1887

Abstract

A new α-haemolytic streptococcal strain has been isolated from the dental plaque of a teenager with Down syndrome. Genetic and taxonomic analyses place this within the oralis group. It is a Gram-stain-positive, non-motile, non-spore-forming spherical alpha-haemolytic coccus arranged in chains, and it ferments a large number of monosaccharides and disaccharides, as well as polymeric carbohydrates. It differs biochemically from closely related species of due to its production of α-galactosidase, β-galactosidase and -acetyl-β--glucosaminidase and by the absence of arginine dihydrolase deiminase and IgA1-protease. It grows in a temperature range of 25 to 40 °C (optimal growth temperature at 37 °C) and in a pH range of 4.5 to 8 (optimal pH at 7.0). A phylogenetic analysis based on its 16S and 23S rRNA gene sequences placed it close to CECT 7747. The ANIb and ANIm values were 93.19 and 93.61 %, respectively, both below the accepted threshold to designate it as a new species of bacteria. A phylogenetic tree based on its core genome placed it close to subsp. strain CECT 7747 with a distance in the expanded core phylogeny of 0.1298. The DNA–DNA hybridization value was 52.2 % with respect to the closest species, subsp. CECT 7747. Based on these data, a new species of bacteria within the genus , family and order is described, for which the name of sp. nov. is proposed (type strain CECT 9732=CCUG 73139).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.004180
2020-06-15
2020-12-01
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bentley RW, Leigh JA, Collins MD. Intrageneric structure of Streptococcus based on comparative analysis of small-subunit rRNA sequences. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1991; 41:487–494 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Facklam R. What happened to the Streptococci: overview of taxonomic and nomenclature changes. Clin Microbiol Rev 2002; 15:613–630 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Zheng W, Tan TK, Paterson IC, Mutha NVR, Siow CC et al. StreptoBase: an oral Streptococcus mitis group genomic resource and analysis platform. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0151908 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Arbique JC, Poyart C, Trieu-Cuot P, Quesne G, Carvalho MdGS et al. Accuracy of phenotypic and genotypic testing for identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae and description of Streptococcus pseudopneumoniae sp. nov. J Clin Microbiol 2004; 42:4686–4696 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Casamassimo PS, Thikkurissy S, Edelstein BL, Maiorini EM. Beyond the dmft: the human and economic cost of early childhood caries. J Am Dent Assoc 2009; 140:650–657
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Gross EL, Beall CJ, Kutsch SR, Firestone ND, Leys EJ et al. Beyond Streptococcus mutans: dental caries onset linked to multiple species by 16S rRNA community analysis. PLoS One 2012; 7:e47722 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Mira A, Simon-Soro A, Curtis MA. Role of microbial communities in the pathogenesis of periodontal diseases and caries. J Clin Periodontol 2017; 44:S23–S38 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Huang X, Browngardt CM, Jiang M, Ahn S-J, Burne RA et al. Diversity in antagonistic interactions between commensal oral streptococci and Streptococcus mutans . Caries Res 2018; 52:88–101 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Deps TD, Angelo GL, Martins CC, Paiva SM, Pordeus IA et al. Association between dental caries and Down syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0127484 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Macho V, Palha M, Macedo AP, Ribeiro O, Andrade C. Comparative study between dental caries prevalence of down syndrome children and their siblings. Special Care in Dentistry 2013; 33:2–7 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Areias C, Sampaio-Maia B, Pereira ML, Azevedo A, Melo P et al. Reduced salivary flow and colonization by mutans streptococci in children with Down syndrome. Clinics 2012; 67:1007–1011 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Morinushi T, Lopatin DE, Tanaka H. The relationship between dental caries in the primary dentition and anti S. mutans serum antibodies in children with Down’s syndrome. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1995; 19:279–284
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Jensen A, Scholz CFP, Kilian M. Re-Evaluation of the taxonomy of the mitis group of the genus Streptococcus based on whole genome phylogenetic analyses, and proposed reclassification of Streptococcus dentisani as Streptococcus oralis subsp. dentisani comb. nov., Streptococcus tigurinus as Streptococcus oralis subsp. tigurinus comb. nov., and Streptococcus oligofermentans as a later synonym of Streptococcus cristatus . Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:4803–4820 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Ruoff KL. Miscellaneous catalase-negative, gram-positive cocci: emerging opportunists. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40:1129–1133 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fernández M, Hudson JA, Korpela R, de los Reyes-Gavilán CG. Impact on human health of microorganisms present in fermented dairy products: an overview. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015:41271413 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Weisburg WG, Barns SM, Pelletier DA, Lane DJ. 16S ribosomal DNA amplification for phylogenetic study. J Bacteriol 1991; 173:697–703 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Investigating Deep Phylogenetic Relationships among Cyanobacteria and Plastids by Small Subunit rRNA Sequence Analysis1 - TURNER - 1999 - Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology - Wiley Online Library https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1550-7408.1999.tb04612.x (accessed 8 January 2020).
  18. Suzuki MT, Giovannoni SJ. Bias caused by template annealing in the amplification of mixtures of 16S rRNA genes by PCR. Appl Environ Microbiol 1996; 62:625–630 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Camelo-Castillo A, Benítez-Páez A, Belda-Ferre P, Cabrera-Rubio R, Mira A. Streptococcus dentisani sp. nov., a novel member of the mitis group. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:60–65 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Notredame C, Higgins DG, Heringa J. T-coffee: a novel method for fast and accurate multiple sequence alignment 1 1Edited by J. Thornton. J Mol Biol 2000; 302:205–217 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Darriba D, Taboada GL, Doallo R, Posada D. jModelTest 2: more models, new heuristics and parallel computing. Nat Methods 2012; 9:772 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Guindon S, Dufayard J-F, Lefort V, Anisimova M, Hordijk W et al. New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. Syst Biol 2010; 59:307–321 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Letunic I, Bork P. Interactive tree of life (iTOL) V4: recent updates and new developments. Nucleic Acids Res 2019; 47:W256–W259 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Seemann T. Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics 2014; 30:2068–2069 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Götz S, García-Gómez JM, Terol J, Williams TD, Nagaraj SH et al. High-Throughput functional annotation and data mining with the Blast2GO suite. Nucleic Acids Res 2008; 36:3420–3435 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R. Shifting the genomic gold standard for the prokaryotic species definition. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009; 106:19126–19131 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 1990; 215:403–410 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 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]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Page AJ, Cummins CA, Hunt M, Wong VK, Reuter S et al. Roary: rapid large-scale prokaryote pan genome analysis. Bioinformatics 2015; 31:3691–3693 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Colston SM, Fullmer MS, Beka L, Lamy B, Gogarten JP et al. Bioinformatic genome comparisons for taxonomic and phylogenetic assignments using Aeromonas as a test case. mBio 2014; 5:e02136 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 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]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.004180
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.004180
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