Skip to content
1887

Microbiology Society logo Microbiology

Volume 171, Issue 7

Comparative genomic analysis of strains provides new insights into their association with different niche adaptations Open Access

Abstract

, a lactic acid bacterium in diverse environments such as fermented foods, meat and the human gastrointestinal tract, exhibits significant genetic diversity and niche-specific adaptations. This study conducts a comprehensive comparative genomic analysis of 29 complete genomes to uncover the genetic mechanisms underlying these adaptations. Phylogenetic analysis divided the species into three distinct clades that did not correlate with the source of isolation and did not suggest any niche-specific evolutionary direction. The pan-genome analysis revealed a substantial core genome alongside a diverse genetic repertoire, indicating both high genetic conservation and adaptability. Predicted growth rates based on codon use bias analysis suggest that strains have an overall faster growth rate and may be able to efficiently dominate in competitive environments. Plasmid analysis revealed a variety of plasmids carrying genes essential for carbohydrate metabolism, enhancing ’s ability to thrive in various fermentation substrates. It was also found that the number of genes belonging to the GH1 family amongst sugar metabolism-related genes present on chromosomes and plasmids varies between strains and that AA1, which is involved in alcohol oxidation, has been acquired from plasmids. analysis revealed that some strains have environmental adaptation gene clusters of cell surface polysaccharides that may mediate attachment to food and mucosa. The knowledge gleaned from this study lays a solid foundation for future research aimed at harnessing the genetic traits of strains for industrial and health-related applications.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): codon usage bias , CRISPR-Cas , fermentation , Latilactobacillus sakei and plasmids
© 2025 The Authors
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001578
2025-07-03
2025-07-10
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/171/7/mic001578.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001578&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Hammes WP, Bantleon A, Min S. Lactic acid bacteria in meat fermentation. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1990; 87:165–174 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Takahashi M, Morikawa K, Kita Y, Shimoda T, Akao T et al. Changes in bacterial and chemical components and growth prediction for Lactobacillus sakei during Kimoto-style fermentation starter preparation in sake brewing: a comprehensive analysis. Appl Environ Microbiol 2021; 87: [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Tsuji A, Kozawa M, Tokuda K, Enomoto T, Koyanagi T. Robust domination of Lactobacillus sakei in microbiota during traditional Japanese sake starter yamahai-moto fermentation and the accompanying changes in metabolites. Curr Microbiol 2018; 75:1498–1505 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Zhang S, Zhang Y, Wu L, Zhang L, Wang S. Characterization of microbiota of naturally fermented sauerkraut by high-throughput sequencing. Food Sci Biotechnol 2023; 32:855–862 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Dal Bello F, Walter J, Hammes WP, Hertel C. Increased complexity of the species composition of lactic acid bacteria in human feces revealed by alternative incubation condition. Microb Ecol 2003; 45:455–463 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Champomier-Vergès M-C, Chaillou S, Cornet M, Zagorec M. Erratum to “Lactobacillus sakei: recent developments and future prospects”. Res Microbiol 2002; 153:115–123 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Hammes WP, Hertel C. New developments in meat starter cultures. Meat Science 1998; 49:S125–S138 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Mani-López E, Ramírez-Corona N, López-Malo A. Latilactobacillus sakei as a starter culture to ferment pepper fruits. Food Human 2024; 2:100233 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Martín I, Barbosa J, Pereira SIA, Rodríguez A, Córdoba JJ et al. Study of lactic acid bacteria isolated from traditional ripened foods and partial characterization of their bacteriocins. LWT 2023; 173:114300 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Lim S, Moon JH, Shin CM, Jeong D, Kim B. Effect of Lactobacillus sakei, a probiotic derived from kimchi, on body fat in Koreans with obesity: a randomized controlled study. Endocrinol Metab 2020; 35:425–434 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Tatsinkou LLT, Fossi BT, Sotoing GT, Mambou HMAY, Ivo PEA et al. Prophylactic effects of probiotic bacterium Latilactobacillus sakei on haematological parameters and cytokine profile of mice infected with Plasmodium berghei ANKA during early malaria infection. Life Sci 2023; 331:122056 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Chaillou S, Lucquin I, Najjari A, Zagorec M, Champomier-Vergès M-C. Population genetics of Lactobacillus sakei reveals three lineages with distinct evolutionary histories. PLoS One 2013; 8:e73253 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Nyquist OL, McLeod A, Brede DA, Snipen L, Aakra Å et al. Comparative genomics of Lactobacillus sakei with emphasis on strains from meat. Mol Genet Genomics 2011; 285:297–311 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Botzman M, Margalit H. Variation in global codon usage bias among prokaryotic organisms is associated with their lifestyles. Genome Biol 2011; 12:R109 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Willenbrock H, Friis C, Juncker AS, Ussery DW. An environmental signature for 323 microbial genomes based on codon adaptation indices. Genome Biol 2006; 7:R114 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Chen Y, Li N, Zhao S, Zhang C, Qiao N et al. Integrated phenotypic-genotypic analysis of from different niches. Foods 2021; 10:
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Schwengers O, Jelonek L, Dieckmann MA, Beyvers S, Blom J et al. Bakta: rapid and standardized annotation of bacterial genomes via alignment-free sequence identification. Microb Genom 2021; 7:000685 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Couvin D, Bernheim A, Toffano-Nioche C, Touchon M, Michalik J et al. CRISPRCasFinder, an update of CRISRFinder, includes a portable version, enhanced performance and integrates search for Cas proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 2018; 46:W246–W251 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Weissman JL, Hou S, Fuhrman JA. Estimating maximal microbial growth rates from cultures, metagenomes, and single cells via codon usage patterns. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2021; 118:e2016810118 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Tonkin-Hill G, MacAlasdair N, Ruis C, Weimann A, Horesh G et al. Producing polished prokaryotic pangenomes with the Panaroo pipeline. Genome Biol 2020; 21:180 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Tonkin-Hill G, Gladstone RA, Pöntinen AK, Arredondo-Alonso S, Bentley SD et al. Robust analysis of prokaryotic pangenome gene gain and loss rates with Panstripe. Genome Res 2023; 33:129–140 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Katoh K, Standley DM. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol 2013; 30:772–780 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP. FastTree 2--approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS One 2010; 5:e9490 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Xu S, Li L, Luo X, Chen M, Tang W et al. Ggtree: a serialized data object for visualization of a phylogenetic tree and annotation data. iMeta 2022; 1:e56 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Yu G, Smith DK, Zhu H, Guan Y, Lam T-Y. Ggtree: an R package for visualization and annotation of phylogenetic trees with their covariates and other associated data. Methods Ecol Evol 2017; 8:28–36
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Galperin MY, Makarova KS, Wolf YI, Koonin EV. Expanded microbial genome coverage and improved protein family annotation in the COG database. Nucleic Acids Res 2015; 43:D261–9 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Robertson J, Nash JHE. MOB-suite: software tools for clustering, reconstruction and typing of plasmids from draft assemblies. Microb Genom 2018; 4:e000206 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Zheng J, Ge Q, Yan Y, Zhang X, Huang L et al. dbCAN3: automated carbohydrate-active enzyme and substrate annotation. Nucleic Acids Res 2023; 51:W115–W121 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. van Heel AJ, de Jong A, Song C, Viel JH, Kok J et al. BAGEL4: a user-friendly web server to thoroughly mine RiPPs and bacteriocins. Nucleic Acids Res 2018; 46:W278–W281 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 1990; 215:403–410 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Chaillou S, Champomier-Vergès M-C, Cornet M, Crutz-Le Coq A-M, Dudez A-M et al. The complete genome sequence of the meat-borne lactic acid bacterium Lactobacillus sakei 23K. Nat Biotechnol 2005; 23:1527–1533 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Pang X, Li W, Yang L, Hu C, Lu J et al. Whole-Genome Sequencing and Genomic-Based Acid Tolerance Mechanisms of Lactobacillus Delbrueckii Subsp. Bulgaricus LJJ Research Square; 2019
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Yao W, Yang L, Shao Z, Xie L, Chen L. Identification of salt tolerance-related genes of Lactobacillus plantarum D31 and T9 strains by genomic analysis. Ann Microbiol 2020; 70:1–14 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Hunter JD. Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment. Comput Sci Eng 2007; 9:90–95 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Ito K, Niwa R, Yamagishi Y, Kobayashi K, Tsuchida Y et al. A unique case in which Kimoto-style fermentation was completed with Leuconostoc as the dominant genus without transitioning to Lactobacillus. J Biosci Bioeng 2023; 135:451–457 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Ito K, Niwa R, Kobayashi K, Nakagawa T, Hoshino G et al. A dark matter in sake brewing: origin of microbes producing a Kimoto-style fermentation starter. Front Microbiol 2023; 14:1112638 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Kanamoto E, Terashima K, Shiraki Y, Nishida H. Diversity of Bacillus isolates from the sake brewing process at a sake brewery. Microorganisms 2021; 9:1760 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Terasaki M, Kimura Y, Yamada M, Nishida H. Genomic information of Kocuria isolates from sake brewing process. AIMS Microbiol 2021; 7:114–123 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Barrangou R, Fremaux C, Deveau H, Richards M, Boyaval P et al. CRISPR provides acquired resistance against viruses in prokaryotes. Science 2007; 315:1709–1712 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Hatoum-Aslan A, Maniv I, Samai P, Marraffini LA. Genetic characterization of antiplasmid immunity through a type III-A CRISPR-Cas system. J Bacteriol 2014; 196:310–317 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Jiang W, Samai P, Marraffini LA. Degradation of phage transcripts by CRISPR-associated RNases enables type III CRISPR-Cas immunity. Cell 2016; 164:710–721 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Semenova E, Jore MM, Datsenko KA, Semenova A, Westra ER et al. Interference by clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR) RNA is governed by a seed sequence. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2011; 108:10098–10103 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Tamulaitis G, Kazlauskiene M, Manakova E, Venclovas Č, Nwokeoji AO et al. Programmable RNA shredding by the type III-A CRISPR-Cas system of Streptococcus thermophilus. Mol Cell 2014; 56:506–517 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Schuster JA, Vogel RF, Ehrmann MA. Characterization and distribution of CRISPR-Cas systems in Lactobacillus sakei. Arch Microbiol 2019; 201:337–347 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Tyson GW, Banfield JF. Rapidly evolving CRISPRs implicated in acquired resistance of microorganisms to viruses. Environ Microbiol 2008; 10:200–207 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Lin H, Yu M, Wang X, Zhang X-H. Comparative genomic analysis reveals the evolution and environmental adaptation strategies of vibrios. BMC Genomics 2018; 19:135 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Billane K, Harrison E, Cameron D, Brockhurst MA. Why do plasmids manipulate the expression of bacterial phenotypes?. Phil Trans R Soc B 2022; 377: [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Heuer H, Smalla K. Plasmids foster diversification and adaptation of bacterial populations in soil. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2012; 36:1083–1104 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Cui Y, Wang M, Zheng Y, Miao K, Qu X. The carbohydrate metabolism of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum. Int J Mol Sci 2021; 22:13452 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Qian N, Stanley GA, Hahn-Hägerdal B, Rådström P. Purification and characterization of two phosphoglucomutases from Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis and their regulation in maltose- and glucose-utilizing cells. J Bacteriol 1994; 176:5304–5311 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Ren D, Liu S, Zhang S, Qin H, Han X et al. Multi-Omics Reveals Microbial Roles and Metabolic Functions at the Spatiotemporal Niche in Pit Mud Research Square; 2022
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Liang T, Jiang T, Liang Z, Zhang N, Dong B et al. Carbohydrate-active enzyme profiles of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strain 84-3 contribute to flavor formation in fermented dairy and vegetable products. Food Chem X 2023; 20:101036 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Plaza-Vinuesa L, Sánchez-Arroyo A, Moreno FJ, de Las Rivas B, Muñoz R. Dual 6Pβ-galactosidase/6Pβ-glucosidase GH1 family for lactose metabolism in the probiotic bacterium Lactiplantibacillus plantarum WCFS1. J Agric Food Chem 2023; 71:10693–10700 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Gaspar C, Donders GG, Palmeira-de-Oliveira R, Queiroz JA, Tomaz C et al. Bacteriocin production of the probiotic Lactobacillus acidophilus KS400. AMB Express 2018; 8:153 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Cintas LM, Casaus P, Fernández MF, Hernández PE. Comparative antimicrobial activity of enterocin L50, pediocin PA-1, nisin A and lactocin S against spoilage and foodborne pathogenic bacteria. Food Microbiol 1998; 15:289–298 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Darbandi A, Asadi A, Mahdizade Ari M, Ohadi E, Talebi M et al. Bacteriocins: properties and potential use as antimicrobials. J Clin Lab Anal 2022; 36:e24093 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Møretrø T, Naterstad K, Wang E, Aasen IM, Chaillou S et al. Sakacin P non-producing Lactobacillus sakei strains contain homologues of the sakacin P gene cluster. Res Microbiol 2005; 156:949–960 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Vaughan A, Eijsink VGH, Van Sinderen D. Functional characterization of a composite bacteriocin locus from malt isolate Lactobacillus sakei 5. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003; 69:7194–7203 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001578
Loading
Comparative genomic analysis of Latilactobacillus sakei strains provides new insights into their association with different niche adaptations
Microbiology 171, 001578 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.001578
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001578
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001578
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

EXCEL

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