Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of CLPP and enzyme activity assay for functional characterization of bacterial soil communities

  • Microbial Communities
  • Published:
Journal of Soils and Sediments Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background, Aims and Scope

Functional characterization of soil microbial communities by the use of BIOLOG GN microtiter plates was compared with an optimized assay of measuring the enzymatic activity of bacterial associated enzymes. Since the first use of BIOLOG GN microtiter plates for characterization of environmental microorganisms, this Community Level Physiological Profile (CLPP) has been widely used and is today routinely used in soil monitoring programmes in e.g. the Netherlands (Nielsen and Winding 2002). The CLPP method is based upon the metabolic capabilities of bacteria during growth in the wells of the microtiter plates at nutrient rich conditions compared to the conditions in soil. Inoculum preparation, incubation conditions, reading intervals and data treatment have all been the subject of many investigations. In spite of the various criticisms, the method remains to be widely used, to a large extent due to the ease and speed of performance.

The Enzymatic Activity Assay (EAA) is based on enzymatic cleavage of model fluorogenic enzyme substrates (4-methylumbelliferyl, MUF), that upon cleavage forms a fluorescent product. The assay is independent of bacterial growth and can be used directly on bacteria extracted from soil, yielding a functional characterization of the bacterial communities based on the enzymatic activities. The substrates chosen here represent 14 different enzymes related to the degradation of different carbohydrates, including starch, chitin and cellulose.

Methods

The microbial communities of 11 different agricultural and forest soils were collected around Sjælland, Denmark, and characterized by CLPP and EAA. For CLPP the bacteria were extracted from the soils by dilution and shaking. For EAA the bacteria were extracted by Nycodenz buoyant density centrifugation to ensure that the enzymatic activities were associated to the bacteria and not to free soil enzymes. In addition, the culturable and total number of bacteria and soil respiration were used to describe the size and activity of the soil microbial communities. The data were subjected to principal component analysis followed by correlation analysis.

Results

Significant correlations were found between the principal components of CLPP and EAA. Hence, the functional characterization of the bacterial communities by the growth based CLPP correlated positively to the functional characterization by the EEA, while correlation to the abundance estimations of bacteria (CFU and total counts) correlated negatively. The overall assessment of soil activity, the soil respiration, did not correlate with either. Significant correlations were found between the principal components of pH, CLPP, EAA, and culturable and total number of bacteria, while no correlations were found to soil respiration, loss on ignition and soil moisture content. The pH in the test system might make differences between bacterial communities more detectable. The functional characterization of the bacterial communities by the growth based CLPP correlated positively to the bacterial community function assayed by the EAA, which is independent of growth and, hence, more closely reflects the in situ activities.

Discussion

Functional characterization of microbial communities aims to describe the in situ functions. However, most functional tests depends on manipulation, including incubation of the microbial communities, in the laboratory. Certainly, the CLPP assay is dependant on microbial growth in the wells, which has the potential to change the functional characteristis of the microbial communities. Our results show that the functional characterization of microbial communities by the growth based assay of CLPP correlated posistively to the EAA which is independent of growth and, hence, more closely should reflect the in situ activities. This observation is of importance for the current debate on assessment of the functions of soil microbial communities.

The estimations of the abundance of bacteria (CFU and total counts), however, showed negative correlations to the functional characterizations. This highlights the questions on the identity and culturability versus dormancy of the functional bacterial players in soil.

Recommendations and Perspectives

The two assays tested, CLPP and EAA, separated the soil bacterial communities similarly in vitro. Hence, depending on the objectives, either technique can be used to get a fingerprint of the soil bacterial community diversity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bakken LR, Lindahl V (1995): Recovery of Bacterial Cells from Soil. In: van Elsas JD, Trevors JT (eds), Nucleic Acids in the Environment: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 9–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandick AK, Dick RP (1999): Field management effets on soil enzyme activities. Soil Biol Biochem 31, 1471–1479

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bending GD, Turner MK, Jones JE (2002): Interactions between crop residue and soil organic matter quality and the functional diversity of soil microbial communities. Soil Biol Biochem 34, 1073–1082

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bending GD, Turner MK, Rayns F, Marx M-C, Wood M (2004): Microbial and biochemical soil quality indicators and their potential for differentiating areas under contrasting agricultural management regimes. Soil Biol Biochem 36, 1785–1792

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Caracciolo AB, Grenni P, Cupo C, Rossetti S (2005): In situ analysis of native microbial communities in complex samples with high particulate loads. FEMS Microbiol Let 253, 55–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Costa AL, Paixäo S, Cacador I, Carolino M (2007): CLPP and EAA profiles of microbial communities in salt marsh sediments. J Soils Sediments 7(6) 418–425

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Courtois S, Frostegård Å, Göransson P, Depret G, Jeanin P, Simonet P (2001): Quantification of bacterial subgroups in soil: Comparison of DNA extracted directly from soil or from cells previously released by density gradient centrifugation. Env Microbiol 3, 431–439

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Garland J, Mills A (1991): Classification and characterisation of heterotrophic microbial communities on the basis of patterns of community-level sole-carbon-source utilisation. Appl Environ Microbiol 57, 2351–2359

    Google Scholar 

  • Haack SK, Garchow H, Klug MJ, Forney LJ (1995): Analysis of factors affecting the accuracy, reproducibility, and interpretation of microbial community carbon source utilization patterns. Appl Environ Microbiol 61, 1458–1468

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hernesmaa A, Björklöf K, Kiikkila O, Fritze H, Haahtela K, Romantschuk M (2005): Structure and function of microbial communities in the rhizosphere of Scots pine after tree-felling. Soil Biol Biochem 37, 777–785

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heuer H, Smalla K (1997): Evaluation of community-level catabolic profiling using BIOLOG GN microplates to study microbial community changes in potato phyllosphere. J Microbiol Methods 30, 49–61

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge A, Alexander IJ, Gooday GW (1995): Chitinolytic enzymes of pathogenic and ectomycorrhizal fungi. Mycol Res 99, 935–941

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johansen A, Knudsen IMB, Binnerup SJ, Winding A, Johansen JE, Jensen LE, Andersen KS, Svenning MM, Bonde TA (2005): Nontarget effects of the microbial agents Pseudomonas fluorescens DR54 and Clonostachys rosea IK726 in soils cropped with barley followed by sugar beet: A greenhouse assessment. Soil Biol Biochem 37, 2225–2239

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kepner RL, Pratt JR (1994): Use of fluorochromes for direct enumeration of total bacteria in environmental samples: Past and present. Microbiol Rev 58, 603–615

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl V (1996): Improved soil dispersion procedures for total bacterial counts, extraction of indigenous bacteria and cell survival. J Microbiol Meth 25, 279–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maron P-A, Schimann H, Ranjard L, Brothier E, Domenach A-M, Lensi R, Nazaret S (2006) Evaluation of quantitative and qualitative recovery of bacterial communities from different soil types by density gradient centrifugation. Eur J Soil Biol 42, 65–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx M-C, Wood M, Jarvis SC (2001): A microplate fluorimetric assay for the study of enzyme diversity in soils. Soil Biol Biochem 33, 1633–1640

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr C, Winding A, Hendriksen NB (1999): Community level physiological profile of soil bacteria unaffected by extraction method. J Microbiol Methods 36, 29–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen MN, Winding A (2002): Microorganisms as indicators of soil health. National Environmental Research Institute, Denmark, technical report no. 388, http://www2.dmu.dk/1_viden/2_Publikationer/3_fagrapporter/rapporter/FR388.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul EA, Clark FE (1989): Soil Microbiology and Biochemistry. Acad Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston-Mafham J, Boddy L, Randerson PF (2002): Analysis of microbial community functional diversity using sole-carbon utilization profiles — A critique. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 42, 1–14

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey PW, Rillig MC, Feris KP, Holben WE, Gannon JE (2006): Choice of methods for soil microbial community analysis: PLFA maximizes power compared to CLPP and PCR-based approaches. Pedobiolgia 50, 275–280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rhee YH, Hah YC, Hong W (1987): Relative contribution of fungi and bacteria to soil carboxymethylcellulase activity. Soil Biol Biochem 19, 479–481

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Van Tilbeurgh H, Claeyssens M (1985): Detection and differentiation of cellulose components using low molecular mass fluorogenic substrates. FEBS Letters 187, 283–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vepsäläinen M, Kukkonen S, Vestberg M, Sirviö H, Niemi RM (2001): Application of soil enzyme activity test kit in a field experiment. Soil Biol Biochem 33, 1665–1672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widmer F, Fliessbach A, Laczko W, Schulze-Aurich J, Zeyer J (2001): Assessing soil biological characteristics: A comparison of bulk soil community DNA-, PLFA-, and Biolog™-analyses. Soil Biol Biochem 33, 1029–1036

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Widmer F, Rasche F, Hartmann M, Fliessbach A (2006): Community structure and substrate utilization of bacteria in soils from organic and conventional farming systems of the DOK long-term field experiment. Appl Soil Ecol 33, 294–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winding A (1994): Fingerprinting bacterial soil communities using Biolog microtitre plates. In: Ritz K, Dighton J, Giller K (eds), Beyond the Biomass. A Wiley-Sayce publication, pp 85–94

  • Winding A, Binnerup SJ, Sørensen J (1994): Viability of indigenous soil bacteria assayed by respiratory activity and growth. Appl Environ Microbiol 60, 2869–2875

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Winding A, Hendriksen NB (1997): Biolog substrate utilization assay for metabolic fingerprints of soil bacteria: Effects of incubation. In: Insam H, Rangger A (eds), Microbial Communities: Functional versus structural approaches. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 195–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Winding A, Hund-Rinke K, Rutgers M (2005): Microorganisms as indicators of soil quality. Ecotox Environ Safety 62, 230–248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wittmann C, Suominen KP, Salkinoja-Salonen MS (2000): Evaluation of ecological disturbance and intrinsic bioremediation potential of pulp mill-contaminated lake sediment using key enzymes as probes. Environ Poll 107, 255–261

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zak JC, Willig MR, Moorhead DL, Wildman HG (1994): Functional diversity of microbial communities: A quantitative approach. Soil Biol Biochem 26, 1101–1108

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Chemistry and Microbiology, National Environmental Research Institute, University of Aarhus, Frederiksborgvej 399, P.O. Box 358, 4000, Roskilde, Denmark

    Anne Winding & Niels Bohse Hendriksen

Authors
  1. Anne Winding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Niels Bohse Hendriksen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Winding.

Additional information

ESS-Submission Editor: Chengrong Chen, PhD (c.chen@griffith.edu.au)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Winding, A., Hendriksen, N.B. Comparison of CLPP and enzyme activity assay for functional characterization of bacterial soil communities. J Soils Sediments 7, 411–417 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1065/jss2007.11.262

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1065/jss2007.11.262

Keywords

Search

Navigation