4.7 Article

Diversity of 16S rDNA and naphthalene dioxygenase genes from coal-tar-waste-contaminated aquifer waters

期刊

MICROBIAL ECOLOGY
卷 44, 期 2, 页码 95-106

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00248-002-0005-8

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial diversity in four wells along a groundwater flowpath in a coal-tar-waste-contaminated aquifer was examined using RFLP analysis of both 16S rDNA and naphthalene dioxygenase (NDO) genes. Amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis (ARDRA) relied upon eubacteria-specific primers to generate four clone libraries. From each library, 100 clones were randomly picked for analysis. Sixty percent of 400 clones contained unique ARDRA patterns. Diversity indices calculated for each community were high (Shannon-Weaver, H' = 3.53 to 3.69). Clones representing ARDRA patterns found in the highest abundance were sequenced (31 total). Sequences related to aerobic bacteria (e.g., Nitrospira, Methylomonas, and Gallionella) predominated among those retrieved from the uncontaminated area of the site, whereas sequences related to facultatively aerobic and anaerobic bacteria (e.g. Azoarcus, Syntrophus, and Desulfotomaculum) predominated among those retrieved from contaminated areas of the site. Using NDO-specific primers and low-stringency PCR conditions, variability in RFLP patterns was only detected in community-derived DNA (3 of 4 wells) and not in 5 newly isolated naphthalene-degrading pure cultures. The ARDRA patterns of the pure culture isolates were not found in the clone libraries. Polymorphisms in community 16S rDNA and NDO genes found in well-water microorganisms reflected distinctive geochemical conditions across the site. Sequences related to sulfate-reducing bacteria were found in groundwater that contained sulfide, while sequences related to Gallionella, Syntrophus, and nitrate-reducing aromatic hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria were found in groundwater that contained ferrous iron, methane, and naphthalene, respectively.

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

4.7
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