{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016587677725118485, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00033852403520649965, 'mean_word_length': 5.9203747072599535, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Biosurfactants Produced by Phyllosphere-Colonizing Pseudomonads Impact Diesel Degradation but Not Colonization of Leaves of Gnotobiotic Arabidopsis thaliana

Many leaf-colonizing bacteria produce surfactants and are able to degrade aliphatic compounds; however, whether surfactant production provides a competitive advantage during leaf colonization is unclear. Furthermore, it is unclear if leaf colonizers take advantage of the aliphatic compounds that constitute the leaf cuticle and cuticular waxes. ABSTRACT Biosurfactant production is a common trait in leaf surface-colonizing bacteria that has been associated with increased survival and movement on leaves. At the same time, the ability to degrade aliphatics is common in biosurfactant-producing leaf colonizers. Pseudomonads are common leaf colonizers and have been recognized for their ability to produce biosurfactants and degrade aliphatic compounds. In this study, we investigated the role of biosurfactants in four non-plant-pathogenic Pseudomonas strains by performing a series of experiments to characterize their surfactant properties and their role during leaf colonization and diesel degradation. The biosurfactants produced were identified using mass spectrometry. Two strains produced viscosin-like biosurfactants, and the other two produced massetolide A-like biosurfactants, which aligned with the phylogenetic relatedness between the strains. To further investigate the role of surfactant production, random Tn5 transposon mutagenesis was performed to generate knockout mutants. The knockout mutants were compared to their respective wild types with regard to their ability to colonize gnotobiotic Arabidopsis thaliana and to degrade diesel or dodecane. It was not possible to detect negative effects during plant colonization in direct competition or individual colonization experiments. When grown on diesel, knockout mutants grew significantly slower than their respective wild types. When grown on dodecane, knockout mutants were less impacted than during growth on diesel. By adding isolated wild-type biosurfactants, it was possible to complement the growth of the knockout mutants. IMPORTANCE Many leaf-colonizing bacteria produce surfactants and are able to degrade aliphatic compounds; however, whether surfactant production provides a competitive advantage during leaf colonization is unclear. Furthermore, it is unclear if leaf colonizers take advantage of the aliphatic compounds that constitute the leaf cuticle and cuticular waxes. Here, we tested the effect of surfactant production on leaf colonization, and we demonstrate that the lack of surfactant production decreases the ability to degrade aliphatic compounds. This indicates that leaf surface-dwelling, surfactant-producing bacteria contribute to degradation of environmental hydrocarbons and may be able to utilize leaf surface waxes. This has implications for plant-microbe interactions and future studies.