| Literature DB >> 28791535 |
Monika Marek-Kozaczuk1, Sylwia Wdowiak-Wróbel2, Michał Kalita2, Mykhaylo Chernetskyy3, Kamil Deryło4, Marek Tchórzewski4, Anna Skorupska2.
Abstract
Trifolium rubens L., commonly known as the red feather clover, is capable of symbiotic interactions with rhizobia. Up to now, no specific symbionts of T. rubens and their symbiotic compatibility with Trifolium spp. have been described. We characterized the genomic diversity of T. rubens symbionts by analyses of plasmid profiles and BOX-PCR. The phylogeny of T. rubens isolates was inferred based on the nucleotide sequences of 16S rRNA and two core genes (atpD, recA). The nodC phylogeny allowed classification of rhizobia nodulating T. rubens as Rhizobium leguminosarum symbiovar trifolii (Rlt). The symbiotic efficiency of the Rlt isolates was determined on four clover species: T. rubens, T. pratense, T. repens and T. resupinatum. We determined that Rlt strains formed mostly inefficient symbiosis with their native host plant T. rubens and weakly effective (sub-optimal) symbiosis with T. repens and T. pratense. The same Rlt strains were fully compatible in the symbiosis with T. resupinatum. T. rubens did not exhibit strict selectivity in regard to the symbionts and rhizobia closely related to Rhizobium grahamii, Rhizobium galegae and Agrobacterium radiobacter, which did not nodulate Trifolium spp., were found amongst T. rubens nodule isolates.Entities:
Keywords: MLSA; Rhizobia; Symbiosis; Trifolium rubens
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28791535 PMCID: PMC5676844 DOI: 10.1007/s10482-017-0922-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek ISSN: 0003-6072 Impact factor: 2.271
Fig. 1The dendrogram constructed based on BOX-PCR fingerprint profiles (on the left) of genomic DNA of the 63 T. rubens isolates using UPGMA method. The numbers represent the different isolates
Fig. 2Plasmid profiles of selected T. rubens nodule isolates. M—molecular weights of R. leguminosarum bv. viciae 3841 plasmids, star—symbiotic plasmid
Genetic and symbiotic differences among Trifolium rubens nodule isolates
| Strain | Nodulation of clover | Number of plasmids | BOX group |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trb5C.1 | + | 5 | II |
| Trb45 | + | 4 | II |
| Trb65 | + | 5 | II |
| Trb75 | + | 4 | I |
| Trb78b | + | 3 | II |
| Trb107 | + | 5 | II |
| Trb116 | + | 3 | II |
| Trb124 | + | 4 | I |
| Trb30 | – | 1 | II |
| Trb32 | – | 4 | II |
| Trb61 | – | – | II |
| Trb142 | – | 2 | II |
Fig. 3Neighbor-joining (NJ) phylogenetic tree inferred based on partial (786 bp) of 16S rRNA gene sequences of T. rubens isolates. The GenBank accession number for each strain is shown in parentheses. The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per 100 nt
Fig. 4Neighbor-joining (NJ) phylogenetic tree inferred based on concatenated sequences (759 bp) of atpD and recA genes of T. rubens isolates. The GenBank accession number for each strain is shown in parentheses. The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per 100 nt
Sequence similarities (%) of 16S rDNA, concatenated atpD, recA, and nodC between Trifolium rubens nodule isolates and the closely related Rhizobium spp
| Strains | Trb45 | Trb65 | Trb75 | Trb107 | Trb116 | Trb124 | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16S |
|
| 16S |
|
| 16S |
|
| 16S |
|
| 16S |
|
| 16S |
|
| |
|
| 100 | 97.8 | 73.6 | 100 | 96.6 | 73.4 | 100 | 95.4 | 74.2 | 100 | 96.4 | 74.2 | 100 | 96.1 | 74.2 | 100 | 96.4 | 74.2 |
|
| 100 | 95.6 | 74.2 | 100 | 94.7 | 73.4 | 100 | 95.4 | 74.8 | 100 | 94.9 | 74.8 | 100 | 95.0 | 74.8 | 100 | 94.9 | 74.8 |
|
| 97.3 | 95.0 | – | 97.3 | 94.2 | – | 97.3 | 95.1 | – | 97.3 | 94.3 | – | 97.3 | 94.4 | – | 97.3 | 94.3 | – |
|
| 99.8 | 95.1 | 96.7 | 99.8 | 94.3 | 93.8 | 99.8 | 95.0 | 96.7 | 99.8 | 94.4 | 96.7 | 99.8 | 94.4 | 96.7 | 99.8 | 94.4 | 96.7 |
|
| 100 | 95.4 | 67.0 | 100 | 95.0 | 66.8 | 100 | 94.2 | 67.2 | 100 | 95.1 | 67.2 | 100 | 95.0 | 67.2 | 100 | 95.1 | 67.2 |
|
| 99.5 | 93.2 | 67.0 | 99.5 | 92.5 | 67.0 | 99.5 | 91.8 | 67.2 | 99.5 | 92.6 | 67.2 | 99.5 | 92.0 | 67.2 | 99.5 | 92.6 | 67.2 |
|
| 100 | 94.2 | 72.6 | 100 | 93.3 | 72.6 | 100 | 92.7 | 73.2 | 100 | 93.5 | 73.2 | 100 | 93.3 | 73.2 | 100 | 93.5 | 73.2 |
|
| 99.7 | 91.8 | 97.3 | 99.7 | 90.6 | 94.2 | 99.7 | 91.3 | 97.3 | 99.7 | 91.1 | 97.3 | 99.7 | 91.3 | 97.3 | 99.7 | 91.1 | 97.3 |
Fig. 5Neighbor-joining (NJ) phylogenetic tree inferred based on nodC sequences (372 bp) of T. rubens isolates. The GenBank accession number for each strain is shown in parentheses. The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per 100 nt
Host range and symbiotic efficiencies of Trifolium rubens nodule isolates—plant pot experiment
| Strains |
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nodule no./plant | Fresh weight of shoots (mg) | Fold of shoot weight | Nodule no./plant | Fresh weight of shoots (mg) | Fold of shoot weight | Nodule no./plant | Fresh weight of shoots (mg) | Fold of shoot weight | Nodule no./plant | Fresh weight of shoots (mg) | Fold of shoot weight | |
| Trb45 | 22.4 ± 10.2 | 20.8 ± 9.6 | 0.9 | 22 ± 6.2 | 160.1 ± 53.9* | 2.1 | 5.7 ± 1.7 | 136.5 ± 26.7* | 3.7 | 17.1 ± 4.3 | 183.8 ± 83.1* | 3.9 |
| Trb65 | 8.5 ± 1.9 | 23.1 ± 7.8 | 1 | 14.1 ± 2.9 | 106.3 ± 54.6 | 1.4 | 8.5 ± 2.7 | 81.6 ± 29.0* | 2.2 | 22.2 ± 3.6 | 180.9 ± 43.9* | 3.8 |
| Trb75 | 14 ± 2.6 | 50.8 ± 17.0* | 2.2 | 10.0 ± 5 | 177.8 ± 87.9* | 2.3 | 5.2 ± 1.8 | 111.6 ± 29.1* | 3 | 14.7 ± 4.8 | 643.6 ± 206.8* | 13.6 |
| Trb124 | 10.3 ± 4.4 | 36.9 ± 20.0 | 1.6 | 19.1 ± 4.3 | 170.9 ± 51.3* | 2.2 | 4 ± 1.6 | 119.4 ± 40.7* | 3.3 | 17.8 ± 5.4 | 369.6 ± 186.3* | 7.8 |
| Control un-inoculated (N+) | 0 | 28.5 ± 11.1 | 1.2 | 0 | 133.1 ± 23.4 | 1.7 | 0 | 51.2 ± 13.1 | 1.4 | 0 | 223.3 ± 86.3 | 4.7 |
| Control un-inoculated (N−) | 0 | 23.1 ± 10.8 | 1.0 | 0 | 76.2 ± 28.5 | 1.0 | 0 | 36.6 ± 12.1 | 1.0 | 0 | 47.3 ± 16.4 | 1.0 |
Data were analyzed using Student’s test
* significant difference P ≤ 0.05