Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Environmental Microbiology

Effects of Ammonium and Nitrite on Growth and Competitive Fitness of Cultivated Methanotrophic Bacteria

Györgyi Nyerges, Suk-Kyun Han, Lisa Y. Stein
Györgyi Nyerges
1Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California, Riverside, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Suk-Kyun Han
1Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California, Riverside, California
2Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lisa Y. Stein
1Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California, Riverside, California
2Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: lisa.stein@ualberta.ca
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.00747-10
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

The effects of nitrite and ammonium on cultivated methanotrophic bacteria were investigated. Methylomicrobium album ATCC 33003 outcompeted Methylocystis sp. strain ATCC 49242 in cultures with high nitrite levels, whereas cultures with high ammonium levels allowed Methylocystis sp. to compete more easily. M. album pure cultures and cocultures consumed nitrite and produced nitrous oxide, suggesting a connection between denitrification and nitrite tolerance.

The application of ammonium-based fertilizers has been shown to immediately reduce the uptake of methane in a number of diverse ecological systems (3, 5, 7, 8, 11-13, 16, 27, 28), due likely to competitive inhibition of methane monooxygenase enzymes by ammonia and production of nitrite (1). Longer-term inhibition of methane uptake by ammonium has been attributed to changes in methanotrophic community composition, often favoring activity and/or growth of type I Gammaproteobacteria methanotrophs (i.e., Gammaproteobacteria methane-oxidizing bacteria [gamma-MOB]) over type II Alphaproteobacteria methanotrophs (alpha-MOB) (19-23, 25, 26, 30). It has been argued previously that gamma-MOB likely thrive in the presence of high N loads because they rapidly assimilate N and synthesize ribosomes whereas alpha-MOB thrive best under conditions of N limitation and low oxygen levels (10, 21, 23).

Findings from studies with rice paddies indicate that N fertilization stimulates methane oxidation through ammonium acting as a nutrient, not as an inhibitor (2). Therefore, the actual effect of ammonium on growth and activity of methanotrophs depends largely on how much ammonia-N is used for assimilation versus cometabolism. Many methanotrophs can also oxidize ammonia into nitrite via hydroxylamine (24, 29). Nitrite was shown previously to inhibit methane consumption by cultivated methanotrophs and by organisms in soils through an uncharacterized mechanism (9, 17, 24), although nitrite inhibits purified formate dehydrogenase from Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b (15). Together, the data from these studies show that ammonium and nitrite have significant effects on methanotroph activity and community composition and reveal the complexity of ammonia as both a nutrient and a competitive inhibitor. The present study demonstrates the differential influences of high ammonium or nitrite loads on the competitive fitness of a gamma-MOB versus an alpha-MOB strain.

Growth and activity of pure cultures.

Methylomicrobium album ATCC 33003 (a gamma-MOB strain) and Methylocystis sp. strain ATCC 49242 (an alpha-MOB strain) were grown in batch cultures (consisting of 100 ml of medium in 250-ml Wheaton bottles sealed with septated screw-top lids) with nitrate mineral salts medium (NMS; ATCC medium 1306) or ammonium mineral salts medium (AMS; ATCC medium 784) containing 10 μM copper at pH 6.8 under a 50% air-50% methane atmosphere. Cultures were initiated with 1 × 106 to 3 × 106 cells ml−1 and grown in the dark at 30°C with shaking (200 rpm). Although a range of NH4Cl (25 to 100 mM) and NaNO2 (0.5 to 5 mM) amendments were tested in both NMS and AMS (data not shown), 50 mM excess ammonium and 2.5 mM excess nitrite (the medium contained a 10 mM concentration of the respective N source) were selected for intensive investigation as these amounts caused differential responses by the bacteria but did not cause measurable osmotic effects. It must be recognized that bacteria in pure cultures have vastly different physiological responses from those operating in diverse natural communities; hence, while these N loads were necessary to stimulate measurable differential responses in the cultivated MOB, they are not directly applicable to MOB in natural environments.

M. album had shorter doubling times in AMS than in NMS (P = 0.03 by the t test), although final cell densities in the two media were equivalent as measured by direct microscopic counting using a Petroff-Hausser chamber under phase-contrast light microscopy (Table 1). Methylocystis sp. had equivalent doubling times and final cell densities when grown in NMS and AMS. Both strains released less nitrite when grown in AMS than in NMS, indicating more efficient uptake and assimilation of ammonium than nitrate as an N source (Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1.

Growth and activity measurements for pure cultures and cocultures of M. album and Methylocystis sp.a

The addition of 2.5 mM nitrite decreased the initial doubling time for M. album in NMS but did not alter the overall growth curves (Fig. 1A and B) or methane consumption rates (Table 1) in either NMS or AMS as measured by gas chromatography (GC)-thermal conductivity detection (TCD) using a GC-8A instrument (Shimadzu) and a Hayesep Q column (Alltech). Final M. album cell densities were 29 and 36% lower in nitrite-amended than in unamended NMS and AMS, respectively (Table 1). Nitrite-amended cultures also showed net nitrite consumption (measured using a standard colorimetric assay [6]) and production of significantly more nitrous oxide (measured simultaneously with methane) than cultures with unamended medium. Amendment of Methylocystis sp. cultures with 2.5 mM nitrite significantly increased doubling times by 65 and 51%, increased methane consumption rates by 57 and 69%, and reduced final cell densities by 46 and 63% relative to those in unamended NMS and AMS, respectively (Table 1). Nitrite-amended cultures took 24 to 50 h longer to reach the end of exponential phase than unamended cultures (Fig. 1C and D). Unlike M. album cultures, Methylocystis sp. cultures accumulated nitrite in excess of the 2.5 mM amendment, and no nitrous oxide was detected in any Methylocystis sp. culture (Table 1).

FIG. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 1.

Growth curves for M. album in NMS (A) and AMS (B) and Methylocystis sp. in NMS (C) and AMS (D) without N amendment (•), with the addition of 2.5 mM NaNO2 (○), and with the addition of 50 mM NH4Cl (▿). Error bars represent standard errors for six replicate cultures as described in the text. Cells were enumerated by direct cell counting as described in the text.

The addition of 50 mM ammonium to M. album cultures increased doubling times, but not significantly, slowed methane consumption in NMS by 61%, and reduced final cell densities by 48 and 35% relative to those in unamended NMS and AMS, respectively (Table 1). Although similar amounts of nitrite were produced in ammonium-amended and unamended M. album cultures, no nitrous oxide was measured in ammonium-amended cultures. The addition of 50 mM ammonium to Methylocystis sp. cultures significantly increased doubling times and slowed methane consumption only in NMS, by 28 and 18%, respectively, and did not significantly alter final cell densities or nitrite production in any culture (Table 1; Fig. 1C and D).

Together, these results demonstrate that M. album was more tolerant to the inhibitory effects of nitrite than ammonium and that Methylocystis sp. was more tolerant to the inhibitory effects of ammonium than nitrite.

Growth and activity of cocultures.

Cocultures with equivalent initial numbers of M. album and Methylocystis sp. cells were challenged with either 2.5 mM excess nitrite or 50 mM excess ammonium added to NMS or AMS. The cocultures grew equally well in the two types of unamended media, consumed methane at similar rates, and reached similar final cell densities (Table 1). Enumeration of cells of the two isolates by quantitative PCR (qPCR) showed equivalent numbers in the cocultures from 0 to 24 h, at which point M. album outgrew Methylocystis sp., accounting for 80 to 90% of the population by 48 h (Fig. 2A). However, late into the period of zero net cell growth (60 h), the percentage of M. album cells decreased to 31 to 41% of the population while Methylocystis sp. became dominant. Interestingly, nitrite levels did not substantially increase in NMS or AMS cocultures and N2O levels were lower than those in pure cultures of M. album, indicating more efficient N assimilation by the coculture than by either pure culture (Table 1).

FIG. 2.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 2.

Individual growth curves for M. album (•, ○) and Methylocystis sp. (▪, □) in cocultures. Cells of the two isolates were enumerated separately by qPCR. Cocultures were grown in NMS (closed symbols) or AMS (open symbols) without N amendment (A), with the addition of 2.5 mM NaNO2 (B), or with the addition of 50 mM NH4Cl (C). Standard errors for replicated experiments (n = 6) are indicated by bars. R2 values and PCR efficiency for standard curves with known cell numbers were 0.99 and 107% for M. album and 0.94 and 137% for Methylocystis sp.

For qPCR, primers were designed for M. album (Ma455F1, TCTGATGGCGAATACCCATC, and Ma856R, CACGAATCTTACGAATAAG) and Methylocystis sp. (Mcy177F1, GGATACGTGCGAGAGCAGA, and Mcy481R1, CCGTCATTATCGTCCCTGGC) by aligning their 16S rRNA genes using ClustalX (14). Primer sets were tested against both strains to ensure specificity. Standard curves were based on a dilution series of 102 to 108 cell ml−1 for each bacterium and verified by direct cell counting. Total DNA was extracted with a one-step, closed-tube cell lysis and DNA extraction system (ZyGem, New Zealand) with 100% efficiency. qPCRs (with 30-μl reaction mixtures) were performed using a MyIQ optical thermocycler (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA) with one primer set at a time and with standard reagent concentrations for Taq polymerase, as follows: 95°C for 5 min and 45 cycles at 94°C (10 s), 60°C (20 s), 72°C (20 s), and 85°C (10 s) to measure the fluorescence from Sybr green I (Molecular Probes, Eugene, OR) while avoiding signals from primer-dimer pairs. Threshold cycle (CT) values from the standards were used to extrapolate relative cell numbers in the samples.

The addition of 2.5 mM nitrite to the cocultures resulted in essentially no growth of Methylocystis sp. until well into the period of zero net change in cell numbers; 98 to 99% of growth through exponential phase was attributable to M. album, which also accounted for 94 to 97% of the population after 60 h of growth (Fig. 2B). Methane oxidation rates and final cell densities were unaffected by the addition of nitrite relative to those in unamended cocultures (Table 1). Doubling times increased only in NMS, by 37% relative to those in unamended cocultures. Levels of N2O production in nitrite-amended cocultures were similar to that in nitrite-amended M. album pure cultures (Table 1).

Ammonium-amended cocultures showed equivalent growth of the two bacteria up to late log phase (36 h), at which point loss of M. album cells and growth of Methylocystis sp. resulted in dominance of the latter after 60 h (Fig. 2C). Addition of ammonium increased doubling times for the coculture by 25 and 37% relative to those for unamended NMS and AMS cocultures, respectively (Table 1). Ammonium amendment had no effect on final cell densities in either medium or on methane oxidation rates in AMS, but methane oxidation rates in NMS decreased by 11% relative to those in unamended cocultures. A small amount of nitrous oxide was detected in ammonium-amended cocultures, although far less nitrite was released into the media than in ammonium-amended pure cultures of either bacterium (Table 1).

Results from the cocultures indicate that M. album outcompeted Methylocystis sp. in the absence of challenge by high N loads (i.e., in unamended cocultures) and in the presence of high nitrite levels and that ammonium-amended cocultures provided greater competitive fitness to Methylocystis sp. Findings from prior studies indicate that Methylocystis isolates prefer low methane concentrations (18) or low oxygen concentrations (4), which may explain the resurgence of Methylocystis sp. following exponential cell growth.

Conclusions.

It is clear that ammonium and nitrite have strong effects on methanotrophic activity and, in ecological studies, on community composition. The present study demonstrates that competitive fitness of individual methanotrophic strains depends upon differential mechanisms to overcome inhibition and toxicity from imposed high N loads, as well as an ability to rapidly respond to and assimilate available nutrients. Consumption of nitrite and production of N2O by M. album suggest that denitrifying ability may be an important mechanism for its relatively high tolerance of nitrite.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the Kearney Foundation of Soil Science grant no. 2005.202 to L. Y. Stein.

We thank B. D. Lanoil and anonymous reviewers for critical reading and comments.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 24 March 2010.
    • Accepted 20 June 2010.
  • Copyright © 2010 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Bédard, C., and R. Knowles. 1989. Physiology, biochemistry, and specific inhibitors of CH4, NH4+, and CO oxidation by methanotrophs and nitrifiers. Microbiol. Rev.53:68-84.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    Bodelier, P. L. E., P. Roslev, T. Henckel, and P. Frenzel. 2000. Stimulation by ammonium-based fertilizers of methane oxidation in soil around rice roots. Nature403:421-424.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.↵
    Bosse, U., P. Frenzel, and R. Conrad. 1993. Inhibition of methane oxidation by ammonium in the surface layer of a littoral sediment. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol.13:123-134.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  4. 4.↵
    Bowman, J. 2006. The methanotrophs—the families Methylococcaceae and Methylocystaceae, p. 266-289. In M. Dworkin et al. (ed.), The prokaryotes,vol. 5. Springer, New York, NY.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    Bronson, K. F., and A. R. Mosier. 1994. Suppression of methane oxidation in aerobic soil by nitrogen fertilisers, nitrification inhibitors, and urease inhibitors. Biol. Fertil. Soils17:263-268.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. 6.↵
    Clesceri, L. S., A. E. Greenberg, and A. D. Eaton (ed.). 1998. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 20th ed. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
  7. 7.↵
    Conrad, R., and F. Rothfuss. 1991. Methane oxidation in the soil surface layer of a flooded rice field and the effect of ammonium. Biol. Fertil. Soils12:28-32.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    Crill, P. M., P. J. Martikainen, H. Nykanen, and J. Silvola. 1994. Temperature and N fertilization effects on methane oxidation in a drained peatland soil. Soil Biol. Biochem.26:1331-1339.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  9. 9.↵
    Dunfield, P. F., and R. Knowles. 1995. Kinetics of inhibition of methane oxidation by nitrate, nitrite, and ammonium in a humisol. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.61:3129-3135.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    Graham, D. W., J. A. Chaudhary, R. S. Hanson, and R. G. Arnold. 1993. Factors affecting competition between type I and type II methanotrophs in two-organism, continuous-flow reactors. Microb. Ecol.25:1-17.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  11. 11.↵
    Hansen, S., J. E. Maehlum, and L. R. Bakken. 1993. N2O and CH4 fluxes in soil influenced by fertilization and tractor traffic. Soil Biol. Biochem.25:621-630.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. 12.
    Hütsch, B. W. 1998. Methane oxidation in arable soil as inhibited by ammonium, nitrite, and organic manure with respect to soil pH. Biol. Fertil. Soils28:27-35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  13. 13.↵
    Hütsch, B. W. 1996. Methane oxidation in soils of two long-term fertilization experiments in Germany. Soil Biol. Biochem.28:773-782.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. 14.↵
    Jeanmougin, F., J. D. Thompson, M. Gouy, D. G. Higgins, and T. J. Gibson. 1998. Multiple sequence alignment with Clustal X. Trends Biochem. Sci.23:403-405.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.↵
    Jollie, D. R., and J. D. Lipscomb. 1991. Formate dehydrogenase from Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b—purification and spectroscopic characterization of the cofactors. J. Biol. Chem.266:21853-21863.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    Kightley, D., D. B. Nedwell, and M. Cooper. 1995. Capacity for methane oxidation in landfill cover soils measured in laboratory-scale soil microcosms. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.61:592-601.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    King, G. M., and S. Schnell. 1994. Ammonium and nitrite inhibition of methane oxidation by Methylobacter albus BG8 and Methylosinus trichosporium OB3b at low methane concentrations. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.60:3508-3513.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    Knief, C., and P. F. Dunfield. 2005. Response and adaptation of different methanotrophic bacteria to low methane mixing ratios. Environ. Microbiol.7:1307-1317.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. 19.↵
    Lee, S. W., J. Im, A. A. DiSpirito, L. Bodrossy, M. J. Barcelona, and J. D. Semrau. 2009. Effect of nutrient and selective inhibitor amendments on methane oxidation, nitrous oxide production, and key gene presence and expression in landfill cover soils: characterization of the role of methanotrophs, nitrifiers, and denitrifiers. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.85:389-403.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.
    MacDonald, J. A., U. Skiba, L. J. Sheppard, K. J. Hargreaves, K. A. Smith, and D. Fowler. 1996. Soil environmental variables affecting the flux of methane from a range of forest, moorland, and agricultural soils. Biogeochemistry34:113-132.
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    Mohanty, S. R., P. L. E. Bodelier, V. Floris, and R. Conrad. 2006. Differential effects of nitrogenous fertilizers on methane-consuming microbes in rice field and forest soils. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.72:1346-1354.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.
    Mosier, A. R., D. S. Schimel, D. W. Valentine, K. Bronson, and W. J. Parton. 1991. Methane and nitrous oxide fluxes in native, fertilized and cultivated grasslands. Nature350:330-332.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  23. 23.↵
    Noll, M., P. Frenzel, and R. Conrad. 2008. Selective stimulation of type I methanotrophs in a rice paddy soil by urea fertilization revealed by RNA-based stable isotope probing. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol.65:125-132.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. 24.↵
    Nyerges, G., and L. Y. Stein. 2009. Ammonia co-metabolism and product inhibition vary considerably among species of methanotrophic bacteria. FEMS Microbiol. Lett.297:131-136.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. 25.↵
    Qiu, Q. F., M. Noll, W. R. Abraham, Y. H. Lu, and R. Conrad. 2008. Applying stable isotope probing of phospholipid fatty acids and rRNA in a Chinese rice field to study activity and composition of the methanotrophic bacterial communities in situ. ISME J.2:602-614.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  26. 26.↵
    Saari, A., P. J. Martikainen, A. Ferm, J. Ruuskanen, W. DeBoer, S. R. Troelstra, and H. J. Laanbroek. 1997. Methane oxidation in soil profiles of Dutch and Finnish coniferous forests with different texture and atmospheric nitrogen deposition. Soil Biol. Biochem.29:1625-1632.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  27. 27.↵
    Steudler, P. A., R. D. Bowden, J. M. Melillo, and J. D. Aber. 1989. Influence of nitrogen fertilizer on methane uptake in temperate forest soils. Nature341:314-316.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  28. 28.↵
    van der Nat, F.-J. W. A., J. F. C. de Brouwer, J. J. Middelburg, and H. J. Laanbroek. 1997. Spatial distribution and inhibition by ammonium of methane oxidation in intertidal freshwater marshes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.63:4734-4740.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    Whittenbury, R., K. C. Phillips, and J. F. Wilkinson. 1970. Enrichment, isolation and some properties of methane-utilizing bacteria. J. Gen. Microbiol.61:205-218.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. 30.↵
    Wu, L. Q., K. Ma, and Y. H. Lu. 2009. Rice roots select for type I methanotrophs in rice field soil. Syst. Appl. Microbiol.32:421-428.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Effects of Ammonium and Nitrite on Growth and Competitive Fitness of Cultivated Methanotrophic Bacteria
Györgyi Nyerges, Suk-Kyun Han, Lisa Y. Stein
Applied and Environmental Microbiology Aug 2010, 76 (16) 5648-5651; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.00747-10

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Applied and Environmental Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Effects of Ammonium and Nitrite on Growth and Competitive Fitness of Cultivated Methanotrophic Bacteria
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Applied and Environmental Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Applied and Environmental Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Effects of Ammonium and Nitrite on Growth and Competitive Fitness of Cultivated Methanotrophic Bacteria
Györgyi Nyerges, Suk-Kyun Han, Lisa Y. Stein
Applied and Environmental Microbiology Aug 2010, 76 (16) 5648-5651; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.00747-10
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • Growth and activity of pure cultures.
    • Growth and activity of cocultures.
    • Conclusions.
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Methylococcaceae
Methylocystaceae
Nitrites
Quaternary Ammonium Compounds

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AEM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AppEnvMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

 

Print ISSN: 0099-2240; Online ISSN: 1098-5336