4.6 Article

Localization of bacteria in lichens from Alpine soil crusts by fluorescence in situ hybridization

期刊

APPLIED SOIL ECOLOGY
卷 68, 期 -, 页码 20-25

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2013.03.008

关键词

Acidobacteria; Alphaproteobacteria; Confocal microscopy; FISH; Thallus structures

资金

  1. Austrian Science Foundation [FWF P19098, I799]
  2. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [I 799] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [I799] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lichens are prominent components of many biological soil crusts. Owing to their persistence, lichen thalli create microhabitats for other microbes. Here, the structure of bacterial communities at the thallus-soil interface in lichen soil crusts was studied by using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and 3D image reconstruction. Terricolous lichen thalli above the tree-line in open habitats of the Austrian Alps were sampled. We selected six lichen species associated with green algal photobionts: Arthrorhaphis citrinella, Baeomyces placophyllus, B. rufus, Icmadophila ericetorum, Psora decipiens and Trapeliopsis granulosa. Alphaproteobacteria and Acidobacteria are predominant in these soil crust lichens, where the latter are frequently present in the lower part of lichen thalli and in the hypothallosphere. In the inconspicuous thallus structures of Arthrorhaphis citrinella, Baeomyces rufus, Icmadophila ericetorum and Trapeliopsis granulosa we observed association of bacteria with algal cells in soil particles and on the outer surface of the mycobiont-photobiont aggregates. We found bacterial cells intermixed with photobiont cells in the lower part of the lichen thalli and as small colonies on the surface of the squamules of Baeomyces placophyllus and Psora decipiens. Moreover, technical issues of performing FISH and confocal microscopy with biological soil crusts are discussed. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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