Advertisement

Microbial Ecology

, Volume 78, Issue 2, pp 416–427 | Cite as

Guild Composition of Root-Associated Bacteria Changes with Increased Soil Contamination

  • Cairn S. ElyEmail author
  • Barth F. Smets
Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

The interaction of plants and root-associated bacteria encourage the removal of soil contaminants. Engineers and scientists have looked at this phenomenon as a possible means of soil treatment (rhizodegradation). In this study, root-associated bacteria were isolated and selected for growth on a model soil contaminant: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Isolates were compared genetically to see how plant–bacteria interactions change with soil contamination levels. Characterization of root-associated bacteria was performed using REP-PCR genetic fingerprinting and 16s rRNA gene alignments for identification. Genomic fingerprinting indicated that the composition of PAH-metabolizing bacteria (“guild”) was similar among plant species at each treatment level. However, guild composition changed with contamination level and differed from that of bulk soils, suggesting a common rhizosphere effect among plant species related to PAH contamination. PAH-metabolizing bacteria were identified through 16s rRNA gene alignment as members of the α-, β-, and γ-proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, and Bacilli classes. Burkholderia and Pseudomonas spp. were the only genera of bacteria isolated from all plant types in uncontaminated controls. Bacterial species found at the highest treatment included Achromobacter xylosoxidans, Rhodococcus spp., members of the Microbacteriae, Stenotrophomonas rhizophilia, as well as other members of the alpha-proteobacteria. Given their ability to grow on PAHs and inhabit highly contaminated rhizospheres, these bacteria appear good candidates for the promotion of rhizodegradation.

Keywords

Rhizodegradation Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Rhizosphere Phytoremediation Soil remediation Bacteria 

Notes

Funding Information

This research was performed by a funding grant from the Environmental Protection Agency Star Program, R829405.

References

  1. 1.
    Glick BR (2003) Phytoremediation, synergistic use of plants and bacteria to clean up the environment. Biotechnol Adv 21:383–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miya RK, Firestone MK (2001) Enhanced phenanthrene biodegradation in soil by slender oat root exudates and root debris. J Environ Qual 30(6):1911–1918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kamath R, Schnoor J, Alvarez P (2004) Effect of root-derived substrates on the expression of nah-lux genes in Pseudomonas fluorescens hk44: implications for PAH biodegradation in the rhizosphere. Environ Sci Technol 38(1740):1740–1745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Knueffel DA (1993) The behavior and tracking of bacteria in the rhizosphere. Annu Rev Phytopathol 31:441–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dandurand LM and G.R. Knudsen (2001) Sampling Microbes from the Rhizosphere and Phyllosphere. In: Hurst CJ, et al. (eds) Manual of Environmental Microbiology. American Society for MicrobiologyGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Duineveld BM, Kowalchuk GA, Keijzer A, van Elsas JD, van Veen JA (2001) Analysis of bacterial communities in the rhizosphere of chrysanthemum via denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis of PCR-amplified 16S rRNA as well as DNA fragments coding for 16S rRNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 67(1):172–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Whipps JM (2001) Microbial interactions and biocontrol in the rhizosphere. J Exp Bot 52(suppl_1):487–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Whipps JM (1990) Carbon Economy. In: Lynch JM (ed) The Rhizosphere. John Wiley and Sons, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sims RC, Overcash MR (1983) Fate of polynuclear aromatic compounds (PNAs) in soil-plant systems. Residue Reviews 88:1–68Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shuttleworth KL, Cerniglia CE (1995) Environmental aspects of PAH biodegradation. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 54(1–3):291–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lepsis J, Blanke MM Environmental Effects, Phytotoxicity and Breakdown of Tar Oil From Impregnated Tree Stakes, in VIII International Symposium on Canopy, Rootstocks, and Environmental Physiology in Orchard Systems, ISHS Acta HorticulturaeGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aitken MD, Stringfellow WT, Nagel RD, Kazunga C, Chen SH (1998) Characteristics of phenanthrene-degrading bacteria isolated from soils contaminated with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Can J Microbiol 44(8):743–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Siciliano SD et al (2001) Selection of specific endophytic bacterial genotypes by plants in response to soil contamination. Appl Environ Microbiol 67(6):2469–2475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Daane LL et al (2001) Isolation and characterization of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria associated with the rhizosphere of salt marsh plants. Appl Environ Microbiol 67(6):2683–2691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bastiaens L et al (2000) Isolation of adherent polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH)-degrading bacteria using PAH-sorbing carriers. Appl Environ Microbiol 66(5):1834–1843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parrish ZD, White JC, Isleyen M, Gent MPN, Iannucci-Berger W, Eitzer BD, Kelsey JW, Mattina MI (2006) Accumulation of weathered polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) by plant and earthworm species. Chemosphere 64(4):609–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Corgie SC, Beguiristain T, Leyval C (2004) Spatial distribution of bacterial communities and phenanthrene degradation in the rhizosphere of Lolium perenne L. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(6):3552–3557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Juhasz AL, Naidu R (2000) Enrichment and isolation of non-specific aromatic degraders from unique uncontaminated (plant and faecal material) sources and contaminated soils. J Appl Microbiol 89(4):642–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ramos C, Molbak L, Molin S (2000) Bacterial activity in the rhizosphere analyzed at the single-cell level by monitoring ribosome contents and synthesis rates. Appl Environ Microbiol 66(2):801–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bringhurst RM, Cardon ZG, Gage DJ (2001) Galactosides in the rhizosphere: utilization by Sinorhizobium meliloti and development of a biosensor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98:4540–4545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Niemi MR et al (2001) Extraction and purification of DNA in rhizosphere soil samples for PCR-DGGE analysis of bacterial consortia. J Microbiol Methods 45(3):155–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nunan N et al (2005) Links between plant and rhizoplane bacterial communities in grassland soils, characterized using molecular techniques. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(11):6784–6792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pritchina O, Ely C, Smets B (2011) Effects of PAH-contaminated soil on rhizosphere microbial communities. Water Air Soil Pollut:1–9Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baudoin E, Benizri E, Guckert A (2002) Impact of growth stage on the bacterial community structure along maize roots, as determined by metabolic and genetic fingerprinting. Appl Soil Ecol 19(2):135–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Winkel-Shirley B (2002) Biosynthesis of flavonoids and effects of stress. Curr Opin Plant Biol 5(3):218–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cowan MM (1999) Plant products as antimicrobial agents. Clin Microbiol Rev 12(4):564–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pillai BVS, Swarup S (2002) Elucidation of the flavonoid catabolism pathway in Pseudomonas putida PML2 by comparative metabolic profiling. Appl Environ Microbiol 68(1):143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Adams N et al (2000) Introduction to phytoremediation. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ely CS, Smets BF (2017) Bacteria from wheat and cucurbit plant roots metabolize PAHs and aromatic root exudates: implications for rhizodegradation. Int J Phytoremediat 19(10):877–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Taghavi S et al (2005) Horizontal gene transfer to endogenous endophytic bacteria from poplar improves phytoremediation of toluene. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(12):8500–8505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ramette A, LiPuma JJ, Tiedje JM (2005) Species abundance and diversity of Burkholderia cepacia complex in the environment. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(3):1193–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Salles JF, van Veen JA, van Elsas JD (2004) Multivariate analyses of Burkholderia species in soil: effect of crop and land use history. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(7):4012–4020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rosenblueth M, Martinez-Romero E (2006) Bacterial endophytes and their interactions with hosts. Mol Plant-Microbe Interact 19(8):827–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Compant S et al (2005) Endophytic colonization of Vitis vinifera L. by plant growth-promoting bacterium Burkholderia sp. strain PsJN. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(4):1685–1693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kahng, et al. (2002) PAH utilization by Pseudomonas rhodesiae KK1 isolated from a former manufactured-gas plant site. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 60(4):475–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Deziel E et al (1996) Biosurfactant production by a soil Pseudomonas strain growing on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Appl Environ Microbiol 62(6):1908–1912PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    MacNaughton SJ et al (1999) Microbial population changes during bioremediation of an experimental oil spill. Appl Environ Microbiol 65(8):3566–3574PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Stringfellow WT, Aitken MD (1994) Comparative physiology of phenanthrene degradation by 2 dissimilar pseudomonads isolated from a creosote-contaminated soil. Can J Microbiol 40(6):432–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stringfellow W, Aitken M (1995) Competitive metabolism of naphthalene, methylnaphthalenes, and fluorene by phenanthrene-degrading pseudomonads. Appl Environ Microbiol 61(1):357–2392PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kazunga C, Aitken MD (2000) Products from the incomplete metabolism of pyrene by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 66(5):1917–1922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Eriksson M et al (2003) Degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons at low temperature under aerobic and nitrate-reducing conditions in enrichment cultures from northern soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 69(1):275–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Moody JD et al (2001) Degradation of phenanthrene and anthracene by cell suspensions of Mycobacterium sp. strain PYR-1. Appl Environ Microbiol 67(4):1476–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Brezna B, Khan A, Cerniglia CE (2003) Molecular characterization of dioxygenases from polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-degrading Mycobacterium spp. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 223:177–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Larkin MJ et al (1999) Purification and characterization of a novel naphthalene dioxygenase from Rhodococcus sp. strain NCIMB12038. J Bacteriol 181(19):6200–6204PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Demaneche S et al (2004) Identification and functional analysis of two aromatic-ring-hydroxylating dioxygenases from a Sphingomonas strain that degrades various polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(11):6714–6725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Masson-Boivin M et al (2009) Establishing nitrogen-fixing symbioses with legumes: how many rhizobium recipes? Trends Microbiol 17(10):458–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Central Connecticut State UniversityNew BritainUSA
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA
  3. 3.Department of Environmental EngineeringTechnical University of DenmarkLyngbyDenmark

Personalised recommendations