4.6 Article

High motility reduces grazing mortality of planktonic bacteria

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 71, 期 2, 页码 921-929

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.71.2.921-929.2005

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We tested the impact of bacterial swimming speed on the survival of planktonic bacteria in the presence of protozoan grazers. Grazing experiments with three common bacterivorous nanoflagellates revealed low clearance rates for highly motile bacteria. High-resolution video microscopy demonstrated that the number of predator-prey contacts increased with bacterial swimming speed, but ingestion rates dropped at speeds of >25 mum s(-1) as a result of handling problems with highly motile cells. Comparative studies of a moderately motile strain (<25 mum s-1) and a highly motile strain (>45 mum s-1) further revealed changes in the bacterial swimming speed distribution due to speed-selective flagellate grazing. Better long-term survival of the highly motile strain was indicated by fourfold-higher bacterial numbers in the presence of grazing compared to the moderately motile strain. Putative constraints of maintaining high swimming speeds were tested at high growth rates and under starvation with the following results: (i) for two out of three strains increased growth rate resulted in larger and slower bacterial cells, and (ii) starved cells became smaller but maintained their swimming speeds. Combined data sets for bacterial swimming speed and cell size revealed highest grazing losses for moderately motile bacteria with a cell size between 0.2 and 0.4 mum(3). Grazing mortality was lowest for cells of >0.5 mum(3) and small, highly motile bacteria. Survival efficiencies of >95% for the ultramicrobacterial isolate CP-1 (less than or equal to0.1 mum(3), >50 mum s(-1)) illustrated the combined protective action of small cell size and high motility. Our findings suggest that motility has an important adaptive function in the survival of planktonic bacteria during protozoan grazing.

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