4.4 Article

Nocardioides marinisabuli sp nov., a novel actinobacterium isolated from beach sand

出版社

SOC GENERAL MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1099/ijs.0.65127-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Korea Institute of Industrial Technology(KITECH) [C04-07] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2006-07336] 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

The taxonomic position of a novel actinobacterium (designated SBS-12(T)), which was isolated from beach sand on Jeju Island, Republic of Korea, was determined following a polyphasic taxonomic characterization. Cells of the organism were Gram-positive, catalase-positive, oxiclase-negative and non-motile rods. The organism contained LL-diaminopimelic acid in the cell-wall peptidoglycan and MK-8(H-4) as predominant menaquinone, and had a polar lipid profile containing phosphatidylglycerol and phosphatidylinositol, iSO-C-16:0 as the major fatty acid and a DNA G+C content of 73.1 mol%. A neighbour-joining tree based on 16S rRNA gene sequences showed that the organism occupies a distinct phylogenetic: position within the radiation including representatives of the family Nocardioidaceae. High levels of 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity were found with Nocardioides kribbensis (97.2 %), Nocardioides aquiterrae (96.9 %), Nocardioides pyridinolyticus (96.6 %) and Nocardioides aquaticus (96.3 %). The combination of morphological and chemotaxonomic characteristics was consistent with classification in the genus Nocardioides, but the isolate can be differentiated from all Nocardioides species with validly published names by a range of physiological properties. The name Nocardioides marinisabuli sp. nov. is proposed for this novel organism, with the type strain SIBS-12(T) (=JBRI 2003(T) =KCCM 42681(T) =DSM 18965(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