Additions of maize root mucilage to soil changed the structure of the bacterial community

Additions of maize root mucilage to soil changed the structure of the bacterial community
复制标题

DOI:
10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.12.026
复制
发表时间:
2007-05-01
影响因子:
9.7
通讯作者:
Philippot, Laurent
Philippot, Laurent
中科院分区:
农林科学1区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Benizri, Emile;Nguyen, Christophe;Philippot, Laurent

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

从根(根沉积物)释放的有机化合物刺激根际微生物群落的生长。它们可能是根际和土壤中常见微生物群落结构差异的原因。根状沉积物由多种化合物组成,包括根部粘液。本研究的目的是研究在农业土壤中以70mgCg(-1)天(-1)的速度添加玉米根部粘液15d是否会影响细菌群落的结构。粘液的添加适度增加了微生物C(与对照相比增加了23%),这表明消耗该底物的微生物的周转率很高。与此一致,可培养细菌的数量增加了+450%。分解代谢(Biolog((R))GN2)和16S-23S基因间隔区指纹图谱在对照和粘液处理之间显示出显著的差异。这些数据表明,粘液可以影响细菌群落的代谢和遗传结构,表现为碳水化合物更大的分解潜力。我们的结论是,与块状土壤相比,粘液很可能对根际细菌群落结构的差异做出重大贡献。(C)2007爱思唯尔有限公司。保留所有权利。
The organic compounds released from roots (rhizodeposits) stimulate the growth of the rhizosphere microbial community. They may be responsible for the differences in the structure of the microbial communities commonly observed between the rhizosphere and the bulk soil. Rhizodeposits consists of a broad range of compounds including root mucilage. The aim of this study was to investigate if additions of maize root mucilage, at a rate of 70 mu g C g(-1) day(-1) for 15 days, to an agricultural soil could affect the structure of the bacterial community. Mucilage additions moderately increased microbial C (+ 23% increase relative to control), which suggests that the turnover rate of microorganisms consuming this substrate was high. Consistent with this, the number of cultivable bacteria was enhanced by + 450%. Catabolic (Biolog((R)) GN2) and 16S-23S intergenic spacer fingerprints exhibited significant differences between control and mucilage treatments. These data indicate that mucilage can affect both the metabolic and genetic structure of the bacterial community as shown by a greater catabolic potential for carbohydrates. We concluded that mucilage is likely to significantly contribute to differences in the structure of the bacterial communities present in the rhizosphere compared to the bulk soil. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.