Skip to content

Advertisement

Standards in Genomic Sciences

What do you think about BMC? Take part in

Open Access

The genomic study of an environmental isolate of Scedosporium apiospermum shows its metabolic potential to degrade hydrocarbons

Standards in Genomic Sciences201712:71

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40793-017-0287-6

Received: 19 June 2017

Accepted: 23 November 2017

Published: 4 December 2017

Abstract

Crude oil contamination of soils and waters is a worldwide problem, which has been actively addressed in recent years. Sequencing genomes of microorganisms involved in the degradation of hydrocarbons have allowed the identification of several promoters, genes, and degradation pathways of these contaminants. This knowledge allows a better understanding of the functional dynamics of microbial degradation. Here, we report a first draft of the 44.2 Mbp genome assembly of an environmental strain of the fungus Scedosporium apiospermum. The assembly consisted of 178 high-quality DNA scaffolds with 1.93% of sequence repeats identified. A total of 11,195 protein-coding genes were predicted including a diverse group of gene families involved in hydrocarbon degradation pathways like dioxygenases and cytochrome P450. The metabolic pathways identified in the genome can potentially degrade hydrocarbons like chloroalkane/alkene, chorocyclohexane, and chlorobenzene, benzoate, aminobenzoate, fluorobenzoate, toluene, caprolactam, geraniol, naphthalene, styrene, atrazine, dioxin, xylene, ethylbenzene, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The comparison analysis between this strain and the previous sequenced clinical strain showed important differences in terms of annotated genes involved in the hydrocarbon degradation process.

Keywords

Scedosporium apiospermum GenomeHydrocarbon degradation

Introduction

Accidental spills of oil have risen as a global important problem due to the serious environmental damages caused by soil and water contamination [1]. Whereas oil is a complex mixture of aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbons of different molecular weights, its removal from the environment is difficult and its permanence is prolonged [2]. These compounds have gained considerable attention because of their harmful features like resistance to degradation, bioaccumulation, and carcinogenic activity. Their persistence in the environment increases with their molecular weight and there is a need to develop technologies or processes able to degrade or to transform these compounds into less toxic molecules [3].

The ability of several organisms, primarily microorganisms (bacteria, fungi and microalgae), to degrade these toxic substances has been extensively studied in recent decades [1, 49]. The main goal is to improve the decontamination of the environment via bioremediation, which encompasses technologies that allow the transformation of compounds to less harmful or not harmful forms, with less use of chemicals, energy, and time [10, 11]. Microbial bioremediation is very effective due to the catabolic activity of microorganisms; among these, many species of bacteria, fungi, and microalgae have demonstrated the ability of hydrocarbon degradation. This process involves the breakdown of organic molecules through biotransformation in less complex metabolites, or mineralization to water, carbon dioxide, or methane [3].

Several strategies have been employed to study these microorganisms and to understand the processes carried out by them. Within these, genomics have allowed the recognition of promoters, genes, and degradation pathways that influence the construction of more efficient degradative strains relevant in bioremediation processes [12, 13]. Genome sequencing of hydrocarbon-degrader organisms has allowed the identification of several genes involved in metabolism and catabolism of aliphatic, aromatic alcohols, and other similar compounds, as well as some metals resistance genes [14]. However, the number of sequenced genomes of fungal species is lower than in bacteria. To date, there are 103,076 prokaryotic genomes sequenced whereas there are only 4503 genomes from eukaryotes in GenBank database (July 2017).

Scedosporium apiospermum (teleomorph: Pseudallescheria apiosperma [15]) is a fungus belonging to the phylum Ascomycota, which has been isolated from various environments, usually in those influenced by human activity [16]. This fungus was reported as a hydrocarbon-degrading microorganism since 1998 due to its ability to degrade polluting compounds, such as phenol and p-cresol [17]. One year later, its ability to degrade phenylbenzoate and its derivatives was elucidated [18]. In recent years, studies regarding degradation of complex compounds, such as toluene [19], polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) [20], long-chain aliphatic hydrocarbons, and mixtures of these contaminants (unpublished results from our group) [21] have risen. Additionally, the fungus’ ability to regenerate granular activated carbon once it has been saturated with phenol was shown in our laboratory (unpublished results).

Therefore, Scedosporium apiospermum presents a wide range of opportunities in bioremediation and its genome sequencing can allow the identification of promoters, genes, and degradation pathways of hydrocarbons. Indeed, the genomic analysis of this fungus can improve the understanding of functional dynamics of contaminants microbial degradation and enhance conditions for effective decontamination processes in different environments [2]. On the other hand, this fungus has been recognized as a potent etiologic agent of severe infections in immunocompromised and occasionally in immunocompetent patients [22]. For this reason, in 2014, the genome of an isolate from a cystic fibrosis patient (clinical strain) was sequenced with the aim of gaining knowledge of its pathogenic mechanisms [23].

Thus, our objective was the complete characterization of the genome of the S. apiospermum environmental strain HDO1. In order to analyze the genes and pathways involved in the degradation process and to assess the unique components of its genome compared to the clinical strain and other sister species, we sequenced, assembled, annotated, and fully characterized the environmental strain’s genome.

Organism information

Classification and features

Scedosporium apiospermum environmental strain HDO1 was isolated as a contaminant from assays on bacterial strains able to grow in crude oil (API gravity 33) as the unique carbon source. It was selected for sequencing due to its capability to grow in cultures containing aliphatic hydrocarbons of crude oil, naphthalene, phenanthrene, phenol, and mixtures of these compounds in the laboratory. The fungal isolate was grown on potato dextrose agar (OXOID LTD, Hampshire, UK) plates for a period of 7 days at 30 °C. The optimal growth temperature was 30–37 °C. Identification was based on the following morphological characteristics: obverse and reverse colony color (according to the color chart Küppers, H. [24]), colony texture, size, and presence of diffusible pigments, hyphae characteristics, and conidia arrangement. The morphological characteristics were: colonies with a diameter of 7 cm on PDA at 25 °C after 7 days, cottony textured, greyish-white (N00, C00-A00) with yellowish-white reverse. No diffusible pigment was observed. The mycelium was hyaline, septate, and thin. Unbranched conidiphores with long neck-bottle shaped phialides were observed. Conidia were hyaline, approximately 5 μm in diameter, occurring in basipetal chains leaving long hyaline annelids (Fig. 1). For the molecular characterization, the fungus was grown in Sabouraud broth at 25 °C, 150 rpm for 7 days, and the biomass obtained was lyophilized for at least 12 h. Fungal genomic DNA was extracted from 100 mg of lyophilized and pulverized mycelia conducting the CTAB and Phenol/Chloroform/Isoamylic alcohol method [25]. The universal primers used for amplification of the ITS region, were ITS4 (5′-TCCTCCGCTTATTGATATGC-3′) and ITS5 (5′-GGAAGTAAAAGTCGTAACAAGG-3′) [26]. Sanger sequencing was performed by Macrogen (South Korea). Nucleotide sequences obtained were compared with the non-redundant database of the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) using the tBlastx program (parameters by default), and the ITS region sequences were assigned to the fungus Scedosporium apiospermum with an E-value equal to 0.0, 100% query coverage and 100% identity. The obtained sequence is deposited at the NCBI Genbank nr database with the accession number JQ003882.1.
Fig. 1

Micrograph of Scedosporium apiospermum. a Optical microscopy of hyphae and conidia from a PDA culture, at 100× total magnification. Lactophenol cotton blue wet mount preparation. b Scanning electron microscopy of hyphae and conidia from a liquid culture grown in minimal salt medium plus crude oil as the sole carbon and energy source

A phylogenetic analysis was performed using the long subunit rRNA gene, the internal transcribed spacer and the elongation factor 1-α sequences obtained from GenBank. Species from the Microascaceae family were included [27] [28] and are described in the Additional file 1: Table S3. Individual gene regions (LSU, ITS and TEF) were aligned using MAFFT v. 7.187 [29]. Maximum Likelihood analyses were performed using RAxML v.7.6.3 [30] as implemented on the CIPRES portal [31]. The sequence alignment was partitioned into three subsets, each one under a specified model of nucleotide substitution, chosen with PartitionFinder [32]. Estimation of different shapes, GTR rates, and base frequencies for each partition were allowed. The majority rule criterion implemented in RAxML [33] (−autoMRE) was used to assess clade support by bootstrap. The resulting trees were plotted using FigTree v. 1.4.2 [34]. Microascus longirostris and Scopulariopsis brevicaulis were used as outgroups. Environmental strain HDO1 used in this study clustered with the clinical strain IHEM14462 with good support, and they are the sister group of Trichurus spiralis CBS635.78 (Fig. 2). The whole group is contained within the wardamycopsis lineage described by Sandoval-Denis, M. et al. [28]. Summary of the classification and general features of S. apiospermum is given in Table 1.
Fig. 2

Phylogenetic Analysis of S. apiospermum HDO1. Estimated relationships of S. apiospermum HDO1 with S. apiospermum IHEM 14462 and other species from the Microascaceae family. The tree shows the concatenated analysis of the Internal Transcribed Spacer, the Large Subunit and the Elongation factor gene regions. Sequences from reference strains were used (Additional file 1:Table S3). Support values represent Bootstrap support values (Maximum Likelihood)

Table 1

Classification and general features of Scedosporium apiospermum strain HDO1

MIGS ID

Property

Term

Evidence codea

 

Classification

Domain Fungi

TAS [71]

  

Phylum Ascomycota.

TAS [72]

  

Class Sordariomycetes

TAS [72]

  

Order Microascales

TAS [72]

  

Family – Microascaceae

TAS [72]

  

Genus Scedosporium

TAS [73]

  

Species Scedosporium apiospermum

TAS [73]

  

strain: HDO1

 
 

Gram stain

n/a

 
 

Cell shape

Mycelium with septae

IDA

 

Motility

non-motile

IDA

 

Sporulation

Conidia

TAS [72]

 

Temperature range

25–42 °C

TAS [17]

 

Optimum temperature

30–37 °C

TAS [17]

 

pH range; Optimum

5.5–8.5: 7.3

TAS [17]

 

Carbon source

Glucose, sucrose, urea, ethanol, ribitol, xylitol, L-arabinitol, phenol, p-cresol, hydroquinone, 1,2,4-benzenetriol, catechol, 4-hydroxybenzylalcohol, 4-hydroxybenzaldehyde,, 4-hydroxybenzoate, protocatechuate, 3-oxoadipate, phenylbenzoate, naphthalene, pyrene, phenantrene, crude oil.

TAS [1721]

MIGS-6

Habitat

Soil and polluted water

TAS [74, 75]

MIGS-6.3

Salinity

1.7–2.8/Up to 5% in vitro

TAS [76]

MIGS-22

Oxygen requirement

Aerobic/Tolerate low pressure of O2

TAS [76, 77]

MIGS-15

Biotic relationship

free-living

IDA

MIGS-14

Pathogenicity

Pathogenic

TAS [22]

MIGS-4

Geographic location

Bogotá, Colombia

IDA

MIGS-5

Sample collection

20 May 2008

IDA

MIGS-4.1

Latitude

4.600659

IDA

MIGS-4.2

Longitude

−74.065592

IDA

MIGS-4.4

Altitude

2658 m

IDA

aEvidence codes: IDA inferred from direct assay (first time in publication); 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 codes are from the Gene Ontology project [56]

Genome sequencing information

Genome project history

The Genome of the isolate HDO1 was sequenced by NovoGene Technology Bioinformatics Co., Ltd. (Hong Kong). The whole genome shotgun project of S. apiospermum has been deposited in NCBI database under the accession number MVOQ00000000, belonging to the bioproject PRJNA357602. A summary of the project and information about genome sequence are shown in Table 2.
Table 2

Project information

MIGS ID

Property

Term

MIGS 31

Finishing quality

Draft

MIGS-28

Libraries used

One 250 pb Paired-End library, one 5 kb Mate pair library

MIGS 29

Sequencing platforms

Illumina HiSeq2500

MIGS 31.2

Fold coverage

540 x

MIGS 30

Assemblers

Abyss 1.9.0.20

MIGS 32

Gene calling method

Augustus 3.0.3

 

Locus Tag

BTW05

 

Genbank ID

MVOQ00000000

 

GenBank Date of Release

May 26, 2017

 

GOLD ID

NA

 

BIOPROJECT

PRJNA357602

MIGS 13

Source Material Identifier

Strain HDO1 Museo de Historia Natural Andes

 

Project relevance

Biotechnological

Growth conditions and genomic DNA preparation

Fungus growth was carried out in liquid culture (YPG: 1% yeast extract, peptone 1% and 2% glucose) at 30 °C for 7 days, followed by vacuum filtration, lyophilization, and maceration to have a homogeneous sample. DNA was extracted by the CTAB and Phenol/Chloroform/Isoamyl alcohol method [25]. DNA quality was analyzed by Nanodrop2000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA, USA) and agarose gel electrophoresis (0.8%). DNA quantity was determined by Qubit2.0 (Invitrogen, CA, USA).

Genome sequencing and assembly

Genome sequencing of the strain was performed using high-throughput Illumina technology on a Hiseq2500 and employing two libraries: a 250 bp paired-end library and a 5kpb mate-pair library. Quality trimming of reads was performed using Trimmomactic 0.23 [35] and quality control was performed using FastQC 0.11.2 [36]. Coverage and depth of sequencing was analyzed by mapping the reads using Bowtie2–2.2.4 [37], the sam files were converted to bam files for visualization using samtools1.1 [38], and the visualization was made using tablet. 1.15.09.1 [39]. The genome was the novo assembled using Abyss 1.0.9.20 [40] with a kmer size of 64, scaffolds were generated with SSPACE BASIC 2.0 [41], and gaps were reduced using GapFiller 1.1 [42]. Assembly statistics were obtained using Quast 2.3 (Additional file 1: Table S1) [43]. Repetitive elements were identified with RepeatMasker 4.0.5 [44]. The draft genome of S. apiospermum strain HDO1 was assembled from a total of 97,208,043 reads using Abyss [40] assembler. The assembly yielded 178 scaffolds (larger than 500 bp) with a genome size of 44.2 Mbp and a G + C content of 49.91% with a mean depth of 541X. The genome assembly statistics are shown in Table 3. The total number of non-coding repetitions was found using RepeatMasker [44] and was of 1.93%. The majority of repetitions were found to be simple repeats (0.89%) and low complexity regions (0.25%). The complete report of the annotation results for the non-coding repeats sequences can be seen in the Additional file 1: Table S2. The assembly features obtained for the draft sequence were similar to other fungal genome sequence projects [23, 45, 46].
Table 3

Genomic statistics

Attribute

Value

% of total

Genome size (bp)

44,188,879

100

DNA coding (bp)

18,219,288

41.2

DNA G + C (bp)

22,057,939

49.91

DNA scaffolds

178

100

Total genes

11,278

100

Protein coding genes

11,184

99.16

RNA genes

92

0.81

Pseudo genes

2

0,1 × 10−1

Genes in internal clusters

ND

ND

Genes with function prediction

8575

76.0

Genes assigned to COGs

4789

42.4

Genes with Pfam domains

7978

70.8

Genes with signal peptides

1333

11.8

Genes with transmembrane helices

2293

20.3

Genome annotation

Gene prediction and structure annotation was conducted using Augustus 3.0.3 [47]. Functional annotation was performed using Blast2GO 3.1 [48]. Briefly, a BLASTx against the National Center for Biotechnology Information “nr” database [49] was conducted. Then, results were classified among Gene Ontology categories [50]. Protein classification was made using the COG [51], KOG (Eukaryotic Orthologous Groups) [52] and EggNOG [53] databases using Blast2GO v4.0 platform [48]. Annotated genes were mapped against Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes [54] to its functional analysis and assigned the Enzyme Codes. A total of 11,195 protein-encoding genes were predicted using Augustus [47]. Functional annotation showed a total of 8595 (76.0% of predicted genes) sequences with predicted function using Blastx [49]. Then, InterProScan [55] and Gene Ontology [56] permitted the annotation of 7934 (70.3%) sequences with GO terms, whilst the remaining genes were annotated as hypothetical (17.1%) and unknown function proteins (5.0%). A total of 7978 (70.8%) genes contained pfam [57] domains and 1333 had signal peptide domains. The transmembrane helices in the proteins were predicted with TMHMM sever v.2.0 in the online portal [58]. The ribosomal RNA genes were predicted in the RNAmmer 1.2 Server [59] and making an alignment with the predicted genes for Neurospora crassa from the database FungiDB [60], same database was used for pseudogenes prediction comparing with pseudogenes predicted for Neurospora crassa . The statistics of the genome annotation are shown in Table 3. A total of 4789 (42.5%) genes were assigned to the KOG [61] categories, most of them (60%) were assigned to one or more functional groups and the rest of genes were assigned to the function unknown group (Table 4). KEGG pathway analysis assigned an enzyme code to 2645 (23.5%) genes and revealed specific genes involved in the pathways of hydrocarbon degradation. These hydrocarbons are chloroalkane/alkene, chlorocyclohexane and chlorobenzene, benzoate, aminobenzoate, fluorobenzoate, toluene, caprolactam, geraniol, naphthalene, styrene, atrazine, dioxin, xylene, ethylbenzene, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Also, the analysis revealed the presence of genes involved in metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450 and in synthesis and degradation of ketone bodies. These results are shown in Fig. 3.
Table 4

Number of genes associated with general COG functional categories

Code

Value

% age

Description

J

234

2.09

Translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis

A

42

0.37

RNA processing and modification

K

163

1.46

Transcription

L

126

1.12

Replication, recombination and repair

B

19

0.17

Chromatin structure and dynamics

D

32

0.29

Cell cycle control, Cell division, chromosome partitioning

V

32

0.29

Defense mechanisms

T

153

1.37

Signal transduction mechanisms

M

126

0.44

Cell wall/membrane biogenesis

N

2

0.02

Cell motility

U

241

2.15

Intracellular trafficking and secretion

O

294

2.63

Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones

C

216

1.93

Energy production and conversion

G

399

3.56

Carbohydrate transport and metabolism

E

257

2.30

Amino acid transport and metabolism

F

65

0.58

Nucleotide transport and metabolism

H

63

0.56

Coenzyme transport and metabolism

I

140

1.25

Lipid transport and metabolism

P

131

1.17

Inorganic ion transport and metabolism

Q

186

1.66

Secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism

R

0

0

General function prediction only

S

1918

17.14

Function unknown

6402

57.2

Not in KOGs

Fig. 3

Distribution of the hydrocarbon degradation genes in KEEG pathways. The bars represent the number of genes mapped in KEEG pathways related to hydrocarbon degradation. Most of the genes were mapped to the benzoate and its derivate compounds as aminobenzoate and fluorobenzoate

Genome properties

The assembled genome of the strain HDO1 has a size of 44,188,879 pb (distributed in 178 scaffolds) with a G-C content of 49.91%; the genome size and the G-C content was similar to the draft genome reported for the strain IHEM 14462 [22] (Table 5). A total of 11,278 genes were predicted; among these, 11,184 were identified as coding protein genes (representing the 99.16% of the total genes); 92 as RNA genes (0.81%); and 2 as pseudogenes (0.02%) (Table 3). Some other features of the predicted genes are shown in Table 4. The number of chromosomes could not be elucidated.
Table 5

Genomic features comparison between HDO1 strain and IHEM 14462 strain [22]

Parameter

IHEM 14462

HDO1

Size (Mb)

43.44

44.19

Content G-C (%)

50.4

49.91

Predicted genes

10,919

11,278

Predicted proteins

8.375

11,184

Insights from the genomic sequence

Comparative genomics

Reads were mapped versus the clinical strain IHEM 14462 using Bowtie2–2.2.4 [26]. The sam files were converted to bam files for the visualization using samtools1.1 [27] and the visualization was made using tablet. 1.15.09.1 [28] resulting in an overall alignment of 92.75%. Genomes’ comparison between the environmental strain HDO1 and the clinical strain IHEM 14462 was performed using MAUVE 20150226 [62]. The genome sequence of HDO1 strain aligned with the sequence of IHEM 14462 strain in 88,1% of its length. The MAUVE [62] alignment showed a high level of similarity between the clinical and the environmental strains (Fig. 4). A total of 508 local collinear blocks (LCBs) that correspond to the homologous regions that are shared by the two sequences were found and a few of them were in reverse orientation after eight reordered cycles. From ordered output fasta file obtained with MAUVE [48] a new alignment was made with Nucmer at nucleotide level (maximum gap between two adjacent matches in a cluster of 90 bp and a minimum length of a maximal exact match of 20 bp) and Promer at amino acid level (maximum gap between two adjacent matches in a cluster of 30 amino acids and a minimum length of a maximal exact match of 6 amino acids). Nucmer and Promer alignments were plotted using Mumerplot, the last three mentioned tools from mummer 3.0 suite [63] (Fig. 5). This analysis revealed that a high number of forward matches are in the greatest scaffolds of HDO1 genome sequence and reverse matches are more common in the smallest scaffolds. These differences and similarities seen for the nucleotides showed the same trends when these were translated to amino acids. These analyses and their corresponding plots also permitted to determine rearrangements, insertions, and deletions between both genomes.
Fig. 4

MAUVE [62] alignment of draft genome sequence of HDO1 strain and draft genome sequence of IHEM 14462 strain. The figure represents the locally contiguous blocks (LCBs) that both sequences share, connected by lines to show their positions in the genomes. At the top the sequence of HDO1 strain is visualized and at the bottom the re-ordered sequence of the IHEM 14462 strain appears [23]. Blocks that are shown below indicate regions that have the reverse sequence related to the HDO1 sequence

Fig. 5

Dot plot analysis comparing the HDO1 and IHEM14462 strains’ genomes. a Comparison at the nucleotide level. b Comparison at the protein level. It shows the alignment of the genome sequence of IHEM 14462 strains (y axis) against HDO1 genome sequence (x axis). The red color lines and dots represent the forward matches between the both genome sequences while the blue color ones represent reverse matches

A thorough comparative analysis showed some important differences between the genome draft sequences of the clinical and the environmental strain sequenced here. These differences were evident in the genome size of the assemblies and the number of predicted genes (Table 5). Indeed, our assembly had a total of 783.135 bp (1.77% of genome size) and 276 coding sequences more than the clinical strain. The remarkable difference in the number of annotated genes involved in hydrocarbons degradation pathways could be attributed to the pipeline followed to annotate genes. For the clinical strain the CDSs found were annotated against TrEmbl database [64] that only comprises UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot, while in this study, we used the nr (non-redundant protein sequences) database of NCBI which has a wider coverage because it comprises sequences obtained from another databases like GenPept, TPA, PIR, PRF, PDB, NCBI RefSeq, and UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot [65]. Since the repetitive elements of the genome were estimated as only 1.93%, it is highly probable that the difference in size can be attributed to some of the elements involved in functional categories.

Genes involved in hydrocarbon biodegradation pathways

Several genes involved in hydrocarbon biodegradation pathways were annotated in the genome of the environmental strain. In Table 6 the genes previously reported in the clinical strain [23] are shown. Results revealed that some genes are involved in several degradation pathways, principally corresponding to aromatic hydrocarbon metabolism (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and phenolic compounds) and cytochrome P450 system. The number of these genes annotated for each strain can also be seen in the table and these values showed a higher number of genes in the environmental strain HDO1. The genes solely found in the draft sequence of the strain HDO1 are reported in Table 7. These genes comprised some genes belonging to the aromatic hydrocarbons degradation pathways completing the pathways in which genes found in both strains are also involved. Genes involved in the degradation of other organic compounds like toluene, lignin, and xylenol were found (Table 6).
Table 6

Annotated genes involved in hydrocarbons degradation pathways

Gene

Pathway

# of genes in HDO1

# of genes in IHEM 14462 [23]

Cytochrome P450 monooxygenase (EC:1.14.13.12)

PAHs degradation, alkane biodegradation [78, 79]

79

44

Phenol hydroxylase

Phenol degradation [17]

4

4

Epoxide hydrolase (EC:3.3.2.9)

PAHs degradation [80]

3

2

Oxidoreductase

Organic compound metabolism [81]

13

8

Salicylate hydroxylase (EC:1.14.13.24)

Naphthalene degradation [82]

13

4

Laccase (EC:1.10.3.2)

PAHs degradation [83]

2

2

Catechol 1,2-dioxygenase (EC:1.13.11.1)

Phenol degradation [17]

  

2,4-dichlorophenol 6-monooxygenase (EC:1.14.13.7; EC:1.14.13.20)

Chlorinated phenols degradation [84]

5

5

2,3-dihydroxybenzoate decarboxylase (EC:4.1.1.46)

2,3-dihydroxybenzoate degradation [85]

1

1

Carboxy-cis,cis-muconate cyclase

Phenol degradation [17]

4

2

Phenylacetate 2-hydroxylase

Homogentisate degradation [86]

1

2

2-nitropropane dioxygenase (EC:1.13.12.16)

Nitroalquene oxidation [87]

4

4

Biphenyl-2,3-diol 1,2-dioxygenase

Byphenyl degradation [88]

1

2

Dienelactone hydrolase

Chloroaromatic degradation [89]

2

7

Vanillyl-alcohol oxidase (EC:1.1.3.38)

Aromatic degradation [90]

4

6

Cyclopentanone 1,2-monooxygenase (EC:1.14.13.8; EC:1.14.13.16)

Cyclopentanol degradation [91]

2

2

Tyrosinase

Phenolic compounds degradation [92]

1

3

Lignostilbene dioxygenase (EC:1.13.11.43)

Lignin degradation [93]

2

1

Total number of genes

 

145

103

Table 7

Annotated genes found only in the HDO1 strain

Genes in HDO1

Pathway

# of genes

3-oxoadipate enol-lactonase

Phenol degradation [94]

5

5-carboxymethyl-2-hydroxymuconate isomerase

Homoprotocatechuate degradation pathway [95]

1

Trihydroxytoluene oxygenase

2,4-dinitrotoluene degradation [96]

1

Benzoate 4-monooxygenase (EC:3.6.1.3)

Benzoate degradation [18]

5

Diphenol oxidase

Phenolic compounds degradation [97]

1

Cyclohexanone monooxygenase (EC:1.14.13.8)

Cyclohexane degradation [98]

4

Gentisate 1,2-dioxygenase

PAHs degradation [99]

2

2-keto-4-pentenoate hydratase (EC:3.7.1.5)

Benzoate degradation [100]

1

carboxymuconolactone decarboxylase

Protocatechuate degradation [101]

1

3-(3-hydroxy-phenyl)propionate 3-hydroxycinnamic acid hydroxylase

Phenyl propionate degradation [102]

2

3-hydroxybenzoate 6-hydroxylase

Xylenol [103] and 3-hydroxybenzoate degradation [104]

1

3-hydroxyisobutyrate dehydrogenase (EC:1.1.1.44; EC:2.1.1.43)

Aromatic compounds metabolism [105]

5

Total number of genes

 

30

The complete annotation of the genome and, particularly, of the genes belonging to a major class of protein families involved in fungal catabolism of organic pollutants was made. We could identify genes coding for proteins that have the ability to oxidize aromatic compounds like dioxygenases or monooxygenases. Among these, we could predict dioxygenases such as 2-nitropropane dioxygenase, extracellular dioxygenase (EC:1.13.11), gentisate 1,2-dioxygenase, intradiol ring-cleavage dioxygenase (EC:1.13.11), lignostilbene dioxygenase (EC:1.13.11.43), catechol 1,2-dioxygenase (EC:1.13.11.1), biphenyl-2,3-diol 1,2-dioxygenase, aromatic ring-opening dioxygenase, and 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (EC:1.13.11.27). These enzymes have great importance because, along with NADH-dependent flavin reductase and [2Fe-2S] redox centers, they catalyze the transformation of several aromatic compounds to dihydrodiols [66], allowing the complete mineralization of these compounds to CO2 and H2O (with the participation of other specific enzymes). Another enzyme family identified among the annotated genes was cytochrome P450. These enzymes have an interesting catabolic potential because they do not have substrate specificity and can catalyze epoxidation and hydroxylation of several organic pollutants like dioxins, nonylphenol, and PAHs [67]. Genes coding for extracellular proteins like laccases and tyrosinase (known as phenoloxidase enzymes), which have the ability to degrade several groups of organic compounds due to their non-specificity action, were annotated in the genome. These enzymes produce organic radicals beyond one electron abstraction; those free radicals can be transformed by several reactions that include the ether cleavage in dioxins, quinone formations from PAHs and chlorophenols [68]. These extracellular enzymes are extremely important because of their potential in biotechnological applications [69, 70]. Moreover, several oxidoreductases, hydrolases, dehydroxylases, isomerases, and transferases were also predicted in the studied strain. However, extracellular enzymes such as lignin and manganese peroxidases could not be identified yet.

Catabolic proteins of S. apiospermum involved in phenol, p-cresol and phenylbenzoate degradation pathway previously reported by (Clauβen and Schmidt) [17, 18] like phenol 2-monooxygenase and cathecol 1,2 dioxygenase were identified. However, hydroquinone hydroxylase, 4-hydroxybenzoate 3-hydroxylase, hydroxiquinone 1,2 dioxygenase, protocatechuate 3,4 dioxygenase, and maleylacetate reductase could not be found, suggesting that these proteins could be classified among the proteins annotated as hypothetical or with an unknown function or that they can be in the gap regions of the genome assembly.

Conclusions

The draft genome sequence of environmental strain S. apiospermum HDO1 isolated from bacterial bioremediation assays in crude oil was described here. The structural and functional information of the genome sequence of S. apiospermum has allowed advancing in the understanding of the ability of this fungus to degrade several kinds of xenobiotic compounds mainly several hydrocarbons families and offers an opportunity to propose its use or its enzymes in controlled bioremediation or bioaugmentation processes.

Abbreviations

API: 

American Petroleum Institute

CDS: 

Coding DNA Sequence

COG: 

Cluster of Orthologous Groups

CTAB: 

Cetyl Trimethyl Ammonium Bromide

EC: 

Enzyme Codes

GO: 

Gene Ontology

ITS: 

Internal Transcribed Spacer

KEGG: 

Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes

KOG: 

Eukaryotic Orthologous Groups

LSU: 

long subunit rRNA

PAHs: 

Polycyclic Aromatic hydrocarbons

PDA: 

Potato Dextrose Agar

PDB: 

Protein Data Bank Protein

PIR: 

The Protein Information Resource

PRF: 

Protein Research Foundation

TEF: 

Elongation factor

TPA: 

Third-Party Annotation Sequences

YPG: 

Yeast extract, Peptone, Glucose

Declarations

Acknowledgements

Authors thank Alejandro Grajales for helping with the phylogenetic studies. Special thanks to Juan Pablo Mallarino and the High Performance Computing core facility at Universidad de los Andes at Bogota, Colombia, for providing HPC resources that have contributed to the research results reported within this paper. URL: http://hpc.uniandes.edu.co.

Funding

The School of Sciences, Universidad de los Andes, funded the project “Sequencing of the whole genome of fungi strain capable of degrading hydrocarbons”. Departamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación - Colciencias, financed the project “Hydrocarbons biodegradation using a microbial consortium (fungi-bacteria) immobilized on activated carbon” code 1204-569-34732. Additionally, Colciencias awarded to LTM the “beca-pasantía joven investigador” from “Young researchers and innovators program 2014”, announcement 645–21 2014. These funding bodies had no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.

Authors’ contributions

MJV isolated the fungal strain, conceived the study, drafted and revised the manuscript. MCO identified the isolate and determined its enzymatic properties. LTM performed the laboratory experiments for the sequencing of the genome, the bioinformatics analyses and wrote the manuscript. LNG performed the bioinformatics analyses. SR conceived the study, drafted and revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

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)
Centro de Investigaciones Microbiológicas, Department of Biological Sciences, Universidad de los Andes
(2)
Laboratorio de Micología y Fitopatología Uniandes, Universidad de los Andes
(3)
Department of Biological Sciences, Universidad de los Andes

References

  1. Atlas RM. Microbial degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons: an environmental perspective. Microbiol Rev. 1981;45(1):180.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker SE, et al. Fungal genome sequencing and bioenergy. Fungal Biol Rev. 2008;22(1):1–5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Haritash A, Kaushik C. Biodegradation aspects of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs): a review. J Hazard Mater. 2009;169(1):1–15.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Leahy JG, Colwell RR. Microbial degradation of hydrocarbons in the environment. Microbiol Rev. 1990;54(3):305–15.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  5. April TM, Foght J, Currah R. Hydrocarbon-degrading filamentous fungi isolated from flare pit soils in northern and western Canada. Can J Microbiol. 1999;46(1):38–49.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Semple KT, Cain RB, Schmidt B. Biodegradation of aromatic compounds by microalgae. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 1999;170(2):291–300.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Smith, M.R. The biodegradation of aromatic hydrocarbons by bacteria, in Physiology of Biodegradative Microorganisms. 1991, Springer. p. 191–206.Google Scholar
  8. Grady CL Jr. Biodegradation of toxic organics: status and potential. J Environ Eng. 1990;116(5):805–28.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Samanta SK, Singh OV, Jain RK. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: environmental pollution and bioremediation. Trends Biotechnol. 2002;20(6):243–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Providenti MA, Lee H, Trevors JT. Selected factors limiting the microbial degradation of recalcitrant compounds. J Ind Microbiol. 1993;12(6):379–95.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Morgan P, Atlas RM. Hydrocarbon degradation in soils and methods for soil biotreatment. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 1989;8(4):305–33.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hickey WJ, Chen S, Zhao J. The phn island: a new genomic island encoding catabolism of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. Front Microbiol. 2012;3:125.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Hickey WJ. Development of tools for genetic analysis of phenanthrene degradation and nanopod production by Delftia sp. Cs1-4. Front Microbiol. 2011;2:187.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Desai C, Pathak H, Madamwar D. Advances in molecular and “-omics” technologies to gauge microbial communities and bioremediation at xenobiotic/anthropogen contaminated sites. Bioresour Technol. 2010;101(6):1558–69.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gilgado F, Gené J, Cano J, Guarro J. Heterothallism in Scedosporium apiospermum and description of its teleomorph Pseudallescheria apiosperma sp. nov. Med Mycol. 2010;48(1):122–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaltseis J, Rainer J, De Hoog GS. Ecology of Pseudallescheria and Scedosporium species in human-dominated and natural environments and their distribution in clinical samples. Med Mycol. 2009;47(4):398–405.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Claußen M, Schmidt S. Biodegradation of phenol and p-cresol by the hyphomycete Scedosporium apiospermum. Res Microbiol. 1998;149(6):399–406.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Clauβen M, Schmidt S. Biodegradation of phenylbenzoate and some of its derivatives by Scedosporium apiospermum. Res Microbiol. 1999;150(6):413–20.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. García-Peña EI, Hernández S, Favela-Torres E, Auria R, Revah S. Toluene biofiltration by the fungus Scedosporium apiospermum TB1. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2001;76(1):61–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Reyes-César A, Absalón A, Fernández F, González J, Cortés-Espinosa. Biodegradation of a mixture of PAHs by non-ligninolytic fungal strains isolated from crude oil-contaminated soil. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2014;30(3):999–1009.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Sandoval, C. Pijarán, J. C. Vives-Florez, M. Remoción de hidrocarburos por hongos filamentosos. Universidad de los Andes (Master's Thesis ), 2012.Google Scholar
  22. Guarro J, Kantarcioglu A, Horré R, Rodriguez-Tudela J, Cuenca M, Berenguer J, De Hoog G. Scedosporium apiospermum: changing clinical spectrum of a therapy-refractory opportunist. Med Mycol. 2006;44(4):295–327.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Vandeputte P, et al. Draft genome sequence of the pathogenic fungus Scedosporium apiospermum. Genome Announcements. 2014;2(5):e00988–14.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Küppers, H., Atlas de los colores. 3ͣ Edición. Barcelona, Blume, S.A., 1996(ISBN 84–87535–37-2.).Google Scholar
  25. Vasco MF, Cepero M, Restrepo S, Vives-Florez M. Recovery of mitosporic fungi actively growing in soils after bacterial bioremediation of oily sludge and their potential for removing recalcitrant hydrocarbons. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad. 2011;65(4):649–55.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. White TJ, Bruns T, Lee D, Taylor SB, J. W. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. PCR Protocols. 1990;18(1):315–22.Google Scholar
  27. Sandoval-Denis M, Sutton DA, Fothergill AW, Cano-Lira JF, Gené J, Decock C, De Hood GS, Guarro J. Scopulariopsis, a poorly known opportunistic fungus: spectrum of species in clinical samples and in vitro responses to antifungal drugs. J Clin Microbiol. 2013;51(12):3937–43.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Sandoval-Denis M, et al. Phylogeny and taxonomic revision of Microascaceae with emphasis on synnematous fungi. Stud Mycol. 2016;83:193–233.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Katoh K, Toh H. Parallelization of the MAFFT multiple sequence alignment program. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(15):1899–900.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Stamatakis A. RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics. 2006;22(21):2688–90.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Miller, M.A. Pfeiffer, W. Schwartz, T. Creating the CIPRES Science Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. in Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE), 2010. 2010. IEEE.Google Scholar
  32. Lanfear R, Calcott B, Ho SYW, Guindon S. PartitionFinder: combined selection of partitioning schemes and substitution models for phylogenetic analyses. Mol Biol Evol. 2012;29(6):1695–701.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Stamatakis A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(9):1312–3.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Rambaut, A. FigTree, a graphical viewer of phylogenetic trees. See http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree, 2007.
  35. Bolger, A.M. Lohse, M. Usadel, B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics, 2014: p. btu170.Google Scholar
  36. Andrews, S.F. and Q. Fast, A quality control tool for high throughput sequence data. 2010, 2015.Google Scholar
  37. Langmead B, Salzberg SL. Fast gapped-read alignment with bowtie 2. Nat Methods. 2012;9(4):357–9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Li H, et al. The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics. 2009;25(16):2078–9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Milne I, Bayer M, Cardle L, Shaw P, Stephen G, Wright F, Marshall D. Tablet—next generation sequence assembly visualization. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(3):401–2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Simpson JT, Wong K, Jackman S, Schein D, Jones JE, Birol SJ, I. ABySS: a parallel assembler for short read sequence data. Genome Res. 2009;19(6):1117–23.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Boetzer M, Henkel C, Jansen V, Butler HJ, Pirovano D, W. Scaffolding pre-assembled contigs using SSPACE. Bioinformatics. 2011;27(4):578–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Boetzer M, Pirovano W. Toward almost closed genomes with GapFiller. Genome Biol. 2012;13(6):1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. Gurevich A, Saveliev V, Vyahhi N, Tesler G. QUAST: quality assessment tool for genome assemblies. Bioinformatics. 2013;29(8):1072–5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Smit, A.F. Hubley, R. Green, P. RepeatMasker. Published on the web at http://www. repeatmasker.org, 1996.Google Scholar
  45. Yew SM, et al. The genome of newly classified Ochroconis mirabilis: insights into fungal adaptation to different living conditions. BMC Genomics. 2016;17(1):1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  46. Galagan JE, et al. The genome sequence of the filamentous fungus Neurospora crassa. Nature. 2003;422(6934):859–68.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Stanke M, Morgenstern B. AUGUSTUS: a web server for gene finding in eukaryotes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(suppl 2):W309–12.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Conesa A, Götz S, García-Gómez JM, Terol J, Talón M, Robles M. Blast2GO: a universal tool for annotation, visualization and analysis in functional genomics research. Bioinformatics. 2005;21(18):3674–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990;215(3):403–10.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Consortium GO. The gene ontology (GO) database and informatics resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(suppl 1):D258–61.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  51. Tatusov RL, Galperin MY, Natale DA, Koonin EV. The COG database: a tool for genome-scale analysis of protein functions and evolution. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000;28(1):33–6.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  52. Koonin EV, et al. A comprehensive evolutionary classification of proteins encoded in complete eukaryotic genomes. Genome Biol. 2004;5(2):1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  53. Powell S, et al. eggNOG v3. 0: orthologous groups covering 1133 organisms at 41 different taxonomic ranges. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(D1):D284–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Kanehisa M, Goto S. KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000;28(1):27–30.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Zdobnov EM, Apweiler R. InterProScan–an integration platform for the signature-recognition methods in InterPro. Bioinformatics. 2001;17(9):847–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Ashburner M, et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat Genet. 2000;25(1):25–9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Sonnhammer EL, Eddy SR, Birney E, Bateman A, Durbin R. Pfam: multiple sequence alignments and HMM-profiles of protein domains. Nucleic Acids Res. 1998;26(1):320–2.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Krogh A, Larsson B, von Heijne G, Sonnhammer EL. Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes. J Mol Biol. 2001;305(3):567–80.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Lagesen K, Hallin P, Rodland EA, Staerfieldt HH, Rognes T, Ussery DW. RNammer: consistent annotation of rRNA genes in genomic sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35(9):3100–8.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  60. Stajich JE, et al. FungiDB: an integrated functional genomics database for fungi. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(D1):D675–81.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Yong Jung W, Sook Lee S, Wook Kim C, Kim, H. S, Ran Min S, Moon J. S, Kwon S.Y, Jeon J. H, Sun Cho H. Eukaryotic Orthologous Groups (KOG) classification of the assembled loci. figshare., 2014.Google Scholar
  62. Darling AE, Mau B, Perna NT. progressiveMauve: multiple genome alignment with gene gain, loss and rearrangement. PloS one. 2010;5(6):e11147.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  63. Kurtz S, Phillippy A, Delcher AL, Smoot M, Shumway M, Antonescu C, Salzberg SL. Versatile and open software for comparing large genomes. Genome Biol. 2004;5(2):1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  64. Magrane M, Consortium U. UniProt knowledgebase: a hub of integrated protein data. Database. 2011;2011:bar009.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  65. Apweiler R, et al. UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(suppl 1):D115–9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  66. Mason JR, Cammack R. The electron-transport proteins of hydroxylating bacterial dioxygenases. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1992;46(1):277–305.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Kasai N, Ikushiro SI, Shinkyo R, Yasuda K, Hirosue S, Arisawa A, Ichinose H, Wariishi H, Sakaki T. Metabolism of mono-and dichloro-dibenzo-p-dioxins by Phanerochaete chrysosporium cytochromes P450. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2010;86(2):773–80.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Harms H, Schlosser D, Wick LY. Untapped potential: exploiting fungi in bioremediation of hazardous chemicals. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2011;9(3):177–92.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Duran N, Esposito E. Potential applications of oxidative enzymes and phenoloxidase-like compounds in wastewater and soil treatment: a review. Appl Catal B Environ. 2000;28(2):83–99.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  70. Gianfreda L, Rao MA. Potential of extra cellular enzymes in remediation of polluted soils: a review. Enzym Microb Technol. 2004;35(4):339–54.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  71. Hibbett DS, et al. A higher-level phylogenetic classification of the fungi. Mycol Res. 2007;111(5):509–47.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Gilgado F, Cano J, Gené J, Sutton DA, Guarro J. Molecular and phenotypic data supporting distinct species statuses for Scedosporium apiospermum and Pseudallescheria boydii and the proposed new species Scedosporium dehoogii. J Clin Microbiol. 2008;46(2):766–71.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Castellani, A. Chambers, A. J. Manual of tropical medicine. 1919: William Wood.Google Scholar
  74. Delhaes, L., Molecular Typing of Australian Scedosporium Isolates Showing Genetic Variability and Numerous S. aurantiacum. Risk. 8: p. 34.8.Google Scholar
  75. Dabrowa N, Landau JW, Newcomer VD, Plunkett OA. A survey of tide-washed coastal areas of southern California for fungi potentially pathogenic to man. Mycopathologia. 1964;24(2):137–50.Google Scholar
  76. Hoog Gd, Marvin-Sikkema FD, Lahpoor GA, Gottschall JC, Prins RA, Guého E. Ecology and physiology of the emerging opportunistic fungi Pseudallescheria boydii and Scedosporium prolificans. Mycoses. 1994;37(3–4):71–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Eggertsberger M, Rainer J, Kaltseis J, Poeder, R. Temperature dependence and environmental conditions enhancing the distribution of the opportunistic pathogens P. boydii and S. apiospermum. in MYCOSES. 2008. Wiley-Blackwell commerce place, 350 main St, MALDEN 02148, MA USA.Google Scholar
  78. Martinez D, et al. Genome sequence of the lignocellulose degrading fungus Phanerochaete chrysosporium strain RP78. Nat Biotechnol. 2004;22(6):695–700.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Vatsyayan P, Kamur AK, Goswami P, Goswami P. Broad substrate cytochrome P450 monooxygenase activity in the cells of Aspergillus terreus MTCC 6324. Bioresour Technol. 2008;99(1):68–75.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Cerniglia CE, Hebert RL, Szaniszlo PJ, Gibson DT. Fungal transformation of naphthalene. Arch Microbiol. 1978;117(2):135–43.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Asgher M, Bhatti HN, Ashraf M, Legge RL. Recent developments in biodegradation of industrial pollutants by white rot fungi and their enzyme system. Biodegradation. 2008;19(6):771–83.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. You IS, Ghosal D, Gunsalus IC. Nucleotide sequence analysis of the pseudomonas putida PpG7 salicylate hydroxylase gene (nahG) and its 3′-flanking region. Biochemistry. 1991;30(6):1635–41.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Novotný Č, Svobodová K, Erbanová P, Cajthaml T, Kasinath A, Lang E, Sasek V. Ligninolytic fungi in bioremediation: extracellular enzyme production and degradation rate. Soil Biol Biochem. 2004;36(10):1545–51.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  84. Bollag J, Helling C, Alexander M. 2, 4-D metabolism. Enzymic hydroxylation of chlorinated phenols. J Agric Food Chem. 1968;16(5):826–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  85. Anderson JJ, Dagley S. Catabolism of tryptophan, anthranilate, and 2, 3-dihydroxybenzoate in Trichosporon cutaneum. J Bacteriol. 1981;146(1):291–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  86. Mingot JM, Peñalva MA, Fernández-Cañón JM. Disruption of phacA, an Aspergillus nidulans gene encoding a novel cytochrome P450 monooxygenase catalyzing phenylacetate 2-hydroxylation, results in penicillin overproduction. J Biol Chem. 1999;274(21):14545–50.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Kido T, Soda K. Oxidation of anionic nitroalkanes by flavoenzymes, and participation of superoxide anion in the catalysis. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1984;234(2):468–75.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Yang X, Xie F, Zhang G, Shi Y, Qian S. Purification, characterization, and substrate specificity of two 2, 3-dihydroxybiphenyl 1, 2-dioxygenase from Rhodococcus sp. R04, showing their distinct stability at various temperature. Biochimie. 2008;90(10):1530–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Schlömann M, Schmidt E, Knackmuss H. Different types of dienelactone hydrolase in 4-fluorobenzoate-utilizing bacteria. J Bacteriol. 1990;172(9):5112–8.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  90. Fraaije MW, Pikkemaat M, Van Berkel W. Enigmatic gratuitous induction of the covalent Flavoprotein Vanillyl-alcohol Oxidase in Penicillium simplicissimum. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1997;63(2):435–9.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  91. Iwaki H, Hasegawa Y, Wang S, Kayser MM, Lau PC. Cloning and characterization of a gene cluster involved in cyclopentanol metabolism in Comamonas sp. strain NCIMB 9872 and biotransformations effected by Escherichia Coli-expressed cyclopentanone 1, 2-monooxygenase. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002;68(11):5671–84.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  92. Ikehata K, Nicell JA. Characterization of tyrosinase for the treatment of aqueous phenols. Bioresour Technol. 2000;74(3):191–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  93. Kamoda S, Habu N, Samejima M, Yoshimoto T. Purification and some properties of Lignostilbene-a,/i-dioxygenase responsible for the ca—cp cleavage of a Diarylpropane type lignin model compound from pseudomonas sp. TMY1009. Agric Biol Chem. 1989;53(10):2757–61.Google Scholar
  94. Harwood CS, Parales RE. The β-ketoadipate pathway and the biology of self-identity. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1996;50(1):553–90.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Roper DI, Cooper RA. Purification, some properties and nucleotide sequence of 5-carboxymethyl-2-hydroxymuconate isomerase of Escherichia Coli C. FEBS Lett. 1990;266(1–2):63–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. Johnson GR, Jain RK, Spain JC. Properties of the trihydroxytoluene oxygenase from Burkholderia cepacia R34: an extradiol dioxygenase from the 2, 4-dinitrotoluene pathway. Arch Microbiol. 2000;173(2):86–90.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Williamson PR. Biochemical and molecular characterization of the diphenol oxidase of Cryptococcus Neoformans: identification as a laccase. J Bacteriol. 1994;176(3):656–64.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  98. Sheng D, Ballou DP, Massey V. Mechanistic studies of cyclohexanone monooxygenase: chemical properties of intermediates involved in catalysis. Biochemistry. 2001;40(37):11156–67.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Luo S, Liu DQ, Liu H, Zhou NY. Site-directed mutagenesis of gentisate 1, 2-dioxygenases from Klebsiella Pneumoniae M5a1 and Ralstonia sp. strain U2. Microbiol Res. 2006;161(2):138–44.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. Perez-Pantoja D, De la Iglesia R, Pieper DH, González B. Metabolic reconstruction of aromatic compounds degradation from the genome of the amazing pollutant-degrading bacterium Cupriavidus necator JMP134. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2008;32(5):736–94.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Eulberg D, Lakner S, Golovleva LA, Schlömann M. Characterization of a protocatechuate catabolic gene cluster from Rhodococcus opacus 1CP: evidence for a merged enzyme with 4-carboxymuconolactone-decarboxylating and 3-oxoadipate enol-lactone-hydrolyzing activity. J Bacteriol. 1998;180(5):1072–81.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  102. Burlingame R, Chapman PJ. Catabolism of phenylpropionic acid and its 3-hydroxy derivative by Escherichia Coli. J Bacteriol. 1983;155(1):113–21.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  103. Poh CL, Bayly RC. Evidence for isofunctional enzymes used in m-cresol and 2, 5-xylenol degradation via the gentisate pathway in Pseudomonas Alcaligenes. J Bacteriol. 1980;143(1):59–69.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  104. Park M, Jeon Y, Ho Hee J, Hyun-su R, Woodjun P, Madsen EL, Che Ok J. Molecular and biochemical characterization of 3-hydroxybenzoate 6-hydroxylase from Polaromonas naphthalenivorans CJ2. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73(16):5146–52.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  105. Masai E, Katayama Y, Fukuda M. Genetic and biochemical investigations on bacterial catabolic pathways for lignin-derived aromatic compounds. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2007;71(1):1–15.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2017

Advertisement