Community-Level Physiological Profiling of Microbial Communities in Constructed Wetlands: Effects of Sample Preparation

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Mark Button ; Kela Weber ; Jaime Nivala…
• 关键词：CLPP ; Domestic wastewater ; Horizontal flow ; Microbial activity ; Treatment wetland
• 刊名：Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：March 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：178
• 期：5
• 页码：960-973
• 全文大小：571 KB
• 参考文献：1.Garland, J. L. (1999) Potential and limitations of BIOLOG for microbial community analysis. Microbial Biosystems: New Frontiers. Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Microbial Ecology (eds Bell CR, Brylinsky M and P, J.-G.). Halifax, Canada.
  2.Allegrini, M., Zabaloy, M. C., & Gómez, E. D. V. (2015). Ecotoxicological assessment of soil microbial community tolerance to glyphosate. Science of the Total Environment, 533, 60–68.CrossRef
  3.Deng, H., Yu, Y.-J., Sun, J.-E., Zhang, J.-B., Cai, Z.-C., Guo, G.-X., & Zhong, W.-H. (2015). Parent materials have stronger effects than land use types on microbial biomass, activity and diversity in red soil in subtropical China. Pedobiologia, 58, 73–79.CrossRef
  4.Lupwayi, N. Z., Harker, K. N., O’Donovan, J. T., Turkington, T. K., Blackshaw, R. E., Hall, L. M., Willenborg, C. J., Gan, Y., Lafond, G. P., May, W. E., & Grant, C. A. (2015). Relating soil microbial properties to yields of no-till canola on the Canadian prairies. Euro J of Agron, 62, 110–119.CrossRef
  5.Button, M., Nivala, J., Weber, K. P., Aubron, T., & Müller, R. A. (2015). Microbial community metabolic function in subsurface flow constructed wetlands of different designs. Ecological Engineering, 80, 162–171.CrossRef
  6.Zaveri, P., Munshi, N., Vaidya, A., Jha, S., & Kumar, G. N. (2015). Functional microbial diversity dynamics in common effluent treatment plants of South Gujarat and hydrocarbon degradation. Canadian J of Microbio, 61, 389–397.CrossRef
  7.Weber, K. P., & Legge, R. L. (2013). Comparison of the catabolic activity and catabolic profiles of rhizospheric, gravel-associated and interstitial microbial communities in treatment wetlands. Water Sci Tech, 67, 886–893.CrossRef
  8.Weber, K. P., & Gagnon, V. (2014). Microbiology in Treatment Wetlands. Sust Sanit Pract, 18, 25–30.
  9.Insam, H. (1997), in Microbial Communities, (Insam, H. and Rangger, A., eds.), Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 259-260.
  10.Weber, K. P., & Legge, R. L. (2009). One-dimensional metric for tracking bacterial community divergence using sole carbon source utilization patterns. J of microbiol methods, 79, 55–61.CrossRef
  11.Weber, K. and Legge, R. (2010), in Bioremediation, vol. 599: Methods in Molecular Biology, (Cummings, S. P., ed.), Humana Press, pp. 263-281.
  12.Garland, J. L., & Mills, A. L. (1991). Classification and characterization of heterotrophic microbial communities on the basis of patterns of community-level sole-carbon-source utilization. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 57, 2351–2359.
  13.Nurk, K., Truu, J., Truu, M., & Mander, Ü. (2005). Microbial characteristics and nitrogen transformation in planted soil filter for domestic wastewater treatment. J Environ Sci and Health, Part A, 40, 1201–1214.CrossRef
  14.Weber, K. P., & Legge, R. L. (2011). Dynamics in the bacterial community-level physiological profiles and hydrological characteristics of constructed wetland mesocosms during start-up. Ecological Engineering, 37, 666–677.CrossRef
  15.Zhang, C.-B., Wang, J., Liu, W.-L., Zhu, S.-X., Ge, H.-L., Chang, S. X., Chang, J., & Ge, Y. (2010). Effects of plant diversity on microbial biomass and community metabolic profiles in a full-scale constructed wetland. Ecological Engineering, 36, 62–68.CrossRef
  16.Bissegger, S., Rodriguez, M., Brisson, J., & Weber, K. P. (2014). Catabolic profiles of microbial communities in relation to plant identity and diversity in free-floating plant treatment wetland mesocosms. Ecological Engineering, 67, 190–197.CrossRef
  17.Weber, K. P., Mitzel, M. R., Slawson, R. M., & Legge, R. L. (2011). Effect of ciprofloxacin on microbiological development in wetland mesocosms. Water Research, 45, 3185–3196.CrossRef
  18.Christian, B. W., & Lind, O. T. (2006). Key issues concerning biolog use for aerobic and anaerobic freshwater bacterial community-level physiological profiling. Int Review Hydrobiol, 91, 257–268.CrossRef
  19.Garland, J. L. (1997). Analysis and interpretation of community-level physiological profiles in microbial ecology. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 24, 289–300.CrossRef
  20.Preston-Mafham, J., Boddy, L., & Randerson, P. F. (2002). Analysis of microbial community functional diversity using sole-carbon-source utilisation profiles—a critique. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 42, 1–14.
  21.Weber, K. P., Grove, J. A., Gehder, M., Anderson, W. A., & Legge, R. L. (2007). Data transformations in the analysis of community-level substrate utilization data from microplates. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 69, 461–469.CrossRef
  22.Stefanowics, A. (2006). The Biolog Plates technique as a tool in ecological studies of microbial communities. Polish J of Environ Stud, 15, 669–676.
  23.Weber, K. P., Gehder, M., & Legge, R. L. (2008). Assessment of changes in the microbial community of constructed wetland mesocosms in response to acid mine drainage exposure. Water Research, 42, 180–188.CrossRef
  24.Pierce, M. L., Ward, J. E., & Dobbs, F. C. (2014). False positives in Biolog EcoPlatesTM and MT2 MicroPlatesTM caused by calcium. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 97, 20–24.CrossRef
  25.Nivala, J., Headley, T., Wallace, S., Bernhard, K., Brix, H., van Afferden, M., & Müller, R. A. (2013). Comparative analysis of constructed wetlands: the design and construction of the ecotechnology research facility in Langenreichenbach, Germany. Ecological Engineering, 61(Part B), 527–543.CrossRef
  26.Lindstrom, J. E., Barry, R. P., & Braddock, J. F. (1999). Long-term effects on microbial communities after a subarctic oil spill. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 31, 1677–1689.CrossRef
  27.Garland, J. L., Mills, A. L., & Young, J. S. (2001). Relative effectiveness of kinetic analysis vs single point readings for classifying environmental samples based on community-level physiological profiles (CLPP). Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 33, 1059–1066.CrossRef
  28.Flieβbach, A. and Mäder, P. (1997), in Microbial Communities, (Insam, H. and Rangger, A., eds.), Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 109-120.
  29.Glimm, E., Heuer, H., Engelen, B., Smalla, K., & Backhaus, H. (1997). Statistical comparisons of community catabolic profiles. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 30, 71–80.CrossRef
  30.Haack, S. K., Garchow, H., Klug, M. J., & Forney, L. J. (1995). Analysis of factors affecting the accuracy, reproducibility, and interpretation of microbial community carbon source utilization patterns. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 61, 1458–1468.
  31.Gryta, A., Frąc, M., & Oszust, K. (2014). The application of the Biolog EcoPlate approach in ecotoxicological evaluation of dairy sewage sludge. App Biochem and Biotech, 174, 1434–1443.CrossRef
  32.Mondini, C., & Insam, H. (2003). Community level physiological profiling as a tool to evaluate compost maturity: a kinetic approach. Euro J Soil Biol, 39, 141–148.CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Mark Button (1)
  Kela Weber (1)
  Jaime Nivala (2)
  Thomas Aubron (2)
  Roland Arno Müller (2)
  
  1. Environmental Sciences Group, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Royal Military College of Canada, Kingston, Ontario, K7K 7B4, Canada
  2. Helmholtz Center for Environmental Research (UFZ), Environmental and Biotechnology Center (UBZ), Permoserstrasse 15, Leipzig, 04318, Germany
  
• 刊物类别：Chemistry and Materials Science
• 刊物主题：Chemistry
  Biotechnology
  Biochemistry
  
• 出版者：Humana Press Inc.
• ISSN：1559-0291

文摘

Community-level physiological profiling (CLPP) using BIOLOG® EcoPlates™ has become a popular method for characterizing and comparing the functional diversity, functional potential, and metabolic activity of heterotrophic microbial communities. The method was originally developed for profiling soil communities; however, its usage has expanded into the fields of ecotoxicology, agronomy, and the monitoring and profiling of microbial communities in various wastewater treatment systems, including constructed wetlands for water pollution control. When performing CLPP on aqueous samples from constructed wetlands, a wide variety of sample characteristics can be encountered and challenges may arise due to excessive solids, color, or turbidity. The aim of this study was to investigate the impacts of different sample preparation methods on CLPP performed on a variety of aqueous samples covering a broad range of physical and chemical characteristics. The results show that using filter paper, centrifugation, or settling helped clarify samples for subsequent CLPP analysis, however did not do so as effectively as dilution for the darkest samples. Dilution was able to provide suitable clarity for the darkest samples; however, 100-fold dilution significantly affected the carbon source utilization patterns (CSUPs), particularly with samples that were already partially or fully clear. Ten-fold dilution also had some effect on the CSUPs of samples which were originally clear; however, the effect was minimal. Based on these findings, for this specific set of samples, a 10-fold dilution provided a good balance between ease of use, sufficient clarity (for dark samples), and limited effect on CSUPs. The process and findings outlined here can hopefully serve future studies looking to utilize CLPP for functional analysis of microbial communities and also assist in comparing data from studies where different sample preparation methods were utilized.