ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Germs come clean

Posted: Monday, August 31, 2009 8:00 PM by Alan Boyle


Gary Meek / Georgia Tech
Georgia Tech Professor Kostas Konstantinidis displays Shewanella
microbes that have the ability to “inhale” certain metals and compounds
and convert them to an altered state, which is typically much less toxic.

Using genetic analysis, scientists discover that a type of germ used for cleaning up toxic sites is actually many types of germs that gobble up different kinds of crud. This suggests that a smorgasbord of microbes could be customized for different applications – ranging from cleaning nuclear dump sites to powering future fuel cells.

"Soon we will be able to pick the right strain for cleaning specific environments," said Kostas Konstantinidis, an environmental microbiologist at Georgia Tech. "But we are in the beginning stages of this."

Konstantinidis and his colleagues focused on a bacterial genus known as Shewanella, which is found in a wide spectrum of ecosystems ranging from the Arctic to the Amazon. Their genetic analysis of 10 strains of Shewanella is being published online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Shewanella typically converts metals and other nasty compounds into less toxic stuff - which makes the bacteria well-suited for environmental cleanup duty. One strain of the bacteria, Shewanella oneidensis MR-1, is particularly good at sucking metal oxides from groundwater and transforming them into insoluble forms that are ripe for removal. The Energy Department is looking into whether that strain could help clean up radioactive nuclear weapons sites.

Shewanella is also being studied as a potential power converter for microbial fuel cells. In that application, Shewanella (or other microbes such as Geobacter) would gobble up metals and expel electrons as a waste product, setting up "circuits of slime."

One of Shewanella's strengths is that it adapts easily to different environments and energy sources. "They can actually capture DNA from the environment that gives them a selective advantage," said Margaret Romine, a researcher at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and one of Konstantinidis' co-authors.

In the lab, one strain of Shewanella can look just like another - which is a problem if you're trying to find just the right germ for the job.

"If you look at different strains of Shewanella under a microscope, or you look at their ribosomal genes, which are routinely used to identify newly isolated strains of bacteria, they look identical," Konstantinidis explained in a Georgia Tech news release. But when 10 seemingly similar strains were subjected to whole-genome sequencing and proteomic analysis, the researchers found far more diversity than they expected.

Some strains had 98 percent of their genes in common, while others shared only 70 percent of their genes. And the differences in expressed proteins were even larger than the differences in genetic content. In comparison, humans and chimpanzees have 96 percent of their genetic coding in common.

"In humans, there are multiple levels of organization, so it's not fair just to compare the numbers," Konstantinidis told me. "But it does give you a perspective on how much diversity exists there in the environment."

All but one of the 10 strains studied could gobble up several types of metals. The oddball was a type of bacteria that couldn't convert metals anaerobically, but relied on nitrates and oxygen instead. "There are a lot of things that this one guy has lost, so what it's done is that it's taken a different evolutionary path," Romine said.

The genetic analysis indicated that the Shewanella strains acquired the genes that were needed to adapt to a particular environment - freshwater or saltwater, sandstone or sediment - and shed the genes that became unnecessary.

Konstantinidis said the kind of genetic analysis he and his colleagues conducted could eventually serve as a guide for finding "the right strain for the right environment in the right conditions."

In the short term, scientists could mix up a smorgasbord of Shewanella and see which strains worked best in which setting, Konstantinidis said. In the longer term - say, five years from now - scientists could well be making genetic modifications to customize bacterial strains for a particular cleanup job or energy application.

That may sound like a bioengineering dream come true - and in fact, there are signs that we're already well on our way toward a biotech bounty. But in the wrong hands, genetically engineered bacteria could spark a bioterror nightmare. What do you think? Feel free to weigh in with your comments below.


The research reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences was supported by the Energy Department through the Shewanella Federation consortium and the Proteomics Application project. In addition to Konstantinidis and Romine, the research team included Margrethe Serres of the Marine Biological Laboratory at Woods Hole, Mass.; Jorge Rodrigues of the University of Texas; Jennifer Auchtung and James Tiedje of Michigan State University;  Anna Obraztsova and Kenneth Nealson of the University of Southern California; Carol Giometti of Argonne National Laboratory; and Lee-Ann McCue, Mary Lipton and James Fredrickson of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

Join the Cosmic Log team by signing up as my Facebook friend or hooking up on Twitter. And reserve your copy of my upcoming book, "The Case for Pluto."  You can pre-order it from Amazon, Barnes & Noble or Borders.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

By contaminating nature with these frankengerms, you are potentially going to direct the evolution of natural organisms.  You will, not likely, ensure these are sterile, and they will potentially displace normal bacteria.  Worse, they may find natural organisms more favorable to forage upon than metals and that which they are intended to "clean up".
Another case of humans taking the irresponsible route towards an end, rather than not polluting in the first place.  
So It's going to be,"heads you win,Tails you don't" or something like that. And to make it even MORE likely to infect unsuspecting foriggers,you can't even make it yellow or something that would give folks a clue, "Don't eat the yellow snow" and you must have gotten a promise from these things that they should never,never,never attack humans, right?
This is fascinating stuff, particularly since these hold both clean-up and energy-source possibilities. As for the artificial genetic manipulation for customization, that should greatly broaden the possibilities for applications in both spheres, though researchers will, no doubt, be accused of being "Dr. Frankensteins" by some. Maybe to head off such squeals of fear it would be a good idea to develop "antidotes" simultaneously that would allow the Good Guys to stop the Baddies from nefarious use of this knowledge.
Except that these "frankengerms" are already natural bacteria, roaming wild. All they are doing is finding which ones fit in a given habitat best, then putting them to work. This is no less irresponsible then choosing which breed of dog works best for duck hunting, for instance. The only way humans won't pollute is if humans suddenly cease to exsist, but at least they are finding ways to mitigate human's unhealthy impact on the enviroment. Last time I checked, the computer you used to write that comment has rather nasty effects on the enviroment over time...
Gosh this actually scares me. Just think if the bacteria were to get out of control and end up infecting someone it could lead to a global disease. It could kill millions before these scienctist get a hold on killing it. This sounds worst than the polluction. We all share in alot of the pollution on our planet, I think we need to find other ways of cleaning up our messes and send it into outer space instead if putting it underground.  
You make a good point Ella. However, this research is still in the beginning stages and I expect that there are numerous more challenges and experimental set-ups that need to be successfully undertaken before we finally see the bacteria in action. We can't ignore the massive potential that this holds for the benefit of the environment. It seems that that the bacteria has been naturally present in several eco-systems and there is so much that can be done to harness its full potential. What a great way forward!
I am skeptical that man-made microbes will cause the eco-disaster scenario Ms. Ella is proposing, Though she presents a valid concern. It is more likely that these "frankengerms" will continue to readily adapt, as nature designed them to do. They will find a niche in the eco-system, or to die out as almost all known species, with exception of extant species, have done.
Well said, Elle, Spokane WA.  DC must put the pressure onto industry and commerce to find alternatives to the practices that lead to pollution.  Having said that, there is a lot of pollution already hear and something has to be done about it.  These bacteria so far have been used very successfully in removing certain types of pollution and I say "good job".  The alternative is to let the pollution destroy the world as we know it regardless of any influence of rogue bacteria.
Thanks for coming clean on bacteria Alan!  It's good to see the lowly bacteria getting some good press about it's useful purposes that can help clean up our mess on our only nest.  It's good to see the scientists hard at work finding new innovative ways to clean up our pollution by putting some of the lowest lifeforms to work.
Sadly, Ella, "not polluting in the first place" is not a viable way to clean up the pollution we've already made. But thank you for playing!
well, ella, we are already directing the evolutionary courses of everything on earth by everything we do, including "conservation efforts."  Humans are a part of the earth, and anything we do will have an effect on the biosphere.  Fear shouldn't impede on progress.
"You will, not likely, ensure these are sterile, and they will potentially displace normal bacteria"

This and other statements show a lack of understanding of the basic fundamentals of biology and what is discussed in the blog posting.  A common problems with the knee-jerk "anti-franken/germ/food/etc" crowd that wants to think they are "doing the right thing" but actually don't know what they are talking about.
One Man's pollution is another bacteria's smorgasbord.
It's a simple fact that we will always pollute, however if we actually have the means to clean-up after ourselves, it would be a huge improvement over what our predecessors have done.  At some point in our future Earth will no longer support us.  Now we can either learn to clean up after ourselves, or perish alond with the planet.  
Sounds very purposeful if we can isolate and or grow the proper sequence of genes for whatever task we have at hand.On the nightmare side it could be the Andromeda Strain in real life absorbing life as an inpurity.Sounds very versatile.
"Genetic engineering" has already been ongoing for the last 3000 years.  When humans selectively pollinated wheat, or selectively bred cows, we were passively conducting genetic engineering on those species.  This only takes the next logical step forward.  We can’t live in a pipe-dream world where we don’t pollute or contaminate, so we have to be responsible and clean up our mess first.  Regardless of how eco-friendly developed nations are or will be, there will always be a long line of developing counties that will industrialize and make mistakes on the way.  A "grey goo" situation won't happen here any more than the HLC will cause a black hole in the middle of the Earth.
Bob, Thanks for the true sight in reading what was printed.  Most of these other commenters have not fully read or at least comprhended what was written in black and white.  Your Analogy to the hunting dog works very well and I will add the hunting dog vs. say a seeing eye dog, or cadaver sniffing dog as even more concise.  No where in the article did it state they were creating germs.  It stated they were SELECTING bacteria.

Quote "Soon we will be able to pick the right strain for cleaning specific environments," end quote.

Please read the entire article instead of skimming before comenting.
I look forward to hearing more about these germs and what they can do to clean up the messes we make.  Are there any indications of what "eat" these germs?  What happens to the metals that are absorbed?
I think this conversation is thoughtful.  I don't agree with you Ella, but you put your thoughts out there, and let everyone into a hearty conversation that I really enjoyed reading.  Thanks for that.
Purple loosestrife, wild parsnip, garlic mustard, dandelion, starlings, english sparrows, pigeons and nightcrawlers are other organisms that seem harmless when introduced into a new environment.
Ella, there is strength in your point that we should beware of the "frankengerms" we create, though your ingnorance betrays your argument. If evolution is infallible, then either we will make ourselves extinct, or perhaps we are meant to "direct the evolution of natural organisms." Maybe that is why we are here. The sands of time know the answer, but you and I do not.
that's great work! Who would have thought about it?
Maybe a strain that eats up bad beer or tacky clothing.
To Ella and anyone else choosing to be ill-informed:  These bacteria are not man-made.  However they do talk about tweaking them to better fit some useful applications.  The fear that you express that this will somehow lead to a "super disease" is not well grounded.  The types of changes to these bacteria would be like changing the type of headlight on some car.  This will not turn it into an airplane, it will still be a car.

There are millions of species of bacteria in our world.  The overwhelming majority are benign to us and do not cause disease.  We live with them everyday without knowing it.  For these bacteria to become disease causing in humans we would need to completely rewrite their genomes for that purpose.  Like I said changing the headlights won't turn a car into an airplane.  But if small changes help them metabolise waste more efficiently then everybody wins.
Unless you have taken microbiology don't pass judgement on bacteria. I have had the priviledge to study viruses in micro and bacteria seem to be alot more beneficial than a virus. So before you condem them study them or listen to someone who has ok.
Whatever doesn't kill us makes us stronger?

It is fear that takes a tool and twists it to no good. It takes both humans and bacteria to keep nature's balance, so why not use the tools we have and lose the fear?

I agree that finding unique and interesting things nature has already created is definitely a solution to humanity's excesses.
As someone who has worked in the field of cleaning up radioactive and heavy metal waste, I am excited and fascinated by the use of bacteria to this end. It would go a long way toward cleaning up existing Superfund sites relatively inexpensively. Sorry ella, I am for progress, not regress, in this area.
It is hard to sustain the desired effects of microbes once introduced into a natural setting.  If the conversion of contaminants into 'safe' products is a fundamental component of the organism's biochemistry, it is likely that the organism will peak out and fade out quickly.  People will need to constantly re-seed the areas for decontamination.  If the conversion of chemicals is not a fundamental component, the organism will quickly mutate to favor more abundant energy sources and likely lose its decontaminating potency, perhaps displacing existing natural microbes, but performing their function.  The natural world has nothing to fear.
Hello? We've been directing the evolution of many species of plants and animals for tens of thousands of years. And now we have better tools for the job.

There wouldn't be much advantage (more likely disadvantage) for these things to change their food source from metals to humans. Metals don't have immune systems, and there's already plenty of competition in the biosphere for things that eat humans. And our immune systems are ahead in that race.

You want a way to kill these things? It's called ozone. Most municipalities in the U.S.A use it to sterilize their water.
One day we will find that these bacterea might be the
building block of life on EARTH.
Others may thing that aliens from space "high energy" taking what's on EARTH recreating themselves in different forms to survive and make observations of the EARTH!!!
I am skeptical that man-made microbes will cause the eco-disaster scenario Ms. Ella is proposing, Though she presents a valid concern. It is more likely that these "frankengerms" will continue to readily adapt, as nature designed them to do.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=2048463

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google