Assessing soil biological characteristics:: a comparison of bulk soil community DNA-, PLFA-, and Biolog™-analyses

被引:115
作者
Widmer, F
Fliessbach, A
Laczkó, E
Schulze-Aurich, J
Zeyer, J
机构
[1] ETH Zurich, Inst Terr Ecol Soil Biol, CH-8952 Schlieren, Switzerland
[2] FIBL, Dept Soil & Plant Nutr, CH-5070 Frick, Switzerland
[3] SOLVIT Environm Microbiol, CH-6005 Lucern, Switzerland
[4] Novartis Crop Protection Inc, CH-4002 Basel, Switzerland
关键词
soil quality; soil biology; community level physiological profile; CLPP; community changes;
D O I
10.1016/S0038-0717(01)00006-2
中图分类号
S15 [土壤学];
学科分类号
0903 ; 090301 ;
摘要
Soil microbiological analyses may serve as a means for assessing soil characteristics. Standard microbiological culture-techniques, however, leave over 90% of the microorganisms in the environment unaccounted for. Several more recently developed analytical techniques such as DNA, phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA), and community level substrate utilization (CLSU) fingerprints allow for more detailed analyses of soil microbial communities. We applied analyses of(l) community DNA with PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), (2) community PLFAs with gas chromatography and mass spectrometry, and (3) CLSU with Biolog (TM) gram-negative-plates. to evaluate the biological characteristics of three soils used in pesticide degradation studies. Each of these methods analyzes a different aspect of soil microbial characteristics. A protocol was developed for the statistical comparison and combination of the data from all the analyses, thus allowing for a polyphasic approach to biological soil characterization. We found that all three methods yielded highly reproducible results for each soil and allowed to distinguish the soils based on the structures of specific gene- and PLFA-pools as well as on CLSU fingerprints. Not all methods, however, revealed the same relative similarities of the three soils based on cluster analysis of the biological characteristics. These results demonstrate the value of comparative data analyses and indicate that biological soil characterization needs to be interpreted with caution if it is performed with one method only. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1029 / 1036
页数:8
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]   PHYLOGENETIC IDENTIFICATION AND IN-SITU DETECTION OF INDIVIDUAL MICROBIAL-CELLS WITHOUT CULTIVATION [J].
AMANN, RI ;
LUDWIG, W ;
SCHLEIFER, KH .
MICROBIOLOGICAL REVIEWS, 1995, 59 (01) :143-169
[2]  
Bååth E, 1998, APPL ENVIRON MICROB, V64, P238
[3]  
BLIGH EG, 1959, CAN J BIOCHEM PHYS, V37, P911
[4]  
BOCHNER B, 1989, ASM NEWS, V55, P536
[5]   Determinants of soil microbial communities: Effects of agricultural management, season, and soil type on phospholipid fatty acid profiles [J].
Bossio, DA ;
Scow, KM ;
Gunapala, N ;
Graham, KJ .
MICROBIAL ECOLOGY, 1998, 36 (01) :1-12
[6]   Comparison of substrate utilization assay and fatty acid analysis of soil microbial communities [J].
Buyer, JS ;
Drinkwater, LE .
JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS, 1997, 30 (01) :3-11
[7]   Analysis of broad-scale differences in microbial community composition of two pristine forest soils [J].
Chatzinotas, A ;
Sandaa, RA ;
Schönhuber, W ;
Amann, R ;
Daae, FL ;
Torsvik, V ;
Zeyer, J ;
Hahn, D .
SYSTEMATIC AND APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY, 1998, 21 (04) :579-587
[8]   Comparison of parental and transgenic alfalfa rhizosphere bacterial communities using Biolog GN metabolic fingerprinting and enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus sequence-PCR (ERIC-PCR) [J].
Di Giovanni G.D. ;
Watrud L.S. ;
Seidler R.J. ;
Widmer F. .
Microbial Ecology, 1999, 37 (2) :129-139
[9]  
ELLIS RJ, 1995, FEMS MICROBIOL ECOL, V16, P9, DOI 10.1111/j.1574-6941.1995.tb00263.x
[10]  
FLIESSBACH A, 1996, MICROBIAL COMMUNITIE, P109