Current Microbiology

, Volume 76, Issue 3, pp 338–345 | Cite as

Species Diversity and Functional Prediction of Soil Bacterial Communities in Constructed Wetlands with Different Plant Conditions

  • Weiguo FuEmail author
  • Yuxuan Wang
  • Wei Wei
  • Pingping Li


The diversities of soil bacterial communities in the Phragmites australis, Phalaris arundinacea, and non-plantation constructed wetlands were compared and analyzed by through high-throughput Illumina sequencing. At the phylum level, the ten dominant bacterial phyla in the three types of constructed wetlands were the same. At the genus level, the three most dominant bacterial genera in the three types of constructed wetlands were the same. The non-plantation constructed wetland (Nop-cw) had the highest diversity of soil bacterial community. The introduction of P. australis or P. arundinacea did not increase diversity of the soil bacterial communities in the constructed wetlands but greatly changed the compositions and potential function of the soil bacterial communities, especially some bacterial genera involved in pollutant removal. So it was predicted that the P. australis constructed wetland (Pau-cw) had a larger capacity for the removal of heavy metals and sulfur than the P. arundinacea constructed wetland (Par-cw), and the nitrification capacity of the P. arundinacea constructed wetland was stronger than that of the P. australis constructed wetland. The above results not only clarified the differences among the soil bacterial communities of the constructed wetlands with different plants in terms of diversity but also revealed the decontamination mechanism of the constructed wetlands to some degree.



This study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [31370448], Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province of China [BK20150496], Major Projects of Natural Science Research in Colleges and Universities, Jiangsu Province [15KJA2100001], and the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions [PAPD].

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Li B, Chen H, Li N, Wu Z, Wen Z, Xie S, Liu Y (2017) Spatio-temporal shifts in the archaeal community of a constructed wetland treating river water. Sci Total Environ 605–606:269–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wang M, Zhang D, Dong J (2017) Application of constructed wetlands for treating agricultural runoff and agro-industrial wastewater: a review. Hydrobiologia 1:1–31Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weber K (2016) Microbial community assessment in wetlands for water pollution control: past, present, and future outlook. Water 8(11):503–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chang JJ, Wu SQ, Liang K, Wu Z, Liang W (2015) Comparative study of microbial community structure in integrated vertical-flow constructed wetlands for treatment of domestic and nitrified wastewaters. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(5):3518–3527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhou XH, Zhang JP, Wen CZ (2017) Community composition and abundance of anammox bacteria in cattail rhizosphere sediments at three phenological stages. Curr Microbiol 74:1349–1357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ibekwe AM, Lyon SR, Leddy M, Jacobson-Meyers M (2007) Impact of plant density and microbial composition on water quality from a free water surface constructed wetland. J Appl Microbiol 102(4):921–936Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li X, Zhang M, Liu F, Li Y, Li Y (2017) Bacterial community dynamics in a Myriophyllum elatinoides purification system for swine wastewater in sediments. Appl Soil Ecol 119:56–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bai SY, Tao L, Ding YL, Li ZL, Wang DQ, You SH, Xie QL (2017) Campus sewage treatment in multilayer horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands: nitrogen removal and microbial community distribution. Clean - Soil Air Water 45(11):254–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ligi T, Oopkaup K, Truu M, Preem JK, Nõlvak H (2014) Characterization of bacterial communities in soil and sediment of a created riverine wetland complex using high-throughput 16S r RNA amplicon sequencing. Ecol Eng 72:56–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang F, Zhao HW, Xiang HY, Wu LJ, Men X, Qi C, Chen GQ, Zhang HB, Wang Y, Xian M (2018) Species diversity and functional prediction of surface bacterial communities on aging flue-cured tobaccos. Curr Microbiol 75:1306–1315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Peralta RM, Ahn C, Gillevet PM (2013) Characterization of soil bacterial community structure and physicochemical properties in created and natural wetlands. Sci Total Environ 443(3):725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vymazal J, Svehla J, Kröpfelová L, Chrastný V (2007) Trace metals in Phragmites australis and Phalaris arundinacea growing in constructed and natural wetlands. Sci Total Environ 380(1):154–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fu WG, Li PP, Wu YY (2011) Mechanism of the plant community succession process in the Zhenjiang Waterfront Wetland. Plant Ecol 212:1339–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brzezinska MS, Lalke-Porczyk E, Kalwasin A (2012) Extracellular enzyme activity in a willow sewage treatment system. Curr Microbiol 65:776–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chen Y (2015) Experimental study on the optimal operating conditions of vertical subsurface flow constructed wetland technology in cold regions of Northwest China. Dissertation, Lanzhou Jiaotong UniversityGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vymazal J, Kröpfelová L (2015) Multistage hybrid constructed wetland for enhanced removal of nitrogen. Ecol Eng 84:202–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rodrigues NF, Kästle J, Coutinho TJ, Amorim AT, Campos GB, Santos VM, Marques LM, Timenetsky J, Farias ST (2015) Qualitative analysis of the vaginal microbiota of healthy cattle and cattle with genital-tract disease. Genet Mol Res 14(2):6518–6528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang Q, Garrity GM, Tiedje JM, Cole JR (2007) Naïve bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl Environ Microbiol 73(16):5261–5267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Broszat M, Nacke H, Blasi R, Siebe C, Huebner J, Daniel R, Grohmann E (2014) Wastewater irrigation increases abundance of potentially harmful Gammaproteo bacteria in soils from Mezquital Valley, Mexico. Appl Environ Microbiol 80(17):5282–5291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu CL, Zuo WY, Zhao ZY, Qiu LH (2012) Bacterial diversity of different successional stage forest soils in Dinghushan. Acta Microbiol Sin 52(12):1489–1496Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yang J, Zhou GY, Tian YY, Liu QL, Liu CF, Yang Q, Zhou JC (2015) Differential analysis of soil bacteria diversity in different mixed forests of Dalbergia odorifera. Acta Ecol Sin 35(24):8117–8127Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Du YX, Xie BM, Cai HS, Tang L, Guo CH (2016) Structural and functional diversity of rhizosphere microbial community of nine plant species in the Daqing Saline-alkali soil region. Acta Ecol Sin 36(3):740–747Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liu FP (2015) Archaea community and function of the nitrogen cycle in surface sediment from Poyang Lake, China, Dissertation, University of NanchangGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Teira E, Martinez-Garcia S, Lonborg C, Alvarez-Salgado XA (2011) Betaproteobacteria growth and nitrification rates during long-term natural dissolved organic matter decomposition experiments. Aquat Microb Ecol 63(1):19–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Du T (2016) Change of Microbial Communities and Algal Facies in Large Water Pond for Sea Cucumber Apostichopus Japonicus Farming at All Seasons and Probiotics Screening. Dissertation, Shanghai Ocean UniversityGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kielak AM, Barreto CC, Kowalchuk GA, Veen JAV, Kuramae EE (2016) The ecology of acidobacteria: moving beyond genes and genomes. Front Microbiol 7(16):744Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lei X, Li B, Li X, Wang L, Zhu J (2015) Rhizosphere microbial communities of three plants in vertical-flow constructed wetland. Chin J Ecol 34(5):1373–1381Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ducey TF, Vanotti MB, Shriner AD, Szogi A, Ellison A (2010) Characterization of a microbial community capable of nitrification at cold temperature. Bioresource Technol 101(2):491–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zhang HX (2017) Effects of water conditions on soil microbial diversity in coastal reed wetland. Ocean Sci 41(5):144–152Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wang H (2017) Study on the Nitrogen Removal Effects and Mechanism by Using Elodea Nuttallii-immobilized Nitrogen Cycling Bacteria Assemblage Technology in Qinshui River,Gonghu Bay. Dissertation. Nangjing UniversityGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang L, Lin XJ, Zhang Z, Chen GH, Jiang F (2017) Elemental sulfur as an electron acceptor for organic matter removal in a new high-rate anaerobic biological wastewater treatment process. Chem Eng J 331:442–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Carroza C, Hurtado C, Gutierrez F (2012) Nitrogenated compounds’ biofiltration under alternative bacterium fixation substrates. Lat Am J Aquat Res 40(SpecIssue):772–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vanotti MB, Szogi AA, Ducey TF (2013) High performance nitrifying sludge for high ammonium concentration and low temperature wastewater treatment. US Patent 8445253Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology, Ministry of Education & Jiangsu ProvinceJiangsu UniversityZhenjiangPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Cooperative Innovation Center of Southern Modern ForestryNanjing Forestry UniversityNanjingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations