Environmental DNA is made-up of intracellular (iDNA) and extracellular (eDNA) pools. In soils, eDNA can be present up to 40% and could distort the assessment of living microorganisms. Distribution of microbial community is inconsistent among different size-aggregates, and the persistence and turnover of eDNA are thus uneven. Uneven persistence and distribution of eDNA could lead to heterogeneity in community analysis biases that arise due to eDNA sequences at micro-scale distribution. Here, we investigated the diversity and structure of eDNA and iDNA bacterial communities in bulk soil and different size-aggregates. Significant differences were observed between eDNA and iDNA bacterial diversity and composition. Changes in community composition are more important than the amount of eDNA to assess the biases caused by eDNA in community analysis. Furthermore, variations were also observed in aggregates-levels for eDNA and iDNA community which indicates that colonization pattern of iDNA community and protection of eDNA through absorbance on particle surface within soil-matrix is heterogeneous. Our work provides empirical evidence that eDNA presence could mask the detection of aggregates-level spatial dynamics in soil microbial community and have potential to qualitatively baffle observed live effects of given treatment by adequately muting the actual response dynamics of the soil microbiome.

Pathan, S. I., Arfaioli, P., Taskin, E., Ceccherini, M. T., Puglisi, E., Pietramellara, G., The extracellular DNA can baffle the assessment of soil bacterial community, but the effect varies with microscale spatial distribution, <<FEMS MICROBIOLOGY LETTERS>>, 2021; 368 (12): 1-1. [doi:10.1093/femsle/fnab074] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/194020]

The extracellular DNA can baffle the assessment of soil bacterial community, but the effect varies with microscale spatial distribution

Taskin, E.;Puglisi, E.;
2021

Abstract

Environmental DNA is made-up of intracellular (iDNA) and extracellular (eDNA) pools. In soils, eDNA can be present up to 40% and could distort the assessment of living microorganisms. Distribution of microbial community is inconsistent among different size-aggregates, and the persistence and turnover of eDNA are thus uneven. Uneven persistence and distribution of eDNA could lead to heterogeneity in community analysis biases that arise due to eDNA sequences at micro-scale distribution. Here, we investigated the diversity and structure of eDNA and iDNA bacterial communities in bulk soil and different size-aggregates. Significant differences were observed between eDNA and iDNA bacterial diversity and composition. Changes in community composition are more important than the amount of eDNA to assess the biases caused by eDNA in community analysis. Furthermore, variations were also observed in aggregates-levels for eDNA and iDNA community which indicates that colonization pattern of iDNA community and protection of eDNA through absorbance on particle surface within soil-matrix is heterogeneous. Our work provides empirical evidence that eDNA presence could mask the detection of aggregates-level spatial dynamics in soil microbial community and have potential to qualitatively baffle observed live effects of given treatment by adequately muting the actual response dynamics of the soil microbiome.
Inglese
Pathan, S. I., Arfaioli, P., Taskin, E., Ceccherini, M. T., Puglisi, E., Pietramellara, G., The extracellular DNA can baffle the assessment of soil bacterial community, but the effect varies with microscale spatial distribution, <<FEMS MICROBIOLOGY LETTERS>>, 2021; 368 (12): 1-1. [doi:10.1093/femsle/fnab074] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/194020]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/10807/194020
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact