Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Maps of (A) Tebenquiche and (B) Brava Lakes, showing sample collection sites. Inset: Vertical section of the microbial mats. Map data available from the U.S. Geological Survey.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Taxonomic abundance at phylum level on each mat.

Annotations based on MG-RAST or kaiju (see Materials and Methods for details). Proteobacteria were annotated at class level.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Functional analysis of biogeochemical cycles, based on KO markers.

(A) Relative abundance and taxonomic affiliation of markers associated to each process. (B) Abundance (in counts per million–CPM) and taxonomic affiliation of markers for different carbon fixation pathways. Additional markers analyzed had very low abundances or provided unreliable results (see text).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

COG markers for carbon fixation in different metagenomes.

Abundance and taxonomic affiliation of COG markers for different carbon fixation pathways were obtained from MG-RAST. Data for Brava and Tebenquiche is compared to several microbial mats and microbialites.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Rhodopsin types, abundances and affiliation in Brava and Tebenquiche microbial mats.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Rhodopsin abundances in metagenomes.

Data from 1063 metagenomes, standardized to RecA and Rad51 abundances, and grouped by category Metagenomes from this work and other HAAL sites are included as “Puna”.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Xanthorhodopsin clusters.

(A) Clustering of metagenomes from different environments based on rhodopsin type abundances. (B) Proportion of xanthorhodopsins in different groups.

More »

Fig 7 Expand