1887

Abstract

Strain RHZ10 was isolated from an oak rhizosphere sampled in Reims, France, and characterized to assess its taxonomy. Based on 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity, strain RHZ10 was affiliated to the genus and the closest species were NRRL B-2000 and ch24. Average nucleotide identity and digital DNA–DNA hybridization values were 77.3–92.4 % and 23.0–50.9 %, respectively, when compared to the type strains of fully sequenced related species having a 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity over 98 %. These data suggested that strain RHZ10 represented a novel species within the genus . The genome of RHZ10 was 8.0 Mbp long, had 7  894 predicted coding genes, and a G+C content of 71.7 mol%. Cultures of RHZ10 on ISP 2 medium mostly led to the production a green pigmentation of the core of its colonies in the vegetative mycelium, surrounded by white pigmentation of the aerial mycelium. The main fatty acids of RHZ10 were anteiso-C, iso-C, anteiso-C and C. Polar lipids were phosphatidylethanolamine, diphosphatidylglycerol, unidentified lipids, unidentified phospholipids, unidentified aminolipids and unidentified glycolipids. Its main quinones were MK-9(H) (69.3 %), MK-9(H) (17.3 %) and MK-9(H) (17.0%). Phylogenetic, physiological and chemotaxonomic studies clearly supported that strain RHZ10 represents a novel species within the genus , for which the name sp. nov. is proposed and the type strain is RHZ10 (=DSM 112634=LMG 32187=CIP 111907).

  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 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.0.005480
2022-09-01
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/72/9/ijsem005480.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005480&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Oren A, Garrity GM. Valid publication of the names of forty-two phyla of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2021; 71: [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Chater KF. Recent advances in understanding Streptomyces. F1000Res 2016; 5:2795 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Whitman WB, Rainey F, Kämpfer P, Trujillo M, Chun J et al. Streptomyces. In Bergey’s Manual of Systematics of Archaea and Bacteria Oxford: Wiley; 2015 pp 1–414
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Parte AC, Sardà Carbasse J, Meier-Kolthoff JP, Reimer LC, Göker M. List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN) moves to the DSMZ. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:5607–5612 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Procópio RE de L, Silva IR da, Martins MK, Azevedo JL de, Araújo JM de. Antibiotics produced by Streptomyces. Braz J Infect Dis 2012; 16:466–471 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chevrette MG, Currie CR. Emerging evolutionary paradigms in antibiotic discovery. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 2019; 46:257–271 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Seipke RF, Kaltenpoth M, Hutchings MI. Streptomyces as symbionts: an emerging and widespread theme?. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2012; 36:862–876 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chater KF, Biró S, Lee KJ, Palmer T, Schrempf H. The complex extracellular biology of Streptomyces. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2010; 34:171–198 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Viaene T, Langendries S, Beirinckx S, Maes M, Goormachtig S. Streptomyces as a plant’s best friend?. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2016; 92:fiw119 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Piao C, Ling L, Zhao J, Jin L, Jiang S et al. Streptomyces urticae sp. nov., isolated from rhizosphere soil of Urtica urens L. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2018; 111:1835–1843 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cao T, Shen Y, Zhao J, Liu C, Zhao X et al. Streptomyces flavalbus sp. nov., an actinobacterium isolated from rhizosphere of maize (Zea mays L.). Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2018; 111:1047–1054 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Vargas Hoyos HA, Nobre Santos S, Da Silva LJ, Paulino Silva FS, Bonaldo Genuário D et al. Streptomyces rhizosphaericola sp. nov., an actinobacterium isolated from the wheat rhizosphere. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:2431–2439 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Luo X, Sun Y, Xie S, Wan C, Zhang L. Streptomyces indoligenes sp. nov., isolated from rhizosphere soil of Populus euphratica. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:2424–2428 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Mo P, Liu J, Zhao Y, Xu Z. Streptomyces phaeolivaceus sp. nov. and Streptomyces broussonetiae sp. nov., isolated from the leaves and rhizosphere soil of Broussonetia papyrifera. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:6458–6467 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Rey T, Dumas B. Plenty is no plague: Streptomyces symbiosis with crops. Trends Plant Sci 2017; 22:30–37 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Vergnes S, Gayrard D, Veyssière M, Toulotte J, Martinez Y et al. Phyllosphere colonization by a soil Streptomyces sp. promotes plant defense responses against fungal infection. MPMI 2020; 33:223–234 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. de Melo RR, Tomazetto G, Persinoti GF, Sato HH, Ruller R et al. Unraveling the cellulolytic and hemicellulolytic potential of two novel Streptomyces strains. Ann Microbiol 2018; 68:677–688 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Kumar M, Kumar P, Das P, Solanki R, Kapur MK. Potential applications of extracellular enzymes from Streptomyces spp. in various industries. Arch Microbiol 2020; 202:1597–1615 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Danso B, Ali SS, Xie R, Sun J. Valorisation of wheat straw and bioethanol production by a novel xylanase- and cellulase-producing Streptomyces strain isolated from the wood-feeding termite, Microcerotermes species. Fuel 2022; 310:122–333 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Alderson G, Goodfellow M, Minnikin DE. Menaquinone composition in the classification of Streptomyces and other sporoactinomycetes. Microbiology 1985; 131:1671–1679 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Shirling EB, Gottlieb D. Methods for characterization of Streptomyces species. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1966; 16:313–340 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Besaury L, Marty F, Buquet S, Mesnage V, Muyzer G et al. Culture-dependent and independent studies of microbial diversity in highly copper-contaminated Chilean marine sediments. Microb Ecol 2013; 65:311–324 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Altschul SF. BLAST algorithm. In ELS 2014 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res 2013; 41:D590–6 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 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]
  26. 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] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Thompson JD, Gibson TJ, Higgins DG. Multiple sequence alignment using ClustalW and ClustalX. Curr Protoc Bioinformatics 2002; Chapter 2:Unit [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 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]
  29. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Klenk H-P, Göker M. Taxonomic use of DNA G+C content and DNA-DNA hybridization in the genomic age. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:352–356 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 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]
  31. 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]
  32. Giuffrè A, Borisov VB, Arese M, Sarti P, Forte E. Cytochrome bd oxidase and bacterial tolerance to oxidative and nitrosative stress. Biochim Biophys Acta 2014; 1837:1178–1187 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Göker M. TYGS is an automated high-throughput platform for state-of-the-art genome-based taxonomy. Nat Commun 201916 May 2019 10:2182 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Labeda DP, Doroghazi JR, Ju K-S, Metcalf WW. Taxonomic evaluation of Streptomyces albus and related species using multilocus sequence analysis and proposals to emend the description of Streptomyces albus and describe Streptomyces pathocidini sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:894–900 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Guo Y, Zheng W, Rong X, Huang Y. A multilocus phylogeny of the Streptomyces griseus 16S rRNA gene clade: use of multilocus sequence analysis for streptomycete systematics. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:149–159 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Alanjary M, Steinke K, Ziemert N. AutoMLST: an automated web server for generating multi-locus species trees highlighting natural product potential. Nucleic Acids Res 2019; 47:W276–W282 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Blin K, Shaw S, Kloosterman AM, Charlop-Powers Z, van Wezel GP et al. antiSMASH 6.0: improving cluster detection and comparison capabilities. Nucleic Acids Res 2021; 49:W29–W35 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Stefanowics A. The biolog plates technique as a tool in ecological studies of microbial communitiesplates technique as a tool in ecological studies of microbial communities. Pol J Environ Stud 2006; 15:669–676
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Shirling EB, Gottlieb D. Cooperative description of type cultures of Streptomyces. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1968; 18:69–189 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Shirling EB, Gottlieb D. Cooperative description of type cultures of Streptomyces III. Additional species descriptions from first and second studies. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1968; 18:279–392 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Shirling EB, Gottlieb D. Cooperative description of type strains of Streptomyces. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1972; 22:265–394 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Reiner K. Catalase Test Protocol. asm.org: American Society for Microbiology; 2010
  43. 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]
  44. Kuykendall LD, Roy MA, O’neill JJ, Devine TE. Fatty acids, antibiotic resistance, and deoxyribonucleic acid homology groups of Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1988; 38:358–361 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Tindall BJ, Sikorski J, Smibert RA, Krieg NR. Phenotypic characterization and the principles of comparative systematics. Meth Gen Mol Microbiol 2007330–393
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Tindall BJ. Lipid composition of Halobacterium lacusprofundi. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1990; 66:199–202 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Tindall BJ. A comparative study of the lipid composition of Halobacterium saccharovorum from various sources. Syst Appl Microbiol 1990; 13:128–130 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005480
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005480
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF
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