THE IMPACT OF PASSAGE THROUGH THE INTESTINE OF THE EARTHWORM APORRECTODEA CALIGINOSA ON THE BACTERIAL COMMUNITY

Ecophysiological features of the transit (passed through the intestinal lacune) bacterial hydrolytic complex Aporrectodea caliginosa were studied: a comparison of biodiversity was made in the soil and coprolites, the prevailing ecological strategy and physiological states among its members. The study was conducted by a complex structural and functional method based on the succession kinetic analysis of initiated hydrolytic bacterial communities that occur after the inoculation of a set of selective liquid nutrient media with a suspension of the test samples. In addition to hydrolytic microorganisms, non-hydrolytic bacterial satellites (oligotrophs and copyotropes) are included in initiated communities. The growth of initiated bacterial communities on eight media with biopolymers (chitin, cellulose, pectin, starch, xylan, dextran 500, tween 20, casein) was measured by optical density. It was described by two kinetic parameters used to describe the pure cultures of microorganisms: the maximum specific growth rate and the initial physiological state. The biodiversity of the initiated communities was de-termined according to the planting from liquid nutrient media with polymers on the agar medium. Rank distributions of the studied indicators were abnormal, therefore, median and nonparametric dispersion analyzes were used, as well as a direct analysis of rank distributions. The bacterial community from coprolites acquires greater sustainability - the species composition becomes more leveled (the Berger-Parker index, showing the degree of dominance of the most abundant species, decreases after the passage) and diverse (the Shannon index becomes higher after passage). The hydrolytic bacterial complex is activated at passage, as the median value of the initial physiological state of the initiated communities increases. In the bacterial block, the proportion of fast-growing bacteria of r-strategists increases (on liquid media with polymers, the share of initiated hydrolytic associations increases with large values of the maximum specific growth rate).

zoomicrobial interactions, growth kinetics, physiological state of microorganisms, ecological strategies of microorganisms

1. Akkermans S., Van Impe J.F. Mechanistic modelling of the inhibitory effect of pH on microbial growth, Food Microbiology, 2018, V. 72, pp. 214–219. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2017.12.007 2. AlSayed A., Fergala A., Eldyasti A. Influence of biomass density and food to micro-organisms ratio on the mixed culture type I methanotrophs enriched from activated sludge. Journal of Environmental Sciences, (2017). doi: 10.1016/j.jes.2017.11.017

2. Atungulu G.G., Thote S., Wilson S. Storage of hybrid rough rice–Consideration of microbial growth kinetics and prediction models, Journal of Stored Products Research, 2016, V. 69, pp. 235–244. doi: 10.1016/j.jspr.2016.09.003

3. Bal L. Morphological investigation in two moder-humus profiles and the role of the soil fauna in their genesis, Geoderma, 1970. V. 4(1), pp. 5–36. doi: 10.1016/0016-7061(70)90030-3 5. Bi Y.M., Tian G.L., Wang C., Zhang Y., Wang D.N., Zhang F.F., Sun Z.J. Differ-ential effects of two earthworm species on Fusarium wilt of strawberry. Applied Soil Ecology, 2018. V. 126, pp. 174–181. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2018.02.024

4. Blagodatskaya E.V., Ermolaev A.M., Myakshina T.N Ecological Strategies of Soil Microbial Communities under Plants of Meadow Ecosystems, Biology Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 31(6), 620–627, (2004). doi: 10.1023/B:BIBU.0000049735.79628.7d

5. Blagodatskii S.A., Bogomolova I.N., Blagodatskaya E.V. Microbial biomass and growth kinetics of microorganisms in chernozem soils under different land use modes, Microbiology, 2008, V. 77 (1), pp. 99–106. doi: 10.1134/S0026261708010141

6. Byzov B.A. Zoomicrobial interactions in soil, Moscow, GEOS Publ., 2005. 214 p. (in Russian) 9. Byzov B.A., Thanh V.N., Babjeva I.P. Interrelationships between yeasts and soil diplopods, Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 1993. V. 25 (8), pp. 1119–1126. doi: 10.1016/0038-0717(93)90160-D 10. Chang C.H., Szlavecz, K., Buyer J.S. Species-specific effects of earthworms on mi-crobial communities and the fate of litter-derived carbon. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2016, V. 100, pp. 129–139. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.06.004

7. Córdova O. et al. Influence of growth kinetics of microalgal cultures on biogas pro-duction, Renewable Energy, 2018, V. 122, pp. 455–459. doi: 10.1016/0378-4754(95)00127-1

8. Dev S., Roy S., Bhattacharya J. Understanding the performance of sulfate reducing bacteria based packed bed reactor by growth kinetics study and microbial profiling, Jour-nal of Environmental Management, 2016, 177, 101–110. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.03.049

9. Hargitai L. The role of organic matter content and humus quality in the maintenance of soil fertility and in environmental protection, Landscape and Urban Planning, 1993. V. 27(2–4), pp. 161–167. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(93)90044-E

10. Hramchenkova O., Veremeev V., Bachura Y.U. Algae of soils and courses of rain wiles in meadow ecosystems, Nauka i Innovacii, 2012, Т. 2, No 108. 15. Huang K., Xia H. Role of earthworms' mucus in vermicomposting system: Biodeg-radation tests based on humification and microbial activity, Science of the Total Envi-ronment, 2018. V. 610, pp. 703–708. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.104.

11. Huang, G., Chen S., Dai C., Sun L., Sun W., Tang Y., Xiong F., He R., Ma H., Effects of ultrasound on microbial growth and enzyme activity, Ultrasonics Sonochem-istry, 2017, V. 37, pp. 144–149. doi: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.12.018

12. Krichen E., Harmand J., Torrijos M., Godon J. J., Bernet N., Rapaport, A. High bi-omass density promotes density-dependent microbial growth rate, Biochemical Engi-neering Journal, 2018, V. 130, pp. 66–75. doi: 10.1016/j.bej.2017.11.017

13. Kutovaya O.V. Characterization of humus and coprolites of earthworms in agrosoddy podzolic soil, Dokuchaev Soil Bulletin, 2012, V. 69, pp. 46–59. (in Russian) 19. Laverack M.S. The Physiology of Earthworms, N.Y., Macmillan Publ., 1963, 230 p.

14. Panikov N.S. Mechanistic mathematical models of microbial growth in bioreactors and in natural soils: explanation of complex phenomena, Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 1996, V. 42(2–3), pp. 179–186.

15. Panikov N.S. Kinetics of Microbial Processes, Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences, Elsevier, 2016, pp. 1–19. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.09733-5

16. Panikov N.S. A synthetic chemostat model as a means of describing the complex dynamic behavior of microorganisms, Microbiology, 1991, V. 60(3), pp. 299–307. (in Russian)

17. Peigné J., Vian J. F., Payet V., Saby N. P. Soil fertility after 10 years of conservation tillage in organic farming. Soil and Tillage Research, 2018, V. 175, pp. 194–204. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2017.09.008

18. Rozanova M.S., Prokof’eva T.V., Lysak L V., Rakhleeva A.A. Soil Organic Matter in the Moscow State University Botanical Garden on the Vorob’evy Hills, Eurasian Soil Science, 2016, V. 49 (9), pp. 1013-1025. doi: 10.1134/S106422931609012X 25. Sanchez-Hernandez J.C., del Pino J. N., Capowiez Y., Mazzia C., Rault M. Soil en-zyme dynamics in chlorpyrifos-treated soils under the influence of earthworms. Science of the Total Environment, 2018, V. 612, pp. 1407–1416, doi: 10.1016/j.sci-totenv.2017.09.043 26. Sanchez-Hernandez J. C. Biochar activation with exoenzymes induced by earth-worms: A novel functional strategy for soil quality promotion, Journal of hazardous materials, 2018, V. 350, pp. 136–143. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.02.019

19. Satchell J.E. Earthworm microbiology, Earworm ecology from Darwin to vermiculture, London, N.Y., 1983, pp. 315–364. doi: 10.1007/978-94-009-5965-1

20. Stanbury P.F., Whitaker A., Hall S.J. Principles of Fermentation Technology, Else-vier, 2017, pp. 21–74. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-08-099953-1.00002-8

21. Vsevolodova-Perel T.S. The earthworms of the fauna Russia: Cadastr and key, Mos-cow, Nauka Publ., 1997, 102 p. (in Russian)

22. Tikhonov V.V., Byzov B.A., Zavgorodnyaya Y.A., Demin V.V. Earthworms as modifiers of the structure and biological activity of humic acids, Biology bulletin, 2011, V. 38, No. 1, pp. 17–24. doi: 10.1134/S1062359010061032

23. Yakushev AV., Byzov B.A. Microbiological characterization of vermicomposts by the method of multisubstrate testing, Eurasian Soil Science, 2008, Т. 41, No.11, pp. 1221–1227. doi: 10.1134/S1064229308110112

24. Yakushev A.V. Integral structural-functional method for characterizing microbial populations, Eurasian Soil Science, 2015, V. 48 (4), pp. 378–394. doi: 10.1134/S1064229315040110

25. Yurkov A.M., Chernov I.Y., Tiunov A.V. Influence of Lumbricus terrestris earth-worms on the structure of the yeast community of forest litter, Microbiology, 2008, Т. 77, No. 1, pp. 107–111. doi: 10.1134/S0026261708010153

26. Zvyagintsev D.G., Bab'eva I.P., Zenova G.M. Biology of soils, Moscow, 2005, 445 p. (in Russian)