Complete genome sequence of Ilyobacter polytropus type strain (CuHbu1T)

Standards in Genomic Sciences (Impact Factor: 3.17). 12/2010; 3(3):304-14. DOI: 10.4056/sigs.1273360
Source: PubMed


Ilyobacter polytropus Stieb and Schink 1984 is the type species of the genus Ilyobacter, which belongs to the fusobacterial family Fusobacteriaceae. The species is of interest because its members are able to ferment quite a number of sugars and organic acids. I. polytropus has a broad versatility in using various fermentation pathways. Also, its members do not degrade poly-β-hydroxybutyrate but only the monomeric 3-hydroxybutyrate. This is the first completed genome sequence of a member of the genus Ilyobacter and the second sequence from the family Fusobacteriaceae. The 3,132,314 bp long genome with its 2,934 protein-coding and 108 RNA genes consists of two chromosomes (2 and 1 Mbp long) and one plasmid, and is a part of the Genomic Encyclopedia of Bacteria and Archaea project.

Download full-text


Available from: Johannes Sikorski,
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Covering: up to September 2012.A total of 211 complete and published genomes from anaerobic bacteria are analysed for the presence of secondary metabolite biosynthesis gene clusters, in particular those tentatively coding for polyketide synthases (PKS) and non-ribosomal peptide synthetases (NRPS). We investigate the distribution of these gene clusters according to bacterial phylogeny and, if known, correlate these to the type of metabolic pathways they encode. The potential of anaerobes as secondary metabolite producers is highlighted.
    Natural Product Reports 12/2012; 30(3). DOI:10.1039/c2np20103h · 10.11 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mammalian intestinal microbiota remain poorly understood despite decades of interest and investigation by culture-based and other long-established methodologies. Using high-throughput sequencing technology we now report a detailed analysis of canine faecal microbiota. The study group of animals comprised eleven healthy adult miniature Schnauzer dogs of mixed sex and age, some closely related and all housed in kennel and pen accommodation on the same premises with similar feeding and exercise regimes. DNA was extracted from faecal specimens and subjected to PCR amplification of 16S rDNA, followed by sequencing of the 5' region that included variable regions V1 and V2. Barcoded amplicons were sequenced by Roche-454 FLX high-throughput pyrosequencing. Sequences were assigned to taxa using the Ribosomal Database Project Bayesian classifier and revealed dominance of Fusobacterium and Bacteroidetes phyla. Differences between animals in the proportions of different taxa, among 10,000 reads per animal, were clear and not supportive of the concept of a "core microbiota". Despite this variability in prominent genera, littermates were shown to have a more similar faecal microbial composition than unrelated dogs. Diversity of the microbiota was also assessed by assignment of sequence reads into operational taxonomic units (OTUs) at the level of 97% sequence identity. The OTU data were then subjected to rarefaction analysis and determination of Chao1 richness estimates. The data indicated that faecal microbiota comprised possibly as many as 500 to 1500 OTUs.
    PLoS ONE 01/2013; 8(1):e53115. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0053115 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The members of the phylum Fusobacteria and its two families, Fusobacteriaceae and Leptotrichiaceae, are distinguished at present mainly on the basis of their branching in the 16S rRNA gene trees and analysis of the internal transcribed spacer sequences in the 16S-23S rDNA. However, no biochemical or molecular characteristics are known that are uniquely shared by all of most members of these groups of bacteria. We report here detailed phylogenetic and comparative analyses on 45 sequenced Fusobacteria genomes to examine their evolutionary relationships and to identify molecular markers that are specific for the members of this phylum. In phylogenetic trees based on 16S rRNA gene sequences or concatenated sequences for 17 conserved proteins, members of the families Fusobacteriaceae and Leptotrichiaceae formed strongly supported clades and were clearly distinguished. In these trees, the species from the genus Fusobacterium also formed a number of well-supported clades. In parallel, comparative analyses on Fusobacteria genomes have identified 44 conserved signature indels (CSIs) in proteins involved in a broad range of functions that are either specific for the phylum Fusobacteria or a number of distinct subclades within this phylum. Seven of these CSIs in important proteins are uniquely present in the protein homologues of all sequenced Fusobacteria and they provide potential molecular markers for this phylum. Six and three other CSIs in other protein sequences are specific for members of the families Fusobacteriaceae and Leptotrichiaceae, respectively, and they provide novel molecular means for distinguishing members of these two families. Fourteen additional CSIs in different proteins, which are specific for either members of the genera Fusobacterium or Leptotrichia, or a number of other well-supported clades of Fusobacteria at multiple phylogenetic levels, provide molecular markers for these groups and information regarding the evolutionary relationships among the members of this phylum. Lastly, the present work has also identified 14 CSIs in divergent proteins that are specific for three specific subclades of Fusobacterium species, which are also indicated to be distinct by phylogenetic analyses. The members of these three Fusobacterium subclades also differ significantly from each other in their whole genome average nucleotide identities values, suggesting that they are possible candidates for recognition as different genera. The molecular markers reported here provide novel means for the identification of members of the phylum Fusobacteria and for their classification.
    Anaerobe 08/2014; 28. DOI:10.1016/j.anaerobe.2014.06.007 · 2.48 Impact Factor

Similar Publications