Literature DB >> 27022996

Differences down-under: alcohol-fueled methanogenesis by archaea present in Australian macropodids.

Emily C Hoedt1, Páraic Ó Cuív2, Paul N Evans1, Wendy J M Smith3, Chris S McSweeney3, Stuart E Denman3, Mark Morrison2.   

Abstract

The Australian macropodids (kangaroos and wallabies) possess a distinctive foregut microbiota that contributes to their reduced methane emissions. However, methanogenic archaea are present within the macropodid foregut, although there is scant understanding of these microbes. Here, an isolate taxonomically assigned to the Methanosphaera genus (Methanosphaera sp. WGK6) was recovered from the anterior sacciform forestomach contents of a Western grey kangaroo (Macropus fuliginosus). Like the human gut isolate Methanosphaera stadtmanae DSMZ 3091(T), strain WGK6 is a methylotroph with no capacity for autotrophic growth. In contrast, though with the human isolate, strain WGK6 was found to utilize ethanol to support growth, but principally as a source of reducing power. Both the WGK6 and DSMZ 3091(T) genomes are very similar in terms of their size, synteny and G:C content. However, the WGK6 genome was found to encode contiguous genes encoding putative alcohol and aldehyde dehydrogenases, which are absent from the DSMZ 3091(T) genome. Interestingly, homologs of these genes are present in the genomes for several other members of the Methanobacteriales. In WGK6, these genes are cotranscribed under both growth conditions, and we propose the two genes provide a plausible explanation for the ability of WGK6 to utilize ethanol for methanol reduction to methane. Furthermore, our in vitro studies suggest that ethanol supports a greater cell yield per mol of methane formed compared to hydrogen-dependent growth. Taken together, this expansion in metabolic versatility can explain the persistence of these archaea in the kangaroo foregut, and their abundance in these 'low-methane-emitting' herbivores.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27022996      PMCID: PMC5030694          DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2016.41

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  ISME J        ISSN: 1751-7362            Impact factor:   10.302


  51 in total

1.  KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes.

Authors:  M Kanehisa; S Goto
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2000-01-01       Impact factor: 16.971

2.  Population structure and phylogenetic characterization of marine benthic Archaea in deep-sea sediments.

Authors:  C Vetriani; H W Jannasch; B J MacGregor; D A Stahl; A L Reysenbach
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Methane production by red-necked wallabies (Macropus rufogriseus).

Authors:  J Madsen; M F Bertelsen
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 4.  Macropod nutrition.

Authors:  Joseph A Smith
Journal:  Vet Clin North Am Exot Anim Pract       Date:  2009-05

5.  Diversity, abundance and novel 16S rRNA gene sequences of methanogens in rumen liquid, solid and epithelium fractions of Jinnan cattle.

Authors:  Cai-Xia Pei; Sheng-Yong Mao; Yan-Fen Cheng; Wei-Yun Zhu
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The genome sequence of the rumen methanogen Methanobrevibacter ruminantium reveals new possibilities for controlling ruminant methane emissions.

Authors:  Sinead C Leahy; William J Kelly; Eric Altermann; Ron S Ronimus; Carl J Yeoman; Diana M Pacheco; Dong Li; Zhanhao Kong; Sharla McTavish; Carrie Sang; Suzanne C Lambie; Peter H Janssen; Debjit Dey; Graeme T Attwood
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-01-28       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Oxidation of hydrogen and reduction of methanol to methane is the sole energy source for a methanogen isolated from human feces.

Authors:  T L Miller; M J Wolin
Journal:  J Bacteriol       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 3.490

8.  Methane emissions from cattle.

Authors:  K A Johnson; D E Johnson
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 3.159

9.  From genomics to chemical genomics: new developments in KEGG.

Authors:  Minoru Kanehisa; Susumu Goto; Masahiro Hattori; Kiyoko F Aoki-Kinoshita; Masumi Itoh; Shuichi Kawashima; Toshiaki Katayama; Michihiro Araki; Mika Hirakawa
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2006-01-01       Impact factor: 16.971

10.  Heritability estimates of methane emissions from sheep.

Authors:  C S Pinares-Patiño; S M Hickey; E A Young; K G Dodds; S MacLean; G Molano; E Sandoval; H Kjestrup; R Harland; C Hunt; N K Pickering; J C McEwan
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Energy Conservation and Hydrogenase Function in Methanogenic Archaea, in Particular the Genus Methanosarcina.

Authors:  Thomas D Mand; William W Metcalf
Journal:  Microbiol Mol Biol Rev       Date:  2019-09-18       Impact factor: 11.056

2.  Culture- and metagenomics-enabled analyses of the Methanosphaera genus reveals their monophyletic origin and differentiation according to genome size.

Authors:  Emily C Hoedt; Donovan H Parks; James G Volmer; Carly P Rosewarne; Stuart E Denman; Christopher S McSweeney; Jane G Muir; Peter R Gibson; Páraic Ó Cuív; Philip Hugenholtz; Gene W Tyson; Mark Morrison
Journal:  ISME J       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 10.302

3.  The Draft Genome of the Non-Host-Associated Methanobrevibacter arboriphilus Strain DH1 Encodes a Large Repertoire of Adhesin-Like Proteins.

Authors:  Anja Poehlein; Rolf Daniel; Henning Seedorf
Journal:  Archaea       Date:  2017-05-28       Impact factor: 3.273

4.  Assembly of 913 microbial genomes from metagenomic sequencing of the cow rumen.

Authors:  Robert D Stewart; Marc D Auffret; Amanda Warr; Andrew H Wiser; Maximilian O Press; Kyle W Langford; Ivan Liachko; Timothy J Snelling; Richard J Dewhurst; Alan W Walker; Rainer Roehe; Mick Watson
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 14.919

5.  Comparative Microbiome Analysis Reveals the Ecological Relationships Between Rumen Methanogens, Acetogens, and Their Hosts.

Authors:  Zhipeng Li; Xiaoxu Wang; Antton Alberdi; Jiabo Deng; Zhenyu Zhong; Huazhe Si; Chengli Zheng; Hanlin Zhou; Jianming Wang; Yifeng Yang; André-Denis G Wright; Shengyong Mao; Zhigang Zhang; Leluo Guan; Guangyu Li
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 5.640

6.  Comparative Genomic Analysis of Members of the Genera Methanosphaera and Methanobrevibacter Reveals Distinct Clades with Specific Potential Metabolic Functions.

Authors:  Anja Poehlein; Dominik Schneider; Melissa Soh; Rolf Daniel; Henning Seedorf
Journal:  Archaea       Date:  2018-08-19       Impact factor: 3.273

7.  3-NOP vs. Halogenated Compound: Methane Production, Ruminal Fermentation and Microbial Community Response in Forage Fed Cattle.

Authors:  Gonzalo Martinez-Fernandez; Stephane Duval; Maik Kindermann; Horst J Schirra; Stuart E Denman; Christopher S McSweeney
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2018-08-07       Impact factor: 5.640

8.  Occurrence and expression of genes encoding methyl-compound production in rumen bacteria.

Authors:  William J Kelly; Sinead C Leahy; Janine Kamke; Priya Soni; Satoshi Koike; Roderick Mackie; Rekha Seshadri; Gregory M Cook; Sergio E Morales; Chris Greening; Graeme T Attwood
Journal:  Anim Microbiome       Date:  2019-11-14

9.  A catalogue of 1,167 genomes from the human gut archaeome.

Authors:  Cynthia Maria Chibani; Alexander Mahnert; Guillaume Borrel; Alexandre Almeida; Almut Werner; Jean-François Brugère; Simonetta Gribaldo; Robert D Finn; Ruth A Schmitz; Christine Moissl-Eichinger
Journal:  Nat Microbiol       Date:  2021-12-30       Impact factor: 17.745

Review 10.  Several ways one goal-methanogenesis from unconventional substrates.

Authors:  Julia M Kurth; Huub J M Op den Camp; Cornelia U Welte
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 4.813

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.