Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Frankia as a Biodegrading Agent

Written By

Medhat Rehan, Erik Swanson and Louis S. Tisa

Submitted: March 11th, 2015Reviewed: October 22nd, 2015Published: February 11th, 2016

DOI: 10.5772/61825

Chapter metrics overview

2,093 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

The Frankia actinorhizal plant symbiosis plays an important role in colonization of soils contaminated with toxic aromatic hydrocarbons. Our understanding of the bacterial partner, Frankia, in the actinorhizal symbiosis has been greatly facilitated by the availability of sequenced genomes. The analysis of these Frankia genomes has suggested that these bacteria are metabolically diverse and have potential for toxic aromatic hydrocarbon degradation. In this chapter, we explore what is known about that metabolic potential.

Keywords

  • Frankia s-triazines
  • aromatic hydrocarbon degradation
  • PAH
  • bioremediation
  • bioinformatics
  • actinobacteria

1. Introduction

Frankiaare filamentous nitrogen-fixing Gram-positive actinobacteria that are found as free-living microbes in the soil and in symbiotic associations with actinorhizal plants [1-5]. These bacteria fix nitrogen by converting atmospheric N2 into biologically useful ammonia and supply the host plants with a source of reduced nitrogen. Frankiaare developmentally complex and form three cell types: vegetative hyphae, spores located in sporangia, and vesicles. Hyphae are septate structures and form the growing state of this microbe. Under appropriate conditions, either terminal or intercalary multilocular sporangia are produced and contain many spores. When mature, the spores are released from the sporangia. The spores are presumed to aid in the survival and dispersal of Frankiain the environment. Vesicles are produced under nitrogen-limited conditions and consist of unique lipid-enveloped cellular structures that contain the enzymes responsible for nitrogen fixation. Thus, vesicles act as specialized structures for the nitrogen fixation process. Frankiaare able to establish symbiotic nitrogen-fixing associations with over 220 species of woody dicotyledonous plants, termed actinorhizal plants, that are found in eight families of angiosperms [1, 3-6]. The symbiosis with Frankiaallows these actinorhizal host plants to colonize nutrient-poor soil and harsh environments. Actinorhizal plants have been used to recolonize and reclaim industrial wastelands and environments contaminated with heavy metals and toxic aromatic hydrocarbon [7-15]. The metabolic potential of these bacteria has only recently been investigated in the context of bioremediation [16-18].

1.1. Frankiagenomics and identification of metabolic potential

Based on phylogenetic analysis, Frankiastrains have been classified into four main lineages [19-23]. Members of lineage 1 are found infective on host plants of the Betulaceae (Alnus), Myricaceae, and Casuariaraceae families, while lineage 2 represents strains that are infective on Rosaceae (Dryas, etc.), Coriariaceae (Coriaria), Datiscaceae (Datisca),and the genus Ceanothus(Rhamnaceae).Members of lineage 3 are the most promiscuous and are infective on Eleagnaceae, Rhamnaceae, Myricaceae, Gynmmostoma,and occasionally Alnus.The fourth Frankialineage consists of the “atypical” strains which are unable to reinfect actinorhizal host plants or form ineffective root nodule structures that are unable to fix nitrogen. Our understanding of this genus has been greatly enhanced by the sequencing of several Frankiagenomes from the different Frankialineages [24-33]. Analysis of Frankiagenomes has revealed new potential with respect to metabolic diversity, natural product biosynthesis, and stress tolerance, which may help aid the cosmopolitan nature of the actinorhizal symbiosis [31, 34].

In this chapter, we will describe what is known about the degradation properties of these bacteria.

Advertisement

2. Rhizodegradation

Among bacteria with bioremediation potential, Frankiaare unique in that these bacteria form a symbiosis with actinorhizal plants. The implications of this trait for bioremediation efforts have only recently been explored. In the context of bioremediation, the most extensively studied system is the Frankia–Alnusassociation. Diverse assemblages of free-living Frankiastrains are present in soils with polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) contamination [8-10, 15, 35-38]. These Frankiastrains readily form symbioses with alders, resulting in greatly increased alder fitness in harsh environments. The Frankia–alder symbiosis also increases the mineralization of representative organic pollutants in oil-sands reclamation sites. The Frankia–alder symbiosis has been used in reclamation projects because of these traits [5, 8, 36-38]. Free-living Frankiaalso appears to be part of natural degradation communities. Specifically, Frankiahas been found to be one of the most abundant genera in wastewater treatment communities [35]. Based on these findings, Frankiaappears to be an underutilized tool in holistic remediation approaches.

Advertisement

3. S- triazines degradation

3.1. Overview

Triazines are a class of herbicides composed of a heterocyclic six-membered ring with alternating carbon and nitrogen atoms joined by double bonds. These herbicides have been used extensively for control of broadleaf and grassy weeds in corn, sorghum, and sugarcane cultivation. Atrazine and simazine are the most ubiquitous members of the s-triazine family. Biodegradation of atrazine is a complex process and depends on the nature and amount of atrazine in soil or water [39-41]. There are four major steps in atrazine degradation: hydrolysis, dealkylation, deamination, and ring cleavage. For the hydrolysis step, an amidohydrolase enzyme (AtzA) cleaves the carbon-chlorine (C-Cl) bond and thus dechlorinates atrazine to hydroxylatrazine. This intermediate is dealkylated and deaminated at the ethyl and isopropyl groups by the amidohydrolase enzymes, AtzB and AtzC, to produce cyanuric acid. This product is converted to ammonia and carbon dioxide by the AtzD, AtzE, and AtzF enzymes [42-44].

3.2. S-triazine degradation pathway in Frankia

In Frankia,the first two steps in atrazine degradation have been identified as well as the regulation of their gene expression [17]. The mineralization of atrazine to ammonia and carbon dioxide is generally initiated by hydrolytic dechlorination, catalyzed by the enzyme atrazine chlorohydrolase (AtzA). Alternatively, this reaction is catalyzed by another atrazine chlorohydrolase (TrzN), which is also able to use atrazine derivatives including desethyl-desisopropylatrazine as substrates. Analysis of the Frankiagenomes identified candidate genes for the atrazine degradation pathway (Figure 1). The trzNgene was identified in Frankia alniACN14a (FRAAL1474) and Frankiasp EuI1c (FraEuI1c_5874) genomes and its amidohydrolase gene product is predicted to remove chlorine from s-triazine compounds to produce hydroxyatrazine or ammeline from atrazine and desethyl desisopropyl atrazine, respectively. Furthermore, a putative atzBgene was also identified in both Frankiagenomes (FRAAL1473 and FraEuI1c_5875) whose predicted gene product, adenosine aminohydrolase 3, is involved in the dealkylation reaction of the N-ethyl group from hydroxyatrazine transforming it into N-isopropylammelide. Physiological studies showed that FrankiaACN14a and EuI1c cultures are able to break down atrazine and desethyl-desisopropylatrazine producing the end products hydroxyatrazine and N-isopropylammelide. Although the enzymes were not purified, these data clearly showed metabolism of atrazine. Analysis of gene expression in FrankiaACN14a found that the two genes, trzN(FRAAL1474) and atzB(FRAAL1473) are under control of the atzR(FRAAL1471) gene, which encodes a predicted LysR-type transcriptional regulator.

Figure 1.

Gene cluster organization inFrankia alniACN14a for atrazine degradation. The cluster contains a putativetrzN(FRAAL1474), putativeatzB(FRAAL1473), and putative LysR-family transcriptional (atzR).

Bioinformatics analysis of the Frankiagenomes revealed a potential full pathway for atrazine degradation in the Frankiasp EuI1c genome (Figure 2). The atzC(FraEuI1c_4724) gene, which encodes a putative amidhydrolase enzyme, was identified and is predicted to be involved in the dealkylation of the N-isopropyl group from atrazine to produce cyanuric acid. With other bacterial systems, cyanuric acid is hydrolyzed to ammonium and carbon dioxide via the atzDEFoperon [43, 45]. In FrankiaEuI1c, the atzD(FraEuI1c_3137) gene product is predicted to transform cyanuric acid into carboxybiuret, which spontaneously decarboxylates to biuret. Putative atzE(FraEuI1c_1007 and 1008), and atzF(FraEuI1c_3831) genes were also identified in the FrankiaEuI1c genome and their gene products expected to complete s-triazine mineralization by converting biuret to allophanate and ammonia plus carbon dioxide. A trzR(FraEuI1c_3136) gene, which encodes a GntR family transcriptional regulator, is found before the atzDgene and is involved in the expression of that gene (Rehan unpublished).

Figure 2.

The atrazine degradation steps inFrankiastrains EuI1c and ACN14a include atrazine dechlorination and dealkylation and ring cleavage by TrzN, atzB, and atzD enzymes.

Advertisement

4. Aromatic compounds degradation

4.1. Biphenyl and polychlorinated biphenyl

Biphenyls and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are some of the most recalcitrant xenobiotics found in the environment. The degree of chlorination differs greatly among the PCBs, ranging from 1 to 10, as does their position on the carbon atoms. Since the mid-1980s, the use of PCBs has been phased out in many countries. However, due to their toxicity, persistence in the environment, and potential carcinogenicity, they are still a major global environmental problem [46-48].

Bacteria degrade biphenyl and PCBs via the meta-cleavage pathway, which is encoded by the bphoperon, and produces tricarboxylic acid and chlorobenzoate (CBA) as intermediates [47-50]. The first enzyme in this pathway is biphenyl dioxygenase, which is a multimeric complex consisting of the large α and small β subunits, and the ferredoxine and ferredoxine reductase subunits. The degradation process is initiated by biphenyl dioxygenase which incorporates two oxygen atoms at the 2 and 3 carbon positions of the aromatic ring (called 2,3-dioxygenation) to generate hydroxyl groups. For PCBs degradation, biphenyl dioxygenase catalyzes the initial 2,3-dioxygenation, and dihydrodiol dehydrogenase converts the product into 2,3-dihydroxybiphenyl. The enzyme, 2,3 dihydroxybiphenyl dioxygenase, cleaves the dihydroxylated ring to produce (chlorinated) 2-hydroxy-6-oxo-6-phenylhexa-2,4-dienoic acid (HOPDA). A hydrolase enzyme then hydrolyzes HOPDA to (chlorinated) benzoic acid and 2-hydroxypent a-2,4-dienoate.

4.1.1. Biphenyl degradation pathway in Frankia

At least four Frankiastrains (ACN14a, CcI3, EUN1f, and EuI1c) are resistant to biphenyl and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) at concentrations up to 5mM [51, Swanson unpublished results]. Data mining for known organisms capable of biphenyl degradation [46, 52] and the availability of a Frankiagenome database enabled the identification of genes potentially involved in biphenyl degradation in several of the Frankiastrains listed above. Five genes were identified that encode enzymes involved in biphenyl degradation: the alpha and beta subunits of the aromatic-ring-hydroxylating dioxygenase, a Rieske (2Fe-2S) iron–sulfur domain protein, an alpha/beta hydrolase fold protein, and a short-chain dehydrogenase/reductase (SDR). These enzymes are putatively capable of oxidizing and hydroxylating benzene rings, and are also known as the upper meta-cleavage pathway. A lower pathway of aromatic ring degradation consisting of three genes (encoding the 2-hydroxypenta-2,4-dienoate hydratase; acylating acetaldehyde dehydrogenase; and 4-hydroxy-2-oxovalerate aldolase) is located downstream of this operon [53, Swanson and Tisa unpublished data]. Figure [3] shows the gene neighborhood of the Biphenyl degradation genes. These genes were also found in Frankiastrain EUN1f and Dg1 genomes (Swanson and Tisa unpublished). Both the meta-cleavage upper and the lower pathways are commonly referred to as the bphoperon in several other PCB-degrading bacteria. RhodococcusRAH1, a species closely related to Frankia, utilizes bphgenes homologous to those found in Frankiato metabolize PCBs as a sole carbon and energy source [54]. Since at least two genes (Aromatic-ring-hydroxylating dioxygenase, subunit alpha-like protein (FraEuI1c_4097) and short-chain dehydrogenase/reductase (FraEuI1c_4101) in the bphoperon in Frankiaare upregulated in the presence of biphenyl, it is likely that Frankiaalso uses the bphoperon to metabolize biphenyl and PCBs (Rehan and Tisa unpublished)

Figure 3.

The gene neighborhood ofbphoperon inFrankiaEuI1c in comparison toRhodococcus equi 103SandPhotorhabdus luminescens laumondiiTTO1 operon. (1) Aromatic-ring-hydroxylating dioxygenase, subunit alpha. (2) Rieske (2Fe-2S) iron–sulfur domain protein. (3) Aromatic-ring-hydroxylating dioxygenase, subunit beta. (4) Alpha/beta hydrolase fold protein. (5) Short-chain dehydrogenase/reductase SDR.

4.2. Phenol degradation

4.2.1. Overview

Phenol (or hydroxybenzene) consists of a benzene ring substituted with a hydroxyl group. Derivatives of this molecule are colloquially known as phenolic compounds. Phenolic compounds are ubiquitous chemicals with diverse properties and uses. The simplest phenolic compound, phenol, is widely used in oil and coal processing, tinctorial and metallurgic industries, and many other industrial applications. Phenol also enters the environment via vehicle exhaust and as the product of natural metabolic processes, and chlorophenols are widely used as biocides in agricultural applications [for a review see 55]. While anthropogenic phenolics are often hazardous, natural phenolic compounds are mostly harmless in the concentrations that are found in foods such as coffee and tea, and some are used as antibiotics [56, 57]. However, the toxicity of some phenolics, particularly phenol and chlorinated phenols, has prompted considerable research activity devoted to phenol remediation. Acute and chronic exposure to phenol and chlorophenol has serious health effects. Phenol and chlorophenol cause lipid peroxidation which ultimately leads to tissue necrosis, and liver and kidney damage [58]. Additionally, chlorophenol exposure is associated with elevated risks of cancer, immune deficiencies, and teratogenic effects [59-61].

4.2.2. General phenol degradation pathway

One of the most promising techniques for removing anthropogenic phenolics from the environment is bioremediation. As was the case for many compounds, the degradation pathway for phenol was first elucidated in a Pseudomonasstrain [62]. Most bacteria degrade phenolics using catechol catabolic enzymes, most importantly catechol-2,3-dioxygenase. Phenols are first hydroxylated to form catechol, and then catechol-2,3-dioxygenase cleaves the benzene ring at the meta position [62]. Therefore, the degradation pathway that begins with catechol-2,3-dioxygenase is called the meta pathway (Figure 4). While the meta pathway is most prevalent, degradation can also begin with cleavage at the para or ortho position using catechol-1,2-oxygenase [63-65]. After ring cleavage, 2-hydroxymuconic semialdehyde hydrolase catalyzes a decarboxylation reaction yielding 4-oxalocrotonate. 4-oxalocrotonate is hydrated by 2-oxopent-4-enoate hydratase to form 4-hydroxy-2-oxovalerate. 4-hydroxy-2-oxovalerate aldolase then splits 4-hydroxy-2-oxovalerate into pyruvate and acetaldehyde, which can then be incorporated into the central metabolic pathways [62].

Figure 4.

General phenol degradation pathway.

4.2.3. Phenolic compounds and Frankia

Frankiaspp. both produce and are affected by phenolic compounds. However, it is unclear whether Frankiamay degrade phenol and other phenolic compounds. The response of Frankiato phenolics was first studied in the context of plant–microbe interactions. Despite apparent functional and morphological similarities between Frankianodules and leguminous nodules, the molecular and physiological mechanisms that control nodulation are distinct. Therefore, the unique process of nodulation by Frankiais still an area of intense research. Alnusspp. (Alders) plants are a major host plant for Frankia,and also have unusually high levels of phenolics in their root exudates, which affect the growth of Frankia. Most Alnusphenolics tested inhibit Frankiagrowth to varying degrees [66, 67]. Specifically, benzoic acids are less inhibitory than cinnamic acids such as caffeinic acid. However, one plant phenolic, o-hydroxyphenylacetic acid, promoted Frankiagrowth, and both benzoic and cinnamic acids caused increased branching of Frankiahyphae. Low concentration plant phenolics also mediate a global shift in Frankiagene expression, while higher concentrations (above 30 mg L-1) simply inhibit biosynthesis [33]. Interestingly, Frankiaalso increases phenolic expression of their host plant, causing them to produce more phenol, flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acid [68].

Frankiamay promote excretion of phenolics as a way to increase available nutrients. However, this explanation depends on Frankiahaving the ability to degrade phenolic compounds. While no study has demonstrated that Frankiadegrades phenolic compounds, there is genetic evidence that this bacterium may have the ability to degrade phenolics. First, some Frankiastrains have genes coding for the production of catechol and other phenolic compounds [34]. Because bacteria often salvage the biomolecules they produce, the presence of an anabolic pathway suggests that a catabolic pathway is also present [69]. Furthermore, multiple Frankiastrains contain catechol-2, 3-dioxygenase, the most important enzyme in the phenol degradation pathway (Swanson and Tisa unpublished data) [64]. A closely related bacterium, Rhodococcusspp., uses the catechol-2,3-dioxygenase pathway to grow with phenol as its sole carbon source [70]. The same species is also able to break down the more recalcitrant pentachlorophenol via the para pathway [71]. This suggests that Frankiamay break down phenol, a trait that could be applied in bioremediation efforts. Several Frankiastrains are able to grow on phenol, quercetin, catechol, and other phenolic compounds (Furnholm, Greenleaf, and Tisa unpublished data), but the metabolism of their breakdown has not been studied.

4.3. Naphthalene degradation

4.3.1. Overview

Naphthalene is a ubiquitous polyaromatic hydrocarbon composed of two benzene rings joined at the 9 and 10 carbons (Figure 5). Naphthalene is produced by distilling and crystallizing coal tar, and also as by-product of fossil fuel combustion and cigarette smoke [72]. Naphthalene is used in a number of industrial applications including as feed stock for the production of plastics and resins, and as a component of creosote-based wood preservatives. Naphthalene is also used in tincture and leather tanning industries [72]. Unlike many organic pollutants, naphthalene does not bioaccumulate. Instead, naphthalene is metabolized and excreted in the urine of rats and humans [72, 73]. Nonetheless, naphthalene is a problematic pollutant with numerous toxic effects. Acute exposure to naphthalene causes hemolytic anemia, and liver and neurological damage [74]. Chronic naphthalene exposure is associated with elevated cancer risk [75, 76]. The toxicity of naphthalene and its prevalence as a pollutant has spurred research on remediation techniques, including bioremediation and biodegradation.

Figure 5.

Structure of naphthalene.

4.3.2. Degradation pathway

The naphthalene biodegradation pathway was first studied in a strain of Pseudomonaswhich has two related naphthalene degradation pathways. The upper pathway catabolizes naphthalene to produce salicylate and a molecule of pyruvate [77]. The lower pathway breaks salicylate down into acetyl Co-A and pyruvate [78]. The first step of the upper pathway is catalyzed by four proteins: naphthalene dioxygenase reductase, naphthalene dioxygenase ferredoxin, and naphthalene dioxygenase Fe-S protein small and large subunits. This collection of enzymes oxidizes naphthalene to produce cis-naphthalene dihydrodiol, which is subsequently dehydrogenated by naphthalene cis-dihyrdodiol dehydrogenase to form 1,2-dihydroxynaphthalene. 1,2-dihydronaphthalene dioxygenase then produces 2-hydroxychromene-2-carboxylate which is then cleaved by 2-hydroxychromene-2-carboxylate dehydrogenase to form cis-o-hydroxybenzylpyruvate. 1,2-dihydroxybenzylpyruvate aldolase then splits cis-o-hydroxybenzylpyruvate producing pyruvate and salicylaldehyde. Finally, salicylaldehyde dehydrogenase carboxylates salicylaldehyde to form salicylate [77, 78].

In the lower pathway, salicylate hydroxylase hydroxylates salicylate to produce catechol. The remaining benzene ring is then cleaved by catechol-2,3-dioxygenase to produce 2-hydroxymuconic semialdehyde [78]. Hydroxymuconic semialdehyde dehydrogenase then produces 2-hydroxyhexa-2,4-diene-1,6-dioate which is subsequently isomerized by 4-oxalocrotmate isomerase to produce 2-oxohexa-3-ene-1,6-dioate. This is then transformed into 2-oxopent-4-enoate by 4-oxalocrotomate decarboxylase. 2-oxopent-4-enole hydratase produces 4-hydroxy-2-oxovalerate, which is subsequently split into acetaldehyde and pyruvate by 2-oxo-4-hydroxypentanoate aldolase. Finally, acetaldehyde dehydrogenase converts acetaldehyde into acetyl Co-A [78]. Both of these pathways are also found in Rhodococcusspp, a close relative of Frankia[79].

4.3.3. Naphthalene degradation in Frankia

Not surprisingly, Frankiaalso metabolizes naphthalene as a sole carbon and energy source via a related pathway [18]. Specifically, Frankiauses the protocatechuate pathway to convert naphthalene or a naphthalene derivative into acetyl Co-A and succinyl Co-A (Figure 6) [18]. This finding confirms the role of Frankiain naphthalene degradation, which was suggested by earlier field studies [8-10, 37, 38]. In symbiosis with alders, Frankiaincreases polyaromatic hydrocarbon degradation in oil-sand tailings for the first 1.5 years [8, 10, 37]. However, after 2.5 years, alders without Frankiasymbionts demonstrated naphthalene degradation equal to the degradation or Frankia-inoculated alders [8]. The Frankia-alder symbiosis thrives in PAH-contaminated areas [15]. Interestingly, alder plants found in these PAH-contaminated areas maintained a symbiosis with Frankialineage III as opposed to the normal lineage I, suggesting that this pollutant affected nodulation and/or survival of the actinorhizal plants. Taken together, these findings indicate that Frankiacould be a useful tool in naphthalene remediation.

Figure 6.

Putative naphthalene degradation pathway inFrankia[18]. (Figure is recopied with permission fromCanadian Journal of Microbiology.)

4.4. Protocatechuate

4.4.1. Overview

Under oxic conditions, microbial degradation of many aromatic compounds occurs through the catechol or protocatechuate branch of the ß-ketoadipate pathway via either orthocleavage by catechol 1,2-dioxygenase and protocatechuate 3,4-dioxygenase or meta-cleavage by catechol-2,3-dioxygenase and protocatechuate-4,5-dioxygenase.

4.4.2. Potential protocatechuate degradation pathway in Frankia

Besides the protochatechuate pathway found in FrankiaQA3 [18], several other potential protocatechuate pathways have been identified from bioinformatics analysis of the available Frankiagenomes. In FrankiaEuI1c, a potential operon (FraEuI1c_2560-to- FraEuI1c_2564) for a putative protocatechuate pathway was identified (Figure 7). This operon encodes the predicted gene products involved in the putative pathway including protocatechuate 3,4-dioxygenase alpha and beta subunits, fumarate lyase, 3-oxoadipate enol-lactonase, and 4-hydroxybenzoate 3-monooxygenase. These gene products are similar to the protocatechuate degradation pathway found in Rhodococcus opacus1CP [80, 81]. These results suggest that Frankiamay use the protocatechuate degradation pathway to degrade many aromatic ring compounds after their conversion to protocatechuate.

Figure 7.

The proposed protocatechuate degradation pathway inFrankiastrains EuI1c and EUN1f.

Advertisement

5. Hydrocarbons

5.1. Overview

Petroleum-based energy and products are used extensively around the world. The pervasiveness of petroleum inevitably leads to serious environmental pollution. Petroleum is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons, cycloalkanes, aromatic hydrocarbons, and more complex chemicals like asphaltenes. These chemicals and their derivatives, which are termed petrogenic compounds, are released into the environment as a result of oil spills and combustion of petroleum-based products [82]. Oil spills are one of the most serious sources of petroleum pollution and devastate aquatic and marine environments. Ongoing research to identify new methods for petroleum remediation is important because oil spills and other types of petroleum-derived pollution continue to pose environmental health risks.

Hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria and fungi are widely distributed in marine and freshwater environments, as well as soil habitats [83, 84]. In Pseudomonas, the alkane hydroxylase (monooxygenase) system consists of three components: alkane hydroxylase (AlkB), rubredoxin, and rubredoxin reductase. This system is responsible for the first oxidation step in the utilization of n-alkanes [85]. Similar alkane hydroxylase systems have been found in a variety of alkane-degrading bacteria [86, 87]. Alcanivoraxsp. strain 2B5 will degrade C13–C30 n-alkanes and branched alkanes (pristine and phytane) from crude oil as the sole carbon source via a novel alkane hydroxylase gene (alkB). Other Acinetobacterare able to use n-alkanes with chain length C10–C40 as a sole source of carbon. In addition, the presence of multiple alkane hydroxylases in two Rhodococcusstrains were characterized and both organisms contained at least four alkane monooxygenase gene homologs (alkB1, alkB2, alkB3, and alkB4) [76, 88].

A bioinformatics approach was used to identify these potential hydrocarbon degradation pathways among the sequenced Frankiastrains. Functionally analyzed genes for the known hydrocarbon degradation pathways [84, 88] were used to probe the Frankiagenome database and identify potential pathways. Our preliminary results (Rehan unpublished data) revealed that the F. alniACN14a genome possesses a putative alkane-1 monooxygenase (Alkane omega-hydroxylase) gene (FRAAL1986), which is one of the known enzymes involved in the breakdown of n-alkanes (Figure 8). Furthermore, a similar gene (Franean1_2192) was also found in the Frankiasp. EAN1pec genome. These bioinformatics results support the hypothesis that Frankiamay be able to degrade oil-spill-derived hydrocarbons. However, these preliminary results need further study.

Figure 8.

Potential alkane-1 monooxygenase identified inF. alniACN14a.

Advertisement

6. Future aspects

Clearly, we have only begun to scratch the surface of the metabolism of Frankiaand its biodegradative potential. These initial studies correlating metabolic capacity to gene function are the first step in exploiting the bacteria for their bioremediation ability. Further bioinformatics data mining are necessary to elucidate the unique metabolic potential of Frankia. However, these in silicostudies require “wet lab” experiments to confirm these capabilities.

From limited field studies, actinorhizal nodule occupancy seems to be under control by environmental conditions. The presence of Frankialineage III strains inside alder nodules found under PAH-stressed soils suggests that this lineage may have a greater metabolic potential. The larger genome size of this lineage compared to the other infective strains also supports this hypothesis. However, further experiments are required to confirm this postulate.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

We thank Michele Greenleaf, Teal Furnholm, and Kaci B. Kus for their efforts on our degradation studies. Partial funding was provided by the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station. This is scientific Contribution Number 2613. This work was supported by USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture Hatch Project NH585. MR was supported by an Egyptian Channel Fellowship from The Egyptian Cultural Affairs and Missions Sectors.

References

  1. 1.Normand P, Benson DR, Berry AM, Tisa LS. Family Frankiaceae. In: Rosenberg E, DeLong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E, Thompson F, editors.The Prokaryote – ActinobacteriaBerlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2014. p. 339-356
  2. 2.Chaia EE, Wall LG, Huss-Danell K. Life in soil by the actinorhizal root nodule endophyteFrankia. A review.Symbiosis2010;51(3):201-226.
  3. 3.Benson DR, Silvester WB. Biology ofFrankiastrains,actinomycete symbionts of actinorhizal plants.Microbiol Rev1993;57(2):293-319.
  4. 4.Schwencke J, Caru M. Advances in actinorhizal symbiosis: Host plant-Frankiainteractions, biology, and applications in arid land reclamation. A review.Arid Land Res Manag2001;15(4):285-327.
  5. 5.Diagne N, Arumugam K, Ngom M, Nambiar-Veetil M, Franche C, Narayanan KK, et al. Use of Frankia and actinorhizal plants for degraded lands reclamation.Biomed Res Int2013.
  6. 6.Benson DR, Dawson JO. Recent advances in the biogeography and genecology of symbioticFrankiaand its host plants.Physiologia Plantarum2007;130(3):318-330.
  7. 7.Wheeler CT, Miller IM. Current and potential uses of actinorhizal plants in Europe.. In: Schwintzer CR, Tjepkema JD, editors.The Biology of Frankia and Actinorhizal Plants. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1990. p. 365-389.
  8. 8.Lefrancois E, Quoreshi A, Khasa D, Fung M, Whyte LG, Roy S, et al. Field performance of alder-Frankiasymbionts for the reclamation of oil sands sites.Appl Soil Ecol2010;46(2):183-191.
  9. 9.Roy S, Khasa DP, Greer CW. Combining alders, frankiae, and mycorrhizae for the revegetation and remediation of contaminated ecosystems.Can J Botany-Revue Canadienne De Botanique2007;85(3):237-251.
  10. 10.Roy S, Labelle S, Mehta P, Mihoc A, Fortin N, Masson C, et al. Phytoremediation of heavy metal and PAH-contaminated brownfield sites.Plant Soil2005;272(1-2):277-290.
  11. 11.Torri SI, Zubillaga M, Cusato M. Potential of Discaria Americana for Metal Stabilization on soils amended with biosolids and ash-spiked biosolids.Int J Phytoremed2009;11(2):187-199.
  12. 12.Lorenc-Plucinska G, Walentynowicz M, Niewiadomska A. Capabilities of alders (Alnus incana and A. glutinosa) to grow in metal-contaminated soil.Ecologic Engin2013;58:214-227.
  13. 13.Belanger PA, Bissonnette C, Berneche-D'Amours A, Bellenger JP, Roy S. Assessing the adaptability of the actinorhizal symbiosis in the face of environmental change.Environ Exper Botany2011;74:98-105.
  14. 14.Sun WHH, Lo JB, Robert FM, Ray C, Tang CS. Phytoremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons in tropical coastal soils – I. Selection of promising woody plants. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2004;11(4):260-266.
  15. 15.Ridgway KP, Marland LA, Harrison AF, Wright J, Young JPW, Fitter AH. Molecular diversity ofFrankiain root nodules ofAlnus incanagrown with inoculum from polluted urban soils.FEMS Microbiol Ecol2004;50(3):255-263.
  16. 16.Rehan M, Furnholm T, Finethy RH, Chu FX, El-Fadly G, Tisa LS. Copper tolerance inFrankiasp strain EuI1c involves surface binding and copper transport.Appl Microbiol Biotechnol2014;98(18):8005-8015.
  17. 17.Rehan M, Kluge M, Franzle S, Kellner H, Ullrich R, Hofrichter M. Degradation of atrazine byFrankia alniACN14a: gene regulation, dealkylation, and dechlorination.Appl Microbiol Biotechnol2014;98(13):6125-6135.
  18. 18.Baker E, Tang Y, Chu FX, Tisa LS. Molecular responses ofFrankiasp strain QA3 to naphthalene.Can J Microbiol2015;61(4):281-292.
  19. 19.Normand P, Orso S, Cournoyer B, Jeannin P, Chapelon C, Dawson J, et al. Molecular phylogeny of the genusFrankiaand related genera and emendation of the family Frankiaceae.Int J System Bacteriol1996;46(1):1-9.
  20. 20.Ghodhbane-Gtari F, Nouioui I, Chair M, Boudabous A, Gtari M. 16S-23S rRNA intergenic spacer region variability in the genus Frankia.Microb Ecol2010;60(3):487-495.
  21. 21.Nouioui I, Ghodhbane-Gtari F, Beauchemin NJ, Tisa LS, Gtari M. Phylogeny of members of theFrankiagenus based on gyrB, nifH and glnII sequences.Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek Int J Gen Mole Microbiol2011;100(4):579-587.
  22. 22.Cournoyer B, Lavire C. Analysis ofFrankiaevolutionary radiation using glnII sequences.FEMS Microbiol Lett1999;177(1):29-34.
  23. 23.Gtari M, Tisa LS, Normand P. Diversity ofFrankiastrains, actinobacterial symbionts of actinorhizal plants. In: Aroca R, editor.Symbiotic Endophytes. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2014. p. 123-148
  24. 24.Normand P, Lapierre P, Tisa LS, Gogarten JP, Alloisio N, Bagnarol E, et al. Genome characteristics of facultatively symbioticFrankiasp strains reflect host range and host plant biogeography.Genome Res2007;17(1):7-15.
  25. 25.Ghodbhane-Gtari F, Beauchemin N, Bruce D, Chain P, Chen A, Walston Davenport K, et al. Draft Genome sequence ofFrankiasp. strain CN3, an atypical, non-infective (Nod-) ineffective (Fix-) isolate fromCoriaria nepalensis.Genome Announcements; 2013. p. 1(2):00085-13.
  26. 26.Ghodhbane-Gtari F, Hurst SGt, Oshone R, Morris K, Abebe-Akele F, Thomas WK, et al. Draft genome sequence ofFrankiasp. strain BMG5.23, a salt-tolerant nitrogen-fixing actinobacterium isolated from the root nodules ofCasuarina glaucagrown in Tunisia.Genome Announc2014;2(3):e00520-14.
  27. 27.Hurst SG, Oshone R, Ghodhbane-Gtari F, Morris K, Abebe-Akele F, Thomas WK, et al. Draft genome sequence ofFrankiasp. strain Thr, a nitrogen-fixing actinobacterium isolated from the root nodules ofCasuarina cunninghamianagrown in Egypt.Genome Announ2014;2(3):e00493-14.
  28. 28.Mansour SR, Oshone R, Hurst SGt, Morris K, Thomas WK, Tisa LS. Draft genome sequence ofFrankiasp. strain CcI6, a salt-tolerant nitrogen-fixing actinobacterium isolated from the root nodule ofCasuarina cunninghamiana.Genome Announc2014;2(1).
  29. 29.Nouioui I, Beauchemin N, Cantor MN, Chen A, Detter JC, Furnholm T, et al. Draft genome sequence ofFrankiasp. strain BMG5.12, a nitrogen-fixing actinobacterium isolated from Tunisian soils. Genome Announc 2013;1(4):1(4):e00468-13.
  30. 30.Sen A, Beauchemin N, Bruce B, Chain P, Chen A, Walston Davenport K, et al. Draft Genome sequence ofFrankiasp. strain QA3, a nitrogen-fixing actinobacterium isolated from the root nodule ofAlnus nitida.Genome Announ2013;1(2):1(2):e00103-13.
  31. 31.Tisa LS, Beauchemin N, Gtari M, Sen A, Wall LG. What stories can theFrankiagenomes start to tell us?J Biosci2013;38(4):719-26.
  32. 32.Wall LG, Beauchemin N, Cantor MN, Chaia E, Chen A, Detter JC, et al. Draft genome sequence ofFrankiasp. strain BCU110501, a nitrogen-fixing actinobacterium isolated from nodules ofDiscaria trinevis.Genome Announ2013;1(4):1(4):e00503-13..
  33. 33.Bagnarol E, Popovici J, Alloisio N, Marechal J, Pujic P, Normand P, et al. DifferentialFrankiaprotein patterns induced by phenolic extracts from Myricaceae seeds.Physiologia Plantarum2007;130(3):380-390.
  34. 34.Udwary DW, Gontang EA, Jones AC, Jones CS, Schultz AW, Winter JM, et al. Significant natural product biosynthetic potential of actinorhizal symbionts of the genusFrankia, as revealed by comparative genomic and proteomic analyses.Appl Environ Microbiol2011;77(11):3617-3625.
  35. 35.Fang H, Cai L, Yu Y, Zhang T. Metagenomic analysis reveals the prevalence of biodegradation genes for organic pollutants in activated sludge.Bioresour Technol2013;129:209-18.
  36. 36.Diagne N, Ngom M, Djighaly PI, Ngom D, Ndour B, Cissokho M, et al. Remediation of heavy-metal-contaminated soils and enhancement of their fertility with actinorhizal plants. In: Sherameti I, Varma A, editors.Heavy Metal Contamination of Soils, Soil Biology. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2015. p. 355-366.
  37. 37.Mallet P, Roy S. The Symbiosis betweenFrankiaand Alder shrubs results in a tolerance of the environmental stress associated with tailings from the Canadian oil sands industry.J Petroleum Environ Engin2014. p. 180.
  38. 38.Bissonnette C, Fahlman B, Peru KM, Khasa DP, Greer CW, Headley JV, et al. Symbiosis withFrankiasp benefits the establishment ofAlnus viridissspcrispaandAlnus incanassprugosain tailings sand from the Canadian oil sands industry.Ecolog Engin2014;68:167-175.
  39. 39.Mandelbaum RT, Allan DL, Wackett LP. Isolation and Characterization of aPseudomonassp That Mineralizes the S-Triazine Herbicide Atrazine.Appl Environ Microbiol1995;61(4):1451-1457.
  40. 40.Rousseaux S, Hartmann A, Soulas G. Isolation and characterisation of new Gram-negative and Gram-positive atrazine degrading bacteria from different French soils.FEMS Microbiol Ecol2001;36(2-3):211-222.
  41. 41.Singh P, Suri CR, Cameotra SS. Isolation of a member ofAcinetobacterspecies involved in atrazine degradation.Biochem Biophys Res Commun2004;317(3):697-702.
  42. 42.Crawford JJ, Sims GK, Mulvaney RL, Radosevich M. Biodegradation of atrazine under denitrifying conditions.Appl Microbiol Biotechnol1998;49(5):618-623.
  43. 43.Govantes F, Porrua O, Garcia-Gonzalez V, Santero E. Atrazine biodegradation in the lab and in the field: enzymatic activities and gene regulation.Microb Biotechnol2009;2(2):178-185.
  44. 44.Scott C, Jackson CJ, Coppin CW, Mourant RG, Hilton ME, Sutherland TD, et al. Catalytic improvement and evolution of atrazine chlorohydrolase.Appl Environ Microbiol2009;75(7):2184-2191.
  45. 45.Govantes F, Garcia-Gonzalez V, Porrua O, Platero AI, Jimenez-Fernandez A, Santero E. Regulation of the atrazine-degradative genes inPseudomonassp strain ADP.FEMS Microbiol Lett2010;310(1):1-8.
  46. 46.Asturias JA, Diaz E, Timmis KN. The evolutionary relationship of biphenyl dioxygenase from gram-positiveRhodococcus globerulusP6 to multicomponent dioxygenases from gram-negative bacteria.Gene1995;156(1):11-18.
  47. 47.Fujihara H, Furukawa K. Biphenyl and salicylate catabolic genes inPseudomonas pseudoalcaligenesKF707 are cross-regulated by two regulatory proteins.J Biotechnol2008;136:S395-S395.
  48. 48.Ang EL, Zhao HM, Obbard JP. Recent advances in the bioremediation of persistent organic pollutants via biomolecular engineering.Enzy Microb Technol2005;37(5):487-496.
  49. 49.Erickson BD, Mondello FJ. Enhanced biodegradation of polychlorinated-biphenyls after site-directed mutagenesis of a biphenyl dioxygenase gene.Appl Environ Microbiol1993;59(11):3858-3862.
  50. 50.Furukawa K, Hirose J, Suyama A, Zaiki T, Hayashida S. Gene components responsible for discrete substrate-specificity in the metabolism of biphenyl (Bph Operon) and toluene (Tod Operon).J Bacteriol1993;175(16):5224-5232.
  51. 51.Rehan M. Genetic activities of Actinobacteria,Frankia, for the detoxificating mechanisms of two heavy metals and the biodegradation of aromatic compounds in addition to its bioremediation potential: Kafrelsheikh University; 2012.
  52. 52.Sylvestre M, Sirois M, Hurtubise Y, Bergeron J, Ahmad D, Shareck F, et al. Sequencing ofComamonas testosteronistrain B-356-biphenyl/chlorobiphenyl dioxygenase genes: Evolutionary relationships among Gram-negative bacterial biphenyl dioxygenases.Gene1996;174(2):195-202.
  53. 53.Pieper DH, Seeger M. Bacterial metabolism of polychlorinated biphenyls.J Mole Microbiol Biotechnol2008;15(2-3):121-138.
  54. 54.Masai E, Yamada A, Healy JM, Hatta T, Kimbara K, Fukuda M, et al. Characterization of biphenyl catabolic genes of gram-positive polychlorinated biphenyl degraderRhodococcussp. strain RHA1.Appl Environ Microbiol1995;61(6):2079-85.
  55. 55.Michalowicz J, Duda W. Phenols – Sources and toxicity.Polish J Environ Stud2007;16(3):347-362.
  56. 56.Belofsky G, Percivill D, Lewis K, Tegos GP, Ekart J. Phenolic metabolites ofDalea versicolorthat enhance antibiotic activity against model pathogenic bacteria.J Natur Prod2004;67(3):481-484.
  57. 57.Naczk M, Shahidi F. Extraction and analysis of phenolics in food.J ChromatA 2004;1054(1-2):95-111.
  58. 58.Toxicological profile for phenol. In: Services USDoHaH, editor. Atlanta; 2008.
  59. 59.Buckley JD, Meadows AT, Kadin ME, Le Beau MM, Siegel S, Robison LL. Pesticide exposures in children with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.Cancer2000;89(11):2315-2321.
  60. 60.Moridani MY, Siraki A, Chevaldina T, Scobie H, O'Brien PJ. Quantitative structure toxicity relationships for catechols in isolated rat hepatocytes.Chemi-Biologic Interact2004;147(3):297-307.
  61. 61.Hooiveld M, Heederik DJ, Kogevinas M, Boffetta P, Needham LL, Patterson DG, Jr., et al. Second follow-up of a Dutch cohort occupationally exposed to phenoxy herbicides, chlorophenols, and contaminants.Am J Epidemiol1998;147(9):891-901.
  62. 62.Shingler V, Moore T. Sensing of aromatic compounds by the DmpR transcriptional activator of phenol-catabolizingPseudomonassp. strain CF600.J Bacteriol1994;176(6):1555-60.
  63. 63.Haggblom MM. Microbial breakdown of halogenated aromatic pesticides and related compounds.FEMS Microbiol Lett1992;103(1):29-72.
  64. 64.Ali S, Fernandez-Lafuente R, Cowan DA. Meta-pathway degradation of phenolics by thermophilic Bacilli.Enzy Microb Technol1998;23(7-8):462-468.
  65. 65.Jeong JJ, Kim JH, Kim CK, Hwang I, Lee K. 3- and 4-alkylphenol degradation pathway inPseudomonassp strain KL28: genetic organization of the lap gene cluster and substrate specificities of phenol hydroxylase and catechol 2,3-dioxygenase.Microbiology-Sgm2003;149:3265-3277.
  66. 66.Perradin Y, Mottet MJ, Lalonde M. Influence of phenolics onin vitrogrowth ofFrankiastrains.Can J Botany – Revue Canadienne De Botanique1983;61(11):2807-2814.
  67. 67.Vogel CS, Dawson JO. Invitro growth of 5Frankiaisolates in the presence of 4 phenolic-acids and juglone.Soil Biol Biochem1986;18(2):227-231.
  68. 68.Popovici J, Walker V, Bertrand C, Bellvert F, Fernandez MP, Comte G. Strain specificity in the Myricaceae-Frankiasymbiosis is correlated to plant root phenolics.Funct Plant Biol2011;38(8-9):682-689.
  69. 69.Sekowska A, Denervaud V, Ashida H, Michoud K, Haas D, Yokota A, et al. Bacterial variations on the methionine salvage pathway.BMC Microbiol2004;4:9.
  70. 70.Arif NM, Ahmad SA, Syed MA, Shukor MY. Isolation and characterization of a phenol-degradingRhodococcussp. strain AQ5NOL 2 KCTC 11961BP.J Basic Microbiol2013;53(1):9-19.
  71. 71.Haggblom MM, Nohynek LJ, Salkinojasalonen MS. Degradation and O-Methylation of Chlorinated Phenolic-Compounds byRhodococcusandMycobacteriumStrains.Appl Environ Microbiol1988;54(12):3043-3052.
  72. 72.Preuss R, Angerer J, Drexler H. Naphthalene – an environmental and occupational toxicant.Int Arch Occup Environ Health2003;76(8):556-576.
  73. 73.Andreoli R, Manini P, Bergamaschi E, Mutti A, Franchini I, Niessen WMA. Determination of naphthalene metabolites in human urine by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry with electrospray ionization.J ChromatA 1999;847(1-2):9-17.
  74. 74.Toxicological profile for napthalene, 1-methylnaphthalene and 2-methylnaphthalene. In: Services USDoHaH, editor. Atlanta; 2005.
  75. 75.Benigni R. The first US National Toxicology Program exercise on the prediction of rodent carcinogenicity: Definitive results.Mutat Res – Rev MutatResearch 1997;387(1):35-45.
  76. 76.Abdo KM, Grumbein S, Chou BJ, Herbert R. Toxicity and carcinogenicity study in F344 rats following 2 years of whole-body exposure to naphthalene vapors.Inhal Toxicol2001;13(10):931-950.
  77. 77.Bosch R, Garcia-Valdes E, Moore ERB. Genetic characterization and evolutionary implications of a chromosomally encoded naphthalene-degradation upper pathway fromPseudomonas stutzeriAN10.Gene1999;236(1):149-157.
  78. 78.Bosch R, Garcia-Valdes E, Moore ERB. Complete nucleotide sequence and evolutionary significance of a chromosomally encoded naphthalene-degradation lower pathway fromPseudomonas stutzeriAN10.Gene2000;245(1):65-74.
  79. 79.Grund E, Denecke B, Eichenlaub R. Naphthalene Degradation Via Salicylate and Gentisate byRhodococcussp Strain B4.Appl Environ Microbiol1992;58(6):1874-1877.
  80. 80.Eulberg D, Lakner S, Golovleva LA, Schlomann M. Characterization of a protocatechuate catabolic gene cluster fromRhodococcus opacus1CP: Evidence for a merged enzyme with 4-carboxymuconolactone-decarboxylating and 3-oxoadipate enol-lactone-hydrolyzing activity.J Bacteriol1998;180(5):1072-1081.
  81. 81.Perez-Pantoja D, De la Iglesia R, Pieper DH, Gonzalez B. Metabolic reconstruction of aromatic compounds degradation from the genome of the amazing pollutant-degrading bacteriumCupriavidus necatorJMP134.FEMS Microbiol Rev2008;32(5):736-94.
  82. 82.Neff JM, Stout SA, Gunster DG. Ecological risk assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in sediments: identifying sources and ecological hazard.Integr Environ Assess Manag2005;1(1):22-33.
  83. 83.Okoh AI, Trejo-Hernandez MR. Remediation of petroleum hydrocarbon polluted systems: Exploiting the bioremediation strategies.Afr J Biotechnol2006;5(25):2520-2525.
  84. 84.Liu YC, Li LZ, Wu Y, Tian W, Zhang LP, Xu L, et al. Isolation of an alkane-degradingAlcanivoraxsp strain 2B5 and cloning of the alkB gene.Bioresou Technol2010;101(1):310-316.
  85. 85.van Beilen JB, Wubbolts MG, Witholt B. Genetics of alkane oxidation byPseudomonas oleovorans.Biodegradation1994;5(3-4):161-74.
  86. 86.van Beilen JB, Smits THM, Whyte LG, Schorcht S, Rothlisberger M, Plaggemeier T, et al. Alkane hydroxylase homologues in Gram-positive strains.Environ Microbiol2002;4(11):676-682.
  87. 87.Smits THM, Balada SB, Witholt B, van Beilen JB. Functional analysis of alkane hydroxylases from gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria.J Bacteriol2002;184(6):1733-1742.
  88. 88.Whyte LG, Smits THM, Labbe D, Witholt B, Greer CW, van Beilen JB. Gene cloning and characterization of multiple alkane hydroxylase systems inRhodococcusstrains Q15 and NRRL B-16531.Appl Environ Microbiol2002;68(12):5933-5942.

Written By

Medhat Rehan, Erik Swanson and Louis S. Tisa

Submitted: March 11th, 2015Reviewed: October 22nd, 2015Published: February 11th, 2016