Cellulosimicrobium fucosivorans is a later heterotypic synonym of Cellulosimicrobium composti

References

1. Oren A, Garrity GM. Valid publication of the names of forty-two phyla of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2021; 71:71 [View Article] [PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
2. Schumann P, Weiss N, Stackebrandt E. Reclassification of Cellulomonas cellulans (Stackebrandt and Keddie 1986) as Cellulosimicrobium cellulans gen. nov., comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001; 51:1007–1010 [View Article] [PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
3. Nouioui I, Carro L, García-López M, Meier-Kolthoff JP, Woyke T et al. Genome-based taxonomic classification of the phylum Actinobacteria. Front Microbiol 2018; 9:2007 [View Article] [PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
4. Oh M, Kim JH, Yoon JH, Schumann P, Kim W. Cellulosimicrobium arenosum sp. nov., isolated from marine sediment sand. Curr Microbiol 2018; 75:901–906 [View Article] [PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
5. Schumann P, Stackebrandt E. Cellulosimicrobium. In Bergey’s Manual of Systematics of Archaea and Bacteria Bergey’s Manual Trust; 2015 pp 1–9 [View Article]
   [Google Scholar]
6. Brown JM, Steigerwalt AG, Morey RE, Daneshvar MI, Romero LJ et al. Characterization of clinical isolates previously identified as Oerskovia turbata: proposal of Cellulosimicrobium funkei sp. nov. and emended description of the genus Cellulosimicrobium. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:801–804 [View Article] [PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
7. Yoon JH, Kang SJ, Schumann P, Oh TK. Cellulosimicrobium terreum sp. nov., isolated from soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2007; 57:2493–2497 [View Article] [PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
8. Hu L, Xia M, Gao X, Huo YX, Yang Y. Cellulosimicrobium composti sp. nov., a thermophilic bacterium isolated from compost. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2021; 71:71 [View Article]
   [Google Scholar]
9. Aviles FA, Kyndt JA. Cellulosimicrobium fucosivorans sp. nov., isolated from San Elijo lagoon, contains a fucose metabolic pathway linked to carotenoid production. Arch Microbiol 2021; 203:4525–4538 [View Article] [PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
10. Stackebrandt E, Schumann P, Cui XL. Reclassification of Cellulosimicrobium variabile Bakalidou et al. 2002 as Isoptericola variabilis gen. nov., comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2004; 54:685–688 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
11. Yoon SH, Ha SM, 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]
12. Hall T. BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symp Ser 1999; 41:95–98
    [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, 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. Rodriguez-R LM, Gunturu S, Harvey WT, Rosselló-Mora R, Tiedje JM et al. The Microbial Genomes Atlas (MiGA) webserver: taxonomic and gene diversity analysis of Archaea and Bacteria at the whole genome level. Nucleic Acids Res 2018; 46:W282–W288 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
16. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Klenk H-P, Göker M. Taxonomic use of DNA G+C content and DNA-DNA hybridization in the genomic age. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:352–356 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
17. 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]
18. Na S-I, Kim YO, Yoon S-H, Ha S-M, Baek I et al. UBCG: Up-to-date bacterial core gene set and pipeline for phylogenomic tree reconstruction. J Microbiol 2018; 56:280–285 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
19. 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]
20. Konstantinidis KT, Tiedje JM. Towards a genome-based taxonomy for prokaryotes. J Bacteriol 2005; 187:6258–6264 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
21. Yoon SH, Ha SM, Lim J, Kwon S, 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]
22. 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]
23. 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 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
24. 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]
25. Bhattacharjee A, Bayzid MS. Machine learning based imputation techniques for estimating phylogenetic trees from incomplete distance matrices. BMC Genomics 2020; 21:497 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]