| Literature DB >> 26029177 |
Robinson W Fulweiler1, Elise M Heiss2, Mary Kate Rogener3, Silvia E Newell4, Gary R LeCleir5, Sarah M Kortebein5, Steven W Wilhelm5.
Abstract
Here we examined the impact of a commonly employed method used to measure nitrogen fixation, the acetylene reduction assay (ARA), on a marine sediment community. Historically, the ARA technique has been broadly employed for its ease of use, in spite of numerous known artifacts. To gauge the severity of these effects in a natural environment, we employed high-throughput 16S rRNA gene sequencing to detect differences in acetylene-treated sediments vs. non-treated control sediments after a 7 h incubation. Within this short time period, significant differences were seen across all activity of microbes identified in the sediment, implying that the changes induced by acetylene occur quickly. The results have important implications for our understanding of marine nitrogen budgets. Moreover, because the ARA technique has been widely used in terrestrial and freshwater habitats, these results may be applicable to other ecosystems.Entities:
Keywords: acetylene reduction assay; heterotrophic nitrogen fixation; high throughput sequencing; sediments; sulfate-reducing bacteria
Year: 2015 PMID: 26029177 PMCID: PMC4428210 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00418
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Geochemical measurements of the sediments used in this study.
| Core ID | Net N2–N flux, μmol m-2 h-1 | Depth, cm | Acetylene reduction assay (ARA) | Treated with Molybdate (M) or Seawater (S) | ARA N2 Flux, μmol m-2 h-1 | % change between SW and Mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core 1 | 7.5 | 0–2 | Y | S | 22.7 | -77 |
| 0–2 | Y | M | 5.1 | |||
| 2–4 | Y | S | 19.6 | -55 | ||
| 2–4 | Y | M | 8.9 | |||
| 0–2 | N | S | n.a. | |||
| 0–2 | N | M | n.a. | |||
| 2–4 | N | S | n.a. | |||
| 2–4 | N | M | n.a. | |||
| Core 2 | 28.6 | 0–2 | Y | S | 27.1 | -57 |
| 0–2 | Y | M | 11.6 | |||
| 2–4 | Y | S | 30.5 | -67 | ||
| 2–4 | Y | M | 10.0 | |||
| 0–2 | N | S | n.a. | |||
| 0–2 | N | M | n.a. | |||
| 2–4 | N | S | n.a. | |||
| 2–4 | N | M | n.a. | |||
| Core 3 | -10.3 | 0–2 | Y | S | 44.3 | -60 |
| 0–2 | Y | M | 17.6 | |||
| 2–4 | Y | S | 62.4 | -100 | ||
| 2–4 | Y | M | 0.0 | |||
| 0–2 | N | S | n.a. | |||
| 0–2 | N | M | n.a. | |||
| 2–4 | N | S | n.a. | |||
| 2–4 | N | M | n.a. |
Dominant operational taxonomic units (OTUs) that drive the separation of the acetylene treated sediments versus the control sediments.
| OTU | OTU count | Phylum | Genus (best hit) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9877∗ | 3738 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9979∗†‡ | 3313 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9899∗† | 1660 | Bacteroidetes | Unclassified |
| 9800∗†‡ | 1489 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9635∗† | 1044 | Bacteroidetes | |
| 9960∗†‡ | 1033 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9734∗† | 1005 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9918∗†‡ | 912 | Bacteroidetes | |
| 9879∗ | 497 | Spirochaetes | |
| 8638∗†‡ | 128 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9780†‡ | 165 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9819†‡ | 98 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9878∗†‡ | 4110 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9814∗† | 3642 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9829∗† | 2373 | Cyanobacteria | |
| 9905∗‡ | 2328 | Bacteroidetes | |
| 9921∗†‡ | 1912 | Bacteroidetes | |
| 9941∗† | 1436 | Bacteroidetes | |
| 9937∗† | 1347 | Bacteroidetes | |
| 9054∗† | 607 | Bacteroidetes | |
| 9908∗†‡ | 560 | Proteobacteria | |
| 6603∗† | 508 | Proteobacteria | |
| 9633†‡ | 516 | Bacteroidetes | |
| 9608†‡ | 265 | Proteobacteria | |
| 5645†‡ | 160 | Proteobacteria | |
| 7286‡ | 30 | Lentisphaerae |
Results from the ANOSIM and PERMANOVA analyses describing the impact acetylene, depth, or molybdate has on the active sediment microbial community.
| Treatment | ANOSIM | PERMANOVA | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample statistic ( | Significance level | Pseudo-F | ||
| ARA | 0.15 | 1.1 | 2.461 | 0.003 |
| Depth | 0.347 | 0.1 | 3.739 | 0.001 |
| Molybdate | -0.016 | 57.8 | 0.974 | 0.495 |