Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Metatranscriptomic exploration of microbial functioning in clouds

Abstract

Clouds constitute the uppermost layer of the biosphere. They host diverse communities whose functioning remains obscure, although biological activity potentially participates to atmospheric chemical and physical processes. In order to gain information on the metabolic functioning of microbial communities in clouds, we conducted coordinated metagenomics/metatranscriptomics profiling of cloud water microbial communities. Samples were collected from a high altitude atmospheric station in France and examined for biological content after untargeted amplification of nucleic acids. Living microorganisms, essentially bacteria, maintained transcriptional and translational activities and expressed many known complementary physiological responses intended to fight oxidants, osmotic variations and cold. These included activities of oxidant detoxification and regulation, synthesis of osmoprotectants/cryoprotectants, modifications of membranes, iron uptake. Consistently these energy-demanding processes were fueled by central metabolic routes involved in oxidative stress response and redox homeostasis management, such as pentose phosphate and glyoxylate pathways. Elevated binding and transmembrane ion transports demonstrated important interactions between cells and their cloud droplet chemical environments. In addition, polysaccharides, potentially beneficial for survival like exopolysaccharides, biosurfactants and adhesins, were synthesized. Our results support a biological influence on cloud physical and chemical processes, acting notably on the oxidant capacity, iron speciation and availability, amino-acids distribution and carbon and nitrogen fates.

Introduction

The outdoor atmosphere harbors diverse microbial assemblages composed of bacteria, fungi and viruses (e.g.1) whose functioning remains largely unexplored. While the occasional presence of Human pathogens or opportunists can cause potential hazard2,3, in general the vast majority of airborne microbes originate from natural environments like soil or plants, with large spatial and temporal variations of biomass and biodiversity (e.g.4,5). Once ripped off and aerosolized from surfaces by mechanical disturbances such as those generated by wind, raindrop impacts or water bubbling6,7, microbial cells are transported upward by turbulent fluxes8,9. They remain aloft for an average of ~3 days10, a time long enough for being transported across oceans and continents11,12,13 until being finally deposited, eventually helped by water condensation and precipitation processes; microbial aerosols themselves can contribute to form clouds and trigger precipitation by serving as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN)14 and ice nuclei (IN)15,16.

Living airborne microorganisms may end up concretizing aerial dispersion by colonizing their new habitat17, provided that they survive their journey from emission to deposition. Bacterial survival is indeed naturally impaired during atmospheric transport18,19, but a fraction remains viable20,21. At high altitude, the peculiar environments offered by cloud droplets are thus regarded in some aspects as temporary microbial habitats, providing water and nutrients to airborne living cells22,23,24. In addition, the detection of low levels of heterotrophy25 raised questions about microbial functioning in cloud water and its potential influence on the chemical reactivity of these complex and dynamic environments24,26. The metabolic functioning of microbial cells in clouds is still albeit unknown, while fundamental for apprehending microbial life conditions during long distance aerial transport and their geochemical and ecological impacts.

Within the last decade, coordinated metagenomics and metatranscriptomics studies provided new insights into microbial ecosystems’ functioning and the relationships that microorganisms maintain with their environment. These were pictured in soil27, ocean28,29, human gut30 and elsewhere31,32. In the atmosphere, though, microbial gene expression and metabolic functioning remain largely unexplored, in part due to low biomass and sampling difficulties. So far, metagenomics confirmed high fungal, bacterial and viral biodiversity33,34,35,36, whereas targeted genomics/transcriptomics towards ribosomal genes supported earlier findings about the maintenance of metabolic activity in aerosols37,38, and in clouds5; Alpha- and Gamma-Proteobacteria in particular were highlighted. Consistently, in atmospheric chamber airborne bacteria were demonstrated to react to the presence of carbon substrate by regulating ribosomal gene expression39.

Here we aimed at specifying microbial activity in clouds. We performed a comparative combined metatranscriptomics/metagenomics analysis to explore their metabolic and physiological functioning, their potential interactions with cloud water chemical environment, and to examine the constraints imposed by cloud environments to living microorganisms. Cloud water samples were collected from puy de Dôme Atmospheric station (1465 m a.s.l., France), and whole metagenomes and metatranscriptomes were amplified and explored for biodiversity and biological functions. Comparative analysis highlighted a diverse biological system driven by prokaryotes. Metabolism was seemingly directed for a large part toward acclimatation to a demanding environment, including elevated oxidants and low temperatures. This gives an unprecedented picture of microbial life conditions in clouds and specifies possible biological impacts on the chemical reactivity.

Material and Methods

Sample collection

Cloud water was collected from the instrumental platform situated on the roof of the meteorological station at the summit of puy de Dôme Mountain (1465 m a.s.l., 45.772°N, 2.9655°E, France). Protocols similar as in Amato et al.5 were used. The volumes of water collected after sampling periods of five consecutive hours were immediately processed within the station’s microbiology facility. Subsamples for total cell counts and chemical analyses were first collected and the remaining volumes were filtered through 0.22 µm porosity (MoBio 14880-50-WF). Filters were then cut in halves, transferred into ca. 5 mL of RNA Later (Sigma-Aldrich, Saint-Louis, MO, USA) and stored at −80 °C until being further processed.

Meteorological data, backward trajectories, cell counts and chemical analyses

Protocols similar as in Amato et al.5 were used for characterizing the samples. Briefly, meteorological data were provided by puy de Dôme’ meteorological station, backward air mass trajectories were generated using HYSPLIT40, ion concentrations were measured by ion chromatography (Dionex, Sunnyvale, CA, USA), and cells counts were performed by flow cytometry (BD FacsCalibur, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) on SYBR-Green stained samples (Molecular Probes Inc., Eugene, OR, USA).

Ice nucleation assay

The concentration of ice nucleating particles (INP) in the cloud water samples were examined by droplet freezing assay, as in Joly et al.41. Freshly collected samples were distributed into volumes of 20 µL in 0.2 mL microtubes and exposed to decreasing temperature from 0 °C to −10 °C in a cryobath (Julabo F34-ED), and the cumulative concentration of INP at each temperature was calculated (see Joly et al., 2014 for details).

Nucleic acids extraction, amplification and sequencing

DNA and RNA were extracted using MoBio PowerWater isolation kits (now Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) following manufacturer’s recommendations, from dedicated filter halves kept at −80 °C in RNA Later. We attempted to generate sequencing libraries directly from DNA extracts and cDNA extracts; these could not be validated by the quality controls due to low amounts of material (0.5–0.7 ng DNA/µL). Hence, untargeted amplification was performed: whole metagenomes (MG) and whole metatranscriptomes (MT) were amplified by multiple displacement amplification (MDA) of genomic DNA and total RNAs, from volumes of 10 µL of the corresponding extracts using REPLI-g Cell WGA & WTA kit (Qiagen).

Tropospheric clouds are among the lowest biomass environments on Earth, and sampling large volumes of cloud water within a short timeframe is still not an option, so the only alternative for accessing the nucleic acid sequences was amplification. Although MDA is known to introduce biases in the relative abundance of sequences in complex samples42, this provided valuable information in low biomass environments such as sediments or permafrost43,44. Shotgun libraries were generated using Nextera XT DNA Sample Preparation Kit. These were controlled for quality on Agilent High Sensitivity microarray, and mixed in an equimolar pool for sequencing (2 × 300 bp paired-end Illumina MiSeq; Genoscreen, Lille, France). Experimental blank controls led to exploitable library only for MT. The corresponding sequence files were deposited to NCBI’s Sequence Read Archive (BioProject ID PRJEB25763) with the sample accession numbers ERS2351639 to ERS2351645.

Sequence processing and data analysis

All sequences were processed using free software and custom Perl scripts, using the regional calcul center Mesocentre Clermont Auvergne (in general 32 CPUs with 128 Go of RAM were used here), and locally under Linux Ubuntu operated computers. Sequences were first quality controlled (FastQC version 0.11.3; Babraham Bioinformatics) and trimmed for removing low quality ends, sequences < 40 bp or containing ambiguous bases using PRINSEQ-LITE45. Mate pairs were assembled using PANDAseq Assembler version 2.846; final sequence length was ~300 bp. Potential contaminant sequences were removed by alignment against the experimental control using BWA-MEM47 and SAMtools48.

Taxonomic annotations of prokaryotes and eukaryotes were obtained using BLASTN49 against the ribosomal database SILVA 119.1 SSURef Nr9950; the best hits with an alignment e-value < 0.01 were recovered. Chloroplasts and mitochondria sequences were manually removed from the analysis.

Functional annotations were performed using BLASTX49 against the protein database UniprotKB51, restricted to cellular organisms (Archaea, Bacteria and Eukaryotes) and viruses. The best hits with an alignment e-value <10−4 were collected. Data were then analyzed using gene ontologies (GO IDs terms defined by the Gene Ontology Consortium)52,53,54 associated with UniprotKB identifiers and using notably the following informatics tools and databases: Protein Information Resource PIR55, REVIGO56, GOSlimViewer57, AmiGO53, and KEGG58,59,60. In total, 2670 to 3373 unique GO terms were found in each cloud water MG or MT dataset.

For comparative analysis, other sequence files were collected from literature studies selected for including both metagenomes and metatranscriptomes (Table S1), and these were reprocessed similarly as our data using our bioinformatic pipeline. When necessary, data were rarefied to ~400,000 sequences to remain consistent between datasets. Rarefaction may have decreased the sensitivity of the intercomparison, but this is acceptable in the frame of our descriptive study looking for large differences originating from multiple features (GO terms), rather than a direct comparison of the abundance of specific sequences61. GO terms represented by ≥0.05% of the sequences in at least one MT dataset were considered (823 GO terms in total; Table S2). Among those, 724 occured in cloud MT and 764 in MG, and 699 were present in both MT and the corresponding MG: 317 of these related to a Molecular Function (MF), 313 to a Biological Process (BP), and 69 to a Cellular Component (CC). Their corresponding rank-abundance in MT and relative abundance respect to MG are shown in Figs S1 and S2. The GO were finally manually classified according to functional categories, and their relative level of expression was assessed through their relative contribution in MT (i.e. %MT), and after normalization to their relative representation in MG (i.e. %MT/%MG). This approach is commonly used in metatranscriptomics studies30,62, and it has the advantage to overcome problems related to unknown gene copy numbers.

Results and Discussion

The main meteorological, chemical and biological characteristics of the cloud water samples are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Main characteristics of the cloud water samples.

Samples were collected at ambient temperatures close to freezing, under moderate to strong winds with bursts up to 14 m/s; liquid water content varied between 0.16 and 0.47 mL m−3. Air masses originated from West (Atlantic Ocean; Fig. S3), and the chemical signature of water samples (pH, dissolved ion concentrations) was consistently typical of “Marine” type clouds at this site63. Total cell concentration was ~2.8 × 103 cells mL−1 of cloud water, i.e. ~4 × 102 to ~9 × 102 cells m−3 of cloud air; this is at the very lower end of microbial biomass usually observed64 confirming the background-type situation (i.e. low influence of Human activities).

Community composition

Biodiversity was assessed from ribosomal sequences; this does not necessarily represent cell number distribution. Eukaryotes largely dominated in metagenomes (MG) (~95% of the ribosome sequences; Fig. 1), as expected from their much higher ribosome gene copy number than prokaryotes: up to thousands copies in eukaryotes versus ~1–15 copies in bacteria65,66. Most were affiliated with Nucletmycea (equiv. Holomycota), Viridiplantae and Stramenopiles-Alveolata-Rhizaria (SAR), i.e. fungi, plants/algaes and planctonic unicellular organisms. Prokaryotes consisted essentially of bacteria, dominated by Proteobacteria, over Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Acidobacteria, Actinobacteria, and Chloroflexi as often in atmospheric samples67. Conversely, prokaryotes sequences were much more abundant in metatranscriptomes (MT) (50.2% ± 10.9% of the ribosome sequences) than they were in MG. Their mean relative representation in MT, with respect to MG, was thus ~20 times greater than that of eukaryotes (5.7 versus 0.26, respectively), suggesting probable higher protein synthesis and metabolic activity27; this emphasized bacteria in particular as the active microbiota of clouds. Based on this ratio, the most active bacterial taxa comprised notably groups related with water environments, like Planctomycetes, Chlorobia and Cyanobacteria, along with bacteria shown previously to maintain metabolic activity in clouds, such as Alpha and BetaProteobacteria5.

Figure 1
figure 1

(A) Mean relative contribution of eukaryotic (dashed) and prokaryotic (clear) taxa to the pool of identified SSU rRNA gene sequences in metagenomes (MG, pink) and in metatranscriptomes (MT, blue). (B) Mean relative distribution between MG and MT of the dominant taxonomic classes, ordered by increasing representation in MT.

Apart from ribosomal sequences, a number of functional genes indicated the presence of viruses. Viruses are frequently reported among aerosols, including potential pathogens3,68. We observed here the presence of dsDNA and ssRNA viruses and retroviruses, known to infect with more or less specificity arthropodes (Baculoviridae, Poxviridae, Picornavirales), plants (Ourmiavirus, Tymovirales), animals and Humans (Herpesviridae, Flaviviridae, Mononegavirales), aquatic organisms like fish and amphibians (Iridoviridae, Phycodnaviridae) or fungi (Hypoviridae).

Functional analysis

In order to examine community functioning, we explored the gene ontologies (GO) associated with identified protein sequences. The relative distribution of GO terms among MG and MT datasets was variable, thus highlighting metabolic requirements within community’s capabilities. Overall, metabolic processes oriented toward energy production (catabolism) and transports dominated (Fig. 2).

Figure 2
figure 2

Main gene ontology terms related with Biological Processes, Molecular Functions and Cellular Components in cloud metatranscriptomes (blue), and in the corresponding metagenomes (red).

Accordingly, among cellular components, membranes and ribosomes were highly represented in MT, relatively to MG. Meanwhile, cellular nucleus and mitochondria tended to be underrepresented in MT compared with MG, supporting prokaryotes as the active microorganisms.

In the absence of reference, the information provided per se by metranscriptomes for examining the microbial life conditions in a particular environment is limited. Hence, since our study of cloud water microbial communities has no counterpart yet in the atmosphere, and with the objective to reveal the specificities and constraints imposed by clouds to living microorganisms, we assessed MT in regard to the corresponding MG29, and we based our interpretation on a comparative analysis between clouds and other environments, obtained from reprocessed literature data selected for including both metagenomes and metatranscriptomes on same samples (see Table S1).

Comparative metatranscriptomics specifies harsh microbial lifestyle in clouds, driven by oxidants and low temperatures

The biological processes exhibited by the cloud microbiota were compared to those observed in other environments using similar approaches and available in literature (see SI for details): crop rhizosphere (n = 3)69, river (Amazon) (n = 2)31, estuary (Columbia river) (n = 2)70, biogas fermenter (n = 1)71, Human gut (n = 2)30, and acid mine drainage (AMD; n = 4)32. Overall, clouds were distinct from the other environments assessed (principal component analysis PCA; Fig. 3), with MT closely related to corresponding MG. In the case of Cloud 3, MG and MT were clearly separated, and MT resembled other known environments such as crop and river. It is not possible to conclude here on the reason(s) for the apparent distinct biological functioning of Cloud 3; it may be related to changes in air mass characteristics (chemical composition; see Table 1), or to other environmental feature like sunrise. Such variations on such a short period of time illustrates the great short-term variability of biodiversity existing in the atmosphere72. Moreover, large short-term variations of the expression of biological functions are regularly reported in other environments like seawater73.

Figure 3
figure 3

Principal component analysis representation of metagenomes (MG) and metatranscriptomes (MT) datasets in clouds (this study) and in other environments (from litterature data, see Table S1 for references and details), based on sequence distribution among the GO terms obtained from identified protein sequences.

The main results of the functional analysis are presented in Fig. 4 and the corresponding data are shown in Table S2; these are to be consulted throughout this section. More details are presented in SI Figures, which are referenced when appropriate. These unique datasets allowed us to draw an unprecedented picture of cloud microbiota’s functioning and of its relationships with its temporary cloud water habitat.

Figure 4
figure 4

Biological processes expressed by cloud communities, compared with other environments (see Table S1 for details and references). Bubble size depicts function’s expression level; as expressed it is equal to 0 for similar representation in MT as in MG, and >0 for greater representation in MT, so only overexpressed functions are visualized. See Table S2 for the complete GO term list and the number of corresponding sequences in each dataset.

Our analysis revealed the expression of biological functions reflecting a challenging environment, largely oriented toward the response to a demanding environment as one can figure: oxidant, cold, and subjected to osmotic variations. These thus seemingly drove many aspects of cell functioning, as depicted here, from carbon metabolism to transports. Living cells indeed deployed multiple processes largely involved in the maintenance of homeostasis and in the response to oxidative stress (Fig. S4). Free radical (superoxide) and oxidant (hydrogen peroxyde) detoxification processes themselves strongly solicited cells through enzymes such as catalase (E.C. 1.11.1.6; GO:0004096), superoxide dismutase (E.C. 1.15.1.1; GO:0004784), peroxiredoxin (E.C. 1.11.1.15; GO:0051920) and peroxidase (E.C. 3.5.2.6; GO:0004601), and antioxidant compound synthesis (glutathione; GO:0006750).

Additionally, transition metal (copper and iron) transport was notable (Fig. S5); these participate to various oxidant detoxification enzymatic reactions74,75. Noteworthy, siderophore synthesis and transport processes were detected; these are high affinity iron complexing compounds released by cells in their surrounding when deficient, notably by numerous Pseudomonas species isolated from clouds76.

The implication of membranes, ribosomes and protein complexes is confirmed in the comparative analysis (Fig. S6). Elevated transmembrane transports and binding activities suggested important interactions between cells and their direct surroundings. The respective phosphorylation level stimuli and signals transduction systems from the environment to cell’s inside, guenine cell’ sensing “organs”77, indicated that mostly bacteria, but not only, were attempting to respond/acclimate to their environment (MAPK cascades in eukaryotes; GO:000016578; and phosphorelay systems in bacteria; GO:0000155 and GO:000016079) (Fig. S4). The high calcium transport activity observed was potentially acting in signal transduction80.

Despite temperatures close to freezing during sampling, translational activity, i.e. protein synthesis was maintained (Fig. S7). This is consistent with the reported capacity of cloud microbial communities to uptake 14C labelled leucine at 0 °C25. In all likelihood ammonium, abundant in the samples (Table S1), was taken up from clouds water and fed amino-acid metabolism with nitrogen (Fig. S5)81. This was oriented toward valine, glycine, glutamate and glutamine metabolisms; in addition of permitting new proteins synthesis implied by metabolic arrangements, glycine and glutamate are constituents of gluthathione, the main intracellular redox regulator. Glutamine and glutamate have a central role in nitrogen and amino-acid metabolisms, which they connect with central metabolism (TCA or glyoxylate cycles). Metabolomic profiling of the bacterium P. syringae isolated from clouds highlighted increased concentration of these amino-acids in cells exposed to cold82.

The synthesis of compatible solutes like trehalose (GO:0005992) or glycine betaine, from glycine metabolism, allowed cells to endure cold and osmotic variations83,84. Functions of lipid metabolism and transport indicated other responses to cold: membrane synthesis and modifications. High activities of glycerol ether, steroid, phospholipid and unsaturated fatty acid metabolisms were indeed occurring (Fig. S8), with enzymes such as stearoyl-CoA desaturase (E.C.1.14.19.1; GO:0004768), along with branched-chain amino-acid (BCAA) biosynthetic processes (GO:0009082) and phospholipid transport (Fig. S5). Adjustments (increase) of fatty acids unsaturation level in membrane for maintaining fluidity is a well known acclimatation to cold in Gram-negative bacteria85, while Gram-positive bacteria rather adjust the branching of their branched-chain fatty acids, involving BCAA biosynthesis86.

Laboratory investigations of cloud microbial isolates indicated that H2O2, at its cloud water concentration of < ~0.1 mM, was not altering microbial survival87. When exposed to cold, bacteria such as Pseudomonas syringae exhibit many simultaneous metabolic regulations similar as those observed here, and imparting increased tolerance to changing environmental conditions: metabolism rerouting, compatible solutes and antioxidants synthesis, membrane modifications or again increased biochemical energy production82.

These defenses and acclimatation mechanisms were associated with marked activities of energy transducer and redox cofactor synthesis (riboflavin, NAD and ATP, through proton translocation; Fig. S9). These attested of a substantial demand of energy for feeding the biosynthetic pathways and physiological responses ongoing here88. Accordingly, the cell machineries were likely essentially fueled by metabolic pathways including glyoxylate, tricarboxylic acids (TCA) and pentose phosphate cycles (Fig. S8). These are known to greatly contribute to cell homeostasis and fight oxidants, consistently with the other functions observed. In clouds, indeed, ATP concentration was reported to vary in relation with that of H2O2 suggesting metabolic regulations linked with oxidative stress response89.

TCA cycle is a central pathway common to all aerobic organisms and dedicated to the production of energy and reducing power from acetyl moieties (acetyl-CoA). This corresponds to the final oxydation steps of carbohydrates, lipids and amino-acids into CO2. Numerous key enzymes of the TCA cycle were found overexpressed here, including succinate dehydrogenase, citrate synthase, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase (ATP), and pyruvate dehydrogenase (Fig. S10). The glyoxylate cycle is a shortened alternative to the TCA cycle sharing several steps with it, but avoiding carbon dissimilation for allowing biomass production from C2 substrates like acetate90. Glyoxylate pathway is notably used for fatty acid synthesis, and it was found to be connected with the response to cold and oxidative stress in several Alpha- and Gamma-proteobacteria (Caulobacter, Colwellia, Pseudoalteromonas, Pseudomonas, Psychrobacter, Rhizobium and others)91,92,93,94. Several enzymes specific of this pathway were detected at high level in MT, including malate synthase and isocitrate lyase (Fig. S11). The pentose phosphate shunt is a major pathway involved in the regulation of cell redox homeostasis, in addition to having a central role in the biosynthesis of amino acids and RNA precursors. This leads to the production and regeneration of NADPH95,96, the redox cofactor required for recycling the main cell’s antioxidant machinery intermediate: gluthathione. Related enzymes such as ribose phosphate diphosphokinase, fructose-bisphosphate aldolase phosphogluconate dehydrogenase (NADP + dependent, decarboxylating) and again fructose 1,6-bisphosphate 1-phosphatase (Fig. S12) were found overexpressed, along with, accordingly, NADP binding activity (GO:0050661).

Other remarkable carbon metabolic pathways included glucose metabolic processes and polysaccharide synthesis (Fig. S8). This was possibly linked with the synthesis of exopolysaccharides (EPS), known to protect cells from environmental variations and dessication97 and emphasized in cloud bacteria isolates98, as were biosurfactants99, and/or of adhesins, compounds involved in cell adhesion and aggregation (GO:0007155)100. The production of such compounds could be beneficial for the survival of airborne living cells101,102. The carbon routes detected overexpressed in clouds based on the identification of specific enzymes are summarized in Fig. S13.

Finally, this analysis can give hints about the potential carbon substrates uptaken by microorganisms in cloud water. Although the exact substrate(s) remain(s) undetermined here, biological processes involving one-carbon compounds (GO:0006730) were occuring (Fig. S8). Tetrahydrofolate (THF) synthesis (GO:0046654) notably was high; it acts as a C1 metabolism cofactor in plants and microorganisms, allowing methylotrophy for biosynthetic processes103. In the atmosphere, C1 compounds are among the most abundant carbon compounds (e.g.63); they are end-products of organic compounds oxidation before their complete mineralization into CO2. Laboratory incubation of cloud water previously demonstrated a biological role in their degradation26, and viable facultative methylotrophic bacteria like Pseudomonas spp. or Methylobacterium spp. are frequently detected in atmospheric samples5,22,24.

Potential implications for atmospheric chemical and physical processes

Clouds are highly dynamic environments, with extremely complex chemistry and microphysics that have huge impacts on atmosphere and climate, yet far from being well known and understood104,105,106. The current view in cloud water chemistry is that this is driven by free radicals, generated by sources including direct photolysis of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), its dissolution from the surrounding gas phase, and its reactivity with transition metals and nitrate ions107.

Biological particles and activity were regularly proposed as probably involved in processes such as cloud formation14, precipitation triggering108 and chemical reactivity26. Figure 5 illustrates the biological processes identified here as taking place in clouds and potentially affecting chemistry and physics. First, our results support earlier suggestions based on laboratory observations that biological activity may regulate, at least in part, the oxidant and radical concentrations in clouds26 and contribute to the degradation of carbon compounds including, but not limited to, formate, formaldehyde, acetate and succinate109,110,111. In addition, metals were shown to be largely complexed by undefined organic compounds in atmospheric water, thus limiting their chemical availability112. Such strong complexants as siderophores, which the synthesis is evidenced here, are likely involved113.

Figure 5
figure 5

Schematic summary of the main probable impacts of microbial activity on cloud processes, based on coordinated metagenomics/metatranscriptomics. Biological processes and their targets are indicated by green arrows, while red arrows indicate abiotic processes. EPS: Exopolysaccharide; SOA: Secondary organic aerosol.

Beside this, the abundance and distribution of amino-acids in cloud water were examined earlier at the same sampling site114. Total amino-acids amounted ~3 µM (~9% of the dissolved OC), and the distribution of the 16 amino-acids detected and quantified was not equimolar, but it was dominated by tryptophane, isoleucine, and phenylalanine. Here we observed overexpression of tryptophane and isoleucine biosynthesic pathways, indicating that cloudborne microorganisms themselves could be responsible for the uneven distribution of amino-acids observed.

The activity of polysaccharide synthesis possibly corresponded to biosurfactants and exopolysaccharides (EPS). The former can influence cloud formation and exchanges between liquid and gas phases115, whereas EPS scavenge oxidants116, complex metals117, and represent potential secondary organic aerosols once cloud dissipates97.

Finally, ice nucleation (IN), in particular at temperatures >−10 °C, i.e. catalyzed by biological entities, is a topic of interest in atmospheric sciences as this influences precipitation118. There is no doubt on the presence of low numbers of ice nucleating bacteria in clouds119. Here, IN assays on the samples demonstrated freezing between −6 °C and −7 °C, with up to >200 IN particles mL−1 of water at −8 °C (Fig. S14). This is relatively high compared with previous observations and totally compatible with bacterial IN activity41; however, no known gene coding for IN activity was observed; detecting specific signature of such rare microbial phenotypes or traits in nucleic acids requires targeted methods120.

In conclusion, we provided here the first molecular picture of microbial living conditions in the top layer of the biosphere constituted by clouds. As samples were collected during the night, we did not detect photosynthetic activity, but the presence of diverse phototrophic organisms indicates that this potentially occurs. A different picture could have been drawn under different environmental configuration like during the day, in the case of pollution events from anthropogenic or natural emissions, under warmer/colder conditions etc, which then remain to be explored. Numerous aspects led us to affirm that cloud droplets are demanding habitats for living cells, challenged to respond or acclimate to oxidative stress, low temperatures and osmotic variations. Thus, specific central metabolic routes directed toward the management of oxidants were preferred for producing the energy required for homeostatis, synthesis of protective compounds and physiological rearrangements. In microbial evolution, atmospheric dispersal could have promoted the maintenance and diversification of such phenotypes by exerting strong selection pressure on inapt individuals, while allowing others to spread over the planet. Furthermore, oxidants are considered as the main drivers of atmospheric chemistry. Their regulation in cloud water by the multiple ways deployed by living microorganisms clearly positions microbial cells as central actors, to some extent, of cloud chemical reactivity. The results also suggest biomass and biochemical energy production from substrates including small carbon compounds (C1 and C2, succinate), and ammonium as the source of nitrogen.

Our untargeted metatranscriptomic approach gave many insights into the functioning of microbial cells within cloud droplets, their physiological traits and potential impacts. This specified biological functions of interest, and this should help identifying specific target genes for futures investigations. The low biomass imposed a step of DNA amplification by MDA. This necessarily distorted to some extent the view of the actual nucleic acid content of the samples. Significant progress to a better evaluation of biological functions expression levels will consist of absolute quantifications of genes and transcripts, i.e. without amplification step. Furthermore, as gene expression cannot be directly related with any quantification of activity, activity measurements remain necessary to determine the actual biological imprint on clouds, and in order to take into account posttranscriptional regulations, potentially caused by environmental factors.

Data Availability

The sequence filesgenerated in this study were deposited to NCBI’s Sequence Read Archive (BioProject ID PRJEB25763) with the sample accession numbers ERS2351639 to ERS2351645.

References

  1. Amato, P. et al. Main Biological Aerosols, Specificities, Abundance, and Diversity. In Microbiology of Aerosols (eds Delort, A.-M. & Amato, P.) 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119132318.ch1a (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2017).

  2. Brodie, E. L. et al. Urban aerosols harbor diverse and dynamic bacterial populations. PNAS 104, 299–304 (2007).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Courault, D. et al. Assessment and risk modeling of airborne enteric viruses emitted from wastewater reused for irrigation. Sci. Total Environ. 592, 512–526 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bowers, R. M., McLetchie, S., Knight, R. & Fierer, N. Spatial variability in airborne bacterial communities across land-use types and their relationship to the bacterial communities of potential source environments. ISME J 5, 601–612 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Amato, P. et al. Active microorganisms thrive among extremely diverse communities in cloud water. PLOS ONE 12, e0182869 (2017).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Aller, J. Y., Kuznetsova, M. R., Jahns, C. J. & Kemp, P. F. The sea surface microlayer as a source of viral and bacterial enrichment in marine aerosols. Journal of Aerosol Science 36, 801–812 (2005).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Joung, Y. S., Ge, Z. & Buie, C. R. Bioaerosol generation by raindrops on soil. Nature Communications 8, 14668 (2017).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brunet, Y. et al. A relaxed-eddy accumulation system for measuring microbial emission fluxes from the vegetation. In (American Association for Aerosol Research., 2013).

  9. Carotenuto, F. et al. Measurements and modeling of surface–atmosphere exchange of microorganisms in Mediterranean grassland. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 17, 14919–14936 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Burrows, S. M. et al. Bacteria in the global atmosphere – Part 2: Modeling of emissions and transport between different ecosystems. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 9, 9281–9297 (2009).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Griffin, D. w., Gonzalez-Martin, C., Hoose, C. & Smith, D. J. Global-Scale Atmospheric Dispersion of Microorganisms. In Microbiology of Aerosols (eds Delort, A.-M. & Amato, P.) 155–194, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119132318.ch2c (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2017).

  12. Šantl-Temkiv, T., Gosewinkel, U., Starnawski, P., Lever, M. & Finster, K. Aeolian dispersal of bacteria in southwest Greenland: their sources, abundance, diversity and physiological states. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 94 (2018).

  13. Barberán, A. et al. Continental-scale distributions of dust-associated bacteria and fungi. PNAS 112, 5756–5761 (2015).

    ADS  PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bauer, H. et al. Airborne bacteria as cloud condensation nuclei. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (19842012) 108, (2003).

  15. Morris, C. E., Georgakopoulos, D. G. & Sands, D. C. Ice nucleation active bacteria and their potential role in precipitation. Journal de Physique IV (Proceedings) 121, 87–103 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Creamean, J. M. et al. Dust and Biological Aerosols from the Sahara and Asia Influence Precipitation in the Western U.S. Science 339, 1572–1578 (2013).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Morris, C. E. & Sands, D. C. Impacts of microbial aerosols on natural and agro-ecosystems: immigration, invasions and their consequences. In Microbiology of aerosols (Delort, A. M. & Amato, P.) (2017).

  18. Smith, D. J., Griffin, D. W., McPeters, R. D., Ward, P. D. & Schuerger, A. C. Microbial survival in the stratosphere and implications for global dispersal. Aerobiologia 27, 319–332 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Amato, P. et al. Survival and ice nucleation activity of bacteria as aerosols in a cloud simulation chamber. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 15, 6455–6465 (2015).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hill, K. A. et al. Processing of atmospheric nitrogen by clouds above a forest environment. J. Geophys. Res. 112, D11301 (2007).

    ADS  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hara, K. & Zhang, D. Bacterial abundance and viability in long-range transported dust. Atmospheric Environment 47, 20–25 (2012).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Šantl-Temkiv, T., Finster, K., Hansen, B. M., Nielsen, N. W. & Karlson, U. G. The microbial diversity of a storm cloud as assessed by hailstones. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 81, 684–695 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fuzzi, S., Mandrioli, P. & Perfetto, A. Fog droplets—an atmospheric source of secondary biological aerosol particles. Atmospheric Environment 31, 287–290 (1997).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Amato, P. et al. A fate for organic acids, formaldehyde and methanol in cloud water: their biotransformation by micro-organisms. Atmos. Chem. Phys 7, 4159–4169 (2007).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sattler, B., Puxbaum, H. & Psenner, R. Bacterial growth in supercooled cloud droplets. Geophysical Research Letters 28, 239–242 (2001).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Vaïtilingom, M. et al. Potential impact of microbial activity on the oxidant capacity and organic carbon budget in clouds. PNAS 110, 559–564 (2013).

    ADS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Baldrian, P. et al. Active and total microbial communities in forest soil are largely different and highly stratified during decomposition. ISME J 6, 248–258 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gifford, S. M., Sharma, S., Rinta-Kanto, J. M. & Moran, M. A. Quantitative analysis of a deeply sequenced marine microbial metatranscriptome. The ISME Journal 5, 461–472 (2011).

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gilbert, J. A. et al. Detection of Large Numbers of Novel Sequences in the Metatranscriptomes of Complex Marine Microbial Communities. PLOS ONE 3, e3042 (2008).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Franzosa, E. A. et al. Relating the metatranscriptome and metagenome of the human gut. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, E2329–2338 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Satinsky, B. M. et al. The Amazon continuum dataset: quantitative metagenomic and metatranscriptomic inventories of the Amazon River plume, June 2010. Microbiome 2, 17 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Chen, L. et al. Comparative metagenomic and metatranscriptomic analyses of microbial communities in acid mine drainage. The ISME Journal 9, 1579–1592 (2015).

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Be, N. A. et al. Metagenomic analysis of the airborne environment in urban spaces. Microb. Ecol. 69, 346–355 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Whon, T. W. et al. Metagenomic characterization of airborne viral DNA diversity in the near-surface atmosphere. J. Virol. 86, 8221–8231 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Yooseph, S. et al. A Metagenomic Framework for the Study of Airborne Microbial Communities. PLOS ONE 8, e81862 (2013).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Xu, C. et al. Investigation of diverse bacteria in cloud water at Mt. Tai, China. Science of The Total Environment 580, 258–265 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Klein, A. M., Bohannan, B. J. M., Jaffe, D. A., Levin, D. A. & Green, J. L. Molecular Evidence for Metabolically Active Bacteria in the Atmosphere. Front. Microbiol. 772, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.00772 (2016).

  38. Womack, A. M. et al. Characterization of active and total fungal communities in the atmosphere over the Amazon rainforest. Biogeosciences 12, 6337–6349 (2015).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Krumins, V., Mainelis, G., Kerkhof, L. J. & Fennell, D. E. Substrate-Dependent rRNA Production in an Airborne Bacterium. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 1, 376–381 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Draxler, R. R. & Rolph, G. D. HYSPLIT (HYbrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory) Model access via NOAA ARL READY Website, http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT.php, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD (2013).

  41. Joly, M. et al. Quantification of ice nuclei active at near 0 °C temperatures in low-altitude clouds at the Puy de Dôme atmospheric station. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 14, 8185–8195 (2014).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Yilmaz, S., Allgaier, M. & Hugenholtz, P. Multiple displacement amplification compromises quantitative analysis of metagenomes. Nature Methods 7, 943–944 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Abulencia, C. B. et al. Environmental Whole-Genome Amplification To Access Microbial Populations in Contaminated Sediments. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72, 3291–3301 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Yergeau, E., Hogues, H., Whyte, L. G. & Greer, C. W. The functional potential of high Arctic permafrost revealed by metagenomic sequencing, qPCR and microarray analyses. The ISME Journal 4, 1206–1214 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Schmieder, R. & Edwards, R. Quality control and preprocessing of metagenomic datasets. Bioinformatics 27, 863–864 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Masella, A. P., Bartram, A. K., Truszkowski, J. M., Brown, D. G. & Neufeld, J. D. PANDAseq: paired-end assembler for illumina sequences. BMC Bioinformatics 13, 31 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. arXiv:1303.3997 [q-bio] (2013).

  48. Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Altschul, S. F. et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 25, 3389–3402 (1997).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Quast, C. et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res 41, D590–D596 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Pundir, S., Martin, M. J. & O’Donovan, C. UniProt Protein Knowledgebase. In Protein Bioinformatics 41–55, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6783-4_2 (Humana Press, New York, NY, 2017).

  52. Ashburner, M. et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat. Genet. 25, 25–29 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Carbon, S. et al. AmiGO: online access to ontology and annotation data. Bioinformatics 25, 288–289 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Expansion of the Gene Ontology knowledgebase and resources. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D331–D338 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Wu, C. H. et al. The Protein Information Resource. Nucleic Acids Res 31, 345–347 (2003).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Supek, F., Bošnjak, M., Škunca, N. & Šmuc, T. REVIGO Summarizes and Visualizes Long Lists of Gene Ontology Terms. PLOS ONE 6, e21800 (2011).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  57. McCarthy, F. M. et al. AgBase: a functional genomics resource for agriculture. BMC Genomics 7, 229 (2006).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Kanehisa, M. & Goto, S. KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 27–30 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Kanehisa, M., Sato, Y., Kawashima, M., Furumichi, M. & Tanabe, M. KEGG as a reference resource for gene and protein annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, D457–462 (2016).

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Kanehisa, M., Furumichi, M., Tanabe, M., Sato, Y. & Morishima, K. KEGG: new perspectives on genomes, pathways, diseases and drugs. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D353–D361 (2017).

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. Waste Not, Want Not: Why Rarefying Microbiome Data Is Inadmissible. PLOS Computational Biology 10, e1003531 (2014).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Stewart, F. J., Ulloa, O. & DeLong, E. F. Microbial metatranscriptomics in a permanent marine oxygen minimum zone. Environmental Microbiology 14, 23–40 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Deguillaume, L. et al. Classification of clouds sampled at the puy de Dôme (France) based on 10 yr of monitoring of their physicochemical properties. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 14, 1485–1506 (2014).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Vaïtilingom, M. et al. Long-term features of cloud microbiology at the puy de Dôme (France). Atmospheric Environment 56, 88–100 (2012).

    ADS  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Torres-Machorro, A. L., Hernández, R., Cevallos, A. M. & López-Villaseñor, I. Ribosomal RNA genes in eukaryotic microorganisms: witnesses of phylogeny? FEMS Microbiology Reviews 34, 59–86 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Stoddard, S. F., Smith, B. J., Hein, R., Roller, B. R. K. & Schmidt, T. M. rrnDB: improved tools for interpreting rRNA gene abundance in bacteria and archaea and a new foundation for future development. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, D593–598 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Després, V. R. et al. Primary biological aerosol particles in the atmosphere: a review. Tellus B 64 (2012).

  68. Verreault, D., Moineau, S. & Duchaine, C. Methods for Sampling of Airborne Viruses. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 72, 413–444 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Guo, J. Rhizosphere metagenomics of three biofuel crops. (Michigan State University, 2016).

  70. Fortunato, C. S. & Crump, B. C. Microbial Gene Abundance and Expression Patterns across a River to Ocean Salinity Gradient. PLOS ONE 10, e0140578 (2015).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Bremges, A. et al. Deeply sequenced metagenome and metatranscriptome of a biogas-producing microbial community from an agricultural production-scale biogas plant. GigaScience 4, 33 (2015).

  72. Fierer, N. et al. Short-Term Temporal Variability in Airborne Bacterial and Fungal Populations. Appl Environ Microbiol 74, 200–207 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Ottesen, E. A. et al. Pattern and synchrony of gene expression among sympatric marine microbial populations. PNAS 110, E488–E497 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Arredondo, M. & Núñez, M. T. Iron and copper metabolism. Molecular Aspects of Medicine 26, 313–327 (2005).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Ma, Z., Jacobsen, F. E. & Giedroc, D. P. Coordination Chemistry of Bacterial Metal Transport and Sensing. Chemical Reviews 109, 4644–4681 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Vinatier, V. et al. Siderophores in Cloud Waters and Potential Impact on Atmospheric Chemistry: Production by Microorganisms Isolated at the Puy de Dôme Station. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 9315–9323 (2016).

  77. Gunn, J. S. & Richards, S. M. Recognition and Integration of Multiple Environmental Signals by the Bacterial Sensor Kinase PhoQ. Cell Host & Microbe 1, 163–165 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Elion, E. A. Methods for analyzing MAPK cascades. Methods 40, 207–208 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Hoch, J. A. Two-component and phosphorelay signal transduction. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 3, 165–170 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Dominguez, D. C. Calcium signalling in bacteria. Mol. Microbiol. 54, 291–297 (2004).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  81. von Wirén, N. & Merrick, M. Regulation and function of ammonium carriers in bacteria, fungi, and plants. In Molecular Mechanisms Controlling Transmembrane Transport 9, 95–120 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2004).

  82. Jousse, C. et al. Metabolomic study of the response to cold shock in a strain of Pseudomonas syringae isolated from cloud water. Metabolomics 14, 11 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Ko, R., Smith, L. T. & Smith, G. M. Glycine betaine confers enhanced osmotolerance and cryotolerance on Listeria monocytogenes. J Bacteriol 176, 426–431 (1994).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Kempf, B. & Bremer, E. Uptake and synthesis of compatible solutes as microbial stress responses to high-osmolality environments. Arch. Microbiol. 170, 319–330 (1998).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Feller, G. & Gerday, C. Psychrophilic enzymes: hot topics in cold adaptation. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 1, 200–208 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Kaneda, T. Function, and Taxonomic Significancet. Microbiol Rev. 55, 15 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  87. Joly, M. et al. Survival of microbial isolates from clouds toward simulated atmospheric stress factors. Atmospheric Environment 117, 92–98 (2015).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Welch, W. J. How Cells Respond to Stress. Scientific American 268, 56–64 (1993).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Wirgot, N., Vinatier, V., Deguillaume, L., Sancelme, M. & Delort, A.-M. H2O2 modulates the energetic metabolism of the cloud microbiome. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 17, 14841–14851 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Cronan, J. J. & Laporte, D. Tricarboxylic Acid Cycle and Glyoxylate Bypass. EcoSal Plus 1 (2005).

  91. Santos, J. S., da Silva, C. A. P. T., Balhesteros, H., Lourenço, R. F. & Marques, M. V. CspC regulates the expression of the glyoxylate cycle genes at stationary phase in Caulobacter. BMC Genomics 16, 638 (2015).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Watanabe, S., Yamaoka, N., Fukunaga, N. & Takada, Y. Purification and characterization of a cold-adapted isocitrate lyase and expression analysis of the cold-inducible isocitrate lyase gene from the psychrophilic bacterium Colwellia psychrerythraea. Extremophiles 6, 397–405 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Piette, F. et al. Proteomics of life at low temperatures: trigger factor is the primary chaperone in the Antarctic bacterium Pseudoalteromonas haloplanktis TAC125. Mol. Microbiol. 76, 120–132 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Ahn, S., Jung, J., Jang, I.-A., Madsen, E. L. & Park, W. Role of Glyoxylate Shunt in Oxidative Stress Response. J. Biol. Chem. 291, 11928–11938 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Stincone, A. et al. The return of metabolism: biochemistry and physiology of the pentose phosphate pathway. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 90, 927–963 (2015).

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Singh, R., Lemire, J., Mailloux, R. J. & Appanna, V. D. A Novel Strategy Involved Anti-Oxidative Defense: The Conversion of NADH into NADPH by a Metabolic Network. PLOS ONE 3, e2682 (2008).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Kumar, A. S., Mody, K. & Jha, B. Bacterial exopolysaccharides – a perception. Journal of Basic Microbiology 47, 103–117 (2007).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Matulová, M., Husárová, S., Capek, P., Sancelme, M. & Delort, A.-M. Biotransformation of Various Saccharides and Production of Exopolymeric Substances by Cloud-Borne Bacillus sp. 3B6. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 14238–14247 (2014).

    ADS  PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Renard, P. et al. Screening of cloud microorganisms isolated at the Puy de Dôme (France) station for the production of biosurfactants. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 16, 12347–12358 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Berne, C., Ducret, A., Hardy, G. G. & Brun, Y. V. Adhesins involved in attachment to abiotic surfaces by Gram-negative bacteria. Microbiol Spectr 3 (2015).

  101. Monier, J.-M. & Lindow, S. E. Differential survival of solitary and aggregated bacterial cells promotes aggregate formation on leaf surfaces. PNAS 100, 15977–15982 (2003).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Hoppe, H.-G. Attachment of Bacteria: Advantage or Disadvantage for Survival in the Aquatic Environment. In Microbial Adhesion and Aggregation, 283–301, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-70137-5_19 (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1984).

  103. Vorholt, J. A. Cofactor-dependent pathways of formaldehyde oxidation in methylotrophic bacteria. Arch Microbiol 178, 239–249 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Herrmann, H. et al. Tropospheric Aqueous-Phase Chemistry: Kinetics, Mechanisms, and Its Coupling to a Changing Gas Phase. Chemical Reviews 115, 4259–4334 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Boucher, O. et al. Clouds and aerosols. In Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Stocker, T. F. et al.) (2013).

  106. Ervens, B. Modeling the Processing of Aerosol and Trace Gases in Clouds and Fogs. Chem. Rev. 115, 4157–4198 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Bianco, A. et al. A better understanding of hydroxyl radical photochemical sources in cloud waters collected at the puy de Dôme station – experimental versus modelled formation rates. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 15, 9191–9202 (2015).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Morris, C. E. et al. Microbiology and atmospheric processes: research challenges concerning the impact of airborne micro-organisms on the atmosphere and climate. Biogeosciences 8, 17–25 (2011).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Herlihy, L. J., Galloway, J. N. & Mills, A. L. Bacterial utilization of formic and acetic acid in rainwater. Atmospheric Environment 21, 2397–2402 (1987).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Šantl-Temkiv, T., Finster, K., Hansen, B. M., Pašić, L. & Karlson, U. G. Viable methanotrophic bacteria enriched from air and rain can oxidize methane at cloud-like conditions. Aerobiologia 29, 373–384 (2013).

  111. Amato, P. et al. Microbial population in cloud water at the Puy de Dôme: Implications for the chemistry of clouds. Atmospheric Environment 39, 4143–4153 (2005).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Parazols, M. et al. Speciation and role of iron in cloud droplets at the puy de Dôme station. J Atmos Chem 54, 267–281 (2006).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Passananti, M., Vinatier, V., Delort, A.-M., Mailhot, G. & Brigante, M. Siderophores in Cloud Waters and Potential Impact on Atmospheric Chemistry: Photoreactivity of Iron Complexes under Sun-Simulated Conditions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 9324–9332 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Bianco, A., Voyard, G., Deguillaume, L., Mailhot, G. & Brigante, M. Improving the characterization of dissolved organic carbon in cloud water: Amino acids and their impact on the oxidant capacity. Scientific Reports 6 (2016).

  115. Noziere, B. Don’t forget the surface. Science 351, 1396–1397 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Kodali, V. P. & Sen, R. Antioxidant and free radical scavenging activities of an exopolysaccharide from a probiotic bacterium. Biotechnology Journal 3, 245–251 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Loaëc, M., Olier, R. & Guezennec, J. Uptake of lead, cadmium and zinc by a novel bacterial exopolysaccharide. Water Research 31, 1171–1179 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Hoose, C. & Möhler, O. Heterogeneous ice nucleation on atmospheric aerosols: a review of results from laboratory experiments. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12, 9817–9854 (2012).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Joly, M. et al. Ice nucleation activity of bacteria isolated from cloud water. Atmospheric Environment 70, 392–400 (2013).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Hill, T. C. J. et al. Measurement of Ice Nucleation-Active Bacteria on Plants and in Precipitation by Quantitative PCR. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 80, 1256–1267 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank in particular L. Nauton for help with informatics, J.-M. Pichon for meteorological data, F. Enault and B. Ervens for constructive comments on manuscript, and G. Lefebvre for language correction. Two anonymous reviewers are also acknowledged for their constructive remarks. This project was funded by CNRS EC2CO (MicrobiEN) program, “FONCOMIC” project attributed to PA. MJ and LB were hired on the projects ANR-15-CE01-0002 (“INHALE”) and ANR-DFG-14-CE35-005-02 (“CHLOROFILTER”), respectively.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

P.A. conceptualized this study; P.A. and L.D. performed field work; P.A. analyzed the samples and did the experimental work; P.A., L.B., M.J. and B.P. analyzed the data; P.A., L.B., M.J., L.D. and A.M.D. wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pierre Amato.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amato, P., Besaury, L., Joly, M. et al. Metatranscriptomic exploration of microbial functioning in clouds. Sci Rep 9, 4383 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41032-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41032-4

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing