4.6 Article

Isolation and substrate screening of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon degrading bacteria from soil with long history of contamination

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2015.11.004

关键词

Phenanthrene; Pseudomonas; Dioxygenase; Bioremediation; Ryegrass

资金

  1. RhizOrg project - ANR (Agence Nationale de la Recherche) [ANR-13-JSV7-0007_01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial degradation is a promising soil remediation strategy for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) frequently polluting some post-industrial environments. Thirteen PAH-degrading bacterial strains were isolated from bare or ryegrass-vegetated aged-contaminated soil, based on their potential for phenanthrene biodegradation. 16S rRNA gene phylogeny showed that all isolates were affiliated with three closely related taxonomic subgroups within the Pseudomonas genus. Two of these subgroups were exclusively retrieved from planted soil. Genes encoding PAH-ring hydroxylating dioxygenases were detected in all strains and matched known sequences in other Pseudomonas strains from polluted environments. Genes for protocatechuate-3,4-dioxygenases (pcaH) and catechol-2,3-dioxygenases were also detected in all strains, whereas the catechol-1,2-dioxygenase gene was absent. The presence of pcaH genes, the utilization of protocatechuate, the strong inhibitory effect of salicylate and the detection of phthalate during phenanthrene biodegradation suggest that these isolates preferentially catabolize PAHs via the protocatechuate pathway. Metabolic profiling was further performed for three representative isolates on a large range of 61 organic substrates. Although closely related phylogenetically, they were able to use different sets of labile carbon compounds (e.g. sugars, amino acids), PAHs and their metabolites, and released different degradation products from phenanthrene. These contrasted metabolic capabilities might reflect differential adaptation to their respective environment. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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