1887

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY logo

Volume 73, Issue 2

sp. nov. isolated from a suppressive potato field in Greenland No Access

Abstract

The bacterial strain In5 was previously isolated from a suppressive potato field in southern Greenland and has been characterized and described as . However, the results of new polyphasic analyses coupled with those of phenotypic, phylogenetic and genomic analyses reported here demonstrate that the affiliation to the species was incorrect. The strain is Gram-stain-negative, rod-shaped, aerobic and displays growth at 4–28 °C (optimum temperature 20–25 °C) and at pH 5–9 (optimum pH 6–7). Major fatty acids were C (38.2 %), a summed feature consisting of Cω6 and/or Cω7) (20.7 %), Ccyclo ω7 (14.3 %) and a summed feature consisting of Cω6 and/or Cω7 (11.7 %). The respiratory quinones were determined to be Q9 (95.5 %) and Q8 (4.5 %) and major polar lipids were phosphatidylethanolamine, phosphatidylglycerol and diphosphatidylglycerol. The DNA G+C content was determined to be 59.4 mol%. The results of phylogenetic analysis based on the 16S rRNA gene and multi-locus sequence analysis (MLSA; concatenated and sequences) indicated that In5 was affiliated with the subgroup within the genus . Comparison of the genome sequence of In5 and those of related type strains of species of the genus revealed an average nucleotide identity (ANI) of 87.7 % or less and digital DNA–DNA hybridization (dDDH) of less than 34.5 % relatedness, respectively. Two more strains, In614 and In655, isolated from the same suppressive soil were included in the genome analysis. The ANI and dDDH of In614 and In655 compared with In5 were ANI: 99.9 and 97.6 and dDDH (GGDC) 99.9 and 79.4, respectively, indicating that In5, In614 and In655 are representatives of the same species. The results of the phenotypic, phylogenetic and genomic analyses support the hypothesis that strain In5 represents a novel species of the genus , for which the name sp. nov. is proposed. The type strain is In5(=LMG 32653=NCIMB 15428).

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): antifungal , biocontrol , phylogenomics , potato soil and Pseudomonas mandelii subgroup
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Novo Nordisk Fonden (Award NNF19SA0059360)
    • Principle Award Recipient: PeterStougaard
© 2023 The Authors
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005700
2023-02-07
2024-05-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Michelsen CF, Stougaard P. A novel antifungal Pseudomonas fluorescens isolated from potato soils in Greenland. Curr Microbiol 2011; 62:1185–1192 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Hennessy RC, Glaring MA, Michelsen CF, Olsson S, Stougaard P. Draft genome sequence of Pseudomonas sp. strain In5 isolated from a Greenlandic disease suppressive soil with potent antimicrobial activity. Genome Announc 2015; 3:e01251-15 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Michelsen CF, Stougaard P. Hydrogen cyanide synthesis and antifungal activity of the biocontrol strain Pseudomonas fluorescens In5 from Greenland is highly dependent on growth medium. Can J Microbiol 2012; 58:381–390 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Michelsen CF, Watrous J, Glaring MA, Kersten R, Koyama N et al. Nonribosomal peptides, key biocontrol components for Pseudomonas fluorescens In5, isolated from a Greenlandic suppressive soil. mBio 2015; 6:e00079 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Frapolli M, Pothier JF, Défago G, Moënne-Loccoz Y. Evolutionary history of synthesis pathway genes for phloroglucinol and cyanide antimicrobials in plant-associated fluorescent pseudomonads. Mol Phylogenet Evol 2012; 63:877–890 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Hockett KL, Nishimura MT, Karlsrud E, Dougherty K, Baltrus DA. Pseudomonas syringae CC1557: a highly virulent strain with an unusually small type III effector repertoire that includes a novel effector. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 2014; 27:923–932 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Strano CP, Bella P, Licciardello G, Fiore A, Lo Piero AR et al. Pseudomonas corrugata crpCDE is part of the cyclic lipopeptide corpeptin biosynthetic gene cluster and is involved in bacterial virulence in tomato and in hypersensitive response in Nicotiana benthamiana. Mol Plant Pathol 2015; 16:495–506 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Zhao H, Ma Y, Wu X, Zhang L. Pseudomonas viciae sp. nov., isolated from rhizosphere of broad bean. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:5012–5018 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Watrous J, Roach P, Alexandrov T, Heath BS, Yang JY et al. Mass spectral molecular networking of living microbial colonies. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012; 109:E1743–52 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Kosina M, Barták M, Mašlaňová I, Pascutti AV, Sedo O et al. Pseudomonas prosekii sp. nov., a novel psychrotrophic bacterium from Antarctica. Curr Microbiol 2013; 67:637–646 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Verhille S, Baida N, Dabboussi F, Izard D, Leclerc H. Taxonomic study of bacteria isolated from natural mineral waters: proposal of Pseudomonas jessenii sp. nov. and Pseudomonas mandelii sp. nov. Syst Appl Microbiol 1999; 22:45–58 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Andersen SM, Johnsen K, Sørensen J, Nielsen P, Jacobsen CS. Pseudomonas frederiksbergensis sp. nov., isolated from soil at a coal gasification site. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2000; 50 Pt 6:1957–1964 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Kolmogorov M, Yuan J, Lin Y, Pevzner PA. Assembly of long, error-prone reads using repeat graphs. Nat Biotechnol 2019; 37:540–546 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Gourlé H, Karlsson-Lindsjö O, Hayer J, Bongcam-Rudloff E. Simulating Illumina metagenomic data with InSilicoSeq. Bioinformatics 2019; 35:521–522 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Walker BJ, Abeel T, Shea T, Priest M, Abouelliel A et al. Pilon: an integrated tool for comprehensive microbial variant detection and genome assembly improvement. PLoS One 2014; 9:e112963 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Manni M, Berkeley MR, Seppey M, Simão FA, Zdobnov EM. BUSCO Update: novel and streamlined workflows along with broader and deeper phylogenetic coverage for scoring of eukaryotic, prokaryotic, and viral genomes. Mol Biol Evol 2021; 38:4647–4654 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 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]
  18. Mulet M, Lalucat J, García-Valdés E. DNA sequence-based analysis of the Pseudomonas species. Environ Microbiol 2010; 12:1513–1530 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Duman M, Mulet M, Altun S, Saticioglu IB, Gomila M et al. Pseudomonas piscium sp. nov., Pseudomonas pisciculturae sp. nov., Pseudomonas mucoides sp. nov. and Pseudomonas neuropathica sp. nov. isolated from rainbow trout. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 71: [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Girard L, Lood C, Höfte M, Vandamme P, Rokni-Zadeh H et al. The ever-expanding Pseudomonas genus: description of 43 new species and partition of the Pseudomonas putida group. Microorganisms 2021; 9:1766 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 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]
  22. Yoon SH, Ha SM, Lim JM, Kwon SJ, Chun J. A large-scale evaluation of algorithms to calculate average nucleotide identity. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2017; 110:1281–1286 [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. Olm MR, Brown CT, Brooks B, Banfield JF. dRep: A tool for fast and accurate genomic comparisons that enables improved genome recovery from metagenomes through de-replication. ISME J 2017; 11:2864–2868 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Ondov BD, Treangen TJ, Melsted P, Mallonee AB, Bergman NH et al. Mash: fast genome and metagenome distance estimation using MinHash. Genome Biol 2016; 17:132 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Varghese NJ, Mukherjee S, Ivanova N, Konstantinidis KT, Mavrommatis K et al. Microbial species delineation using whole genome sequences. Nucleic Acids Res 2015; 43:6761–6771 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res 2015; 25:1043–1055 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Katoh K, Standley DM. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol 2013; 30:772–780 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Stamatakis A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 2014; 30:1312–1313 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Miller LT. Single derivatization method for routine analysis of bacterial whole-cell fatty acid methyl esters, including hydroxy acids. J Clin Microbiol 1982; 16:584–586 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Kuykendall LD, Roy MA, O’neill JJ, Devine TE. Fatty acids, antibiotic resistance, and deoxyribonucleic acid homology groups of Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1988; 38:358–361 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Tindall BJ, Sikorski J, Smibert RM, Kreig N. R et al. Phenotypic characterization and the principles of comparative systematics. In Reddy CA, Beveridge TJ, Breznak JA, Marzluf G, Schmidt TM. eds Methods for General and Molecular Microbiology 3rd Washington, DC, USA: ASM Press; 2007 pp 330–393
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Tindall BJ. A comparative study of the lipid composition of Halobacterium saccharovorum from various sources. Syst Appl Microbiol 1990; 13:128–130 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Kim CM, Jeong JW, Lee DH, Kim SB. Pseudomonas guryensis sp. nov. and Pseudomonas ullengensis sp. nov., isolated from soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2021; 71: [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Suslow TV, Schroth MN, Isaka M. Application of a rapid method for Gram differentiation of plant pathogenic and saprophytic bacteria without staining. Phytopathology 1982; 72:917 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005700
Loading
Pseudomonas nunensis sp. nov. isolated from a suppressive potato field in Greenland
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 73, 005700 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.005700
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005700
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005700
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Most cited 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