OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Frontiers in microbiology
2020;11 1528.

Microbiome Variation Across Two Hemlock Species With Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Infestation.

Nicholas C Dove, Timothy J Rogers, Christy Leppanen, Daniel Simberloff, James A Fordyce, Veronica A Brown, Anthony V LeBude, Thomas G Ranney, Melissa A Cregger
Author Information
  1. Nicholas C Dove: Biosciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, United States.
  2. Timothy J Rogers: Department of Microbiology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, United States.
  3. Christy Leppanen: Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, United States.
  4. Daniel Simberloff: Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, United States.
  5. James A Fordyce: Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, United States.
  6. Veronica A Brown: Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, United States.
  7. Anthony V LeBude: Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Mills River, NC, United States.
  8. Thomas G Ranney: Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Mills River, NC, United States.
  9. Melissa A Cregger: Biosciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, United States.
PMID: 32733417 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.01528

Abstract

The hemlock woolly adelgid (, HWA), an invasive insect, is devastating native hemlock populations in eastern North America, and management outcomes have so far had limited success. While many plant microbiomes influence and even support plant immune responses to insect herbivory, relatively little is known about the hemlock microbiome and its interactions with pathogens or herbivores such as HWA. Using 16S rRNA and ITS gene amplicon sequencing, we characterized the needle, branch, root, and rhizosphere microbiome of two hemlock species, and , that displayed low and high levels of HWA populations. We found that both archaeal/bacterial and fungal needle communities, as well as the archaeal/bacterial branch and root communities, varied in composition in both hemlock species relative to HWA population levels. While host species and plant-associated habitats explained a greater proportion of the variance in the microbiome than did HWA population level, high HWA populations were associated with enrichment of 100 likely fungal pathogen sequence variants across the four plant-associated habitats (e.g., needle, branch, root, rhizosphere) compared to trees with lower HWA populations. This work contributes to a growing body of literature linking plant pathogens and pests with the changes in the associated plant microbiome and host health. Furthermore, this work demonstrates the need to further investigate plant microbiome effects across multiple plant tissues to understand their influences on host health.

Keywords

16S rRNA ITS epiphyte microbial ecology phyllosphere plant pathology plant-microbe interactions rhizosphere

References

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Sep 23;111(38):13715-20 [PMID: 25225376]
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 22;8(4):e61217 [PMID: 23630581]
Genome Biol. 2014;15(12):550 [PMID: 25516281]
Oecologia. 1999 Mar;118(3):297-305 [PMID: 28307273]
Biochem J. 1962 Sep;84:501-6 [PMID: 14490535]
Front Microbiol. 2014 Sep 12;5:479 [PMID: 25309519]
New Phytol. 2010 Apr;186(2):281-5 [PMID: 20409185]
Microbiome. 2017 Feb 23;5(1):25 [PMID: 28231859]
Mol Ecol. 2016 May;25(9):2065-80 [PMID: 26880353]
Ecology. 2006 Jul;87(7):1792-804 [PMID: 16922328]
Microbiome. 2019 May 18;7(1):76 [PMID: 31103040]
Science. 2015 Aug 21;349(6250):860-4 [PMID: 26184915]
Trends Plant Sci. 2017 Jul;22(7):583-595 [PMID: 28549621]
Ecology. 2010 Apr;91(4):1075-82 [PMID: 20462121]
New Phytol. 2013 Jul;199(1):41-51 [PMID: 23713553]
Microbiome. 2018 Feb 12;6(1):31 [PMID: 29433554]
Nat Methods. 2016 Jul;13(7):581-3 [PMID: 27214047]
Ecol Appl. 2020 Jun;30(4):e02072 [PMID: 31925848]
Microbiol Res. 2016 Feb;183:92-9 [PMID: 26805622]
Trends Plant Sci. 2017 Sep;22(9):770-778 [PMID: 28757147]
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005 Sep;71(9):4951-9 [PMID: 16151072]
Environ Microbiol Rep. 2018 Oct;10(5):532-541 [PMID: 29727054]
Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Jan;41(Database issue):D590-6 [PMID: 23193283]
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2009 May;22(5):551-9 [PMID: 19348573]
Science. 1987 Feb 6;235(4789):678-80 [PMID: 17833628]
Pest Manag Sci. 2017 Mar;73(3):546-553 [PMID: 27158946]
Mycorrhiza. 2008 Feb;18(2):103-10 [PMID: 18157555]
PLoS Biol. 2016 Jan 20;14(1):e1002352 [PMID: 26788878]
Trends Ecol Evol. 1994 Jul;9(7):251-5 [PMID: 21236843]
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e53987 [PMID: 23326555]
J Chem Ecol. 2013 Aug;39(8):1090-100 [PMID: 23900803]
New Phytol. 2016 Mar;209(4):1681-92 [PMID: 26565565]
Mol Plant Pathol. 2012 May;13(4):414-30 [PMID: 22471698]
Ecol Evol. 2019 May 23;9(12):6860-6868 [PMID: 31380021]
Mycologia. 2008 May-Jun;100(3):353-74 [PMID: 18751543]
Mol Ecol. 2019 Apr;28(7):1801-1811 [PMID: 30582660]
Nat Commun. 2019 Sep 12;10(1):4135 [PMID: 31515535]
J Chem Ecol. 2014 Sep;40(9):1003-12 [PMID: 25278447]
Front Microbiol. 2019 May 08;10:1015 [PMID: 31143169]
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2020 Apr;104(8):3627-3641 [PMID: 32078018]
Microb Ecol. 2009 Jul;58(1):189-98 [PMID: 19221834]
Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2012;28:489-521 [PMID: 22559264]
New Phytol. 2013 Apr;198(1):264-73 [PMID: 23347044]
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 25;9(9):e108242 [PMID: 25254657]
Microb Ecol. 2019 Apr;77(3):640-650 [PMID: 30094615]
J Gen Microbiol. 1993 Sep;139(9):1995-2001 [PMID: 7504066]
ISME J. 2013 Aug;7(8):1493-506 [PMID: 23575374]
Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2003;41:177-98 [PMID: 12651961]
Environ Microbiol. 2015 Jul;17(7):2352-61 [PMID: 25367625]
Nat Biotechnol. 2019 Aug;37(8):852-857 [PMID: 31341288]
Journal Article

Word Cloud

Similar Articles

Cited By