Production and characterization of a trehalolipid biosurfactant produced by the novel marine bacteriumRhodococcussp., strain PML026

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate biosurfactant production by a novel marine Rhodococcus sp., strain PML026 and characterize the chemical nature and properties of the biosurfactant. METHODS AND RESULTS: A novel marine bacterium (Rhodococcus species; strain PML026) was shown to produce biosurfactant in the presence of hydrophobic substrate (sunflower oil). Biosurfactant production (identified as a trehalolipid) was monitored in whole-batch cultures (oil layer and aqueous phase), aqueous phase (no oil layer) and filtered (0·2mum) aqueous phase (no oil or cells; extracellular) and was shown to be closely associated with growth/biomass production. Extracellular trehalolipid levels increased postonset of stationary growth phase. Purified trehalolipid was able to reduce the surface tension of water to 29mN m(-1) at Critical Micellar Concentration (CMC) of c. 250mgl(-1) and produced emulsions that were stable to a wide range of conditions (pH 2-10, temperatures of 20-100°C and NaCl concentrations of 5-25% w/v). Separate chemical analyses of the intact trehalolipid and its constituents demonstrated the compound was in fact a mixture of homologues (>1180MW) consisting of a trehalose moiety esterified to a series of straight chain and hydroxylated fatty acids. CONCLUSIONS: The trehalolipid biosurfactant produced by the novel marine strain Rhodococcus sp. PML026 was characterized and exhibited high surfactant activity under a wide range of conditions. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF STUDY: Strain PML026 of Rhodococcus sp. is a potential candidate for bioremediation or biosurfactant production for various applications.

Long-term changes in the meroplankton of the North Sea

Data from the continuous plankton recorder (CPR) survey collected in the late-1940s to early-1960s indicated that the abundance of decapod larvae was low and the seasonal peak of abundance was late following cold winters. The phenological effect of temperature was shown to be consistent with relationships between both geographical and interannual patterns of variation. Analyses of CPR data collected from the 1940s to the present day reveal large-scale long-term changes in the abundance and phenology of the North Sea meroplankton. Echinoderm larvae, whose peak abundance has advanced by 47 days, show the greatest shift in timing. Echinoderm larvae have also increased in abundance to become the most abundant taxon in North Sea CPR samples. Genetic and morphological analyses of CPR samples show that the variations in echinoderm larvae are mainly attributable to an increasing abundance and earlier occurrence of the larvae of a resident species, Echinocardium cordatum, rather than a change in species composition. The remarkable scale of the changes in abundance and phenology of the meroplankton, which are greater than those seen in the holoplankton, has stimulated the development of further research into the causes and effects of these changes.

Assessing the sensitivity of blue mussel beds to pressures associated with human activities.

The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) commissioned this project to generate an improved understanding of the sensitivities of blue mussel (Mytilus edulis) beds, found in UK waters, to pressures associated with human activities in the marine environment. The work will provide an evidence base that will facilitate and support management advice for Marine Protected Areas, development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. Blue mussel beds are identified as a Habitat of Principle Importance (HPI) under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, as a Priority Marine Feature (PMF) under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, and included on the OSPAR (Annex V) list of threatened and declining species and habitats. The purpose of this project was to produce sensitivity assessments for the blue mussel biotopes included within the HPI, PMF and OSPAR habitat definitions, and clearly document the supporting evidence behind the assessments and any differences between them. A total of 20 pressures falling in five categories - biological, hydrological, physical damage, physical loss, and pollution and other chemical changes - were assessed in this report. The review examined seven blue mussel bed biotopes found on littoral sediment and sublittoral rock and sediment. The assessments were based on the sensitivity of M. edulis rather than associated species, as M. edulis was considered the most important characteristic species in blue mussel beds. To develop each sensitivity assessment, the resistance and resilience of the key elements are assessed against the pressure benchmark using the available evidence gathered in this review. The benchmarks were designed to provide a ‘standard’ level of pressure against which to assess sensitivity. Blue mussel beds were highly sensitive to a few human activities: • introduction or spread of non-indigenous species (NIS); • habitat structure changes - removal of substratum (extraction); and • physical loss (to land or freshwater habitat). Physical loss of habitat and removal of substratum are particularly damaging pressures, while the sensitivity of blue mussel beds to non-indigenous species depended on the species assessed. Crepidula fornicata and Crassostrea gigas both had the potential to outcompete and replace mussel beds, so resulted in a high sensitivity assessment. Mytilus spp. populations are considered to have a strong ability to recover from environmental disturbance. A good annual recruitment may allow a bed to recovery rapidly, though this cannot always be expected due to the sporadic nature of M. edulis recruitment. Therefore, blue mussel beds were considered to have a 'Medium' resilience (recovery within 2-10 years). As a result, even where the removal or loss of proportion of a mussel bed was expected due to a pressure, a sensitivity of 'Medium' was reported. Hence, most of the sensitivities reported were 'Medium'. It was noted, however, that the recovery rates of blue mussel beds were reported to be anywhere between two years to several decades. In addition, M. edulis is considered very tolerant of a range of physical and chemical conditions. As a result, blue mussel beds were considered to be 'Not sensitive' to changes in temperature, salinity, de-oxygenation, nutrient and organic enrichment, and substratum type, at the benchmark level of pressure. The report found that no distinct differences in overall sensitivity exist between the HPI, PMF and OSPAR definitions. Individual biotopes do however have different sensitivities to pressures, and the OSPAR definition only includes blue mussel beds on sediment. These differences were determined by the position of the habitat on the shore and the sediment type. For example, the infralittoral rock biotope (A3.361) was unlikely to be exposed to pressures that affect sediments. However in the case of increased water flow, mixed sediment biotopes were considered more stable and ‘Not sensitive’ (at the benchmark level) while the remaining biotopes were likely to be affected.

Using a clearly documented, evidence-based approach to create sensitivity assessments allows the assessment basis and any subsequent decision making or management plans to be readily communicated, transparent and justifiable. The assessments can be replicated and updated where new evidence becomes available ensuring the longevity of the sensitivity assessment tool. For every pressure where sensitivity was previously assessed as a range of scores in MB0102, the assessments made by the evidence review have supported one of the MB0102 assessments. The evidence review has reduced the uncertainty around assessments previously undertaken in the MB0102 project (Tillin et al., 2010) by assigning a single sensitivity score to the pressures as opposed to a range. Finally, as blue mussel bed habitats also contribute to ecosystem function and the delivery of ecosystem services, understanding the sensitivity of these biotopes may also support assessment and management in regard to these. Whatever objective measures are applied to data to assess sensitivity, the final sensitivity assessment is indicative. The evidence, the benchmarks, the confidence in the assessments and the limitations of the process, require a sense-check by experienced marine ecologists before the outcome is used in management decisions.