Is bacterial microbiome from the Polemonium caeruleum L. (Polemoniaceae) nectar geographically variable?

Justyna Ryniewicz, Przemyslaw Decewicz, Lukasz Dziewit, Marcin Zych

Abstract


Floral nectar is one of the key rewards in the mutualistic interactions between plants and pollinators. However, there is a growing amount of evidence that shows that another group of organisms may be involved in the pollination process, namely the microorganisms, which often inhabit floral nectar. However, little is known about the function and taxonomic diversity of microorganisms inhabiting the nectar of plants. Bacterial communities inhabiting nectar of a rare plant species, Polemonium caeruleum, in one artificial and two natural populations in Poland were analyzed using a metagenomic approach. Polemonium caeruleum is a boreal plant species, and requires appropriate pollinator services for seed production. The reproductive system of this plant may vary between individuals and populations (mixed-mating), as well as with insect visitor assemblages. We considered that nectar-dwelling bacteria of P. caeruleum might affect the insects visiting the plant’s flowers, which in turn can result in changes in the plant’s phenotype and its reproductive system. Bacterial diversity in nectar samples was surveyed using culture-independent 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing (MiSeq, Illumina). We found that bacterial communities inhabiting the nectar of P. caeruleum differed between populations, although those differences were mostly quantitative. Many of the identified bacterial genera have been found previously in nectar of other plant species, or in the guts of insect visitors, and are described as tolerant of high sugar concentrations and catalase positive (which allows bacteria to survive in the presence of hydrogen peroxide).

Keywords


16S rRNA; flower; operational taxonomy units (OTUs); mutualism; plant–bacteria interactions; plant reproduction; pollination

Full Text:

PDF

References


Herrera CM, de Vega C, Canto A, Pozo MI. Yeasts in floral nectar: a quantitative survey. Ann Bot. 2009;103:1415–1423. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcp026

Vannette RL, Gauthier MP, Fukami T. Nectar bacteria, but not yeast, weaken a plant–pollinator mutualism. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012;280:e20122601. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.2601

Jacquemyn H, Lenaerts M, Brys R, Willems K, Honnay O, Lievens B. Among-population variation in microbial community structure in the floral nectar of the bee-pollinated forest herb Pulmonaria officinalis L. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e56917. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056917

Roy R, Schmitt AJ, Thomas JB, Carter CJ. Nectar biology: from molecules to ecosystems. Plant Sci. 2017;262:148–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2017.04.012

Alvarez-Perez S, Herrera CM, de Vega C. Zooming-in on floral nectar: a first exploration of nectar associated bacteria in wild plant communities. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2012;80:591–602. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2012.01329.x

Fridman S, Izhaki I, Gerchman Y, Halpern M. Bacterial communities in floral nectar. Environ Microbiol Rep. 2012;4(1):97–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-2229.2011.00309.x

Aizenberg-Gershtein Y, Izhaki I, Halpern M. Do honeybees shape the bacterial community composition in floral nectar? PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e67556. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067556

Junker RR, Keller A. Microhabitat heterogeneity across leaves and flower organs promotes bacterial diversity. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2015;91(9):fiv097. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiv097

Junker RR, Romeike T, Keller A, Langen D. Density-dependent negative responses by bumblebees to bacteria isolated from flowers. Apidologie. 2014;45:467–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13592-013-0262-1

Good AP, Gauthier MP, Vannette RL, Fukami T. Honey bees avoid nectar colonized by three bacterial species, but not by a yeast species, isolated from the bee gut. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e86494. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0086494

Samuni-Blank M, Izhaki I, Laviad S, Bar-Massada A, Gerchman Y, Halpern M. The role of abiotic environmental conditions and herbivory in shaping bacterial community composition in floral nectar. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e99107. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099107

Lenaerts M, Pozo MI, Wäckers F, van den Ende W, Jacquemyn H, Lievens B. Impact of microbial communities on floral nectar chemistry: potential implications for biological control of pest insects. Basic Appl Ecol. 2015;17:189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2015.10.001

Zych M, Junker RR, Nepi M, Stpiczyńska M, Stolarska B, Roguz K. Spatiotemporal variation in the pollination systems of a supergeneralist plant: is Angelica sylvestris (Apiaceae) locally adapted to its most effective pollinators? Ann Bot. 2019;123(2):415–428. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcy140

Zych M, Stpiczyńska M, Roguz K. Reproductive biology of the red list species Polemonium caeruleum (Polemoniaceae). Bot J Linn Soc. 2013;173:92–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/boj.12071

Ostrowiecka B, Brzosko E, Jermakowicz E, Wróblewska A, Mirski P, Roguz K, et al. Breeding system variability, pollination biology and reproductive success of the rare Polemonium caeruleum L. in NE Poland. Acta Agrobot. 2017;70:1709. https://doi.org/10.5586/aa.1709

Stpiczyńska M, Kamińska M, Zych M. Nectary structure in dichogamous flowers of Polemonium caeruleum L. Acta Biol Crac Ser Bot. 2012;54(2):61–68. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10182-012-0019-6

Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 2011;17(1):10–12. https://doi.org/10.14806/ej.17.1.200

Rognes T, Flouri T, Nichols B, Quince C, Mahé F. VSEARCH: a versatile open source tool for metagenomics. PeerJ. 2016;4:e2584. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2584

Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics. 2011;27(16):2194–2200. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr381

Wang Q, Garrity GM, Tiedje JM, Cole JR. Naïve Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73(16):5261–5267. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00062-07

Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:D590–D596. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks1219

Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods. 2010;7(5):335–336. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.303

Mohr KI, Tebbe CC. Diversity and phylotype consistency of bacteria in the guts of three bee species (Apoidea) at an oilseed rape field. Environ Microbiol. 2006;8(2):258–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2005.00893.x

Praet J, Parmentier A, Schmid-Hempel R, Meeus I, Smagghe G, Vandamme P. Large-scale cultivation of the bumblebee gut microbiota reveals an underestimated bacterial species diversity capable of pathogen inhibition. Environ Microbiol. 2018;20(1):214–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13973

Pirttilä AM, Frank AC, editors. Endophytes of forest trees. Biology and applications. 2nd ed. Cham: Springer; 2018. (Forestry Sciences; vol 86). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89833-9

Kandel SL, Joubert PM, Doty SL. Bacterial endophyte colonization and distribution within plants. Microorganisms. 2017;5(4):77. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms5040077

Izhaki I, Fridman S, Gerchman Y, Halpern M. Variability of bacterial community composition on leaves between and within plant species. Curr Microbiol. 2013;66:227–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-012-0261-x

Bodenhausen N, Horton MW, Bergelson J. Bacterial communities associated with the leaves and the roots of Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56329. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056329

Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, editors. Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology. Vol 2. Part B and C. New York, NY: Springer; 2005.