1996
DOI: 10.3354/meps133149
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microbial biomass and community structures in the burrows of bromophenol producing and non-producing marine worms and surrounding sediments

Abstract: Microbial biomass and community structures were determined in sediments lining the burrows of 3 species of marine worms, and in nearby surface and subsurface sediments, using esterlinked phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) analysis. The potential impact of biogenic bromophenols produced by 2 of these animals on burrow microbial communities was of particular interest. The burrow microbial communities were markedly different from those of surrounding surface and subsurface sedi m e n t~. Differences in microbial biom… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

10
76
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(87 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
10
76
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast, in this study the bacterial communities inhabiting the burrow wall more closely resembled those in surface rather than subsurface sediment. Similar observations have been made for polychaete worm burrows (Steward et al, 1996) and other thalassinidean shrimp burrows (Bertics and Ziebis, 2009). Such relationships between burrow and surface communities may be a consequence of similarities in their physicochemical environments, at least for some species (Bird et al, 2000;Bertics and Ziebis, 2009); although previous studies have cautioned that the burrow should not be seen as a simple extension of the sediment surface (Papaspyrou et al, 2005).…”
Section: Figuresupporting
confidence: 51%
“…In contrast, in this study the bacterial communities inhabiting the burrow wall more closely resembled those in surface rather than subsurface sediment. Similar observations have been made for polychaete worm burrows (Steward et al, 1996) and other thalassinidean shrimp burrows (Bertics and Ziebis, 2009). Such relationships between burrow and surface communities may be a consequence of similarities in their physicochemical environments, at least for some species (Bird et al, 2000;Bertics and Ziebis, 2009); although previous studies have cautioned that the burrow should not be seen as a simple extension of the sediment surface (Papaspyrou et al, 2005).…”
Section: Figuresupporting
confidence: 51%
“…Although ammonium oxidation appears especially sensitive to bromophenol inhibition, other aerobic processes, including thymidine uptake, may be relatively insensitive (Steward et al 1992(Steward et al , 1996. Likewise, anaerobic processes such as sulfate reduction appear insensitive to bromophenols, at least at typical ambient concentrations.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Slightly higher bacterial densities occur in the burrow wall lining of Stereobalanus canadensis, a 2,4,6-tribromophenol (TBP)-containing enteropneust, than in adjacent sediments, but bacterial cell density, acetate assimilation, microalgal biomass and production, and meiofaunal densities do not differ significantly between bulk sediments and sediments from areas with Notomastus lobatus, a 4-bromophenol (BP)-containing capitellid polychaete (Steward et al 1992). Similarly, no significant differences in microbial biomass and community structure have been noted for burrow sediments of N. lobatus and Branchyoasychus americana, a polychaete that does not contain bromophenols (Steward et al 1996). O Inter-Research 1997 At least some of the differences among published reports may be attributed to differences in both the intrinsic toxicity of the various naturally occurring bromophenols and the susceptibility of specific taxa.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…They move actively on the sediment surface or burrow into its subsurface layers, feeding and excreting the sedimentary organic and inorganic materials (Fauchald and Jumars, 1979;Lopez and Levinton, 1987). These biological activities have an enormous impact, not only on the reworking of the sediment, but also on the abundance and community structure of microorganisms in the sediment (Dobbs and Guckert, 1988;Steward et al, 1996;Marinelli et al, 2002;Lucas et al, 2003;Papaspyrou et al, 2006). Microbial abundance tends to increase along the inner walls of the burrows (Alongi, 1985;Aller and Aller, 1986;Lucas et al, 2003;Wu et al, 2003;Wada et al, 2006) and around the feces excreted from the animals (Hargrave, 1976;Plante and Wilde, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%