1887

Abstract

A novel Gram-strain-positive, non-spore-forming bacterial strain, designated SKC1-2, was isolated from volcanic rock of the scoria cone of Seobjikoji, Jeju, Republic of Korea. Cells were aerobic, catalase-positive, oxidase-negative, motile and cocci. Colonies of cells were dark orange-coloured, circular, smooth and convex. Phylogenetic analyses based on 16S rRNA gene sequences indicated that the isolate was related to members of the genus . Phylogenetic neighbours were KCCM 42250 (98.2 %, 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity) and DSM 23768 (98.0 %). The diagnostic diamino acid in the cell-wall peptidoglycan was -diaminopimelic acid. The predominant respiratory quinone was MK-9(H). The predominant respiratory quinone was MK-9(H) and the major fatty acid was anteiso-C. The polar lipid profile included major amounts of diphosphatidylglycerol, phosphatidylglycerol, phosphatidylinositol, two unidentified phospholipids and two unidentified phosphoglycolipids. The DNA G+C content was 74.9 mol%. DNA–DNA relatedness values between strain SKC1-2 and DSM 23768 or KCCM 42250 were 37.5–38.1 % or 45.4–46.4 %, respectively. On the basis of the phenotypic differences and DNA–DNA relatedness data, the isolate represents a new species of the genus , for which the name sp. nov. is proposed. The type strain is SKC1-2 (=DSM 103726=KCCM 43221).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.002206
2017-10-01
2020-01-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/67/10/3824.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.002206&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Jurado V, Laiz L, Ortiz-Martinez A, Groth I, Saiz-Jimenez C. Pseudokineococcus lusitanus gen. nov., sp. nov., and reclassification of Kineococcus marinus Lee 2006 as Pseudokineococcus marinus comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2011;61:2515–2519 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Lee SD. Kineococcus marinus sp. nov., isolated from marine sediment of the coast of Jeju, Korea. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006;56:1279–1283 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Shirling EB, Gottlieb D. Methods for characterization of Streptomyces species. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1966;16:313–340 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Lee DW, Lee SD. Aeromicrobium ponti sp. nov., isolated from seawater. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008;58:987–991 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Lane D. 16S/23S rRNA sequencing. In Stackebrandt E, Goodfellow M. (editors) Nucleic Acid Techniques in Bacterial Systematics London: Wiley; 1991; pp.115–144
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Thompson JD, Gibson TJ, Plewniak F, Jeanmougin F, Higgins DG. The CLUSTAL_X windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Res 1997;25:4876–4882 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 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]
  8. Felsenstein J. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 1981;17:368–376 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Fitch WM. Toward defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific tree topology. Syst Zool 1971;20:406–416 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Jukes T, Cantor C. Evolution of protein molecules. In Munro HN. (editor) Mammalian Protein Metabolism New York: Academic Press; 1969; pp.21–132[Crossref]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 1985;39:783–791 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Komagata K, Suzuki K-I. Lipid and cell-wall analysis in bacterial systematics. Methods Microbiol 1988;19:161–207[Crossref]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Staneck JL, Roberts GD. Simplified approach to identification of aerobic actinomycetes by thin-layer chromatography. Appl Microbiol 1974;28:226–231[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Kroppenstedt R. Fatty acid and menaquinone analysis of actinomycetes and related organisms. In Goodfellow M, Minnikin DE. (editors) Chemical Methods in Bacterial Systematics London: Academic Press; 1985; pp.173–199
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Minnikin DE, Alshamaony L, Goodfellow M. Differentiation of Mycobacterium, Nocardia, and related taxa by thin-layer chromatographic analysis of whole-organism methanolysates. J Gen Microbiol 1975;88:200–204 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 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]
  17. Stackebrandt E, Ebers J. Taxonomic parameters revisited: tarnished gold standards. Microbiol Today 2006;33:152–155
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Ezaki T, Hashimoto Y, Yabuuchi E. Fluorometric deoxyribonucleic acid-deoxyribonucleic acid hybridization in microdilution wells as an alternative to membrane filter hybridization in which radioisotopes are used to determine genetic relatedness among bacterial strains. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1989;39:224–229 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hirayama H, Tamaoka J, Horikoshi K. Improved immobilization of DNA to microwell plates for DNA-DNA hybridization. Nucleic Acids Res 1996;24:4098–4099 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 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.0.002206
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.002206
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