| Literature DB >> 29935536 |
Hirokazu Toju1,2, Akifumi S Tanabe3, Hirotoshi Sato4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although a number of recent studies have uncovered remarkable diversity of microbes associated with plants, understanding and managing dynamics of plant microbiomes remain major scientific challenges. In this respect, network analytical methods have provided a basis for exploring "hub" microbial species, which potentially organize community-scale processes of plant-microbe interactions.Entities:
Keywords: Agriculture; Biodiversity; Ecosystem restoration; Host specificity or preference; Latitudinal gradients; Metacommunities; Microbial inoculation; Mycorrhizal and endophytic symbiosis; Network hubs; Plant–fungus interactions
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29935536 PMCID: PMC6015470 DOI: 10.1186/s40168-018-0497-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbiome ISSN: 2049-2618 Impact factor: 14.650
Fig. 1Study sites examined in this study. Across the entire range of the Japanese Archipelago, root samples were collected in four cool-temperate forests (sites 1–4), one warm-temperate forest (site 5), and three subtropical forests (sites 6–8)
Fig. 2Compositions of fungal taxa and functional groups in each forest. a Order-level taxonomic composition of fungal OTUs in each locality. The number of fungal OTUs detected is shown in a parenthesis for each forest. b Functional-group composition. The fungal functional groups were inferred by the program FUNGuild [67]
Fig. 3Fungal OTUs with highest local betweenness. a Order-level taxonomic composition of top 20 OTUs with highest local betweenness in each forest. (Additional file 4; Data S4) for betweenness scores of all fungal OTUs in respective local forests. b Genus-level taxonomic composition of top 20 OTUs with highest local betweenness. c Functional-group composition of top 20 OTUs with highest local betweenness
Fig. 4Metacommunity-scale network including all the eight local forests. The size of circles roughly represents relative scores of betweenness centrality. The functional groups of fungi inferred with the program FUNGuild [67] were organized into six categories, i.e., arbuscular mycorrhizal (bue), ectomycorrhizal (red), ericoid mycorrhizal (skyblue), saprotrophic/endophytic (yellow), plant pathogenic (purple), and other/unknown fungi (gray) (Additional file 4: Data S4). For plant species/taxa (green), the geographic information of source populations is indicated in (Additional file 8: Figure S3)
Top 10 list of non-Glomeromycota OTUs with the highest betweenness within the metacommunity networks
| OTU | Score | Phylum | Class | Order | Family | Genus | Category | NCBI Blast top hit | Accession | Cover | Identity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full (8 sites) | |||||||||||
| F_0042* | 1.000 | – | – | Mortierellales | Mortierellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| KP714537 | 100% | 100% |
| F_0381 | 0.844 | Basidiomycota | Tremellomycetes | Trichosporonales | Trichosporonaceae |
| Others_unknown | KY320605 | 92% | 99% | |
| F_0079 | 0.679 | Ascomycota | Sordariomycetes | Hypocreales | Nectriaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| NR_152890 | 99% | 100% |
| F_0489 | 0.576 | – | – | Mortierellales | Mortierellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte | KM113754 | 100% | 100% | |
| F_0010 | 0.411 | Ascomycota | Leotiomycetes | – | Myxotrichaceae |
| Ericoid_mycorrhizal |
| LC206669 | 100% | 100% |
| F_0368 | 0.403 | Basidiomycota | Malasseziomycetes | Malasseziales | Malasseziaceae |
| Others_unknown |
| KT809059 | 100% | 100% |
| F_0623 | 0.382 | – | – | Mortierellales | Mortierellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| KY305027 | 100% | 100% |
| F_1188 | 0.334 | Basidiomycota | Tremellomycetes | Trichosporonales | Trichosporonaceae |
| Others_unknown | KY320605 | 92% | 99% | |
| F_0007 | 0.333 | Ascomycota | Sordariomycetes | Diaporthales | Melanconidaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| KJ173701 | 100% | 85% |
| F_0485 | 0.288 | Ascomycota | Sordariomycetes | Hypocreales | Hypocreaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte | HG008760 | 100% | 100% | |
| Northern 4 sites (cool-temperate) | |||||||||||
| F_0042* | 1.000 | – | – | Mortierellales | Mortierellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| KP714537 | 100% | 100% |
| F_0034* | 0.795 | Ascomycota | Eurotiomycetes | Chaetothyriales | Herpotrichiellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| KF359558 | 100% | 99% |
| F_0079* | 0.767 | Ascomycota | Sordariomycetes | Hypocreales | Nectriaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| NR_152890 | 99% | 100% |
| F_0015* | 0.763 | Ascomycota | – | – | – |
| Others_unknown |
| KX611558 | 100% | 99% |
| F_0202* | 0.749 | Ascomycota | Eurotiomycetes | Chaetothyriales | Herpotrichiellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| HQ871875 | 100% | 99% |
| F_0195* | 0.611 | Ascomycota | Eurotiomycetes | Chaetothyriales | Herpotrichiellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| EU035405 | 100% | 100% |
| F_0181* | 0.580 | Ascomycota | Leotiomycetes | Helotiales | Dermateaceae |
| Endophyte |
| LC206665 | 100% | 99% |
| F_0010 | 0.545 | Ascomycota | Leotiomycetes | – | Myxotrichaceae |
| Ericoid_mycorrhizal |
| LC206669 | 100% | 100% |
| F_0103* | 0.538 | Ascomycota | Eurotiomycetes | Chaetothyriales | Herpotrichiellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| EU035403 | 100% | 97% |
| F_0489* | 0.534 | – | – | Mortierellales | Mortierellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte | KM113754 | 100% | 100% | |
| Southern 4 sites (warm-temperate and subtropical) | |||||||||||
| F_0381* | 1.000 | Basidiomycota | Tremellomycetes | Trichosporonales | Trichosporonaceae |
| Others_unknown | KY320605 | 92% | 99% | |
| F_0042* | 0.569 | – | – | Mortierellales | Mortierellaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| KP714537 | 100% | 100% |
| F_0610* | 0.460 | Ascomycota | Sordariomycetes | Hypocreales | Hypocreaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| KU948158 | 100% | 100% |
| F_1188* | 0.443 | Basidiomycota | Tremellomycetes | Trichosporonales | Trichosporonaceae |
| Others_unknown | KY320605 | 92% | 99% | |
| F_0029 | 0.414 | Ascomycota | Eurotiomycetes | Chaetothyriales | Herpotrichiellaceae |
| Others_unknown | LC189029 | 100% | 99% | |
| F_0017 | 0.319 | Ascomycota | – | – | – |
| Others_unknown | KT809119 | 100% | 98% | |
| F_0007 | 0.314 | Ascomycota | Sordariomycetes | Diaporthales | Melanconidaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte |
| KJ173701 | 100% | 85% |
| F_0485 | 0.303 | Ascomycota | Sordariomycetes | Hypocreales | Hypocreaceae |
| Saprotroph/endophyte | HG008760 | 100% | 100% | |
| F_0112 | 0.266 | Basidiomycota | Agaricomycetes | Thelephorales | Thelephoraceae |
| Ectomycorrhizal |
| KR019860 | 100% | 98% |
| F_0073 | 0.258 | Ascomycota | Sordariomycetes | – | – |
| Others_unknown |
| KY173442 | 94% | 95% |
In each of the three metacommunity-scale networks examined (full, cool-temperate, and warm-temperate/subtropical), fungal OTUs were ranked based on their betweenness centrality scores. As taxonomic information of Glomeromycota OTUs with high betweenness scores was redundant (e.g., Glomus spp. or Glomeraceae spp.), the top 10 list of non-Glomeromycota OTUs is shown. Taxonomy information of each OTU was inferred based on the query-centric auto-k-nearest-neighbor algorithm of reference database search [59, 60] and subsequent taxonomic assignment with the lowest common ancestor algorithm [66]. The results of the NCBI nucleotide Blast are also shown. For simplicity, the functional groups of fungi inferred with the program FUNGuild [67] were organized into several categories. See Additional file 4; Data S4 for details of the categories and for full results including Glomeromycota and other fungal OTUs
*Fungal OTUs classified as metacommunity hubs (mean local betweenness > 0.5; metacommunity betweenness > 0.5)
†Synonym, Cryptcoccus podzolica
Fig. 5Relationship between local- and metacommunity-level betweenness. a Full meatcommunity. On the horizontal axis, the mean values of betweenness centrality scores across all the eight local forests are shown for respective fungal OTUs. On the vertical axis, the betweenness scores within the metacommunity-scale network consisting of the eight localities (Fig. 4) are shown for respective OTUs. b Metacommunity of cool-temperate forests. For the sub-dataset consisting of the four cool-temperate forests (Additional file 9: Figure S4), mean local betweenness and metacommunity betweenness are shown on the horizontal and vertical axes, respectively. c Metacommunity of warm-temperate and subtropical forests. For the sub-dataset consisting of the warm-temperate forest and the three subtropical forests (Additional file 10: Figure S5), mean local betweenness and metacommunity betweenness are shown on the horizontal and vertical axes, respectively