1887

Abstract

A Gram-negative, rod-shaped aerobic bacterium designated as strain 2R12 was isolated from the rhizosphere soil of . Phylogenetic analyses based on the 16S rRNA gene revealed that strain 2R12 should be assigned to the genus with the highest sequence similarity to DSM 3695 (99.1 %) and DSM 18108 (98.6 %). The major fatty acids of strain 2R12 (>10 %) were iso-C, C 5 and iso-C 3-OH. The major polar lipids were phosphatidylethanolamine, two unidentified aminolipids and five unidentified lipids. The predominant respiratory quinone was MK-7. The genomic DNA G+C content was 46.1 mol%. The average nucleotide identity values of strain 2R12 with DSM 3695 and DSM 18108 were 77.9 and 78.8 %, respectively, while DNA–DNA hybridization values for strain 2R12 with these strains were 22.8 and 23.3 %, respectively. Based on comparative analysis of phylogenetic, phylogenomic, phenotypic and chemotaxonomic characteristics, strain 2R12 represents a novel species in the genus , for which the name sp. nov. is proposed. The type strain is 2R12 (=ACCC 61757=JCM 34719).

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Scientific Research Project of Shanghai Landscaping & City Appearance Administrative Bureau (Award G200201)
    • Principle Award Recipient: Ji-gangHan
  • Key Technologies Research and Development Program of China (CN) (Award 2019YFD1002001)
    • Principle Award Recipient: Xiao-XiaZhang
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005335
2022-04-28
2022-05-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Sangkhobol V, Skerman VBD. Chitinophaga, a new genus of chitinolytic myxobacteria. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1981; 31:285–293 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Parte AC. LPSN - List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (bacterio.net), 20 years on. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2018; 68:1825–1829 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Dahal RH, Chaudhary DK, Kim DU, Kim J. Chitinophaga fulva sp. nov., isolated from forest soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2021; 71:004646 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Goh CBS, Wong LW, Parimannan S, Rajandas H, Loke S et al. Chitinophaga extrema sp. nov., isolated from subsurface soil and leaf litter in a tropical peat swamp forest. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:6355–6363 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ping W, Zhang Y, Pang H, Zhang J, Li D et al. Chitinophaga solisilvae sp. nov., isolated from forest soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:4808–4815 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Zhang X-J, Feng G-D, Yao Q, Zhang J, Phuong LTB et al. Chitinophaga tropicalis sp. nov., isolated from forest soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:3859–3864 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Tran TLQ, Anani H, Trinh HT, Pham TPT, Dang VK et al. Chitinophaga vietnamensis sp. nov., a multi-drug resistant bacterium infecting humans. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:1758–1768 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Kämpfer P, Young C-C, Sridhar KR, Arun AB, Lai WA et al. Transfer of [Flexibacter] sancti, [Flexibacter] filiformis, [Flexibacter] japonensis and [Cytophaga] arvensicola to the genus Chitinophaga and description of Chitinophaga skermanii sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:2223–2228 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Frank JA, Reich CI, Sharma S, Weisbaum JS, Wilson BA et al. Critical evaluation of two primers commonly used for amplification of bacterial 16S rRNA genes. Appl Environ Microbiol 2008; 74:2461–2470 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Yoon S-H, Ha S-M, Kwon S, Lim J, Kim Y et al. Introducing EzBioCloud: a taxonomically united database of 16S rRNA gene sequences and whole-genome assemblies. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2017; 67:1613–1617 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Huelsenbeck JP, Crandall KA. Phylogeny estimation and hypothesis testing using maximum likelihood. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 1997; 28:437–466 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Saitou N, Nei M. The neighbor-joining methods: A new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 1987; 4:406–425 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Sourdis J, Nei M. Relative efficiencies of the maximum parsimony and distance-matrix methods in obtaining the correct phylogenetic tree. Mol Biol Evol 1988; 5:298–311 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol Biol Evol 2016; 33:1870–1874 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 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 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Wick RR, Judd LM, Gorrie CL, Holt KE. Unicycler: Resolving bacterial genome assemblies from short and long sequencing reads. PLoS Comput Biol 2017; 13:e1005595 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lee I, Chalita M, Ha S-M, Na S-I, Yoon S-H et al. ContEst16S: an algorithm that identifies contaminated prokaryotic genomes using 16S RNA gene sequences. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2017; 67:2053–2057 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Tatusova T, DiCuccio M, Badretdin A, Chetvernin V, Nawrocki EP et al. NCBI prokaryotic genome annotation pipeline. Nucleic Acids Res 2016; 44:6614–6624 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Carbasse JS, Peinado-Olarte RL, Göker M. TYGS and LPSN: a database tandem for fast and reliable genome-based classification and nomenclature of prokaryotes. Nucleic Acids Res 2022; 50:D801–D807 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R, Oliver Glöckner F, Peplies J. JSpeciesWS: a web server for prokaryotic species circumscription based on pairwise genome comparison. Bioinformatics 2016; 32:929–931 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 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 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R. Shifting the genomic gold standard for the prokaryotic species definition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009; 106:19126–19131 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Chun J, Oren A, Ventosa A, Christensen H, Arahal DR et al. Proposed minimal standards for the use of genome data for the taxonomy of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2018; 68:461–466 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Chaudhari NM, Gupta VK, Dutta C. BPGA- an ultra-fast pan-genome analysis pipeline. Sci Rep 2016; 6:24373 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Seemann T. Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics 2014; 30:2068–2069 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Collins MD. 11 Analysis of isoprenoid quinones. Methods Microbiology 1985; 18:329–366
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Minnikin DE, O’Donnell AG, Goodfellow M, Alderson G, Athalye M et al. An integrated procedure for the extraction of bacterial isoprenoid quinones and polar lipids. J Microbiol Methods 1984; 2:233–241 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Lefort V, Desper R, Gascuel O. FastME 2.0: a comprehensive, accurate, and fast distance-based phylogeny inference program. Mol Biol Evol 2015; 32:2798–2800 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005335
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005335
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