Microbial Ecology

, Volume 50, Issue 4, pp 496–505 | Cite as

Microbial Biomass, Community Structure and Metal Tolerance of a Naturally Pb-Enriched Forest Soil

  • E. BååthEmail author
  • M. Díaz-Raviña
  • L. R. Bakken


The effect of long-term elevated soil Pb levels on soil microbiota was studied at a forest site in Norway, where the soil has been severely contaminated with Pb since the last period of glaciation (several thousand years). Up to 10% Pb (total amount, w/w) has been found in the top layer. The microbial community was drastically affected, as judged from changes in the phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) pattern. Specific PLFAs that were high in Pb-enriched soil were branched (especially br17:0 and br18:0), whereas PLFAs common in eukaryotic organisms such as fungi (18:2ω6,9 and 20:4) were low compared with levels at adjacent, uncontaminated sites. Congruent changes in the PLFA pattern were found upon analyzing the culturable part of the bacterial community. The high Pb concentrations in the soil resulted in increased tolerance to Pb of the bacterial community, measured using both thymidine incorporation and plate counts. Furthermore, changes in tolerance were correlated to changes in the community structure. The bacterial community of the most contaminated soils showed higher specific activity (thymidine and leucine incorporation rates) and higher culturability than that of control soils. Fungal colony forming units (CFUs) were 10 times lower in the most Pb-enriched soils, the species composition was widely different from that in control soils, and the isolated fungi had high Pb tolerance. The most commonly isolated fungus in Pb-enriched soils was Tolypocladium inflatum. Comparison of isolates from Pb-enriched soil and isolates from unpolluted soils showed that T. inflatum was intrinsically Pb-tolerant, and that the prolonged conditions with high Pb had not selected for any increased tolerance.


Bacterial Community Control Soil Coniferous Forest Soil Individual PLFAs PLFA Pattern 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This study was supported by grants from the Ministerio Español de Educación y Ciencia to M.D.-R. and from the Swedish Research Council to E.B.


  1. 1.
    Arnebrant, K, Bååth, E, Nordgren, A 1987Copper tolerance of microfungi isolated from polluted and unpolluted forest soilMycologia79890895Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bååth, E 1981Microfungi in a clear-cut pine forest soil in central SwedenCan J Bot5913311337Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bååth, E 1989Effects of heavy metals in soil on microbial processes and populations (a review)Water Air Soil Pollut47335379Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bååth, E 1992Thymidine incorporation into macromolecules of bacteria extracted from soil by homogenization–centrifugationSoil Biol Biochem2411571165Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bååth, E 1992Measurement of heavy metal tolerance of soil bacteria using thymidine incorporation into bacteria extracted after homogenization–centrifugationSoil Biol Biochem2411671172Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bååth, E 1994Measurement of protein synthesis by soil bacterial assemblages with the leucine incorporation techniqueBiol Fertil Soils17147153Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bååth, E 1994Thymidine and leucine incorporation in soil bacteria with different cell sizeMicrob Ecol27267278Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bååth, E, Anderson, T-H 2003Comparison of soil fungal/bacterial ratios in a pH gradient using physiological and PLFA-based techniquesSoil Biol Biochem35955963Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bååth, E, Frostegård, Å, Díaz-Raviña, M, Tunlid, A 1998Microbial community-based measurements to estimate heavy metal effects in soilAmbio275861Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bååth, E, Nilsson, LO, Göransson, H, Wallander, H 2004Can the extent of degradation of soil fungal mycelium during soil incubation be used to estimate ectomycorrhizal biomass in soil?Soil Biol Biochem3621052109Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blanck, H 2002A critical review of procedures and approaches used for assessing pollution-induced community tolerance (PICT) in biotic communitiesHum Ecol Risk Assess810031034Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bølvigen, B, Låg, J 1977Natural heavy-metal poisoning of soils and vegetation: an exploration tool in glaciated terrainAppl Earth Sci Trans Sect B86173180Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Díaz-Raviña, M, Bååth, E 1996Thymidine and leucine incorporation into bacteria from soils experimentally contaminated with heavy metalsAppl Soil Ecol3225234Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ekelund, F, Olsson, S, Johansen, A 2003Changes in the succession and diversity of protozoan and microbial populations in soil spiked with a range of copper concentrationsSoil Biol Biochem3515071516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Frostegård, Å, Bååth, E 1996The use of phospholipid fatty acid analysis to estimate bacterial and fungal biomass in soilBiol Fertil Soils225965Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Frostegård, Å, Tunlid, A, Bååth, E 1993Phospholipid fatty acid composition, biomass and activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different heavy metalsAppl Environ Microbiol5936053617PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Giller, KE, Witter, E, McGrath, SP 1998Toxicity of heavy metals to microorganisms and microbial processes in agricultural soil: a reviewSoil Biol Biochem3013891414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Grant, A 2002Pollution-tolerant species and communities: intriguing toys or invaluable monitoring tools?Human Ecol Risk Assess8955970Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Låg, J, Hvatum, OØ, Bølvigen, B 1969An occurrence of naturally lead-poisoned soil at Kastad near Gjøvik, NorwayNor Geol Surv266141159Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khan, M, Scullion, J 2000Effect of soil on microbial responses to metal contaminationEnviron Pollut110115125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khan, M, Scullion, J 2002Effects of metal (Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb or Zn) enrichment of sewage-sludge on soil micro-organisms and their activitiesAppl Soil Ecol20145155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Korthals, GW, Alexiev, AD, Lexmond, TM, Kammenga, JE, Bongers, T 1996Long-term effects of copper and pH on the nematode community in an agroecosystemEnviron Toxicol Chem15979985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lindsay, WL, Norvell, WA 1978Development of a DTPA test forzinc, iron, manganese and copperSoil Sci Soc Am J42421428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Müller, AK, Westergaard, K, Christensen, S, Sørensen, SJ 2001The effect of long-term mercury pollution on the soil microbial communityFEMS Microbiol Ecol361119PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nordgren, A, Söderström, B, Bååth, E 1983Microfungi and microbial activity along a heavy metal gradientAppl Environ Microbiol4518291837PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pennanen, T 2001Microbial communities in boreal coniferous forest humus exposed to heavy metals and changes in soil pH—a summary of the use of phospholipid fatty acids, Biolog® and 3H-thymidine incorporation methods in field studiesGeoderma10091126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pennanen, T, Fritze, H, Vanhala, P, Kiikkilä, O, Neuvonen, S, Bååth, E 1998Structure of a microbial community in soil after prolonged addition of low levels of simulated acid rainAppl Environ Microbiol6421732180PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pennanen, T, Frostegård, Å, Fritze, H, Bååth, E 1996Phospholipid fatty acid composition and heavy metal tolerance of soil microbial communities along two heavy metal-polluted gradients in coniferous forestsAppl Environ Microbiol62420428PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rajapaksha, RMCP, Tobor-Kapłan, MA, Bååth, E 2004Metal toxicity affects fungal and bacterial activities in soil differentlyAppl Environ Microbiol7029662973PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Renella, G, Chaudri, AM, Brookes, PC 2002Fresh additions of heavy metals do not model long-term effects on microbial biomass and activitySoil Biol Biochem34121124Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Söderberg, KH, Olsson, PA, Bååth, E 2002Structure and activity of the bacterial community in the rhizosphere of different plant species and the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal colonizationFEMS Microbiol Ecol40223231PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Söderberg, KH, Probanza, A, Jumpponen, A, Bååth, E 2004The microbial community in the rhizosphere determined by community-level physiological profiles (CLPP) and direct soil- and cfu-PLFA techniquesAppl Soil Ecol25135145Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Söderström, B, Bååth, E 1978Soil microfungi in three Swedish coniferous forestsHolarct Ecol16272Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Beelen, P, Doelman, P 1997Significance and application ofmicrobial toxicity tests in assessing ecotoxicological risks ofcontamination in soil and sedimentChemosphere34455499Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yamamoto, H, Tatsuyama, K, Uchiwa, T 1985Fungal flora of soil polluted with copperSoil Biol Biochem17785790Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zelles, L 1997Phospholipid fatty acid profiles in selected members of soil microbial communitiesChemosphere35275294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Microbial Ecology, Ecology BuildingLund UniversityLundSweden
  2. 2.Instituto de Investigaciones Agrobiológicas de Galicia (CSIC)Santiago de CompostelaSpain
  3. 3.Department of Plant and Environmental SciencesAgricultural University of NorwayÅsNorway

Personalised recommendations