Stable-Isotope Probing Identifies Uncultured Planctomycetes as Primary Degraders of a Complex Heteropolysaccharide in Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The exopolysaccharides (EPSs) produced by some bacteria are potential growth substrates for other bacteria in soil. We used stable-isotope probing (SIP) to identify aerobic soil bacteria that assimilated the cellulose produced by Gluconacetobacter xylinus or the EPS produced by Beijerinckia indica. The latter is a heteropolysaccharide comprised primarily of l-guluronic acid, d-glucose, and d-glycero-d-mannoheptose. (13)C-labeled EPS and (13)C-labeled cellulose were purified from bacterial cultures grown on [(13)C]glucose. Two soils were incubated with these substrates, and bacteria actively assimilating them were identified via pyrosequencing of 16S rRNA genes recovered from (13)C-labeled DNA. Cellulose C was assimilated primarily by soil bacteria closely related (93 to 100% 16S rRNA gene sequence identities) to known cellulose-degrading bacteria. However, B. indica EPS was assimilated primarily by bacteria with low identities (80 to 95%) to known species, particularly by different members of the phylum Planctomycetes. In one incubation, members of the Planctomycetes made up >60% of all reads in the labeled DNA and were only distantly related (<85% identity) to any described species. Although it is impossible with SIP to completely distinguish primary polysaccharide hydrolyzers from bacteria growing on produced oligo- or monosaccharides, the predominance of Planctomycetes suggested that they were primary degraders of EPS. Other bacteria assimilating B. indica EPS included members of the Verrucomicrobia, candidate division OD1, and the Armatimonadetes. The results indicate that some uncultured bacteria in soils may be adapted to using complex heteropolysaccharides for growth and suggest that the use of these substrates may provide a means for culturing new species.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".