4.3 Article

Electron microscopic detection and in situ characterization of bacterial nanoforms in extreme biotopes

Journal

MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 77, Issue 1, Pages 39-46

Publisher

MAIK NAUKA/INTERPERIODICA/SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1134/S0026261708010062

Keywords

nanoforms; ultramicrobacteria; microorganisms in situ; cell ultrastructure; extreme biotopes; fractionation of microorganisms

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The morphology, ultrastructure, and quantity of bacterial nanoforms were studied in extreme biotopes: East Siberia permafrost soil (1-3 Ma old), petroleum-containing slimes (35 years old), and biofilms from subsurface oil pipelines. The morphology and ultrastructure of microbial cells in natural biotopes in situ were investigated by high-resolution transmission electron microscopy and various methods of sample preparation: ultrathin sectioning, cell replicas, and cryofractography. It was shown that the biotopes under study contained high numbers of bacterial nanoforms (29-43% of the total number of microorganisms) that could be assigned to ultramicrobacteria due to their size (diameter of <= 0.3 mu m and volume of: <= 0.014 mu m(3)) and structural characteristics (the presence of the outer and cytoplasmic membranes, nucleoid, and cell wall, as well as their division patterns). Seven different morphostructural types of nanoforms of vegetative cells, as well as nanospores and cyst-like cells were described, potentially representing new species of ultramicrobacteria. In petroleum-containing slimes, a peculiar type of nanocells was discovered, gram-negative cells mostly 0.18-0.20 x 0.20-0.30 mu m in size, forming in situ spherical aggregates (microcolonies) of dividing cells. The data obtained promoted the isolation of pure cultures of ultramicrobacteria from petroleum-containing slimes; they resembled the ultramicrobacterium observed in situ in their morphology and ultrastructure.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available