1887

Abstract

Two Gram-negative, rod-shaped, motile bacterial strains, named CPA5 and BR75, were isolated from the halophyte . Both presented optimum growth at 30 °C, pH 7.0–7.5 and 1–2 % NaCl (w/v) for strain CPA5, and pH 7.5–8.0 and 2 % NaCl (w/v) for strain BR75. Phylogenetic analyses based on 16S rRNA gene sequences affiliated both strains to the genus . CPA5 presented highest 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity with KYW147 (96.5 %), followed by KYW48 (95.9 %), H25 (95.6 %) and Y2 (95.5 %). BR75 displayed highest similarity with MSW-14 (96.5 %), followed by S3-63, SW-109 and MSSRF26 (96.1 %). Neither strain contained Bacteriochlorophyll . The main fatty acids observed for CPA5 were Cω6 and summed features 3 (Cω7 and/or iso-C 2-OH) and 8 (C ω7 and/or Cω6). The latter summed feature was the dominant fatty acid observed for strain BR75 as well. The major polar lipids were phosphatidylethanolamine, unidentified phospholipids and unidentified glycolipids for both strains. The predominant ubiquinone was Q-10 for both strains, and the DNA G+C contents were 63.4 mol% and 58.3 mol% for CPA5 and BR75, respectively. Based on phenotypic and genotypic results, both strains represent novel species belonging to the genus for which the names sp. nov. (type strain CPA5=CECT 9130=LMG 29519) and sp. nov (type strain BR75=CECT 9129=LMG 29518) are proposed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.002079
2017-08-01
2020-01-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/67/8/3057.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.002079&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Kwon KK, Woo JH, Yang SH, Kang JH, Kang SG et al. Altererythrobacter epoxidivorans gen. nov., sp. nov., an epoxide hydrolase-active, mesophilic marine bacterium isolated from cold-seep sediment, and reclassification of Erythrobacter luteolus Yoon et al. 2005 as Altererythrobacter luteolus comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2007;57:2207–2211 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Xue X, Zhang K, Cai F, Dai J, Wang Y et al. Altererythrobacter xinjiangensis sp. nov., isolated from desert sand, and emended description of the genus Altererythrobacter. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012;62:28–32 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Xue H, Piao CG, Guo MW, Wang LF, Fang W et al. Description of Altererythrobacter aerius sp. nov., isolated from air, and emended description of the genus Altererythrobacter. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016;66:4543–4548 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Lee KB, Liu CT, Anzai Y, Kim H, Aono T et al. The hierarchical system of the 'Alphaproteobacteria': description of Hyphomonadaceae fam. nov., Xanthobacteraceae fam. nov. and Erythrobacteraceae fam. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2005;55:1907–1919 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Lai Q, Yuan J, Shao Z. Altererythrobacter marinus sp. nov., isolated from deep seawater. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009;59:2973–2976 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Seo SH, Lee SD. Altererythrobacter marensis sp. nov., isolated from seawater. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2010;60:307–311 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Park SC, Baik KS, Choe HN, Lim CH, Kim HJ et al. Altererythrobacter namhicola sp. nov. and Altererythrobacter aestuarii sp. nov., isolated from seawater. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2011;61:709–715 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Park S, Jung YT, Park JM, Yoon JH. Altererythrobacter confluentis sp. nov., isolated from water of an estuary environment. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016;66:4002–4008 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Kumar NR, Nair S, Langer S, Busse HJ, Kämpfer P et al. Altererythrobacter indicus sp. nov., isolated from wild rice (porteresia coarctata Tateoka). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008;58:839–844 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fidalgo C, Henriques I, Rocha J, Tacão M, Alves A. Culturable endophytic Bacteria from the salt marsh plant Halimione portulacoides: phylogenetic diversity, functional characterization, and influence of metal(loid) contamination. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2016;23:10200–10214 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Lane DJ. 16S/23S rRNA sequencing. In Stackebrandt E, Goodfellow M. (editors) Nucleic Acid Techniques in Bacterial Systematics New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons; 1991; pp.115–175
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Kaksonen AH, Plumb JJ, Robertson WJ, Spring S, Schumann P et al. Novel thermophilic sulfate-reducing bacteria from a geothermally active underground mine in Japan. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006;72:3759–3762 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kim OS, Cho YJ, Lee K, Yoon SH, Kim M et al. Introducing EzTaxon-e: a prokaryotic 16S rRNA gene sequence database with phylotypes that represent uncultured species. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012;62:716–721 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Mcwilliam H, Li W, Uludag M, Squizzato S, Park YM et al. Analysis Tool web Services from the EMBL-EBI. Nucleic Acids Res 2013;41:W597–W600 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hall TA. BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment edit and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucl Acids Symp Ser 1999;41:95–98
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S. MEGA6: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol 2013;30:2725–2729 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Saitou N, Nei M. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 1987;4:406–425[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Felsenstein J. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 1981;17:368–376 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kimura M. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 1980;16:111–120 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Bowman JP. Description of Cellulophaga algicola sp. nov., isolated from the surfaces of antarctic algae, and reclassification of Cytophaga uliginosa (ZoBell and Upham 1944) Reichenbach 1989 as Cellulophaga uliginosa comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2000;50:1861–1868 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Proença DN, Nobre MF, Morais PV. Chitinophaga costaii sp. nov., an endophyte of pinus pinaster, and emended description of Chitinophaga niabensis. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014;64:1237–1243 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Mesbah M, Premachandran U, Whitman WB. Precise measurement of the G+C content of deoxyribonucleic acid by high-performance liquid chromatography. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1989;39:159–167 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Stackebrandt E, Goebel BM. Taxonomic note: a place for DNA-DNA reassociation and 16S rRNA sequence analysis in the present species definition in bacteriology. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1994;44:846–849 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Wayne LG, Moore WEC, Stackebrandt E, Kandler O, Colwell RR et al. Report of the ad hoc committee on reconciliation of approaches to bacterial systematics. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1987;37:463–464 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.002079
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.002079
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary File 1

PDF

Most cited articles

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