Advertisement

Physiological and Ecological Adaptations of Slow-Growing, Heterotrophic Microbes and Consequences for Cultivation

  • Thomas M. SchmidtEmail author
  • Allan E. Konopka
Chapter
Part of the Microbiology Monographs book series (MICROMONO, volume 10)

Abstract

There is a large discrepancy between the number of microbes that can be visualized in samples from most natural environments and the small number that grows readily in the laboratory. This anomaly hinders opportunities to advance our understanding of the vast metabolic and evolutionary diversity of microbes, and imposes severe limitations on our capacity to link patterns of ecological diversity with the functioning of microbial communities. This chapter focuses on slow-growing, heterotrophic microbes as a potential source of cultures to represent the remarkable phylogenetic diversity of the microbial world. Despite the obvious advantages conferred upon microbes that leave the most progeny per unit time, chronic limitation of nutrients in many environments selects for microbes that are able to survive and use resources efficiently, even if it involves a trade-off for faster growth when resources are abundant. Understanding the ecological strategies of slow-growing microbes and adjusting expectations for cultivation to match the physiological capabilities of these microbes offer an opportunity to narrow the tremendous gap between the microscopically visible microbes and those that are readily cultivated.

Keywords

Substrate Concentration Dilution Rate Chemostat Culture Cultivation Strategy Initial Substrate Concentration 
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.

References

  1. Alden L, Demoling F et al. (2001) Rapid method of determining factors limiting bacterial growth in soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 67(4):1830–1838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baath E (1998) Growth rates of bacterial communities in soils at varying pH: a comparison of the thymidine and leucine incorporation techniques. Microb Ecol 36(3):316–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker JM, Parkin T et al. (2006) Bacterial activity, community structure, and centimeter-scale spatial heterogeneity in contaminated soil. Microb Ecol 51(2):220–231PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bloomfield S F, Stewart G et al. (1998)The viable but non-culturable phenomenon explained. Microbiology 144 (Part 1):1–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brock TD (1966) Principles of microbial ecology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruns A, Hoffelner H et al. (2003) A novel approach for high throughput cultivation assays and the isolation of planktonic bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 45(2):161–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burns DG, Camakaris HM et al. (2004) Combined use of cultivation-dependent and cultivation-independent methods indicates that members of most haloarchaeal groups in an Australian crystallizer pond are cultivable. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(9):5258–5265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Button DK (1985) Kinetics of nutrient-limited transport and microbial-growth. Microbiol Rev 49(3):270–297PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Button DK (1994) The physical base of marine bacterial ecology. Microb Ecol 28(2):273–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Button DK (1998) Nutrient uptake by microorganisms according to kinetic parameters from theory as related to cytoarchitecture. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 62(3):636–645PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Button DK, Schut F et al. (1993) Viability and isolation of marine-bacteria by dilution culture – theory, procedures, and initial results. Appl Environ Microbiol 59(3):881–891PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Button DK, Robertson BR et al. (1996) Microflora of a subalpine lake: bacterial populations, size and DNA distributions, and their dependence on phosphate. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 21(2):87–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Button DK, Robertson BR et al. (1998) A small, dilute-cytoplasm, high-affinity, novel bacterium isolated by extinction culture and having kinetic constants compatible with growth at ambient concentrations of dissolved nutrients in seawater. Appl Environ Microbiol 64(11):4467–4476PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Button DK, Robertson B et al. (2004) Experimental and theoretical bases of specific affinity, a cytoarchitecture-based formulation of nutrient collection proposed to supercede the Michaels-Menten paradigm of microbial kinetics. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(9):5511–5521PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cho JC, Giovannoni SJ (2004) Cultivation and growth characteristics of a diverse group of oligotrophic marine Gammaproteobacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(1):432–440PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coale KH, Johnson KS et al. (1996) A massive phytoplankton bloom induced by an ecosystem-scale iron fertilization experiment in the equatorial Pacific Ocean. Nature 383(6600):495–501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cole JJ, Findlay S et al. (1988) Bacterial production in fresh and saltwater ecosystems – a cross-system overview. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 43(1–2):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Connon SA, Giovannoni SJ (2002) High-throughput methods for culturing microorganisms in very-low-nutrient media yield diverse new marine isolates. Appl Environ Microbiol 68(8):3878–3885PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davis KER, Joseph SJ et al. (2005) Effects of growth medium, inoculum size, and incubation time on culturability and isolation of soil bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(2):826–834PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dethlefsen L, Schmidt TM (2007) Performance of the translational apparatus varies with the ecological strategies of bacteria. J Bacteriol 189(8):3237–3245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eichorst SA, Breznak JA et al. (2007) Isolation and characterization of soil bacteria that define Terriglobus gen. nov., in the Phylum Acidobacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 73(8):2708–2717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fenchel T, King GM et al. (1998) Bacterial biogeochemistry: the ecophysiology of mineral cycling. Academic, San Diego, CAGoogle Scholar
  23. Ferrari BC, Binnerup SJ et al. (2005) Microcolony cultivation on a soil substrate membrane system selects for previously uncultured soil bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(12):8714–8720PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gans J, Wolinsky M et al. (2005) Computational improvements reveal great bacterial diversity and high metal toxicity in soil. Science 309(5739):1387–1390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gich F, Schubert K et al. (2005) Specific detection, isolation, and characterization of selected, previously uncultured members of the freshwater bacterioplankton community. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(10):5908–5919PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hahn MW, Stadler P et al. (2004) The filtration-acclimatization method for isolation of an important fraction of the not readily cultivable bacteria. J Microbiol Methods 57(3):379–390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hamaki T, Suzuki M et al. (2005) Isolation of novel bacteria and actinomycetes using soil-extract agar medium. J Biosci Bioeng 99(5):485–492PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hashimoto T, Hattori T (1989) Grouping of soil bacteria by analysis of colony formation on agar plates. Biol Fertil Soils 7(3):198–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hattori T, Mitsui H et al. (1997) Advances in soil microbial ecology and the biodiversity. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek Int J Gen Mol Microbiol 72(1):21–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Inoue K, Nishimura M et al. (2007) Separation of marine bacteria according to buoyant density by use of the density-dependent cell sorting method. Appl Environ Microbiol 73(4):1049–1053PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Janssen PH, Yates PS et al. (2002) Improved culturability of soil bacteria and isolation in pure culture of novel members of the divisions Acidobacteria, Actinobacteria, Proteobacteria, and Verrucomicrobia. Appl Environ Microbiol 68(5):2391–2396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jassby AD, Platt T (1976) Mathematical formulation of relationship between photosynthesis and light for phytoplankton. Limnol Oceanogr 21(4):540–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Joseph SJ, Hugenholtz P et al. (2003) Laboratory cultivation of widespread and previously uncultured soil bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 69(12):7210–7215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kaeberlein T, Lewis K et al. (2002) Isolating “uncultivable” microorganisms in pure culture in a simulated natural environment. Science 296(5570):1127–1129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kalasinsky KS, Hadfield T et al. (2007) Raman chemical imaging spectroscopy reagentless detection and identification of pathogens: signature development and evaluation. Anal Chem 79(7):2658–2673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kirchman DL (1990) Limitation of bacterial-growth by dissolved organic-matter in the sub-arctic Pacific. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 62(1–2):47–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kirchman DL, Meon B et al. (2001) Glucose fluxes and concentrations of dissolved combined neutral sugars (polysaccharides) in the Ross Sea and Polar Front Zone, Antarctica. Deep-Sea Res. II. Topical Stud Oceanogr 48(19–20):4179–4197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Klappenbach JA, Dunbar JM et al. (2000) rRNA operon copy number reflects ecological strategies of bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 66(4):1328–1333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Koch AL (1997) Microbial physiology and ecology of slow growth. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 61(3):305–318PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Koch AL (2001) Oligotrophs versus copiotrophs. BioEssays 23:657–661PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Leadbetter JR (2003) Cultivation of recalcitrant microbes: cells are alive, well and revealing their secrets in the 21st century laboratory. Curr Opin Microbiol 6(3):274–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lovley DR, Klug MJ (1982) Intermediary metabolism of organic-matter in the sediments of a utrophic lake. Appl Environ Microbiol 43(3):552–560PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, NJGoogle Scholar
  44. Martin JH, Fitzwater SE (1988) Iron-deficiency limits phytoplankton growth in the northeast Pacific subarctic. Nature 331(6154):341–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mitsui H, Gorlach K et al. (1997) Incubation time and media requirements of culturable bacteria from different phylogenetic groups. J Microbiol Methods 30(2):103–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Morris RM, Rappe MS et al. (2002) SAR11 clade dominates ocean surface bacterioplankton communities. Nature 420(6917):806–810PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Naumann D, Helm D et al. (1991) Microbiological characterizations by FT-IR spectroscopy. Nature 351(6321):81–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Nystrom T (2001) Not quite dead enough: on bacterial life, culturability, senescence, and death. Arch Microbiol 176(3):159–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Park HS, Schumacher R et al. (2005) New method to characterize microbial diversity using flow cytometry. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 32(3):94–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Parkin TB, Brock TD (1980) Photosynthetic bacterial production in lakes – the effects of light-intensity. Limnol Oceanogr 25(4):711–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Poindexter JS (1981) Oligotrophy – fast and famine existence. Adv Microb Ecol 5:63–89Google Scholar
  52. Rappe MS, Connon SA et al. (2002) Cultivation of the ubiquitous SAR11 marine bacterioplankton clade. Nature 418(6898):630–633PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rosenstock B, Simon M (2001) Sources and sinks of dissolved free amino acids and protein in a large and deep mesotrophic lake. Limnol Oceanogr 46(3):644–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sait M, Hugenholtz P et al. (2002) Cultivation of globally distributed soil bacteria from phylogenetic lineages previously only detected in cultivation-independent surveys. Environ Microbiol 4(11):654–666PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sangwan P, Kovac S et al. (2005) Detection and cultivation of soil verrucomicrobia. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(12):8402–8410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schoenborn L, Yates PS et al. (2004) Liquid serial dilution is inferior to solid media for isolation of cultures representative of the phylum-level diversity of soil bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(7):4363–4366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schut F, Devries EJ et al. (1993) Isolation of typical marine-bacteria by dilution culture – growth, maintenance, and characteristics of isolates under laboratory conditions. Appl Environ Microbiol 59(7):2150–2160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Schut F, Prins RA et al. (1997) Oligotrophy and pelagic marine bacteria: facts and fiction. Aquat Microb Ecol 12(2):177–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sessitsch A, Weilharter A et al. (2001) Microbial population structures in soil particle size fractions of a long-term fertilizer field experiment. Appl Environ Microbiol 67(9):4215–4224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Seymour JR, Mitchell JG et al. (2004) Microscale heterogeneity in the activity of coastal bacterioplankton communities. Aquat Microb Ecol 35(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Smith EM, Prairie YT (2004) Bacterial metabolism and growth efficiency in lakes: the importance of phosphorus availability. Limnol Oceanogr 49(1):137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sogin ML, Morrison HG et al. (2006) Microbial diversity in the deep sea and the underexplored “rare biosphere”. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(32):12115–12120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Staley JT, Konopka A (1985) Measurement of insitu activities of nonphotosynthetic microorganisms in aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Annual Rev Microbiol 39:321–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stevenson BS, Schmidt TM (2004) Life history implications of rRNA gene copy number in Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(11):6670–6677PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stevenson BS, Eichorst SA et al. (2004) New strategies for cultivation and detection of previously uncultured microbes. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(8):4748–4755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tempest DW, Neijssel OM et al. (1983) Properties and performance of microorganisms in laboratory culture: their relevance to growth in natural ecosystems. Symp Soc Gen Microbiol 34:119–152Google Scholar
  67. Tilman D (1981) Tests of resource competition theory using four species of Lake Michigan algae. Ecology 62(3):802–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Torsvik V, Daae FL et al. (1998) Novel techniques for analysing microbial diversity in natural and perturbed environments. J Biotechnol 64(1):53–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vancanneyt M, Schut F et al. (2001) Sphingomonas alaskensis sp nov., a dominant bacterium from a marine oligotrophic environment. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 51:73–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Vargha M, Takats Z et al. (2006) Optimization of MALDI-TOF MS for strain level differentiation of Arthrobacter isolates. J Microbiol Methods 66(3):399–409PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Vives-Rego J, Lebaron P et al. (2000) Current and future applications of flow cytometry in aquatic microbiology. FEMS Microbiol Rev 24(4):429–448PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wandersman C, Delepelaire P (2004) Bacterial iron sources: from siderophores to hemophores. Annu Rev Microbiol 58:611–647PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Watve M, Shejval V et al. (2000) The ‘K’ selected oligophilic bacteria: a key to uncultured diversity? Curr Sci 78(12):1535–1542Google Scholar
  74. Whitman WB, Coleman DC et al. (1998) Prokaryotes: the unseen majority. PNAS 95(12):6578–6583PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Yokokawa T, Nagata T et al. (2004) Growth rate of the major phylogenetic bacterial groups in the Delaware estuary. Limnol Oceanogr 49(5):1620–1629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zengler K, Toledo G et al. (2002) Cultivating the uncultured. PNAS 99(24):15681–15686PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zhou JZ, Xia BC et al. (2002) Spatial and resource factors influencing high microbial diversity in soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 68(1):326–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Microbiology and Molecular GeneticsMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  2. 2.Biological Sciences DivisionPacific Northwest National LaboratoryRichlandUSA

Personalised recommendations