Skip to content
1887

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

Volume 75, Issue 1

sp. nov., isolated from the faecal sample of a zoo animal, No Access

Abstract

Strain NoAH (=KACC 23135=JCM 35999), a novel Gram-negative, motile bacterium with a rod-shaped morphology, was isolated from the zoo animal faecal samples, specifically the long-tailed goral species . The novel bacterial strain grew optimally in a nutrient broth medium under the following conditions: 1–2% (w/v) NaCl, pH 7–8 and 30 °C. The strain NoAH exhibited high tolerance to NaCl, with the ability to tolerate up to 7% (w/v) NaCl. Based on phylogenetic analyses using 16S rRNA gene sequencing, strain NoAH was found to have the closest relatedness to YW1 (98.5%), ATCC 11330 (97.9%), KCTC 82561 (97.9%), CJ34 (97.7%) and EJ-4 (97.6%). The genome size and genomic DNA G+C content of strain NoAH were 4.05 Mbp and 55.9 mol%, respectively. A whole-genome-level comparison of strain NoAH with YW, LMG 3475, NBRC 14918, NBRC 12685 and CJ34 revealed the following orthologous average nucleotide identity values: 80.1, 79.0, 78.6, 76.3 and 75.2%, respectively. The major polar lipids of strain NoAH were phosphatidylethanolamine, phosphatidylglycerol and diphosphatidylglycerol. Considering our findings in chemotaxonomic, genotypic and phenotypic characteristics, strain NoAH is identified as a novel species within the genus , for which the name sp. nov. is proposed.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): Betaproteobacteria , Burkholderiales , Comamonas , faeces , taxonomy and zoo animal
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (Award NRF-2022R1A4A1025913)
    • Principal Award Recipient: WoojunPark
© 2025 The Authors
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006665
2025-01-29
2026-01-21

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. De Vos P, Kersters K, Falsen E, Pot B, Gillis M et al. Comamonas Davis and Park 1962 gen. nov., nom. rev. emend., and Comamonas terrigena Hugh 1962 sp. nov., nom. rev. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1985; 35:443–453 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Kämpfer P, Busse HJ, Baars S, Wilharm G, Glaeser SP. Comamonas aquatilis sp. nov., isolated from a garden pond. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2018; 68:1210–1214 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Wauters G, Baere T, Willems A, Falsen E. For two subgroups of comamonas terrigena and emended description of comamonas terrigena. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2003; 53:859–862 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Sun LN, Zhang J, Chen Q, He J, Li QF et al. Comamonas jiangduensis sp. nov., a biosurfactant-producing bacterium isolated from agricultural soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2013; 63:2168–2173 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Subhash Y, Bang JJ, You TH, Lee SS. Description of Comamonas sediminis sp. nov., isolated from lagoon sediments. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:2735–2739 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Yu XY, Li YF, Zheng JW, Li Y, Li L et al. Comamonas zonglianii sp. nov., isolated from phenol-contaminated soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2011; 61:255–258 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chipirom K, Tanasupawat S, Akaracharanya A, Leepepatpiboon N, Prange A et al. Comamonas terrae sp. nov., an arsenite-oxidizing bacterium isolated from agricultural soil in Thailand. J Gen Appl Microbiol 2012; 58:245–251 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Tago Y, Yokota A. Comamonas badia sp. nov., a floc-forming bacterium isolated from activated sludge. J Gen Appl Microbiol 2004; 50:243–248 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Gumaelius L, Magnusson G, Pettersson B, Dalhammar G. Comamonas denitrificans sp. nov., an efficient denitrifying bacterium isolated from activated sludge. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001; 51:999–1006 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Yin Y, Han J, Wu H, Lu Y, Bao X et al. Comamonas resistens sp. nov. and Pseudomonas triclosanedens sp. nov., two members of the phylum Pseudomonadota isolated from the wastewater treatment system of a pharmaceutical factory. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74: [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Kang W, Soo Kim P, Hyun D-W, Lee J-Y, Sik Kim H et al. Comamonas piscis sp. nov., isolated from the intestine of a Korean rockfish, Sebastes schlegelii. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:780–785 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Chou JH, Sheu SY, Lin KY, Chen WM, Arun AB et al. Comamonas odontotermitis sp. nov., isolated from the gut of the termite Odontotermes formosanus. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2007; 57:887–891 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Young CC, Chou JH, Arun AB, Yen WS, Sheu SY et al. Comamonas composti sp. nov., isolated from food waste compost. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:251–256 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Min J, Kim P, Yun S, Hong M, Park W. Zoo animal manure as an overlooked reservoir of antibiotic resistance genes and multidrug-resistant bacteria. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2023; 30:710–726 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Liu T, Wang Y, Hou Z, Shi Z, Wang R et al. Effects of antibiotic cocktail on the fecal microbiota and their potential correlation of local immune response. BMC Microbiol 2024; 24:283 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Yang Y, Liu Y, Liu J, Wang H, Guo Y et al. Composition of the fecal microbiota of piglets at various growth stages. Front Vet Sci 2021; 8:661671 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Elokil AA, Magdy M, Melak S, Ishfaq H, Bhuiyan A et al. Faecal microbiome sequences in relation to the egg-laying performance of hens using amplicon-based metagenomic association analysis. Animal 2020; 14:706–715 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Hem S, Wyrsch ER, Drigo B, Baker DJ, Charles IG et al. Genomic analysis of carbapenem-resistant Comamonas in water matrices: implications for public health and wastewater treatments. Appl Environ Microbiol 2022; 88:e0064622 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Frank JA, Reich CI, Sharma S, Weisbaum JS, Wilson BA et al. Critical evaluation of two primers commonly used for amplification of bacterial 16S rRNA genes. Appl Environ Microbiol 2008; 74:2461–2470 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 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]
  21. Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res 2015; 25:1043–1055 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Tanizawa Y, Fujisawa T, Nakamura Y. DFAST: a flexible prokaryotic genome annotation pipeline for faster genome publication. Bioinformatics 2018; 34:1037–1039 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 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]
  24. Lee I, Ouk Kim Y, Park SC, Chun J. OrthoANI: an improved algorithm and software for calculating average nucleotide identity. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:1100–1103 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. 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]
  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. 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]
  28. Letunic I, Bork P. Interactive Tree of Life (iTOL) v6: recent updates to the phylogenetic tree display and annotation tool. Nucleic Acids Res 2024; 52:W78–W82 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Kim J, Na S-I, Kim D, Chun J. UBCG2: Up-to-date bacterial core genes and pipeline for phylogenomic analysis. J Microbiol 2021; 59:609–615 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 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] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Kanehisa M, Sato Y, Morishima K. BlastKOALA and GhostKOALA: KEGG tools for functional characterization of genome and metagenome sequences.. J Mol Biol 2016; 428:726–731 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Hiraishi A, Ueda Y, Ishihara J, Mori T. Comparative lipoquinone analysis of influent sewage and activated sludge by high-performance liquid chromatography and photodiode array detection. J Gen Appl Microbiol 1996; 42:457–469 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Park Y, Kim M, Cha Y, Park W. Rheinheimera faecalis sp. nov., isolated from Ceratotherium simum feces. Arch Microbiol 2023; 205:200 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Park Y, Min J, Kim W, Park W. Kaistella rhinocerotis sp. nov., isolated from the faeces of rhinoceros and reclassification of Chryseobacterium faecale as Kaistella faecalis comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74: [View Article]
     [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. Park Y, Min J, Kim B, Park W. Pedobacter faecalis sp. nov., isolated from the faeces of eland, Taurotragus oryx. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74: [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Min J, Son Y, Park Y, Park W. Niabella defluvii sp. nov., isolated from influent water of a wastewater treatment plant. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74: [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Tanghe A, Van Dijck P, Thevelein JM. Why do microorganisms have aquaporins?. Trends Microbiol 2006; 14:78–85 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Heo S, Lee J, Lee JH, Jeong DW. Genomic Insight into the Salt tolerance of Enterococcus faecium, Enterococcus faecalis and Tetragenococcus halophilus. J Microbiol Biotechnol 2019; 29:1591–1602 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Schiefner A, Breed J, Bösser L, Kneip S, Gade J et al. Cation-pi interactions as determinants for binding of the compatible solutes glycine betaine and proline betaine by the periplasmic ligand-binding protein ProX from Escherichia coli. J Biol Chem 2004; 279:5588–5596 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Subhadra B, Surendran S, Lim BR, Yim JS, Kim DH et al. The osmotic stress response operon betIBA is under the functional regulation of BetI and the quorum-sensing regulator AnoR in Acinetobacter nosocomialis. J Microbiol 2020; 58:519–529 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Wu Y, Zaiden N, Cao B. The core- and pan-genomic analyses of the genus Comamonas: From environmental adaptation to potential virulence. Front Microbiol 2018; 9:3096 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Cohen Y, Borenstein E. The microbiome’s fiber degradation profile and its relationship with the host diet. BMC Biol 2022; 20:266 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Takeuchi T, Kubota T, Nakanishi Y, Tsugawa H, Suda W et al. Gut microbial carbohydrate metabolism contributes to insulin resistance. Nature 2023; 621:389–395 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Sicard J-F, Vogeleer P, Le Bihan G, Rodriguez Olivera Y, Beaudry F et al. N-Acetyl-glucosamine influences the biofilm formation of Escherichia coli. Gut Pathog 2018; 10:26 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Hylemon PB, Wells JS, Krieg NR, Jannasch HW. The Genus Spirillum: a taxonomic Study. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1973; 23:340–380 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Xie F, Ma H, Quan S, Liu D, Chen G. Comamonas phosphati sp. nov., isolated from a phosphate mine. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:456–461 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006665
Loading
Comamonas halotolerans sp. nov., isolated from the faecal sample of a zoo animal, Naemorhedus caudatus
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 75, 006665 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.006665
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006665
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006665
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