1887

Abstract

Strain BD7642 was isolated from Chinese pickled potherb mustard ( Coss.) purchased from a local market in Shanghai, PR China. A polyphasic approach, including 16S rRNA gene sequence, housekeeping gene, average nucleotide identity (ANI), digital DNA–DNA hybridization (dDDH), G+C content and phenotypic analyses, was employed to characterize strain BD7642. Cells of the bacterium were short round rods, Gram-stain-positive, non-spore-forming and catalase-negative. The strain grew at 30–45 °C and pH 4.0–8.0. Optimum growth occurred at 35–40 °C and pH 6.0–7.0. The strain exhibited growth with salt (NaCl) concentrations of up to 5 % (w/v). The G+C content of the strain’s genomic DNA was 31.37 mol%. The major fatty acids were C, Cc9 and summed feature 10 (Cc11/t9/t6). 16S rRNA gene sequencing revealed that strain BD7642 represents a member of the genus and it had high sequence similarity to NBRC 102162 (96.73 %), LGM 23560 (96.66 %) and JCM 1231 (95.82 %). The dDDH values between strain BD7642 and its phylogenetically related species within the genus ranged from 12.6 to 25.4 %. The ANI values between strain BD7642 and its closely related taxa were far lower than the threshold (95 %–96 %) used for species differentiation. Results of phylogenetic, physiological and phenotypic characterization confirmed that strain BD7642 represents a novel species within the genus , for which the name sp. nov. is proposed. The type strain is BD7642 (=CCTCC AB 2022398=JCM 36074).

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Shanghai Municipal State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (Award No. 2022013)
    • Principle Award Recipient: liuzhenmin
  • Key Technologies Research and Development Program (Award 2022YFD2100704)
    • Principle Award Recipient: zhengjunwu
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006160
2023-11-10
2024-07-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/73/11/ijsem006160.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006160&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Zheng J, Wittouck S, Salvetti E, Franz CMAP, Harris HMB et al. A taxonomic note on the genus Lactobacillus: description of 23 novel genera, emended description of the genus Lactobacillus Beijerinck 1901, and union of Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:2782–2858 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Rogosa M, Wiseman RF, Mitchell JA, Disraely MN, Beaman AJ. Species differentiation of oral Lactobacilli from man including description of Lactobacillus salivarius nov spec and Lactobacillus cellobiosus nov spec. J Bacteriol 1953; 65:681–699 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Sharpe ME, Latham MJ, Garvie EI, Zirngibl J, Kandler O. Two new species of Lactobacillus isolated from the bovine rumen, Lactobacillus ruminis sp.nov. and Lactobacillus vitulinus sp.nov. J Gen Microbiol 1973; 77:37–49 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Hemme D, Ducluzeau R, Galpin JV, Sicard P, Van Heijenoort J. Lactobacillus murinus sp. nov., a new species of the autochtoneous dominant flora of the digestive tract of rat and mouse (author’s transl). Ann Microbiol 1980; 131:297–308
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Weiss N, Schillinger U, Laternser M, Kandler O. Lactobacillus sharpeae sp.nov. and Lactobacillus agilis sp.nov., two new species of homofermentative, meso-diaminopimelic acid-containing Lactobacilli isolated from sewage. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg 1981; 2:242–253 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Dent VE, Williams RAD. Lactobacillus animalis sp. nov., a new species of Lactobacillus from the alimentary canal of animals. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg 1982; 3:377–386 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Fujisawa T, Shirasaka S, Watabe J, Mitsuoka T. Lactobacillus aviarius sp. nov.: a new species isolated from the intestine of chickens. Syst Appl Microbiol 1984; 5:414–420 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Tanasupawat S, Shida O, Okada S, Komagata K. Lactobacillus acidipiscis sp. nov. and Weissella thailandensis sp. nov., isolated from fermented fish in Thailand. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2000; 50 Pt 4:1479–1485 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Morotomi M, Yuki N, Kado Y, Kushiro A, Shimazaki T et al. Lactobacillus equi sp. nov., a predominant intestinal Lactobacillus species of the horse isolated from faeces of healthy horses. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2002; 52:211–214 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Morita H, Shiratori C, Murakami M, Takami H, Kato Y et al. Lactobacillus hayakitensis sp. nov., isolated from intestines of healthy thoroughbreds. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2007; 57:2836–2839 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Pedersen C, Roos S. Lactobacillus saerimneri sp. nov., isolated from pig faeces. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2004; 54:1365–1368 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Osawa R, Fujisawa T, Pukall R. Lactobacillus apodemi sp. nov., a tannase-producing species isolated from wild mouse faeces. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:1693–1696 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Vela AI, Fernandez A, Espinosa de los Monteros A, Goyache J, Herraez P et al. Lactobacillus ceti sp. nov., isolated from beaked whales (Ziphius cavirostris). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:891–894 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Chen Y-S, Miyashita M, Suzuki K-I, Sato H, Hsu J-S et al. Lactobacillus pobuzihii sp. nov., isolated from pobuzihi (fermented cummingcordia). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2010; 60:1914–1917 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Endo A, Irisawa T, Futagawa-Endo Y, Salminen S, Ohkuma M et al. Lactobacillus faecis sp. nov., isolated from animal faeces. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2013; 63:4502–4507 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Tohno M, Tanizawa Y, Kojima Y, Sakamoto M, Nakamura Y et al. Lactobacillus salitolerans sp. nov., a novel lactic acid bacterium isolated from spent mushroom substrates. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:964–969 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Tohno M, Tanizawa Y, Sawada H, Sakamoto M, Ohkuma M et al. A novel species of lactic acid bacteria, Ligilactobacillus pabuli sp. nov., isolated from alfalfa silage. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72: [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Heng YC, Menon N, Chen B, Loo BZL, Wong GWJ et al. Ligilactobacillus ubinensis sp. nov., a novel species isolated from the wild ferment of a durian fruit (Durio zibethinus). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73: [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Gilroy R, Ravi A, Getino M, Pursley I, Horton DL et al. Extensive microbial diversity within the chicken gut microbiome revealed by metagenomics and culture. PeerJ 2021; 9:e10941 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Behera SS, El Sheikha AF, Hammami R, Kumar A. Traditionally fermented pickles: how the microbial diversity associated with their nutritional and health benefits?. J Func Foods 2020; 70:103971 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhao D, Ding X. Studies on the low-salt Chinese potherb mustard (Brassica juncea, Coss.) pickle. I—The effect of a homofermentative l(+)-lactic acid producer Bacillus coagulans on starter culture in the low-salt Chinese potherb mustard pickle fermentation. LWT Food Sci Technol 2008; 41:474–482 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Tohno M, Kobayashi H, Nomura M, Uegaki R, Cai Y. Identification and characterization of lactic acid bacteria isolated from mixed pasture of timothy and orchardgrass, and its badly preserved silage. Anim Sci J 2012; 83:318–330 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 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]
  24. Kim M, Oh H-S, Park S-C, Chun J. Towards a taxonomic coherence between average nucleotide identity and 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity for species demarcation of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:346–351 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 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]
  26. Besemer J, Borodovsky M. GeneMark: web software for gene finding in prokaryotes, eukaryotes and viruses. Nucleic Acids Res 2005; 33:W451–4 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lowe TM, Eddy SR. tRNAscan-SE: a program for improved detection of transfer RNA genes in genomic sequence. Nucleic Acids Res 1997; 25:955–964 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Fang F, Li Y, Bumann M, Raftis EJ, Casey PG et al. Allelic variation of bile salt hydrolase genes in Lactobacillus salivarius does not determine bile resistance levels. J Bacteriol 2009; 191:5743–5757 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. McAuliffe O, Cano RJ, Klaenhammer TR. Genetic analysis of two bile salt hydrolase activities in Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM. Appl Environ Microbiol 2005; 71:4925–4929 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Aguirre AM, Adegbite AO, Sorg JA. Clostridioides difficile bile salt hydrolase activity has substrate specificity and affects biofilm formation. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes 2022; 8:94 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 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]
  32. Heng YC, Silvaraju S, Kittelmann S. Whole-genome sequence of Ligilactobacillus faecis WILCCON 0062, isolated from feces of a wild boar (Sus scrofa). Microbiol Resour Announc 2023; 12:e0037623 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 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]
  34. 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] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 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]
  36. Gerhardt P, Murray RGE, Wood WA, Krieg NR. Methods for General and Molecular Bacteriology Washington, DC: ASM Press; 1994
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Tohno M, Tanizawa Y, Kojima Y, Sakamoto M, Ohkuma M et al. Lactobacillus corticis sp. nov., isolated from hardwood bark. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2021; 71: [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Romano I, Nicolaus B, Lama L, Trabasso D, Caracciolo G et al. Accumulation of osmoprotectants and lipid pattern modulation in response to growth conditions by Halomonas pantelleriense. Syst Appl Microbiol 2001; 24:342–352 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Hasegawa T, Takizawa M, Tanida S. A rapid analysis for chemical grouping of aerobic actinomycetes. J Gen Appl Microbiol 1983; 29:319–322 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Collins MD, Pirouz T, Goodfellow M, Minnikin DE. Distribution of menaquinones in actinomycetes and corynebacteria. J Gen Microbiol 1977; 100:221–230 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006160
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006160
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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