MICROBIAL COMMUNITY COMPOSITION IN CONTAMINATED SOIL SAMPLES OF THE YAMUNA RIVER

SUSHMA SHARMA¹, KHUSHBOO SINGH²*, DILEEP KUMAR SINGH^3
1Department of Zoology, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110007, India
²Department of Zoology, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110007, India
³Department of Zoology, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110007, India
* Corresponding Author : khushboosingh18@gmail.com

Received : 23-02-2017     Accepted : 08-03-2017     Published : 28-03-2017
Volume : 9     Issue : 3       Pages : 874 - 877
Int J Microbiol Res 9.3 (2017):874-877

Keywords : Cloning, Microbes, Pollutants, 16S rDNA and Yamuna
Academic Editor : Dr Sumit Pal
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : The research was supported by the DST- PURSE (2011-2013), Delhi, India
Author Contribution : Khushboo Singh: Research work, analysis and manuscript

Yamuna is one of the important river of India and its stretch through Delhi is its most polluted part. Therefore it is important to study the effects of pollutants on microbial community structure to restorate it. For bioremediation, microbial community is needed to be investigated. 16S rDNA cloning technique was employed to study the microbial community composition. Results were analyzed by Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) to understand the impact of environmental variables and coupled with Principle coordinate analysis (PCoA) to compare the diversity composition between the samples. Representative strains belonging to genera Geobacter, Sphaerobacter, Exinguobacterium and Eubacterium were dominant in the soil adjacent to contaminated river water. The presence of Geobacter indicated the phenolic compounds and organic compounds contamination in the river. On the other hand, the presence of Sphaerobacter indicated the sewage wastes in water while Exinguobacterium and Eubacterium showed the contamination of heavy metals. The indigenous bacterial communities were capable of decreasing the level of pollutants in the river water.

1. Mishra A.K. (2010) Journal of Water Research Protocol, 2, 489-500.
2. Central Pollution Control Board, India (2006 and 2008).
3. Jain P. (2009) Delhi.
4. Kennedy A.C., Smith K.L. (1995) Plant Soil, 170, 75-86.
5. Nannipieri P. (1994) In: Pankhurst CE, Double BM, Gupta VVSR, Grace PR (ed). Victoria, Australia: CSIRO, East Melbourne. pp 238-244
6. Wang Y., Shi I., Wang H., Lin Q., Chen X., Chen Y. (2007) Ecotoxicology and Environment Safety, 67, 75-81.
7. Alef K. and Nannipieri P. (1995) Academic Press Harcourt Brace and Company Publisher, New York, pp 55.
8. Alef K. and Nannipieri P. (1995) Academic Press Harcourt Brace and Company Publisher, New York, pp 215.
9. Schinner F., Ohlinger R., Kandeler D.E. and Margesin R.D. (1996) Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 241-243.
10. Schinner F., Ohlinger R., Kandeler D.E. and Margesin R.D. (1996) Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 174-176.
11. Schinner F., Ohlinger R., Kandeler D.E. and Margesin R.D. (1996) Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York,pp. 176-179.
12. Edwards U., Rogall T., Blocker H., Emde M. and Botter E.C. (1989) Nucleic Acids Research, 17, 7843–7853.
13. Allen M.A., Goh F., Burns B.P. and Neilan B.A. (2009) Geobiological, 7, 82-96.
14. Rana L., Dhankhar R. and Chhikara S. (2010) International Journal of Environmental Research, 4, 513-518.
15. Sorci J.J., Paulauskis J.D. and Ford T.E. (1999) Marine Pollution Bullet, 38, 663-675.
16. Ibekwe A.M., Leddy M.B., Bold R.D. and Graves A.K. (2012) FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 79, 155–166.
17. Werner J.J., Knights D., Garcia M.L., Scalfone N.B., Smith S. and Yarasheski K. (2011) Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 4158–4163.
18. Atlas R. (1984) Current Perspectives in Microbial Ecology, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC, pp 540-545.
19. Lovley D.R., Giovannoni S.J., White D.C., Champine J.E., Phillips E.J.P., Gorby Y.A. and Goodwin S. (1993) Archives of Microbiology, 159, 336-344
20. Pati A., LaButti K., Pukall R., Nolan M., Rio T.G.D., Tice H., Cheng T.F., Lucas S., Chen F., Copeland A., Ivanova N., Mavromatis K., Mikhailova P.S., Bruce D., Goodwin L., Land M., Hauser L., Chang Y.J., Jeffries C.D., Chen A., Palaniappan K., Chain P., Brettin T., Sikorski B., Rohde M., Göker M., Bristow J., Eisen J.A., Markowitz V., Hugenholtz P., Kyrpides N.C., Klenk H.P. and Lapidus A. (2010) Stand Genomic Science, 2, 49-56.
21. Ordoneza O.F., Lanzarottid E., Kurtha D., Gorritia M.F., Revalec S., Cortez N., Vazquez M.P., Farías M.E. and Turjanskie A.G. (2013) Genome Announcement, 1 (4), 2037-2042.
22. Zhang H., Xu Y., Ding Y., Yang Q., Ren S., Li X., Chen X., Xu Y. and Hao H. (2012) African Journal of Microbiology Research, 6 (37), 6635-6641.
23. Shen G., Lu Y. and Zhou Q. (2005) Chemosphere, 61: 1175–1182.
24. Mathew M. and Obbard J.F. (2001) Biotechnology Letters, 23, 227–230.
25. Byrnes B.H. and Freney J.R. (1995) Fertilizer Research, 42, 251–259.
26. Nicholas J.B., Jill B.F., Tamara S.G., Richard D.H. and Timothy E.F. (2010) Ecotoxicology, 19, 317–328.
27. Malkomes H.P. and Modified E. (1993) Plant protection, 45 (9), 180 –185.
28. Bremner J.M. and Shaw K. (1958) Journal of Agriculture Science, 5, 40-52.