Assessment of Microbial Community Hydrocarbon Degradation potential in Arctic Sea ice
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: PRJEB49528 | ENA |
REPOSITORIES: ENA
Similar Datasets
Project description:The anthropogenic release of oil hydrocarbons into the cold marine environment is an increasing concern due to the elevated usage of sea routes and the exploration of new oil drilling sites in Arctic areas. The aim of this study was to evaluate prokaryotic community structures and the genetic potential of hydrocarbon degradation in the metagenomes of seawater, sea ice, and crude oil encapsulating the sea ice of the Norwegian fjord, Ofotfjorden. Although the results indicated substantial differences between the structure of prokaryotic communities in seawater and sea ice, the crude oil encapsulating sea ice (SIO) showed increased abundances of many genera-containing hydrocarbon-degrading organisms, including Bermanella, Colwellia, and Glaciecola. Although the metagenome of seawater was rich in a variety of hydrocarbon degradation-related functional genes (HDGs) associated with the metabolism of n-alkanes, and mono- and polyaromatic hydrocarbons, most of the normalized gene counts were highest in the clean sea ice metagenome, whereas in SIO, these counts were the lowest. The long-chain alkane degradation gene almA was detected from all the studied metagenomes and its counts exceeded ladA and alkB counts in both sea ice metagenomes. In addition, almA was related to the most diverse group of prokaryotic genera. Almost all 18 good- and high-quality metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) had diverse HDGs profiles. The MAGs recovered from the SIO metagenome belonged to the abundant taxa, such as Glaciecola, Bermanella, and Rhodobacteracea, in this environment. The genera associated with HDGs were often previously known as hydrocarbon-degrading genera. However, a substantial number of new associations, either between already known hydrocarbon-degrading genera and new HDGs or between genera not known to contain hydrocarbon degraders and multiple HDGs, were found. The superimposition of the results of comparing HDG associations with taxonomy, the HDG profiles of MAGs, and the full genomes of organisms in the KEGG database suggest that the found relationships need further investigation and verification.
| S-EPMC8879337 | biostudies-literature
Project description:"Rotting" Arctic sea ice: extreme melt series (raw sequence reads)
| PRJNA531514 | ENA
Project description:This SuperSeries is composed of the following subset Series: GSE17517: Microarray analysis of high Arctic soil bacterial response to hydrocarbon pollution and bioremediation GSE17532: RT-PCR analysis of high Arctic soil bacterial response to hydrocarbon pollution and bioremediation Refer to individual Series
2009-08-07 | E-GEOD-17533 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:High Arctic soils have low nutrient availability, low moisture content and very low temperatures and, as such, they pose a particular problem in terms of hydrocarbon bioremediation. An in-depth knowledge of the microbiology involved in this process is likely to be crucial to understand and optimize the factors most influencing bioremediation. Here, we compared two distinct large-scale field bioremediation experiments, located at Alert (ex situ approach) and Eureka (in situ approach), in the Canadian high Arctic. Bacterial community structure and function were assessed using microarrays targeting the 16S rRNA genes of bacteria found in cold environments and hydrocarbon degradation genes as well as reverse-transcriptase real-time PCR targeting key functional genes. Results indicated a large difference between sampling sites in terms of both soil microbiology and decontamination rates. A rapid reorganization of the bacterial community structure and functional potential as well as rapid increases in the expression of alkane monooxygenases and polyaromatic hydrocarbon ring-hydroxylating-dioxygenases were observed one month after the bioremediation treatment commenced in the Alert soils. In contrast, no clear changes in community structure were observed in Eureka soils, while key gene expression increased after a relatively long lag period (1 year). Such discrepancies are likely caused by differences in bioremediation treatments (i.e. ex situ vs. in situ), weathering of the hydrocarbons, indigenous microbial communities, and environmental factors such as soil humidity and temperature. In addition, this study demonstrates the value of molecular tools for the monitoring of polar bacteria and their associated functions during bioremediation. 38 soil samples from two high arctic locations that were contaminated-treated, contaminated or not contaminated followed for up to 4 years
2010-05-15 | E-GEOD-17517 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:High Arctic soils have low nutrient availability, low moisture content and very low temperatures and, as such, they pose a particular problem in terms of hydrocarbon bioremediation. An in-depth knowledge of the microbiology involved in this process is likely to be crucial to understand and optimize the factors most influencing bioremediation. Here, we compared two distinct large-scale field bioremediation experiments, located at Alert (ex situ approach) and Eureka (in situ approach), in the Canadian high Arctic. Bacterial community structure and function were assessed using microarrays targeting the 16S rRNA genes of bacteria found in cold environments and hydrocarbon degradation genes as well as reverse-transcriptase real-time PCR targeting key functional genes. Results indicated a large difference between sampling sites in terms of both soil microbiology and decontamination rates. A rapid reorganization of the bacterial community structure and functional potential as well as rapid increases in the expression of alkane monooxygenases and polyaromatic hydrocarbon ring-hydroxylating-dioxygenases were observed one month after the bioremediation treatment commenced in the Alert soils. In contrast, no clear changes in community structure were observed in Eureka soils, while key gene expression increased after a relatively long lag period (1 year). Such discrepancies are likely caused by differences in bioremediation treatments (i.e. ex situ vs. in situ), weathering of the hydrocarbons, indigenous microbial communities, and environmental factors such as soil humidity and temperature. In addition, this study demonstrates the value of molecular tools for the monitoring of polar bacteria and their associated functions during bioremediation. 38 soil samples from two high arctic locations that were contaminated-treated, contaminated or not contaminated followed for up to 4 years
2010-06-19 | E-GEOD-17532 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:RNA and DNA based biodiversity of sea ice protists over the central Arctic Ocean
| PRJEB7577 | ENA
Project description:Viromic sequence reads of Arctic cryopeg brine, sea-ice brine, and seawater
| PRJNA911474 | ENA
Project description:High Arctic soils have low nutrient availability, low moisture content and very low temperatures and, as such, they pose a particular problem in terms of hydrocarbon bioremediation. An in-depth knowledge of the microbiology involved in this process is likely to be crucial to understand and optimize the factors most influencing bioremediation. Here, we compared two distinct large-scale field bioremediation experiments, located at Alert (ex situ approach) and Eureka (in situ approach), in the Canadian high Arctic. Bacterial community structure and function were assessed using microarrays targeting the 16S rRNA genes of bacteria found in cold environments and hydrocarbon degradation genes as well as reverse-transcriptase real-time PCR targeting key functional genes. Results indicated a large difference between sampling sites in terms of both soil microbiology and decontamination rates. A rapid reorganization of the bacterial community structure and functional potential as well as rapid increases in the expression of alkane monooxygenases and polyaromatic hydrocarbon ring-hydroxylating-dioxygenases were observed one month after the bioremediation treatment commenced in the Alert soils. In contrast, no clear changes in community structure were observed in Eureka soils, while key gene expression increased after a relatively long lag period (1 year). Such discrepancies are likely caused by differences in bioremediation treatments (i.e. ex situ vs. in situ), weathering of the hydrocarbons, indigenous microbial communities, and environmental factors such as soil humidity and temperature. In addition, this study demonstrates the value of molecular tools for the monitoring of polar bacteria and their associated functions during bioremediation.
2009-08-07 | GSE17532 | GEO
Project description:High Arctic soils have low nutrient availability, low moisture content and very low temperatures and, as such, they pose a particular problem in terms of hydrocarbon bioremediation. An in-depth knowledge of the microbiology involved in this process is likely to be crucial to understand and optimize the factors most influencing bioremediation. Here, we compared two distinct large-scale field bioremediation experiments, located at Alert (ex situ approach) and Eureka (in situ approach), in the Canadian high Arctic. Bacterial community structure and function were assessed using microarrays targeting the 16S rRNA genes of bacteria found in cold environments and hydrocarbon degradation genes as well as reverse-transcriptase real-time PCR targeting key functional genes. Results indicated a large difference between sampling sites in terms of both soil microbiology and decontamination rates. A rapid reorganization of the bacterial community structure and functional potential as well as rapid increases in the expression of alkane monooxygenases and polyaromatic hydrocarbon ring-hydroxylating-dioxygenases were observed one month after the bioremediation treatment commenced in the Alert soils. In contrast, no clear changes in community structure were observed in Eureka soils, while key gene expression increased after a relatively long lag period (1 year). Such discrepancies are likely caused by differences in bioremediation treatments (i.e. ex situ vs. in situ), weathering of the hydrocarbons, indigenous microbial communities, and environmental factors such as soil humidity and temperature. In addition, this study demonstrates the value of molecular tools for the monitoring of polar bacteria and their associated functions during bioremediation.
2009-08-07 | GSE17517 | GEO