Back

A fast-track, high-throughput screening platform for biological nitrification inhibitors discovery based on soil relevant ammonia oxidizing strains

Kanellopoulos, A. E.; Malits, A.; Ribeiro, H.; Kerou, M.; Ghatak, A.; Chaturvedi, P.; Weckwerth, W.; Karpouzas, D. G.; Schleper, C.; Papadopoulou, E. S.

2024-12-03 microbiology
10.1101/2024.12.03.626636 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Nitrogen cycling is critical for ecosystem functioning, with nitrification playing a central role. Excessive nitrification, triggered by heavy nitrogen fertilisation, contributes to reduced nitrogen use efficiency, nitrate leaching, and nitrous oxide emissions. While synthetic nitrification inhibitors (SNIs) help reduce these impacts, their erratic performance and environmental risks have shifted focus to biological nitrification inhibitors (BNIs) as sustainable alternatives. In vitro bioassays with ammonia-oxidising microorganisms (AOM) are valuable for BNI discovery and research, but often have low throughput and rely on a limited number of mostly non-soil-relevant or genetically modified ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB) strains, lacking validation with established BNIs. We present a refined fast-track, high-throughput assay for BNI screening, utilizing soil-relevant, ecophysiologically and phylogenetically diverse AOB (Nitrosospira multiformis, Nitrosomonas ureae, Nitrosomonas communis) and ammonia-oxidizing archaea (AOA) strains (Nitrososphaera viennensis, "Ca. Nitrosocosmicus franklandianus"), achieving consistent cellular activity and density. The assay was validated with established SNIs and BNIs, showing differences in inhibition efficacy and strain sensitivity, consistent with literature. As a proof of concept, root exudates from diverse wheat genotypes were screened, demonstrating distinct inhibition profiles. The proposed system advances previously available screening systems and, when integrated with realistic soil tests, will facilitate the discovery of novel BNIs and BNI-producing plant genotypes.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.