2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.syapm.2014.05.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Archaeal and bacterial diversity in five different hydrothermal ponds in the Copahue region in Argentina

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
38
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Conversely, It3 was mainly populated by Archaea (96.6%), including species such as Acidianus, Sulfolobus and Pyrobaculum (Menzel et al 2015). When these data were compared with those from previous studies (Inskeep et al 2013a;Sahm et al 2013;Urbieta et al 2014;Wemheuer et al 2013) the authors conclude that environmental chemico-physical parameters are the major determinants in shaping the structure and composition of the microbial community (Menzel et al 2015).…”
Section: Phlegraean Fields Italymentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Conversely, It3 was mainly populated by Archaea (96.6%), including species such as Acidianus, Sulfolobus and Pyrobaculum (Menzel et al 2015). When these data were compared with those from previous studies (Inskeep et al 2013a;Sahm et al 2013;Urbieta et al 2014;Wemheuer et al 2013) the authors conclude that environmental chemico-physical parameters are the major determinants in shaping the structure and composition of the microbial community (Menzel et al 2015).…”
Section: Phlegraean Fields Italymentioning
confidence: 82%
“…This result is consistent with our previous shotgun metagenome analyses for SK (Chan et al, 2015) and US (data not shown). High-temperature environments were previously generally believed to be the realm of archaea (Urbieta et al, 2014; Li et al, 2015). However, recent studies applying molecular methods have revealed that bacteria rather are the predominant prokaryotic communities in such environments (Badhai et al, 2015; López-López et al, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our research group has worked on the microbiology of Copahue, focusing on prokaryotic biodiversity assessments through culture-independent approaches using microbial ecology techniques such as amplification and sequencing of the complete 16S rRNA gene of the entire community and FISH (Fluorescence In Situ Hybridisation) or its more sensible version CARD FISH (Catalysed Reported Deposition Fluorescence In Situ Hybridisation) for quantitative information on the species distribution and community structure [ 21 , 22 , 23 ]. Additionally, we tried to isolate and characterise autochthonous extremophilic microorganisms [ 24 , 25 , 26 ].…”
Section: Description Of the Copahue Geothermal Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have proposed the study of prokaryotic biodiversity in the Copahue geothermal field through two complementary strategies. On the one hand, we performed comprehensive non-culture based studies on the whole prokaryotic community of different ponds that were selected to represent the diverse temperature and pH characteristics found in the area ( Table 1 ) as well as the influence of anthropogenic intervention [ 22 ]. The assessments of water samples as well as the microbial biofilms that develop at the edges of the rocks where thermal activity is less intense were conducted by amplification and sequencing of the partial 16S rRNA gene of bacteria and archaea (the set of primers used was 8F: 5′-AGAGTTTGATC(A/C)TGGC-3′ for Bacteria and 25F: 5′-TCYGGTTGATCCYGCCRG-3′ for Archaea ; reverse primer for both was 1492r: 5′-TACCTTGTTACGACTT-3′ [ 27 , 28 ]).…”
Section: Prokaryotic Biodiversity At Copahue Geothermal Fieldmentioning
confidence: 99%