1887

Abstract

Two bacterial strains, designated 5GH9-11 and 5GH9-34, were isolated from greenhouse soil sampled in Wanju-gun, Jeollabuk-do, Republic of Korea. Both strains formed yellow colonies and were aerobic, rod-shaped and flagellated. The 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity between 5GH9-11 and 5GH9-34 was 98.6 %. Strain 5GH9-11 showed the highest sequence similarities to ATSB10 (98.1 %) and DSM 6220 (97.7 %) while strain 5GH9-34 revealed the highest sequence similarity to DSM 6220 (98.3 %) and ATSB10 (98.3 %). Phylogenetic analysis on the basis of the 16S rRNA gene sequence showed that strains 5GH9-11 and 5GH9-34 formed a robust cluster with MAH-13 and NBRC 104236. The phylogenomic tree also showed that strains 5GH9-11 and 5GH9-34 formed a robust cluster with DSM 26515 and MAH-13. Strain 5GH9-11 showed the highest orthologous average nucleotide identity (OrthoANI; 88.5 %) and digital DNA–DNA hybridization (dDDH) values (35.5 %) with MAH-13, and strain 5GH9-34 revealed highest OrthoANI (88.1 %) and dDDH (34.2 %) values with MAH-13. The orthoANI and dDDH values between strain 5GH9-11 and 5GH9-34 were 87.7 and 33.9 %, respectively. Their major respiratory quinone was ubiquinone 8, and the major cellular fatty acids were iso-C, summed feature 9 (iso-C ω9 and/or C 10-methyl) and iso-C. The major polar lipids of both strains were composed of large or moderate amounts of phosphatidylethanolamine, phosphatidylglycerol, diphosphatidylglycerol, an unidentified aminolipid and an unidentified aminophospholipid. Based on these data, strains 5GH9-11 and 5GH9-34 should represent two independent novel species of , for which the names sp. nov. (type strain 5GH9-11=KACC 16943=JCM 35197) and sp. nov. (type strain 5GH9-34=KACC 16945=JCM 35198) are proposed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005759
2023-03-02
2024-03-05
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Won M, Heo J, Weon HY, Lee D, Han BH et al. Frateuria soli sp. nov. and Frateuria edaphi sp. nov., isolated from greenhouse soil. Figshare 2022 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Swings J, Gillis M, Kersters K, De Vos P, Gossele F et al. Frateuria, a new genus for “Acetobacter aurantius.”. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1980; 30:547–556 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Zhang J-Y, Liu X-Y, Liu S-J. Frateuria terrea sp. nov., isolated from forest soil, and emended description of the genus Frateuria. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2011; 61:443–447 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Lidor O, Santos-Garcia D, Mozes-Daube N, Naor V, Cohen E et al. Frateuria defendens sp. nov., bacterium isolated from the yellows grapevine’s disease vector Hyalesthes obsoletus. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:1281–1287 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Akter S, Lee S-Y, Huq MdA. Frateuria flava sp. nov., isolated from soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2021; 71:005171 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Brierley JA. Use of microorganisms for mining metals. In Halvorson HO, Pramer D, Rogul M. eds Engineered Organisims in the Environment: Scientifc Issues Washington: ASM Press; 1985 pp 141–146
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ehrlich HL. Geomicrobiology, 2nd edn. New York: Dekker; 1990 p 646
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Subhashini DV. Growth promotion and increased potassium uptake of tobacco by potassium-mobilizing bacterium Frateuria aurantia grown at different potassium levels in vertisols. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 2015; 46:210–220 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Naor V, Iasur-Kruh L, Barkai R, Weiss N, Yahalomi R et al. Introducing the potential biological control agent frateuria defendens into pot- and field-grown grapevines. Phytopathol Mediterr 2019; 58:341–346
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Naama-Amar A, Gitman S, Shoshana N, Bahar O, Naor V et al. Antimicrobial activity of metabolites secreted by the endophytic bacterium Frateuria defendens. Plants 2020; 9:72 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Lane DJ. 16S/23S rRNA sequencing. In Stackebrandt E, Goodfellow M. eds Nucleic Acid Techniques in Bacterial Systematics New York: Wiley; 1991 pp 115–175
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 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]
  13. Thompson JD, Gibson TJ, Plewniak F, Jeanmougin F, Higgins DG. The CLUSTAL_X windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Res 1997; 25:4876–4882 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 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]
  15. Saitou N, Nei M. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 1987; 4:406–425 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Felsenstein J. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 1981; 17:368–376 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 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]
  18. Fitch WM. Toward defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific tree topology. Syst Zool 1971; 20:406 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap.. Evolution 1985; 39:783–791 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 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]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 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]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Na SI, Kim YO, Yoon SH, Ha SM, Baek I et al. UBCG: Up-to-date Bacterial Core Gene set and pipeline for phylogenomic tree reconstruction. J Microbiol 2018; 56:280–285
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 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:D206–14 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lee I, Ouk Kim Y, Park S-C, Chun J. OrthoANI: an improved algorithm and software for calculating average nucleotide identity. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:1100–1103 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 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]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Auch AF, Klenk HP, Göker M. Genome sequence-based species delimitation with confidence intervals and improved distance functions. BMC Bioinformatics 2013; 14:60 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Konstantinidis KT, Tiedje JM. Towards a genome-based taxonomy for prokaryotes. J Bacteriol 2005; 187:6258–6264 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 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]
  29. Kulajta C, Thumfart JO, Haid S, Daldal F, Koch HG. Multi-step assembly pathway of the cbb3-type cytochrome c oxidase complex. J Mol Biol 2006; 355:989–1004 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Okoye CO, Dong K, Wang Y, Gao L, Li X et al. Comparative genomics reveals the organic acid biosynthesis metabolic pathways among five lactic acid bacterial species isolated from fermented vegetables. N Biotechnol 2022; 70:73–83 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Claus D. A standardized Gram staining procedure. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 1992; 8:451–452 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Powers EM. Efficacy of the Ryu nonstaining KOH technique for rapidly determining Gram reactions of food-borne and waterborne bacteria and yeasts. Appl Environ Microbiol 1995; 61:3756–3758 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Smibert RM, Krieg NR. Phenotypic characterization. In Gerhardt P, Murray R, W W, Krieg N. eds Methods for General and Molecular Bacteriology Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology; 1994 pp 607–654
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Sasser M. Identification of Bacteria by Gas Chromatography of Cellular Fatty Acids. MIDI Technical Note 101 Newark, DE: MIDI Inc; 1990
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 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]
  36. Komagata K, Suzuki K. Lipid and cell-wall analysis in bacterial systematics. Methods Microbiol 1987; 19:161–208
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Jung H-M, Ten LN, Kim K-H, An DS, Im W-T et al. Dyella ginsengisoli sp. nov., isolated from soil of a ginseng field in South Korea. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009; 59:460–465 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Anandham R, Kwon S-W, Indira Gandhi P, Kim S-J, Weon H-Y et al. Dyella thiooxydans sp. nov., a facultatively chemolithotrophic, thiosulfate-oxidizing bacterium isolated from rhizosphere soil of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2011; 61:392–398 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Madhaiyan M, Poonguzhali S, Saravanan VS, Kwon S-W. Rhodanobacter glycinis sp. nov., a yellow-pigmented gammaproteobacterium isolated from the rhizoplane of field-grown soybean. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:2023–2028 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005759
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005759
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