1887

Abstract

A novel anaerobic, mesophilic, non-spore-forming bacterium (strain m25) was isolated from methanogenic enrichment cultures obtained from a lab-scale methanogenic landfill bioreactor containing anaerobic digester sludge. Cells were Gram-stain-negative, catalase-positive, oxidase-negative, rod-shaped, and motile by means of a flagellum. The genomic DNA G+C content was 40.11 mol%. The optimal NaCl concentration, temperature and pH for growth were 2.5 g l, 35 °C and at pH 7.0, respectively. Strain m25 was able to grow in the absence of yeast extract on glycerol, pyruvate, arginine and cysteine. In the presence of 0.2 % yeast extract, strain m25 grew on carbohydrates and was able to use glucose, cellobiose, fructose, raffinose and galactose. The novel strain could utilize glycerol, urea, pyruvate, peptone and tryptone. The major fatty acids were iso-C, C, C DMA (dimethyl acetal) and iso-C DMA. Phylogenetic analysis based on 16S rRNA gene sequences indicated that the new isolate was closely related to EBR46 (95.02 % 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity). Genome relatedness was determined using both average nucleotide identity and amino acid identity analyses, the results of which both strongly supported that strain m25 belongs to the genus . Based on its unique phylogenetic features, strain m25 is considered to represent a novel species within the genus . Moreover, based on its unique physiologic features, mainly the lack of spore formation, a proposal to amend the genus is also provided to include the non-spore-forming and mesophilic species. sp. nov. is proposed. The type strain of the species is m25 (=DSM 112749=ATCC TSD-268).

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (Award BB/T011076/1)
    • Principle Award Recipient: JamesE. McDonald
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. This article was made open access via a Publish and Read agreement between the Microbiology Society and the corresponding author’s institution.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005683
2023-01-25
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/73/1/ijsem005683.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005683&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Palmisano AC, Barlaz MA. Microbiology of Solid Waste CRC press; 2020 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Denafas G, Ruzgas T, Martuzevičius D, Shmarin S, Hoffmann M et al. Seasonal variation of municipal solid waste generation and composition in four East European cities. Resour Conserv Recycl 2014; 89:22–30 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Barlaz MA, Schaefer DM, Ham RK. Bacterial population development and chemical characteristics of refuse decomposition in a simulated sanitary landfill. Appl Environ Microbiol 1989; 55:55–65 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Weaver JE, Wang L, Reyes FL, Barlaz MA. Systems and methods for studying microbial processes and communities in landfills. In In: Understanding Terrestrial Microbial Communities Springer; 2019 pp 129–150
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ransom-Jones E, McCarthy AJ, Haldenby S, Doonan J, McDonald JE. Lignocellulose-degrading microbial communities in landfill sites represent a repository of unexplored biomass-degrading diversity. mSphere 2017; 2:e00300-17 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Meyer-Dombard DR, Bogner JE, Malas J. A review of landfill microbiology and ecology: a call for modernization with “next generation” technology. Front Microbiol 2020; 11:1127 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Stamps BW, Lyles CN, Suflita JM, Masoner JR, Cozzarelli IM et al. Municipal solid waste landfills harbor distinct microbiomes. Front Microbiol 2016; 7:534 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Feng Q, Lin Y. Integrated processes of anaerobic digestion and pyrolysis for higher bioenergy recovery from lignocellulosic biomass: a brief review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017; 77:1272–1287 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Gogoi G, Hazarika S. Coupling of ionic liquid treatment and membrane filtration for recovery of lignin from lignocellulosic biomass. Sep Purif Technol 2017; 173:113–120 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hosseini Koupaie E, Dahadha S, Bazyar Lakeh AA, Azizi A, Elbeshbishy E. Enzymatic pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for enhanced biomethane production-a review. J Environ Manage 2019; 233:774–784 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Loow Y-L, Wu TY, Yang GH, Ang LY, New EK et al. Deep eutectic solvent and inorganic salt pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for improving xylose recovery. Bioresour Technol 2018; 249:818–825 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Yao Y, Chen S. A novel and simple approach to the good process performance of methane recovery from lignocellulosic biomass alone. Biotechnol Biofuels 2016; 9:1–9 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Ali J, Rasheed T, Afreen M, Anwar MT, Nawaz Z et al. Modalities for conversion of waste to energy - challenges and perspectives. Sci Total Environ 2020; 727:138610 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hurst CJ, Crawford RL, Garland JL, Lipson DA, Mills AL. Anaerobic decomposition of refuse in landfills and methane oxidation in landfill covers. In Manual of Environmental Microbiology, Third Edition. American Society of microbiology; pp 818–842 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. McDonald JE, Allison HE, McCarthy AJ. Composition of the landfill microbial community as determined by application of domain- and group-specific 16S and 18S rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes. Appl Environ Microbiol 2010; 76:1301–1306 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Burrell PC, O’Sullivan C, Song H, Clarke WP, Blackall LL. Identification, detection, and spatial resolution of Clostridium populations responsible for cellulose degradation in a methanogenic landfill leachate bioreactor. Appl Environ Microbiol 2004; 70:2414–2419 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Huang L-N, Zhu S, Zhou H, Qu L-H. Molecular phylogenetic diversity of bacteria associated with the leachate of a closed municipal solid waste landfill. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2005; 242:297–303 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. O’Sullivan CA, Burrell PC, Clarke WP, Blackall LL. Structure of a cellulose degrading bacterial community during anaerobic digestion. Biotechnol Bioeng 2005; 92:871–878 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Wiegel J, Tanner R, Rainey FA. An introduction to the family clostridiaceae. Prokaryotes 2006; 4:654–678
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Shiratori H, Ohiwa H, Ikeno H, Ayame S, Kataoka N et al. Lutispora thermophila gen. nov., sp. nov., a thermophilic, spore-forming bacterium isolated from a thermophilic methanogenic bioreactor digesting municipal solid wastes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:964–969 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. El Houari A, Ranchou-Peyruse M, Ranchou-Peyruse A, Dakdaki A, Guignard M et al. Desulfobulbus oligotrophicus sp. nov., a sulfate-reducing and propionate-oxidizing bacterium isolated from a municipal anaerobic sewage sludge digester. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2017; 67:275–281 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Widdel F, Pfennig N. Studies on dissimilatory sulfate-reducing bacteria that decompose fatty acids. Arch Microbiol 1981; 129:395–400 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Imhoff-Stuckle D, Pfennig N. Isolation and characterization of a nicotinic acid-degrading sulfate-reducing bacterium, Desulfococcus niacini sp. nov. Arch Microbiol 1983; 136:194–198 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Balch WE, Fox GE, Magrum LJ, Woese CR, Wolfe RS. Methanogens: reevaluation of a unique biological group. Microbiol Rev 1979; 32:260–296 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Wada A, Kono M, Kawauchi S, Takagi Y, Morikawa T et al. Rapid discrimination of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria in liquid samples by using NaOH-sodium dodecyl sulfate solution and flow cytometry. PLoS ONE 2012; 7:e47093 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Lane D 1. 16S/23S rrna sequencing. Nucleic Acid Tech Bact Syst 1991115–175
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Tamura K, Nei M, Kumar S. Prospects for inferring very large phylogenies by using the neighbor-joining method. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2004; 101:11030–11035 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K. MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across computing platforms. Mol Biol Evol 2018; 35:1547–1549 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Lee YJ, Romanek CS, Mills GL, Davis RC, Whitman WB et al. Gracilibacter thermotolerans gen. nov., sp. nov., an anaerobic, thermotolerant bacterium from a constructed wetland receiving acid sulfate water. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:2089–2093 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 2014; 30:2114–2120 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol 2012; 19:455–477 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Seemann T. Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics 2014; 30:2068–2069 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Auch AF, von Jan M, Klenk H-P, Göker M. Digital DNA-DNA hybridization for microbial species delineation by means of genome-to-genome sequence comparison. Stand Genomic Sci 2010; 2:117–134 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Tindall BJ, Rosselló-Móra R, Busse H-J, Ludwig W, Kämpfer P. Notes on the characterization of prokaryote strains for taxonomic purposes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2010; 60:249–266 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Moore WEC, Stackebrandt E, Kandler O, Colwell RR, Krichevsky MI et al. Report of the ad hoc committee on reconciliation of approaches to bacterial systematics. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1987; 37:463–464 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Chaumeil PA, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the genome taxonomy database. Bioinformatics 2019; 36:1925–1927 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kozlov AM, Darriba D, Flouri T, Morel B, Stamatakis A. RAxML-NG: a fast, scalable and user-friendly tool for maximum likelihood phylogenetic inference. Bioinformatics 2019; 35:4453–4455 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 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]
  39. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Göker M. TYGS is an automated high-throughput platform for state-of-the-art genome-based taxonomy. Nat Commun 2019; 10:2182 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Hahnke RL, Petersen J, Scheuner C, Michael V et al. Complete genome sequence of DSM 30083(T), the type strain (U5/41(T)) of Escherichia coli, and a proposal for delineating subspecies in microbial taxonomy. Stand Genomic Sci 2014; 9:2 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Lee YJ, Romanek CS, Wiegel J. Clostridium aciditolerans sp. nov., an acid-tolerant spore-forming anaerobic bacterium from constructed wetland sediment. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2007; 57:311–315 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005683
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005683
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF
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