Comparative Evaluation of Microbial Diversity of Epipellic and Benthic Sediments using Cultural and Metagenomics Techniques
U. O. Edet, S. P. Antai, A. D. Asitok, A. A. Brooks
Asian Journal of Environment & Ecology · pp. 1–13 · Published 28 May 2018
10.9734/AJEE/2018/41431Abstract
Introduction: Studies have shown that molecular techniques are better in describing microbial diversity in various ecosystems than cultural techniques. The study was aimed at comparative evaluation of the microbial diversity of benthic and epipellic sediments using cultural and metagenomics techniques. Methodology: Benthic and epipellic sediments were collected in triplicates from five locations from the Iko River estuary in Eastern Obolo. Total heterotrophic bacterial and fungal counts, and characterization of microbial isolates were done using the standard microbiological technique. Metagenomic DNA was extracted using ZYMO soil DNA extraction Kit (Model D601, Zymo Research, USA). Following extraction and amplification, the resulting DNA was sequenced using next-generation sequence on Miseq Illumina platform. Data from cultured based techniques were analysed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and student t-test while resulting metagenomic data were analyzed using web-based bioinformatics tools. Results: Bacteria and fungi counts ranged from 1.08 to 1.60 (x 106 CFU/g) and 0.10 to 2.2 (x 103 CFU/g) with benthic sediments having the highest abundance in both cases. Compared to cultural techniques which captured only bacterial and fungal kingdoms, metagenomics captured archaea, protozoa, viruses, plantae, and unknown kingdoms. Furthermore, 17 phyla were obtained using metagenomics compared to 3 phyla captured by cultural techniques. A total of 61 isolates were recovered spread across various genera (10 from benthic and 11 from epipellic). Most common isolates in both samples were Bacillus, Micrococcus and Pseudomonas. Although a total of 300 species were identified using metagenomics, about 78.92% and 71.19% of the species were uncultured bacterium for benthic and epipellic sediments, respectively. Furthermore, the species were dominated with species involved in nutrient recycling such as Thiobacillus prosperus, Sulfurimonas species and Marinobacterium nitratireducens. Surprisingly, 15(0.15%) of the reads showed sequence similar to Influenza A virus (H3N6) viral cRNA with accession number LC053487.1. Conclusion: The results show that metagenomic assessment is better in capturing the bacterial diversity of sediment than cultural methods.
Cited by 5
Bassey Ini Ubi, Edet Uwem Okon, I. E. Andy · Scientific African · 2025
N. Umoafia, A. Joseph, U. Edet · Food and Chemical Toxicology · 2023
Rok Tomazin, Tjaša Cerar Kišek, Tea Janko · Microorganisms · 2024
Ashim Jyoti Pathak, Indrani Gogoi, Pankaj Chetia · Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology · 2024
Anika Ogemdi Chinwendu, Akin-Osanaiye Bukola Catherine, Edet Uwem Okon · Journal of microbiology, biotechnology and food sciences · 2021
Related research
- An Improved Protocol for Extraction of Metagenomic DNA from High Humus, Alkaline and Saline Soil of Chinampa for T-RFLP Fingerprinting Analysis — shares topic coverage
- Comparative Bacterial Metagenomics of Cnidoscolus aconitifolius (Mill.) I. M. Johnston and Other Leafy Vegetables — shares topic coverage
- Microbiomes as Natural Allies: Towards Sustainable Farming Practices — shares topic coverage
- Optimization of Soil DNA Extraction Protocol Using Na2EDTA, SDS, Heating, Vortexing and CaCl2 and Its Validation for Metagenomic Studies — shares topic coverage
- Metagenomic Approach towards Bioprospection of Novel Biomolecule(s) and Environmental Bioremediation — shares topic coverage
Article metrics
Real usage data collected on this platform.
0
Page views
0
PDF downloads
0
Outbound clicks
5
Citations
Views by country
Approximate, from request IP at view time — not citizenship or institution. Countries with fewer than 5 views are grouped as "Other".
No views recorded yet.
Traffic sources
Referring site, by host.
No traffic recorded yet.
Views and downloads exclude known bots/crawlers. Citations combines this platform's own DOI-resolved index with each external source's own reported total — see Cited by above for individually listed citing works. Last refreshed 0 seconds ago.