- Original article
- Open Access
Advantages of functional single-cell isolation method over standard agar plate dilution method as a tool for studying denitrifying bacteria in rice paddy soil
- Tomoyasu Nishizawa†1Email author,
- Kanako Tago†2,
- Yusuke Uei1,
- Satoshi Ishii1, 3,
- Kazuo Isobe1,
- Shigeto Otsuka1 and
- Keishi Senoo1
© Nishizawa et al.; licensee Springer. 2012
- Received: 24 July 2012
- Accepted: 27 July 2012
- Published: 18 September 2012
We recently established a method for isolating functional single cells from environmental samples using a micromanipulator (Functional single-cell (FSC) isolation), and applied it to the study of denitrifying bacteria in rice paddy soil (Ashida et al. 2010. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 85:1211–1217). To further examine the advantages and possible disadvantages of the FSC method, we isolated denitrifying bacteria from the same rice paddy soil sample using both FSC and standard agar plate dilution (APD) methods and compared in this study. The proportion of denitrifying bacteria in the total isolates was more than 6-fold larger with FSC isolation (57.1%) compared with the APD method (9.2%). Denitrifying bacteria belonging to Alphaproteobacteria and Bacilli were commonly isolated using both methods, whereas those belonging to Betaproteobacteria, which had been found to be active in the denitrification-inductive paddy soil, were isolated only with the FSC method. On the other hand, Actinobacteria were only isolated using the APD method. The mean potential denitrification activity of the FSC isolates was higher than that of the APD isolates. Overall, FSC isolation was confirmed to be an excellent method for studying denitrifying bacteria compared with the standard agar plate dilution method.
- 16S rRNA gene
- Denitrifying bacteria
- Functional single-cell isolation
- Phylogenetic analysis
- Rice paddy soil
Denitrification is a microbial respiratory process where nitrate/nitrite are reduced in a stepwise manner to form the gaseous end products NO, N2O, and N2 ([Zumft 1997]). A variety of microorganisms, including some archaea and fungi, are known to have denitrification capabilities ([Hayatsu et al. 2008]). Denitrification is an important process during the nitrogen transformation of arable soils, because it causes N2O emission in upland soils and nitrogen loss in rice paddy soils ([Ishii et al. 2011]). Denitrification of rice paddy soil was reported as early as 1907 ([Ishii et al. 2011]), however, the microbial populations responsible for denitrification have not been investigated for a long period.
To overcome this situation, we recently established a method for isolating functional single cells from environments using a micromanipulator (Functional single-cell (FSC) isolation), which we applied in studying denitrifying bacteria in rice paddy soil ([Ashida et al. 2010]). FSC isolation was used to isolate denitrifying bacteria from various rice paddy and rice-soybean rotation fields and their phylogenetic and functional diversity were examined ([Tago et al. 2011]). Oligotrophic denitrifying bacteria carrying previously uncharacterized functional gene sequences were also isolated using the FSC method ([Ishii et al. 2010a]). These studies clearly indicated the usefulness of the FSC isolation method as a tool for studying denitrifying bacteria in soil. However, the advantages and possible disadvantages of the FSC isolation method compared with the standard isolation method have not been well understood.
In this study, we isolated denitrifying bacteria from the same soil sample using both the FSC method and the standard agar plate dilution method. The following criteria were evaluated for each method and compared: (1) acquisition rate of denitrifying bacteria, i.e., the final number of denitrifying bacteria over the number of well-isolated candidate single colonies during the isolation process; (2) taxonomic composition; and (3) potential denitrification activity of the obtained denitrifying isolates.
Soil samples were collected from the upper 10 cm soil layer of a rice paddy field at Niigata Agricultural Research Institute (37°20′N, 138°45′E), Japan, on April 7 (before the cultivation period) in 2009. Ten soil samples were randomly collected from the field, which were combined together and sieved through a 2-mm mesh, and stored at 4°C until use. The soil type is gley soil, and its physicochemical properties are as follows: pH (H2O): 5.6; total carbon: 14.0 g kg-1 dry soil; and total nitrogen: 1.3 g kg-1 dry soil.
Soil microcosm and isolation
To perform functional single-cell isolation of denitrifying bacteria, a denitrification-inductive soil microcosm was set up according to the method of [Tago et al. (2011]), with some modifications. In brief, 1.0 g of the soil sample was placed in a 10 ml glass serum vial (Nichiden-Rika Glass, Kobe, Japan), which was submerged in sterile MilliQ water (3 ml) for 1 week at 30°C (pre-incubation). A 2.5 ml layer of clear water was removed, and 0.05 mg-C succinate (1.4 μmol) and 0.01 mg-N nitrate (2.1 μmol) were added as an electron donor and acceptor for denitrification, respectively. Nalidixic acid (final concentration, 20 μg g−1 dry soil), pilomidic acid (10 μg g−1 dry soil), and pipemidic acid (20 μg g-1 dry soil) were also added to the soil as bacterial cell division inhibitors. The vial was sealed with a butyl rubber stopper and the headspace air was replaced with Ar-C2H2 (90:10) gas. The prepared soil microcosm was incubated at 30°C for 16 h to elongate bacterial cell ready to grow by succinate assimilation under denitrification-inductive conditions ([Tago et al. 2011]).
After live staining with 5-carboxyfluorescein diacetate-acetoxymethyl ester (CFDA-AM), single elongated cells were individually captured using a micromanipulator under a fluorescent microscope (Functional single-cell isolation, [Ashida et al. 2010]), and transferred into separate 10 ml vials containing 100-fold diluted nutrient broth medium supplemented with 0.3 mM sodium nitrate and 4.4 mM sodium succinate (DNB-NS) liquid medium. After anaerobic cultivation at 30°C for 2 weeks, each cell suspension was streaked onto DNB-NS agar medium and incubated anaerobically at 30°C for 2 weeks to obtain well-isolated single colonies ([Tago et al. 2011]). Denitrifying bacteria was isolated from the incubated soil using the standard agar plate dilution (APD) method. An aliquot (100 Âµl) of the diluted soil suspension was spread onto DNB-NS agar, and incubated anaerobically at 30Â°C for 2 weeks to obtain single colonies.
Measurement of potential activity of denitrification
The potential activities of denitrification, proportion (%) of nitrate reduced to N2O in two weeks, of denitrifying bacteria obtained using the FSC and APD methods were determined with the acetylene-block method ([Tiedje 1994]), as described previously ([Tago et al. 2011]). The vials containing DNB-NS medium were inoculated with each strain, and the head-space air was replaced with Ar-C2H2 (90:10) gas. After incubation at 30°C for 2 weeks, a portion (0.5 ml) of the head-space gas was analyzed for N2O by gas chromatography ([Saito et al. 2008]). The quantity of water-dissolved N2O gas was calculated as the Bunsen absorption coefficient ([Tiedje 1994]). Strains reducing more than 20% of the added nitrate to N2O were considered to be denitrifying bacteria in this study ([Tiedje 1994]; [Tago et al. 2011]). A two-sided, unpaired Student’s t-test was performed to statistically analyze the denitrifying activity.
DNA extraction and PCR amplification
DNA was extracted from single colonies as described previously ([Ashida et al. 2010]), and used for PCR amplification. The bacterial 16S rRNA gene was amplified using the m-27 F (5′-AGRGTTTGATYMTGGCTCAG-3′) primer and the m-1492R (5′-GGYTACCTTGTTACGACTT-3′) primer pair ([Tyson et al. 2004]), as described previously ([Tago et al. 2011]).
Amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis (ARDRA)-based profiling
The PCR amplicons of 16S rRNA gene were purified with a Wizard SV Gel and PCR Clean-Up System (Promega, Madison, WI, USA) and condensed to a final volume of 20 μl in sterilized-MilliQ water. Aliquots (3 μl) of the DNA samples were individually digested with HaeIII (Toyobo, Tokyo, Japan) and RsaI (Takara Bio), according to the manufacturer’s instructions. To determine the precise length of generated DNA fragments, the digested DNA samples were subjected to MetaPhor Agarose (Takara Bio) gel (3%) electrophoresis. Grouping of the denitrifying isolates was performed based on the ARDRA gel profiles.
Sequencing and phylogenetic analysis
The 16S rRNA gene PCR amplicons derived from one to three representative strains from each ARDRA group, i.e., a total of 47 strains, were purified and directly sequenced as described previously ([Ashida et al. 2010]). DNA sequencing reactions were performed using a BigDye™ Terminator Cycle Sequencing Ready Reaction Kit (Applied Biosystems), according to the manufacturer’s protocol, and analyzed using a PE Applied Biosystems Automated DNA Sequencer (model 3130xl). Based on the gene sequences, taxonomic assignments of the strains at the genus level were performed using RDP Naïve Bayesian classifier, with an 80% bootstrap cutoff ([Cole et al. 2009]). Multiple alignments were performed using CLUSTAL W (ver. 1.83) ([Thompson et al. 1994]). Phylogenetic trees were constructed using the neighbor-joining method with Kimura-2 parameters and 500 bootstrap replicates, in the MEGA4 program ([Tamura et al. 2007]).
Accession numbers of nucleotide sequences
The sequence data of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene produced in this study have been deposited in the DDBJ database under accession numbers AB696837 to AB696882.
Isolation of denitrifying bacteria
Acquisition rate of denitrifying bacteria using the FSC and APD methods
number of well-isolated single colonies
number of isolates showing NO3−reduction
mean of potential denitrifying activity ± SD,%c
Acquisition rate of denitrifying bacteria (%)
53.1 ± 21.2
36.8 ± 16.1
16S rRNA gene-based phylogenetic analysis of denitrifying bacteria
Taxonomic composition of denitrifying bacteria and their denitrifying activity
Number of isolates (mean of potential denitrifying activity ± SD,%)a
Class and Order
12 (53.4 ± 18.7)
11 (52.0 ± 15.9)
13 (54.6 ± 18.4)
3 (33.7 ± 18.2)
3 (48.5 ± 19.1)
3 (60.8 ± 8.6)
14 (63.1 ± 23.2)
3 (50.9 ± 23.3)
29 (54.5 ± 21.8)
4 (27.7 ± 10.4)
8 (28.3 ± 8.3)
14 (29.7 ± 10.4)
Potential activity of denitrification
This study isolated denitrifying bacteria from the same rice paddy soil sample using both FSC and APD isolation methods. The overall proportion of denitrifying bacteria isolates was more than 6-fold in the FSC isolation (57.1%; 44/77) compared with APD isolation (9.2%; 33/357). A similar large proportion (45%; 37/82) was also observed in our previous FSC isolation of denitrifying bacteria from another type of rice paddy soil. APD isolation resulted in a low proportion, although the DNB-NS medium under an anaerobic condition was used to grow denitrifying bacteria preferentially. FSC isolation was confirmed as a highly efficient method for obtaining denitrifying bacteria from soil, compared with the standard agar-plating method. Strains belonging to the genera Bradyrhizobium (class Alphaproteobacteria) were frequently isolated by both FSC (12 strains) and APD (11 strains) isolation methods, suggesting that Bradyrhizobium is one of the abundant denitrifying bacteria present in the Niigata paddy soil.
The taxonomic composition of the remaining strains was remarkably different in the FSC isolates and APD isolates. One striking difference was that strains belonging to Betaproteobacteria were only isolated in the FSC isolation method. This is probably because Betaproteobacteria bacteria were outcompeted by faster-growing microorganisms on DNB-NS agar plates in APD isolation. In contrast, FSC isolation provides a habitat where there is no competition for the bacterial growth substrate ([Ishii et al. 2010b]), so a number of Betaproteobacteria denitrifiers (27 strains) were isolated by the FSC isolation method in this study. Strains belonging to Zoogloea in Betaproteobacteria were most frequently isolated (14 strains), suggesting that Zoogloea is another abundant denitrifying bacteria in the Niigata paddy soil. In our soil RNA-based culture-independent study, Betaproteobacteria including Zoogloea was found to be active in the denitrification-inductive microcosm of the Niigata paddy soil ([Yoshida et al. 2010]). The FSC isolation method seems good to isolate this type of active, but relatively slow-growing denitrifying bacteria in soil.
Another striking difference was that strains belonging to Actinobacteria were isolated only by the APD isolation method. It was possible that the cell division inhibitors (nalidixic acid, pilomidic acid, and pipemidic acid) used for FSC isolation were not very effective in elongating Actinobacteria cells. In fact, nalidixic acid-resistant actinomycetes are known (Kieser et al. ). In addition, some actinomycete strains also possess a pathway for the metabolism of pilomidic acid ([Hironaka and Nishikawa 1975]). Other suitable cell division inhibitors should be sought in order to isolate Actinobacteria denitrifiers by the FSC isolation method. On the other hand, strains belonging to Bacillus were isolated less frequently using the FSC isolation method (2 strains) than the APD isolation method (14 strains). This means that some population of Bacillus denitrifier could not form elongated cells under the condition used in this study, but the reason is unclear at present.
Both methods isolated strains with potential activity of denitrification ranging from 20% to over 80%, but the mean denitrification activity of the FSC isolates was higher (53.1%) than that of the APD isolates (36.8%). This was largely because of the relatively high denitrification activities of Betaproteobacteria strains isolated only in the FSC method, and the low activities of Actinobacteria strains isolated only in the APD method.
In conclusions, our current study indicated that the FSC isolation is an excellent method to isolate active denitrifying bacteria from rice paddy soil with high efficiency. However, the current FSC method was not always the best, because some taxonomic groups (e.g., Actinobacteria) were rarely isolated in the FSC method.
This work was supported by the Program for Promotion of Basic and Applied Researches for Innovations in Bio-oriented Industry (BRAIN). We thank Yutaka Shiratori for his help in collecting soil sample.
- Ashida N, Ishii S, Hayano S, Tago K, Tsuji T, Yoshimura Y, Otsuka S, Senoo K: Isolation of functional single cells from environments using a micromanipulator: application to study denitrifying bacteria. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2010, 85: 1211–1217. 10.1007/s00253-009-2330-zView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cole JR, Wang Q, Cardenas E, Fish J, Chai B, Farris RJ, Kulam-Syed-Mohideen AS, McGarrell DM, Marsh T, Garrity GM, Tiedje JM: The Ribosomal Database Project: improved alignments and new tools for rRNA analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 2009, 37: D141-D145. 10.1093/nar/gkn879PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hayatsu M, Tago K, Saito M: Various players in the nitrogen cycle: Diversity and functions of the microorganisms involved in nitrification and denitrification. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 2008, 54: 33–45. 10.1111/j.1747-0765.2007.00195.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hironaka J, Nishikawa S: A new antibacterial metabolite converted from piromidic acid by Streptomyces sp. J Ferment Technol 1975, 53: 372–379.Google Scholar
- Ishii S, Tago K, Senoo K: Single-cell analysis and isolation for microbiology and biotechnology: methods and applications. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2010, 86: 1281–1292. 10.1007/s00253-010-2524-4View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ishii S, Yamamoto M, Tago K, Otsuka S, Senoo K: Microbial populations in various paddy soils respond differently to denitrification-inducing conditions, albeit background bacterial populations are similar. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 2010, 56: 220–224. 10.1111/j.1747-0765.2010.00453.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ishii S, Ikeda S, Minamisawa K, Senoo K: Nitrogen cycling in rice paddy environments: past achievements and future challenges. Microbes Environ 2011, 26: 282–292. 10.1264/jsme2.ME11293View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kieser T, Bibb MJ, Buttner MJ, Chater KF, Hopwood DA: Practical Streptomyces Genetics. 2nd edition. John Innes Foundation, England, Norwich; 2000.Google Scholar
- Saito T, Ishii S, Otsuka S, Nishiyama M, Senoo K: Identification of novel Betaproteobacteria in a succinate-assimilating population in denitrifying rice paddy soil by using stable isotope probing. Microbes Environ 2008, 23: 192–200. 10.1264/jsme2.23.192View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tago K, Ishii S, Nishizawa T, Otsuka S, Senoo K: Phylogenetic and functional diversity of denitrifying bacteria isolated from various rice paddy and rice-soybean rotation fields. Microbes Environ. 2011, 26: 30–35. 10.1264/jsme2.ME10167View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tamura K, Dudley J, Nei M, Kumar S: MEGA4: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis (MEGA) software version 4.0. Mol Biol Evol 2007, 24: 1596–1599. 10.1093/molbev/msm092View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Thompson JD, Desmond GH, Gibson TJ: CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 1994, 22: 4673–4680. 10.1093/nar/22.22.4673PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tiedje JM: Denitrifiers. In Methods of soil analysis, Part 2: Microbiological and biochemical properties. Edited by: Weaver RW, Angle JS, Bottomley PJ. Soil Science Society of America, Madison; 1994:245–267.Google Scholar
- Tyson GW, Chapman J, Hugenholtz P, Allen EE, Ram RJ, Richardson PM, Solovyev VV, Rubin EM, Rokhsar DS, Banfield JF: Community structure and metabolism through reconstruction of microbial genomes from the environment. Nature 2004, 428: 37–43. 10.1038/nature02340View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yoshida M, Ishii S, Otsuka S, Senoo K: Expressions of denitrification functional genes in rice paddy soil. Conference proceedings of the 13th International Society for Microbial Ecology, PS.22.061 2010, 814.Google Scholar
- Zumft G: Cell biology and molecular basis of denitrification. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 1997, 61: 533–616.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.