Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 1001–1011 | Cite as

Bacterial communities estimated by pyrosequencing in the soils of chinampa, a traditional sustainable agro-ecosystem in Mexico

  • Salvador Embarcadero-Jiménez
  • Flor N. Rivera-Orduña
  • En Tao Wang
Soils, Sec 5 • Soil and Landscape Ecology • Research Article



As artificial islands created by accumulation of sediments and litters, chinampas formed a unique and sustainable agro-ecosystem. However, no investigation on the chinampa microbial communities has been reported. With the goal of revealing the soil bacterial communities in the chinampas and their changes influenced by environmental conditions, soils were sampled for determining their bacterial communities.

Materials and methods

Soil samples were collected from a cultivated and an abandoned chinampa at two horizontal layers and from rhizosphere of Portulaca oleracea L. The bacterial community composition was assayed by 454 high-throughput pyrosequencing. The correlation between environmental parameters and bacterial diversity was analyzed.

Results and discussion

Sequence analysis based on the V1–V3 regions of 16S rRNA gene obtained 140,790 bacterial tags. A total of 22 phyla and 30 candidate divisions were detected in the chinampa soils. The dominant phyla were Proteobacteria, Chloroflexi, Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and Acidobacteria. Bacillus, Thiobacillus, Nitrospira, and Planctomyces were the principal genera. Greater bacterial diversity was revealed in the superficial soils than in the deep-layer soils and in bulk soils than in the rhizosphere. The structure of microbial communities in the rhizosphere was remarkably different from that of communities in the bulk soils. Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) revealed that contents of nitrogen were negatively correlated with Chlorobi, Verrucomicrobia, Gemmatimonadetes, and Acidobacteria but favored Cyanobacteria, Bacteroidetes, and Nitrospirae, whereas total organic carbon and electrical conductivity were positively correlated with Actinobacteria and Chloroflexi.


As the first exhaustive census on the bacterial communities in chinampa soils, our study demonstrates that the chinampas harbor diverse bacteria from soil and sediments and the agricultural activity and rhizosphere effect can shape the microbial communities in this singular agro-ecosystem.


Anthrosol Bacterial communities Pyrosequencing Rhizosphere Sustainable agriculture Wetland 



We acknowledge the assistance of Dr. Olivia Franco Hernández from IPN-UPIBI by her help in the physicochemical analysis of soil. We also thank Dr. M. Soledad Vásquez Murrieta for her help in CCA and Dr. Gerardo Zúñiga from IPN ENCB for his suggestions and review of the manuscript. This research is financially supported by the projects of SIP20140124, authorized by IPN, and 169494 authorized by CONACyT, Mexico. SEJ received a PhD scholarship by the CONACyT (grant number 230841).

Supplementary material

11368_2015_1277_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.5 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 1581 kb)


  1. Alcántara-Onofre S (2005) The floating gardens in Mexico Xochimilco, world heritage risk site. City Time 1:47–57Google Scholar
  2. Altieri MA, Nicholls CI (2013) The adaptation and mitigation potential of traditional agriculture in a changing climate. Climatic Change (Special Issue on Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation with Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples, edited by McLean KG, Castillo AR, Castellanos E, Lynge A) doi:  10.1007/s10584-013-0909-y
  3. Ansola G, Arroyo P, Sáenz de Miera LE (2014) Characterization of the soil bacterial community structure and composition of natural and constructed wetlands. Sci Total Environ 473–474:63–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arndt D, Xia J, Liu Y, Zhou Y, Guo AC, Cruz JA, Sinelnikov I, Budwill K, Nesbø CL, Wishart DS (2012) METAGENassist: a comprehensive web server for comparative metagenomics. Nucleic Acids Res 40:W88–W95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arroyo P, Sáenz de Miera LE, Ansola G (2015) Influence of environmental variables on the structure and composition of soil bacterial communities in natural and constructed wetlands. Sci Total Environ 506–507:380–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandounas L, Wierckx NJ, de Winde HJ, Ruijssenaars HJ (2011) Isolation and characterization of novel bacterial strains exhibiting ligninolytic potential. BMC Biotechnol 11:94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Basak P, Majumder NS, Nag S, Bhattacharyya A, Roy D, Chakraborty A, SenGupta S, Roy A, Mukherjee A, Pattanayak R, Ghosh A, Chattopadhyay D, Bhattacharyya M (2015) Spatiotemporal analysis of bacterial sediments of Sundarbans using parallel 16S rRNA gene tag sequencing. Microb Ecol 69:500–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bellini MI, Gutiérrez L, Tarlera S, Scavino AF (2013) Isolation and functional analysis of denitrifiers in an aquifer with high potential for denitrification. Syst Appl Microbiol 36:505–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buée M, De Boer W, Martin F, Van OL, Jurkevitch E (2009) The rhizosphere zoo: an overview of plant-associated communities of microorganisms, including phages, bacteria, archaea, and fungi, and of some of their structuring factors. Plant Soil 321:189–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Peña 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 (2010a) QIIME allows analysis of high–throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7:335–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Caporaso JG, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, DeSantis TZ, Andersen GI, Knight R (2010b) PyNAST: a flexible tool for aligning sequences to a template alignment. Bioinformatics 26:266–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ceja-Navarro JA, Rivera-Orduña FN, Patiño-Zúñiga L, Vila-Sanjurjo A, Crossa J, Govaerts B, Dendooven L (2010) Phylogenetic and multivariate analyses to determine the effects of different tillage and residue management practices on soil bacterial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 76:3684–3691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chan BC, Han XQ, Lui SL, Wong CW, Wang TB, Cheung DW, Cheng SW, Ip M, Han SQ, Yang XS, Jolivalt C, Lau CB, Leung PC, Fung KP (2015) Combating against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus—two fatty acids from purslane (Portulaca oleracea L.) exhibit synergistic effects with erythromycin. J Pharm Pharmacol 67:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crossley PL (2004) Sub-irrigation in wetland agriculture. Agri Hum Val 21:191–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crouch SR, Malmstdt HV (1967) Mechanistic investigation of molybdenum blue method for determination of phosphate. Anal Chem 39:1084–1089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Doran JW, Elliott ET, Paustian K (1998) Soil microbial activity, nitrogen cycling, and long-term changes in organic carbon pools as related to fallow tillage management. Soil Till Res 49:3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Edgar RC (2010) Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26:2460–2461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Embarcadero-Jiménez S, Yang FL, Freye-Hernández R, Trujillo-Cabrera Y, Rivera Orduña FN, Yuan HL, Wang ET (2014) An improved protocol for extraction of metagenomic DNA from high humus, alkaline and saline soil of chinampa for T-RFLP fingerprinting analysis. Bri Microbiol Res J 4:821–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Faith DP, Baker AM (2007) Phylogenetic diversity (PD) and biodiversity conservation: some bioinformatics challenges. Evol Bioinform Online 2:121–128Google Scholar
  20. Fierer N, Jackson RB (2006) The diversity and biogeography of soil bacterial communities. Proc Natl Acad Soc USA 103:626–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gans J, Wolinsky M, Dunbar J (2005) Computational improvements reveal great bacterial diversity and high metal toxicity in soil. Science 309:1387–1389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Haaijer SC, Van der Welle ME, Schmid MC, Lamers LPM, Jetten MSM, Op den Camp HJ (2006) Evidence for the involvement of betaproteobacterial Thiobacilli in the nitrate-dependent oxidation of iron sulphide minerals. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 58:439–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Haas BJ, Gevers D, Earl AM, Feldgarden M, Ward DV, Giannoukos G, Ciulla D, Tabbaa D, Highlander SK, Sodergren E, Methé B, DeSantis TZ, Human Microbiome C, Petrosino JF, Knight R, Birren BW (2011) Chimeric 16S rRNA sequence formation and detection in Sanger and 454-pyrosequenced PCR amplicons. Genome Res 21:494–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hamady M, Lozupone C, Knight R (2010) Fast UniFrac: facilitating high-throughput phylogenetic analyses of microbial communities including analysis of pyrosequencing and PhyloChip data. ISME J 4:17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hammer O, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Paleontol Electron 4:1–9Google Scholar
  26. Kersters K, De Vos P, Gillis M, Swings J, Vandamme P, Stackebrant E (2006) Introduction to the Proteobacteria. In: Dworkin M, Falkow S, Rosenberg E, Schleifer KH, Stackebrandt E (eds) The prokaryotes, vol 5, 3rd edn. Springer, New York, pp 3–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krzmarzick MJ, Cray BB, Harding JJ, Oyerinde OO, Leri AC, Myneni SC, Novak PJ (2012) Natural niche for organohalide-respiring Chloroflexi. Appl Environ Microbiol 78:393–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kumar A, Prakash A, Johri BN (2011) Bacillus as PGPR in crop ecosystem. In: Maheshwari DK (ed) Bacteria in agrobiology: crop ecosystems. Springer, Berlin, pp 37–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lauber CL, Hamady M, Knight R, Fierer N (2009) Pyrosequencing-based assessment of soil pH as a predictor of soil bacterial community structure at the continental scale. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:5111–5120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lienhard P, Terrat S, Chemidlin N, Bouré P, Nowak V, Régnier T, Sayphoummie S, Panyasiri K, Tivet F, Mathieu O, Levêque J, Maron PA, Ranjard L (2013) Pyrosequencing evidences the impact of cropping on soil bacterial and fungal diversity in Laos tropical grassland. Agron Sustain Dev 34:525–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ligi T, Oopkaup K, Truu M, Preem J-K, Nõlvak H, Mitsch WJ, Mander Ü, Truu J (2014) Characterization of bacterial communities in soil and sediment of a created riverine wetland complex using high-throughput 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing. Ecol Eng 72:56–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Merlín-Uribe Y, González-Esquivel CE, Contreras-Hernández A, Zambrano L, Moreno-Casasola P, Astier M (2013) Environmental and socio-economic sustainability of chinampas (raised beds) in Xochimilco, Mexico City. Int J Agr Sustain 11:216–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Muyzer G, Stams AJ (2008) The ecology and biotechnology of sulphate-reducing bacteria. Nat Rev Microbiol 6:441–454Google Scholar
  34. Nannipieri P, Ascher J, Ceccherini MT, Landi L, Pietramellara G, Renella G (2003) Microbial diversity and soil functions. Eur J Soil Sci 54:655–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Navarro-Noya YE, Gómez-Acata S, Montoya-Ciriaco N, Rojas-Valdez R, Suárez-Arriaga MC, Valenzuela-Encinas C, Jiménez-Bueno N, Verhulst N, Govaerts B, Dendooven L (2013) Relative impacts of tillage, residue management and crop-rotation on soil bacterial communities in a semi-arid agro-ecosystem. Soil Biom Biochem 65:86–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Peralta RM, Ahn C, Gillevet PM (2013) Characterization of soil bacterial community structure and physicochemical properties in created and natural wetlands. Sci Total Environ 15:725–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP (2009) FastTree: computing large minimum evolution trees with profiles instead of a distance matrix. Mol Biol Evol 26:1641–1650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Qi X, Wang E, Xing M, Zhao W, Chen X (2012) Rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere bacterial community composition of the wild medicinal plant Rumex patientia. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 28:2257–2265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ramos-Bello R, García-Calderon NE, Ortega-Escobar HM, Krasilnikov P (2011) Artificial chinampas soils of Mexico City: their properties and salinization hazards. Span J Soil Sci 1:71–85Google Scholar
  40. Roesch LFW, Fulthorpe RR, Riva A, Casella G, Hadwin AKM, Kent AD, Daroub SH, Camargo FAO, Farmerie WG, Triplett EW (2007) Pyrosequencing enumerates and contrasts soil microbial diversity. ISME J 1:283–290Google Scholar
  41. Scherf U, Ross DT, Waltham M, Smith LH, Lee JK, Tanabe L, Kohn KW, Reinhold WC, Myers TG, Andrews DT, Scudiero DA, Eisen MB, Sausville EA, Pommier Y, Botstein D, Brown PO, Weinstein JN (2000) A gene expression database for the molecular pharmacology of cancer. Nat Genet 24:236–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stroobants A, Degrune F, Olivier C, Muys C, Roisin C, Colinet G, Bodson B, Portetelle D, Vandenbol M (2014) Diversity of bacterial communities in a profile of a winter wheat field: known and unknown members. Microb Ecol 68:822–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Trujillo-Cabrera Y, Ponce-Mendoza A, Vásquez-Murrieta MS, Rivera-Orduña FN, Wang ET (2013) Diverse cellulolytic bacteria isolated from the high humus, alkaline-saline chinampa soils. Ann Microbiol 63:779–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Uroz S, Buée M, Murat C, Frey-Klett P, Martin F (2010) Pyrosequencing reveals a contrasted bacterial diversity between oak rhizosphere and surrounding soil. Environ Microbiol Rep 2:281–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vásquez-Murrieta MS, Migueles-Garduño I, Franco-Hernández O, Govaerts B, Dendooven L (2006) C and N mineralization and microbial biomass in heavy-metal contaminated soil. Eur J Soil Biol 42:89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Verástegui-Valdés MM, Zhang YJ, Rivera-Orduña FN, Cheng HP, Sui XH, Wang ET (2014) Microsymbionts of Phaseolus vulgaris in acid and alkaline soils of Mexico. Syst Appl Microbiol 37:605–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 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 73:5261–5267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang Y, Sheng H-F, He Y, Wu JY, Jiang Y-X, Tam NF-Y, Zhou H-W (2012) Comparison of the levels of bacterial diversity in freshwater, intertidal wetland, and marine sediments by using millions of illumina tags. Appl Environ Microbiol 78:8264–8271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Whipps JM (2001) Microbial interactions and biocontrol in the rhizosphere. J Exp Bot 52:487–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Xiang L, Xing D, Wang W, Wang R, Ding Y, Du L (2005) Alkaloids from Portulaca oleracea L. Phytochemistry 66:2595–2601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Xing J, Yang Z, Lv B, Xiang L (2008) Rapid screening for cyclo-dopa and diketopiperazine alkaloids in crude extracts of Portulaca oleracea L. using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 22:1415–1422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yun J, Ju Y, Deng Y, Zhang H (2014) Bacterial community structure in two permafrost wetlands on the Tibetan Plateau and Sanjiang Plain, China. Microb Ecol 68:360–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhang W, Wu X, Liu G, Chen Y, Zhang G, Dong Z, Yang X, Hu P (2013) Pyrosequencing reveals bacterial diversity in the rhizosphere of three Phragmites australis ecotypes. Geomicrobiol J 30:593–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Salvador Embarcadero-Jiménez
    • 1
  • Flor N. Rivera-Orduña
    • 1
  • En Tao Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Microbiología, Escuela Nacional de Ciencias BiológicasInstituto Politécnico NacionalMexicoMexico

Personalised recommendations