Advertisement

Culturomics and metagenomics: In understanding of environmental resistome

  • Monika Nowrotek
  • Łukasz Jałowiecki
  • Monika Harnisz
  • Grażyna Anna PłazaEmail author
Open Access
Review Article
  • 41 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Special Issue—Environmental Antibiotics and Antibiotic Resistance

Abstract

Pharmaceutical residues, mainly antibiotics, have been called “emerging contaminants” in the environment because of their increasing frequency of detection in aquatic and terrestrial systems and their sublethal ecological effects. Most of them are undiscovered. Both human and veterinary pharmaceuticals, including antibiotics, are introduced into the environment via many different routes, including discharges from municipal wastewater treatment plants and land application of animal manure and biosolids to fertilize croplands. To gain a comprehensive understanding of the widespread problem of antibiotic resistance, modern and scientific approaches have been developed to gain knowledge of the entire antibiotic-resistant microbiota of various ecosystems, which is called the resistome. In this review, two omics methods, i.e. culturomics, a new approach, and metagenomics, used to study antibiotic resistance in environmental samples, are described. Moreover, we discuss how both omics methods have become core scientific tools to characterize microbiomes or resistomes, study natural communities and discover new microbes and new antibiotic resistance genes from environments. The combination of the method for get better outcome of both culturomics and metagenomics will significantly advance our understanding of the role of microbes and their specific properties in the environment.

Keywords

Culturomics Metagenomics Antibiotic resistance Resistome 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper was prepared in connection with the work done under the project No. 2017/26/M/NZ9/00071 funded by the National Science Center (Poland).

References

  1. Abdallah R A, Beye M, Diop A, Bakour S, Raoult D, Fournier P E (2017). The impact of culturomics on taxonomy in clinical microbiology. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 110(10): 1327–1337Google Scholar
  2. Akiyama T, Savin M C (2010). Populations of antibiotic-resistant coliform bacteria change rapidly in a wastewater effluent dominated stream. The Science of the total environment, 408(24): 6192–6201Google Scholar
  3. Allan E (2014). Metagenomics: unrestricted access to microbial communities. Virulence, 5(3): 397–398Google Scholar
  4. Alves L F, Westmann C A, Lovate G L, de Siqueira G M V, Borelli T C, Guazzaroni M E (2018). Metagenomic approaches for understanding new concepts in microbial science. International Journal of Genomics, 2018: 1Google Scholar
  5. Amos G C A, Zhang L, Hawkey P M, Gaze W H, Wellington E M (2014). Functional metagenomic analysis reveals rivers are a reservoir for diverse antibiotic resistance genes. Veterinary Microbiology, 171(3–4): 441–447Google Scholar
  6. Amrane S, Lagier J C (2018). Metagenomic and clinical microbiology. Human Microbiome Journal, 9(1): 1–6Google Scholar
  7. Anjum M F (2015). Screening methods for the detection of antimicrobial resistance genes present in bacterial isolates and the microbiota. Future Microbiology, 10(3): 317–320Google Scholar
  8. Bilen M, Dufour J C, Lagier J C, Cadoret F, Daoud Z, Dubourg G, Raoult D (2018). The contribution of culturomics to the repertoire of isolated human bacterial and archaeal species. Microbiome, 6(1): 94Google Scholar
  9. Chen B, Yang Y, Liang X, Yu K, Zhang T, Li X (2013). Metagenomic profiles of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) between human impacted estuary and deep ocean sediments. Environmental Science & Technology, 47(22): 12753–12760Google Scholar
  10. Chistoserdova L (2010). Functional metagenomics: recent advances and future challenges. Biotechnology & Genetic Engineering Reviews, 26(1): 335–352Google Scholar
  11. Christgen B, Yang Y, Ahammad S Z, Li B, Rodriquez D C, Zhang T, Graham D W (2015). Metagenomics shows that low-energy anaerobic-aerobic treatment reactors reduce antibiotic resistance gene levels from domestic wastewater. Environmental Science & Technology, 49(4): 2577–2584Google Scholar
  12. Chu B T T, Petrovich M L, Chaudhary A, Wright D, Murphy B, Wells G, Poretsky R (2018). Metagenomics reveals the impact of wastewater treatment plants on the dispersal of microorganisms and genes in aquatic sediments. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 84(5): e02168–e17Google Scholar
  13. Crofts T S, Gasparrini A J, Dantas G (2017). Next-generation approaches to understand and combat the antibiotic resistome. Nature Reviews. Microbiology, 15(7): 422–434Google Scholar
  14. Davies J, Davies D (2010). Origins and evolution ofantibiotic resistance. Microbiology Molecular Reports, 74(3): 417–433Google Scholar
  15. Di Bella J M, Bao Y, Gloor G B, Burton J P, Reid G (2013). High throughput sequencing methods and analysis for microbiome research. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 95(3): 401–414Google Scholar
  16. Elbehery A H A, Aziz R K, Siam R (2016). Antibiotic resistome: Improving detection and quantification accuracy for comparative metagenomics. OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, 20(4): 229–238Google Scholar
  17. Escobar-Zepeda A, Vera-Ponce de Leon A, Sanchez-Flores A (2015). The road to metagenomics: From microbiology to DNA sequencing technologies and bioinformatics. Froniers in Genetics, 6: 348Google Scholar
  18. Fitzpatrick D, Walsh F (2016). Antibiotic resistance genes across a wide variety of metagenomes. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 92(2): 11–21Google Scholar
  19. Gatica J, Tripathi V, Green S, Manaia C M, Berendonk T, Cacace D, Merlin C, Kreuzinger N, Schwartz T, Fatta-Kassinos D, Rizzo L, Schwermer C U, Garelick H, Jurkevitch E, Cytryn E (2016). High throughput analysis of integrin gene cassettes in wastewater environments. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(21): 11825–11836Google Scholar
  20. Greub G (2012). Culturomics: A new approach to study the human microbiome. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 18(12): 1157–1159Google Scholar
  21. Guo J, Li J, Chen H, Bond P L, Yuan Z (2017). Metagenomic analysis reveals wastewater treatment plants as hotspots of antibiotic resistance genes and mobile genetic elements. Water Research, 123(3): 468–478Google Scholar
  22. Gupta S K, Shin H, Han D, Hur H G, Unno T (2018). Metagenomic analysis reveals the prevalence and persistence of antibiotic- and heavy metal-resistance genes in wastewater treatment plant. Journal of Microbiology (Seoul, Korea), 56(6): 408–415Google Scholar
  23. Hamad I, Ranque S, Azhar E I, Yasir M, Jiman-Fatani A A, Tissot-Dupont H, Raoult D, Bittar F, Bittar F (2017). Culturomics and Amplicon-based Metagenomic Approaches for the Study of Fungal Population in Human Gut Microbiota. Scientific Reports, 7(1): 16788Google Scholar
  24. Handelsman J, Rondon M R, Brady S F, Clardy J, Goodman R M (1998). Molecular biological access to the chemistry of unknown soil microbes: A new frontier for natural products. Chemistry & Biology, 5(10): R245–R249Google Scholar
  25. Hu Q, Zhang X X, Jia S, Huang K, Tang J, Shi P, Ye L, Ren H (2016). Metagenomic insights into ultraviolet disinfection effects on antibiotic resistome in biologically treated wastewater. Water Research, 101(3): 309–317Google Scholar
  26. Hugon P, Dufour J C, Colson P, Fournier P E, Sallah K, Raoult D (2015). A comprehensive repertoire of prokaryotic species identified in human beings. The Lancet. Infectious Diseases, 15(10): 1211–1219Google Scholar
  27. Jackson R W, Vinatzer B, Arnold D L, Dorus S, Murillo J (2011). The influence of the accessory genome on bacterial pathogen evolution. Mobile Genetic Elements, 1(1): 55–65Google Scholar
  28. Jalowiecki L, Chojniak J, Dorgeloh E, Hegedusova B, Ejhed H, Magnér J, Plaza G (2017). Using phenotype microarrays in the assessment of the antibiotic susceptibility profile of bacteria isolated from waste-water in on-site treatment facilities. Folia Microbiologica, 62(6): 453–461Google Scholar
  29. Kambouris M E, Pavlidis C, Skoufas E, Arabatzis M, Kantzanou M, Velegraki A, Patrinos G P (2018). Culturomics: A new kid on the block of OMICS to enable personalized medicine. OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, 22(2), 234–245Google Scholar
  30. Khelaifia S, Lagier J Ch, Bibi F, Azhar E I, Croce O, Padmanabhan R, Jiman-Fatani A A, Yasir M, Robert C, Andrieu C, Fournier P E, Raoult D (2016). Microbial culturomics to map halophilic bacterium in human gut: genome sequence and description of Oceanobacillus jeddahense sp. nov. Journal of Integrative Biolology, 20(4): 248–258Google Scholar
  31. Lagier J C, Armougom F, Million M, Hugon P, Pagnier I, Robert C, Bittar F, Fournous G, Gimenez G, Maraninchi M, Trape J F, Koonin E V, La Scola B, Raoult D (2012). Microbial culturomics: paradigm shift in the human gut microbiome study. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 18(12): 1185–1193Google Scholar
  32. Lagier J C, Dubourg G, Million M, Cadoret F, Bilen M, Fenollar F, Levasseur A, Rolain J M, Fournier P E, Raoult D (2018). Culturing the human microbiota and culturomics. Nature Reviews. Microbiology, 16(9): 540–550Google Scholar
  33. Lagier J C, Hugon P, Khelaifia S, Fournier P E, La Scola B, Raoult D (2015). The rebirth of culture in microbiology through the example of culturomics to study human gut microbiota. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 28(1): 237–264Google Scholar
  34. Lagier J C, Khelaifia S, Alou M T, Ndongo S, Dione N, Hugon P, Caputo A, Cadoret F, Traore S I, Seck E H, Dubourg G, Durand G, Mourembou G, Guilhot E, Togo A, Bellali S, Bachar D, Cassir N, Bittar F, Delerce J, Mailhe M, Ricaboni D, Bilen M, Dangui Nieko N P, Dia Badiane N M, Valles C, Mouelhi D, Diop K, Million M, Musso D, Abrahão J, Azhar E I, Bibi F, Yasir M, Diallo A, Sokhna C, Djossou F, Vitton V, Robert C, Rolain J M, La Scola B, Fournier P E, Levasseur A, Raoult D (2016). Culture of previously uncultured members of the human gut microbiota by culturomics. Nature Microbiology, 1(2): 16203Google Scholar
  35. Lam K N, Cheng J, Engel K, Neufeld J D, Charles T C (2015). Current and future resources for functional metagenomics. Frontiers in Microbiology, 6: article1196Google Scholar
  36. Lanza V F, Baquero F, Martínez J L, Ramos-Ruíz R, González-Zorn B, Andremont A, Sánchez-Valenzuela A, Ehrlich S D, Kennedy S, Ruppé E, van Schaik W, Willems R J, de la Cruz F, Coque T M (2018). In-depth resistome analysis by targeted metagenomics. Microbiome, 6(1): 11Google Scholar
  37. Lee J, Jeon J H, Shin J, Jang H M, Kim S, Song M S, Kim Y M (2017). Quantitative and qualitative changes in antibiotic resistance genes after passing through treatment processes in municipal wastewater treatment plants. Science of the Total Environment, 605–606: 906–914Google Scholar
  38. Lefkowitz J R, Duran M (2009). Changes in antibiotic resistance patterns of Escherichia coli during domestic wastewater treatment. Water Environment Research, 81(9): 878–885Google Scholar
  39. Luby E, Ibekwe A M, Zilles J, Pruden A (2016). Molecular methods for assessment of antibiotic resistance in agricultural ecosystems: prospects and challenges. Journal of Environmental Quality, 45(2): 441–453Google Scholar
  40. Ma Y, Metch JW, Yang Y, Pruden A, Zhang T (2016). Shift in antibiotic resistance gene profiles associated with nanosilver during wastewater treatment. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 92(3): pii: fiw022Google Scholar
  41. March-Rosselló G A (2017). Rapid methods for detection of bacterial resistance to antibiotics. Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiologia Clinica, 35(3): 182–188Google Scholar
  42. Martínez J L, Coque T M, Lanza V F, de la Cruz F, Baquero F (2017). Genomic and metagenomic technologies to explore the antibiotic resistance mobilome. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1388(1): 26–41Google Scholar
  43. Masucci L, Quaranta G, Nagel D, Primus S, Romano L, Graffeo R, Ianiro G, Gasbarrini A, Cammarota G, Sanguinetti M (2017). Culturomics: Bacterial species isolated in 3 healthy donors for faecal microbiota transplantation in Clostridium difficile infection. Microbiologia Medica, 32: 6510Google Scholar
  44. McLain J E, Cytryn E, Durso L M, Young S (2016). Culture-based methods for detection of antibiotic resistance in agroecosystems: Advantages, challenges, and gaps in knowledge. Journal of Environmental Quality, 45(2): 432–440Google Scholar
  45. Miller R R, Montoya V, Gardy J L, Patrick D M, Tang P (2013). Metagenomics for pathogen detection in public health. Genome Medicine, 5(9): No article: 81Google Scholar
  46. Mohammadali M, Davies J (2018). Antimicrobial resistance genes and wastewater treatment. In: Keen P L, Fugère R, eds. Antimicrobial Resistance in Wastewater Treatment Processes. 1st ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1–14Google Scholar
  47. Monier J M, Demanèche S, Delmont T O, Mathieu A, Vogel T M, Simonet P (2011). Metagenomic exploration of antibiotic resistance in soil. Current Opinion in Microbiology, 14(3): 229–235Google Scholar
  48. Mullany P (2014). Functional metagenomics for the investigation of antibiotic resistance. Virulence, 5(3): 443–447Google Scholar
  49. Nagarajan M. (2018). Metagenomics. Perspectives, Methods, and Applications. 1st ed. London: Academic Press, Elsevier, 1–10Google Scholar
  50. Pärnänen K, Karkman A, Tamminen M, Lyra C, Hultman J, Paulin L, Virta M (2016). Evaluating the mobility potential of antibiotic resistance genes in environmental resistomes without metagenomics. Scientific Reports, 6(1): 35790Google Scholar
  51. Perry J A, Westman E L, Wright G D (2014). The antibiotic resistome: What’s new? Current Opinion in Microbiology, 21: 45–50Google Scholar
  52. Płaza G, Turek A, Szczygłowska R (2013). Characterization of E. coli strains obtained from wastewater effluent. International Journal of Environmental of Research, 2(1): 67–74Google Scholar
  53. Rizzo L, Manaia C, Merlin C, Schwartz T, Dagot C, Ploy M C, Michael I, Fatta-Kassinos D (2013). Urban wastewater treatment plants as hotspots for antibiotic resistant bacteria and genes spread into the environment: A review. The Science of the total environment, 447: 345–360Google Scholar
  54. Rosso G E, Muday J A, Curran J F (2018). Tools for Metagenomic Analysis at Wastewater Treatment Plants: Application to a Foaming Episode. Water environment research: A research publication of the Water Environment Federation, 90(3): 258–268Google Scholar
  55. Schmidt T M, DeLong E F, Pace N R (1991). Analysis of a marine picoplankton community by 16S rRNA gene cloning and sequencing. Journal of Bacteriology, 173(14): 4371–4378Google Scholar
  56. Schmieder R, Edwards R (2012). Insights into antibiotic resistance through metagenomic approaches. Future Microbiology, 7(1): 73–89Google Scholar
  57. Seck E H, Diop A, Armstrong N, Delerce J, Fournier P E, Raoult D, Khelaifia S (2018). Microbial culturomics to isolate halophilic bacteria from table salt: genome sequence and description of the moderately halophilic bacterium Bacillus salis sp. nov. New Microbes and New Infections, 23(1): 28–38Google Scholar
  58. Tang J, Bu Y, Zhang X X, Huang K, He X, Ye L, Shan Z, Ren H (2016). Metagenomic analysis of bacterial community composition and antibiotic resistance genes in a wastewater treatment plant and its receiving surface water. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 132(2): 260–269Google Scholar
  59. Venter J C, Remington K, Heidelberg J F, Halpern A L, Rusch D, Eisen J A, Wu D, Paulsen I, Nelson K E, Nelson W, Fouts D E, Levy S, Knap A H, Lomas M W, Nealson K, White O, Peterson J, Hoffman J, Parsons R, Baden-Tillson H, Pfannkoch C, Rogers Y H, Smith H O (2004). Environmental genome shotgun sequencing of the Sargasso Sea. Science, 304(5667): 66–74Google Scholar
  60. Wang Z, Zhang X X, Huang K, Miao Y, Shi P, Liu B, Long C, Li A (2013). Metagenomic profiling of antibiotic resistance genes and mobile genetic elements in a tannery wastewater treatment plant. PLoS One, 8(10): e76079Google Scholar
  61. Xiao K Q, Li B, Ma L, Bao P, Xue Zhou X, Zhang T, Zhu Y G (2016). Metagenomic profiles of antibiotic resistance genes in paddy soils from South China. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 92: fiw023Google Scholar
  62. Yang Y, Li B, Ju F, Zhang T (2013). Exploring variation of antibiotic resistance genes in activated sludge over a four-year period through a metagenomic approach. Environmental Science & Technology, 47(18): 10197–10205Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s). This article is published with open access at link.springer.com and journal.hep.com.cn 2019

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit https://doi.org/creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Monika Nowrotek
    • 1
  • Łukasz Jałowiecki
    • 1
  • Monika Harnisz
    • 2
  • Grażyna Anna Płaza
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Microbiology UnitInstitute for Ecology of Industrial AreasKatowicePoland
  2. 2.Department of Environmental Microbiology, Faculty of Environmental SciencesUniversity of Warmia and MazuryOlsztynPoland
  3. 3.Faculty of Organization and Management, Institute of Engineering ProductionSilesian University of TechnologyZabrzePoland

Personalised recommendations