| Literature DB >> 32190114 |
Marius Bredon1, Benjamin Herran1, Joanne Bertaux1, Pierre Grève1, Bouziane Moumen1, Didier Bouchon1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Isopods have colonized all environments, partly thanks to their ability to decompose the organic matter. Their enzymatic repertoire, as well as the one of their associated microbiota, has contributed to their colonization success. Together, these holobionts have evolved several interesting life history traits to degrade the plant cell walls, mainly composed of lignocellulose. It has been shown that terrestrial isopods achieve lignocellulose degradation thanks to numerous and diverse CAZymes provided by both the host and its microbiota. Nevertheless, the strategies for lignocellulose degradation seem more diversified in isopods, in particular in aquatic species which are the least studied. Isopods could be an interesting source of valuable enzymes for biotechnological industries of biomass conversion.Entities:
Keywords: CAZymes; Holobiont; Isopods; Lignocellulose; Microbiota; Shotgun metagenomics; Transcriptomics
Year: 2020 PMID: 32190114 PMCID: PMC7071664 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-020-01683-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Fig. 1Lignocellulose-degrading CAZymes of isopod holobionts. Numbers represent normalized CAZyme counts identified in the host (red) on the left and microbiota (blue) on the right. The thickness of the connector is proportional with the number of normalized CAZyme counts identified in a given family
Fig. 2Distribution of lignocellulose-degrading CAZymes from the microbiota in the host digestive tissues. Orange connectors show normalized CAZyme counts identified in caeca and green connectors those identified in hindguts
Fig. 3Compositions of the bacterial community associated with the lignocellulose degradation at the level of the phylum (a) and of the order (b) according to CAZy classes
Fig. 4Comparative analysis of bacterial communities associated with the lignocellulose degradation in isopods, considering (a) or not (b) the effect of sex. a A principal component analysis (PCA) plot of the bacterial counts, at the family level, that characterize the bacterial community from each studied species depending of its origin and sex (51.2% of the information was extracted from the two principal components PC1 and PC2). Each dot represents the taxonomic composition of a metagenome and each color represents the host species and its origin (laboratory or field). b Phylogenetic tree of the bacterial communities of the studied isopods. All branches are drawn to scale as indicated by the scale bar
Fig. 5Gene organization in PULs identified in the metagenomes of A. aquaticus. PULs were assigned to unclassified Flavobacterium and Bacteroidetes. In addition to genes encoding CAZymes, various other genes and unknown proteins (abbreviated “unk” in the figure) were also present
CAZymes containing dockerin domains
| Host | Origin | Gender | Tissue | Assignation | CAZymes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Field | Female | Nd.a tissues | Bacteria | GH35 | |
| Field | Female | Nd.a tissues | Bacteroidetes | GH130 | |
| Field | Female | Nd.a tissues | Cytophagales | GH35 | |
| Field | Male | Nd.a tissues | Bacteria | GH130 | |
| Field | Male | Nd.a tissues | Cytophagales | GH35 | |
| Laboratory | Female | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH3 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Armatimonadetes | CE10 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH18 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH136 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH2 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH50 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | PL9_2 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | CE1 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH5_13 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH93 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH99 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Bacteria | GH135 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Phycisphaerae | GH99 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Planctomycetes | GH44 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Planctomycetes | GH26 + CBM35 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Planctomycetes | GH18 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Planctomycetes | GH43_5 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Hindgut | Planctomycetes | CE1 | |
| Field | Female | Nd.a tissues | Polynucleobacter | GT102 | |
| Laboratory | Male | Nd.a tissues | Algoriphagus | GH33 | |
| Laboratory | Female | Hindgut | Algoriphagus | CBM38 | |
| Laboratory | Female | Nd.a tissues | Bacteroidetes | CBM32 | |
| Field | Female | Hindgut | Bacteroidetes | CE3 | |
| Field | Female | Hindgut | Rhizobiales | GH108 | |
| Laboratory | Female | Caeca | Rhizobiales | CE10 |
Assignation corresponds to the closest bacterial taxon possible as predicted by CAT-BAT
aNd. non-digestive tissues