English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Microbial Community Response during the Iron Fertilization Experiment LOHAFEX

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons210818

Thiele,  S.
Department of Molecular Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons210389

Fuchs,  B. M.
Department of Molecular Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons210230

Amann,  R.
Department of Molecular Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

Thiele12.pdf
(Publisher version), 2MB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Thiele, S., Fuchs, B. M., Ramaiah, N., & Amann, R. (2012). Microbial Community Response during the Iron Fertilization Experiment LOHAFEX. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 78(24), 8803-8812.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0001-C780-D
Abstract
Iron fertilization experiments in high-nutrient, low-chlorophyll areas are known to induce phytoplankton blooms. However, little is known about the response of the microbial community upon iron fertilization. As part of the LOHAFEX experiment in the southern Atlantic Ocean, Bacteria and Archaea were monitored within and outside an induced bloom, dominated by Phaeocystis-like nanoplankton, during the 38 days of the experiment. The microbial production increased 1.6-fold (thymidine uptake) and 2.1-fold (leucine uptake), while total cell numbers increased only slightly over the course of the experiment. 454 tag pyrosequencing of partial 16S rRNA genes and catalyzed reporter deposition fluorescence in situ hybridization (CARD FISH) showed that the composition and abundance of the bacterial and archaeal community in the iron-fertilized water body were remarkably constant without development of typical bloom-related succession patterns. Members of groups usually found in phytoplankton blooms, such as Roseobacter and Gammaproteobacteria, showed no response or only a minor response to the bloom. However, sequence numbers and total cell numbers of the SAR11 and SAR86 clades increased slightly but significantly toward the end of the experiment. It seems that although microbial productivity was enhanced within the fertilized area, a succession-like response of the microbial community upon the algal bloom was averted by highly effective grazing. Only small-celled members like the SAR11 and SAR86 clades could possibly escape the grazing pressure, explaining a net increase of those clades in numbers.