| Literature DB >> 30258283 |
Huihui Wang1,2, Shaoping Kuang1,2, Qiaolin Lang1, Wenjuan Yu3.
Abstract
The oilfield soil was contaminated for years by large quantities of aged oil sludge generated in the petroleum industry. In this study, physicochemical properties, contents of main pollutants, and fungal diversity of the aged oil sludge-contaminated soil were analyzed. Results revealed that aged oil sludge significantly changed physical and chemical properties of the receiving soil and increased the contents of main pollutants (petroleum hydrocarbons and heavy metals) in soil. Meanwhile, the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequencing by Illumina Miseq platform at each taxonomic level demonstrated that the toxicological effect of oil pollutants obviously influenced the fungal diversity and community structure in soil. Moreover, it was found that the presence of three genera (Cephalotheca, Lecanicillium, and Septoriella) appeared in aged oil sludge-contaminated soil. And oil pollutants promoted the growth of certain genera in Ascomycota (70.83%) and Basidiomycota (10.78%), such as Venturia, Alternaria, and Piloderma. Nevertheless, the growth of Mortierella (9.16%), Emericella (6.02%), and Bjerkandera (0.00%) was intensively limited. This study would aid thorough understanding of microbial diversity in oil-contaminated soil and thus provide new point of view to soil bioremediation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30258283 PMCID: PMC6146557 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9264259
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Archaea Impact factor: 3.273
Figure 1Sampling sites.
Physicochemical properties of aged oil sludge-contaminated soil.
| Sample | pH | Salinity (%) | MCa (%) | TOCb (%) | HMsc (mg∙kg−1) | TPHsd (mg∙kg−1) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cu | Zn | Cr | ||||||
| S1 | 8.44 | 0.27 | 21.05 | 0.41 | 76.60 | 131.63 | 74.55 | 15.2 |
| S2 | 8.56 | 0.36 | 22.55 | 0.35 | 47.93 | 93.81 | 111.46 | 13.6 |
| S3 | 8.11 | 1.45 | 13.95 | 0.22 | 12.20 | 15.68 | 34.07 | <5 |
aMC: moisture content; bTOC: total organic carbon; cHMs: heavy metals; dTPHs: total petroleum hydrocarbons.
Sequence information and fungal diversity indexes of samples.
| Sample ID | Reads | 0.97 (the similarity threshold of OTUs) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OTUs | Ace | Chao1 | Coverage | Shannon-Weaver | Simpson | ||
| S1 | 31,118 | 475 | 476 | 478 | 0.999734 | 4.36 | 0.0467 |
| S2 | 31,938 | 557 | 558 | 558 | 0.999812 | 4.61 | 0.0355 |
| S3 | 33,275 | 565 | 567 | 566 | 0.999730 | 4.44 | 0.0414 |
Figure 2Rarefaction curves based on the 18s rRNA gene sequencing.
Figure 3OTU venn analysis in different samples.
Figure 4Histogram of fungal community structure at phylum level.
The fungal community structures and diversities at family level.
| OTU ID | S1 | S2 | S3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cephalothecaceae | 16.76% | 12.63% | 0.00% |
| Aspergillaceae | 10.76% | 2.80% | 11.32% |
| Unclassified | 9.61% | 7.63% | 7.28% |
| Mortierellaceae | 5.58% | 12.74% | 13.46% |
| Thelephoraceae | 5.36% | 2.18% | 0.58% |
| Nectriaceae | 4.22% | 5.08% | 5.24% |
| Cordycipitaceae | 4.06% | 3.09% | 1.43% |
| Hypocreaceae | 3.52% | 1.11% | 4.22% |
| Trichocomaceae | 2.72% | 2.36% | 3.17% |
| Pleosporaceae | 2.46% | 5.44% | 0.19% |
| Lasiosphaeriaceae | 2.39% | 6.26% | 5.50% |
| Hypocreales_norank | 2.27% | 3.01% | 3.85% |
| Pseudeurotiaceae | 2.15% | 0.91% | 2.03% |
| Didymellaceae | 1.91% | 1.42% | 0.80% |
| Chaetomiaceae | 1.67% | 2.97% | 3.62% |
| Venturiaceae | 1.60% | 0.40% | 0.08% |
| Stachybotriaceae | 1.48% | 0.33% | 1.47% |
| Sporormiaceae | 1.28% | 0.35% | 1.09% |
| Atheliaceae | 1.21% | 0.37% | 0.10% |
| Sebacinaceae | 1.17% | 0.26% | 0.16% |
| Botryosphaeriaceae | 1.15% | 3.09% | 4.46% |
| Helotiales_norank | 1.12% | 0.92% | 0.55% |
| Hyaloscyphaceae | 0.86% | 2.09% | 2.01% |
| Cystofilobasidiaceae | 0.82% | 1.49% | 1.38% |
| Herpotrichiellaceae | 0.57% | 0.59% | 1.15% |
| Polyporales_norank | 0.47% | 1.04% | 0.94% |
| Clavicipitaceae | 0.42% | 1.21% | 0.72% |
| Phaeosphaeriaceae | 0.34% | 1.74% | 0.06% |
| Meruliaceae | 0.00% | 0.00% | 9.33% |
Figure 5Relative abundance of the three (a) limited genera and (b) oil-resistant genera in samples.
Figure 6Multiple sample cluster tree.