| Literature DB >> 26657303 |
Akira Kobayashi1, Yuki Ohdaira Kobayashi, Nobutaka Someya, Seishi Ikeda.
Abstract
Eight genotypes of potato plants with different resistance levels against common scab were grown in a field infested with Streptomyces turgidiscabies. DNA was extracted from the roots, tubers, and rhizosphere soils of each of the eight genotypes at the flowering stage, and the quantity of S. turgidiscabies genomic DNA was assessed by real-time PCR using a TaqMan probe. The results obtained showed that the different potato genotypes had significant impacts on the population levels of S. turgidiscabies between resistant and susceptible genotypes in the tubers, but not in the roots or rhizosphere soils. Clone analyses of 16S rRNA gene libraries from the eight potato genotypes identified three phyla (Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, and Actinobacteria) as dominant taxa in root and tuber clone libraries, while a clustering analysis identified 391 operational taxonomic units (OTUs) at the species level. Eleven OTUs closely related to Aquicella siphonis, Arthrobacter nicotinovorans, Streptomyces rishiriensis, Rhodococcus baikonurensis, Rhizobium radiobacter, Rhizobium etli, Phyllobacterium myrsinacearum, Paenibacillus pabuli, Paenibacillus alginolyticus, and Bacillus halmapalus were detected in the root or tuber libraries of all the potato genotypes examined. Furthermore, an abundance of OTUs related to Aquicella and Rhodococcus was observed in the rhizospheres of resistant and susceptible potato genotypes, respectively. Based on this ecological information, an efficient survey may be conducted for biological agents from the potato rhizosphere.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26657303 PMCID: PMC4676553 DOI: 10.1264/jsme2.ME15109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbes Environ ISSN: 1342-6311 Impact factor: 2.912
Characteristics of 8 potato genotypes harboring different resistance levles against common scab.
| Cultivers/line | Abbreviation | Resistance levels against common scab | Cross parent | Maturity | Usage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| female | male | |||||
| Yukirasha | R1 | Highly resistant | Early Gem | 86002-100 | medium-early | table use |
| 02005-10 | R2 | Highly resistant | Yukirahsa | Pike | medium | table use |
| Snow March | R3 | resistant | Atlantic | Cherokee | medium | table use |
| Star Ruby | M1 | moderately resistant | Hokkai No. 77 | 87028-6 | medium | table use |
| Snowden | M2 | moderately resistant | B5141-6 | Wischip | medium-late | chips |
| Irish Cobbler | S1 | susceptible | unknown | unknown | early | table use |
| Toyoshiro | S2 | susceptible | Hokkai No. 19 | Eniwa | medium-early | chips |
| Piruka | S3 | susceptible | Meihou | Tokachikogane | medium-early | table use |
Chemical characteristics of soil at the time of sampling rhizospheres.
| pH (H2O) | Organic C (g kg−1) | Total N (g kg−1) | Available N (mg kg−1) | NH4-N (mg kg−1) | NO3-N (mg kg−1) | Truog P (mg kg−1) | Ex-K2O (mg kg−1) | Ex-CaO (mg kg−1) | Ex-MgO (mg kg−1) | CEC (meq kg−1) | PAC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.9 | 29 | 2.5 | 73.4 | 10.3 | 9.3 | 105 | 365 | 1830 | 544 | 185 | 1639 |
phosphate absorption coefficient.
Fig. 1Quantification of genomic DNA of Streptomyces turgidiscabies in total DNA extracted from tubers. Eight genotypes of potato plants were grown in a field infested with S. turgidiscabies. DNA was extracted from the tubers of each of the eight genotypes at the flowering stage, and the quantity of genomic DNA of S. turgidiscabies was assessed by a real-time PCR assay using a TaqMan probe. The significance of differences in the amount of the genomic DNA of S. turgidiscabies between resistant and susceptible potato genotypes was tested by the two sample t-test. ** indicates significance at the 1% level (P<0.01).
Statistical characteristics of clone libraries of 16S rRNA gene sequences for root- and tuber-associated bacteria of 8 potato genotypes.
| Statistics and diversity indexes | Clone libraries | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Root | Tuber | |||||||||||||||
|
|
| |||||||||||||||
| R1 | R2 | R3 | M1 | M2 | S1 | S2 | S3 | R1 | R2 | R3 | M1 | M2 | S1 | S2 | S3 | |
| No. of sequences | 156 | 165 | 173 | 162 | 170 | 175 | 164 | 177 | 135 | 53 | 43 | 97 | 69 | 92 | 81 | 95 |
| No. of singletons | 50 | 47 | 43 | 44 | 40 | 60 | 68 | 51 | 20 | 17 | 10 | 31 | 21 | 25 | 16 | 18 |
| Library coverage (%) | 67.9 | 71.5 | 75.1 | 72.8 | 76.5 | 65.7 | 58.5 | 71.2 | 85.2 | 67.9 | 76.7 | 68.0 | 69.6 | 72.8 | 80.2 | 81.1 |
| No. of OTUs | 71 | 75 | 70 | 71 | 74 | 86 | 93 | 81 | 27 | 22 | 14 | 41 | 31 | 32 | 24 | 29 |
| Chao1 | 224.1 | 152.2 | 152.1 | 138.6 | 119.9 | 246.9 | 244.9 | 187.3 | 65.0 | 67.3 | 29.0 | 118.5 | 73.0 | 182.0 | 54.0 | 59.6 |
| ACE | 456.2 | 264.4 | 245.7 | 231.5 | 175.6 | 438.3 | 541.7 | 306.1 | 198.4 | 382.7 | 36.5 | 301.6 | 107.1 | 300.1 | 105.7 | 140.3 |
| Shannon ( | 3.8 | 3.9 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 4.2 | 4.0 | 1.8 | 2.5 | 1.7 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 2.6 |
| Simpson (1/ | 31.5 | 31.4 | 34.1 | 32.3 | 47.3 | 40.2 | 56.2 | 46.1 | 3.5 | 8.2 | 2.7 | 7.2 | 11.1 | 7.5 | 4.1 | 8.5 |
R, M, and S indicate the phenotypes of the 8 potato genotypes: resistant, medium resistant, and susceptible to potato scab diseases, respectively. R1, R2, R3, M1, M2, S1, S2, and S3 are designated for clone libraries of the 8 potato genotypes (Yukirasha, 02005-10, Snow March, Star Ruby, Snowden, Irish Cobbler, Toyoshiro, and Piruka, respectively).
C=1 (n/N), where n is the number of singletons that are encountered only once in a library and N is the total number of clones.
OTUs were defined at ≥97% sequence identity.
Fig. 2Principal-coordinates analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequences of clone libraries for bacteria derived from roots (○) and tubers (●) of eight potato genotypes (R1 [Yukirasha], R2 [02005-10], R3 [Snow March], M1 [Star Ruby], M2 [Snowden], S1 [Irish Cobbler], S2 [Toyoshiro], and S3 [Piruka]) grown in a field infested with common scab. The ordinations were constructed using UniFrac distances weighted by the relative abundance.
Phyllogenetic compositions of major taxa for root- and tuber-assoicated bacteria in 8 potato genotypes.
| Phyllogenetic composition | Clone libraries (%) | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Root | Tuber | |||||||||||||||
|
|
| |||||||||||||||
| R1 | R2 | R3 | M1 | M2 | S1 | S2 | S3 | R1 | R2 | R3 | M1 | M2 | S1 | S2 | S3 | |
| Actinobacteria | 11.5 | 9.1 | 8.7 | 3.7 | 11.8 | 8.6 | 6.1 | 9.6 | 3.0 | 3.8 | 2.3 | 10.3 | 8.7 | 15.2 | 13.6 | 23.2 |
| | 1.9 | 3.0 | 2.9 | — | 3.5 | 4.0 | 1.2 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.9 | — | — | 1.4 | 12.0 | 8.6 | 20.0 |
| | 3.8 | 1.2 | 2.3 | — | 4.1 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 1.1 | — | — | 2.3 | — | 1.4 | 1.1 | 1.2 | — |
| | 1.9 | 3.0 | 1.7 | 1.9 | 2.4 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.7 | 0.7 | — | — | 1.0 | — | 1.1 | 1.2 | 2.1 |
| Bacteroidetes | — | — | — | — | 1.8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| | — | — | — | — | 1.8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Chloroflexi | 0.6 | — | — | 0.6 | — | 0.6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Firmicutes | 21.8 | 18.2 | 12.7 | 19.8 | 13.5 | 10.3 | 18.9 | 15.8 | 38.5 | 35.8 | 69.8 | 59.8 | 50.7 | 26.1 | 9.9 | 41.1 |
| Clostridia | — | — | — | 0.6 | 0.6 | — | — | — | 0.7 | — | 7.0 | 4.1 | 1.4 | 1.1 | — | — |
| Bacilli | 21.8 | 18.2 | 12.7 | 19.2 | 12.9 | 10.3 | 18.9 | 15.8 | 36.3 | 35.8 | 60.5 | 54.6 | 49.3 | 25.0 | 8.6 | 37.9 |
| | 18.6 | 12.1 | 8.1 | 16.7 | 12.9 | 8.6 | 12.2 | 10.2 | 3.0 | 3.8 | — | 3.1 | 13.0 | 4.3 | — | 3.2 |
| | 2.6 | 5.5 | 4.6 | 2.5 | — | 1.7 | 5.5 | 5.1 | 32.6 | 30.2 | 58.1 | 40.2 | 29.0 | 18.5 | 8.6 | 32.6 |
| Gemmatimonadetes | — | — | — | — | — | 0.6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Planctomycetes | 5.1 | 2.4 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 4.7 | 9.7 | 4.9 | 1.7 | — | — | — | 1.0 | — | 3.3 | 2.5 | — |
| | 1.9 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.6 | — | — | — | — | — | 2.2 | 2.5 | — |
| Proteobacteria | 57.7 | 67.3 | 72.8 | 73.5 | 64.7 | 62.9 | 64.0 | 68.4 | 57.8 | 60.4 | 23.3 | 27.8 | 40.6 | 51.1 | 74.1 | 35.8 |
| Alphaproteobacteria | 13.5 | 21.2 | 26.6 | 27.2 | 28.2 | 36.6 | 18.9 | 32.8 | 49.6 | 45.3 | 18.6 | 19.6 | 31.9 | 43.5 | 65.4 | 18.9 |
| | — | 2.4 | — | — | — | — | 0.6 | — | 44.4 | 13.2 | 7.0 | 7.2 | 7.2 | 30.4 | 48.1 | 1.1 |
| | 2.6 | 6.7 | 13.3 | 14.8 | 8.2 | 21.1 | 7.9 | 16.4 | 2.2 | 1.9 | 4.7 | — | 4.3 | 8.7 | 9.9 | 5.3 |
| | 1.9 | 1.2 | 1.7 | 1.9 | 2.4 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 2.3 | — | — | — | — | 1.4 | — | 1.2 | — |
| Betaproteobacteria | 3.2 | 10.3 | 3.5 | 7.4 | 5.9 | 5.7 | 8.5 | 5.6 | 1.5 | 5.7 | — | 1.0 | — | 4.3 | 4.9 | 1.1 |
| Gammaproteobacteria | 33.3 | 35.2 | 37.0 | 37.0 | 28.2 | 19.4 | 27.4 | 24.3 | 5.9 | 7.6 | 4.7 | 6.2 | 7.2 | 3.3 | 2.5 | 15.8 |
| | 18.6 | 15.8 | 9.2 | 13.0 | 7.1 | 9.1 | 7.9 | 6.8 | — | 1.9 | — | 3.1 | — | 1.1 | — | — |
| | — | 2.4 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 2.8 | 0.7 | 5.7 | 4.7 | — | 4.3 | — | 1.2 | 4.2 |
| Unclassified | ||||||||||||||||
| Gammaproteobacteria | 12.8 | 9.7 | 16.8 | 9.3 | 4.1 | 5.1 | 11.0 | 5.1 | — | — | — | 1.0 | 1.4 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Deltaproteobacteria | 6.4 | 0.6 | 5.8 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 7.3 | 5.6 | — | 1.9 | — | 1.0 | — | — | — | — |
| Verrucomicrobia | 1.3 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 3.5 | 5.7 | 3.7 | 4.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 2.2 | — | — |
| Bacteria_incertae_sedis | — | — | — | 0.6 | 1.8 | 0.6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Unclassified Bacteria | 1.9 | 1.2 | 1.2 | — | — | 1.7 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 0.7 | — | 4.7 | 1.0 | — | 2.2 | — | — |
Sequences were grouped using the RDP Classifier of the Ribosomal Database Project-II release 11 with a confidence threshold of 80%.
R, M, and S indicate the phenotypes of the 8 potato genotypes; resistant, medium resistant, and susceptible to potato scab diseases, respectively. R1, R2, R3, M1, M2, S1, S2, and S3 are designated for clone libraries of the 8 potato genotypes (Yukirasha, 02005-10, Snow March, Star Ruby, Snowden, Irish Cobbler, Toyoshiro, and Piruka, respectively). CD stands for the isolate collections derived from roots or tubers of cultivar “Yukirasha”.
indicate significance at the 5% and 1% levels (P<0.05 and P<0.01), respectively, calculated with the Library Compare of RDP II, between R1 and other libraries.
Fig. 3Phylogenetic tree of representative sequences of OTUs for novel Gammaproteobacteria related to the genus Aquicella in the potato rhizosphere. The tree was constructed by the neighbor-joining method. The scale represents 0.1 substitutions per site. The numbers at the nodes are the proportions of 1,000 bootstrap resamplings; however, values <500 are not shown. The representative sequences of two OTUs (GP37 and GP47) discussed in the main text are indicated in bold.