| Literature DB >> 32733398 |
Dean Thompson1, Valérie Cognat2, Michael Goodfellow3, Sandrine Koechler2, Dimitri Heintz2, Christine Carapito4, Alain Van Dorsselaer4, Huda Mahmoud5, Vartul Sangal1, Wael Ismail6.
Abstract
Rhodococcus strain IGTS8 is the most extensively studied model bacterium for biodesulfurization of fossil fuels via the non-destructive sulfur-specific 4S pathway. This strain was initially assigned to Rhodococcus rhodochrous and later to Rhodococcus erythropolis thus making its taxonomic status debatable and reflecting the limited resolution of methods available at the time. In this study, phylogenomic analyses of the whole genome sequences of strain IGTS8 and closely related rhodococci showed that R. erythropolis and Rhodococcus qingshengii are very closely related species, that Rhodococcus strain IGTS8 is a R. qingshengii strain and that several strains identified as R. erythropolis should be re-classified as R. qingshengii. The genomes of strains assigned to these species contain potentially novel biosynthetic gene clusters showing that members of these taxa should be given greater importance in the search for new antimicrobials and other industrially important biomolecules. The plasmid-borne dsz operon encoding fossil fuel desulfurization enzymes was present in R. qingshengii IGTS8 and R. erythropolis XP suggesting that it might be transferable between members of these species.Entities:
Keywords: 4S pathway; Rhodococcus; average nucleotide identity; biodesulfurization; dibenzothiophene; digital DNA-DNA hybridization; phylogenomics
Year: 2020 PMID: 32733398 PMCID: PMC7358434 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.01417
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
List of strains analyzed in this study.
| Species | Strain ID | Assembly accession | Assembly | Size (Mb) | GC (mol%) | Designation changed |
| ACN1 | ASM230387v1 | Draft | 7.24 | 62.3 | ||
| AV96 | ASM223371v1 | Draft | 6.44 | 62.4 | ||
| 1159 | ASM209193v1 | Draft | 7.09 | 62.3 | ||
| IEGM 267 | ASM190074v1 | Draft | 7.18 | 62.3 | ||
| VSD3 | ASM183130v1 | Draft | 6.55 | 62.4 | ||
| MI2 | ASM176688v1 | Draft | 7.18 | 62.3 | ||
| NSX2 | ASM171584v1 | Draft | 6.28 | 62.4 | ||
| NBRC 15567T | ASM155259v1 | Draft | 6.59 | 62.4 | ||
| R138 | ASM69667v2 | Complete | 6.81 | 62.3 | ||
| JCM 9803 | ASM131272v1 | Draft | 6.87 | 62.3 | ||
| JCM 9805 | ASM131274v1 | Draft | 6.96 | 62.4 | ||
| JCM 9804 | ASM131324v1 | Draft | 6.55 | 62.4 | ||
| CAS922i | ASM102022v1 | Draft | 7.20 | 62.3 | ||
| BG43 | ASM97517v1 | Complete | 6.87 | 62.3 | ||
| S-43 | ASM83035v1 | Draft | 6.81 | 62.2 | ||
| JCM6824 | ASM74774v1 | Draft | 7.02 | 62.3 | ||
| NRRL B-16532 | ASM71998v1 | Draft | 6.94 | 62.4 | ||
| DN1 | GCF_000454425.1 | Draft | 6.55 | 62.4 | ||
| CCM2595 | ASM45404v1 | Complete | 6.37 | 62.5 | ||
| XP | ASM22566v2 | Draft | 7.23 | 62.3 | ||
| SK121 | ASM17483v1 | Draft | 6.79 | 62.5 | ||
| PR4 | ASM1010v1 | Complete | 6.90 | 62.3 | ||
| djl-6-2 | ASM289396v1 | Complete | 6.70 | 62.4 | ||
| MK1 | ASM208702v1 | Draft | 6.47 | 62.5 | ||
| CS98 | ASM166250v1 | Draft | 6.71 | 62.4 | ||
| JCM 15477T | ASM164674v1 | Draft | 7.26 | 62.4 | ||
| CW25 | ASM162343v1 | Draft | 6.40 | 62.5 | ||
| TUHH-12 | ASM69845v1 | Draft | 7.43 | 61.7 | ||
| BKS 20-40 | GCA_000341815.1 | Draft | 6.60 | 62.4 | ||
| IGTS8 | GCA_006384225.1 | Complete | 7.01 | 62.4 |
Genomic features of R. qingshengii strain IGTS8.
| Contigs | Accession number | Size (bp) | GC (mol%) | #CDS | rRNA genes | tRNA |
| IGTS8_Scaffold | 6442598 | 61.72 | 6132 | 2 | 54 | |
| IGTS8_Plasmid1 | 42410 | 63.23 | 42 | |||
| NODE_19_Plasmid | 88412 | 61.84 | 94 | |||
| NODE_21_Plasmid | 64469 | 61.99 | 83 | |||
| NODE_22_Plasmid | 61977 | 61.54 | 60 | |||
| NODE_23_Plasmid | 17249 | 58.51 | 19 | |||
| NODE_25_Plasmid | 56340 | 60.91 | 62 | |||
| NODE_28_Plasmid | 40531 | 62.88 | 48 | |||
| NODE_29_Plasmid | 32351 | 57.63 | 27 | |||
| NODE_30_Plasmid | 31520 | 58.84 | 29 | |||
| NODE_32_Plasmid | 28097 | 62.96 | 33 | |||
| NODE_34_Plasmid | 21657 | 60.14 | 20 | |||
| NODE_37_Plasmid | 15574 | 62.17 | 15 | |||
| NODE_38_Plasmid | 14699 | 60.84 | 21 | |||
| NODE_39_Plasmid | 12554 | 60.84 | 11 | 1 | ||
| NODE_40_Plasmid | 8513 | 62.7 | 9 | |||
| NODE_41_Plasmid | 8462 | 58 | 6 | |||
| NODE_45_Plasmid | 5482 | 59.61 | 8 | |||
| NODE_46_Plasmid | 5051 | 59.55 | 7 | |||
| NODE_47_Plasmid | 4941 | 55.47 | 3 | |||
| NODE_50_Plasmid | 1757 | 64.88 | 2 | |||
| NODE_52_Plasmid | 1571 | 60.73 | ||||
| NODE_54_Plasmid | 1462 | 62.04 | 1 | |||
| NODE_56_Plasmid | 1327 | 63.07 | ||||
| NODE_59_Plasmid | 1181 | 63.93 | 1 |
dDDH values (recommended formula #2), ANI values, GGDC distances and differences in GC content between the genomes of Rhodococcus strain IGTS8 and R. erythropolis and R. qingshengii strains obtained from GenBank.
| Strain | dDDH | FAST-ANI | GGDC distance | GC difference |
| 98.2 | 99.68 | 0.0028 | 0.01 | |
| 90.2 | 98.86 | 0.0119 | 0.14 | |
| 88.4 | 98.55 | 0.0139 | 0.06 | |
| 83.6 | 98.07 | 0.0192 | 0.04 | |
| 87.5 | 98.53 | 0.0148 | 0.01 | |
| 83.7 | 98.09 | 0.0191 | 0.06 | |
| 88.4 | 98.65 | 0.0139 | 0.05 | |
| 88.6 | 98.66 | 0.0137 | 0.08 | |
| 80.5 | 97.81 | 0.0228 | 0.01 | |
| 84.7 | 98.22 | 0.018 | 0.07 | |
| 88.8 | 98.73 | 0.0134 | 0.04 | |
| 90.0 | 98.82 | 0.0122 | 0.16 | |
| 89.7 | 98.8 | 0.0125 | 0.02 | |
| 86.7 | 98.49 | 0.0158 | 0.65 | |
| 88.6 | 98.63 | 0.0136 | 0.03 | |
| 54.2 | 93.97 | 0.0626 | 0.09 | |
| 62.0 | 95.49 | 0.0482 | 0.06 | |
| 62.2 | 95.51 | 0.0479 | 0.13 | |
| 62.0 | 95.41 | 0.0482 | 0.02 | |
| 62.3 | 95.44 | 0.0477 | 0.13 | |
| 62.3 | 95.52 | 0.0478 | 0.07 | |
| 62.1 | 95.48 | 0.048 | 0.02 | |
| 61.9 | 95.45 | 0.0484 | 0.08 | |
| 62.3 | 95.51 | 0.0478 | 0.1 | |
| 62.1 | 95.17 | 0.048 | 0.22 | |
| 63.0 | 95.57 | 0.0466 | 0.04 | |
| 62.7 | 95.54 | 0.0471 | 0.07 | |
| 62.3 | 95.44 | 0.0477 | 0.08 | |
| 62.2 | 95.50 | 0.0479 | 0.07 |
FIGURE 1A maximum-likelihood phylogenomic tree generated from concatenated nucleotide sequences of the core genomes of the R. erythropolis and R. qingshengii strains. The scale bar represents the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.
FIGURE 2Correlation between dDDH and ANI values in the dataset.