Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Probiotic Biofilms

Written By

Mariella Rivas and Carlos Riquelme

Submitted: February 2nd, 2012 Reviewed: May 24th, 2012 Published: October 3rd, 2012

DOI: 10.5772/50124

Chapter metrics overview

4,235 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

1. Introduction

Microalgae are in global scale primary producers, they are involved in all marine and fresh waters ecosystems. The growth of microalgae is correlated directly with the chlorophyll aconcentration, and the bacterial population, and both variables are tightly related with the number of planktonic cells [1, 2]. However, there are numerous studies completed at date about microalgae, often the associated communities of bacteria have not been considered. Recently it has been evidenced that there is not only a positive correlation between bacteria and microalgae concentration but there is also a positive correlation between the extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), which is bigger in bacteria-microalgae mixed cultures than in microalgae axenic cultures [3]. These bacterial communities play a critical role in modulating the population dynamic and the algal metabolism. The kinds of interactions between algae and symbiotic bacteria under photoautotrophic conditions may involve mutualism and commensalism [4]. The role of bacteria is important because they act as a source of inorganic nutrients, feeding, and in viral lysis in algal growth control, physiology, and events of cellular differentiation [5, 6]. Bacteria in microalgal phycosphere stimulate algal growth creating a favorable environment [figure 1; 7], regenerating organic and inorganic nutrients [8, 9], or producing growing factors, including trace metals, vitamins, phytohormones and chelates [10, 11]. Nevertheless, in some described cases microbiota can inhibit algal growth. Algaecide bacteria are investigated as a one of the key biological agents in the abrupt end of microalgae blooms [12]. Algaecide bacteria attack and kill directly the microalgae or produce special compounds to lyse these cells [13, 14, 15]. Other non-algaecide bacteria can inhibit the microalgal growth changing the microenvironment of the microalgae [16] or by competing with the microalgae for nutrients [17, 18].

Other described processes that occur between bacteria and microalgae involve various ecological relationships such as competence, parasitism and other important microbiological processes [19]. Thereby, the microalgae can inhibit and/or induce the bacterial growth due to the production of organic exudates or toxic metabolites. Inversely, the bacteria can produce stimulating or inhibiting effects in microalgae through the production or absence of nutrients and/or stimulating or inhibiting substances which affect microalgae [20, 21, 22]. Delucca and McCracken (1977) [23] suggest that the interactions bacteria-algae are not randomly but highly specific. There are numerous data which report that the extracellular products from algae are capable to stimulate the growth of bacterial strains [21, 22] through the excretion of carbohydrates, organic acids, nitrogenous substances and vitamins [24]. Some studies in natural ecosystems have determined that organic substances derived from phytoplankton are used by bacteria as a substrate for growing. However, microalgae also inhibit bacterial growth by production of organic exudates or toxic metabolites. There are several reports suggesting a synergistic action between microalgae and its bacterial flora associated [figure 2; 25].

Most part of microbial life develops in biofilm form, either in surface or aggregates. In this ecosystem, bacteria and microalgae are the predominant components and they are the basis of the trophic chain and of the organic matter recirculation. A biofilm is a microbial consortium associated with EPS and other molecules attached to a submerged surface. The formation of a biofilm begins with the accumulation of organic molecules over a submerged surface, this physicochemical event occurs in a few seconds or minutes after the immersion of any surface in a liquid. Few hours later of the establishment of a macromolecular film, the bacterial colonization starts [26].

A mature biofilm is capable to maintain the concentrations of ammonium and phosphate present in the surrounding medium at low levels. Thompson et al. (2002) [27] determined that the decline of the ammonium concentrations is related with the increase of the chlorophyll ain biofilms, determining that the ammonium was absorbed mainly by the microalgae to produce new biomass. In Thompson et al. (2002) [27] experiments, most of the ammonium ingest in biofilm occurs at 10-15 days after the beginning of the experiment, when the chlorophyll aconcentration reaches 5 µgcm-2. In this case, the microalgae community is dominated by pennates diatoms (Amphora, Campylopyxis, Navícula, Sinedra, Hantschiaand Cylindrotheca) and filamentous cyanobacteria (Oscillatoriaand Spirulina). The fact that a biofilm effectively absorbs or transforms the ammonium present in the water column has important applications as probiotic for health of cultivable species such as juveniles of mollusks and crustaceans, including Farfantepenaeus paulensis, due to that shrimps tolerate high nitrate (>15000 µM) and nitrite (>1000 µM) concentrations [28], but ammonium in high concentrations is lethal, and can inhibit seriously the ingestion of food and growth [29, 30].

Mainly, the use of bacteria-microalgae biofilms would be applicable to tanks of intensive cultures in which there are a great accumulation of dissolved nitrogen, especially ammonium, as a result of addition of food and excretion of organisms maintained in high density, being one of the most important problems in intensive culture of shrimp and other mollusks, affecting the ingestion of food, growth and survival [28, 30]. One alternative to maintain a high water quality is the biological treatment, based in the use of pre-colonized filters by microorganisms that absorb the excess of nutrients from water. A similar process occurs in nature, where biofilms associated with a matrix of EPS attached are responsible of many biogeochemical cycles in aquatic ecosystems, especially the one of the nitrogen [31]. The eutrophication process accelerates if the main form of nitrogen inputted in the ecosystem is ammonium. This happens due to that the primary producers use less energy to incorporate this source of N into the amino acids and proteins, while the nitrate form must be transformed inside the cells to ammonium, with a higher cost of energy. Therefore, autotrophic cells grow faster in presence of ammonium forms than nitrate [27]. Thus, the presence of biofilms could reduce the eutrophication in the water mass that receives the effluents of aquaculture rich in ammonium through the absorption of this.

Figure 1.

A, Biofilm from bacteriaAlteromonassp. and microalgaNavicula incerta. B, Biofilm from microalgaBotryococcus brauniiand bacteriaRhizobiumsp.

Nevertheless, a point to consider is that the biofilms have been thoughtful as reservoirs of pathogens bacteria, like Vibrio harveyi, which can affect crustacean’s cultures such as shrimp. Pathogens bacteria present in biofilms are difficult to eliminate through the use of antibiotics, due to the hardness of the access of these molecules into the biofilms [32]. However, the results of Thompson et al. (2002) [27] indicate that the ingestion and transformation of nitrogen by the biofilm may help to reduce the occurrence of pathogens bacteria, due to that this microorganisms normally are present in situations where nitrogenous compounds are extremely high [33]. On the other way, lots of microalgae present in biofilms are capable to produce antibiotics that prevent the growing of pathogens bacteria [34, 35]. Protozoa that inhabit biofilms could also control abundance of pathogenic bacteria through the grazing [36]. Avila-Villa et al. (2011) [37] evaluate the presence of pathogen bacteria in microalgae, determining that species of these kind of bacteria such as NHPB (necrotizing hepatic pancreatitis bacteria) don´t attach to the surface of any microalgae and besides, they don´t survive in presence of these species, confirming the production of antibiotic substances by these microalgae species [38]. Respect to the benthic microalgae Naviculasp., this can easily form biofilms, and some bacteria thrive there using the exudates of the microalgae and the excreted extracellular products (carbohydrated substances and with nitrogen, organic acids and lipids) as a source of nutrients [39]. Besides, it has been documented that predominant bacteria linked to biofilms of algae are -proteobacteria and -proteobacteria [40]. Thus it is possible, on the contrary to the expected effect, that the elimination of a biofilm could increase the risk to develop pathogenic bacteria. Also, is important to note that biofilms are considered an important source of food for cultivable species such as Daphnia[41], Nile tilapia [42] and carpa [43]. Despite the low protein content measured in biofilms, the microorganisms in there can provide essential elements such as; polyunsaturated fatty acids, sterols, amino acids, vitamins and carotenoids [36]. Thus, the biofilm probably contribute to the increment of weight and total biomass of juvenile of crustaceans like F. paulensis[27]. On the other hand, biofilms are essential in crustacean´s cultures too like fresh water crab Cherax quadricarinatus, and also another kind of cultures, the presence of biofilms impact directly in water quality of cultures, increasing survival almost in 100% when they are feed with biofilms and also there is an increment in the growth of juveniles [44]. Different species of cultured crustaceans have improved their growth or survival when biofilms are used as a food source [27, 45, 46]. Moreover, water quality in culture systems is remarkably improved by the use of the biofilm [27, 47].

Figure 2.

Interactions between microalgae and bacteria.

Advertisement

2. Probiotic role

Aquaculture is an important economic activity worldwide, in an attempt to improve the production of organisms it has been used a great quantity of antibiotics in an indiscriminate way for diseases control. Due to this, nowadays its use is questioned because the bacterial resistance generated and for the tons of antibiotics released to the biosphere during the last 60 years [48]. Recently, as an alternative for improve the growth of the cultured organisms, disease control and to improve the immune system it has been proposed the use of probiotics [49, 50, 51, 52]. The term “probiotic” is defined as “live microorganisms administered in appropriated quantities as food or food supplement that have benefic effects in the intestinal microbiological equilibrium of the host” [53]. The benefits for the host consist in to optimize the degradation and absorption of the food, favoring the autochthonous microbiota balance [49] reducing the pathogenic load [50]. According to the literature, most of the probiotics proposed as agents of biological control in aquaculture are bacteria from genus Vibrioand Bacillus[50].

In natural habitats, most bacteria are associated to algae and can have both effects in the algal growth, beneficial or deleterious. The interaction between algae and bacteria are complex and include competition for resources [54], production of antimicrobial agents [55, 56], stress protection through the production of extracellular polymeric substances, and the junction of metals or transformation through the production of exudates [57]. The algal cells can associate with a range of bacterial communities [58, 59] and this association vary from to share the general habitat, to a colonization of bacteria in the algal surface (epiphytic biofilm) and the endophytic association of bacteria inside de algal cells. There are reports that show that the presence of a large number and diversity of bacteria associated with algal cultures enhances the growth of algal species [table 1; 60]. This increase in growth rate suggests that the relationship between algae and bacteria in these cultures is beneficial to algae. Grossart et al. (2006) [59] also found that the cell density of Skeletonemacostatumin the exponential phase of growth was significantly higher in the presence of bacteria. The ability of bacteria to increase algal growth depends on the growth phase of algae in which is added [59]. It has been determined that the cell densities of Thalassiosira rotularemain higher when is exposed to bacteria in the exponential phase of growth, but if is exposed in the stationary phase, the algal cell densities decrease rapidly. The response of the algae will then depend on the species of bacteria and the medium in which the algae obtain their nutrients and vitamins [5, 61]. It has been observed that bacteria specifically isolated from the surface of marine diatoms have a greater positive effect on algal growth than those isolated from the ocean [54], suggesting that the spatial relationships between bacteria and algae can be important. Rier and Stevenson (2002) [62] suggest that bacteria tend to be effective competitors for resources because they have (i) rapid growth rate, (ii) a ratio of volume per surface area larger (iii) rapid rates of phosphorus intake. In the oligotrophic conditions of the open sea the algae-bacteria relationship is consolidated because the concentration of the non-algal dissolved organic matter is very low and bacteria prefer carbon derived from algae as an energy source. This was verified in laboratory bioassays in which dissolved organic matter decreases rapidly when bacteria are present, demonstrating that they have a rapid dissolution and decomposition of organic matter [59].

There are many studies reporting the growth promoter effect on microalgae by bacteria (table 1). Induction of bacterial growth in specific cultures has been reported for a few species of microalgae such as Chlorella vulgaris, C. sorokinianaand B. braunii, and growth promoter bacterial strains are mainly of Azospirillumsppand a Rhizobiumsp.[63, 64, 65, 66, 67]. Induction of growth in plants used in agriculture through the use of plant growth promoter bacteria (PGPB) [68] is an established fact, involving the use of different mechanisms between plants and bacteria, in which the final product of these many associations is to improve a characteristic of the plant, usually depending on the uses of the plant for human consumption [69]. On the other hand, induction of aquatic microalgae by bacteria, although it was discovered decades ago, is an emerging field in which the majority of studies have been performed in recent years [65, 70,71]. The main interest in this artificial association between algae and bacteria is due to obtaining a community associated with better characteristics than the microalgae alone [73] for applications such as removal of contaminants from wastewater [8], or use as food [74] or as a probiotic. The mechanisms by which growth-promoter bacteria in plants (PGBP) [68] affect the growth of plants vary widely. PGPB directly affect the metabolism of plants giving substances that are usually of low availability. These bacteria are capable of fixing atmospheric nitrogen, solubilize phosphorus and iron, and produce plant hormones such as; auxins, giggerelins, cytokinins, ethylene, nitrite and nitric oxide. Additionally, they improve stress tolerance in plants (drought, high salinity, metal toxicity and the presence of pesticides). One or more of these mechanisms may contribute to increase the growth and development of plants, higher than normal in standard culture conditions [69, 75]. Most PGPB are Bacillusspp. that work by diseases control [76], however some species of Bacilluspromote the absence of disease by stimulating the immune system [77]. Possible interactions between Bacillusspp. with microalgae are unknown. Thereby, Azospirillumis one of the few genera of bacteria known to promote the growth of microalgae (Microalgae growth promoter bacteria, MGPB) [65]. Azospirillumis the most studied PGPB in agriculture [77]. Its habitat is the rhizosphere, N2-fixing bacteria that is very versatile in its nitrogen transformations. In addition to fix N2 under microaerobic conditions, act as denitrifying under anaerobic or microaerobic conditions, and can assimilate NH4+, NO3-, o NO2- and acts as a general PGPB for many species of plants, including the microalgae Chlorella[65]. Azospirillumspp. significantly alters the metabolism of microalgae, mainly producing indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) [78] and increasing the nitrogen cycle enzymes in these algae [73]. Although several studies described that inoculation of marine phytoplankton and freshwater bacteria sometimes increase their productivity [74], these studies are descriptive and exploratory and there is no mechanism described or demonstrated by which the phenomenon occurs. Despite the induction of microalgal growth by bacteria, not all interactions are positives; interaction of C. vulgariswith their associated bacteria Phyllobacterium myrsinacearuminduces culture senescence [65, 79]. In a study by Hernández et al. (2009) [66] was employed the PGPB Bacillus pumilusEs4, originally isolated from the rhizosphere. This PGPB fix atmospheric nitrogen, produce IAA in vitro in the presence of tryptophan, besides to efficiently produce siderophores and increase growth in a cactus for long periods of time. B. pumilusEs4 also induces the growth of the microalga C. vulgarisacting as a MGPB, but this occurs only in the absence of nitrogen. Chlorellaspp. is able to grow without nitrogen by a limited period of time, using ammonium that can be produced and recycled within the organism by a variety of metabolic pathways, such as photorespiration, phenylpropanoid metabolism, use of compounds of nitrogen transport, and amino acids catabolism [66, 80]. In this regard, Chlorellagrowth in the absence of other microorganisms can be explained by the differential activity of the enzyme glutamate dehydrogenase. This enzyme serves as a bond between the nitrogen and carbon metabolism due to its ability to assimilate ammonium to glutamate or to deaminate the glutamate to 2-oxoglutarate and ammonium under stress conditions [80, 81]; thus, the ammonium may be re-absorbed by Chlorellaand used to a limited growth.

De Bashan and Bashan (2008) [78], proposed and studied a model of microalgae and bacteria immobilized in alginate to analyze and evaluate their possible interactions. In their study described the following sequence of events occurring during the interaction between the two microorganisms. Randomly immobilization of Chlorellaspp. occurs first with a PGPB strain within a matrix and nutrients are in the surrounding medium that diffuses freely. In a given time (from 6 to 48 hours), depending on the bacteria-microalgae combination, both microorganisms are in the same cavity of the sphere, mainly in the periphery [79]. Here the bacteria secrete indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) and other undefined signal-molecules, possibly near the microalgal cells. At this stage, the activity microalgal enzyme (glutamine synthetase and glutamate dehydrogenase) does not increase. In the next phase of interaction, after 48 h occurs the increment of the enzymatic activity, production of photosynthetic pigments, and nitrogen and phosphorus intake. It also occurs releasing of oxygen as a byproduct of photosynthesis [for review see 65]. The most notable effect is the increasing by 2 to 3% on growth of microalgae with PGPB on those without PGPB [65]. This model proposed by Bashan and Bashan (2008) [78] has been evaluated in various combinations of microalgae-PGPB demonstrating the induction of growth in C. sorokinianaand B. pumilus, and others C. vulgarisand A. brasilenseSp6 [table 1; 78]. At cell and culture level there is an increase in the absorption of ammonium. The addition of exogenous tryptophan (precursor of the phytohormone IAA and the main mechanism by which Azospirillumaffects the growth of Chlorella[64]) also induces a significant increase in the growth of microalgae. It also increases the activity of glutamate dehydrogenase, a key enzyme in ammonium assimilation in plants. Other PGPB such as B. pumilusand other microalgae, such as C. sorokinianahave been tested successfully (table 1). These options create opportunities for many combinations of microalgae and PGPB. Similarly, different alginates and derivatives from many macroalgae are commercially available [72] and to design the necessary combination and entrapment schemes. Because the immobilization of microorganisms is commonly used with other polymers [83], this model is not restricted to alginates, but each polymer has its advantages and disadvantages to be studied in future studies.

The EPS (a heterogeneous mixture of polysaccharides, proteins, nucleic acids, lipids and humic acids [84]) have a key role in biofilms, recently defined as a stabilization mechanism in mixed biofilms of bacteria and microalgae and present in a significantly higher percentage only when microalgae are associated with bacteria [3]. Furthermore, EPS are also important for the recycling of trace metals in aquatic systems, favoring metal binding to bacterial and algal agglomerates, and colloidal material/EPS, allowing the removal from surface waters and large particles [57]. Bacterial colonization is superior in stressed algal cells more than in healthy algal cells [54], which can be related to the release of organic material from the cell after cell lysis as part of a process of senescence, or under conditions of induced stress, such as exposure to contaminant metals [60]. The inability to detect visually bacteria from axenic cultures may be due to a very close association of the bacteria in the algal phycosphere or in the cell wall, or bacteria are in endophytic form in the algal cell, making it impossible to remove the bacteria from the algae using physical techniques. What's more, it appears that algal species benefit from the presence of bacteria, increasing their growth rate [60, 67]. The production of exudates of communities in bacteria/microalgae mixed biofilm increase in exposure to metals [85]. These exudates may be produced from algae or bacteria, but they are used as a mechanism of survival and resistance to stress for entire biofilm [60].

Type of studyMicroalga speciesBacterial strain (s)Reference (s)
Growth promotionOscillatoriasp.Pseudomonassp., Xanthomonassp.,Flavobacteriumsp.23
Growth promotion (dry wt, cell no., colony size, cell size)Asterionella gracilisPseudomonassp., Vibriosp.20
Antibacterial activityChattonella marinaPseudomonas20
Growth promotionAsterionella gracilisFlavobacteriumNAST20
Antibacterial activitySkeletonema costatumVibriosp., Listonella anguillarum, Vibrio fisheri108
Growth promotionIsochrysis galbanaVibriosp. C33, Pseudomonassp. 11, Arthrobactersp. 7722
Antibacterial activityTetraselmis suecicaListonella anguillarum, V. alginolyticus, V. salmonicida, V. vulnificus, Vibriosp.34
Growth promotion (dry wt, cell no., colony size, cell size)C. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd. Sp6, Sp245; A. lipoferum JA465, 70
Delayed senescenceC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd; P. myrsinacearum79
Population controlC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd; P. myrsinacearum59, 79
LipidsC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd126
Modification of fatty acidsC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd126
Cell-cell interactionsC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd126
Mitigation of heat and intense sunlightC. SorokinianaA. brasilenseCd126
Population dynamicsC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd63
Mitigation of tryptophan inhibitionC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd63
Mitigation of pH inhibitionC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd8
Photosynthetic pigmentsC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd, Phyllobacterium myrsinacearum, B. pumilus8, 66, 72, 105, 126
Nutrient starvationC. SorokinianaA. brasilenseCd70
Enzymes in the nitrogen cycleC. vulgarisA. brasilenseCd70
HormonesC. SorokinianaA. brasilenseCd; B. pumilus66, 70
Absortion of nitrogen and phosphorusC. vulgaris, C. SorokinianaA. brasilenseCd, Sp6, Sp245; FAJ0009, SpM7918; A. lipoferumJA4, JA4::ngfp1573
Growth promotionBotryococcus brauniiRhizobiumsp.67

Table 1.

Studies of paired microalga-bacteria interactions.

Advertisement

3. Induction of larval settlement

Benthic diatoms present in the biofilm plays an important role in the marine ecosystem not only serve as food for advanced stages of development of marine invertebrate larvae [86], but also with bacteria and other microorganisms, form an attractive site for larval settlement in the process of metamorphosis [87]. There are numerous studies which have determined the characteristics that make a substrate optimal for larval settlement, and which are the effects of various biofilms in controlling larval settlement events [87, 88, 89, 90]. In the natural environment, the development of a biofilm formed by diatoms and other organisms is preceded by primary colonization of bacteria [91] aided by the EPS which act as "glue" and work at the cellular and molecular level to establish a strong and irreversible binding to a given substrate [92]. This succession of microorganisms often precedes the subsequent stages in a substrate, in which the macroorganisms eventually begin to be dominant [26].

Avendaño-Herrera and Riquelme (2007) [87] showed how optimize the production of a biofilm formed by the diatom Navicula venetaand a bacterium of the genus Halomonassp., proposed model for the use in the induction of larval settlement. When the strain of Halomonasspp. was added to the diatom occurs an acceleration of growth of N. veneta[87], this occurs only when adding live bacteria, indicating the requirement of precursors of extracellular products excreted by the bacteria. Without the presence of Halomonasthe microalgal biomass obtained is 65% lower. Is important to note that the diatom-bacteria biofilm can be used efficiently to provide food for species such as, abalone or scallop juvenile stages, and/or to colonize substrates that are used for adhesion, favoring larval settlement and reducing production time in macroorganisms cultures [93]. In addition, phytoplankton cultures are widely used in the aquaculture industry for a variety of purposes; these cultures are described as "green water" because they contain high levels of phytoplankton species such as Nannochloropsissp. and Chlorellasp. The "green water" is added to the tanks with fish larvae and to enrich zooplankton, and provide a direct and indirect nutrition for the larvae. Moreover, the "green water" reduces water clarity, minimizing larval exposure to light, which acts as a stressor [94]. According to this, the presence of phytoplankton improves water quality by reducing the ammonium ion concentrations and increasing concentrations of dissolved oxygen through photosynthesis. Notably, phytoplankton also produces antibacterial substances that can prevent disease outbreaks [95, 96, 97, 98]. Among these, important are some members of the Roseobacterclade (Alphaproteobacteria) such as Phaeobacterand Ruegeriathat suppress the growth of the fish pathogen Vibrioanguillarumby producing tropodithietic acid (TDA) [98, 99, 100, 101]. Also the abundance of bacteria from Roseobacterclade is highly correlated with phytoplankton blooms [102].

Advertisement

4. Chemical signals in bacteria-microalgae biofilms

According to the study of Sharifah and Eguchi (2011) [94] there is synergy and beneficial contribution by using bacteria belonging to the Roseobacterclade together with phytoplankton like N.oculata. In their study they used approximately between 11.4 to 13.2% of bacteria in indoor cultures of N.oculata. These levels are comparable to the concentration of bacteria in coastal sea water (<1-25%) [102, 103]. Most of the cultivable bacteria in the Roseobacterclade corresponding to the genera Phaeobacter, Silicibacter, Sulfitobacter, Roseobacterand Roseovarius, which have potentially probiotic properties [99, 100, 102]. When these species are adding with phytoplankton to the tanks with fish larvae increased larval survival [95, 96, 97, 104] for growth inhibition of pathogenic bacteria. This process could be mediated by at least two possible mechanisms. The first one involves the preferential entry of nutrients or competition for nutrients, by bacteria. The second one, and more complex, involves a direct interaction between phytoplankton and microbes such as phytoplankton and pathogenic bacteria, probiotic bacteria and pathogenic bacteria, and phytoplankton-probiotic bacteria and pathogenic bacteria. Regarding the first mechanism, competition for entry of nutrients, the abundance of the Roseobacterclade in the coastal sea is correlated with the release of organic substances from natural phytoplankton blooms such as dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSP) and amino acids [105, 106]. In turn N.oculatamay also excrete some substances similar to DMSP or amino acids that support more optimally bacterial growth of the clade [94]. Referring to the second mechanism described above, involving complex interactions, there is no direct inhibition of fish pathogens by phytoplankton, in contrast to other studies [107, 108]. As there is no difference in the viability of V.anguillarumby using probiotic bacteria it was concluded that there is no direct inhibition on the viability of V.anguillarum. In contrast, a study of the diatom Skeletonemacostatumand the macroalgae Ulvaclathrata, they produce organic compounds that inhibit the growth of V.anguillarumdirectly [107, 108].

From this point of view, the Roseobacterclade is beneficial and acts as a probiotic to induce the spread of scallop [109] and larvae of turbot [110] by removing fish pathogens. Other studies show that bacterial cell density of the clade in the range of 106-109 CFUml-1 is needed to reduce pathogenic bacterial population by 10% [94]. Added to this, the static conditions favor culture biofilm formation by allowing bacteria of the genera Phaeobacter, Silicibacter, Sulfitobacter, Roseobacter, Pseudoalteromonasand Roseovariusproduce tropodithietic acid (TDA), antibacterial compound produced by Phaeobacterspp., Silicibactersp. and Ruegeriasp. [100, 111]. Static culture conditions and the presence of a brown pigment are indicators of the production of TDA [100]. However, in the study of Sharifah and Eguchi (2011) [94] Roseobacterclade members produced different antibacterial compounds to TDA, and the cultures were incubated under agitation and did not produce brown pigment. Interestingly, the previous study demonstrated that agitated Roseobactercultures are able to eliminate V. anguillarumonly in the presence of substances excreted from phytoplankton, and none of these species belongs to Phaeobactersp. previously described [101]. The Inhibitory activity of Sulfitobactersp., Thalassobiussp., Rhodobactersp. and Antarctobactersp., is significantly affected by the thermostable substances excreted by N. oculata[94]. Microalgae N. oculata, N. granulata, N. oceanicaand N. salinaproduce putrescine, a thermostable polyamine [112]. Moreover, N. oculataCCMP525 produces signaling molecules like low molecular weight n-acyl-homoserine lactones which are produced by bacteria to the communication system cell-to-cell regulating gene expression [quorum sensing; 113]. The analogues of n-acyl-homoserine lactones are thermostable. These compounds can be secreted by N. oculataand act as signaling molecules for communication with Sulfitobactersp. RO3 resulting in growth inhibition of V. anguillarum. These results demonstrate that phytoplankton cultures used as "green water" for the production of fish larvae have a key role in enhancing the inhibitory effect of Roseobacterclade against V. anguillarum. A similar inhibitory effect was also observed in Chlorellasp., other marine microalgae used in aquaculture [94].

Advertisement

5. Other applications

Immobilization of microorganisms on polymers because the production of different products and environmental and agricultural applications is well known and have increased in the last two decades [93, 114, 115]. The immobilization of microalgae is a common approach for many applications of bioremediation [66]. Immobilization in several substances provides to the microorganisms several advantages over free-living microorganisms. These advantages include: (i) a continuous source of nutrients without competition with other microorganisms [116] and (ii) protection against environmental stress [66, 117], bacteriophages, toxins, and UV irradiation [118]. A recently developed treatment for tertiary domestic wastewaters uses the green microalga Chlorellaspp. and the plant growth promoter bacteria (PGPB) Azospirillumbrasilense, both bound and immobilized in alginate beads [116]. Each unit in this technological model, a single polymer sphere, contains within cavities that serve as matrix for the folding of microalgae and bacteria [66, 78, 119]. Additionally, the entrapment of microorganisms may also be within the solid matrix polymer of the polymeric sphere. In some cases, microbial cells are on the surface or partially in or out of the gel matrix. During the formation of alginate spheres the number of organisms is higher outside than inside. However, this approach can be used in aquaculture as a feeding method for growing mollusks such as Haliotisrufescens[120].

The algae are the organisms most commonly used to assess metal contamination and bioavailability in aquatic systems, are highly sensitive to heavy metals such as Cu, Fe and Cd in environmentally relevant concentrations. Algae are primary producers and affect nutrient cycling in marine and fresh water ecosystems, and in aquaculture [121]. As such, the algae are considered ecologically significant organisms and the ideal candidates for ecotoxicological studies. However, algae are rarely isolated in the environment, but are part of complex planktonic communities and biofilms. The alteration of community structure may influence the overall function (e.g. respiration, photosynthesis) and community sensitivity to toxicants. Although the tests of toxicity for single-species used in microalgae are highly sensitive and reproducible, they do not have a realistic environment. Interactions between algae and associated bacteria, in plankton or in biofilms, may alter algal sensitivity to pollutants. Recent research has attempted to develop multi-species algal test in the evaluation of metals based on toxicity [122, 123]. These studies explored the toxicological response of individual algal species when they are exposed in combination with one or other species of algae.

Bacteria can have both positive and negative effects on algae in polluted environments. For example, the tolerance of the green macroalga Enteromorphacompressato copper in a coastal environment in Chile attributed to an epiphytic bacterial community colonizing the surface [1]. Bacterial biofilms can mediate metal toxicity to the host organism by limiting the diffusion of toxins, protective effects of high concentrations of extracellular polymeric substances, protective effects of stored nutrients trapped, and effects due to a larger surface area (less toxic per cell). While the effects of metals in biofilms are widely reported [85, 124, 125], there are few studies on the effects of metal toxicity to algae biofilms.

Advertisement

6. Conclusions

Since the first studies of bacteria-microalgae interactions decades ago, it has been elucidate and discovered several events in which the close connection between these two heterotrophs and autotrophs components is evidenced. Showing that the coupling of microalgae-bacteria produces changes in the excreted compounds in the surrounding environment, that affects positively or negatively to others organisms.

Most of the interactions are strongly regulated by chemical signals. Although it has been described lots of phenomena in positive and negative interactions in biofilms, there are a few investigations that explore the chemical and molecular nature of chemical compounds involved in this interactions which are produced by microorganisms, this is why in the future will be required to deepen in the study of mechanisms involved in the growth of mixture biofilms.

The use of this biofilms in nature can be easily developed in the laboratory; they can be used increasing and affecting some specific compounds which are useful for a third organism of commercial interest. As well, in phenomena like larval settlement, induction of growth and increment of biomass rich in lipids has revealed a great potential probiotic use, particularly in aquatic industry which require more attention to the involved mechanisms in the action of this beneficial biofilms. These uses will allow us to get a better understanding of the role of these microbial consortiums in nature, and also a biotechnological orientation could be spread for the production of these beneficial biofilms in a stable and standard form.

References

  1. 1. RiquelmeC.ArayaR.VergaraN.RojasA.GuaitaM.Candia1997, Candia M (1997) Potential probiotic strain in the culture of the Chilean scallop Argopecten purpuratus (Lamarrck, 1819). Aquaculture1541726.
  2. 2. AbarzuaM.BasualtoS.Urrutia1995(1995) Relación entre la abundancia y la biomasa de fitoplancton y bacterioplancton heterotrofico en aguas superficiales del Golfo de Arauco, Chile. Investigaciones Marinas Valparaíso236774.
  3. 3. LubarskyH. V.HubasC.ChocholekM.LarsonF.ManzW.PatersonD. M.GerbersdorfS. U.2010The stabilisation potential of individual and mixed assemblages of natural bacteria and microalgae. PLOS One 5(11), e13794.
  4. 4. WatanabeK.TakihanaN.AoyagiH.HanadaS.WatanabeY.OhmuraN.SaikiH.TanakaHl.2005Symbiotic association in Chlorella culture. FEMS Microbiol Ecol51187196
  5. 5. Grossart HP, Simon2007(2007) Interactions of planktonic algae and bacteria: effects on algal growth and organic matter dynamics. Aquat Microb Ecol47163176.
  6. 6. MatsuoY.ImagawaH.NishizawaM.Shizuri2005, Imagawa H, Nishizawa M, Shizuri Y (2005) Isolation of an algal morphogenesis inducer from a marine bacterium. Science 307,1598.
  7. 7. Mouget-LJ.DakhamaA.LavoieM. C.de la Noüe1995-L, Dakhama A, Lavoie MC, de la Noüe J (1995) Algal growth enhancement by bacteria: is consumption of photosynthetic oxygen involved? FEMS Microbiol Ecol183543.
  8. 8. Hernandez J-P, de-Bashan LE, Bashan2006(2006) Starvation enhances phosphorus removal from wastewater by the microalga Chlorella spp. coimmobilized with Azospirillum brasilense. Enzyme Microb Tech38190198.
  9. 9. JiangL.et al.2007Quantitative studies on phosphorus transference occurring between Microcystis aeruginosa and its attached bacterium (Pseudomonas sp.). Hydrobiologia581161165.
  10. 10. Amin SA, et al.2009Photolysis of iron-siderophore chelates promotes bacterial-algal mutualism. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA1061707117076.
  11. 11. CroftM. T.LawrenceA. D.Raux-DeeryE.MJWarrenSmith. A. G.2005Algae acquire vitamin B12 trough a symbiotic relationship with bacteria. Nature 438(3), 90-93.
  12. 12. AdachiM.FukamiK.KondoR.Nishijima2002(2002) Identification of marine algicidal Flavobacterium sp. 5 N-3 using multiple probes and whole-cell hybridization. Fisheries Sci68713720.
  13. 13. Amaro AM, Fuentes MS, Ogalde SR, Venegas JA, Suarez-Isla BA2005Identification and characterization of potentially algal-lytic marine bacteria strongly associated with the toxic dinoflagellate Alexandrium catenella. J Eukaryot Microbiol52191200.
  14. 14. SimonN.BiegalaI. C.SmithE. A.Vaulot2002(2002) Kinetics of attachment of potentially toxic bacteria to Alexandrium tamarense. Aquat Microb Ecol28249256.
  15. 15. Su JQ, et al.2007Isolation and characterization of a marine algicidal bacterium against the toxic dinoflagellate Alexandrium tamarense. Harmful Algae6799810.
  16. 16. FerrierM.MartinJ.Rooney-Varga2002, Rooney-Varga J (2002) Stimulation of Alexandrium fundyense growth by bacterial assemblages from the Bay of Fundy. J Appl Microbiol92706716.
  17. 17. OtsukaS.AbeY.FukuiR.NishiyamaM.Sendoo2008(2008) Presence of previously undescribed bacterial taxa in non-axenic Chlorella cultures. J Gen Appl Microbiol54187193.
  18. 18. WangH.HaywoodD.LaughinghouseI. V.MatthewA.ChenF.WillliamsE.PlaceA. R.ZmoraO.ZoharY.ZhengT.HillaR. T.2012Novel Bacterial Isolate from Permian Groundwater, Capable of Aggregating Potential Biofuel-Producing Microalga Nannochloropsis oceanica IMET1. Appl Environ Microbiol7814451453.
  19. 19. SalvensenI.ReitanK. I.SkjermoJ.Oie2000, Oie J (2000) Microbial environment in marine larviculture: Impact of algal growth rates on the bacterial load in six microalgae. Aquaculture International8275287.
  20. 20. CERiquelmeFukami. K.Ishida1988(1988) Effects of bacteria on the growth of a marine diatom, Asterionella glacialis. Bull Jpn Soc Microb Ecol32934.
  21. 21. MunroP. D.BarbourA.BirkbeckT. H.1995Comparison of the growth and survival and larval turbot in the absence of cultivable bacteria with dose in the presence of Vibrio anguillarum, Vibrio alginolyticus or a marine Aeromonas sp. Applied and Environmental Microbiology6144254428.
  22. 22. AvendañoR.Riquelme1999(1999) Establishment of mixed-culture probiotics and microalgae as food for bivalve larvae. Aquaculture Research30893900.
  23. 23. DeluccaR.Mc Craken1977cCraken M (1977) Observations on interactions between naturally collected bacteria and several species of algae. Hydrobiologia557175.
  24. 24. LodeirosC.CamposY.Marin1991(1991) Production de antibióticos por la flora bacteriana asociada a monocultivos microalgales de utilidad en acuacultura. Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales136213223.
  25. 25. RiquelmeC. E.Avendaño-HerreraR. E.2003Interacción bacteria-microalga en el ambiente marino y uso potencial en acuicultura. Revista Chilena Historia Natural 76(4), 725-736.
  26. 26. Wahl1989(1989) Marine epibiosis I. Fouling and antifouling: some basic aspects. Mar Ecol Prog Ser58175189.
  27. 27. Thompson FL, Abreu PC,2001asielesky W (2001) Importance of biofilm for water quality and nourishment in intensive shrimp culture. Aquaculture203263278.
  28. 28. Cavalli RO, Wasielesky JW, Franco CS, Miranda FC1996Evaluation of the short-term toxicity of ammonia, nitrite and nitrate to Penaeus paulensis ŽCRUSTACEA, DECAPODA. Broodstock Arq Biol Tecnol 39 (3), 567-575.
  29. 29. Miranda FKC1997Efeito da amonia na sobrevivencia e crescimento de juvenis de camarao-rosa Penaeus paulensis Perez-Farfante, 1967 CRUSTACEA: DECAPODA. Effect of ammonium on the survival and growth of the pink-shrimp Penaeus paulensis Perez-Farfante, 1967 CRUSTACEA: DECAPODA. juveniles. MSc Thesis, Fundacao Universidade do Rio Grande, Rio Grande, RS, Brazil, 122 pp.
  30. 30. Wasielesky JW, Marchiori MA, Santos MH1994Efeito da amonia no crescimento de pos-larvas do camarao rosa, Penaeus paulensis, Perez Farfante, 1967 Decapoda Penaeidae. Effect of ammonium on the growth of the pink-shrimp Penaeus paulensis, Perez Farfante, 1967 Decapoda: Penaeidae. post larvaex Nauplius299105.
  31. 31. 1994eyer-Reil M (1994) Microbial life in sedimentary biofilms-the challenge to microbial ecologists. Review Mar Ecol Prog Ser112303311.
  32. 32. Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Greenberg EP1999Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science28413181322.
  33. 33. AustinB.Austin1999(1999) Bacterial Fish Pathogens: Disease of Farmed and Wild Fish. 3rd edn. Springer, Chichester, 457 pp.
  34. 34. AustinB.DayJ. G.1990Inhibition of prawn pathogenic Vibrio spp. by a commercial spray-dried preparation of Tetraselmis suecica. Aquaculture90389392.
  35. 35. Alabi AO, Cob ZC, Jones DA, Latchford JW1999Influence of algal exudates and bacteria on growth and survival of white shrimp larvae fed entirely on microencapsulated diets. Aquacult Int 7 (Ž3), 137-158.
  36. 36. Thompson FL, Abreu PC, Cavalli RO1999The use of microorganisms as food source for Penaeus paulensis larvae. Aquaculture174139153.
  37. 37. Avila-VillaL. A.Martínez-PorchasM.Gollas-GalvánT.López-ElíasJ. A.MercadoL.Murguia-LópezA.Mendoza-CanoF.Hernández-López2011A, Mercado L, Murguia-López A, Mendoza-Cano F, Hernández-López J (2011) Evaluation of different microalgae species Artemia (Artemia franciscana) as possible vectors of necrotizing hepatopancreatitis bacteria. Aquaculture318273276.
  38. 38. Sánchez-SaavedraM. P.Licea-NavarroA.Berlández-Sarabia20102010. Evaluation of the antibacterial activity of different species of phytoplankton. Revista de Biología Marina y Oceanografía45531536.
  39. 39. CaroppoC.StabiliL.CavalloR. A.2003Diatoms and bacteria diversity: stury of their relationships in the Southern Adriatic Sea. Mediterranean Marine Science47382.
  40. 40. Dovretsov20102010. Marine biofilms. Chapter 9. In: Durr, S., Thomason, J.C. (Eds.), Biofouling. Wiley-Blackwell, Singapore,405
  41. 41. LangisR.ProulxD.NoueJ.Couture1988roulx D, Noue J, Couture1988Effects of bacterial biofilm on intensive Daphnia culture. Aquacult. Eng. 7, 21-38.
  42. 42. Shrestha MK, Knud-Hansen19941994. Increasing attached microorganism biomass as a management strategy for Nile Tilapia Oreochromis niloticus. production. Aquacult. Eng.13101108.
  43. 43. Ramesh MR, Shankar KM, Mohan CV, Varghese19991999. Comparison of three plant substrates for enhancing carp growth through bacterial biofilm. Aquacult. Eng.19119131.
  44. 44. ViauV. E.OsteraJ. M.ToliviaA.BallesterE. L. C.AbreuP. C.RodríguezE. M.2012Contribution of biofilm to water quality, survival and growth of juveniles of the freshwater crayfish Cherax quadricarinatus (Decapoda, Parastacidae). Aquaculture 324-325, 70-78.
  45. 45. AbreuP. C.BallesterE. C.OdebrechtC.WasieleskyJ. W.CavalliR. O.GraneliW.AnesioA. M.2007Importance of biofilm as food source for shrimp (Farfantepenaeus paulensis) evaluated by stable isotopes (d13C and d15N). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology3478896.
  46. 46. Ballester EC, Wasielesky JW, Cavalli RO, Abreu PC2007Nursery of the pink shrimp Farfantepenaeus paulensis in cages with artificial substrates: biofilm composition and shrimp performance. Aquaculture269355362.
  47. 47. HollC. M.OtoshiC.UnabiaC. R.2011Nitrifying biofilms critical for water quality in intensive shrimp RAS. Global Aquaculture Advocate143839.
  48. 48. Scientific committee on animal nutrition (SCAN)2003Opinion of the scientific committee on animal nutrition on the criteria for assessing the safety of microorganisms resistant to antibiotics of human clinical and veterinary importance. European Commission Health and Consumer Protection Directorate General. Available at:http://europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scan/out108.en.pdf/
  49. 49. VerschuereL.RombautG.SorgeloosP.Verstraete2000Probiotic bacteria as biological control agents in aquaculture. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews64655671.
  50. 50. BalcazarJ. L.De BlasL.Ruiz-ZarzuelaL.CunninghamD.VendrellD.MuzquizJ. L.2006The role of probiotics in aquaculture. Veterinary Microbiology114173186.
  51. 51. Wang YB, Han JZ2007The role of probiotic cell wall hydrophobicity in bioremediation of aquaculture. Aquaculture269349354.
  52. 52. Wang YB, Li2008R, Lin J (2008) Probiotics in aquaculture: challenges and outlook. Aquaculture 281 (1-4), 1-4.
  53. 53. Sihag RC, Sharma2012Probiotics: The new ecofriendly alternative measures of disease control for sustainableaquaculture. Journal of fisheries and aquatic science.DOI:10.3923/jfas.
  54. 54. Grossart HP1999Interactions between marine bacteria and axenic diatoms (Cylindrotheca fusiformis, Nitzschia laevis and Thalassiosira weissflogii) incubated under various conditions in the lab. Aquat Microb Ecol19111.
  55. 55. FukamiK.NishijimaT.Ishida1997(1997) Stimulative and inhibitory effects of bacteria on the growth of microalgae. Hydrobiologia358185191.
  56. 56. Gross2003(2003) Allelopathy of aquatic autotrophs. Crit Rev Plant Sci22313339.
  57. 57. 2007, Loizeau JL, Dominik J (2007) Effect of Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata (Chlorophyceae) exudates on metal toxicity and colloid aggregation. Water Res416370.
  58. 58. SchäferH.AbbasB.WitteH.Muyzer2002(2002) Genetic diversity of ‘satellite’ bacteria present in cultures of marine diatoms. FEMS Microbiol Ecol422535.
  59. 59. GrossartH. P.CzubG.Simon2006(2006) Algae-bacteria interactions and their effects on aggregation and organic matter flux in the sea. Environ Microbiol810741084.
  60. 60. Levy JL, Stauber JL, Wakelin SA, Jolley DF2009The effect of bacteria on the sensitivity of microalgae to copper in laboratory bioassays. Chemosphere7412661274.
  61. 61. GurungT. B.UrabeJ.Nakanishi1999(1999) Regulation of the relationship between phytoplankton Scenedesmus acutus and heterotrophic bacteria by the balance of light and nutrients. Aquat Microb Ecol172735.
  62. 62. Rier ST, Stevenson RJ2002Effects of light, dissolved organic carbon, and inorganic nutrients on the relationship between algae and heterotrophic bacteria in stream periphyton. Hydrobiologia489179184.
  63. 63. de -BashanL. E.AntounH.Bashan2005(2005) Cultivation factors and population size control uptake of nitrogen by the microalgae Chlorella vulgaris when interacting with the microalgae growth-promoting bacterium Azospirillum brasilense. FEMS Microbiol Ecol54197203.
  64. 64. de -BashanL. E.AntounH.BashanY.2008bInvolvement of indole- 3-acetic-acid produced by the growth-promoting bacterium Azospirillum spp. in promoting growth of Chlorella vulgaris. J Phycol44938947.
  65. 65. Gonzalez LE, Bashan2000(2000) Increased growth of the microalga Chlorella vulgaris when coimmobilized and cocultured in alginate beads with the plant-growth-promoting bacterium Azospirillum brasilense. Appl Environ Microbiol6615271531.
  66. 66. HernandezJ. P.de -BashanL. E.RodriguezJ.RodriguezY.Bashan2009, Bashan Y (2009) Growth promotion of the freshwater microalga Chlorella vulgaris by the nitrogen-fixing, plant growth-promoting bacterium Bacillus pumilus from arid zone soils. European Journal of soil Biology458893.
  67. 67. RivasM. O.VargasP.CERiquelme2010Interactions of Botryococcus braunii cultures with bacterial biofilms.Microbial Ecology 60(3), 628-635.
  68. 68. BashanY.Holguin1998(1998) Proposal for the division of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria into two classifications: biocontrol-PGPB (plant growth-promoting bacteria) and PGPB. Soil Biol Biochem3012251228.
  69. 69. BashanY.de -BashanL. E.2005Bacteria/plant growth-promotion, in: D. Hillel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment,1Elsevier, Oxford, UK103115.
  70. 70. de -BashanL. E.TrejoA.HussV. A. R.HernandezJ. P.BashanY.2008aChlorella sorokiniana UTEX 2805, a heat and intense, sunlight-tolerant microalga with potential for removing ammonium from wastewater. Bioresour Technol9949804989.
  71. 71. de Bashan LE, Bashan2003(2003) Microalgae growth-promoting bacteria: a novel approach in wastewater treatment. Rev Colomb Biotechnol58590.
  72. 72. YaburR.BashanY.Hernandez-Carmona2007(2007) Alginate from the macroalgae Sargassum sinicola as a novel source for microbial immobilization material in wastewater treatment and plant growth promotion. J Appl Phycol194353.
  73. 73. de -BashanL. E.MagallonP.AntounH.BashanY.2008cRole of glutamate dehydrogenase and glutamine synthetase in Chlorella vulgaris during assimilation of ammonium when jointly immobilized with the microalgae growth-promoting bacterium Azospirillum brasilense. J Phycol4411881196.
  74. 74. Garg SK, Bhatnagar1999(1999) Effect of Azospirillum and Azotobacter inoculation on pond productivity and fish growth under fresh water conditions. Indian J Microbiol39227233.
  75. 75. RodriguezH.FragaR.GonzalezT.Bashan2006(2006) Genetics of phosphate solubilization and its potential applications for improving plant growth-promoting bacteria. Plant Soil2871521.
  76. 76. Kloepper JW, Ryu CM, Zhang2004(2004) Induced systemic resistance and promotion of plant growth by Bacillus spp. Phytopathology9412591266.
  77. 77. BashanY.MorenoM.Troyo2000(2000) Growth promotion of the seawater-irrigated oilseed halophyte Salicornia bigelovii inoculated with mangrove rhizosphere bacteria and halotolerant Azospirillum spp. Biol Fertil Soils32265272.
  78. 78. de-Bashan LE, Bashan2008(2008) Joint immobilization of plant growth-promoting bacteria and green microalgae in alginate beads as an experimental model for studying plant-bacterium interactions. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 74(21), 6797-6802.
  79. 79. Lebsky VK, Gonzalez-Bashan LE, Bashan2001(2001) Ultrastructure of coimmobilization of the microalga Chlorella vulgaris with the plant growth-promoting bacterium Azospirillum brasilense and with its natural associative bacterium Phyllobacterium myrsinacearum in alginate beads. Can J Microbiol4718.
  80. 80. 2003, Estavillo JM, Sangwan R, Gallais A, Hirel B (2003) Glutamate dehydrogenase in plants: is there a new story for an old enzyme? Plant Physiol Biochem41565576.
  81. 81. RobinsonS. A.SladeA. P.FoxG. G.PhillipsR.RatcliffeG.StewartG. R.1991The role of glutamate dehydrogenase in plant nitrogen metabolism, Plant Physiol95509516.
  82. 82. Gacesa1998Bacterial alginate biosynthesis- recent progress and future prospects.Microbiology 144, 1133-1143.
  83. 83. O´Reilly AM, Scott JA1995Defined coimmobilization of mixed microorganism cultures. Enzyme Microbiology Technology17636646.
  84. 84. Flemming HC, Wingender2001(2001) Relevance of microbial extracelular polymeric substances (EPSs)- Part I: Structural and ecological aspects. Water Science and Technology4318.
  85. 85. Garcia-MezaJ. V.BarranguetC.Admiraal2005(2005) Biofilm formation by algae as a mechanism for surviving on mine tailings. Environ Toxicol Chem24573581.
  86. 86. TakamiH.KawamuraT.Yamashita1997amashita Y (1997) Contribution of diatoms as food sources for post-larval abalone Haliotis discus hannai on a crustose coralline alga. Molluscan Res18143151.
  87. 87. Avendaño-HerreraR.Riquelme2007(2007) Production of a diatom-bacteria biofilm in a photobioreactor for aquaculture applications. Aquaculture Engineering3697104.
  88. 88. Pearce CM, Bourget1996(1996) Settlement of larvae of the giant scallop, Placopecten magellanicus (Gmelin), on various artificial and natural substrata under hatchery-type conditions. Aquaculture141201221.
  89. 89. HarveyM.BourgetE.Gagne1997(1997) Spat settlement of the giant scallop, Placopecten magellanicus (Gmelin 1791), and other bivalve species on artificial filamentous collector coated with chitinous material. Aquaculture148277298.
  90. 90. DaumeS.Brand-GardnerS.Woelkerling1999oelkerling W (1999) Settlement of abalone larvae (Haliotis laevigata Donovan) in response to non-geniculate coralline red algae (Corallinales, Rhodophyta). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol234125143.
  91. 91. Allison DG, Gilberg1992Bacterial biofilms. Sci Prog 76, 301-321.
  92. 92. WetherbeeR.LindJ. L.BurkeJ.Quatrano1998, Lind JL, Burke J, Quatrano R (1998) The first kiss: establishment and control of initial adhesion by raphid diatoms. Journal of Phycology34915.
  93. 93. LebeauT.RobertM. R.2003Diatom cultivation and biotechnologically relevant products. Part I. Cultivation at various scales. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol60612623.
  94. 94. Sharifah EN, Eguchi2011(2011) The phytoplankton Nannochloropsis oculata enhances the ability of Roseobacter clade bacteria to inhibit the growth of fish pathogen Vibrio anguillarum. PLOS One 6(10), e26756.
  95. 95. Muller-Feuga2000(2000) The role of microalgae in aquaculture: situation and trends. J Appl Phycol12527534.
  96. 96. OieG.MakridisP.ReitanK. I.Olsen1997(1997) Protein and carbon utilization of rotifers (Brachionus plicatilis) in first feeding of turbot larvae (Scophthalmus maximus L.). Aquaculture153103122.
  97. 97. Palmer PJ, Burke MJ, Palmer CJ, Burke JB2007Developments in controlled green-water larval culture technologies for estuarine fishes in Queensland, Australia and elsewhere. Aquaculture272121.
  98. 98. PradoS.MontesJ.RomaldeJ. L.BarjaJ. L.2009Inhibitory activity of Phaeobacter strains against aquaculture pathogenic bacteria. Int Microbiol12107114.
  99. 99. Porsby CH, Nielsen KF, Gram2008(2008) Phaeobacter and Ruegeria species of the Roseobacter clade colonize separate niches in a Danish turbot (Scophthalmus maximus)-rearing farm and antagonize Vibrio anguillarum under different growth conditions. Appl Environ Microbiol7473567364.
  100. 100. BruhnJ. B.GramL.Belas2007(2007) Production of antibacterial compounds and biofilm formation by Roseobacter species are influenced by culture conditions. Appl Environ Microbiol73442450.
  101. 101. D’AlviseP. W.MelchiorsenJ.PorsbyC. H.NielsenK. F.Gram2010(2010) Inactivation of Vibrio anguillarum by attached and planktonic Roseobacter cells. Appl Environ Microbiol7623662370.
  102. 102. BuchanA.Gonza´lezJ. M.MAMoran2005Overview of the marine Roseobacter lineage. Appl Environ Microbiol7156655677. 103. Brinkhoff T, Giebel HA, Simon M (2008) Diversity, ecology, and genomics of the Roseobacter clade: a short overview. Arch Microbiol 189, 531-539.
  103. 103. NakaseG.Eguchi2007(2007) Analysis of bacterial communities in Nannochloropsis sp. cultures used for larval fish production. Fish Sci73543549.
  104. 104. Gonzalez-BashanL. E.LebskyV.HernandezJ. P.BustillosJ. J.Bashan2000(2000) Changes in the metabolism of the microalgae Chlorella vulgaris when coimmobilized in alginate with the nitrogen-fixing Phyllobacterium myrsinacearum. Can J Microbiol46653659.
  105. 105. ZubkovM. V.BMFuchsArcher. S. D.KieneR. P.AmannR.et al.2001Linking the composition of bacterioplankton to rapid turnover of dissolved dimethylsulphoniopropionate in an algal bloom in the North Sea. Environ Microbiol3304311.
  106. 106. LuK.LinW.Liu2008(2008) The characteristics of nutrient removal and inhibitory effect of Ulva clathrata on Vibrio anguillarum 65. J Appl Phycol2010611068.
  107. 107. NavinerM.BergéJ. P.DurandP.Le Bris1999(1999) Antibacterial activity of marine diatom Skeletonema costatum against aquacultural pathogens. Aquaculture1741524.
  108. 108. Ruiz-PonteC.SamainJ. F.SánchezJ. L.NicolasJ. L.1999The benefit of a Roseobacter species on the survival of scallop larvae. Mar Biotechnol15259.
  109. 109. PlanasM.Peréz-LorenzoM.HjelmM.GramL.FiksdalI. U.et al.2006Probiotic effect in vivo of Roseobacter strain 27-4 against Vibrio (Listonella) anguillarum infections in turbot (Scophthalmus maximus L.) larvae. Aquaculture255323333.
  110. 110. HolmströmC.Kjelleberg1999(1999) Marine Pseudoalteromonas species are associated with higher organisms and produce biologically active extracellular agents. FEMS Microbiol Ecol30285293.
  111. 111. Hamana2008(2008) Cellular polyamines of phototrophs and heterotrophs belonging to the lower eukaryotic phyla Cercoza, Euglenozoa, Heterokonta and Metamonada. J Gen Appl Microbiol54135140.
  112. 112. NatrahF. M. I.MMKenmegneWiyoto. W.SorgeloosP.BossierP.et al.2011Effects of micro-algae commonly used in aquaculture on acyl-homoserine lactones quorum sensing. Aquaculture3175357.
  113. 113. Moreno-Garrido2008(2008) Microalgae immobilization: current techniques and uses. Bioresource Technol9939493964.
  114. 114. 2011, Ramakrishnan B, Megharaj M, Venkateswarlu K, Naidu R (2011) Consortia of cyanobacteria/microalgae and bacteria: Biotechnological potential. Biotechnology Advances29896907.
  115. 115. de -BashanL. E.HernándezJ. P.MoreyT.Bashan2004(2004) Microalgae growth-promoting bacteria as “helpers” for microalgae a novel approach for removing ammonium and phosphorus from municipal wastewater. Water Res38466474.
  116. 116. Moreno-GarridoI.CoddG. A.GaddG. M.LubianL. M.2002Acumulación de Cu y Zn por células microalgales marinas Nannochloropsis gaditana (Eustigmatophyceae) inmovilizadas en alginato de calcio. Cienc Mar28107119.
  117. 117. Zohar-PerezC.CherninL.ChetI.Nussinovitch2003(2003) Structure of dried cellular alginate matrix containing fillers provides extra protection for microorganisms against UVC radiation. Radiat Res160198204.
  118. 118. CovarrubiasS. A.de -BashanL. E.MorenoM.Bashan2012(2012) Alginate beads provide a benefical physical barrier against native microorganisms in wastewater treated with immobilized bacteria and microalgae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol9326692680.
  119. 119. Silva-Aciares FR, Carvajal PO, Mejías CA, Riquelme CE2011Use of macroalgae supplemented with probiotics in the Haliotis rufescens (Swainson, 1822) culture in Northern Chile. Aquaculture Research42953961.
  120. 120. AzamF.Malfatti2007, Malfatti F (2007) Microbial structuring of marine systems. Nature Rev Microbiol5782791.
  121. 121. Franklin NM, Stauber JL, Lim RP2004Development of multispecies algal bioassays using flow cytometry. Environ Toxicol Chem2314521462.
  122. 122. YuY.KongF.WangM.QianL.Shi2007(2007) Determination of short-term copper toxicity in a multiseries microalgal population using flow cytometry. Ecotox Environ Safety664956.
  123. 123. BarranguetC.Van denEnde. F. P.RutgersM.BreureA. M.GreijdanusM.SinkeJ. J.Admiraal2003(2003) Copper-induced modifications of the trophic relations in riverine algal-bacterial biofilms. Environ Toxicol Chem2213401349.
  124. 124. MassieuxB.BoivinM. E. Y.Van denEnde. F. P.LangenskiöldJ.MarvanP.BarranguetC.AdmiraalW.LannbroekH. J.Zwart2004(2004) Analysis of structural and physiological profiles to assess the effects of Cu on biofilm microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol7045124521.
  125. 125. de -BashanL. E.MorenoM.HernandezJ. P.Bashan2002(2002) Removal of ammonium and phosphorus ions from synthetic wastewater by the microalgae Chlorella vulgaris coimmnobilized in alginate beads with the microalgae growth-promoting bacterium Azospirillum brasilense. Water Res3629412948.

Written By

Mariella Rivas and Carlos Riquelme

Submitted: February 2nd, 2012 Reviewed: May 24th, 2012 Published: October 3rd, 2012