DOCSLIB.ORG

Figure SM1.5.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Figure SM1.5.Pdf 1 Alcanivorax dieselolei B5 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Alcanivorax sp. DG881 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Alcanivorax hongdengensis A-11-3 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 marine gamma proteobacterium HTCC2148 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 gamma proteobacterium NOR5-3 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 Congregibacter litoralis KT71 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 6 Methylobacter tundripaludum SV96 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Methylococcales 1 Glaciecola polaris LMG 21857 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Glaciecola psychrophila 170 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 2 Reinekea blandensis MED297 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 gamma proteobacterium BDW918 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 marine gamma proteobacterium HTCC2143 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 3 Thioalkalivibrio thiocyanoxidans ARh 4 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Chromatiales 1 Marinobacter sp. BSs20148 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Marinobacter adhaerens HP15 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 3 Marinobacter algicola DG893 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 2 Photobacterium sp. AK15 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 4 Photobacterium profundum SS9 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 2 Allochromatium vinosum DSM 180 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Chromatiales 1 Allochromatium vinosum DSM 180 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Chromatiales 1 Pseudomonas tolaasii PMS117 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 2 Pseudomonas fuscovaginae UPB0736 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Thioalkalivibrio thiocyanoxidans ARh 4 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Chromatiales 1 Dyella japonica A8 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Xanthomonadales 1 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia K279a B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Xanthomonadales 1 Stenotrophomonas sp. SKA14 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Xanthomonadales 1 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia R551-3 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Xanthomonadales 1 gamma proteobacterium HIMB55 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 marine gamma proteobacterium HTCC2080 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 gamma proteobacterium NOR51-B B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 Chromohalobacter salexigens DSM 3043 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Halomonas smyrnensis AAD6 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Halomonas elongata DSM 2581 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Halomonas sp. KM-1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Halomonas jeotgali Hwa B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Halomonas titanicae BH1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Halomonas sp. GFAJ-1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Halomonas sp. TD01 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Halothiobacillus neapolitanus c2 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Chromatiales 1 gamma proteobacterium IMCC3088 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 Reinekea blandensis MED297 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 Marinobacter hydrocarbonoclasticus ATCC 49840 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Colwellia psychrerythraea 34H B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 gamma proteobacterium HTCC2207 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 Glaciecola nitratireducens FR1064 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Glaciecola pallidula DSM 14239 = ACAM 615 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Glaciecola punicea DSM 14233 = ACAM 611 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Vibrio furnissii CIP 102972 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 1 Ferrimonas balearica DSM 9799 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella frigidimarina NCIMB 400 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella denitrificans OS217 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella amazonensis SB2B B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella baltica OS678 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 2 Shewanella sp. HN-41 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella sp. MR-7 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella loihica PV-4 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella piezotolerans WP3 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella pealeana ATCC 700345 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella halifaxensis HAW-EB4 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella woodyi ATCC 51908 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella sediminis HAW-EB3 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella benthica KT99 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Shewanella violacea DSS12 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Teredinibacter turnerae T7901 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Rheinheimera nanhaiensis E407-8 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Chromatiales 1 Hahella chejuensis KCTC 2396 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Oceanospirillales 1 Thiomicrospira crunogena XCL-2 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Thiotrichales 1 Thioalkalimicrobium aerophilum AL3 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Thiotrichales 1 Thioalkalimicrobium cyclicum ALM1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Thiotrichales 1 Oceanimonas sp. GK1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Aeromonadales 1 Aeromonas media WS B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Aeromonadales 1 Aeromonas sp. 159 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Aeromonadales 1 Aeromonas hydrophila subsp. hydrophila ATCC 7966 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Aeromonadales 1 Wohlfahrtiimonas chitiniclastica SH04 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Xanthomonadales 1 gamma proteobacterium HdN1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 Marinobacterium stanieri S30 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Alteromonas sp. S89 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Pseudomonas psychrotolerans L19 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas sp. HYS B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas putida S12 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas fulva 12-X B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas syringae pv. mori str. 301020 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas pseudoalcaligenes KF707 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas alcaliphila 34 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas sp. M47T1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas luteola XLDN4-9 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Azotobacter vinelandii DJ B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas sp. M1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas aeruginosa E2 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas fragi B25 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas fragi A22 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas stutzeri T13 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas stutzeri SDM-LAC B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Pseudomonas stutzeri DSM 10701 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Pseudomonadales 1 Thiothrix nivea DSM 5205 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Thiotrichales 1 endosymbiont of Bathymodiolus sp. B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; unclassified Gammaproteobacteria 1 Psychromonas sp. CNPT3 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Psychromonas ingrahamii 37 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Alteromonadales 1 Vibrio shilonii AK1 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 1 Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicida DI21 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 1 Photobacterium sp. AK15 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 1 Photobacterium profundum SS9 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 1 Photobacterium leiognathi subsp. mandapamensis svers.1.1. B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 1 Photobacterium angustum S14 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Vibrionales 1 Morganella morganii SC01 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Enterobacteriales 1 Edwardsiella tarda ATCC 23685 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Enterobacteriales 1 Edwardsiella tarda EIB202 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Enterobacteriales 1 Xenorhabdus nematophila ATCC 19061 B; Proteobacteria; Gammaproteobacteria; Enterobacteriales
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reporting of Diseases and Conditions Regulation, Amendment, M.R. 289/2014
    THE PUBLIC HEALTH ACT LOI SUR LA SANTÉ PUBLIQUE (C.C.S.M. c. P210) (c. P210 de la C.P.L.M.) Reporting of Diseases and Conditions Règlement modifiant le Règlement sur la Regulation, amendment déclaration de maladies et d'affections Regulation 289/2014 Règlement 289/2014 Registered December 23, 2014 Date d'enregistrement : le 23 décembre 2014 Manitoba Regulation 37/2009 amended Modification du R.M. 37/2009 1 The Reporting of Diseases and 1 Le présent règlement modifie le Conditions Regulation , Manitoba Règlement sur la déclaration de maladies et Regulation 37/2009, is amended by this d'affections , R.M. 37/2009. regulation. 2 Schedules A and B are replaced with 2 Les annexes A et B sont remplacées Schedules A and B to this regulation. par les annexes A et B du présent règlement. Coming into force Entrée en vigueur 3 This regulation comes into force on 3 Le présent règlement entre en vigueur January 1, 2015, or on the day it is registered le 1 er janvier 2015 ou à la date de son under The Statutes and Regulations Act , enregistrement en vertu de Loi sur les textes whichever is later. législatifs et réglementaires , si cette date est postérieure. December 19, 2014 Minister of Health/La ministre de la Santé, 19 décembre 2014 Sharon Blady 1 SCHEDULE A (Section 1) 1 The following diseases are diseases requiring contact notification in accordance with the disease-specific protocol. Common name Scientific or technical name of disease or its infectious agent Chancroid Haemophilus ducreyi Chlamydia Chlamydia trachomatis (including Lymphogranuloma venereum (LGV) serovars) Gonorrhea Neisseria gonorrhoeae HIV Human immunodeficiency virus Syphilis Treponema pallidum subspecies pallidum Tuberculosis Mycobacterium tuberculosis Mycobacterium africanum Mycobacterium canetti Mycobacterium caprae Mycobacterium microti Mycobacterium pinnipedii Mycobacterium bovis (excluding M.
    [Show full text]
  • Inactivation of CRISPR-Cas Systems by Anti-CRISPR Proteins in Diverse Bacterial Species April Pawluk1, Raymond H.J
    LETTERS PUBLISHED: 13 JUNE 2016 | ARTICLE NUMBER: 16085 | DOI: 10.1038/NMICROBIOL.2016.85 Inactivation of CRISPR-Cas systems by anti-CRISPR proteins in diverse bacterial species April Pawluk1, Raymond H.J. Staals2, Corinda Taylor2, Bridget N.J. Watson2, Senjuti Saha3, Peter C. Fineran2, Karen L. Maxwell4* and Alan R. Davidson1,3* CRISPR-Cas systems provide sequence-specific adaptive immu- MGE-encoded mechanisms that inhibit CRISPR-Cas systems. In nity against foreign nucleic acids1,2. They are present in approxi- support of this hypothesis, phages infecting Pseudomonas aeruginosa mately half of all sequenced prokaryotes3 and are expected to were found to encode diverse families of proteins that inhibit constitute a major barrier to horizontal gene transfer. We pre- the CRISPR-Cas systems of their host through several distinct viously described nine distinct families of proteins encoded in mechanisms4,5,17,18. However, homologues of these anti-CRISPR Pseudomonas phage genomes that inhibit CRISPR-Cas function4,5. proteins were found only within the Pseudomonas genus. Here, We have developed a bioinformatic approach that enabled us to we describe a bioinformatic approach that allowed us to identify discover additional anti-CRISPR proteins encoded in phages five novel families of functional anti-CRISPR proteins encoded in and other mobile genetic elements of diverse bacterial phages and other putative MGEs in species spanning the diversity species. We show that five previously undiscovered families of Proteobacteria. of anti-CRISPRs inhibit the type I-F CRISPR-Cas systems of The nine previously characterized anti-CRISPR protein families both Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Pectobacterium atrosepticum, possess no common sequence motifs, so we used genomic context to and a dual specificity anti-CRISPR inactivates both type I-F search for novel anti-CRISPR genes.
    [Show full text]
  • Bacterial Epibiotic Communities of Ubiquitous and Abundant Marine Diatoms Are Distinct in Short- and Long-Term Associations
    fmicb-09-02879 December 1, 2018 Time: 14:0 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 04 December 2018 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.02879 Bacterial Epibiotic Communities of Ubiquitous and Abundant Marine Diatoms Are Distinct in Short- and Long-Term Associations Klervi Crenn, Delphine Duffieux and Christian Jeanthon* CNRS, Sorbonne Université, Station Biologique de Roscoff, Adaptation et Diversité en Milieu Marin, Roscoff, France Interactions between phytoplankton and bacteria play a central role in mediating biogeochemical cycling and food web structure in the ocean. The cosmopolitan diatoms Thalassiosira and Chaetoceros often dominate phytoplankton communities in marine systems. Past studies of diatom-bacterial associations have employed community- level methods and culture-based or natural diatom populations. Although bacterial assemblages attached to individual diatoms represents tight associations little is known on their makeup or interactions. Here, we examined the epibiotic bacteria of 436 Thalassiosira and 329 Chaetoceros single cells isolated from natural samples and Edited by: collection cultures, regarded here as short- and long-term associations, respectively. Matthias Wietz, Epibiotic microbiota of single diatom hosts was analyzed by cultivation and by cloning- Alfred Wegener Institut, Germany sequencing of 16S rRNA genes obtained from whole-genome amplification products. Reviewed by: The prevalence of epibiotic bacteria was higher in cultures and dependent of the host Lydia Jeanne Baker, Cornell University, United States species. Culture approaches demonstrated that both diatoms carry distinct bacterial Bryndan Paige Durham, communities in short- and long-term associations. Bacterial epibonts, commonly University of Washington, United States associated with phytoplankton, were repeatedly isolated from cells of diatom collection *Correspondence: cultures but were not recovered from environmental cells.
    [Show full text]
  • Uncommon Pathogens Causing Hospital-Acquired Infections in Postoperative Cardiac Surgical Patients
    Published online: 2020-03-06 THIEME Review Article 89 Uncommon Pathogens Causing Hospital-Acquired Infections in Postoperative Cardiac Surgical Patients Manoj Kumar Sahu1 Netto George2 Neha Rastogi2 Chalatti Bipin1 Sarvesh Pal Singh1 1Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, CN Centre, All Address for correspondence Manoj K Sahu, MD, DNB, Department India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, CTVS office, 7th floor, CN 2Infectious Disease, Department of Medicine, All India Institute of Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi-110029, Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India India (e-mail: [email protected]). J Card Crit Care 2020;3:89–96 Abstract Bacterial infections are common causes of sepsis in the intensive care units. However, usually a finite number of Gram-negative bacteria cause sepsis (mostly according to the hospital flora). Some organisms such as Escherichia coli, Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus are relatively common. Others such as Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Chryseobacterium indologenes, Shewanella putrefaciens, Ralstonia pickettii, Providencia, Morganella species, Nocardia, Elizabethkingia, Proteus, and Burkholderia are rare but of immense importance to public health, in view of the high mortality rates these are associated with. Being aware of these organisms, as the cause of hospital-acquired infections, helps in the prevention, Keywords treatment, and control of sepsis in the high-risk cardiac surgical patients including in ► uncommon pathogens heart transplants. Therefore, a basic understanding of when to suspect these organ- ► hospital-acquired isms is important for clinical diagnosis and initiating therapeutic options. This review infection discusses some rarely appearing pathogens in our intensive care unit with respect to ► cardiac surgical the spectrum of infections, and various antibiotics that were effective in managing intensive care unit these bacteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Reportable Disease Surveillance in Virginia, 2013
    Reportable Disease Surveillance in Virginia, 2013 Marissa J. Levine, MD, MPH State Health Commissioner Report Production Team: Division of Surveillance and Investigation, Division of Disease Prevention, Division of Environmental Epidemiology, and Division of Immunization Virginia Department of Health Post Office Box 2448 Richmond, Virginia 23218 www.vdh.virginia.gov ACKNOWLEDGEMENT In addition to the employees of the work units listed below, the Office of Epidemiology would like to acknowledge the contributions of all those engaged in disease surveillance and control activities across the state throughout the year. We appreciate the commitment to public health of all epidemiology staff in local and district health departments and the Regional and Central Offices, as well as the conscientious work of nurses, environmental health specialists, infection preventionists, physicians, laboratory staff, and administrators. These persons report or manage disease surveillance data on an ongoing basis and diligently strive to control morbidity in Virginia. This report would not be possible without the efforts of all those who collect and follow up on morbidity reports. Divisions in the Virginia Department of Health Office of Epidemiology Disease Prevention Telephone: 804-864-7964 Environmental Epidemiology Telephone: 804-864-8182 Immunization Telephone: 804-864-8055 Surveillance and Investigation Telephone: 804-864-8141 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 ECCMID | 00656 in Vitro Activities of Ceftazidime-Avibactam and Comparator Agents Against Enterobacterales
    IHMA In Vitro Activities of Ceftazidime-avibactam and Comparator Agents against Enterobacterales and 2122 Palmer Drive 00656 Schaumburg, IL 60173 USA Pseudomonas aeruginosa from Israel Collected Through the ATLAS Global Surveillance Program 2013-2019 www.ihma.com M. Hackel1, M. Wise1, G. Stone2, D. Sahm1 1IHMA, Inc., Schaumburg IL, USA, 2Pfizer Inc., Groton, CT USA Introduction Results Results Summary Avibactam (AVI) is a non-β- Table 1 Distribution of 2,956 Enterobacterales from Israel by species Table 2. In vitro activity of ceftazidime-avibactam and comparators agents Figure 2. Ceftazidime and ceftazidime-avibactam MIC distribution against 29 . Ceftazidime-avibactam exhibited a potent lactam, β-lactamase inhibitor against Enterobacterales and P. aeruginosa from Israel, 2013-2019 non-MBL carbapenem-nonsusceptible (CRE) Enterobacterales from Israel, antimicrobial activity higher than all Organism N % of Total mg/L that can restore the activity of Organism Group (N) %S 2013-2019 comparator agents against all Citrobacter amalonaticus 2 0.1% MIC90 MIC50 Range ceftazidime (CAZ) against Enterobacterales (2956) 20 Enterobacterales from Israel (MIC90, 0.5 Citrobacter braakii 5 0.2% Ceftazidime-avibactam 99.8 0.5 0.12 ≤0.015 - > 128 Ceftazidime Ceftazidime-avibactam organisms that possess Class 18 mg/L; 99.8% susceptible). Citrobacter freundii 96 3.2% Ceftazidime 70.1 64 0.25 ≤0.015 - > 128 A, C, and some Class D β- Cefepime 71.8 > 16 ≤0.12 ≤0.12 - > 16 16 . Susceptibility to ceftazidime-avibactam lactmase enzymes. This study Citrobacter gillenii 1 <0.1% Meropenem 98.8 0.12 ≤0.06 ≤0.06 - > 8 increased to 100% for the Enterobacterales Amikacin 95.4 8 2 ≤0.25 - > 32 14 examined the in vitro activity Citrobacter koseri 123 4.2% when MBL-positive isolates were removed Colistin (n=2544)* 82.2 > 8 0.5 ≤0.06 - > 8 12 of CAZ-AVI and comparators Citrobacter murliniae 1 <0.1% Piperacillin-tazobactam 80.4 32 2 ≤0.12 - > 64 from analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Which Organisms Are Used for Anti-Biofouling Studies
    Table S1. Semi-systematic review raw data answering: Which organisms are used for anti-biofouling studies? Antifoulant Method Organism(s) Model Bacteria Type of Biofilm Source (Y if mentioned) Detection Method composite membranes E. coli ATCC25922 Y LIVE/DEAD baclight [1] stain S. aureus ATCC255923 composite membranes E. coli ATCC25922 Y colony counting [2] S. aureus RSKK 1009 graphene oxide Saccharomycetes colony counting [3] methyl p-hydroxybenzoate L. monocytogenes [4] potassium sorbate P. putida Y. enterocolitica A. hydrophila composite membranes E. coli Y FESEM [5] (unspecified/unique sample type) S. aureus (unspecified/unique sample type) K. pneumonia ATCC13883 P. aeruginosa BAA-1744 composite membranes E. coli Y SEM [6] (unspecified/unique sample type) S. aureus (unspecified/unique sample type) graphene oxide E. coli ATCC25922 Y colony counting [7] S. aureus ATCC9144 P. aeruginosa ATCCPAO1 composite membranes E. coli Y measuring flux [8] (unspecified/unique sample type) graphene oxide E. coli Y colony counting [9] (unspecified/unique SEM sample type) LIVE/DEAD baclight S. aureus stain (unspecified/unique sample type) modified membrane P. aeruginosa P60 Y DAPI [10] Bacillus sp. G-84 LIVE/DEAD baclight stain bacteriophages E. coli (K12) Y measuring flux [11] ATCC11303-B4 quorum quenching P. aeruginosa KCTC LIVE/DEAD baclight [12] 2513 stain modified membrane E. coli colony counting [13] (unspecified/unique colony counting sample type) measuring flux S. aureus (unspecified/unique sample type) modified membrane E. coli BW26437 Y measuring flux [14] graphene oxide Klebsiella colony counting [15] (unspecified/unique sample type) P. aeruginosa (unspecified/unique sample type) graphene oxide P. aeruginosa measuring flux [16] (unspecified/unique sample type) composite membranes E.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity of Microorganisms Colonizing the Surface of Polystyrene Samples Exposed to Different Aqueous Environments
    sustainability Article Biodiversity of Microorganisms Colonizing the Surface of Polystyrene Samples Exposed to Different Aqueous Environments Tatyana Tourova 1, Diyana Sokolova 1, Tamara Nazina 1,* , Denis Grouzdev 2 , Eugeni Kurshev 3 and Anatoly Laptev 3 1 Winogradsky Institute of Microbiology, Research Center of Biotechnology, Russian Academy of Sciences, 119071 Moscow, Russia; [email protected] (T.T.); [email protected] (D.S.) 2 Institute of Bioengineering, Research Center of Biotechnology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 119071 Moscow, Russia; [email protected] 3 Federal State Unitary Enterprise “All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Aviation Materials”, State Research Center of the Russian Federation, 105005 Moscow, Russia; [email protected] (E.K.); [email protected] (A.L.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +7-499-135-03-41 Received: 25 March 2020; Accepted: 29 April 2020; Published: 30 April 2020 Abstract: The contamination of marine and freshwater ecosystems with the items from thermoplastics, including polystyrene (PS), necessitates the search for efficient microbial degraders of these polymers. In the present study, the composition of prokaryotes in biofilms formed on PS samples incubated in seawater and the industrial water of a petrochemical plant were investigated. Using a high-throughput sequencing of the V3–V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene, the predominance of Alphaproteobacteria (Blastomonas), Bacteroidetes (Chryseolinea), and Gammaproteobacteria (Arenimonas and Pseudomonas) in the biofilms on PS samples exposed to industrial water was revealed. Alphaproteobacteria (Erythrobacter) predominated on seawater-incubated PS samples. The local degradation of the PS samples was confirmed by scanning microscopy. The PS-colonizing microbial communities in industrial water differed significantly from the PS communities in seawater.
    [Show full text]
  • An Update on the Genus Aeromonas: Taxonomy, Epidemiology, and Pathogenicity
    microorganisms Review An Update on the Genus Aeromonas: Taxonomy, Epidemiology, and Pathogenicity Ana Fernández-Bravo and Maria José Figueras * Unit of Microbiology, Department of Basic Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, IISPV, University Rovira i Virgili, 43201 Reus, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: mariajose.fi[email protected]; Tel.: +34-97-775-9321; Fax: +34-97-775-9322 Received: 31 October 2019; Accepted: 14 January 2020; Published: 17 January 2020 Abstract: The genus Aeromonas belongs to the Aeromonadaceae family and comprises a group of Gram-negative bacteria widely distributed in aquatic environments, with some species able to cause disease in humans, fish, and other aquatic animals. However, bacteria of this genus are isolated from many other habitats, environments, and food products. The taxonomy of this genus is complex when phenotypic identification methods are used because such methods might not correctly identify all the species. On the other hand, molecular methods have proven very reliable, such as using the sequences of concatenated housekeeping genes like gyrB and rpoD or comparing the genomes with the type strains using a genomic index, such as the average nucleotide identity (ANI) or in silico DNA–DNA hybridization (isDDH). So far, 36 species have been described in the genus Aeromonas of which at least 19 are considered emerging pathogens to humans, causing a broad spectrum of infections. Having said that, when classifying 1852 strains that have been reported in various recent clinical cases, 95.4% were identified as only four species: Aeromonas caviae (37.26%), Aeromonas dhakensis (23.49%), Aeromonas veronii (21.54%), and Aeromonas hydrophila (13.07%).
    [Show full text]
  • Aliagarivorans Marinus Gen. Nov., Sp. Nov. and Aliagarivorans Taiwanensis Sp
    International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (2009), 59, 1880–1887 DOI 10.1099/ijs.0.008235-0 Aliagarivorans marinus gen. nov., sp. nov. and Aliagarivorans taiwanensis sp. nov., facultatively anaerobic marine bacteria capable of agar degradation Wen Dar Jean,1 Ssu-Po Huang,2 Tung Yen Liu,2 Jwo-Sheng Chen3 and Wung Yang Shieh2 Correspondence 1Center for General Education, Leader University, No. 188, Sec. 5, An-Chung Rd, Tainan, Wung Yang Shieh Taiwan, ROC [email protected] 2Institute of Oceanography, National Taiwan University, PO Box 23-13, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC 3College of Health Care, China Medical University, No. 91, Shyue-Shyh Rd, Taichung, Taiwan, ROC Two agarolytic strains of Gram-negative, heterotrophic, facultatively anaerobic, marine bacteria, designated AAM1T and AAT1T, were isolated from seawater samples collected in the shallow coastal region of An-Ping Harbour, Tainan, Taiwan. Cells grown in broth cultures were straight rods that were motile by means of a single polar flagellum. The two isolates required NaCl for growth and grew optimally at about 25–30 6C, in 2–4 % NaCl and at pH 8. They grew aerobically and could achieve anaerobic growth by fermenting D-glucose or other sugars. The major isoprenoid quinone was Q-8 (79.8–92.0 %) and the major cellular fatty acids were summed feature 3 (C16 : 1v7c and/or iso-C15 : 0 2-OH; 26.4–35.6 %), C18 : 1v7c (27.1–31.4 %) and C16 : 0 (14.8–16.3 %) in the two strains. Strains AAM1T and AAT1T had DNA G+C contents of 52.9 and 52.4 mol%, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Bacteremia Caused by Pseudomonas Luteola in Pediatric Patients
    Jpn. J. Infect. Dis., 68, 50–54, 2015 Original Article Bacteremia Caused by Pseudomonas luteola in Pediatric Patients Gulsum Iclal Bayhan1*, Saliha Senel2,4, Gonul Tanir1, and Sengul Ozkan3 1Department of Pediatric Infectious Disease, 2Department of Pediatrics, and 3Department of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Disease, Dr. Sami Ulus Maternity and Children's Health Education and Research Hospital; and 4Department of Pediatrics, Yƒldƒrƒm Beyazit University, Ankara, Turkey SUMMARY: Pseudomonas luteola has rarely been reported as a human pathogen. The clinical mani- festations of P. luteola bacteremia and its susceptibility to antibiotics have not been characterized. This retrospective study was conducted at a 382-bed tertiary care center in Turkey. During the 9-year study period, 7 patients (5 females and 2 males) were diagnosed with P. luteola bacteremia. Six of these patients had hospital-acquired bacteremia, whereas 1 patient had community-acquired P. luteola infec- tion. All patients had monomicrobial bacteremia. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that all strains of P. luteola were sensitive to amikacin, gentamicin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and meropenem, and that all strains were resistant to piperacillin-tazobactam, aztreonam, and colistin. In conclusion, we believe that P. luteola can cause both community- and hospital-acquired bacteremia. Amikacin, gentamicin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and meropenem were effective against P. lu- teola in the present study. tion of antibiotic treatment because of clinical deterio- INTRODUCTION ration or antibiogram results, duration of antibiotic Pseudomonas luteola, which is also called Chryseo- treatment, and treatment outcome. monas luteola, is a nonfermenting gram-negative bac- P. luteola bacteremia was diagnosed based on the iso- terium that was previously classified in US Centers for lation of bacterium in 1 peripheral blood cultures.
    [Show full text]
  • Biotechnological Reclamation of Oil-Polluted Soils
    ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY Ecological Engineering & Environmental Technology 2021, 22(2), 27–38 Received: 2020.12.22 https://doi.org/10.12912/27197050/133328 Accepted: 2021.02.12 ISSN 2719-7050, License CC-BY 4.0 Published: 2021.02.21 Biotechnological Reclamation of Oil-Polluted Soils Iryna Ablieieva1*, Leonid Plyatsuk1, Iryna Berezhna1, Myroslav Malovanyy2 1 Sumy State University, 2 Rymskogo-Korsakova St., 40007 Sumy, Ukraine 2 Lviv National Polytechnic University, 12 S. Bandery St., 79013 Lviv, Ukraine * Corresponding author’s email: [email protected] ABSTRACT The aim of the paper was to determine the efficiency of petroleum hydrocarbons (PHs) degradation by devel- oped bacterial consortium during bioremediation of oil-contaminated soils caused by accidental oil spills. The soil samples were collected from three different areas near the Bugruvate field of the Dnieper-Donets oil and gas region, Sumy region, Ukraine. The total petroleum hydrocarbon was determined by conducting measurements us- ing a gravimetric method. Gas chromatographic analysis was performed for determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The level of oil contamination follows an increasing preferential order: Sample 1 < Sample 2 < Sample 3 (5, 10 and 15 g∙kg-1, respectively). The soil samples comprised different concentrations of PHs includ- ing n-alkanes, fluorine, anthracene, phenanthrene, pyrene, toluene, xylene, benzene and other PHs. The results of -1 research indicated that the maximum oil degradation rate at the level of 80% was set at Cin within 4–8 g∙kg and τ = 70 days, under natural condition. In order to improve the efficiency of bioremediation of oil-contaminated soils, bioaugmentation was performed using the developed preparation of such bacteria and fungi strains as Pseu- doxanthomonas spadix, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Rhodococcus opacus, Acinetobacter baumannii, Bacillus ce- reus, Actinomyces sp., Mycobacterium flavescens.
    [Show full text]