Response of birch and alder root endophytes as well as rhizosphere and bulk soil microorganisms to heavy metal pollution

• Autorzy: Złoch M. , Kowalkowski T. , Szymańska S. , Hrynkiewicz K.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Research on soil microorganisms associated with plant roots (endophytes) and their outside habitats (rhizosphere, soil) under exposure to high concentrations of heavy metals in the environment may contribute to an increased knowledge about the effects of unfavorable pollutants in the natural ecosystem and improve the efficiency of remediation processes of degraded soils. The main goal of our study was to evaluate properties of microbial populations inhabiting different but spatially closed habitats: interior of the tree roots – endophytes (Betula pendula L. and Alnus glutinosa L.), rhizosphere and soil not influenced by plant roots at two heavy metal polluted areas in southern Poland where the content of cadmium, lead and zinc ranged 9.2–14.9, 26.2–75.1 and 1080–1559 mg∙kg^-1 of dried soil, respectively. In our experiment, we analyzed their density as well as determined the total metabolic activity and ability for utilization of different carbon sources. The density of endophytes (5.76–7.16 log₁₀ c.f.u. × g dw^-1) was higher than the density of bacteria inhabiting outside habitats – the rhizosphere and soil (5.43–5.91 and 5.08–5.57 log₁₀ c.f.u. × g dw^-1, respectively) and was not affected by heavy metal content. However, the total metabolic activity of endophytic populations was strongly influenced by the physicochemical properties of the soil and was significantly lower at more contaminated site. In general, the metabolic activity of endophytes was ~15 times lower than the activity of rhizobacteria and at the same level or lower than the activity of soil microorganisms. Discriminant analysis revealed a higher utilization of α-Cyclodextrin and D-Xylose by microorganisms isolated from more polluted test site. The use of an artificial neural network (ANN) followed by principal component analysis (PCA) allowed the distinguishing of preferences in the utilization of carbon sources by microorganisms due to tree species but not the zone of isolation – endophytes, rhizosphere, soil. Our study revealed no significant impact of the metal concentrations present in the soil on the density of microorganisms (bacteria and fungi) inhabiting three analyzed zones (interior of the roots, rhziosphere, soil); however, their total metabolic activity was decreased in more contaminated site. Since the density of endophytes was higher compared to the number of bacteria present in the outside habitats (rhizosphere and soil), and their total metabolic activity was in general lower, we suggest a high specialization of microorganisms associated with the cellular spaces of plant roots compared to other microbial populations.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

endophytes; rhizosphere and soil bacteria; total metabolic activity; heavy metal pollution

PL

endofity; bakterie ryzosferowe; bakterie glebowe; aktywność metaboliczna; zanieczyszczenie metalami ciężkimi

• Wydawca: Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: Vol. 62, nr 1
• Strony: 37--53
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 58 poz., il.

Twórcy

autor

Złoch M.

• Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Biology and Environment Protection, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Lwowska 1, 87-100 Torun, Poland

autor

Kowalkowski T.

• Department of Environmental Chemistry and Bioanalytics, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Gagarina 7, 87-100 Toruń, Poland

autor

Szymańska S.

• Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Biology and Environment Protection, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Lwowska 1, 87-100 Torun, Poland

autor

Hrynkiewicz K.

• Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Biology and Environment Protection, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Lwowska 1, 87-100 Torun, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Bååth E., Díaz-Raviña M., Frostegård A., Campbell C.D. 1998 – Effect of metal-rich sludge amendments on the soil microbial community – Appl. Environ. Microb. 64: 238–245.
• 2. Bais H.P., Weir T.L., Perry L.G., Gilroy S., Vivanco J.M. 2006 – The role of root exudates in rhizosphere interactions with plants and other organisms – Ann. Rev. Plant. Biol. 57: 233–266.
• 3. Bardgett R.D., Speir T.W., Ross D.J., Yeates G.W., Kettles H.A. 1994 – Impact of pasture contamination by cooper, chromium, and arsenic timber preservative on soil microbial properties and nematodes – Biol. Fertil. Soils, 18: 71–79.
• 4. Becerra-Castro C., Monterroso C., Prieto-Fernández A., Rodriquez-Lamas L., Loureiro-Viñas M., Acea M.J., Kidd P.S. 2012 – Pseudometallophytes colonizing Pb/Zn mine tailings: A description of the plant-microorganism-rhizosphere soil sys¬tem and isolation of metal-tolerant bacteria – J. Hazard. Mater. 217–218: 350–359.
• 5. Campbell C.D., Grayston S.J., Hirst D.J. 1997 – Use of rhizosphere carbon sources in sole carbon source tests to discriminate soil microbial communities – J. Microbiol. Methods, 30: 33–41.
• 6. Epelde L., Becerril J.M., Hernández-Allica J., Barrutia O., Garbisu C. 2008 – Functional diversity as indicator of the recovery of soil health derived from Thlaspi caerulescens growth and metal phytoextraction – Appl. Soil Ecol. 39: 299–310.
• 7. Dziennik Ustaw 2002, Nr 165, poz. 1359 [The Decree of the Minister of Environment on 9 September 2002 on standards for soil quality] (in Polish).
• 8. Fließbach A., Martens R., Reber H.H. 1994 – Soil microbial biomass and microbial activity in soils treated with heavy metal contaminated sewage sludge – Soil Biol. Biochem. 26: 1201–1205.
• 9. Frostegård Å., Tunlid A., Bååth E. 1996 – Changes in microbial community structure during long-term incubation in two soils experimentally contaminated with metals – Soil Biol. Biochem. 28: 55–63.
• 10. Gao Y., Miao C., Xia J., Mao L., Wang Y., Zhou P. 2012 – Plant diversity reduces the effect of multiple heavy metal pollution on soil enzyme activities and microbial community structure – Front. Environ. Sci. Engin. 6: 213–223.
• 11. Garland J.L. 1997 – Analysis and interpretation of community-level-physiological profiles in microbial ecology – FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 24: 289–300.
• 12. Garland J.L., Mills A.L. 1991 – Classification and characterization of heterotrophic microbial communities on the basis of patterns of community-level-sole-carbon-source-utilization – Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 57: 2351–2359.
• 13. Gleixner G., Kramer C., Hahn V., Sachse D. 2005 – The effect of biodiversity on carbon storage in soils (In: Forest diversity and function: Temperate and boreal systems, Eds: M. Scherer-Lorenzen, Ch. Körner, E.D. Schulze) – Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 165–183.
• 14. Grayston S.J., Campbell C.D. 1996 – Functional biodiversity of microbial communities in the rhizospheres of hybrid larch (Larix eurolepis) and Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) – Tree Physiol. 16: 1031–1038.
• 15. Grayston S.J., Wang S., Campbell C.D., Edwards A.C. 1998 – Selective influence of plant species on microbial diversity in the rhizosphere – Soil Biol. Biochem. 30: 369–378.
• 16. Hallmann J., Berg B. 2007 – Spectrum and population dynamics of bacterial root endophytes (In: Microbial root endophytes, Eds: B.J.E. Schulz, C.J.C. Boyle, T.N. Sieber) – Springer, Berlin, pp. 15–31.
• 17. Hallmann J., Quadt-Hallmann A., Mahaffee W.F., Kloepper J.W. 1997 – Bacterial endophytes in agricultural crops – Can. J. Microbiol. 43: 895–914.
• 18. Hardoim P.R., van Overbeek L.S., van El¬sas J.D. 2008 – Properties of bacterial endophytes and their proposed role in plant growth – Trends in Microbiology, 16: 463–471.
• 19. Hiroki M. 1992 – Effects of heavy metal contamination on soil microbial population – Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 38: 141–147.
• 20. Hrynkiewicz K., Baum C. 2012 – The potential of rhizosphere microorganisms to promote the plant growth in disturbed soils (In: Environmental protection strategies for sustainable development, strategies for sustainability, Eds: A. Malik, E. Grohmann) – Springer, London- New York, pp. 35–64.
• 21. Janniche G.S., Spliid H., Albrechtsen H.J. 2012 – Microbial Community-Level Physiological Profiles (CLPP) and herbicide mineralization potential in groundwater affected by agricultural land use – J. Cont. Hydro. 140–141: 45–55.
• 22. Kamaludeen S.P.B., Ramasamy K. 2008 – Rhizoremediation of metals: harnessing microbial communities – Indian J. Microbiol. 48: 80–88.
• 23. Kapusta P., Szarek-Łukaszewska G., Stefanowicz A.M. 2011 – Direct and indirect effects of metal contamination on soil biota in a Zn-Pb post-mining and smelting area (S Poland) – Environ. Pollut. 159: 1516–1522.
• 24. Kavamura V.N., Esposito E. 2010: Biotechnological strategies applied to the decontamination of soils polluted with heavy metals – Biotech. Adv. 28: 61–69.
• 25. Kelly J.J., Häggblom M., Tate R.L. 1999 – Changes in soil microbial communities over time resulting from one time application of zinc: a laboratory microcosm study – Soil Biol. and Biochem. 31: 1455–1465.
• 26. Kelly J.J., Tate R.L. 1998 – Effects of heavy metal contamination and remediation on soil microbial communities in the vicinity of a zinc smelter – J. Environ. Qual. 27: 609–617.
• 27. Kenarova A., Encheva M., Chipeva V., Chipev N., Hristova P., Moncheva P. 2013 – Physiological diversity of bacterial communities from different soil locations on Livingston Island, South Shetland archipelago, Antarctica – Polar Biol. 36: 223–233.
• 28. Khan M., Sculion J. 2000 – Effect of soil on microbial responses to metal contamination – Environ. Pollut. 110: 115–125.
• 29. Kidd P., Barceló J., Bernal M.P., Navari- Izzo F., Proschenrieder C., Shilev S., Clemente R., Monterroso C. 2009 – Trace element behavior at the root-soil interface: implications in the phytoremediation – Environ. Exp. Bot. 67: 243–259.
• 30. Knight B.P., McGrath S.P., Chaudri A.M. 1997 – Biomass carbon measurements and substrate utilization patterns of microbial populations from soils amended with cadmium, cooper, or zinc – Appl. and Environ. Microb. 63: 39–43.
• 31. Kuffner M., De Maria S., Puschenreiter M., Fallmann K., Wieshammer G., Gorfer M., Strauss J., Rivelli A.R., Sessitsch A. 2010 – Culturable bacteria from Zn- and Cd-accumulating Salix caprea with differential effects on plant growth and heavy metal availability – J. Appl. Microbiol. 108: 1471–1484.
• 32. Kunito T., Saeki K., Nagaoka K., Oyaizu H., Matsumoto S. 2001 – Characterization of Cooper-resistant bacterial community In rhizosphere of highly cooper-contaminated soil – Eur. J. Soil Biol. 37: 95–102.
• 33. Lacava P.T., Araújo W.L., Marcon J., Maccheroni Jr W., Azevedo J.L.2004 – Interaction between endophytic bacteria from citrus plants and the phytopathogenic bacteria Xylella fastidiosa, causal agent of citrus-variegated chlorosis – Let. Appl. Microbiol. 39: 55–59.
• 34. Liao M., Xie X.M. 2007 – Effect of heavy metals on substrate utilization pattern, biomass, and activity of microbial communities in a reclaimed mining wasteland of red soil area – Ecotox. Environ. Safe. 66: 217–223.
• 35. Liao M., Xie X.M., Subhani A., Klose S. 2002 – Combined effect of nutrient and pest managements on substrate utilization pattern of soil microbial population in hybrid rice cropping system – Pedosphere, 12: 129–138.
• 36. Long H.H., Schmidt D.D., Baldwin I.T. 2008 – Native bacterial endophytes promote host growth in a species-specific manner; phytohormone manipulations do not result in common growth responses – PLoS ONE 3: e2702. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002702.
• 37. Long X.X., Chen X., Chen Y., Wong J.W.C., Wei Z., Wu, Q. 2011 – Isolation and characterization endophytic bacteria from hyperaccumulator Sedum alfredii Hance and their potential to promote phytoextraction of zinc polluted soil – World J. Microbiol. Bio¬tech. 27: 1197–1207.
• 38. Luo S., Chen L., Chen J., Xiao X., Xu T., Wan Y., Rao C., Liu C., Liu Y., Lai C., Zeng G. 2011 – Analysis and characterization of cultivable heavy metal-resistant bacterial endophytes isolated from Cd-hyperaccumulator Solanum nigrum L. and their potential use for phytoremediation – Chemosphere, 85: 1130–1138.
• 39. Ma Y., Prasad M.N.V., Rajkumar M., Freitas H. 2011 – Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and endophytes accelerate phytoremediation of metalliferous soils – Biotech. Adv. 29: 248–258.
• 40. Malik A. 2004 – Metal bioremediation through growing cells – Environ. Inter. 30:261–278.
• 41. Mao Y., Sun M., Yang X., Wei H., Song Y., Xin J. 2013 – Remediation of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) contaminated soil by successive hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin and peanut oil enhanced soil washing–nutrient addition: a laboratory evaluation – J. Soils Sediments, 13: 403–412.
• 42. McGrath S.P. 1987 – Long-term studies of metal transfers following application of sewage sludge (In: Pollutant transport and fate in ecosystems, Eds: P.J. Coughtrey, M.H. Martin, M.H. Unsworth) – Br. Ecol. Soc. Spec. Publ. No. 6, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 301–317.
• 43. Muhammad A., Xu J., Li Z., Wang H., Yao H. 2005 – Effect of lead and cadmium nitrate on biomass and substrate utilization pattern of soil microbial communities – Che¬mosphere, 60: 508–514.
• 44. Müller A.K., Westergaard K., Christensen S., Sørensen S.J. 2001 – The effect of long-term mercury pollution on the soil microbial community – FEMS Microbiol. Eco. 36: 11–19
• 45. Newman L.A., Reynolds C.M. 2005 – Bac¬teria and phytoremediation: new uses for endophytic bacteria in plants – Trend. Biotechnol. 23: 6–8.
• 46. Nguyen C. 2003 – Rhizodeposition of organic C by plants: mechanisms and controls – Agronomie, 23: 375–396.
• 47. Niemeyer J.C., Lolata G.B., de Carvalho G.M., Da Silva E.M., Sousa J.P., Nogueira M.A. 2012 – Microbial indicators of soil health as tools for ecological risk assess¬ment of a metal contaminated site in Brazil – Appl. Soil Ecol. 59: 96–105.
• 48. Nies D.H. 2000 – Heavy metal-resistant bacteria as extremophiles: molecular physiology and biotechnological use of Ralstonia sp. CH34 – Extremophiles, 4: 77–82.
• 49. Pennanen T., Frostegård Å., Fritze H., Bååth E. 1996 – Phospholipid fatty acid composition and heavy metal tolerance of soil microbial communities along two heavy metal polluted gradients in coniferous forests – Appl. Environ. Microb. 62: 420–428.
• 50. Preston-Mafham J., Boddy L., Rander¬son P.F. 2002 – Analysis of microbial community functional diversity using sole-carbon source utilization profiles- a critique – FEMS microbial. Ecol. 42: 1–14.
• 51. Rajkumar M., Ae N., Freitas H. 2009 – Endophytic bacteria and their potential to enhance heavy metal phytoextraction – Chemosphere, 77: 153–160.
• 52. Stefanowicz A.M. 2006 – The Biolog plates technique as a tool in ecological studies of microbial communities – Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 15: 669–676.
• 53. Stefanowicz A.M., Niklińska M., Kapusta P., Szarek-Łukaszewicz G. 2010 – Pine forest and grassland differently influence the response of soil microbial communities to metal contamination – Sci. Total Environ. 408: 6134–6141.
• 54. Sułowicz S., Płociniczak T., Piotrowska- Seget Z., Kozdrój J. 2011 – Significance of silver birch and bushgrass for establishment of microbial heterotrophic community in a metal-mine spoil heap – Water Air Soil Pollut. 214: 205–218.
• 55. Szymańska S., Piernik A., Hrynkiewicz K. 2013 – Metabolic potential of microorganisms associated with the halophyte Aster tripolium L. in saline soils– Ecological Questions, 18: 9–19.
• 56. Yamamoto H., Tatsuyama K., Egawa H., Furuta T. 1981 – Microflora in soils polluted by Cooper mine drainage – J. Sci. Soil Manure, 52: 119–124.
• 57. Yao H., He Z., Wilson M.J., Campbell C.D. 2000 – Microbial biomass and community structure in a sequence of soils with increasing fertility and changing land use – Microb. Ecol. 40: 223–237.
• 58. Yao H.Y., Xu J.M., Huang C.Y. 2003 – Substrate utilization pattern, biomass and activity of microbial communities in a sequence of heavy metal-polluted paddy soils – Geoderma, 115: 139–148.