4.8 Article

Cultivation and genomics of the first freshwater SAR11 (LD12) isolate

期刊

ISME JOURNAL
卷 12, 期 7, 页码 1846-1860

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41396-018-0092-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. Louisiana Board of Regents [LEQSF(2014-17)-RD-A-06]
  2. LSU Department of Biological Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Evolutionary transitions between fresh and salt water happen infrequently among bacterioplankton. Within the ubiquitous and highly abundant heterotrophic Alphaproteobacteria order Pelagibacterales (SAR11), most members live in marine habitats, but the LD12 subclade has evolved as a unique freshwater lineage. LD12 cells occur as some of the most dominant freshwater bacterioplankton, yet this group has remained elusive to cultivation, hampering a more thorough understanding of its biology. Here, we report the first successful isolation of an LD12 representative, strain LSUCC0530, using highthroughput dilution-to-extinction cultivation methods, and its complete genome sequence. Growth experiments corroborate ecological data suggesting active populations of LD12 in brackish water up to salinities of similar to 5. LSUCC0530 has the smallest closed genome thus far reported for a SAR11 strain (1.16 Mbp). The genome affirms many previous metabolic predictions from cultivation-independent analyses, like a complete Embden-Meyerhof-Parnas glycolysis pathway, but also provides novel insights, such as the first isocitrate dehydrogenase in LD12, a likely homologous recombination of malate synthase from outside of the SAR11 clade, and analogous substitutions of ion transporters with others that occur throughout the rest of the SAR11 clade. Growth data support metagenomic recruitment results suggesting temperature-based ecotype diversification within LD12. Key gene losses for osmolyte uptake provide a succinct hypothesis for the evolutionary transition of LD12 from salt to freshwater. For strain LSUCC0530, we propose the provisional nomenclature Candidatus fonsibacter ubiquis.

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

4.8
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