4.8 Article

Diversity and ecological footprint of Global Ocean RNA viruses

Journal

SCIENCE
Volume 376, Issue 6598, Pages 1202-+

Publisher

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/science.abn6358

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. US National Science Foundation [OCE 1829831, ABI 1759874, DBI 2022070]
  2. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation [3790]
  3. Ohio State University's Center of Microbiome Science
  4. Ramon-Areces Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship
  5. France Genomique [ANR-10-INBS-09]
  6. Laulima Government Solutions, LLC
  7. US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) [HHSN272201800013C]
  8. Laulima Government Solutions, LLC [HHSN272201800013C]
  9. Ohio Supercomputer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study reveals patterns and predictors of marine RNA virus diversity and identifies their ecological impacts on marine ecosystems. The research also highlights unexpectedly high polar ecological interactions.
viruses are increasingly recognized as influencing marine microbes and microbe-mediated biogeochemical cycling. However, little is known about global marine RNA virus diversity, ecology, and ecosystem roles. In this study, we uncover patterns and predictors of marine RNA virus community- and species-level diversity and contextualize their ecological impacts from pole to pole. Our analyses revealed four ecological zones, latitudinal and depth diversity patterns, and environmental correlates for RNA viruses. Our findings only partially parallel those of cosampled plankton and show unexpectedly high polar ecological interactions. The influence of RNA viruses on ecosystems appears to be large, as predicted hosts are ecologically important. Moreover, the occurrence of auxiliary metabolic genes indicates that RNA viruses cause reprogramming of diverse host metabolisms, including photosynthesis and carbon cycling, and that RNA virus abundances predict ocean carbon export.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available