1887

Abstract

A novel bacterial strain, designated as MAH-18, was isolated from soil sampled in a flower garden. Cells of strain MAH-18 were Gram-stain-positive, aerobic, motile, and rod-shaped. The colonies were beige in colour, smooth, and spherical when grown on Reasoner's 2A agar medium. Strain MAH-18 grew at 20–40 °C, pH 6.0–8.0, and 0–1.0 % NaCl. Cells were able to hydrolyse aesculin, gelatin, and Tween 20. According to the 16S rRNA gene sequence comparisons, the isolate was determined to be a member of the genus and most closely related to OS4 (97.9 %), DS-30 (97.9 %), GW-9 (97.6 %), mbc-2 (97.5 %), HWE 2-02 (97.4 %), and GBK3QG-3 (96.3 %). Strain MAH-18 has a draft genome size of 4 788 325 bp (eight contigs), 4572 protein-coding genes, 46 tRNA, and three rRNA genes. The average nucleotide identity and digital DNA–DNA hybridization values between strain MAH-18 and the closest type strains were 81.5–83.4 % and 24.4–25.8 %, respectively. genome mining revealed several biosynthetic gene clusters in the genome of the novel strain MAH-18. The G+C content of the genomic DNA of strain was 72.2 mol% and the predominant isoprenoid quinone was MK-8 (H). The main polar lipids were phosphatidylglycerol, diphosphatidylglycerol, phosphatidylethanolamine, and unknown phospholipids. The major cellular fatty acids were determined to be C iso and C 6. The DNA–DNA hybridization results and phenotypic, genotypic, and chemotaxonomic data demonstrated that strain MAH-18 represents a novel species, for which the name sp. nov. is proposed, with MAH-18 as the type strain (=KACC 19744=CGMCC 1.13656).

  • 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.0.006407
2024-06-18
2024-07-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/74/6/ijsem006407.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006407&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Prauser H. Nocardioides, a new genus of the order actinomycetales. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1976; 26:58–65 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Han J-H, Kim T-S, Joung Y, Kim MN, Shin K-S et al. Nocardioides endophyticus sp. nov. and Nocardioides conyzicola sp. nov., isolated from herbaceous plant roots. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2013; 63:4730–4734 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Sun L-N, Zhang J, Gong F-F, Wang X, Hu G et al. Nocardioides soli sp. nov., a carbendazim-degrading bacterium isolated from soil under the long-term application of carbendazim. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:2047–2052 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Wang X, Jiang W-K, Cui M-D, Yang Z-G, Yu X et al. Nocardioides agrisoli sp. nov., isolated from farmland soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2017; 67:3722–3727 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Yoon JH, Kim IG, Kang KH, Oh TK, Park YH. Nocardioides aquiterrae sp. nov., isolated from groundwater in Korea. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2004; 54:71–75 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Yoon JH, Kang SJ, Lee MH, Oh TK. Nocardioides hankookensis sp. nov., isolated from soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:434–437 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Yoon JH, Rhee SK, Lee JS, Park YH, Lee ST. Nocardioides pyridinolyticus sp. nov., a pyridine-degrading bacterium isolated from the oxic zone of an oil shale column. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1997; 47:933–938 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen M-S, Chen F, Chen X-H, Zheng Z-Q, Ma X et al. Nocardioides mangrovi sp. nov., a novel endophytic actinobacterium isolated from root of Kandelia candel. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72:005295 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Farh ME-A, Kim Y-J, Van An H, Sukweenadhi J, Singh P et al. Burkholderia ginsengiterrae sp. nov. and Burkholderia panaciterrae sp. nov., antagonistic bacteria against root rot pathogen Cylindrocarpon destructans, isolated from ginseng soil. Arch Microbiol 2015; 197:439–447 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Huq M, Kim Y-J, Min J-W, Bae KS, Yang D-C. Use of Lactobacillus rossiae DC05 for bioconversion of the major ginsenosides Rb1 and Re into the pharmacologically active ginsenosides C-K and Rg2. Food Sci Biotechnol 2014; 23:1561–1567 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Wang P, Kong X, Chen H, Xiao Y, Liu H et al. Exploration of intrinsic microbial community modulators in the rice endosphere indicates a key role of distinct bacterial taxa across different cultivars. Front Microbiol 2021; 12:629852 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Alam K, Hao J, Zhang Y, Li A. Synthetic biology-inspired strategies and tools for engineering of microbial natural product biosynthetic pathways. Biotechnol Adv 2021; 49:107759 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Weisburg WG, Barns SM, Pelletier DA, Lane DJ. 16S ribosomal DNA amplification for phylogenetic study. J Bacteriol 1991; 173:697–703 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Kim O-S, Cho Y-J, Lee K, Yoon S-H, Kim M et al. Introducing EzTaxon-e: a prokaryotic 16S rRNA gene sequence database with phylotypes that represent uncultured species. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012; 62:716–721 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 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]
  16. Hall TA. Bioedit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for windows 95/98/NT. Nucl Acids Symp Ser 1999; 41:95–98
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kimura M. The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1983 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Saitou N, Nei M. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Bio Evol 1987; 4:406–425
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Tamura K, Stecher G, Kumar S. MEGA11: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 11. Mol Biol Evol 2021; 38:3022–3027 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 1985; 39:783–791 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Alanjary M, Steinke K, Ziemert N. AutoMLST: an automated web server for generating multi-locus species trees highlighting natural product potential. Nucleic Acids Res 2019; 47:W276–W282 [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. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Auch AF, Klenk HP, Göker M. Genome sequence-based species delimitation with confidence intervals and improved distance functions. BMC Bioinform 2013; 14:60 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 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]
  25. Camacho C, Coulouris G, Avagyan V, Ma N, Papadopoulos J et al. BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinform 2009; 10:421 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 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–D214 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Wayne LG, Brenner DJ, Colwell RR, Grimont PAD, Kandler O et al. International committee on systematic bacteriology. report of the ad hoc committee on reconciliation of approaches to bacterial systematics. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1987; 37:463–464 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Stackebrandt E, Goebel BM. Taxonomic note: a place for DNA-DNA reassociation and 16S rRNA sequence analysis in the present species definition in bacteriology. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1994; 44:846–849 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R. Shifting the genomic gold standard for the prokaryotic species definition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009; 106:19126–19131 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Grant JR, Stothard P. The CGView server: a comparative genomics tool for circular genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 2008; 36:W181–W184 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Blin K, Shaw S, Augustijn HE, Reitz ZL, Biermann F et al. antiSMASH 7.0: new and improved predictions for detection, regulation, chemical structures and visualisation. Nucleic Acids Res 2023; 51:W46–W50 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. van Heel AJ, de Jong A, Song C, Viel JH, Kok J et al. BAGEL4: a user-friendly web server to thoroughly mine RiPPs and bacteriocins. Nucleic Acids Res 2018; 46:W278–W281 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Huq MA. Chryseobacterium chungangensis sp. nov., a bacterium isolated from soil of sweet gourd garden. Arch Microbiol 2018; 200:581–587 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Fautz E, Reichenbach H. A simple test for flexirubin-type pigments. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1980; 8:87–91 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Huq MA. Caenispirillum humi sp. nov., a bacterium isolated from the soil of Korean pine garden. Arch Microbiol 2018; 200:343–348 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Skerman VBD. A Guide to the Identification of the Genera of Bacteria, 2nd edn Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1967
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Christensen WB. Urea decomposition as a means of differentiating proteus and paracolon cultures from each other and from Salmonella and Shigella types. J Bacteriol 1946; 52:461–466 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Sasser M. Identification of bacteria by gas chromatography of cellular fatty acids. In MIDI Technical Note vol 101 Newark, DE: MIDI Inc; 1990
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Collins MD. Isoprenoid quinone analyses in bacterial classification and identification. In Goodfellow M, Minnikin DE. eds Chemical Methods in Bacterial Systematics London: Academic Press; 1985 pp 267–287
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Collins MD, Jones D. Distribution of isoprenoid quinone structural types in bacteria and their taxonomic implication. Microbiol Rev 1981; 45:316–354 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Minnikin DE, Patel PV, Alshamaony L, Goodfellow M. Polar lipid composition in the classification of Nocardia and related bacteria. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1977; 27:104–117 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Akter S, Huq MA. Sphingomonas chungangi sp. nov., a bacterium isolated from garden soil sample. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:4151–4157 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006407
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006407
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