4.8 Article

Molecular Mechanism of Modified Clay Controlling the Brown Tide Organism Aureococcus anophagefferens Revealed by Transcriptome Analysis

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 52, 期 12, 页码 7006-7014

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b05172

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFC1404300]
  2. AoShan Talents Cultivation Program by Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology [2017ASTCP-OS16]
  3. NSFC-Shandong Joint Fund for Marine Science Research Centers [U1606404]
  4. AoShan Technological Innovation Program by Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology [2016ASKJ02-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The data and experiences in mitigating harmful algal blooms (HABs) by modified clay (MC) show that a bloom does not continue after the dispersal of the MC, even though the density of the residual cells in the water is still high, at 20-30% of the initial cell density. This interesting phenomenon indicates that in addition to flocculation, MC has an additional control mechanism. Here, transcriptome sequencing technology was used to study the molecular mechanism of MC in controlling HABs. In residual cells treated with MC, the photosynthetic light reaction was the most affected physiological process. Some genes related to the light harvesting complex, photosystem (PS) I and PS II, were significantly up-regulated (p < 0.05), and several transcripts increased by as much as 6-told. In contrast, genes associated with the dark reaction did not significantly change. In addition to genes associated with photosynthesis, numerous genes related to energy metabolism, stress adaptation, cytoskeletal functioning, and cell division also responded to MC treatment. These results indicated that following treatment with MC, the normal physiological processes of algal cells were disrupted, which inhibited cell proliferation and growth. Thus, these findings provide scientific proof that HABs are controlled by MC.

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

4.8
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