| Literature DB >> 29593677 |
Iame A Guedes1, Caio T C C Rachid2, Luciana M Rangel3, Lúcia H S Silva3, Paulo M Bisch1, Sandra M F O Azevedo1, Ana B F Pacheco1.
Abstract
Cyanobacteria tend to become the dominant phytoplankton component in eutrophic freshwater environments during warmer seasons. However, general observations of cyanobacterial adaptive advantages in these circumstances are insufficient to explain the prevalence of one species over another in a bloom period, which may be related to particular strategies and interactions with other components of the plankton community. In this study, we present an integrative view of a mixed cyanobacterial bloom occurring during a warm, rainy period in a tropical hydropower reservoir. We used high-throughput sequencing to follow temporal shifts in the dominance of cyanobacterial genera and shifts in the associated heterotrophic bacteria community. The bloom occurred during late spring-summer and included two distinct periods. The first period corresponded to Microcystis aeruginosa complex (MAC) dominance with a contribution from Dolichospermum circinale; this pattern coincided with high water retention time and low transparency. The second period corresponded to Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii and Synechococcus spp. dominance, and the reservoir presented lower water retention time and higher water transparency. The major bacterial phyla were primarily Cyanobacteria and Proteobacteria, followed by Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Verrucomicrobia, and Planctomycetes. Temporal shifts in the dominance of cyanobacterial genera were not only associated with physical features of the water but also with shifts in the associated heterotrophic bacteria. The MAC bloom was associated with a high abundance of Bacteroidetes, particularly Cytophagales. In the second bloom period, Planctomycetes increased in relative abundance, five Planctomycetes OTUs were positively correlated with Synechococcus or C. raciborskii OTUs. Our results suggest specific interactions of the main cyanobacterial genera with certain groups of the heterotrophic bacterial community. Thus, considering biotic interactions may lead to a better understanding of the shifts in cyanobacterial dominance.Entities:
Keywords: 16S rDNA; Cylindrospermopsis; Illumina; Microcystis; Synechococcus; cyanobacterial bloom; microbial community
Year: 2018 PMID: 29593677 PMCID: PMC5857610 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00424
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Limnological variables and abiotic parameters associated with the collected samples.
| RT | 35 | 35 | 28 | 28 | 33 | 33 | 38 | 38 | 36 | 36 | 31 | 31 | 28 | 28 | 23 | 23 | 24 | 24 | 29 | 29 | 36 | 36 |
| Secchi | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.25 | 0.8 | 0.35 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 2.0 |
| Temp | 24.5 | 24.3 | 24.9 | 24.9 | 27.9 | 27.4 | 26.9 | 26.6 | 29.1 | 28.8 | 28.9 | 28.4 | 28.7 | 29.2 | 28.0 | 27.9 | 28.7 | 28.6 | 28.5 | 27.7 | 27.5 | 28.9 |
| pH | 7.1 | 8.7 | 7.5 | 8.2 | 8.3 | 9.4 | 9.2 | 8.8 | 10.5 | 10.1 | 10.4 | 10.4 | 10.1 | 10.3 | 7.9 | 8.0 | 9.9 | 10.9 | 7.3 | 8.7 | 7.2 | 6.6 |
| DIN | 1079 | 1062 | 858 | 695 | 1038 | 265 | 402 | 437 | 435 | 453 | 307 | 435 | 665 | 597 | 700 | 829 | 171 | 505 | 507 | 485 | 437 | 577 |
| SRP | 28.7 | <2.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | 27.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | 12.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | 31.3 | <2.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | <2.0 | 18.3 | 33.4 | <2.0 |
| TP | 44.8 | 19.0 | 10.7 | 8.5 | 40.5 | 40.9 | 25.2 | 6.3 | 36.3 | 10.5 | 7.4 | 9.4 | 6.1 | 6.8 | 42.8 | 16.6 | 25.6 | 15.0 | 3.5 | 45.9 | 56.3 | 26.0 |
| Cyano | 1.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 6.0 | 5.0 | 8.0 | 4.0 | 8.0 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| H' | 4.5 | 4.0 | 4.7 | 4.5 | 3.6 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 3.6 | 4.6 | 4.3 | 4.2 | 4.8 | 3.3 | 3.6 | 4.5 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 4.3 | 4.6 | 4.7 | 3.2 | 4.9 |
| S | 1718 | 997 | 1488 | 1347 | 613 | 973 | 801 | 702 | 1222 | 998 | 662 | 1170 | 1074 | 1706 | 2038 | 1781 | 1037 | 960 | 1241 | 1314 | 1835 | 1664 |
1 and 2 corresponds to sampling points 1 (central part of the reservoir) and 2 (dam). RT, retention time (days); Secchi, water transparency (m); Temp, water temperature (°C); DIN, dissolved inorganic nitrogen (μg L.
Figure 1Variation of cyanobacteria density from October 2013 to March 2014 in two locations of Funil reservoir (A) point 1, central part, (B) point 2, near the dam.
Figure 2Variation of cyanobacterial community accessed by 16S rDNA sequencing from October 2013 to March 2014 in two sampling points of Funil reservoir (A) point 1, central part, (B) point 2, near the dam.
Figure 3Relative abundance of OTUs classified as Order and Phyla across the sampling period. The area of the bubbles represents the relative abundance of OTUs (average values of the two sampling points). The color of the bubbles indicates the Phylum to which the OTUs were assigned.
Figure 4Non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination based on Bray-Curtis similarity of data from OTU abundance in the samples from the two sampling points. Squares correspond to samples from October 2013 to mid January 2014, and triangles correspond to samples from the end of January 2014 to March. Vectors are environmental variables and cyanobacterial microscopic counts that were significantly different between the two defined periods (p < 0.01). RT (retention time) WT (water transparency).
Figure 5Average relative contribution of OTUs in the two defined periods (Period 1 from October to mid January and Period 2 from mid January to March). The selected OTUs contributed to at least 2% for the differentiation between the periods (SIMPER analysis).
Values of Spearman correlations (r) among cyanobacterial taxa considering both 16S rDNA sequencing (OTU) and microscopy data and limnological parameters (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.001).
| RT | −0.31 | ||||||||||
| DIN | −0.44 | −0.04 | |||||||||
| Secchi | 0.14 | −0.31 | −0.05 | ||||||||
| −0.17 | 0.74** | −0.18 | −0.74** | ||||||||
| 0.49 | −0.33 | −0.22 | −0.58* | −0.49* | |||||||
| −0.07 | 0.47 | −0.62* | −0.51* | 0.63** | −0.31 | ||||||
| SYN OTU | 0.45* | 0.62** | −0.22 | −0.55** | −0.65 | 0.57** | −0.57 | ||||
| MIC OTU | 0.09 | 0.40 | 0.05 | −0.49* | 0.44 | −0.44 | −0.06 | −0.43 | |||
| DLC OTU | 0.13 | 0.25 | −0.33 | −0.21 | 0.36** | −0.07 | 0.60** | −0.15 | 0.07 | ||
| PSD OTU | 0.14 | −0.34* | 0.01 | 0.74* | −0.81* | 0.44* | −0.65 | 0.71 | −0.58** | −0.43 | |
| CR OTU | −0.3 | −0.04 | −0.19 | −0.09 | 0.19 | −0.26 | 0.27 | −0.09 | −0.17 | 0.20 | −0.41 |
RT, retention time (days); Secchi, water transparency (m); Temp, water temperature (°C); DIN, dissolved inorganic nitrogen (ug L-1); SYN, Synechococcus; MIC, Microcystis; DLC, Dolichospermum; PSD, Pseudoanabaena; CR, C. raciborskii. Microcystis spp., C. raciborskii, D. circinale, microscopy count of these species.
Figure 6Edge-weighted Spring-embedded network with significant correlations (p < 0.001 and r > 0.6) between cyanobacterial and heterotrophic bacterial OTUs. Node size is proportional to the OTU abundance and the colors indicate the Phylum to which the OTUs were assigned. Line colors are indicative of the Spearman correlation coefficient (green = positive and red = negative). The network included the OTUs which contributed with at least 0.2% of the total. Centroid sequences of the dominant cyanobacterial OTUs are listed on Supplementary File 1.
Significant (p < 0.001) Spearman correlations (r > 0.6) among the main cyanobacterial OTUs and heterotrophic bacteria.
| Actinobacteria(p) | EB1017 (f) | 0.78 | |
| ACK-M1 (f) | −0.66 | ||
| Proteobacteria(p) | −0.71 | ||
| Betaproteobacteria (c) | −0.69 | ||
| Burkholderiales (o) | −0.67 | ||
| Burkholderiales (o) | −0.66 | ||
| −0.62 | |||
| Sphingomonadales (o) | 0.68 | ||
| Firmicutes(p) | Bacillales (o) | −0.69 | |
| Chloroflexi(p) | −0.62 | ||
| WCHB1-50 (o) | −0.65 | ||
| SBR1031 (o) | −0.61 | ||
| WCHB1-50 (o) | 0.63 | ||
| Verrucomicrobia (p) | −0.65 | ||
| Planctomycetes(p) | −0.63 | ||
| Gemmatimonadetes(p) | Gemmatimonadaceae (f) | 0.69 | |
| Proteobacteria(p) | Comamonadaceae(f) | 0.61 | |
| Actinobacteria(p) | Actinomycetales (o) | 0.82 | |
| ACK-M1 (f) | 0.62 | ||
| Candidatus_Aquiluna (f) | 0.60 | ||
| Gemmatimonadetes(p) | KD8-87 (o) | 0.81 | |
| 0.77 | |||
| Planctomycetes(p) | Pirellulales (o) | 0.81 | |
| Gemmataceae (f) | 0.72 | ||
| Pirellulaceae (f) | 0.65 | ||
| CL500-15 (o) | −0.63 | ||
| Proteobacteria(p) | 0.73 | ||
| Betaproteobacteria (c) | 0.69 | ||
| Acetobacteraceae (f) | 0.64 | ||
| Vibrionales (o) | 0.62 | ||
| OD1(p) | 0.71 | ||
| Bacteroidetes(p) | Chitinophagaceae (f) | 0.61 | |
| Chloroflexi(p) | A4b (f) | 0.61 | |
| Verrucomicrobia(p) | 0.84 | ||
| 0.62 | |||
| LD19(f) | −0.66 | ||
| Proteobacteria(p) | 0.83 | ||
| Comamonadaceae(f) | −0.67 | ||
| Comamonadaceae(f) | −0.65 | ||
| Comamonadaceae(f) | 0.64 | ||
| Comamonadaceae(f) | 0.67 | ||
| Comamonadaceae(f) | 0.71 | ||
| Enterobacteriaceae(f) | 0.77 | ||
| Oxalobacteraceae(f) | 0.61 | ||
| Chloroflexi(p) | 0.77 | ||
| Actinobacteria(p) | C111(f) | 0.70 | |
| C111(f) | −0.66 | ||
| Actinomycetales(o) | 0.60 | ||
| Solirubrobacterales(o) | 0.69 | ||
| 0.64 | |||
| Planctomycetes(p) | Pirellulaceae(f) | 0.67 | |
| Pirellulaceae(f) | −0.68 | ||
| 0.62 | |||
| Cyanobacteria(p) | 0.71 | ||
| Armatimonadetes(p) | Armatimonadaceae(f) | 0.70 | |
| Bacteroidetes(p) | −0.66 | ||
| Firmicutes(p) | Bacillales(o) | 0.65 | |
| Acidobacteria(p) | iii1-15(o) | 0.65 | |
| Bacteroidetes(p) | Chitinophagaceae(f) | −0.63 | |
Taxonomic assignment according to Greengenes databases. p, Phyla; c, Class; o, Order; f, Family; g, Genus. The analysis included those OTUs that contributed with ate least 0.2% of the total of OTUs per sample.