Skip to content
1887

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

Volume 75, Issue 11

Phylogenomic evidence supporting the reclassification of within the genus with subdivision into subsp. comb. nov. and subsp. comb. nov. No Access

Abstract

The bacterial order has recently undergone major taxonomic revisions, with several new families and genera described. Within this framework, the rare genus and the newly proposed genus occupy closely related positions. The present study provides a comprehensive phylogenomic, phenotypic and functional assessment of LAM2020 and H11S18 to clarify their taxonomic relationship. Genomic relatedness indices revealed high similarity between the two type strains, with average nucleotide identity, average amino acid identity and digital DNA–DNA hybridization values exceeding established species delineation thresholds. Phylogenetic analyses based on 16S rRNA, whole genomes and core gene sets consistently placed the two strains in a robustly supported monophyletic clade. These findings were further supported by shared metabolic and phenotypic traits. Taken together, the evidence demonstrates that and represent members of the same biological species. Accordingly, and in line with Rule 42 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes, we propose the reclassification of Li 2024 as a later heterotypic synonym of Maddock 2023. Furthermore, we propose two subspecies within this species: subsp. comb. nov. and subsp. comb. nov.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): Cedecea sulfonylureivorans , Dryocola clanedunensis , Enterobacteriaceae , genome-based reclassification and subspecies
© 2025 The Authors
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006977
2025-11-21
2025-12-16

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adeolu M, Alnajar S, Naushad S, Gupta R.S. Genome-based phylogeny and taxonomy of the ‘Enterobacteriales’: proposal for Enterobacterales ord. nov. divided into the families Enterobacteriaceae, Erwiniaceae fam. nov., Pectobacteriaceae fam. nov., Yersiniaceae fam. nov., Hafniaceae fam. nov., Morganellaceae fam. nov., and Budviciaceae fam. nov. Int J of Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:5575–5599 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Chuvochina M, Mussig AJ, Chaumeil P-A, Skarshewski A, Rinke C et al. Proposal of names for 329 higher rank taxa defined in the genome taxonomy database under two prokaryotic codes. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2023; 370:fnad071 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Farmer JJ, Farmer MK, Holmes B. The Enterobacteriaceae: general characters. In Borriello SP, Murray PR, Funke G. eds Topley & Wilson’s Microbiology & Microbial Infections, 10th ed. London, United Kingdom: Hodder Arnold; 2005 pp 1317–1359
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Boukoucha M, Menasria T, Bouguerra N. Phenotypic characterization and genotypic subtyping of Salmonella enterica serovars enteritidis and Gallinarum isolated from human and poultry-related samples. Food Biotechnol 2018; 32:206–221 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Zaatout N, Al-Mustapha AI, Bouaziz A, Ouchene R, Heikinheimo A. Prevalence of AmpC, ESBL, and colistin resistance genes in Enterobacterales isolated from ready-to-eat food in Algeria. Braz J Microbiol 2023; 54:2205–2218 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Tilahun M, Kassa Y, Gedefie A, Ashagire M. Emerging carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infection, its epidemiology and novel treatment options: a review. Infect Drug Resist 2021; 14:4363–4374 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Wyres KL, Lam MMC, Holt KE. Population genomics of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Nat Rev Microbiol 2020; 18:344–359 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Tacconelli E, Carrara E, Savoldi A, Harbarth S, Mendelson M et al. Discovery, research, and development of new antibiotics: the WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis. Lancet Infect Dis 2018; 18:318–327 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Mehainaoui A, Menasria T, Benouagueni S, Benhadj M, Lalaoui R et al. Rapid screening and characterization of bacteria associated with hospital cockroaches (Blattella germanica L.) using MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. J Appl Microbiol 2021; 130:960–970 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Andersson DI, Balaban NQ, Baquero F, Courvalin P, Glaser P et al. Antibiotic resistance: turning evolutionary principles into clinical reality. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2020; 44:171–188 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Zhou Y, Ji X, Liang B, Jiang B, Li Y et al. Antimicrobial resistance and prevalence of extended spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli from dogs and cats in Northeastern China from 2012 to 2021. Antibiotics 2022; 11:1506 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Farmer JJ, Sheth NK, Hudzinski JA, Rose HD, Asbury MF. Bacteremia due to Cedecea neteri sp. nov. J Clinic Microbiol 1982; 16:775–778 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Peretz A, Simsolo C, Farber E, Roth A, Brodsky D et al. A rare bacteremia caused by Cedecea davisae in patient with chronic renal disease. Am J Case Rep 2013; 14:216–218 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Thompson DK, Sharkady SM. Expanding spectrum of opportunistic Cedecea infections: Current clinical status and multidrug resistance. Int J Infect Dis 2020; 100:461–469 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Ahmad H, Masroor T, Parmar SA, Panigrahi D. Urinary tract infection by a rare pathogen Cedecea neteri in a pregnant female with Polyhydramnios: rare case report from UAE. BMC Infect Dis 2021; 21:637 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Grimont PAD, Grimont F, Farmer JJ, Asbury MA. Cedecea davisae gen. nov., sp. nov. and Cedecea lapagei sp. nov., new Enterobacteriaceae from clinical specimens. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1981; 31:317–326 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Al-Kassab-Córdova A, Valdiviezo-Polo P, Ulloque-Badaracco JR, Honorio-Arroyo CL, Hueda-Zavaleta M et al. Case report: Cedecea lapagei infection: report of a case in peru and review of the literature. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2023; 109:356–367 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Li Q, Wang J, Ma Q, Han X, Zhang W et al. Cedecea sulfonylureivorans sp. nov., a novel chlorimuron-ethyldegrading bacterium isolated from an herbicides-degrading consortium. Arch Microbiol 2023; 205:21 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhang S, Liu Y, Wang H, Peng J, Li K et al. Cedecea selenatireducens sp. nov. and Rahnella selenatireducens sp. nov., isolated from the seleniferous soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2025; 75:006885 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Farmer JJ. Cedecea. In Bergey’s Manual of Systematics of Archaea and Bacteria 2015 pp 1–14 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Boath JM, Dakhal S, Van TTH, Moore RJ, Dekiwadia C et al. Polyphasic characterisation of Cedecea colo sp. nov., a new enteric bacterium isolated from the koala hindgut. Microorganisms 2020; 8:309 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Maddock D, Brady C, Denman S, Arnold D. Description of Dryocola gen. nov. and two novel species, Dryocola boscaweniae sp. nov. and Dryocola clanedunensis sp. nov. isolated from the rhizosphere of native British oaks. Syst Appl Microbiol 2023; 46:126399 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Araeinejhad M-H, Falahi Chrakhabi N, Rahimian H, Brady C. Association of Dryocola boscaweniae, Gibbsiella greigii and Gibbsiella quercinecans with oak decline in Iran. Eur J Forest Res 2024; 143:803–811 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Benhadj M, Menasria T, Zaatout N, Ranque S. Genomic insights and antimicrobial potential of newly Streptomyces cavourensis Isolated from a ramsar wetland ecosystem. Microorganisms 2025; 13:576 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Caudill MT, Brayton KA. The use and limitations of the 16S rRNA sequence for species classification of Anaplasma Samples. Microorganisms 2022; 10:605 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Hugenholtz P, Chuvochina M, Oren A, Parks DH, Soo RM. Prokaryotic taxonomy and nomenclature in the age of big sequence data. ISME J 2021; 15:1879–1892 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Parks DH, Chuvochina M, Chaumeil P-A, Rinke C, Mussig AJ et al. A complete domain-to-species taxonomy for bacteria and archaea. Nat Biotechnol 2020; 38:1079–1086 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 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]
  29. Rodriguez-R LM, Conrad RE, Viver T, Feistel DJ, Lindner BG et al. An ANI gap within bacterial species that advances the definitions of intra-species units. mBio 2024; 15:e0269623 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 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]
  31. Rodriguez-R LM, Gunturu S, Harvey WT, Rosselló-Mora R, Tiedje JM et al. The Microbial Genomes Atlas (MiGA) webserver: taxonomic and gene diversity analysis of archaea and bacteria at the whole genome level. Nucleic Acids Res 2018; 46:W282–W288 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 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]
  33. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schäffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 1997; 25:3389–3402 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. 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]
  35. Fitch WM. Toward defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific tree topology. Syst Zool 1971; 20:406 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. 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]
  37. Felsenstein J. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 1981; 17:368–376 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 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]
  39. Lee I, Ouk Kim Y, Park SC, Chun J. OrthoANI: an improved algorithm and software for calculating average nucleotide identity. Int J of Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:1100–1103 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Rodriguez-R LM, Konstantinidis KT. The enveomics collection: a toolbox for specialized analyses of microbial genomes and metagenomes. PeerJ Preprints 2016; 4e1900v1 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  41. 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]
  42. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Auch AF, Klenk HP, Göker M. Genome sequence-based species delimitation with confidence intervals and improved distance functions. BMC Bioinformatics 2013; 14:1–14 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 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]
  44. Kreft L, Botzki A, Coppens F, Vandepoele K, Van Bel M. PhyD3: a phylogenetic tree viewer with extended phyloXML support for functional genomics data visualization. Bioinformatics 2017; 33:2946–2947 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Tian R, Imanian B. VBCG: 20 validated bacterial core genes for phylogenomic analysis with high fidelity and resolution. Microbiome 2023; 11:247 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Aziz RK, Bartels D, Best AA, DeJongh M, Disz T et al. The RAST server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genomics 2008; 9:1–15 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 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 of Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:346–351 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Nakano Y, Domon Y, Yamagishi K. Phylogenetic trees of closely related bacterial species and subspecies based on frequencies of short nucleotide sequences. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0268847 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Janda JM, Abbott SL. 16S rRNA gene sequencing for bacterial identification in the diagnostic laboratory: pluses, perils, and pitfalls. J Clin Microbiol 2007; 45:2761–2764 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 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]
  51. 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]
  52. Lombard V, Golaconda Ramulu H, Drula E, Coutinho PM, Henrissat B. The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy) in 2013. Nucleic Acids Res 2014; 42:D490–5 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Parker CT, Tindall BJ, Garrity GM. International code of nomenclature of prokaryotes: prokaryotic code (2008 revision). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:S1–S111 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006977
Loading
Phylogenomic evidence supporting the reclassification of Cedecea sulfonylureivorans within the genus Dryocola with subdivision into Dryocola clanedunensis subsp. clanedunensis comb. nov. and Dryocola clanedunensis subsp. sulfonylureivorans comb. nov.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 75, 006977 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.006977
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006977
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006977
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