Serratia glossinae DSM 22080T was compared with Serratia fonticola ATCC 29844T to clarify the taxonomic relationship of both species. 16S rRNA gene sequence comparisons demonstrated that these species share 99.6 % sequence similarity. Investigation of substrate utilization profiles displayed no striking differences from the type strains of both species. DNA–DNA hybridizations between both strains showed 100 % (99.9 %) similarity. Therefore, the reclassification of S. glossinae as a later synonym of S. fonticola is proposed, based upon the estimated phylogenetic position derived from 16S rRNA gene sequence data, biochemical data and DNA–DNA hybridization results.
BradyC.,
CleenwerckI.,
VenterS.,
CoutinhoT.,
De VosP.(2013). Taxonomic evaluation of the genus Enterobacter based on multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA): proposal to reclassify E. nimipressuralis and E. amnigenus into Lelliottia gen. nov. as Lelliottia nimipressuralis comb. nov. and Lelliottia amnigena comb. nov., respectively, E. gergoviae and E. pyrinus into Pluralibacter gen. nov. as Pluralibacter gergoviae comb. nov. and Pluralibacter pyrinus comb. nov., respectively, E. cowanii, E. radicincitans, E. oryzae and E. arachidis into Kosakonia gen. nov. as Kosakonia cowanii comb. nov., Kosakonia radicincitans comb. nov., Kosakonia oryzae comb. nov. and Kosakonia arachidis comb. nov., respectively, and E. turicensis, E. helveticus and E. pulveris into Cronobacter as Cronobacter zurichensis nom. nov., Cronobacter helveticus comb. nov. and Cronobacter pulveris comb. nov., respectively, and emended description of the genera Enterobacter and Cronobacter
. . Syst Appl Microbiol36, 309–319. [View Article][PubMed]
GaviniF.,
FerragutC.,
IzardD.,
TrinelP. A.,
LeclercH.,
LefebvreB.,
MosselD. A. A.(1979).Serratia fonticola, a New Species from Water. . Int J Syst Bacteriol29, 92–101. [View Article]
KämpferP.(1990). Evaluation of the Titertek-Enterobac-Automated System (TTE-AS) for identification of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae
. . Zentralbl Bakteriol273, 164–172. [View Article][PubMed]
KämpferP.,
GlaeserS. P.(2012). Prokaryotic taxonomy in the sequencing era - the polyphasic approach revisited. . Environ Microbiol14, 291–317. [View Article]
KämpferP.,
SteiofM.,
DottW.(1991). Microbiological characterization of a fuel-oil contaminated site including numerical identification of heterotrophic water and soil bacteria. . Microb Ecol21, 227–251. [View Article][PubMed]
KimuraM.(1980). A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. . J Mol Evol16, 111–120. [View Article][PubMed]
LapageS. P.,
SneathP. H. A.,
LesselE. F.,
SkermanV. B. D.,
SeeligerH. P. R.,
ClarkW. A.(editors) (1992).International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria. Bacteriological Code (1990 Revision) Bacteriological Code. Washington, DC:: American Society for Microbiology;.
Tindall, B. J., Rosselló-Mora, R., Busse, H.-J., Ludwig, W. & Kämpfer, P. (2010). Notes on the characterization of prokaryote strains for taxonomic purposes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol60, 249–266.
ZiemkeF.,
HöfleM. G.,
LalucatJ.,
Rosselló-MoraR.(1998). Reclassification of Shewanella putrefaciens Owen’s genomic group II as Shewanella baltica sp. nov.. Int J Syst Bacteriol48, 179–186. [View Article][PubMed]