4.4 Article

Dialister hominis sp. nov., isolated from human faeces

出版社

MICROBIOLOGY SOC
DOI: 10.1099/ijsem.0.003797

关键词

Dialister; hsp60; human faeces; succinate-utilizing bacteria

资金

  1. PRIME, the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [JP18gm6010007]
  2. AMED-CREST [JP18gm1010006]
  3. RIKEN Competitive Program for Creative Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An obligately anaerobic, Gram-stain-negative, rod or coccobacilli organism was isolated from a faecal sample of a healthy Japanese woman. In the 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis, strain 5BBH33(T) showed the highest 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity to Dialister succinatiphilus YIT 11850(T) (95.9%), Dialister propionicifaciens ADV 1053.03(T) (94.3 %), Dialister micraerophilus DSM 19965(T) (93.1%), Dialister invisus DSM 15470(T) (92.5%) and Dialister pneumosintes ATCC 33048(T) (91.4%). The hsp60 gene sequence analysis also revealed strain 5BBH33(T) had relatively low hsp60 gene sequence similarities (74.4-85.3%) to other Dialister species. Strain 5BBH33(T) showed 21.8-23.9% in silico DNA-DNA hybridization values with other Dialister species. In addition, the average nucleotide identity values between strain 5BBH33(T) and other Dialister species ranged from 68.7-74.2 %, indicating that this strain should be considered as new species based on whole-genome relatedness. Strain 5BBH33(T) was asaccharolytic and largely unreactive for commercial kit. However, its growth was enhanced by adding 1 % (w/v) succinate to the medium; strain 5BBH33(T) was able to decarboxylate succinate to propionate. The strain 5BBH33(T) genome contained the enzymes involved in succinate utilization. These results improve our understanding of succinate-utilizing bacteria. On the basis of the collected data, strain 5BBH33(T) represents a novel species in the genus Dialister, for which the name Dialister hominis sp. nov. is proposed. The type strain of D. hominis is 5BBH33(T) (=JCM 33369(T)=DSM 109768(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