生物絮团系统中温度突变对日本囊对虾肠道和水体微生物多样性的影响

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0614

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

利用生物絮团对虾养殖系统进行日本囊对虾的养殖实验,研究温度突变对生物絮团系统中水体氮转化效率及其稳定性的影响。实验将日本囊对虾随机分为2组,对照组为消毒的洁净海水,日换水量20%（半封闭养殖系统）,实验组为初始量20 mL/L的生物絮团海水（生物絮团系统）。在实验组与对照组水质保持1周的稳定后,进行温度突变胁迫,温度骤升10℃。在温度突变过程中,温度突变对水体中氮转化通路无显著影响(P>0.05),实验组的硝酸盐氮在温度突变后有上升的趋势,温度突变实验第5天（突变前）为19.65 mg/L到实验第10天（突变后）升高到31.54 mg/L,实验组的累计速率大于对照组。高通量测序显示,实验组与对照组水体微生物中共获得了4219个OTU。实验组的丰度与多样性指数均大于对照组,温度突变前大于突变后。温度突变后的水体和肠道的微生物群落的丰度与多样性均低于突变前。结果表明生物絮团系统在应对温度突变中的表现要优于半封闭养殖系统,在微生物群落的丰度与多样性上均具有更高的稳定性。

关键词: 生物絮团, 氮转化, 微生物群落, 温度突变

Abstract:

The bioflocs shrimp culture system was used to culture M. japonicus and investigate the efficiency and stability of nitrogen conversion in the biofloc system during abrupt temperature change. In the experiment, M. japonicus was randomly divided into 2 groups. The control group was disinfected clean seawater with a daily water exchange rate of 20% (semi-closed culture system), and the experimental group was biofloc seawater with an initial volume of 20 mL/L (biofloc floc culture system). After the water quality of the experimental group and the control group remained stable for one week, the temperature mutation stress was applied, and the temperature rose sharply by 10℃. The results showed that there was no significant effect of abrupt temperature change on the nitrogen conversion pathway in the biofloc system during the experiments, and the nitrate nitrogen in the experimental group showed an increase after abrupt temperature change, from 19.65 mg/L on the 5 d of the experiment (before abrupt temperature change) to 31.54 mg/L on the 10 d (after abrupt temperature change), and the cumulative rate was greater in the experimental group than in the control group. High-throughput sequencing revealed that a total of 4219 OTUs were obtained in both experimental and control aqueous organisms. The abundance and diversity indices were greater in the experimental group than those in the control group, and greater before than after abrupt temperature change. Microbial communities in the water and gut after temperature mutation were lower in abundance and diversity than before abrupt temperature change. Bioflocs system performed better than semi-closed culture system in coping with abrupt temperature change, with higher stability in both abundance and diversity of microbial communities.

Key words: biofloc, nitrogen conversion, microbial community, temperature mutation

中图分类号:

S966.1

秦海鹏, 王博, 廖栩峥, 胡世康, 孙成波. 生物絮团系统中温度突变对日本囊对虾肠道和水体微生物多样性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(32): 157-164.

Qin Haipeng, Wang Bo, Liao Xuzheng, Hu Shikang, Sun Chengbo. Effects of Temperature Mutation on the Intestinal and Water Microbial Diversity of Marsupenaeus Japonicus in the Biofloc System[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(32): 157-164.

图/表 7

参考文献 42

[1]	王克行. 虾蟹类增养殖学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1997, 8:18.
[2]	李义军, 李婷, 王平, 等. 日本囊对虾(Marsupenaeus japonicus)3个野生种群和1个养殖种群的形态差异与判别分析[J]. 海洋与湖沼, 2010, 41(4):500-504.
[3]	徐涵, 熊慧, 吴亚林, 等. 养殖密度、底质类型对日本囊对虾生长、存活的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2015, 54(4):923-925.
[4]	韩琳, 王秀华, 杨冰, 等. 一例日本囊对虾暴发性死亡的病原分析[J]. 水产学报, 2018, 42(3):431-441.
[5]	陈学雷, 林琼武, 李少菁, 等. 日本对虾仔虾相残的实验研究[J]. 厦门大学学报:自然科学版, 2003, 42(3):358-362.
[6]	Tacon A, Forster I P. Aquafeeds and the environment: policy implications[J]. Aquaculture, 2003, 226(1):181-189. doi: 10.1016/S0044-8486(03)00476-9 URL
[7]	熊向英, 王贤丰, 彭银辉, 等. 健康和患病卵形鲳鲹肠道菌群结构的差异[J]. 水产学报, 2019, 43(5):1317-1325.
[8]	Ma C, Chen C, Jia L, et al. Comparison of the intestinal microbiota composition and function in healthy and diseased Yunlong Grouper[J]. AMB Express, 2019, 9(1):1-11. doi: 10.1186/s13568-018-0728-7 URL
[9]	王春忠, 林国荣, 严涛, 等. 长毛对虾海水养殖环境以及虾肠道微生物群落结构研究[J]. 水产学报, 2014, 38(5):706-712.
[10]	Wang C, Lin G, Yan T, et al. The cellular community in the intestine of the shrimp Penaeus penicillatus and its culture environments[J]. Fisheries science, 2014, 80(5):1001-1007. doi: 10.1007/s12562-014-0765-3 URL
[11]	Zhou J, Wu L, Deng Y, et al. Reproducibility and quantitation of amplicon sequencing-based detection[J]. Multidisciplinary Journal of Microbial Ecology, 2011, 5(8):1303-1313.
[12]	Sun Z, Xuan Y, Zhang H, et al. Bacterial diversity in the Penaeus vannamei Boone intestine and aquaculture environment[J]. Journal of Fishery Sciences of China, 2016.
[13]	Huang F, Pan L, Song M, et al. Microbiota assemblages of water, sediment, and intestine and their associations with environmental factors and shrimp physiological health[J]. Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2018, 102(19):8585-8598. doi: 10.1007/s00253-018-9229-5 pmid: 30039332
[14]	Martínez-Córdova L R, Martínez-Porchas M, Emerenciano M G C, et al. From microbes to fish the next revolution in food production[J]. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 2017, 37(3):287-295. doi: 10.3109/07388551.2016.1144043 pmid: 26863376
[15]	Wong S, Rawls J F. Intestinal microbiota composition in fishes is influenced by host ecology and environment[J]. Molecular Ecology, 2012, 21(13):3100-3102. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05646.x URL
[16]	郭昱廷, 彭剑峰, 宋永会, 等. 温度对ABR反应器处理效果和微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 环境科学学报, 2012, 32(7):1542-1548.
[17]	钱苏雯, 王如意, 孙培德, 等. 水温变化对EBPR系统除磷效果响应机制的数值模拟研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 2010(12):2420-2429.
[18]	Oehmen A, Lemos P C, Carvalho G, et al. Advances in enhanced biological phosphorus removal: from micro to macro scale[J]. Water research, 2007, 41(11):2271-2300. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2007.02.030 URL
[19]	王亚宜, 王淑莹, 彭永臻, 等. 污水有机碳源特征及温度对反硝化聚磷的影响[J]. 环境科学学报, 2006, 26(2):186-192.
[20]	Zhang M, Sun Y, Chen K, et al. Characterization of the intestinal microbiota in Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei, fed diets with different lipid sources[J]. Aquaculture, 2014, 434:449-455. doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2014.09.008 URL
[21]	刘新春, 吴成强, 张昱, 等. PCR-DGGE法用于活性污泥系统中微生物群落结构变化的解析[J]. 生态学报, 2005(04):186-191.
[22]	Luo H F, Qi H Y, Zhang H X. Assessment of the Bacterial Diversity in Fenvalerate-Treated Soil[J]. World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology, 2004, 20(5):509-515. doi: 10.1023/B:WIBI.0000040401.46606.a4 URL
[23]	雷衍之. 养殖水环境化学实验[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006:49-70.
[24]	罗亮, 李卓佳, 张家松, 等. 对虾精养池塘碳,氮和异养细菌含量的变化及其相关性研究[J]. 南方水產科學, 2011, 7(5):24-29.
[25]	Li M, Lovell R T. Effect of dietary protein concentration on nitrogenous waste in intensively fed catfish ponds[J]. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society, 1992, 23(2):122-127. doi: 10.1111/jwas.1992.23.issue-2 URL
[26]	Weber J T, Mintz E D, Canizares R, et al. Epidemic cholera in Ecuador: multidrug-resistance and transmission by water and seafood[J]. Epidemiology & infection, 1994, 112(1):1-11.
[27]	毕冬, 韩相奎, 叶长兵, 等. 不同温度下异波折板反应器处理生活污水的研究[J]. 中国资源综合利用, 2008, 26(2):6-8.
[28]	吴鹏, 陆爽君, 徐乐中, 等. 温度对ABR-MBR复合工艺处理生活污水的影响及其微生物群落分析[J]. 环境科学, 2014, 35(9):3466-3472.
[29]	Haslun J, Correia E, Strychar K, et al. Characterization of Bioflocs in a No Water Exchange Super-intensive System for the Production of Food Size Pacific White Shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei[J]. International Journal of Aquaculture, 2012, 2(6):29-39.
[30]	罗固源, 豆俊峰, 吉芳英, 等. 螺旋升流式反应器脱氮除磷效果及其特性的研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 2004(01):15-19.
[31]	杨章武, 杨铿, 张哲, 等. 基于宏基因组测序技术分析凡纳滨对虾育苗中生物絮团细菌群落结构[J]. 福建水产, 2015, 37(2):91-97.
[32]	Rungrassamee W, Klanchui A, Maibunkaew S, et al. Characterization of intestinal bacteria in wild and domesticated adult black tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon)[J]. PloS one, 2014, 9(3):e91853. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091853 URL
[33]	Zhao P, Huang J, Wang X H, et al. The application of bioflocs technology in high-intensive, zero exchange farming systems of Marsupenaeus japonicus[J]. Aquaculture, 2012, 354:97-106.
[34]	Sakami T, Fujioka Y, Shimoda T. Comparison of microbial community structures in intensive and extensive shrimp culture ponds and a mangrove area in Thailand[J]. Fisheries Science, 2010, 74(4):889-898. doi: 10.1111/fis.2008.74.issue-4 URL
[35]	Wagner M R A, Amann R I, Lemmer H, et al. Probing Activated Sludge with Oligonucleotides Specific for Proteobacteria: Inadequacy of Culture-Dependent Methods for Describing Microbial Community Structure[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1993, 59(5):1520-1525. doi: 10.1128/aem.59.5.1520-1525.1993 pmid: 8517747
[36]	Miura Y, Hiraiwa M N, Ito T, et al. Bacterial community structures in MBRs treating municipal wastewater: Relationship between community stability and reactor performance[J]. Water Research, 2007, 41(3):0-637.
[37]	Wagner M, Rath G, Amann R, et al. In situIdentification of Ammonia-oxidizing Bacteria[J]. Systematic & Applied Microbiology, 1995, 18(2):251-264.
[38]	Daims H, Brühl A, Amann R, et al. The domain-specific probe EUB338 is insufficient for the detection of all Bacteria: development and evaluation of a more comprehensive probe set[J]. Systematic & Applied Microbiology, 1999, 22(3):434.
[39]	Das S, Ward L R, Burke C. Prospects of using marine actinobacteria as probiotics in aquaculture[J]. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2008, 81(3):589-589. doi: 10.1007/s00253-008-1747-0 URL
[40]	Kim S, Pang Z, Seo H, et al. Effect of bioflocs on growth and immune activity of Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei postlarvae[J]. Aquaculture Research, 2014, 45(2):362-371. doi: 10.1111/are.2014.45.issue-2 URL
	[ 41 Manan H, Amin-Safwan A, Ikhwanuddin M. Effects of Biofloc Application on Survival Rate, Growth Performance and Specific Growth Rate of Pacific Whiteleg Shrimp, Penaeus vannamei Culture in Closed Hatchery System[J]. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences: PJBS, 2020, 23(12):1563-1571. doi: 10.3923/pjbs.2020.1563.1571 URL
[42]	Apprill A. Marine animal microbiomes: toward understanding host-microbiome interactions in a changing ocean[J]. Frontiers in Marine Science, 2017, 4:222. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00222 URL

样品	Ace指数	Chao1指数	Observed OTUs	Shannon指数	Simpson指数
Qa	1326.38±259.59	1325.95±242.01	852±88.88	5.32±0.22	0.92±0.02
Qb	1939.39±214.58	1991.25±232.30	1264.33±83.48	6.61±0.17	0.96±0.01
Ha	1486.55±157.99	1523.58±103.66	985.33±99.97	5.81±0.16	0.94±0.01
Hb	1798.14±324.27	1843.05±312.27	1313.67±192.04	6.84±0.82	0.95±0.03
a	1427.99±134.20	1417.81±163.22	953±89.37	5.80±0.30	0.93±0.02
b	1365.61±386.06	1373.76±327.07	944±117.66	6.47±0.10	0.96±0.01
A	1196.43±991.52	1178.70±85.35	799±76.15	5.61±0.69	0.93±0.03
B	1278.51±590.97	1287.59±530.90	879.67±320.81	5.76±0.63	0.91±0.03

样品	Ace指数	Chao1指数	Observed OTUs	Shannon指数	Simpson指数
Qa	1326.38±259.59	1325.95±242.01	852±88.88	5.32±0.22	0.92±0.02
Qb	1939.39±214.58	1991.25±232.30	1264.33±83.48	6.61±0.17	0.96±0.01
Ha	1486.55±157.99	1523.58±103.66	985.33±99.97	5.81±0.16	0.94±0.01
Hb	1798.14±324.27	1843.05±312.27	1313.67±192.04	6.84±0.82	0.95±0.03
a	1427.99±134.20	1417.81±163.22	953±89.37	5.80±0.30	0.93±0.02
b	1365.61±386.06	1373.76±327.07	944±117.66	6.47±0.10	0.96±0.01
A	1196.43±991.52	1178.70±85.35	799±76.15	5.61±0.69	0.93±0.03
B	1278.51±590.97	1287.59±530.90	879.67±320.81	5.76±0.63	0.91±0.03

门	丰度/%
门	Qa	Qb	Ha	Hb	a	b	A	B
Proteobacteria	57.36±25.76	44.45±2.22	79.66±2.14	45.44±6.05	84.42±8.11	82.5±4.65	82.1±9.86	78.17±5.93
Bacteroidetes	36.45±23.93	16.07±1.19	13.53±1.33	16.03±2.91	5.66±3.02	10.02±3.24	15.2±9.55	7.77±0.83
Actinobacteria	3.19±2.08	5.33±0.69	1.68±0.38	4.33±1.35	3.41±4.04	1.76±1.75	0.49±0.32	4.38±3.36
Chloroflexi	0.26±0.15	19.02±3.09	0.21±0.09	17.13±12.54	2.03±3.2	0.63±0.95	0.05±0.06	1.76±2
TM7	0.01±0	3.43±0.36	0.02±0.02	2.02±0.83	1.17±1.88	0.67±1.09	0.03±0.02	3.57±1.44
Acidobacteria	0.03±0.03	5.42±0.22	0.01±0.01	5.98±1.34	0.27±0.27	0.3±0.45	0.01±0	0.25±0.04

门	丰度/%
门	Qa	Qb	Ha	Hb	a	b	A	B
Proteobacteria	57.36±25.76	44.45±2.22	79.66±2.14	45.44±6.05	84.42±8.11	82.5±4.65	82.1±9.86	78.17±5.93
Bacteroidetes	36.45±23.93	16.07±1.19	13.53±1.33	16.03±2.91	5.66±3.02	10.02±3.24	15.2±9.55	7.77±0.83
Actinobacteria	3.19±2.08	5.33±0.69	1.68±0.38	4.33±1.35	3.41±4.04	1.76±1.75	0.49±0.32	4.38±3.36
Chloroflexi	0.26±0.15	19.02±3.09	0.21±0.09	17.13±12.54	2.03±3.2	0.63±0.95	0.05±0.06	1.76±2
TM7	0.01±0	3.43±0.36	0.02±0.02	2.02±0.83	1.17±1.88	0.67±1.09	0.03±0.02	3.57±1.44
Acidobacteria	0.03±0.03	5.42±0.22	0.01±0.01	5.98±1.34	0.27±0.27	0.3±0.45	0.01±0	0.25±0.04

属	丰度/%
属	Qa	Qb	Ha	Hb	a	b	A	B
Polaribacter	8.6±14.38	0.07±0.05	1.17±0.97	0.06±0.03	0.31±0.07	0.2±0.29	0.31±0.3	0.27±0.2
Roseivivax	7.68±12.48	0.06±0.01	6.93±8.27	0.05±0.03	0.33±0.1	0.26±0.15	0.11±0.06	0.21±0.26
Marivita	7.41±5.2	0.11±0.04	14.85±1.63	0.12±0.09	2.08±1.77	0.62±0.29	0.77±0.36	0.06±0.03
Winogradskyella	6.16±10.08	1.34±0.2	0.33±0.23	1.23±0.23	0.07±0.03	0.11±0.05	0.34±0.3	0.07±0.05
Vibrio	1.6±0.4	0.18±0.01	1.78±0.55	0.29±0.26	10.79±9.29	4.83±1.49	2.17±1.86	3.48±2.6
Psychroserpens	1.56±2.05	3.74±0.24	0.27±0.1	3.69±0.37	0.29±0.2	0.68±0.15	1.66±1.4	0.71±0.59
Octadecabacter	1.28±0.59	0.61±0.07	2.44±1.08	0.63±0.14	2.63±1.14	10.87±4.99	4.52±0.88	2.7±1.44
Tenacibaculum	0.53±0.54	0.71±0.14	0.42±0.04	0.3±0.15	0.34±0.31	2.48±1.24	0.79±0.22	3.19±1.75
Ruegeria	0.15±0.05	0.65±0.09	0.28±0.19	0.41±0.14	2.99±1.45	2.74±0.73	4.43±0.82	2.93±1.02
Photobacterium	0.11±0.1	0.06±0.03	0.21±0.08	0.14±0.14	13.53±12.05	8.11±2.9	0.25±0.29	0.87±0.24
Ardenscatena	0.1±0.13	12.69±1.6	0.04±0.01	13.31±11.8	1.85±2.99	0.43±0.74	0.01±0.01	1.66±1.88