Impact of storage and extraction methods on peat soil microbiomes

PeerJ. 2024 Dec 23:12:e18745. doi: 10.7717/peerj.18745. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

Recovered microbial community structure is known to be influenced by sample storage conditions and nucleic acid extraction methods, and the impact varies by sample type. Peat soils store a large portion of soil carbon and their microbiomes mediate climate feedbacks. Here, we tested three storage conditions and five extraction protocols on peat soils from three physicochemically distinct habitats in Stordalen Mire, Sweden, revealing significant methodological impacts on microbial (here, meaning bacteria and archaea) community structure. Initial preservation method impacted alpha but not beta diversity, with in-field storage in LifeGuard buffer yielding roughly two-thirds the richness of in-field flash-freezing or transport from the field on ice (all samples were stored at -80 °C after return from the field). Nucleic acid extraction method impacted both alpha and beta diversity; one method (the PowerSoil Total RNA Isolation kit with DNA Elution Accessory kit) diverged from the others (PowerMax Soil DNA Isolation kit-High Humic Acid Protocol, and three variations of a modified PowerMax Soil DNA/RNA isolation kit), capturing more diverse microbial taxa, with divergent community structures. Although habitat and sample depth still consistently dominated community variation, method-based biases in microbiome recovery for these climatologically-relevant soils are significant, and underscore the importance of methodological consistency for accurate inter-study comparisons, long-term monitoring, and consistent ecological interpretations.

Keywords: Extraction; Methods; Microbiome; Peatland; Soil; Storage; Stordalen.

MeSH terms

  • Archaea / classification
  • Archaea / genetics
  • Archaea / isolation & purification
  • Bacteria* / classification
  • Bacteria* / genetics
  • Bacteria* / isolation & purification
  • DNA, Bacterial / analysis
  • DNA, Bacterial / isolation & purification
  • Microbiota* / genetics
  • Soil Microbiology*
  • Soil* / chemistry
  • Specimen Handling / methods
  • Sweden

Substances

  • Soil
  • DNA, Bacterial

Grants and funding

This research is a contribution of the EMERGE Biology Integration Institute, funded by the National Science Foundation, Biology Integration Institutes Program, grant # 2022070. This study was also supported by the Genomic Science Program of the United States Department of Energy Office of Biological and Environmental Research, grant #s DE-SC0010580 and DE-SC0016440. Quality control of RNA used in this publication was performed at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center Core Facilities, which is supported by Center and by the National Institutes of Health grant # P30 CA016058. The Abisko Scientific Research Station (where samples were collected) is managed by the Swedish Polar Research Secretariat with support from the Swedish Research Council’s grant # 4.3-2021-00164. Ben J Woodcroft was supported by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship, grant # FT210100521. There was no additional external funding received for this study. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.