| Literature DB >> 27482927 |
Nina Dombrowski1, Klaus Schlaeppi2, Matthew T Agler1, Stéphane Hacquard1, Eric Kemen1,3, Ruben Garrido-Oter1,3,4, Jörg Wunder5, George Coupland5, Paul Schulze-Lefert1,3.
Abstract
Recent field and laboratory experiments with perennial Boechera stricta and annual Arabidopsis thaliana suggest that the root microbiota influences flowering time. Here we examined in long-term time-course experiments the bacterial root microbiota of the arctic-alpine perennial Arabis alpina in natural and controlled environments by 16S rRNA gene profiling. We identified soil type and residence time of plants in soil as major determinants explaining up to 15% of root microbiota variation, whereas environmental conditions and host genotype explain maximally 11% of variation. When grown in the same soil, the root microbiota composition of perennial A. alpina is largely similar to those of its annual relatives A. thaliana and Cardamine hirsuta. Non-flowering wild-type A. alpina and flowering pep1 mutant plants assemble an essentially indistinguishable root microbiota, thereby uncoupling flowering time from plant residence time-dependent microbiota changes. This reveals the robustness of the root microbiota against the onset and perpetual flowering of A. alpina. Together with previous studies, this implies a model in which parts of the root microbiota modulate flowering time, whereas, after microbiota acquisition during vegetative growth, the established root-associated bacterial assemblage is structurally robust to perturbations caused by flowering and drastic changes in plant stature.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27482927 PMCID: PMC5097464 DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2016.109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISME J ISSN: 1751-7362 Impact factor: 10.302
Experimental design and numbers of replicates per DNA sample across experimental setups
| Soil | — | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Rhizosphere | 4 | 5 | — | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | — | — | — | — | |
| — | — | — | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | — | — | — | — | ||
| — | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||
| — | 5 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||
| Root | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | ||
| 4 | 5 | — | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | ||
| — | — | — | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | — | — | — | — | ||
| — | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||
| — | 5 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||
| Soil type | Cologne | France | Cologne | Cologne | Cologne | |||||||||
| Residence time | 12 weeks | 12 weeks | ND | 6 weeks | 6 weeks | 12 weeks | 12 weeks | 28 weeks | 28 weeks | 6 weeks | 6 weeks | 6 weeks | 6 weeks | |
| Harvest date soil | Spring13 | Fall12 | Spring13 | Fall13 | Spring13 | Fall13 | Spring13 | Fall13 | Fall10 | Spring13 | Fall13 | Spring13 | ||
| Environment | Controlled | Native | Controlled | Controlled | Controlled | |||||||||
| Seq. technology | Illumina | Illumina | 454 | Illumina | ||||||||||
Abbreviations: CS, Cologne soil; FS, French soil; ND, not determined.
Experimental setup comparing bacterial community composition under natural growth conditions (‘soil type and environment' experiments), prolonged residence time of plants in soil (‘time-course' experiment) on three different plant species (‘diversification' experiment). The first two columns characterize the tested compartment, host plant and plant genotype. The numbers indicate the number of sequenced DNA samples. ‘Soil type and environment' experiment: plants were grown in CS or FS under controlled environmental conditions (C) or in their native habitat in France (N). ‘Time course' experiment: A. alpina plants were grown under controlled environmental conditions in CS for 6, 12 and 28 weeks. ‘Diversification' experiment: A. alpina, C. hirsuta and A. thaliana were grown under controlled environmental conditions in CS for 6 weeks. Indicated are the number of independent biological replicates (rep1–rep3), the soil type used for growing plants (see also Supplementary Tables S3 and S4), the harvest date of the soil, the environmental conditions used for plant growth and the employed sequencing technology. ND, not determined.
Represents the same DNA samples that were processed with both 454 and Illumina sequencing technologies.
Figure 1Growth phenotype of A. alpina in a natural French habitat and under controlled environmental conditions. (a) Natural habitat of A. alpina in the French Alps. (b) Growth morphology of different A. alpina accessions in a French soil (FS) in its native habitat in the French Alps, in FS under controlled environmental conditions and Cologne soil (CS) under controlled environmental conditions. Gal60, French A. alpina accession collected in its natural habitat in the French Alps, Col du Galibier; Gal5, French A. alpina accession; Paj, Spanish A. alpina accession.
Figure 2Bacterial community shifts in A. alpina rhizosphere and root compartments. (a) Unconstrained ordination revealing that most of the variation among all 201 samples from the 3 experimental setups is explained by the factor compartment (first principal coordinate axis) and soil type (second principal coordinate axis) based on the Bray–Curtis distance metric. (b) Ternary plot depicting the number of OTUs enriched in the soil, rhizosphere and root compartments of the 59 samples of the ‘soil type and environment' experiment (SoilOTUs (black), RhizoOTUs (brown), RootOTUs (green), respectively). Each circle depicts one individual OTU. The size of the circle reflects the relative abundance (RA). The position of each circle is determined by the contribution of the indicated compartments to the RA. Number in brackets: Enriched OTUs based on a Bayes moderated t-test; P<0.05 (FDR-corrected). (c) Constrained principal coordinates analysis on the genotypes Paj, Gal60 and Gal5 grown in the French Soil in the greenhouse using the Bray–Curtis dissimilarity and constraining by host genotype. In each case, the percentage of variation explained by each axis refers to the fraction of the total variance of the data explained by the constrained factor. CS-C, Cologne soil grown under controlled environmental conditions' FS-C, French soil grown under controlled environmental conditions; FS-N, French soil grown under native environmental conditions.
Determining drivers of bacterial community assembly using CAP
| P | P | P- | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil type+environment | Compartment | 31 | *** | 21, 48 | 33 | *** | 20, 52 | 36 | *** | 23, 64 |
| Environment | 11 | *** | 8, 16 | 8.2 | *** | 5, 13 | 9.8 | *** | 7, 14 | |
| Compartment | 25 | *** | 15, 47 | 24 | *** | 13, 46 | 37 | *** | 19, 78 | |
| Genotype | 9.1 | *** | 7.3, 11 | 12 | *** | 8.5, 16 | 4.8 | * | 4.2, 5.5 | |
| Compartment | 31 | *** | 20, 50 | 39 | *** | 22, 67 | 33 | *** | 21, 53 | |
| Soil type | 15 | *** | 9, 26 | 11 | *** | 6, 20 | 15 | *** | 10, 25 | |
| Time course | Compartment | 19 | *** | 14, 27 | 25 | *** | 17, 39 | 18 | *** | 14, 26 |
| Time point | 9.9 | *** | 7.8, 13 | 12 | *** | 8.5, 18 | 6.6 | *** | 5.7, 7.8 | |
| Soil batch | 6.6 | *** | 4.9, 9.1 | 5.3 | *** | 3.6, 8 | 8.4 | *** | 6.6, 11 | |
| Flowering stage | 1.5 | NS | 1.2, 1.9 | 1.3 | NS | 1.0, 1.9 | 1.8 | * | 1.3, 2.5 | |
| Mutant background | 0.6 | NS | 0.4, 0.8 | 0.8 | NS | 0.5, 1.2 | 0.7 | NS | 0.5, 1.1 | |
| Diversification | Compartment | 21 | *** | 12, 37 | 26 | *** | 12, 51 | 18 | *** | 12, 31 |
| Soil batch | 19 | *** | 14, 28 | 20 | *** | 12, 32 | 18 | *** | 14, 24 | |
| Plant species | 10 | *** | 8, 14 | 10 | *** | 7, 15 | 7.3 | *** | 6, 9 | |
Abbreviations: CAP, constrained analysis of principal coordinates; CI, confidence interval; NS, non-significant; PERMANOVA, permutation-based analysis of variance.
Variation (in %) between samples in the ‘soil type and environment', ‘time course' and ‘diversification' experiments based on Bray–Curtis, weighted and unweighted UniFrac distances, constraining for the indicated factors. P-value based on PERMANOVA (999 permutations). *P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001. Samples were analyzed separately according to the three different experimental setups as stated in Table 1. In addition, the ‘soil type and environment' samples were separated as follows:
Gal60 grown at the natural site and the greenhouse.
Gal60, Gal5 and Paj grown in French soil in the greenhouse.
Paj grown in the French and Cologne soil in the greenhouse.
Figure 3A. alpina root-associated bacterial communities depend on soil residence time. (a) Principal coordinate analysis on samples from the ‘time course' experiment (106 samples) constrained for the factor time point for soil, rhizosphere and root compartments at 6, 12 and 28 weeks, respectively. The percentage of variation explained by each axis refers to the fraction of the total variance of the data explained by the constrained factor. (b–d) Soil-, rhizosphere- and root-enriched OTUs (RootOTUs, RhizoOTUs, SoilOTUs) including OTUs observed across all tested time points and OTUs specific for individual time points. Time point-specific SoilOTUs (b), RhizoOTUs (c) and RootOTUs (d). The mean of soil (b), rhizosphere (c) or root (d) samples at each time point is plotted. Number in brackets: total number of OTUs enriched in the respective compartment or time point. Enriched OTUs are based on a Bayes moderated t-test; P<0.05 (FDR-corrected).
Figure 4The A. alpina root microbiota is independent of flowering time. (a–c) Growth morphology of A. alpina wild-type (Paj) and pep1 mutant plants across the ‘time course' experiment. (d–f) Ternary plots of OTUs enriched in the ‘time course' experiment across the soil and root compartments of the A. alpina wild-type (Paj) and pep1 mutant plants after 6 weeks (a, d), 12 weeks (b, e) and 28 weeks (c, f). Each circle depicts one individual OTU. The size of the circle reflects the relative abundance (RA). The position of each circle is determined by the contribution of the indicated compartments to the RA. Number in brackets: total number of OTUs enriched in the respective plant line. OTUs enriched in the two plant lines are based on a Bayes moderated t-test; P<0.05 (FDR-corrected).
Figure 5The bacterial root microbiota of A. alpina is similar compared with A. thaliana and Cardamine hirsuta. (a) Constrained principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) based on the Bray–Curtis distances on the 36 samples of the ‘diversification' experiment constrained by sample groups. (b) OTUs enriched on roots of A. alpina, C. hirsuta and A. thaliana. Color-coded in black are root-enriched OTUs (RootOTUs). All enriched OTUs are based on a Bayes moderated t-test, P<0.05 (FDR-corrected). Number in brackets: total number of OTUs enriched in the respective plant species. (c) Pie chart reporting family distribution of 18 shared OTUs based on parametric Tukey's honest significant difference and Bayesian and non-parametric Mann-Whitney statistics.