Open Access

Two draft genome sequences of Pseudomonas jessenii strains isolated from a copper contaminated site in Denmark

Standards in Genomic Sciences201611:86

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40793-016-0200-8

Received: 17 February 2016

Accepted: 4 October 2016

Published: 3 November 2016

Abstract

Pseudomonas jessenii C2 and Pseudomonas jessenii H16 were isolated from low-Cu and high-Cu industrially contaminated soil, respectively. P. jessenii H16 displayed significant resistance to copper when compared to P. jessenii C2. Here we describe genome sequences and interesting features of these two strains. The genome of P. jessenii C2 comprised 6,420,113 bp, with 5814 protein-coding genes and 67 RNA genes. P. jessenii H16 comprised 6,807,788 bp, with 5995 protein-coding genes and 70 RNA genes. Of special interest was a specific adaptation to this harsh copper-contaminated environment as P. jessenii H16 contained a novel putative copper resistance genomic island (GI) of around 50,000 bp.

Keywords

Pseudomonas jessenii Comparative genomicsCopper resistance

Introduction

Copper is an essential micronutrient in most organisms and required as a co-factor in biological processes such as redox reactions (electron transport, oxidative respiration, denitrification) [1, 2]. However, at higher concentrations copper will become toxic and inhibit or kill cells. Therefore, microorganisms have developed sophisticated copper homeostasis and resistance mechanisms in order to maintain the normal cellular copper supply to essential cuproenzymes while avoiding copper poisoning [3, 4]. Some highly copper resistant microorganisms have attracted great interests due to potential biotechnological applications in bio-mining and bioremediation of environments contaminated with copper [5].

Pseudomonas spp. are ubiquitous inhabitants of soil, water and plant surfaces belonging to the Gammaproteobacteria . Pseudomonas spp. has an exceptional capacity to produce a wide variety of secondary metabolites, including antibiotics that are toxic to plant pathogens [6, 7]. Pseudomonas jessenii was also found to be an important rhizobacterium conferring protection against a number of soilborne plant pathogens [8]. P. jessenii C2 and P. jessenii H16 were isolated from low-Cu soil and high-Cu soil from an abandoned wood impregnation site in Hygum, Denmark, respectively [9]. The Hygum site was contaminated with copper sulfate from 1911 to 1924, then the area was cultivated until 1993 and has been a fallow field since then [9, 10]. P. jessenii H16 was able to grow in medium containing high concentrations of copper, whereas P. jessenii C2 was sensitive to high copper concentrations. Here, we present the genome sequences, a brief characterization and annotation of P. jessenii C2 and P. jessenii H16.

Organism information

Classification and features

A highly copper contaminated high-Cu soil and a corresponding low-Cu soil were collected (0–20 cm depth) from a well-described Cu gradient field site in Hygum, Denmark. The high-Cu site was contaminated almost exclusively with CuSO4 more than 90 years ago [9]. The adjacent low-Cu control site was located just outside the contaminated area and had been subjected to the same land use for more than 80 years. The low-Cu and high-Cu soil had similar physicochemical characteristics except for their total Cu contents of 21 and 3172 mg kg-1, respectively [9, 11]. Bacteria were isolated from replicated soil subsamples (n = 3) and diluted, spread-plated on Pseudomonas -selective Gould’s S1 agar [11]. For each dilution series, 30 colonies emerging after two days at 25 °C were selected and isolated in pure culture by repeated plating [11]. Two of the resulting isolates were selected for further study. P. jessenii H16 was able to grow at high concentration of Cu (2 mM) on one-tenth strength LB agar, whereas P. jessenii C2 only grew with up to 0.125 mM Cu.

Strain C2 and H16 were both Gram-reaction negative. Cells of strain C2 and H16 were rod shaped with rounded ends and motile. The cells of C2 were 2.12–2.45 μm (mean, 2.28 μm) in length compared to 0.49–0.62 μm (mean, 0.55 μm) in width (Fig. 1a). The cells of H16 were 1.95–2.38 μm × 0.42–0.57 μm in size (Fig. 1b). No Sporulation was observed for both strains. The colonies were white and translucent on Gould’s S1 agar medium. Growth occurred aerobically at 4–37 °C, and optimal growth was observed at 30 °C, pH 7.0 for strain C2. Strain H16 preferred pH 6.7, at 30 °C for optimal growth. Both strains grew in 0–4 % (w/v) NaCl (Tables 1 and 2).
Fig. 1

Micrograph of Pseudomonas jessenii C2 and H16 obtained by scanning electron microscopy. a Pseudomonas jessenii C2. b Pseudomonas jessenii H16

Table 1

Classification and general features of P.jessenii C2 according to the MIGS recommendations [15]

MIGS ID

Property

Term

Evidence codea

 

Classification

Domain Bacteria

TAS [40]

Phylum Proteobacteria

TAS [41]

Class Gammaproteobacteria

TAS [42, 43]

Order Pseudomonadales

TAS [44]

Family Pseudomonadaceae

TAS [45]

Genus Pseudomonas

TAS [46, 47]

Species P. jessenii

TAS [48]

strain: C2

IDA

Gram stain

Negative

IDA

Cell shape

Rod-shaped

IDA

Motility

Motile

IDA

Sporulation

Non-sporulating

IDA

Temperature range

4–37 °C

IDA

Optimum temperature

30 °C

IDA

Optimum pH

7.0

IDA

Carbon source

d-glucose, d-melibiose, d-sucrose, d-mannitol, L-rhamnose, inositol, trehalose, d-lyxose,L-arabinose

IDA

MIGS-6

Habitat

soil

IDA

MIGS-6.3

Salinity

0–4 %

IDA

MIGS-22

Oxygen requirement

Aerobic

IDA

MIGS-15

Biotic relationship

Free-living

IDA

MIGS-14

Pathogenicity

Non-pathogen

NAS

MIGS-4

Geographic location

Hygum, Denmark

IDA

MIGS-5

Sample collection

May 2013

IDA

MIGS-4.1

Latitude

55° 46’ 25’’N

IDA

MIGS-4.2

Longitude

9° 25’ 52’’ E

IDA

aEvidence 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 [49]. If the evidence is IDA, the property was directly observed by the authors

Table 2

Classification and general features of P.jessenii H16 according to the MIGS recommendations [15]

MIGS ID

Property

Term

Evidence codea

 

Classification

Domain Bacteria

TAS [40]

Phylum Proteobacteria

TAS [41]

Class Gammaproteobacteria

TAS [42, 43]

Order Pseudomonadales

TAS [44]

Family Pseudomonadaceae

TAS [45]

Genus Pseudomonas

TAS [46, 47]

Species P. jessenii

TAS [48]

strain: H16

IDA

Gram stain

Negative

IDA

Cell shape

Rod-shaped

IDA

Motility

Motile

IDA

Sporulation

Non-sporulating

IDA

Temperature range

4–37 °C

IDA

Optimum temperature

30 °C

IDA

Optimum pH

6.7

IDA

Carbon source

d-glucose, d-melibiose, d-sucrose, d-mannitol, trehalose, d-lyxose, L-arabinose,inostitol

IDA

MIGS-6

Habitat

Copper contaminated soil

IDA

MIGS-6.3

Salinity

0–4 %

IDA

MIGS-22

Oxygen requirement

Aerobic

IDA

MIGS-15

Biotic relationship

Free-living

IDA

MIGS-14

Pathogenicity

Non-pathogen

NAS

MIGS-4

Geographic location

Hygum, Denmark

IDA

MIGS-5

Sample collection

May 2013

IDA

MIGS-4.1

Latitude

55° 46’ 25’’N

IDA

MIGS-4.2

Longitude

9° 25’ 52’’ E

IDA

aEvidence 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 [49]. If the evidence is IDA, the property was directly observed by the authors

Chemotaxonomy

Fatty acid analyses were performed by the Identification Service of the DSMZ, Braunschweig, Germany [12]. The fatty acid profiles were similar when comparing strains C2 and H16. The major fatty acids of the two strains showed as follows: C16: 1 ω7c and/or iso-C15: 0 2-OH (36.4 % in P. jessenii C2 and 40.1 % in P. jessenii H16); C18 : 1 ω7c (15.3 % in P. jessenii C2 and 10.8 % in P. jessenii H16) and C16 : 0 (28.8 % in P. jessenii C2 and 34.6 % P. jessenii H16).

Biochemical properties were tested using API 20NE (BioMérieux) for Strains C2 and H16. In the API 20NE system, positive reactions for both strains were observed for nitrate reduction and production of arginine dihydrolase; negative reactions were observed for indole production, urease activity, Lysine and ornithine decarboxylase and gelatin hydrolysis (Additional file 1: Table S1). Strain C2 assimilated d-glucose, d-melibiose, d-sucrose, d-mannitol, l-rhamnose, inositol, trehalose, d-lyxose and l-arabinose, but not sorbitol. Strain H16 could utilize d-glucose, d-melibiose, d-sucrose, d-mannitol, trehalose, d-lyxose, l-arabinose and inostitol as carbon sources, but not, l-rhamnose and sorbitol (Additional file 1: Table S1).

16S rRNA gene analysis

Comparative 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis using the EzTaxon database [13] indicated that strain C2 and H16 were both most closely related to P. jessenii CIP 105275T (GenBank accession no. AF068259) with sequence similarities of 99.87 and 99.14 %, respectively. Phylogenetic analysis was performed using the 16S rRNA gene sequences of strains C2, H16 and related species. Sequences were aligned and phylogenic trees were constructed using Maximum Likelihood method implemented in MEGA version 6 [14]. The resultant tree topologies were evaluated by bootstrap analyses with 1000 random samplings (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2

Phylogenetic tree of P. jessenii C2 and P. jessenii H16 relative to type strains within the genus Pseudomonas. The strains and their corresponding GenBank accession numbers of 16S rRNA genes are displayed in parentheses. The sequences were aligned using Clustal W, and the maximum likelihood tree was constructed based on Jukes-Cantor model by using MEGA6 [14]. Bootstrap values above 50 % are shown obtained from 1000 bootstrap replications. Bar 0.005 substitutions per nucleotide position

Genome sequencing information

Genome project history

Next-generation shotgun-sequencing was performed at the Beijing Genomics Institute (BGI, Shenzhen). The whole genome shotgun project of P. jessenii C2 and P. jessenii H16 has been deposited at DDBJ/EMBL/GenBank under the accession numbers JSAK00000000 and JSAL00000000. The version described in this paper is the first version. A summary of the project and the Minimum Information about a Genome Sequence [15] are shown in Table 3.
Table 3

Project information

MIGS ID

Property

Term

MIGS 31

Finishing quality

High-quality draft

High-quality draft

MIGS-28

Libraries used

One paired-end Illumina library

One paired-end Illumina library

MIGS 29

Sequencing platforms

llIumina HiSeq 2000

llIumina HiSeq 2000

MIGS 31.2

Fold coverage

170×

160×

MIGS 30

Assemblers

CLC Genomics

Workbench, version7.0.4

CLC Genomics

Workbench, version7.0.4

MIGS 32

Gene calling method

Glimmer 3.0

Glimmer 3.0

Locus Tag

NL64

RY26

Genbank ID

JSAK00000000.1

JSAL00000000.1

GenBank Date of Release

2014/12/17

2014/12/17

GOLD ID

Gp0157184

Gp0157185

BIOPROJECT

PRJNA264019

PRJNA264019

MIGS 13

Source Material Identifier

HC-Cu02

HC_Cu16

Project relevance

Low-Cu soil

Copper contaminated soil

Growth conditions and genomic DNA preparation

P. jessenii C2 and P. jessenii H16 were aerobically cultivated on Pseudomonas -selective Gould’s S1 agar at 28 °C [16]. Total genomic DNA was extracted using Puregene Yeast/Bact Kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions (QIAGEN). The quantity of the genomic DNA was determined by Qubit® fluorometer (Invitrogen, CA, USA) with Qubit dsDNA BR Assay kit (Invitrogen, CA, USA) and amounted to 55 ng/μL of DNA for P. jessenii C2 and 48.2 ng/μL of DNA for P. jessenii H16.

Genome sequencing and assembly

The genome sequence of P. jessenii H16 and P. jessenii C2 was determined by BGI using the Illumina Hiseq2000 with a 500 bp library constructed [17], generating 1.09 gigabytes of DNA sequence with an average coverage of ~160 fold and ~170 fold; yielding 1,205,9244 and 1,203,8756 paired-end reads with a 90-bp read length, respectively. The resulting sequence data was quality assessed, trimmed, and assembled de novo as described previously [18] using CLCBio Genomic Workbench 7.0 (CLCBio, Denmark). P. jessenii H16 generated 78 contigs with an n50 value of 279,014 bp. P. jessenii C2 generated 64 contigs with an n50 value of 224,893 bp.

Genome annotation

The genes in the assembled genome were predicted based on the RAST database [19]. The predicted ORFs were annotated by searching clusters of orthologous groups [20] using the SEED database [21]. RNAmmer 1.2 [22] and tRNAscanSE 1.23 [23] were used to identify rRNA and tRNA genes, respectively.

Genome properties

P. jessenii C2 contained 6,420,113 bp with a G+C content of 59.83 %, 5881 predicted genes, 5814 were protein-coding genes, 63 tRNA genes and 4 rRNA genes. In total, 5179 genes were assigned to biological functions and 635 were annotated as hypothetical proteins. P. jessenii H16 contained 6,807,788 bp, with a GC content of 59.02 %, 6065 predicted genes, and 5995 were protein-coding genes, 65 tRNA and 5 rRNA genes. Among the protein coding genes 5344 were assigned to biological functions, while 651 were annotated as hypothetical proteins. The properties and statistics of those two genomes are summarized in Table 4. The distribution of genes into COG functional categories is presented in Table 5 and Fig. 3.
Table 4

Genome statistics

Attribute

P. jessenii C2

P. jessenii H16

Value

% of total

Value

% of total

Genome size (bp)

6,420,113

100.00

6,807,788

100.00

DNA coding (bp)

5,484,120

85.42

5,835,906

85.72

DNA G+C (bp)

3,851,154

59.83

4,017,956

59.02

DNA scaffolds

64

-

78

-

Total genes

5881

100.00

6065

100.00

Protein coding genes

5814

98.86

5995

98.85

RNA genes

67

1.14

70

1.15

Pseudo genes

 Genes with function prediction

5179

88.06

5344

88.11

 Genes assigned to COGs

4314

73.75

4354

71.79

 Genes with Pfam domains

3595

61.13

3587

59.14

 Genes with signal peptides

510

8.67

537

8.85

 Genes with transmembrane helices

1260

21.42

1343

22.14

 CRISPR repeats

38

-

11

-

Table 5

Number of genes associated with general COG functional categories

 

P. jessenii C2

P. jessenii H16

 

Code

Value

%a

Value

%a

Description

J

183

3.14

186

3.10

Translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis

A

1

0.02

2

0.03

RNA processing and modification

K

425

7.31

425

7.09

Transcription

L

147

2.53

135

2.25

Replication, recombination and repair

B

2

0.34

3

0.05

Chromatin structure and dynamics

D

35

0.60

35

0.58

Cell cycle control, Cell division, chromosome partitioning

V

59

1.01

57

0.95

Defense mechanisms

T

368

6.33

389

6.49

Signal transduction mechanisms

M

239

4.11

282

4.70

Cell wall/membrane biogenesis

N

128

2.20

135

2.25

Cell motility

U

119

2.05

128

2.14

Intracellular trafficking and secretion

O

175

3.01

168

2.80

Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones

C

312

5.37

278

4.64

Energy production and conversion

G

219

3.77

247

4.12

Carbohydrate transport and metabolism

E

515

8.86

497

8.29

Amino acid transport and metabolism

F

85

1.46

99

1.65

Nucleotide transport and metabolism

H

177

3.04

193

3.22

Coenzyme transport and metabolism

I

237

4.08

194

3.24

Lipid transport and metabolism

P

300

5.16

286

4.77

Inorganic ion transport and metabolism

Q

142

2.44

129

2.15

Secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism

R

532

9.15

572

9.54

General function prediction only

S

444

7.64

451

7.52

Function unknown

-

970

16.68

1104

18.42

Not in COGs

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

Fig. 3

Circular map of the chromosome of P. jessenii C2 and P. jessenii H16. From outside to the center: P. jessenii H16 genes on forward strand (color by COG categories), P. jessenii H16 CDS on forward strand, tRNA, rRNA, other; P. jessenii H16 CDS on reverse strand, P. jessenii H16 tRNA, rRNA, other, genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories); P. jessenii C2 CDS blast with P. jessenii H16 CDS; P. fluorescens SW25 (NC_012660) CDS blast with P. jessenii H16 CDS; P. jessenii H16 GC content; P. jessenii H16 GC skew, where green indicates positive values and magenta indicates negative values

Insights into the genome

Genes conferring resistances to heavy metals in the two studied strains are listed in Table 6. Copper efflux from the cytosol is mediated by the P1B-type ATPase family, which is highly conserved from bacteria to humans [24]. Both P. jessenii C2 and P. jessenii H16 contained genes encoding a copper-transporting P1B-type ATPase (CopA) with conserved CPCALG motif [25], a copper-responsive metalloregulatory protein CueR, and the multicopper oxidase CueO. In addition, one additional gene encoding a Cu+-ATPase is present on the genome of P. jessenii H16 as part of the GI discussed later. P. jessenii H16 also contained ccoI encoding a Cu+-ATPase catalyzing a slower rate of efflux for copper insertion into cytochrome c oxidase [26]. The presence of a cop operon, comprising copABCDRS had been reported in related P.fluorescens SBW25 and P.putida KT2440 [27, 28]. Both P. jessenii strains contained copCDRS probably encoding proteins responsible for copper uptake, however, only P. jessenii H16 also contained copAB as part of the GI. Both P. jessenii C2 and P. jessenii H16 contain an arsenic resistance determinant (arsRBCH) [29] a gene involved in chromate resistance (chrA) [26] (Table 6). The two strains also contained genes encoding a multidrug efflux system MexEF-OprN regulated by MexT and genes encoding DNA gyrase subunit A and B, and topoisomerase subunit (IV) A and B [30, 31].
Table 6

P.jessenii C2 and P.jessenii H16 genes related to heavy metal resistance

P.jessenii C2

P.jessenii H16

 

Protein id

Size/aa

Protein id

Size/aa

Predicted function

KII28258

513

KII28679

459

Multicopper oxidase CueO-1

KII31612

122

KII28987

121

Copper resistance protein CopC

KII31613

282

KII28988

286

Copper resistance protein CopD-1

KII30013

133

KII32596

138

Cu(I)-responsive transcriptional regulator CopR

KII30014

798

KII32595

798

Copper-translocating P-type ATPase CopA-1

KII30016

66

KII32593

66

Copper resistance protein CopZ

KII37329

149

KII29565

149

Metal-binding protein CopG-1

KII33434

179

KII28041

179

Copper tolerance protein

KII33435

227

KII28042

227

Copper response regulator CusR-1

KII33436

450

KII28043

450

Copper sensor histidine kinase CusS-1

KII34384

759

KII35062

770

Lead, cadmium, zinc and mercury transporting ATPase

KII29503

231

KII36596

231

Arsenic resistance protein ArsH

KII29504

157

KII36597

157

Arsenate reductase ArsC

KII29505

428

KII36598

116

Arsenical resistance operon repressor ArsR

KII29506

116

KII36460

428

Arsenical pump membrane protein ArsB

KII31669

453

KII30277

447

Chromate transport protein ChrA

KII37024

798

Cytochrome c oxidases

KII37706

1047

Cation transporter CusA

KII37707

494

RND transporter CusB

KII37708

418

RND efflux outer membrane protein CusC

KII37709

312

Copper resistance protein CopD-2

KII37710

462

Copper sensor histidine kinase CusS-2

KII37711

231

Copper response regulator CusR-2

KII37713

178

Blue (type1) copper domain-containing protein

KII37893

676

Copper-translocating P-type ATPase CopA-2

KII37715

642

Multicopper oxidase CueO-2

KII37716

333

Copper resistance protein CopB

KII37717

155

Metal-binding protein CopG-2

KII37719

321

Cation transporter CzcD

KII37721

436

Nickel efflux system NrcA

KII37723

99

Nickel resistance protein NcrB

KII37733

116

Mercuric transport protein MerT

KII37734

91

Mercury transporter MerR

KII37735

144

Mercury transport protein MerC

KII37736

560

Mercuric reductase MerA

KII37737

212

Alkylmercury lyase MerB

P. jessenii H16 contained an additional putative metal fitness/pathogenicity island when compared with P. jessenii C2. It encompasses about 50,000 bp beginning at a gene encoding a sulfur carrier protein (KII37703) and ending with genes encoding Tn7 transposition proteins (KII37740-KII37743). This potential pathogenicity/fitness island harbored several copper resistance determinants including the cus determinant encoding CusABCRS (KII37706-37708, KII37711-37712) involved in periplasmic copper detoxification [32, 33]. In addition, genes encoding the P-type ATPase CopA, the multicopper oxidase CueO and CopBDG (KII37893, KII37715, KII37716, KII37709, KII37717) could be identified (Fig. 4). We also predicted specific GI for both P. jessenii H16 and P. jessenii C2 using the IsfindViewer [34]. Based on the automatic prediction algorithm two putative regions (coordinates KII37706-KII37717, KII37721-KII37737) were only identified in P. jessenii H16. Similar copper fitness islands could also be detected in P.extremaustralis 14-3b (AHIP00000000), isolated from a temporary pond in Antarctica; Pseudomonas sp.Ag1 (AKVH00000000) isolated from midguts of mosquitoes and P. fluorescens FH4 (AOHN00000000) [3537]. This island also contained genes encoding the nickel efflux transporter NcrA (KII37721) and the transcriptional repressor NcrB (KII37723) [38]. Moreover, genes merTRCAB (KII37733-37737) encoding a mercury-resistance determinant are present on this island [39]. Many of the various putative GI contain functions related to mobility such as integrases or mobile genetic elements (MGE) which includes transposons and IS elements. As shown in P. jessenii H16, these putative GI have conferred this strain with additional heavy metal resistance capability, which may be transferred to other bacteria via Tn7 transposons and are highly relevant for adaption to this specific copper contaminated niche.
Fig. 4

Putative copper fitness/pathogenicity island in P.jessenii H16. Model of encoded proteins involved in copper resistance. CusA copper transporter, CusB RND transporter, CusC RND efflux outer membrane protein, CopD copper resistance protein, CusS-2 copper sensor histidine kinase, CusR-2 copper response regulator, CopA-2 copper-translocating P-type ATPase, CueO-2 multicopper oxidase, CopB copper resistance protei, CopG-2 metal-binding protein, CzcD cation transporter, B blue (type1) copper domain-containing protein CinA, H hypothetical protein, M putative metal-binding protein, Z copper chaperone

Conclusion

The draft genome sequences of P. jessenii C2 isolated from low-Cu soil and P. jessenii H16 isolated from high-Cu soil were determined and described here. H16 provided an insight into the genomic basis of the observed higher copper resistance when compared with C2. Based on analysis and characterization of the genome, P. jessenii H16 is predicted to be resistant to a number of heavy metal(loid)s, such as Hg2+, Ni2+ Cr2+ and As3+. Comparative genomic analysis of those two strains suggested acquisition of a fitness island encoding numerous genes involved in conferring resistance to Cu and other metals as an important adaptive mechanism enabling survival of P. jessenii H16 in its Cu contaminated habitat. Possibly, P. jessenii H16 may have potential for bioremediation of copper contamination environments.

Abbreviations

BGI: 

Beijing Genomics Institute

GI: 

Genomic island

MGE: 

Mobile genetic elements

Declarations

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Center for Environmental and Agricultural Microbiology (CREAM) funded by the Villum Foundation.

Authors’ contributions

YQ drafted the manuscript, performed laboratory experiments, and analyzed the data; DW analyzed data; KKB isolated bacteria and assisted in selection of strains, planning and manuscript preparation; CR organized the study and drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of Copenhagen
(2)
State Key Laboratory of Agricultural Microbiology, College of Life Sciences and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University
(3)
College of Resources and the Environment, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University
(4)
J. Craig Venter Institute

References

  1. Chaturvedi KS, Henderson JP. Pathogenic adaptations to host-derived antibacterial copper. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2014;4:3.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  2. González-Guerrero M, Raimunda D, Cheng X, Argüello JM. Distinct functional roles of homologous Cu+ efflux ATPases in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Mol Microbiol. 2010;78(5):1246–58.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Fu Y, Chang FMJ, Giedroc DP. Copper transport and trafficking at the host-bacterial pathogen interface. Accounts Chem Res. 2014;47(12):3605–13.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Porcheron G, Garénaux A, Proulx J, Sabri M, Dozois CM. Iron, copper, zinc, and manganese transport and regulation in pathogenic Enterobacteria: correlations between strains, site of infection and the relative importance of the different metal transport systems for virulence. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2013;3:90.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Navarro CA, Bernath-von D, Jerez CA. Heavy metal resistance strategies of acidophilic bacteria and their acquisition: importance for biomining and bioremediation. Biol Res. 2013;46(4):363–71.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Haas D, Keel C. Regulation of antibiotic production in root-colonizing Pseudomonas spp. and relevance for biological control of plant disease. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2003;41:117–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Raaijmakers JM, Vlami M, de Souza JT. Antibiotic production by bacterial biocontrol agents. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2002;81:537–47.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Deora A, Hatano E, Tahara S, Hashidoko Y. Inhibitory effects of furanone metabolites of a rhizobacterium, Pseudomonas jessenii, on phytopathogenic Aphanomyces cochlioides and Pythium aphanidermatum. Plant Pathol. 2010;59:84–99.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Berg J, Thorsen MK, Holm PE, Jensen J, Nybroe O, Brandt KK. Cu exposure under field conditions coselects for antibiotic resistance as determined by a novel cultivation-independent bacterial community tolerance assay. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44(22):8724–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Strandberg B, Axelsen JA, Pedersen MB, Jensen J, Attrill MJ. Effect of a copper gradient on plant community structure. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2006;25(3):743–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Thorsen MK, Brandt KK, Nybroe O. Abundance and diversity of culturable Pseudomonas constitute sensitive indicators for adverse long-term copper impacts in soil. Soil Biol Biochem. 2013;57:933–35.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Kämpfer P, Kroppenstedt RM. Numerical analysis of fatty acid patterns of coryneform bacteria and related taxa. Can J Microbiol. 1996;42:989–1005.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim OS, Cho YJ, Lee K, Yoon SH, Kim M, Na H, Park SC, Jeon YS, Lee JH, Yi H, Won S, Chun J. Introducing EzTaxon-e: a prokaryotic 16S rRNA gene sequence database with phylotypes that represent uncultured species. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2012;62:716–21.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 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;28:2731–39.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Field D, Garrity G, Gray T, Morrison N, Selengut J, Sterk P, Tatusova T, Thomson N, Allen MJ, Angiuoli SV, Ashburner M, Axelrod N, Baldauf S, Ballard S, Boore J, Cochrane G, Cole J, Dawyndt P, DeVos P, dePamphilis C, Edwards R, Faruque N, Feldman R, Gilbert J, Gilna P, Glöckner FO, Goldstein P, Guralnick R, Haft D, Hancock D. The minimum information about a genome sequence (MIGS) specification. Nat Biotechnol. 2008;26(5):541–7.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Brandt KK, Petersen A, Holm PE, Nybroe O. Decreased abundance and diversity of culturable Pseudomonas spp. populations with increasing copper exposure in the sugar beet rhizosphere. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2006;56(2):281–91.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Bentley DR, Balasubramanian S, Swerdlow HP, Smith GP, Milton J, Brown CG, Hall KP, Evers DJ, Barnes CL, Bignell HR, Boutell JM, Bryant J, Carter RJ, Cheetham RK, Cox AJ, Ellis DJ, Flatbush MR, Gormley NA, Humphray SJ, Irving LJ, Karbelashvili MS, Kirk SM, Li H, Liu X, Maisinger KS, Murray LJ, Obradovic B, Ost T, Parkinson ML, Pratt MR, et al. Accurate whole human genome sequencing using reversible terminator chemistry. Nature. 2008;456(7218):53–9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Yap KP, Gan HM, Teh CS, Baddam R, Chai LC, Kumar N, Tiruvayipati SA, Ahmed N, Thong KL. Genome sequence and comparative pathogenomics analysis of a Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi strain associated with atyphoid carrier in Malaysia. J Bacteriol. 2012;194(21):5970–1.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Aziz RK, Bartels D, Best AA, DeJongh M, Disz T, Edwards RA, Formsma K, Gerdes S, Glass EM, Kubal M, Meyer F, Olsen GJ, Olson R, Osterman AL, Overbeek RA, McNeil LK, Paarmann D, Paczian T, Parrello B, Pusch GD, Reich C, Stevens R, Vassieva O, Vonstein V, Wilke A, Zagnitko O. The RAST Server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genomics. 2008;9:75.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Stackebrandt E, Ebers J. Taxonomic parameters revisited: tarnished gold standards. Microbiol Today. 2006;33:152–55.Google Scholar
  21. Overbeek R, Begley T, Butler RM, Choudhuri JV, Chuang HY, Cohoon M, de Crecy-Lagard V, Diaz N, Disz T, Edwards R, Fonstein M, Frank ED, Gerdes S, Glass EM, Goesmann A, Hanson A, Iwata-Reuyl D, Jensen R, Jamshidi N, Krause L, Kubal M, Larsen N, Linke B, McHardy AC, Meyer F, Neuweger H, Olsen G, Olson R, Osterman A, Portnoy V, et al. The subsystems approach to genome annotation and its use in the project to annotate 1000 genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:5691–702.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 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;35:3100–08.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Lowe TM, Eddy SR. tRNAscan-SE: a program for improved detection of transfer RNA genes in genomic sequence. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997;25:955–64.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Rensing C, Grass G. Escherichia coli mechanisms of copper homeostasis in a changing environment. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2003;27(2–3):197–213.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Fan B, Rosen BP. Biochemical characterization of CopA, the Escherichia coli Cu(I)-translocating P-type ATP-ase. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(49):46987–92.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Ekici S, Yang H, Koch HG, Daldal F. Novel transporter required for biogenesis of cbb3-type cytochrome c oxidase in Rhodobacter capsulatus. MBio. 2012;3(1):e00293–11.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhang XX, Rainey PB. Regulation of copper homeostasis in Pseudomonas Fluorescens SBW25. Environ Microbiol. 2008;10(12):3284–94.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Cánovas D, Cases I, de Lorenzo V. Heavy metal tolerance and metal homeostasis in Pseudomonas putida as revealed by complete genome analysis. Environ Microbiol. 2003;5(12):1242–56.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Fernández M, Udaondo Z, Niqui JL, Duque E, Ramos JL. Synergic role of the two ars operons in arsenic tolerance in Pseudomonas putida KT2440. Environ Microbiol Rep. 2014;6(5):483–89.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Jalal S, Ciofu O, Hoiby N, Gotoh N, Wretlind B. Molecular mechanisms of fluoroquinolone resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from cystic fibrosis patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemoter. 2000;44(3):710–12.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Wong A, Kassen R. Parallel evolution and local differentiation in quinolone resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbiology. 2011;157(4):937–44.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Argüello JM, Raimunda D, Padilla-Benavides T. Mechanisms of copper homeostasis in bacteria. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2013;3:73.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Bondarczuk K, Piotrowska-Seget Z. Molecular basis of active copper resistance mechanisms in Gram-negative bacteria. Cell Biol Toxicol. 2013;29(6):397–405.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Dhillon BK, Chiu TA, Laird MR, Langille MGI, Brinkman FSL. IslandViewer update: improved genomic island discovery and visualization. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41(Web Server issue):W129–32.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Tribelli PM, Raiger Iustman LJ, Catone MV, Di Martino C, Revale S, Méndez BS, López NI. Genome sequence of the polyhydroxybutyrate producer Pseudomonas extremaustralis, a highly stress-resistant antarctic bacterium. J Bacteriol. 2012;194(9):2381–82.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Alvarez C, Kukutla P, Jiang JJ, Yu WQ, Xu JN. Draft genome sequence of Pseudomonas sp. Strain Ag1, isolated from the midgut of the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae. J Bacteriol. 2012;194(19):5449.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Rhodes G, Bosma H, Studholme D, Arnold DL, Jackson RW, Pickup RW. The rulB gene of plasmid pWW0 is a hotspot for the site-specific insertion of integron-like elements found in the chromosomes of environmental Pseudomonas fluorescens group bacteria. Environ Microbiol. 2014;16(8):2374–88.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhu T, Tian J, Zhang SY, Wu NF, Fan YL. Identification of the transcriptional regulator NcrB in the nickel resistance determinant of Leptospirillum ferriphilum UBK03. Plos one. 2011;6(2):e17367.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhang WW, Chen LX, Liu DY. Characterization of a marine-isolated mercury-resistant Pseudomonas putida strain SP1 and its potential application in marine mercury reduction. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2012;93(3):1305–14.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Woese CR, Kandler O, Wheelis ML. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990;87:4576–79.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Phylum XIV. Proteobacteria phyl. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, editors. Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology, volume 2, part B. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Validation of publication of new names and new combinations previously effectively published outside the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2005;55(6):2235–38.Google Scholar
  43. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Class III. Gammaproteobacteria class. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, editors. Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology, volume 2, part B. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Order IX. Pseudomonadales. nov. In: Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, Garrity GM, editors. Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology, volume 2: part B. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 323.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  45. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Family I. Pseudomonadaceae. In: Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, Garrity GM, editors. Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology, volume 2: part B. 2nd ed. Springer: New York; 2005. p. 324.Google Scholar
  46. Anzai Y, Kim H, Park JY, Wakabayashi H. Phylogenetic affiliation of the pseudomonads based on 16S rRNA sequence. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2000;50(4):1563–89.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Palleroni NJ. The road to the taxonomy of Pseudomonas. In: Cornelis P, editor. Pseudomonas: Genomic and Molecular Biology. Norfolk: Caister Academic Press; 2008: p.10.Google Scholar
  48. Verhille S, Baida N, Dabboussi F, Izard D, Lecierc H. Taxonomic study of bacteria isolated from natural mineral waters: proposal of Pseudomonas jessenii sp. nov. and Pseudomonas mandelii sp. nov. Syst Appl Microbiol. 1999;22(1):45–58.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS, Eppig JT, Harris MA, Hill DP, Issel-Tarver L, Kasarskis A, Lewis S, Matese JC, Richardson JE, Ringwald M, Rubin GM, Sherlock G. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet. 2000;25:25–9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2016