Skip to content
1887

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

Volume 75, Issue 4

sp. nov. and sp. nov., two novel butyrate-producing bacteria of the family Open Access

Abstract

Two Gram-stain-negative, strictly anaerobic, non-motile, non-­spore-forming and rod-shaped bacterial strains, namely, P01024 and P01025, were isolated from piglet manure. The strains P01024 and P01025 fermented glucose to acetate and butyrate. The major cellular fatty acids (>10.0%) of strain P01024 were C, C and summed feature 9 (iso-C 9c and/or 10-Methyl-C) and of strain P01025 were C, C and summed feature 3 (C c and/or C c). Analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequences indicated that strains P01024 and P01025 belonged to the family . The strain P01024 showed high identities of 16S rRNA genes to type species ATCC 29863 (96.64%). The highest percentages of conserved protein (POCP) value between strain P01024 and ATCC 29863 was 59.84%. The average identity (ANI) and digital DNA–DNA hybridization (dDDH) values between strain P01024 and ATCC 29863 were 79.51% and 23.80%, respectively, supporting that strain P01024 represented a novel species of the genus . Strain P01025 showed high identities of 16S rRNA genes to the type species BLS21 (95.87%). The highest POCP and AAI (average identity) values of strains P01025 to New-19 were 53.02% and 73.11%, respectively. The ANI and dDDH values between strains P01025 and New-19 were 75.44% and 23.40%, respectively, supporting that strain P01025 represented a novel species in the genus . The calculated G+C molar contents for strains P01024 and P01025 were 58.43 and 56.44 mol%, respectively. Together with phenotypic features, we concluded that strains P01024 and P01025 represented novel species in the genera and of the family , respectively, for which the names sp. nov. (type strain P01024=CGMCC 1.18055=KCTC 25793) and sp. nov. (type strain P01025=CGMCC 1.18060=KCTC 25794) are proposed.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): Flavonifractor porci strain P01024T , Flintibacter porci strain P01025T , Oscillospiraceae , pig gut microbiome and polyphasic taxonomy
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (Award 32270113)
    • Principal Award Recipient: Ming-XiaBi
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (Award 2022YFA1304202)
    • Principal Award Recipient: Ming-XiaBi
© 2025 The Authors
  • 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.0.006767
2025-04-30
2026-02-17

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/75/4/ijsem006767.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006767&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Chen M, Hu E, Kuen LL, Wu L. Study on consumer preference for traceable pork with animal welfare attribute. Front Psychol 2021; 12:675554 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Meurens F, Summerfield A, Nauwynck H, Saif L, Gerdts V. The pig: a model for human infectious diseases. Trends Microbiol 2012; 20:50–57 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Käser T. Swine as biomedical animal model for T-cell research-success and potential for transmittable and non-transmittable human diseases. Mol Immunol 2021; 135:95–115 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Patterson JK, Lei XG, Miller DD. The pig as an experimental model for elucidating the mechanisms governing dietary influence on mineral absorption. Exp Biol Med 2008; 233:651–664 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Mair KH, Sedlak C, Käser T, Pasternak A, Levast B et al. The porcine innate immune system: an update. Dev Comp Immunol 2014; 45:321–343 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Gresse R, Chaucheyras-Durand F, Fleury MA, Van de Wiele T, Forano E et al. Gut microbiota dysbiosis in postweaning piglets: understanding the keys to health. Trends Microbiol 2017; 25:851–873 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Dong B, Lin X, Jing X, Hu T, Zhou J et al. A bacterial genome and culture collection of gut microbial in weanling piglet. Microbiol Spectr 2022; 10:e0241721 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Vedel G, Triadó-Margarit X, Linares O, Moreno-Rojas JM, la Peña E de et al. Exploring the potential links between gut microbiota composition and natural populations management in wild boar (Sus scrofa). Microbiol Res 2023; 274:127444 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Carlier JP, Bedora-Faure M, K’Ouas G, Alauzet C. Proposal to unify Clostridium orbiscindens Winter et al. 1991 and Eubacterium plautii (Séguin 1928) Hofstad and Aasjord 1982, with description of Flavonifractor plautii gen. nov., comb. nov., and reassignment of Bacteroides capillosus to Pseudoflavonifractor capillosus gen. nov., comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1991; 60:585–590
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Lagkouvardos I, Pukall R, Abt B, Foesel BU, Meier-Kolthoff JP et al. The Mouse intestinal bacterial Collection (miBC) provides host-specific insight into cultured diversity and functional potential of the gut microbiota. Nat Microbiol 2016; 1:16131 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Huang H-J, Liu C, Sun X-W, Wei R-Q, Liu L-W et al. The rheumatoid arthritis gut microbial biobank reveals core microbial species that associate and effect on host inflammation and autoimmune responses. iMeta 2024; 3:e242 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Wikins TD, Holdeman LV, Abramson IJ, Moore WE. Standardized single-disc method for antibiotic susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1972; 1:451–459 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Abdugheni R, Wang Y-J, Li D-H, Du M-X, Liu C et al. Pararoseburia lenta gen. nov., sp. nov. isolated from human faeces. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72: [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Preston-Mafham J, Boddy L, Randerson PF. Analysis of microbial community functional diversity using sole-carbon-source utilisation profiles - a critique. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2002; 42:1–14 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Sun X-W, Abdugheni R, Huang H-J, Wang Y-J, Jiang M-Z et al. Bacteroides propionicigenes sp. nov., isolated from human faeces. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72: [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Miller LT. Single derivatization method for routine analysis of bacterial whole-cell fatty acid methyl esters, including hydroxy acids. J Clin Microbiol 1982; 16:584–586 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Athalye M, Noble WC, Minnikin DE. Analysis of cellular fatty acids by gas chromatography as a tool in the identification of medically important coryneform bacteria. J Appl Bacteriol 1985; 58:507–512 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 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]
  19. Yoon S-H, Ha S-M, 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]
  20. Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K. MEGA X: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms4o. Mol Biol Evol 2018; 35:1547–1549 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Felsenstein J. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 1981; 17:368–376 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. 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]
  23. 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]
  24. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 1985; 39:783–791 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol 2012; 19:455–477 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. 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]
  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. Liu C, Du M-X, Abuduaini R, Yu H-Y, Li D-H et al. Enlightening the taxonomy darkness of human gut microbiomes with a cultured biobank. Microbiome 2021; 9:119 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Kim D, Park S, Chun J. Introducing EzAAI: a pipeline for high throughput calculations of prokaryotic average amino acid identity. J Microbiol 2021; 59:476–480 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Qi J, Luo H, Hao B. CVTree: a phylogenetic tree reconstruction tool based on whole genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 2004; 32:W45–7 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Song K, Ren J, Reinert G, Deng M, Waterman MS et al. New developments of alignment-free sequence comparison: measures, statistics and next-generation sequencing. Brief Bioinform 2014; 15:343–353 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Huang H-J, Zhang X, Sun X-W, Chen B, Li X-T et al. Xiashengella succiniciproducens gen. nov., sp. nov., a succinate-producing bacterium isolated from an anaerobic digestion tank in the family Marinilabiliaceae of the order Bacteroidales. Arch Microbiol 2024; 206:141 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 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]
  34. Qin Q-L, Xie B-B, Zhang X-Y, Chen X-L, Zhou B-C et al. A proposed genus boundary for the prokaryotes based on genomic insights. J Bacteriol 2014; 196:2210–2215 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. 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]
  36. International committee on systematic bacteriology announcement of the report of the ad hoc committee on reconciliation of approaches to bacterial systematics. J Appl Bacteriol 1988; 64:283–284 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. International code of nomenclature of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:S1–S111 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Zenner C, Hitch TCA, Riedel T, Wortmann E, Tiede S et al. Early-life immune system maturation in chickens using a synthetic community of cultured gut bacteria. mSystems 2021; 6:e01300-20 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Afrizal A, Jennings SAV, Hitch TCA, Riedel T, Basic M et al. Enhanced cultured diversity of the mouse gut microbiota enables custom-made synthetic communities. Cell Host Microbe 2022; 30:1630–1645 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Hitch TCA, Riedel T, Oren A, Overmann J, Lawley TD et al. Automated analysis of genomic sequences facilitates high-throughput and comprehensive description of bacteria. ISME Commun 2021; 1:16 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006767
Loading
Flavonifractor porci sp. nov. and Flintibacter porci sp. nov., two novel butyrate-producing bacteria of the family Oscillospiraceae
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 75, 006767 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.006767
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006767
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006767
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