4.6 Article

Alpha- and Gammaproteobacterial Methanotrophs Codominate the Active Methane-Oxidizing Communities in an Acidic Boreal Peat Bog

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 82, 期 8, 页码 2363-2371

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.03640-15

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0007144, DE-SC0012088]
  2. U.S. Department of Education (DoED)
  3. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0007144, DE-SC0012088] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this study was to characterize metabolically active, aerobic methanotrophs in an ombrotrophic peatland in the Marcell Experimental Forest, in Minnesota. Methanotrophs were investigated in the field and in laboratory incubations using DNA-stable isotope probing (SIP), expression studies on particulate methane monooxygenase (pmoA) genes, and amplicon sequencing of 16S rRNA genes. Potential rates of oxidation ranged from 14 to 17 mu mol of CH(4)g dry weight soil(-1) day(-1). Within DNA-SIP incubations, the relative abundance of methanotrophs increased from 4% in situ to 25 to 36% after 8 to 14 days. Phylogenetic analysis of the C-13-enriched DNA fractions revealed that the active methanotrophs were dominated by the genera Methylocystis (type II; Alphaproteobacteria), Methylomonas, and Methylovulum (both, type I; Gammaproteobacteria). In field samples, a transcript-to-gene ratio of 1 to 2 was observed for pmoA in surface peat layers, which attenuated rapidly with depth, indicating that the highest methane consumption was associated with a depth of 0 to 10 cm. Metagenomes and sequencing of cDNA pmoA amplicons from field samples confirmed that the dominant active methanotrophs were Methylocystis and Methylomonas. Although type II methanotrophs have long been shown to mediate methane consumption in peatlands, our results indicate that members of the genera Methylomonas and Methylovulum (type I) can significantly contribute to aerobic methane oxidation in these ecosystems.

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