4.2 Article

Comparison of benthic bacterial community composition in nine streams

期刊

AQUATIC MICROBIAL ECOLOGY
卷 40, 期 1, 页码 51-60

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/ame040051

关键词

bacteria; fluorescent in situ hybridization; denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis; proteobacteria; streams; benthos

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the abundance of major bacterial taxa (based on fluorescent in situ hybridization, FISH) and the structure of the bacterial community (based on denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis, DGGE) were determined in the benthos of 9 streams in the southeastern and mid-western United States and related to differences in environmental conditions. Taxa examined via FISH were Domain Bacteria, Domain Archaea, alpha-, beta-, and gamma-Proteobacteria, a portion of the Bacteroidetes (formerly Cytophaga-Flavobacterium-Bacteroides), and Gram-positive bacteria with high (actinobacteria) and low percent guanine + cytosine (GC) content. Of these taxa, generally the most abundant were the beta- and alpha-Proteobacteria, which constituted on average 19.5 and 17.0% of the Domain Bacteria, respectively. Abundance of most taxa was significantly different among streams and sites within a stream. Based on canonical correspondence and correlation analyses, beta- and gamma-Proteobacteria tended to be most abundant at sites with high dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and nitrate/nitrite concentrations and high benthic organic matter content. In contrast, alpha-Proteobacteria were more abundant in environments with low DOC and nitrate/nitrite concentrations and low sediment organic carbon content. The other taxa did not exhibit clear correlations with the environmental variables measured. DGGE results revealed that the structure of the bacterial community differed among the streams examined, with limited differences in a given stream and much larger differences among streams. Overall, there were clear differences in community composition that in some cases correlated with differences in environmental conditions.

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

4.2
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