4.6 Article

Comparative Characterization of the Microbial Diversities of an Artificial Microbialite Model and a Natural Stromatolite

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 74, 期 23, 页码 7410-7421

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01710-08

关键词

-

资金

  1. Florida Space Research and Education
  2. Florida Space Grant Consortium [UCF-0000127787]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbialites are organosedimentary structures that result from the trapping, binding, and lithification of sediments by microbial mat communities. In this study we developed a model artificial microbialite system derived from natural stromatolites, a type of microbialite, collected from Exuma Sound, Bahamas. We demonstrated that the morphology of the artificial microbialite was consistent with that of the natural system in that there was a multilayer community with a pronounced biofilm on the surface, a concentrated layer of filamentous cyanobacteria in the top 5 mm, and a lithified layer of fused oolitic sand grains in the subsurface. The fused grain layer was comprised predominantly of the calcium carbonate polymorph aragonite, which corresponded to the composition of the Bahamian stromatolites. The microbial diversity of the artificial microbialites and that of natural stromatolites were also compared using automated ribosomal intergenic spacer analysis (ARISA) and 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The ARISA profiling indicated that the Shannon indices of the two communities were comparable and that the overall diversity was not significantly lower in the artificial microbialite model. Bacterial clone libraries generated from each of the three artificial microbialite layers and natural stromatolites indicated that the cyanobacterial and crust layers most closely resembled the ecotypes detected in the natural stromatolites and were dominated by Proteobacteria and Cyanobacteria. We propose that such model artificial microbialites can serve as experimental analogues for natural stromatolites.

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