Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36698172›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2023

High-resolution metagenomic reconstruction of the freshwater spring bloom.

Vinicius S Kavagutti, Paul-Adrian Bulzu, Cecilia M Chiriac, Michaela M Salcher, Indranil Mukherjee, Tanja Shabarova, Vesna Grujčić, Maliheh Mehrshad, Vojtěch Kasalický, Adrian-Stefan Andrei and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
23.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.

Vinicius S KavaguttiInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic. viniciuskavagutti@gmail.com.
Paul-Adrian BulzuInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Cecilia M ChiriacInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Michaela M SalcherInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Indranil MukherjeeInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Tanja ShabarovaInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Vesna GrujčićInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Maliheh MehrshadInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Vojtěch KasalickýInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Adrian-Stefan AndreiLimnological Station, Microbial Evogenomics Lab (MiEL), University of Zurich, Kilchberg, Switzerland.
Jitka JezberováInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Jaromir SeďaInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Pavel RychteckýInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Petr ZnachorInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Karel ŠimekInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Rohit GhaiInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CAS, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic. ghai.rohit@gmail.com.
Czech Academy of Sciences, Biology Centre · CZInstitute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic · CZSanatorium Kilchberg · CHStockholm University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe phytoplankton spring bloom in freshwater habitats is a complex, recurring, and dynamic ecological spectacle that unfolds at multiple biological scales. Although enormous taxonomic shifts in microbial assemblages during and after the bloom have been reported, genomic information on the microbial community of the spring bloom remains scarce.

resultsWe performed a high-resolution spatio-temporal sampling of the spring bloom in a freshwater reservoir and describe a multitude of previously unknown taxa using metagenome-assembled genomes of eukaryotes, prokaryotes, and viruses in combination with a broad array of methodologies. The recovered genomes reveal multiple distributional dynamics for several bacterial groups with progressively increasing stratification. Analyses of abundances of metagenome-assembled genomes in concert with CARD-FISH revealed remarkably similar in situ doubling time estimates for dominant genome-streamlined microbial lineages. Discordance between quantitations of cryptophytes arising from sequence data and microscopic identification suggested the presence of hidden, yet extremely abundant aplastidic cryptophytes that were confirmed by CARD-FISH analyses. Aplastidic cryptophytes are prevalent throughout the water column but have never been considered in prior models of plankton dynamics. We also recovered the first metagenomic-assembled genomes of freshwater protists (a diatom and a haptophyte) along with thousands of giant viral genomic contigs, some of which appeared similar to viruses infecting haptophytes but owing to lack of known representatives, most remained without any indication of their hosts. The contrasting distribution of giant viruses that are present in the entire water column to that of parasitic perkinsids residing largely in deeper waters allows us to propose giant viruses as the biological agents of top-down control and bloom collapse, likely in combination with bottom-up factors like a nutrient limitation.

conclusionWe reconstructed thousands of genomes of microbes and viruses from a freshwater spring bloom and show that such large-scale genome recovery allows tracking of planktonic succession in great detail. However, integration of metagenomic information with other methodologies (e.g., microscopy, CARD-FISH) remains critical to reveal diverse phenomena (e.g., distributional patterns, in situ doubling times) and novel participants (e.g., aplastidic cryptophytes) and to further refine existing ecological models (e.g., factors affecting bloom collapse). This work provides a genomic foundation for future approaches towards a fine-scale characterization of the organisms in relation to the rapidly changing environment during the course of the freshwater spring bloom. Video Abstract.

Indexed as

MetagenomeVirusesBacteriaEukaryotaFresh WaterPlanktonWaterWater

Identifiers

PMID36698172
PMCPMC9878933
OpenAlexW4318034610

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.