Advertisement

Marine Biology

, Volume 156, Issue 4, pp 669–677 | Cite as

Sulfide assimilation by ectosymbionts of the sessile ciliate, Zoothamnium niveum

  • Hans RøyEmail author
  • Kay Vopel
  • Markus Huettel
  • Bo Barker Jørgensen
Original Paper

Abstract

We investigated the constraints on sulfide uptake by bacterial ectosymbionts on the marine peritrich ciliate Zoothamnium niveum by a combination of experimental and numerical methods. Protists with symbionts were collected on large blocks of mangrove-peat. The blocks were placed in a flow cell with flow adjusted to in situ velocity. The water motion around the colonies was then characterized by particle tracking velocimetry. This shows that the feather-shaped colony of Z. niveum generates a unidirectional flow of seawater through the colony with no recirculation. The source of the feeding current was the free-flowing water although the size of the colonies suggests that they live partly submerged in the diffusive boundary layer. We showed that the filtered volume allows Z. niveum to assimilate sufficient sulfide to sustain the symbiosis at a few micromoles per liter in ambient concentration. Numerical modeling shows that sulfide oxidizing bacteria on the surfaces of Z. niveum can sustain 100-times higher sulfide uptake than bacteria on flat surfaces, such as microbial mats. The study demonstrates that the filter feeding zooids of Z. niveum are preadapted to be prime habitats for sulfide oxidizing bacteria due to Z. niveum’s habitat preference and due to the feeding current. Z. niveum is capable of exploiting low concentrations of sulfide in near norm-oxic seawater. This links its otherwise dissimilar habitats and makes it functionally similar to invertebrates with thiotrophic symbionts in filtering organs.

Keywords

Sulfide Diffusive Boundary Layer Bacterial Symbiont Peat Surface Feeding Current 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Caribbean Coral Reef Ecosystems program of the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History (Washington, DC), the Danish Research Academy and the Max Plank Society. We thank J. Ott for introducing us to the study Z. niveum, and M. Carpenter and D. Miller for support on Carrie Bow Cay. The manuscript was greatly improved by constructive reviews. This is contribution 658, Caribbean Coral Reef Ecosystems Program, Smithsonian Institution. The experiments comply with the current laws of Belize and Germany.

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Supplementary material

227_2008_1117_MOESM1_ESM.mph (15 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (M 14 kb)

References

  1. Bauer-Nebelsick M, Bardele CF, Ott JA (1996a) Electron microscopic studies on Zoothamnium niveum (Hemprich & Ehrenberg, 1831) Ehrenberg 1838 (Oligohymenophora, Peritrichida), a ciliate with ectosymbiotic, chemoautotrophic bacteria. Eur J Protistol 32:202–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bauer-Nebelsick M, Bardele CF, Ott JA (1996b) Redescription of Zoothamnium niveum (Hemprich & Ehrenberg, 1831) Ehrenberg, 1838 (Oligohymenophora, Peritrichida), a ciliate with ectosymbiotic, chemoautotrophic bacteria. Eur J Protistol 32:18–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cavanaugh CM (1994) Microbial symbiosis––patterns of diversity in the marine-environment. Am Zool 34:79–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fenchel T (1986) Protozoan filter feeding. Prog Protistol 1:65–113Google Scholar
  5. Huettel M, Gust G (1992) Solute release mechanisms from confined sediment cores in stirred Benthic Chambers and Flume Flows. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 82:187–197. doi: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps082187 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jørgensen BB (2001) Life in the diffusive boundary layer. In: Boudreau BP, Jørgensen BB (eds) The benthic boundary layer: transport processes and biogeochemistry. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 348–373Google Scholar
  7. Klute A, Dirksen C (1986) Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: laboratory methods. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis––part 1––physical and mineralogical methods. Am Soc Agron, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  8. Nelson DC, Jørgensen BB, Revsbech NP (1986) Growth-pattern and yield of a chemoautotrophic Beggiatoa sp in oxygen-sulfide microgradients. Appl Environ Microbiol 52:225–233PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Ott JA, Bright M, Schiemer F (1998) The ecology of a novel symbiosis between a marine peritrich ciliate and chemoautotrophic bacteria. Mar Ecol-Pubbl Stn Zool Napoli 19:229–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rinke C, Schmitz-Esser S, Stoecker K, Nussbaumer AD, Molnar DA, Vanura K, Wagner M, Horn M, Ott JA, Bright M (2007) “Candidatus thiobios zoothamnicoli” an ectosymbiotic bacterium covering the giant marine ciliate Zoothamnium niveum. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:2014–2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.72.3.2014-2021.2006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rützler K, Macintyre IG (1982) The habitat distribution and community structure of the barrier reef complex at Carrie Bow cay, Belize. In: Rützler K, Macintyre IG (eds) The Atlantic barrier reef ecosystems at Carrie Bow Cay, Belize, I: structure and communities. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp 9–45Google Scholar
  12. Visser JM, Robertson LA, VanVerseveld HW, Kuenen JG (1997) A novel membrane-bound flavocytochrome C sulfide dehydrogenase from the colourless sulfur bacterium Thiobacillus sp. W5. Arch Microbiol 167:295–301. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s002030050447 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Vopel K, Pöhn M, Sorgo A, Ott JA (2001) Ciliate-generated advective seawater transport supplies chemoautotrophic ectosymbionts. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 210:93–99. doi: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps210093 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Vopel K, Thistle D, Ott JA, Bright M, Røy H (2005) Wave-induced H2S flux sustains a chemoautotrophic symbiosis. Limnol Oceanogr 50:128–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Vopel K, Reick CH, Arlt G, Pöhn M, Ott JA (2002) Flow microenvironment of two marine peritrich ciliates with ectobiotic chemoautotrophic bacteria. Aquat Microb Ecol 29:19–28. doi: https://doi.org/10.3354/ame029019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Zhang JZ, Millero FJ (1994) Kinetics of oxidation of hydrogen sulfide in natural waters. In: Alpers CN, Blowes DW (eds) Environmental geochemistry of sulfide oxidation. Am Chem Soc, Washington, pp 393–409Google Scholar
  17. Zopfi J, Ferdelman T, Jørgensen BB, Teske A, Thamdrup B (2001) Influence of water column dynamics on sulfide oxidation and other major biogeochemical processes in the chemocline of Mariager Fjord (Denmark). Mar Chem 74:29–51. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4203(00)00091-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2009

Open AccessThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://doi.org/creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans Røy
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Kay Vopel
    • 3
  • Markus Huettel
    • 4
  • Bo Barker Jørgensen
    • 1
  1. 1.Max Planck Institute for Marine MicrobiologyBremenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Biological Sciences, Center for GeomicrobiologyUniversity of AarhusAarhus CDenmark
  3. 3.School of Applied SciencesAuckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand
  4. 4.Department of OceanographyFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations