Skip to content
1887

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY logo International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology

Volume 74, Issue 12

Genome-based reclassification of Fu . 2017 as a later heterotypic synonym of Huys . 2017 and proposal of subsp. subsp. nov. and subsp. subsp. nov. No Access

Abstract

, as the type genus of the family , comprises a diverse array of species found in various environments. In this study, we aim to reassess and elucidate the taxonomic relationships of species. Based on 16S rRNA gene sequences, the phylogeny of 70 validly published species was reconstructed. Of which, 50 species with available genomes were further subjected to overall genome relatedness indices (OGRI) analysis, resulting in the identification of distinct pairs of closely related species. One such pair, consisting of the type strains of and , exhibited an average nucleotide identity (ANI) of 97.7%, a digital DNA–DNA hybridization (dDDH) of 80.1% and an average amino acid identity (AAI) of 98.3%, alongside a 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity of 99.8%. Based on the phylogenetic, OGRI and phenotypical evidence, we propose as a later heterotypic synonym of . Additionally, another pair of type strains, and , possessed ANI, dDDH, AAI and 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity values of 96.3, 70.1, 96.0 and 99.0%, respectively. These values, together with differences in phenotypic traits, support the proposal of two subspecies within this taxonomic lineage. Thus, we propose the establishment of two new subspecies, subsp. subsp. nov. and subsp. subsp. nov.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): genome relatedness indices , phylogenetic analysis , Sphingobacterium , subspecies differentiation and taxonomic reclassification
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation (Award 2023A1515012020)
    • Principal Award Recipient: ShuaiLi
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (Award 32270076)
    • Principal Award Recipient: LeiDong
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (Award 32400004)
    • Principal Award Recipient: ShuaiLi
  • Third Xinjiang Scientific Expedition Program (Award 2022xjkk1200)
    • Principal Award Recipient: LeiDong
© 2024 Sun Yat-Sen University
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006610
2024-12-19
2026-01-22

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Yabuuchi E, Kaneko T, Yano I, Moss CW, Miyoshi N. Sphingobacterium gen. nov., Sphingobacterium spiritivorum comb. nov., Sphingobacterium multivorum comb. nov., Sphingobacterium mizutae sp. nov., and Flavobacterium indologenes sp. nov.: Glucose-Nonfermenting Gram-Negative Rods in CDC Groups IIK-2 and IIb. Int J Bacteriol 1983; 33:580–598 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Parte AC. LPSN - List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (bacterio.net), 20 years on. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2018; 68:1825–1829 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Song J, Joung Y, Li SH, Hwang J, Cho JC. Sphingobacterium chungjuense sp. nov., isolated from a freshwater lake. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:6126–6132 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Wang Q, Fang Z-Q, Zhang C-L, Shen J-Q, Lai J-D et al. Sphingobacterium bovistauri sp. nov., isolated from the faeces of Bos taurus. Curr Microbiol 2022; 79:92 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen M, Li N, Zhang X-F, Zhou X-K, Shi R et al. Sphingobacterium faecale sp. nov., a 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase producing bacterium isolated from camel faeces. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72:005215 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Sun LN, Zhang J, Chen Q, He J, Li SP. Sphingobacterium caeni sp. nov., isolated from activated sludge. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2013; 63:2260–2264 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Lai W-A, Hameed A, Liu Y-C, Hsu Y-H, Lin S-Y et al. Sphingobacterium cibi sp. nov., isolated from the food-waste compost and emended descriptions of Sphingobacterium spiritivorum (Holmes et al. 1982) Yabuuchi et al. 1983 and Sphingobacterium thermophilum Yabe et al. 2013. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:5336–5344 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Kim KH, Ten LN, Liu QM, Im WT, Lee ST. Sphingobacterium daejeonense sp. nov., isolated from a compost sample. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:2031–2036 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Xu L, Sun J-Q, Wang L-J, Gao Z-W, Sun L-Z et al. Sphingobacterium alkalisoli sp. nov., isolated from a saline-alkaline soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2017; 67:1943–1948 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhou X-K, Huang Y, Li M, Zhang X-F, Wei Y-Q et al. Sphingobacterium cavernae sp. nov., a novel bacterium isolated from soil sampled at Tiandong Cave. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:2348–2354 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Liu L, Hui N, Liang L, Zhang X, Li L et al. Sphingobacterium haloxyli sp. nov., an endophytic bacterium isolated from Haloxylon ammodendron stems in Kumtag desert. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2018; 68:3279–3284 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Liu Y-Y, Liu F, Li Y-Q, Lei R-F, Ma Q et al. Sphingobacterium endophyticum sp. nov., a novel endophyte isolated from halophyte. Arch Microbiol 2020; 202:2771–2778 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Mehnaz S, Weselowski B, Lazarovits G. Sphingobacterium canadense sp. nov., an isolate from corn roots. Syst Appl Microbiol 2007; 30:519–524 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Li Y, Guo L, Chang J, Yang X, Xie S et al. Sphingobacterium corticibacter sp. nov., isolated from bark of Populus × euramericana. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:1870–1874 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Li Y, Wang S, Chang J, Bian D, Guo L et al. Sphingomonas corticis sp. nov., and Sphingobacterium corticibacterium sp. nov., from bark canker. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:5627–5633 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Schmidt VSJ, Wenning M. Sphingobacterium lactis sp. nov. and Sphingobacterium alimentarium sp. nov., isolated from raw milk and a dairy environment. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012; 62:1506–1511
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Huys G, Purohit P, Tan CH, Snauwaert C, Vos PD et al. Sphingobacterium cellulitidis sp. nov., isolated from clinical and environmental sources. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2017; 67:1415–1421 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Fu Y-S, Hussain F, Habib N, Khan IU, Chu X et al. Sphingobacteriumsoli sp. nov., isolated from soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2017; 67:2284–2288 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Lee DH, Hur JS, Kahng HY. Sphingobacterium cladoniae sp. nov., isolated from lichen, Cladonia sp., and emended description of Sphingobacterium siyangense. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2013; 63:755–760 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Liu R, Liu H, Zhang C-X, Yang S-Y, Liu X-H et al. Sphingobacterium siyangense sp. nov., isolated from farm soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:1458–1462 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Chun J, Rainey FA. Integrating genomics into the taxonomy and systematics of the Bacteria and Archaea. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:316–324 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Riesco R, Trujillo ME. Update on the proposed minimal standards for the use of genome data for the taxonomy of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74:006300 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Tonial F, Guella F, Passaglia LMP, Sant’Anna FH. Genome-based reclassification of Paenibacillus panacisoli DSM 21345T as Paenibacillus massiliensis subsp. Panacisoli subsp. nov. and description of Paenibacillus massiliensis subsp. Massiliensis subsp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:4838–4842 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Dos Santos Ferreira N, Hayashi Sant’ Anna F, Massena Reis V, Ambrosini A, Gazolla Volpiano C et al. Genome-based reclassification of Azospirillum brasilense Sp245 as the type strain of Azospirillum baldaniorum sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:6203–6212 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Straková D, Galisteo C, de la Haba RR, Ventosa A. Characterization of Haloarcula terrestris sp. nov. and reclassification of a Haloarcula species based on a taxogenomic approach. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73:006157 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Hu X, Yang F, Yang S, Guo W, Ren J et al. Roseinatronobacter alkalisoli sp. nov., an alkaliphilic bacterium isolated from soda soil, and genome-based reclassification of the genera Rhodobaca and Roseinatronobacter. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74:006402 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Chalita M, Kim YO, Park S, Oh H-S, Cho JH et al. EzBioCloud: a genome-driven database and platform for microbiome identification and discovery. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74:006421 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 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] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 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]
  30. Felsenstein J. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 1981; 17:368–376 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Fitch WM. Toward defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific tree topology. Syst Biol 1971; 20:406–416 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 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]
  33. Tamura K, Nei M. Estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions in the control region of mitochondrial DNA in humans and chimpanzees. Mol Biol Evol 1993; 10:512–526 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 1985; 39:783–791 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Chklovski A, Parks DH, Woodcroft BJ, Tyson GW. CheckM2: a rapid, scalable and accurate tool for assessing microbial genome quality using machine learning. Nat Methods 2023; 20:1203–1212 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Parks DH, Chuvochina M, Rinke C, Mussig AJ, Chaumeil P-A et al. GTDB: an ongoing census of bacterial and archaeal diversity through a phylogenetically consistent, rank normalized and complete genome-based taxonomy. Nucleic Acids Res 2022; 50:D785–D794 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Chaumeil PA, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. GTDB-Tk v2: memory friendly classification with the genome taxonomy database. Bioinformatics 2022; 38:5315–5316 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Minh BQ, Schmidt HA, Chernomor O, Schrempf D, Woodhams MD et al. IQ-TREE 2: New models and efficient methods for phylogenetic inference in the genomic era. Mol Biol Evol 2020; 37:1530–1534 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 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]
  40. 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]
  41. 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]
  42. Bhattacharjee A, Bayzid MS. Machine learning based imputation techniques for estimating phylogenetic trees from incomplete distance matrices. BMC Genomics 2020; 21:497 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 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]
  44. Jain C, Rodriguez-R LM, Phillippy AM, Konstantinidis KT, Aluru S. High throughput ANI analysis of 90K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries. Nat Commun 2018; 9:5114 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Hahnke RL, Petersen J, Scheuner C, Michael V et al. Complete genome sequence of DSM 30083(T), the type strain (U5/41(T)) of Escherichia coli, and a proposal for delineating subspecies in microbial taxonomy. Stand Genomic Sci 2014; 9:2 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Seemann T. Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics 2014; 30:2068–2069 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Aziz RK, Bartels D, Best AA, DeJongh M, Disz T et al. The RAST server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genomics 2008; 9:75 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Sun J, Lu F, Luo Y, Bie L, Xu L et al. OrthoVenn3: an integrated platform for exploring and visualizing orthologous data across genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 2023; 51:W397–W403 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  49. 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]
  50. 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]
  51. Konstantinidis KT, Rosselló-Móra R, Amann R. Uncultivated microbes in need of their own taxonomy. ISME J 2017; 11:2399–2406 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006610
Loading
Genome-based reclassification of Sphingobacterium soli Fu et al. 2017 as a later heterotypic synonym of Sphingobacterium cellulitidis Huys et al. 2017 and proposal of Sphingobacterium siyangense subsp. siyangense subsp. nov. and Sphingobacterium siyangense subsp. cladoniae subsp. nov.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 74, 006610 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.006610
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006610
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006610
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