4.4 Article

Halophilic Prokaryotes in Urmia Salt Lake, a Hypersaline Environment in Iran

期刊

CURRENT MICROBIOLOGY
卷 78, 期 8, 页码 3230-3238

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00284-021-02583-w

关键词

-

资金

  1. Shahed University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study used FISH and PCR to determine prokaryotic diversity in Urmia Salt Lake. It found that the prokaryote cell populations were more diverse and abundant than expected in this hypersaline environment, with bacteria forming the metabolically active part of the microbial population. Molecular approaches revealed different aspects of the microbiota in this extreme environment.
In this study, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and PCR-amplified fragments of the 16SrDNA gene were used to determine prokaryotes diversity in Urmia Salt Lake. Prokaryote cell population in Urmia lake range from 3.1 +/- 0.3 x 10(6), 2 +/- 0.2 x 10(8), 4 +/- 0.3 x 10(8), and 1.8 +/- 0.2 x 10(8) cells ml(-1) for water, soil, sediment, and salt samples by DAPI (4, 6-diamidino-2-phenylindole) direct count, respectively. The proportion of bacteria and archaea in the samples determinable by FISH ranged between 36.1 and 55% and 48.5 and 55.5%, respectively. According to the DGGE method, some bands were selected and separated from the gel, then amplified and sequenced. The results of sequences were related to two phyla Proteobacteria (16.6%) and Bacteroidetes (83.3%), which belonged to four genera Salinibacter, Mangroviflexus, Pseudomonas, and Cesiri-bacter, and the archaeal sequences were related to Euryarchaeota phyla and three genera Halonotius, Haloquadraturn, and Halorubrum. According to our results, it seems that prokaryotic populations in this hypersaline environment are more diverse than expected, and bacteria are so abundant and diverse and form the metabolically active part of the microbial population inhabiting this extreme environment. Molecular dependent and independent approaches revealed a different aspect of this environment microbiota.

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

4.4
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