Culturable Actinobacteria from the Marine Sponge Hymeniacidon perleve: Isolation and Phylogenetic Diversity by 16S rRNA gene-RFLP Analysis
- 928 Downloads
A total of 106 actinobacteria associated with the marine sponge Hymeniacidon perleve collected from the Yellow Sea, China were isolated using eight different media. The number of species and genera of actinobacteria recovered from the different media varied significantly, underlining the importance of optimizing the isolation conditions. The phylogenetic diversity of the actinobacteria isolates was assessed using 16S rRNA gene amplification–restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis of the 106 strains with different morphologies. The RFLP fingerprinting of selected strains by HhaI-digestion of the 16S rRNA genes resulted in 11 different patterns. The HhaI-RFLP analysis gave good resolution for the identification of the actinobacteria isolates at the genus level. A phylogenetic analysis using 16S rRNA gene sequences revealed that the isolates belonged to seven genera of culturable actinobacteria including Actinoalloteichus, Micromonospora, Nocardia, Nocardiopsis, Pseudonocardia, Rhodococcus, and Streptomyces. The dominant genus was Streptomyces, which represented 74% of the isolates. Three of the strains identified are candidates for new species.
KeywordsMarine sponge Actinobacteria RFLP Streptomycetes Nocardiopsis Pseudonocardia Nocardia Micromonospora Rhodococcus Actinoalloteichus
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
The authors wish to thank financial supports from “Innovation Fund” from the Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, “973 Hi-Tech Research and Development Program of China” (2003CB716001). This research was also funded by National Research Laboratory Program of the Korean Ministry of Science & Technology (PE05009). We appreciate Professor Li-Jinhe, at Qingdao Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences for the sponge identification.
- Bultel-Ponce VC, Debitus JP, Berge GP, Guyot M (1998) Metabolites from the marine sponge-associated bacterium Micrococcus luteus. J Mar Biotech 6:233–236Google Scholar
- Chun J (1995) Computer-assisted classification and identification of actinomycetes. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UKGoogle Scholar
- Felsenstein J (1993) PHYLIP (Phylogeny inference package), version 3.5c. Department of Genetics, University of Washington, seattle, WA, USAGoogle Scholar
- Fenical W, Baden D, Burg M, Goyet CV, Grimes JD, Katz M, Marcus NH, Pomponi S, Rhines P, Tester P, Vena J (1999) Marine-derived pharmaceuticals and related bioactive compounds. In: Fenical W (ed) From monsoons to microbes: understanding the ocean’s role in human health, Washington, D.C. pp 71–86Google Scholar
- Imhoff JF, Stöhr R (2003) Sponge-associated bacteria: general overview and special aspects of bacteria association with Halichondria panacea. In: Müller WEG (ed) Sponge (Porifera). Springer, Berlin, pp 35–58Google Scholar
- Labeda D, Shearer M (1990) Isolation of Actinomycetes for biotechnological applications. In: Labeda DP (ed) Isolation of biotechnological organisms from nature. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York, pp 1–19Google Scholar
- Lee YK, Lee JH, Lee HK (2001) Microbial symbiosis in marine sponges. J Microbiol 39:254–264Google Scholar
- Peltola JS, Andersson MA, Kampfer P, Auling G, Kroppenstedt RM, Busse HJ, Salkinoja-Salonen MS, Rainey FA (2001) Isolation of toxigenic Nocardiopsis strains from indoor environments and description of two new Nocardiopsis species, N. exhalans sp. nov. and N. umidischolae sp. nov. Appl Environ Microbiol 67:4293–4304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Saitou N, Nei M (1987) The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Bio Evol 4:406–425Google Scholar
- Xu JY, Jin Y, Yu XJ, Jin MF, Zhang W (2004) Bacteria Diversity Associated with the marine sponge Hymeniacidon perleve in China Yellow Sea. Acta Microbiol Sinica 44:576–579Google Scholar
- Yang Y, Xu L, Li Q, Jiang C (1995) A Study on Isolation Methods of Actinomycetes. Chin J Microbiol 22:88–91Google Scholar