Cargando…
Differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte Suaeda species
Root-related or endophytic microbes in halophytes play an important role in adaptation to extreme saline environments. However, there have been few comparisons of microbial distribution patterns in different tissues associated with halophytes. Here, we analyzed the bacterial communities and distribu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9275862/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35593105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21655979.2022.2076009 |
_version_ | 1784745580359057408 |
---|---|
author | Peng, Mu Wang, Chao Wang, Zhiyong Huang, Xiufang Zhou, Fangzhen Yan, Shaopeng Liu, Xiaopeng |
author_facet | Peng, Mu Wang, Chao Wang, Zhiyong Huang, Xiufang Zhou, Fangzhen Yan, Shaopeng Liu, Xiaopeng |
author_sort | Peng, Mu |
collection | PubMed |
description | Root-related or endophytic microbes in halophytes play an important role in adaptation to extreme saline environments. However, there have been few comparisons of microbial distribution patterns in different tissues associated with halophytes. Here, we analyzed the bacterial communities and distribution patterns of the rhizospheres and tissue endosphere in two Suaeda species (S. salsa and S. corniculata Bunge) using the 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The results showed that the bacterial abundance and diversity in the rhizosphere were significantly higher than that of endophytic, but lower than that of bulk soil. Microbial-diversity analysis showed that the dominant phyla of all samples were Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Acidobacteria and Firmicutes, among which Proteobacteria were extremely abundant in all the tissue endosphere. Heatmap and Linear discriminant analysis Effect Size (LEfSe) results showed that there were notable differences in microbial community composition related to plant compartments. Different networks based on plant compartments exhibited distinct topological features. Additionally, the bulk soil and rhizosphere networks were more complex and showed higher centrality and connectedness than the three endosphere networks. These results strongly suggested that plant compartments, and not species, affect microbiome composition. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9275862 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Taylor & Francis |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92758622022-07-13 Differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte Suaeda species Peng, Mu Wang, Chao Wang, Zhiyong Huang, Xiufang Zhou, Fangzhen Yan, Shaopeng Liu, Xiaopeng Bioengineered Research Paper Root-related or endophytic microbes in halophytes play an important role in adaptation to extreme saline environments. However, there have been few comparisons of microbial distribution patterns in different tissues associated with halophytes. Here, we analyzed the bacterial communities and distribution patterns of the rhizospheres and tissue endosphere in two Suaeda species (S. salsa and S. corniculata Bunge) using the 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The results showed that the bacterial abundance and diversity in the rhizosphere were significantly higher than that of endophytic, but lower than that of bulk soil. Microbial-diversity analysis showed that the dominant phyla of all samples were Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Acidobacteria and Firmicutes, among which Proteobacteria were extremely abundant in all the tissue endosphere. Heatmap and Linear discriminant analysis Effect Size (LEfSe) results showed that there were notable differences in microbial community composition related to plant compartments. Different networks based on plant compartments exhibited distinct topological features. Additionally, the bulk soil and rhizosphere networks were more complex and showed higher centrality and connectedness than the three endosphere networks. These results strongly suggested that plant compartments, and not species, affect microbiome composition. Taylor & Francis 2022-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9275862/ /pubmed/35593105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21655979.2022.2076009 Text en © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Paper Peng, Mu Wang, Chao Wang, Zhiyong Huang, Xiufang Zhou, Fangzhen Yan, Shaopeng Liu, Xiaopeng Differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte Suaeda species |
title | Differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte Suaeda species |
title_full | Differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte Suaeda species |
title_fullStr | Differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte Suaeda species |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte Suaeda species |
title_short | Differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte Suaeda species |
title_sort | differences between the effects of plant species and compartments on microbiome composition in two halophyte suaeda species |
topic | Research Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9275862/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35593105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21655979.2022.2076009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pengmu differencesbetweentheeffectsofplantspeciesandcompartmentsonmicrobiomecompositionintwohalophytesuaedaspecies AT wangchao differencesbetweentheeffectsofplantspeciesandcompartmentsonmicrobiomecompositionintwohalophytesuaedaspecies AT wangzhiyong differencesbetweentheeffectsofplantspeciesandcompartmentsonmicrobiomecompositionintwohalophytesuaedaspecies AT huangxiufang differencesbetweentheeffectsofplantspeciesandcompartmentsonmicrobiomecompositionintwohalophytesuaedaspecies AT zhoufangzhen differencesbetweentheeffectsofplantspeciesandcompartmentsonmicrobiomecompositionintwohalophytesuaedaspecies AT yanshaopeng differencesbetweentheeffectsofplantspeciesandcompartmentsonmicrobiomecompositionintwohalophytesuaedaspecies AT liuxiaopeng differencesbetweentheeffectsofplantspeciesandcompartmentsonmicrobiomecompositionintwohalophytesuaedaspecies |