1887

Abstract

The genomes of two historical species strains isolated from the roots of oilseed rape and used routinely in PR China as biocontrol agents to suppress disease were sequenced. Average nucleotide identity (ANI) and digital DNA–DNA hybridization analyses demonstrated that they were originally misclassified as and now belong to the bacterial species . A broader ANI analysis of available genomes identified 292 genomes that were then subjected to core gene analysis and phylogenomics. Prediction and dereplication of specialized metabolite biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) defined the prevalence of multiple antimicrobial-associated BGCs and highlighted the natural product potential of . By defining the core and accessory antimicrobial biosynthetic capacity of the species, we offer an in-depth understanding of natural product capacity to facilitate the selection and testing of strains for use as biological control agents.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Eshwar Mahenthiralingam , Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council , (Award BB/S007652/1)
  • Xiaojia Hu , Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Program
  • Xiaojia Hu , National Natural Science Foundation of China , (Award 31801311)
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000986
2020-11-09
2021-01-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/166/12/1121.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000986&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Compant S, Duffy B, Nowak J, Clément C, Barka EA. Use of plant growth-promoting bacteria for biocontrol of plant diseases: principles, mechanisms of action, and future prospects. Appl Environ Microbiol 2005; 71:4951–4959 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Fira D, Dimkić I, Berić T, Lozo J, Stanković S. Biological control of plant pathogens by Bacillus species. J Biotechnol 2018; 285:44–55 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Borriss R. Use of plant-associated Bacillus strains as biofertilizers and biocontrol agents in agriculture. In Maheshwari D. editor Bacteria in Agrobiology: Plant Growth Responses Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2011
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Hu X, Roberts DP, Jiang M, Zhang Y. Decreased incidence of disease caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum and improved plant vigor of oilseed rape with Bacillus subtilis Tu-100. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2005; 68:802–807 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Rabbee MF, Ali MS, Choi J, Hwang BS, Jeong SC et al. Bacillus velezensis: A valuable member of bioactive molecules within plant microbiomes. Molecules 2019; 24:1046 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Fritze D. Taxonomy of the genus Bacillus and related genera: the aerobic endospore-forming bacteria. Phytopathology 2004; 94:1245–1248 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Fan B, Blom J, Klenk HP, Borriss R. Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, Bacillus velezensis and Bacillus siamensis form an “Operational Group B. amyloliquefaciens” within the B. subtilis species complex.. Front Microbiol 2017; 8:22 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Reva ON, Dixelius C, Meijer J, Priest FG. Taxonomic characterization and plant colonizing abilities of some bacteria related to Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and Bacillus subtilis . FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2004; 48:249–259 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Dunlap CA, Kim S-J, Kwon SW, Rooney AP. Phylogenomic analysis shows that Bacillus amyloliquefaciens subsp. plantarum is a later heterotypic synonym of Bacillus methylotrophicus . Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2015; 65:2104–2109 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Dunlap CA, Kim SJ, Kwon SW, Rooney AP. Bacillus velezensis is not a later heterotypic synonym of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens; Bacillus methylotrophicus, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens subsp. plantarum and 'Bacillus oryzicola' are later heterotypic synonyms of Bacillus velezensis based on phylogenomics. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:1212–1217 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Rooney AP, Price NPJ, Ehrhardt C, Swezey JL, Bannan JD. Phylogeny and molecular taxonomy of the Bacillus subtilis species complex and description of Bacillus subtilis subsp. inaquosorum subsp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009; 59:2429–2436 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Hossain MJ, Ran C, Liu K, Ryu C-M, Rasmussen-Ivey CR et al. Deciphering the conserved genetic loci implicated in plant disease control through comparative genomics of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens subsp. plantarum . Front Plant Sci 2015; 6:631 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Chun BH, Kim KH, Jeong SE, Jeon CO. Genomic and metabolic features of the Bacillus amyloliquefaciens group- B. amyloliquefaciens, B. velezensis, and B. siamensis- revealed by pan-genome analysis. Food Microbiol 2019; 77:146–157 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dunlap CA, Bowman MJ, Rooney AP. Iturinic lipopeptide diversity in the Bacillus subtilis species group - important antifungals for plant disease biocontrol applications. Front Microbiol 2019; 10:10 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Chen XH, Koumoutsi A, Scholz R, Schneider K, Vater J et al. Genome analysis of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens FZB42 reveals its potential for biocontrol of plant pathogens. J Biotechnol 2009; 140:27–37 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fan B, Wang C, Song X, Ding X, Wu L et al. Bacillus velezensis FZB42 in 2018: the Gram-positive model strain for plant growth promotion and biocontrol. Front Microbiol 2018; 9:2491 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Rückert C, Blom J, Chen X, Reva O, Borriss R. Genome sequence of B. amyloliquefaciens type strain DSM7(T) reveals differences to plant-associated B. amyloliquefaciens FZB42. J Biotechnol 2011; 155:78–85 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hu X, Roberts DP, Xie L, Qin L, Li Y et al. Seed treatment containing Bacillus subtilis BY-2 in combination with other Bacillus isolates for control of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum on oilseed rape. Biological Control 2019; 133:50–57 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Derbyshire MC, Denton-Giles M. The control of sclerotinia stem rot on oilseed rape (Brassica napus): current practices and future opportunities. Plant Pathol 2016; 65:859–877 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hu X, Roberts DP, Maul JE, Emche SE, Liao X et al. Formulations of the endophytic bacterium Bacillus subtilis Tu-100 suppress Sclerotinia sclerotiorum on oilseed rape and improve plant vigor in field trials conducted at separate locations. Can J Microbiol 2011; 57:539–546 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hu X, Roberts DP, Xie L, Maul JE, Yu C et al. Formulations of Bacillus subtilis BY-2 suppress Sclerotinia sclerotiorum on oilseed rape in the field; 2014; 7054–64
  22. Jiang M, Zhao R, Hu X, Zhang Y, Wang G. Colonization of antifungal endobacterium BY-2 in oilcrop rape and its control effect on disease caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Acta Phytopathologica Sinica 2007; 37:192–196
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hu X, Huan Q, Zhang X. Isolating and inoculating rhizosphere bacteria to promote oilseed rape growth. Oil Crops China 1992; 4:67–69
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Miller JH. Experiments in Molecular Genetics Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; 1972
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Wang F, Hong K. CTAB method for genomic DNA extraction from Nonomuraea . Microbiology China 2010; 37:1211–1215
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Besemer J, Lomsadze A, Borodovsky M. GeneMarkS: a self-training method for prediction of gene starts in microbial genomes. Implications for finding sequence motifs in regulatory regions. Nucleic Acids Res 2001; 29:2607–2618 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Huerta-Cepas J, Szklarczyk D, Heller D, Hernández-Plaza A, Forslund SK et al. eggNOG 5.0: a hierarchical, functionally and phylogenetically annotated orthology resource based on 5090 organisms and 2502 viruses. Nucleic Acids Res 2019; 47:D309–D314 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Grant JR, Stothard P. The CGView server: a comparative genomics tool for circular genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 2008; 36:W181–W184 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Connor TR, Loman NJ, Thompson S, Smith A, Southgate J et al. CLIMB (the cloud infrastructure for microbial bioinformatics): an online resource for the medical microbiology community. Microb Genom 2016; 2:e000086 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 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 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Pritchard L, Glover RH, Humphris S, Elphinstone JG, Toth IK. Genomics and taxonomy in diagnostics for food security: soft-rotting enterobacterial plant pathogens. Analytical Methods 2016; 8:12–24 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R. Shifting the genomic gold standard for the prokaryotic species definition. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009; 106:19126–19131 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Page AJ, Cummins CA, Hunt M, Wong VK, Reuter S et al. Roary: rapid large-scale prokaryote pan genome analysis. Bioinformatics 2015; 31:3691–3693 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 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 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 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 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Auch AF, von Jan M, Klenk HP, 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 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Mullins AJ, Murray JAH, Bull MJ, Jenner M, Jones C et al. Genome mining identifies cepacin as a plant-protective metabolite of the biopesticidal bacterium Burkholderia ambifaria . Nat Microbiol 2019; 4:996–1005 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Grady EN, MacDonald J, Ho MT, Weselowski B, McDowell T et al. Characterization and complete genome analysis of the surfactin-producing, plant-protecting bacterium Bacillus velezensis 9D-6. BMC Microbiol 2019; 19:5 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Wang J, Xing J, Lu J, Sun Y, Zhao J et al. Complete genome sequencing of Bacillus velezensis WRN014, and comparison with genome sequences of other Bacillus velezensis strains. J Microbiol Biotechnol 2019; 29:794–808 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Grubbs KJ, Bleich RM, Santa Maria KC, Allen SE, Farag S et al. Large-scale bioinformatics analysis of Bacillus genomes uncovers conserved roles of natural products in bacterial physiology. mSystems 2017; 2:00040–17 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Caulier S, Nannan C, Gillis A, Licciardi F, Bragard C et al. Overview of the antimicrobial compounds produced by members of the Bacillus subtilis group. Front Microbiol 2019; 10:302 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000986
Loading
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000986
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Supplementary material 2

EXCEL
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