4.1 Article

Metagenomes from deep Baltic Sea sediments reveal how past and present environmental conditions determine microbial community composition

期刊

MARINE GENOMICS
卷 37, 期 -, 页码 58-68

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.margen.2017.08.004

关键词

Metagenomes; Marine sediment; Deep subsurface; Baltic Sea; Salinity; Methane

资金

  1. Danish National Research Foundation [DNRF104]
  2. ERC Advanced Grant MICROENERGY under the European Union 7th Framework Program [294200]
  3. ERC Marie Curie IIF fellowship ATP_adapt_low_energy under the European Union 7th Framework Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial communities that lived near the sediment surface in the past become slowly buried and are the source of deep subsurface communities thousands of years later. We used metagenomes to analyse how the composition of buried microbial communities may change to conform to altered environmental conditions at depth. Sediment samples were collected from down to 85 m below sea floor during the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Expedition 347, Baltic Sea Paleoenvironment. The sediments vary in age, organic carbon content, porewater salinity, and other parameters that reflect the changing Baltic environment from the last ice age and throughout the Holocene. We found microorganisms capable of energy conservation by fermentation, acetogenesis, methanogenesis, anaerobic oxidation of methane, and reductive dehalogenation. Glacial sediments showed a greater relative abundance of genes encoding enzymes in the Wood-Ljungdahl pathway and pyruvate:ferredoxin oxidoreductase than Holocene sediments. Relative abundance of genes conferring salinity tolerance was found to correlate with the present salinity, even in deep late-glacial sediment layers where salinity has increased since the sediment was deposited in a freshwater lake > 9000 years ago. This suggests that deeply buried and isolated sediment communities can slowly change in composition in response to geochemical changes that happen long after deposition.

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

4.1
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