Literature DB >> 35175125

Genome-Annotated Bacterial Collection of the Barley Rhizosphere Microbiota.

Senga Robertson-Albertyn1, James C Abbott2, Federico Concas1, Lynn H Brown1, Jamie N Orr3, Timothy S George4, Davide Bulgarelli1.   

Abstract

A culture collection of 41 bacteria isolated from the rhizosphere of cultivated barley (Hordeum vulgare subsp. vulgare) is available at the Division of Plant Sciences, University of Dundee (UK). The data include information on genes putatively implicated in nitrogen fixation, HCN channels, phosphate solubilization, and linked whole-genome sequences.

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 35175125      PMCID: PMC8852276          DOI: 10.1128/mra.01064-21

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Microbiol Resour Announc        ISSN: 2576-098X


ANNOUNCEMENT

The microbial communities thriving at the root-soil interface, that is, the rhizosphere microbiota, represent an untapped resource of plant probiotic functions (1, 2). Bacterial members of the microbiota capable of enhancing a plant’s mineral uptake from soil and pathogen protection, namely, plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPRs), have gained prominence in both basic scientific and translational applications (3–5). As a resource for comparative investigations of the plant microbiota across host species, we present a collection of 41 bacterial strains encompassing 15 genera with the presence of at least 5 putative plant growth-promoting (PGP)-associated gene orthologs, including, dinG, hcn, nif, pho, and pqq (Table 1) (6).
TABLE 1

Taxonomic affiliation, genomic characteristics, and accession numbers of genomes of 41 individual bacterial isolates described in this study

IsolateBacterial speciesbGenome size (bp)No. of contigsN50 (bp)PGPR operon gene(s) identified
GC content (%)ENA accession no.
pqq dinG c pho nif hcn
Bi02 Plantibacter cousiniae 3,994,22478112,363C,H,R,U69.52 ERS5639569
Bi03 Microbacterium foliorum 3,548,8079563,748C,D+D,H,R,U67.79 ERS5639570
Bi04Chryseobacterium sp.5,066,12434280,276A,D,H,RA,U36.22 ERS5639571
Bi05 Agrobacterium fabrum 5,161,91221417,533E,H,T,R,UA,S,U59.17 ERS5639572
Bi06 Pseudomonas brassicacearum 6,570,46416868,008B,C,D,E,F,H+D,H,R,UAA,B,C60.84 ERS5639573
Bi08 Pseudomonas carnis 6,697,46511794,982B,C,D,E,F+D,H,R,UA59.44 ERS5639574
Bi13 Erwinia aphidicola 4,939,01442383,165B,C,D,E,F+A,C,E,H,R,U56.33 ERS5639577
Bi26Arthrobacter sp. Bi265,112,47721743,594F+H,R,U66.4 ERS5639578
Bi27Pedobacter sp. Bi276,285,70323908,772A,H,R,UA,U39.01 ERS5639579
Bi35 Stenotrophomonas lactitubi 4,595,59010667,604+A,C,D,H,Q,R,U66.03 ERS5639581
Bi36Pedobacter sp. Bi366,291,37223901,067A,H,RA, U38.98 ERS5639582
Bi44 Microbacterium foliorum 3,535,88557117,718+H,R,U68.79 ERS5639584
Bi45 Enterobacter ludwigii 4,753,18720697,319+A,E,H,R,UJ54.61 ERS5639585
Bi46 Agrobacterium fabrum 5,161,46920379,239E,H,R,T,UA, L, S, U59.17 ERS5639586
Bi64Pseudomonas carnis6,761,930127163,868B,C,D,E,F+A,D,H,R,UA, U58.02 ERS5639588
Bi66 Stenotrophomonas lactitubi 4,755,071138114,998F+A,C,D,H,Q,R,U65.19 ERS5639589
Bi70Pseudomonas sp. Bi705,263,54123633,755B,C,D,E,F,H+H,R,U62.36 ERS5639590
Bi76 Microbacterium oxydans 3,812,38011078,63568.34 ERS5639593
Bi80 Bacillus frigoritolerans 5,107,2151,0167,00840.48 ERS5639594
Bi81 Stenotrophomonas lactitubi 4,657,4189199,70665.95 ERS5639595
Bi82 Priestia megaterium 5,805,67865369,44537.9 ERS5639596
Bi83Arthrobacter sp. Bi834,893,18712176,95065.19 ERS5639597
Bi84 Peribacillus simplex 5,576,71946527,03539.86 ERS5639598
Bi89 Pseudomonas koreensis 6,136,48273165,40060.15 ERS5639600
Bi91 Rhodococcus fascians 5,679,42054276,01064.41 ERS5639601
Bi96Peribacillus sp. Bi965,513,92575186,91739.53 ERS5639602
Bi98Microbacterium sp. Bi983,651,23325247,90967.94 ERS5639603
Bi102 Stenotrophomonas lactitubi 4,657,92810375,776+A,C,D,H,Q,R65.92 ERS5639604
Bi106 Rahnella aquatilis 4,557,6991,6143,01951.67 ERS5639653
Bi110Pseudomonas carnis6,696,26562160,81259.44 ERS5639654
Bi111Pseudomonas carnis6,695,87716975,93059.44 ERS5639655
Bi112 Pseudomonas mediterranea 6,109,87537728,693B+R,UA,B,C61.4 ERS5639656
Bi118Massilia sp. Bi1185,786,02648291,100L+A,D,H,R,U,X65.3 ERS5639658
Bi121Microbacterium sp. Bi1213,088,80920392,560H,R,U67.75 ERS5639659
Bi122 Stenotrophomonas lactitubi 4,652,81312566,023+A,C,D,H,Q,R,U65.96 ERS5639660
Bi123Pseudomonas sp. Bi1236,405,17252250,449B,C,D,E,F,H+D,H,R,UA,B,C59.37 ERS5639661
Bi126Pedobacter sp. Bi1266,291,746221,097,689A,H,RA, L, U38.98 ERS5639662
Bi128Microbacterium sp. Bi1286,566,3201,6944,998+H,R,U68.6 ERS6138326
Bi130Pseudomonas sp. Bi1306,574,12454239,349B,C,D,E,F,H+D,H,R,UAA,B,C59.41 ERS5640634
Bi133 Peribacillus simplex 5,310,97921442,292+A,B,D,H,Q,R,US, U40.03 ERS5640636
Bi134Peribacillus sp. Bi1345,473,50631522,968+A,B,D,H,Q,R,U40.2 ERS5640637

ANI cutoff, 96%. Capital letters depict actual genes identified within the inspected metabolic processes.

Strain taxonomy reflects the lowest and unique rank as defined by GTDBTK (v1.6.0) with data version r202.

The identification in each bacterial genome is depicted by the plus sign.

Taxonomic affiliation, genomic characteristics, and accession numbers of genomes of 41 individual bacterial isolates described in this study ANI cutoff, 96%. Capital letters depict actual genes identified within the inspected metabolic processes. Strain taxonomy reflects the lowest and unique rank as defined by GTDBTK (v1.6.0) with data version r202. The identification in each bacterial genome is depicted by the plus sign. Strains were isolated from the rhizosphere of cultivated barley (Hordeum vulgare L. subsp. vulgare), the fourth most cultivated cereal worldwide (7), which was grown in an agricultural soil used for previous barley-microbiota investigations (8, 9). Bacterial rhizosphere fractions were obtained by detaching the soil adhering the uppermost 6 cm of barley roots by vortexing in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) buffer. Serial dilutions were plated onto R2A and nutrient agar media and incubated at 20°C for 48 to 72 h (10, 11). Individual CFUs were selected for isolation based on morphological variation; clean isolate liquid cultures were stored at −80°C in 70% glycerol following 24 to 48 h of shaking incubation at 27°C. DNA was extracted as per the manufacturer’s instructions using the FastDNA spin kit for soil (MP Biomedicals, USA). Individual bacterial isolates were subjected to whole-genome sequencing using the “standard service” of MicrobesNG (Birmingham, UK). Briefly, bacterial genomic DNA libraries were prepared using the Nextera XT library prep kit (Illumina, USA) following the manufacturer’s protocol with the following modifications: 2 ng of DNA were input, and PCR elongation time was increased to 1 min. DNA quantification and library preparation were conducted on a Hamilton Microlab STAR automated liquid handling system. Pooled libraries were quantified using the Kapa Biosystems library quantification kit for Illumina on a Roche light cycler 96 quantitative PCR (qPCR) machine. Libraries were sequenced by using an Illumina HiSeq instrument with a 250-bp paired-end protocol. Reads were adapter trimmed using Trimmomatic (v0.30) with a sliding window quality cutoff of Q15 (12). De novo assembly was performed using SPAdes (v3.7), and contigs were annotated using Prokka (v1.12) (13, 14). On the basis of GC content, unambiguous taxonomic annotations generated using amphora classification (15) and whole-genome average nucleotide identity (ANI) to identify individual “founder” members (ANI cutoff, 96%) yielded 41 genomes retained for downstream analyses. To compare only components of characterized metabolic pathways, predicted genes were concatenated and annotated with eggNOG-Mapper (v1.0.3) (16, 17). The resultant annotation file was parsed in Python to generate a table of taxonomic identities (IDs) of Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) ortholog (KO) identifiers. From this table, a presence-absence matrix of all KOs predicted at least once in each isolate was generated in R (https://www.r-project.org). Predicted proteomes were clustered using OrthoFinder (v2.2.1) and functionally annotated using InterProScan (v5.29-68.0) (18, 19). Clusters and annotations were aggregated using KinFin (v1.0) (20). Cluster and KO intersections were defined using UpSetR (v1.3.3) (21). The phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1) was constructed using bcgTree (v1.1.0) and RAxML (v8.2.12), using RAxML’s GTRGAMMA model and 100 bootstrap iterations (22, 23); default parameters were used for all analyses unless otherwise noted.
FIG 1

Whole-genome phylogenetic tree of individual genomes (ANI cutoff, 96%) constructed incorporating additional sequences for Bifidobacterium longum NCC2705 (GCA_000007525), Microbacterium foliorum DSM 12966 (GCA_000956415), Bacillus subtilis NCIB 3610 (GCA_006088795), Pedobacter luteus DSM 22385 (GCA_900168015), Stenotrophomonas lactitubi M15 (GCA_002803515), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 (GCA_000006765). Protein predictions were obtained using Prokka (v1.14.6), and the tree was constructed with 100 bootstrap iterations and annotated with iTOL (24). The size of circular shapes on the periphery of the tree reflects the number of the indicated PGPR genes ranging from 1 to 7 present in each individual sample.

Whole-genome phylogenetic tree of individual genomes (ANI cutoff, 96%) constructed incorporating additional sequences for Bifidobacterium longum NCC2705 (GCA_000007525), Microbacterium foliorum DSM 12966 (GCA_000956415), Bacillus subtilis NCIB 3610 (GCA_006088795), Pedobacter luteus DSM 22385 (GCA_900168015), Stenotrophomonas lactitubi M15 (GCA_002803515), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 (GCA_000006765). Protein predictions were obtained using Prokka (v1.14.6), and the tree was constructed with 100 bootstrap iterations and annotated with iTOL (24). The size of circular shapes on the periphery of the tree reflects the number of the indicated PGPR genes ranging from 1 to 7 present in each individual sample. The collection is available as frozen isolates preserved in 300 to 500 µL of nutrient or R2A medium containing 50% glycerol and maintained at −70°C. To revive the frozen cultures, we recommend using a sterile inoculating loop to transfer a small amount (e.g., 50 µL equivalent) of the frozen culture onto a nutrient or R2A agar medium base following standard microbiological procedures. The plates should be incubated at 27°C for 24 to 48 h.

Data availability.

The genomic sequences reported in this study are deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA). Accession numbers for the individual genomes are provided in Table 1. To acquire isolates, or for questions or suggestions, please contact Davide Bulgarelli at d.bulgarelli@dundee.ac.uk.
  22 in total

Review 1.  Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria.

Authors:  Ben Lugtenberg; Faina Kamilova
Journal:  Annu Rev Microbiol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 15.500

Review 2.  Establishing Causality: Opportunities of Synthetic Communities for Plant Microbiome Research.

Authors:  Julia A Vorholt; Christine Vogel; Charlotte I Carlström; Daniel B Müller
Journal:  Cell Host Microbe       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 21.023

3.  Visual analysis of the quantitative composition of metagenomic communities: the AmphoraVizu webserver.

Authors:  Csaba Kerepesi; Balázs Szalkai; Vince Grolmusz
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2014-10-10       Impact factor: 4.552

Review 4.  Tracing the evolutionary routes of plant-microbiota interactions.

Authors:  Carmen Escudero-Martinez; Davide Bulgarelli
Journal:  Curr Opin Microbiol       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 7.934

5.  Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL) v5: an online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation.

Authors:  Ivica Letunic; Peer Bork
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 16.971

6.  InterProScan 5: genome-scale protein function classification.

Authors:  Philip Jones; David Binns; Hsin-Yu Chang; Matthew Fraser; Weizhong Li; Craig McAnulla; Hamish McWilliam; John Maslen; Alex Mitchell; Gift Nuka; Sebastien Pesseat; Antony F Quinn; Amaia Sangrador-Vegas; Maxim Scheremetjew; Siew-Yit Yong; Rodrigo Lopez; Sarah Hunter
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 6.937

7.  KEGG as a reference resource for gene and protein annotation.

Authors:  Minoru Kanehisa; Yoko Sato; Masayuki Kawashima; Miho Furumichi; Mao Tanabe
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2015-10-17       Impact factor: 16.971

8.  Root Hair Mutations Displace the Barley Rhizosphere Microbiota.

Authors:  Senga Robertson-Albertyn; Rodrigo Alegria Terrazas; Katharin Balbirnie; Manuel Blank; Agnieszka Janiak; Iwona Szarejko; Beata Chmielewska; Jagna Karcz; Jenny Morris; Pete E Hedley; Timothy S George; Davide Bulgarelli
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 5.753

Review 9.  A review on the plant microbiome: Ecology, functions, and emerging trends in microbial application.

Authors:  Stéphane Compant; Abdul Samad; Hanna Faist; Angela Sessitsch
Journal:  J Adv Res       Date:  2019-03-20       Impact factor: 10.479

10.  A footprint of plant eco-geographic adaptation on the composition of the barley rhizosphere bacterial microbiota.

Authors:  Rodrigo Alegria Terrazas; Katharin Balbirnie-Cumming; Jenny Morris; Pete E Hedley; Joanne Russell; Eric Paterson; Elizabeth M Baggs; Eyal Fridman; Davide Bulgarelli
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 4.379

View more
  1 in total

1.  Identifying plant genes shaping microbiota composition in the barley rhizosphere.

Authors:  Carmen Escudero-Martinez; Max Coulter; Rodrigo Alegria Terrazas; Alexandre Foito; Rumana Kapadia; Laura Pietrangelo; Mauro Maver; Rajiv Sharma; Alessio Aprile; Jenny Morris; Pete E Hedley; Andreas Maurer; Klaus Pillen; Gino Naclerio; Tanja Mimmo; Geoffrey J Barton; Robbie Waugh; James Abbott; Davide Bulgarelli
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 17.694

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.