Bacterial metabolic landscapes of the Sumaco volcano: a Picrust2 analysis of 16S rRNA data from Amazonian Ecuador


Abstract

The Sumaco volcano in Ecuador, which has a distinct geological origin from the Andes and is located in the Amazon basin, offers an opportunity to study untouched microbiomes. We explored comparative patterns of abundance from predicted functional profiling in soil samples collected along elevation and sulfur gradients on its slopes. Using 16S rRNA gene metabarcoding, we estimated metagenome functional profiles, contrasting sample groups by altitude or soil sulfur concentration. We predict that high-altitude communities may have an enhanced potential for anaerobic metabolism (crotonate fermentation), coenzyme B12 synthesis, and degradation of diverse carbon sources (sugars, octane). High-sulfur soils were inferentially associated with enriched pathways for degrading complex organic compounds and nitrogen metabolism, reflecting adaptation to unique geochemical conditions. In contrast, low-sulfur soils are consistent with a higher glycerol degradation potential. Within the limitation imposed by the potential weak associations of the applied predicted functional profiling to actual gene content, we propose that the detected metabolic changes represent different ecological strategies for resource acquisition, energy generation, and stress tolerance, optimized for varying conditions in this unique volcanic ecosystem. Our findings highlight how environmental gradients shape soil microbiome functional diversity and offer insights into microbial adaptation in Sumaco's exceptional geochemistry within the Amazon. Further efforts linking functional predictions back to specific taxa will offer a complete ecological perspective of the microbiome exploration in the Sumaco volcano.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].