| Literature DB >> 29604472 |
Muhammad Atikul Islam Khan1, Bhabananda Biswas2, Euan Smith3, Siraje Arif Mahmud4, Nur A Hasan5, Md Abdul Wadud Khan6, Ravi Naidu7, Mallavarapu Megharaj8.
Abstract
In the ecotoxicological assessment of petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated soil, microbial community profile is important aspect due to their involvement in soil functions. However, soil physicochemical properties and the inhabiting plants could dictate the microbial composition. A question remains unanswered is, how an integrated approach may be utilized to account for various contrasting soil properties, plant types (reference vs. native) and the nature of the hydrocarbon contamination. In this study, we utilized bacterial DNA profiling techniques to investigate the relationship between soil properties, contaminant and plant species. Results identified that Proteobacteria and Actinobacteria were the most abundant bacteria of the 45 phyla identified in the hydrocarbon-contaminated soil. The bulk and rhizosphere microbiome showed that the contaminated soil originally had quite distinct bacterial communities compared to the artificially contaminated soil (mine soil = 95 genera vs. other soils = 2-29 genera). In these cases, not significantly but the native plant slightly increased bacterial diversity and relative abundance in the same soils. Also, within each site, the bacterial community was significantly altered with the hydrocarbon concentration. In this instance, the influence of the contaminant was strong and also with the soil pH and organic matter. These results would significantly contribute to the novel insights on the molecular technique-based hydrocarbon toxicity assessment and the development of the further integrative approach with other microbial community and their metabolic profile in the contaminated sites.Entities:
Keywords: 16S rRNA gene diversity; Hydrocarbon toxicity; Reference vs Australian native plant; Rhizosphere microbiome
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29604472 DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.03.006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecotoxicol Environ Saf ISSN: 0147-6513 Impact factor: 6.291