| Literature DB >> 29380948 |
Bianca C A Cabral1, Luísa Hoffmann1, Bruce Budowle2,3, Turán P Ürményi1, Rodrigo S Moura-Neto4, Sandra M F O Azevedo1, Rosane Silva1.
Abstract
Our comprehension of the dynamics and diversity of freshwater planktonic bacterial communities is far from complete concerning the Brazilian Amazonian region. Therefore, reference studies are urgently needed. We mapped bacterial communities present in the planktonic communities of a freshwater artificial reservoir located in the western Amazonian basin. Two samples were obtained from rainy and dry seasons, the periods during which water quality and plankton diversity undergo the most significant changes. Hypervariable 16S rRNA and shotgun sequencing were performed to describe the first reference of a microbial community in an Amazonian lentic system. Microbial composition consisted mainly of Betaproteobacteria, Cyanobacteria, Alphaproteobacteria, and Actinobacteria in the dry period. The bacteria distribution in the rainy period was notably absent of Cyanobacteria. Microcystis was observed in the dry period in which the gene cluster for cyanotoxins was found. Iron acquisition gene group was higher in the sample from the rainy season. This work mapped the first inventory of the planktonic microbial community of a large water reservoir in the Amazon, providing a reference for future functional studies and determining other communities and how they interact.Entities:
Keywords: archaea; betaproteobacteria; cyanobacteria; massively parallel sequencing; microbial mapping; phage
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29380948 PMCID: PMC5911997 DOI: 10.1002/mbo3.523
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbiologyopen ISSN: 2045-8827 Impact factor: 3.139
Figure 1Spatial illustration of Samuel hydroelectric power plant located in the state of Rondonia (08° 45′ 02.6″ S and 63° 26′ 25.9″ W), Amazon region, Brazil. The picture was taken on 23 October 2013 illustrates the tree remains in the water reservoir
Physical and chemical water parameters
| Samuel hydroelectric power plant reservoir | ||
|---|---|---|
| Collection date | Collection date | |
| 26 June, 2013 (dry‐period sample) | 23 October, 2013 (rainy‐period sample) | |
| pH | 7.6 | 6.9 |
| Conductivity (μS/cm) | 23 | 19 |
| O2 (mg/L) | 7.8 | 9.2 |
| Temperature (°C) | 30.0 | 30.7 |
| Rainfall (mm)/month | 70 | 200 |
Figure 2Relative abundances of Bacteria, Eukarya, Family of viruses and Archaea genera distribution according to season period. (a) Dry period, (b) Rainy period
Figure 3Relative abundances of the bacterial phyla profile from the dry and rainy period sample of Samuel reservoir based on the 16SrRNA fragments analyzed by SILVAngs. Others represent minor relative proportions of bacterial phyla and no relative reds
Figure 4Relative abundances of the bacterial profile according dry and rainy period samples of Samuel reservoir based on the shotgun sequence analysis using MG‐RAST. DRY shotgun and RAINY shotgun_1 samples were collected from the water surface. RAINY shotgun_2 water sample was collected every 50 cm from the euphotic zone. Others represent minor relative proportions of bacterial class. Unassigned reads were not considered in the comparison
Relative abundances of the bacterial genera distribution among the dry or rainy period samples based on the shotgun sequence reads using MG‐RAST
| DRY period sample | RAINY period sample | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phylum/class | Genus | % | Phylum/class | Genus | % |
| Betaproteobacteria |
| 2.0 | Betaproteobacteria |
|
|
|
| 1.7 |
|
| ||
|
| 1.5 |
|
| ||
|
| 1.4 |
| 1.1 | ||
|
| 1.2 |
| 2.6 | ||
|
| 1.0 |
| 2.1 | ||
|
| 0.8 |
| 1.5 | ||
|
| 0.8 |
| 1.4 | ||
|
| 0.8 |
| 1.4 | ||
|
| 0.7 |
| 1.1 | ||
|
| 0.6 |
| 1.0 | ||
|
| 0.6 |
| 0.9 | ||
|
| 0.5 |
| 0.8 | ||
| Cyanobacteria |
|
|
| 0.7 | |
|
| 1.3 |
| 0.7 | ||
|
| 1.1 |
| 0.6 | ||
|
| 0.9 |
| 0.6 | ||
|
| 0.8 |
| 0.6 | ||
| Alphaproteobacteria |
| 1.6 |
| 0.5 | |
|
| 1.2 | Gammaproteobacteria |
| 2.7 | |
| Flavobacteriia |
| 0.5 |
| 0.6 | |
| Deltaproteobacteria |
| 1.0 | Flavobacteriia |
| 0.5 |
| Sphingobacteriia |
| 1.1 | |||
| Others (<0.5%) | 70.5 | Others (<0.5%) | 54.3 | ||
Genera, in bold, were found in both samples; bold numbers represent the most abundant genus in dry and rainy period samples. Only Genera found >0.5% in the samples are displayed.
Figure 5Relative abundance of gene functional categories in the rainy and dry period samples