| Literature DB >> 35892966 |
Sumit Mukherjee1,2,3,4, Zhuoran Kuang1, Samrat Ghosh5,6, Rajesh Detroja3, Gon Carmi3, Sucheta Tripathy5,6, Danny Barash2, Milana Frenkel-Morgenstern3, Eviatar Nevo4, Kexin Li1.
Abstract
Soil bacteria respond rapidly to changes in new environmental conditions. For adaptation to the new environment, they could mutate their genome, which impacts the alternation of the functional and regulatory landscape. Sometimes, these genetic and ecological changes may drive the bacterial evolution and sympatric speciation. Although sympatric speciation has been controversial since Darwin suggested it in 1859, there are several strong theoretical or empirical evidences to support it. Sympatric speciation associated with soil bacteria remains largely unexplored. Here, we provide potential evidence of sympatric speciation of soil bacteria by comparison of metagenomics from two sharply contrasting abutting divergence rock and soil types (Senonian chalk and its rendzina soil, and abutting Pleistocene basalt rock and basalt soil). We identified several bacterial species with significant genetic differences in the same species between the two soil types and ecologies. We show that the bacterial community composition has significantly diverged between the two soils; correspondingly, their functions were differentiated in order to adapt to the local ecological stresses. The ecologies, such as water availability and pH value, shaped the adaptation and speciation of soil bacteria revealed by the clear-cut genetic divergence. Furthermore, by a novel analysis scheme of riboswitches, we highlight significant differences in structured non-coding RNAs between the soil bacteria from two divergence soil types, which could be an important driver for functional adaptation. Our study provides new insight into the evolutionary divergence and incipient sympatric speciation of soil bacteria under microclimatic ecological differences.Entities:
Keywords: evolution plateau; genetic divergence; metagenomics; riboswitches; structured non-coding RNA; sympatric speciation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35892966 PMCID: PMC9331176 DOI: 10.3390/biology11081110
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biology (Basel) ISSN: 2079-7737
Figure 1Geological map and ecological differences. (A) Geological map including the senonian chalk soil and the abutting derivative Plio-Pleistocence basalt soil, which is like reddish basaltic islands in pale chalk ocean. (B) The contrasting plants with only 28% of the same plant species in the different abutting soils. (C) The clayey wetter and milder basalt soil, and (D) the drier and stressful chalk soil, with a mound of the mole rat Spalax galili chalk.
Figure 2The taxonomy analysis of soil microbiomes and relative abundance of the two soil types. (A) Bacteria composition, which shows the most abundant species are from Actinobacteria and Proteobacteria. (B) Principal component analysis shows the bacterial composition of the two soil types was clearly separated. (C) Comparison of community diversity measured by Shannon diversity, showing it was higher in the arid chalk than that in the clayey wetter and milder basalt soils. (D) The relative abundance of the five dominant phyla. In this figure, *, **, and **** indicates the significance levels p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.0001 accordingly.
Figure 3Functional composition of the two soil type metagenomics. (A) Principal component analysis shows the function composition of the two soil types was clearly separated. (B) There was no significant difference based on the Shannon index of non-redundant gene sets. (C) Principal component analysis shows that the comparison of carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZyomes) composition of the two soil types was clearly separated. (D) The diversity of CAZYomes in basalt is higher. (E) Comparison of abundances of different CAZYomes families between basalt and chalk. (F) KEGG pathways with significant differences between basalt and chalk. In this figure, *, **, and *** indicates the significance levels p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001; and NS indicates not significant accordingly.
Figure 4(A) Riboswitch distributions in the metagenomic assembled genomes (MAGs) from basalt and chalk samples. (B) The differences in GC content in the identified TPP riboswitches between basalt and chalk samples. (C) Secondary structure of fluoride sensing riboswitch identified in the MAGs from the chalk sample.
Figure 5Sympatric divergence of the single bacteria of Streptomyces lividans. (A) Principal component analysis shows samples from basalt clustered together, and samples from chalk were in one cluster. (B) Phylogenetic tree of the chalk and abutting basalt populations. (C) Population structure analysis. (D) Genetic network analysis.