Abstract
Species utilizing the same resources often fail to coexist for extended periods of time. Such competitive exclusion mechanisms potentially underly microbiome dynamics, causing breakdowns of communities composed of species with similar genetic backgrounds of resource utilization. Although genes responsible for competitive exclusion among a small number of species have been investigated in pioneering studies, it remains a major challenge to integrate genomics and ecology for understanding stable coexistence in species-rich communities. Here, we examine whether community-scale analyses of functional gene redundancy can provide a useful platform for interpreting and predicting collapse of bacterial communities. Through 110-day time-series of experimental microbiome dynamics, we analyzed the metagenome-assembled genomes of co-occurring bacterial species. We then inferred ecological niche space based on the multivariate analysis of the genome compositions. The analysis allowed us to evaluate potential shifts in the level of niche overlap between species through time. We hypothesized that community-scale pressure of competitive exclusion could be evaluated by quantifying overlap of genetically determined resource-use profiles (metabolic pathway profiles) among coexisting species. We found that the degree of community compositional changes observed in the experimental microbiome was correlated with the magnitude of gene-repertoire overlaps among bacterial species, although the causation between the two variables deserves future extensive research. The metagenome-based analysis of genetic potential for competitive exclusion will help us forecast major events in microbiome dynamics such as sudden community collapse (i.e., dysbiosis).
Introduction
Classic niche theory predicts that coexistence of species requires interspecific difference in resource use patterns (Volterra, 1928; ; ; Zaret and Rand, 1971; ; ). Although some specific mechanisms can promote stable coexistence even with complete resource overlap (e.g., spatial structure of habitats and temporal variability in resource availability), similarity/dissimilarity in basic resource dependency among species is the basic factor determining the occurrence of competitive exclusion (, ; ). Therefore, evaluating the overlap of “fundamental niches,” which are defined by species’ fundamental resource requirements and resource-use capabilities (; ), is an essential step for understanding and predicting community-level dynamics.
Insights into fundamental niches are encrypted in species’ genomes (; Smith et al., 2019; Régimbeau et al., 2022; ): as species’ traits are encoded in their DNA, genomic information provides the ultimate basis for evaluating target species’ fundamental niches (; ; ). Thus, potential strength of competitive interactions within ecological guilds or communities could be evaluated based on the distribution of species’ gene repertoires within ecological niche space inferred with metagenomic data (; ; ; Régimbeau et al., 2022), also referred to as “metagenomic niche space.” Although overlap of niches does not always cause competitive exclusion (, ; ), higher levels of gene repertoire overlap within a community may impose greater impacts on population dynamics of constituent species.
In considering coexistence of microbial species, it is essential to examine whether such competition-driven population-level phenomena underly drastic ecological events observed at the community level. Microbial communities sometimes show sudden and substantial changes in species and/or taxonomic compositions (Ravel et al., 2013; ; ; Yajima et al., 2023). Human gut microbiomes, for example, have been reported to show drastic shifts from species-rich states to “imbalanced” states with low α-diversity and overrepresentation of pathogenic species (; ; ; ) (e.g., Clostridium difficile). Elucidating the ecological mechanisms causing such drastic community-level events provide fundamental insights into microbiome dynamics (; ; ). In this respect, an important challenge is to test the hypothesis that high levels of gene-repertoire overlap are observable prior to drastic community compositional changes. However, tests of this hypothesis have remained elusive due to the paucity of time-series observations of microbiomes with substantial compositional changes. Even if such microbiome time-series data are available, analyses of potential niche (gene repertoire) overlap require another line of information. Specifically, we need data of respective species’ genomes at multiple time points (). Therefore, developing research systems that can overcome these constrains will deepen our understanding of microbiome ecological processes.
In this study, we examine the degree to which gene-repertoire overlap changes through dynamics of species-rich microbial communities. By targeting an experimental microbial system showing rapid and substantial changes in taxonomic compositions (), we infer niche space depicting species’ gene repertoires. A previous study in this system using a metabolic modeling analysis suggested that interactions between species were keys to understand the drastic microbiome dynamics (). Now, by compiling the shotgun metagenomic data collected at 13 time points across the 110-day time-series of the experiment, we reveal temporal shifts in the magnitude of gene repertoire overlap among microbial species. We then examine whether a high level of fundamental-niche overlap is observed prior to drastic changes in community structure. Overall, we explore how signs of drastic shifts in community structure are detected by inferring community-scale degree of fundamental niche overlap with the aid of genomic information. The knowledge will lead us to develop platforms for forecasting and preventing unfavorable shifts of microbiome compositions and those for recovering and designing functionally benign microbial ecosystems based on the evaluation of niche overlap levels.
Materials and methods
Time-series data of experimental microbiomes
We focused on the experimental microbiome showing drastic shifts in taxonomic compositions (). In our previous study (), a 110-day monitoring of microbiomes was performed with six experimental settings. To set up experimental microbiomes with high diversity of bacterial species/taxa, we used natural microbial communities derived from soil or pond-water ecosystems as source inocula, rather than “synthetic” communities with pre-defined diversity. In the experiment, microbiomes differing in the magnitude of community compositional shifts were constructed across the six treatments defined by the combinations of two inoculum source microbiomes and three types of media. One of the source microbiomes derived from the soil collected from the A layer (0–10 cm in depth) in the research forest of Center for Ecological Research, Kyoto University, Otsu, Japan (34.972°N; 135.958°E). The other source inoculum was prepared by collecting water from a pond (“Shoubuike”) near Center for Ecological Research (34.974°N, 135.966°E). Each of the source inocula was introduced into oatmeal (Medium-A), oatmeal-peptone (Medium-B), or peptone (Medium-C) broth media with eight replicates. Thus, in total, 48 experimental microcosms (two source microbiomes × three media × eight replicates) were constructed in a deep-well plate (1,000-μl-scale culture in each well). The plate was kept shaken at 1,000 rpm at 23°C. After 5-day pre-incubation, 200 μl out of the 1,000-μl culture medium was sampled from each well every 24 h for 110 days. In each sampling event, 200 μl of fresh medium was added to each well so that the total culture volume was kept constant. In total, 5,280 samples (48 communities/day × 110 days) were collected through the time-series experiment. After DNA extraction, the samples were subjected to the amplicon sequencing analysis of the 16S rRNA region ().
To quantify the speed and magnitude of community shifts through time, the “abruptness” index was calculated through the time-series of each replicate microcosm in each experimental treatment (). Specifically, an estimate of the abruptness index for time point t was obtained as the Bray–Curtis β-diversity between average community compositions from time points t − 4 to t and those from t + 1 to t + 5 (i.e., dissimilarity between 5-day time-windows). The Bray–Curtis β-diversity () was calculated as
where Xij and Xik denoted relative abundance of microbial amplicon sequence variant (ASV) i in the compared time windows (j, from t − 4 to t; k, from t + 1 to t + 5). An abruptness score larger than 0.5 indicates that turnover of more than 50% of community compositions occurred between the time-windows (). Based on the calculated magnitude of time-series changes in community compositions (; Figure 1A), we focused on a water-inoculum/oatmeal-medium replicate community showing the most abrupt (rapid and substantial) changes in community compositions among the 48 microbiomes examined as described in a study on metabolic interactions between species (; Supplementary Figure 1).
FIGURE 1
Shotgun metagenomics
Focusing on the replicate microcosm in which the most rapid and substantial turnover of community compositions was observed (replicate no. 5 of Water/Medium-A treatment; Figure 1A and Supplementary Figure 1), shotgun metagenomic sequencing was conducted by targeting 13 samples (day 1, 10, 20, 24, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, and 110) as described elsewhere (
FIGURE 2

Metabolic pathway/process profiles of the MAGs. KEGG metabolic pathways/profiles of the reconstructed bacterial genomes (MAGs) are shown. The detection (relative abundance >0.1%) of each microbial MAG on each day within the shotgun metagenomic data is indicated in the panel below. Only the microbial MAGs with >80% completeness and <5% contamination were included (Supplementary Table 1). The five MAGs detected at least once from days 40–60 and metabolic pathways/processes mentioned in the main text (see section “Results”) are highlighted. Only the metabolic pathways/processes with highly heterogeneous patterns across microbial MAGs and those possessed by a small number of MAGs are shown. See Supplementary Figure 3 for detailed profiles of the metabolic pathways/processes.
Background environmental conditions
For the 13 samples subjected to the shotgun metagenomic analysis, concentrations of ammonium (NH4+) and nitrate (NO3–) were measured to obtain Supplementary Information of background environmental conditions. Colorimetric methods with a modified indophenol reaction (
Multivariate analysis of the metagenomic space
We used the shotgun metagenomic data to evaluate how the level of gene repertoire overlap among microbes shifted through time. We anticipated that microbial species with similar resource-use abilities or restrictions have similar genomic structure. Therefore, it is expected that species competing for the same resource tend to form clusters within the space defined based on the principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of dissimilarity in gene repertoires. Thus, based on the whole matrix representing the presence/absence of the 6,999 genes annotated with the program Prokka (Seemann, 2014; Supplementary Data 1), the Jaccard metric of distance was calculated for each pair of the 32 microbial MAGs (Dij, where i and j represent MAGs). The Jaccard-distance estimates were then used to perform a PCoA. Using the obtained principal coordinate scores, all the microbial MAGs detected through the time-series were plotted on a multivariate space consisting of the first three PCoA axes (PCoA 1, PCoA 2, and PCoA 3). Since we did not have a priori knowledge of specific metabolic pathways keys to the microbe-to-microbe competition within the experimental microbiome, all datasets were included in this multivariate analysis. Given general characteristics of multivariate analysis based on β-diversity metrics, the multivariate reconstruction of ecological niche space depends greatly on the genes whose presence/absence profiles vary among species, while housekeeping genes possessed by most species are expected to contribute little to the multivariate analysis. To visualize the time-series shifts in the distribution of microbial genomes, the MAGs detected with the shotgun metagenomic sequencing (defined as the MAGs whose relative abundance is greater than 0.1%) at each time point was plotted on the three-dimensional space defined with the PCoA axes.
Evaluation of niche overlap level
We quantitatively evaluated dynamics in the magnitude of community-scale niche overlap within the multivariate space. We developed two types of simple indices for evaluating community-scale niche overlap. The one is defined as the overall mean of gene-repertoire similarity between pairs of MAGs within a community. For a time point, the niche overlap index is calculated as:
where T is the set of MAGs detected on a focal day (relative abundance >0.1%), Dij is the Jaccard metric of dissimilarity (
This index can be modified by incorporating the information of the relative abundance of MAGs (pi) as follows:
To test whether a high level of fundamental-niche overlap is observed prior to drastic changes in microbial community structure, we examined relationship between the above niche overlap index and time-series shifts in community structure (Bray–Curtis β-diversity between present and next time points through the time-series of the shotgun metagenomic data).
Results
Functional dynamics of microbiomes
As indicated in the amplicon sequencing analysis (
Multivariate analysis of gene repertoires
Within the three-dimensional space defined with the gene repertoires (Figure 3A), alphaproteobacterial and gammaproteobacterial MAGs respectively constituted some clusters within the niche space reconstructed based on the multivariate analysis early in the microbiome dynamics (days 1–20; Figure 3B). This state with high niche overlap and potential within-guild competition for resources then collapsed into a simpler community state represented by Hydrotalea, Mangrovibacter, Terracidiphilus, and Rhizomicrobium as detailed above (Figure 3B). The space once occupied by many alphaproteobacterial and gammaproteobacterial MAGs remained unoccupied or sparsely occupied after the community compositional collapse. Even when the number of MAGs detectable with our shotgun-metagenomic sequencing increased again late in the time-series (four MAGs during days 40–50 vs. eight MAGs on day 110), dense aggregations of microbes with similar genomic compositions remained unobserved (Figure 3B).
FIGURE 3

Metagenomic niche space. (A) Distributions of MAGs within metagenomic niche space. Based on dissimilarity in gene repertoires, microbial MAGs that appeared in the time-series of the target microcosm were plotted on the three-dimensional space defined by the principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of 6,999 genes. (B) Changes in the distributions of microbial MAGs within niche space. At each time point, detected MAGs (relative abundance >0.1%) were plotted on the space defined in the multivariate analysis in the in the panel (A).
Metagenomic niche overlap
Each of three types of niche overlap indices was the highest on day 1 or day 10 and then it decreased until day 30 [overall mean, 0.361 (day 1); nearest mean, 0.551 (day 10); weighted nearest mean, 0.507 (day 1); Figure 4A]. Although the niche overlap score remained low between day 40 and 60 [overall mean, 0.304 (day 40–60); nearest mean, 0.349 (days 40 and 50) – 0.378 (day 60); weighted nearest mean, 0.363 (day 50) – 0.368 (day 60)], it increased again late in the microbiome time-series (Figures 4A, B). Note that α-diversity of the community showed similar temporal shifts and it was significantly associated with each of the three niche overlap indices (overall mean, P = 0.0001; nearest mean, P < 0.0001; weighted nearest mean, P < 0.0001; Figures 4B, C). Through the time-series, the estimated niche overlap level was significantly associated with the magnitude of the observed community compositional changes (overall mean, P = 0.0003; nearest mean, P = 0.0011; weighted nearest mean, P = 0.0007; Figure 5).
FIGURE 4

Dynamics of niche-overlap level. (A) Community-level profiles of metabolic pathways/processes and niche overlap index. The niche overlap indices were defined based on the Jaccard similarity/dissimilarity of gene compositions between pairs of the microbial MAGs detected at a target time point. Three types of niche overlap indices are shown on a PCoA surface representing community-level compositions of genes. On the PCoA surface, time points are distributed based on the sum of the gene repertoires of the detected MAGs. (B) Dynamics of niche-overlap levels. Niche overlap scores are shown across the time-series. The magnitude of community compositional changes (Bray–Curtis β-diversity between present and next time points through the time-series of the shotgun metagenomic data) and α-diversity indices of the communities are shown as well. The values of each index were rescaled between 0 (minimum through the time series) to 1 (maximum through the time series) through the time series. (C) Relationship between α-diversity and niche overlap scores. The lines represent linear regressions (with 95% confidence intervals).
FIGURE 5

Niche overlap level and community compositional shifts. The magnitude of community compositional changes observed in the microbiome was regressed on each niche overlap index obtained based on the shotgun metagenomic analysis. Niche overlap index at each time point and time-series shifts in community structure (Bray–Curtis β-diversity between present and next time points through the time-series of the shotgun metagenomic data) are shown along horizontal and vertical axes, respectively. The regression lines are shown with 95% confidence intervals.
Discussion
By developing simple metrics of among-species overlap of gene repertoires, we examined potential relationship between community-scale niche overlap and drastic changes in community structure. Early in the experimental microbiome dynamics, alphaproteobacterial and gammaproteobacterial species were present, resulting in relatively high niche-overlap scores at the community level (Figures 3, 4). The quasi-equilibrium state of microbial compositions then collapsed into another quasi-equilibrium represented by a small number of bacteria varying in genome size and metabolic capabilities. Throughout the time-series, higher niche overlap levels were associated with greater changes in microbial community compositions (Figure 5), although causation between the two variables deserves further experimental investigations. These findings lead to the working hypothesis that collapse of microbiome structure is predicted by the level of potential niche overlap within multivariate metagenomic space. In light of the “limiting similarity” rule of ecological niches (
The results also indicated that niche overlap level does not necessarily show monotonic decrease through microbial community processes. Although gene-repertoire overlap level and detectable species richness sharply declined early in the microbiome dynamics, both variables gradually increased again around day 80 (Figures 1A, 4B). In the resurgence process, however, the dense clusters of alphaproteobacterial or gammaproteobacterial species detected until day 20 did not appear again within the niche space (Figure 3B). These observations suggest that once collapsed, microbial communities may not return to previous states with highest levels of niche overlap, but refilling of poorly used niches can occur under the constraint of limiting similarity within niche space. Although these insights are useful, our present analysis is based only on 13 time points of a microbiome experiment. Due to the limitation, it remained elusive to separate effects of α-diversity from those of gene-repertoire overlap (Figures 4B, C). Thus, the statistical analysis proposed in this study need to be expanded by reducing the cost of metagenomic sequencing as well as by developing more efficient pipelines for the computationally intensive analyses of metagenomic datasets.
The approach of systematically evaluating potential overlap of ecological niches have been previously explored in “community phylogenetics,” in which phylogenetic overdispersion/clustering is evaluated based on null model analysis of random assembly from species pools (Webb et al., 2002;
The simple framework for evaluating overlap of fundamental niches is applicable to diverse types of microbiomes. Given that our Jaccard-dissimilarity-based indices are standardized within the range from 0 to 1, the next crucial step is to examine how threshold niche overlap values for anticipating microbial community collapse vary among different types of ecosystems. Such threshold values can vary among ecosystems depending on their basic levels of sustainable functional redundancy. In our laboratory microbiome, for example, the lack of spatial structure (e.g., refuges for inferior species) and environmental fluctuations (e.g., temperature fluctuations) might have severely limited coexistence of functionally similar species (species with similar metabolic capabilities). In contrast, in human gut microbiomes, spatial complexity (
While genomic information provides an ultimate platform for inferring fundamental niches (
Statements
Data availability statement
The 16S rRNA sequencing data reported in a previous study (
Author contributions
HT: Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing — original draft, Writing — review and editing. HF: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing — original draft, Writing — review and editing. MU: Methodology, Writing — review and editing. KS: Methodology, Software, Writing — review and editing. MA: Methodology, Writing — review and editing. MY: Writing — review and editing. YO: Methodology, Writing — review and editing. AC: Investigation, Methodology, Writing — review and editing. IH: Writing — review and editing. KF: Methodology, Writing — review and editing. SF: Writing — review and editing. EK: Writing — review and editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work was financially supported by JST PRESTO (JPMJPR16Q6), Human Frontier Science Program (RGP0029/2019), JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (20K20586), NEDO Moonshot Research and Development Program (JPNP18016), JST FOREST (JPMJFR2048) to HT, JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (20K06820 and 20H03010) to KS, and JSPS Fellowship to HF and AC.
Acknowledgments
Computation time was provided by the SuperComputer System, Institute for Chemical Research, Kyoto University. We thank reviewers for their constructive comments that improved the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
HT is the founder and director of Sunlit Seedlings Ltd. This had no impact on the design and implementation of the study. The remaining 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. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Publisher’s note
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.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1261137/full#supplementary-material
References
1
AlnebergJ.BennkeC.BeierS.BunseC.QuinceC.IninbergsK.et al (2020). Ecosystem-wide metagenomic binning enables prediction of ecological niches from genomes.Commun. Biol.31–10. 10.1038/s42003-020-0856-x
2
AndersonM. J.CristT. O.ChaseJ. M.VellendM.InouyeB. D.FreestoneA. L.et al (2011). Navigating the multiple meanings of β diversity: A roadmap for the practicing ecologist.Ecol. Lett.1419–28. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01552.x
3
BankevichA.NurkS.AntipovD.GurevichA. A.DvorkinM.KulikovA. S.et al (2012). SPAdes: A new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing.J. Comput. Biol.19455–477. 10.1089/cmb.2012.0021
4
BoolchandaniM.D’SouzaA. W.DantasG. (2019). Sequencing-based methods and resources to study antimicrobial resistance.Nat. Rev. Genet.20356–370. 10.1038/s41576-019-0108-4
5
CardingS.VerbekeK.VipondD. T.CorfeB. M.OwenL. J. (2015). Dysbiosis of the gut microbiota in disease.Microb. Ecol. Health Dis.26:26191. 10.3402/mehd.v26.26191
6
Cavender-BaresJ.KozakK. H.FineP. V. A.KembelS. W. (2009). The merging of community ecology and phylogenetic biology.Ecol. Lett.12693–715. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01314.x
7
ChaseJ. M.LeiboldM. A. (2004). Ecological niches: linking classical and contemporary approaches.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 10.1023/b:bioc.0000029366.24837.fc
8
ChaumeilP. A.MussigA. J.HugenholtzP.ParksD. H. (2020). GTDB-Tk: A toolkit to classify genomes with the genome taxonomy database.Bioinformatics361925–1927. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz848
9
ChenS.ZhouY.ChenY.GuJ. (2018). Fastp: An ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor.Bioinformatics34i884–i890. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty560
10
ChessonP. (2000). Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity.Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.31343–366.
11
ChessonP. (2018). Updates on mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity.J. Ecol.1061773–1794. 10.1111/1365-2745.13035
12
CostelloE. K.StagamanK.DethlefsenL.BohannanB. J. M.RelmanD. A. (2012). The application of ecological theory toward an understanding of the human microbiome.Science3361255–1262. 10.1126/science.1224203
13
DavidL. A.MauriceC. F.CarmodyR. N.GootenbergD. B.ButtonJ. E.WolfeB. E.et al (2014). Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome.Nature505559–563. 10.1038/nature12820
14
EarleK. A.BillingsG.SigalM.LichtmanJ. S.HanssonG. C.EliasJ. E.et al (2015). Quantitative imaging of gut microbiota spatial organization.Cell Host Microbe18478–488. 10.1016/j.chom.2015.09.002
15
FahimipourA. K.GrossT. (2020). Mapping the bacterial metabolic niche space.Nat. Commun.111–8. 10.1038/s41467-020-18695-z
16
FiererN. (2017). Embracing the unknown: Disentangling the complexities of the soil microbiome.Nat. Rev. Microbiol.15579–590. 10.1038/nrmicro.2017.87
17
FlintH. J.ScottK. P.DuncanS. H.LouisP.ForanoE. (2012). Microbial degradation of complex carbohydrates in the gut.Gut Microbes3289–306. 10.4161/gmic.19897
18
FujitaH.UshioM.SuzukiK.AbeM. S.YamamichiM.OkazakiY.et al (2023a). Facilitative interaction networks in experimental microbial community dynamics.Front. Microbiol.14:1153952. 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1153952
19
FujitaH.UshioM.SuzukiK.AbeM.YamamichiM.IwayamaK.et al (2023b). Alternative stable states, nonlinear behavior, and predictability of microbiome dynamics.Microbiome11:63.
20
GauseG. F. (1934). The struggle for coexistence.Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
21
GibsonD. G.GlassJ. I.LartigueC.NoskovV. N.ChuangR.-Y.AlgireM. A.et al (2010). Creation of a bacterial cell controlled by a chemically synthesized genome.Science32952–56. 10.1126/science.1190719
22
GrahamE. D.HeidelbergJ. F.TullyB. J. (2018). Potential for primary productivity in a globally-distributed bacterial phototroph.ISME J.121861–1866. 10.1038/s41396-018-0091-3
23
GrimeJ. P. (1973). Competitive exclusion in herbaceous vegetation.Nature242344–347. 10.1038/242344a0
24
HardinG. (1960). The competitive exclusion principle.Science1311292–1297.
25
Heintz-BuschartA.WilmesP. (2018). Human gut microbiome: Function matters.Trends Microbiol.26563–574. 10.1016/j.tim.2017.11.002
26
HeroldM.Martínez ArbasS.NarayanasamyS.SheikA. R.Kleine-BorgmannL. A. K.LebrunL. A.et al (2020). Integration of time-series meta-omics data reveals how microbial ecosystems respond to disturbance.Nat. Commun.11:5281. 10.1038/s41467-020-19006-2
27
Hood-NowotnyR.UmanaN. H.-N.InselbacherE.Oswald- LachouaniP.WanekW. (2010). Alternative methods for measuring inorganic, organic, and total dissolved nitrogen in soil.Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.741018–1027. 10.2136/sssaj2009.0389
28
HutchinsonG. E. (1957). Concluding remarks.Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol.22415–427. 10.1101/sqb.1957.022.01.039
29
HuttenhowerC.GeversD.KnightR.AbubuckerS.BadgerJ. H.ChinwallaA. T.et al (2012). Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome.Nature486207–214. 10.1038/nature11234
30
JainC.Rodriguez-RL. M.PhillippyA. M.KonstantinidisK. T.AluruS. (2018). High throughput ANI analysis of 90K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries.Nat. Commun.9:5114. 10.1038/s41467-018-07641-9
31
JanssonJ. K.HofmockelK. S. (2020). Soil microbiomes and climate change.Nat. Rev. Microbiol.1835–46. 10.1038/s41579-019-0265-7
32
KandelerE.GerberH. (1988). Short-term assay of soil urease activity using colorimetric determination of ammonium.Biol. Fertil. Soils668–72. 10.1007/BF00257924
33
KanehisaM.SatoY.MorishimaK. (2016). BlastKOALA and GhostKOALA: KEGG tools for functional characterization of genome and metagenome sequences.J. Mol. Biol.428726–731. 10.1016/j.jmb.2015.11.006
34
KhoZ. Y.LalS. K. (2018). The human gut microbiome – A potential controller of wellness and disease.Front. Microbiol.9:1835. 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01835
35
KrissM.HazletonK. Z.NusbacherN. M.MartinC. G.LozuponeC. A. (2018). Low diversity gut microbiota dysbiosis: Drivers, functional implications and recovery.Curr. Opin. Microbiol.4434–40. 10.1016/j.mib.2018.07.003
36
LahtiL.SalojärviJ.SalonenA.SchefferM.de VosW. M. (2014). Tipping elements in the human intestinal ecosystem.Nat. Commun.54344. 10.1038/ncomms5344
37
LegendreP.de CáceresM. (2013). Beta diversity as the variance of community data: Dissimilarity coefficients and partitioning.Ecol. Lett.16951–963. 10.1111/ele.12141
38
LettenA. D.KeP. J.FukamiT. (2017). Linking modern coexistence theory and contemporary niche theory.Ecol. Monogr.87161–177. 10.1002/ecm.1242
39
LososJ. B. (2008). Phylogenetic niche conservatism, phylogenetic signal and the relationship between phylogenetic relatedness and ecological similarity among species.Ecol. Lett11995–1007. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01229.x
40
MacArthurR.LevinsR. (1967). The limiting similarity, convergence, and divergence of coexisting species.American Naturalist101377–385.
41
MaidenM. C. J.van RensburgM. J. J.BrayJ. E.EarleS. G.FordS. A.JolleyK. A.et al (2013). MLST revisited: The gene-by-gene approach to bacterial genomics.Nat. Rev. Microbiol.11728–736. 10.1038/nrmicro3093
42
MalardL.GuisanA. (2023). Into the microbial niche.Trends Ecol. Evol.10.1016/j.tree.2023.04.015[Epub ahead of print].
43
MartinM. (2011). Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads.EMBnet J.17:200. 10.14806/ej.17.1.200
44
MarvigR. L.SommerL. M.MolinS.JohansenH. K. (2015). Convergent evolution and adaptation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa within patients with cystic fibrosis.Nat. Genet.4757–64. 10.1038/ng.3148
45
MayfieldM. M.LevineJ. M. (2010). Opposing effects of competitive exclusion on the phylogenetic structure of communities.Ecol. Lett.131085–1093. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01509.x
46
McCutcheonJ. P.McDonaldB. R.MoranN. A. (2009). Convergent evolution of metabolic roles in bacterial co-symbionts of insects.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.10615394–15399. 10.1073/pnas.0906424106
47
MerhejV.Royer-CarenziM.PontarottiP.RaoultD. (2009). Massive comparative genomic analysis reveals convergent evolution of specialized bacteria.Biol. Direct.4:13. 10.1186/1745-6150-4-13
48
MullerE. E. L. (2019). Determining microbial niche breadth in the environment for better ecosystem fate predictions.mSystems480–19. 10.1128/msystems.00080-19
49
NowinskiB.MoranM. A. (2021). Niche dimensions of a marine bacterium are identified using invasion studies in coastal seawater.Nat. Microbiol.6524–532. 10.1038/s41564-020-00851-2
50
OvermannJ.AbtB.SikorskiJ. (2017). Present and future of culturing bacteria.Annu. Rev. Microbiol.71711–730. 10.1146/annurev-micro-090816-093449
51
PalomoA.PedersenA. G.FowlerS. J.DechesneA.Sicheritz-PonténT.SmetsB. F. (2018). Comparative genomics sheds light on niche differentiation and the evolutionary history of comammox Nitrospira.ISME J.121779–1793. 10.1038/s41396-018-0083-3
52
ParksD. H.ChuvochinaM.RinkeC.MussigA. J.ChaumeilP.-A.HugenholtzP. (2022). GTDB: an ongoing census of bacterial and archaeal diversity through a phylogenetically consistent, rank normalized and complete genome-based taxonomy.Nucleic Acids Res.50D785–D794. 10.1093/nar/gkab776
53
ParksD. H.ImelfortM.SkennertonC. T.HugenholtzP.TysonG. W. (2015). CheckM: Assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes.Genome Res.251043–1055. 10.1101/gr.186072.114
54
PereiraF. C.BerryD. (2017). Microbial nutrient niches in the gut.Environ. Microbiol.191366–1378. 10.1111/1462-2920.13659
55
RavelJ.BrotmanR. M.GajerP.MaB.NandyM.FadroshD. W.et al (2013). Daily temporal dynamics of vaginal microbiota before, during and after episodes of bacterial vaginosis.Microbiome1:29. 10.1186/2049-2618-1-29
56
RégimbeauA.BudinichM.LarhlimiA.Pierella KarlusichJ. J.AumontO.MemeryL.et al (2022). Contribution of genome-scale metabolic modelling to niche theory.Ecol. Lett.251352–1364. 10.1111/ele.13954
57
SchirmerM.FranzosaE. A.Lloyd-PriceJ.McIverL. J.SchwagerR.PoonT. W.et al (2018). Dynamics of metatranscription in the inflammatory bowel disease gut microbiome.Nat. Microbiol.3337–346. 10.1038/s41564-017-0089-z
58
SeemannT. (2014). Prokka: Rapid prokaryotic genome annotation.Bioinformatics302068–2069. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu153
59
SmithS. R.DupontC. L.McCarthyJ. K.BroddrickJ. T.OborníkM.HorákA.et al (2019). Evolution and regulation of nitrogen flux through compartmentalized metabolic networks in a marine diatom.Nat. Commun.10:4552. 10.1038/s41467-019-12407-y
60
TaylorB. W.KeepC. F.HallR. O.KochB. J.TronstadL. M.FleckerA. S.et al (2007). Improving the fluorometric ammonium method: Matrix effects, background fluorescence, and standard additions.J. North Am. Benthol. Soc.26167–177.
61
TrivediP.LeachJ. E.TringeS. G.SaT.SinghB. K. (2020). Plant–microbiome interactions: from community assembly to plant health.Nat. Rev. Microbiol.18607–621. 10.1038/s41579-020-0412-1
62
TropiniC.EarleK. A.HuangK. C.SonnenburgJ. L. (2017). The gut microbiome: Connecting spatial organization to function.Cell Host Microbe21433–442. 10.1016/j.chom.2017.03.010
63
TurnerT. R.RamakrishnanK.WalshawJ.HeavensD.AlstonM.SwarbreckD.et al (2013). Comparative metatranscriptomics reveals kingdom level changes in the rhizosphere microbiome of plants.ISME J.72248–2258. 10.1038/ismej.2013.119
64
UritskiyG. V.DiRuggieroJ.TaylorJ. (2018). MetaWRAP—a flexible pipeline for genome-resolved metagenomic data analysis.Microbiome6:158. 10.1186/s40168-018-0541-1
65
VenterJ. C.RemingtonK.HeidelbergJ. F.HalpernA. L.RuschD.EisenJ. A.et al (2004). Environmental genome shotgun sequencing of the Sargasso sea.Science30466–74. 10.1126/science.1093857
66
VolterraV. (1928). Variations and fluctuations of the number of individuals in animal species living together.ICES J. Marine Sci.33–51. 10.1093/icesjms/3.1.3
67
WebbC. O.AckerlyD. D.McPeekM. A.DonoghueM. J. (2002). Phylogenies and community ecology.Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.33475–505. 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.33.010802.150448
68
WoodcroftB. (2021). CoverM: program.Woodcroft: Queensland University.
69
YajimaD.FujitaH.HayashiI.ShimaG.SuzukiK.TojuH. (2023). Core species and interactions prominent in fish-associated microbiome dynamics.Microbiome11:53. 10.1186/s40168-023-01498-x
70
ZaretT. M.RandA. S. (1971). Competition in tropical stream fishes: Support for the competitive exclusion principle.Ecology52336–342. 10.2307/1934593
Summary
Keywords
community stability, competition, dysbiosis, ecological niche, metabolic interactions, shotgun metagenomics, microbial functions, time-series dynamics
Citation
Fujita H, Ushio M, Suzuki K, Abe MS, Yamamichi M, Okazaki Y, Canarini A, Hayashi I, Fukushima K, Fukuda S, Kiers ET and Toju H (2023) Metagenomic analysis of ecological niche overlap and community collapse in microbiome dynamics. Front. Microbiol. 14:1261137. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1261137
Received
19 July 2023
Accepted
27 October 2023
Published
15 November 2023
Volume
14 - 2023
Edited by
Sumit Singh Dagar, Agharkar Research Institute, India
Reviewed by
Zhiyuan Yao, Ningbo University, China; Kiran Gajanan Javkar, Illumina, United States
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2023 Fujita, Ushio, Suzuki, Abe, Yamamichi, Okazaki, Canarini, Hayashi, Fukushima, Fukuda, Kiers and Toju.
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) and the copyright owner(s) 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: Hiroaki Fujita, fujita.h@ecology.kyoto-u.ac.jpHirokazu Toju, toju.hirokazu.4c@kyoto-u.ac.jp
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.