4.5 Article

Classifying the uncultivated microbial majority: A place for metagenomic data in the Candidatus proposal

Journal

SYSTEMATIC AND APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages 223-230

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.syapm.2015.01.001

Keywords

Candidatus; Species concept; Taxonomy; Metagenomics; 16 rRNA gene; Uncultivated diversity

Funding

  1. US National Science Foundation [DEB 0516252, DEB 1241046]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Economy [CGL2012-39627-C03-03]
  3. European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) funds
  4. preparatory phase of Microbial Resource Research Infrastructure (MIRRI) - EU [312251]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Microbial taxonomists have generally been reluctant to accept the valid publication of names of uncultured taxa given that only pure cultures allow for a thorough description of the genealogy, genetics and phenotype of the putative taxa to be classified. The classification of conspicuous uncultured organisms has been considered into the Candidatus provisional status, but this is only possible with organisms for which it is possible to retrieve basic data on phylogeny, morphology, ecology and some metabolic traits that unequivocally identify them. The current developments on modern sequencing techniques, and especially metagenomics, allow the recognition of discrete populations of DNA sequences in environmental samples, which can be considered to belong to individual closely related populations that may be identified as members of yet-to-be described species. The recognition of such populations of (meta)genomes allow the retrieval of valuable taxonomic information, i.e. genealogy, genome, phenotypic coherence with other populations, and ecological relevant traits. Such traits may be included in the Candidatus proposals of environmentally occurring, yet uncultured species not exhibiting exceptional morphologies, phenotypes or ecological relevancies. (C) 2015 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available