Advertisement

Metagenomic insights into microbial diversity in a groundwater basin impacted by a variety of anthropogenic activities

  • Prinpida SonthiphandEmail author
  • Siwat Ruangroengkulrith
  • Wuttichai Mhuantong
  • Varodom Charoensawan
  • Srilert Chotpantarat
  • Satika Boonkaewwan
Research Article

Abstract

Microbial communities in groundwater are diverse and each may respond differently to environmental change. The goal of this study was to investigate the diversity, abundance, and dynamics of microbial communities in impacted groundwater and correlate them to the corresponding land use and groundwater geochemistry, using an Illumina MiSeq platform targeting the V3 and V4 regions of the 16S rRNA gene. The resulting MiSeq sequencing revealed the co-occurrence patterns of both abundant and rare microbial taxa within an impacted groundwater basin. Proteobacteria were the most common groundwater-associated bacterial phylum, mainly composed of the classes Gammaproteobacteria, Betaproteobacteria, Alphaproteobacteria, and Deltaproteobacteria. The phyla detected at less abundances were the Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Planctomycetes, Actinobacteria, OD1, and Nitrospirae. The members of detected groundwater microorganisms involved in natural biogeochemical processes such as nitrification, anammox, methane oxidation, sulfate reduction, and arsenic transformation. Some of the detected microorganisms were able to perform anaerobic degradation of organic pollutants. The resulting PCA indicates that major land usage within the sampling area seemed to be significantly linked to the groundwater microbial distributions. The distinct microbial pattern was observed in the groundwater collected from a landfill area. This study suggests that the combinations of anthropogenic and natural effects possibly led to a unique pattern of microbial diversity across different locations at the impacted groundwater basin.

Keywords

Microbial diversity Groundwater Anthropogenic activities Land use Groundwater microbiome Metagenomics analysis 

Notes

Funding information

This research was supported by Mahidol University through the New Researcher Grant and the Faculty of Science, Mahidol University. V.C. lab is supported by the Thailand Research Fund (TRF) Grant for New Scholar (MRG6080235); the Faculty of Science, Mahidol University; and the Crown Property Bureau Foundation. The authors also received financial support from the research program on controls of hazardous contaminants in raw water resources for water scarcity resilience.

Supplementary material

11356_2019_5905_MOESM1_ESM.docx (870 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 869 kb)

References

  1. Abbai NS, Govender A, Shaik R, Pillay B (2012) Pyrosequence analysis of unamplified and whole genome amplified DNA from hydrocarbon-contaminated groundwater. Mol Biotechnol 50:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agrawal A, Sahu KK (2009) An overview of the recovery of acid from spent acidic solutions from steel and electroplating industries. J Hazard Mater 171:61–75.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.06.099 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Albers CN, Ellegaard-Jensen L, Harder CB, Rosendahl S, Knudsen BE, Ekelund F, Aamand J (2015) Groundwater chemistry determines the prokaryotic community structure of waterworks sand filters. Environ Sci Technol 49:839–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alfreider A, Vogt C (2007) Bacterial diversity and aerobic biodegradation potential in a BTEX-contaminated aquifer. Water Air Soil Pollut 183:415–426.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-007-9390-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alsalah D, Al-Jassim N, Timraz K, Hong PY (2015) Assessing the groundwater quality at a Saudi Arabian agricultural site and the occurrence of opportunistic pathogens on irrigated food produce. Int J Environ Res Public Health 12:12391–12411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ambuchi JJ, Liu J, Wang H, Shan L, Zhou X, Mohammed MO, Feng Y (2016) Microbial community structural analysis of an expanded granular sludge bed (EGSB) reactor for beet sugar industrial wastewater (BSIW) treatment. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 100:4651–4661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. American Public Health Association (APHA) (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st edn. American Water Works Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  8. American Public Health Association (APHA) (2012) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 22nd edn. American Water Works Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Azari M, Walter U, Rekers V, Gu JD, Denecke M (2017) More than a decade of experience of landfill leachate treatment with a full-scale anammox plant combining activated sludge and activated carbon biofilm. Chemosphere. 174:117–126.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.01.123 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bautista P, Mohedano AF, Casas JA, Zazo JA, Rodriguez JJ (2008) An overview of the application of Fenton oxidation to industrial wastewaters treatment. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 83:1323–1338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beck DA, Kalyuzhnaya MG, Malfatti S, Tringe SG, del Rio TG, Ivanova N et al (2013) A metagenomic insight into freshwater methane-utilizing communities and evidence for cooperation between the Methylococcaceae and the Methylophilaceae. PeerJ. 1:e23.  https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.23 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bifulco JM, Shirey JJ, Bissonnette GK (1989) Detection of Acinetobacter spp. in rural drinking water supplies. Appl Environ Microbiol 55:2214–2219Google Scholar
  13. Boivin-Jahns V, Bianchi A, Ruimy R, Garcin J, Daumas S, Christen R (1995) Comparison of phenotypical and molecular methods for the identification of bacterial strains isolated from a deep subsurface environment. Appl Environ Microbiol 61:3400–3406Google Scholar
  14. Boonsrang A, Chotpantarat S, Sutthirat C (2017) Factors controlling the release of metals and a metalloid from the tailings of a gold mine in Thailand. Geochem Explor Env A 18:109–119.  https://doi.org/10.1144/geochem2017-034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bowman J (2006) The methanotrophs—the families Methylococcaceae and Methylocystaceae. In: The prokaryotes. Springer, New York, pp 266–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bowman KS, Rainey FA, Moe WM (2008) Production of hydrogen by Clostridium species in the presence of chlorinated solvents. FEMS Microbiol Lett 290:188–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Peña AG, Goodrich JK, Gordon JI, Huttley GA, Kelley ST, Knights D, Koenig JE, Ley RE, Lozupone CA, McDonald D, Muegge BD, Pirrung M, Reeder J, Sevinsky JR, Turnbaugh PJ, Walters WA, Widmann J, Yatsunenko T, Zaneveld J, Knight R (2010) QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7:335–336.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cardinali-Rezende J, Araújo JC, Almeida PG, Chernicharo CA, Sanz JL, Chartone-Souza E, Nascimento AM (2013) Organic loading rate and food-to-microorganism ratio shape prokaryotic diversity in a demo-scale up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor treating domestic wastewater. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 104:993–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chang YJ, Peacock AD, Long PE, Stephen JR, McKinley JP, Macnaughton SJ et al (2001) Diversity and characterization of sulfate-reducing bacteria in groundwater at a uranium mill tailings site. Appl Environ Microbiol 67:3149–3160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chang YT, Lo T, Chou HL, Laio YF, Lin CC, Chen HT (2016) Anaerobic biodegradation of decabromodiphenyl ether (BDE-209)-contaminated sediment by organic compost. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 113:228–237.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2016.04.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cho K, Zholi A, Frabutt D, Flood M, Floyd D, Tiquia SM (2012) Linking bacterial diversity and geochemistry of uranium-contaminated groundwater. Environ Technol 33:1629–1640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chotpantarat S, Boonkaewwan S (2018) Impacts of land-use changes on watershed discharge and water quality in a large intensive agricultural area in Thailand. Hydrol Sci J 63:1386–1407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Chotpantarat S, Wongsasuluk P, Siriwong W, Borjan M, Robson M (2014) Non-carcinogenic hazard maps of heavy metal contamination in shallow groundwater for adult and aging populations at an agricultural area in northeastern Thailand. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 20:689–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chotpantarat S, Chunhacherdchai L, Tongcumpou C (2015) Effects of humic acid amendment on the mobility of heavy metals (Co. Cu, Cr, Mn, Ni, Pb, Zn) in gold mine tailings in Thailand. Arab J Geosci 8:7589–7600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Daims H, Lebedeva EV, Pjevac P, Han P, Herbold C, Albertsen M, Jehmlich N, Palatinszky M, Vierheilig J, Bulaev A, Kirkegaard RH, von Bergen M, Rattei T, Bendinger B, Nielsen PH, Wagner M (2015) Complete nitrification by Nitrospira bacteria. Nature. 528:504–509.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16461 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Das S, Kar S, Jean JS, Rathod J, Chakraborty S, Liu HS, Bundschuh J (2013) Depth-resolved abundance and diversity of arsenite-oxidizing bacteria in the groundwater of Beimen, a blackfoot disease endemic area of southwestern Taiwan. Water Res 47:6983–6991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Das S, Bora SS, Yadav RNS, Barooah M (2017) A metagenomic approach to decipher the indigenous microbial communities of arsenic contaminated groundwater of Assam. Genom Data.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gdata.2017.03.013
  28. Doronina N, Kaparullina E, Trotsenko Y (2014) The family Methylophilaceae. In: The Prokaryotes. Springer, New York, pp 869–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Edgar RC (2010) Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26:2460–2461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R (2011) UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27:2194–2200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Eisentraeger A, Klag P, Vansbotter B, Heymann E, Dott W (2001) Denitrification of groundwater with methane as sole hydrogen donor. Water Res 35:2261–2267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fahy A, Lethbridge G, Earle R, Ball AS, Timmis KN, McGenity TJ (2005) Effects of long-term benzene pollution on bacterial diversity and community structure in groundwater. Environ Microbiol 7:1192–1199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Flynn TM, Sanford RA, Ryu H, Bethke CM, Levine AD, Ashbolt NJ, Santo Domingo JW (2013) Functional microbial diversity explains groundwater chemistry in a pristine aquifer. BMC Microbiol 13:146.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2180-13-146 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. França L, Lopéz-Lopéz A, Rosselló-Móra R, Costa MS (2015) Microbial diversity and dynamics of a groundwater and a still bottled natural mineral water. Environ Microbiol 17:577–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gao W, Gentry TJ, Mehlhorn TL, Carroll SL, Jardine PM, Zhou J (2010) Characterization of Co (III) EDTA-reducing bacteria in metal-and radionuclide-contaminated groundwater. Geomicrobiol J 27:93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gorra R, Webster G, Martin M, Celi L, Mapelli F, Weightman AJ (2012) Dynamic microbial community associated with iron–arsenic co-precipitation products from a groundwater storage system in Bangladesh. Microb Ecol 64:171–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Griebler C, Lueders T (2009) Microbial biodiversity in groundwater ecosystems. Freshw Biol 54:649–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Grossman EL, Cifuentes LA, Cozzarelli IM (2002) Anaerobic methane oxidation in a landfill-leachate plume. Environ Sci Technol 36:2436–2442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gülay A, Musovic S, Albrechtsen HJ, Al-Soud WA, Sørensen SJ, Smets BF (2016) Ecological patterns, diversity and core taxa of microbial communities in groundwater-fed rapid gravity filters. ISME J 10:2209–2222.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2016.16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hassan Z, Sultana M, Westerhoff HV, Khan SI, Röling WF (2016) Iron cycling potentials of arsenic contaminated groundwater in Bangladesh as revealed by enrichment cultivation. Geomicrobiol J 33:779–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hemme CL, Deng Y, Gentry TJ, Fields MW, Wu L, Barua S, Barry K, Tringe SG, Watson DB, He Z, Hazen TC, Tiedje JM, Rubin EM, Zhou J (2010) Metagenomic insights into evolution of a heavy metal-contaminated groundwater microbial community. ISME J 4:660–672.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2009.154 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Huang LN, Chen YQ, Zhou H, Luo S, Lan CY, Qu LH (2003) Characterization of methanogenic Archaea in the leachate of a closed municipal solid waste landfill. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 46:171–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Huysman F, Van Renterghem B, Verstraete W (1993) Antibiotic resistant sulphite-reducing clostridia in soil and groundwater as indicator of manuring practices. Water Air Soil Pollut 69:243–255.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00478161 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ibekwe AM, Ma J, Murinda SE (2016) Bacterial community composition and structure in an urban river impacted by different pollutant sources. Sci Total Environ 566-567:1176–1185.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.05.168 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Imfeld G, Pieper H, Shani N, Rossi P, Nikolausz M, Nijenhuis I, Paschke H, Weiss H, Richnow HH (2011) Characterization of groundwater microbial communities, dechlorinating bacteria, and in situ biodegradation of chloroethenes along a vertical gradient. Water Air Soil Pollut 221:107–122.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-011-0774-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Jiang Y, Yan J (2010) Effects of land use on hydrochemistry and contamination of Karst groundwater from Nandong underground river system, China. Water Air Soil Pollut 210:123–141.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-009-0229-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jørgensen BB (1982) Mineralization of organic matter in the sea bed—the role of sulphate reduction. Nature 296:643–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Joshi B, Walia S (1996) PCR amplification of catechol 2, 3-dioxygenase gene sequences from naturally occurring hydrocarbon degrading bacteria isolated from petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated groundwater. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 19:5–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Karwautz C, Lueders T (2014) Impact of hydraulic well restoration on native bacterial communities in drinking water wells. Microbes Environ 29:363–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Klindworth A, Pruesse E, Schweer T, Peplies J, Quast C, Horn M, Glöckner FO (2013) Evaluation of general 16S ribosomal RNA gene PCR primers for classical and next-generation sequencing-based diversity studies. Nucleic Acids Res 41:e1.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks808 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Krumova K, Nikolovska M, Groudeva V (2008) Isolation and identification of arsenic-transforming bacteria from arsenic contaminated sites in Bulgaria. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 22:721–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kuever J (2014) The family Desulfovibrionaceae. In: The Prokaryotes. Springer, Berlin, pp 107–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Laloui-Carpentier W, Li T, Vigneron V, Mazeas L, Bouchez T (2006) Methanogenic diversity and activity in municipal solid waste landfill leachates. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 89:423–434.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10482-005-9051-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lee JH, Unno T, Ha K (2018) Vertical and horizontal distribution of bacterial communities in alluvial groundwater of the Nakdong River bank. Geomicrobiol J 35:74–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Li Y, Guo H, Hao C (2014) Arsenic release from shallow aquifers of the Hetao basin, Inner Mongolia: evidence from bacterial community in aquifer sediments and groundwater. Ecotoxicology 23:1900–1914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Li P, Wang Y, Dai X, Zhang R, Jiang Z, Jiang D, Wang S, Jiang H, Wang Y, Dong H (2015a) Microbial community in high arsenic shallow groundwater aquifers in Hetao Basin of Inner Mongolia, China. PLoS One 10:e0125844.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0125844 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Li L, He Q, Ma Y, Wang X, Peng X (2015b) Dynamics of microbial community in a mesophilic anaerobic digester treating food waste: relationship between community structure and process stability. Bioresour Technol 189:113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lozupone C, Lladser ME, Knights D, Stombaugh J, Knight R (2011) UniFrac: an effective distance metric for microbial community comparison. ISME J 5:169–172.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2010.133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Masoud AA, Abdel-Wahab Arafa NA, El-Bouraie M (2018) Patterns and Trends of the Pesticide Pollution of the Shallow Nile Delta Aquifer (Egypt). Water Air Soil Pollut 229.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-018-3802-5
  60. Moore TA, Xing Y, Lazenby B, Lynch MD, Schiff S, Robertson WD et al (2011) Prevalence of anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing bacteria in contaminated groundwater. Environ Sci Technol 45:7217–7225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mulder A, Van de Graaf AA, Robertson LA, Kuenen JG (1995) Anaerobic ammonium oxidation discovered in a denitrifying fluidized bed reactor. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 16:177–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nelson WC, Stegen JC (2015) The reduced genomes of Parcubacteria (OD1) contain signatures of a symbiotic lifestyle. Front Microbiol 6.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.00713
  63. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, et al (2019) vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.5-4. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan. Accessed 6 June 2019
  64. Ollivier B, Caumette P, Garcia JL, Mah RA (1994) Anaerobic bacteria from hypersaline environments. Microbiol Rev 58:27–38Google Scholar
  65. Patel M, Baxi K, Dayma P, Upadhyay D, Parmar N, Kundu S, Haldar S, Mody KH, Jha B (2014) Assessment of ground water quality with respect to bacteriological contamination in Bhavnagar, Gujarat, India. CLEAN–Soil, Air, Water 42:1351–1362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Peura S, Eiler A, Bertilsson S, Nykänen H, Tiirola M, Jones RI (2012) Distinct and diverse anaerobic bacterial communities in boreal lakes dominated by candidate division OD1. ISME J 6:1640–1652.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2012.21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Postigo C, Martinez DE, Grondona S, Miglioranza KSB (2018) Groundwater Pollution: Sources, Mechanisms, and Prevention. In: DellaSala DA, Goldstein MI (eds) The encyclopedia of the Anthropocene. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 87–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pujalte MJ, Lucena T, Ruvira MA, Arahal DR, Macián MC (2014) The family Rhodobacteraceae. In: Rosenberg E et al (eds) The Prokaryotes: Alphaproteobacteria and Betaproteobacteria. Springer, Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp 439–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 6 June 2019
  70. Ramos DT, da Silva MLB, Nossa CW, Alvarez PJ, Corseuil HX (2014) Assessment of microbial communities associated with fermentative–methanogenic biodegradation of aromatic hydrocarbons in groundwater contaminated with a biodiesel blend (B20). Biodegradation 25:681–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Richardson SD, Kimura SY (2015) Water analysis: emerging contaminants and current issues. Anal Chem 88:546–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Röling WF, van Breukelen BM, Braster M, Lin B, van Verseveld HW (2001) Relationships between microbial community structure and hydrochemistry in a landfill leachate-polluted aquifer. Appl Environ Microbiol 67:4619–4629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Santos IC, Martin MS, Reyes ML, Carlton DD, Stigler-Granados P, Valerio MA et al (2018) Exploring the links between groundwater quality and bacterial communities near oil and gas extraction activities. Sci Total Environ 618:165–173.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.264 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sarkar A, Kazy SK, Sar P (2013) Characterization of arsenic resistant bacteria from arsenic rich groundwater of West Bengal, India. Ecotoxicology 22:363–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Schreiber C, Rechenburg A, Rind E, Kistemann T (2015) The impact of land use on microbial surface water pollution. Int J Hyg Environ Health 218:181–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Shaieb AMF, Elzen AK (2008) Detection and identification of groundwater bacteria in Sebha City, Libya. Afr J Microbiol Res 2:224–228Google Scholar
  77. Shakya S, Pradhan B, Smith L, Shrestha J, Tuladhar S (2012) Isolation and characterization of aerobic culturable arsenic-resistant bacteria from surface water and groundwater of Rautahat District, Nepal. Nepal J Environ Manage 95:S250–S255.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.08.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Shi P, Jia S, Zhang XX, Zhang T, Cheng S, Li A (2013) Metagenomic insights into chlorination effects on microbial antibiotic resistance in drinking water. Water Res 47:111–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Smedley PL, Kinniburgh DG (2002) A review of the source, behaviour and distribution of arsenic in natural waters. Appl Geochem 17:517–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Smith KS, Ingram-Smith C (2007) Methanosaeta, the forgotten methanogen? Trends Microbiol 15:150–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sonthiphand P, Neufeld JD (2013) Evaluating primers for profiling anaerobic ammonia oxidizing bacteria within freshwater environments. PLoS One 8:e57242.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057242 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Suzuki D, Ueki A, Shizuku T, Ohtaki Y, Ueki K (2010) Desulfovibrio butyratiphilus sp. nov., a Gram-negative, butyrate-oxidizing, sulfate-reducing bacterium isolated from an anaerobic municipal sewage sludge digester. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 60:595–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Takahashi M, Ohya A, Kawakami S, Yoneyama Y, Onodera T, Syutsubo et al (2011) Evaluation of treatment characteristics and sludge properties in a UASB reactor treating municipal sewage at ambient temperature. Int J Environ Res 5:821–826Google Scholar
  84. Taş N, Brandt BW, Braster M, van Breukelen BM, Röling WF (2018) Subsurface landfill leachate contamination affects microbial metabolic potential and gene expression in the Banisveld aquifer. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 94.  https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiy156
  85. Tiankao W, Chotpantarat S (2018) Risk assessment of arsenic from contaminated soils to shallow groundwater in Ong Phra sub-district, Suphan Buri Province, Thailand. J Hydrol Reg Stud 19:80–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Uz I, Rasche ME, Townsend T, Ogram AV, Lindner AS (2003) Characterization of methanogenic and methanotrophic assemblages in landfill samples. Proc R Soc Lond B 270.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2003.0061
  87. Vaz-Moreira I, Nunes OC, Manaia CM (2014) Bacterial diversity and antibiotic resistance in water habitats: searching the links with the human microbiome. FEMS Microbiol Rev 38:761–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Waleeittikul A, Chotpantarat S, Ong SK (2019) Impacts of salinity level and flood irrigation on Cd mobility through a Cd-contaminated soil, Thailand: experimental and modeling techniques. J Soils Sediments 19:2357–2373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wang Q, Garrity GM, Tiedje JM, Cole JR (2007) Naive Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl Environ Microbiol 73:5261–5267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wang Y, Li P, Jiang D, Li B, Dai X, Jiang Z, Wang Y (2014) Vertical distribution of bacterial communities in high arsenic sediments of Hetao Plain, Inner Mongolia. Ecotoxicology 23:1890–1899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Williams M, Fordyce F, Paijitprapapon A, Charoenchaisri P (1996) Arsenic contamination in surface drainage and groundwater in part of the southeast Asian tin belt, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, southern Thailand. Environ Geol 27:16–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wongsasuluk P, Chotpantarat S, Siriwong W, Robson M (2018a) Using urine as a biomarker in human exposure risk associated with arsenic and other heavy metals contaminating drinking groundwater in intensively agricultural areas of Thailand. Environ Geochem Health 40:323–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wongsasuluk P, Chotpantarat S, Siriwong W, Robson M (2018b) Using hair and fingernails in binary logistic regression for bio-monitoring of heavy metals/metalloid in groundwater in intensively agricultural areas, Thailand. Environ Res 162:106–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wu X, Deutschbauer AM, Kazakov AE, Wetmore KM, Cwick BA, Walker RM, Novichkov PS, Arkin AP, Chakraborty R (2017) Draft genome sequences of two Janthinobacterium lividum strains, isolated from pristine groundwater collected from the Oak Ridge Field Research Center. Genome Announc 5.  https://doi.org/10.1128/genomeA.00582-17
  95. Wurl J, Mendez-Rodriguez L, Acosta-Vargas B (2014) Arsenic content in groundwater from the southern part of the San Antonio-El Triunfo mining district, Baja California Sur, Mexico. J Hydrol 518:447–459.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.05.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Yu Z, Krause S, Beck DA, Chistoserdova L (2016) A synthetic ecology perspective: How well does behavior of model organisms in the laboratory predict microbial activities in natural habitats? Front Microbiol 7.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.00946
  97. Zhang D, Vahala R, Wang Y, Smets BF (2016) Microbes in biological processes for municipal landfill leachate treatment: community, function and interaction. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 113:88–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2016.02.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Zhang J, Liu S, Li L, Ren Y, Feng C, Wei C, Li Y, Huang Z (2017) Anaerobic dechlorination of tetrachlorobisphenol A in river sediment and associated changes in bacterial communities. Water Air Soil Pollut 228.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-017-3254-3
  99. Zwart G, Crump BC, Kamst-van Agterveld MP, Hagen F, Han SK (2002) Typical freshwater bacteria: an analysis of available 16S rRNA gene sequences from plankton of lakes and rivers. Aquat Microb Ecol 28:141–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology, Faculty of ScienceMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand
  2. 2.Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of ScienceMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand
  3. 3.Enzyme Technology LaboratoryNational Center for Genetic Engineering and BiotechnologyPathum ThaniThailand
  4. 4.Integrative Computational BioScience (ICBS) CenterMahidol UniversityNakhon PathomThailand
  5. 5.Systems Biology of Diseases Research Unit, Faculty of ScienceMahidol UniversityNakhon PathomThailand
  6. 6.Department of Geology, Faculty of ScienceChulalongkorn UniversityBangkokThailand
  7. 7.Research Program on Controls of Hazardous Contaminants in Raw Water Resources for Water Scarcity Resilience, Center of Excellence on Hazardous Substance Management (HSM)Chulalongkorn UniversityBangkokThailand
  8. 8.Research Unit of Green Mining (GMM)Chulalongkorn UniversityBangkokThailand
  9. 9.International Postgraduate Program in Hazardous Substance and Environmental ManagementChulalongkorn UniversityBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations