The effect of diet on the structure of gut bacterial community of sympatric pair of whitefishes (Coregonus lavaretus): one story more
In the Coregonus lavaretus complex may be found lacustrine sympatric pairs, which serves as an intriguing model for studying different aspects of fish evolutionary biology. One such sympatric whitefish pair inhabits Teletskoye Lake (West Siberia, Russia) and includes a “large” form (Coregonus lavare...
| Published in: | PeerJ |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
PeerJ Inc.
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8005 https://doaj.org/article/d07444d70b6a45e8bc5e06420089039b |
| Summary: | In the Coregonus lavaretus complex may be found lacustrine sympatric pairs, which serves as an intriguing model for studying different aspects of fish evolutionary biology. One such sympatric whitefish pair inhabits Teletskoye Lake (West Siberia, Russia) and includes a “large” form (Coregonus lavaretus pidschian (Gmelin, 1789)) and a “small” form (C. l. pravdinellus (Dulkeit, 1949)). C. l. pravdinellus has a narrow trophic specialization and feeds on zooplankton, whereas the diet of C. l. pidschian is based on benthic prey. In the present study we aimed to address the question of how the gut microbial community reflects the divergence in diet of a sympatric pair of whitefish. Studied samples included the mucosa and content were collected for cardiac and pyloric stomach, anterior, middle, and posterior intestine, but only mucosa was collected for the pyloric caeca. In addition, water, sediment, macrophyte (environmental microbiota) and invertebrate (microbiota of prey) samples were collected in the same location. The V3–V4 region of the 16S rRNA genes was chosen for microbiome analysis and the software PICRUSt used to estimate the difference functional roles of the microbiota. The number of OTUs and Chao1 index in mucosa and content of cardiac and pyloric stomach were significantly different between whitefish. Significant differences were observed between whitefish for content from different parts of the intestine in terms of OTU number and Chao1 indices, whereas for mucosa from the same parts of intestine these differences were absent. No significant differences were found for diversity estimates of mucosa and content of different parts of the gut (there were a few exceptions) between whitefish. The form of whitefish and the segment of the digestive system were factors with a significant determinative effect on the structure of the microbiota from gut mucosa and content. The most dominant phyla in mucosa and content of cardiac and pyloric stomach was Proteobacteria (57.0–84.0%) for both whitefish. Throughout the ... |
|---|