4.5 Article

Cellulose utilization in forest litter and soil: identification of bacterial and fungal decomposers

期刊

FEMS MICROBIOLOGY ECOLOGY
卷 80, 期 3, 页码 735-746

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2012.01343.x

关键词

cellobiohydrolase; cellulose; decomposition; forest soil; litter; microbial ecology

资金

  1. Czech Science Foundation [526/08/0751]
  2. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic [ME10028]
  3. Institutional Research Concept of the Institute of Microbiology ASCR [AV0Z50200510]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Organic matter decomposition in the globally widespread coniferous forests has an important role in the carbon cycle, and cellulose decomposition is especially important in this respect because cellulose is the most abundant polysaccharide in plant litter. Cellulose decomposition was 10 times faster in the fungi-dominated litter of Picea abies forest than in the bacteria-dominated soil. In the soil, the added 13C-labelled cellulose was the main source of microbial respiration and was preferentially accumulated in the fungal biomass and cellulose induced fungal proliferation. In contrast, in the litter, bacterial biomass showed higher labelling after 13C-cellulose addition and bacterial biomass increased. While 80% of the total community was represented by 104106 bacterial and 3359 fungal operational taxonomic units (OTUs), 80% of the cellulolytic communities of bacteria and fungi were only composed of 818 highly abundant OTUs. Both the total and 13C-labelled communities differed substantially between the litter and soil. Cellulolytic bacteria in the acidic topsoil included Betaproteobacteria, Bacteroidetes and Acidobacteria, whereas these typically found in neutral soils were absent. Most fungal cellulose decomposers belonged to Ascomycota; cellulolytic Basidiomycota were mainly represented by the yeasts Trichosporon and Cryptococcus. Several bacteria and fungi demonstrated here to derive their carbon from cellulose were previously not recognized as cellulolytic.

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

4.5
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