4.6 Article

Bulk and rhizosphere soil bacterial communities studied by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis: Plant-dependent enrichment and seasonal shifts revealed

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 67, 期 10, 页码 4742-4751

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.67.10.4742-4751.2001

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The bacterial rhizosphere communities of three host plants of the pathogenic fungus Verticillium dahliae, field-grown strawberry (Fragaria ananassa Duch.), oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.), and potato (Solanum tuberosum L.), were analyzed. We aimed to determine the degree to which the rhizosphere effect is plant dependent and whether this effect would be increased by growing the same crops in two consecutive years. Rhizosphere or soil samples were taken five times over the vegetation periods. To allow a cultivation-independent analysis, total community DNA was extracted from the microbial pellet recovered from root or soil samples. 16S rDNA fragments amplified by PCR from soil or rhizosphere bacterium DNA were analyzed by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE). The DGGE fingerprints showed plant-dependent shifts in the relative abundance of bacterial populations in the rhizosphere which became more pronounced in the second year. DGGE patterns of oilseed rape and potato rhizosphere communities were more similar to each other than to the strawberry patterns. In both years seasonal shifts in the abundance and composition of the bacterial rhizosphere populations were observed. Independent of the plant species, the patterns of the first sampling times for both years were characterized by the absence of some of the bands which became dominant at the following sampling times. Bacillus megaterium and Arthrobacter sp. were found as predominant populations in bulk soils. Sequencing of dominant bands excised from the rhizosphere patterns revealed that 6 out of 10 bands resembled grain-positive bacteria. Nocardia populations were identified as strawberry-specific bands.

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