4.7 Article

Genotypic diversity in Oenococcus oeni by high-density microarray comparative genome hybridization and whole genome sequencing

Journal

APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 86, Issue 2, Pages 681-691

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00253-009-2425-6

Keywords

Comparative genomics; Whole genome sequencing; Lactic acid bacteria; Oenococcus

Funding

  1. The Australian Wine Research Institute (AWRI)
  2. Grape and Wine Research Development Corporation
  3. Australian Government

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Many bacteria display substantial intra-specific genomic diversity that produces significant phenotypic variation between strains of the same species. Understanding the genetic basis of these strain-specific phenotypes is especially important for industrial microorganisms where these characters match individual strains to specific industrial processes. Oenococcus oeni, a bacterium used during winemaking, is one such industrial species where large numbers of strains show significant differences in commercially important industrial phenotypes. To ascertain the basis of these phenotypic differences, the genomic content of ten wine strains of O. oeni were mapped by array-based comparative genome hybridization (aCGH). These strains comprised a genomically diverse group in which large sections of the reference genome were often absent from individual strains. To place the aCGH results in context, whole genome sequence was obtained for one of these strains and compared with two previously sequenced, unrelated strains. While the three strains shared a core group of conserved ORFs, up to 10% of the coding potential of any one strain was specific to that isolate. The genome of O. oeni is therefore likely to be much larger than that present in any single strain and it is these strain-specific regions that are likely to be responsible for differences in industrial phenotypes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available