Bacterial communities in a subarctic stream network: Spatial and seasonal patterns of benthic biofilm and bacterioplankton.
amplicon sequence variant
bacteria
microbial diversity
river network
temporal
Journal
Molecular ecology
ISSN: 1365-294X
Titre abrégé: Mol Ecol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9214478
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
revised:
01
09
2022
received:
02
04
2022
accepted:
21
09
2022
pubmed:
6
10
2022
medline:
7
12
2022
entrez:
5
10
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Water-column bacterial communities are assembled by different mechanisms at different stream network positions, with headwater communities being controlled by mass effects (advection of bacteria from terrestrial soils) while downstream communities are mainly driven by environmental sorting. Conversely, benthic biofilms are colonized largely by the same set of taxa across the entire network. However, direct comparisons of biofilm and bacterioplankton communities along whole stream networks are rare. We used 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing to explore the spatiotemporal variability of benthic biofilm (2 weeks old vs. mature biofilm) and water-column communities at different network positions of a subarctic stream from early summer to late autumn. Amplicon sequence variant (ASV) richness of mature biofilm was about 2.5 times higher than that of early biofilm, yet the pattern of seasonality was the same, with the highest richness in midsummer. Biofilm bacterial richness was unrelated to network position whereas bacterioplankton diversity was negatively related to water residence time and distance from the source. This pattern of decreasing diversity along the network was strongest around midsummer and diminished greatly as water level increased towards autumn. Biofilm communities were phylogenetically clustered at all network positions while bacterioplankton assemblages were phylogenetically clustered only at the most downstream site. Both early and mature biofilm communities already differed significantly between upstream (1st order) and midstream (2nd order) sections. Network position was also related to variation in bacterioplankton communities, with upstream sites harbouring substantially more unique taxa (44% of all upstream taxa) than midstream (20%) or downstream (8%) sites. Some of the taxa that were dominant in downstream sections were already present in the upmost headwaters, and even in riparian soils, where they were very rare (relative abundance <0.01%). These patterns in species diversity and taxonomic and phylogenetic community composition of the riverine bacterial metacommunity were particularly strong for water-column communities, whereas both early and mature biofilm exhibited weaker spatial patterns. Our study demonstrated the benefits of studying bacterioplankton and biofilm communities simultaneously to allow testing of ecological hypotheses about biodiversity patterns in freshwater bacteria.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36198099
doi: 10.1111/mec.16711
pmc: PMC10091710
doi:
Substances chimiques
RNA, Ribosomal, 16S
0
Water
059QF0KO0R
Soil
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
6649-6663Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Molecular Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2022 Jun 28;88(12):e0042122
pubmed: 35674429
Sci Total Environ. 2015 Feb 1;505:435-45
pubmed: 25461045
ISME J. 2012 Sep;6(9):1653-64
pubmed: 22456445
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Sep 2;111(35):12799-804
pubmed: 25136087
Microb Ecol. 2021 Oct;82(3):591-601
pubmed: 33532913
Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Jan;41(Database issue):D590-6
pubmed: 23193283
BMC Bioinformatics. 2011 Jan 28;12:38
pubmed: 21276213
Environ Microbiol. 2015 Dec;17(12):4994-5007
pubmed: 25922985
Environ Microbiol. 2018 Oct;20(10):3560-3572
pubmed: 30051569
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006 Jan;72(1):713-22
pubmed: 16391111
Microbiome. 2018 May 17;6(1):90
pubmed: 29773078
ISME J. 2012 Sep;6(9):1629-39
pubmed: 22378536
Environ Microbiol. 2021 Jan;23(1):484-498
pubmed: 33258525
ISME J. 2012 Mar;6(3):554-63
pubmed: 22011718
Microb Ecol. 2005 Nov;50(4):589-601
pubmed: 16341639
Ecology. 2020 Apr;101(4):e02968
pubmed: 31925775
Sci Rep. 2016 Nov 25;6:37719
pubmed: 27886241
Nat Methods. 2016 Jul;13(7):581-3
pubmed: 27214047
Mol Ecol. 2022 Dec;31(24):6649-6663
pubmed: 36198099
Bioinformatics. 2010 Jun 1;26(11):1463-4
pubmed: 20395285
Mol Ecol. 2016 Sep;25(18):4674-88
pubmed: 27481285
ISME J. 2017 Sep;11(9):2012-2021
pubmed: 28585940
Nat Commun. 2020 Jul 14;11(1):3514
pubmed: 32665548
Environ Microbiol. 2020 Mar;22(3):1000-1010
pubmed: 31464061
Ecol Lett. 2016 Dec;19(12):1506-1515
pubmed: 27882701
ISME J. 2016 Jul;10(7):1755-66
pubmed: 26849312
Microbiology (Reading). 2017 May;163(5):664-668
pubmed: 28530167
ISME J. 2017 Dec;11(12):2639-2643
pubmed: 28731476
Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Oct 02;280(1771):20131760
pubmed: 24089333
Oecologia. 2021 Jan;195(1):13-24
pubmed: 33040164
mBio. 2014 Jul 15;5(4):e01371-14
pubmed: 25028427
Ecol Lett. 2015 Nov;18(11):1198-1206
pubmed: 26306742
ISME J. 2012 Aug;6(8):1459-68
pubmed: 22237539
Mol Ecol. 2021 May;30(9):2162-2177
pubmed: 33639035
PLoS One. 2010 Mar 10;5(3):e9490
pubmed: 20224823
Environ Microbiol. 2012 Sep;14(9):2417-28
pubmed: 22626459
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2019 May 16;85(11):
pubmed: 30952660
Nat Microbiol. 2016 Oct 03;1:16178
pubmed: 27694939
ISME J. 2015 Feb;9(2):516-26
pubmed: 25238398
ISME J. 2013 Aug;7(8):1493-506
pubmed: 23575374
Front Microbiol. 2017 Aug 08;8:1495
pubmed: 28848513
Environ Microbiol. 2008 Oct;10(10):2760-72
pubmed: 18643927
ISME J. 2022 Apr;16(4):937-947
pubmed: 34725445
Nat Biotechnol. 2019 Aug;37(8):852-857
pubmed: 31341288
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2008 Sep;65(3):463-73
pubmed: 18637965
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2016 Apr;14(4):251-63
pubmed: 26972916