4.6 Article

Metagenomics of the Water Column in the Pristine Upper Course of the Amazon River

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 6, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023785

关键词

-

资金

  1. Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras, Federal University of Sao Carlos, SP, Brazil [0050.0045454.08-4]
  2. National Council for Research and Development (CNPq) [305655/2009-4]
  3. Brazilian Federal Agency for the Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES)
  4. MAGYK [BIO2008-02444]
  5. MICROGEN [CSD2009-00006]
  6. METAGHALO [BIO2009-10138]
  7. Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion [CGL2010-19303]
  8. Generalitat Valenciana [PROMETEO/2010/089]
  9. Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

River water is a small percentage of the total freshwater on Earth but represents an essential resource for mankind. Microbes in rivers perform essential ecosystem roles including the mineralization of significant quantities of organic matter originating from terrestrial habitats. The Amazon river in particular is famous for its size and importance in the mobilization of both water and carbon out of its enormous basin. Here we present the first metagenomic study on the microbiota of this river. It presents many features in common with the other freshwater metagenome available (Lake Gatun in Panama) and much less similarity with marine samples. Among the microbial taxa found, the cosmopolitan freshwater acI lineage of the actinobacteria was clearly dominant. Group I Crenarchaea and the freshwater sister group of the marine SAR11 clade, LD12, were found alongside more exclusive and well known freshwater taxa such as Polynucleobacter. A metabolism-centric analysis revealed a disproportionate representation of pathways involved in heterotrophic carbon processing, as compared to those found in marine samples. In particular, these river microbes appear to be specialized in taking up and mineralizing allochthonous carbon derived from plant material.

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