Abstract
In a previous study by our group, CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation were simultaneously activated in the roots of wild-type rice plants in a paddy field with no N input; both processes are likely controlled by a rice gene for microbial symbiosis. The present study examined which microorganisms in rice roots were responsible for CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation under the field conditions. Metaproteomic analysis of root-associated bacteria from field-grown rice (Oryza sativa Nipponbare) revealed that nitrogenase complex-containing nitrogenase reductase (NifH) and the alpha subunit (NifD) and beta subunit (NifK) of dinitrogenase were mainly derived from type II methanotrophic bacteria of the family Methylocystaceae, including Methylosinus spp. Minor nitrogenase proteins such as Methylocella, Bradyrhizobium, Rhodopseudomonas, and Anaeromyxobacter were also detected. Methane monooxygenase proteins (PmoCBA and MmoXYZCBG) were detected in the same bacterial group of the Methylocystaceae. Because these results indicated that Methylocystaceae members mediate both CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation, we examined their localization in rice tissues by using catalyzed reporter deposition-fluorescence in situ hybridization (CARD-FISH). The methanotrophs were localized around the epidermal cells and vascular cylinder in the root tissues of the field-grown rice plants. Our metaproteomics and CARD-FISH results suggest that CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation are performed mainly by type II methanotrophs of the Methylocystaceae, including Methylosinus spp., inhabiting the vascular bundles and epidermal cells of rice roots.
INTRODUCTION
Methane is the second most important greenhouse gas in the atmosphere following carbon dioxide, and mitigation of methane emission has become a major global concern in the minimization of global climate change (1). Wetland rice fields are major sources of CH4 emission, accounting for up to 19% of the global CH4 budget (1). CH4 produced from anoxic soils by methanogenic archaea is emitted to the atmosphere via the aerenchyma of the rice plant (2). The paddy rice root and rhizosphere are partially oxic, allowing the growth of aerobic methanotrophic bacteria that utilize methane and methanol as sole carbon and energy sources (3). Up to 90% of CH4 in the rice root zone is consumed by aerobic methanotrophs (4, 5). On the basis of phylogenetic and physiological differences, aerobic methanotrophs belong to phyla Proteobacteria and Verrucomicrobia, although members of Verrucomicrobia were found as acidophilic methanotrophs in geothermal environments (6). Proteobacterial methanotrophs are classified into two groups: the family Methylocystaceae (type II methanotrophs) belongs to the class Alphaproteobacteria, and the family Methylococcaceae (type I methanotrophs) belongs to the class Gammaproteobacteria (7, 8).
Aerobic methanotrophs inhabiting the root zone and bulk soil have been detected by using culture-independent methods based on pmoA (encoding methane monooxygenase) and 16S rRNA genes in the rice rhizosphere (9–12). Nitrogen fertilization (13, 14) and rice genotype (15, 16) often influence the abundance of methanotrophs in rice fields. It was recently found that OsCCaMK, a microbial symbiosis gene of rice plants, simultaneously enhances CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation in a nitrogen-limited environment (17). However, little is known about the microbes in rice roots that are responsible for these processes. There are two possibilities: (i) methanotrophs mediate both CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation, and (ii) methanotrophs simply mediate CH4 oxidation, whereas other diazotrophs fix N2 by using intermediate substrates such as methanol during CH4 oxidation (17).
Although N2 fixation may lead to lowering methane oxidation via energy consumption as hypothesized earlier (18), in situ N2 fixation in CH4-enriched soil by type II methanotrophs has previously been demonstrated (19, 20). In support of possibility i, both type I and type II methanotrophs possess nif (nitrogen fixation) genes and both are able to fix N2 under laboratory experiment conditions (21–23). Moreover, metagenomic and isotopic analyses have revealed type II methanotrophs to be the predominant root-associated bacteria (12, 24). However, these studies lack evidence as to whether methanotrophs contribute to N2 fixation in rice roots. Therefore, the first aim of the present study was to examine whether methanotrophs simultaneously mediate both CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation in the roots of field rice. The second aim was to determine the location of methanotrophic microbes in the root tissues of paddy field-grown rice plants.
Metaproteomics analysis is a powerful approach to identifying microbes and their biogeochemical pathways (25). This approach has been applied to the rhizosphere (26), phyllosphere (27), and rice plants (28) under natural conditions. Knief et al. (28) found that the majority of proteins in the root zones of rice plants were derived from the Alphaproteobacteria, including Methylosinus spp., although they did not discuss the functions of these bacterial species in CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation.
Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) has become a standard technique in environmental microbiology. FISH combined with catalyzed reporter deposition (CARD-FISH) is a powerful tool in modern microbial ecology (29). CARD-FISH allows the specific direct detection of target populations in their natural environments, such as soil, sediment, and the rhizosphere (30–33). In addition, CARD-FISH has been used to analyze methanogens in anaerobic sludge (34) and methanotrophs in the soil covering an aged municipal landfill (35). Although FISH or CARD-FISH is potentially very useful for studying methanotroph ecology (11), reports on the use of CARD-FISH to localize indigenous methanotroph populations in paddy field-grown rice roots have not yet been published.
The present study used (i) metaproteomics analysis to analyze the protein diversity in enriched bacterial cells from rice roots and (ii) CARD-FISH to localize methanotrophs in the root tissues of rice plants grown in a paddy field.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Rice root sampling and bacterial cell enrichment.
The rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivar Nipponbare was planted in the Kashimadai experimental field of Tohoku University, Japan (38°27′39″N, 141°5′33″E), on 28 May 2010. Since 2004, the field had been treated with P-K fertilizer but without nitrogen fertilizer (17). The rice roots were sampled at the flowering stage, on 22 August 2010. The CH4 flux (14.8 to 15.4 mg C/h/m2) and N2 fixation (88.7 nmol h−1 g−1 root dry weight) values have been recorded in the same paddy field where Nipponbare was cultivated in the same stage in 2013 (17). The roots were washed well with tap water until no soil particles remained. Four sets of composite root samples from at least three rice plants (over 100 g each) were independently prepared for each treatment. Approximately 100 g of each root sample was used for microbial metaproteomics analysis; the remainder was used for CARD-FISH to visualize the target bacteria residing in the rice root. For microbial metaproteomics analysis, the composite samples of roots were homogenized to prepare the root-associated bacterial cells, which consisted of both epiphytes and endophytes. The bacterial cells were extracted and purified by using a method for enriching bacterial cells from plant materials by density gradient centrifugation (36).
Protein database construction.
The metagenomic sequences of the rice root-associated microbiome obtained in a previous study (24) were used for proteomic annotation. DNA sequences of rice root microbiomes in the paddy field were generated by shotgun sequencing on 454 GS FLX titanium (454 Life Sciences, Branford, CT); the sequences are listed in DDBJ Sequence Read Archive DRA000321 (24). The metagenomic sequences were assembled with GS De Novo Assembler (454 Life Sciences). MetaGeneAnnotator (37) predicted 55,306 open reading frames (ORFs) from the assembled sequences. Similarity searches for all predicted ORFs were performed by using a BLASTP comparison against the NCBI nr database. The resultant protein database was designated the RRM (Rice Root Microbiome) database.
Proteome analysis.
Proteome analysis was performed as described previously (38). Proteins (50 μg) were separated by using 12.5% sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) and stained with Coomassie blue. The gel lanes were cut into 60 strips of approximately 1 mm. The gel strips were completely destained with 30% acetonitrile–25 mM NH4HCO3, reduced with 10 mM dithiothreitol, and alkylated with 55 mM iodoacetamide. After the gel strips were completely dried, they were digested with 40 μl of sequencing-grade modified trypsin (12.5 ng/μl in 50 mM NH4HCO3) at 37°C overnight. The digested peptides were extracted with 25 mM NH4HCO3–60% acetonitrile and then twice more with 5% formic acid–70% acetonitrile.
A nano-liquid chromatography (LC)–electrospray ionization–tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) analysis for peptide mixtures was performed with an LTQ ion-trap MS (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Yokohama, Japan) coupled with a multidimensional high-performance LC (HPLC) Paradigm MS2 chromatograph (AMR Inc., Tokyo, Japan) and a nanospray electrospray ionization device (Michrom Bioresources Inc., Auburn, CA). The tryptic peptides were loaded onto an octadecyl silane (ODS) L-column2 (Chemicals Evaluation and Research Institute, Tokyo, Japan) packed with C18-modified silica particles (5 μm; pore size, 12 nm) and were separated by a linear gradient of 15% to 65% buffer B for 40 min, followed by a gradient of 65% to 95% buffer B for 1 min (buffer A, 2% methanol–0.1% formic acid–H2O; buffer B, 90% methanol–0.1% formic acid–H2O) at a flow rate of 1 μl/min. Peptide spectra were recorded in a mass range of m/z 450 to 1,800. MS/MS spectra were acquired in data-dependent scan mode. After the full-spectrum scan, one MS/MS spectrum of the single most intense peaks was also collected. The dynamic exclusion features were set as follows: a repeat count of 1 within 30 s, an exclusion duration of 180 s, and an exclusion list size of 50.
Using the protein database of the rice microbiome as described above, the MS/MS data obtained were searched against the RRM (Rice Root Microbiome) database by using Mascot program ver. 2.4 (Matrix Science, London, United Kingdom) on an in-house server to identify proteins. Search parameters were set as follows: tryptic digest with a maximum of two missed cleavage sites; fixed modification, carbamidomethyl cysteine; variable modification, methionine oxidation; peptide masses, monoisotopic, positive charge (+1, +2, +3) of peptide; and mass tolerances of 1.2 Da for the precursor ion and 0.8 Da for product ions.
CARD-FISH.
Methylocystis parvus (NCIMB11129) and Methylosinus trichosporium (NCIMB11131) were used as positive controls. Both strains were incubated in nitrate mineral salts (NMS) medium (39) at 30°C with 50% (vol/vol) methane in the headspace. Beijerinckia indica (JCM20098) was used as a negative control.
To detect methanotrophs in the rice roots, samples were prepared in two ways: (i) enriched bacterial cells extracted from rice roots (see above) were used to enumerate methanotrophs, and (ii) rice roots sectioned into ∼2-cm-thick pieces (referred to here as root samples) after being washed well with tap water were used to visualize the localization of methanotrophs. Samples were fixed at 4°C in 3% paraformaldehyde–phosphate-buffered saline (PBS; 130 mM NaCl, 10.8 mM Na2HPO4, 4.2 mM NaH2PO4 [pH 7.2]) for 2.5 to 3 h in the case of enriched bacterial samples and cultured bacteria (NCIMB11129, NCIMB11131, and JCM20098) and for 6 to 10 h in the case of root samples. All samples were stored in 50% ethanol–PBS at −20°C.
The fixed-root samples were subjected to CARD-FISH within 4 days. To detect methanotrophs in rice roots, a Ma450 probe (5′-ATC CAG GTA CCG TCA TTA TC-3′) targeting type II methanotrophs (40) was selected. The probe was labeled with horseradish peroxidase at the 5′ end (Japan Bio Services Co. Ltd., Saitama, Japan). CARD-FISH for the pure cultures and the enriched samples was done on glass slides in accordance with a method used in previous studies (31, 34). For the root samples, all steps were done in Eppendorf tubes (0.5 or 1.5 ml). The root samples were carefully transferred from tube to tube to avoid tissue damage. For permeabilization, the root samples were immersed in lysozyme solution (10 mg ml−1 in 0.05 M EDTA [pH 8.0] and 0.1 M Tris-HCl [pH 8.0]) and incubated for 60 min at 37°C. After the root samples had been rinsed with ultrapure water, endogenous peroxidases were inactivated by dipping the samples in 0.15% H2O2 in methanol for 30 min at room temperature (RT) (31). Subsequently, the samples were dehydrated in 50%, 80%, and 96% ethanol (vol/vol) for 3, 1, and 1 min, respectively, air-dried at RT, and kept in Eppendorf tubes at 4°C until hybridization.
The root samples were equilibrated in 1.5 ml PBS buffer for 15 min at RT before hybridization. Hybridization was performed for 3 h at 40°C in 500 μl hybridization buffer (0.9 M NaCl, 20 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 10% [wt/vol] dextran sulfate, 2% [wt/vol] blocking reagent [Roche, Mannheim, Germany], 0.1% [wt/vol] SDS, and 30% [vol/vol] formamide) containing 0.1 μM labeled probe, in an incubator rotating at 12 rpm, by the use of an HB hybridization incubator (Taitec, Tokyo, Japan). For washing, the root samples were transferred into 14 ml of prewarmed washing buffer (80 mM NaCl, 5 mM EDTA [pH 8.0], 20 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], and 0.01% [wt/vol] SDS) for 15 min at 42°C with 12 rpm rotation. Subsequently, the root samples were equilibrated by immersion in 14 ml of TNT buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.5], 150 mM NaCl, and 0.05% Triton X-100; Wako, Osaka, Japan) for 15 min at RT. For tyramide signal amplification, Alexa Fluor 488-tyramide was prepared as previously described (41). A mixture of 1 part of Alexa Fluor 488-labeled tyramide and 100 parts of amplification buffer consisting of 10% dextran sulfate, 1× PBS, 0.1% blocking reagent, and 0.0015% H2O2 was prepared; the root samples were dipped in 500 μl of the mixture and incubated for 30 min at 37°C in the dark. After signal amplification, the root samples were washed in 14 ml TNT buffer for 15 min and ultrapure water for 1 min. The samples were finally immersed in 96% ethanol for 1 min and air dried.
Microscopic observation.
An epifluorescence microscope (BX50F; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) with a color charge-coupled-device (CCD) camera and phase-constant system (DP70; Olympus) was used for microscopic observation and image acquisition. To visualize and enumerate the microbes, the samples were counterstained with 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; 1 μg ml−1 for 2 min at room temperature). More than 600 DAPI-stained cells in the enriched samples were counted to calculate the rate of detection of Ma450-positive cells. These experiments were performed in four replicates. To visualize Ma450-positive cells in the roots, the root samples were sectioned (80 to 100 μm thickness) with a Vibratome 3000 system (Vibratome, St. Louis, MO). Microscopy was done with a Zeiss LSM710 microscope (Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany) and ZEN2011 software (Carl Zeiss).
Nucleotide sequence accession numbers.
The DNA sequences of rice root microbiomes in the paddy field are available under accession number DRX000494 in DDBJ Sequence Read Archive DRA000321.
RESULTS
Proteomic analysis.
By using the metagenomic data set, a total of 4,271 different bacterial and archaeal proteins were identified in the enriched bacterial cells from the roots of rice plants grown in the paddy field (Table 1; see also Table S1 in the supplemental material). More than 90% of the proteins were identified in the protein database constructed previously by using metagenomic sequences (24). The dominant proteins were assigned to members of the classes Alphaproteobacteria (59.6%), Betaproteobacteria (10.9%), and Deltaproteobacteria (9.6%), followed by minor members of Firmicutes (4.5%), Gammaproteobacteria (3%), Actinobacteria (2%), and Archaea (3.1%) (Table 1). Within Alphaproteobacteria, Methylocystaceae and Bradyrhizobiaceae were dominant families (Table 1), including Methylosinus and Methylocystis among the Methylocystaceae and Bradyrhizobium and Rhodopseudomonas among the Bradyrhizobiaceae as major genera with abundant detected proteins (see Table S2).
TABLE 1.
Protein identification to the microbial taxon level of enriched microbial cells from root of paddy field-grown rice planta
Domain | Phylum or class | Family | No. of proteins | % |
---|---|---|---|---|
Bacteria | 4,138 | 96.9 | ||
Alphaproteobacteriab | 2,544 | 59.6 | ||
Methylocystaceae | 1,270 | 29.7 | ||
Bradyrhizobiaceae | 932 | 21.8 | ||
Beijerinckiaceae | 49 | 1.1 | ||
Methylobacteriaceae | 42 | 1.0 | ||
Rhizobiaceae | 44 | 1.0 | ||
Xanthobacteraceae | 36 | 0.8 | ||
Rhodospirillaceae | 29 | 0.7 | ||
Hyphomicrobiaceae | 23 | 0.5 | ||
Others | 222 | 5.2 | ||
Betaproteobacteria | 464 | 10.9 | ||
Burkholderiaceae | 399 | 9.3 | ||
Comamonadaceae | 19 | 0.4 | ||
Others | 46 | 1.1 | ||
Deltaproteobacteria | 409 | 9.6 | ||
Myxococcaceae | 108 | 2.5 | ||
Geobacteraceae | 59 | 1.4 | ||
Bdellovibrionaceae | 51 | 1.2 | ||
Bacteriovoracaceae | 38 | 0.9 | ||
Cystobacteraceae | 38 | 0.9 | ||
Desulfovibrionaceae | 26 | 0.6 | ||
Others | 89 | 2.1 | ||
Firmicutes | 194 | 4.5 | ||
Veillonellaceae | 40 | 0.9 | ||
Clostridiaceae | 30 | 0.7 | ||
Peptococcaceae | 25 | 0.6 | ||
Others | 99 | 2.3 | ||
Gammaproteobacteria | 129 | 3.0 | ||
Actinobacteria | 84 | 2.0 | ||
Cyanobacteria | 42 | 1.0 | ||
Bacteroidetes | 46 | 1.1 | ||
Planctomycetes | 44 | 1.0 | ||
Acidobacteria | 35 | 0.8 | ||
Spirochaetes | 28 | 0.7 | ||
Others | 119 | 2.8 | ||
Archaea | 133 | 3.1 | ||
Euryarchaeota | 127 | 3.0 | ||
Methanobacteriaceae | 79 | 1.8 | ||
Methanosarcinaceae | 28 | 0.7 | ||
Others | 20 | 0.5 | ||
Others | 6 | 0.1 |
Microbial taxa with more than 0.5% abundance are shown.
The major genera are Bradyrhizobium and Rhodopseudomonas in addition to type II methanotrophs as shown in Table S2 in the supplemental material. With respect to peptide levels, 4,336 were assigned to Alphaproteobacteria among all 6,447.
Functionally, many proteins were associated with enzymes for CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation (Table 2; see also Table S1 in the supplemental material), where they were mainly affiliated with the genera Methylosinus and Methylocystis (Methylocystaceae, type II methanotrophs), Methylocella (Beijerinckiaceae), Methylobacterium (Methylobacteriaceae), and Bradyrhizobium and Rhodopseudomonas (Bradyrhizobiaceae) (Table 2).
TABLE 2.
Proteins relevant to CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation in enriched microbial cells from roots of paddy field-grown rice planta
Function | Annotationb | Accession no. | Closest organism |
No. of peptides | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Genus | Family | ||||
Methane oxidation (methane monooxygenase [MMO]) | Methane monooxygenase/ammonia monooxygenase, subunit B (P) | ZP_06890678 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 13 |
Methane monooxygenase/ammonia monooxygenase, subunit C (P) | ZP_06890680 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
Methane monooxygenase/ammonia monooxygenase, subunit C (P) | ZP_06888910 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 1 | |
MmoX1 (S) | ABD46892 | Methylosinus sporium | Methylocystaceae | 26 | |
MmoX2 (S) | ABD46898 | Methylosinus sporium | Methylocystaceae | 21 | |
MmoY (S) | ABD46893 | Methylosinus sporium | Methylocystaceae | 19 | |
MmoZ (S) | ABD46895 | Methylosinus sporium | Methylocystaceae | 17 | |
MmoB (S) | ABD46894 | Methylosinus sporium | Methylocystaceae | 7 | |
MmoC (S) | ABD46897 | Methylosinus sporium | Methylocystaceae | 1 | |
MmoG (S) | ABD46891 | Methylosinus sporium | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
MmoX | AAG31818 | Methylosinus sp. LW8 | Methylocystaceae | 5 | |
MmoY (S) | AAF01269 | Methylocystis sp. WI14 | Methylocystaceae | 10 | |
PmoB2 (P) | CAE48353 | Methylocystis sp. SC2 | Methylocystaceae | 12 | |
PmoA2 (P) | CAE48352 | Methylocystis sp. SC2 | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
Particulate methane monooxygenase, chain A (P) | 3RFR_A | Methylocystis sp. M | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
Soluble methane monooxygenase protein A beta subunit (S) | AAC45290 | Methylocystis sp. M | Methylocystaceae | 7 | |
Soluble methane monooxygenase protein A alpha subunit (S) | AAC45289 | Methylocystis sp. M | Methylocystaceae | 13 | |
Soluble methane monooxygenase component A alpha subunit (S) | CAD30360 | Methylocystis sp. F10V2a | Methylocystaceae | 3 | |
Particulate methane monooxygenase subunit A (P) | ABD57885 | Uncultured Methylocystis sp. GSC357 | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
Monooxygenase component MmoB/DmpM (S) | YP_002361595 | Methylocella silvestris BL2 | Beijerinckiaceae | 3 | |
Methane monooxygenase (S) | YP_002361593 | Methylocella silvestris BL2 | Beijerinckiaceae | 7 | |
Methane monooxygenase (S) | YP_002361596 | Methylocella silvestris BL2 | Beijerinckiaceae | 3 | |
Methane monooxygenase (S) | YP_002361594 | Methylocella silvestris BL2 | Beijerinckiaceae | 6 | |
Methanol oxidation (methanol dehydrogenase [MDH]) | PQQ-dependent dehydrogenase, methanol/ethanol family | ZP_06888489 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 20 |
PQQ-dependent dehydrogenase, methanol/ethanol family | ZP_06888494 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 8 | |
Methanol dehydrogenase beta subunit | ZP_06888486 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 4 | |
Methanol dehydrogenase beta subunit | ZP_08073772 | Methylocystis sp. ATCC 49242 | Methylocystaceae | 4 | |
PQQ-dependent dehydrogenase, methanol/ethanol family | ZP_08073775 | Methylocystis sp. ATCC 49242 | Methylocystaceae | 41 | |
Methanol dehydrogenase large subunit-like protein | NP_772853 | Bradyrhizobium japonicum USDA 110 | Bradyrhizobiaceae | 3 | |
Methanol dehydrogenase large subunit | BAL08762 | Bradyrhizobium japonicum USDA 6 | Bradyrhizobiaceae | 1 | |
PQQ-dependent dehydrogenase, methanol/ethanol family | YP_002490201 | Methylobacterium nodulans ORS 2060 | Methylobacteriaceae | 14 | |
PQQ-dependent dehydrogenase, methanol/ethanol family | YP_001756860 | Methylobacterium radiotolerans JCM 2831 | Methylobacteriaceae | 3 | |
Methanol dehydrogenase | P15279 | Methylobacterium organophilum | Methylobacteriaceae | 1 | |
MxaI | ACB32199 | Uncultured bacterium 16A2 | Uncultured bacteria | 4 | |
MxaJ | ACB32193 | Uncultured bacterium 16A2 | Uncultured bacteria | 2 | |
MxaR | ACB32198 | Uncultured bacterium 16A2 | Uncultured bacteria | 2 | |
Formaldehyde oxidation (formaldehyde dehydrogenase [FAD]) | Formaldehyde-activating enzyme, Fae | ZP_06886820 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 16 |
Formaldehyde-activating enzyme, Fae | ZP_06886821 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 6 | |
Formaldehyde-activating enzyme, Fae | AAS91609 | Methylosinus sp. LW3 | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
Formaldehyde-activating enzyme, Fae | ZP_08072607 | Methylocystis sp. ATCC 49242 | Methylocystaceae | 5 | |
Formaldehyde-activating enzyme, Fae | ZP_08070745 | Methylocystis sp. ATCC 49242 | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
Formaldehyde dehydrogenase | NP_615385 | Methanosarcina acetivorans C2A | Methanosarcinaceae | 1 | |
Formate oxidation (formate dehydrogenase [FDH]) | Formate dehydrogenase, alpha subunit | ZP_06889979 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 11 |
Formate dehydrogenase, alpha subunit | ZP_08074532 | Methylocystis sp. ATCC 49242 | Methylocystaceae | 1 | |
Formate dehydrogenase, alpha subunit | ZP_09437742 | Bradyrhizobium sp. STM 3843 | Bradyrhizobiaceae | 1 | |
Formate dehydrogenase, alpha subunit | YP_001379195 | Anaeromyxobacter sp. Fw109–5 | Myxococcaceae | 1 | |
Nitrogen fixation (nitrogenase [Nif]) | Nitrogenase iron protein, NifH | ZP_06886595 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 7 |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein alpha chain, NifD | ZP_06886596 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | 8 | ||
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein beta chain, NifK | ZP_06886597 | Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b | Methylocystaceae | 8 | |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein beta chain, NifK | ZP_08073550 | Methylocystis sp. ATCC 49242 | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
Nitrogen fixation protein, NifH | ZP_08073546 | Methylocystis sp. ATCC 49242 | Methylocystaceae | 2 | |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein alpha chain, NifD | ZP_08073551 | Methylocystis sp. ATCC 49242 | Methylocystaceae | 1 | |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein beta chain, NifK | YP_002363877 | Methylocella silvestris BL2 | Beijerinckiaceae | 5 | |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein alpha chain, NifD | ZP_09438590 | Bradyrhizobium sp. STM 3843 | Bradyrhizobiaceae | 2 | |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein alpha chain, NifD | YP_004111075 | Rhodopseudomonas palustris DX-1 | Bradyrhizobiaceae | 1 | |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein beta chain, NifK | NP_949952 | Rhodopseudomonas palustris CGA009 | Bradyrhizobiaceae | 2 | |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein alpha chain, NifD | YP_004677462 | Hyphomicrobium sp. MC1 | Hyphomicrobiaceae | 1 | |
Nitrogenase reductase, NifH | ZP_03515899 | Rhizobium etli IE4771 | Rhizobiaceae | 1 | |
Nitrogenase iron protein, NifH | YP_001380211 | Anaeromyxobacter sp. Fw109–5 | Myxococcaceae | 2 | |
Nitrogenase iron protein 1, NifH1 | P51602 | Methanobacterium ivanovii | Methanobacteriaceae | 1 | |
Nitrogenase alpha chain, VnfD | YP_004291600 | Methanobacterium sp. AL-21 | Methanobacteriaceae | 1 | |
Nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein beta chain, NifK | NP_618770 | Methanosarcina acetivorans C2A | Methanosarcinaceae | 1 |
Boldface entries indicate members of the family Methylocystaceae, including Methylosinus and Methylocystis.
“P” and “S” in parentheses indicate particulate methane monooxygenase (pMMO) and soluble methane monooxygenase (sMMO), respectively.
The biochemical processes of conversion from CH4 to methanol, from methanol to formaldehyde, from formaldehyde to formate, and from formate to CO2 are mediated by methane monooxygenase (MMO), methanol dehydrogenase (MDH), formaldehyde dehydrogenase (FADH), and formate dehydrogenase (FDH), respectively (3). In relation to CH4 oxidation, MMOs were assigned to Methylosinus (MmoX1, MmoX2, MmoY, MmoZ, MmoB, MmoC, MmoG, MmoX, and methane monooxygenase), Methylocystis (MmoY, PmoA2, PmoB2, particulate-form MMO [pMMO] subunits, and soluble-form MMO [sMMO] subunits), and Methylocella (MmoB and methane monooxygenase) (Table 2). Biochemically, MMO generally has two forms, a membrane-bound particulate form (pMMO) and a cytoplasmic soluble form (sMMO) (3, 8). The detected MMO proteins included both sMMO and pMMO (Table 2).
MDHs (14 proteins) were detected in Methylosinus (pyrroloquinoline quinone [PQQ]-dependent dehydrogenase and methanol dehydrogenase beta subunit), Methylocystis (PQQ-dependent dehydrogenase), Bradyrhizobium (MDH), and uncultured bacteria (MxaI, MxaJ, and MxaR). The formaldehyde-activating enzymes (FADHs) were matched with Methylosinus and Methanosarcina, whereas the FDHs were matched with Methylosinus, Bradyrhizobium, and Anaeromyxobacter (Table 2).
Biological nitrogen fixation is the process by which atmospheric N2 gas is converted to ammonium by a nitrogenase complex containing nitrogenase reductase (NifH) and the alpha subunit (NifD) and beta subunit (NifK) of dinitrogenase. These nitrogenase proteins were detected in Methylosinus, Methylocystis, Methylocella, Bradyrhizobium, Rhodopseudomonas, Hyphomicrobium, Rhizobium, Anaeromyxobacter, Methanobacterium, and Methanosarcina (Table 2).
The total numbers of peptides detected were summarized into their respective biochemical categories (Table 3). Proteins relevant to CH4 oxidation (MMO, MDH, FADH, and FDH; 285 of a total of 343 peptides) and N2 fixation (NifH, NifD, and NifK; 26 of a total of 42 peptides) were detected frequently in members of the family Methylocystaceae. Notably, Methylosinus species showed both biochemical processes. The three structural components of nitrogenase (NifH, NifD, and NifK) were consistently detected in Methylosinus as well (Table 3). Therefore, our proteome analysis suggested that both CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation were mediated mainly through Methylocystaceae members, including Methylosinus and Methylocystis (type II methanotrophs), in rice roots. However, we could not exclude the possibility that other diazotrophs such as Bradyrhizobium, Rhodopseudomonas, and Anaeromyxobacter fix N2 as minor contributors in rice microbiome (Table 3).
TABLE 3.
Number of peptides relevant to CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation in enriched microbial cells from root of paddy field-grown rice planta
Domain | Family | Genus | CH4 oxidation |
N2 fixation |
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MMO | MDH | FADH | FDH | NifH | NifD | NifK | VnfD | |||
Bacteria | ||||||||||
Methylocystaceae | Methylosinus | 114 | 32 | 24 | 11 | 7 | 8 | 8 | ||
Methylocystaceae | Methylocystis | 51 | 45 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |||
Beijerinckiaceae | Methylocella | 19 | 5 | |||||||
Methylobacteriaceae | Methylobacterium | 18 | ||||||||
Bradyrhizobiaceae | Bradyrhizobium | 9 | 1 | 2 | ||||||
Bradyrhizobiaceae | Rhodopseudomonas | 1 | 2 | |||||||
Hyphomicrobiaceae | Hyphomicrobium | 1 | 1 | |||||||
Rhizobiaceae | Rhizobium | 1 | ||||||||
Cystobacterineae | Anaeromyxobacter | 1 | 2 | |||||||
Archaea | ||||||||||
Methanobacteriaceae | Methanobacterium | 1 | 1 | |||||||
Methanosarcinaceae | Methanosarcina | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||
Other | Uncultured bacteria | 8 | ||||||||
Total peptides | 184 | 112 | 32 | 15 | 11 | 13 | 18 | 2 |
Boldface entries indicate members of the family Methylocystaceae, including Methylosinus and Methylocystis. MMO, methane monooxygenase; MDH, methanol dehydrogenase; FADH, formaldehyde dehydrogenase; FDH, formate dehydrogenase; NifH, nitrogenase reductase; NifD, alpha subunit of dinitrogenase; NifK, beta subunit of dinitrogenase; VnfD, alpha subunit of vanadium dinitrogenase.
Detection of type II methanotrophs in enriched bacterial cells.
The Ma450 probe specific for Methylocystis and Methylosinus type II methanotrophs was used to detect these members of the Methylocystaceae in bacterial cells enriched from rice roots (40). This probe has often been used to detect and enumerate type II methanotrophs in natural environments (35, 40, 42). Clear signals indicated that type II methanotrophs in the enriched samples were successfully visualized by CARD-FISH (Fig. 1). Ma450-positive cells accounted for 6.6% ± 0.3% (range, 6.2% to 7.0%) of DAPI-stained cells. Note that signals were not detected from the strain used as a negative control (data not shown).
FIG 1.
Catalyzed reporter deposition-fluorescence in situ hybridization (CARD-FISH) detection of Methylocystaceae members (Methylosinus and Methylocystis) in enriched bacterial cells from rice roots. Micrographs of in situ hybridization with probe Ma450 (A), 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole staining (B), and phase-contrast image (C) are shown. Scale bar = 10 μm.
Localization of type II methanotrophs in rice roots.
Both the proteome analysis and the CARD-FISH analysis of the enriched bacterial cells suggested that type II methanotrophs were present in the rice root microbiome. We applied CARD-FISH to the root tissues of rice plants during the maximum-tillering stage to localize type II methanotrophs in the rice root. Type II methanotrophic signals were clearly observed not only in and around the epidermal cells (Fig. 2A, B, C, and J) but also in the vascular cylinder (Fig. 2G, H, I, and L) of the rice roots. CARD-FISH signals were observed in and around the epithelial cells in both cross sections (Fig. 2A, B, C, and J) and vertical sections (Fig. 2D, E, F, and K) of the roots. In the vascular cylinder, CARD-FISH signals were often detected in and around the phloem around the xylem vessels (Fig. 2I and L).
FIG 2.
Catalyzed reporter deposition-fluorescence in situ hybridization (CARD-FISH) detection of Methylocystaceae members (Methylosinus and Methylocystis) in roots of field-grown rice (Oryza sativa Nipponbare) by confocal laser scanning microscopy. A, B, C, and J, cross sections of epidermis of rice root; D, E, F, and K, vertical sections of rice root; G, H, I, and L, cross sections of stele of rice roots. A, D, and G, autofluorescence of cell wall of rice root (blue); B, E, and H, Alexa Fluor 488 of Ma450 probe (green); C, F, I, J, K, and L, their overlay. Scale bars = 10 μm.
DISCUSSION
Combined analysis by using metaproteomics and CARD-FISH suggested that CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation were simultaneously performed mainly by type II methanotrophs (Methylocystaceae) inhabiting the vascular bundles and epidermal cells of the roots of rice plants grown in a paddy field.
In paddy ecosystems, many studies of aerobic methanotrophs in rice roots have focused on the diversity and activity of methane oxidation (11, 14, 43). However, no study has yet emphasized N2 fixation by methanotrophs in the rice and soil microbiomes of paddy fields. Several of the methanotrophs have been reported to fix nitrogen in culture experiments (21, 22). In the present study, metaproteomics analysis indicated that nitrogenase was also expressed in field-grown rice roots, as shown by bacterial protein levels (Tables 2 and 3). Indeed, major structural components of nitrogenase (NifH, NifD, and NifK) were detected at the protein level (Table 3). In addition, type II methanotrophs were likely the major contributors to N2 fixation (Tables 2 and 3). This supposition is partially supported by the detection of nitrogenase of type II methanotrophs in rice root-associated microbes by transcriptome analysis (44), although the authors of that paper did not discuss this aspect of their findings. Moreover, this result is also consistent with the observation that type II methanotrophs fix N2 in CH4-enriched soil (19).
The present report supports the hypothesis that methanotrophs are involved in N2 fixation and CH4 oxidation in paddy fields (17, 18). A recent observation has shown that N2 fixation for peatland development has been mediated by methanotrophs as well (45). In a metagenomic analysis of the bacterial community associated with the roots of rice grown in a paddy field, type II methanotrophs had a relative abundance of approximately 10% in metagenomic reads and were the dominant bacterial group (24). This is consistent with the detection of approximately 7% relative abundance of type II methanotrophs by CARD-FISH in the present study (Fig. 1). However, it is difficult to compare the protein abundance of type II methanotrophs (approximately 29.7% in total proteins in Table 1) with the abundance in cell or DNA levels (approximately 7% to 10%), because metatranscriptome analysis depends on its database and detects the highly expressed proteins in microbial cell community.
Because the fluorescence intensity of the 16S rRNA probe for type II methanotrophs is too low in FISH (46), it was expected that direct visualization of methanotrophs in rice roots might be difficult by using FISH. This study therefore used the CARD-FISH approach to localize type II methanotrophs in rice roots. Signals of type II methanotrophs were visualized not only in enriched bacterial cells from the rice roots (Fig. 1) but also in epidermal cell walls and around the xylem of rice roots in situ (Fig. 2). These results suggested that type II methanotrophs inhabit the surface and interior of the root tissues as endophytes.
An early inoculation experiment detected antibody-labeled methanotrophs on the surface and in the xylem of rice roots (46). However, the present report is the first to give direct evidence that type II methanotrophs reside on the surface of, and inside, the root tissues of field-grown rice plants. This finding is supported by the fact that type II methanotrophs have often been isolated from surface-sterilized rice roots (47, 48). In addition, the abundance of type II methanotrophs is positively correlated with rice plant growth (49). Ecologically, symbiosis of rice plants with N2-fixing methanotrophs is probably beneficial for both organisms, because methanotrophs in the root zone are able to use the CH4 that is continuously produced from paddy soils by methanogens under anaerobic conditions (17).
Generally, endophytic bacterial cells are difficult to extract and separate from plant cells, because inside the plant tissues they are tightly attached to the host cells (50). A high relative abundance of type II methanotrophs has been observed in enriched bacterial cells from rice roots, not only by a previous metagenome analysis (24) but also by the proteomic analysis and CARD-FISH approach used in the present study. The method used here to extract and enrich bacterial cells may therefore be suitable for studies of endophytic methanotrophic bacteria in plants (36, 51). These results are in agreement with detection of type II methanotrophs as dominant in root materials by using DNA–stable-isotope probing (SIP) analysis (12).
Apart from type II methanotrophs, other proteins were matched with Methylocella, Bradyrhizobium, Methylobacterium, Rhodopseudomonas, Hyphomicrobium, Rhizobium, Anaeromyxobacter, Methanobacterium, Methanosarcina, and uncultured bacteria. The metaproteomic data (Tables 2 and 3) revealed that their functions were also related to methanol oxidation or nitrogen fixation or both. Methylocella have been isolated from acidic environments as facultative methanotrophs and have N2-fixing activity (52, 53). A recent study has shown that Methylocella are widely distributed in natural environments and are not restricted to acidic environments (54). The proteome data from the present study suggest that Methylocella also inhabit rice roots and may contribute to CH4 oxidation and nitrogen fixation. Methylobacterium and Bradyrhizobium have been detected in rice roots (24, 27, 28) and often possess the MDH-encoding xoxF gene for methanol oxidation (55–57). In addition, nifH has been detected in Bradyrhizobium in rice roots by metagenomic and proteomic analyses (28, 50). Thus, it is likely that Bradyrhizobium species contribute in a minor way to C1 compound metabolism and N2 fixation. Moreover, nitrogenase proteins of Rhodopseudomonas, Hyphomicrobium, Rhizobium, and Anaeromyxobacter were detected in the present study as minor components which were also similar to those in the phyllosphere or rhizosphere of rice plants shown by previous proteomic analysis (28). Proteins of archaea were also detected from the root microbiome (Tables 1 to 3; see also Table S1 in the supplemental material), which is in agreement with a previous study (28). It is likely that Methanobacteriaceae and Methanosarcinaceae contribute not only to methane production (58) but to N2 fixation as well.
Methane oxidation by type II methanotrophs generally occurs in aerobic environments, but anaerobic and microanaerobic conditions are generally required for N2 fixation (59, 60). This oxygen paradox warrants a brief discussion. An early report indicated that oxygen concentration is a limiting factor for growth and nitrogenase expression of methanotrophs under N-free conditions (60). In that work, the nitrogenase activity of Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b (type II) was less sensitive to the partial pressure of O2 than was that of the Methylococcus capsulatus Bath (type I) methanotroph. In addition, a Methylocystis (type II) isolate from soil was able to grow and fix N2 under microaerobic conditions (<0.5% to 4% oxygen) in N-free medium (59). Moreover, in the center (i.e., the stele, including the xylem and phloem) and surface (epidermis) of the rice root, O2 concentrations are lower than atmospheric saturation concentrations (61). Therefore, both the epidermis and the xylem of the rice root are under low-O2 conditions, and this may enable methanotrophs to express CH4 oxidation and N2 fixation simultaneously. Because the O2 concentration in the center (55% of atmospheric saturation) was higher than that in the surface (5% of atmospheric saturation) (61), it is possible that N2 fixation mainly occurs on the surface and CH4 oxidation in the center. To investigate the paradox further, it will be crucial in the future to characterize the biochemical activity of Methylosinus isolates from rice plants and to observe the activities of these bacteria microscopically in rice tissues by using 15N/13C tracers.
Supplementary Material
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported in part by grants from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries of Japan (Development of Mitigation and Adaptation Techniques to Global Warming and Genomics for Agricultural Innovation, PMI-0002 and BRAIN) and by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) 23248052 and 26252065 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan.
Footnotes
Published ahead of print 13 June 2014
Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00969-14.
REFERENCES
- 1.Denman KL, Brasseur G, Chidthaisong A, Ciais P, Cox PM, Dickinson RE, Hauglustaine D, Heinze C, Holland E, Jacob D, Lohmann U, Ramachandran S, Dias PLdS, Wofsy SC, Zhang X. 2007. Couplings between changes in the climate system and biogeochemistry, p 501–587 In Solomon DQ, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL. (ed), Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom [Google Scholar]
- 2.Nouchi I, Mariko S, Aoki K. 1990. Mechanism of methane transport from the rhizosphere to the atmosphere through rice plants. Plant Physiol. 94:59–66. 10.1104/pp.94.1.59 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Hanson RS, Hanson TE. 1996. Methanotrophic bacteria. Microbiol. Rev. 60:439–471 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Holzapfel-Pschorn A, Conrad R, Seiler W. 1986Effects of vegetation on the emission of methane from submerged paddy soil. Plant Soil 92:223–233. 10.1007/BF02372636 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Kruger M, Frenzel P. 2003. Effects of N-fertilisation on CH4 oxidation and production, and consequences for CH4 emissions from microcosms and rice fields. Global Change Biol. 9:773–784. 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00576.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Op den Camp HJM, Islam T, Stott MB, Harhangi HR, Hynes A, Schouten S, Jetten MSM, Birkeland NK, Pol A, Dunfield PF. 2009. Environmental, genomic and taxonomic perspectives on methanotrophic Verrucomicrobia. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 1:293–306. 10.1111/j.1758-2229.2009.00022.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Bowman JP, Sly LI, Nichols PD, Hayward AC. 1993. Revised taxonomy of the methanotrophs: description of Methylobacter gen. nov., emendation of Methylococcus, validation of Methylosinus and Methylocystis species, and a proposal that the family Methylococcaceae includes only the group I methanotrophs. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 43:735–753. 10.1099/00207713-43-4-735 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Bowman JP. 1999. The methanotrophs—the families Methylococcaceae and Methylocystaceae. In Dworkin M. (ed), The prokaryotes. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY [Google Scholar]
- 9.Wu L, Ma K, Lu Y. 2009. Rice roots select for type I methanotrophs in rice field soil. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 32:421–428. 10.1016/j.syapm.2009.05.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Lüke C, Krause S, Cavigiolo S, Greppi D, Lupotto E, Frenzel P. 2010. Biogeography of wetland rice methanotrophs. Environ. Microbiol. 12:862–872. 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2009.02131.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Eller G, Frenzel P. 2001. Changes in activity and community structure of methane-oxidizing bacteria over the growth period of rice. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 67:2395–2403. 10.1128/AEM.67.6.2395-2403.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Qiu QF, Conrad R, Lu YH. 2009. Cross-feeding of methane carbon among bacteria on rice roots revealed by DNA-stable isotope probing. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 1:355–361. 10.1111/j.1758-2229.2009.00045.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Alam MS, Jia Z. 2012. Inhibition of methane oxidation by nitrogenous fertilizers in a paddy soil. Front. Microbiol. 3:1–13. 10.3389/fmicb.2012.00246 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Bodelier PLE, Roslev P, Henckel T, Frenzel P. 2000. Stimulation by ammonium-based fertilizers of methane oxidation in soil around rice roots. Nature 403:421–424. 10.1038/35000193 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Ma KE, Qiu Q, Lu Y. 2010. Microbial mechanism for rice variety control on methane emission from rice field soil. Global Change Biol. 16:3085–3095. 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.02145.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Lüke C, Bodrossy L, Lupotto E, Frenzel P. 2011. Methanotrophic bacteria associated to rice roots: the cultivar effect assessed by T-RFLP and microarray analysis. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 3:518–525. 10.1111/j.1758-2229.2011.00251.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Bao Z, Watanabe A, Sasaki K, Okubo T, Tokida T, Liu D, Ikeda S, Imaizumi-Anraku H, Asakawa S, Sato T, Mitsui H, Minamisawa K. 2014. A rice gene for microbial symbiosis, Oryza sativa CCaMK, reduces CH4 flux in a paddy field with low nitrogen input. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 80:1995–2003. 10.1128/AEM.03646-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Bodelier PLE, Laanbroek HJ. 2004. Nitrogen as a regulatory factor of methane oxidation in soils and sediments. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 47:265–277. 10.1016/S0168-6496(03)00304-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Buckley DH, Huangyutitham V, Hsu S-F, Nelson TA. 2008. 15N2–DNA–stable isotope probing of diazotrophic methanotrophs in soil. Soil Biol. Biochem. 40:1272–1283. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2007.05.006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Bodelier PLE. 2011. Interactions between nitrogenous fertilizers and methane cycling in wetland and upland soils. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 3:379–388. 10.1016/j.cosust.2011.06.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Auman AJ, Speake CC, Lidstrom ME. 2001. nifH sequences and nitrogen fixation in type I and type II methanotrophs. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 67:4009–4016. 10.1128/AEM.67.9.4009-4016.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Boulygina ES, Kuznetsov BB, Marusina AI, Tourova TP, Kravchenko IK, Bykova SA, Kolganova TV, Galchenko VF. 2002. A study of nucleotide sequences of nifH genes of some methanotrophic bacteria. Microbiology 71:425–432. 10.1023/A:1019893526803 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Dedysh SN, Ricke P, Liesack W. 2004. NifH and NifD phylogenies: an evolutionary basis for understanding nitrogen fixation capabilities of methanotrophic bacteria. Microbiology 150:1301–1313. 10.1099/mic.0.26585-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Ikeda S, Sasaki K, Okubo T, Yamashita A, Terasawa K, Bao Z, Liu D, Watanabe T, Murase J, Asakawa S, Eda S, Mitsui H, Sato T, Minamisawa K. 2014. Low nitrogen fertilization adapts rice root microbiome to low nutrient environment by changing biogeochemical functions. Microbes Environ. 29:50–59. 10.1264/jsme2.ME13110 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.VerBerkmoes NC, Denef VJ, Hettich RL, Banfield JF. 2009. Systems biology: functional analysis of natural microbial consortia using community proteomics. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 7:196–205. 10.1038/nrmicro2080 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Wang HB, Zhang ZX, Li H, He HB, Fang CX, Zhang AJ, Li QS, Chen RS, Guo XK, Lin HF, Wu LK, Lin S, Chen T, Lin RY, Peng XX, Lin WX. 2011. Characterization of metaproteomics in crop rhizospheric soil. J. Proteome Res. 10:932–940. 10.1021/pr100981r [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Delmotte N, Knief C, Chaffron S, Innerebner G, Roschitzki B, Schlapbach R, von Mering C, Vorholt JA. 2009. Community proteogenomics reveals insights into the physiology of phyllosphere bacteria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 106:16428–16433. 10.1073/pnas.0905240106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Knief C, Delmotte N, Chaffron S, Stark M, Innerebner G, Wassmann R, von Mering C, Vorholt JA. 2012. Metaproteogenomic analysis of microbial communities in the phyllosphere and rhizosphere of rice. ISME J. 6:1378–1390. 10.1038/ismej.2011.192 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Kubota K. 2013. CARD-FISH for environmental microorganisms: technical advancement and future applications. Microbes Environ. 28:3–12. 10.1264/jsme2.ME12107 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Bulgarelli D, Rott M, Schlaeppi K, van Themaat EVL, Ahmadinejad N, Assenza F, Rauf P, Huettel B, Reinhardt R, Schmelzer E, Peplies J, Gloeckner FO, Amann R, Eickhorst T, Schulze-Lefert P. 2012. Revealing structure and assembly cues for Arabidopsis root-inhabiting bacterial microbiota. Nature 488:91–95. 10.1038/nature11336 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Ishii K, Mußmann M, MacGregor BJ, Amann R. 2004. An improved fluorescence in situ hybridization protocol for the identification of bacteria and archaea in marine sediments. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 50:203–213. 10.1016/j.femsec.2004.06.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Pernthaler A, Pernthaler J, Amann R. 2002. Fluorescence in situ hybridization and catalyzed reporter deposition for the identification of marine bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 68:3094–3101. 10.1128/AEM.68.6.3094-3101.2002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Eickhorst T, Tippkötter R. 2008. Improved detection of soil microorganisms using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and catalyzed reporter deposition (CARD-FISH). Soil Biol. Biochem. 40:1883–1891. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.03.024 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Kubota K, Imachi H, Kawakami S, Nakamura K, Harada H, Ohashi A. 2008. Evaluation of enzymatic cell treatments for application of CARD-FISH to methanogens. J. Microbiol. Methods 72:54–59. 10.1016/j.mimet.2007.10.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Kallistova AY, Kevbrina MV, Nekrasova VK, Shnyrev NA, Einola JKM, Kulomaa MS, Rintala JA, Nozhevnikova AN. 2007. Enumeration of methanotrophic bacteria in the cover soil of an aged municipal landfill. Microb. Ecol. 54:637–645. 10.1007/s00248-007-9219-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Ikeda S, Kaneko T, Okubo T, Rallos LE, Eda S, Mitsui H, Sato S, Nakamura Y, Tabata S, Minamisawa K. 2009. Development of a bacterial cell enrichment method and its application to the community analysis in soybean stems. Microb. Ecol. 58:703–714. 10.1007/s00248-009-9566-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Noguchi H, Taniguchi T, Itoh T. 2008. MetaGeneAnnotator: detecting species-specific patterns of ribosomal binding site for precise gene prediction in anonymous prokaryotic and phage genomes. DNA Res. 15:387–396. 10.1093/dnares/dsn027 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Kasahara Y, Morimoto H, Kuwano M, Kadoya R. 2012. Genome-wide analytical approaches using semi-quantitative expression proteomics for aromatic hydrocarbon metabolism in Pseudomonas putida F1. J. Microbiol. Methods 91:434–442. 10.1016/j.mimet.2012.09.017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Whittenbury R, Phillips KC, Wilkinson JF. 1970. Enrichment, isolation and some properties of methane-utilizing bacteria. J. Gen. Microbiol. 61:205–218. 10.1099/00221287-61-2-205 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Eller G, Stubner S, Frenzel P. 2001. Group-specific 16S rRNA targeted probes for the detection of type I and type II methanotrophs by fluorescence in situ hybridisation. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 198:91–97. 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2001.tb10624.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Pernthaler A, Pernthaler J, Amann R. 2004. Section 3 update: sensitive multi-color fluorescence in situ hybridization for the identification of environmental microorganisms, p 2613–2627 In Kowalchuk GA, Bruijn FJ, Head IM, Akkermans AD, Elsas JD. (ed), Molecular microbial ecology manual. Springer, Houten, Netherlands [Google Scholar]
- 42.Dedysh SN, Derakshani M, Liesack W. 2001. Detection and enumeration of methanotrophs in acidic sphagnum peat by 16S rRNA fluorescence in situ hybridization, including the use of newly developed oligonucleotide probes for Methylocella palustris. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 67:4850–4857. 10.1128/AEM.67.10.4850-4857.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Horz H-P, Yimga MT, Liesack W. 2001. Detection of methanotroph diversity on roots of submerged rice plants by molecular retrieval of pmoA, mmoX, mxaF, and 16S rRNA and ribosomal DNA, including pmoA-based terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism profiling. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 67:4177–4185. 10.1128/AEM.67.9.4177-4185.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Zhang L, Hurek T, Reinhold-Hurek B. 2007. A nifH-based oligonucleotide microarray for functional diagnostics of nitrogen-fixing microorganisms. Microb. Ecol. 53:456–470. 10.1007/s00248-006-9126-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Larmola T, Leppanen SM, Tuittila ES, Aarva M, Merila P, Fritze H, Tiirola M. 2014. Methanotrophy induces nitrogen fixation during peatland development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 111:734–739. 10.1073/pnas.1314284111 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Gilbert B, Aßmus B, Hartmann A, Frenzel P. 1998. In situ localization of two methanotrophic strains in the rhizosphere of rice plants. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 25:117–128. 10.1111/j.1574-6941.1998.tb00465.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Takeda K, Tonouchi A, Takada M, Suko T, Suzuki S, Kimura Y, Matsuyama N, Fujita T. 2008. Characterization of cultivable methanotrophs from paddy soils and rice roots. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 54:876–885. 10.1111/j.1747-0765.2008.00318.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Takeda K, Suzuki S, Neko K, Tomiyama Y, Fujita T, Matsuyama N, I W. 1998. Enumeration and characteristics of methanotrophs in paddy soils and rice roots. Jpn. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 69:570–575 (In Japanese with English summary.) [Google Scholar]
- 49.Macalady JL, McMillan AMS, Dickens AF, Tyler SC, Scow KM. 2002. Population dynamics of type I and II methanotrophic bacteria in rice soils. Environ. Microbiol. 4:148–157. 10.1046/j.1462-2920.2002.00278.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Sessitsch A, Hardoim P, Döring J, Weilharter A, Krause A, Woyke T, Mitter B, Hauberg-Lotte L, Friedrich F, Rahalkar M, Hurek T, Sarkar A, Bodrossy L, van Overbeek L, Brar D, van Elsas JD, Reinhold-Hurek B. 2012. Functional characteristics of an endophyte community colonizing rice roots as revealed by metagenomic analysis. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 25:28-36 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Ikeda S, Okubo T, Anda M, Nakashita H, Yasuda M, Sato S, Kaneko T, Tabata S, Eda S, Momiyama A, Terasawa K, Mitsui H, Minamisawa K. 2010. Community- and genome-based views of plant-associated bacteria: plant-bacterial interactions in soybean and rice. Plant Cell Physiol. 51:1398–1410. 10.1093/pcp/pcq119 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Dedysh SN, Liesack W, Khmelenina VN, Suzina NE, Trotsenko YA, Semrau JD, Bares AM, Panikov NS, Tiedje JM. 2000. Methylocella palustris gen. nov., sp. nov., a new methane-oxidizing acidophilic bacterium from peat bogs, representing a novel subtype of serine-pathway methanotrophs. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 50:955–969. 10.1099/00207713-50-3-955 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Dunfield PF, Khmelenina VN, Suzina NE, Trotsenko YA, Dedysh SN. 2003. Methylocella silvestris sp. nov., a novel methanotroph isolated from an acidic forest cambisol. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 53:1231–1239. 10.1099/ijs.0.02481-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Rahman MT, Crombie A, Chen Y, Stralis-Pavese N, Bodrossy L, Meir P, McNamara NP, Murrell JC. 2011. Environmental distribution and abundance of the facultative methanotroph Methylocella. ISME J. 5:1061–1066. 10.1038/ismej.2010.190 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Sudtachat N, Ito N, Itakura M, Masuda S, Eda S, Mitsui H, Kawaharada Y, Minamisawa K. 2009. Aerobic vanillate degradation and C1 compound metabolism in Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 75:5012–5017. 10.1128/AEM.00755-09 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Schmidt S, Christen P, Kiefer P, Vorholt JA. 2010. Functional investigation of methanol dehydrogenase-like protein XoxF in Methylobacterium extorquens AM1. Microbiology 156:2575–2586. 10.1099/mic.0.038570-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Skovran E, Palmer AD, Rountree AM, Good NM, Lidstrom ME. 2011. XoxF is required for expression of methanol dehydrogenase in Methylobacterium extorquens AM1. J. Bacteriol. 193:6032–6038. 10.1128/JB.05367-11 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Lu YH, Lueders T, Friedrich MW, Conrad R. 2005. Detecting active methanogenic populations on rice roots using stable isotope probing. Environ. Microbiol. 7:326–336. 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2005.00697.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Takeda K. 1988. Characteristics of a nitrogen-fixing methanotroph, Methylocystis T-1. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 54:521–534. 10.1007/BF00588388 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Murrell JC, Dalton H. 1983. Nitrogen fixation in obligate methanotrophs. J. Gen. Microbiol. 129:3481–3486 [Google Scholar]
- 61.Revsbech NP, Pedersen O, Reichardt W, Briones A. 1999. Microsensor analysis of oxygen and pH in the rice rhizosphere under field and laboratory conditions. Biol. Fertil. Soils 29:379–385. 10.1007/s003740050568 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.