| Literature DB >> 32203124 |
Jie-Liang Liang1, Jun Liu2, Pu Jia1, Tao-Tao Yang2, Qing-Wei Zeng2, Sheng-Chang Zhang2, Bin Liao2, Wen-Sheng Shu1, Jin-Tian Li3,4.
Abstract
Little is known about the changes in soil microbialEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32203124 PMCID: PMC7242446 DOI: 10.1038/s41396-020-0632-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISME J ISSN: 1751-7362 Impact factor: 10.302
Selected physico-chemical properties of the three types of soil samples collected at 3 and 4 years after ecological restoration initiation.
| Three years | Four years | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTa | ULRT | ALRT | UT | ULRT | ALRT | |
| pH | 2.87 ± 0.05 bc | 7.13 ± 0.36 a | 7.12 ± 0.21 a | 2.64 ± 0.10 b | 6.42 ± 1.17 a | 7.29 ± 0.14 a |
| Eh (mV) | 624 ± 13 a | 347 ± 75 b | 265 ± 8 b | 618 ± 25 a | 386 ± 144 b | 174 ± 10 c |
| EC (mS m−1) | 0.81 ± 0.07 a | 0.62 ± 0.16 ab | 0.36 ± 0.02 b | 0.87 ± 0.21 a | 0.50 ± 0.06 b | 0.37 ± 0.01 b |
| NAG (kg H2SO4 t−1) | 21.1 ± 2.48 a | 0.8 ± 0.92 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 29.2 ± 1.02 a | 2.17 ± 1.07 b | 2.20 ± 3.14 b |
| NAG-pH | 2.66 ± 0.02 b | 6.79 ± 1.26 a | 7.84 ± 0.73 a | 2.58 ± 0.05 b | 5.81 ± 0.38 a | 6.56 ± 0.59 a |
| Total C (g kg−1) | 1.01 ± 0.04 b | 3.26 ± 1.71 b | 91.1 ± 13.5 a | 1.19 ± 0.21 b | 3.10 ± 0.11 b | 68.7 ± 16.2 a |
| TOCb (g kg−1) | 0.22 ± 0.01 b | 2.08 ± 0.99 b | 63.0 ± 20.7 a | 0.52 ± 0.22 b | 1.36 ± 0.12 b | 41.2 ± 14.5 a |
| WSOC (mg kg−1) | 19 ± 2 b | 113 ± 31b | 1040 ± 257 a | 54 ± 30 b | 89 ± 35 b | 569 ± 102 a |
| Total N (mg kg−1) | 157 ± 6 b | 347 ± 155 b | 8090 ± 1705 a | 207 ± 32 b | 367 ± 31 b | 6337 ± 1500 a |
| NH4+–N (mg kg−1) | 9.3 ± 0.4 b | 11.3 ± 3.9 ab | 48.6 ± 32.7 a | 5.6 ± 2.5 c | 11.4 ± 3.9 b | 18.6 ± 0.6 a |
| NO3−–N (mg kg−1) | 0.13 ± 0.11 c | 0.89 ± 0.25 b | 1.34 ± 0.15 a | 0.12 ± 0.21 b | 6.28 ± 4.88 a | 6.71 ± 0.20 a |
| Total P (mg kg−1) | 49 ± 47 b | 204 ± 43 b | 1445 ± 441 a | 90 ± 69 b | 339 ± 83 b | 983 ± 495 a |
| Bioavailable P (mg kg−1) | 0.0 ± 0.0 b | 14.9 ± 13.2 b | 93.2 ± 46.9 a | 0.5 ± 0.9 b | 40.0 ± 33.6 a | 44.4 ± 6.0 a |
| C/N | 7.52 ± 0.09 c | 10.8 ± 0.46 b | 13.3 ± 0.54 a | 6.76 ± 0.44 c | 9.91 ± 0.62 b | 12.6 ± 0.01 a |
| C/P | 39.5 ± 12.4 b | 39.6 ± 7.41 b | 171 ± 24.3 a | 22.8 ± 4.09 b | 24.5 ± 3.30 b | 216 ± 72.9 a |
| N/P | 5.28 ± 1.61 b | 3.64 ± 0.52 b | 12.9 ± 1.74 a | 3.48 ± 0.29 b | 2.49 ± 0.39 b | 17.1 ± 5.78 a |
| Moisture content (%) | 10.6 ± 1.9 b | 11.0 ± 4.6 b | 34.0 ± 1.7 a | 12.4 ± 3.4 b | 14.1 ± 3.0 b | 32.5 ± 3.1 a |
C/N, C/P, and N/P referred to the mole ratios among total C, total N, and total P.
aUT the unreclaimed tailings, ULRT the unamended layer of the reclaimed tailings, ALRT the amended layer of the reclaimed tailings.
bTOC total organic carbon, WSOC water soluble organic carbon.
cData (n = 3; mean ± S.E.) for different types of samples with different letters were significantly different from each other (P < 0.05, LSD).
Fig. 1The effects of ecological restoration on the relative abundances of genes responsible for soil microbial P-cycling potential.
Data (n = 3; mean ± S.E.) of soil samples collected at 3 and 4 years after the initiation of the ecological restoration were presented in the left and right panel, respectively. UT, ALRT, and ULRT represent soil samples collected from unrestored mine tailings, the amended layer (0–10 cm) of the restored mine tailings and the unamended layer (11–20 cm) of the restored mine tailings, respectively. Asterisk symbol indicates significant (P < 0.05, LSD) differences between UT and ALRT (i.e. ALRT > UT). Hash symbol indicates significant differences between the three types of soil samples (i.e. ALRT > ULRT > UT).
Fig. 2The linkages between genes responsible for soil microbial P-cycling potential and soil P status.
Relationships between the relative abundance of all genes involved in soil microbial P cycling and total soil P (a) or bioavailable soil P (b) are shown. Panel (c) shows the significant (P < 0.05) gene predictors of bioavailable soil P, identified by random forest analysis. The data of the two sampling dates were analyzed together.
Fig. 3Analysis of the 39 high-quality metagenome-assembled genomes harboring sequences of gcd genes.
The left panel shows the maximum-likelihood phylogenetic tree constructed using PhyloPhlAn. Bootstrap values were based on 100 replicates, and percentages higher than 70% are shown with black circles. Numbers of genes encoding enzymes responsible for P solubilization identified in the genomes are shown in the middle panel. gcd encoding quinoprotein glucose dehydrogenase, phnP C-P lyase subunit (PhnP), phoA alkaline phosphatase (PhoA), phoD alkaline phosphatase (PhoD), and phoN acid phosphatase (class A). Spearman correlations between the relative abundance of the 39 genomes and concentrations of total soil P (TP) or bioavailable soil P (AP) are listed in the table present in the right part of the figure. MAGs metagenome-assembled genomes. The relationship between the relative abundance of the genome bin ALRT3_3.63 and AP concentration is shown in the inset present in the right part of the figure.
Fig. 4Phylogenic analysis of quinoprotein glucose dehydrogenases (GCDs).
Bootstrap values were based on 100 replicates, and only bootstrap values higher than 70% are shown with black circles. The accession number of each published protein is shown in parenthesis. The new GCDs recovered in our study are indicated with red stars. The published GCDs with functional validation by experimentation in the literature are indicated with green circles. Numbers of genes annotated as mobile genetic elements involved in horizontal gene transfer (HGT) on the same scaffolds with gcd genes are indicated with green bars outside the phylogenetic tree. Details on mobile genetic elements involved in HGT were provided in Table 2 and Table S7.
Summary of mobile genetic elements detected in the scaffolds containing gcd genes in the 39 genome bins reconstructed in this study.
| Binsa | Scaffoldsb | Total | Phage related | Integrases | Recombinases | Transposable | Others |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALRT4_1.19 | Scaffold2.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 |
| ULRT4_2.74 | Scaffold7.1 | 5 | 1 (20)c | 1 (20) | 2 (40) | 2 (40) | 0 |
| ULRT4_3.50 | Scaffold9.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 |
| ULRT4_3.50 | Scaffold9.2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 |
| ULRT4_3.50 | Scaffold9.3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 |
| ULRT4_3.50 | Scaffold9.4 | 1 | 1 (100) | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| ULRT4_3.75 | Scaffold10.1 | 20 | 5 (25) | 5 (25) | 10 (50) | 2 (10) | 0 |
| ULRT3_1.133 | Scaffold11.1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 (33) | 2 (67) | 0 |
| ULRT3_3.130 | Scaffold12.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ALRT3_1.33 | Scaffold13.1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ALRT3_3.36 | Scaffold14.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ALRT3_3.36 | Scaffold14.2 | 3 | 2 (67) | 0 | 1 (33) | 0 | 0 |
| ULRT4_1.51 | Scaffold16.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ULRT3_2.126 | Scaffold18.1 | 12 | 4 (33) | 2 (17) | 7 (58) | 1 (8) | 0 |
| ULRT3_3.52 | Scaffold19.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ULRT3_1.11 | Scaffold21.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ULRT3_1.160 | Scaffold22.1 | 1 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| ULRT3_1.79 | Scaffold24.1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 (67) | 1 (33) | 0 |
| ALRT4_1.24 | Scaffold31.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ALRT4_2.13 | Scaffold32.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ALRT4_2.13 | Scaffold32.2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ALRT4_2.13 | Scaffold32.3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ALRT4_2.13 | Scaffold32.4 | 1 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| ALRT4_3.1 | Scaffold34.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| ULRT4_3.172 | Scaffold35.1 | 13 | 3 (23) | 2 (15) | 6 (46) | 4 (31) | 0 |
| ULRT3_2.14 | Scaffold36.1 | 2 | 0 | 1 (50) | 1 (50) | 0 | 0 |
| ULRT3_2.161 | Scaffold37.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| UT4_2.26 | Scaffold39.1 | 3 | 1 (33) | 1 (33) | 0 | 1 (33) | 0 |
aThe bins were named after the sample from which they were assembled and binned. For example, the name ‘ALRT4_1.19’ meant that this bin was generated from the metagenomic dataset of the sample ALRT4_1 (representing the first replicate sample collected from the amended layer of the reclaimed tailings at 4 years after ecological restoration initiation), as the 19th bin of the genome bins recovered in this study.
bDetailed functional annotations were provided in Table S7.
cPercentages of each type of element were given in parentheses.