| Literature DB >> 35495661 |
Junfeng Li1, Siran Wang1, Jie Zhao1, Zhihao Dong1, Tao Shao1.
Abstract
Most arthropod guts harbor diverse microbiota for symbiotic digestion. The European corn borer (ECB), Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner), is a devastating pest that feeds the lignocellulose-rich tissues of maize plants. However, the potential role of ECB gut microbes in degrading maize cellulose remains largely unexplored. Here, we investigated the gut microbiota of ECB fed with different diets and their potential function in maize lignocellulose degradation. The diversity and composition of gut bacterial communities varied dramatically between the ECB larva fed with artificial diets (ECB-D) and maize plants (ECB-M). Draft genomes of the microbial consortia from ECB-D and ECB-M showed that the principal degraders of cellulose mainly belonged to Firmicutes or Proteobacteria and they were primarily found in the midgut. The cellulolytic microbial consortia contained genes encoding various carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZyme). Furthermore, scanning electron microscopy revealed significant breakdown of lignocellulose in maize treated by the two microbial consortia for 9 days in vitro. Metabolomic analyses show that maize particles treated by two microbial consortia generate distinctive metabolomic profiles, with enrichment for different monosaccharides (i.e., Glucose, Rhamnofuranose, Isomaltose, and Cellobiose) and amino acids (i.e., Threonine, Histidine, and Lysine). The results indicated that the diet of the host impacted the composition and function of its gut microbiota and ECB exploited specific gut microbes to digest maize lignocellulose with distinctive products. Our study provides valuable microbiota resources for lignocellulose bioconversion.Entities:
Keywords: European corn borer; cellulose; degradation; gut microbiota; microbial consortia
Year: 2022 PMID: 35495661 PMCID: PMC9039043 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.816954
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 6.064
FIGURE 1Gut microbial diversity and community composition in the ECB larvae fed with an artificial diet (ECB-D) or maize plants (ECB-M). (A) Relative abundance of microbiota in both strains at the phylum level. The number of x-axis indicates individual gut sample. (B) Linear discriminant analysis effect sizes (LEFSe) for the top 10 bacterial genus that differed significantly in relative abundance between ECB-D and ECB-M. (C) α-diversity comparison based on the Shannon diversity index, using a t-test to determine significant differences (**P < 0.01). Horizontal lines indicate the mean (± SE) of biological replicates. (D) Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) plot generated using OTU metrics based on Bray-Curtis distance. The variation explained by the PCoA axes is given in parentheses. (E) Heatmap showing the main function of microbiota present in the larval gut of ECB-D and ECB-M with different abundance.
FIGURE 2Draft genomes of two microbial consortia from the gut of ECB larvae fed with an artificial diet (BI-D) and maize plants (BI-M) respectively. Panel (A) and panel (B) represent the relative abundance of the dominant bacteria in BI-D and BI-M respectively. (C) The number of CAZyme genes defined in the draft genomes of BI-D and BI-M.
FIGURE 3FISH analysis of the localization of (A) Streptococcus (green), (B) Klebsiella (purple), (C) Enterococcus (blue), and (D) three bacteria in the larval midgut of ECB-M, and (E) Bacillus (green), (F) Enterobacter (purple), (G) Enterococcus (blue), and (H) three bacteria in the larval midgut of ECB-D.
A partial list of CAZymes identified in the microbial consortia from the ECB larvae fed with an artificial diet (BI-D) or maize plants (BI-M)
| Number of proteins | |||
|
| |||
| GHs | BI-M | BI-D | Known activities ( |
| GH1 | 22 | 39 | β-glucosidase, β-galactosidase, β-mannosidase, others |
| GH2 | 6 | 6 | β-galactosidase, β-mannosidase, β-glucuronidase, others |
| GH3 | 6 | 8 | β-glucosidase, 1,4-β-xylosidase, 1,3-β-glucosidase, 1,4-β-glucosidase, others |
| GH4 | 9 | 16 | α-glucosidase; α-galactosidase; α-glucuronidase, others |
| GH5 | 3 | 2 | chitosanase, β-mannosidase, cellulase, 1,3-β-glucosidase, others |
| GH8 | 2 | 5 | chitosanase, cellulase, licheninase, endo-1,4-β-xylanase, others |
| GH13 | 38 | 49 | α-amylase, α-glucosidase, pullulanase, cyclomaltodextrinase, others |
| GH15 | 0 | 1 | glucoamylase, glucodextranase, α,α-trehalase |
| GH16 | 0 | 3 | endo-1,3-β-glucanase, licheninase, xyloglucanase, others |
| GH18 | 10 | 3 | chitinase, endo-β-N-acetylglucosaminidase, others |
| GH19 | 1 | 1 | chitinase |
| GH20 | 3 | 1 | β-hexosaminidase, β-1,6-N-acetylglucosaminidase, others |
| GH23 | 12 | 20 | lysozyme, peptidoglycan lyase |
| GH24 | 3 | 17 | lysozyme |
| GH25 | 6 | 10 | lysozyme |
| GH28 | 1 | 4 | polygalacturonase, exo-polygalacturonase, others |
| GH31 | 5 | 5 | α-glucosidase, α-1,3-glucosidase, α-xylosidase, α-glucan lyase, others |
| GH32 | 4 | 13 | invertase, endo-inulinase, endo-levanase, others |
| GH33 | 2 | 0 | sialidase, |
| GH35 | 2 | 1 | β-galactosidase, exo-β-glucosaminidase |
| GH36 | 2 | 7 | α-galactosidase, α-N-acetylgalactosaminidase, others |
| GH37 | 2 | 5 | α,α-trehalase |
| GH38 | 6 | 5 | α-mannosidase, α-1,3-1,6-mannosidase, others |
| GH39 | 0 | 2 | α-L-iduronidase, β-xylosidase |
| GH42 | 0 | 1 | β-galactosidase |
| GH43 | 4 | 13 | β-xylosidase, β-1,3-xylosidase, xylanase, 1,3-β-galactosidase, others |
| GH51 | 3 | 4 | α-L-arabinofuranosidase, endoglucanase |
| GH53 | 0 | 3 | endo-β-1,4-galactanase |
| GH63 | 1 | 1 | α-1,3-glucosidase, α-glucosidase |
| GH65 | 7 | 6 | α,α-trehalase, maltose phosphorylase, trehalose phosphorylase, others |
| GH70 | 0 | 2 | dextransucrase, alternansucrase, others |
| GH73 | 15 | 20 | peptidoglycan hydrolase |
| GH74 | 3 | 0 | endoglucanase, xyloglucanase |
| GH77 | 2 | 6 | amylomaltase, 4-α-glucanotransferase |
| GH78 | 2 | 6 | α-L-rhamnosidase |
| GH80 | 1 | 0 | chitosanase |
| GH85 | 1 | 0 | endo-β-N-acetylglucosaminidase |
| GH88 | 3 | 2 | d-4,5 unsaturated β-glucuronyl hydrolase |
| GH92 | 2 | 3 | α-1,2-mannosidase, α-1,3-mannosidase |
| GH94 | 1 | 2 | cellobiose phosphorylase, cellodextrin phosphorylase, others |
| GH101 | 1 | 0 | endo-α-N-acetylgalactosaminidase |
| GH102 | 1 | 2 | peptidoglycan lytic transglycosylase |
| GH103 | 1 | 2 | peptidoglycan lytic transglycosylase |
| GH104 | 0 | 4 | peptidoglycan lytic transglycosylase |
| GH105 | 2 | 4 | unsaturated rhamnogalacturonyl hydrolase |
| GH108 | 0 | 1 | N-acetylmuramidase |
| GH109 | 26 | 29 | α-N-acetylgalactosaminidase |
| GH112 | 1 | 0 | lacto-N-biose phosphorylase, D-galactosyl-1,4-L-rhamnose phosphorylase |
| GH113 | 1 | 0 | β-mannanase |
| GH114 | 1 | 1 | endo-α-1,4-polygalactosaminidase |
| GH125 | 3 | 2 | exo-α-1,6-mannosidase |
| GH126 | 2 | 1 | amylase |
| GH127 | 0 | 3 | L-arabinofuranosidase, 3-C-carboxy-5-deoxy-L-xylose hydrolase |
| GH129 | 1 | 0 | N-acetylgalactosaminidase |
| GH136 | 1 | 0 | lacto-N-biosidase |
| GH153 | 1 | 2 | β-1,6-D-glucosamine hydrolase |
| GH154 | 2 | 1 | β-glucuronidase |
| GH158 | 1 | 0 | endo-β-1,3-glucanase |
GH, glycoside hydrolase.
FIGURE 4In vitro maize cellulose degradation by microbial consortia BI-D and BI-M. Scanning electron micrographs of (A) untreated maize particles, (B) maize particles treated by BI-D for 9 days, and (C) maize particles treated by BI-M for 9 days. The content of (D) lignin, (E) cellulose and (F) hemicellulose in maize particles after treated for 9 days. The cellulose-associated enzyme activity of (G) endoglucanase, (H) exoglucanase, and (I) β-glucosidase in the culture medium of maize particles treated with BI-D and BI-M for 9 days. Horizontal lines in the boxes represent group medians, and whiskers represent the 10th–90th percentiles. Superscripts (a, b) indicate significant differences between different groups (P < 0.05).
FIGURE 5Metabolomic analysis of in vitro degradation of maize particles by two microbial consortia. PCA score plot of metabolic profiles in (A) positive and (B) negative ionization modes. Colored circles represent the metabolic profiles of individual samples. Ellipses indicate 95% confidence region for each group. Relative metabolite levels of maize cellulolytic degradation by two bacterial isolates in (C) positive and (D) negative ionization modes. The color scale shows levels for each metabolite relative to the average abundance. Asterisks indicate significant differences (P < 0.05) between each group. Summary statistics are provided in Supplementary Table 7.
FIGURE 6Graphical summary of the main results. Diet shapes the gut bacterial community of ECB larvae. Two bacterial isolates from the guts of ECB larvae exhibited the ability to degrade maize cellulose to varying degrees in vitro and produced distinctive metabolomic profiles, including reduced sugars and amino acids.