4.5 Article

Metabolically active microbial communities in uranium-contaminated subsurface sediments

期刊

FEMS MICROBIOLOGY ECOLOGY
卷 59, 期 1, 页码 95-107

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2006.00203.x

关键词

nitrate-reducing bacteria; uranium contamination; subsurface sediments; microbial community composition; nitrate reduction; Fe(III) reduction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to develop effective bioremediation strategies for radionuclide contaminants, the composition and metabolic potential of microbial communities need to be better understood, especially in highly contaminated subsurface sediments for which little cultivation-independent information is available. In this study, we characterized metabolically active and total microbial communities associated with uranium-contaminated subsurface sediments along geochemical gradients. DNA and RNA were extracted and amplified from four sediment-depth intervals representing moderately acidic (pH 3.7) to near-neutral (pH 6.7) conditions. Phylotypes related to Proteobacteria (Alpha-, Beta-, Delta- and Gammaproteobacteria), Bacteroidetes, Actinobacteria, Firmicutes and Planctomycetes were detected in DNA- and RNA-derived clone libraries. Diversity and numerical dominance of phylotypes were observed to correspond to changes in sediment geochemistry and rates of microbial activity, suggesting that geochemical conditions have selected for well-adapted taxa. Sequences closely related to nitrate-reducing bacteria represented 28% and 43% of clones from the total and metabolically active fractions of the microbial community, respectively. This study provides the first detailed analysis of total and metabolically active microbial communities in radionuclide-contaminated subsurface sediments. Our microbial community analysis, in conjunction with rates of microbial activity, points to several groups of nitrate-reducers that appear to be well adapted to environmental conditions common to radionuclide-contaminated sites.

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

4.5
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