DOCSLIB.ORG

Bacteria Clostridia Bacilli Eukaryota CFB Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bacteria Clostridia Bacilli Eukaryota CFB Group AM935842.1.1361 uncultured Burkholderiales bacterium Class Betaproteobacteria AY283260.1.1552 Alcaligenes sp. PCNB−2 Class Betaproteobacteria AM934953.1.1374 uncultured Burkholderiales bacterium Class Betaproteobacteria AJ581593.1.1460 uncultured betaAM936569.1.1351 proteobacterium uncultured Class Betaproteobacteria Derxia sp. Class Betaproteobacteria AJ581621.1.1418 uncultured beta proteobacterium Class Betaproteobacteria DQ248272.1.1498 uncultured soil bacterium soil uncultured DQ248272.1.1498 DQ248235.1.1498 uncultured soil bacterium RS49 DQ248270.1.1496 uncultured soil bacterium DQ256489.1.1211 Variovorax paradoxus Class Betaproteobacteria Class paradoxus Variovorax DQ256489.1.1211 AF523053.1.1486 uncultured Comamonadaceae bacterium Class Betaproteobacteria AY706442.1.1396 uncultured bacterium uncultured AY706442.1.1396 AJ536763.1.1422 uncultured bacterium CS000359.1.1530 Variovorax paradoxus Class Betaproteobacteria Class paradoxus Variovorax CS000359.1.1530 AY168733.1.1411 uncultured bacterium AJ009470.1.1526 uncultured bacterium SJA−62 Class Betaproteobacteria Class SJA−62 bacterium uncultured AJ009470.1.1526 AY212561.1.1433 uncultured bacterium D16212.1.1457 Rhodoferax fermentans Class Betaproteobacteria Class fermentans Rhodoferax D16212.1.1457 AY957894.1.1546 uncultured bacterium AJ581620.1.1452 uncultured beta proteobacterium Class Betaproteobacteria RS76 AY625146.1.1498 uncultured bacterium RS65 DQ316832.1.1269 uncultured beta proteobacterium Class Betaproteobacteria DQ404909.1.1513 uncultured bacterium uncultured DQ404909.1.1513 AB021341.1.1466 bacterium rM6 AJ487020.1.1500 uncultured bacterium uncultured AJ487020.1.1500 RS7 RS86RC AF364862.1.1425 bacterium BA128 Class Betaproteobacteria AY957931.1.1529 uncultured bacterium uncultured AY957931.1.1529 CP000884.723807.725332 Delftia acidovorans SPH−1 Class Betaproteobacteria AY957923.1.1520 uncultured bacterium uncultured AY957923.1.1520 RS18 AY957918.1.1527 uncultured bacterium uncultured AY957918.1.1527 AY945883.1.1500 uncultured bacterium AF526940.1.1489 uncultured Ralstonia sp. Class Betaproteobacteria Class sp. Ralstonia uncultured AF526940.1.1489 AB076856.1.1523 Diaphorobacter nitroreducens Class Betaproteobacteria AY945874.1.1501 uncultured bacterium uncultured AY945874.1.1501 AY661996.1.1528 uncultured bacterium AY568512.1.1525 Burkholderia fungorum Class Betaproteobacteria Class fungorum Burkholderia AY568512.1.1525 CU918829.2.1326 uncultured bacterium RS79 DQ202243.1.1305 uncultured bacterium AB487113.1.1358 uncultured bacterium RS61 CP001340.2866137.2867609 Caulobacter crescentus NA1000 Class Alphaproteobacteria AY773197.1.1497 Burkholderia sp. Br3469 Class Betaproteobacteria Class Br3469 sp. Burkholderia AY773197.1.1497 DQ177494.1.1453 Caulobacter sp. Tibet−S913 Class Alphaproteobacteria CP000378.3048145.3049671 Burkholderia cenocepacia AU 1054 Class Betaproteobacteria Class 1054 AU cenocepacia Burkholderia CP000378.3048145.3049671 DQ184515.1.1442 Brevundimonas sp. C6B3 Class Alphaproteobacteria AB252928.1.1503 uncultured beta proteobacterium Class Betaproteobacteria RS42 DQ395857.1.1455 uncultured organism AY568509.1.1494 uncultured Burkholderia sp. Class Betaproteobacteria Class sp. Burkholderia uncultured AY568509.1.1494 AY293404.1.1421 uncultured alpha proteobacterium Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ264620.1.1505 uncultured bacterium uncultured DQ264620.1.1505 DQ177489.1.1431 Brevundimonas sp. Tibet−IX23 Class Alphaproteobacteria RS64 DQ108394.1.1457 Brevundimonas sp. Tibet−IBa1 Class Alphaproteobacteria RS39 DQ404656.1.1441 uncultured bacterium AL646053.1205189.1206722 Ralstonia solanacearum GMI1000 Class Betaproteobacteria Class GMI1000 solanacearum Ralstonia AL646053.1205189.1206722 AM697237.1.1429 uncultured bacterium DQ351926.1.1501 uncultured bacterium bacterium uncultured DQ490030.1.1494 DQ493433.1.1449 soil bacterium TWE165 DQ351927.1.1493 uncultured bacterium bacterium uncultured DQ298326.1.1386 RS51 AB234302.1.1562 Alcaligenes sp. TS−MOSK−6 Class Betaproteobacteria Class TS−MOSK−6 sp. Alcaligenes AB234302.1.1562 DQ163946.1.1446 uncultured bacterium RS66 AJ318163.1.1443 uncultured alpha proteobacterium Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ159185.1.1457 uncultured bacterium uncultured DQ159185.1.1457 AY515421.1.1431 uncultured alpha proteobacterium Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ499310.1.1495 uncultured bacterium Betaproteobacteria Class TS−MOSK−3 sp. Alcaligenes AB234299.1.1490 BA000012.2750005.2751465 Mesorhizobium loti MAFF303099 Class Alphaproteobacteria AB234301.1.1459 Alcaligenes sp. TS−MOSK−5 Class Betaproteobacteria Class TS−MOSK−5 sp. Alcaligenes AB234301.1.1459 CU920584.1.1304 uncultured bacterium DQ298145.1.1386 uncultured bacterium uncultured DQ298145.1.1386 RS12 AY856842.1.1513 Stenotrophomonas sp. 22 Class GammaproteobacteriaAF358001.1.1499 uncultured bacterium DQ104991.1.1399 Mesorhizobium sp. JS 6 Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ228378.1.1424 uncultured bacterium DQ223206.1.1498 uncultured proteobacterium DQ499293.1.1494 uncultured bacterium DQ305289.1.1365 Mesorhizobium sp. S1−8 Class Alphaproteobacteria AY690680.1.1425 Mesorhizobium sp. GC15 Class Alphaproteobacteria AY922072.1.1337 uncultured alpha proteobacterium Class Alphaproteobacteria AY555807.1.1460 uncultured bacterium RS69 DQ113412.1.1322 uncultured Bartonella sp. Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ228413.1.1488 uncultured bacterium AY748888.1.1471 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Class Gammaproteobacteria AJ884484.1.1549 Stenotrophomonas sp. Class Gammaproteobacteria DQ113413.1.1323 uncultured Bartonella sp. Class Alphaproteobacteria CU918533.1.1283 uncultured bacterium AF100731.1.1472 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Class Gammaproteobacteria DQ507209.1.1446 Rhizobium sp. MTR32A Class Alphaproteobacteria RS10 CU919014.55.1379 uncultured bacterium AY856845.1.1538 Stenotrophomonas sp. 45 Class Gammaproteobacteria DQ468101.1.1444 Ochrobactrum sp. Yw15 Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ125653.1.1474 uncultured bacterium AB257640.1.1537 uncultured gamma proteobacterium Class Gammaproteobacteria AF250354.1.1401 Sinorhizobium xinjiangense Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ337551.1.1442 Rhizobium sp. BBCT66 Class Alphaproteobacteria AJ879127.1.1445 Sinorhizobium sp. L1 Class Alphaproteobacteria AM084032.1.1466 Sinorhizobium sp. R−25078 Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ337571.1.1448 Rhizobium sp. CHNTR26 Class Alphaproteobacteria RS43 AF508095.1.1212 Agrobacterium tumefaciens Class Alphaproteobacteria D14506.1.1472 Agrobacterium sp. NCPPB1650 Class Alphaproteobacteria RS59 CU922903.1.1294 uncultured bacterium AY725258.1.1506 uncultured bacterium AF525841.1.1409 uncultured soil bacterium RS32 DQ395499.1.1472 uncultured organism AY820173.1.1481 Stenotrophomonas sp. EBPR−1 Class Gammaproteobacteria CU927207.1.1306 uncultured bacterium DQ450758.1.1310 uncultured alpha proteobacterium Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ413077.1.1408 uncultured bacterium AY663436.1.1431 Stenotrophomonas sp. H2AY345536.1.1527 Class Gammaproteobacteria unidentified bacterium DQ463209.1.1285 uncultured bacterium AY661995.1.1531 uncultured bacterium DQ336968.1.1445 uncultured bacterium AY838526.1.1522 uncultured bacterium CU926364.1.1307 uncultured bacterium AJ973277.1.1534 Pseudomonas sp. NN84 Class Gammaproteobacteria RS77 CU926633.1.1307 uncultured bacterium RS67 CU922363.1.1299 uncultured bacterium 0.1 AB252934.1.1450 uncultured alpha proteobacterium Class Alphaproteobacteria AY373393.1.1491 uncultured bacterium AY957934.1.1474 uncultured bacterium AB247485.1.1471 uncultured bacterium AY958854.1.1516 uncultured bacterium AY081988.1.1463 uncultured bacterium CU924130.1.1350 uncultured bacterium CU927036.1.1332 uncultured bacterium AY959027.1.1519 uncultured bacterium DQ351924.1.1454 uncultured bacterium DQ465010.1.1523 Pseudomonas sp. VTT E−052911 Class Gammaproteobacteria DQ351918.1.1450 uncultured bacterium RS48 CP001002.146467.147942 Methylobacterium radiotolerans JCM 2831 Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ065780.1.1456 uncultured bacterium RS46 RS73 AY177358.1.1353 phenanthrene−degrading bacterium 35 Class Alphaproteobacteria RS54 AJ518767.1.1242 uncultured alpha proteobacterium Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ456289.1.1457 uncultured bacteriumRS83 AY922113.1.1346 uncultured alpha proteobacterium Class Alphaproteobacteria RS28 DQ347522.1.1399 Paracoccus sp. DL213327.8.1540B−1012 Class Alphaproteobacteria synthetic construct AF358002.1.1453 uncultured bacterium DQ071483.1.1508 uncultured bacterium RS47 DQ234100.1.1513 uncultured Enterobacteriaceae bacterium Class Gammaproteobacteria AB286367.1.1397 uncultured bacterium CU923508.1.1374 uncultured bacterium DQ234143.1.1570 uncultured EnterobacteriaceaeDQ248285.1.1502 bacterium unculturedGammaproteobacteria soil bacterium DQ303296.1.1480 uncultured Bradyrhizobium sp. Class Alphaproteobacteria DQ071123.1.1407 uncultured marine bacterium RS31 CP000826.298569.300103 Serratia proteamaculans 568 Class Gammaproteobacteria CU919026.2.1309 uncultured bacterium CU919927.2.1313 uncultured bacterium DQ297950.1.1449 uncultured soil bacterium CU918905.2.1313 uncultured bacterium AF407695.1.1523 uncultured bacterium AACY020355234.491.2006 marine metagenome D87345.1.1504 unculturable Mariana eubacterium no. 1 Class Gammaproteobacteria AY570631.1.1492 uncultured bacterium AJ488068.1.1625 uncultured bacterium AY570621.1.1493 uncultured bacterium RS60 DQ353902.1.1482 uncultured bacterium DQ492807.1.1480 Pseudoalteromonas sp. BSw20700 Class Gammaproteobacteria AY571338.1.1544 Sedimentibacter hongkongensis Class Clostridia RS68 AY913838.1.1434 uncultured bacterium RS78 RS45 DQ354709.1.1499 uncultured bacterium CU919563.1.1353
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Spatio-Temporal Study of Microbiology in the Stratified Oxic-Hypoxic-Euxinic, Freshwater- To-Hypersaline Ursu Lake
    Spatio-temporal insights into microbiology of the freshwater-to- hypersaline, oxic-hypoxic-euxinic waters of Ursu Lake Baricz, A., Chiriac, C. M., Andrei, A-., Bulzu, P-A., Levei, E. A., Cadar, O., Battes, K. P., Cîmpean, M., enila, M., Cristea, A., Muntean, V., Alexe, M., Coman, C., Szekeres, E. K., Sicora, C. I., Ionescu, A., Blain, D., O’Neill, W. K., Edwards, J., ... Banciu, H. L. (2020). Spatio-temporal insights into microbiology of the freshwater-to- hypersaline, oxic-hypoxic-euxinic waters of Ursu Lake. Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.14909, https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.14909 Published in: Environmental Microbiology Document Version: Peer reviewed version Queen's University Belfast - Research Portal: Link to publication record in Queen's University Belfast Research Portal Publisher rights Copyright 2019 Wiley. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Queen's University Belfast Research Portal is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The Research Portal is Queen's institutional repository that provides access to Queen's research output. Every effort has been made to ensure that content in the Research Portal does not infringe any person's rights, or applicable UK laws. If you discover content in the Research Portal that you believe breaches copyright or violates any law, please contact [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks Bioblitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 ON THIS PAGE Photograph of BioBlitz participants conducting data entry into iNaturalist. Photograph courtesy of the National Park Service. ON THE COVER Photograph of BioBlitz participants collecting aquatic species data in the Presidio of San Francisco. Photograph courtesy of National Park Service. The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 Elizabeth Edson1, Michelle O’Herron1, Alison Forrestel2, Daniel George3 1Golden Gate Parks Conservancy Building 201 Fort Mason San Francisco, CA 94129 2National Park Service. Golden Gate National Recreation Area Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1061 Sausalito, CA 94965 3National Park Service. San Francisco Bay Area Network Inventory & Monitoring Program Manager Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1063 Sausalito, CA 94965 March 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Genomics 98 (2011) 370–375
    Genomics 98 (2011) 370–375 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Genomics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ygeno Whole-genome comparison clarifies close phylogenetic relationships between the phyla Dictyoglomi and Thermotogae Hiromi Nishida a,⁎, Teruhiko Beppu b, Kenji Ueda b a Agricultural Bioinformatics Research Unit, Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, 1-1-1 Yayoi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan b Life Science Research Center, College of Bioresource Sciences, Nihon University, Fujisawa, Japan article info abstract Article history: The anaerobic thermophilic bacterial genus Dictyoglomus is characterized by the ability to produce useful Received 2 June 2011 enzymes such as amylase, mannanase, and xylanase. Despite the significance, the phylogenetic position of Accepted 1 August 2011 Dictyoglomus has not yet been clarified, since it exhibits ambiguous phylogenetic positions in a single gene Available online 7 August 2011 sequence comparison-based analysis. The number of substitutions at the diverging point of Dictyoglomus is insufficient to show the relationships in a single gene comparison-based analysis. Hence, we studied its Keywords: evolutionary trait based on whole-genome comparison. Both gene content and orthologous protein sequence Whole-genome comparison Dictyoglomus comparisons indicated that Dictyoglomus is most closely related to the phylum Thermotogae and it forms a Bacterial systematics monophyletic group with Coprothermobacter proteolyticus (a constituent of the phylum Firmicutes) and Coprothermobacter proteolyticus Thermotogae. Our findings indicate that C. proteolyticus does not belong to the phylum Firmicutes and that the Thermotogae phylum Dictyoglomi is not closely related to either the phylum Firmicutes or Synergistetes but to the phylum Thermotogae. © 2011 Elsevier Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Diversity of Bartonella Species in Small Mammals in the Qaidam
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Genetic diversity of Bartonella species in small mammals in the Qaidam Basin, western China Huaxiang Rao1, Shoujiang Li3, Liang Lu4, Rong Wang3, Xiuping Song4, Kai Sun5, Yan Shi3, Dongmei Li4* & Juan Yu2* Investigation of the prevalence and diversity of Bartonella infections in small mammals in the Qaidam Basin, western China, could provide a scientifc basis for the control and prevention of Bartonella infections in humans. Accordingly, in this study, small mammals were captured using snap traps in Wulan County and Ge’ermu City, Qaidam Basin, China. Spleen and brain tissues were collected and cultured to isolate Bartonella strains. The suspected positive colonies were detected with polymerase chain reaction amplifcation and sequencing of gltA, ftsZ, RNA polymerase beta subunit (rpoB) and ribC genes. Among 101 small mammals, 39 were positive for Bartonella, with the infection rate of 38.61%. The infection rate in diferent tissues (spleens and brains) (χ2 = 0.112, P = 0.738) and gender (χ2 = 1.927, P = 0.165) of small mammals did not have statistical diference, but that in diferent habitats had statistical diference (χ2 = 10.361, P = 0.016). Through genetic evolution analysis, 40 Bartonella strains were identifed (two diferent Bartonella species were detected in one small mammal), including B. grahamii (30), B. jaculi (3), B. krasnovii (3) and Candidatus B. gerbillinarum (4), which showed rodent-specifc characteristics. B. grahamii was the dominant epidemic strain (accounted for 75.0%). Furthermore, phylogenetic analysis showed that B. grahamii in the Qaidam Basin, might be close to the strains isolated from Japan and China.
    [Show full text]
  • Table S4. Phylogenetic Distribution of Bacterial and Archaea Genomes in Groups A, B, C, D, and X
    Table S4. Phylogenetic distribution of bacterial and archaea genomes in groups A, B, C, D, and X. Group A a: Total number of genomes in the taxon b: Number of group A genomes in the taxon c: Percentage of group A genomes in the taxon a b c cellular organisms 5007 2974 59.4 |__ Bacteria 4769 2935 61.5 | |__ Proteobacteria 1854 1570 84.7 | | |__ Gammaproteobacteria 711 631 88.7 | | | |__ Enterobacterales 112 97 86.6 | | | | |__ Enterobacteriaceae 41 32 78.0 | | | | | |__ unclassified Enterobacteriaceae 13 7 53.8 | | | | |__ Erwiniaceae 30 28 93.3 | | | | | |__ Erwinia 10 10 100.0 | | | | | |__ Buchnera 8 8 100.0 | | | | | | |__ Buchnera aphidicola 8 8 100.0 | | | | | |__ Pantoea 8 8 100.0 | | | | |__ Yersiniaceae 14 14 100.0 | | | | | |__ Serratia 8 8 100.0 | | | | |__ Morganellaceae 13 10 76.9 | | | | |__ Pectobacteriaceae 8 8 100.0 | | | |__ Alteromonadales 94 94 100.0 | | | | |__ Alteromonadaceae 34 34 100.0 | | | | | |__ Marinobacter 12 12 100.0 | | | | |__ Shewanellaceae 17 17 100.0 | | | | | |__ Shewanella 17 17 100.0 | | | | |__ Pseudoalteromonadaceae 16 16 100.0 | | | | | |__ Pseudoalteromonas 15 15 100.0 | | | | |__ Idiomarinaceae 9 9 100.0 | | | | | |__ Idiomarina 9 9 100.0 | | | | |__ Colwelliaceae 6 6 100.0 | | | |__ Pseudomonadales 81 81 100.0 | | | | |__ Moraxellaceae 41 41 100.0 | | | | | |__ Acinetobacter 25 25 100.0 | | | | | |__ Psychrobacter 8 8 100.0 | | | | | |__ Moraxella 6 6 100.0 | | | | |__ Pseudomonadaceae 40 40 100.0 | | | | | |__ Pseudomonas 38 38 100.0 | | | |__ Oceanospirillales 73 72 98.6 | | | | |__ Oceanospirillaceae
    [Show full text]
  • Bartonella Henselae Detected in Malignant Melanoma, a Preliminary Study
    pathogens Article Bartonella henselae Detected in Malignant Melanoma, a Preliminary Study Marna E. Ericson 1, Edward B. Breitschwerdt 2 , Paul Reicherter 3, Cole Maxwell 4, Ricardo G. Maggi 2, Richard G. Melvin 5 , Azar H. Maluki 4,6 , Julie M. Bradley 2, Jennifer C. Miller 7, Glenn E. Simmons, Jr. 5 , Jamie Dencklau 4, Keaton Joppru 5, Jack Peterson 4, Will Bae 4, Janet Scanlon 4 and Lynne T. Bemis 5,* 1 T Lab Inc., 910 Clopper Road, Suite 220S, Gaithersburg, MD 20878, USA; [email protected] 2 Intracellular Pathogens Research Laboratory, Comparative Medicine Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27607, USA; [email protected] (E.B.B.); [email protected] (R.G.M.); [email protected] (J.M.B.) 3 Dermatology Clinic, Truman Medical Center, University of Missouri, Kansas City, MO 64108, USA; [email protected] 4 Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; [email protected] (C.M.); [email protected] (A.H.M.); [email protected] (J.D.); [email protected] (J.P.); [email protected] (W.B.); [email protected] (J.S.) 5 Department of Biomedical Sciences, Duluth Campus, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Duluth, MN 55812, USA; [email protected] (R.G.M.); [email protected] (G.E.S.J.); [email protected] (K.J.) 6 Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, University of Kufa, Kufa 54003, Iraq 7 Galaxy Diagnostics Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA; [email protected] Citation: Ericson, M.E.; * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-720-560-0278; Fax: +1-218-726-7906 Breitschwerdt, E.B.; Reicherter, P.; Maxwell, C.; Maggi, R.G.; Melvin, Abstract: Bartonella bacilliformis (B.
    [Show full text]
  • NC10 Phylum Anaerobs? Methanotrophs? Where Can I Find Them?
    NC10 phylum Anaerobs? Methanotrophs? Where can I find them? Beate Kraft Microbial Diversity 2012 Abstract Methylomirabilis oxyfera, the only cultured member of the NC10 phylum performs the newly discovered pathway of NO-dismutation. In this study different habitats were screened for the presence of member of this phylum and the diversity of the sequences obtained was analyzed. Furthermore enrichment cultures for nitrite reduction coupled to methane oxidation were set up. Indeed, the presence of NC10 seems to be associated with nitrite and methane rich fresh water environments. Introduction Recently a new nitrite reduction pathway, NO-dismutation, coupled to methane oxidation has been discovered (Ettwig et al. 2010). In NO-dismutation nitrite is oxidized to NO as in denitrification but then NO dimutated into N2 and O2 instead of being further reduced to N2O. The generated oxygen is then used for methane oxidation. The organism responsible for this process is Methylomirabils oxfera. It is the only cultured member of the candidate phylum NC10. Fig 1: Pathway of NO-dismutation (from Ettwig et al. 2010) It remains open if other members of the NC10 phylum share the same metabolism and respiratory pathway or if they are metabolically more diverse. 16S sequences that fall into the NC10 phylum have been found in mainly oxygen limited freshwater habitats such as lakes including lake sediments, rice paddy soils, wastewater sludge and ditches (Deutzmann and Schink 2011, Luesken et a.l 2011). Their occurrence apparently seem to be correlated with the presence of methane and nitrite in the habitat. This would suggest a similar respiratory pathway as in Methylomirabilis oxyfera.
    [Show full text]
  • Yu-Chen Ling and John W. Moreau
    Microbial Distribution and Activity in a Coastal Acid Sulfate Soil System Introduction: Bioremediation in Yu-Chen Ling and John W. Moreau coastal acid sulfate soil systems Method A Coastal acid sulfate soil (CASS) systems were School of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia formed when people drained the coastal area Microbial distribution controlled by environmental parameters Microbial activity showed two patterns exposing the soil to the air. Drainage makes iron Microbial structures can be grouped into three zones based on the highest similarity between samples (Fig. 4). Abundant populations, such as Deltaproteobacteria, kept constant activity across tidal cycling, whereas rare sulfides oxidize and release acidity to the These three zones were consistent with their geological background (Fig. 5). Zone 1: Organic horizon, had the populations changed activity response to environmental variations. Activity = cDNA/DNA environment, low pH pore water further dissolved lowest pH value. Zone 2: surface tidal zone, was influenced the most by tidal activity. Zone 3: Sulfuric zone, Abundant populations: the heavy metals. The acidity and toxic metals then Method A Deltaproteobacteria Deltaproteobacteria this area got neutralized the most. contaminate coastal and nearby ecosystems and Method B 1.5 cause environmental problems, such as fish kills, 1.5 decreased rice yields, release of greenhouse gases, Chloroflexi and construction damage. In Australia, there is Gammaproteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria about a $10 billion “legacy” from acid sulfate soils, Chloroflexi even though Australia is only occupied by around 1.0 1.0 Cyanobacteria,@ Acidobacteria Acidobacteria Alphaproteobacteria 18% of the global acid sulfate soils. Chloroplast Zetaproteobacteria Rare populations: Alphaproteobacteria Method A log(RNA(%)+1) Zetaproteobacteria log(RNA(%)+1) Method C Method B 0.5 0.5 Cyanobacteria,@ Bacteroidetes Chloroplast Firmicutes Firmicutes Bacteroidetes Planctomycetes Planctomycetes Ac8nobacteria Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • The Phylogenetic Composition and Structure of Soil Microbial Communities Shifts in Response to Elevated Carbon Dioxide
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy The ISME Journal (2012) 6, 259–272 & 2012 International Society for Microbial Ecology All rights reserved 1751-7362/12 www.nature.com/ismej ORIGINAL ARTICLE The phylogenetic composition and structure of soil microbial communities shifts in response to elevated carbon dioxide Zhili He1, Yvette Piceno2, Ye Deng1, Meiying Xu1,3, Zhenmei Lu1,4, Todd DeSantis2, Gary Andersen2, Sarah E Hobbie5, Peter B Reich6 and Jizhong Zhou1,2 1Institute for Environmental Genomics, Department of Botany and Microbiology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA; 2Ecology Department, Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA; 3Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Microbial Culture Collection and Application, Guangdong Institute of Microbiology, Guangzhou, China; 4College of Life Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China; 5Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, St Paul, MN, USA and 6Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA One of the major factors associated with global change is the ever-increasing concentration of atmospheric CO2. Although the stimulating effects of elevated CO2 (eCO2) on plant growth and primary productivity have been established, its impacts on the diversity and function of soil microbial communities are poorly understood. In this study, phylogenetic microarrays (PhyloChip) were used to comprehensively survey the richness, composition and structure of soil microbial communities in a grassland experiment subjected to two CO2 conditions (ambient, 368 p.p.m., versus elevated, 560 p.p.m.) for 10 years. The richness based on the detected number of operational taxonomic units (OTUs) significantly decreased under eCO2.
    [Show full text]
  • Being Aquifex Aeolicus: Untangling a Hyperthermophile's Checkered Past
    GBE Being Aquifex aeolicus: Untangling a Hyperthermophile’s Checkered Past Robert J.M. Eveleigh1,2, Conor J. Meehan1,2,JohnM.Archibald1, and Robert G. Beiko2,* 1Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada 2Faculty of Computer Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada *Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected]. Accepted: November 22, 2013 Abstract Lateral gene transfer (LGT) is an important factor contributing to the evolution of prokaryotic genomes. The Aquificae are a hyper- thermophilic bacterial group whose genes show affiliations to many other lineages, including the hyperthermophilic Thermotogae, the Proteobacteria, and the Archaea. Previous phylogenomic analyses focused on Aquifex aeolicus identified Thermotogae and Downloaded from Aquificae either as successive early branches or sisters in a rooted bacterial phylogeny, but many phylogenies and cellular traits have suggested a stronger affiliation with the Epsilonproteobacteria. Different scenarios for the evolution of the Aquificae yield different phylogenetic predictions. Here, we outline these scenarios and consider the fit of the available data, including three sequenced Aquificae genomes, to different sets of predictions. Evidence from phylogenetic profiles and trees suggests that the Epsilonproteobacteria have the strongest affinities with the three Aquificae analyzed. However, this pattern is shown by only a http://gbe.oxfordjournals.org/ minority of encoded proteins, and the Archaea, many lineages of thermophilic bacteria, and members of genus Clostridium and class Deltaproteobacteria also show strong connections to the Aquificae. The phylogenetic affiliations of different functional subsystems showed strong biases: Most but not all genes implicated in the core translational apparatus tended to group Aquificae with Thermotogae, whereas a wide range of metabolic and cellular processes strongly supported the link between Aquificae and Epsilonproteobacteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Isolation of Francisella Tularensis from Skin Ulcer After a Tick Bite, Austria, 2020
    microorganisms Case Report Isolation of Francisella tularensis from Skin Ulcer after a Tick Bite, Austria, 2020 Mateusz Markowicz 1,*, Anna-Margarita Schötta 1 , Freya Penatzer 2, Christoph Matscheko 2, Gerold Stanek 1, Hannes Stockinger 1 and Josef Riedler 2 1 Center for Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Institute for Hygiene and Applied Immunology, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15, A-1090 Vienna, Austria; [email protected] (A.-M.S.); [email protected] (G.S.); [email protected] (H.S.) 2 Kardinal Schwarzenberg Klinikum, Kardinal Schwarzenbergplatz 1, A-5620 Schwarzach, Austria; [email protected] (F.P.); [email protected] (C.M.); [email protected] (J.R.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +43-1-40160-33023 Abstract: Ulceroglandular tularemia is caused by the transmission of Francisella tularensis by arthro- pods to a human host. We report a case of tick-borne tularemia in Austria which was followed by an abscess formation in a lymph node, making drainage necessary. F. tularensis subsp. holarctica was identified by PCR and multilocus sequence typing. Keywords: tularemia; Francisella tularensis; tick; multi locus sequence typing Depending on the transmission route of Francisella tularensis, tularemia can present Citation: Markowicz, M.; Schötta, as a local infection or a systemic disease [1]. Transmission of the pathogen takes place A.-M.; Penatzer, F.; Matscheko, C.; by contact with infected animals, by bites of arthropods or through contaminated water Stanek, G.; Stockinger, H.; Riedler, J. and soil. Hares and wild rabbits are the main reservoirs of the pathogen in Austria [2].
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Bartonellosis Christoph Dehio & Anna Sander
    Emerging bartonellosis Christoph Dehio & Anna Sander Bartonellae are arthropod-borne pathogens of they cause a long-lasting infection within the red blood Ggrowing medical importance. Until the early cells (intraerythrocytic bacteraemia). Blood-sucking 1990s, only two species of this bacterial genus, arthropod vectors transmit the bacteria from this reservoir B. bacilliformis and B. quintana, were recognized as caus- to new hosts. Incidental infection of non-reservoir hosts ing disease in humans. In addition to re-emergence of the (e.g. humans by the zoonotic species) may cause disease, human-specific B. quintana, a number of zoonotic but does not result in intraerythrocytic infection. Bartonella species have now been recognized as causative agents for a broadening spectrum of diseases that can be Natural history and epidemiology transmitted to humans from their animal hosts. Most Humans are the only known reservoir for two Bartonella prominently, B. henselae is an important zoonotic species, B. bacilliformis and B. quintana. pathogen that is frequently passed from its feline B. quintana was a leading cause of infectious morbidity reservoir to humans. among soldiers during World War I, and recurred on the Bacteria of the genus Bartonella are Gram-negative, East European front in World War II. The disease, pleomorphic, fastidious bacilli that belong to the α-2 Trench fever, is rarely fatal and is characterized by an subclass of Proteobacteria. All Bartonella species appear intraerythrocytic bacteraemia with recurrent, cycling to have a specific mammalian species as a host, in which fever. It is transmitted among humans by the human body louse Pediculus humanus. Although almost forgotten Table 1.
    [Show full text]