Five Strains of Cellulosimicrobium: Isolation, Identification and Enzymatic Activity

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0013

Abstract

Abstract:

The aim is to apply the corn stalk biomass resources of Guizhou in tobacco crop rotation by using the microbial degradation method. The tobacco planting soil was used as material, the Congo red staining method and CMCase enzyme activity determination were used to screen the bacteria strains, and the straw degradation rate of corn stalk was determined by weight loss method. The results showed that 44 cellulose decomposing bacteria strains were obtained in the experiment, 20 cellulose decomposing bacteria strains were obtained in the preliminary screening. Five strains with larger D/d value were selected and 10 compound bacteria strains were obtained through antagonistic experiment. In addition, the five high efficient cellulose decomposing bacterial strains were preliminarily identified as Cellulosimicrobium cellulans or Cellulosimicrobium funkei (100% homology). The CMCase enzyme activity of the compound bacteria strains was higher than that of the single bacteria strain, and the bacteria with high enzyme activity value (i.e., 314.39 U/mL) and short time of achieving the enzyme activity (i.e., 5 days) were selected to do corn stalk degradation experiments. The degradation rate of corn stalk was about 53.35% after 25 days, which was 1.87 times of the control group. Therefore, the five strains can be used as potential developing strains for corn stalk returning to field in tobacco growing areas of Guizhou Province, and could play a significant role in the effective utilization of resources, environmental protection and improvement of continuous cropping obstacles in tobacco-growing soil.

Key words: cellulolytic bacteria, Guizhou tobacco area, corn stalk, tobacco-growing soil, Cellulosimicrobium

CLC Number:

S572

Wang Guangqin, Huang Ying, Wen Mingxia, Gou Jianyu, Dai Fei, Ding Mengjiao. Five Strains of Cellulosimicrobium: Isolation, Identification and Enzymatic Activity[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(15): 112-119.

Figures/Tables 8

References 27

[1]	刘瑞伟. 我国农作物秸秆利用现状及对策[J]. 农业与技术, 2009,29(01):7-9.
[2]	张国, 逯非, 赵红, 等. 我国农作物秸秆资源化利用现状及农户对秸秆还田的认知态度[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2017,36(05):981-988.
[3]	Cheng Y, Zhang J B, Müller C, et al. 15N racing study on undersand the N supply associaed wih organic amendmens in a vineyard soil[J]. Biology and Feriliy of Soils, 2015,51:983-993
[4]	Shan H X, Lu C A, Zhang J T, et al. Effec of maize sraw applied with N ferilizer on nirogen adsorpion of winer whea under differen soil feriliy. Plan Nuriion and Ferilizer Sciences, 2012,18(1):35-41.
[5]	Yuriy R L, Barre Chrisopher J, Liu Zhen Y, et al. Producion of dimehylfuran for liquid fuels from biomass-derived carbohydraes[J]. Naure, 2007,447(7147):982-985.
[6]	王国珍. 纤维素转化为有机化合物的降解研究[D]. 武汉:武汉大学, 2016.
[7]	何荣玉, 闫志英, 刘晓风, 等. 秸秆干发酵沼气增产研究[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2007,13(4):583-585.
[8]	金海洋, 姚政, 徐四新, 等. 纤维素分解菌剂对水稻秸秆田间降解效果的研究[J]. 上海农业学报, 2004,20(4):83-85.
[9]	赵伟, 孙泰朋, 田宗泽, 等. 秸秆配施低温菌剂直接还田对黑土土壤碳、氮的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2018,26(03):147-152.
[10]	Hart T D, De Leij F, Kinsey G, et al. Strategies for the isolation of cellulolytic fungi for composting of wheat straw[J]. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2002,18(5):471-480. doi: 10.1023/A:1015519005814 URL
[11]	刘东阳, 王蒙蒙, 马磊, 等. 高效纤维素分解菌的分离筛选及其分解纤维素研究[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2014,37(6):49-58.
[12]	李振高, 骆永明, 滕应. 土壤与环境微生物研究法[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2008:364-368.
[13]	Jeong J, Young K. Degradation of crystalline cellulose by the brown-rot basidiomycete fomitopsis palustris[J]. Journal of Microbiology, 2005,4(6):487-492.
[14]	张宇昊, 王颉, 张伟, 等. 一种改进的纤维素分解菌鉴别培养基[J]. 纤维素科学与技术, 2004,12(1):33-36.
[15]	QB 2583-2003. 纤维素酶制剂 2583-2003.纤维素酶制剂[S]. 北京:中华人民共和国国家发展和改革委员会, 2003.
[16]	刘霄. 高效降解玉米秸秆复合菌群的构建及其降解效果研究[D]. 哈尔滨:东北农业大学, 2019.
[17]	Yuan Y, Hu Y B, Hu C X, et al. Overexpression and characterization of a glycoside hydrolase family 1enzyme from Cellulosimicrobium cellulans sp. 21 and its application for minor ginsenosides production[J]. J Mol Catal B Enzym., 2015,120:60-67. doi: 10.1016/j.molcatb.2015.06.015 URL
[18]	Dou T Y, Chen J, Hao Y F, et al. Effects of Different Carbon Sources on Enzyme Production and Ultrastructure of Cellulosimicrobium cellulans[J]. Curr Microbiol, 2019,76(3):355-360. doi: 10.1007/s00284-019-01633-8 URL
[19]	Qin W, Fan F, Zhu Y, et al. Anaerobic biodegradation of benzo(a)pyrene by a novel Cellulosimicrobium cellulans CWS2 isolated from polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-contaminated soil[J]. Braz J Microbiol., 2018,49(2):258-268. doi: 10.1016/j.bjm.2017.04.014 URL
[20]	Fu Y, Cheng L, Meng Y, et al. Cellulosimicrobium cellulans strain E4-5 enzymatic hydrolysis of curdlan for production of (1 → 3)-linked β-D-glucan oligosaccharides[J]. Carbohydr Polym., 2015,10(134):740-744.
[21]	Nkem B M, Halimoon N, Yusoff F M, et al. Isolation, identification and diesel-oil biodegradation capacities of indigenous hydrocarbon-degrading strains of Cellulosimicrobium cellulans and Acinetobacter baumannii from tarball at Terengganu beach, Malaysia[J]. Mar Pollut Bull, 2016,107(1):261-268. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.03.060 URL
[22]	Dou T Y, Luan H W, Liu X B, et al. Enzymatic hydrolysis of 7-xylosyltaxanes by an extracellular xylosidase from Cellulosimicrobium cellulans[J]. Biotechnol Lett., 2015,37(9):1905-1910. doi: 10.1007/s10529-015-1867-4 URL
[23]	Brown J M, Steigerwalt A G, Morey R E, et al. Characterization of clinical isolates previously identified as Oerskovia turbata: proposal of Cellulosimicrobium funkei sp. nov. and emended description of the genus Cellulosimicrobium[J]. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol, 2006,56(Pt 4):801-804. doi: 10.1099/ijs.0.63882-0 URL
[24]	Karthik C, Barathi S, Pugazhendhi A, et al. Evaluation of Cr(VI) reduction mechanism and removal by Cellulosimicrobium funkei strain AR8, a novel haloalkaliphilic bacterium[J]. J Hazard Mater., 2017,5(333):42-53.
[25]	Liu J, Song W J, Zhang N Y, et al. Biodetoxification of aflatoxin B1 in cottonseed meal by fermentation of Cellulosimicrobium funkei in duckling diet. Poult Sci., 2017,96(4):923-930. doi: 10.3382/ps/pew352 URL
[26]	王元明. 高温纤维素降解菌的筛选及其复合菌剂对秸秆降解效果的研究[D]. 南京:南京农业大学, 2013.
[27]	Petkar H, Li A, Bunce N, et al. Cellulosimicrobium funkei: first report of infection in a nonimmunocompromised patient and useful phenotypic tests for differentiation from Cellulosimicrobium cellulans and Cellulosimicrobium terreum[J]. J Clin Microbiol., 2011,49(3):1175-1178. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01103-10 URL

菌株	菌源	透明圈直径D/cm	菌株直径d/cm	D/d
FCM-1	遵义湄潭土壤	0.75±0.05ab	0.22±0.06a	3.4
FCM-10	遵义湄潭土壤	0.83±0.05a	0.20±0.05a	4.2
FCM-11	遵义湄潭土壤	0.76±0.01ab	0.20±0.03a	3.8
FCY-2	安顺杨武土壤	0.69±0.06b	0.25±0.05a	2.8
FCW-2	毕节威宁土壤	0.83±0.05a	0.21±0.01a	4.0

菌株	菌源	透明圈直径D/cm	菌株直径d/cm	D/d
FCM-1	遵义湄潭土壤	0.75±0.05ab	0.22±0.06a	3.4
FCM-10	遵义湄潭土壤	0.83±0.05a	0.20±0.05a	4.2
FCM-11	遵义湄潭土壤	0.76±0.01ab	0.20±0.03a	3.8
FCY-2	安顺杨武土壤	0.69±0.06b	0.25±0.05a	2.8
FCW-2	毕节威宁土壤	0.83±0.05a	0.21±0.01a	4.0

菌株/复合菌剂编号	菌株/复合菌剂命名	CMCase活性/(U/mL)
菌株/复合菌剂编号	菌株/复合菌剂命名	2 d	5 d	7 d
1	FCM-1	152.20±3.11hi	146.00±11.89i	142.15±3.73l
2	FCM-10	179.72±4.78g	241.48±0.00de	260.45±4.20i
3	FCM-11	166.38±0.52h	243.85±10.07de	204.03±3.93j
4	FCY-2	158.18±2.58h	153.65±3.36hi	172.10±1.05k
5	FCW-2	146.56±1.56i	189.26±2.24fg	174.33±4.20k
6	FCM-1+FCM-10	258.08±0.00b	251.67±6.13d	358.11±2.74a
7	FCM-1+FCM-11	235.86±7.73d	230.18±3.22e	291.05±2.74df
8	FCM-1+FCY-2	209.49±7.73f	245.35±9.66de	283.27±4.75efg
9	FCM-1+FCW-2	230.77±5.26de	285.56±4.29c	298.23±8.10d
10	FCM-10+FCM-11	242.34±8.02c	281.51±14.10c	297.04±2.74d
11	FCM-10+FCY-2	224.76±10.01e	314.39±14.94a	346.13±5.08bc
12	FCM-10+FCW-2	255.76±2.12b	310.85±12.90ab	343.74±5.77c
13	FCM-11+FCY-2	203.47±4.46f	204.64±10.10f	273.39±8.90h
14	FCM-11+FCW-2	228.92±2.78de	173.58±1.70gh	292.25±2.54de
15	FCY-2+FCW-2	290.38±11.90a	292.82±20.44bc	290.45±10.16dg

菌株/复合菌剂编号	菌株/复合菌剂命名	CMCase活性/(U/mL)
菌株/复合菌剂编号	菌株/复合菌剂命名	2 d	5 d	7 d
1	FCM-1	152.20±3.11hi	146.00±11.89i	142.15±3.73l
2	FCM-10	179.72±4.78g	241.48±0.00de	260.45±4.20i
3	FCM-11	166.38±0.52h	243.85±10.07de	204.03±3.93j
4	FCY-2	158.18±2.58h	153.65±3.36hi	172.10±1.05k
5	FCW-2	146.56±1.56i	189.26±2.24fg	174.33±4.20k
6	FCM-1+FCM-10	258.08±0.00b	251.67±6.13d	358.11±2.74a
7	FCM-1+FCM-11	235.86±7.73d	230.18±3.22e	291.05±2.74df
8	FCM-1+FCY-2	209.49±7.73f	245.35±9.66de	283.27±4.75efg
9	FCM-1+FCW-2	230.77±5.26de	285.56±4.29c	298.23±8.10d
10	FCM-10+FCM-11	242.34±8.02c	281.51±14.10c	297.04±2.74d
11	FCM-10+FCY-2	224.76±10.01e	314.39±14.94a	346.13±5.08bc
12	FCM-10+FCW-2	255.76±2.12b	310.85±12.90ab	343.74±5.77c
13	FCM-11+FCY-2	203.47±4.46f	204.64±10.10f	273.39±8.90h
14	FCM-11+FCW-2	228.92±2.78de	173.58±1.70gh	292.25±2.54de
15	FCY-2+FCW-2	290.38±11.90a	292.82±20.44bc	290.45±10.16dg