454 Pyrosequencing-based assessment of bacterial diversity and community structure in termite guts, mounds and surrounding soils.

Huxley M Makonde, Romano Mwirichia, Zipporah Osiemo, Hamadi I Boga, Hans-Peter Klenk
Author Information
  1. Huxley M Makonde: Leibniz-Institute DSMZ-German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures, Inhoffenstraße 7B, 38124 Brunswick, Germany ; Pure and Applied Sciences, Technical University of Mombasa, P.O.Box 90420-80100, Mombasa, Kenya.
  2. Romano Mwirichia: Department of Biological Sciences, Embu University College, P.O.Box 6-60100, Embu, Kenya.
  3. Zipporah Osiemo: Zoology, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, P.O.Box 62000-00200, Nairobi, Kenya.
  4. Hamadi I Boga: Botany, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, P.O.Box 62000-00200, Nairobi, Kenya.
  5. Hans-Peter Klenk: Leibniz-Institute DSMZ-German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures, Inhoffenstraße 7B, 38124 Brunswick, Germany ; School of Biology, Newcastle University, Ridley Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU UK.

Abstract

Termites constitute part of diverse and economically important termite fauna in Africa, but information on gut microbiota and their associated soil microbiome is still inadequate. In this study, we assessed and compared the bacterial diversity and community structure between termites' gut, their mounds and surrounding soil using the 454 pyrosequencing-based analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequences. A wood-feeder termite (Microcerotermes sp.), three fungus-cultivating termites (Macrotermes michaelseni, Odontotermes sp. and Microtermes sp.), their associated mounds and corresponding savannah soil samples were analyzed. The pH of the gut homogenates and soil physico-chemical properties were determined. The results indicated significant difference in bacterial community composition and structure between the gut and corresponding soil samples. Soil samples (Chao1 index ranged from 1359 to 2619) had higher species richness than gut samples (Chao1 index ranged from 461 to 1527). The bacterial composition and community structure in the gut of Macrotermes michaelseni and Odontotermes sp. were almost identical but different from that of Microtermes and Microcerotermes species, which had unique community structures. The most predominant bacterial phyla in the gut were Bacteroidetes (40-58 %), Spirochaetes (10-70 %), Firmicutes (17-27 %) and Fibrobacteres (13 %) while in the soil samples were Acidobacteria (28-45 %), Actinobacteria (20-40 %) and Proteobacteria (18-24 %). Some termite gut-specific bacterial lineages belonging to the genera Dysgonomonas, Parabacteroides, Paludibacter, Tannerella, Alistipes, BCf9-17 termite group and Termite Treponema cluster were observed. The results not only demonstrated a high level of bacterial diversity in the gut and surrounding soil environments, but also presence of distinct bacterial communities that are yet to be cultivated. Therefore, combined efforts using both culture and culture-independent methods are suggested to comprehensively characterize the bacterial species and their specific roles in these environments.

Keywords

References

  1. PLoS One. 2013 Jul 17;8(7):e69184 [PMID: 23874908]
  2. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2012 Jul;78(13):4691-701 [PMID: 22544239]
  3. Environ Microbiol. 2004 May;6(5):462-9 [PMID: 15049919]
  4. Environ Microbiol. 2010 Jul;12(7):1889-98 [PMID: 20236171]
  5. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2007 Apr;71(4):906-15 [PMID: 17420599]
  6. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004 Mar;70(3):1315-20 [PMID: 15006748]
  7. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2013 Nov;104(5):869-83 [PMID: 23942613]
  8. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56464 [PMID: 23437139]
  9. PeerJ. 2014 Aug 21;2:e545 [PMID: 25177538]
  10. Genome Biol. 2007;8(7):R143 [PMID: 17659080]
  11. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2005 Jun;69(6):1145-55 [PMID: 15973046]
  12. Curr Microbiol. 2007 Sep;55(3):254-9 [PMID: 17657534]
  13. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Aug;73(16):5199-208 [PMID: 17574999]
  14. Mol Ecol Resour. 2011 Sep;11(5):759-69 [PMID: 21592312]
  15. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Jan;41(Database issue):D590-6 [PMID: 23193283]
  16. Microb Ecol. 2012 May;63(4):975-85 [PMID: 22173371]
  17. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2012 Feb;79(2):504-17 [PMID: 22092951]
  18. Nat Methods. 2010 May;7(5):335-6 [PMID: 20383131]
  19. Microb Ecol. 2004 Aug;48(2):191-9 [PMID: 15546039]
  20. Mol Ecol. 2014 Sep;23(18):4631-44 [PMID: 25066007]
  21. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005 Dec;71(12):8228-35 [PMID: 16332807]
  22. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2003 Oct;69(10):6007-17 [PMID: 14532056]
  23. J Biotechnol. 2008 Aug 31;136(1-2):3-10 [PMID: 18616967]
  24. J Clin Microbiol. 1990 Sep;28(9):1942-6 [PMID: 2095137]
  25. PLoS One. 2011 Feb 16;6(2):e17000 [PMID: 21359220]
  26. J Bacteriol. 2005 Jun;187(11):3739-51 [PMID: 15901698]
  27. Bioinformatics. 2010 Oct 1;26(19):2460-1 [PMID: 20709691]
  28. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2007 Sep;44(3):953-67 [PMID: 17625919]
  29. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Mar;73(5):1576-85 [PMID: 17220268]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0gutbacterialsoiltermitecommunitysamplesstructurespdiversitymoundssurrounding454speciesTermitesassociatedusingMicrocerotermesMacrotermesmichaelseniOdontotermesMicrotermescorrespondingresultscompositionChao1indexrangedenvironmentsconstitutepartdiverseeconomicallyimportantfaunaAfricainformationmicrobiotamicrobiomestillinadequatestudyassessedcomparedtermites'pyrosequencing-basedanalysis16SrRNAgenesequenceswood-feederthreefungus-cultivatingtermitessavannahanalyzedpHhomogenatesphysico-chemicalpropertiesdeterminedindicatedsignificantdifferenceSoil13592619higherrichness4611527almostidenticaldifferentuniquestructurespredominantphylaBacteroidetes40-58 %Spirochaetes10-70 %Firmicutes17-27 %Fibrobacteres13 %Acidobacteria28-45 %Actinobacteria20-40 %Proteobacteria18-24 %gut-specificlineagesbelonginggeneraDysgonomonasParabacteroidesPaludibacterTannerellaAlistipesBCf9-17groupTermiteTreponemaclusterobserveddemonstratedhighlevelalsopresencedistinctcommunitiesyetcultivatedThereforecombinedeffortscultureculture-independentmethodssuggestedcomprehensivelycharacterizespecificrolesPyrosequencing-basedassessmentgutssoilsPyrosequencingMacrotermitinaeOTUssymbionts

Similar Articles

Cited By