| Literature DB >> 31029164 |
R Heyer1, K Schallert1, C Siewert2, F Kohrs1, J Greve1, I Maus3, J Klang4, M Klocke4, M Heiermann5, M Hoffmann2, S Püttker1, M Calusinska6, R Zoun7, G Saake7, D Benndorf8,9, U Reichl1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In biogas plants, complex microbial communities produce methane and carbon dioxide by anaerobic digestion of biomass. For the characterization of the microbial functional networks, samples of 11 reactors were analyzed using a high-resolution metaproteomics pipeline.Entities:
Keywords: Anaerobic Digestion Model 1; Anaerobic digestion; Metaproteomics; Microbiomes; Phage-host interactions; Phages
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31029164 PMCID: PMC6486700 DOI: 10.1186/s40168-019-0673-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbiome ISSN: 2049-2618 Impact factor: 14.650
Technical and chemical process parameters of the investigated BGPs
T1 and T2 corresponded to the first and second sampling date. BGP 05 comprised two parallel process lines which were labeled with a and b. Circles indicate the approximate percentage of the substrates, biogas composition or acid composition. Mesophilic process temperature is marked in the column “Temperature” by blue bars and thermophilic process temperature is marked by red bars. Green bars just visualize the values of the different parameters. CSTR: continuously stirred tank reactor; OLR: organic loading rate; HRT: hydraulic retention time; VS: volatile solids; TS: total solids; TVFA/TA: total volatile fatty acids to total alkalinity; TAN: total ammonia nitrogen; mb3: cubic meter biogas; mr: cubic meter reactor volume; kgvs: kilogram VS
Fig. 2Krona plot of identified bacteria, archaea and viruses. The krona plot shows all taxonomic levels based on the NCBI taxonomy starting from superkingdom to family level and the associated abundances based on the number of identified spectra summed over all BGPs. Therefore, all 562,390 identified microbial and viral spectra from all 10,970 metaproteins were fed into the krona plot. For more details please refer to the Additional file 4 “C_InputKronaPlot”. In contrast, the calculation of the phage abundance in Additional file 7: Table S5 considers also metaproteins that were assigned on root level, only. These metaprotein were assigned to phages based on their function. An interactive version of this Figure can be found in Additional file 12
Fig. 1Cluster analysis of all samples based on archaeal and bacterial metaproteins. Cluster analysis was carried out for all metaproteins based on the “cityblock” distance and an “average” linkage using Matlab. All BGPs were colored in a different color. Three main clusters could be observed which were linked with laboratory scaled reactors as well as the process temperature
Fig. 3Linkage between taxa and functions. The chord diagram shows the link between taxonomic families and biological processes for the 20 most abundant taxonomic families and 20 most abundant biological processes based on the number of spectral counts summed for all BGPs. The size of a circle segment corresponds to the spectral abundance of a taxon or biological process, while the arcs connecting them correspond to the amount of spectra shared by two entities. The data were exported directly from the MetaProteomeAnalyzer and are stored in Additional file 4: Table S2. In contrast to the print version of this figure, the interactive plot enables to visualize and select all families and biological processes. An interactive version of this Figure can be found in Additional file 13
Fig. 4Abundance of methanogenesis pathways as well as of archaeal and bacterial acetyl-CoA decarbonylase/synthase (ACDS). Spectral counts of representative metaproteins for A.) methanogenesis pathway and B.) each ACDS metaprotein (Additional file 5: Table S3 E_Methanogenese) sorted by archaeal and non-archaeal and summed. The black bars indicate bacterial one carbon metabolism and hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis. The red bars are associated with either acetoclastic methanogenesis or acetoclastic methanogenesis as well as the methanol and methylamine pathways. Differences between both groups of BGPs were validated by student’s t-test and highlighted by “*” and the associated p-values. The parentheses under the sample names on the x-axis show the total number of identified microbial spectra for each BGP
Fig. 5Mapping of the identified metaproteins to the Anaerobic Digestion Model 1. Identified metaproteins were assigned to the single steps of the Anaerobic Digestion Model 1. Significant differences between the assumed steps in the Anaerobic Digestion Model 1 and the proved steps by the identified metaproteins were highlighted in RED or BLUE color. Aspects that were not covered by metaproteomics analysis are displayed in gray (e.g., “Inert compounds”). For each of the analyzed steps a summary provides the most important findings of this study. MCs: microbial communities
Fig. 6Abundances of microbial families, phages and CRISPR proteins. Figure A shows the main microbial families (at least 1000 spectra for each family) and their associated phages or CRISPR proteins based on the spectral count. Figure B shows the abundance of the microbial families, phages and CRISPR proteins for each biogas plant
Fig. 7Impact of phages on biogas processes and on the nutrition cycle in biogas plants. The microbial community consists of auxotroph microorganisms and prototroph microorganisms. Whereas prototroph microorganisms may produce vitamins, cofactors and amino acids for their growth themselves, auxotroph microorganisms require external sources for these compounds. Phage induced cell lysis of both microbial groups slows biogas processes due to the lyses of the microorganisms. However, it represents also a major source of vitamins, cofactors and amino acids for the auxotroph microorganism