↓ Skip to main content

Oceanospirillales containing the DMSP lyase DddD are key utilisers of carbon from DMSP in coastal seawater

Overview of attention for article published in Microbiome, July 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Oceanospirillales containing the DMSP lyase DddD are key utilisers of carbon from DMSP in coastal seawater
Published in
Microbiome, July 2022
DOI 10.1186/s40168-022-01304-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jingli Liu, Chun-Xu Xue, Jinyan Wang, Andrew T. Crombie, Ornella Carrión, Andrew W. B. Johnston, J. Colin Murrell, Ji Liu, Yanfen Zheng, Xiao-Hua Zhang, Jonathan D. Todd

Abstract

Ubiquitous and diverse marine microorganisms utilise the abundant organosulfur molecule dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSP), the main precursor of the climate-active gas dimethylsulfide (DMS), as a source of carbon, sulfur and/or signalling molecules. However, it is currently difficult to discern which microbes actively catabolise DMSP in the environment, why they do so and the pathways used. Here, a novel DNA-stable isotope probing (SIP) approach, where only the propionate and not the DMS moiety of DMSP was 13C-labelled, was strategically applied to identify key microorganisms actively using DMSP and also likely DMS as a carbon source, and their catabolic enzymes, in North Sea water. Metagenomic analysis of natural seawater suggested that Rhodobacterales (Roseobacter group) and SAR11 bacteria were the major microorganisms degrading DMSP via demethylation and, to a lesser extent, DddP-driven DMSP lysis pathways. However, neither Rhodobacterales and SAR11 bacteria nor their DMSP catabolic genes were prominently labelled in DNA-SIP experiments, suggesting they use DMSP as a sulfur source and/or in signalling pathways, and not primarily for carbon requirements. Instead, DNA-SIP identified gammaproteobacterial Oceanospirillales, e.g. Amphritea, and their DMSP lyase DddD as the dominant microorganisms/enzymes using DMSP as a carbon source. Supporting this, most gammaproteobacterial (with DddD) but few alphaproteobacterial seawater isolates grew on DMSP as sole carbon source and produced DMS. Furthermore, our DNA-SIP strategy also identified Methylophaga and other Piscirickettsiaceae as key bacteria likely using the DMS, generated from DMSP lysis, as a carbon source. This is the first study to use DNA-SIP with 13C-labelled DMSP and, in a novel way, it identifies the dominant microbes utilising DMSP and DMS as carbon sources. It highlights that whilst metagenomic analyses of marine environments can predict microorganisms/genes that degrade DMSP and DMS based on their abundance, it cannot disentangle those using these important organosulfur compounds for their carbon requirements. Note, the most abundant DMSP degraders, e.g. Rhodobacterales with DmdA, are not always the key microorganisms using DMSP for carbon and releasing DMS, which in this coastal system were Oceanospirillales containing DddD. Video abstract.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 18%
Student > Master 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 2 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 8 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 August 2022.
All research outputs
#5,081,106
of 24,229,740 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
#1,330
of 1,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,982
of 420,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
#49
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,229,740 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.2. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.