Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome Received for publication: March 1, 2022. Accepted for publication: August 17, 2022. Doi: 10.15446/agron.colomb.v40n2.101378 1 Unidad de Desarrollo e Innovación, Centro de Estudios de Energía y Procesos Industriales, Universidad de Sancti Spíritus “José Martí Pérez”, Sancti Spíritus (Cuba). 2 Institute for Sustainable Horticulture, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Surrey (Canada). 3 Centro Universitario Municipal de Taguasco “Enrique José Varona”, Universidad de Sancti Spíritus “José Martí Pérez”, Sancti Spíritus (Cuba). * Corresponding author: acperez@uniss.edu.cu, anneryscp@gmail.com Agronomía Colombiana 40(2), 278-292, 2022 ABSTRACT RESUMEN Soil microorganisms found in agricultural residues and the so-called efficient microorganisms (EM) are attractive for their potential applications and benefits in the bioremediation of complex ecosystems. However, the knowledge about Who is doing what?, as well as the trophic interaction in those com- munities that explain its benefits are limited; a better under- standing of this microbiome is needed to explain its benefits. The objective of this research was to characterize the microor- ganisms isolated from two soil communities and the efficient microorganisms obtained in laboratory (EM16 consortium), taking into account physico-chemical characteristics, diversity, quantification, and taxonomic identification through microbio- logical and molecular techniques. A microbiological analysis was performed according to the morphological characteristics of the colonies as well as the study of the dynamics and taxo- nomic identification of the microbial populations through the TRFLP and Ion Torrent techniques. The diversity, dynamics, and taxonomic identification achieved in these studies showed the prospects for using these soil EM in bioremediation, con- sidering the diverse metabolic pathways that these species have and their symbiotic interactive potential for biodegradation of lignocellulosic-resilient compounds. This study provides the first molecular characterization of the EM (EM16 consortium) and soil isolates from agricultural residues (sugarcane crop and bamboo field). The results suggest that the use of microbio- logical and molecular tools in a polyphasic approach allows the complete characterization of non-cultivable microorganisms that could contribute to sustainable environmental management and crop production. Los microorganismos del suelo que se encuentran en los re- siduos agrícolas y los llamados microorganismos eficientes (ME) son atractivos por su potencial aplicación y beneficios en la biorremediación de ecosistemas complejos. Sin em- bargo, el conocimiento sobre ¿Quién hace qué?, así como la interacción trófica en esas comunidades que explican sus beneficios son limitados; se necesita una mejor comprensión de este microbioma que explique sus beneficios. El objetivo de esta investigación fue caracterizar los microorganismos aislados de dos comunidades de suelo y los ME obtenidos en el laboratorio (consorcio EM16), teniendo en cuenta las carac- terísticas físico-químicas, la diversidad, la cuantificación y la identificación taxonómica mediante técnicas microbiológicas y moleculares. Se realizó un análisis microbiológico según las características morfológicas de las colonias, así como el estudio de la dinámica e identificación taxonómica de las poblaciones microbianas mediante las técnicas TRFLP e Ion Torrent. La diversidad, dinámica e identificación taxonómica logradas en este estudio mostraron las perspectivas para uso de estos ME del suelo para la biorremediación, considerando las posibles rutas metabólicas que tienen estas especies y su potencial de interacción simbiótica para la biodegradación de compuestos lignocelulósicos resistentes. Este estudio proporciona la prime- ra caracterización molecular de los ME (consorcio EM16) y de aislados del suelo procedentes de residuos agrícolas (cultivo de caña de azúcar y campo de bambú). Los resultados sugieren que el uso de herramientas microbiológicas y moleculares en un enfoque polifásico permite la caracterización completa de microorganismos no cultivables que podrían contribuir a la gestión ambiental sostenible y a la producción de cultivos. Key words: molec u la r met hod s , soi l m icroorga n isms , agricultural residues, polyphasic approach. Palabras clave: métodos moleculares, microorganismos del suelo, residuos agrícolas, enfoque polifásico. Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome Identificación taxonómica y diversidad de microorganismos efectivos del suelo: hacia un mejor entendimiento de este microbioma Annerys Carabeo1*, Janet Jiménez1, Zuleiqui Gil1, Deborah Henderson2, Paul Adams2, and Alexander Calero-Hurtado3 Introduction A wide diversity of microbial species interacts in natural ecosystems, contributing to waste degradation (Sun et al., 2013; Azman et al., 2015; Raja et al., 2017). The use of agricultural crop residues and agro-industrial waste would be attractive alternatives as a source of renewable energy https://doi.org/10.15446/agron.colomb.v40n2.101378 mailto:acperez@uniss.edu.cu mailto:anneryscp@gmail.com 279Carabeo, Jiménez, Gil, Henderson, Adams, and Calero-Hurtado: Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome because they close production cycles in a circular economy approach. However, despite the diversity of microorgan- isms involved in the decomposition of organic matter, the efficient biodegradation of these residues remains a chal- lenge for bioethanol and biogas production due to the high percentages of lignocellulosic material, whose polymers are difficult to decompose (Cortés, 2016; Widjaja et al., 2016; Amin et al., 2017). The search continues, therefore, for microorganisms that naturally contain this lignocel- lulolytic capacity that can be exploited biotechnologically. Teuro Higa developed in 1986 the technology of so-called efficient microorganisms (EM) (Allahverdiyev, Kırdar et al., 2011; Higa & Parr, 2013) that are isolated from undisturbed soils and ecosystems. EM technology has been applied in agriculture and forestry in more than 80 countries worldwide (Calero Hurtado, Pérez Díaz et al., 2019; Tanya & Leiva-Mora, 2019) with beneficial impacts. Microbial community compositions related to anaerobic EM consortia have not been characterized, but previous studies have identified phylogenetic groups, including Actinomycetales and fermenting fungi, photosynthetic bacteria, yeasts, and lactic acid bacteria (Namasivayam et al., 2014; Joshi et al., 2019). Soil microorganisms, including EM consortia, play a cru- cial role in agricultural production and environmental de- contamination, as they allow the availability of assimilable nutrients for plants during the biodegradation of organic matter, where phytohormones and secondary metabolites are released (López-Dávila, Gil Unday et al., 2017; Calero Hurtado, Quintero Rodríguez et al., 2019; Joshi et al., 2019; Tanya & Leiva-Mora, 2019; Castro et al., 2022). However, physico-chemical characteristics and microbiological com- position of EM consortia should be clarified in order to understand their beneficial effects on agricultural produc- tion (Calero Hurtado et al., 2020). The beneficial uses of EM consortia include restoration of damaged soils after application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides (Alvarez et al., 2018), manufacturing of fermented fertilizers (biofertil- izers) (Calero Hurtado, Quintero Rodríguez et al., 2019), processing of organic waste, and wastewater treatment (Al- lahverdiyev, Atilla et al., 2011). It has been widely reported that Lactobacillus species are prevalent in the EM consortia that is the basis for their use as a biofertilizer to enhance agricultural production (Blainski et al., 2018; Daranas et al., 2018; Quattrini et al., 2018; Naik et al., 2019; Abd El- Mageed et al., 2020; Muhialdin et al., 2020). Therefore, an important strategy would be to determine not only the main physico-chemical characteristics but also which of them contribute to the improvement of soil properties, growth of plants, and other important environ- mental processes (Higa & Parr, 2013). The EM consortia works synergistically to release beneficial substances such as vitamins, hormones, enzymes, organic acids, bioac- tive minerals, and various antioxidants when they come into contact with the soil organic matter (Allahverdiyev, Kırdar et al., 2011). In addition, the EM consortia helped to improve the soil pH and increase the action of mineral nutrients, hormones, and other metabolites that accelerate decomposition of organic wastes and increase formation of biogas (López-Dávila, Gil Unday et al., 2017). Therefore, the hydrolytic and fermentative activities of the EM consortia could be potentially used as a pre-treatment or biostimu- lant in the agricultural waste bioconversion processes into bioenergy, for instance in bioethanol or biogas production. The microbial dynamics of natural ecosystems (soils) as well as artificial ecosystems (anaerobic reactors), can be very complex due to the wide diversity of species and metabolic interactions required to degrade the organic matter. Microbiological characterization of these ecosys- tems using culture-dependent techniques are insufficient since only 0.1-10% of the bacteria in the environment can be cultivated (Nobu et al., 2015; Saw et al., 2015; Jiménez-Hernández et al., 2021). Hence, it is necessary to apply molecular methods that allow the analysis of taxonomic diversity and spatial structure of complex microbial communities to identify specific microbial populations in their natural habitat as well as to predict existing metabolic interactions. Previous studies for microbiome monitoring employed molecular techniques based on 16S rRNA gene analysis such as denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE), terminal restriction fragment length polymorphisms (TRFLP), single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) or capillary sequencing of selected genes by the Sanger method (Zoetendal et al., 2008). In complex microbial ecosystems, these methods provide an incom- plete composition of the microbial community, showing only the existence of certain groups. The development of metagenomic approaches based on next-generation sequencing (NGS) has been one of the great advances in molecular biology (Zhou et al., 2015; Sanz & Köchling, 2019). The combination of different technologies seems to be imperative to reach the goals. Techniques comple- ment each other, being the weaknesses of some and the strengths of others, especially when the study requires the identification of species to elucidate predominant metabolic pathways (Carabeo-Pérez et al., 2019). 280 Agron. Colomb. 40(2) 2022 Since 2014, in the Microbiology Laboratory of the Uni- versity of Sancti Spíritus (Universidad de Sancti Spíritus “José Martí Pérez” - UNISS, Cuba), EM consortia have been developed, taking into account the methodology proposed by Teuro Higa and modified by Olivera-Viciedo et al. (2014). These studies were focused on the application of EM as a biostimulant to soils and plants. However, a detailed characterization of this microbial consortium has not been performed. Agricultural soils in Cuba are currently in unfavorable conditions due to intensive cultivation and inadequate management (Febles-González et al., 2014). Most of the agricultural soils in this overexploited condition are lo- cated in the central region of the country that is a major producer of sugarcane (ONEI, 2020). These are brown carbonate soils with a pH between 5.0 and 8.5. In addition, they have high N, P and K content due to fertirrigation with wastewater from sugar factories and distilleries (Crespo et al., 2018). However, the diversity and dynamics of the microbial populations present in this soil and how they contribute to the degradation of agricultural residues were not found in previous studies. There are also extensive areas of soil in Cuba that have very little anthropogenic action and are of special interest. These are generally forested areas covered by bamboo spe- cies (Phyllostachys reticulata [Ruprecht] Koch) and marabu (Dichrostachys cinerea [L.] Wight & Arnott). In the case of bamboo, they are generally found in forested areas near rivers or canals with alluvial soils (non-carbonate) (Oca- Risco et al., 2014), and marabu species can germinate in any type of soil. No further molecular characterization of these virgin ecosystems was done in this study. The objective of this research was to characterize the micro- organisms isolated from two soil communities (sugar cane crop and bamboo forest) and the efficient microorganisms obtained in the laboratory (EM16 consortium), taking into account physico-chemical characteristics, diversity, quan- tification, and taxonomic identification through molecular techniques. Materials and methods Obtaining isolates of EM consortium and agricultural soils The EM consortium was produced in the Microbiology Laboratory of the University of Sancti Spíritus (UNISS, Cuba) pilot plant (20 L fermenter), following a methodology similar to that proposed by Olivera-Viciedo et al. (2014). Production was carried out as follows: 5 L of whey was mixed with 5 L of “C molasses” from a sugarcane factory. This mixture was added in layers to 10 kg of decomposing foliage and soil obtained from virgin forests undisturbed by human activity in the vicinities of the Zaza River of the Southern region of Sancti Spiritus province. Nine kg of corn f lour was added to the mixture which was homogenized, compacted, and sealed in an anaerobic tank. The mixture (solid EM material) was kept at 28°C in the dark for 21-25 d for fermentation. After this time, 2 kg of this solid EM material was diluted in 18 L of distilled water containing 1 L of whey and 1 L of “C molasses” to obtain a total volume of 20 L of liquid bioproduct. The culture was kept hermeti- cally sealed for 7 d under the same conditions described above, to avoid disturbing the fermentation process. The consortium obtained was called EM16. To obtain the culture of soil microorganisms, 10 samples of 20 g were collected from two different agroecosystems: i) 10 cm of soil beneath the leaf f loor of sugarcane field 7 d after harvest and ii) 10 cm of soil beneath the leaf f loor of 5-year-old bamboo (Bambusa vulgaris Schrader) field (brown soils with carbonates and alluvial). Each soil sample was individually suspended in 350 ml of peptone cellulose solution (PCS medium: 0.1% yeast extract, 0.5% peptone, 0.2% CaCO3, 0.5% NaCl, 0.5% cellulose, pH 7.0) for 7 d at 30ºC in static culture f lasks to isolate microbial strains capable of degrading lignocellulosic substrates. Physico-chemical characterization of EM The EM16 consortium and the soil isolates grown for 7 d in PCS were characterized by the following physico-chemical parameters: dry matter (DM), volatile solids (VS), ash, and pH, according to the 23rd Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (Baird et al., 2017). Morphological analysis (growth in plates) To identify the cultural bacteria, NA (nutrient agar) me- dium was used, employing surface spreading plate techni- que, with 0.1 ml of original samples and dilutions 10-1, 10-2 and 10-3 as inoculum. Petri plates were incubated at 37°C for 96 h, after which it was possible to differentiate the co- lonies by their morphological characteristics in the culture. DNA extraction Genomic DNA was extracted from each sample (triplicate aliquots of 200 mg) using the FastDNA® SPIN Kit for Soil and the FastPrep® Instrument (MP Biomedicals, USA) according to the manufacturer’s guidelines. The quantity and purity of DNA were determined photometrically using a NanoDrop 2000/2000c (Thermo Scientific, USA) 281Carabeo, Jiménez, Gil, Henderson, Adams, and Calero-Hurtado: Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome according to the manufacturer’s guidelines. Isolated DNA was stored at -20°C until further processing. Amplification of bacterial 16S rRNA gene sequences Genes encoding for bacterial 16S rRNA (rrs) were amplified using the PCR primers 27f (5’-AGAGTTTGATCMTGGCT- CAG-3’) (Lane, 1991; Sipos et al., 2007) and 1492r (5’- TAC- GGYTACCTTGTTACGACTT-3’) (Weisburg et al., 1991; Després et al., 2007). The PCR reaction mix contained 1X Taq buffer, 2 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM of each deoxynucleoside triphosphate, 0.4 µM of each primer, 1 µl (10 ng approxima- tely) of template DNA and 1 U of Taq DNA polymerase for a final volume of 25 µl. The amplification was performed with an initial denaturation step for 1 min at 94°C, followed by 34 cycles of denaturation at 94°C for 1 min, annealing at 57°C for 1 min, extension at 72°C for 2 min and a final extension stage at 72°C for 3 min. Chemicals and enzymes were provided by Fermentas (St. Leon-Rot, Germany), Promega (USA) Corporation and Molecular Biology (Thermo Scientific, USA). The correct length of the amplicons was verified by 1% agarose gel electrophoresis, using the GeneRuler® 1kb Plus DNA Lad- der (Thermo Scientific, USA). To minimize the risk of any PCR bias, three parallel PCR reactions were performed for each of the three parallel DNA extracts obtained from each environmental sample. The concentration of the amplified 16S rRNA gene fragments was measured using the Qubit4® f luorometer (Invitrogen, Thermo Scientific, USA). Terminal Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism analysis (TRFLP) For the bacteria diversity study, TRFLP analysis was carried out following the protocol proposed before by Rademacher et al. (2012). The primers 27f (5’-AGAGTTTGATCMT- GGCTCAG-3’) (Lane, 1991; Sipos et al., 2007), labeled at the 5’ terminal end with Indodicarbocianin (Cy5) and 926r (5’-CCGTCAATTCMTTTRAGTTT-3’) (Weisburg et al., 1991; Després et al., 2007) were used. The three independent amplification products, based on the same DNA template, were pooled and purified by applying the PureLink® PCR Purification Kit (Invitrogen, Thermo Scientific, USA). The concentration of purified products was measured using the Qubit4® fluorometer (Invitrogen, Thermo Scientific, USA). After purification, the PCR products were digested with MspI and Hin6I following the manufacturer guidelines for each restriction enzyme. The digestion fragments were electrophoretically separated and detected by f luorescence using a GenomeLab® GeXP Genetic Analysis System (Beckman Coulter, Krefeld, Germany). The data obtained were analyzed using the DataConnect® software (Applied Biosystems interface-Thermo Fisher) considering the size calculation of the detected terminal restriction fragments (TRFs) based on the migration time of the applied size standard. All fragments with a sequence length between 60 and 640 bp were used for further analyses with the T- Rex software package, available online (http://trex.biohpc. org). The identification of “true” peaks by distinguishing baseline “noise” from signals of f luorescently labeled frag- ments, as well as the alignment of TRFs with a threshold of 0.5, was based on the evaluation of the peak height. In the last evaluation step, TRFs were visualized by their relative distribution, considering that TRFs with a relative abundance lower than 2% were removed from the analyses. Bacterial 16S RNAr gene sequencing by Ion Torrent To amplify the 16S hypervariable regions, the Ion 16S® Metagenomics Kit (Life Technologies, Thermo Scientific, USA) was used, on the Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine® (PGM, Ion Torrent) platform, following the manufacturer guidelines. The remaining PCR reaction was purified using the PureLink PCR Purification Kit (Life Technologies, Thermo Scientific), and the concentration of the purified amplicons was assessed with the Qubit4 f luorometer and Qubit® dsDNA High Sensitivity Assay Kit (Life Technologies, Thermo Scientific). The DNA li- brary construction, quantification, template preparation, and sequencing were developed according to the standard protocol, well-described by Adamiak et al. (2018). Metage- nomic data was evaluated using the Ion Reporter® software (Invitrogen, Thermo Scientific, USA), showing the taxono- mic distribution of the target microbial community, based on the software database. The raw data of sequences have been deposited in the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) of the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) under the Bioproject accession number PRJNA764521 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/764521). Analysis of the diversity and organization of the microbial communities The bacteria richness (Rr) considering more than 1% of abundance was calculated by the methodology proposed by Marzorati et al. (2008), based on the number of OTUs obtained in each electropherogram or cluster. The Shan- non-Weaver diversity index (H) (Shannon & Weaver, 1963) was used to evaluate and compare this diversity, and the evenness index (Pielou index, H/Hmax) of the microbial community in each sample was calculated as the quotient of the Shannon index and the potential number of species http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/764521 282 Agron. Colomb. 40(2) 2022 in the sample (Hmax). This index describes the unifor- mity of the distribution of individuals in the community (Pielou, 1966). Results and discussion Physico-chemical characterization of EM16 The EM16 consortium presented low contents of dry matter (DM), which ranged from 0.90% to 1.57% for fresh matter (FM). Also, more than 50% of DM are volatile solids (VS) (0.51-0.95 of VS (% FM)), and 56.8-60.67 VS (% DM) is attributable to the biomass content. During the 7 d anae- robic fermentation process, biomass production is limited due to the anaerobic condition (Madigan et al., 2019). In addition, the dilution during the EM preparation described above (EM and agricultural soils isolates obtention) could contribute to this measure. Dai et al. (2016) also described a low organic matter content in EM bioproducts. The EM16 consortium had acid properties (pH = 4.31-4.46), agreeing with other reports where the pH ranged from 3.1 to 4.7 (López-Dávila, Calero Hurtado et al., 2017; Calero Hurtado et al., 2020). In the EM16 consortium, the low pH might be due to: i) the use of substrates with low pH like whey and molasses (Núñez-Caraballo et al., 2019; González-Herrera et al., 2021) and ii) the volatile organic acids formed during the fermentation processes (Xiong et al., 2012; Dai et al., 2016). In addition, the low pH reported by Calero et al. (2020) could be linked to the assimilation of some important mineral nutrients, such as N, P, K, and Ca that help to improve soil properties and plant growth. Also, knowledge of this characterization could help to identify substances important for use in agricultural production and other environmental practices. Morphological analysis The EM16 sample did not showed colony formation on plate growth (in aerobic condition). This result may be related to the lower relative abundance of the bacterial species in this sample with respect to the other isolated soil or that these microorganisms were not capable of growing under these conditions. EM consortium is frequently composed mainly of Lactobacillus species (Tanya & Leiva-Mora, 2019) that are facultative anaerobic bacteria difficult to grow in a Petri dish. On this basis, Calero et al. (2020) reported that the EM consortium is composed of some species of Lactobacillus bulgaricum, Bacillus subtilis and Saccharomyces cerevisiae that represent microbial diversity. Therefore, in the EM16 consortium, some of these species should also be identified. In contrast, in the undiluted soil isolate samples, bacterial growth exceeded 300 colonies after 24 h of incubation; those plates are reported as uncountable. However, the diluted samples (10-2 and 10-3) showed colony growth. After the incubation period, it was possible to differentiate the bacteria colonies according to the different morphological characteristics in the culture. In sugarcane soil isolates, bacterial colonies were observed mostly in a circular, irregular, or rhizoid shape, with rounded, wavy, or lobed edges and different surfaces such as f lat, convex, accumulated, and umbilical. Bamboo soil isolated colonies with irregular or circular shapes with f lat surfaces and wavy edges predominated. The observed morphological diversity demonstrated that a great variety of metabolic pathways may also exist in soil microorganisms. This physiological diversity allows the microbial community to maintain the balance of agroecosystems. To guarantee soil health, decomposition of organic matter, crop yields, availability of the nutrients, etc., the microorganisms establish a range of ecological in- teractions that make the microbial populations develop or not (Vilatuña, 2019). These relationships are poorly studied and should be considered in research on soil microbiota (Goncharov & Tiunov, 2014; Jacoby et al., 2017; Erktan et al., 2020). When the microbial culture is performed, the growth of the entire community will not be observed because, perhaps, the growth of some species depends on others and once isolated in a different culture medium it does not grow; perhaps the new culture medium does not provide the necessary nutrients or perhaps the dilution factor used affected growth. Traditional phenotypic identification schemes based on “observable” colony characteristics, such as morphology, development, and biochemical and metabolic properties, are essential as diagnostic methods for microbial com- munity studies. However, these are insufficient since, from these methods, it is only possible to observe the growth of those facultative anaerobic microorganisms; but when it comes to environmental samples or samples taken from anaerobic systems, the use of other molecular techniques that contribute to quantification and microbial identifica- tion is recommended. It is important to determine exactly the relationship of the form and physiology of those mi- croorganisms because it would help to understand their importance and function within the processes and how to manage them better. Bacterial community structure and dynamics In EM16 samples, 49 terminal fragments belonging to the Bacteria Domain were detected by TRFLP analysis. 283Carabeo, Jiménez, Gil, Henderson, Adams, and Calero-Hurtado: Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome Terminal fragments (TFs) with 62, 181, 404, 476, 546, 571, 572, 575, 579, 582, 585, 597, 600, and 610 bp showed high relative abundance of more than 2% (Fig. 1). From the su- garcane straw soil isolated samples, 94 TFs were retrieved, where the fragments of 192, 194, 204, 225, 276, 282, 451, 453, 472, 505, 508, 525, 546, 571, 575, 585, and 597 bp showed more than 2% relative abundance. From the bamboo soil isolated samples, 83 TFs were obtained, where the TFs of 152, 192, 194, 204, 225, 276, 281, 282, 451, 453, 472, 505, 508, 525, 546, and 579 bp showed a relative abundance more than 2% (Fig. 1). When the total communities are explored, including the TFs with a relative abundance below 2%, 13 TFs were found in both isolated soil samples (i.e., 192, 194, 204, 225, 276, 282, 451, 453, 472, 505, 508, 525, and 546 bp). That is, probably, because they are endemic microbiota from these niches (brown carbonate soils). According to Ion Torrent identification results from the Bacteria Domain (Tab. 1), five phyla were detected in the samples studied. R el at iv e A bu nd an ce ( % ) 0 25 50 75 100 EM16 Sugarcane Bamboo 152 192 194 204 225 276 404 451 453 472 476 505 508 525 546 571 572 575 579 597 600 610 62 181 281 282 582 585 TABLE 1. Taxonomic distribution of the bacteria domain in samples of EM16 consortium and soil isolates identified by Ion Torrent technique. Phylum Class Order Family % of mapped reads in EM16 % of mapped reads in sugarcane % of mapped reads in bamboo Actinobacteria Actinobacteria Actinomycetales Microbacteriaceae 0.09 0 0 Propionibacteriaceae 0.16 0 0 Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidales Bacteroidaceae 0 0 0.36 Porphyromonadaceae 0 0 15.53 Flavobacteriia Flavobacteriales Flavobacteriaceae 0 1.86 0.42 Sphingobacteriia Sphingobacteriales Chitinophagaceae 0.11 0 0 Sphingobacteriaceae 0 0.2 1.68 Firmicutes Bacilli Bacillales Alicyclobacillaceae 0 0.38 0 Bacillaceae 0 1.59 10.62 Sporolactobacillaceae 92.25 0 0 Paenibacillaceae 0 2.98 2.75 Lactobacillales Lactobacillaceae 3.25 0 0 Clostridia Clostridiales Christensenellaceae 0 0 0.21 Clostridiaceae 1.62 22.13 16.22 Clostridiales Family XI. Incertae Sedis 0 4.36 3.17 Eubacteriaceae 0 0.63 0 Lachnospiraceae 0 1.68 0.78 Oscillospiraceae 0 0 0.1 Peptococcaceae 0 2.36 2.69 Peptostreptococcaceae 0 12.76 9.05 Ruminococcaceae 0.08 17.79 8.09 unclassified Clostridiales 0 0 0.91 Erysipelotrichia Erysipelotrichales Erysipelotrichaceae 0 0 0.33 to be continued FIGURE 1. Relative abundance of bacteria terminal restriction fragments and their sizes (bp) in samples of EM16 and soil isolates (sugarcane crop and bamboo field). The relative abundance of each fragment was determined based on the height of its maximum of fluorescence in re- lation to the total of the heights of all the peaks detected in the sample. 284 Agron. Colomb. 40(2) 2022 Phylum Class Order Family % of mapped reads in EM16 % of mapped reads in sugarcane % of mapped reads in bamboo Planctomycetes Planctomycetia Candidatus Brocadiales Candidatus Brocadiaceae 0.05 0 0 Proteobacteria Alphaproteobacteria Caulobacterales Caulobacteraceae 0.08 9.41 0.47 Rhizobiales Bradyrhizobiaceae 0.1 0 0 Rhodospirillales Acetobacteraceae 0.32 0.45 0.92 Rhodospirillaceae 0 5.44 5.87 Betaproteobacteria Burkholderiales Alcaligenaceae 0 0 0 Burkholderiaceae 1.46 0 0 Comamonadaceae 0.16 0.8 2.34 Epsilonproteobacteria Campylobacterales Campylobacteraceae 0.06 0 0 Gammaproteobacteria Aeromonadales Aeromonadaceae 0 0 0 Enterobacteriales Enterobacteriaceae 0.1 7.77 6.39 Pseudomonadales Moraxellaceae 0 0.93 1.5 Pseudomonadaceae 0.04 4.39 8.3 Xanthomonadales Xanthomonadaceae 0.08 0.22 0 Total 100.00 98.13 98.7 Almost 97% of the microbial community in EM16 was represented by the Firmicutes phylum. Other species were detected belonging to the phyla Proteobacteria (2.4%), Actinobacteria (0.25%), Bacteroidetes (0.11%), Planctomy- cetes (0.05%) (Tab. 1 and Fig. 2). A similar composition of microbial structure was identified in a thermoacidophilic EM consortium with six predominant phyla (Proteobac- teria, Firmicutes, Chlorof lexi, Bacteroidetes, Actinobac- teria, and Acidobacteria) (Henry et al., 2020). The result of this study showed that the microbial community in the EM16 consortium is favored by the formation of Sporolactobacillus species (family Sporolactobacillaceae 92.25%) (Fig. 2). The members of Sporolactobacillus genus are catalase- negative, microaerophilic, spore-forming, homofermen- tative, lactic acid-producing species and require mainly carbohydrate for growth (Chang et al., 2008). Although Sporolactobacillus species are typically isolated from soil, they are occasionally isolated from fermented or spoiled foods (Yanagida et al., 1987; Fujita et al., 2010). The presence of these species was expected in the EM16 consortium due to the composition of the substrate (made in part by whey) considering that Sporolactobacillus, as well as Lactobacillus, are common in all types of dairy products (Madigan et al., 2019). The presence of lactic acid bacteria related to the breakdown of cellulolytic and lignified organic materials has also been reported in EM (Salminen & von Wright, 2004; Joshi et al., 2019). The families Lactobacillaceae (3.14%) and Clostridiaceae (1.62%) were less abundant in this consortium (Fig. 2). The presence of Clostridium species is essential for cellulose degradation (Madigan et al., 2019), therefore they could be used to improve the degradation of lignocellulosic residues. On the other hand, Lactobacillus spp. have potential effects for agricultural needs, so they can enhance soil properties since they show an antagonistic effect against different phytopathogenic agents in the soil, mainly due to the de- crease in pH, production of peptides with antimicrobial activity such as class I bacteriocins, and nisin that is very active against gram-positive bacteria (Tanya & Leiva-Mora, 2019). In addition, Lactobacillus spp. can enhance the tro- phic interactions (Quattrini et al., 2018; Naik et al., 2019), biotic and abiotic responses (Tsuda et al., 2016; Blainski et al., 2018; Abd El-Mageed et al., 2020; Muhialdin et al., 2020), and plant growth and productivity (Daranas et al., 2018; Quattrini et al., 2018). The presence of these species is, therefore, essential in the EM16 consortium to enrich the soil microbiome and its functionality during the cycle of assimilation and de-assimilation of nutrients. The taxonomic groups identified in EM16 are similar to other EM consortia (Alvarez et al., 2018; Naik et al., 2019); however, the diversity and richness of species depend on the environmental conditions and the substrate from which they come. The EM16 consortium could be an efficient alternative to use in sustainable agriculture since it can promote microbial consortia interaction in the soil and 285Carabeo, Jiménez, Gil, Henderson, Adams, and Calero-Hurtado: Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome degrades organic components at the same time it supports a better micro or macronutrient assimilation by roots. The sugarcane soil sample was represented by the Fir- micutes (67.06%), Proteobacteria (29.64%), and Bacteroide- tes (3.38%) phyla (Tab. 1). The most abundant families were Clostridiaceae (22.13%), Ruminococcaceae (17.59%), and Peptostreptococcaceae (12.76%) (Fig. 3). A similar distribution of phyla was detected in bamboo soil samples, represented by Firmicutes (55.52%), Proteobacte- ria (26.28%), and Bacteroidetes (18.17%) (Tab. 1). The most abundant families were Clostridiaceae (16.22%), Porphy- romonadaceae (15.53%), and Bacillaceae (10.62%) (Fig. 4). In the sugarcane and bamboo soil samples (Figs. 3-4), where bacterial species belonging to the phylum Firmicutes FIGURE 2. Krona plot of identified bacteria in EM16 sample, through the Ion Torrent technique, by using the Ion Reporter® software. The Krona plot shows the taxonomic distribution from phyllum to species level and the associated abundance based on the percentage of mapped reads taking into acount the NGS repositories based on NCBI database. Bacilli Firmicutes (family level ID only)70% Sporolactobacillaceae EM_v1 (concensus) Proteobac teria Betaproteobac teria Bacillales Clostridia Clostridial es Lact o...la les Burkh...iales Lact obac illac eae Lact obac illus Sp or ol ac to ba ci llu s 21% (genus level ID only) 1% Burkholderiaceae 2% Clostridiaceae 0.9% vineae 2% (slash calls) 3 m ore 3 m ore 286 Agron. Colomb. 40(2) 2022 predominated, more than 10 different species of the Clos- tridium genus were identified to the species level. These are fermentative bacteria, strictly anaerobic with great metabolic diversity, gram-positive, endospore-forming, generally fermenting sugars or amino acids usually found in soil samples (Madigan et al., 2019). Besides, in the Clostridiales order, with an abundance greater than 1.5% the genera Ruminococcus and Sedimentibacter have been identified in both soil samples. Ruminococcus species are defined as strictly anaerobic, gram-positive, non-motile cocci that do not produce endospores and require fermentable carbohydrates for growth (Goodfellow et al., 2009). They have been detected Fi rm ic ut es (fam ily l eve l ID onl y) 8 % (family level ID only) 11% 1% (f am ily le ve l I D on ly ) 0. 8% (f am ily le ve l I D on ly) (genus level ID only) 1% 1% (g en us le ve l I D on ly ) 2% (g en us le ve l ID on ly) (g en us le ve l I D o nl y) 4 % Cane_v2 (concensus) Bacteroidetes Alphaproteobacteria Peptost reptoco ccacea e Clos tridi um Cl os tri di a Cl os tri di al es Ru m in oc oc ca ce ae Ac et ar ae ro ba ct er iu m Clostridiaceae Clostridium Sedimentibacter Bacilli Bacillales Pr ot eo ba ct er ia Bacillaceae Ane...lus Lys...lus Clostrid...ae Pepto...aceae Sedis Lachno...raceaePaenib...laceae Caulobacterales Caulobacteraceae Brevundim onas Rh od os pi ril la le s Rh od os pi ril la ce ae De ... um Az ... um Ga mm ap rot eo ba cte ria Flavo...ia les P seu. ..ale s Ps.. .as Ac...e r C...mS...m Sp...ia Sp...es Be...ia Bu...es Flavobacter iia Sphi...ceae Flavoba...ri aceae Mora ...cea e Pse udo ...ac eae En ter ob ac ter ial es En ter ob ac ter iac ea e (slash calls) 6% (slash calls) 1% (slash ca lls) 1% (s la sh c al ls ) 4 % 1% (slash calls) 0.6% (slash calls) 0.8% (slash calls) 4% (slash calls) 7% (slash calls) 1% (slash calls) 2% (slash calls) 2% (slash calls) 6% (s lash c alls) 1% (sl ash ca lls) 0.9 % sp . 2% s p. sp . 1 %12 m ore 0.7% Com am onadaceae 7 more 3 more2% sp. 1% diminuta 2 m ore 3 m ore 4 m ore 0. 8% La ch no clo str idu m tet an om orp hu m 0.8 % ma rit im um 0. 9% vir id e 1 % elongatum 1% Ruminococcus 2% Ruminiclostridium 1% biferm entans 6% 1% daecheongense 1% D es ul fo sp or os in us 0. 9% D es ul fo to m ac ul um FIGURE 3. Krona plot of identified bacteria in sugacane isolated soil sample, through the Ion Torrent technique, by using the Ion Reporter® software. The Krona plot shows the taxonomic distribution from phyllum to species level and the associated abundance based on the percentage of mapped reads taking into acount the NGS repositories based on the NCBI database. 287Carabeo, Jiménez, Gil, Henderson, Adams, and Calero-Hurtado: Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome in greatest abundance in samples taken from herbivorous and omnivorous animal hosts, but a few have been found in environmental sources, generally in host-associated samples (La Reau et al., 2016). Some species are cellulolytic, playing an important role in the degradation of particulate substrates (Flint et al., 2008). Other members of family Ruminococcaceae are numerically abundant in the human intestinal tract, like bacterial species capable of degrading crystalline cellulose (Chassard et al., 2012; Moraïs et al., 2016). Others are non-cellulolytic and use polysaccharides like resistant starches (Ze et al., 2012) or selectively use various plant hemicelluloses (Wegmann et al., 2014). Species of the genus Sedimentibacter have been commonly isolated from anaerobic microbial communities (Breit- enstein et al., 2002; Woo et al., 2004; Imachi et al., 2016). Cells are slightly curved rods, motile, gram-positive and spores might be formed. Growth is strictly anaerobic and Bacilli Fi rm ic ut es (family level ID only) 5% (fa mi ly lev el ID on ly) 2% (concensus) Bac tero ide tes Bamboo_v2 Proteobacteria Al ph ap ro te ob ac te ria Be ta pr ot eo ba ct er ia Gam m aproteobacteria Clostridia Clostridiales Ru m in oc oc ca ce ae Peptostreptococcaceae Clostridium Cl os tri di ale s Pe pto ...a ce ae Bacillales Bacilla ceaeL ysinib acillus Paenibacillaceae Pseudomonadaceae PseudomonasPseudomonadales M oraxellaceae Acinetobacter Enterobacteriales Enterobacteriaceae Azospirillum Rh od os pi ril la le s Rh od os p. ..l la ce ae Co m am ... ac ea e Bu rk ho ld er ia le s Ac et ob ac te ra ce ae Co m am on as Bac tero idia Ba cte roi dal es Por ph yro mo nad ace ae Dy sg on om on as Sphingobacteriia Sphingobacteriales Sphingobacter iaceae Sphingobacter ium Clostridiaceae Clostridium B...s P...s Se dim en tib ac ter Fa m ily X I.In ce rta e s ed is 4% (fam ily level ID only) (genus level ID only) 1% sp. 1% (g en us le ve l I D o nl y) 5 % 2% (genus level ID only) (slash calls) 8% (slash calls) 3% (slas h ca lls) 4% (sla sh cal ls) 1% (s la sh c al ls ) 4 % 8% (s las h ca lls ) 6% (sla sh c alls ) 3% (slash calls) 2% (slash calls) 1% (slash calls) 0.8% (slash calls) 0.9% Roseomonas 1% (s las h c alls ) 2% ( sl as h ca lls ) 2% (s la sh c al ls ) 1 more 7 m ore 2 more Ruminococcus 3% biferm entans 1% Desulfosporosinus 0.7% Desulfotomaculum 1% 0. 7% B ac ill us 0. 8% g lu ca no ly lic us 6 more 6 more 0.7% brasilense 0.6% formosense 10% gadeí m ay om be l 1 % vir ide 0 .8 % m ale no m ina tum 0 .8 % Lachnospiraceae 0.8% unclassified Clostridiales 0.9% FIGURE 4. Krona plot of identified bacteria in bamboo isolated soil samples using the Ion Torrent technique, using the Ion Reporter® software. The Krona plot shows the taxonomic distribution from the phyllum to species level and the associated abundance based on the percentage of mapped reads taking into acount the NGS repositories based on the NCBI database. 288 Agron. Colomb. 40(2) 2022 requires yeast extract and is supported by the fermentation of pyruvate or amino acids in a Stickland-type reaction. Hydrogen is not produced and carbohydrates are not fer- mented (Breitenstein et al., 2002). Members of the genus Pseudomonas (class Gammapro- teobacteria) were also identified in soil samples from sugarcane and bamboo. These species show great meta- bolic diversity and consequently are widely distributed in nature. Some species are pathogenic for humans, animals, or plants. The metabolism of Pseudomonas is typically respiratory with oxygen as the terminal electron accep- tor; but some species can also use nitrate as an alterna- tive electron acceptor and carry out oxygen-repressible denitrification (dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to N2O or N2), allowing growth to occur anaerobically (Palleroni, 2015). They are typically oxidase and catalase-positive, do not form spores, with no gas formation from glucose, and perform catabolism of the carbohydrates by the alternative Entner-Doudoroff pathway and the cycle of tricarboxylic acids (Madigan et al., 2019). The microbial diversity found in bamboo and sugarcane soil isolates could be used to enrich the EM16 consortium to achieve a more complete bioproduct (with a broader metabolic capacity). The phylogenetic analysis coincides with the results of the TRFLP, where some fragments were detected in both soil samples. In general, species richness, diversity and the evenness index allows a comparison of isolated soil and EM16 consortium samples as shown in Table 2, considering the Ion Torrent and TRFLP analyses results. As expected, the richness, diversity, and Pielou index were higher in isolated soil samples compared to EM16 samples (Tab. 2) due to the dynamic conditions and the diversity of nutrients in these natural ecosystems. Despite the low diversity in the EM16 samples, it is worth noting the uniformity of the community with a coefficient of over 0.5. TABLE 2. Richness, diversity, and evenness indexes calculated for each sample considering the Ion Torrent and TRFLP (in parenthesis) analysis results. Species with a relative abundance more than 1% were consi- dered. Index EM16 Sugarcane Bamboo Rr 4 (8) 25 (9) 22 (9) H 0.73 (1.64) 2.89 (2.01) 2.86 (1.96) (H/Hmax) 0.52 (0.79) 0.90 (0.92) 0.92 (0.89) Rr=species richness, H=diversity index, H/Hmax=evenness index. Despite the differences among the indices with respect to the richness, the tendency with respect to diversity and the evenness is similar for both techniques. That is why the authors consider that TRFLP is more useful for diversity and dynamic evaluation and Ion Torrent is used for deeper identification until species level. Conclusions This study provides a comprehensive morphological and molecular characterization of the efficient microorganisms (EM16) and sugarcane and bamboo soil samples. The diver- sity, dynamic and taxonomic identification achieved in this study for the EM16 showed the perspective for using these consortia for bioremediation, considering the wide meta- bolic pathway including the presence of key species like Lactobacillus sp. with high potentials for biodegradation of lignocellulosic resilient compounds. Future studies may be aimed at evaluating the mixture of these microorganisms to obtain a microbial consortium with a higher metabolic capacity and increased effectivity in its agricultural or en- vironmental use compared to EM already studied. The use of microbiological and molecular tools under polyphasic approaches allows the completed characterization of non- cultivable microorganisms reported for the first time from an efficient microorganism consortium. Acknowledgments This research was supported by the Canadian Bureau for International Education (Emerging Leaders in the Ame- ricas Program scholarship) with a research grant awarded to Annerys Carabeo-Pérez (grant number 509) and by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) with a postdoctoral grant awarded to Janet Jiménez (grant number 91663901). The authors also acknowledge the cooperation between the Cuban, Canadian and German institutions that participated in the results of this research. Conflict of interest statement The authors declare that there is no conf lict of interests regarding the publication of this article. Author’s contributions JJ and CH formulated the overarching research goals and coordinated the research activity planning and execution. DH and PA provided the study materials, reagents, labo- ratory samples, instrumentation, computing resources, and other analysis tools. ACP carried out the laboratory activities, applied statistical, mathematical, computational, and other formal techniques to analyze study data. ACP and JJ conducted the research and investigation process, specifically performing the experiments. ZG verified the overall replication/reproducibility of results. All authors 289Carabeo, Jiménez, Gil, Henderson, Adams, and Calero-Hurtado: Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome contributed to the writing of the manuscript and carried out the revision of the manuscript. Literature cited Abd El-Mageed, T. A., Rady, M. M., Taha, R. S., Abd El Azeam, S., Simpson, C. R., & Semida, W. M. (2020). Effects of integrated use of residual sulfur-enhanced biochar with effective micro- organisms on soil properties, plant growth and short-term productivity of Capsicum annuum under salt stress. Scientia Horticulturae, 261, Article 108930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. scienta.2019.108930 Adamiak, J., Otlewska, A., Tafer, H., Lopandic, K., Gutarowska, B., Sterf linger, K., & Piñar, G. (2018). First evaluation of the microbiome of built cultural heritage by using the Ion Torrent next generation sequencing platform. International Biodeterio- ration & Biodegradation, 131, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ibiod.2017.01.040 Allahverdiyev, S., Atilla, A., Ismail, B. S., & Sahmurova, A. (2011). Response of photosystem II and photosynthetic pigments to salt and Baikal EM1 in tree seedlings. African Journal of Biotechnology, 10(4), 535–538. Allahverdiyev, S. R., Kırdar, E., Gunduz, G., Kadimaliyev, D., Revin, V., Filonenko, V., Rasulova, D. A., Abbasova, Z. I., Gani-Zade, S. I., & Zeynalova, E. M. (2011). Effective microorganisms (EM) technology in plants. Technology, 14(4), 103–106. Alvarez, M., Tucta, F., Quispe, E., & Meza, V. (2018). Incidencia de la inoculación de microorganismos benéficos en el cultivo de fresa (Fragaria sp.). Scientia Agropecuaria, 9(1), 33–42. https:// doi.org/10.17268/sci.agropecu.2018.01.04 Amin, F. R., Khalid, H., Zhang, H., Rahman, S. U., Zhang, R., Liu, G., & Chen, C. (2017). Pretreatment methods of lignocellulosic biomass for anaerobic digestion. AMB Express, 7(1), Article 72. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-017-0375-4 Azman, S., Khadem, A. F., van Lier, J. B., Zeeman, G., & Plugge, C. M. (2015). Presence and role of anaerobic hydrolytic microbes in conversion of lignocellulosic biomass for biogas production. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 45(23), 2523–2564. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2015.1 053727 Baird, R. B., Eaton, A. D., & Rice, E. W. (Eds.). (2017). Standard methods for the examination of water and wasterwater (23rd ed.). American Public Health Association. Blainski, J. M. L., Rocha Neto, A. C., Schimidt, E. C., Voltolini, J. A., Rossi, M. J., & Di Piero, R. M. (2018). Exopolysaccharides from Lactobacillus plantarum induce biochemical and physiologi- cal alterations in tomato plant against bacterial spot. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 102(11), 4741–4753. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00253-018-8946-0 Breitenstein, A., Wiegel, J., Haertig, C., Weiss, N., Andreesen, J. R., & Lechner, U. (2002). Reclassification of Clostridium hydroxyben- zoicum as Sedimentibacter hydroxybenzoicus gen. nov., comb. nov., and description of Sedimentibacter saalensis sp. nov. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiol- ogy, 52(3), 801–807. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-52-3-801 Calero Hurtado, A., Pérez Díaz, Y., Quintero Rodríguez, E., Olivera Viciedo, D., & Peña Calzada, K. (2019). Efecto de la aplicación asociada entre Rhizobium leguminosarum y microorganismos eficientes sobre la producción del fríjol común. Ciencia y Tec- nología Agropecuaria, 20(2), 295–322. https://doi.org/10.21930/ rcta.vol20_num2_art:1460 Calero Hurtado, A., Quintero Rodríguez, E., Pérez Díaz, Y., Jiménez Hernández, J., & Castro Lizazo, I. (2020). Asociación entre AzoFert® y microorganismos eficientes como potenciadores del crecimiento y la productividad del frijol. Revista de la Fac- ultad de Agronomía, 37(4), 387–409. https://doi.org/10.47280/ RevFacAgron(LUZ).v37.n4.04 Calero Hurtado, A., Quintero Rodríguez, E., Pérez Díaz, Y., Olivera Viciedo, D., Peña Calzada, K., & Jiménez Hernández, J. (2019). Efecto entre microorganismos eficientes y fitomas-e en el in- cremento agroproductivo del frijol. Biotecnología en el Sector Agropecuario y Agroindustrial, 17(1), 25–33. Carabeo-Pérez, A., Guerra-Rivera, G., Ramos-Leal, M., & Jiménez- Hernández, J. (2019). Metagenomic approaches: Effective tools for monitoring the structure and functionality of microbiomes in anaerobic digestion systems. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 103(23), 9379–9390. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00253-019-10052-5 Castro Lizazo, I., Calero Hurtado, A., Rodríguez Hernández, M. G., Peláez Casas, A., Martínez Balmori, D., & Pérez Díaz, Y. (2022). Potencialidades de dos bioestimulantes en la germinación y el crecimiento de las plántulas de tomate: QuitoMax® and OPLANT+® improve tomato germination and growth. Ciencia & Tecnología Agropecuaria, 23(1), Article 2343. https://doi. org/10.21930/rcta.vol23_num1_art:2343 Chang, Y.-H., Jung, M. Y., Park, I.-S., & Oh, H.-M. (2008). Sporolac- tobacillus vineae sp. nov., a spore-forming lactic acid bacterium isolated from vineyard soil. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 58(10), 2316–2320. https://doi. org/10.1099/ijs.0.65608-0 Chassard, C., Delmas, E., Robert, C., Lawson, P. A., & Bernalier- Donadille, A. (2012). Ruminococcus champanellensis sp. nov., a cellulose-degrading bacterium from human gut microbiota. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Micro- biology, 62(1), 138–143. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.027375-0 Cortés Ortiz, W. G. (2016). Tratamientos aplicables a materiales lignocelulósicos para la obtención de etanol y productos químicos. Revista de Tecnología, 13(1), 39–44. Crespo López, G., Cabrera Carcedo, E. A., & Díaz García, V. J. (2018). Study of the fertility of a carbonate red brown soil in a biomass bank with Cenchrus purpureus cv. CUBA CT-115 of ten exploitation years. Cuban Journal of Agricultural Science, 52(1), 67–74. Dai, X., Chen, Y., Zhang, D., & Yi, J. (2016). High-solid anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and cattle manure: The effects of volatile solid ratio and pH. Scientific Reports, 6(1), Article 35194. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep35194 Daranas, N., Badosa, E., Francés, J., Montesinos, E., & Bonaterra, A. (2018). Enhancing water stress tolerance improves fitness in biological control strains of Lactobacillus plantarum in plant environments. PLoS ONE, 13(1), Article e0190931. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190931 Després, V. R., Nowoisky, J. F., Klose, M., Conrad, R., Andreae, M. O., & Pöschl, U. (2007). Characterization of primary biogenic https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2019.108930 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2019.108930 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2017.01.040 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2017.01.040 https://doi.org/10.17268/sci.agropecu.2018.01.04 https://doi.org/10.17268/sci.agropecu.2018.01.04 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-017-0375-4 https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2015.1053727 https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2015.1053727 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-018-8946-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-018-8946-0 https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-52-3-801 https://doi.org/10.21930/rcta.vol20_num2_art:1460 https://doi.org/10.21930/rcta.vol20_num2_art:1460 https://doi.org/10.47280/RevFacAgron(LUZ).v37.n4.04 https://doi.org/10.47280/RevFacAgron(LUZ).v37.n4.04 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-019-10052-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-019-10052-5 https://doi.org/10.21930/rcta.vol23_num1_art:2343 https://doi.org/10.21930/rcta.vol23_num1_art:2343 https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.65608-0 https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.65608-0 https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.027375-0 https://doi.org/10.1038/srep35194 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190931 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190931 290 Agron. Colomb. 40(2) 2022 aerosol particles in urban, rural, and high-alpine air by DNA sequence and restriction fragment analysis of ribosomal RNA genes. Biogeosciences, 4(6), 1127–1141. https://doi.org/10.5194/ bg-4-1127-2007 Erktan, A., Or, D., & Scheu, S. (2020). The physical structure of soil: Determinant and consequence of trophic interactions. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 148, Article 107876. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107876 Febles-González, J. M., Vega-Carreño, M. B., Amaral-Sobrinho, N. M. B., Tolón-Becerra, A., & Lastra-Bravo, X. B. (2014). Soil loss from erosion in the next 50 years in karst regions of Mayabeque province, Cuba. Land Degradation & Development, 25(6), 573–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.2184 Flint, H. J., Bayer, E. A., Rincon, M. T., Lamed, R., & White, B. A. (2008). Polysaccharide utilization by gut bacteria: Potential for new insights from genomic analysis. Nature Reviews Mi- crobiology, 6(2), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro1817 Fujita, R., Mochida, K., Kato, Y., & Goto, K. (2010). Sporolactobacillus putidus sp. nov., an endospore-forming lactic acid bacterium isolated from spoiled orange juice. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 60(7), 1499–1503. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.002048-0 Goncharov, A. A., & Tiunov, A. V. (2014). Trophic chains in the soil. Biology Bulletin Reviews, 4(5), 393–403. https://doi.org/10.1134/ S207908641405003X González-Herrera, J. E., Hernández-Beltrán, Y., López González, L. M., & Jiménez Hernández, J. (2021). Digestión anaerobia de suero de queso utilizando inóculo de estiércol porcino a dife- rentes relaciones inóculo-sustrato. Centro Azúcar, 48(3), 11–20. Goodfellow, M., Kämpfer, P., De Vos, P., Rainey, F. A., Schleifer, K.- H., & Whitman, W. B. (Eds.). (2009). Family VIII. Rumi- nococcaceae fam. nov. In P. De Vos, G. M. Garrity, D. Jones, N. R. Krieg, W. Ludwig, F. A, Rainey, K.-H. Schleifer, & W. B. Whitman (Eds.), Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology (Vol. 3: The Firmicutes, pp. 1016–1043). Springer. Henry, A. B., Maung, C. E. H., & Kim, K. Y. (2020). Metagenomic anal- ysis reveals enhanced biodiversity and composting efficiency of lignocellulosic waste by thermoacidophilic effective micro- organism (tEM). Journal of Environmental Management, 276, Article 111252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111252 Higa, T., & Parr, J. F. (2013). Microorganismos benéficos y efectivos para una agricultura y medio ambiente sostenibles. Centro Internacional de Investigación de Agricultura Natural. Imachi, H., Sakai, S., Kubota, T., Miyazaki, M., Saito, Y., & Takai, K. (2016). Sedimentibacter acidaminivorans sp. nov., an an- aerobic, amino-acid-utilizing bacterium isolated from marine subsurface sediment. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 66(3), 1293–1300. https://doi. org/10.1099/ijsem.0.000878 Jacoby, R., Peukert, M., Succurro, A., Koprivova, A., & Kopriva, S. (2017). The role of soil microorganisms in plant mineral nutrition—Current knowledge and future directions. Fron- tiers in Plant Science, 8, Article 1617. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpls.2017.01617 Jiménez-Hernández, J., Carabeo-Pérez, A., & Guerra-Rivera, G. (2021). Métodos moleculares avanzados para el monitoreo de muestras ambientales: Una propuesta para Cuba. Revista Cubana de Ciencias Biológicas, 9(2), 1–14. Joshi, H., Somduttand, Choudhary, P., & Mundra, S. L. (2019). Role of Effective Microorganisms (EM) in sustainable agri- culture. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 8(3), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.20546/ ijcmas.2019.803.024 La Reau, A. J., Meier-Kolthoff, J. P., & Suen, G. (2016). Sequence- based analysis of the genus Ruminococcus resolves its phylog- eny and reveals strong host association. Microbial Genomics, 2(12), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1099/mgen.0.000099 Lane, D. J. (1991). 16S/23S rRNA sequencing. In E. Stackebrandt, & M. Goodfellow (Eds.), Nucleic acid techniques in bacterial systematics (pp. 115–175). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. López-Dávila, E., Calero Hurtado, A., Gómez León, Y., Gil Unday, Z., Henderson, D., & Jimenez, J. (2017). Efecto agronómico del biosólido en cultivo de tomate (Solanum lycopersicum): Control biológico de Rhizoctonia solani. Cultivos Tropicales, 38(1), 13–23. López-Dávila, E., Gil Unday, Z., Henderson, D., Calero Hurtado, A., & Jiménez Hernánde, J. (2017). Use of biogas plant eff luent and efficient microorganisms as biofertilizers in onion plants (Allium cepa L, cv. ’Caribe-71’). Cultivos Tropicales, 38(4), 7–14. Madigan, M. T., Bender, K. S., Buckley, D. H., Sattley, W. M., & Stahl, D. A. (2019). Brock biology of microorganisms (15th ed.). Pearson Education. Ma rzorat i, M., Wit tebol le, L ., Boon, N., Da f fonchio, D., & Verstraete, W. (2008). How to get more out of molecular f inger prints: Practica l tools for microbia l ecolog y. En- vironmental Microbiology, 10(6), 1571–1581. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01572.x Moraïs, S., David, Y. B., Bensoussan, L., Duncan, S. H., Koropat- kin, N. M., Martens, E. C., Flint, H. J., & Bayer, E. A. (2016). Enzy matic prof iling of cellu losoma l enzy mes from t he human gut bacterium, Ruminococcus champanellensis, re- veals a fine-tuned system for cohesin-dockerin recognition. Environmental Microbiology, 18(2), 542–556. https://doi. org/10.1111/1462-2920.13047 Muhialdin, B. J., Algboory, H. L., Kadum, H., Mohammed, N. K., Saari, N., Hassan, Z., & Meor Hussin, A. S. (2020). Antifungal activity determination for the peptides generated by Lactoba- cillus plantarum TE10 against Aspergillus flavus in maize seeds. Food Control, 109, Article 106898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodcont.2019.106898 Naik, K., Mishra, S., Srichandan, H., Singh, P. K., & Sarangi, P. K. (2019). Plant growth promoting microbes: Potential link to sustainable agriculture and environment. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology, 21, Article 101326. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101326 Namasivayam, S. K. R., Shunmugaraj, M., Bharani, R. S. A., & Lazar, A. L. (2014). Evaluation of phytotoxicity of effective microorganism (EM) treated distillery industry eff luent. Bio- sciences Biotechnology Research Asia, 11(2), 587–592. https:// doi.org/10.13005/bbra/1310 Nobu, M. K., Narihiro, T., Rinke, C., Kamagata, Y., Tringe, S. G., Woyke, T., & Liu, W.-T. (2015). Microbial dark mat- ter ecogenomics reveals complex synergistic networks in a https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-4-1127-2007 https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-4-1127-2007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107876 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107876 https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.2184 https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro1817 https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.002048-0 https://doi.org/10.1134/S207908641405003X https://doi.org/10.1134/S207908641405003X https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.000878 https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.000878 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01617 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01617 https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.803.024 https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.803.024 https://doi.org/10.1099/mgen.0.000099 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01572.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01572.x https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13047 https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13047 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.106898 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.106898 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101326 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101326 https://doi.org/10.13005/bbra/1310 https://doi.org/10.13005/bbra/1310 291Carabeo, Jiménez, Gil, Henderson, Adams, and Calero-Hurtado: Taxonomic identification and diversity of effective soil microorganisms: towards a better understanding of this microbiome methanogenic bioreactor. The ISME Journal, 9(8), 1710–1722. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2014.256 Núñez-Caraballo, A., García-García, J. D., Ilyina, A., Flores- Gallegos, A. C., Michelena-Álvarez, L. G., Rodríguez-Cutiño, G., Martínez-Hernández, J. L ., & Aguilar, C. N. (2019). Alcoholic beverages: Current situation and generalities of anthropological interest. In A. M. Grumezescu, & A. M. Holban (Eds.), Processing and sustainability of beverages (Vol. 2, pp. 37–72). Woodhead Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/ B978-0-12-815259-1.00002-1 Oca-Risco, A. M., Ulloa-Carcassés, M., & García-Cruz, S. (2014). Procedure for the recovery of the mined area in the deposit gravel - sand Rio Sagua, Holguin. Cuba. Boletín de Ciencias de la Tierra, (36), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.15446/rbct.n36.39543 Olivera-Viciedo, D., Sifontes, J. L., Calero Hurtado, A., Santana Sotolongo, M., & Hernández Muñoz, A. (2014). Prácticas agro- ecológicas en la provincia de Sancti Spíritus, Cuba. Microor- ganismos eficientes (EM), una tecnología apropiada sobre bases agroecológicas. Revista Logos Ciencia & Tecnología, 1, 77–83. ONEI, Oficina Nacional de Estadística e Información. (2020). Agricultura, ganadería, silvicultura y pesca. In Anuario estadístico de Cuba (2019th ed., p. 31). http://www.onei.gob. cu/node/15006 Palleroni, N. J. (2015). Pseudomonas. In W. B. Whitman, F. A. Rainey, P. Kämpfer, & M. E. Trujillo (Eds.), Bergey’s manual of systematics of archaea and bacteria (pp. 1–105). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118960608.gbm01210 Pielou, E. C. (1966). The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 13, 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(66)90013-0 Quattrini, M., Bernardi, C., Stuknytė, M., Masotti, F., Passera, A., Ricci, G., Vallone, L., De Noni, I., Brasca, M., & Fortina, M. G. (2018). Functional characterization of Lactobacillus plantarum ITEM 17215: A potential biocontrol agent of fungi with plant growth promoting traits, able to enhance the nutritional value of cereal products. Food Research International, 106, 936–944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.01.074 Rademacher, A., Nolte, C., Schönberg, M., & Klocke, M. (2012). Temperature increases from 55 to 75°C in a two-phase biogas reactor result in fundamental alterations within the bacte- rial and archaeal community structure. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 96(2), 565–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00253-012-4348-x Raja, H. A., Miller, A. N., Pearce, C. J., & Oberlies, N. H. (2017). Fun- gal identification using molecular tools: A primer for the natu- ral products research community. Journal of Natural Products, 80(3), 756–770. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b01085 Salminen, S., & von Wright, A. (Eds.) (2004). Lactic acid bacteria: Microbiological and functional aspects (3rd ed.). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780824752033 Sanz, J. L., & Köchling, T. (2019). Next-generation sequencing and waste/wastewater treatment: A comprehensive overview. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 18(4), 635–680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-019-09513-0 Saw, J. H., Spang, A., Zaremba-Niedzwiedzka, K., Juzokaite, L., Dodsworth, J. A., Murugapiran, S. K., Colman, D. R., Takacs-Vesbach, C., Hedlund, B. P., Guy, L., & Ettema, T. J. G. (2015). Exploring microbial dark matter to resolve the deep archaeal ancestry of eukaryotes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 370(1678), Article 20140328. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0328 Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1963). The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press. Sipos, R., Székely, A. J., Palatinszky, M., Révész, S., Márialigeti, K., & Nikolausz, M. (2007). Effect of primer mismatch, a nnea ling temperatu re a nd PCR c ycle nu mber on 16S rR NA gene-t a rge t t i ng bac ter ia l com mu n it y a na ly si s . FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 60(2), 341–350. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2007.00283.x Sun, L., Müller, B., & Schnürer, A. (2013). Biogas production from wheat straw: Community structure of cellulose-degrading bacteria. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 3(1), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-0567-3-15 Tanya Morocho, M., & Leiva-Mora, M. (2019). Microorganismos eficientes, propiedades funcionales y aplicaciones agrícolas. Centro Agrícola, 46(2), 93–103. Tsuda, K., Tsuji, G., Higashiyama, M., Ogiyama, H., Umemura, K., Mitomi, M., Kubo, Y., & Kosaka, Y. (2016). Biological control of bacterial soft rot in Chinese cabbage by Lactobacillus plan- tarum strain BY under field conditions. Biological Control, 100, 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2016.05.010 Vilatuña Catagña, F. O. (2019). Determinación de la microbiota del suelo en dependencia de la altitud y especies vegetales cultivadas [Undegraduate thesis, Universidad Central del Ecuador]. http://www.dspace.uce.edu.ec/handle/25000/20393 Wegmann, U., Louis, P., Goesmann, A., Henrissat, B., Duncan, S. H., & Flint, H. J. (2014). Complete genome of a new Fir- micutes species belonging to the dominant human colonic microbiota (‘Ruminococcus bicirculans’) reveals two chro- mosomes and a selective capacity to utilize plant glucans. Environmental Microbiology, 16(9), 2879–2890. https://doi. org/10.1111/1462-2920.12217 Weisburg, W. G., Barns, S. M., Pelletier, D. A., & Lane, D. J. (1991). 16S ribosomal DNA amplification for phylogenetic study. Jour- nal of Bacteriology, 173(2), 697–703. https://doi.org/10.1128/ jb.173.2.697-703.1991 Widjaja, T., Noviyanto, Altway, A., & Gunawan, S. (2016). The ef- fect of rumen and mixed microorganism (rumen and effective microorganism) on biogas production from rice straw waste. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 11(4), 2702–2710. Woo, P. C. Y., Teng, J. L. L., Leung, K., Lau, S. K. P., Wong, M. K. M., & Yuen, K. (2004). Bacteremia in a patient with colonic carcinoma caused by a novel Sedimentibacter species: Sedi- mentibacter hongkongensis sp. nov. Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, 50(2), 81–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. diagmicrobio.2004.05.005 Xiong, H., Chen, J., Wang, H., & Shi, H. (2012). Inf luences of volatile solid concentration, temperature and solid retention time for the hydrolysis of waste activated sludge to recover volatile fatty acids. Bioresource Technology, 119, 285–292. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.05.126 https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2014.256 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815259-1.00002-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815259-1.00002-1 https://doi.org/10.15446/rbct.n36.39543 http://www.onei.gob.cu/node/15006 http://www.onei.gob.cu/node/15006 https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118960608.gbm01210 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(66)90013-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.01.074 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-012-4348-x https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-012-4348-x https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b01085 https://doi.org/10.1201/9780824752033 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-019-09513-0 https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0328 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2007.00283.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2007.00283.x https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-0567-3-15 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2016.05.010 http://www.dspace.uce.edu.ec/handle/25000/20393 https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12217 https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12217 https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.173.2.697-703.1991 https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.173.2.697-703.1991 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2004.05.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2004.05.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.05.126 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.05.126 292 Agron. Colomb. 40(2) 2022 Yanagida, F., Suzuki, K.-I., Kaneko, T., Kozaki, M., & Komagata, K. (1987). Morphological, biochemical, and physiological characteristics of spore-forming lactic acid bacteria. The Jour- nal of General and Applied Microbiology, 33(1), 33–45. https:// doi.org/10.2323/jgam.33.33 Ze, X., Duncan, S. H., Louis, P., & Flint, H. J. (2012). Ruminococcus bromii is a keystone species for the degradation of resistant starch in the human colon. The ISME Journal, 6(8), 1535–1543. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2012.4 Zhou, J., He, Z., Yang, Y., Deng, Y., Tringe, S. G., & Alvarez-Cohen, L. (2015). High-throughput metagenomic technologies for complex microbial community analysis: open and closed for- mats. MBio, 6(1), Article e02288-14. https://doi.org/10.1128/ mBio.02288-14 Zoetendal, E., Rajilić-Stojanović, M., & De Vos, W. M. (2008). High-throughput diversity and functionality analysis of the gastrointestinal tract microbiota. Gut, 57(11), 1605–1615. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2007.133603 https://doi.org/10.2323/jgam.33.33 https://doi.org/10.2323/jgam.33.33 https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2012.4 https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.02288-14 https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.02288-14 https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2007.133603