Skip to main content
Standards in Genomic Sciences logoLink to Standards in Genomic Sciences
. 2013 Dec 15;9(2):220–231. doi: 10.4056/sigs.4468250

Genome sequence of the clover-nodulating Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565.

Wayne Reeve 1,*, Elizabeth Drew 2, Ross Ballard 2, Vanessa Melino 1, Rui Tian 1, Sofie De Meyer 1, Lambert Brau 3, Mohamed Ninawi 1, Hazuki Teshima 4, Lynne Goodwin 4, Patrick Chain 4, Konstantinos Liolios 5, Amrita Pati 5, Konstantinos Mavromatis 5, Natalia Ivanova 5, Victor Markowitz 6, Tanja Woyke 5, Nikos Kyrpides 5
PMCID: PMC4062631  PMID: 24976879

Abstract

Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii SRDI565 (syn. N8-J) is an aerobic, motile, Gram-negative, non-spore-forming rod. SRDI565 was isolated from a nodule recovered from the roots of the annual clover Trifolium subterraneum subsp. subterraneum grown in the greenhouse and inoculated with soil collected from New South Wales, Australia. SRDI565 has a broad host range for nodulation within the clover genus, however N2-fixation is sub-optimal with some Trifolium species and ineffective with others. Here we describe the features of R. leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565, together with genome sequence information and annotation. The 6,905,599 bp high-quality-draft genome is arranged into 7 scaffolds of 7 contigs, contains 6,750 protein-coding genes and 86 RNA-only encoding genes, and is one of 100 rhizobial genomes sequenced as part of the DOE Joint Genome Institute 2010 Genomic Encyclopedia for Bacteria and Archaea-Root Nodule Bacteria (GEBA-RNB) project.

Keywords: root-nodule bacteria, nitrogen fixation, rhizobia, Alphaproteobacteria

Introduction

Plant available nitrogen is a precious commodity in many agricultural soils and the most commonly limiting nutrient in plant growth. The supply of plant available nitrogen to nitrogen (N)-deficient farming systems is thus vital to productivity [1]. The application of industrially fixed nitrogenous fertilizer can meet the demand for N. However, this is a costly option as the price of nitrogenous fertilizer is connected to the cost of fossil fuels required for its production. Furthermore, the use of nitrogenous fertilizer contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and pollution of the environment. A more environmentally sustainable option is to exploit the process of biological nitrogen fixation that occurs in the symbiosis between legumes and rhizobia [2].

In this symbiotic association, rhizobia reduce atmospheric dinitrogen (N2) into bioavailable N that can be used by the plant for growth. Pasture legumes, including the clovers that comprise the Trifolium genus, are major contributors of biologically fixed N2 to mixed farming systems throughout the world [3,4]. In Australia, soils with a history of growing Trifolium spp. have developed large and symbiotically diverse populations of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii (R. l. trifolii) that are able to infect and form nodules on a range of clover species. The N2-fixation capacity of the symbioses established by different combinations of clover hosts (Trifolium spp.) and strains of R. l. trifolii can vary from 10 to 130% when compared to an effective host-strain combination [3-9].

R. l. trifolii strain SRDI565 (syn. N8-J [10]) was isolated from a nodule recovered from the roots of the annual clover Trifolium subterraneum subsp. subterraneum that had been inoculated with soil collected from under a mixed pasture stand from Tumet, New South Wales, Australia and grown in N deficient media for four weeks after inoculation, in the greenhouse. SRDI565 was first noted for its sub-optimal N2-fixation capacity on T. subterraneum cv. Campeda (<60% of that with strain WSM1325) and formation of white (Fix-) pseudo-nodules on T. subterraneum cv. Clare [10,11]. Here we present a preliminary description of the general features for R. leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 together with its genome sequence and annotation.

Classification and general features

R. l. trifolii strain SRDI565 is a motile, Gram-negative rod (Figure 1 Left and Center) in the order Rhizobiales of the class Alphaproteobacteria. It is fast growing, forming colonies within 3-4 days when grown on half strength Lupin Agar (½LA) [12] at 28°C. Colonies on ½LA are white-opaque, slightly domed and moderately mucoid with smooth margins (Figure 1 Right).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Images of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 using scanning (Left) and transmission (Center) electron microscopy as well as light microscopy to show the colony morphology on solid media (Right).

Minimum Information about the Genome Sequence (MIGS) is provided in Table 1. Figure 2 shows the phylogenetic neighborhood of R. l. trifolii strain SRDI565 in a 16S rRNA sequence based tree. This strain clusters closest to R. l. trifolii T24 and Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. phaseoli RRE6 with 99.8% and 99.6% sequence identity, respectively.

Table 1. Classification and general features of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii SRDI565 according to the MIGS recommendations [13].

MIGS ID     Property     Term     Evidence code
    Current classification     Domain Bacteria     TAS [13,14]
    Phylum Proteobacteria     TAS [15]
    Class Alphaproteobacteria     TAS [16]
    Order Rhizobiales     TAS [17,18]
    Family Rhizobiaceae     TAS [19,20]
    Genus Rhizobium     TAS [19,21-24]
    Species Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii     TAS [19,21,24,25]
    Gram stain     Negative     IDA
    Cell shape     Rod     IDA
    Motility     Motile     IDA
    Sporulation     Non-sporulating     NAS
    Temperature range     Mesophile     NAS
    Optimum temperature     28°C     NAS
    Salinity     Non-halophile     NAS
MIGS-22     Oxygen requirement     Aerobic     TAS [11]
    Carbon source     Varied     NAS
    Energy source     Chemoorganotroph     NAS
MIGS-6     Habitat     Soil, root nodule, on host     TAS [10]
MIGS-15     Biotic relationship     Free living, symbiotic     TAS [10]
MIGS-14     Pathogenicity     Non-pathogenic     NAS
    Biosafety level     1     TAS [26]
    Isolation     Root nodule     TAS [10]
MIGS-4     Geographic location     NSW, Australia     TAS [10]
MIGS-5     Soil collection date     Dec, 1998     IDA
MIGS-4.1 MIGS-4.2     Longitude
    Latitude
    148.25
    -35.32
    IDA
MIGS-4.3     Depth     0-10cm
MIGS-4.4     Altitude     Not recorded

Evidence codes – IDA: Inferred from Direct Assay; TAS: Traceable Author Statement (i.e., a direct report exists in the literature); NAS: Non-traceable Author Statement (i.e., not directly observed for the living, isolated sample, but based on a generally accepted property for the species, or anecdotal evidence). These evidence codes are from the Gene Ontology project [27].

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Phylogenetic tree showing the relationship of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii SRDI565 (shown in blue print) with some of the root nodule bacteria in the order Rhizobiales based on aligned sequences of the 16S rRNA gene (1,307 bp internal region). All sites were informative and there were no gap-containing sites. Phylogenetic analyses were performed using MEGA, version 5.05 [28]. The tree was built using the maximum likelihood method with the General Time Reversible model. Bootstrap analysis [29] with 500 replicates was performed to assess the support of the clusters. Type strains are indicated with a superscript T. Strains with a genome sequencing project registered in GOLD [30] are in bold print and the GOLD ID is shown after the accession number. Published genomes are indicated with an asterisk.

Symbiotaxonomy

R. l. trifolii SRDI565 forms nodules on (Nod+), and fixes N2 (Fix+) with, a range of annual and perennial clover species of Mediterranean origin (Table 2). SRDI565 forms white, ineffective (Fix-) nodules with annual clovers T. glanduliferum and T. subterraneum cv. Clare, and with the perennial clovers T. pratense and T. polymorphum. SRDI565 does not form nodules on T. vesiculosum.

Table 2. Compatibility of SRDI565 with eleven Trifolium genotypes for nodulation (Nod) and N2-Fixation (Fix).

Species name     Cultivar     Common Name    Growth Type     Nod     Fix    Reference
T. glanduliferum Boiss.     Prima     Gland    Annual     +(w)     -
T. michelianum Savi.     Bolta     Balansa    Annual     +     +
T. purpureum Loisel     Paratta     Purple    Annual     +     +     [11]
T. resupinatum L.     Kyambro     Persian    Annual     +     +
T. subterraneum L.     Campeda     Sub. clover    Annual     +     +     [10,11]
T. subterraneum L.     Clare     Sub. clover    Annual     +(w)     -     [10,11]
T. vesiculosum Savi.     Arrotas     Arrowleaf    Annual     -     -
T. fragiferum L.     Palestine     Strawberry    Perennial     +     +
T. polymorphum Poir     Acc.#087102     Polymorphous    Perennial     +(w)     -     [11]
T. pratense L.     -     Red    Perennial     +(w)     -
T. repens L.     Haifa     White    Perennial     +     +

(w) indicates nodules present were white.

Genome sequencing and annotation information

Genome project history

This organism was selected for sequencing on the basis of its environmental and agricultural relevance to issues in global carbon cycling, alternative energy production, and biogeochemical importance, and is part of the Community Sequencing Program at the U.S. Department of Energy, Joint Genome Institute (JGI) for projects of relevance to agency missions. The genome project is deposited in the Genomes OnLine Database [30] and an improved-high-quality-draft genome sequence in IMG. Sequencing, finishing and annotation were performed by the JGI. A summary of the project information is shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Genome sequencing project information for Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565.

MIGS ID     Property     Term
MIGS-31     Finishing quality     Improved high-quality draft
MIGS-28     Libraries used     2× Illumina libraries; Std short PE & CLIP long PE
MIGS-29     Sequencing platforms     Illumina HiSeq 2000, PacBio
MIGS-31.2     Sequencing coverage     862× Illumina
MIGS-30     Assemblers     with Allpaths, version 39750, Velvet 1.015, phrap 4.24
MIGS-32     Gene calling methods     Prodigal 1.4, GenePRIMP
    GOLD ID     Gi08843
    NCBI project ID     81743
    Database: IMG     2517287029
    Project relevance     Symbiotic N2 fixation, agriculture

Growth conditions and DNA isolation

Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 was cultured to mid logarithmic phase in 60 ml of TY rich media [31] on a gyratory shaker at 28°C. DNA was isolated from the cells using a CTAB (Cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide) bacterial genomic DNA isolation method [32].

Genome sequencing and assembly

The genome of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 was sequenced at the Joint Genome Institute (JGI) using Illumina [33] data. An Illumina short-insert paired-end library with an average insert size of 243 + 58 bp was used to generate 18,700,764 reads and an Illumina long-insert paired-end library with an average insert size of 8,446 + 2,550 bp was used to generate 21,538,802 reads totalling 6,036 Mbp of Illumina data (unpublished, Feng Chen).

All general aspects of library construction and sequencing performed at the JGI can be found at the JGI user homepage [34]. The initial draft assembly contained 22 contigs in 16 scaffolds. The initial draft data was assembled with Allpaths, version 39750, and the consensus was computationally shredded into 10 Kb overlapping fake reads (shreds). The Illumina draft data was also assembled with Velvet, version 1.1.05 [35], and the consensus sequences were computationally shredded into 1.5 Kb overlapping fake reads (shreds). The Illumina draft data was assembled again with Velvet using the shreds from the first Velvet assembly to guide the next assembly. The consensus from the second VELVET assembly was shredded into 1.5 Kb overlapping fake reads. The fake reads from the Allpaths assembly and both Velvet assemblies and a subset of the Illumina CLIP paired-end reads were assembled using parallel phrap, version 4.24 (High Performance Software, LLC). Possible mis-assemblies were corrected with manual editing in Consed [36-38]. Gap closure was accomplished using repeat resolution software (Wei Gu, unpublished), and sequencing of bridging PCR fragments with PacBio (unpublished, Cliff Han) technology. For improved high quality draft, 4 PCR PacBio consensus sequences were completed to close gaps and to raise the quality of the final sequence. The estimated total size of the genome is 7 Mb and the final assembly is based on 6,036 Mb of Illumina draft data, which provides an average 862× coverage of the genome.

Genome annotation

Genes were identified using Prodigal [39] as part of the DOE-JGI annotation pipeline [40], followed by a round of manual curation using the JGI GenePRIMP pipeline [41]. The predicted CDSs were translated and used to search the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) non-redundant database, UniProt, TIGRFam, Pfam, PRIAM, KEGG, COG, and InterPro databases. These data sources were combined to assert a product description for each predicted protein. Non-coding genes and miscellaneous features were predicted using tRNAscan-SE [42], RNAMMer [43], Rfam [44], TMHMM [45], and SignalP [46]. Additional gene prediction analyses and functional annotation were performed within the Integrated Microbial Genomes (IMG-ER) platform [47,48].

Genome properties

The genome is 6,905,599 nucleotides with 60.67% GC content (Table 4) and comprised of 7 scaffolds (Figures 3,4,5,6,7,8,and 9) of 7 contigs. From a total of 6,836 genes, 6,750 were protein encoding and 86 RNA-only encoding genes. The majority of genes (77.98%) were assigned a putative function whilst the remaining genes were annotated as hypothetical. The distribution of genes into COGs functional categories is presented in Table 5.

Table 4. Genome Statistics for Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii SRDI565.

Attribute     Value     % of Total
Genome size (bp)     6,905,599     100.00
DNA coding region (bp)     5,960,775     86.32
DNA G+C content (bp)     4,189,855     60.67
Number of scaffolds     7
Number of contigs     7
Total gene     6,836     100.00
RNA genes     86     1.26
rRNA operons*     3
Protein-coding genes     6,750     98.74
Genes with function prediction     5,331     77.98
Genes assigned to COGs     5,330     77.97
Genes assigned Pfam domains     5,535     80.97
Genes with signal peptides     603     8.82
Genes with transmembrane helices     1,552     22.70
CRISPR repeats     0

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Graphical map of the genome of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 (scaffold 1.1). From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Graphical map of the genome of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 (scaffold 2.2). From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Graphical map of the genome of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 (scaffold 3.3). From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Graphical map of the genome of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 (scaffold 4.4). From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Graphical map of the genome of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 (scaffold 5.5). From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Graphical map of the genome of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 (6.6). From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 9.

Figure 9

Graphical map of the genome of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii strain SRDI565 (7.7). From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Table 5. Number of protein coding genes of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii SRDI565 associated with the general COG functional categories.

Code     Value     %age     Description
J     191     3.22     Translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis
A     0     0.00     RNA processing and modification
K     574     9.67     Transcription
L     189     3.19     Replication, recombination and repair
B     3     0.05     Chromatin structure and dynamics
D     41     0.69     Cell cycle control, mitosis and meiosis
Y     0     0.00     Nuclear structure
V     70     1.18     Defense mechanisms
T     320     5.39     Signal transduction mechanisms
M     315     5.31     Cell wall/membrane biogenesis
N     81     1.37     Cell motility
Z     0     0.00     Cytoskeleton
W     0     0.00     Extracellular structures
U     96     1.62     Intracellular trafficking and secretion
O     208     3.51     Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones
C     326     5.49     Energy production conversion
G     633     10.67     Carbohydrate transport and metabolism
E     591     9.96     Amino acid transport metabolism
F     109     1.84     Nucleotide transport and metabolism
H     193     3.25     Coenzyme transport and metabolism
I     216     3.64     Lipid transport and metabolism
P     272     4.58     Inorganic ion transport and metabolism
Q     148     2.49     Secondary metabolite biosynthesis, transport and catabolism
R     758     12.77     General function prediction only
S     600     10.11     Function unknown
-     1,506     22.03     Not in COGS

Acknowledgements

This work was performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy’s Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Program, and by the University of California, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory under contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC52-07NA27344, and Los Alamos National Laboratory under contract No. DE-AC02-06NA25396. We gratefully acknowledge the funding received from the Murdoch University Strategic Research Fund through the Crop and Plant Research Institute (CaPRI) and the Centre for Rhizobium Studies (CRS) at Murdoch University and the GRDC National Rhizobium Program (UMU00032). The authors would like to thank the Australia-China Joint Research Centre for Wheat Improvement (ACCWI) and SuperSeed Technologies (SST) for financially supporting Mohamed Ninawi’s PhD project.

References

  • 1.O'Hara GW. The role of nitrogen fixation in crop production. J Crop Prod 1998; 1:115-138 10.1300/J144v01n02_06 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Howieson JG, Yates RJ, Foster K, Real D, Besier B. Prospects for the future use of legumes. In: Dilworth MJ, James EK, Sprent JI, Newton WE, editors. Leguminous Nitrogen-Fixing Symbioses. London, UK: Elsevier; 2008. p 363-394. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Herridge DF, Peoples MB, Boddey RM. Global inputs of biological nitrogen fixation in agricultural systems. Plant Soil 2008; 311:1-18 10.1007/s11104-008-9668-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Unkovich MJ, Baldock J, Peoples MB. Prospects and problems of simple linear models for estimating symbiotic N2 fixation by crop and pasture legumes. Plant Soil 2010; 329:75-89 10.1007/s11104-009-0136-5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ballard RA, Shepherd BR, Charman N. Nodulation and growth of pasture legumes with naturalised soil rhizobia. 3. Lucerne (Medicago sativa L.). Aust J Exp Agric 2003; 43:135-140 10.1071/EA02047 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Denton MD, Coventry DR, Bellotti WD, Howieson JG. Distribution, abundance and symbiotic effectiveness of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii from alkaline pasture soils in South Australia. Anim Prod Sci 2000; 40:25-35 10.1071/EA99035 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Drew EA, Charman N, Dingemanse R, Hall E, Ballard RA. Symbiotic performance of Mediterranean Trifolium spp. with naturalised soil rhizobia. Crop Pasture Sci 2011; 62:903-913 10.1071/CP11047 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Rys GJ, Bonish PM. Effectiveness of Rhizobium trifolii populations associated with Trifolium species in Taranaki, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 1981; 9:329-335 10.1080/03015521.1981.10425430 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Slattery JF, Coventry DR. Acid-tolerance and symbiotic effectiveness of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii isolated from subterranean clover growing in permanent pastures. Soil Biol Biochem 1995; 27:111-115 10.1016/0038-0717(94)00143-O [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Drew EA, Ballard RA. Improving N2 fixation from the plant down: Compatibility of Trifolium subterraneum L. cultivars with soil rhizobia can influence symbiotic performance. Plant Soil 2010; 327:261-277 10.1007/s11104-009-0052-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Melino VJ, Drew EA, Ballard RA, Reeve WG, Thomson G, White RG, O'Hara GW. Identifying abnormalities in symbiotic development between Trifolium spp. and Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii leading to sub-optimal and ineffective nodule phenotypes. Ann Bot (Lond) 2012; 110:1559-1572 10.1093/aob/mcs206 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Howieson JG, Ewing MA, D'antuono MF. Selection for acid tolerance in Rhizobium meliloti. Plant Soil 1988; 105:179-188 10.1007/BF02376781 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Field D, Garrity G, Gray T, Morrison N, Selengut J, Sterk P, Tatusova T, Thomson N, Allen M, Angiuoli SV, et al. Towards a richer description of our complete collection of genomes and metagenomes "Minimum Information about a Genome Sequence " (MIGS) specification. Nat Biotechnol 2008; 26:541-547 10.1038/nbt1360 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Woese CR, Kandler O, Wheelis ML. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990; 87:4576-4579 10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Phylum XIV. Proteobacteria phyl. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT (eds), Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part B, Springer, New York, 2005, p. 1. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Class I. Alphaproteobacteria class. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Kreig NR, Staley JT, editors. Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Second ed: New York: Springer - Verlag; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Kuykendall LD. Order VI. Rhizobiales ord. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Kreig NR, Staley JT, editors. Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Second ed: New York: Springer - Verlag; 2005. p 324. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Validation List No 107. List of new names and new combinations previously effectively, but not validly, published. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:1-6 10.1099/ijs.0.64188-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Skerman VBD, McGowan V, Sneath PHA. Approved Lists of Bacterial Names. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1980; 30:225-420 10.1099/00207713-30-1-225 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Conn HJ. Taxonomic relationships of certain non-sporeforming rods in soil. J Bacteriol 1938; 36:320-321 [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Frank B. Über die Pilzsymbiose der Leguminosen. Ber Dtsch Bot Ges 1889; 7:332-346 [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Jordan DC, Allen ON. Genus I. Rhizobium Frank 1889, 338; Nom. gen. cons. Opin. 34, Jud. Comm. 1970, 11. In: Buchanan RE, Gibbons NE (eds), Bergey's Manual of Determinative Bacteriology, Eighth Edition, The Williams and Wilkins Co., Baltimore, 1974, p. 262-264. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Young JM, Kuykendall LD, Martínez-Romero E, Kerr A, Sawada H. A revision of Rhizobium Frank 1889, with an emended description of the genus, and the inclusion of all species of Agrobacterium Conn 1942 and Allorhizobium undicola de Lajudie et al. 1998 as new combinations: Rhizobium radiobacter, R. rhizogenes, R. rubi, R. undicola and R. vitis. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001; 51:89-103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Editorial Secretary (for the Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Nomenclature of Bacteria). OPINION 34: Conservation of the Generic Name Rhizobium Frank 1889. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1970; 20:11-12 10.1099/00207713-20-1-11 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ramírez-Bahena MH, García-Fraile P, Peix A, Valverde A, Rivas R, Igual JM, Mateos PF, Martínez-Molina E, Velázquez E. Revision of the taxonomic status of the species Rhizobium leguminosarum (Frank 1879) Frank 1889AL, Rhizobium phaseoli Dangeard 1926AL and Rhizobium trifolii Dangeard 1926AL. R. trifolii is a later synonym of R. leguminosarum. Reclassification of the strain R. leguminosarum DSM 30132 (=NCIMB 11478) as Rhizobium pisi sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:2484-2490 10.1099/ijs.0.65621-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Agents B. Technical rules for biological agents. TRBA (http://www.baua.de):466.
  • 27.Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS, Eppig JT, et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet 2000; 25:25-29 10.1038/75556 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S. MEGA5: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis using Maximum Likelihood, Evolutionary Distance, and Maximum Parsimony Methods. Mol Biol Evol 2011; 28:2731-2739 10.1093/molbev/msr121 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 1985; 39:783-791 10.2307/2408678 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Liolios K, Mavromatis K, Tavernarakis N, Kyrpides NC. The Genomes On Line Database (GOLD) in 2007: status of genomic and metagenomic projects and their associated metadata. Nucleic Acids Res 2008; 36:D475-D479 10.1093/nar/gkm884 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Reeve WG, Tiwari RP, Worsley PS, Dilworth MJ, Glenn AR, Howieson JG. Constructs for insertional mutagenesis, transcriptional signal localization and gene regulation studies in root nodule and other bacteria. Microbiology 1999; 145:1307-1316 10.1099/13500872-145-6-1307 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.General Information for Collaborators http://my.jgi.doe.gov/general/index.html
  • 33.Bennett S. Solexa Ltd. Pharmacogenomics 2004; 5:433-438 10.1517/14622416.5.4.433 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.http://my.jgi.doe.gov/general/index.html
  • 35.Zerbino DR. Using the Velvet de novo assembler for short-read sequencing technologies. Current Protocols in Bioinformatics 2010;Chapter 11:Unit 11 5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Ewing B, Green P. Base-calling of automated sequencer traces using phred. II. Error probabilities. Genome Res 1998; 8:175-185 10.1101/gr.8.3.175 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ewing B, Hillier L, Wendl MC, Green P. Base-calling of automated sequencer traces using phred. I. Accuracy assessment. Genome Res 1998; 8:175-185 10.1101/gr.8.3.175 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Gordon D, Abajian C, Green P. Consed: a graphical tool for sequence finishing. Genome Res 1998; 8:195-202 10.1101/gr.8.3.195 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Hyatt D, Chen GL, Locascio PF, Land ML, Larimer FW, Hauser LJ. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics 2010; 11:119 10.1186/1471-2105-11-119 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Mavromatis K, Ivanova NN, Chen IM, Szeto E, Markowitz VM, Kyrpides NC. The DOE-JGI Standard operating procedure for the annotations of microbial genomes. Stand Genomic Sci 2009; 1:63-67 10.4056/sigs.632 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Pati A, Ivanova NN, Mikhailova N, Ovchinnikova G, Hooper SD, Lykidis A, Kyrpides NC. GenePRIMP: a gene prediction improvement pipeline for prokaryotic genomes. Nat Methods 2010; 7:455-457 10.1038/nmeth.1457 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Lowe TM, Eddy SR. tRNAscan-SE: a program for improved detection of transfer RNA genes in genomic sequence. Nucleic Acids Res 1997; 25:955-964 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Lagesen K, Hallin P, Rodland EA, Staerfeldt HH, Rognes T, Ussery DW. RNAmmer: consistent and rapid annotation of ribosomal RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res 2007; 35:3100-3108 10.1093/nar/gkm160 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Griffiths-Jones S, Bateman A, Marshall M, Khanna A, Eddy SR. Rfam: an RNA family database. Nucleic Acids Res 2003; 31:439-441 10.1093/nar/gkg006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Krogh A, Larsson B, von Heijne G, Sonnhammer EL. Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes. J Mol Biol 2001; 305:567-580 10.1006/jmbi.2000.4315 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Dyrløv Bendtsen JD, Nielsen H, von Heijne G, Brunak S. Improved prediction of signal peptides: SignalP 3.0. J Mol Biol 2004; 340:783-795 10.1016/j.jmb.2004.05.028 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Markowitz VM, Mavromatis K, Ivanova NN, Chen IM, Chu K, Kyrpides NC. IMG ER: a system for microbial genome annotation expert review and curation. Bioinformatics 2009; 25:2271-2278 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp393 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.DOE Joint Genome Institute http://img.jgi.doe.gov/er

Articles from Standards in Genomic Sciences are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES