| Literature DB >> 21672261 |
Pengcheng Du1, Yinxue Yang, Haiying Wang, Di Liu, George F Gao, Chen Chen.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bacterial virulence enhancement and drug resistance are major threats to public health worldwide. Interestingly, newly acquired genomic islands (GIs) from horizontal transfer between different bacteria strains were found in Vibrio cholerae, Streptococcus suis, and Mycobacterium tuberculosis, which caused outbreak of epidemic diseases in recently years.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21672261 PMCID: PMC3148964 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-11-135
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Figure 1Relation between sGCSs and GIs. Three genome islands in Vibrio Choleae N16961, Streptococcus Suis ZY05 and Escherichia coli O157 were plotted with sGCSs.
Distribution of sGCSs in different phyla.
| Taxon | Phylum | # of | # of sGCSs | Percentage of | Average GC+/- SD (%)* | Average Length +/- SD (kb)$ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 4-8 | > = 10 | ||||||
| Archaea | 23 | 0 | 5 | 18 | 21.74% | 44.39 +/- 9.66 | 2188.85 +/- 506.62 | |
| 57 | 7 | 13 | 37 | 35.09% | 46.31 +/- 12.66 | 2211.67 +/- 1034.73 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.00% | 49.75 +/- 0.00 | 1590.76 +/- 0.00 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.00% | 31.60 +/- 0.00 | 490.88 +/- 0.00 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.00% | 33.90 +/- 0.00 | 1645.26 +/- 0.00 | ||
| Bacteria | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0.00% | 60.13 +/- 1.64 | 6581.12 +/- 3028.39 | |
| 92 | 20 | 23 | 49 | 46.74% | 65.08 +/- 7.01 | 4563.76 +/- 2248.12 | ||
| 7 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 14.29% | 38.82 +/- 5.91 | 1680.59 +/- 161.52 | ||
| 29 | 14 | 14 | 1 | 96.55% | 41.95 +/- 11.91 | 3653.46 +/- 2340.45 | ||
| 15 | 14 | 1 | 0 | 100.00% | 40.25 +/- 1.67 | 1209.16 +/- 343.03 | ||
| 11 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 100.00% | 50.64 +/- 4.40 | 2618.73 +/- 417.30 | ||
| 14 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 64.29% | 55.78 +/- 7.93 | 3290.10 +/- 2063.61 | ||
| 41 | 9 | 14 | 18 | 56.10% | 44.76 +/- 10.19 | 3185.53 +/- 2028.34 | ||
| 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 100.00% | 36.87 +/- 8.07 | 2728.23 +/- 698.40 | ||
| 7 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 85.71% | 66.54 +/- 2.43 | 2170.02 +/- 900.69 | ||
| 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 100.00% | 34.66 +/- 0.02 | 1907.77 +/- 73.84 | ||
| 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 100.00% | 38.13 +/- 2.96 | 1384.71 +/- 366.07 | ||
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00% | 47.74 +/- 0.00 | 3842.64 +/- 0.00 | ||
| 200 | 198 | 2 | 0 | 100.00% | 38.54 +/- 6.93 | 3081.76 +/- 1184.70 | ||
| 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 100.00% | 28.83 +/- 3.56 | 2680.38 +/- 1205.57 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.00% | 64.17 +/- 0.00 | 4636.96 +/- 0.00 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.00% | 33.91 +/- 0.00 | 2003.80 +/- 0.00 | ||
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100.00% | 56.21 +/- 1.74 | 6670.89 +/- 671.31 | ||
| 586 | 369 | 155 | 62 | 89.42% | 53.12 +/- 12.12 | 3516.36 +/- 1661.41 | ||
| 24 | 21 | 3 | 0 | 100.00% | 35.65 +/- 7.38 | 1680.71 +/- 1445.58 | ||
| 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 100.00% | 54.16 +/- 12.43 | 1914.53 +/- 93.42 | ||
| 27 | 12 | 15 | 0 | 100.00% | 27.98 +/- 3.40 | 892.61 +/- 204.62 | ||
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100.00% | 56.02 +/- 11.51 | 1550.79 +/- 673.39 | ||
| 11 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 54.55% | 40.19 +/- 6.51 | 1976.74 +/- 160.46 | ||
| 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 100.00% | 55.24 +/- 8.47 | 3664.91 +/- 1649.61 | ||
| Total | 1173 | 696 | 269 | 208 | 82.27% | |||
* Average GC content and standard deviations (SD) were calculated according to the different strains in the phylum.
$Average length was calculated by averaging the complete genome length in the phylum.
Figure 2Distribution of GI, sGCS, and PAIs in the genome. (A) Scatter plot of the positions of GIs vs. sGCSs. For each genome, we coupled the positions of sGCSs and GIs. (B) Distribution of sGCSs, GIs, and PAIs in the genome. (C) Frequency of Ds along the genome with different sGCSs groups. (D) Gene classification according to COG functions in GIs (red) and all of the genomes. For each category: A, RNA processing and modification; B, Chromatin structure and dynamics; C, Energy production and conversion; D, Cell cycle control, cell division, chromosome partitioning; E, Amino acid transport and metabolism; F, Nucleotide transport and metabolism; G, Carbohydrate transport and metabolism; H, Coenzyme transport and metabolism; I, Lipid transport and metabolism; J, Translation, ribosomal structure, and biogenesis; K, Transcription; L, Replication, recombination, and repair; M, Cell wall/membrane/envelope biogenesis; N, Cell motility; O, Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones; P, Inorganic ion transport and metabolism; Q, Secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism; R, General function prediction only; S, Function unknown; T, Signal transduction mechanisms; U, Intracellular trafficking, secretion, and vesicular transport; V, Defense mechanisms; and W, Cytoskeleton.
Figure 3Correlation between GI evolutionary distance and relative genomic distance. For each GI group, relative genomic distance and evolutionary distance were calculated. Along the relative genomic distance, average evolutionary distance were calculated. Average evolutionary distance was then plotted against relative genomic distance to reveal the correlation between relative genomic distance and evolutionary distance.