Archives of Microbiology

, Volume 201, Issue 2, pp 199–208 | Cite as

Endophytic bacterial communities of Jingbai Pear trees in north China analyzed with Illumina sequencing of 16S rDNA

  • Fei RenEmail author
  • Wei Dong
  • Dong-Hui YanEmail author
Original Paper


Plant endophytes play a crucial role in plant growth, health and ecological function. Jingbai pear (the best quality cultivar of Pyrus ussuriensi Maxim. ex Rupr.) has important ecological and economic value in north China. Conversation of its genetics has great meanings to pear genus (Pyrus L.). However, the bacterial community associated with the cultivar remains unknown. In this study, the structure of endophytic bacterial communities associated with different tissues and soil of Jingbai Pear trees was analyzed with Illumina Miseq sequencing of bacterial 16S rDNA. This is the first report on bacterial microbiome associated with Jingbai pear. Our results demonstrated that different tissues harbored a unique bacterial assemblage. Interestingly, Cyanobacteria was the most abundant phylum, followed by Proteobacteria and Actinobacteria. Samples from three different sites (soils) had significant differences in microbial communities structure. Redundancy analysis (RDA) showed that the bacterial community structure correlated significantly with soil properties—temperature, pH, nitrogen and carbon contents. The conclusion could facilitate to understand the interaction and ecological function of endophytic bacteria with host Jingbai pear trees, so as to benefit the pear variety genetic resource conservation and protection.


Endophytic bacterial community Metagenomic analysis Jingbai pear 



The Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Non-profit Research Institution of Chinese Academy of Forestry is gratefully acknowledged for research funding (Project CAFYBB2017MA019).

Author contributions

FR, DHY conceived the study and contributed in the experimental design of the study; FR, WD and DHY collected the samples; FR did the experiment; FR, WD performed the statistical analysis; FR wrote the first draft of the manuscript; All authors contributed to manuscript revision, read and approved the submitted version.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

203_2018_1597_MOESM1_ESM.tif (2.6 mb)
Supplementary Figure S1. Tissues used for samples. (TIF 2700 KB)
203_2018_1597_MOESM2_ESM.tif (83 kb)
Supplementary Figure S2. Statistically significant differences in the bacterial species richness (a), diversity (b) and evenness (c) of the samples. (TIF 82 KB)
203_2018_1597_MOESM3_ESM.tif (312 kb)
Supplementary Figure S3. Significantly different taxa among samples (a) phylum, (b) class, (c) family, (d) genus (e) OTUs. (TIF 311 KB)


  1. Araújo WL, Marcon J, Maccheroni W, van Elsas JD, van Vuurde JWL, Azevedo JL (2002) Diversity of endophytic bacterial populations and their interaction with Xylella fastidiosa in citrus plants. Appl Environ Microbiol 68:4906–4914. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azevedo JL, Maccheroni W, Pereira JA, Araújo WL (2000) Endophytic microorganisms: a review on insect control and recent advances on tropical plants. Electron J Biotechnol 3(1):15–16. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berg G, Rybakova D, Grube M, Koberl M (2016) The plant microbiome explored: implications for experimental botany. J Exp Bot 67:995–1002. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bogas AC, Ferreira AJ, Araújo WL, Astolfi-Filho S et al (2015) Endophytic bacterial diversity in the phyllosphere of Amazon Paullinia cupana associated with asymptomatic and symptomatic anthracnose. SpringerPlus 4:258. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B (2014) Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30:2114–2120. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bremner JM (1965) Total nitrogen. In: Black CA (ed) Methods of soil analysis part 2: chemical and microbial properties. American Society of Agronomy Publisher Inc., Madison, pp 1049–1178Google Scholar
  7. Campisano A, Pancher M, Puopolo G, Puddu A, Lòpez-Fernàndez S, Biagini B, Yousaf S, Pertot I (2015) Diversity in endophyte populations reveals functional and taxonomic diversity between wild and domesticated grapevines. Am J Enol Vitic 66(1):12–21. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carvalho TL, Ballesteros HG, Thiebaut F, Ferreira PC, Hemerly AS (2016) Nice to meet you: genetic, epigenetic and metabolic controls of plant perception of beneficial associative and endophytic diazotrophic bacteria in non-leguminous plants. Plant Mol Biol 90(6):561–574. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chang S, Puryear J, Cairney J (1993) A simple and efficient method for isolating RNA from pine trees. Plant Mol Biol Rep 11:113–116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen B, Shen J, Zhang X, Pan F, Yang X, Feng Y (2014) The endophytic bacterium, Sphingomonas SaMR12, improves the potential for zinc phytoremediation by its host, Sedum alfredii. PLoS One 9:e106826. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clooney AG, Fouhy F, Sleator RD, O’Driscoll A, Stanton C, Cotter PD, Claesson MJ (2016) Comparing apples and oranges?: next generation sequencing and its impact on microbiome analysis. PLoS One 11:e0148028. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Edwards J, Johnson C, Santos-Medellin C, Lurie E et al (2015) Structure, variation, and assembly of the root-associated microbiomes of rice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112:E911–E920. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Enya J, Shinohara H, Yoshida S, Tsukiboshi T et al (2007) Culturable leaf-associated bacteria on tomato plants and their potential as biological control agents. Microb Ecol 53(4):524–536. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fidalgo C, Henriques I, Rocha J, Tacao M, Alves A (2016) Culturable endophytic bacteria from the salt marsh plant Halimione portulacoides: phylogenetic diversity, functional characterization, and influence of metal (loid) contamination. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 23(10):10200–10214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fürnkranz M, Wanek W, Richter A, Abell G, Rasche F, Sessitsch A (2008) Nitrogen fixation by phyllosphere bacteria associated with higher plants and their colonizing epiphytes of a tropical lowland rainforest of Costa Rica. ISME J 2(5):561–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gagne-Bourgue F, Aliferis K, Seguin P, Rani M, Samson R, Jabaji S (2013) Isolation and characterization of indigenous endophytic bacteria associated with leaves of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) cultivars. J Appl Microbiol 114(3):836–853. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gantar M, Rowell P, Kerby NW, Sutherland IW (1995) Role of extracellular polysaccharide in the colonization of wheat (Triticum vulgare L.) roots by N2-fixing cyanobacteria. Biol Fertil Soils 19(1):41–48. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garbeva P, Van Overbeek LS, Van Vuurde JWL, Van Elsas JD (2001) Analysis of endophytic bacterial communities of potato by plating and denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) of 16S rDNA based PCR fragments. Microb Ecol 41(4):369–383. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Golinska P, Wypij M, Agarkar G, Rathod D, Dahm H, Rai M (2015) Endophytic actinobacteria of medicinal plants: diversity and bioactivity. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 108(2):267–289. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hong YW, Liao D, Hu AY, Wang H et al (2015) Diversity of endophytic and rhizoplane bacterial communities associated with exotic Spartina alterniflora and native mangrove using Illumina amplicon sequencing. Can J Microbiol 61(10):723–733. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hortova B, Novotny D (2011) Endophytic fungi in branches of sour cherry trees: a preliminary study. Czech Mycol 63(1):77–82Google Scholar
  22. Janisiewicz WJ, Jurick WM, Peter KA, Kurtzman CP, Buyer JS (2014) Yeasts associated with plums and their potential for controlling brown rot after harvest. Yeast 31(6):207–218. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Khan AL, Waqas M, Kang SM, Al-Harrasi A et al (2014) Bacterial endophyte Sphingomonas sp. LK11 produces gibberellins and IAA and promotes tomato plant growth. J Microbiol 52(8):689–695. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim H, Nishiyama M, Kunito T, Senoo K et al (1998) High population of Sphingomonas species on plant surface. J Appl Microbiol 85(4):731–736. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kovalchuk A, Mukrimin M, Zeng Z, Raffaello T, Liu MX, Kasanen R, Sun H, Asiegbu FO (2018) Mycobiome analysis of asymptomatic and symptomatic Norway spruce trees naturally infected by the conifer pathogens Heterobasidion spp. Environ Microbiol Rep. Google Scholar
  26. Kozich JJ, Westcott SL, Baxter NT, Highlander SK, Schloss PD (2011) Development of a dual-index sequencing strategy and curation pipeline for analyzing amplicon sequence data on the MiSeq Illumina sequencing platform. Appl Environ Microbiol 79:5112–5120. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Langille MGI, Zaneveld J, Caporaso JG, McDonald D et al (2013) Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences. Nat Biotechnol 31:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liaqat F, Eltem R (2016) Identification and characterization of endophytic bacteria isolated from in vitro cultures of peach and pear rootstocks. 3 Biotech 6(2):120. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liu Y, Li YH, Yao S, Wang H et al (2015) Diversity and distribution of endophytic bacterial community in the Noni (Morinda citrifolia L.) plant. Afr J Microbiol Res 24 9:1649–1657Google Scholar
  30. Liu J, Abdelfattah A, Norelli J, Burchard E, Schena L, Droby S, Wisniewski M (2018) Apple endophytic microbiota of different rootstock/scion combinations suggests a genotype-specific influence. Microbiome 6:18. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Magoč T, Salzberg SL (2011) FLASH: fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 27:2957–2963. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Masoud W, Takamiya M, Vogensen FK, Lillevang S et al (2011) Characterization of bacterial populations in Danish raw milk cheeses made with different starter cultures by denaturating gradient gel electrophoresis and pyrosequencing. Int Dairy J 21:142–148. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mûller DB, Vogel C, Bai Y, Vorholt JA (2016) The plant microbiota: systems-level insights and perspectives. Annu Rev Genet 50:211–234. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1996) Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In: Sparks DL (ed) Methods of soil analysis part 3: chemical methods (methodsofsoilan3). Soil Science Society of America Publisher Inc, Madison, pp 961–1010Google Scholar
  35. Pinto C, Pinho D, Sousa S, Pinheiro M, Egas C, Gomes AC (2014) Unravelling the diversity of grapevine microbiome. PLoS One 9:e85622. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Porras-Alfaro A, Bayman P (2011) Hidden fungi, emergent properties: endophytes and microbiomes. Annu Rev Phytopathol 49:291–315. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J et al (2013) The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res 41(Database):D590–D596. Google Scholar
  38. R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  39. Ren F, Kovalchuk A, Mukrimin M, Liu MX et al (2018) Tissue microbiome of norway spruce affected by heterobasidion-induced wood decay. Microb Ecol. Google Scholar
  40. Ringelberg D, Foley K, Reynolds CM (2012) Bacterial endophyte communities of two wheatgrass varieties following propagation in different growing media. Can J Microbiol 58(1):67–80. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schloss PD, Gevers D, Westcott SL (2011) Reducing the effects of PCR amplification and sequencing artifacts on 16S rRNA-based studies. PLoS ONE 6(12):e27310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sheibani-Tezerji R, Rattei T, Sessitsch A, Trognitz F et al (2015) Transcriptome profiling of the endophyte Burkholderia phytofirmans PsJN indicates sensing of the plant environment and drought stress. mBio 6:e00621–e00615. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Singh JS, Kumar A, Rai AN, Singh DP (2016) Cyanobacteria: a precious bio-resource in agriculture, ecosystem, and environmental sustainability. Front Microbiol 7:529. Google Scholar
  44. Stanier RY, Cohen-Bazire G (1977) Phototrophic prokaryotes: the cyanobacteria. Annu Rev Microbiol 31:225–274. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Turner TR, James EK, Poole PS (2013) The plant microbiome. Genome Biol 14:209. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vandenkoornhuyse P, Quaiser A, Duhamel M, Le Van A, Dufresne A (2015) The importance of the microbiome of the plant holobiont. New Phytol 206:1196–1206. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vepštaitė-Monstavičė I, Lukša J, Stanevičienė R, Strazdaitė-Žielienė Ž, Yurchenko V, Serva S, Servienė E (2018) Distribution of apple and blackcurrant microbiota in Lithuania and the Czech Republic. Microbiol Res 206:1–8. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Whitesides SK, Spotts RA (1991) Frequency, distribution, and characteristics of endophytic Pseudomonas syringae in pear trees. Phytopathology 81(4):453–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Xiong ZQ, Yang YY, Zhao N, Wang Y (2013) Diversity of endophytic fungi and screening of fungal paclitaxel producer from Anglojap yew, Taxus × media. BMC Ecol 13:e71. Google Scholar
  50. Yang RX, Liu P, Ye WY (2017) Illumina-based analysis of endophytic bacterial diversity of tree peony (Paeonia Sect. Moutan) roots and leaves. Braz J Microbiol 48:695–705. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forestry Experiment Center in North ChinaChinese Academy of ForestryBeijingChina
  2. 2.China Electric Power Research InstituteBeijingChina
  3. 3.The Key Laboratory of Forest Protection Affiliated to State Forestry Administration of China, Institute of Forest Ecology, Environment and ProtectionChinese Academy of ForestryBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations