| Literature DB >> 36176899 |
Nathaniel J Ennis1,2, Dhanasekaran Dharumadurai1,3, Joseph L Sevigny1,4, Ryan Wilmot1, Sulaiman M Alnaimat1,5, Julia G Bryce6, W Kelley Thomas1,4, Louis S Tisa1.
Abstract
Metagenomic analysis of stone microbiome from samples collected in New England, USA and Tamil Nadu, India identified numerous Actinobacteria including Geodermatphilaceae. A culture-dependent approach was performed as a companion study with this culture-independent metagenomic analysis of these stone samples and resulted in the isolation of eleven Geodermatphilaceae strains (2 Geodermatophilus and 9 Blastococcus strains). The genomes of the 11 Geodermatphilaceae strains were sequenced and analyzed. The genomes for the two Geodermatophilus isolates, DF1-2 and TF2-6, were 4.45 and 4.75 Mb, respectively, while the Blastococcus genomes ranged in size from 3.98 to 5.48 Mb. Phylogenetic analysis, digital DNA:DNA hybridization (dDDH), and comparisons of the average nucleotide identities (ANI) suggest the isolates represent novel Geodermatophilus and Blastococcus species. Functional analysis of the Geodermatphilaceae genomes provides insight on the stone microbiome niche. © The author(s).Entities:
Keywords: Actinobacteria.; Climate; Genomes; Geochemistry; Geodermatophilaceae; Ruins; Stones
Year: 2022 PMID: 36176899 PMCID: PMC9516006 DOI: 10.7150/jgen.76121
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Genomics
Geodermatophilaceae isolates used in this study and information on the stone sample.
| Isolate | Medium1 | Specific site of collection | Location | Coordinate (DMS) | Stone type | Climate | Stone Condition | Approximate Stone Age (Years) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TF02-8 | Czpek | Outside rock damage area | Fort Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India | 10o49'40” N | Granite | Tropical Wet and Dry | Built | 1,000-1,500 |
| TF02-6 | Czpek | Outside rock damage area | Fort Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India | 10o49'40” N | Granite | Tropical Wet and Dry | Built | 1,000-1,500 |
| TF02-09 | Czpek | Outside rock damage area | Fort Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India | 10o49'40” N | Granite | Tropical Wet and Dry | Built | 1,000-1,500 |
| TF02A-26 | Czpek | Temple wall outside | Fort Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India | 10o49'40” N | Granite | Tropical Wet and Dry | Built | 1,000-1,500 |
| TF02A-30 | Czpek | Temple wall outside | Fort Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India | 10o49'40” N | Granite | Tropical Wet and Dry | Built | 1,000-1,500 |
| TF02A-35 | Czpek | Temple wall outside | Fort Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India | 10o49'40” N | Granite | Tropical Wet and Dry | Built | 1,000-1,500 |
| TBT05-19 | Czpek | Temple wall outside damage area | Thanjavur Big Temple, Tamil Nadu, India | 10o46'58” N | Granite | Tropical Wet and Dry | Built | 1,000-1,500 |
| DF01-2 | Czapek | Temple wall outside | Fort Dindigul, Tamil Nadu, India | 10o21'39” N | Granite | Tropical Wet and Dry | Built | 250-500 |
| CT_GayMR16 | R2A | Mill site foundation | Gay City State Park Hebron, CT, USA | 41o43'34” N | Granite | Humid Continental | Built | 150-200 |
| CT_GayMR19 | LDM | Mill site foundation | Gay City State Park Hebron, CT, USA | 41o43'34” N | Granite | Humid Continental | Built | 150-200 |
| CT_GayMR20 | LDM | Mill site foundation | Gay City State Park Hebron, CT, USA | 41o43'34” N | Granite | Humid Continental | Built | 150-200 |
1 Czapak, Czapek-Dox medium ( DMSZ medium 130 9; R2A medium (DMSZ medium 83011); LDM, Luedemann Medium (DMSZ medium 877 10).
Genome Statistics.
| Bacterial species | Isolate | Genebank accession no. | Numbers of reads | No. of contigs | Avg coverage (X) | Genome assembly size (bp) | N50 contig size (kb) | No. of CDSs | G + C Content (%) | No. of rRNAs | No. of tRNAs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TF02-8 | QOHK00000000 | 16,767,887 | 33 | 1026.0 | 3,982,980 | 380.9 | 3,814 | 75 | 8 | 47 | |
| TF02A-30 | QOHJ00000000 | 15,562.207 | 38 | 922.0 | 4,129,003 | 466.8 | 4,008 | 74 | 6 | 48 | |
| TF02-09 | QOHH00000000 | 9,367,969 | 37 | 558.0 | 4,132,992 | 297.8 | 3,953 | 73 | 11 | 47 | |
| TBT05-19 | QOHI00000000 | 16,871,453 | 25 | 683.0 | 3,927,066 | 476.9 | 3,774 | 74 | 6 | 47 | |
| TF02A-26 | QOHG00000000 | 12,236.063 | 54 | 627.0 | 4,678,378 | 217.9 | 4,561 | 74 | 6 | 47 | |
| TF02A-35 | SPQP00000000 | 7,862,418 | 87 | 809.5 | 3,930,523 | 46.8 | 3,884 | 74 | 5 | 47 | |
| CT_GayMR16 | SPQK00000000 | 5,162,206 | 47 | 157.2 | 4,520,567 | 136.3 | 4,472 | 73 | 8 | 47 | |
| CT_GayMR19 | SPQL00000000 | 6,471,936 | 42 | 154.7 | 4,574,936 | 102.4 | 4,354 | 73 | 8 | 47 | |
| CT_GayMR20 | SPQM00000000 | 1,759,527 | 345 | 37.1 | 5,475,077 | 37.1 | 5,501 | 73 | 7 | 56 | |
| DF01-2 | SPQN00000000 | 4,109,200 | 199 | 385.2 | 4,449,339 | 29.9 | 4,305 | 75 | 6 | 47 | |
| TF02-6 | QOHF00000000 | 12,613,686 | 53 | 639.0 | 4,725,362 | 162,9 | 4,448 | 75 | 7 | 49 |
Figure 1Maximum likelihood (ML) tree for the 16S rRNA sequences showing the position of the Geodermatophilaceae isolates. The tree consists of the following organisms and accession numbers in parenthesis Blastococcus sp. CT_GayMR20 (SPQM00000000); Blastococcus sp. CT_GayMR19 (SPQL00000000); Blastococcus sp. CT_GayMR16 (SPQK00000000); Blastococcus sp. TF02-9 (QOHH00000000); Blastococcus sp. TF02-8 MK239642; Blastococcus sp. TF02A-26 (QOHG00000000); Blastococcus sp. TF02A-30 (QOHJ00000000); Blastococcus sp. TF02A-35 (SPQP00000000);Blastococcus sp. TBT05-19 (QOHI00000000); Geodermatophilus sp. TF02-6 (QOHF00000000); Geodermatophilus sp. DF01-2 (SPQN00000000); Geodermatophilus africanus strain DSM 45422, isolate CF 11/1 (HE654550.1);Geodermatophilus chilensis strain B12TT (KX943328.2); Geodermatophilus normandii DSM:45417, type strain CF 5/3T (HE654546.1); Geodermatophilus arenarius type strain CF 5/4T (HE654547.1); Geodermatophilus daqingensis strain WT-2-1 (KX881378.1); Geodermatophilus tzadiensis DSM45416, type strain CF5/2T (HE654545.1);Geodermatophilus ruber DSM 45317, strain CPCC 201356 (EU438905); Geodermatophilus sabuli strain BMG 8133T (LN626269.1);Geodermatophilus aqueductis BMG801T DSM 46834 (LN626272); Geodermatophilus obscurus strain G20 DSM 43160 (CP001867); Geodermatophilus amargosae strain G96 DSM 46136 (HF679056; Geodermatophilus saharensis type strain CF5/5T (HE654551); Geodermatophilus dictyosporus, type strain G-5T (HF970584); Geodermatophilus nigrescens strain YIM 75980 (JN188947);geodermatophilus pulveris BMG825T (LN626270; Geodermatophilus poikilotrophus, type strain DSM 44209T (HF970583;Geodermatophilus siccatus strain DSM 45419, type strain CF6/1T (HE654548);Geodermatophilus marinus strain LHW52908 (MG200147); Klenkia marina, strain YIM M13156 T, DSM 45722 (LT746188); Klenkia soli strain PB34 16ST (JN033772.1); Klenkia terrae strain PB261 (JN033773): odestobacter lapidis strain MON3.1T (LN810544.1); Modestobacter lacusdianchii strain JXJ CY 19T (KP986567.1); Modestobacter multiseptatus strain AA826T (Y18646.1); Thalassiella azotivora strain DSD2 (KT630890);Nakamurella silvestris strain S20-107 (KP899234;); Blastococcus jejuensis strain KST3-10 (DQ200983); Blastococcus colisei strain BMG 822T (LN626273) ; Blastococcus litoris strain GP-S2-8T (MH128378); Blastococcus deserti strain SYSU D8006 (MH553383); Blastococcus aggregatus strain DSM 4725T (AJ430193.1); Blastococcus endophyticus strain YIM 68236T (GQ494034); Blastococcus capsensis sp. BMG 804T (LN626274); Blastococcus xanthinilyticus strain BMG 862T (LN626275); Blastococcus saxobsidens type strain DSM 44509T (FN600641); and Blastococcus atacamensis strain P6T (KX926540). The evolutionary history was inferred by using the Maximum Likelihood method and Tamura-Nei model 34. The tree with the highest log likelihood (-7042.40) is shown. Initial tree(s) for the heuristic search were obtained automatically by applying Neighbor-Join and BioNJ algorithms to a matrix of pairwise distances estimated using the Tamura-Nei model, and then selecting the topology with superior log likelihood value. This analysis involved 47 nucleotide sequences. There were a total of 1570 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA11 35.
Figure 2Tree inferred with FastME 2.1.6.1 36 from Genome BLAST Distance Phylogeny approach (GBDP) distances calculated from genome sequences. The branch lengths are scaled in terms of GBDP distance formula d5. The numbers above branches are GBDP pseudo-bootstrap support values > 60 % from 100 replications, with an average branch support of 95.1 %. The tree was rooted at the midpoint 37 and redrawn in MEGA11 35.
Figure 3Major Functions of The relative abundances of 10 major functions identified within the 11 Geodermatophilaceae isolate genomes are summarized. Function abundances are reported as the percentage of genomic reads mapped to each function within each genome.
Biosynthetic gene clusters for natural products found in the genomes from Geodermatophilacea.
| Bacterial species | Isolate | No. of Biosynthetic gene clusters 1 | NRPS 2 | PKS 3 | Terpene | Siderophore | Betalactone | Bacteriocin | Lanthipeptide |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TF02-8 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| TF02A-30 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| TF02-09 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| TBT05-19 | 3 | 1 | 1 | lassopeptide | |||||
| TF02A-26 | 1 | 1 | |||||||
| TF02A-35 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | butyrolactone | 1 | |||
| CT_GayMR16 | 2 | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| CT_GayMR19 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| CT_GayMR20 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | indole | 1 | ||
|
| DD2 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | lassopeptide | ||
| DF01-2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | NPSR-terpene hopene | ||||
| TF02-6 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | ||||
|
| DSM 43160 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
1Biosynthetic gene clusters were identified by the use of the antiSMASH software. 2NRPS: Nonribosomal peptide synthase. 3PKS: polyketide synthase including Type I, II, III, Trans-AT, and other types