| Literature DB >> 31379787 |
Seong-Jun Chun1,2, Yingshun Cui1, Chang Soo Lee3, A Ra Cho1, Kiwoon Baek3, Ahyoung Choi4, So-Ra Ko1, Hyung-Gwan Lee1, Seungwoo Hwang5, Hee-Mock Oh1,2, Chi-Yong Ahn1,2.
Abstract
To elucidate the interspecies connectivity between cyanobacteria and other bacteria (non-cyanobacteria) during cyanobacterial harmful algal blooms (cyanoHABs), samples were collected from the Nakdong River, Korea, from June 2016 to August 2017, and microbial recurrent association network (MRAN) analysis was performed to overcome the limitations of conventional network analysis. Microcystis blooms were tightly linked with Pseudanabaena in summer and were accompanied by significant changes in the non-cyanobacterial community composition (nCCC) compared to non-bloom period. Riverine bacterial communities could be clearly separated into modules that were involved in the formation, maintenance, and decomposition of cyanoHABs. Roseomonas and Herbaspirillum were directly linked with major cyanobacteria and assigned to connector and module hub in cyanoHABs-related modules, respectively. The functional profiles of the cyanoHABs-related modules suggested that nitrate reduction, aerobic ammonia oxidation, fermentation, and hydrocarbon degradation could be increased during the Microcystis bloom periods. In conclusion, MRAN analysis revealed that specific bacteria belonging to cyanoHABs-related module, including connectors and module hubs, appeared to contribute to the development and collapse of cyanoHABs. Therefore, to understand cyanoHABs, a modular microbial perspective may be more helpful than a single bacterial species perspective.Entities:
Keywords: bacterial community; connector; cyanoHABs; cyanoHABs-related module; microbial recurrent association network; module hub
Year: 2019 PMID: 31379787 PMCID: PMC6650593 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01637
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
FIGURE 1Relative abundance of (A) total bacterial community structure (phylum level) and (B) non-cyanobacterial community structure (class level). The dendrogram shows the clustering of the OTU data (Bray–Curtis similarity measure). Taxa with <0.5% average abundances are pooled together and shown as “Others.” Samples are labeled by a four-number code indicating the year and month of sampling (in YYMM format).
FIGURE 2Relative abundance of major cyanobacterial OTUs in the bacterial community and 16S rRNA gene copy number of Cyanobacteria.
FIGURE 3db-RDA ordinations of the non-cyanobacterial community based on the Bray–Curtis distance. Vectors indicate the direction of the significant parameter (P < 0.001) effect in the ordination plot. Small gray circles represent OTUs. Dolichospermum1 indicates OTU00013, and Dolichospermum2 indicates OTU00035.
FIGURE 4Modular structure of MRAN, comparison of nCCCs, and monthly patterns of the modules. (A) MRAN (≥3/6): node colors represent modules, Dolichospermum1 indicates OTU00013, Dolichospermum2 indicates OTU00035, solid lines represent positive correlations and dashed lines represent negative correlations. (B) NMDS of the top 50 genera in the major modules. (C) Average relative abundances of non-cyanobacterial OTUs in the major modules. (D) Trend lines representing the normalized average relative abundance of each major module: the green background represents Microcystis bloom periods.
Topological features and statistics of the microbial association networks.
| Features | Association networks∗ ( | MRAN (≥3/6) |
|---|---|---|
| Number of nodes | 423–638 | 362 |
| Number of edges | 3198–9792 | 2072 |
| Diameter | 8–11 | 12 |
| Ratio of positive/negative edge | 0.86–0.92 | 0.92 |
| Average number of neighbors | 15.12–30.7 | 11.45 |
| Network density | 0.036–0.051 | 0.032 |
| Network heterogeneity | 0.826–1.067 | 1.127 |
| Network heterogeneity, random | 0.176–0.252 | 0.290 |
| Centralization | 0.111–0.187 | 0.13 |
| Centralization, random | 0.023–0.031 | 0.032 |
| Modularity | 0.462–0.539 | 0.473 |
| Modularity, random | 0.238–0.285 | 0.267 |
| Average clustering coefficient ( | 0.403–0.477 | 0.318 |
| Clustering coefficient, random ( | 0.037–0.052 | 0.030 |
| Characteristic path length ( | 3.03–3.95 | 3.53 |
| Characteristic path length, random ( | 2.17–2.53 | 2.67 |
| 8.4–11.38 | 10.6 | |
| 1.36–1.67 | 1.32 | |
| Small-world coefficient (SW) | 5.25–7.29 | 8.03 |
FIGURE 5Z–P plot showing the distribution of nodes based on their topological roles in the networks. Colors represent cyanobacterial OTUs and cyanobacteria-related bacterial OTUs. The threshold values of Z and P for categorizing OTUs were 2.5 and 0.62, respectively, as simplified by Olesen et al. (2007).
FIGURE 6The subnetwork of major cyanobacterial OTUs in the MRAN. Node size represents node degree, solid lines represent positive correlations, dashed lines represent negative correlations, and the arrow represents a delayed correlation.
FIGURE 7The heatmap showing the distribution of the functional groups of prokaryotic communities of modules using FAPROTAX. The normalized value was calculated by multiplying the calculated values (“function tables”) by the total sum of the OTUs belonging to each major module. Samples are labeled by a four-number code indicating the year and month of sampling (in YYMM format).