Abstract
Brucella species are intracellular zoonotic pathogens which cause, among other pathologies, increased rates of abortion in ruminants. Human infections are generally associated with exposure to contaminated and unpasteurized dairy products; however Brucellae have been developed as bioweapons. Here we present 17 complete and 7 scaffolded genome assemblies of Brucella strains.
GENOME ANNOUNCEMENT
Brucella are Gram-negative facultative intracellular pathogens with reduced genomes, as typical for intracellular Alphaproteobacteria (1, 2). Globally, Brucella spp. have a substantial impact on rural areas of the world, where surveillance and vaccination programs are lacking (3, 4). Brucella spp. express a surface lipopolysaccharide that contributes to pathogenicity. The bacteria reside within white blood cells (primarily macrophages) without disrupting the cell function and cycle (5, 6), and there is overall a reduced immune response as compared to most other Gram-negative bacteria. They are largely host-specific zoonotic pathogens, and humans may be infected by less than 100 cells (6–8). Disease in animals (ruminants) often causes abortion and/or sterility, but disease in humans is characterized by undulant fever, at times progressing into severe and/or incapacitating complications (9, 10). Human infections are most commonly attributed to unpasteurized dairy consumption, but brucellosis can also be transmitted through aerosols (6, 11, 12). Due to its ease of airborne transmission and chronic, difficult-to-treat pathology, Brucella spp. have been developed as bioweapons and are listed as CDC Category B pathogens (6, 13).
High-quality genomic DNA was extracted from purified isolates of each strain using QIAgen Genome Tip-500 at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, Diagnostic Systems Division (USARMIID-DSD). Specifically, 100-mL bacterial cultures were grown to the stationary phase and nucleic acid was extracted per the manufacturer’s recommendations. For BSL3 Brucella, all extracted material was checked for sterility. If sterility was not achieved, then the nucleic acid was passed through a 0.45-µM filter and rechecked for viable organisms before removal from the BSL3 suite. Sequence data for each draft genome was generated using a combination of Illumina and 454 technologies (14, 15). For each genome, we constructed and sequenced an Illumina “standard” library of 100-bp reads at high coverage and a separate long-insert paired-end library (Roche 454 Titanium or Illumina platform). The two datasets were assembled together in Newbler (Roche) and the consensus sequences computationally shredded into 2-Kbp overlapping fake reads (shreds). The raw reads were also assembled in Velvet and those consensus sequences were computationally shredded into 1.5-Kbp overlapping shreds (16). Draft data from all platforms were then assembled together with ALLPATHS and the consensus sequences were computationally shredded into 10-Kbp overlapping shreds (17). We then integrated the Newbler consensus shreds, Velvet consensus shreds, Allpaths consensus shreds, and a subset of the long-insert read-pairs using parallel Phrap (High Performance Software, LLC). Possible misassemblies were corrected and some gap closure was accomplished with manual editing in Consed (18–20). Of the 24 genomes, 7 are scaffolded draft assemblies and 17 are closed “finished” genomes.
Automatic annotation for each genome utilized an Ergatis-based workflow at LANL with minor manual curation. Each genome is available in NCBI (accession numbers listed in Table 1) and the raw data can be provided upon request. In-depth comparative analyses of these genomes are currently under way and will be published in an upcoming manuscript.
TABLE 1.
Listing of strains, accession numbers, and basic annotation statistics for each genome sequenced
| Strain | Accession no.a | Size (bp) | %GC | Draft coverage | CDS | tRNA | rRNA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brucella abortus | |||||||
| 870 BEV | CP007700 Chr I | 2,123,615 Chr I | 57.2 | 474 | 3,124 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007701 Chr II | 1,161,664 Chr II | ||||||
| 870 BFX | CP007709 Chr I | 2,124,096 Chr I | 57.2 | 150 | 3,127 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007710 Chr II | 1,157,058 Chr II | ||||||
| 2308 | JMRZ00000000 | 3,269,686 total | 57.2 | 793 | 3,124 | 52 | 5 |
| WGS (12) | |||||||
| BEU | JMSA00000000 | 3,321,680 total | 57.2 | 167 | 3,226 | 55 | 9 |
| WGS (5) | |||||||
| BDW | CP007681 Chr I | 2,128,683 Chr I | 57.2 | 161 | 3,141 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007680 Chr II | 1,160,817 Chr II | ||||||
| 292 DPG | JMSB00000000 | 3,262,739 total | 57.2 | 272 | 3,135 | 49 | 3 |
| WGS (43) | |||||||
| 63 75 | CP007663 Chr I | 2,124,677 Chr I | 57.3 | 176 | 3,112 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007662 Chr II | 1,155,633 Chr II | ||||||
| 86/8/59 | CP007765 Chr I | 2,123,991 Chr I | 57.2 | 327 | 3,434 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007764 Chr II | 1,162,137 Chr II | ||||||
| B3196 | CP007707 Chr I | 2,123,890 Chr I | 57.2 | 342 | 3,113 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007708 Chr II | 1,155,864 Chr II | ||||||
| Tulya BER | CP007682 Chr I | 2,125,180 Chr I | 57.2 | 216 | 2,121 | 54 | 9 |
| CP007683 Chr II | 1,163,338 Chr II | ||||||
| Tulya BFY | CP007738 Chr I | 2,124,832 Chr I | 57.2 | 300 | 3,120 | 54 | 9 |
| CP007737 Chr II | 1,163,326 Chr II | ||||||
| C68 | CP007705 Chr I | 2,124,100 Chr I | 57.2 | 119 | 3,111 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007706 Chr II | 1,155,846 Chr II | ||||||
| Brucella canis RM6/66 | CP007758 Chr I | 2,105,950 Chr I | 57.2 | 320 | 3,108 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007759 Chr II | 1,206,801 Chr II | ||||||
| Brucella melitensis | |||||||
| 16 M | CP007762 Chr I | 2,116,984 Chr I | 57.2 | 762 | 3,140 | 54 | 9 |
| CP007763 Chr II | 1,177,791 Chr II | ||||||
| 63/9 | CP007789 Chr I | 2,127,512 Chr I | 57.2 | 152 | 3,156 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007788 Chr II | 1,185,446 Chr II | ||||||
| Ether | CP007760 Chr I | 2,122,766 Chr I | 57.2 | 321 | 3,156 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007761 Chr II | 1,187,961 Chr II | ||||||
| Brucella neotomae 5K33 | JMSC00000000 | 3,328,864 total | 57.2 | 321 | 3,199 | 55 | 11 |
| WGS (7) | |||||||
| Brucella pinnipedialis 6/566 | CP007743 Chr I | 2,139,033 Chr I | 57.3 | 217 | 3,137 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007742 Chr II | 1,191,996 Chr II | ||||||
| Brucella suis | |||||||
| 686 | CP007719 Chr I | 2,107,052 Chr I | 57.2 | 304 | 3,091 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007718 Chr II | 1,190,208 Chr II | ||||||
| 1330 | JMUC00000000 | 3,294,601 total | 57.3 | 319 | 3,124 | 51 | 3 |
| WGS (16) | |||||||
| 513UK | CP007717 Chr I | 2,131,717 Chr I | 57.3 | 300 | 3,091 | 55 | 9 |
| CP007716 Chr II | 1,187,980 Chr II | ||||||
| 40 BSP | CP008757 Chr I | 1,902,870 Chr I | 57.2 | 790 | 3,101 | 55 | 9 |
| CP008756 Chr II | 1,410,995 Chr II | ||||||
| BSQ (40) | JMUD00000000 | 3,308,964 total | 57.3 | 399 | 3,099 | 55 | 9 |
| WGS (5) | |||||||
| Thompsen | JMUE00000000 | 3,316,531 total | 57.2 | 314 | 3,152 | 52 | 6 |
| WGS (10) | |||||||
Chr I, chromosome I; Chr II, chromosome II.
Nucleotide sequence accession numbers.
Genome accession numbers to public databases are listed in Table 1.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Funding for this effort was provided by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency’s Joint Science and Technology Office (DTRA J9-CB/JSTO). This manuscript is approved by LANL for unlimited release (LA-UR-14-25134).
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.
Footnotes
Citation Minogue TD, Daligault HA, Davenport KW, Bishop-Lilly KA, Broomall SM, Bruce DC, Chain PS, Chertkov O, Coyne SR, Frey KG, Gibbons HS, Jaissle J, Koroleva GI, Ladner JT, Lo C-C, Palacios GF, Redden CL, Rosenzweig CN, Scholz MB, Xu Y, Johnson SL. 2014. Whole-genome sequences of 24 Brucella strains. Genome Announc. 2(5):e00915-14. doi:10.1128/genomeA.00915-14.
REFERENCES
- 1. Wattam AR, Foster JT, Mane SP, Beckstrom-Sternberg SM, Beckstrom-Sternberg JM, Dickerman AW, Keim P, Pearson T, Shukla M, Ward DV, Williams KP, Sobral BW, Tsolis RM, Whatmore AM, O’Callaghan D. 2014. Comparative phylogenomics and evolution of the Brucellae reveal a path to virulence. J. Bacteriol. 196:920–930. 10.1128/JB.01091-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Batut J, Andersson SG, O’Callaghan D. 2004. The evolution of chronic infection strategies in the α-proteobacteria. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2:933–945. 10.1038/nrmicro1044 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. O’Callaghan D, Whatmore AM. 2011. Brucella genomics as we enter the multi-genome era. Brief. Funct. Genomics 10:334–341. 10.1093/bfgp/elr026 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. McDermott JJ, Arimi SM. 2002. Brucellosis in sub-Saharan Africa: epidemiology, control and impact. Vet. Microbiol. 90:111–134. 10.1016/S0378-1135(02)00249-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Gorvel JP, Moreno E. 2002. Brucella intracellular life: from invasion to intracellular replication. Vet. Microbiol. 90:281–297. 10.1016/S0378-1135(02)00214-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Pappas G, Panagopoulou P, Christou L, Akritidis N. 2006. Biological weapons. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 63:2229–2236. 10.1007/s00018-006-6311-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Young EJ. 2006. Brucella spp., p 265–271 In Gillespie S, Hawkey PM. (ed), Principles and practice of clinical bacteriology. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ [Google Scholar]
- 8. Hernández-Mora G, Palacios-Alfaro JD, González-Barrientos R. 2013. Wildlife reservoirs of brucellosis: Brucella in acquatic environments. Rev. Sci. Tech. 32:89–103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. World Health Organization 2006. Brucellosis in humans and animals. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland [Google Scholar]
- 10. Kousoulis AA, Economopoulos KP, Poulakou-Rebelakou E, Androutsos G, Tsiodras S. 2012. The plague of Thebes, a historical epidemic in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 18:153–157. 10.3201/eid1801.AD1801 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. American Academy of Pediatrics 2014. Consumption of raw or unpasteurized milk and milk products by pregnant women and children. Pediatrics 133:175–179. 10.1542/peds.2013-3502 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Kaufmann AF, Fox MD, Boyce JM, Anderson DC, Potter ME, Martone WJ, Patton CM. 1980. Airborne spread of brucellosis. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 353:105–114. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1980.tb18912.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Rotz L, Khan AS, Lillibridge SR, Ostroff SM, Hughes JM. 2002. Public health assessment of potential biological terrorism agents. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 8:225–230 http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/8/2/01-0164_article [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Bennett S. 2004. Solexa Ltd. Pharmacogenomics 5:433–438. 10.1517/14622416.5.4.433 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Margulies M, Egholm M, Altman WE, Attiya S, Bader JS, Bemben LA, Berka J, Braverman MS, Chen Y-J, Chen Z, Dewell SB, Du L, Fierro JM, Gomes XV, Godwin BC, He W, Helgesen S, Ho CH, Irzyk GP, Jando SC, Alenquer MLI, Jarvie TP, Jirage KB, Kim J-B, Knight JR, Lanza JR, Leamon JH, Lefkowitz SM, Lei M, Li J, Lohman KL, Lu H, Makhijani VB, McDade KE, McKenna MP, Myers EW, Nickerson E, Nobile JR, Plant R, Puc BP, Ronan MT, Roth GT, Sarkis GJ, Simons JF, Simpson JW, Srinivasan M, Tartaro KR, Tomasz A, Vogt KA, Volkmer GA, Wang SH, Wang Y, Weiner MP, Yu P, Begley RF, Rothberg JM. 2005. Genome sequencing in microfabricated high-density picolitre reactors. Nature 437:376–380. 10.1038/nature03959 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Zerbino DR, Birney E. 2008. Velvet: algorithms for de novo short read assembly using de Bruijn graphs. Genome Res. 18:821–829. 10.1101/gr.074492.107 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Butler J, MacCallum I, Kleber M, Shlyakhter IA, Belmonte MK, Lander ES, Nusbaum C, Jaffe DB. 2008. ALLPATHS: de novo assembly of whole-genome shotgun microreads. Genome Res. 18:810–820. 10.1101/gr.7337908 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Ewing B, Hillier L, Wendl MC, Green P. 1998. Base-calling of automated sequencer traces using Phred. I: accuracy assessment. Genome Res. 8:175–185. 10.1101/gr.8.3.175 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Ewing B, Green P. 1998. Base-calling of automated sequencer traces using Phred. II: error probabilities. Genome Res. 8:186–194 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Gordon D, Abajian C, Green P. 1998. Consed: A graphical tool for sequence finishing. Genome Res. 8:195–202. 10.1101/gr.8.3.195 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
