4.6 Article

Metabolomics reveals differences of metal toxicity in cultures of Pseudomonas pseudoalcaligenes KF707 grown on different carbon sources

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00827

关键词

bacteria; metal toxicity; Pseudomonas; GC-MS metabolomics; bioremediation; aluminum; copper; biphenyl

资金

  1. NSERC DG grant
  2. AIHS studentship
  3. NSERC CGSD scholarship
  4. Alberta Innovates [201100429] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Co-contamination of metals and organic pollutants is a global problem as metals interfere with the metabolism of complex organics by bacteria. Based on a prior observation that metal tolerance was altered by the sole carbon source being used for growth, we sought to understand how metal toxicity specifically affects bacteria using an organic pollutant as their sole carbon source. To this end metabolomics was used to compare cultures of Pseudomonas pseudoalcaligenes KF707 grown on either biphenyl (Bp) or succinate (Sc) as the sole carbon source in the presence of either aluminum (Al) or copper (Cu). Using multivariate statistical analysis it was found that the metals caused perturbations to more cellular processes in the cultures grown on Bp than those grown on Sc. Al induced many changes that were indicative of increased oxidative stress as metabolites involved in DNA damage and protection, the Krebs cycle and anti-oxidant production were altered. Cu also caused metabolic changes that were indicative of similar stress, as well as appearing to disrupt other key enzymes such as fumarase. Additionally, both metals caused the accumulation of Bp degradation intermediates indicating that they interfered with Bp metabolism. Together these results provide a basic understanding of how metal toxicity specifically affects bacteria at a biochemical level during the degradation of an organic pollutant and implicate the catabolism of this carbon source as a major factor that exacerbates metal toxicity.

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