Skip to main content
Microbiology Resource Announcements logoLink to Microbiology Resource Announcements
. 2025 Aug 11;14(9):e00502-25. doi: 10.1128/mra.00502-25

Draft genome sequences of 25 candidate biocontrol bacteria against Phytophthora cactorum

Juliane Ferreira 1,2, Hans Rediers 1,2,✉
Editor: David A Baltrus3
PMCID: PMC12424375  PMID: 40788124

ABSTRACT

To provide a biocontrol solution for managing the phytopathogen Phytophthora cactorum, bacteria were tested for antagonistic activity in vitro and in planta. This paper presents the draft genomes of 25 candidate biocontrol organisms, providing a solid foundation to decipher the underlying mechanisms of their antagonistic activity.

KEYWORDS: biocontrol, Phytophthora cactorum, Illumina sequencing, whole genome sequencing

ANNOUNCEMENT

Phytophthora cactorum is one of the most economically important phytopathogens in the world, causing significant annual yield losses across a wide range of crops (1). Chemical control is often inefficient, increases fungicide resistance, and is being phased out for its detrimental side effects (2–4). To support a more sustainable agriculture, the focus is set on biological control. In a recent study, 38 phylogenetically diverse bacteria were tested for their biocontrol potential against P. cactorum (J. Ferreira, B. Lievens, and H. Rediers, unpublished data). Among these, 25 bacterial strains were not fully sequenced yet.

Here, we report the draft genome sequences of 25 candidate biocontrol strains, consisting of 11 Bacillus spp., 3 Pantoea spp., 2 Peribacillus spp., 2 Priesta spp., and 7 Pseudomonas spp. These strains belong to the PME&BIM −80°C glycerol culture collection and were isolated in-house from various niches, including banana rhizosphere, sludge, whiskey barrel, nectar, and insects (Table 1).

TABLE 1.

Summary of the assembly parameters of the 25 candidate biocontrol bacteriaa

Strain Species IDc ANI%d Origin Isolation source GenBank accession no. SRA accession no. No. of readse Avg coverage No. of ctg Largest ctg (bp)f Genome assembly size (bp) Ctg N50 (kbp)f GC% No. of CDSg No. of tRNA No. of rRNA Contamination
%h
Completeness
%h
BW7P1 Pseudomonas bananamidigenes 97.07 Sri Lanka Banana rhizosphere JBNMSE000000000 SRX28306108 4,938,501 117 72 1,129,168 6,077,771 365.4 60.5 5,421 59 5 0.15 100
ST01.11_032 Priestia megaterium 96.97 Belgium Sludge JBNMSD000000000 SRX28306109 959,661 25 111 824,800 5,572,100 370.3 37.5 5,699 60 13 0.8 100
ST01.11_034 Bacillus altitudinis 98.45 Belgium Sludge JBNMSC000000000 SRX28306121 3,204,954 126 33 908,681 3,708,887 614.2 41.0 3,776 62 7 0.25 100
ST01.11_050 Bacillus pumilus 95.45 Belgium Sludge JBNMSB000000000 SRX28306126 2,241,284 88 50 862,170 3,682,460 616.5 41.5 3,719 63 9 0 100
ST01.11_055 Bacillus toyonensis 98.34 Belgium Sludge JBNMSA000000000 SRX28306127 7,097,656 121 141 635,469 5,900,098 318.2 35.0 5,981 70 6 0.21 100
ST01.11_056 Bacillus subtilis 98.55 Belgium Sludge JBNMRZ000000000 SRX28306128 4,095,536 172 84 1,084,249 4,095,536 1,044.8 44.0 4,216 67 7 0.08 100
ST01.11_057 Peribacillus simplex 91.07 Belgium Sludge JBNMRY000000000 SRX28306129 8,493,073 228 811 414,279 5,416,895 85.2 39.5 5,710 70 9 0.95 100
ST01.11_082 Bacillus pumilus 95.49 Belgium Sludge JBNMRX000000000 SRX28306130 7,886,892 308 54 956,109 3,722,690 643.7 41.5 3,771 64 8 0 100
ST01.11_096 Priestia megaterium 97.06 Belgium Sludge JBNMRW000000000 SRX28306131 6,532,029 168 209 1,224,908 5,669,09 708.6 37.5 5,916 77 15 1.13 100
ST01.11_112 Peribacillus simplex 94.52 Belgium Sludge JBNMRV000000000 SRX28306132 6,486,018 179 381 279,955 5,293,975 99.3 40.0 5,282 66 11 0.3 100
ST12.11_029 Bacillus wiedmannii 96.28 Belgium Whiskey barrel JBNMRU000000000 SRX28306110 7,538,873 189 221 470,079 5,898,176 81.3 35.0 5,999 66 6 0.2 100
ST12.14_237b Pseudomonas zeae 97.68 Belgium Cornflower nectar JBNMRT000000000 SRX28306111 6,193,593 136 119 732,130 6,585,441 331.0 59.0 5,926 60 4 0.37 100
ST12.14_379b Pseudomonas zeae 97.67 Belgium Borage nectar JBNMRS000000000 SRX28306112 11,227,064 247 63 611,397 6,566,488 331.0 59.0 5,876 61 4 0.37 100
ST12.14_392b Pseudomonas zeae 97.66 Belgium Borage nectar JBNMRR000000000 SRX28306113 5,316,136 116 100 732,577 6,581,027 379.7 59.0 5,912 61 4 0.37 100
ST12.14_393 Pantoea agglomerans 98.44 Belgium Borage nectar JBNMRQ000000000 SRX28306114 8,127,762 244 200 602,208 4,828,456 470.9 55.0 4,567 68 8 0.08 100
ST12.14_520b Pseudomonas kitaguniensis 96.54 Belgium Helleborine nectar JBNMRP000000000 SRX28306115 2,427,057 55 266 257,359 6,145,138 131.2 59.5 5,704 59 3 0.87 100
ST12.15_006 Bacillus velezensis 99.99 Belgium Aphidus ervi JBNMRO000000000 SRX28306116 5,316,153 197 218 766,952 3,912,410 422.4 46.5 3,836 71 10 0.57 100
ST12.15_014 Pseudomonas shirazensis 99.17 Belgium Aphidus ervi JBNMRN000000000 SRX28306117 9,986,911 274 73 450,008 5,247,258 171.5 61.5 4,807 66 4 0.05 100
ST12.15_023 Pseudomonas fragariae 94.96 Belgium Psylla pyri JBNMRM000000000 SRX28306118 4,498,446 103 365 510,199 6,296,113 190.2 59.0 5,678 56 5 0.22 100
ST14.12_094 Pantoea agglomerans 98.52 Belgium Helleborine nectar JBNMRL000000000 SRX28306120 7,745,336 228 183 530,366 4,889,562 225.1 55.0 4,576 62 8 0.02 100
ST14.12_205 Pantoea agglomerans 98.33 Belgium Helleborine nectar JBNMRK000000000.2 SRX28306119 8,879,989 278 298 246,398 4,791,170 66.1 55.13 4,557 52 3 0.55 99.99
ST14.14_008 Bacillus altitudinis 97.91 Belgium Whiskey barrel JBNMRJ000000000 SRX28306122 7,561,929 285 57 818,994 3,845,368 298.5 41.0 3,914 60 7 0.01 100
ST14.14_009 Bacillus subtilis 99.96 Belgium Whiskey barrel JBNMRI000000000 SRX28306123 4,819,543 171 45 1,057,479 4,083,235 1,043.3 43.5 4,199 70 13 0.01 100
ST14.14_013 Bacillus wiedmannii 96.25 Belgium Whiskey barrel JBNMRH000000000 SRX28306124 6,741,869 166 242 941,155 5,890,985 415.8 35.0 5,926 72 8 0.17 100
ST14.14_029 Bacillus altitudinis 98.00 Belgium Whiskey barrel JBNMRG000000000 SRX28306125 7,900,903 292 227 489,933 3,828,296 243.2 41.5 4,003 62 11 0.62 100
a

All the parameters described are for assemblies with contigs above 200 bp.

b

Reads decontaminated with the following taxids: 135623, 91347, 135614, 28211, and 2759 using Kraken2.

c

Species-level identification was done using multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) using the PubMLST interface.

d

The average nucleotide identity based on BLAST analysis (ANIb) was done against the reference strain of the species.

e

The number of raw reads.

f

ctg, contig.

g

CDS, coding sequence.

h

Completeness and contamination percentages were determined with checkm2 using the neural network model.

Genomic DNA was obtained from overnight bacterial pure cultures inoculated from a single colony and grown on Tryptone Soy Broth (Oxoid). The DNA extraction was achieved using the DNeasy UltraClean Microbial Kit (Qiagen) following the manufacturer’s instructions. The 151 bp paired-end read libraries were prepared for Illumina sequencing on the NovaSeq platform with Novogenes (UK) or Genomics Core (Belgium), roughly as described previously (5). All downstream sequence analyses were performed on the Galaxy platform (6), with default parameters. After the quality check of the raw reads with FastQC (v0.12.1, 7), they were filtered and trimmed with Trimmomatic (v0.36, 8). Contaminant reads originating from carry-over during sequencing were discarded based on their taxonomic identification with Kraken2 (v2.1.3, 9). Paired reads with a Phred score above 30 were assembled de novo using SPAdes (v3.15.4, 10). The completeness and quality of the assembly were assessed with CheckM2 (v1.0.2, 11) and QUAST (v5.3.0, 12), respectively. Strain ST14.12/205 exhibited a high contamination rate and was therefore decontaminated by binning the assembly using MaxBin2 (v2.2.7, 13). Reads were then mapped to the target bin with Bowtie2 (v2.5.3, 14), and the mapped reads were reassembled following the described pipeline. Gene prediction and functional annotation were achieved with PGAP (v6.10, 15). Species identification was achieved using the PubMLST interface (accessed in February 2025, 16) and confirmed by assessing the average nucleotide identity (ANI) with the reference genome of the closest identified species using FastANI (v1.3, 17).

Overall, the draft genomes' average coverage was 180× (25×–308×), with an average of 226 contigs over 200 bp, and N50 of 66.1 kb to 1,044 kbp. Genome sizes and GC% varied for the species of Bacillus (3.7–5.9 Mbp; 35–47%), Pantoea (4.8 Mbp; 55%), Peribacillus (5.3–5.4 Mbp; 40%), Piestia (5.6–5.7 Mbp; 38%), and Pseudomonas (5.3–6.6 Mbp; 59–62%).

The availability of draft genomes of the candidate biocontrol strains will contribute to future studies to decipher the molecular mechanisms underlying their antagonistic activity toward P. cactorum and other relevant plant pathogens. In addition, it allows studying niche-specific genetic differences in strains belonging to the same species but isolated from various sources.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek organization (grant no. 1SC6425N) and by VLAIO (Flanders Innovation and Entrepreneurship) (HBC.2017.0833).

Contributor Information

Hans Rediers, Email: hans.rediers@kuleuven.be.

David A. Baltrus, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA

DATA AVAILABILITY

The draft genome assemblies have been deposited in GenBank, and the raw reads before decontamination have been deposited in SRA. The corresponding accession numbers are listed and linked in Table 1. All the data produced are part of the BioProject PRJNA1216553, hosted by the NCBI organization.

REFERENCES

  • 1. Erwin DC, Ribeiro OK. 1996. Phytophthora diseases worldwide. APS Press, St. Paul, Minnesota. [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Rosskopf E, Gioia FD, Vincent I, Hong J, Zhao X. 2024. Impacts of the ban on the soil-applied fumigant methyl bromide. Phytopathology 114:1161–1175. doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-09-23-0345-IA [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Cabrera JA, Hanson BD, Gerik JS, Gao S, Qin R, Wang D. 2015. Pre-plant soil fumigation with reduced rates under low permeability films for nursery production, orchard and vineyard replanting. Crop Prot 75:34–39. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2015.05.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Marin MV, Seijo TE, Zuchelli E, Peres NA. 2021. Resistance to mefenoxam of Phytophthora cactorum and Phytophthora nicotianae causing crown and leather rot in Florida strawberry. Plant Dis 105:3490–3495. doi: 10.1094/PDIS-11-20-2474-RE [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Kim N, Vargas P, Fortuna K, Wagemans J, Rediers H. 2023. Draft genome sequences of 27 rhizogenic Agrobacterium biovar 1 strains, the causative agent of hairy root disease. Microbiol Resour Announc 12. doi: 10.1128/mra.00124-23 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Abueg LAL, Afgan E, Allart O, Awan AH, Bacon WA, Baker D, Bassetti M, Batut B, Bernt M, Blankenberg D, et al. 2024. The Galaxy platform for accessible, reproducible, and collaborative data analyses: 2024 update. Nucleic Acids Res 52:W83–W94. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkae410 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Andrews S. 2010. FastQC: a quality control tool for high throughput sequence data. Available from: http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc
  • 8. Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. 2014. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30:2114–2120. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Wood DE, Salzberg SL. 2014. Kraken: ultrafast metagenomic sequence classification using exact alignments. Genome Biol 15:R46. doi: 10.1186/gb-2014-15-3-r46 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M, Kulikov AS, Lesin VM, Nikolenko SI, Pham S, Prjibelski AD, Pyshkin AV, Sirotkin AV, Vyahhi N, Tesler G, Alekseyev MA, Pevzner PA. 2012. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol 19:455–477. doi: 10.1089/cmb.2012.0021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Chklovski A, Parks DH, Woodcroft BJ, Tyson GW. 2023. CheckM2: a rapid, scalable and accurate tool for assessing microbial genome quality using machine learning. Nat Methods 20:1203–1212. doi: 10.1038/s41592-023-01940-w [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Mikheenko A, Prjibelski A, Saveliev V, Antipov D, Gurevich A. 2018. Versatile genome assembly evaluation with QUAST-LG. Bioinformatics 34:i142–i150. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty266 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Wu Y-W, Simmons BA, Singer SW. 2016. MaxBin 2.0: an automated binning algorithm to recover genomes from multiple metagenomic datasets. Bioinformatics 32:605–607. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv638 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Langmead B, Salzberg SL. 2012. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods 9:357–359. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1923 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Tatusova T, DiCuccio M, Badretdin A, Chetvernin V, Nawrocki EP, Zaslavsky L, Lomsadze A, Pruitt KD, Borodovsky M, Ostell J. 2016. NCBI prokaryotic genome annotation pipeline. Nucleic Acids Res 44:6614–6624. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw569 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Jolley KA, Bray JE, Maiden MCJ. 2018. Open-access bacterial population genomics: BIGSdb software, the PubMLST.org website and their applications. Available from: https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/3-124/v1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 17. Jain C, Rodriguez-R LM, Phillippy AM, Konstantinidis KT, Aluru S. 2018. High throughput ANI analysis of 90K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries. Nat Commun 9:5114. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-07641-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The draft genome assemblies have been deposited in GenBank, and the raw reads before decontamination have been deposited in SRA. The corresponding accession numbers are listed and linked in Table 1. All the data produced are part of the BioProject PRJNA1216553, hosted by the NCBI organization.


Articles from Microbiology Resource Announcements are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES