4.4 Article

Roseovarius sediminilitoris sp nov., isolated from seashore sediment

出版社

SOC GENERAL MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1099/ijs.0.043737-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST) of the Republic of Korea
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2008-2004725] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A Gram-negative, motile and ovoid- to rod-shaped bacterial strain, designated M-M10(T), was isolated from a seashore sediment collected from the South Sea, South Korea. Strain M-M10(T) grew optimally at pH 7.0-8.0, at 30 degrees C and in the presence of 2% (w/v) NaCl. The phylogenetic trees based on 16S rRNA gene sequences revealed that strain M-M10(T) clustered with the type strains of Roseovarius crassostreae, Roseovarius halocynthiae and Roseovarius marinus, with which it exhibited sequence similarities of 97.4, 97.3 and 95.1%, respectively. It exhibited 93.2-95.1% sequence similarity to the type strains of the other species of the genus Roseovarius. Strain M-M10(T) contained Q-10 as the predominant ubiquinone and C-18:1 omega 7c and C-16:0 as the major fatty acids, as observed in the genus Roseovarius. The polar lipid profile of strain M-M10(T) was similar to that of Roseovarius tolerans DSM 11457(T). The DNA G+C content of strain M-M10(T) was 63.0 mol% and its mean DNA DNA relatedness values with Roseovarius crassostreae DSM 16950(T) and Roseovarius halocynthiae MA1-10(T) were 16 % and 22 %, respectively. Differential phenotypic properties, together with the phylogenetic and genetic distinctiveness, demonstrated that strain M-M10(T) is distinct from other species of the genus Roseovarius. On the basis of the data presented, strain M-M10(T) is considered to represent a novel species of the genus Roseovarius, for which the name Roseovarius sediminilitoris sp. nov. is proposed. The type strain is M-M10(T). (=KCTC 23959(T)=CCUG 62413(T)).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据