Abstract
All metals are toxic at high concentrations and consequently their intracellular concentrations must be regulated. Extremely acidophilic microorganisms have an optimum growth of pH <3 and proliferate in natural and anthropogenic low pH environments. Some acidophiles are involved in the catalysis of sulfide mineral dissolution, resulting in high concentrations of metals in solution. Acidophiles are often described as highly metal resistant via mechanisms such as multiple and/or more efficient active resistance systems than are present in neutrophiles. However, this is not the case for all acidophiles and we contend that their growth in high metal concentrations is partially due to an intrinsic tolerance as a consequence of the environment in which they live. In this perspective, we highlight metal tolerance via complexation of free metals by sulfate ions and passive tolerance to metal influx via an internal positive cytoplasmic transmembrane potential. These tolerance mechanisms have been largely ignored in past studies of acidophile growth in the presence of metals and should be taken into account.
INTRODUCTION
Microorganisms utilize metals as structural components of biomolecules, as cofactors in reversible oxidation/reduction reactions and in electron transfer chains during energy conservation. However, metals can become toxic if their intracellular concentrations are too high. Therefore, metal (and metalloid) homeostasis and resistance systems are required to maintain optimal intracellular metal concentrations ().
Acidophilic microorganisms (optimal growth pH <3) often grow in metal rich environments such as acid sulfate soils containing iron sulfides () and milieus associated with metal sulfide mining (). As many metals are more soluble at acidic pH, acidophiles are typically exposed to high metal concentrations and can survive in ≤1000-fold higher amounts than neutrophilic microorganisms (). As a consequence, they are often described as highly metal resistant and that they have multiple and/or more efficient active resistance systems than are present in neutrophiles. However, some acidophiles do not appear to have more metal resistance genes and we contend that their growth in high metal concentrations is partially due to an intrinsic tolerance as a consequence of the environment in which they live.
ACIDOPHILE METAL RESISTANCE OR TOLERANCE?
Acidophile metal resistance strategies do not fully explain why they are able to grow in solution with very high concentrations of metals. Below we describe largely ignored acidophile metal tolerance systems such as complexation of free metals by sulfate ions and passive tolerance to metal influx via an internal positive cytoplasmic transmembrane potential.
METAL SPECIATION AND ACIDOPHILES
In modern ecotoxicology, it is acknowledged that the distribution of metals between different chemical species (the speciation) must be accounted for when their ecotoxic effects are assessed () and that the free ion is the most toxic form of the metal (). Acidophilic microorganisms often grow in environments containing high concentrations of sulfate ions that can complex metal cations at acidic pH. Therefore, the concentrations of free ions that can enter the cytoplasm and consequently challenge acidophiles are significantly lower than the total concentration of the metal. As a consequence, it is possible that extreme metal tolerance in acidophiles is partially a function of free metal ion complexation by sulfate that precludes the metal ion entry into the cell. The percentages of free metal ion for Cu2+, Ni2+, and Zn2+ were between 60 to 70% of the 200 mM metal ion calculated for each case (i.e., 60 to 80 mM of the metals were bound as sulfate ions and could not enter the cell; Figure 1). This was correct for a pH range from 1.0 to 3.5 that is typical for acidophilic microorganisms. When higher metal concentrations are present, the sulfate concentration would also likely be higher (metal sulfide dissolution also generates sulfate ions from oxidation of the sulfur moiety). An example calculated for an extreme acid mine drainage stream is at Iron Mountain, California that has 5 mM Cu, <1 mM Ni, 31 mM Zn, 324 mM Fe2+, and 39 mM Fe3+ that may be complexed by 1229 mM sulfate (). Modeling of the metal speciation for this case showed >98% of all the metals other than Fe2+ were complexed by sulfate (Figure 2). Complexation of free metal by sulfate highlights the necessity of taking the speciation into account when metal tolerance is examined for acidophiles. This has been shown for Zn2+ toxicity to Acidithiobacillus caldus, Acidimicrobium ferrooxidans, and Ferroplasma acidarmanus ().
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2

The aqueous metal speciation in Iron Mountain, California. The concentrations of free metal ions and metal speciation by sulfate are calculated assuming the composition of sample 90WA103 from the Richmond Mine, Iron Mountain (
METAL TOLERANCE CONFERRED BY pH HOMEOSTASIS AND pH OPTIMA
Cytoplasmic membranes have three electrostatic potentials: the transmembrane potential, the dipole potential, and the surface potential (
A further effect of acidophile optimum growth pH is increased competition between cations and protons for cell surface binding sites (
HIGHER FREQUENCY OF KNOWN METAL RESISTANCE SYSTEMS
A further method by which acidophiles are more metal resistant is that their genomes contain genes encoding for more metal resistance systems than in neutrophiles. An example of a multiple metal resistance systems is the ATPase and Cus systems encoded on a gene island in Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans ATCC 53993 that is not present on the type strain that may explain its higher Cu resistance (
OXYANIONS, AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULE?
Arsenic is predominantly present in biomining environments as the metalloids, arsenate (AsO43-) and arsenite (AsO33- at neutral pH and AsOH3 at acidic pH). Therefore, the intrinsic acidophile cation tolerance systems described in this review would not aid in arsenic resistance. This may at least partially explain why acidophiles are <100-fold more resistant to arsenic than neutrophiles when they are up to 1000-fold more resistant than neutrophiles to metal cations (
CONCLUSION
It is very difficult to compare resistance between microbial species as metal toxicity is dependent on its biological availability (free ion toxicity), the solution chemistry, and the variable toxicity of metal ions to specific cellular functions. Acidophiles have a variety of intrinsic and active metal resistance systems that likely combine to permit their growth in very high metal concentrations. Also, it cannot be ruled out that novel, previously undetected resistance systems are present that contribute to active acidophile metal resistance. The potential contribution of abiotic factors such as metal speciation combined with metal tolerance afforded by the internal positive transmembrane and dipole potentials, and competition for binding sites to acidophile metal resistance has been largely overlooked. In the future, these factors should also be taken into account when assessing acidophile growth in high metal loads.
Statements
Acknowledgments
Mark Dopson acknowledges the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsradet contract number 621-2007-3537) and Cost action CM0902 – Molecular machineries for ion translocation across biomembranes for funding research included in this review. David Holmes acknowledges support from Fondecyt Grant 1130683.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
1
Baker-AustinC.DopsonM. (2007). Life in acid: pH homeostasis in acidophiles.Trends Microbiol.15165–171. 10.1016/j.tim.2007.02.005
2
Baker-AustinC.DopsonM.WexlerM.SawersG.BondP. L. (2005). Molecular insight into extreme copper resistance in the extremophilic archaeon “Ferroplasma acidarmanus” Fer1.Microbiology1512637–2646. 10.1099/mic.0.28076-0
3
ChristiansenK. S.HolmP. E.BorggaardO. K.HauschildM. Z. (2011). Addressing speciation in the effect factor for characterisation of freshwater ecotoxicity – the case of copper.Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.16761–773. 10.1007/s11367-011-0305-7
4
Di ToroD. M.AllenH. E.BergmanH. L.MeyerJ. S.PaquinP. R.SantoreR. C. (2001). Biotic ligand model of the acute toxicity of metals. 1. Technical basis.Environ. Toxicol. Chem.202383–2396. 10.1897/1551-5028(2001)0202.0.CO;2
5
DopsonM.Baker-AustinC.BondP. L. (2005). Analysis of differential protein expression during growth states of Ferroplasma strains and insights into electron transport for iron oxidation.Microbiology1514127–4137. 10.1099/mic.0.28362-0
6
DopsonM.Baker-AustinC.HindA.BowmanJ. P.BondP. L. (2004). Characterization of Ferroplasma isolates and Ferroplasma acidarmanus sp. nov., extreme acidophiles from acid mine drainage and industrial bioleaching environments. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.702079–2088. 10.1128/AEM.70.4.2079-2088.2004
7
DopsonM.Baker-AustinC.KoppineediP. R.BondP. L. (2003). Growth in sulfidic mineral environments: metal resistance mechanisms in acidophilic micro-organisms.Microbiology1491959–1970. 10.1099/mic.0.26296-0
8
DopsonM.JohnsonD. B. (2012). Biodiversity, metabolism and applications of acidophilic sulfur- metabolizing micro-organisms.Environ. Microbiol.142620–2631. 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2012.02749.x
9
DopsonM.LindströmE. B. (2004). Analysis of community composition during moderately thermophilic bioleaching of pyrite, arsenical pyrite and chalcopyrite.Microb. Ecol.4819–28. 10.1007/s00248-003-2028-1
10
ErikssonG. (1979). An algorithm for the computation of aqueous multicomponent, multiphase equilibria.Anal. Chim. Acta112375–383. 10.1016/S0003-2670(01)85035-2
11
HeijerickD. G.De SchamphelaereK. A.JanssenC. R. (2002). Biotic ligand model development predicting Zn toxicity to the alga Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata: possibilities and limitations.Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C Toxicol. Pharmacol.133207–218. 10.1016/S1532-0456(02)00077-7
12
KarlssonM.LindgrenJ. (2006). WinSGW, a User Interface for SolGasWater. Available at: www.winsgw.se (accessed February 13, 2014).
13
MaezatoY.JohnsonT.MccarthyS.DanaK.BlumP. (2012). Metal resistance and lithoautotrophy in the extreme thermoacidophile Metallosphaera sedula.J. Bacteriol.1946856–6863. 10.1128/JB.01413-12
14
MangoldS.PotrykusJ.BjörnE.LövgrenL.DopsonM. (2012). Extreme zinc tolerance in acidophilic microorganisms from the bacterial and archaeal domains.Extremophiles1775–85. 10.1007/s00792-012-0495-3
15
MielkeR. E.PaceD. L.PorterT.SouthamG. (2003). A critical stage in the formation of acid mine drainage: colonization of pyrite by Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans under pH-neutral conditions.Geobiology181–90. 10.1046/j.1472-4669.2003.00005.x
16
NiesD. H.SilverS. (eds). (2007). Molecular Microbiology of Heavy Metals. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978-3-540-69771-8
17
NordstromD. K.AlpersC. N. (1999). Negative pH, efflorescent mineralogy, and consequences for environmental restoration at the iron mountain superfund site, California.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.963455–3462. 10.1073/pnas.96.7.3455
18
OkibeN.GerickeM.HallbergK. B.JohnsonD. B. (2003). Enumeration and characterization of acidophilic microorganisms isolated from a pilot plant stirred-tank bioleaching operation.Appl. Environ. Microbiol.691936–1943. 10.1128/AEM.69.4.1936-1943.2003
19
OrellA.RemonsellezF.ArancibiaR.JerezC. A. (2013). Molecular characterization of copper and cadmium resistance determinants in the biomining thermoacidophilic archaeon Sulfolobus metallicus.Archaea201328923610.1155/2013/289236
20
OrellanaL. H.JerezC. A. (2011). A genomic island provides Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans ATCC 53993 additional copper resistance: a possible competitive advantage.Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.92761–767. 10.1007/s00253-011-3494-x
21
PuigdomenechI. (2004). Hydra/MedusaChemical Equilibrium Database and Plotting Software.Stockholm: KTH – Royal Institute of Technology.
22
RamR. J.VerberkmoesN. C.ThelenM. P.TysonG. W.BakerB. J.BlakeR. C.et al (2005). Community proteomics of a natural microbial biofilm.Science3081915–1920. 10.1126/science.1109070
23
SlonczewskiJ. L.FujisawaM.DopsonM.KrulwichT. A. (2009). Cytoplasmic pH measurement and homeostasis in bacteria and archaea.Adv. Microb. Physiol.551–79. 10.1016/S0065-2911(09)05501-5
24
WangL. (2012). Measurements and implications of the membrane dipole potential.Annu. Rev. Biochem.81615–635. 10.1146/annurev-biochem-070110-123033
25
WuX.WongZ. L.StenP.EngblomS.ÖsterholmP.DopsonM. (2013). Microbial community potentially responsible for acid and metal release from an Ostrobothnian acid sulfate soil.FEMS Microbiol. Ecol.84555–563. 10.1111/1574-6941.12084
Summary
Keywords
metal, acidophile, resistance, tolerance, homeostasis, biomining
Citation
Dopson M, Ossandon FJ, Lövgren L and Holmes DS (2014) Metal resistance or tolerance? Acidophiles confront high metal loads via both abiotic and biotic mechanisms. Front. Microbiol. 5:157. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00157
Received
10 February 2014
Accepted
24 March 2014
Published
09 April 2014
Volume
5 - 2014
Edited by
Axel Schippers, Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, Germany
Reviewed by
Johannes Gescher, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany; Sabrina Hedrich, Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, Germany
Copyright
© 2014 Dopson, Ossandon, Lövgren and Holmes.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Mark Dopson, Department of Biology and Environmental Sciences and Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems, Linnaeus University, Landgången 3, 391 82 Kalmar, Sweden e-mail: mark.dopson@lnu.se
This article was submitted to Extreme Microbiology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Microbiology.
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.