2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145144
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The microbiome mediates the interaction between predation and heavy metals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The significant differences in the structure of protistan consumer community between the forest and cropland soils further supported this finding (Figure S9), as changes in the microbial community structure could also reflect the changes of interkingdom microbial interactions. 57 There were two possible reasons for the disturbance on protistan predation from land-use conversion: on one hand, soil properties (e.g., nutrient availability) could affect the efficiency of protist predation 58−60 and thus the shifts of soil properties induced by agricultural practices in this study might reduce the predation efficiency of protists; on the other hand, the forest-tocropland conversion enriched the pathogenic fungi and bacterial populations affiliated with Actinobacteria phylum herein (Figure S8 and Table S4), which are undesirable prey for protists because their metabolites (e.g., mycotoxin and antibiotics) could kill predators 61 and protists would distinguish and avoid preying these taxa. 62 This was supported by the observation that although Actinobacteria replaced Acidobacteria to be the dominant bacterial phylum in the cropland soils (Figure S8), the number of negative links between protist Cercozoa phylum and bacteria Actinobacteria phylum was nearly unchanged in the prokaryotic−protistan network herein (Table S7).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The significant differences in the structure of protistan consumer community between the forest and cropland soils further supported this finding (Figure S9), as changes in the microbial community structure could also reflect the changes of interkingdom microbial interactions. 57 There were two possible reasons for the disturbance on protistan predation from land-use conversion: on one hand, soil properties (e.g., nutrient availability) could affect the efficiency of protist predation 58−60 and thus the shifts of soil properties induced by agricultural practices in this study might reduce the predation efficiency of protists; on the other hand, the forest-tocropland conversion enriched the pathogenic fungi and bacterial populations affiliated with Actinobacteria phylum herein (Figure S8 and Table S4), which are undesirable prey for protists because their metabolites (e.g., mycotoxin and antibiotics) could kill predators 61 and protists would distinguish and avoid preying these taxa. 62 This was supported by the observation that although Actinobacteria replaced Acidobacteria to be the dominant bacterial phylum in the cropland soils (Figure S8), the number of negative links between protist Cercozoa phylum and bacteria Actinobacteria phylum was nearly unchanged in the prokaryotic−protistan network herein (Table S7).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the main channel for various substances to enter the body, the intestinal own health and the gut microbiota inhabiting the intestine are also more susceptible to external factors ( Sadeq et al, 2021 ; Zheng et al, 2021 ). Generally, the gut microbiota is in a dynamic balance under the action of various factors, but intestinal function does not change significantly ( Michaudel and Sokol, 2020 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, cadmium has been shown to inhibit the activity of free-living bacteria (Shi and Ma, 2017). Multiple stressors might be synergistic and acute the effects of the pollutants in the bacterial communities in aquatic ecosystems affecting for example organic matter (re)cycling, microbial trophic interactions and nutrient availability (Cabrerizo et al, 2019;Sadeq et al, 2021). Furthermore, host-associated bacteria, such as gut microbiota have been shown to be affected by pollutants and its synergistic interactions (Breton et al, 2013;Varg et al, 2022b;Wu et al, 2014;Yuan et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%