1887

Abstract

Three bacterial strains, C9, H5 and TLL-A3, were isolated from fecal pellets of conventionally raised C57BL/6J mice. Analysis of 16S rRNA genes indicated that the strains belonged to the , and shared 91.6–99.9 % sequence identity with the recently described DSM 103720. Genome-sequencing of the isolates was performed to compare average nucleotide identities (ANI) between strains. The ANI analysis revealed that all isolates shared highest ANI with DSM 103720, with strain C9 being most similar (ANI: 98.0 %) followed by strains H5 (ANI: 76.4 %) and TLL-A3 (ANI: 74.4 %). Likewise, digital DNA–DNA hybridization (dDDH) indicated high similarity of strain C9 (dDDH: 86.6 %) to DSM 103720, but strains H5 and TLL-A3 showed lower similarity (dDDH <35 %) to either of the three type species of the ( DSM 28989 DSM 100749, DSM 103720). MK-10 and MK-11 were abundant in all three isolates, but concentrations varied between species. Based on genotypic, phylogenetic and phenotypic differences, the strains TLL-A3 and H5 are considered to represent novel species of the genus , for which the names sp. nov., and sp. nov., are proposed. The respective type strains are TLL-A3 (=DSM 108168=KCTC 15769), and H5 (=DSM 107170=KCTC 15734). Strain C9 reveals limited sequence dissimilarity and minor differences in morphological properties with DSM 103720 and is therefore proposed to belong to the same species. The respective strain is C9 (=DSM 107165=KCTC 15733).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.004137
2020-04-06
2020-06-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/70/5/3105.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.004137&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Lagkouvardos I, Pukall R, Abt B, Foesel BU, Meier-Kolthoff JP et al. The mouse intestinal bacterial collection (miBC) provides host-specific insight into cultured diversity and functional potential of the gut microbiota. Nat Microbiol 2016; 1:16131 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Forster SC, Kumar N, Anonye BO, Almeida A, Viciani E et al. A human gut bacterial genome and culture collection for improved metagenomic analyses. Nat Biotechnol 2019; 37:186–192 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Lagier J-C, Khelaifia S, Alou MT, Ndongo S, Dione N et al. Culture of previously uncultured members of the human gut microbiota by culturomics. Nat Microbiol 2016; 1:16203 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Zou Y, Xue W, Luo G, Deng Z, Qin P et al. 1,520 reference genomes from cultivated human gut bacteria enable functional microbiome analyses. Nat Biotechnol 2019; 37:179–185 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Lagkouvardos I, Overmann J, Clavel T. Cultured microbes represent a substantial fraction of the human and mouse gut microbiota. Gut Microbes 2017; 8:493–503 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Seedorf H, Griffin NW, Ridaura VK, Reyes A, Cheng J et al. Bacteria from diverse habitats colonize and compete in the mouse gut. Cell 2014; 159:253–266 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ormerod KL, Wood DLA, Lachner N, Gellatly SL, Daly JN et al. Genomic characterization of the uncultured Bacteroidales family S24-7 inhabiting the guts of homeothermic animals. Microbiome 2016; 4:36 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Lagkouvardos I, Lesker TR, Hitch TCA, Gálvez EJC, Smit N et al. Sequence and cultivation study of Muribaculaceae reveals novel species, host preference, and functional potential of this yet undescribed family. Microbiome 2019; 7:28 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Harris MA, Reddy CA, Carter G. Anaerobic bacteria from the large intestine of mice. Appl Environ Microbiol 1976; 31:907–912 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Caldwell DR, Bryant MP. Medium without rumen fluid for nonselective enumeration and isolation of rumen bacteria. Appl Microbiol 1966; 14:794–801 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Romano KA, Vivas EI, Amador-Noguez D, Rey FE. Intestinal microbiota composition modulates choline bioavailability from diet and accumulation of the proatherogenic metabolite trimethylamine-N-oxide. MBio 2015; 6:e02481–02414 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lagesen K, Hallin P, Rødland EA, Stærfeldt H-H, Rognes T et al. RNAmmer: consistent and rapid annotation of ribosomal RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res 2007; 35:3100–3108 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Pruesse E, Peplies J, Glöckner FO. SINA: accurate high-throughput multiple sequence alignment of ribosomal RNA genes. Bioinformatics 2012; 28:1823–1829 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Stamatakis A. RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics 2006; 22:2688–2690 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Ludwig W, Strunk O, Westram R, Richter L, Meier H et al. ARB: a software environment for sequence data. Nucleic Acids Res 2004; 32:1363–1371 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Yarza P, Yilmaz P, Pruesse E, Glöckner FO, Ludwig W et al. Uniting the classification of cultured and uncultured bacteria and archaea using 16S rRNA gene sequences. Nat Rev Microbiol 2014; 12:635–645 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Koren S, Walenz BP, Berlin K, Miller JR, Bergman NH et al. Canu: scalable and accurate long-read assembly via adaptive k -mer weighting and repeat separation. Genome Res 2017; 27:722–736 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Overbeek R, Olson R, Pusch GD, Olsen GJ, Davis JJ et al. The seed and the rapid annotation of microbial genomes using subsystems technology (RAST). Nucleic Acids Res 2014; 42:D206–D214 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Auch AF, Klenk H-P, Göker M. Genome sequence-based species delimitation with confidence intervals and improved distance functions. BMC Bioinformatics 2013; 14:60 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Yoon S-H, Ha S-M, Lim J, Kwon S, Chun J. A large-scale evaluation of algorithms to calculate average nucleotide identity. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2017; 110:1281–1286 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Qin Q-L, Xie B-B, Zhang X-Y, Chen X-L, Zhou B-C et al. A proposed genus boundary for the prokaryotes based on genomic insights. J Bacteriol 2014; 196:2210–2215 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Luo C, Rodriguez-R LM, Konstantinidis KT. MyTaxa: an advanced taxonomic classifier for genomic and metagenomic sequences. Nucleic Acids Res 2014; 42:e73 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Miyake S, Ding Y, Soh M, Seedorf H. Complete genome sequence of Duncaniella muris Strain B8, isolated from the feces of C57/BL6 Mice. Microbiol Resour Announc 2019; 8:e00566–00519 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Zhang H, Yohe T, Huang L, Entwistle S, Wu P et al. dbCAN2: a meta server for automated carbohydrate-active enzyme annotation. Nucleic Acids Res 2018; 46:W95–W101 [CrossRef][PubMed][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.004137
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.004137
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Most cited this month 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