Advertisement

Microbial Ecology

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 181–192 | Cite as

Phenotypical divergences between populations of soil bacteria isolated on different media

  • Roald Sørheim
  • Vigdis Lid Torsvik
  • Jostein Goksøyr
Note

Abstract

Bacterial strains were randomly isolated from soil using three different media with glucose (TG), Tryptone Soya Broth (TTS), and succinate (TS) as carbon sources. Plate counts obtained were 12.0×107, 4.5 ×107, and 1.5×107 g−1 soil dry weight, respectively. The strains were characterized phenotypically by the API 20B test system. A cluster analysis of all isolates revealed 40 biotypes at 80% similarity, 23 in TG, 29 in TTS, and 27 in TS. Each of the 10 most common biotypes contained 10 to 2.5% of the isolates, and 17 biotypes contained one or two isolates. The common biotypes were unevenly distributed among the isolates from the different media. About 20% of the isolates from TG and TTS were unique for the particular medium, whereas among the isolates from TS, about 60% were unique. Thirty percent of the isolates belonged to biotypes that were common to all three populations. All media gave approximately the same high diversity measured as Shannon index and Equitability, indicating no direct correlation between plate count and diversity.

Keywords

Glucose Carbon Source Cluster Analysis Bacterial Strain Succinate 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Buchanan RE, Gibbons NE (1974) Bergey's manual of determinative bacteriology, 8th ed. Williams and Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buck JD (1982) Nonstaining (KOH) method for determination of Gram reactions of marine bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 44:992–993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gamble TN, Betlach MR, Tiedje JM (1977) Numerically dominant denitrifying bacteria from world soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 33:926–939PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hanssen JF, Thingstad TF, Goksøyr J (1974) Evaluation of hyphal lengths and fungal biomass in soil by a membrane filter technique. OIKOS 7:102–107Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hoffman PS, Pine L, Bell S (1983) Production of Superoxide and hydrogen peroxide in medium used to cultureLegionella pneumophilia: Catalytic decomposition by charcoal. Appl Environ Microbiol 45:784–791PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jensen V (1968) The plate count technique. In: Gray TRG, Parkinson D (eds) The ecology of soil bacteria. University Press, Liverpool, pp 158–170Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lance GN, Williams WT (1967) A general theory of classifactory sorting strategies. 1. Hierarchical systems. Computer J 9:373–380Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    Lockhead AG, Burton MO (1956) Importance of soil extract for the enumeration and study of soil bacteria. Sixieme Congres de la Science du Sol Paris III, pp 157–161Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    Martin JK (1975) Comparison of agar media for counts of viable soil bacteria. Soil Biol Biochem 7:401–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Martin SE, Flowers RS, Ordal ZJ (1976) Catalase: Its effect on microbial enumeration. Appl Environ Microbiol 32:731–734PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mills AL, Wassel RA (1980) Aspects of diversity measurement for microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 40:578–586Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Olsen RA, Bakken LR (1987) Viability of soil bacteria: Optimization of plate-counting technique and comparison between total counts and plate counts within different size groups. Microb Ecol 13:59–74Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Olsson S, Söderström B, Nordbring-Hertz B (1984) A fast and simple method for classification of soil bacterial populations. Z Pflanzenernaehr Bodenk 147:198–202Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pielou EC (1966) The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J Theoret Biol 13:131–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pochon J (1954) Manuel technique d'analyse microbiologique du sol. Masson et Cie., ParisGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ristroph JD, Hedlund KW, Allen RG (1980) Liquid medium for growth ofLegionella pneumophilia. J Clin Microbiol 11:19–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosswall T (1971) List of media used in microbiological studies. International Biological Programme—Swedish Tundra Biome Project. Technical Report No. 8Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Technol 27:379–423Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sokal RR, Michener CD (1958) A statistical method for evaluating systematic relationships. Univ Kansas Sci Bull 38:1049–1438Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sundman V (1970) Four bacterial soil populations characterized and compared by a factor analytical method. Can J Microbiol 16:455–464PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tate RL III, Mills AL (1983) Cropping and the diversity and function of bacteria in Pahokee muck. Soil Boil Biochem 15:175–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thornton HG (1922) On the development of a standardised agar medium for counting soil bacteria, with especial regard to the repression of spreading colonies. Ann Appl Biol 9:241–274Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Williams RT, Crawford RL (1983) Microbial diversity of Minnesota peatlands. Microb Ecol 9:201–214Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roald Sørheim
    • 1
  • Vigdis Lid Torsvik
    • 1
  • Jostein Goksøyr
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Microbiology and Plant PhysiologyUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations