4.7 Article

Bacterial Community Assemblages Associated with the Phyllosphere, Dermosphere, and Rhizosphere of Tree Species of the Atlantic Forest are Host Taxon Dependent

期刊

MICROBIAL ECOLOGY
卷 68, 期 3, 页码 567-574

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00248-014-0433-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. BIOTA-FAPESP (Sao Paulo Research Foundation, Sao Paulo, Brazil)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacterial communities associated with tree canopies have been shown to be specific to their plant hosts, suggesting that plant species-specific traits may drive the selection of microbial species that comprise their microbiomes. To further examine the degree to which the plant taxa drive the assemblage of bacterial communities in specific plant microenvironments, we evaluated bacterial community structures associated with the phyllosphere, dermosphere, and rhizosphere of seven tree species representing three orders, four families and four genera of plants from a pristine Dense Ombrophilous Atlantic forest in Brazil, using a combination of PCR-DGGE of 16S rRNA genes and clone library sequencing. Results indicated that each plant species selected for distinct bacterial communities in the phyllosphere, dermosphere, and rhizosphere, and that the bacterial community structures are significantly related to the plant taxa, at the species, family, and order levels. Further characterization of the bacterial communities of the phyllosphere and dermosphere of the tree species showed that they were inhabited predominantly by species of Gammaproteobacteria, mostly related to Pseudomonas. In contrast, the rhizosphere bacterial communities showed greater species richness and evenness, and higher frequencies of Alphaproteobacteria and Acidobacteria Gp1. With individual tree species each selecting for their specific microbiomes, these findings greatly increase our estimates of the bacterial species richness in tropical forests and provoke questions concerning the ecological functions of the microbial communities that exist on different plant parts.

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

4.7
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