4.5 Article

Genome reduction in an abundant and ubiquitous soil bacterium 'Candidatus Udaeobacter copiosus'

期刊

NATURE MICROBIOLOGY
卷 2, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.198

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DEB0953331, EAR1331828]
  2. Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences
  3. Alfred P Sloan Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although bacteria within the Verrucomicrobia phylum are pervasive in soils around the world, they are under-represented in both isolate collections and genomic databases. Here, we describe a single verrucomicrobial group within the class Spartobacteria that is not closely related to any previously described taxa. We examined more than 1,000 soils and found this spartobacterial phylotype to be ubiquitous and consistently one of the most abundant soil bacterial phylotypes, particularly in grasslands, where it was typically the most abundant. We reconstructed a nearly complete genome of this phylotype from a soil metagenome for which we propose the provisional name 'Candidatus Udaeobacter copiosus'. The Ca. U. copiosus genome is unusually small for a cosmopolitan soil bacterium, estimated by one measure to be only 2.81 Mbp, compared to the predicted effective mean genome size of 4.74 Mbp for soil bacteria. Metabolic reconstruction suggests that Ca. U. copiosus is an aerobic heterotroph with numerous putative amino acid and vitamin auxotrophies. The large population size, relatively small genome and multiple putative auxotrophies characteristic of Ca. U. copiosus suggest that it may be undergoing streamlining selection to minimize cellular architecture, a phenomenon previously thought to be restricted to aquatic bacteria. Although many soil bacteria need relatively large, complex genomes to be successful in soil, Ca. U. copiosus appears to use an alternative strategy, sacrificing metabolic versatility for efficiency to become dominant in the soil environment.

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

4.5
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