Publishing House SB RAS:

Publishing House SB RAS:

Address of the Publishing House SB RAS:
Morskoy pr. 2, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia



Advanced Search

Contemporary Problems of Ecology

2026 year, number 1

Study of the bacterial community of nest litter from the burrows of the long-tailed gopher by metagenomic analysis

E. G. TOKMAKOVA1, N. F. GALATSEVICH2, A. S. PONOMARYOVA1, S. V. ERDYNEEV1, A. A. CHALBAKAI2, I. S. AKIMOVA2, S. V. BALAKHONOV1
1Irkutsk Research Anti-Plague Institute of Rospotrebnadzor, Irkutsk, Russia
2Tuva Anti-Plague Station, Kyzyl, Russia
Keywords: bacterial community, metagenomic analysis, long-tailed gopher, nest

Abstract

The results of parasitologic and metagenomic study of two nests of the long-tailed gopher obtained in the Tuva mountain plague focus (Mongun-Taiga kozhun of the Tyva Republic) are presented. The fauna of blood-sucking arthropods of both nests was formed by fleas Citellophilus tesquorum Wagn., Frontopsylla elatoides Wagn., Rhadinopsylla li transbaikalica Ioff et Tifl., Oropsylla alaskensis Baker, Neopsylla mana Wagn. and ticks Haemogamasus mandschuricus Vitzthum and Hg. hodosi Goncharova et Buyakova. F. hetera Wagn., F. frontalis baikal Ioff were sporadically present in nest No. 1. According to the size, depth of occurrence, length of passage to the nest chamber, species composition and physiological state of ectoparasites, nests were defined as wintering nest No. 1 and reserve nest No. 2. According to the results of metagenomic analysis, nest community No. 1 contained 64.2 % of Proteobacteria phyla (Allorhizobium - 22.8 %, Aureimonas - 9.71 % and Methylobacterium - 7.68 %), 35 % of Actinobacteria (including Brachybacterium - 3.8 %, Amycolatopsis - 3.33 %, Brevibacterium - 1.76 %), 0.8 % of Firmicutes (Staphylococcus). In the sample from nest No. 2, 87.1 % of sequenced sequences belonged to Actinobacteria phyla (Brachybacterium - 51.0 %, Brevibacterium - 19.6 % and Nocardioides - 7.4 %), 12.8 % to Firmicutes (Staphylococcus), 0.08 % to Proteobacteria (Methylobacterium). Possible reasons for the differences in the composition of nest bacterial communities are discussed.