|Taxonomy Citation ID||Reference|
( 2016 )
Bifidobacterium aerophilum sp. nov., Bifidobacterium avesanii sp. nov. and Bifidobacterium ramosum sp. nov.: Three novel taxa from the faeces of cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus L.).
PMID : 27236565 DOI : 10.1016/j.syapm.2016.04.005
Forty-five microorganisms were isolated on bifidobacteria selective medium from one faecal sample of an adult subject of the cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus L.). All isolates were Gram-positive, catalase-negative, anaerobic, fructose-6-phosphate phosphoketolase positive, and asporogenous rod-shaped bacteria. In this study, only eight out of the forty-five strains were characterized more deeply, whereas the others are still currently under investigation. They were grouped by BOX-PCR into three clusters: Cluster I (TRE 17(T), TRE 7, TRE 26, TRE 32, TRE 33, TRE I), Cluster II (TRE C(T)), and Cluster III (TRE M(T)). Comparative analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequences confirmed the results from the cluster analysis and revealed relatively low level similarities to each other (mean value 95%) and to members of the genus Bifidobacterium. All eight isolates showed the highest level of 16S rRNA gene sequence similarities with Bifidobacterium scardovii DSM 13734(T) (mean value 96.6%). Multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA) of five housekeeping genes (hsp60, rpoB, clpC, dnaJ and dnaG) supported their independent phylogenetic position to each other and to related species of Bifidobacterium. The G+C contents were 63.2%, 65.9% and 63.0% for Cluster I, Cluster II and Cluster III, respectively. Peptidoglycan types were A3�\ l-Lys-l-Thr-l-Ala, A4�] l-Orn (Lys)-d-Ser-d-Glu and A3�] l-Orn-l-Ser-l-Ala in Clusters I, II and III, respectively. Based on the data provided, each cluster represented a novel taxon for which the names Bifidobacterium aerophilum sp. nov. (TRE 17(T)=DSM 100689=JCM 30941; TRE 26=DSM 100690=JCM 30942), Bifidobacterium avesanii sp. nov. (TRE C(T)=DSM 100685=JCM 30943) and Bifidobacterium ramosum sp. nov. (TRE M=DSM 100688=JCM 30944) are proposed.
|37887||This taxonomic name has been effectively published but not validly published under the rules of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria (Bacteriological Code).|