Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2E9, Canada.
Biol Direct. 2011 Nov 10;6:58. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-6-58.
A few major discoveries have influenced how ecologists and evolutionists study microbes. Here, in the format of an interview, we answer questions that directly relate to how these discoveries are perceived in these two branches of microbiology, and how they have impacted on both scientific thinking and methodology.The first question is "What has been the influence of the 'Universal Tree of Life' based on molecular markers?" For evolutionists, the tree was a tool to understand the past of known (cultured) organisms, mapping the invention of various physiologies on the evolutionary history of microbes. For ecologists the tree was a guide to discover the current diversity of unknown (uncultured) organisms, without much knowledge of their physiology.The second question we ask is "What was the impact of discovering frequent lateral gene transfer among microbes?" In evolutionary microbiology, frequent lateral gene transfer (LGT) made a simple description of relationships between organisms impossible, and for microbial ecologists, functions could not be easily linked to specific genotypes. Both fields initially resisted LGT, but methods or topics of inquiry were eventually changed in one to incorporate LGT in its theoretical models (evolution) and in the other to achieve its goals despite that phenomenon (ecology).The third and last question we ask is "What are the implications of the unexpected extent of diversity?" The variation in the extent of diversity between organisms invalidated the universality of species definitions based on molecular criteria, a major obstacle to the adaptation of models developed for the study of macroscopic eukaryotes to evolutionary microbiology. This issue has not overtly affected microbial ecology, as it had already abandoned species in favor of the more flexible operational taxonomic units. This field is nonetheless moving away from traditional methods to measure diversity, as they do not provide enough resolution to uncover what lies below the species level.The answers of the evolutionary microbiologist and microbial ecologist to these three questions illustrate differences in their theoretical frameworks. These differences mean that both fields can react quite distinctly to the same discovery, incorporating it with more or less difficulty in their scientific practice.
一些重大的发现影响了生态学家和进化生物学家研究微生物的方式。在这里,我们以访谈的形式回答了一些直接与这两个微生物学分支领域对这些发现的看法以及这些发现对科学思维和方法论的影响相关的问题。第一个问题是:“基于分子标记的‘普遍生命之树’有什么影响?”对于进化生物学家来说,该树是了解已知(培养)生物过去的工具,将各种生理机能的发明映射到微生物的进化历史上。对于生态学家来说,该树是发现未知(未培养)生物当前多样性的指南,而对其生理学的了解甚少。我们要问的第二个问题是:“发现微生物之间频繁的水平基因转移有什么影响?”在进化微生物学中,频繁的水平基因转移(LGT)使得对生物体之间关系的简单描述变得不可能,而对于微生物生态学家来说,功能不能轻易地与特定基因型联系起来。这两个领域最初都抵制 LGT,但最终还是改变了方法或研究主题,一个是在理论模型(进化)中纳入 LGT,另一个是尽管存在这种现象(生态学),仍要实现其目标。我们要问的第三个也是最后一个问题是:“多样性的程度出乎意料,这意味着什么?”生物多样性程度的变化使基于分子标准的物种定义的普遍性失效,这是将为研究宏观真核生物而开发的模型应用于进化微生物学的主要障碍。这个问题并没有明显影响微生物生态学,因为它已经放弃了物种,转而采用更灵活的操作分类单位。该领域尽管如此,正在远离传统的多样性测量方法,因为它们不能提供足够的分辨率来揭示物种以下的层次。进化微生物学家和微生物生态学家对这三个问题的回答说明了他们理论框架的差异。这些差异意味着两个领域可以对同一发现做出非常不同的反应,在将其纳入科学实践时会遇到或多或少的困难。