| Literature DB >> 35154054 |
Xu Liu1,2, Yu Shi3, Teng Yang1,2, Gui-Feng Gao1,2, Liyan Zhang4, Ruoyu Xu5, Chenxin Li5, Ruiyang Liu5, Junjie Liu6, Haiyan Chu1,2.
Abstract
Studies of methane-oxidizing bacteria are updating our views of their composition and function in paddy and natural wetlands. However, few studies have characterized differences in the methane-oxidizing bacterial communities between paddy and natural wetlands. Here, we conducted a 13C stable isotope-probing experiment and high-throughput sequencing to determine the structure profiling, co-occurrence relationships, and assembly processes of methanotrophic communities in four wetlands of Northeast China. There was a clear difference in community structure between paddy and natural wetlands. LEfSe analyses revealed that Methylobacter, FWs, and Methylosinus were enriched in natural wetlands, while Methylosarcina were prevailing in paddy, all identified as indicative methanotrophs. We observed distinct co-occurrence relationships between paddy and natural wetlands: more robust and complex connections in natural wetlands than paddy wetlands. Furthermore, the relative importance of stochastic processes was greater than that of deterministic processes, as stochastic processes explained >50% of the variation in communities. These results demonstrated that the co-occurrence relationships and assembly processes of active methanotrophic communities in paddy and natural wetlands were distinct. Overall, the results of this study enhance our understanding of the communities of methane-oxidizing bacteria in paddy and natural wetlands of Northeast China.Entities:
Keywords: CH4 oxidation; DNA-SIP; assembly processes; co-occurrence relationships; methane-oxidizing bacterial communities
Year: 2022 PMID: 35154054 PMCID: PMC8826055 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.809074
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Figure 1A pipeline of the study on the differences in active methanotrophic communities between paddy and natural wetlands. CC on behalf of Changchun paddy wetland, MZ on behalf of Minzhu paddy wetland, XH on behalf of Xianghai natural wetland, and ZL on behalf of Zhalong natural wetland.
Figure 2(A) Methane oxidation potentials at the CH4 incubations of four wetland soils. Boxes with different lowercase letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05). (B) Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) biplots of Bray–Curtis distances for the active methanotrophic communities of four wetland soils. (C,D) Relative abundance of active methanotrophs on the genus levels and methanotrophic category levels identified with pmoA gene sequencing in four wetland soils.
Figure 3The upper barplot showed LDA score of the active methanotrophic communities between paddy and natural wetlands identified by Lefse analysis (A). The following four histograms showed the relative abundance of indicative methanotrophs that make differences (B).
Figure 4(A) Networks visualizing co-occurring phylotypes of active methanotrophs in paddy and natural wetlands. All co-occurrence networks were analyzed by Spiec-Easi method. Colorful nodes represented different ecological module affiliations of active methanotrophs and edges on behalf of potential ecological co-occurring relationships. (B) Relationships between degree scores and betweenness centralities in active methanotrophic co-occurrence networks of four wetland soils. The difference test was adopted by Mann–Whitney U test. (C) Network robustness analysis of active methanotrophic co-occurrence networks in four wetland soils, measured as natural connectivities with remained proportion of nodes.
Figure 5(A) Manhattan plots showing differential operational taxonomic units (OTUs) in networks of paddy and natural wetlands. OTUs that belonged to Type I were depicted as circles shape where Type II OTUs as triangle shape. The dashed line corresponded to the adjusted value of p threshold of significance (α = 0.01/0.001). The color of each dot represented the different taxonomic affiliation of the OTUs, and the size corresponded to their abundance in the respective samples. Gray backgrounds were used to denote the different taxonomic groups. (B,C) Relative abundance of the dominant genus in the respective main ecological modules of natural and paddy wetland networks, respectively.
Figure 6(A) Phylogenetic tree displaying the taxonomic information, phylogenetic clusters, and OTU average abundance from inside layer to the outside layer of active methanotrophic phylotypes in four wetland soils. (B) The standardized difference of mean pairwise distance for active methanotrophic communities in four wetland soils using standard deviation (Z-score). Boxes with different lowercase letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05). (C) The contributions of different assembly processes of active methanotrophic communities in four wetland soils. The five processes indicated the relative importance in dominating the community dissimilarity between two samples. VS, variable selection; HS, homogeneous selection; DL, dispersal limitation; HD, homogenizing dispersal; UD, undominated.