4.6 Article

The characterisation of eukaryotic microbial communities on sandstone buildings in Belfast, UK, using TRFLP and 454 pyrosequencing

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.03.010

关键词

Lithobiontic eukaryotes; Sandstone heritage structures; TRFLP; Pyrosequencing; Microbial community structure

资金

  1. EPSRC [EP/G011338/1]
  2. EPSRC [EP/G011338/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/G011338/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. Natural Environment Research Council [ceh010010] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Eukaryotic microorganisms, notably microbial algae and fungi, can have a major impact on the biodeterioration of building stone, particularly when they form green biofilms. However, comparatively little is known about the composition and structure of eukaryotic communities living on the surface of stone. The twin aims of this study were to a) characterise algal and fungal:communities living on heritage structures in Belfast, UK and b) to investigate the relationship between eukaryotic community composition and a variety of substrate characteristics. We used molecular techniques (TRFLP and 454 pyrosequencing) to characterise the communities. We found unexpectedly high levels of taxonomic richness in algal communities, but low overall levels of diversity in both the algal and the fungal assemblages resulting from inequitable distributions of taxa. Our findings suggest the existence of a small pool of cosmopolitan algal species and relatively homogeneous algal communities on sandstone structures. In contrast, fungal communities were much richer and more spatially heterogeneous. It is likely that the aggressive chemical cleaning of one of the structures in the 1980s has had an ongoing impact on microbial community structure. Furthermore, whilst substrate characteristics seem to impact on the abundance/biomass of eukaryotic microbial communities, they do not influence diversity. (c) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据