cellulose required the synergy between bacteria and fungi in the curing phase.
© 2015 The Authors. Microbial Biotechnology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Society for Applied Microbiology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25989417      PMCID: PMC4621448          DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.12290

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Microb Biotechnol        ISSN: 1751-7915            Impact factor:   5.813


Introduction

Composting is an aerobic process, during which organic waste is biologically degraded by microorganisms to humus-like material (Partanen et al., 2010). The products have a commercial value as soil conditioner or organic fertilizer (Negro et al., 1999). The typical composting batch could be divided into three phases: the mesophilic phase (10–42°C), the thermophilic phase (45–70°C) and the cooling and maturation phase (65–23°C) (Joséphine and Philippe, 2004; Bonito et al., 2010). Both bacteria and fungi play a key role in a typical composting process. Thus, a thorough understanding of microbial communities throughout the composting process is crucial for understanding the system and optimizing compost product quality (De Gannes et al., 2013a). The information of microbial communities in composts has been examined by culture-independent deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-based methods. These investigations have focused on analysis of shifts in microbial community composition via amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis, single strand-conformation polymorphism, restriction fragment length polymorphism, denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis and nucleic acid microarrays (Peters et al., 2000; Dees and Ghiorse, 2001; Franke-Whittle et al., 2009; 2014; Baharuddin et al., 2010; Bonito et al., 2010; Partanen et al., 2010; Charbonneau et al., 2012; Tian et al., 2013). However, little is known about global gene expression of compost as relevant studies have not been performed. Proteins reflect the actual functionality with respect to metabolic reactions and regulatory cascades, and give more direct information about microbial activity than functional genes and even the corresponding messenger RNAs (Wilmes and Bond, 2006). Furthermore, the use of proteins also bears the potential to reveal the identity of the active microorganisms via database analysis using the level of homology to other species (Benndorf et al., 2007). Thus, the presence of specific proteins in environmental samples is a potentially reliable indicator for microbial function (Benndorf et al., 2007). Wilmes and Bond (2004) proposed the term ‘metaproteomics’ for the large-scale characterization of the entire protein complement of environmental microbiota at a given point in time. By determining proteins which have been synthesized by microorganisms present at the time of sampling, metaproteomics enables the reconstruction of microbial processes and metabolic pathways that are central to the functioning of the ecosystem (Williams et al., 2012). Until now, several authors presented metaproteome data from different environmental systems, such as soil (Benndorf et al., 2007; Chourey et al., 2010), activated sludge (Wilmes and Bond, 2006), water (Benndorf et al., 2007; Lauro et al., 2011; Williams et al., 2012) and leaf litter (Schneider et al., 2012). Additionally, metaproteomics was used to define key catabolic players at contaminated sites to predict pollutant degradation networks in the environment (Guazzaroni et al., 2012). Metaproteomics has become an efficient tool to unravel and characterize metabolic networks as well as ecological interactions during complex environments. For economical and capacity reasons, there is always a tendency to push the capacity limits and minimize the retention time at composting plants (Partanen et al., 2010). This may lead to unwanted anaerobic conditions and failure to attain the temperatures required for hygienization. To adjust these conditions at the large-scale composting plants, comprehensive information is needed regarding total biodiversity and metabolic processes. In the current study, we analysed the metaproteome from composting samples collected in different phases in a large-scale composting plant. By examining expressed proteins in the samples, we were able to infer the predominant metabolic processes performed by bacteria and fungi present in composting pile, and consider the significance of the differences between main composting phases.

Results and discussion

Physicochemical data for the composting samples

The composting pile achieved thermophilic temperature shortly after pile establishment. This temperature was maintained for 16 days, and gradually descended to ambient values thereafter. The pH values of the composting pile increased from acidic values in earlier phase to alkaline values on day 50 (Table 1). The highest water content level was seen in the active phase, with approximately 30% water content loss occurring afterwards, which might be explained by microbial heat generation causing enhanced desiccation. The total organic carbon (C) content reductions were found in composting pile, reflecting a notable mineralization of organic matter over time. The total nitrogen (N) percentage showed an increasing trend with composting duration, which is due to the concentration effect caused by carbon loss associated with mineralization of the organic matter (Shemekite et al., 2014). The C/N ratio decreased significantly over time, as C was lost in the form of CO2 through microbial respiration and N was recycled (Ryckeboer et al., 2003).
Table 1

Physical and chemical properties of the samples

LS1LS2LS3
Age (d)52050
Temperature (°C)60.362.447.0
pH6.466.907.46
Water content (%)58.8053.0234.84
Organic C (%)63.7152.2947.17
N (%)1.701.771.95
C : N ratio37.4829.5424.19
Physical and chemical properties of the samples

Bacterial diversity represented in the composting metaproteome

A total of 640 proteins were detected (222 from the sample LS1, 220 from the sample LS2 and 198 from the sample LS3). Of the 640 proteins, 449 were with highest sequence identity to bacterial proteins and 191 fungal proteins. Within the bacterial subset, the majority had the best match (highest sequence identity) to proteins from members of the Gammaproteobacteria (181), followed by Bacilli (65), Alphaproteobacteria (41), Actinobacteria (37) and Betaproteobacteria (31) (Table 2). Within the Gammaproteobacteria, most of the matches had highest identity to proteins from the order Pseudomonadales (61) and Enterobacteriales (50). Within Pseudomonadales, the genus Azotobacter (5) can carry out the denitrification process (Szántó, 2009). The order Enterobacteriales includes the genus Salmonella, most of which are pathogens, and Escherichia, which also includes pathogenic strains (Sundberg et al., 2011). Within the Alphaproteobacteria, most of the proteins had the best match to members of three groups: order Rhizobiales (22), Rhodobacterales (7) and Rhodospirillales (6). The Rhizobium is the nitrogen-fixing bacteria; they take nitrogen from the air and convert it into ammonia, a form of nitrogen that plants can use. Within Rhodobacterales, some are denitrifying bacteria such as Paracoccus denitrificans (Baumann et al., 1996; Siddavattam et al., 2011). The order Rhodospirillales includes nitrogen-fixing bacteria such as Rhodobacter sphaeroides (Kontur et al., 2012). In the groups related to Betaproteobacteria, most of the matches had highest identity to proteins from the order Burkholderiales (17), Methylophilales (5), Neisseriales (4) and Nitrosomonadales (3). Cupriavidus and Bordetella were the most dominant genuses among the order Burkholderiales. Cupriavidus is adapted to several form of heavy metal stress (Nies, 1999; 2000). Bordetella is best known for species that are opportunistic human pathogens, but is also identified as a soil bacterium (Eriksson et al., 2003). The order Nitrosomonadales was found as nitrifying bacteria (Szántó, 2009). Pathogens such as Neiseria were also found among the Betaproteobacteria.
Table 2

Most abundant bacterial order/suborder for the predominant phyla

TaxonomyProtein number
Proteobacteria
Gammaproteobacteria181
 Pseudomonadales61
 Enterobacteriales50
Alphaproteobacteria41
 Rhizobiales22
 Rhodobacterales7
 Rhodospirillales6
Betaproteobacteria31
 Burkholderiales17
 Methylophilales5
 Neisseriales4
 Nitrosomonadales3
Deltaproteobacteria15
Firmicutes
 Bacilli65
 Bacillales45
 Lactobacillales20
 Clostridia19
Actinobacteria37
 Corynebacterineae19
 Streptosporangineae5
 Frankineae4
Tenericutes13
Cyanobacteria12
Bacteroidetes8
Spirochaetes7
Thermotogae5
Aquificae5
Most abundant bacterial order/suborder for the predominant phyla The bacteria found in the metaproteome, such as members of the Actinobacteria, Bacilli, Alphaproteobacteria, Betaproteobacteria and Gammaproteobacteria, were typical for municipal solid waste and lignocellulosic materials (bagasse, coffee and rice) compost. Our data are consistent with the phylogenetic diversity obtained by previous gene-based analyses of facility composting, which identified the relative abundance of Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes and Proteobacteria (Partanen et al., 2010; Sundberg et al., 2011; De Gannes et al., 2013b). Exception included Bacteroidetes, which were minor community constituents in our study.

Fungal diversity represented in the composting metaproteome

Matches to the fungi were mainly to Saccharomycetes (114), followed by Schizosaccharomycetes (25), Sordariomycetes (16), Eurotiomycetes (16) and Basidiomycota (9) (Table 3). Within the Saccharomycetes, nearly half (51) of the matches had highest identity to proteins from the genus Saccharomyces; other proteins had the best match to members of genus Candida (14), Eremothecium (14) and Kluyveromyces (11). Some of the yeasts genuses are pathogens, such as Candida, which are opportunistic human pathogens (Bonito et al., 2010), and Eremothecium (also known as Ashbya), which are plant pathogens (Ashby and Nowell, 1926). Within the Sordariomycetes, most of the proteins had the best match to members of genus Neurospora (8) and Chaetomium (3), which relate to the degradation of cellulose (Umikalsom et al., 1997; Phillips et al., 2011; Sygmund et al., 2012). Matches to the Eurotiomycetes were mainly to Aspergillus (13), which includes pathogenic strains (Dehghani et al., 2012). Basidiomycetes are known to produce powerful degradation enzymes (Bonito et al., 2010). In our study, Phanerochaete chrysosporium, which produced cellobiose dehydrogenase, was detected in earlier phase (Table 4).
Table 3

Most abundant fungal genera for the predominant phyla

TaxonomyProtein number
Ascomycota
 Saccharomycetes114
 Saccharomyces51
 Candida14
 Eremothecium14
 Kluyveromyces11
 Yarrowia6
 Pichia4
 Schizosaccharomycetes25
 Schizosaccharomyces25
 Sordariomycetes16
 Neurospora8
 Chaetomium3
 Eurotiomycetes16
 Aspergillus13
Basidiomycota9
Microsporidia8
Table 4

Proteins belonged to carbohydrate metabolic pathway identified in the composting metaproteome

Protein nameAccessionFunctional groupSpeciesTaxonomy
LS1
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseP0A1P0Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisSalmonella entericaGammaproteobacteria
EnolaseA8AY46Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisStreptococcus gordoniiBacilli; Lactobacillales
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase 2Q6FSM4Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisCandida glabrataSaccharomycetes
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseQ00584Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisClaviceps purpureaSordariomycetes
Acetyl-coenzyme A synthetaseQ3IFM6Pyruvate metabolismPseudoalteromonas haloplanktisGammaproteobacteria
Acetate kinaseA4VSL6Pyruvate metabolismStreptococcus suisBacilli; Lactobacillales
Aconitate hydratase 2Q9I2V5TCAPseudomonas aeruginosaGammaproteobacteria
Aconitate hydratase 1Q9I3F5TCAPseudomonas aeruginosaGammaproteobacteria
Isocitrate lyaseQ9I0K4TCAPseudomonas aeruginosaGammaproteobacteria
Malate synthase GQ3K5N4TCAPseudomonas fluorescensGammaproteobacteria
Malate dehydrogenaseQ4FQU7TCAPsychrobacter arcticusGammaproteobacteria
Isocitrate dehydrogenase [NADP] 2P41561TCAColwellia marisGammaproteobacteria
Malate dehydrogenaseA5UCQ1TCAHaemophilus influenzaeGammaproteobacteria
Citrate synthaseO33915TCASinorhizobium melilotiAlphaproteobacteria
Malate synthase GQ2J0A5TCARhodopseudomonas palustrisAlphaproteobacteria
Malate synthase GC0RES0TCABrucella melitensisAlphaproteobacteria
Malate dehydrogenaseQ2GCH6TCANeorickettsia sennetsuAlphaproteobacteria
Malate synthase GA1UGU7TCAMycobacterium sp.Actinobacteria
Succinate dehydrogenase [ubiquinone] flavoprotein subunit, mitochondrialQ00711TCASaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomycetes
Citrate synthase, mitochondrialP00890TCASaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomycetes
Aconitate hydratase, mitochondrialP19414TCASaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomycetes
Malate dehydrogenase, cytoplasmicP83778TCACandida albicansSaccharomycetes
Putative exoglucanase type CP46238Cellulose degradationFusarium oxysporumSordariomycetes
Exoglucanase 1P38676Cellulose degradationNeurospora crassaSordariomycetes
Cellobiose dehydrogenaseQ01738Cellulose degradationPhanerochaete chrysosporiumBasidiomycota
Mannose-6-phosphate isomeraseQ870Y1Amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolismNeurospora crassaSordariomycetes
Endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase 1P53753Cell wall degradationSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomycetes
LS2
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseP0A1P0Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisSalmonella entericaGammaproteobacteria
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseQ00584Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisClaviceps purpureaSordariomycetes
Phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase [GTP]A8L175Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisFrankia sp.Actinobacteria
Fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase class 1C0QTP7Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisPersephonella marinaAquificae
Glyoxylate/hydroxypyruvate reductase BQ0W9V5Pyruvate metabolismYersinia pestisGammaproteobacteria
Acetyl-coenzyme A synthetaseQ9F7R5Pyruvate metabolismuncultured marine gamma proteobacteriumGammaproteobacteria
Acetyl-coenzyme A synthetase 1Q9Z3R3Pyruvate metabolismSinorhizobium melilotiAlphaproteobacteria
Pyruvate, phosphate dikinaseQ59754Pyruvate metabolismSinorhizobium melilotiAlphaproteobacteria
Malate dehydrogenaseA5WGM2TCAPsychrobacter sp.Gammaproteobacteria
Citrate lyase subunit betaP17725TCAKlebsiella pneumoniaeGammaproteobacteria
Probable malate : quinone oxidoreductaseB3QK65TCARhodopseudomonas palustrisAlphaproteobacteria
Succinate dehydrogenase flavoprotein subunitQ59661TCAParacoccus denitrificansAlphaproteobacteria
Succinate dehydrogenase iron-sulfur subunitQ1RGP3TCARickettsia belliiAlphaproteobacteria
Succinate dehydrogenase flavoprotein subunitP08065TCABacillus subtilisBacilli; Bacillales
Malate dehydrogenaseC1DB66TCALaribacter hongkongensisBetaproteobacteria
EndoglucanaseP10475Cellulose degradationBacillus subtilisBacilli; Bacillales
Endoglucanase E-2P26222Cellulose degradationThermobifida fuscaActinobacteria
Endo-1,4-beta-xylanase BP26515Hemicellulose degradationStreptomyces lividansActinobacteria
1,4-alpha-glucan branching enzyme GlgBB0TZI5Starch and sucrose metabolismFrancisella philomiragiaGammaproteobacteria
Phosphoglucosamine mutaseQ5NNT4Amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolismZymomonas mobilisAlphaproteobacteria
Phosphoglucosamine mutaseA8AWM5Amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolismStreptococcus gordoniiBacilli; Lactobacillales
Beta-N-acetylhexosaminidaseP49610Amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolismStreptococcus pneumoniaeBacilli; Lactobacillales
2-keto-3-deoxy-L-rhamnonate aldolaseQ0TFJ7Fructose and mannose metabolismEscherichia coliGammaproteobacteria
Xylose isomeraseP19148Fructose and mannose metabolismThermoanaerobacterium thermosulfurigenesClostridia
LS3
6-phosphofructokinaseA8GLB0Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisSerratia proteamaculansGammaproteobacteria
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseP24750Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisEscherichia hermanniiGammaproteobacteria
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseO32755Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisLactobacillus delbrueckiiBacilli; Lactobacillales
Hexokinase-2P50521Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisSchizosaccharomyces pombeSchizosaccharomycetes
Triosephosphate isomeraseQ9HGY8Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisAspergillus oryzaeEurotiomycetes
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseQ00584Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisClaviceps purpureaSordariomycetes
Phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase [GTP]A8L175Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisFrankia sp.Actinobacteria
Aryl-phospho-beta-D-glucosidase BglCP42403Glycolysis / GluconeogenesisBacillus subtilisBacilli; Bacillales
Pyruvate dehydrogenase E1 componentQ59637Pyruvate metabolismPseudomonas aeruginosaGammaproteobacteria
Glyoxylate/hydroxypyruvate reductase BQ0W9V5Pyruvate metabolismYersinia pestisGammaproteobacteria
Acetyl-coenzyme A synthetaseQ9F7R5Pyruvate metabolismuncultured marine GammaproteobacteriumGammaproteobacteria
Acetyl-coenzyme A synthetase 1Q9Z3R3Pyruvate metabolismSinorhizobium melilotiAlphaproteobacteria
Malate dehydrogenaseA5WGM2TCAPsychrobacter sp.Gammaproteobacteria
Citrate lyase subunit betaP17725TCAKlebsiella pneumoniaeGammaproteobacteria
Succinate dehydrogenase flavoprotein subunitQ59661TCAParacoccus denitrificansAlphaproteobacteria
Malate dehydrogenaseB2JQD2TCABurkholderia phymatumBetaproteobacteria
Succinate dehydrogenase flavoprotein subunitP08065TCABacillus subtilisBacilli; Bacillales
Malate synthase GA4IN50TCAGeobacillus thermodenitrificansBacilli; Bacillales
EndoglucanaseP10475Cellulose degradationBacillus subtilisBacilli; Bacillales
Endoglucanase E-2P26222Cellulose degradationThermobifida fuscaActinobacteria
Probable beta-glucosidase IA2R989Cellulose degradationAspergillus nigerEurotiomycetes
Endo-1,4-beta-xylanase BP26515Hemicellulose degradationStreptomyces lividansActinobacteria
1,4-alpha-glucan branching enzyme GlgBA8GKV0Starch and sucrose metabolismSerratia proteamaculansGammaproteobacteria
Phosphoglucosamine mutaseQ5NNT4Amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolismZymomonas mobilisAlphaproteobacteria
2-keto-3-deoxy-L-rhamnonate aldolaseQ31Z78Fructose and mannose metabolismShigella boydiiGammaproteobacteria
Sensor protein ChvGP72292Cell wall degradationSinorhizobium melilotiAlphaproteobacteria
Most abundant fungal genera for the predominant phyla Proteins belonged to carbohydrate metabolic pathway identified in the composting metaproteome Compared with bacteria, the diversity of fungi was lower, but also generally the species richness of fungi is not as high as that of bacteria. This finding was congruent with those of other investigators (Hultman et al., 2010; De Gannes et al., 2013a).

Microbial community differs between sampling times

The protein assignments illustrated that specific taxa of bacteria and fungi had different temporal abundances (Fig. 1). The Bacilli, Gammaproteobacteria and Alphaproteobacteria were further divided into the orders in order to study the phylogenetic differences between the three samples (Fig. 1A). The largest increase in the proportion of plant spectra was observed in Bacillales (4.8 to 14.1%) in the active phase, followed by Actinomycetales (6.2 to 11.3%). The proportion of Pseudomonadales sharply decreased in the active phase from 29.7% to 4.3%. As the composts transitioned into the curing phase, the proportion of order Rhizobiales decreased from 6.2% to 2.1%.
Figure 1

Phylogenetic assignment of (A) bacterial and (B) fungal proteins detected in the three samples. Relative abundances were calculated from the sum of SpCns found for each group at the respective sampling sites. (A) The sum is 717 565 and 443 respectively; (B) the sum is 315 225 and 242 respectively.

Phylogenetic assignment of (A) bacterial and (B) fungal proteins detected in the three samples. Relative abundances were calculated from the sum of SpCns found for each group at the respective sampling sites. (A) The sum is 717 565 and 443 respectively; (B) the sum is 315 225 and 242 respectively. Bacteria may be present throughout the composting process as active or dormant cells, or as spores. Only their numbers and level of activity change during the composting process (Gentleman et al., 2004). Microorganisms belonging to the Bacillales and Actinobacteria, known to be critical for an efficient composting process, were sufficiently abundant in the waste to inoculate the subsequent composting process. However, the numbers were found to be lower than those of the Lactobacillales in most large-scale reactors, because the oxygen supply may be restricted (Partanen et al., 2010; Watanabe et al., 2010). To improve this situation, the active phase of the composting process should be steered towards conditions that favour thermotolerant microbes such as Bacillales and Actinobacteria. In this study, the main adjustment was turning the compost pile mechanically according to a schedule. The Bacillales and Actinobacteria groups became dominant as composting progressed, and there was no increase in Lactobacillales, suggesting that improving the internal aeration of the composting mass by mechanized turning was an efficient way to improve the performance of the composting plant. The sharp decrease of the order Pseudomonadales could be explained by the effects of high temperature on Gram-negative bacteria (Dees and Ghiorse, 2001). On the other hand, as previously reported, the type of indigenous microorganisms such as actinomycetes and fungi is critical for the suppression of pathogens growth in compost (Kim et al., 2011). This might be another reason why the order Pseudomonadales decreased. Since proteins representing the Saccharomycetes were by far the largest group, this class was further divided into genuses in order to study the phylogenetic differences (Fig. 1B). The largest increase in the proportion was observed in Saccharomyces (19.5% to 35.7%), followed by Schizosaccharomyces (13.0% to 16.1%). The smallest decrease was observed in Kluyveromyces (6.5% to 3.6%), followed by Candida (10.4% to 5.4%) and Sordariomycetes (13.0% to 1.8%). The proportion of Eremothecium rose to 12.3% in the active phase and decreased to 7.1% in the curing phase. A high proportion of ascomycetous yeasts, included order Saccharomycetes and Schizosaccharomycetes, were detected at all examined phases. Yeasts being able to grow at low pH may promote a reduction in the acidity and an increase in the growth of thermophilic bacteria (Choi and Park, 1998). Previous studies have reported on the presence of yeasts during the early phases of composting (Bonito et al., 2010; Hultman et al., 2010). Although plant and human pathogens were found at the start of active phase, few pathogenic species were recovered from samples representing the curing phase of composting suggesting that the composting process is effective in the removal of fungal pathogens.

Carbohydrate metabolism in composting process

The most prevalent bacterial and fungal proteins in the metaproteome were components of carbohydrate metabolic enzymes (77 proteins; 12.0% of the total metaproteome), translation proteins (74; 11.6%), ribosomal subunits (60; 9.4%) and transport proteins (42; 6.6%). Deoxyribonucleic acid replication and repair proteins (41), amino acid metabolic enzymes (36), protein chaperones (36), transcription proteins (36) and outer membrane proteins (32) were also detected in the metaproteome (Supplementary Table S1 and S2). Composting can be defined as an aerobic process of decomposition of organic matter. The active phase of composting involves the degradation of easily degradable compounds such as carbohydrates, amino acids, proteins and lipids. In the current metaproteome, the carbohydrate metabolic enzymes comprised a higher proportion, suggesting that the carbohydrate metabolism was the principal metabolic pathway in composting process. These enzymes were involved in different carbohydrate metabolic pathways (Fig. 2). The largest amounts (29 of the 77 total) of carbohydrate metabolic enzymes were involved in the citrate cycle (TCA cycle, Krebs cycle), including malate dehydrogenase (9), succinate dehydrogenase (6) and malate synthase (5), which were much more abundant than the enzymes were essential for glycolysis/gluconeogenesis (16), pyruvate metabolism (10), cellulose degradation (8) and amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolism (5) (Table 4).
Figure 2

Depiction of the carbohydrate metabolic characteristics of microbial communities inferred from the metaproteome. Proteins shown are: (1) Hexokinase; (2) 6-phosphofructokinase; (3) Triosephosphate isomerase; (4) Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase; (5) Enolase; (6) Aryl-phospho-beta-D-glucosidase; (7) Fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase; (8) Phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase; (9) Pyruvate dehydrogenase; (10) Acetyl-coenzyme A synthetase; (11) Acetate kinase; (12) Pyruvate, phosphate dikinase; (13) Glyoxylate/hydroxypyruvate reductase; (14) Citrate synthase; (15) Aconitate hydratase; (16) Isocitrate dehydrogenase; (17) Succinate dehydrogenase; (18) Malate dehydrogenase; (19) Isocitrate lyase; (20) Malate synthase; (21) Citrate lyase; (22) Exoglucanase; (23) Endoglucanase; (24) Cellobiose dehydrogenase; (25) Beta-glucosidase; (26) Endo-1,4-beta-xylanase B; (27)1,4-alpha-glucan branching enzyme GlgB; (28) Mannose-6-phosphate isomerase; (29) Phosphoglucosamine mutase; (30) Beta-N-acetylhexosaminidase; (31) 2-keto-3-deoxy-L-rhamnonate aldolase; (32) Xylose isomerase.

Depiction of the carbohydrate metabolic characteristics of microbial communities inferred from the metaproteome. Proteins shown are: (1) Hexokinase; (2) 6-phosphofructokinase; (3) Triosephosphate isomerase; (4) Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase; (5) Enolase; (6) Aryl-phospho-beta-D-glucosidase; (7) Fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase; (8) Phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase; (9) Pyruvate dehydrogenase; (10) Acetyl-coenzyme A synthetase; (11) Acetate kinase; (12) Pyruvate, phosphate dikinase; (13) Glyoxylate/hydroxypyruvate reductase; (14) Citrate synthase; (15) Aconitate hydratase; (16) Isocitrate dehydrogenase; (17) Succinate dehydrogenase; (18) Malate dehydrogenase; (19) Isocitrate lyase; (20) Malate synthase; (21) Citrate lyase; (22) Exoglucanase; (23) Endoglucanase; (24) Cellobiose dehydrogenase; (25) Beta-glucosidase; (26) Endo-1,4-beta-xylanase B; (27)1,4-alpha-glucan branching enzyme GlgB; (28) Mannose-6-phosphate isomerase; (29) Phosphoglucosamine mutase; (30) Beta-N-acetylhexosaminidase; (31) 2-keto-3-deoxy-L-rhamnonate aldolase; (32) Xylose isomerase. The identified enzymes related to carbohydrate metabolism were mainly affiliated to Gammaproteobacteria (25), Alphaproteobacteria (16), Bacilli (11), Actinobacteria (7), Saccharomycetes (6) and Sordariomycetes (6) members (Table 4). The proportion of Saccharomyces proteins increased significantly in composting process, but no proteins involved in carbohydrate metabolism were detected except the earlier phase.

Key cellulolytic community in different composting stages is different

Ten cellulase and hemicellulase were identified in composting samples (Table 4). All three cellulase in the sample LS1 matched to fungi, included Fusarium oxysporum, Neurospora crassa and Phanerochaete chrysosporium, whereas all cellulase and hemicellulase in the sample LS2 matched to bacteria, such as Bacillus subtilis and Thermobifida fusca. The most common complex carbohydrate available in the composting substrates is cellulose. A key function of bacteria and fungi during composting is to produce cellulolytic enzymes (Hubbe et al., 2010). In the earlier phase, cellulolytic fungal communities specifically targeted the breakdown of the cellulose. However, the cellulolytic fungal communities were replaced by a purely bacterial one in the active phase. As the composts transitioned into the curing phase, cellulolytic fungal communities were recovered and the mixed community of bacteria and fungi enhance the decomposition of cellulose. Previously, it has been shown that thermophilic fungi are active through the thermophilic phase (Tchobanoglous et al., 1993). Our results revealed that the cellulolytic fungal communities played a vital role in earlier phase, after which they gradually disappeared and cellulolytic bacterial communities gradually played a leading role. This suggested that the key microbiologic population for cellulose degradation in different composting stages was different. Cellulose is a polymer of glucose, which is digested by a variety of enzymes. Cellulose itself requires three types of enzymes for its decomposition: Endoglucanases hydrolyse accessible intramolecular β-1,4-glucosidic bonds of cellulose chains randomly to produce new chain ends; exoglucanases or cellobiohydrolases processively cleave cellulose chains at the ends to release soluble cellobiose or glucose; and β-glucosidases hydrolyse cellobiose to glucose in order to eliminate cellobiose inhibition (Percival Zhang et al., 2006). In the current study, all three types of cellulases were detected in the metaproteome, suggesting the effective breakdown of cellulose in the composting process. Interestingly, exoglucanases and β-glucosidases were only produced by fungi, whereas endoglucanases were only produced by bacteria. Beta-glucosidase is a limited enzyme in cellulose decomposition, and it was only found in the curing phase. This indicated that the curing phase may be the key phase, in which mixed communities of bacteria and fungi worked together to digested cellulose.

Nitrogen flows in composting process

In composting processes, the nitrogen flows can be best described through ammonia (NH3) dynamics, which encompasses the production, volatilization, conversion and assimilation of ammonia (Szántó, 2009). Proteins that could be assigned to a function in the production of ammonia were identified in the metaproteome, including proteases and urease (Table 5). This suggested that the protein and urea were the source of ammonia in the municipal solid waste.
Table 5

Proteins belonged to nitrogen metabolism identified in the composting metaproteome

Protein nameAccessionFunctional groupSpeciesTaxonomy
Lon protease 2P36774Protein degradationMyxococcus xanthusDeltaproteobacteria
Lon protease homolog 2, peroxisomalQ6CWS4Protein degradationKluyveromyces lactisSaccharomycetes
Probable M18 family aminopeptidase 2A4VJG1Protein degradationPseudomonas stutzeriGammaproteobacteria
Probable cytosol aminopeptidaseQ0SHL0Protein degradationRhodococcus jostiiActinobacteria
ATP-dependent zinc metalloprotease FtsHQ03Z46Protein degradationLeuconostoc mesenteroidesBacilli; Lactobacillales
ATP-dependent Clp protease ATP-binding subunit ClpXB2JGL6Protein degradationBurkholderia phymatumBetaproteobacteria
ATP-dependent protease ATPase subunit HslUQ73NE3Protein degradationTreponema denticolaSpirochaetes
Urease subunit alphaB1JR71Urea degradationYersinia pseudotuberculosisGammaproteobacteria
[Protein-PII] uridylyltransferaseQ3J5H6Nitrogen fixationRhodobacter sphaeroidesAlphaproteobacteria
Nitrous-oxide reductaseP19573DenitrificationPseudomonas stutzeriGammaproteobacteria
Proteins belonged to nitrogen metabolism identified in the composting metaproteome Nitrogen can be lost as NO3-, NO2-, N2 or N2O through the process nitrification–denitrification (Szántó, 2009). Only one denitrification enzyme (nitrous-oxide reductase) produced by Pseudomonas stutzeri was detected in the metaproteome (Table 5). This indicated that denitrification enzymes production of other denitrifying bacteria was not obvious, and the Pseudomonas might be the key player in denitrification pathway in composting process. The high abundance of translation proteins (11.6%) and amino acid metabolic enzymes (5.6%) could be attributed to nitrogen assimilation in composting process. Microbial biomass such as bacteria, viruses and fungi require nitrogen for their cell matter, which they gain from ammonium through assimilation into the cell tissue (Szántó, 2009). Assimilation is the immobilization of the ammoniacal nitrogen by the consecutive amino acid and protein synthesis. Another nitrogen assimilation route is the process of nitrogen fixation, in which N2 gas is converted into the biologically useful forms. In the current study, nitrogen fixation enzyme was only produced by Rhodobacter sphaeroides (Table 5).

Conclusions

Our metaproteomic analysis provided insight into microbial succession and in the activity of certain phylogenetic groups in a large-scale composting plant. The investigation of microbial succession revealed that Bacillales, Actinobacteria and Saccharomyces increased significantly with respect to abundance in composting process. The Gammaproteobacteria were the single largest group accounting for 40.3% of the total bacterial proteins. The carbohydrate metabolism was the principal metabolic pathway in composting process. Cellulose and hemicellulose were the main carbon sources. Three types of cellulase essential for cellulose degradation were detected. Fungi were found to be the main producers of cellulase in earlier phase. Only bacterial, but no fungal, cellulolytic enzymes were detected at the end of the active phase, a finding that strongly supported our conclusion that the key microbiologic population for cellulose degradation in different composting stages was different, which did not support the concept that the thermophilic fungi are active through the thermophilic phase. In the curing phase, mixed community of bacteria and fungi enhance decomposition of cellulose, suggesting that the curing phase may be a rate-limiting phase in the cellulose decomposition process. Though some denitrifying bacteria such Azotobacter vinelandii, Azotobacter chroococcum and Paracoccus denitrificans were detected in the samples, only Pseudomonas stutzeri produced denitrification enzyme. This indicated that denitrification enzymes production of other denitrifying bacteria was not obvious, and the Pseudomonas might be the key player in denitrification pathway in composting process. We are fully aware that the metaproteomics-based approach suffers from certain limitations such as the protein extraction efficiency and data analysis. For complex environmental samples, it has been estimated that « 1% of the total metaproteome can be resolved using current method (Wilmes and Bond, 2006; Leary et al., 2013). Database selection has a significant impact in metaproteomics, and provides critical indications for improving depth and reliability of metaproteomic results (Tanca et al., 2013). Nevertheless, we believe that the metaproteome analysis provides a deep insight into molecular details of the composting process. Thus, further proteome analyses will help to elucidate the main metabolic pathways occurring at the microbial level in different composting systems.

Experimental procedures

Sampling

Samples were collected from Asuwei Composting Plant in Beijing, China. More details of this composting plant and how composting was carried out has been described elsewhere (He et al., 2011). The entire composting process was divided into the active and curing phases. The active phase was carried out for 20 days during which the pile was turned every 2 days by forklift, and the average temperature was maintained at around 60°C. The curing phase took 30 days to complete, and the pile was turned mechanically every 7 days. The temperature began to decrease in 20 days and reached a constant level with ambient temperature after 50 days. Triplicate samples were collected at different points from the top to the bottom of the composting plies after 5, 20 and 50 days. At different sampling-times, triplicate samples were mixed, and the composite sample was divided into two parts. Metaproteome analyses were performed in duplicate.

Physicochemical analyses

The pH was measured with a pH meter (SevenEasy S20, Mettler Toledo, Shanghai, China) and a standard electrode by mixing the samples with deionized water at a weight/volume ratio of 1:10 (Laos et al., 2002). Water content was determined gravimetrically by drying the sample at 105°C for 6 h. Total carbon was evaluated by dry combustion at 550°C (Navarro et al., 1990), and total nitrogen by the Kjeldahl digestion analysis. Information on the sampling and the physical-chemical properties at the sampling dates is illustrated in Table 1.

Metaproteomics

Protein extraction from 5 g fresh composting samples followed the method of Keiblinger and colleagues (2012) using 20 ml extraction buffer [1: 1 (v: v) SDSphenol buffer: 50 mM Tris, 1% SDS pH 7.5 + phenol (pH 8.0)]. Extracted proteins were separated by one-dimensional SDS-PAGE. Before electrophoresis, the protein pellet was dissolved in appropriate volumes sample buffer for SDS-PAGE and incubated 20 min at 100°C. After centrifugation, the supernatant (5 μl) was loaded on SDS gel (5% stacking gel, 10% separating gel) using a Mini-PROTEAN Tetra system (Bio-Rad, Beijing, China). After electrophoresis, gel was stained with Coomassie brilliant blue R250. For identification of proteins from composting samples, each lane of the SDS-PAGE was cut into seven slices. The gel slices were further cut into 1 mm3 gel pieces and subjected to immediate in-gel tryptic digestion (Promega, Madison, WI, USA). Digested peptides were separated by nano-LC (Ultimate 3000, Dionex, Sunnyvale, CA, USA; column: Venusil XBP-C18, 3.0 μm, 150 × 0.075 mm, Agela Technologies, Wilmington, DE, USA; eluent: 0.1% formic acid, 0% to 60% acetonitrile) and analysed by MS/MS (Q Exactive, Thermo Scientific, Pittsburgh PA, USA) as described earlier (Williams et al., 2012). Database searches were carried out with MS/MS ion search (MASCOT, http://www.matrixscience.com) against a non-redundant protein database, SwissProt2013 xyzzy (539 616 sequences; 191 569 459 residues). The following search parameters were applied: (i) trypsin was chosen as protein-digesting enzyme and one missed cleavages were tolerated, (ii) carbamidomethyl-cysteine was chosen as fixed modification and (iii) Gln- > pyro-Glu (N-term Q) and oxidation (M) were chosen as variable modification. Searches were performed with a peptide mass tolerance of ± 15 ppm and a fragment mass tolerance of ± 20 mmu. Mascot searches with a false discovery rate > 5% were rejected. Protein matches were only accepted if they were identified by a minimum of one unique peptide. All proteins were manually annotated with the aid of blastp, and the protein hit that showed the highest sequence identity was recorded, including the organism name (Supplementary Table S1 and S2). Higher protein abundance is represented by a higher number of MS/MS spectra acquired from peptides of the respective protein. Thus, protein abundances were calculated based on the normalized spectral counts (SpCn; Piersma et al., 2010). An important consideration with spectrum counting and similar approaches is the fact that small proteins tend to have fewer peptides identified per protein compared with large proteins (Florens et al., 2006). All phylogenetic group abundances presented in the metaproteome are based on SpCns.

Conflict of interest

None declared.
  39 in total

1.  Succession of microbial communities during hot composting as detected by PCR-single-strand-conformation polymorphism-based genetic profiles of small-subunit rRNA genes.

Authors:  S Peters; S Koschinsky; F Schwieger; C C Tebbe
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 2.  Heavy metal-resistant bacteria as extremophiles: molecular physiology and biotechnological use of Ralstonia sp. CH34.

Authors:  D H Nies
Journal:  Extremophiles       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.395

3.  Identification of fungi associated with municipal compost using DNA-based techniques.

Authors:  Gregory Bonito; Omoanghe S Isikhuemhen; Rytas Vilgalys
Journal:  Bioresour Technol       Date:  2009-09-18       Impact factor: 9.642

4.  Prokaryotic successions and diversity in composts as revealed by 454-pyrosequencing.

Authors:  Vidya de Gannes; Gaius Eudoxie; William J Hickey
Journal:  Bioresour Technol       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 9.642

5.  Quantitative proteomic approach for cellulose degradation by Neurospora crassa.

Authors:  Christopher M Phillips; Anthony T Iavarone; Michael A Marletta
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2011-08-01       Impact factor: 4.466

6.  Which metaproteome? The impact of protein extraction bias on metaproteomic analyses.

Authors:  Dagmar Hajkova Leary; W Judson Hervey; Jeffrey R Deschamps; Anne W Kusterbeck; Gary J Vora
Journal:  Mol Cell Probes       Date:  2013-07-02       Impact factor: 2.365

7.  Revised sequence and annotation of the Rhodobacter sphaeroides 2.4.1 genome.

Authors:  Wayne S Kontur; Wendy S Schackwitz; Natalia Ivanova; Joel Martin; Kurt Labutti; Shweta Deshpande; Hope N Tice; Christa Pennacchio; Erica Sodergren; George M Weinstock; Daniel R Noguera; Timothy J Donohue
Journal:  J Bacteriol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.490

8.  Characterization of the two Neurospora crassa cellobiose dehydrogenases and their connection to oxidative cellulose degradation.

Authors:  Christoph Sygmund; Daniel Kracher; Stefan Scheiblbrandner; Kawah Zahma; Alfons K G Felice; Wolfgang Harreither; Roman Kittl; Roland Ludwig
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 4.792

9.  Who is who in litter decomposition? Metaproteomics reveals major microbial players and their biogeochemical functions.

Authors:  Thomas Schneider; Katharina M Keiblinger; Emanuel Schmid; Katja Sterflinger-Gleixner; Günther Ellersdorfer; Bernd Roschitzki; Andreas Richter; Leo Eberl; Sophie Zechmeister-Boltenstern; Kathrin Riedel
Journal:  ISME J       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 10.302

10.  Coffee husk composting: an investigation of the process using molecular and non-molecular tools.

Authors:  Fekadu Shemekite; María Gómez-Brandón; Ingrid H Franke-Whittle; Barbara Praehauser; Heribert Insam; Fassil Assefa
Journal:  Waste Manag       Date:  2013-12-23       Impact factor: 7.145

View more
  8 in total

1.  A meta-proteomics approach to study the interspecies interactions affecting microbial biofilm development in a model community.

Authors:  Jakob Herschend; Zacharias B V Damholt; Andrea M Marquard; Birte Svensson; Søren J Sørensen; Per Hägglund; Mette Burmølle
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  Taxonomic differences of gut microbiomes drive cellulolytic enzymatic potential within hind-gut fermenting mammals.

Authors:  Emma C L Finlayson-Trick; Landon J Getz; Patrick D Slaine; Mackenzie Thornbury; Emily Lamoureux; Jamie Cook; Morgan G I Langille; Lois E Murray; Craig McCormick; John R Rohde; Zhenyu Cheng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Metaproteomics analysis of the functional insights into microbial communities of combined hydrogen and methane production by anaerobic fermentation from reed straw.

Authors:  Xuan Jia; Bei-Dou Xi; Ming-Xiao Li; Yang Yang; Yong Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-17       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Bacterial succession and functional diversity during vermicomposting of the white grape marc Vitis vinifera v. Albariño.

Authors:  Allison R Kolbe; Manuel Aira; María Gómez-Brandón; Marcos Pérez-Losada; Jorge Domínguez
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Soil Metaproteomics for the Study of the Relationships Between Microorganisms and Plants: A Review of Extraction Protocols and Ecological Insights.

Authors:  Maria Tartaglia; Felipe Bastida; Rosaria Sciarrillo; Carmine Guarino
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-11-11       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  Microbial Communities Influence Soil Dissolved Organic Carbon Concentration by Altering Metabolite Composition.

Authors:  Tayte P Campbell; Danielle E M Ulrich; Jason Toyoda; Jaron Thompson; Brian Munsky; Michaeline B N Albright; Vanessa L Bailey; Malak M Tfaily; John Dunbar
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 5.640

7.  Study on Microbial Community Succession and Functional Analysis during Biodegradation of Mushroom Residue.

Authors:  Chaonan Wang; Yuxin Wang; Hua Ru; Ting He; Nan Sun
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-07-12       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Assigning ecological roles to the populations belonging to a phenanthrene-degrading bacterial consortium using omic approaches.

Authors:  Sabrina Festa; Bibiana Marina Coppotelli; Laura Madueño; Claudia Lorena Loviso; Marianela Macchi; Ricardo Martin Neme Tauil; María Pía Valacco; Irma Susana Morelli
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.