| Literature DB >> 30647156 |
Qi-Long Qin1, Yi Li1, Lin-Lin Sun1, Zhi-Bin Wang1, Shi Wang2, Xiu-Lan Chen1,3, Aharon Oren4, Yu-Zhong Zhang5,2,3.
Abstract
The streamlining hypothesis is generally used to explain the genomic reduction events related to the small genome size of free-living bacteria like marine bacteria SAR11. However, our current understanding of the correlation between bacterial genome size and environmental adaptation relies on too few species. It is still unclear whether there are other paths leading to genomic reduction in free-living bacteria. The genome size of marine free-living bacteria of the genus Idiomarina belonging to the order Alteromonadales (Gammaproteobacteria) is much smaller than the size of related genomes from bacteria in the same order. Comparative genomic and physiological analyses showed that the genomic reduction pattern in this genus is different from that of the classical SAR11 lineage. Genomic reduction reconstruction and substrate utilization profile showed that Idiomarina spp. lost a large number of genes related to carbohydrate utilization, and instead they specialized on using proteinaceous resources. Here we propose a new hypothesis to explain genomic reduction in this genus; we propose that trophic specialization increasing the metabolic efficiency for using one kind of substrate but reducing the substrate utilization spectrum could result in bacterial genomic reduction, which would be not uncommon in nature. This hypothesis was further tested in another free-living genus, Kangiella, which also shows dramatic genomic reduction. These findings highlight that trophic specialization is potentially an important path leading to genomic reduction in some marine free-living bacteria, which is distinct from the classical lineages like SAR11.IMPORTANCE The streamlining hypothesis is usually used to explain the genomic reduction events in free-living bacteria like SAR11. However, we find that the genomic reduction phenomenon in the bacterial genus Idiomarina is different from that in SAR11. Therefore, we propose a new hypothesis to explain genomic reduction in this genus based on trophic specialization that could result in genomic reduction, which would be not uncommon in nature. Not only can the trophic specialization hypothesis explain the genomic reduction in the genus Idiomarina, but it also sheds new light on our understanding of the genomic reduction processes in other free-living bacterial lineages.Entities:
Keywords: Idiomarinazzm321990; genome; marine bacteria; trophic specialization
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30647156 PMCID: PMC6336423 DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02545-18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: mBio Impact factor: 7.867
FIG 1Phylogenetic and physiological analyses of the genus Idiomarina. (A) Phylogenetic tree and genomic size of species of the genus Idiomarina and related genera from the order Alteromonadales. The tree was constructed based on concatenated alignment of 685 single-copy orthologous proteins shared by all the genomes using the neighbor-joining method with 1,000 bootstrap replications. Genome size is shown in megabase pairs (Mb). The numbers in parentheses are the number of genomes used to calculate the average genome size of the genus. This tree was used to infer gene gain and loss events in the Idiomarina genus. LUCA indicates the position of the last universal common ancestor of the Idiomarina genus. The strains used for physiological analyses, namely, Idiomarina sp. strain X4 and Paraglaciecola chathamensis S18K6, are shown in red. All the species except strain X4 were formally identified. (B and C) Cells (B) and growth curves (C) of strains X4 and S18K6 cultured in 2216E medium.
Comparison of the genomic characteristics of selected genomes
| Genomic characteristic | “ | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Genome size (Mbp) | 1.31 | 2.84 | 2.62 | 2.68 | 5.37 | 5.26 | 5.39 |
| G+C content (%) | 29.7 | 47.0 | 47.3 | 47.2 | 37.9 | 44.1 | 43.2 |
| % coding | 97.1 | 92.1 | 92.3 | 93.5 | 85.8 | 87.5 | 84.4 |
| No. of rRNA operons | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 8 |
| No. of CRISPR sites | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
| No. of paralog clusters | |||||||
| With 50% identity | 9 | 30 | 22 | 20 | 145 | 99 | 101 |
| With 80% identity | 0 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 59 | 15 | 34 |
| No. of sigma factors | 4 | 14 | 10 | 12 | 19 | 18 | 8 |
| % protein located outside the cell | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.5 |
| Total no. of peptidase sequences | 63 (4.6) | 130 (5.0) | 116 (4.7) | 124 (5.0) | 191 (3.9) | 180 (3.8) | 198 (4.0) |
| No. of peptidases located outside | 3 | 17 | 20 | 15 | 26 | 29 | 27 |
| α-Amylase | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| β-Galactosidase | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2 |
| Alginate lyase | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Total no. of carbohydrate-active | 27 (1.9) | 26 (1.0) | 25 (1.0) | 26 (1.0) | 83 (1.7) | 109 (2.3) | 63 (1.3) |
FIG 2Comparison of the identified COG functions of lost and gained genes (A to C) and heatmap of identified transporters in three strains (D). (A) The identified COG functions of lost and gained genes in the last universal common ancestor (LUCA) of the genus Idiomarina. (B and C) The identified COG functions of lost and gained genes in the evolutionary path from the LUCA to the X4 (B) and I. loihiensis L2TR (C) terminus. COG functional categories are shown on the x axis and are as follows: C, energy production and conversion; 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 functions, and biogenesis; K, transcription; L, replication, recombination, and repair; M, cell wall/membrane/envelope biogenesis; O, posttranslational modification, protein turnover, or chaperone functions; P, inorganic ion transport and metabolism; Q, secondary metabolite functions; R, general function prediction only; S. unknown function; T, signal transduction mechanism functions; U, intracellular trafficking, secretion, and vesicular transport; V, defense mechanism functions.
Substrate utilization profiles of Idiomarina sp. strain X4 and Paraglaciecola chathamensis S18K6
| Substrate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expected from | Experimental | Expected from | Experimental | |
| Glucose | + | + | + | + |
| Mannose | − | − | + | + |
| Fructose | − | − | + | + |
| Sucrose | − | − | + | + |
| Glycerol | − | − | + | + |
| Maltose | − | − | + | + |
| CMC-Na | − | − | + | − |
| Galactose | − | − | + | + |
| Starch | − | − | + | + |
| Xylan | − | − | + | + |
| Alginate-Na | − | − | + | − |
| Casein | + | + | + | + |
| Gelatin | + | + | + | + |
| Elastin | + | − | + | − |
Symbols: +, the OD600 of cultures was >0.1 after 6 days’ growth; −, the OD600 was <0.05 after 6 days’ growth.
CMC-Na, carboxymethylcellulose-Na.
FIG 3Comparison of the proteinaceous substrate utilization abilities of strains X4 and S18K6. (A) Growth curves of both strains cultured in 0.1% casein medium. (B) Concentrations of casein in the medium when both strains were cultured in 0.1% casein medium. (C) Growth curves of both strains cultured in 0.002% casein medium. (D) Cysteine absorption efficiencies for both strains.
FIG 4Genomic reduction analyses of the genus Kangiella. (A) Phylogenetic tree and genome size (in megabase pairs [Mb]) of the genus Kangiella and related genera, showing the dramatic genomic reduction in the genus Kangiella. (B) Comparison of the identified COG functions of lost and gained genes in the LUCA of the genus Kangiella. (C) Comparison of the identified COG functions of all the genes of strains X4, Kangiella geojedonensis YCS-5, and S18K6. COG functional categories are given in the legend to Fig. 2.