3.9 Article

Bacterial aggregates in the tentacles of the sea anemone Metridium senile

Journal

HELGOLAND MARINE RESEARCH
Volume 61, Issue 3, Pages 211-216

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10152-007-0069-4

Keywords

cnidaria; anthozoa; Metridium senile; tentacles; bacterial aggregates; scanning electron microscopy (SEM); PCR; DGGE; sequencing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper provides first information on organ-like bacterial aggregates in the tentacles of the sea anemone Metridium senile. The specimens were collected from waters near Helgoland (German Bight, North Sea) and the Orkney Islands. Tentacles were prepared for morphological inspection by light and scanning electron microscopy as well as for the phylogenetic analysis of endocytic bacteria. Bacterial aggregates are located in caverns of the tentacles' epidermis. The aggregates are enwrapped in thin envelopes, which contain coccoid and/or rod-shaped tightly packed bacteria of different division states. Most of the bacterial cells are connected by fine filamentous structures. The phylogenetic determination is based on the sequence data of the 16S rDNA derived from tentacle material. Sequence analysis revealed three different subgroups of intratentacular proteobacteria. The dominant band, detected in all of the samples tested, showed a close relationship (98%) to a gram-negative Endozoicimonas elysicola. Two bands, only detected in tentacles of M. senile from Helgoland were assigned to Pseudomonas saccherophilia (99%), a knallgas bacterium, and to Ralstonia pickettii (100%). The bacteria represent a specific bacterial community. Their DGGE profiles do not correspond to the profiles of the planktonic bacteria generated from seawater close to the habitats of the anemones. The allocation of DNA sequences to the different morphotypes, their isolation, culturing and the elucidation of the physiological functions of intratentacular bacteria are in progress.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available