Open Access

Complete genome sequence of Granulicella tundricola type strain MP5ACTX9T, an Acidobacteria from tundra soil

  • Suman R. Rawat1,
  • Minna K. Männistö2,
  • Valentin Starovoytov3,
  • Lynne Goodwin4,
  • Matt Nolan5,
  • Loren Hauser6,
  • Miriam Land6,
  • Karen Walston Davenport4,
  • Tanja Woyke5 and
  • Max M. Häggblom1Email author
Standards in Genomic Sciences20149:9030449

DOI: 10.4056/sigs.4648353

Published: 15 June 2014

Abstract

Granulicella tundricola strain MP5ACTX9T is a novel species of the genus Granulicella in subdivision 1 Acidobacteria. G. tundricola is a predominant member of soil bacterial communities, active at low temperatures and nutrient limiting conditions in Arctic alpine tundra. The organism is a cold-adapted acidophile and a versatile heterotroph that hydrolyzes a suite of sugars and complex polysaccharides. Genome analysis revealed metabolic versatility with genes involved in metabolism and transport of carbohydrates, including gene modules encoding for the carbohydrate-active enzyme (CAZy) families for the breakdown, utilization and biosynthesis of diverse structural and storage polysaccharides such as plant based carbon polymers. The genome of G. tundricola strain MP5ACTX9T consists of 4,309,151 bp of a circular chromosome and five mega plasmids with a total genome content of 5,503,984 bp. The genome comprises 4,705 protein-coding genes and 52 RNA genes.

Keywords

cold adapted acidophile tundra soil Acidobacteria

Introduction

The strain MP5ACTX9T (=ATCC BAA-1859T =DSM 23138T) is the type strain of Granulicella tundricola [tun.dri.co’la. N.L. n. tundra, tundra, a cold treeless region; L. masc. suffix-cola (from L. n. incola) dweller; N.L. n. tundricola tundra dweller] that was isolated from soil at the Malla Nature Reserve, Kilpisjärvi, Finland; 69°01′N, 20°50′E) and described along with other species of the genus Granulicella isolated from tundra soil [1].

Acidobacteria is a phylogenetically and physiologically diverse phylum [2,3], the members of which are ubiquitously found in diverse habitats and are abundant in most soil environments [4,5] including Arctic tundra soils [6,7]. Acidobacteria are relatively difficult to cultivate, as they have slow growth rates. To date only subdivisions 1, 3, 4, 8, 10 and 23 Acidobacteria are defined by taxonomically characterized representatives [823] as well as three ‘Candidatus’ taxa [24,25]. The phylogenetic diversity, ubiquity and abundance of this group suggest that they play important ecological roles in soils. The abundance of Acidobacteria correlates with soil pH [26,27] and carbon [28,29], with subdivision 1 Acidobacteria being most abundant in slightly acidic soils. Acidobacteria, including members of the genera Granulicella and Terriglobus, dominate the acidic tundra heaths of northern Finland [26,3032]. Using selective isolation techniques we have been able to isolate several slow growing and fastidious strains of Acidobacteria [1,11]. On the basis of phylogenetic, phenotypic and chemotaxonomic data, including 16S rRNA, rpoB gene sequence similarity and DNA-DNA hybridization, strain MP5ACTX9T was classified as a novel species of the genus Granulicella [1]. Here, we summarize the physiological features together with the complete genome sequence, annotation and data analysis of Granulicella tundricola strain MP5ACTX9T.

Classification and features

Within the genus Granulicella, eight species are described with validly published names: G. mallensis MP5ACTX8T, G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T, G. arctica MP5ACTX2T,G. sapmiensis S6CTX5AT isolated from Arctic tundra soil [1] and G. paludicola OB1010T, G. paludicola LCBR1, G. pectinivorans TPB6011T,G. rosea TPO1014T,G. aggregans TPB6028T isolated from sphagnum peat bogs [2].

Strain MP5ACTX9T shares 95.5–97.2% 16S rRNA gene identity with tundra soil strains G. mallensis MP5ACTX8T (95.5%), G. arctica MP5ACTX2T (96.9%), G. sapmiensis S6CTX5AT (97.2%) and 95.2 – 97.7% identity with the sphagnum bog strains, G. pectinivorans TPB6011T (97.7%), G. rosea TPO1014T (97.2%), %), G. aggregans TPB6028T (96.8%), G. paludicola LCBR1 (95.9%), and G. paludicola strain OB1010T (95.3%), which were isolated from sphagnum peat. Phylogenetic analysis based on the 16S rRNA gene of taxonomically classified strains of family Acidobacteriaceae placed G. rosea type strain T4T (AM887759) as the closest taxonomically classified relative of G. tundricola strain MP5ACTX9T (Table 1, Figure 1).
Figure 1.

Phylogenetic tree highlighting the position of G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T (shown in bold) relative to the other type strains within subdivision1 Acidobacteria. The maximum likelihood tree was inferred from 1,361 aligned positions of the 16S rRNA gene sequences and derived based on the Tamura-Nei model using MEGA 5 [42]. Bootstrap values >50 (expressed as percentages of 1,000 replicates) are shown at branch points. Bar: 0.01 substitutions per nucleotide position. The corresponding GenBank accession numbers are displayed in parentheses. Strains whose genomes have been sequenced, are marked with an asterisk; G. mallensis MP5ACTX8T (CP003130), G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T (CP002480), T. saanensis SP1PR4T (CP002467), T. roseus KBS63T (CP003379), and A. capsulatum ATCC 51196T (CP001472). Bryobacter aggregatus MPL3 (AM162405) in SD3 Acidobacteria was used as an outgroup.

Table 1.

Classification and general features of G. tundricola strain MP5ACTX9T

MIGS ID

Property

Term

Evidence code

 

Classification

Domain Bacteria

TAS [33]

 

Phylum Acidobacteria

TAS [34,35]

 

Class Acidobacteria

TAS [36,37]

 

Order Acidobacteriales

TAS [37,38]

 

Family Acidobacteriaceae

TAS [35,39]

 

Genus Granulicella

TAS [1,40]

 

Species Granulicella tundricola

TAS [1]

 

Type strain: MP5ACTX9T (ATCC BAA-1859T = DSM 23138T)

 
 

Gram stain

negative

TAS [1]

 

Cell shape

rod

TAS [1]

 

Motility

non-motile

TAS [1]

 

Sporulation

not reported

NAS

 

Temperature range

4−28°C

TAS [1]

 

Optimum temperature

21−24 °C

TAS [1]

 

pH range; Optimum

3.5−6.5; 5

TAS [1]

 

Carbon source

D-glucose, maltose, cellobiose, D-fructose, D-galactose, lactose, lactulose, D-mannose, sucrose, trehalose, D-xylose, raffinose, N-acetyl-D-glucosamine, glutamate

TAS [1]

MIGS-6

Habitat

terrestrial, tundra soil

TAS [1]

MIGS-6.3

Salinity

No growth with >1.0% NaCl (w/v)

TAS [1]

MIGS-22

Oxygen requirement

aerobic

TAS [1]

MIGS-15

Biotic relationship

free-living

TAS [1]

MIGS-14

Pathogenicity

non-pathogen

NAS

MIGS-4

Geographic location

Malla Nature Reserve, Arctic-alpine tundra, Finland

TAS [1]

MIGS-5

Sample collection

2006

TAS [1]

MIGS-4.1

Latitude

69°01′N

TAS [1]

MIGS-4.2

Longitude

20°50′E

TAS [1]

MIGS-4.4

Altitude

700 m

TAS [1]

a Evidence codes - IDA: Inferred from Direct Assay; TAS: Traceable Author Statement (i.e., a direct report exists in the literature); NAS: Non-traceable Author Statement (i.e., not directly observed for the living, isolated sample, but based on a generally accepted property for the species, or anecdotal evidence). These evidence codes are from the Gene Ontology project [41].

Morphology and physiology

G. tundricola cells are Gram-negative, non-motile, aerobic rods, approximately 0.5 µm wide and 0.5 – 1.8 µm long. Colonies on R2A agar are pink, circular, convex and smooth. Growth occurs at +4 to 28°C and at pH 3.5–6.5 with an optimum at 21–24°C and pH 5 (Fig. 2). Genotypic analyses, including low rpoB gene sequence similarity and phenotypic characteristics clearly distinguished strain MP5ACTX9T from other Granulicella species/strains, leading us to conclude that MP5ACTX9T represents a novel species of the genus Granulicella, for which the name Granulicella tundricola sp. nov. was proposed [1].
Figure 2.

Electron micrograph of G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T

Strain MP5ACTX9T hydrolyzed complex to simple carbon substrates [1] which include complex polysaccharides like aesculin, pectin, laminarin, starch and pullulan, but not gelatin, cellulose, lichenan, sodium alginate, xylan, chitosan or chitin. Strain MP5ACTX9T also utilized the following sugars as growth substrates: D-glucose, maltose, cellobiose, D-fructose, D-galactose, lactose, lactulose, D-mannose, sucrose, trehalose, D-xylose, raffinose, N-acetyl-D-glucosamine, glutamate and gluconic acid. Enzyme activities reported for the strain MP5ACTX9T include acid phosphatase, esterase (C4 and C8), leucine arylamidase, valine arylamidase, α-chymotrypsin, trypsin, naphthol-AS-BI-phosphohydrolase, α- and β-galactosidases, α- and β-glucosidases, N-acetyl-β-glucosaminidase, β-glucuronidase, α-fucosidase and α-mannosidase but negative for alkaline phosphatase and lipase (C14). Strain MP5ACTX9T is resistant to ampicillin, erythromycin, chloramphenicol, neomycin, streptomycin, tetracycline, gentamicin, bacitracin, polymyxin B and penicillin, but susceptible to rifampicin, kanamycin, lincomycin and novobiocin.

Chemotaxonomy

The major cellular fatty acids in G. tundricola are iso-C15:0 (46.4%), C16:1ω7c (35.0%) and C16:0 (6.6%). The cellular fatty acid composition of strain MP5ACTX9T was similar to that of other Granulicella strains with fatty acids iso-C15:0 and C16:1ω7c being most abundant in all strains. Strain MP5ACTX9T contains MK-8 as the major quinone and also contains 4% of MK-7.

Genome sequencing and annotation

Genome project history

G. tundricola strain MP5ACTX9T was selected for sequencing in 2009 by the DOE Joint Genome Institute (JGI) community sequencing program. The Quality Draft (QD) assembly and annotation were completed on May 24, 2010. The GenBank Date of Release was February 2, 2011. The genome project is deposited in the Genomes On-Line Database (GOLD) [43] and the complete genome sequence of strain MP5ACTX9T is deposited in GenBank (CP002480.1). Table 2 presents the project information and its association with MIGS version 2.0 [44].
Table 2.

Project information.

MIGS ID

Property

Term

MIGS 31

Finishing quality

Finished

MIGS-28

Libraries used

Three libraries, an Illumina GAii shotgun library (GUIX), a 454 Titanium standard library (GTWG, GWTA) and a paired end 454 (GSUN) library

MIGS 29

Sequencing platforms

454 Titanium standard, 454 Paired End, Illumina

MIGS 31.2

Fold coverage

20×(454), 274X (Illumina)

MIGS 30

Assemblers

Newbler, VELVET, PHRAP

MIGS 32

Gene calling method

ProdigaL, GenePRIMP

 

Locus Tag

AciX9

 

Genbank ID

CP002480.1

 

GenBank Date of Release

February 2, 2011

 

GOLD ID

Gc01833

 

BIOPROJECT

PRJNA50551, PRJNA47621

 

Project relevance

Environmental, Biogeochemical cycling of Carbon, Biotechnological, GEBA

Growth conditions and genomic DNA extraction

G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T was cultivated on R2 medium as previously described [1]. Genomic DNA (gDNA) of high sequencing quality was isolated using a modified CTAB method and evaluated according to the Quality Control (QC) guidelines provided by the DOE Joint Genome Institute [45].

Genome sequencing and assembly

The finished genome of G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T (JGI ID 4088693) was generated at the DOE Joint genome Institute (JGI) using a combination of Illumina [46] and 454 technologies [47]. For this genome we constructed and sequenced an Illumina GAii shotgun library which generated 42,620,699 reads totaling 3239 Mb, a 454 Titanium standard library which generated 146,119 reads and three paired end 454 libraries with an average insert size of 9.3 kb which generated 178,757 reads totaling 154.3 Mb of 454 data. All general aspects of library construction and sequencing performed at the JGI can be found at the JGI website [45]. The 454 Titanium standard data and the 454 paired end data were assembled with Newbler, version 2.3. Illumina sequencing data was assembled with Velvet, version 0.7.63 [48]. The 454 Newbler consensus shreds, the Illumina Velvet consensus shreds and the read pairs in the 454 paired end library were integrated using parallel phrap, version SPS - 4.24 (High Performance Software, LLC) [49]. The software Consed [50] was used in the finishing process. The Phred/Phrap/Consed software package [51] was used for sequence assembly and quality assessment in the subsequent finishing process. Illumina data was used to correct potential base errors and increase consensus quality using the software Polisher developed at JGI (Alla Lapidus, unpublished). Possible misassemblies were corrected using gapResolution (Cliff Han, un-published), Dupfinisher [52] or sequencing cloned bridging PCR fragments with sub-cloning. Gaps between contigs were closed by editing in Consed, by PCR and by Bubble PCR (J-F Cheng, unpublished) primer walks. The final assembly is based on 29.1 Mb of 454 draft data which provides an average 20× coverage of the genome and 975 Mb of Illumina draft data which provides an average 274× coverage of the genome.

Genome annotation

Genes were identified using Prodigal [53] as part of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory genome annotation pipeline, followed by a round of manual curation using the JGI GenePRIMP pipeline [54]. The predicted CDSs were translated and used to search the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) non-redundant database, UniProt, TIGRFam, Pfam, PRIAM, KEGG, (COGs) [55,56], and InterPro. These data sources were combined to assert a product description for each predicted protein. Non-coding genes and miscellaneous features were predicted using tRNAscan-SE [57], RNAMMer [58], Rfam [59], TMHMM [60], and signalP [61]. Additional gene prediction analysis and functional annotation were performed within the Integrated Microbial Genomes Expert Review (IMG-ER) platform [62].

Genome properties

The genome is 5,503,984 bp in size, which includes the 4,309,151 bp chromosome and five plasmids pACIX901 (0.48 Mbp); pACIX902 (0.3 Mbp); pACIX903 (0.19 Mbp), pACIX904 (0.12 Mbp) and pACIX905 (0.12 Mbp), with a GC content of 59.9 mol%. There are 52 RNA genes (Figures 3 and 4, and Table 3). Of the 4,758 predicted genes, 4,706 are protein-coding genes (CDSs) and 163 are pseudogenes. Of the total CDSs, 68.8% represent COG functional categories and 27.5% consist of signal peptides. The distribution of genes into COG functional categories is presented in Figure 3 and Table 4, and Table 5.
Figure 3.

Circular representation of the chromosome of G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T displaying relevant genome features. From outside to center; Genes on forward strand (colored by COG categories), genes on reverse strand (colored by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, rRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content and GC skew.

Figure 4.

Circular representation of the plasmids of G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T displaying relevant genome features. From outside to center; Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories), genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, rRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content and GC skew. Order and size from left to right: pACIX901, 0.48 Mbp; pACIX902, 0.3 Mbp; pACIX903, 0.19 Mbp; pACIX904, 0.12 Mbp; pACIX905, 0.12 Mbp.

Table 3.

Summary of genome: one chromosome and five plasmids

Label

Size (Mb)Topology

INSDC identifier

RefSeq ID

Chromosome

4.3 circular

CP002480.1

NC_015064.1

Plasmid pACIX901

0.48 circular

CP002481.1

NC_015057.1

Plasmid pACIX902

0.3 circular

CP002482.1

NC_015065.1

Plasmid pACIX903

0.19 circular

CP002483.1

NC_015058.1

Plasmid pACIX904

0.12 circular

CP002484.1

NC_015059.1

Plasmid pACIX905

0.12 circular

CP002485.1

NC_015060.1

Table 4.

Genome statistics.

Attribute

Value

% of Total

Genome size (bp)

5,503,984

100

DNA coding (bp)

4,759,459

86.5

DNA G+C (bp)

3,301,098

60.0

DNA scaffolds

6

100

Total genes

4,757

100

Protein coding genes

4,705

98.9

RNA genes

52

1.1

Pseudo genes

163

3.4

Genes in internal clusters

2,395

50.4

Genes with function prediction

2,936

61.7

Genes assigned to COGs

3,259

68.5

Genes with Pfam domains

3,504

73.6

Genes with signal peptides

652

13.7

Genes with transmembrane helices

1,108

23.3

CRISPR repeats

0

-

The total is based on either the size of the genome in base pairs or the protein coding genes in the annotated genome.

Table 5.

Number of genes associated with general COG functional categories.

Code

Value

%age

Description

J

160

4.45

Translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis

A

2

0.06

RNA processing and modification

K

249

6.93

Transcription

L

222

6.18

Replication, recombination and repair

B

1

0.03

Chromatin structure and dynamics

D

33

0.92

Cell cycle control, Cell division, chromosome partitioning

V

68

1.89

Defense mechanisms

T

212

5.9

Signal transduction mechanisms

M

287

7.98

Cell wall/membrane biogenesis

N

73

2.03

Cell motility

U

123

3.42

Intracellular trafficking and secretion

O

125

3.48

Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones

C

174

4.84

Energy production and conversion

G

248

6.9

Carbohydrate transport and metabolism

E

234

6.51

Amino acid transport and metabolism

F

68

1.89

Nucleotide transport and metabolism

H

147

4.09

Coenzyme transport and metabolism

I

126

3.5

Lipid transport and metabolism

P

137

3.81

Inorganic ion transport and metabolism

Q

91

2.53

Secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism

R

446

12.41

General function prediction only

S

370

10.29

Function unknown

-

1498

31.49

Not in COGs

The total is based on the total number of protein coding genes in the genome.

Discussion

Granulicella tundricola MP5ACTX9T is a tundra soil strain with a genome consisting of a circular chromosome and five mega plasmids ranging in size from 1.1 × 105 to 4.7 × 105 bp for a total genome size of 5.5 Mbp. The G. tundricola genome also contains close to twice as many pseudogenes and a large number of mobile genetic elements as compared to Granulicella mallensis and Terrigobus saanensis, two other Acidobacteria isolated from the same habitat [29]. A large number of genes assigned to COG functional categories for transport and metabolism of carbohydrates (6.9%) and amino acids (6.5%) and involved in cell envelope biogenesis (8%) and transcription (6.9%) were identified. Further genome analysis revealed an abundance of gene modules encoding for functional activities within the carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZy) families [63,64] involved in breakdown, utilization and biosynthesis of carbohydrates. G. tundricola hydrolyzed complex carbon polymers, including CMC, pectin, lichenin, laminarin and starch, and utilized sugars such as cellobiose, D-mannose, D-xylose and D-trehalose. Genome predictions for CDSs encoding for enzymes such as cellulases, pectinases, alginate lyases, trehalase and amylases are in agreement with biochemical activities in strain MP5ACTX9T. However, the genome of G. tundricola did contain many CDSs encoding for GH18 chitinases although no chitinase activity was detected after 10 day-incubation with chitinazure [29]. In addition, the G. tundricola genome contained a cluster of genes in close proximity to the cellulose synthase gene (bcsAB), which included cellulase (bscZ) (endoglucanase Y) of family GH8, cellulose synthase operon protein (bcsC) and a cellulose synthase operon protein (yhjQ) involved in cellulose biosynthesis. We previously reported on a detailed comparative genome analysis of G. tundricola MP5ACTX9T with other Acidobacteria strains for which finished genomes are available [29]. The data suggests that G. tundricola is involved in hydrolysis and utilization of stored carbohydrates and biosynthesis of exopolysaccharides from organic matter and plant based polymers in the soil. Therefore, G. tundricola may be central to carbon cycling processes in Arctic and boreal soil ecosystems.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The work conducted by the US Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute is supported by the Office of Science of the US Department of Energy Under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. This work was funded in part by the Academy of Finland and the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
(2)
Finnish Forest Research Institute
(3)
Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
(4)
Bioscience Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory
(5)
DOE Joint Genome Institute
(6)
Oak Ridge National Laboratory

References

  1. Männistö MK, Rawat S, Starovoytov V, Häggblom MM. Granulicella arctica sp. nov., Granulicella mallensis sp. nov., Granulicella sapmiensis sp. nov. and Granulicella tundricola sp. nov., novel Acidobacteria from tundra soil of Northern Finland. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012; 62:2097–2106. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.031864-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Jones RT, Robeson MS, Lauber CL, Hamady M, Knight R, Fierer N. A comprehensive survey of soil acidobacterial diversity using pyrosequencing and clone library analyses. ISME J 2009; 3:442–453. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2008.127PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Barns SM, Cain EC, Sommerville L, Kuske CR. Acidobacteria phylum sequences in uranium-contaminated subsurface sediments greatly expand the known diversity within the phylum. Appl Environ Microbiol 2007; 73:3113–3116. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02012-06PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Janssen PH. Identifying the dominant soil bacterial taxa in libraries of 16S rRNA and 16S rRNA genes. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006; 72:1719–1728. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.72.3.1719-1728.2006PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fierer N, Bradford MA, Jackson RB. Toward an ecological classification of soil bacteria. Ecology 2007; 88:1354–1364. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/05-1839View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Campbell BJ, Polson SW, Hanson TE, Mack MC, Schuur EA. The effect of nutrient deposition on bacterial communities in Arctic tundra soil. Environ Microbiol 2010; 12:1842–1854. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2010.02189.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Chu H, Fierer N, Lauber CL, Caporaso JG, Knight R, Grogan P. Soil bacterial diversity in the Arctic is not fundamentally different from that found in other biomes. Environ Microbiol 2010; 12:2998–3006. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2010.02277.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Pankratov TA, Dedysh SN. Granulicella paludicola gen. nov., sp. nov., Granulicella pectinivorans sp. nov., Granulicella aggregans sp. nov. and Granulicella rosea sp. nov., acidophilic, polymer degrading acidobacteria from Sphagnum peat bogs. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2010; 60:2951–2959. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.021824-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kishimoto N, Kosako Y, Tano T. Acidobacterium capsulatum gen. nov., sp. nov.: an acidophilic chemoorganotrophic bacterium containing menaquinone from acidic mineral environment. Curr Microbiol 1991; 22:1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02106205View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Eichorst SA, Breznak JA, Schmidt TM. Isolation and characterization of soil bacteria that define Terriglobus gen. nov., in the phylum Acidobacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 2007; 73:2708–2717. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02140-06PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Männistö MK, Rawat SR, Starovoytov V, Häggblom MM. Terriglobus saanensis sp. nov., an acidobacterium isolated from tundra soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2011; 61:1823–1828. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.026005-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Koch IH, Gich F, Dunfield PF, Overmann J. Edaphobacter modestus gen. nov., sp. nov., and Edaphobacter aggregans sp. nov., acidobacteria isolated from alpine and forest soils. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:1114–1122. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.65303-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Okamura K, Kawai A, Yamada T, Hiraishi A. Acidipila rosea gen. nov., sp. nov., an acidophilic chemoorganotrophic bacterium belonging to the phylum Acidobacteria. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2011; 317:138–142. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2011.02224.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Pankratov TA, Kirsanova LA, Kaparullina EN, Kevbrin VV, Dedysh SN. Telmatobacter bradus gen. nov., sp. nov., a cellulolytic facultative anaerobe from subdivision 1 of the Acidobacteria and emended description of Acidobacterium capsulatum Kishimoto et al. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012; 62:430–437. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.029629-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kulichevskaya IS, Kostina LA, Valásková V, Rijpstra IC, Sinninghe Damsté JS, de Boer W, Dedysh SN. Acidicapsa borealis gen. nov., sp. nov. and A. ligni sp. nov., two novel subdivision 1 Acidobacteria from sphagnum peat and decaying wood. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012; 62:1512–1520. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.034819-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Dedysh SN, Kulichevskaya IS, Serkebaeva YM, Mityaeva MA, Sorokin VV, Suzina NE, Rijpstra WI, Damste JS. Bryocella elongata gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel member of Subdivision 1 of the Acidobacteria isolated from a methanotrophic enrichment culture, and emended description of Edaphobacter aggregans Koch et al. 2008. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012; 62:654–664. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.031898-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kulichevskaya IS, Suzina NE, Liesack W, Dedysh SN. Bryobacter aggregatus gen. nov., sp. nov., a peat-inhabiting, aerobic chemoorganotroph from subdivision 3 of the Acidobacteria. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2010; 60:301–306. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.013250-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Foesel BU, Rohde M, Overmann J. Blastocatella fastidiosa gen. nov., sp. nov., isolated from semiarid savanna soil — The first described species of Acidobacteria subdivision 4. Syst Appl Microbiol 2013; 36:82–89. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.syapm.2012.11.002View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Izumi H, Nunoura T, Miyazaki M, Mino S, Toki T, Takai K, Sako Y, Sawabe T, Nakagawa S. Thermotomaculum hydrothermale gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel heterotrophic thermophile within the phylum Acidobacteria from a deep-sea hydrothermal vent chimney in the Southern Okinawa Trough. Extremophiles 2012; 16:245–253. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00792-011-0425-9View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Liesack W, Bak F, Kreft JU, Stackebrandt E. Holophaga foetida gen.nov., sp. nov., a new homoacetogenic bacterium degrading methoxylated aromatic compounds. Arch Microbiol 1994; 162:85–90. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00264378PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Coates JD, Ellis DJ, Gaw CV, Lovley DR. Geothrix fermentans gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel Fe(III)-reducing bacterium from a hydrocarbon contaminated aquifer. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1999; 49:1615–1622. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/00207713-49-4-1615View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Fukunaga Y, Kurahashi M, Yanagi K, Yokota A, Harayama S. Acanthopleuribacter pedis gen. nov., sp. nov., a marine bacterium isolated from a chiton, and description of Acanthopleuribacteraceae fam. nov., Acanthopleuribacterales ord. nov., Holophagales ord. nov. and Holophagae classis nov. in the phylum ‘Acidobacteria’. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:2597–2601. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.65589-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Losey NA, Stevenson BS, Busse HJ, Damste JSS, Rijpstra WIC, Rudd S, Lawson PA. Thermoanaerobaculum aquaticum gen. nov., sp. nov., the first cultivated member of Acidobacteria subdivision 23, isolated from a hot spring. [PMID: 23771620]. [DOI 10.1099/ijs.0.051425-0]. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2013; 63:4149–4157.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Ward NL, Challacombe JF, Janssen PH, Henrissat B, Coutinho PM, Wu M, Xie G, Haft DH, Sait M, Badger J, et al. Three genomes from the phylum Acidobacteria provide insight into the lifestyles of these microorganisms in soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 2009; 75:2046–2056. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02294-08PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Bryant DA, Amaya M. Garcia Costas AMG, Maresca JA, Chew AGM, Klatt CG, Bateson MM, Tallon LJ, Hostetler J, Nelson WC, Heidelberg JF, Ward DM. Candidatus Chloracidobacterium thermophilum: an aerobic phototrophic acidobacterium. Science 2007; 317:523–526. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1143236View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Männistö MK, Tiirola M, Häggblom MM. Microbial communities in Arctic fjelds of Finnish Lapland are stable but highly pH dependent. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2007; 59:452–465. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2006.00232.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Sait M, Davis KE, Janssen PH. Effect of pH on isolation and distribution of members of subdivision 1 of the phylum Acidobacteria occurring in soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006; 72:1852–1857. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.72.3.1852-1857.2006PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Eichorst SA, Kuske CR, Schmidt TM. Influence of plant polymers on the distribution and cultivation of bacteria in the phylum Acidobacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 2011; 77:586–596. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01080-10PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Rawat SR, Männistö MK, Bromberg Y, Häggblom MM. Comparative genomic and physiological analysis provides insights into the role of Acidobacteria in organic carbon utilization in Arctic tundra soils. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2012; 82:341–355. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2012.01381.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Rawat SR, Männistö MK, Starovoytov V, Goodwin L, Nolan M, Hauser L, Land M, Davenport KW, Woyke T, Häggblom MM. Complete genome sequence of Terriglobus saanensis strain SP1 PR4T, an Acidobacteria from tundra soil. Stand Genomic Sci 2012; 7:59–69. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.4056/sigs.3036810PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Männistö MK, Tiirola M, Häggblom MM. Effect of freeze-thaw cycles on bacterial communities of Arctic tundra soil. Microb Ecol 2009; 58:621–631. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00248-009-9516-xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Männistö MK, Kurhela E, Tiirola M, Häggblom MM. Acidobacteria dominate the active bacterial communities of sub-Arctic tundra with widely divergent winter-time snow accumulation and soil temperatures. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2013; 84:47–59. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1574-6941.12035View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Woese CR, Kandler O, Wheelis ML. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990; 87:4576–4579. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Thrash JC, Coates JD. Phylum XVII. Acidobacteria phyl. nov. In: Krieg NR, Staley JT, Brown DR, Hedlund BP, Paster BJ, Ward NL, Ludwig W, Whitman WB (eds), Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 4, Springer, New York, 2011, p. 725.Google Scholar
  35. Validation List No. 143. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012; 62:1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.039487-0
  36. Cavalier-Smith T. The neomuran origin of archaebacteria, the negibacterial root of the universal tree and bacterial megaclassification. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2002; 52:7–76. PubMedView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes. The nomenclatural types of the orders Acholeplasmatales, Halanaerobiales, Halobacteriales, Methanobacteriales, Methanococcales, Methanomicrobiales, Planctomycetales, Prochlorales, Sulfolobales, Thermococcales, Thermoproteales and Verrucomicrobiales are the genera Acholeplasma, Halanaerobium, Halobacterium, Methanobacterium, Methanococcus, Methanomicrobium, Planctomyces, Prochloron, Sulfolobus, Thermococcus, Thermoproteus and Verrucomicrobium, respectively. Opinion 79. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2005; 55:517–518. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.63548-0View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Ludwig W, Euzeby J, Whitman WG. Draft taxonomic outline of the Bacteroidetes, Planctomycetes, Chlamydiae, Spirochaetes, Fibrobacteres, Fusobacteria, Acidobacteria, Verrucomicrobia, Dictyoglomi, and Gemmatimonadetes. http://www.bergeys.org/outlines/Bergeys_Vol_4_Outline.pdf. Taxonomic Outline 2008.
  39. Thrash JC, Coates JD. Family I. Acidobacteriaceae fam. nov. In: Krieg NR, Staley JT, Brown DR, Hedlund BP, Paster BJ, Ward NL, Ludwig W, Whitman WB (eds), Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 4, Springer, New York, 2011, p. 728.Google Scholar
  40. Pankratov TA, Dedysh SN. Granulicella paludicola gen. nov., sp. nov., Granulicella pectinivorans sp. nov., Granulicella aggregans sp. nov. and Granulicella rosea sp. nov., acidophilic, polymer-degrading acidobacteria from Sphagnum peat bogs. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2010; 60:2951–2959. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.021824-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS, Eppig JT, et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet 2000; 25:25–29. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/75556PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S. MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol 2011; 28:2731–2739. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr121PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Liolios K, Mavromatis K, Tavernarakis N, Kyrpides NC. The Genomes On Line Database (GOLD) in 2007: status of genomic and metagenomic projects and their associated metadata. Nucleic Acids Res 2007; 36:D475–D479. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkm884PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Field D, Garrity G, Gray T, Morrison N, Selengut J, Sterk P, Tatusova T, Thomson N, Allen MJ, Angiuoli SV, et al. The minimum information about a genome sequence (MIGS) specification. Nat Biotechnol 2008; 26:541–547. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt1360PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. DOE Joint Genome Institute. http://www.jgi.doe.gov.
  46. Bennett S. Solexa Ltd. Pharmacogenomics 2004; 5:433–438. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1517/14622416.5.4.433View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Margulies M, Egholm M, Altman WE. Genome sequencing in microfabricated high-density picolitre reactors. Nature 2005; 437:376–380. PubMedPubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Zerbino DR, Birney E. Velvet: algorithms for de novo short read assembly using de Bruijn graphs. Genome Res 2008; 18:821–829. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gr.074492.107PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Ewing B, Hillier L, Wendl MC, Green P. Base-calling of automated sequencer traces using phred. I. Accuracy assessment. Genome Res 1998; 8:175–185. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gr.8.3.175View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Gordon D, Abajian C, Green P. Consed: a graphical tool for sequence finishing. Genome Res 1998; 8:195–202. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gr.8.3.195View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. The Phred/Phrap/Consed software package. http://www.phrap.com.
  52. Han CS, Chain P. Finishing repeat regions automatically with Dupfinisher CSREA Press. In: Arabnia AR, Valafar H, editors. Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on bioinformatics & computational biology; 2006; June 26–29. CSREA Press. p 141–146.
  53. Hyatt D, Chen GL, Locascio PF, Land ML, Larimer FW, Hauser LJ. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics 2010; 11:119. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-119PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Pati A, Ivanova NN, Mikhailova N, Ovchinnikova G, Hooper SD, Lykidis A, Kyrpides NC. GenePRIMP: a gene prediction improvement pipeline for prokaryotic genomes. Nat Methods 2010; 7:455–457. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.1457View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Tatusov RL, Koonin EV, Lipman DJ. A genomic perspective on protein families. Science 1997; 278:631–637. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.278.5338.631View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Clusters of Orthologous Groups. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/COG.
  57. Lowe TM, Eddy SR. tRNAscan-SE: a program for improved detection of transfer RNA genes in genomic sequence. Nucleic Acids Res 1997; 25:955–964. PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Lagesen K, Hallin P, Rodland EA, Staerfeldt HH, Rognes T, Ussery DW. RNAmmer: consistent and rapid annotation of ribosomal RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res 2007; 35:3100–3108. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkm160PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Griffiths-Jones S, Bateman A, Marshall M, Khanna A, Eddy SR. Rfam: an RNA family database. Nucleic Acids Res 2003; 31:439–441. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkg006PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Krogh A, Larsson B, von Heijne G, Sonnhammer EL. Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes. J Mol Bol 2001; 305:567–580. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.2000.4315View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  61. Bendtsen JD, Nielsen H, von Heijne G, Brunak S. Improved prediction of signal peptides: SignalP 3.0. J Mol Biol 2004; 340:783–795. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2004.05.028View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Markowitz VM, Mavromatis K, Ivanova N, Chen IM, Chu K, Kyrpides N. Expert Review of Functional Annotations for Microbial Genomes. Bioinformatics 2009; 25:2271–2278. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp393View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Cantarel BL, Coutinho PM, Rancurel C, Bernard T, Lombard V, Henrissat B. The Carbohydrate-Active EnZymes database (CAZy): an expert resource for Glycogenomics. Nucleic Acids Res 2009; 37:D233–D238. PubMed http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkn663PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Lombard V, Ramulu HG, Drula E, Coutinho PM and Henrissat B. The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy) in 2013. Nucleic Acids Research 1–6.

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2014