4.7 Review

Comparative genomic analysis of carbon and nitrogen assimilation mechanisms in three indigenous bioleaching bacteria: predictions and validations

期刊

BMC GENOMICS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-9-581

关键词

-

资金

  1. BioSigma
  2. FONDEF [D0411257]
  3. FONDAP [R18]
  4. BASAL-CMM

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Carbon and nitrogen fixation are essential pathways for autotrophic bacteria living in extreme environments. These bacteria can use carbon dioxide directly from the air as their sole carbon source and can use different sources of nitrogen such as ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, or even nitrogen from the air. To have a better understanding of how these processes occur and to determine how we can make them more efficient, a comparative genomic analysis of three bioleaching bacteria isolated from mine sites in Chile was performed. This study demonstrated that there are important differences in the carbon dioxide and nitrogen fixation mechanisms among bioleaching bacteria that coexist in mining environments. Results: In this study, we probed that both Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans and Acidithiobacillus thiooxidans incorporate CO2 via the Calvin-Benson-Bassham cycle; however, the former bacterium has two copies of the Rubisco type I gene whereas the latter has only one copy. In contrast, we demonstrated that Leptospirillum ferriphilum utilizes the reductive tricarboxylic acid cycle for carbon fixation. Although all the species analyzed in our study can incorporate ammonia by an ammonia transporter, we demonstrated that Acidithiobacillus thiooxidans could also assimilate nitrate and nitrite but only Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans could fix nitrogen directly from the air. Conclusion: The current study utilized genomic and molecular evidence to verify carbon and nitrogen fixation mechanisms for three bioleaching bacteria and provided an analysis of the potential regulatory pathways and functional networks that control carbon and nitrogen fixation in these microorganisms.

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