Comparison of phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) and total soil fatty acid methyl esters (TSFAME) for characterizing soil microbial communities
Comparison of phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) and total soil fatty acid methyl esters (TSFAME) for characterizing soil microbial communities
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.soilbio.2004.05.002
复制
发表时间：
2004-11-01
影响因子：
9.7
通讯作者：
Scow, KM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Drenovsky, RE;Elliott, GN;Scow, KM
磷脂脂肪酸（PLFA）和总土壤脂肪酸甲酯（TSFAME），这两种基于脂质的方法用于表征微生物群落，进行了比较，其可靠的检测限，提取精度，并区分农业土壤的能力。两组土壤样品，代表七种作物类型从加州的中央谷，提取使用PLFA和TSFAME程序。PLFA分析需要比TSFAME分析多10倍的土壤，以获得可靠的微生物群落指纹和总脂肪酸含量测量。虽然最初用TSFAME提取的土壤较少，但TSFAME提取的样品中总脂肪酸（FA）含量g（-1）土壤（DW）比PLFA提取的样品高7倍以上。TSFAME分析的样品提取精度比PLFA分析低得多，TSFAME提取的重复之间的变异系数高达4倍。PLFA和TSFAME提取的样品之间有显着差异时，生物标志物池大小（摩尔%值）的细菌，放线菌和真菌进行了比较。PLFA和TSFAME样品的对应分析（CA）表明，提取方法对样品FA组成的影响最大。土壤类型也影响FA组成，样品分组的土壤类型与两种提取方法。然而，PLFA和TSFAME提取样品的单独CA描绘了基础样品分组的强烈差异。提出并讨论了萃取方法选择的建议。(C)2004 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。
Phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) and total soil fatty acid methyl esters (TSFAME), both lipid-based approaches used to characterize microbial communities, were compared with respect to their reliable detection limits, extraction precision, and ability to differentiate agricultural soils. Two sets of soil samples, representing seven crop types from California's Central Valley, were extracted using PLFA and TSFAME procedures. PLFA analysis required 10 times more soil than TSFAME analysis to obtain a reliable microbial community fingerprint and total fatty acid content measurement. Although less soil initially was extracted with TSFAME, total fatty acid (FA) content g(-1) soil (DW) was more than 7-fold higher in TSFAME- versus PLFA-extracted samples. Sample extraction precision was much lower with TSFAME analysis than PLFA analysis, with the coefficient of variation between replicates being as much as 4-fold higher with TSFAME extraction. There were significant differences between PLFA- and TSFAME-extracted samples when biomarker pool sizes (mol% values) for bacteria, actinomycetes, and fungi were compared. Correspondence analysis (CA) of PLFA and TSFAME samples indicated that extraction method had the greatest influence on sample FA composition. Soil type also influenced FA composition, with samples grouping by soil type with both extraction methods. However, separate CAs of PLFA- and TSFAME extracted samples depicted strong differences in underlying sample groupings. Recommendations for the selection of extraction method are presented and discussed. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.