Carbon source utilization patterns of Bacillus simplex ecotypes do not reflect their adaptation to ecologically divergent slopes in 'Evolution Canyon', Israel

6Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The 'Evolution Canyons' I and II in Israel are model habitats to study adaptation and speciation of bacteria in the environment. These canyons represent similar ecological replicates, separated by 40 km, with a strongly sun-exposed and hot 'African' south-facing slope (SFS) vs. a cooler and mesic-lush 'European' north-facing slope (NFS). Previously, among 131 Bacillus simplex isolates, distinct genetic lineages (ecotypes), each specific for either SFS or NFS, were identified, suggesting a temperature-driven slope-specific adaptation. Here, we asked whether the ecological heterogeneity of SFS vs. NFS also affected carbon utilization abilities, as determined using the Biolog® assay. Contrary to expectation, a correlation between substrate utilization patterns and the ecological origin of strains was not found. Rather, the patterns split according to the two major phylogenetic lineages each of which contain SFS and NFS ecotypes. We conclude that traits related to the general energy metabolism, as far as assessed here, are neither shaped by the major abiotic features of 'Evolution Canyon', namely solar radiation, temperature, and drought, nor by the soil characteristics. We further conclude that some traits diverge rather neutrally from each other, whereas other, more environmentally related traits are shaped by natural selection and show evolutionary convergence. © 2008 Federation of European Microbiological Societies. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sikorski, J., Pukall, R., & Stackebrandt, E. (2008). Carbon source utilization patterns of Bacillus simplex ecotypes do not reflect their adaptation to ecologically divergent slopes in “Evolution Canyon”, Israel. In FEMS Microbiology Ecology (Vol. 66, pp. 38–44). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2008.00574.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free