Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Oct;9(10):2178-90.
doi: 10.1038/ismej.2015.30. Epub 2015 Mar 27.

Metatranscriptomic census of active protists in soils

Stefan Geisen  1   2 , Alexander T Tveit  3 , Ian M Clark  4 , Andreas Richter  5 , Mette M Svenning  3 , Michael Bonkowski  1 , Tim Urich  6
Affiliations

Metatranscriptomic census of active protists in soils

Stefan Geisen et al. ISME J. 2015 Oct.

Abstract

The high numbers and diversity of protists in soil systems have long been presumed, but their true diversity and community composition have remained largely concealed. Traditional cultivation-based methods miss a majority of taxa, whereas molecular barcoding approaches employing PCR introduce significant biases in reported community composition of soil protists. Here, we applied a metatranscriptomic approach to assess the protist community in 12 mineral and organic soil samples from different vegetation types and climatic zones using small subunit ribosomal RNA transcripts as marker. We detected a broad diversity of soil protists spanning across all known eukaryotic supergroups and revealed a strikingly different community composition than shown before. Protist communities differed strongly between sites, with Rhizaria and Amoebozoa dominating in forest and grassland soils, while Alveolata were most abundant in peat soils. The Amoebozoa were comprised of Tubulinea, followed with decreasing abundance by Discosea, Variosea and Mycetozoa. Transcripts of Oomycetes, Apicomplexa and Ichthyosporea suggest soil as reservoir of parasitic protist taxa. Further, Foraminifera and Choanoflagellida were ubiquitously detected, showing that these typically marine and freshwater protists are autochthonous members of the soil microbiota. To the best of our knowledge, this metatranscriptomic study provides the most comprehensive picture of active protist communities in soils to date, which is essential to target the ecological roles of protists in the complex soil system.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Community composition of protist supergroups in the investigated soils. For detailed information on soil parameters, see Table 1.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Unweighted Pair Group Method (UPGMA) clustering analysis to evaluate differences between soil protist communities. For detailed information on soil characteristics and abbreviations, see Table 1.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Community composition within the SAR supergroup independently showing the community compositions within the individual clades of SAR, i.e., Rhizaria (a), Alveolata (b) and Stramenopiles (c). Shown are means of biological replicates. Labels and sites as described in Table 1 and Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Community composition within the supergroup Amoebozoa in the investigated soils. Shown are means of biological replicates. Labels and sites as described in Table 1 and Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 5
Figure 5
SSU rRNA transcript abundance±s.d. of Foraminifera and Choanoflagellida in the soil metatranscriptomes. Labels and sites as described in Figure 2 and Table 1.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Maximum likelihood tree of Choanoflagellida placing assembled long SSU rRNA contigs (red) with sequences of described and uncultivated choanoflagellates. Seventy-one sequences with 1232 unambiguously aligned positions were used; the tree is unrooted; values higher than 50 for maximum likelihood analyses (left) and 0.50 for Bayesian analyses (right) shown. Black circles indicate full support.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Adl SM, Simpson AGB, Lane CE, Lukeš J, Bass D, Bowser SS et al. (2012). The revised classification of eukaryotes. J Eukaryot Microbiol 59: 429–514. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Adl SM, Habura A, Eglit Y. (2014). Amplification primers of SSU rDNA for soil protists. Soil Biol Biochem 69: 328–342.
    1. Altizer S, Harvell D, Friedle E. (2003). Rapid evolutionary dynamics and disease threats to biodiversity. Trends Ecol Evol 18: 589–596.
    1. Amaral-Zettler LA, McCliment EA, Ducklow HW, Huse SM. (2009). A method for studying protistan diversity using massively parallel sequencing of V9 hypervariable regions of small-subunit ribosomal RNA genes. PloS One 4: e6372. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Arndt H, Dietrich D, Auer B, Cleven E-J, Gräfenhan T, Weitere M et al. (2000). Functional diversity of heterotrophic flagellates in aquatic ecosystems. In: Leadbeater BSC, Green JC et al. The Flagellates: Unity, Diversity and Evolution. Taylor & Francis: London, pp 240–268.

Publication types