ABSTRACT
Mycobacterium boenickei is a rapidly growing mycobacterium isolated for the first time from a leg wound in the United States. Its 6,506,908-bp draft genome exhibits a 66.77% G+C content, 6,279 protein-coding genes, and 59 predicted RNA genes. In silico DNA-DNA hybridization confirms its assignment to the Mycobacterium fortuitum complex.
GENOME ANNOUNCEMENT
Mycobacterium boenickei has been characterized as one of the members of the former M. fortuitum third biovariant complex sorbitol-negative (1). It is an acid-fast, Gram-positive, pleomorphic bacterium, forming white to slightly beige colonies in less than 7 days. It was initially isolated from a leg wound in the United States (1). M. boenickei encodes the intrinsic macrolide resistance gene erm (2), rendering it resistant to clarithromycin (3).
We performed the whole-genome sequencing of M. boenickei in order to describe its genomic content and to determine its phylogenetic relationships for facilitating the detection and identification of this species.
M. boenickei CIP 107829 (and Collection de Souches de l’Unité des Rickettsies, CSUR 25) was cultured in MGIT Middlebrook liquid culture (Becton Dickinson, Le Pont-de-Claix, France) at 37°C. M. boenickei CIP 107829 genomic DNA was sequenced by Illumina MiSeq runs (Illumina Inc, San Diego, CA, USA) with the mate-pair strategy using the Nextera mate-pair sample prep kit (Illumina). The index representation for M. boenickei CIP 107829 was determined to be 8.67%. A total of 1,391,382 paired-end reads were filtered per the read qualities. These reads were trimmed using Trimmomatic (4) and then assembled into scaffolds using SPAdes version 3.5 (5, 6) before manual finishing. SSPACE version 2 (7) and Opera version 2 (8) were used to combine the contigs, and GapFiller version 1.10 (9) was used to close gaps in the scaffolds. This yielded a draft genome comprising 14 scaffolds composed of 14 contigs, for a total of 6,506,908 bp with a 66.77% G+C content. Noncoding genes and miscellaneous features were predicted using RNAmmer (10), ARAGORN (11), Rfam (12), Pfam (13), and Infernal (14). Coding DNA sequences were predicted using Prodigal (15), and functional annotation was achieved using BLASTp against the GenBank database (16) and the Clusters of Orthologous Groups (COGs) database (17, 18). The genome was shown to encode 59 predicted RNAs, including 3 complete ribosomal operons (5S rRNA, 16S rRNA, and 23S rRNA genes) and 50 tRNAs. A total of 4,828 genes (76.89%) were assigned a putative function, 116 genes (1.85%) were identified as ORFans (open reading frames with no matches in the databases), and the remaining 1.035 genes (16.48%) were annotated as hypothetical proteins. The M. boenickei CIP 107829 genome was further incorporated into in silico DNA-DNA hybridization (DDH) (19) with reference genomes selected based on 16S rRNA gene proximity; DDH values were estimated using the GGDC version 2.0 online tool (20). This analysis yielded 36.35% ± 3.46 with M. septicum DSM 44393, 31.55% ± 3.46 with M. fortuitum strain CT6, 21.55% ± 3.32 with M. cosmeticum strain DSM 44829, 20.95% ± 3.32 with M. neoaurum VKM, 20% ± 3.25 with M. abscessus subsp. bolletii strain MA 1948, and 19.9% ± 3.25 with M. chelonae CCUG 47445, confirming at the genome level the taxonomic assignment of M. boenickei to the M. fortuitum complex.
Accession number(s).
The M. boenickei CIP 107829 genome sequence has been deposited at EMBL under the accession number FUWC00000000.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This study was financially supported by IHU Méditerranée Infection, Marseille, France.
Footnotes
Citation Bouam A, Robert C, Croce O, Levasseur A, Drancourt M. 2017. Draft genome sequence of Mycobacterium boenickei CIP 107829. Genome Announc 5:e00292-17. https://doi.org/10.1128/genomeA.00292-17.
REFERENCES
- 1.Schinsky MF, Morey RE, Steigerwalt AG, Douglas MP, Wilson RW, Floyd MM, Butler WR, Daneshvar MI, Brown-Elliott BA, Wallace RJ Jr, McNeil MM, Brenner DJ, Brown JM. 2004. Taxonomic variation in the Mycobacterium fortuitum third biovariant complex: description of Mycobacterium boenickei sp. nov., Mycobacterium houstonense sp. nov., Mycobacterium neworleansense sp. nov. and Mycobacterium brisbanense sp. nov. and recognition of Mycobacterium porcinum from human clinical isolates. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 54:1653–1667. doi: 10.1099/ijs.0.02743-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Nash KA, Andini N, Zhang Y, Brown-Elliott BA, Wallace RJ. 2006. Intrinsic macrolide resistance in rapidly growing mycobacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 50:3476–3478. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00402-06. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Pang H, Li G, Wan L, Jiang Y, Liu H, Zhao X, Zhao Z, Wan K. 2015. In vitro drug susceptibility of 40 international reference rapidly growing mycobacteria to 20 antimicrobial agents. Int J Clin Exp Med 8:15423–15431. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Lohse M, Bolger AM, Nagel A, Fernie AR, Lunn JE, Stitt M, Usadel B. 2012. RobiNA: a user-friendly, integrated software solution for RNA-Seq based transcriptomics. Nucleic Acids Res 40:W622–W627. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks540. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Nurk S, Bankevich A, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Korobeynikov A, Lapidus A, Prjibelski AD, Pyshkin A, Sirotkin A, Sirotkin Y, Stepanauskas R, Clingenpeel SR, Woyke T, McLean JS, Lasken R, Tesler G, Alekseyev MA, Pevzner PA. 2013. Assembling single-cell genomes and mini-metagenomes from chimeric MDA products. J Comput Biol 20:714–737. doi: 10.1089/cmb.2013.0084. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.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]
- 7.Boetzer M, Henkel CV, Jansen HJ, Butler D, Pirovano W. 2011. Scaffolding pre-assembled contigs using SSPACE. Bioinformatics 27:578–579. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq683. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Gao S, Sung WK, Nagarajan N. 2011. Opera: reconstructing optimal genomic scaffolds with high-throughput paired-end sequences. J Comput Biol 18:1681–1691. doi: 10.1089/cmb.2011.0170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Boetzer M, Pirovano W. 2012. Toward almost closed genomes with GapFiller. Genome Biol 13:R56. doi: 10.1186/gb-2012-13-6-r56. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Lagesen K, Hallin P, Rødland EA, Staerfeldt H-H, Rognes T, Ussery DW. 2007. RNAmmer: consistent and rapid annotation of ribosomal RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res 35:3100–3108. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkm160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Laslett D, Canback B. 2004. ARAGORN, a program to detect tRNA genes and tmRNA genes in nucleotide sequences. Nucleic Acids Res 32:11–16. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh152. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Griffiths-Jones S, Bateman A, Marshall M, Khanna A, Eddy SR. 2003. Rfam: an RNA family database. Nucleic Acids Res 31:439–441. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkg006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Punta M, Coggill PC, Eberhardt RY, Mistry J, Tate J, Boursnell C, Pang N, Forslund K, Ceric G, Clements J, Heger A, Holm L, Sonnhammer EL, Eddy SR, Bateman A, Finn RD. 2012. The Pfam protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res 40:D290–D301. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr1065. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Nawrocki EP, Kolbe DL, Eddy SR. 2009. Infernal 1.0: inference of RNA alignments. Bioinformatics 25:1335–1337. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp157. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Hyatt D, Chen GL, Locascio PF, Land ML, Larimer FW, Hauser LJ. 2010. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics 11:119. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-11-119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Benson DA, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Clark K, Lipman DJ, Ostell J, Sayers EW. 2012. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res 40:D48–D53. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr1202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Tatusov RL, Galperin MY, Natale DA, Koonin EV. 2000. The COG database: a tool for genome-scale analysis of protein functions and evolution. Nucleic Acids Res 28:33–36. doi: 10.1093/nar/28.1.33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Tatusov RL, Koonin EV, Lipman DJ. 1997. A genomic perspective on protein families. Science 278:631–637. doi: 10.1126/science.278.5338.631. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R. 2009. Shifting the genomic gold standard for the prokaryotic species definition. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:19126–19131. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0906412106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Auch AF, von Jan M, Klenk HP, Göker M. 2010. Digital DNA-DNA hybridization for microbial species delineation by means of genome-to-genome sequence comparison. Stand Genomic Sci 2:117–134. doi: 10.4056/sigs.531120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
