1887

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY logo

Volume 47, Issue 3

Phylogenetic Relationship of the Twenty-One DNA Groups of the Genus as Revealed by 16S Ribosomal DNA Sequence Analysis Free

Abstract

The inter- and intrageneric relationships of members of the genus were investigated by performing a comparative sequence analysis of PCR-amplified 16S ribosomal DNAs (rDNAs) from 21 strains representing all of the DNA groups that have been described. Phylogenetic treeing confirmed that spp. form a coherent cluster within the gamma subdivision of the class that includes strains with overall levels of 16S rDNA sequence similarity of more than 94%. The analysis of intrageneric relationships suggested that the majority of the strains cluster in five clearly distinguishable clusters, and this conclusion was supported by the results obtained with the different methods used for phylogenetic analysis (i.e., the maximum-likelihood, parsimony, and distance matrix methods). The first cluster contains the representatives of DNA groups 2 () and TU13, whereas the second cluster comprises representatives of DNA groups 3, “Close To TU13,” and “between 1 and 3.” The representatives of closely related DNA groups 8 () and 9 belong to the third cluster, which includes the representative of DNA group 6 as well. The fourth cluster is formed by DNA groups BJ15, BJ16, and BJ17, and the fifth cluster comprises DNA groups 1 (), BJ14,10, and 11. Within the fifth cluster the 16S rDNA sequences of DNA group 10 and 11 strains are nearly identical. The representatives of DNA groups 4 (), 5 (), 7 (), 12 (), TU14, and TU15 form individual branches that are not significantly affiliated with any of the five clusters identified. Apart from the clustering of the most closely related DNA groups, the general topology of the distance dendrogram revealed some discrepancy with previous DNA-DNA hybridization data, which may point to the inadequacy of comparative 16S rDNA sequence analysis for reflecting true evolutionary relationships of closely related bacterial taxa. Important, however, was the presence of unique sequence motifs in each of the 21 different DNA groups studied, which may be useful for rapid differentiation of DNA groups of the genus .

  • Published Online:
© Society for General Microbiology, 1997
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-47-3-837
1997-07-01
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/47/3/ijs-47-3-837.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-47-3-837&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bouvet P. J. M., Grimont P. A. D. 1986; Taxonomy of the genus Acinetobacter with the recognition of Acinetobacter baumannii sp. nov., Acinetobacter haemolyticus sp. nov., Acinetobacter johnsonii sp. nov., and Acinetobacter junii sp. nov. and emended description of Acinetobacter calcoaceticus and Acinetobacter lwoffii . Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol 36:228–240
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bouvet P. J. M., Jeanjean S. 1989; Delineation of new proteolytic genomic species in the genus Acinetobacter . Res. Microbiol 140:291–299
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Brosius J., Palmer J. L., Kennedy H. P., Noller H. F. 1978; Complete nucleotide sequence of a 16S ribosomal RNA gene from Escherichia coli . Proc. Natl. Acad. SciUSA 75:4801–4805
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Cilia V., Lafay B., Christen R. 1996; Sequence heterogeneities among 16S ribosomal RNA sequences and their effect on phylogenetic analyses at the species level. Mol. Biol. Evol 13:451–461
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Emmert D. B., Stoehr P. J., Stoessner G., Cameron G. N. 1994; The European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI databases). Nucleic Acids Res 22:3445–3449
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Enright M. C., Carter P. E., MacLean I. A., McKenzie H. 1994; Phylogenetic relationships between some members of the genera Neisseria, Acinetobacter, Moraxella, and Kingella based on partial 16S ribosomal DNA sequence analysis. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol 44:387–391
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Felsenstein J. 1985; Confidence limits on phytogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783–791
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Felsenstein J. 1993; PHYLIP: phytogeny inference package (version 3.5c). University of Washington; Seattle:
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Fox G. E., Wisotzkey J. D., Jurtshuk P. Jr 1992; How close is close: 16S rRNA sequence identity may not be sufficient to guarantee species identity. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol 42:166–170
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Gerner-Smidt P., Tjernberg I., Ursing J. 1991; Reliability of pheno-typic tests for identification of Acinetobacter species. J. Clin. Microbiol 29:277–282
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gerner-Smidt P., Tjernberg I. 1993; Acinetobacter in Denmark. II. Molecular studies of the Acinetobacter calcoaceticus-Acinetobacter baumannii complex. APMIS 101:826–832
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Ibrahim A., Goebel B. M., Liesack W., Griffiths M., Stackebrandt E. 1993; The phytogeny of the genus Yersinia based on 16S rDNA sequences. FEMS Microbiol. Lett 114:173–178
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Jukes T. H., Cantor C. R. 1969; Evolution of protein molecules. 21–132 Munro H. N. Mammalian protein metabolism3 Academic Press; New York, N.Y:
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Lane D. J. 1991; 16S/23S rRNA sequencing,. 115–175 Stackebrandt E., Goodfellow M. Nucleic acid techniques in bacterial systematics John Wiley & Sons; New York, N.Y:
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Maidak B. L., Larsen N., McCaughey M. J., Overbeek R., Olsen G. J., Fogel K., Blandy J., Woese C. R. 1994; The Ribosomal Database Project. Nucleic Acids Res 22:3485–3487
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Martinez-Murcia A. J., Belloch S., Collins M. D. 1992; Phylogenetic interrelationship of members of the genera Aeromonas and Plesiomonas as determined by 16S ribosomal DNA sequence: lack of congruence with results of DNA-DNA hybridization. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol 42:412–121
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Nishimura Y., Ino T., Hzuka H. 1988; Acinetobacter radioresistens sp. nov. isolated from cotton and soil. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol 38:209–211
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Rainey F. A., Lang E., Stackebrandt E. 1994; The phylogenetic structure of the genus Acinetobacter . FEMS Microbiol. Lett 124:349–354
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Stackebrandt E., Goebel B. M. 1994; Taxonomic note: a place for DNA-DNA reassociation and 16S rRNA sequence analysis in the present species definition in bacteriology. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol 44:846–849
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Stackebrandt E., Liesack W., Witt D. 1992; Ribosomal RNA and ribosomal DNA sequence analysis. Gene 115:255–260
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Tjernberg I., Ursing J. 1989; Clinical strains of Acinetobacter classified by DNA-DNA hybridization. APMIS 97:595–605
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Van de Peer Y., Chapelle S., De Wachter R. 1996; A quantitative map of nucleotide substitution rates in bacterial rRNA. Nucleic Acids Res 24:3381–3391
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Van de Peer Y., Nicolai S., De Rijk P., De Wachter R. 1996; Database on the structure of small ribosomal subunit RNA. Nucleic Acids Res 24:86–91
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Yamamoto S., Harayama S. 1996; Phylogenetic analysis of Acinetobacter strains based on the nucleotide sequences of gyrB genes and on the amino acid sequences of their products. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol 46:506–511
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-47-3-837
Loading
Phylogenetic Relationship of the Twenty-One DNA Groups of the Genus Acinetobacter as Revealed by 16S Ribosomal DNA Sequence Analysis
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 47, 837 (1997); https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-47-3-837
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-47-3-837
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-47-3-837
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error