Cell dry mass-to-volume relationships.
Cell volume distributions were determined for pure cultures of 12 bacterial and archaeal species of different sizes and shapes (
Nitrosopumilus NAOA6,
Formosa Hel3_A1_48,
Lentimonas CC151,
Muricauda MAR_2010_75,
Maribacter Hel1_7,
Cellulophaga Hel_I_12,
Lacinutrix Hel_I_90,
Methyloceanibacter methanicus LMG 29429,
Methyloceanibacter caenitepidi LMG 28723,
Methyloceanibacter stevinii LMG 29431,
Nitrotoga fabula KNB, and
Kuenenia stuttgartiensis). Environmental representatives related to these species are known to play key roles in the biogeochemical cycling of carbon and nitrogen (for examples, see references
30 to 32). For proper volumetric measurements, cultures were critical point dried (CPD) directly after fixation and immobilization. To additionally preserve cell morphology, cells were not subjected to vacuum filtration but pipetted onto a poly-
l-lysine (PLL)-coated silicon wafer. Volumes of individual cells were calculated from their length and width determined with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (
Fig. 1).
Literature evidence suggests that sample preparation for SEM imaging (chemical fixation, filtration, and staining) tends to alter cell size and shape, resulting in misestimation of cell volume compared to that of living cells (
16,
19,
33). Thus, to prove the validity of using SEM for volume determination and/or to establish a correction factor for fixed versus live cell volume calculation, we measured aliquots of the same microbial culture (
Formosa Hel3_A1_48) as both fixed, CPD-treated cells with SEM and living cells with atomic force microscopy (AFM). AFM is a scanning-probe microscopic technique that gives highly accurate measurements of not only cell length and width but also height, with a very high spatial resolution. Application of AFM to live and suspended cells is challenging because cells tend to be easily displaced during measurements. Thus, the method is comparably tedious and low throughput, compared to, e.g., SEM. Using our test culture we could not detect significant differences in cell volumes between these two measurements (see Fig. S5a in the supplemental material). We thus proceeded to determine cell volumes from SEM images obtained from fixed and CPD-treated cells.
SEM images revealed that the 12 investigated species represented four distinct cell shape types: (i) rod shaped (Muricauda MAR_2010_75, Cellulophaga Hel1_12, Lacinutrix Hel1_90, Methyloceanibacter methanicus LMG 29429, and Methyloceanibacter caenitepidi LMG 28723), (ii) coccoid (Formosa Hel3_A1_48, Lentimonas CC151, and Kuenenia stuttgartiensis), (iii) prolate spheroid shaped (Nitrosopumilus NAOA6, Maribacter Hel1_7), and (iv) C shaped (Nitrotoga fabula KNB and Methyloceanibacter stevinii LMG 29431). The volume of individual cells from the 12 analyzed species ranged from 0.004 μm3 to 1.357 μm3, revealing an almost 500-fold difference in volumes between analyzed cells (Fig. S1). The median volumes of the 12 bacterial and archaeal species varied ca. 65-fold, with Nitrosopumilus NAOA6 having the smallest (0.011 μm3/cell) and Methyloceanibacter stevinii LMG 29431 the largest (0.705 μm3/cell) median volumes of the investigated species. Interestingly, the variability in the measured volumes of the investigated microbial species was rather large and ranged between 5 and 30% (see Table S1).
Next, buoyant masses of single cells were determined using a suspended microchannel resonator (SMR) device. From these data, dry masses of single cells were calculated as described in reference
34. As with volume measurements, at first comparison measurements were made between living and fixed cells of the same microbial culture (
Muricauda MAR_2010_75). No significant differences could be found between the masses of fixed and living cells for this species (Fig. S5b). We thus proceeded to use fixed cells for the SMR measurements, as this way the same sample batches could be used for both SMR and SEM. The samples contained single suspended cells, as confirmed by SEM imaging.
The SMR revealed large differences in the mass of the different species, with
Nitrosopumilus NAOA6 being the lightest of the investigated species (24.6 fg/cell) and
Methyloceanibacter stevinii LMG 29431 the heaviest (266.5 fg/cell). Median dry masses of these two microbial strains varied ca. 10-fold, thus less than their median volumes. Correspondingly, the median dry masses of the other 10 investigated species exhibited smaller differences. Cellular dry mass distributions of individual species followed a Gaussian-like distribution (
Fig. 2) similar to previous observations on other bacterial species (
35–38).
The median volumes and dry masses of all analyzed species were used to determine the relationship of cell volume to dry mass (
Fig. 3a). We found a significant (chi-square analysis of variance [ANOVA],
P < 0.005) nonlinear relationship between cell volume and dry mass. This relationship can be represented by the following equation:
where
V refers to cell volume in cubic micrometers and
mdry stands for dry mass in femtograms. The equation shows that the value of the scaling factor (0.43;
equation 1) is less than 1, meaning that the ratio of dry mass to volume is not constant. The effects of using nonlinear relationship over linear are more pronounced on smaller cells than on larger cells. For example, small cells with a volume of about 0.01 μm
3 end up with a ca. 14-fold-higher mass than in a linear relationship where a scaling factor equals unity (
equation 1;
). Larger cells with a volume about 0.1 μm
3 are less affected by this effect but still exhibit a ca. 4-fold-higher mass than in a linear relationship.
A nonlinear relationship between cell volume and dry mass of bacterial cells has been reported previously (
12,
23). However, for small cells, these models consistently yield lower dry masses than our relationship. For example, our relationship yields dry masses of 44 and 120 fg for cells with volumes of 0.01 and 0.1 μm
3, respectively (
equation 1). This is 50 to 80% higher than the values obtained with the model presented in reference
23, in which the same cells have dry weights of 8 and 60 fg, respectively. This implies that currently used relationships for dry mass estimation of bacterial cells underestimate the mass of microbial cells, with greater bias for small cells (∼0.01 to 0.1 μm
3).
Dry mass expressed per unit cell volume (i.e., dry mass density,
, in femtograms per cubic micrometer) correlated significantly (chi-square ANOVA,
P < 0.05) with cell volume (
Fig. 3b). This relationship could be expressed as follows:
The nonlinear form of this relationship is consistent with the nonlinear relationship between dry mass and cell volume. The negative scaling factor (
equation 2) indicated that smaller cells tend to have considerably higher dry mass content per cell volume than larger cells. This relationship deviates from the previously reported relationship, i.e.,
(
12), and the relationship derived from the dry mass equation reported in reference
23,
.
Elemental composition and cell volume relationships.
The C, N, O, P, and S masses of individual cells (in femtograms per cell) were determined by combining their dry cellular masses (in femtograms per cell, as reported above) and their relative elemental content (expressed as percent; measured with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy [EDS]).
The measured median relative carbon content constituted 55.8% ± 1.3% (median ± standard error [SE]) of cell dry mass for all analyzed microbial species, with
Formosa Hel3_A1_48 possessing the smallest relative carbon content of the investigated species (45.1%) and
Methyloceanibacter caenitepidi LMG 28723 and
Methyloceanibacter stevinii LMG 29431 the largest (61.4%). The median N, O, P, and S contents of these strains were 11.4% ± 1.2%, 15.7% ± 1.3%, 1.8% ± 0.1%, and 1.6% ± 0.2%, respectively. Interestingly, the median C/N/P molar ratio for all 12 microbial species was 105:18:1 and thus very similar to the Redfield ratio (
39) of 106:16:1 (
Fig. 4a and
b), which has been determined for phytoplankton algae.
The calculated median cellular carbon mass for the investigated prokaryotic microorganisms ranged from 12.9 fg of C for
Nitrosopumilus NAOA6 to 163.6 fg of C for
Methyloceanibacter stevinii LMG 29431 (
Fig. 5a). Median cellular N, O, P, and S masses ranged between 2.7 and 36.9 fg of N, 4.4 and 40.1 fg of O, 0.4 and 40.1 fg of P, and 0.6 and 3.1 fg of S (
Fig. 5c and Fig. S2a, S3a, and S4a). Both cellular carbon and nitrogen masses showed significant (chi-square ANOVA,
P < 0.005 and
P < 0.05, respectively) nonlinear relationships with cell volume (
Fig. 5a and
c) that were best described by the following equations:
where
V refers to cell volume expressed in cubic micrometers and
mcarbon and
mnitrogen in femtograms. The scaling factor of the relationship between cellular carbon mass and cell volume (0.46 [
equation 3]) was lower than unity (
Fig. 5a). As with the dry mass-volume relationship, this implies that smaller cells have a higher carbon mass/volume ratio than larger cells. This is also reflected by increasing carbon and nitrogen mass densities (i.e., masses of C and N per unit cell volume) with decreasing cell volume (
and
, respectively [
Fig. 5b and
d]). These observations are in line with previous studies suggesting that small microbial cells contain less water and are richer in carbon and nitrogen (
24). This phenomenon was attributed to the fact that smaller microorganisms need to sustain a minimum amount of necessary proteins/enzymes, lipids, and DNA despite a greatly reduced cell volume.
Our observed relationship between cell volume and carbon mass (
Fig. 5a) differs from most published relationships (for examples, see references
14 and
19) and is most similar to the weak relationship observed for a compilation of published data (
;
[
28]).
We also found nonlinear relationships (Fig. S2a, S3a, and S4a) between cellular volume and O, P, and S masses, which were best described by the following:
It should be noted that the calculated
R2 values for O, P, and, S mass-volume relationships were lower than for C and N. Nonetheless, the scaling factors for O, P, and S mass-volume relationships (
equations 1,
2, and
3) were smaller than unity, implying that smaller cells have more O, P, and S per cell volume than larger cells. This was also reflected by increasing O, P, and S mass densities with decreasing cell volume (Fig. S2b, S3b, and S4b), represented by significant (chi-square ANOVA,
P < 0.05,
P < 0.005, and
P < 0.05, respectively) nonlinear relationships between the volumes and the densities (
,
, and
).
Implications for microbial biomass estimates.
Our results show that, with one exception, all published single-cell carbon biomass-to-volume relationships significantly underestimate the carbon mass of small (<0.5-μm
3) microbial cells (
Fig. 6a and
b). An exception is the model of Verity et al. (
14), which underestimated the carbon mass only for cells <0.15 μm
3 (by as much as 70%) and overestimated the mass of cells >0.15 μm
3 by 65% (
Fig. 6a and
b). This could be due to true inherent differences between large (>1-μm
3) picoeukaryotic algal cells, which were mainly used to establish the equation of Verity et al., and smaller prokaryotic cells used to derive our equation. It thus appears that whereas the equation of Verity et al. is suitable for estimating biomass of larger cells, it might not correctly predict the allometric mass relationship for small cells.
A compilation of our data and the data published in reference
14 showed that cells with larger volumes (>0.5 μm
3) display a constant (carbon) mass-to-volume ratio, whereas cells with volumes below 0.5 μm
3 exhibit a nonlinear increase in (carbon) mass density with decreasing volume (
Fig. 6c). Estimates of microbial biomass that assume a more or less constant cellular mass/volume ratio (for examples, see references
17 and
40) will thus severely underestimate the biomass contributions of smaller cells (
Fig. 6b). It should be noted that also the published nonlinear relationships (for example, see reference
24) generally underestimate the mass of smaller cells (
Fig. 6b).
At this point we call for caution when transferring the established mass-to-volume relationships to living cells. The presented relationships were established from properties of fixed and dried cells, and any systematic changes in cell volume or mass during cell preparation would lead to an over- or underestimation of the mass of living cells. In our two investigated species we could not detect any significant changes in volume or mass between living and fixed cells. However, there is literature evidence that suggests that cells tend to shrink during common sample preparation procedures (
19,
41). Thus, it should be kept in mind that living cells might in fact have larger volumes than their fixed counterparts and the established relationships could overestimate their “
in situ” dry mass/cell element density.
Cell-specific carbon content estimates are crucial for, e.g., correct estimates of the biomass and generation times of microorganisms in the seafloor. These, in turn, are fundamental for determining the role of the microbial deep biosphere in the global carbon cycling. It has been proposed that microbial adaptation to life in these low-energy environments includes cell volume reduction and shrinkage. Current estimates of average cell size in the marine subsurface range between 0.005 μm
3 (
42) and 0.21 μm
3 (
43), but a value in between these end members is often used (0.04 μm
3 [
44], 0.05 μm
3 [
42], or 0.06 μm
3 [
45]). In any case, microbial cells in the deep biosphere are predominantly very small (<0.05 μm
3). The currently used conversion factors range between 14 fg cell
−1 and 65 fg cell
−1 (
1,
42–45). Based on our relationship, and assuming that volumes of living cells are not significantly larger than those of measured fixed cells, the cellular carbon mass will be in the range of 17 fg for cells with average volumes of 0.005 μm
3, whereas it will reach ca. 50 fg cell
−1 for average cell volumes of 0.05 μm
3 and 94 fg cell
−1 for cell volumes of 0.2 μm
3. We estimate, based on the cell counts (2.9 × 10
29 cells) and average cell size (0.042 μm
3) reported in reference
44, that the microbial biomass in the deep biosphere could represent 13.3 Pg of C, which is 220% higher than estimated originally (4.1 Pg of C [
44]) and 33% higher than the most recent assessment (10 Pg of C [
1]).
Notably, also the most abundant microbial taxa in freshwater and marine water columns, such as Prochlorococcus, Pelagibacter (SAR11), Actinobacteria, and marine group I (MGI) Thaumarchaea, are largely represented by cells substantially smaller than 0.5 μm3 (=coccoid cell with a diameter of 1 μm). Our results show that the (carbon) mass of these small cells tends to be underestimated by the commonly used models, and it is thus likely that the overall biomass of marine and freshwater bacterioplankton is larger than currently believed. Additionally, application of the correct estimates of cellular carbon and nitrogen contents will allow for a more precise quantification of the microbial C and N turnover rates and their contribution to the biogeochemical element cycles.