The Tran­scrip­tomic Mo­tion Pic­ture of Ma­rine Mi­crobes

by Su­san S. Golden, with help from stu­dents of The Uni­ver­sity of Cal­i­for­nia – San Diego Bio­Clock Stu­dio

Tran­scrip­tomic and metage­nomic meth­ods make it pos­si­ble to take a snap­shot of the processes oc­cur­ring in a mixed mi­cro­bial pop­u­la­tion; sam­pling over a time course can trans­form that im­age into a mo­tion pic­ture. That's the goal: a mol­e­c­u­lar video of what is be­ing done, by whom, and when, out in the en­vi­ron­ment. But there is a catch: for con­ti­nu­ity of the frames in your movie, you need to sam­ple the same pop­u­la­tion at each time point. When your tar­get pop­u­la­tion is drift­ing ef­fort­lessly in the ma­rine en­vi­ron­ment, and your bucket is teth­ered to a slug­gish ship, the ocean cur­rent presents you with a new pop­u­la­tion each time you cap­ture some wa­ter. Ed De­Long, with post­docs Liz Otte­sen and Frank Ayl­ward, and col­leagues from the Mon­terey Bay Aquar­ium Re­search In­sti­tute, solved this prob­lem by us­ing a free-drift­ing ro­botic En­vi­ron­men­tal Sam­ple Proces­sor (ESP) (1). The ESP, sus­pended 23 m be­low a drift­ing float on the sur­face in the North Pa­cific Sub­trop­i­cal Gyre, could "go with the flow," and col­lect and pre­serve sam­ples of mi­crobes rang­ing from 0.22 – 5 µm in size at spec­i­fied time points. Phys­i­cal mea­sure­ments from the en­vi­ron­ment were recorded in real time, and RNA from the re­cov­ered sam­ples was an­a­lyzed by re­verse tran­scrip­tion and se­quenc­ing, and mapped back to the genomes of ocean denizen. This ex­per­i­men­tal set-up and some early re­sults have been pre­vi­ously in­tro­duced in this blog by Heather Maugham.

Fig­ure 1. Schematic Draw­ing of the En­vi­ron­men­tal Sam­ple Proces­sor. By Jenny Lee.

The au­thors ex­pected, based on pub­lished lab and en­vi­ron­men­tal work, to see diel cy­cles of tran­scripts for var­i­ous bi­o­log­i­cal processes for RNA at­trib­ut­able to al­gae and cyanobac­te­ria; mem­bers of these groups are known to have cir­ca­dian clocks, or at least hour­glasses, that en­able them to ex­e­cute daily pro­grams of gene ex­pres­sion. The big sur­prise came when the tran­scripts from other bac­te­r­ial groups were ex­am­ined and shown to also ex­hibit ex­ten­sive daily cy­cling of tran­script abun­dance. Now that's news!

Dom­i­nant among bac­te­ria in the open ocean is the cyanobac­terium Prochloro­coc­cus, which has been dubbed the most abun­dant or­gan­ism on earth. As is true in lab cul­tures, the Prochloro­coc­cus in the North Pa­cific Sub­trop­i­cal Gyre ex­hib­ited time-of-day-de­pen­dent tran­script abun­dance, with al­most half of the tran­scripts from Prochloro­coc­cus genes ac­cu­mu­lat­ing pe­ri­od­i­cally. Whereas lab cul­tures show strong pref­er­ence of dawn or dusk for tran­script peaks, tran­scripts from many genes in the field sam­ples peaked at mid­day. In­ter­est­ingly, this group was highly en­riched in genes that have no KEGG or­thol­ogy an­no­ta­tion, whereas the dawn- and dusk-peak­ing genes could largely be cat­e­go­rized with re­spect to func­tion.

Other or­gan­isms in the pop­u­la­tion in­clude pro­te­orhodopsin-con­tain­ing pho­to­heterotrophs such as Pelag­ibac­ter which use so­lar power to drive pro­ton-pump­ing rhodopsins, bac­te­ri­ochloro­phyll-con­tain­ing het­erotrophs like Roseobac­ter, and many het­erotrophs that are not di­rectly light re­spon­sive; all of these groups re­quire or­ganic car­bon for their mol­e­cule skele­tons and re­duc­ing power, a clear dis­tinc­tion from the gen­uinely au­totrophic cyanobac­te­ria. None of these groups is known to have a clock, and yet their tran­scripts also showed pe­ri­odic abun­dance.

Fig­ure 2. Ex­pres­sion of genes across the day-night cy­cle. The Prochloro­coc­cus gene ex­pres­sion pre­cedes that from Roseobac­ter and Pelag­ibac­ter. By Jenny Lee.

The re­sult­ing "mo­tion pic­ture" showed a mul­ti­species wave­like pro­gres­sion of suites of genes peak­ing in ex­pres­sion across the day-night cy­cle. No­tably, the cyanobac­te­r­ial wave pre­ceded the peaks in the re­spec­tive gene suites from other groups. In all species trans­la­tional, then tran­scrip­tional, then trans­porter genes peaked in suc­ces­sive waves, but with an off-set such that Prochloro­coc­cus led the pa­rade, fol­lowed by groups dom­i­nated by Roseobac­ter and Pelag­ibac­ter (Fig­ure 2). How do the non-cyanobac­te­r­ial species ex­e­cute daily cy­cles of gene ex­pres­sion? Per­haps they have cir­ca­dian clocks that have not been iden­ti­fied, or use light-sen­si­tive pig­ments to ini­ti­ate a pro­gram that plays out dur­ing the day, like sand through an hour­glass, un­til the next day's light re­sets the timer. The au­thors pose an al­ter­na­tive hy­poth­e­sis: per­haps the meta­bolic processes of the au­totrophs are tightly cou­pled to those of the con­sumers, such that the het­erotrophs take their tim­ing cues from neigh­bors who are wear­ing a watch.

Sup­port for this last hy­poth­e­sis was bol­stered by ad­di­tional sam­pling along the Cal­i­for­nia coast, where the tiny eu­kary­otic alga Os­tre­o­coc­cus, rather than the pelagic Prochloro­coc­cus, dom­i­nates pri­mary pro­duc­tiv­ity (2). As in the open ocean, the au­totroph showed a daily burst of tran­scripts re­lated to pho­to­syn­the­sis, which was fol­lowed by waves of tran­scripts from the het­erotrophs re­lated to trans­la­tion and ox­ida­tive phos­pho­ry­la­tion, trail­ing those processes in the pho­to­syn­thetic pace­set­ter. From ex­ten­sive analy­ses of these datasets from dis­tant ocean tran­sects, the au­thors con­clude that the mi­cro­bial ac­tiv­ity in the ocean is co­or­di­nated on a daily cy­cle and tightly cou­pled be­tween pro­duc­ers who watch the clock, and con­sumers that fol­low their leads.

Ref­er­ences

Otte­sen EA, Young CR, Gif­ford SM, Ep­p­ley JM, Marin R, 3rd, Schus­ter SC, Scholin CA, De­Long EF. (2014). Ocean mi­crobes. Mul­ti­species diel tran­scrip­tional os­cil­la­tions in open ocean het­erotrophic bac­te­r­ial as­sem­blages. Sci­ence, 345. 207–212. DOI: 10.1126/science.1252476

Ayl­ward FO, Ep­p­ley JM, Smith JM, Chavez FP, Scholin CA, De­Long EF. (2015). Mi­cro­bial com­mu­nity tran­scrip­tional net­works are con­served in three do­mains at ocean basin scales. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 112. 5443–5448. PMCID 4418921

 

Susan Golden

Prof. Golden holds a Howard Hughes pro­fes­sor­ship at the Uni­ver­sity of Cal­i­for­nia at San Diego

 

Other Posts

  • Vi­able Counts – A Con­i­cal Ap­proach

    by Roberto — How many liv­ing cells in my cul­ture? There are times when op­ti­cal den­si­ties will not suf­fice, when you will want to have an ac­cu­rate as­say that de­ter­mines vi­able cell counts. It's no won­der one of the first things a stu­dent of mi­cro­bi­ol­ogy learns is the age-old con­cept of us­ing "colony form­ing units" (aka as CFU) as a vi­a­bil­ity as­say.

  • Sym­biont Ex­change in the Aphid·Buchnera Sym­bio­sis (2|2)

    by Christoph — What's pos­si­ble in the wild – sym­biont ex­change, see last week's part 1 – should also be pos­si­ble to achieve in the lab. Less for com­pet­ing with nature's in­ge­nu­ity but more with the aim to study the sep­a­rate con­tri­bu­tions of sym­bi­otic part­ners, of course. So, af­ter be­ing suc­cess­ful ear­lier in trans­fer­ring sec­ondary, fac­ul­ta­tive en­dosym­bionts be­tween aphid hosts, the Moran lab de­vel­oped...

  • Small RNAs Con­sid­ered

    by Janie — With the dis­cov­ery of the 𝘵𝘳𝘱 at­ten­u­a­tor in the 1970s, fol­lowed shortly by the ColE1 plas­mid RNA I, RNA be­came a much more in­ter­est­ing per­son­al­ity. The bio­mol­e­cule wears far more hats than mRNA, rRNA, and tRNA. In all its mul­ti­tudes, RNA seems to boast an in­fi­nite func­tional reper­toire...

  • Bor­re­lia and it's not-so-loose ends (1|2)

    by Christoph — Christina Sav­age, post­doc in Ku­maran Ramamurthi's lab at the NIH, re­cent­ly post­ed on Twit­ter the mo­vie you see be­low with the re­mark: "And we just got our dark­field ob­jec­tiv­es in to­day! This was tak­en with my ca­me­ra look­ing down the ey­e­ece, so not great qua­li­ty. But I just love watch­ing them!" I re­plied: "eve­ry­time I have the rare plea­sure...

  • A New Game for a New Year

    by Elio — Let's come up with ways to tell de­fin­i­tively whether or not the nu­cleic acids in the Mono Lake bug GFAJ‑1 have sub­sti­tuted a sugar-ar­se­n­ate back­bone for the usual sugar-phos­phate one, and if so, to what ex­tent. We sus­pect that every­one will have a dif­fer­ent no­tion. Please share yours by post­ing…