鄯善库木塔格沙漠北缘细菌群落结构特征及影响因素

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2023.08.16

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

鄯善库木塔格沙漠是一个与城市相连的沙漠，蕴含着丰富独特的微生物菌株资源。为了探究鄯善库木塔格沙漠的微生物群落结构以及其与环境因子之间的关系，采集了鄯善库木塔格沙漠北缘4个样点的表层（0~5 cm）和深层（45~50 cm）的沙土样本，并测定了其含水量（WC）、pH、总碳（TC）、总氮（TN）、总有机碳（TOC）和电导率（EC）；利用高通量测序技术，研究不同采样点、不同深度沙土样本的细菌群落结构；运用Spearman相关性分析环境因子和细菌群落结构之间的相关性，探讨影响细菌群落结构的主要因素。结果表明：鄯善库木塔格沙漠北缘沙土样本呈碱性；门水平上的优势菌是放线菌（Actinobacteria）、厚壁菌（Firmicutes）和变形菌（Proteobacteria），属水平上的优势菌是unclassified_f__Micrococcaceae、Bacillus、Sphingomonas、Escherichia-Shigella。PCoA分析表明，鄯善库木塔格沙漠北缘不同样点之间的细菌群落结构存在显著差异（P<0.05）；表层和深层样本的物种多样性没有显著差异。RDA分析表明，WC、TC、TN和pH显著影响表层样本的细菌群落结构（P<0.05），TOC含量显著影响深层样本的细菌群落结构（P<0.05）。本研究为后期鄯善库木塔格沙漠及相似生境中微生物资源的发掘提供了理论依据。

关键词: 鄯善库木塔格沙漠, 高通量测序, 细菌群落结构, 环境因子, 理化性质

Abstract:

The Shanshan Kumtag Desert, which is connected to the city, contains rich and unique microbial resources. To explore the microbial community structure and its relationship with environmental factors in the Shanshan Kumtag Desert, surface (0-5 cm) and deep (45-50 cm) layer sand samples were collected from four points along the northern margin of the desert. Subsequently, the collected samples were analyzed to determine the water content (WC), pH, total carbon (TC), total nitrogen (TN), total organic carbon (TOC), and electrical conductivity. High-throughput sequencing technology was used to analyze the bacterial community structure of the sand samples, and Spearman correlation was used to analyze the correlation between environmental factors and the bacterial community structure. The results showed that the collected sand samples were alkaline, and the dominant bacterial phyla were Actinobacteria, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, and Bacteroidetes. Among these, the dominant genera were unclassified_f__Micrococcaceae, Bacillus, Sphingomonas, Escherichia-Shigella, and Microbacterium. Significant differences in the bacterial community structure were observed among the different points along the northern margin of the Shanshan Kumtag Desert (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference in species diversity was observed between the surface and deep layer samples. Furthermore, WC, TC, TN, and pH significantly affected the bacterial community structure in the surface samples (P < 0.05), while TOC significantly affected the bacterial community structure in the deep samples (P < 0.05). This study provides a theoretical basis for exploring microbial resources in the Shanshan Kumtag Desert and similar habitats.

Key words: Shanshan Kumtag Desert, high-throughput sequencing, bacterial community structure, environmental factors, physicochemical property

李娟, 刘阳, 刘光琇, 程亮, 郭青云, 张威, 章高森. 鄯善库木塔格沙漠北缘细菌群落结构特征及影响因素[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(8): 1358-1368.

LI Juan, LIU Yang, LIU Guangxiu, CHENG Liang, GUO Qingyun, ZHANG Wei, ZHANG Gaosen. Study on bacterial community structure and influencing factors in the northern margin of the Shanshan Kumtag Desert[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(8): 1358-1368.

图/表 9

图1

表1

图2

图3

图4

表2

图5

图6

图7

参考文献 36

[1]	Makhalanyane T P, Valverde A, Gunnigle E, et al. Microbial ecology of hot desert edaphic systems[J]. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 2015, 39(2): 203-221. doi: 10.1093/femsre/fuu011 pmid: 25725013
[2]	吴晋峰, 王鑫, 郭峰, 等. 库姆塔格沙漠风沙地貌遗产美学价值评价[J]. 中国沙漠, 2012, 32(5): 1451-1456.
	[ Wu Jinfeng, Wang Xin, Guo Feng, et al. Aesthetic value of aeolian geomorphosites in the Kumtagh Desert, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2012, 32(5): 1451-1456. ]
[3]	阿不都克里木·热依木, 古丽米热·热孜. 新疆鄯善产淀粉酶沙漠放线菌的生长特性研究[J]. 新疆师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2007, 26(2): 77-79.
	[ Abdukerim Reyimu, Gulmira Rezi. The study of the growth characteristic of amylase productive desert Actinomycetes in Shanshan Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Xinjiang Normal University (Natural Science Edition), 2007, 26(2): 77-79. ]
[4]	Davis K E R, Joseph S J, Janssen P H. Effects of growth medium, inoculum size, and incubation time on culturability and isolation of soil bacteria[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2005, 71(2): 826-834. pmid: 15691937
[5]	Ravi R K, Walton K, Khosroheidari M. MiSeq: A next generation sequencing platform for genomic analysis[C]// DiStefano J K. Disease Gene Identification. New York: Humana Press, 2018.
[6]	An S, Couteau C Fau-Luo F, Luo F Fau-Neveu J, et al. Bacterial diversity of surface sand samples from the Gobi and Taklamaken Deserts[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2013, 66(4): 850-860. doi: 10.1007/s00248-013-0276-2 pmid: 23963222
[7]	Mogul R, Vaishampayan P, Bashir M, et al. Microbial community and biochemical dynamics of biological soil crusts across a gradient of surface coverage in the central Mojave Desert[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2017, 8: 1974-1974. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01974 pmid: 29109701
[8]	Sun Y, Shi Y L, Wang H, et al. Diversity of bacteria and the characteristics of actinobacteria community structure in Badain Jaran Desert and Tengger Desert of China[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2018, 9: 1068. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01068 pmid: 29875762
[9]	Zhang K, Shi Y, Cui X, et al. Salinity is a key determinant for soil microbial communities in a desert ecosystem[J]. mSystems, 2019, 4(1): e00225-00218.
[10]	Zhou J, Xia B, Treves D S, et al. Spatial and resource factors influencing high microbial diversity in soil[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2002, 68(1): 326-334. doi: 10.1128/AEM.68.1.326-334.2002 pmid: 11772642
[11]	张哲瑄, 夏占峰, 张利莉. 基于Illumina MiSeq 测序技术的塔克拉玛干沙漠东缘细菌多样性分析[J]. 微生物学通报, 2021, 48(9): 2941-2955.
	[ Zhang Zhexuan, Xia Zhanfeng, Zhang Lili. Diversity of soil bacterial communities in the eastern margin of the Taklimakan Desert based on Illumina MiSeq sequencing technology[J]. Journal of Microbiology, 2021, 48(9): 2941-2955. ]
[12]	Zhao K, Yang D, Zeng P, et al. Effect of water content on the failure pattern and acoustic emission characteristics of red sandstone[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2021, 142: 104709. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2021.104709
[13]	Li S, Lei X, Qin L, et al. Fe(III) reduction due to low pe+pH contributes to reducing Cd transfer within a soil-rice system[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2021, 415: 125668. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125668
[14]	Liebner S, Rublack K, Stuehrmann T, et al. Diversity of aerobic methanotrophic bacteria in a permafrost active layer soil of the Lena Delta, Siberia[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2009, 57: 25-35. doi: 10.1007/s00248-008-9411-x pmid: 18592300
[15]	Caporaso J G, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data[J]. Nature Methods, 2010, 7(5): 335-336. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.f.303 pmid: 20383131
[16]	Liu Y, Chen T, Li J, et al. High proportions of radiation-resistant strains in the culturable bacteria from Taklimakan Desert[J]. Biology, 2022, 11(4): 501. doi: 10.3390/biology11040501
[17]	刘乐汉, 吕杰, 马媛, 等. 古尔班通古特沙漠藻类结皮中微生物群落空间分异特征[J]. 生态学报, 2023, 43(4): 1-13.
	[ Liu Yuehan, Lü Jie, Ma Yuan, et al. Spatial differentiation of microbial communities in Gurbantunggut Desert algae crust, Xinjiang, China[J]. Ecological Sinica, 2023, 43(4): 1-13. ]
[18]	Lauber C L, Hamady M, Knight R, et al. Pyrosequencing-based assessment of soil pH as a predictor of soil bacterial community structure at the continental scale[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2009, 75(15): 5111-5120. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00335-09 pmid: 19502440
[19]	Bahadur A, Zhang W, Sajjad W, et al. Bacterial diversity patterns of desert dunes in the northeastern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, China[J]. Archives of Microbiology, 2021, 203: 2809-2823. doi: 10.1007/s00203-021-02272-z pmid: 33730221
[20]	Zhang W, Bahadur A, Zhang G S, et al. Diverse bacterial communities from Qaidam Basin of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau: Insights into variations in bacterial diversity across different regions[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2020, 11: 554105. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.554105
[21]	李靖宇, 张琇. 腾格里沙漠不同生物土壤结皮微生物多样性分析[J]. 生态科学, 2017, 36(3): 36-42.
	[ Li Jinyu, Zhang Xiu. Microbial diversity analysis of different biological soil crusts in Tengger Desert[J]. Ecological Science, 2017, 36(3): 36-42. ]
[22]	Mogul R, Vaishampayan P, Bashir M, et al. Microbial community and biochemical dynamics of biological soil crusts across a gradient of surface coverage in the central Mojave Desert[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2017, 8: 1974-1974. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01974 pmid: 29109701
[23]	Miao V, Davies J. Actinobacteria: The good, the bad, and the ugly[J]. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 2010, 98(2): 143-150. doi: 10.1007/s10482-010-9440-6
[24]	Eisenlord S D, Zak D R. Simulated atmospheric nitrogen deposition alters actinobacterial community composition in forest soils[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2010, 74(4): 1157-1166. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2009.0240
[25]	El-Tarabily K A, Sivasithamparam K. Non-streptomycete actinomycetes as biocontrol agents of soil-borne fungal plant pathogens and as plant growth promoters[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2006, 38(7): 1505-1520. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.12.017
[26]	张凯军, 姜鹏飞, 王军, 等. 不同温度对中华绒螯蟹生长及肠道微生物菌群的影响[J]. 上海海洋大学学报, 2022, 31(2): 384-393.
	[ Zhang Kaijun, Jiang Pengfei, Wang Jun, et al. Effects of different temperatures on growth and gut microbiota of Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis)[J]. Journal of Shanghai Ocean University, 2022, 31(2): 384-393. ]
[27]	Benabdelkader S, Ibrahima L C, Naud S, et al. Collinsella provencensis sp. nov. a new species identified from healthy human gut microbiota[J]. New Microbes and New Infections, 2018, 23: 44-47. doi: 10.1016/j.nmni.2018.02.003
[28]	Derakshani M, Lukow T, Liesack W. Novel bacterial lineages at the (sub) division level as detected by signature nucleotide-targeted recovery of 16S rRNA genes from bulk soil and rice roots of flooded rice microcosms[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2001, 67: 623-631. pmid: 11157225
[29]	Harris J K, Caporaso J G, Walker J J, et al. Phylogenetic stratigraphy in the Guerrero Negro hypersaline microbial mat[J]. ISME Journal, 2013, 7: 50-60. doi: 10.1038/ismej.2012.79 pmid: 22832344
[30]	Watanabe T, Kojima H, Fukui M. Identity of major sulfur-cycle prokaryotes in freshwater lake ecosystems revealed by a comprehensive phylogenetic study of the dissimilatory adenylylsulfate reductase[J]. Scientific Report, 2016, 6: 36262.
[31]	Lau M C Y, Aitchison J C, Pointing S B. Bacterial community composition in thermophilic microbial mats from five hot springs in central Tibet[J]. Extremophiles, 2009, 13: 139-149. doi: 10.1007/s00792-008-0205-3 pmid: 19023516
[32]	Direito S O L, Ehrenfreund P, Marees A, et al. A wide variety of putative extremophiles and large beta-diversity at the Mars Desert research station (Utah)[J]. International Journal of Astrobiology, 2011, 10: 191-207. doi: 10.1017/S1473550411000012
[33]	Rivière D, Desvignes V, Pelletier E, et al. Towards the definition of a core of microorganisms involved in anaerobic digestion of sludge[J]. ISME Journal, 2009, 3: 700-714. doi: 10.1038/ismej.2009.2 pmid: 19242531
[34]	Bouali M, Zrafi I, Bakhrouf A, et al. Bacterial structure and spatiotemporal distribution in a horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetland[J]. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2014, 98: 3191-3203. doi: 10.1007/s00253-013-5341-8 pmid: 24193248
[35]	Fang Y, Yuan Y, Liu J, et al. Casting light on the adaptation mechanisms and evolutionary history of the widespread Sumerlaeota[J]. mBio, 2021, 12(2): e00350-21.
[36]	Fuentes B, Choque A, Gómez F, et al. Influence of physical-chemical soil parameters on microbiota composition and diversity in a deep hyperarid core of the Atacama Desert[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2022, 12: 794743. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.794743

样本名称	WC	pH	EC/(mS·cm^-1)	TN/%	TC/%	TOC/%
K1_1_S	0.64	9.46	150	0.040	0.670	0.281
K1_2_S	1.30	9.49	143	0.035	0.745	0.321
K1_3_S	1.55	9.67	171	0.044	0.732	0.300
K2_1_S	0.52	8.66	334	0.040	0.485	0.197
K2_2_S	0.53	8.8	350	0.037	0.409	0.196
K2_3_S	0.42	8.98	236	0.029	0.494	0.182
K3_1_S	0.72	9.14	594	0.033	0.383	0.238
K3_2_S	0.53	9.21	523	0.029	0.438	0.160
K3_3_S	0.49	9.22	616	0.030	0.336	0.178
K4_1_S	0.47	9.42	258	0.026	0.513	0.185
K4_2_S	0.37	9.3	282	0.032	0.613	0.236
K4_3_S	0.30	9.32	408	0.043	0.508	0.189
K1_1_D	0.28	8.89	663	0.034	0.616	0.235
K1_2_D	0.35	8.83	633	0.037	0.516	0.231
K1_3_D	0.26	8.97	278	0.035	0.688	0.247
K2_1_D	0.26	9.17	345	0.021	0.430	0.161
K2_2_D	0.35	9.06	332	0.027	0.456	0.214
K2_3_D	0.28	9.05	358	0.021	0.353	0.152
K3_1_D	0.34	9.29	406	0.029	0.527	0.139
K3_2_D	0.45	9.29	424	0.028	0.385	0.128
K3_3_D	0.56	9.35	287	0.042	0.408	0.176
K4_1_D	0.25	8.76	334	0.034	0.571	0.215
K4_2_D	0.35	8.81	282	0.026	0.498	0.220
K4_3_D	0.37	8.64	466	0.037	0.510	0.211

样本名称	香农指数	辛普森指数	ACE指数	Chao 1指数	覆盖度/%	系统发育树多样性指数
K1_1_S	2.390	0.215	254.967	262.154	1.000	31.200
K1_2_S	2.766	0.143	336.400	338.813	0.999	43.398
K1_3_S	1.974	0.215	315.097	318.561	0.999	32.058
K2_1_S	2.277	0.317	284.391	284.000	1.000	32.017
K2_2_S	1.862	0.386	220.833	222.688	1.000	28.580
K2_3_S	3.583	0.156	616.427	633.067	0.999	79.401
K3_1_S	2.622	0.170	245.595	249.200	1.000	31.607
K3_2_S	2.468	0.233	409.968	413.000	1.000	53.739
K3_3_S	2.114	0.247	182.997	184.500	1.000	22.578
K4_1_S	3.922	0.138	776.334	780.650	0.999	81.842
K4_2_S	2.277	0.302	418.711	435.719	0.999	45.497
K4_3_S	3.251	0.105	657.699	662.017	0.999	73.443
K1_1_D	2.856	0.258	504.457	508.081	0.999	51.449
K1_2_D	3.986	0.068	638.214	643.000	0.999	57.332
K1_3_D	2.827	0.155	579.787	599.192	0.998	48.243
K2_1_D	1.843	0.425	230.223	230.273	1.000	31.763
K2_2_D	2.760	0.147	291.824	304.214	0.999	32.989
K2_3_D	1.989	0.342	187.780	187.000	1.000	31.652
K3_1_D	2.350	0.345	389.315	407.083	1.000	59.362
K3_2_D	1.921	0.331	229.616	231.929	1.000	30.269
K3_3_D	2.260	0.278	306.728	308.120	0.999	37.188
K4_1_D	3.134	0.112	468.690	468.333	0.999	63.828
K4_2_D	2.626	0.163	335.807	338.043	1.000	36.498
K4_3_D	2.114	0.296	227.945	226.688	1.000	26.739