| Literature DB >> 26346219 |
Anish Bhattacharyya1, Niladri Shekhar Majumder2, Pijush Basak1, Shayantan Mukherji3, Debojyoti Roy1, Sudip Nag1, Anwesha Haldar4, Dhrubajyoti Chattopadhyay1, Suparna Mitra5, Maitree Bhattacharyya1, Abhrajyoti Ghosh3.
Abstract
Mangroves are among the most diverse and productive coastal ecosystems in the tropical and subtropical regions. Environmental conditions particular to this biome make mangroves hotspots for microbial diversity, and the resident microbial communities play essential roles in maintenance of the ecosystem. Recently, there has been increasing interest to understand the composition and contribution of microorganisms in mangroves. In the present study, we have analyzed the diversity and distribution of archaea in the tropical mangrove sediments of Sundarbans using 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. The extraction of DNA from sediment samples and the direct application of 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing resulted in approximately 142 Mb of data from three distinct mangrove areas (Godkhali, Bonnie camp, and Dhulibhashani). The taxonomic analysis revealed the dominance of phyla Euryarchaeota and Thaumarchaeota (Marine Group I) within our dataset. The distribution of different archaeal taxa and respective statistical analysis (SIMPER, NMDS) revealed a clear community shift along the sampling stations. The sampling stations (Godkhali and Bonnie camp) with history of higher hydrocarbon/oil pollution showed different archaeal community pattern (dominated by haloarchaea) compared to station (Dhulibhashani) with nearly pristine environment (dominated by methanogens). It is indicated that sediment archaeal community patterns were influenced by environmental conditions.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26346219 PMCID: PMC4543378 DOI: 10.1155/2015/968582
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Archaea Impact factor: 3.273
Figure 1Geographical location of the sampling stations (Jharkhali-A, Sahidnagar-B, and Godkhali-C) in Indian Sundarbans. Coordinates of the sampling points and description of the stations are presented in Section 2.
Environmental parameters of sampling sites analyzed in this study.
| Sample | Site | Latitude °N | Longitude °E | Depth (cm) |
| Salinity (psu) | pH | DO (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surface | Godkhali | 22°06′32.570′′ | 88°46′22.220′′ | 2 | 31.30 | 21.00 | 7.88 | 7.32 |
| Subsurface | Godkhali | 22°06′32.570′′ | 88°46′22.220′′ | 32 | 31.80 | 20.80 | 7.85 | 7.24 |
| Surface | Bonnie camp | 21°49′53.581′′ | 88°36′44.860′′ | 2 | 32.10 | 21.60 | 7.98 | 7.15 |
| Subsurface | Bonnie camp | 21°49′53.581′′ | 88°36′44.860′′ | 32 | 32.50 | 21.40 | 7.97 | 7.05 |
| Surface | Dhulibhashani | 21°37′40.837′′ | 88°33′47.762′′ | 2 | 29.70 | 22.80 | 7.96 | 7.15 |
| Subsurface | Dhulibhashani | 21°37′40.837′′ | 88°33′47.762′′ | 32 | 30.10 | 22.10 | 7.95 | 7.02 |
Average of three independent measurements, n = 3.
Sample statistics.
| Samples | Total number of reads sequenced | Assigned against SILVA using BLASTN 2.2.25+ and MEGAN |
|---|---|---|
| Godkhali_surface | 15,939 | 15,647 |
| Godkhali_subsurface | 23,437 | 23,091 |
| Bonnie camp_surface | 15,371 | 15,120 |
| Bonnie camp_subsurface | 15,788 | 15,654 |
| Dhulibhashani_surface | 33,771 | 33,395 |
| Dhulibhashani_subsurface | 37,510 | 37,046 |
Figure 2Hierarchical clustering (complete-linkage) heat map generated from taxonomic abundance profile (using Spearman's rank correlation) reflecting spatial distribution of archaeal class in the sediment of Sundarbans (using Pearson's correlation).
Univariate diversity indices.
| Sample | Total species ( | Total individuals ( | Species richness (Margalef): | Pielou's evenness | Shannon | Simpson (1 − Lambda′) = 1 − SUM( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Godkhali_surface | 11 | 100 | 2.171 | 0.3447 | 0.8264 | 0.5206 |
| Godkhali_subsurface | 17 | 100 | 3.474 | 0.2384 | 0.6753 | 0.2998 |
| Bonnie camp_surface | 8 | 100 | 1.52 | 0.3597 | 0.748 | 0.5104 |
| Bonnie camp_subsurface | 18 | 100 | 3.692 | 0.3763 | 1.088 | 0.4389 |
| Dhulibhashani_surface | 16 | 100 | 3.257 | 0.3454 | 0.9575 | 0.4761 |
| Dhulibhashani_subsurface | 13 | 100 | 2.606 | 0.357 | 0.9157 | 0.4858 |
Figure 3Archaeal community compositional structure in the sediments of Sundarbans indicated by Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS) using Bray-Curtis distance. Gene abundance data was transformed based on presence/absence before creating Bray-Curtis resemblance matrix for NMDS analysis (showing similarity based on community composition only).
Figure 4(a) Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of samples based on environmental parameters, nutrient, and heavy metal levels in the sediments samples. (b) Correspondence analysis (CA) based on distribution of major taxonomic lineages generated analyzing genomic data in the sediment samples. (c) Correspondence analysis (CA) based on distribution of polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in the sediment samples.
Figure 5Voronoi diagram depicting comparative taxonomic profile composition pattern for each sample as a partition of a plane highlighting 6 major phyla.
(a) Godkhali versus Bonnie camp
| Taxon1 | Order/family/genus | Contribution2 (%) | Average3 % abundance in Godkhali | Average % abundance in Bonnie camp | Average dissimilarities |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thermoplasmata | Thermoplasmatales | 23.30 | 4.85 | 4.64 | 5.23 |
| Halobacteria |
| 11.72 | 1.50 | 1.64 | 2.63 |
| Thaumarchaeota | Thaumarchaeota | 10.08 | 8.29 | 7.99 | 2.26 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 8.33 | 0.65 | 0.99 | 1.87 |
| Methanomicrobia | Methanococcoides | 6.46 | 0.40 | 0.82 | 1.45 |
| Halobacteria |
| 5.42 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 1.22 |
| Halobacteria |
| 5.41 | 0.62 | 0.73 | 1.21 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 5.00 | 0.55 | 1.03 | 1.12 |
| Halobacteria |
| 3.97 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.89 |
| Halobacteria |
| 3.49 | 0.38 | 0.30 | 0.78 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 3.46 | 0.13 | 0.33 | 0.78 |
| Halobacteria |
| 3.17 | 0.08 | 0.30 | 0.71 |
| Halobacteria |
| 2.17 | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.49 |
(b) Dhulibhashani versus Godkhali
| Taxon1 | Order/family/genus | Contribution2 (%) | Average3 % abundance in Dhulibhashani | Average % abundance in Godkhali | Average dissimilarities |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methanomicrobia |
| 19.80 | 2.34 | 0.65 | 4.28 |
| Thermoplasmata | Thermoplasmatales | 18.75 | 4.59 | 4.85 | 4.05 |
| Methanomicrobia | Methanococcoides | 12.14 | 1.43 | 0.40 | 2.62 |
| Thaumarchaeota | Thaumarchaeota | 9.64 | 8.29 | 8.29 | 2.08 |
| Halobacteria |
| 8.80 | 0.75 | 1.50 | 1.90 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 4.02 | 0.34 | 0.00 | 0.87 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 3.84 | 0.45 | 0.13 | 0.83 |
| Halobacteria |
| 3.58 | 0.18 | 0.48 | 0.77 |
| Halobacteria |
| 3.49 | 0.42 | 0.62 | 0.75 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 2.47 | 0.21 | 0.00 | 0.53 |
| Halobacteria |
| 2.20 | 0.00 | 0.19 | 0.47 |
| Halobacteria |
| 1.90 | 0.24 | 0.38 | 0.41 |
(c) Dhulibhashani versus Bonnie camp
| Taxon1 | Order/family/genus | Contribution2 (%) | Average3 % abundance in station A | Average % abundance in station B | Average dissimilarities |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thermoplasmata | Thermoplasmatales | 20.76 | 4.59 | 4.64 | 5.12 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 14.23 | 2.34 | 0.99 | 3.51 |
| Halobacteria |
| 10.05 | 0.75 | 1.64 | 2.48 |
| Methanomicrobia | Methanococcoides | 8.65 | 1.43 | 0.82 | 2.13 |
| Thaumarchaeota | Thaumarchaeota | 6.72 | 8.29 | 7.99 | 1.66 |
| Halobacteria |
| 4.73 | 0.42 | 0.73 | 1.17 |
| Halobacteria |
| 4.42 | 0.18 | 0.47 | 1.09 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 3.96 | 0.70 | 1.03 | 0.98 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 3.42 | 0.34 | 0.00 | 0.84 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 3.40 | 0.45 | 0.33 | 0.84 |
| Halobacteria |
| 3.37 | 0.24 | 0.35 | 0.83 |
| Halobacteria |
| 2.92 | 0.24 | 0.30 | 0.72 |
| Halobacteria |
| 2.70 | 0.00 | 0.30 | 0.67 |
| Methanomicrobia |
| 2.10 | 0.21 | 0.00 | 0.52 |
1Phylum or class level for archaea.
2Contribution of each taxon to the overall dissimilarity between these two clusters.
3Average abundance of each taxon in the two clusters.