A genome-based species taxonomy of the Lactobacillus genus complex

mSystems

Volumn 4, Issue 5, 2019, Pages

  Wittouck, Stijn ^a,b   Wuyts, Sander ^a   Meehan, Conor J ^c,d   van Noort, Vera ^b   Lebeer, Sarah ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD   (United Kingdom)

^d INSTITUTE OF TROPICAL MEDICINE   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Core genome; Genomics; Lactobacillus; Species delimitation; Taxonomy

Indexed keywords

RNA 16S;

ARTICLE; BACTERIAL GENOME; GENE SEQUENCE; LACTOBACILLUS; NONHUMAN; PHYLOGENY; SPECIES; SPECIES IDENTIFICATION; SUBSPECIES; TAXON; TAXONOMY; TYPE STRAIN;

EID: 85071934396     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23795077     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1128/mSystems.00264-19     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Sun Z, Harris HMB, McCann A, Guo C, Argimón S, Zhang W, Yang X, Jeffery IB, Cooney JC, Kagawa TF, Liu W, Song Y, Salvetti E, Wrobel A, Rasinkangas P, Parkhill J, Rea MC, O’Sullivan O, Ritari J, Douillard FP, Ross RP, Yang R, Briner AE, Felis GE, de Vos WM, Barrangou R, Klaenhammer TR, Caufield PW, Cui Y, Zhang H, O’Toole PW. 2015. Expanding the biotechnology potential of lactobacilli through comparative genomics of 213 strains and associated genera. Nat Commun 6:8322. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9322.
2. Duar RM, Lin XB, Zheng J, Martino ME, Grenier T, Perez-Munoz M, Leulier F, Ganzle MG, Walter J. 2017. Lifestyles in transition: evolution and natural history of the genus Lactobacillus. FEMS Microbiol Rev 41(Suppl 1):S27–S48. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsre/fux030.
3. Heeney DD, Gareau MG, Marco ML. 2018. Intestinal Lactobacillus in health and disease, a driver or just along for the ride? Curr Opin Biotechnol 49:140–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2017.08.004.
4. Petrova MI, Lievens E, Malik S, Imholz N, Lebeer S. 2015. Lactobacillus species as biomarkers and agents that can promote various aspects of vaginal health. Front Physiol 6:81. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2015.00081.
5. Wittouck S, Wuyts S, Lebeer S. 2019. Towards a genome-based reclassification of the genus Lactobacillus. Appl Environ Microbiol 85:e02155 -18. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02155-18.
6. Zheng J, Ruan L, Sun M, Gänzle M. 2015. A genomic view of lactobacilli and pediococci demonstrates that phylogeny matches ecology and physiology. Appl Environ Microbiol 81:7233–7243. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02116-15.
7. Salvetti E, Harris HMB, Felis GE, O’Toole PW. 2018. Comparative genomics of the genus Lactobacillus reveals robust phylogroups that provide the basis for reclassification. Appl Environ Microbiol 84:e00993-18. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00993-18.
8. Parks DH, Chuvochina M, Waite DW, Rinke C, Skarshewski A, Chaumeil P-A, Hugenholtz P. 2018. A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life. Nat Biotechnol 36:996–1004. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4229.
9. Jain C, Rodriguez RLM, Phillippy AM, Konstantinidis KT, Aluru S. 2018. High throughput ANI analysis of 90K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries. Nat Commun 9:5114. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07641-9.
10. Wright ES, Baum DA. 2018. Exclusivity offers a sound yet practical species criterion for bacteria despite abundant gene flow. BMC Genomics 19:724. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-5099-6.
11. Konstantinidis KT, Tiedje JM. 2005. Genomic insights that advance the species definition for prokaryotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102: 2567–2572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0409727102.
12. Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R. 2009. Shifting the genomic gold standard for the prokaryotic species definition. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 19126–19131. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0906412106.
13. Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics of Bacteria. 2008. The type strain of Lactobacillus casei is ATCC 393, ATCC 334 cannot serve as the type because it represents a different taxon, the name Lactobacillus paracasei and its subspecies names are not rejected and the revival of the name “Lactobacillus zeae” contravenes Rules 51b (1) and (2) of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria. Opinion 82. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 58:1764–1765. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.2008/005330-0.
14. Wuyts S, Wittouck S, De Boeck I, Allonsius CN, Pasolli E, Segata N, Lebeer S. 2017. Large-scale phylogenomics of the Lactobacillus casei group highlights taxonomic inconsistencies and reveals novel clade-associated features. mSystems 2:e00061-17. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSystems.00061-17.
15. Euzéby JP. 1997. List of Bacterial Names with Standing in Nomenclature: a folder available on the Internet. Int J Syst Bacteriol 47:590–592. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-47-2-590.
16. Parte AC. 2014. LPSN—list of prokaryotic names with standing in nomenclature. Nucleic Acids Res 42:D613–D616. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkt1111.
17. DSMZ. 2017. Prokaryotic Nomenclature Up-to-Date. Deutsche Sammlung von Mikroorganismen und Zellkulturen, Braunschweig, Germany. Accessed 30 January 2019.
18. Heo J, Saitou S, Tamura T, Cho H, Kim J-S, Joa J-H, Kim J-S, Kwon S-W, Kim S-J. 2018. Lactobacilus nuruki sp. nov., isolated from Nuruk, a Korean fermentation starter. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 68:3273–3278. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.002976.
19. Douillard FP, Ribbera A, Kant R, Pietilä TE, Järvinen HM, Messing M, Randazzo CL, Paulin L, Laine P, Ritari J, Caggia C, Lähteinen T, Brouns SJJ, Satokari R, von Ossowski I, Reunanen J, Palva A, de Vos WM. 2013. Comparative genomic and functional analysis of 100 Lactobacillus rhamnosus strains and their comparison with strain GG. PLoS Genet 9:e1003683. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003683.
20. Martino ME, Bayjanov JR, Caffrey BE, Wels M, Joncour P, Hughes S, Gillet B, Kleerebezem M, van Hijum S, Leulier F. 2016. Nomadic lifestyle of Lactobacillus plantarum revealed by comparative genomics of 54 strains isolated from different habitats. Environ Microbiol 18:4974–4989. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13455.
21. Dykhuizen DE, Green L. 1991. Recombination in Escherichia coli and the definition of biological species. J Bacteriol 173:7257–7268. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.173.22.7257-7268.1991.
22. Cohan FM, Kane M. 2001. Bacterial species and speciation. Syst Biol 50:513–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150118398.
23. McFrederick QS, Vuong HQ, Rothman JA. 2018. Lactobacillus micheneri sp. nov., Lactobacillus timberlakei sp. nov. and Lactobacillus quenuiae sp. nov., lactic acid bacteria isolated from wild bees and flowers. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 68:1879–1884. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.002758.
24. Tanasupawat S, Shida O, Okada S, Komagata K. 2000. Lactobacillus acidipiscis sp. nov. and Weissella thailandensis sp. nov., isolated from fermented fish in Thailand. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 50:1479–1485. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-50-4-1479.
25. Lee S-H, Ku H-J, Ahn M-J, Hong J-S, Lee SH, Shin H, Lee KC, Lee J-S, Ryu S, Jeon CO, Lee J-H. 2015. Weissella jogaejeotgali sp. nov., isolated from jogae jeotgal, a traditional Korean fermented seafood. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 65:4674–4681. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.000631.
26. Charlton DB, Nelson ME, Werkman CH. 1934. Physiology of Lactobacillus fructivorans sp. nov. isolated from spoiled salad dressing. Iowa State Coll J Sci 9:1–11.
27. Kitahara K, Kaneko T, Goto O. 1957. Taxonomic studies on the hiochibacteria, specific saprophytes of sake. J Gen Appl Microbiol 3:111–120. https://doi.org/10.2323/jgam.3.111.
28. Suzuki K, Asano S, Iijima K, Kitamoto K. 2008. Sake and beer spoilage lactic acid bacteria - a review. J Inst Brewing 114:209. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2008.tb00331.x.
29. Parker CT, Tindall BJ, Garrity GM. 2019. International code of nomenclature of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 69:S1–111. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.000778.
30. Lindner P. 1887. Über ein neues in Malzmaischen vorkommendes, milchsäurebildendes. Ferment Wochenschr Brauerei 4:437– 440.
31. Doi K, Nishizaki Y, Fujino Y, Ohshima T, Ohmomo S, Ogata S. 2009. Pediococcus lolii sp. nov., isolated from ryegrass silage. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 59:1007–1010. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.005793-0.
32. Wieme A, Cleenwerck I, Van Landschoot A, Vandamme P. 2012. Pediococcus lolii DSM 19927T and JCM 15055T are strains of Pediococcus acidilactici. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 62:3105–3108. https://doi.org/10 .1099/ijs.0.046201-0.
33. Naser SM, Vancanneyt M, Snauwaert C, Vrancken G, Hoste B, De Vuyst L, Swings J. 2006. Reclassification of Lactobacillus amylophilus LMG 11400 and NRRL B-4435 as Lactobacillus amylotrophicus sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 56:2523–2527. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.64463-0.
34. Nakamura LK. 1981. Lactobacillus amylovorus, a new starch-hydrolyzing species from cattle waste-corn fermentations. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 31:56–63. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-31-1-56.
35. Pang H, Kitahara M, Tan Z, Wang Y, Qin G, Ohkuma M, Cai Y. 2012. Reclassification of Lactobacillus kimchii and Lactobacillus bobalius as later subjective synonyms of Lactobacillus paralimentarius. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 62:2383–2387. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.035329-0.
36. Yoon JH, Kang SS, Mheen TI, Ahn JS, Lee HJ, Kim TK, Park CS, Kho YH, Kang KH, Park YH. 2000. Lactobacillus kimchii sp. nov., a new species from kimchi. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 50:1789–1795. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-50-5-1789.
37. Manes-Lazaro R, Ferrer S, Rodas AM, Urdiain M, Pardo I. 2008. Lactobacillus bobalius sp. nov., a lactic acid bacterium isolated from Spanish Bobal grape must. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 58:2699–2703. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.65695-0.
38. Cai Y, Okada H, Mori H, Benno Y, Nakase T. 1999. Lactobacillus paralimentarius sp. nov., isolated from sourdough. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 49:1451–1455. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-49-4-1451.
39. Shaw BG, Harding CD. 1989. Leuconostoc gelidum sp. nov. and Leuconostoc carnosum sp. nov. from chill-stored meats. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 39:217–223. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-39-3-217.
40. Kim B, Lee J, Jang J, Kim J, Han H. 2003. Leuconostoc inhae sp. nov., a lactic acid bacterium isolated from kimchi. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 53:1123–1126. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.02463-0.
41. Björkroth KJ, Geisen R, Schillinger U, Weiss N, De Vos P, Holzapfel WH, Korkeala HJ, Vandamme P. 2000. Characterization of Leuconostoc gasicomitatum sp. nov., associated with spoiled raw tomato-marinated broiler meat strips packaged under modified-atmosphere conditions. Appl Environ Microbiol 66:3764–3772. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.66.9.3764-3772.2000.
42. Lauer E, Kandler O. 1980. Lactobacillus gasseri sp. nov., a new species of the subgenus Thermobacterium. Zentralblr Bakteriol I Abt Orig C 1:75–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0172-5564(80)80019-4.
43. Tanizawa Y, Tada I, Kobayashi H, Endo A, Maeno S, Toyoda A, Arita M, Nakamura Y, Sakamoto M, Ohkuma M, Tohno M. 2018. Lactobacillus paragasseri sp. nov., a sister taxon of Lactobacillus gasseri, based on whole-genome sequence analyses. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 68: 3512–3517. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.003020.
44. Tsenkovskil L. 1878. Gel formation of sugar beet solutions. Proc Soc Nat Sci Imperial Univ Kharkov 12:137–167. (In Russian.)
45. Jeon HH, Kim KH, Chun BH, Ryu BH, Han NS, Jeon CO. 2017. A proposal of Leuconostoc mesenteroides subsp. jonggajibkimchii subsp. nov. and reclassification of Leuconostoc mesenteroides subsp. suionicum (Gu et al., 2012) as Leuconostoc suionicum sp. nov. based on complete genome sequences. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 67:2225–2230. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.001930.
46. Orla-Jensen S. 1916. Maelkeri-bakteriologi. Schønbergske Forlag, Copenhagen, Denmark. (In Danish).
47. Kuznetsov VD. 1959. A new species of lactic acid bacteria. Mikrobiologiia 28:248–351.
48. Hansen PA, Lessel EF. 1971. Lactobacillus casei (Orla-Jensen) comb. nov. Int J Syst Bacteriol 21:69–71. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-21-1-69.
49. Skerman VBD, McGowan V, Sneath P (ed). 1980. Approved Lists of Bacterial Names. Int J Syst Bacteriol 30:225– 420. https://doi.org/10.1099/ 00207713-30-1-225.
50. Dellaglio F, Dicks LMT, Du Toit M, Torriani S. 1991. Designation of ATCC 334 in place of ATCC 393 (NCDO 161) as the neotype strain of Lactobacillus casei subsp. casei and rejection of the name Lactobacillus paracasei (Collins et al., 1989): request for an opinion. Int J Syst Bacteriol 41:340–342. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-41-2-340.
51. Garvie EI. 1960. The genus Leuconostoc and its nomenclature. J Dairy Res 27:283–292. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029900010359.
52. Fujisawa T, Shirasaka S, Watabe J, Mitsuoka T. 1984. Lactobacillus aviarius sp. nov.: a new species isolated from the intestine of chickens. Syst Appl Microbiol 5:414–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0723-2020(84) 80042-9.
53. Pritchard L, Glover RH, Humphris S, Elphinstone JG, Toth IK. 2016. Genomics and taxonomy in diagnostics for food security: soft-rotting enterobacterial plant pathogens. Anal Methods 8:12–24. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5AY02550H.
54. Hyatt D, Chen G-L, Locascio PF, Land ML, Larimer FW, Hauser LJ. 2010. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics 11:119. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471 -2105-11-119.
55. Emms DM, Kelly S. 2015. OrthoFinder: solving fundamental biases in whole genome comparisons dramatically improves orthogroup inference accuracy. Genome Biol 16:157. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015 -0721-2.
56. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. 1990. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215:403–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0022-2836(05)80360-2.
57. Dongen S. 2000. A cluster algorithm for graphs. Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science (CWI), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
58. Katoh K, Misawa K, Kuma K-I, Miyata T. 2002. MAFFT: a novel method for rapid multiple sequence alignment based on fast Fourier transform. Nucleic Acids Res 30:3059–3066. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkf436.
59. Sing T, Sander O, Beerenwinkel N, Lengauer T. 2005. ROCR: visualizing classifier performance in R. Bioinformatics 21:3940–3941. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti623.
60. Rice P, Longden I, Bleasby A. 2000. EMBOSS: the European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite. Trends Genet 16:276–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9525(00)02024-2.
61. R Core Team. 2018. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
62. Winter DJ. 2017. rentrez: an R package for the NCBI eUtils API. PeerJ Preprints 5:e3179v2. https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3179v2.
63. Verslyppe B, De Smet W, De Baets B, De Vos P, Dawyndt P. 2014. StrainInfo introduces electronic passports for microorganisms. Syst Appl Microbiol 37:42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.syapm.2013.11.002.
64. Seemann T. 2018. barrnap 0.9: rapid ribosomal RNA prediction.
65. Capella-Gutiérrez S, Silla-Martínez JM, Gabaldón T. 2009. trimAl: a tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. Bioinformatics 25:1972–1973.
66. Stamatakis A. 2014. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30:1312–1313. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033.
67. Stamatakis A, Hoover P, Rougemont J. 2008. A rapid bootstrap algorithm for the RAxML Web servers. Syst Biol 57:758 –771. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150802429642.
68. Pattengale N, Alipour M, Bininda-Emonds O, Moret B, Stamatakis A. 2009. How many bootstrap replicates are necessary? J Comput Biol 5541:184–200.
69. Wickham H. 2017. tidyverse: easily install and load the “Tidyverse.”
70. Yu G, Smith DK, Zhu H, Guan Y, Lam T. 2016. ggtree: an R package for visualization and annotation of phylogenetic trees with their covariates and other associated data. Methods Ecol Evol 8:28–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12628.