16S metabarcoding, total soil DNA content, and functional bacterial genes quantification to characterize soils under long-term organic and conventional farming systems

IF 5.2 2区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture Pub Date : 2023-08-11 DOI:10.1186/s40538-023-00450-3
Laura Maretto, Saptarathi Deb, Samathmika Ravi, Maria Cristina Della Lucia, Matteo Borella, Giovanni Campagna, Andrea Squartini, Giuseppe Concheri, Serenella Nardi, Piergiorgio Stevanato
{"title":"16S metabarcoding, total soil DNA content, and functional bacterial genes quantification to characterize soils under long-term organic and conventional farming systems","authors":"Laura Maretto,&nbsp;Saptarathi Deb,&nbsp;Samathmika Ravi,&nbsp;Maria Cristina Della Lucia,&nbsp;Matteo Borella,&nbsp;Giovanni Campagna,&nbsp;Andrea Squartini,&nbsp;Giuseppe Concheri,&nbsp;Serenella Nardi,&nbsp;Piergiorgio Stevanato","doi":"10.1186/s40538-023-00450-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The threatening impact of conventional agriculture (CA) on soils could be due to the detrimental effects on soil microbial communities. Conversely, organic agriculture (OA) is envisaged as potentially enhancing helpful microbial communities and is proposed as environmentally sustainable. The soil microbiome influences soil health and quality, hence, it requires deeper investigation and understanding. In this study, applying 16S metabarcoding and qPCR techniques, we compared the microbial patterns of long-term organically and conventionally managed soils to explore their similarities and differences.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Total DNA quantification showed an over 20-fold higher amount of DNA in OA soils (mean = 22.1 ± 3.92 μg g<sup>−1</sup>), compared to CA soils (mean = 0.95 ± 0.17 μg g<sup>−1</sup>). While 16S metabarcoding evidenced the absence of significant differences among communities of the two farming systems in terms of ecological indices, the qPCR analyses targeting functional genes reported a significantly higher abundance of all considered targets in OA sites spanning up to four-fold log increases. While OA and CA did not appear to affect overall bacterial diversity or evenness per se, qPCR-based functional analysis in OA showed a consistently higher abundance of all the salient microbial genes tested, when compared to CA, underlying a potentially beneficial impact on soil fertility and sustainability.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In essence, the sequencing-based analysis of absolute bacterial diversity could not differentiate the farming systems based on the amount of diversity but identified a unique set of taxa defining each. Hence, pairing this evaluation with the qPCR-based functional gene analyses can be a suitable approach to distinguish the exerted effects of CA or OA on soils.</p><h3>Graphical Abstract</h3>\n <figure><div><div><div><picture><source><img></source></picture></div></div></div></figure>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":512,"journal":{"name":"Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://chembioagro.springeropen.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s40538-023-00450-3","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40538-023-00450-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The threatening impact of conventional agriculture (CA) on soils could be due to the detrimental effects on soil microbial communities. Conversely, organic agriculture (OA) is envisaged as potentially enhancing helpful microbial communities and is proposed as environmentally sustainable. The soil microbiome influences soil health and quality, hence, it requires deeper investigation and understanding. In this study, applying 16S metabarcoding and qPCR techniques, we compared the microbial patterns of long-term organically and conventionally managed soils to explore their similarities and differences.

Results

Total DNA quantification showed an over 20-fold higher amount of DNA in OA soils (mean = 22.1 ± 3.92 μg g−1), compared to CA soils (mean = 0.95 ± 0.17 μg g−1). While 16S metabarcoding evidenced the absence of significant differences among communities of the two farming systems in terms of ecological indices, the qPCR analyses targeting functional genes reported a significantly higher abundance of all considered targets in OA sites spanning up to four-fold log increases. While OA and CA did not appear to affect overall bacterial diversity or evenness per se, qPCR-based functional analysis in OA showed a consistently higher abundance of all the salient microbial genes tested, when compared to CA, underlying a potentially beneficial impact on soil fertility and sustainability.

Conclusions

In essence, the sequencing-based analysis of absolute bacterial diversity could not differentiate the farming systems based on the amount of diversity but identified a unique set of taxa defining each. Hence, pairing this evaluation with the qPCR-based functional gene analyses can be a suitable approach to distinguish the exerted effects of CA or OA on soils.

Graphical Abstract

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
16S元条形码,土壤总DNA含量和功能细菌基因定量表征土壤在长期有机和传统耕作系统
传统农业对土壤的威胁可能是由于对土壤微生物群落的不利影响。相反,有机农业(OA)被设想为潜在地增强有益的微生物群落,并被提议为环境可持续发展。土壤微生物群影响土壤的健康和质量,需要深入研究和认识。本研究采用16S元条形码和qPCR技术,比较了长期有机管理和常规管理土壤的微生物模式,探讨了它们的异同。结果OA土壤的DNA含量(平均22.1±3.92 μg−1)是CA土壤(平均0.95±0.17 μg−1)的20倍以上。虽然16S元条形码证明了两种耕作系统的群落之间在生态指数方面没有显著差异,但针对功能基因的qPCR分析报告了OA位点中所有考虑目标的丰度显著更高,增加了4倍。虽然OA和CA本身似乎并不影响总体细菌多样性或均匀性,但基于qpcr的功能分析显示,与CA相比,OA中所有显着微生物基因的丰度始终较高,这可能对土壤肥力和可持续性产生有益影响。结论从本质上讲,基于测序的绝对细菌多样性分析不能根据多样性的数量来区分不同的养殖系统,而是鉴定出一组独特的分类群。因此,将这一评价与基于qpcr的功能基因分析相结合,可能是区分CA或OA对土壤施加影响的合适方法。图形抽象
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture
Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biotechnology
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
3.00%
发文量
83
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture is an international, interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed forum for the advancement and application to all fields of agriculture of modern chemical, biochemical and molecular technologies. The scope of this journal includes chemical and biochemical processes aimed to increase sustainable agricultural and food production, the evaluation of quality and origin of raw primary products and their transformation into foods and chemicals, as well as environmental monitoring and remediation. Of special interest are the effects of chemical and biochemical technologies, also at the nano and supramolecular scale, on the relationships between soil, plants, microorganisms and their environment, with the help of modern bioinformatics. Another special focus is the use of modern bioorganic and biological chemistry to develop new technologies for plant nutrition and bio-stimulation, advancement of biorefineries from biomasses, safe and traceable food products, carbon storage in soil and plants and restoration of contaminated soils to agriculture. This journal presents the first opportunity to bring together researchers from a wide number of disciplines within the agricultural chemical and biological sciences, from both industry and academia. The principle aim of Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture is to allow the exchange of the most advanced chemical and biochemical knowledge to develop technologies which address one of the most pressing challenges of our times - sustaining a growing world population. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture publishes original research articles, short letters and invited reviews. Articles from scientists in industry, academia as well as private research institutes, non-governmental and environmental organizations are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Integrated metabolome and transcriptome analyses provide comprehensive insight into dark- and light-responsive mechanisms in Althaea officinalis hairy root cultures Microbiologically modified bioorganic fertilizer and metal-tolerant Bacillus sp. MN54 regulate the nutrient homeostasis and boost phytoextraction efficiency of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) in nickel-contaminated soil Enhanced phytoremediation of Cd-contaminated soil by Solanum nigrum L. through the addition of earthworm and organic wastes Reduction of oxidative damage caused by Fusarium falciforme and Fusarium foetens in schefflera plants using chitosan nanoparticles loaded with l-proline or indole butyric acid The auxin-like effect of substrate and auxin sensitivity of plant modulate the PGPR activity of Lysinibacillus pinottii sp. nov. PB211
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1