ABSTRACT
We provide complete circularized genome sequences of two mosquito-derived Elizabethkingia anophelis strains with draft sequences currently in the public domain (R26 and Ag1), and two novel E. anophelis strains derived from a different mosquito species, Anopheles sinensis (AR4-6 and AR6-8). The genetic similarity of all four mosquito-derived strains is remarkable.
GENOME ANNOUNCEMENT
Elizabethkingia anophelis was described based on type strain R26, obtained from the midgut of an Anopheles gambiae malaria vector mosquito, G3 strain (1, 2). The bacterium is often found in association with Anopheles and Aedes mosquitoes (2–7). Previously, we provided draft genomes of strain R26, from the I. Faye lab at Stockholm University in Sweden, and strain Ag1, which was isolated from an A. gambiae G3 strain in the J. Xu lab at New Mexico State University, USA (8).
Here we report the genome sequences of two strains, AR4-6 and AR6-8, which were isolated from two female individuals of Anopheles sinensis mosquitoes that were caught wild in Sichuan, China, in July 2015. The midgut content of individual mosquito specimens was cultured on LB plates at 29°C; species identity was determined by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. At CDC, isolates were grown on heart infusion agar with 5% rabbit blood at 35°C. Genomic DNA was extracted via the Joint Genome Institute (JGI) bacterial DNA isolation cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) protocol (9). Libraries were prepared using the NEBNext Ultra DNA library prep kit (New England Biolabs, Inc., Ipswich, MA, USA), and sequence reads were generated on the Illumina MiSeq instrument (Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). Using CLC Genomics Workbench v8.5, reads were trimmed with a quality limit of 0.2, and then de novo assembled using default parameters. The resulting contigs were ordered and oriented based on NcoI whole-genome optical maps with MapSolver v3.2 (Opgen, Inc.), and joined based on read sequence alignments using the sequence editing tool BioEdit v7.1.9 (10). Strains R26 and AR6-8 were also sequenced using PacBio. Genomic DNA was extracted using the MasterPure DNA purification kit (Epicentre, Madison, WI, USA) and quality assessed with a Qubit fluorometer (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA). Libraries of 20 kb were generated with the SMRTbell template prep kit 1.0 (Pacific Biosciences, Menlo Park, CA) and then size selected with the Blue Pippin (Sage Science, Beverly, MA). Libraries were bound to polymerase using the DNA/polymerase binding kit P6v2 (Pacific Biosciences) and were then loaded on one SMRTcell (Pacific Biosciences) and sequenced with C4v2 chemistry (Pacific Biosciences) for 360-min movies on the RSII instrument (Pacific Biosciences). The reads were de novo assembled using PacBio’s hierarchical genome assembly process (HGAP3 and SMRT Analysis 2.3.0). The resulting contigs were examined for overlap and circularized using Circlator (v1.2.1) (11). Illumina reads of strains Ag1 and AR4-6 were mapped to these PacBio assemblies using CLC genomics workbench, and a consensus sequence was extracted. Assemblies for all four strains were compared with the Illumina/Opgen hybrid assemblies, and minor discrepancies were resolved. The complete circularized genomes were annotated by using the NCBI Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline v4.2.
The genomes of AR4-6 and AR6-8 are identical, with a genome size of 4,093,688 bp. The core genomes of all four mosquito-derived strains are closely related, forming a sublineage in lineage A of E. anophelis strains (12). The genomes of Ag1, AR4-6, and AR6-8 contain an ~35.3-kb phage insertion that is absent in R26.
Accession number(s).
The genomes of the strains have been deposited at DDBJ/ENA/GenBank with the accession numbers CP023401 (R26), CP023402 (Ag1), CP023403 (AR6-8), and CP023404 (AR4-6).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by NIH grant SC1AI112786 and NSF award number 1633330 (to J.X.) and grant 81371848 from the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China (to Y.M.) and by CDC program funds designated for the study of emerging infectious agents.
The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China. Mention of company names or products does not constitute endorsement.
Footnotes
Citation Pei D, Nicholson AC, Jiang J, Chen H, Whitney AM, Villarma A, Bell M, Humrighouse B, Rowe LA, Sheth M, Batra D, Juieng P, Loparev VN, McQuiston JR, Lan Y, Ma Y, Xu J. 2017. Complete circularized genome sequences of four strains of Elizabethkingia anophelis, including two novel strains isolated from wild-caught Anopheles sinensis. Genome Announc 5:e01359-17. https://doi.org/10.1128/genomeA.01359-17.
REFERENCES
- 1.Kämpfer P, Matthews H, Glaeser SP, Martin K, Lodders N, Faye I. 2011. Elizabethkingia anophelis sp. nov., isolated from the midgut of the mosquito Anopheles gambiae. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 61:2670–2675. doi: 10.1099/ijs.0.026393-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Lindh JM, Borg-Karlson AK, Faye I. 2008. Transstadial and horizontal transfer of bacteria within a colony of Anopheles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae) and oviposition response to bacteria-containing water. Acta Trop 107:242–250. doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2008.06.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Wang Y, Gilbreath TM III, Kukutla P, Yan G, Xu J. 2011. Dynamic gut microbiome across life history of the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae in Kenya. PLoS One 6:e24767. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024767. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Chen S, Bagdasarian M, Walker ED. 2015. Elizabethkingia anophelis: molecular manipulation and interactions with mosquito hosts. Appl Environ Microbiol 81:2233–2243. doi: 10.1128/AEM.03733-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Terenius O, Lindh JM, Eriksson-Gonzales K, Bussière L, Laugen AT, Bergquist H, Titanji K, Faye I. 2012. Midgut bacterial dynamics in Aedes aegypti. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 80:556–565. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2012.01317.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Boissière A, Tchioffo MT, Bachar D, Abate L, Marie A, Nsango SE, Shahbazkia HR, Awono-Ambene PH, Levashina EA, Christen R, Morlais I. 2012. Midgut microbiota of the malaria mosquito vector Anopheles gambiae and interactions with Plasmodium falciparum infection. PLoS Pathog 8:e1002742. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002742. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Raygoza Garay JA, Hughes GL, Koundal V, Rasgon JL, Mwangi MM. 2016. Genome sequence of Elizabethkingia anophelis strain EaAs1, isolated from the Asian malaria mosquito Anopheles stephensi. Genome Announc 4(2):e00084-16. doi: 10.1128/genomeA.00084-16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Kukutla P, Lindberg BG, Pei D, Rayl M, Yu W, Steritz M, Faye I, Xu J. 2013. Draft genome sequences of Elizabethkingia anophelis strains R26T and Ag1 from the midgut of the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae. Genome Announc 1(6):e01030-13. doi: 10.1128/genomeA.01030-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.William S, Feil H, Copeland A. 2012. Bacterial genomic DNA isolation using CTAB. http://jgi.doe.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/JGI-Bacterial-DNA-isolation-CTAB-Protocol-2012.pdf.
- 10.Hall TA. 1999. BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symp Ser 41:95–98. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Hunt M, Silva ND, Otto TD, Parkhill J, Keane JA, Harris SR. 2015. Circlator: automated circularization of genome assemblies using long sequencing reads. Genome Biol 16:294. doi: 10.1186/s13059-015-0849-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Breurec S, Criscuolo A, Diancourt L, Rendueles O, Vandenbogaert M, Passet V, Caro V, Rocha EP, Touchon M, Brisse S. 2016. Genomic epidemiology and global diversity of the emerging bacterial pathogen Elizabethkingia anophelis. Sci Rep 6:30379. doi: 10.1038/srep30379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]