Influences of plant type on bacterial and archaeal communities in constructed wetland treating polluted river water
- 734 Downloads
Both bacteria and archaeal communities can play important roles in biogeochemical processes in constructed wetland (CW) system. However, the influence of plant type on microbial community in surface water CW remains unclear. The present study investigated bacterial and archaeal communities in five surface water CW systems with different plant species. The abundance, richness, and diversity of both bacterial and archaeal communities considerably differed in these five CW systems. Compared with the other three CW systems, the CW systems planted with Vetiveria zizanioides or Juncus effusus L. showed much higher bacterial abundance but lower archaeal abundance. Bacteria outnumbered archaea in each CW system. Moreover, the CW systems planted with V. zizanioides or J. effusus L. had relatively lower archaeal but higher bacterial richness and diversity. In each CW system, bacterial community displayed much higher richness and diversity than archaeal community. In addition, a remarkable difference of both bacterial and archaeal community structures was observed in the five studied CW systems. Proteobacteria was the most abundant bacterial group (accounting for 33–60 %). Thaumarchaeota organisms (57 %) predominated in archaeal communities in CW systems planted with V. zizanioides or J. effusus L., while Woesearchaeota (23 or 24 %) and Euryarchaeota (23 or 15 %) were the major archaeal groups in CW systems planted with Cyperus papyrus or Canna indica L. Archaeal community in CW planted with Typha orientalis Presl was mainly composed of unclassified archaea. Therefore, plant type exerted a considerable influence on microbial community in surface water CW system.
KeywordsArchaea Bacteria Constructed wetland Microbial community River water Vegetation
This work was financially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 50908095, 41001323).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The work has not been published previously and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
- Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Pena AG, Goodrich JK, Gordon JI, Huttley GA, Kelley ST, Knights D, Koenig JE, Ley RE, Lozupone CA, McDonald D, Muegge BD, Pirrung M, Reeder J, Sevinsky JR, Turnbaugh PJ, Walters WA, Widmann J, Yatsunenko T, Zaneveld J, Knight R (2010) QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7:335–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lee MD, Walworth NG, Sylvan JB, Edwards KJ, Orcutt BN (2015b) Microbial communities on seafloor basalts at Dorado outcrop reflect level of alteration and highlight global lithic clades. Front Microbiol 6:1470Google Scholar
- Quemeneur M, Palvadeau A, Postec A, Monnin C, Chavagnac V, Ollivier B, Erauso G (2015) Endolithic microbial communities in carbonate precipitates from serpentinite-hosted hyperalkaline springs of the Voltri Massif (Ligurian Alps, Northern Italy). Environ Sci Pollut Res 22:13613–13624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vymazal J, Balcarova J, Dousova H (2001) Bacterial dynamics in the sub-surface constructed wetland. Water Sci Technol 44:207–209Google Scholar
- Yang YY, Dai Y, Wu Z, Xie SG, Liu Y (2016) Temporal and spatial dynamics of archaeal communities in two freshwater lakes at different trophic status. Front Microbiol 7:451Google Scholar