Local eukaryotic and bacterial stream community assembly is shaped by regional land use effects.
Journal
ISME communications
ISSN: 2730-6151
Titre abrégé: ISME Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9918205372406676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Jun 2023
26 Jun 2023
Historique:
received:
12
05
2023
accepted:
14
06
2023
revised:
30
05
2023
medline:
27
6
2023
pubmed:
27
6
2023
entrez:
26
6
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
With anticipated expansion of agricultural areas for food production and increasing intensity of pressures stemming from land-use, it is critical to better understand how species respond to land-use change. This is particularly true for microbial communities which provide key ecosystem functions and display fastest responses to environmental change. However, regional land-use effects on local environmental conditions are often neglected, and, hence, underestimated when investigating community responses. Here we show that the effects stemming from agricultural and forested land use are strongest reflected in water conductivity, pH and phosphorus concentration, shaping microbial communities and their assembly processes. Using a joint species distribution modelling framework with community data based on metabarcoding, we quantify the contribution of land-use types in determining local environmental variables and uncover the impact of both, land-use, and local environment, on microbial stream communities. We found that community assembly is closely linked to land-use type but that the local environment strongly mediates the effects of land-use, resulting in systematic variation of taxon responses to environmental conditions, depending on their domain (bacteria vs. eukaryote) and trophic mode (autotrophy vs. heterotrophy). Given that regional land-use type strongly shapes local environments, it is paramount to consider its key role in shaping local stream communities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37365224
doi: 10.1038/s43705-023-00272-2
pii: 10.1038/s43705-023-00272-2
pmc: PMC10293236
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
65Subventions
Organisme : Suomen Akatemia | Strategic Research Council (Strategisen Tutkimuksen Neuvosto)
ID : 312650 BlueAdapt
Organisme : Suomen Akatemia | Strategic Research Council (Strategisen Tutkimuksen Neuvosto)
ID : 312650 BlueAdapt
Organisme : Koneen Säätiö (Kone Foundation)
ID : 202102289
Organisme : Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia)
ID : 309581
Organisme : EC | EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020 | H2020 Priority Excellent Science | H2020 European Research Council (H2020 Excellent Science - European Research Council)
ID : 856506; ERC-synergy project LIFEPLAN
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Allan E, Manning P, Alt F, Binkenstein J, Blaser S, Blüthgen N, et al. Land use intensification alters ecosystem multifunctionality via loss of biodiversity and changes to functional composition. Ecol Lett. 2015;18:834–43.
pubmed: 26096863
pmcid: 4744976
doi: 10.1111/ele.12469
Pereira HM, Navarro LM, Martins IS. Global biodiversity change: The Bad, the good, and the unknown. Annu Rev Environ Resour. 2012;37:25–50.
doi: 10.1146/annurev-environ-042911-093511
Soininen J, Bartels P, Heino J, Luoto M, Hillebrand H. Toward more integrated ecosystem research in aquatic and terrestrial environments. Bioscience. 2015;65:174–82.
doi: 10.1093/biosci/biu216
Scherer-Lorenzen M, Gessner MO, Beisner BE, Messier C, Paquette A, Petermann JS, et al. Pathways for cross-boundary effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning. Trends Ecol Evol. 2022;37:454–67.
pubmed: 35065823
doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2021.12.009
Williamson CE, Dodds W, Kratz TK, Palmer MA. Lakes and streams as sentinels of environmental change in terrestrial and atmospheric processes. Front Ecol Environ. 2008;6:247–54.
doi: 10.1890/070140
Wilson HF, Xenopoulos MA. Effects of agricultural land use on the composition of fluvial dissolved organic matter. Nat Geosci. 2009;2:37–41.
doi: 10.1038/ngeo391
Scanlon BR, Jolly I, Sophocleous M, Zhang L. Global impacts of conversions from natural to agricultural ecosystems on water resources: Quantity versus quality. Water Resour Res. 2007;43:W03437.
FAO. World food and agriculture: statistical yearbook. 2021. Food and Agriculture Organization Rome.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs PD. World Population Prospects 2022: Summary of Results. UN DESA/POP/2022/TR/NO. 3. 2022.
Stehfest E, van Zeist WJ, Valin H, Havlik P, Popp A, Kyle P, et al. Key determinants of global land-use projections. Nat Commun. 2019;10:1–10.
doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09945-w
Ector L, Rimet F Using bioindicators to assess rivers in Europe: An overview. Modelling Community Structure in Freshwater Ecosystems 2005; 7–19.
Burger J. Bioindicators: types, development, and use in ecological assessment and research. Environ Bioindic. 2006;1:22–39.
doi: 10.1080/15555270590966483
Lear G, Ancion PY, Harding J, Lewis GD. Use of bacterial communities to assess the ecological health of a recently restored stream. N Z J Mar Freshwater Res. 2012;46:291–301.
doi: 10.1080/00288330.2011.638647
Findlay S. Stream microbial ecology. J North Am Benthol Soc. 2010;29:170–81.
doi: 10.1899/09-023.1
Falkowski PG, Fenchel T, Delong EF. The microbial engines that drive earth’s biogeochemical cycles. Science (1979). 2008;320:1034–9.
Battin TJ, Besemer K, Bengtsson MM, Romani AM, Packmann AI. The ecology and biogeochemistry of stream biofilms. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2016;14:251–63.
pubmed: 26972916
doi: 10.1038/nrmicro.2016.15
Graham EB, Knelman JE, Schindlbacher A, Siciliano S, Breulmann M, Yannarell A, et al. Microbes as engines of ecosystem function: When does community structure enhance predictions of ecosystem processes? Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1–10.
doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00214
Warton DI, Blanchet FG, O’Hara RB, Ovaskainen O, Taskinen S, Walker SC, et al. So Many Variables: Joint Modeling in Community Ecology. Trends Ecol Evol. 2015;30:766–79.
pubmed: 26519235
doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2015.09.007
Burdon FJ, Bai Y, Reyes M, Tamminen M, Staudacher P, Mangold S, et al. Stream microbial communities and ecosystem functioning show complex responses to multiple stressors in wastewater. Glob Chang Biol. 2020;26:6363–82.
pubmed: 32881210
pmcid: 7692915
doi: 10.1111/gcb.15302
Zeglin LH. Stream microbial diversity in response to environmental changes: Review and synthesis of existing research. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:1–15.
doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00454
Laperriere SM, Hilderbrand RH, Keller SR, Trott R, Santoro AE. Headwater stream microbial diversity and function across agricultural and urban land use gradients. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2020;86:e00018-20.
Cooper SD, Lake PS, Sabater S, Melack JM, Sabo JL. The effects of land use changes on streams and rivers in mediterranean climates. Hydrobiologia. 2013;719:383–425.
doi: 10.1007/s10750-012-1333-4
Le HT, Rochelle-Newall E, Auda Y, Ribolzi O, Sengtaheuanghoung O, Thébault E, et al. Vicinal land use change strongly drives stream bacterial community in a tropical montane catchment. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2018;94:1–16.
doi: 10.1093/femsec/fiy155
Qu X, Ren Z, Zhang H, Zhang M, Zhang Y, Liu X, et al. Influences of anthropogenic land use on microbial community structure and functional potentials of stream benthic biofilms. Sci Rep. 2017;7:1–12.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-15624-x
Chavarria KA, Saltonstall K, Vinda J, Batista J, Lindmark M, Stallard RF, et al. Land use influences stream bacterial communities in lowland tropical watersheds. Sci Rep. 2021;11:21752.
Maloney KO, Weller DE. Anthropogenic disturbance and streams: Land use and land‐use change affect stream ecosystems via multiple pathways. Freshw Biol. 2011;56:611–26.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2010.02522.x
Maloney KO, Feminella JW, Mitchell RM, Miller SA, Mulholland PJ, Houser JN. Landuse legacies and small streams: identifying relationships between historical land use and contemporary stream conditions. J North Am Benthol Soc. 2008;27:280–94.
doi: 10.1899/07-070.1
Finnish Environment Institute. VALUE - Valuma-alueen rajaustyökalu, http://paikkatieto.ymparisto.fi/value/ . 2020.
Finnish Environment Institute. CORINE Land Cover 2012, https://www.syke.fi/avointieto .
Ivanova N, Grainger C, Hajibabaei M. Glass fiber DNA extraction: A new inexpensive method for high throughput DNA isolation. CCDB Advances, Methods Release 2006;3. https://ccdb.ca/site/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/CCDB_DNA_Extraction.pdf .
Ivanova N, Kuzmina M, Fazekas A CCDB Protocols: Manual protocol employing centrifugation: glass fiber plate DNA extraction protocol for plants, fungi, echinoderms and mollusks, http://ccdb.ca/site/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/CCDB_DNA_Extraction-Plants.pdf . 2011.
Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 2011;17:10–12.
doi: 10.14806/ej.17.1.200
Rognes T, Flouri T, Nichols B, Quince C, Mahé F. VSEARCH: A versatile open source tool for metagenomics. PeerJ. 2016;2016:1–22.
Schloss PD, Westcott SL, Ryabin T, Hall JR, Hartmann M, Hollister EB, et al. Introducing mothur: Open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009;75:7537–41.
pubmed: 19801464
pmcid: 2786419
doi: 10.1128/AEM.01541-09
Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: Improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:590–6.
doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1219
Guillou L, Bachar D, Audic S, Bass D, Berney C, Bittner L, et al. The Protist Ribosomal Reference database (PR2): A catalog of unicellular eukaryote Small Sub-Unit rRNA sequences with curated taxonomy. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:597–604.
doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1160
Stecher G, Tamura K, Kumar S. Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis (MEGA) for macOS. Mol Biol Evol. 2020;37:1237–9.
pubmed: 31904846
pmcid: 7086165
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msz312
Edgar RC. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:1792–7.
pubmed: 15034147
pmcid: 390337
doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh340
Foster SD, Givens GH, Dornan GJ, Dunstan PK, Darnell R. Modelling biological regions from multi-species and environmental data. Environmetrics. 2013;24:489–99.
doi: 10.1002/env.2245
Dray S, Dufour A-B. The ade4 Package: Implementing the Duality Diagram for Ecologists. J Stat Softw. 2007;22:1–20.
R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. www.r-project.org . 2020. Vienna, Austria.
Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R,. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan . 2019.
Caliński T, Harabasz J. A dendrite method for cluster analysis. Commun Stat-theory Methods. 1974;3:1–27.
doi: 10.1080/03610927408827101
Ovaskainen O, Abrego N. Joint species distribution modelling: with applications in R. 2020. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Ovaskainen O, Tikhonov G, Norberg A, Guillaume Blanchet F, Duan L, Dunson D, et al. How to make more out of community data? A conceptual framework and its implementation as models and software. Ecol Lett. 2017;20:561–76.
pubmed: 28317296
doi: 10.1111/ele.12757
Tikhonov G, Opedal ØH, Abrego N, Lehikoinen A, de Jonge MMJ, Oksanen J, et al. Joint species distribution modelling with the r-package Hmsc. Methods Ecol Evol. 2020;11:442–7.
pubmed: 32194928
pmcid: 7074067
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13345
Abrego N, Norberg A, Ovaskainen O. Measuring and predicting the influence of traits on the assembly processes of wood-inhabiting fungi. J Ecol. 2017;105:1070–81.
doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.12722
Gelman A, Rubin DB. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Statistical Science. 1992;2:45–52.
Tjur T. Coefficients of determination in logistic regression models—A new proposal: The coefficient of discrimination. Am Stat. 2009;63:366–72.
doi: 10.1198/tast.2009.08210
Pearce J, Ferrier S. Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecol Modell. 2000;133:225–45.
doi: 10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00322-7
Dang C, Kellner E, Martin G, Freedman ZB, Hubbart J, Stephan K, et al. Land use intensification destabilizes stream microbial biodiversity and decreases metabolic efficiency. Sci Total Environ. 2021;767:21752.
Jiao S, Yang Y, Xu Y, Zhang J, Lu Y. Balance between community assembly processes mediates species coexistence in agricultural soil microbiomes across eastern China. ISME J. 2020;14:202–16.
pubmed: 31611655
doi: 10.1038/s41396-019-0522-9
Logue JB, Lindström ES. Species sorting affects bacterioplankton community composition as determined by 16S rDNA and 16S rRNA fingerprints. ISME J. 2010;4:729–38.
pubmed: 20130658
doi: 10.1038/ismej.2009.156
Van Der Gucht K, Cottenie K, Muylaert K, Vloemans N, Cousin S, Declerck S, et al. The power of species sorting: Local factors drive bacterial community composition over a wide range of spatial scales. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:20404–9.
pubmed: 18077371
pmcid: 2154443
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0707200104
Simonin M, Voss KA, Hassett BA, Rocca JD, Wang SY, Bier RL, et al. In search of microbial indicator taxa: shifts in stream bacterial communities along an urbanization gradient. Environ Microbiol. 2019;21:3653–68.
pubmed: 31125479
doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.14694
Hosen JD, Febria CM, Crump BC, Palmer MA. Watershed urbanization linked to differences in stream bacterial community composition. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:1–17.
doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01452
Fierer N, Morse JL, Berthrong ST, Bernhardt ES, Jackson RB. Environmental controls on the landscape-scale biogeography of stream bacterial communities. Ecology. 2007;88:2162–73.
pubmed: 17918395
doi: 10.1890/06-1746.1
Liu S, Ren H, Shen L, Lou L, Tian G, Zheng P, et al. pH levels drive bacterial community structure in the Qiantang River as determined by 454 pyrosequencing. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:1–7.
doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00285
Halvorson HM, Wyatt KH, Kuehn KA. Ecological significance of autotroph–heterotroph microbial interactions in freshwaters. Freshw Biol. 2020;65:1183–8.
doi: 10.1111/fwb.13530
Moore JC, Berlow EL, Coleman DC, De Suiter PC, Dong Q, Hastings A, et al. Detritus, trophic dynamics and biodiversity. Ecol Lett. 2004;7:584–600.
doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00606.x