spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online May 30, 2008
Journal of Experimental Biology 211, 1927-1936 (2008)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2008
doi: 10.1242/jeb.014944
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Material
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rae, R.
Right arrow Articles by Sommer, R. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rae, R.
Right arrow Articles by Sommer, R. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Isolation of naturally associated bacteria of necromenic Pristionchus nematodes and fitness consequences

Robbie Rae, Metta Riebesell, Iris Dinkelacker, Qiong Wang, Matthias Herrmann, Andreas M. Weller, Christoph Dieterich and Ralf J. Sommer*

Max-Planck Institute for Developmental Biology, Department for Evolutionary Biology, Spemannstrasse 37, D-72076 Tübingen, Germany


Figure 1
View larger version (134K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. Pharynx morphology of Pristionchus pacificus and Caenorhabditis elegans. (A) C. elegans pharynx with grinder and long, narrow mouth-like suction pump. (B) Escherichia coli OP50 crushed with the C. elegans grinder. (C) P. pacificus pharynx with no grinder and shorter, broader mouthparts. (D) E. coli OP50 is not completely disrupted after passage through the pharynx of P. pacificus.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. Tritrophic interactions between Pristionchus nematodes, beetle and bacteria. Phylogeny of Pristionchus nematodes with associated beetle hosts detailing bacterial species isolated and used in this study.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. Chemotaxis results of Pristionchus exposed to soil- and insect-derived bacteria. (A) Chemotactic response of P. pacificus, P. entomophagus and P. maupasi after 24 h exposure to five different soil-derived bacteria isolated from adult P. entomophagus. Significant differences between number of live progeny and survival are shown for P. pacificus only (*P<=0.05 and **P<=0.001 using one way analysis of variance). Bars represent ±1 s.e.m. (B) Chemotactic response of P. pacificus, P. entomophagus and P. maupasi exposed to cockchafer-associated bacteria (isolated from P. maupasi). Significant differences between number of live progeny and survival are shown for P. pacificus only (*P<=0.05 and **P<=0.001 using one way analysis of variance). Bars represent ±1 s.e.m.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 4. Chemotaxis results of Pristionchus exposed to insect-derived bacteria. (A) Chemotactic response of P. pacificus, P. entomophagus and P. maupasi exposed to dung beetle-associated bacteria (isolated from P. entomophagus) after 24 h. Significant differences between number of live progeny and survival are shown for P. pacificus only (*P<=0.05 and **P<=0.001 using one way analysis of variance). Bars represent ±1 s.e.m. (B) Chemotactic response of P. pacificus, P. entomophagus and P. maupasi exposed to oriental beetle-associated bacteria (isolated from P. pacificus) after 24 h. Significant differences between number of live progeny and survival are shown for P. pacificus only (*P<=0.05 and **P<=0.001 using one way analysis of variance). Bars represent ±1 s.e.m.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 5. Chemotaxis results of P. pacificus exposed to Bacillus species. Chemotactic response of P. pacificus exposed to a selection of cockchafer-, dung beetle- and oriental beetle-associated bacteria as attractants when assayed using E. coli OP50, B. thuringiensis and Bacillus sp. 1 as counter attractants. Bars represent ±1 s.e.m.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 6. Survival and chemotactic response of P. pacificus exposed to pathogenic bacteria. Survival of P. pacificus (A) and C. elegans (B) exposed to human and insect pathogens for 7 days. Bars represent ±1 s.e.m. (C) Chemotactic response of P. pacificus exposed to human and insect pathogens with E. coli OP50 and P. luminescens as the control. Bars represent ±1 s.e.m.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 7. Mean defecation cycle and residence time of P. pacificus and C. elegans. (A) Mean defecation time (seconds) of C. elegans and P. pacificus exposed to E. coli OP50, Xenorhabdus sp. and Bacillus sp. 2. Error bars represent ±1 s.e.m. (B) Mean residence time (seconds) of E. coli OP50 and Bacillus sp. 2 mixed with fluorescent beads, in C. elegans and P. pacificus. Bars represent ±1 s.e.m.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2008