BCRC Strain Collection Catalog & Shopping Cart

  Home / BCRC Content / 12980 / 

Return

  Taxonomy Citation

The information shown in this page was generated using the cross-referenced linkage within public domain database between their strains and BCRC related strains. Usually the information provided from public domain databases varies with different confidences and errors, BCRC provides the related information here at best effort, but BCRC doesn't take the responsibility about the correctness of the information provided here.

Taxonomy Citation ID Reference
56351 Nouioui  I, Carro  L, García-López  M, Meier-Kolthoff  JP, Woyke  T, Kyrpides  NC, Pukall  R, Klenk  HP, Goodfellow  M, Göker  M,     ( 2018 )

Genome-Based Taxonomic Classification of the Phylum Actinobacteria.

Frontiers in microbiology 9 (N/A)
PMID : 30186281 DOI  :   10.3389/fmicb.2018.02007     PMC  :   PMC6113628    
Abstract >>
The application of phylogenetic taxonomic procedures led to improvements in the classification of bacteria assigned to the phylum Actinobacteria but even so there remains a need to further clarify relationships within a taxon that encompasses organisms of agricultural, biotechnological, clinical, and ecological importance. Classification of the morphologically diverse bacteria belonging to this large phylum based on a limited number of features has proved to be difficult, not least when taxonomic decisions rested heavily on interpretation of poorly resolved 16S rRNA gene trees. Here, draft genome sequences of a large collection of actinobacterial type strains were used to infer phylogenetic trees from genome-scale data using principles drawn from phylogenetic systematics. The majority of taxa were found to be monophyletic but several orders, families, and genera, as well as many species and a few subspecies were shown to be in need of revision leading to proposals for the recognition of 2 orders, 10 families, and 17 genera, as well as the transfer of over 100 species to other genera. In addition, emended descriptions are given for many species mainly involving the addition of data on genome size and DNA G+C content, the former can be considered to be a valuable taxonomic marker in actinobacterial systematics. Many of the incongruities detected when the results of the present study were compared with existing classifications had been recognized from 16S rRNA gene trees though whole-genome phylogenies proved to be much better resolved. The few significant incongruities found between 16S/23S rRNA and whole genome trees underline the pitfalls inherent in phylogenies based upon single gene sequences. Similarly good congruence was found between the discontinuous distribution of phenotypic properties and taxa delineated in the phylogenetic trees though diverse non-monophyletic taxa appeared to be based on the use of plesiomorphic character states as diagnostic features.
KeywordMeSH Terms
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
G+C content
Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny
chemotaxonomy
genome size
morphology
phylogenetic systematics
phylogenomics
1375     ( 1997 )

Characterization of some Actinomyces-like isolates from human clinical specimens: reclassification of Actinomyces suis (Soltys and Spratling) as Actinobaculum suis comb. nov. and description of Actinobaculum schaalii sp. nov.

International journal of systematic bacteriology 47 (3)
PMID : 9226926 DOI  :   10.1099/00207713-47-3-899    
Abstract >>
Five strains of a hitherto unknown Actinomyces-like bacterium were isolated from human clinical sources, including blood cultures. Biochemical and chemotaxonomic characterization indicated that the strains were distinct from previously described Actinomyces and Arcanobacterium species. A comparative 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis demonstrated that the undescribed strains constitute a new subline within the Actinomyces-Arcanobacterium species complex. The closest known relative of the isolates was found to be Actinomyces suis, although a 16S rRNA sequence divergence value of approximately 6% clearly demonstrated that the unknown bacterium represents a distinct species. Based on the results of the present and earlier phylogenetic investigations, it is proposed that Actinomyces suis should be reclassified in a new genus, the genus Actinobaculum, as Actinobaculum suis comb. nov. In addition, a new species, Actinobaculum schaalii, is proposed for the Actinomyces-like bacterium from human sources. The type strain of Actinobaculum schaalii is CCUG 27420.
KeywordMeSH Terms
7563 Wegienek, J., and Reddy, C.A. "Taxonomic study of 'Corynebacterium suis' Soltys and Spratling: proposal of Eubacterium suis (nom. rev.) comb. nov." Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. (1982) 32:218-228. [No PubMed record available.]
55 Ludwig  W, Kirchhof  G, Weizenegger  M, Weiss  N,     ( 1992 )

Phylogenetic evidence for the transfer of Eubacterium suis to the genus Actinomyces as Actinomyces suis comb. nov.

International journal of systematic bacteriology 42 (1)
PMID : 1371060 DOI  :   10.1099/00207713-42-1-161    
Abstract >>
The 16S rRNA primary structures of Eubacterium suis DSM 20639T (T = type strain) and Bifidobacterium bifidum DSM 20456T were determined by sequencing in vitro amplified rDNA. Sequence comparisons indicated that B. bifidum is moderately related to representatives of the genera Actinomyces and Mobiluncus. The closest relative of E. suis is Actinomyces pyogenes. E. suis and A. pyogenes are more closely related phylogenetically to one another than to the other Actinomyces species that have been investigated by using comparative 16S rRNA analysis. Therefore, we propose that E. suis should be transferred to the genus Actinomyces as Actinomyces suis comb. nov.
KeywordMeSH Terms

331, Shih-Pin Rd., Hsinchu 30062, Taiwan

Phone: +886-3-5223191

E-mail: bcrcweb@firdi.org.tw

web maintainance: +886-3-5223191 ext 593

Copyright © 2018.BCRC All rights reserved.The duplication or use of information and data such as texts or images or any linkage the website at the "bcrc.firdi.org.tw" is only permitted with the indication of the source or with prior approval by the BCRC(Bioresource Collection and Research Center).