Abstract
The diversity and role of the gut microbiota of insects is a rapidly growing field of entomology, primarily fueled by new metagenomic techniques. Whereas endosymbionts in the guts of xylophagous or herbivorous insects are well studied, the microbiomes in moss-eating (bryophagous) insects remain uncharacterized. Using the Illumina MiSeq platform, we determined the composition of microbiomes in the gut, abdomen and on the body surface of two bryophagous species: Simplocaria semistriata (Fabricius, 1794) and Curimopsis paleata (Erichson, 1846) (Coleoptera: Byrrhidae). Gut microbiomes differed substantially from abdominal microbiomes in the same individuals, which indicates the need to separate them during dissection. Microbiomes in the gut and abdomen differed markedly from surface microbial assemblages. Gut microbiomes in bryophages had the highest MOTU richness, diversity and relative rarity. The eudominant bacteria in the guts and abdomens of bryophages were Novosphingobium, Bradyrhizobium, Ralstonia and Caulobacter, which are responsible for the detoxification of secondary metabolites or nitrogen fixation. These are less common in the surface samples and, therefore, likely to be associated with the specific ability of bryophages to feed on mosses.
Highlights
Many insects establish symbiotic interactions with microorganisms in their gut, body cavities, or cells (Dillon & Dillon, 2004)
Comparison of the bacterial assemblages of the species of bryophagous beetle studied We classified the sequences into 402 molecular operational taxonomic units (MOTUs) belonging to 22 phyla, 55 classes, 91 orders and 182 families of bacteria, and one MOTU belonging to Archaea
The bacterial assemblages in the abdomens of these beetles were similar in composition and dominated by the MOTUs Novosphingobium (24%), Bradyrhizobium (20%), Ralstonia (14%) or Caulobacter (12.5%)
Summary
Many insects establish symbiotic interactions with microorganisms in their gut, body cavities, or cells (Dillon & Dillon, 2004). Most gut microbes are commensals or parasites; some are known to provide beneficial services to their hosts (Engel & Moran, 2013) They can affect resistance against pathogens or parasites (Hedges et al, 2008; Oliver et al, 2010), intestinal cell renewal and systemic growth (Buchon et al, 2009), production of pheromones (Dillon et al, 2002) and kairomones (Leroy et al, 2011), or mating attractiveness (Sharon et al, 2010). Their beneficial role in diet processing through degradation of complex food components (Warnecke et al, 2007) and toxins (Kikuchi et al, 2012), nitrogen fixation (Nikoh et al, 2011), ammonia recycling (Hongoh et al, 2008), and nutrient supplementation via the synthesis of vitamins (Akman et al, 2002) and essential amino acids (Douglas, 1998) is crucial
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
