| Literature DB >> 28373716 |
Deepak Kumaresan1, Adam T Cross2,3, Benjamin Moreira-Grez1, Khalil Kariman1, Paul Nevill4, Jason Stevens2,3, Richard J N Allcock5,6, Anthony G O'Donnell7, Kingsley W Dixon2,4, Andrew S Whiteley8.
Abstract
Mining of mineral resources produces substantial volumes of crushed rock based wastes that are characterised by poor physical structure and hydrology, unstable geochemistry and potentially toxic chemical conditions. Recycling of these substrates is desirable and can be achieved by blending waste with native soil to form a 'novel substrate' which may be used in future landscape restoration. However, these post-mining substrate based 'soils' are likely to contain significant abiotic constraints for both plant and microbial growth. Effective use of these novel substrates for ecosystem restoration will depend on the efficacy of stored topsoil as a potential microbial inoculum as well as the subsequent generation of key microbial soil functions originally apparent in local pristine sites. Here, using both marker gene and shotgun metagenome sequencing, we show that topsoil storage and the blending of soil and waste substrates to form planting substrates gives rise to variable bacterial and archaeal phylogenetic composition but a high degree of metabolic conservation at the community metagenome level. Our data indicates that whilst low phylogenetic conservation is apparent across substrate blends we observe high functional redundancy in relation to key soil microbial pathways, allowing the potential for functional recovery of key belowground pathways under targeted management.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28373716 PMCID: PMC5428872 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-00650-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) PCA based on chemical parameters. (b) PCO based on bacterial and archaeal community composition (based at the level of Order). The vectors shown indicate taxa that revealed Pearson correlation values of >0.75. RS – Reference sites; SB (100, 50, 25 and 10) refers to different substrate blends. T0, T1 and T4 correspond to time zero, one week and four weeks after incubation.
Figure 2Heatmap comparing the relative abundance of metabolic genes within SEED subsystem category level 1. The columns represent the MG-RAST accession number of the metagenome and different substrate blends are colour coded.
Figure 3Extended bar charts representing SEED subsystem categories (at level 1) that are significantly different (P-value > 0.05) between the groups (reference site and substrate blend samples). RS represents the soil samples from the reference site and SB (10 and 100) refers to different substrate blends.
Figure 4Extended bar chart representing SEED subsystem categories (at level 3) that are significantly different (P-value > 0.05 between the groups (reference site and substrate blend sample). RS represents the soil samples from the reference site and SB10 refers to different substrate blend with 10% topsoil.
Figure 5Extended bar charts representing SEED subsystem categories (at level 3) that are significantly different (P-value > 0.05 between the groups (reference site and substrate blend samples). RS represents the soil samples from the reference site and SB10 and SB100 refers to different substrate blend with 10% and 100% topsoil, respectively.