Skip to main content
MicrobiologyOpen logoLink to MicrobiologyOpen
. 2019 Oct 1;8(12):e938. doi: 10.1002/mbo3.938

Insights into the genome structure of four acetogenic bacteria with specific reference to the Wood–Ljungdahl pathway

Alfonso Esposito 1, Sabrina Tamburini 2, Luca Triboli 1, Luca Ambrosino 3, Maria Luisa Chiusano 4, Olivier Jousson 1,
PMCID: PMC6925170  PMID: 31573151

Abstract

Acetogenic bacteria are obligate anaerobes with the ability of converting carbon dioxide and other one‐carbon substrates into acetate through the Wood–Ljungdahl (WL) pathway. These substrates are becoming increasingly important feedstock in industrial microbiology. The main potential industrial application of acetogenic bacteria is the production of metabolites that constitute renewable energy sources (biofuel); such bacteria are of particular interest for this purpose thanks to their low energy requirements for large‐scale cultivation. Here, we report new genome sequences for four species, three of them are reported for the first time, namely Acetobacterium paludosum DSM 8237, Acetobacterium tundrae DSM 917, Acetobacterium bakii DSM 8239, and Alkalibaculum bacchi DSM 221123. We performed a comparative genomic analysis focused on the WL pathway's genes and their encoded proteins, using Acetobacterium woodii as a reference genome. The Average Nucleotide Identity (ANI) values ranged from 70% to 95% over an alignment length of 5.4–6.5 Mbp. The core genome consisted of 363 genes, whereas the number of unique genes in a single genome ranged from 486 in A. tundrae to 2360 in A.bacchi. No significant rearrangements were detected in the gene order for the Wood–Ljungdahl pathway however, two species showed variations in genes involved in formate metabolism: A. paludosum harbor two copies of fhs1, and A. bakii a truncated fdhF1. The analysis of protein networks highlighted the expansion of protein orthologues in A. woodii compared to A. bacchi, whereas protein networks involved in the WL pathway were more conserved. This study has increased our understanding on the evolution of the WL pathway in acetogenic bacteria.

Keywords: Acetogens, Comparative genomics, NGS, Wood–Ljungdahl pathway


Acetogenic bacteria are able to convert one‐carbon substrates into acetate through the Wood‐Ljungdahl (WL) pathway. We report a comparative genomic analysis of four acetogenic species with a focus on the genes encoding enzymes of the WL pathway. We found variations in the organization of WL pathway gene clusters and an expansion of protein orthologues.

graphic file with name MBO3-8-e938-g009.jpg

1. INTRODUCTION

Acetogenic bacteria, or acetogens, are obligate anaerobes converting one‐carbon substrates, such as carbon dioxide, formate, methyl groups, or carbon monoxide into acetate using molecular hydrogen as electron donor through the Wood–Ljungdahl (WL) pathway, a process known as acetogenesis (Ragsdale & Pierce, 2008). Acetogenesis was first described in the early '30 and has been extensively studied in Clostridia (Drake, 1994). The WL pathway was considered for a long time to be a specific trait of species belonging primarily to the Firmicutes (Ragsdale & Pierce, 2008), but a number of recent studies have shown that this pathway is far more spread in the microbial tree of life than previously thought (Adam, Borrel, & Gribaldo, 2018; Borrel, Adam, & Gribaldo, 2016; Graber & Breznak, 2004; Hug et al., 2013; Strous et al., 2006). Acetogenic species have been found in the archaeal kingdom, although most Archaea produce methane instead of acetate as end product (Borrel et al., 2016), in Chloroflexi (Hug et al., 2013), Spirochetes (Graber & Breznak, 2004), and Planctomycetes (Berg, 2011; Strous et al., 2006).

Due to its low ATP requirement, the WL pathway can be found in prokaryotes adapted to conditions that approach the thermodynamic limits of life (Schuchmann and Mueller, 2014). In addition, comparative genomic analyses of extant microbial taxa revealed that the predicted last common universal ancestor possessed the WL pathway (Adam et al., 2018; Weiss et al., 2016). It is thus conceivable that the WL pathway represented an efficient way to produce energy in the early Earth environment before the great oxidation event, that is the enrichment of oxygen in the early earth atmosphere as a consequence of the emergence of organisms able to perform oxygenic photosynthesis (Poehlein et al., 2012; Weiss et al., 2016). The main advantages of the WL pathway include the following: its versatility; it can be coupled to methanogenesis or to energy conservation via generation of electrochemical gradients; its modularity, since some species utilize partial WL pathways to channel electrons produced during fermentation to CO2; its flexibility, as several organisms use different coenzymes and/or electron carriers, and in some cases the WL pathway is reversed (e.g., it generates molecular hydrogen and carbon dioxide from acetate for energy production (Schuchmann & Mueller, 2016).

There is a growing interest toward acetogens, as they can be used as biocatalyst for the conversion of synthesis gas (a mixture of H2 and CO and/or CO2) into fuels or chemicals with low energy supply (Bengelsdorf et al., 2016; Cavicchioli et al., 2011; Shin et al., 2018). The genome structure and encoded functions of the members of the genus Acetobacterium (Balch, Schoberth, Tanner, & Wolfe, 1977), are still not very well understood. The genes involved in the WL pathway of Acetobacterium woodi are divided into three clusters (Poehlein et al., 2012). Each of them consists of 6 to 10 syntenic genes, with their products orchestrating a specific phase of the WL pathway (Figure 1). Cluster I consists of 7 genes encoding formate dehydrogenase and accessory enzymes catalyzing the reduction of carbon dioxide to formate. Cluster II contains 6 genes, underpinning the four steps leading from formate to acetyl‐CoA. Cluster III encodes the enzymes involved in carbon fixation and production of acetate from acetyl‐CoA (Poehlein et al., 2012). Here, we report new genome sequences of four acetogenic bacteria and perform a comparative genomic analysis focused on the gene clusters and protein networks of the WL pathway.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Graphic depiction of the Wood–Ljungdahl pathway including the genes involved in each step of the pathway. Colors represent the gene clusters; THF: tetrahydrofolate; fdhF1 and 2: formate dehydrogenase 1 and 2; fhs1: formyl‐THF synthetase; fchA:methenyl‐THF cyclohydrolase, folD: methylene‐THF dehydrogenase; metVF: methylene‐THF reductase; rnfC2: rnfC‐like protein. Redrawn from Poehlein et al. (2012)

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Bacterial strains

Acetobacterium paludosum DSM 8237, Acetobacterium tundrae DSM 917, Acetobacterium bakii DSM 8239, Alkalibaculum bacchii DSM 221123 were obtained from the Leibniz Institute DSMZ—German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures. The bacterial strains were grown in Difco sporulation media (DSM) under anaerobic conditions (Table 1). The three Acetobacterium species were grown in DSM 614 medium amended with fructose at a temperature of 22°C, while Alkalibaculum bacchi was grown in DSM 545 medium at a temperature of 37°C.

Table 1.

NGS data and genome assembly statistics

  # read pairs # contigs N50 Tot. length % GC
A. bacchi DSM 22112 553976 49 186894 3,116,598 34.71
A. bakii DSM 8239 786768 43 285194 4,163,517 41.21
A. paludosum DSM 8237 1158287 54 179628 3,691,131 40.04
A. tundrae DSM 9173 757003 66 154452 3,563,081 39.64

2.2. DNA extraction, library preparation, and sequencing

Genomic DNA was extracted using the Qiagen DNeasy Blood and Tissue kit (Hilden, Germany), according to the manufacturer's protocol for gram‐positive bacteria. Bacterial cells were harvested by centrifugation at 10,000g for 15 min and kept at 37°C for 1 hr with the enzymatic lysis buffer provided by the supplier. Cells were then placed at 56°C for 30 min and treated with RNase A. After column purification, DNA was eluted with 100 ml 10 mmol/L Tris/HCl, pH 8.0. Genomic DNA purity and integrity were assessed by measuring the absorbance at 260 nm (A260) and the ratio of the absorbance at 260 and 280 nm (A260/A280) with a NanoDrop ND‐1000 spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific). Genomic DNA concentration was measured by using the Qubit fluorometer (Thermo Fisher). Libraries were prepared using the Nextera XT DNA library preparation kit (Illumina, USA) with default settings, and sequenced on an Illumina MiSeq platform.

2.3. Genome assembly and annotation

The quality of the reads was checked using the software fastqc (Andrews, 2010), and adaptor sequences were removed using trim_galore (Krueger, 2016). The assembly was performed with the software SPAdes version 3.8.0 (Bankevich et al., 2012), using all default parameters and the option “–careful.” After assembly, contigs shorter than 500 bp and/or with a coverage below 3 were removed. Pairwise Average Nucleotide Identity (ANI) values were calculated among the five sequenced genomes and the reference genome of A. woodii using the software pyani (Pritchard, Glover, Humphris, Elphinstone, & Toth, 2016). The output was visualized using the in‐house developed software DiMHepy, publicly available at https://github.com/lucaTriboli/DiMHepy.

Genomes were annotated using Prokka (Seemann, 2014), using an ad hoc database created starting from the genome of A. woodii. Amino acidic sequences predicted by Prokka were used as input for EggNOG mapper for prediction of functional features (Huerta‐Cepas et al., 2017). The outputs of Prokka were imported in R (R Core Team, 2012) for graphical depiction of genomic maps using the R‐package GenoPlotR (Guy, Kultima, Andersson, & Quackenbush, 2011), based on the coordinates found by Prokka. To infer the number of shared genes among the five genomes we used Roary (Page et al., 2015), leaving all default settings beside the blastp identity parameter, that was set to 60 because the comparative analysis included a species from another genus (i.e., Alkalibaculum bacchi). Venn diagrams, based on presence/absence of homologous genes as inferred by Roary, were drawn using the web tool of the Bioinformatics and Evolutionary Genomics Department of the University of Gent (http://bioinformatics.psb.ugent.be/webtools/Venn/).

To identify biosynthetic gene clusters for secondary metabolites, the genome sequences for each of the strains were uploaded in fasta format to the antibiotics and Secondary Metabolites Analysis SHell (antiSMASH) web server (Blin et al., 2017).

2.4. Prediction of orthologues and paralogues

The protein sequences for the five species were predicted by Prokka, and all‐versus‐all sequence similarity searches between the protein set of each pair of the five considered species were performed independently using the BLASTp program of the BLAST package (Camacho et al., 2009). As proposed by Rosenfeld and DeSalle (2012), a paralogy analysis may consider an E‐value threshold that maximizes the number of detectable protein families (Rosenfeld & DeSalle, 2012). Therefore, all similarity searches were initially carried out using an E‐value cutoff of 10−3. In order to identify orthologues, we used a python software developed by Ambrosino et al. (2018). The software accepts the output of the BLAST similarity searches as input, implementing a Bidirectional Best Hit (BBH) approach (Hughes, 2005; Huynen & Bork, 1998; Overbeek, Fonstein, D'Souza, Pusch, & Maltsev, 1999; Tatusov, Koonin, & Lipman, 1997). Such approach establishes that proteins ai and bi, from species A and B, respectively, are the best orthologues if ai is the best scored hit of bi, with bi being the best scored hit of ai, in all‐versus‐all BLAST similarity searches (Hughes, 2005). For paralogy prediction, all‐versus‐all similarity searches were performed for each species using the BLASTp program.

2.5. Protein similarity networks

Networks of proteins based on the inferred similarity relationships were built. The network construction procedure extracted all the connected components into different separated undirected graphs by using NetworkX package (Hagberg, Schult, & Swart, 2008). Each node in the network represents a protein and each edge represents an orthology or paralogy relationship. A filtering step was introduced to select for each species only the E‐value cutoff that maximized the number of paralogue networks. The selected E‐values were e‐10 for Acetobacterium woodii, A. paludosum, A. tundrae, and A. bakii, and e‐5 for Alkalibaculum bacchi. Cytoscape software (Shannon et al., 2003) was used for the graphical visualization of the networks.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Genome‐wide analyses reveal close similarity between A. tundrae and A. paludosum

The number of reads per genome was on average 814.008 ± 251.751; the assembly resulted in an average number of contigs of 53 ± 9 (Table 1). Genome lengths ranged from 3.1 up to 4.1 Mbp; within the Acetobacterium genus the range was 3.1–3.7. The genome of A. bacchi was the largest one, with a size of 4.1 Mbp, an N50 ranging 186.894–285.194 with an average of 201.542 ± 57.474 (Table 1). Genome annotation statistics were consistent with the values reported in a previous pan‐genomic study focussing on 23 bacteria (22 of which belonging to the phylum Firmicutes) (Shin, Song, Jeong, & Cho, 2016). The ANI values calculated across the five genomes ranged from 70% to 95%, the alignment length ranged from 5.4 up to 6.5 Mbp. The analysis showed that A. tundrae and A. paludosum genomes had the highest ANI value (94.9%) and the largest alignment length (6.3 Mbp, Figure 2). It should be pointed out that A. bakii DSM 8239 was sequenced in another study (Hwang, Song, & Cho, 2015). We compared the previously sequenced genome of A. bakii with our data and found an ANI value of 99.76% over an alignment length of 4.12 Mb.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Hierarchically clustered heatmap of ANI calculated using blastn (left), and alignment length (right) between the five genomes

The ANI analysis confirms the evolutionary relationships between these species (Simankova et al., 2000), with A. paludosum and A. tundrae being most closely related within the genus Acetobacterium with an ANI of 95% over an alignment length of 6.4 Mbp. Alkalibaculum bacchi branched outside of the Acetobacterium group, and displayed an ANI value of 70%, over an alignment length of 5.4 Mbp.

The annotation using Prokka found on average 3,343 ± 393 coding sequences. Proteins were assigned using EggNOG mapper to 2,460 ± 221 protein families (Table 2).

Table 2.

Genome annotation statistics, including number of CDS predicted by Prokka, antiSMASH gene clusters analysis and protein family annotation by eggNOG mapper (for A. woodii the analysis was done on the reference strain with acc.no. CP002987)

  Coding sequences (CDS) Avg. # CDS per Kb Avg. gene length % genome containing CDS #rRNA #tRNA # Protein Families Secondary metabolites gene clusters found by antiSMASH

Bacteriocin/

Microcin

Terpene NRPS fatty acids saccharide others
A.woodii 1030 3618 0.89 951.6 85.11 16 58 2698 1 0 2 1 4 9
A. bacchi 22112 2860 0.92 898.7 82.48 6 55 2205 1 0 1 1 4 5
A. bakii 8239 3822 1.23 936.6 85.97 5 48 2740 2 1 0 1 4 8
A. paludosum 8237 3363 1.08 947.2 86.3 6 53 2487 2 0 0 1 3 9
A. tundrae 9173 3330 1.07 919.2 85.13 6 54 2411 3 0 1 1 3 10

The number of gene clusters involved in the production of secondary metabolites identified by the antiSMASH analysis was 12, 16, 15, and 18 in A. bacchi, A. bakii, A. paludosum, and A. tundrae, respectively (Table 2). A single cluster of genes for fatty acid biosynthesis per genome was found by the ClusterFinder algorithm, and this cluster was in all cases homologous to a cluster of 10 genes in Streptococcus pneumoniae. In the four Acetobacterium species, the antiSMASH analysis detected a cluster of genes involved in bacteriocin production. This cluster consisted of 7 syntenic genes homologous to a cluster of genes in A. woodii including two radical SAM proteins, two B12‐binding domain‐containing radical SAM protein, one HlyD family efflux transporter periplasmic adaptor subunit, one Nif11‐like leader peptide family natural product precursor, and a hypothetical protein. This gene cluster was not found in A. bacchi.

The pangenome consisted of 9,262 genes, with a core genome of 363 genes (whose annotation is provided in Table A1), the number of core genes Acetobacterium spp. was 1,241. The number of unique genes into a single genome ranged from 486 to 2,360, in A. tundrae and A. bacchi, respectively (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Venn diagram summarizing the number of shared and unique genes as inferred by Roary

3.2. Gene cluster organization of the WL pathway is well conserved in Acetobacterium spp

As mentioned above, the WL pathway in A. woodii is encoded by three gene clusters. We examined the organization of those genes in three newly sequenced Acetobacterium species. The gene order was perfectly conserved (syntenic), compared with the reference strain Acetobacterium woodii, in the three clusters. A. bakii showed a truncated version of the formate dehydrogenase gene (fdhF1), whereas the other genes in this cluster were conserved (Figure 4). To confirm this observation, we searched the homologue of fdhF1 in the genome of A. bakii deposited in NCBI, which could not be identified. Consistently, a truncated version of fdhF1 in A. bakii was also found by Shin et al. (2018). In the genomes of A. tundrae and A. paludosum, the gene encoding formyl‐tetrahydrofolate synthetase (fhs1, from cluster II), was duplicated (Figure 4). One possible explanation for this feature could be the duplication of this specific gene as an adaptive trait. Examples of gene duplication are frequently connected to environmental adaptation (Tatusov et al., 1997), often through gene dosage (Bratlie et al., 2010; Kondrashov, 2012).

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Organization of the three gene clusters in the four Acetobacterium genomes. Orthologues are connected with purple shades

Gene cluster III presented no rearrangements in any of the four Acetobacterium genomes (Figure 4). Conversely, in Alkalibaculum bacchi, genes of the WL pathway were organized in a different way compared to the Acetobacterium genus, as none of the three clusters was found to be complete. Genes appeared instead to be scattered all over the bacterial chromosome (Table A2). Only the formate dehydrogenase genes (and not the accessory proteins) of cluster I were found on two separate contigs. All genes of cluster II were found, although they were split between two contigs. All but two genes of cluster III were found on the same contig, although the gene order was not maintained (Table A2).

3.3. Protein network analysis reveals gene expansion dynamics for WL pathway proteins

The comparative analysis performed on all considered species led to the construction of networks of protein orthologues and paralogues. Prediction of orthologues between the five species was performed using a Bidirectional Best Hit (BBH) approach. Overall, 20,712 BBHs were detected. Paralogues were detected by all‐against‐all sequence similarity searches. Using as an input the predicted 20,712 orthology relationships, we considered the associated paralogues in all species, which led to the identification of a total of 2,135 distinct networks (Figure 5). A general overview of the generated networks indicates that a consistent core of networks (922) contained proteins present in all considered species, while only 9, 21, 5, 7, and 48 networks contained proteins exclusively found in A. woodii, A. paludosum, A. tundrae, A. bakii, and A. bacchi, respectively (Figure 5).

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Venn diagram summarizing the number of networks that include proteins from the five considered species

We then inferred gene conservation or divergence between species pairs, calculating the number of proteins per species for each network (Figure 6). We defined duplicated proteins starting exclusively from the previously detected orthologue pairs. Specifically, we defined 455 two‐protein networks connected by a single orthology relationship, 1,424 networks including 3–9 proteins, and 256 networks containing 10 or more proteins (Figure 6a). The networks distributed along a hypothetical bisector (Figure 6b), which represent the protein families that did not undergo significant changes in the number of members between species pairs. In contrast, networks that are distant from the bisector represent expansions or reductions in the number of proteins of related protein families in A. woodii compared to the other species. Furthermore, it is possible to infer the most conserved protein families between A. woodii and the other species by considering the networks with the highest number of orthologues (large circles in Figure 6).

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Overview of the defined protein networks highlighting the respective distribution per species. (a) Bar chart showing the number of networks classified according to their size; (b) Scatter plots showing the distribution of the networks based on the respective number of proteins from A. woodii compared to the other considered species. Circle diameter is proportional to the number of BBHs within each network

We then selected the A. woodii proteins encoded by the genes of the WL pathway, identifying them within the generated networks. The proteins encoded by the gene clusters I, II, and III led to the discovery identification of 13 distinct networks (Figure A1). At least one protein per cluster presented cliques of one orthologue per genome (Figure 7), this is the case for FdhD in cluster I, FolD in cluster II and AcsD in cluster III (represented by NET_858, NET_710, and NET_918, respectively) (Figure 7). Gene expansion dynamics, represented as different numbers of paralogues occurring in different genomes, have been detected for a number of genes such as fhs1 (Figure 4 and NET_341 of Figure 7), and fchA (NET_338 of Figure 7). More complex gene expansion dynamics were detected for the other genes (Figure A1). In particular, one out of three networks containing proteins encoded by the gene cluster I (NET_236), five out of eight networks (NET_28, NET_156, NET_647, NET_1061, and NET_1374) in cluster II, and one out of four networks containing proteins encoded by the gene cluster III (NET_341), display different numbers of duplicated genes within each network among all the other considered species. A few examples of specific trends regarding A. bacchi proteins are in NET_338, NET_647, and NET_1374, where A. bacchi orthologues are more numerous in comparison with the ones from the other species; in NET_341 and NET_1061 A. bacchi proteins are less common than the ones from the other species; in NET_236 A. bacchi proteins are completely missing (Figure A1). This confirms the divergence highlighted in the previous comparative analyses.

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Selected networks displaying different amplification patterns in genes involved in the Wood–Ljungdahl pathway. An extended version of this figure including all proteins of the WL pathway is presented in Figure A1

4. CONCLUSIONS

We obtained draft genome sequences for three Acetobacterium species and a acetogenic bacterium, Alkalibaculum bacchi. This study emphasizes the degree of genomic divergence and conservation of protein families within the genus. Having a closer look at the gene clusters involved in WL pathway, we revealed rearrangements and homology patterns that expands our understanding regarding the evolution of this metabolic pathway in the Acetobacterium genus with the perspective of future exploitation of these bacteria for industrial applications.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

None declared.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

AE, ST, and OJ designed the study. AE, ST, LT, LA, and MLC analyzed and interpreted data. AE, ST, LA, and OJ wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

ETHICAL APPROVAL

None required.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The study was financed in part by the Autonomous Province of Trento (ENAM project) in cooperation with the Italian National Research Council (CNR). The authors thank Matthias Kirschberg for providing useful edits on the manuscript.

APPENDIX 1.

Table A1.

Annotation of the genes in the core genome

RefSeq name in A. woodii Cluster number Gene name A. woodii A. bacchi
      Contig Start End Length Contig Start End Length
WP_014355214.1 1 fdhF1 NC_016894.1 944951 947125 2174 NODE_17_length_58697_cov_40.1842 55126 57810 2684
WP_014355215.1 1 hycB1 NC_016894.1 947122 947655 533 not found      
WP_014355216.1 1 fdhF2 NC_016894.1 947921 950089 2168 NODE_29_length_7652_cov_43.4377 4056 6758 2702
WP_014355217.1 1 hycB2 NC_016894.1 950093 950623 530 not found      
WP_083837833.1 1 fdhD NC_016894.1 950758 951549 791 NODE_17_length_58697_cov_40.1842 50333 51133 800
WP_014355219.1 1 hycB3 NC_016894.1 951566 952126 560 not found      
WP_014355220.1 1 hydA1 NC_016894.1 952144 953523 1379 not found      
WP_014355320.1 2 fhs1 NC_016894.1 1080969 1082645 1676 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.281 195911 197584 1673
WP_014355321.1 2 fchA NC_016894.1 1082745 1083404 659 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.281 197704 198330 626
WP_014355322.1 2 folD NC_016894.1 1083442 1084347 905 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.281 198346 199197 851
WP_014355323.1 2 rnfC2 NC_016894.1 1084375 1086339 1964 NODE_7_length_185859_cov_36.1889 108899 110863 1964
WP_014355324.1 2 metV NC_016894.1 1086341 1086958 617 NODE_7_length_185859_cov_36.1889 108265 108897 632
WP_014355325.1 2 metF NC_016894.1 1086992 1087888 896 NODE_7_length_185859_cov_36.1889 107312 108193 881
WP_014355456.1 3 cooC1 NC_016894.1 1235110 1235895 785 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.281 182407 183177 770
WP_014355457.1 3 acsV NC_016894.1 1235961 1237886 1925 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.281 187232 188480 1248
WP_014355458.1 3 orf1 NC_016894.1 1237902 1238549 647 not found      
WP_014355459.1 3 orf2 NC_016894.1 1238546 1239205 659 not found      
WP_014355460.1 3 acsD NC_016894.1 1239392 1240327 935 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.281 183192 184139 947
WP_014355461.1 3 acsC NC_016894.1 1240347 1241687 1340 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.281 184168 185508 1340
WP_014355462.1 3 acsE NC_016894.1 1241757 1242542 785 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.281 185552 186337 785
WP_014355463.1 3 acsA NC_016894.1 1242813 1244711 1898 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.282 177291 179183 1892
WP_014355464.1 3 cooC2 NC_016894.1 1244738 1245523 785 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.282 179205 179794 589
WP_041670690.1 3 acsB1 NC_016894.1 1245585 1247753 2168 NODE_3_length_279548_cov_33.282 180358 182149 1791

Table A2.

Genomic coordinates of the WL pathway genes in A. woodii in comparison with A. bacchi

Gene name Annotation
ackA Acetate kinase
acoA "Acetoin:2,6‐dichlorophenolindophenol oxidoreductase subunit alpha"
acsC Corrinoid/iron‐sulfur protein large subunit
acsE 5‐methyltetrahydrofolate:corrinoid/iron‐sulfur protein co‐methyltransferase
alaA Glutamate‐pyruvate aminotransferase AlaA
alaS Alanine‐‐tRNA ligase
apbC Iron‐sulfur cluster carrier protein
apeA putative M18 family aminopeptidase 1
arcB "Ornithine carbamoyltransferase 2, catabolic"
argC N‐acetyl‐gamma‐glutamyl‐phosphate reductase
argD acetylornithine aminotransferase ArgD1
argG Argininosuccinate synthase
argH Argininosuccinate lyase
argS Arginine‐‐tRNA ligase
artM Arginine transport ATP‐binding protein ArtM
asd2 Aspartate‐semialdehyde dehydrogenase 2
aspS Aspartate‐‐tRNA ligase
asrA Anaerobic sulfite reductase subunit A
asrB Anaerobic sulfite reductase subunit B
asrC Anaerobic sulfite reductase subunit C
atpA ATP synthase subunit alpha
atpB ATP synthase subunit a
atpD "ATP synthase subunit beta, sodium ion specific"
azr FMN‐dependent NADPH‐azoreductase
bfmB Methoxymalonate biosynthesis protein
carE Caffeyl‐CoA reductase‐Etf complex subunit CarE
cbiF Cobalt‐precorrin‐4 C(11)‐methyltransferase
cbiH putative cobalt‐factor III C(17)‐methyltransferase
cfiB 2‐oxoglutarate carboxylase small subunit
cheY Chemotaxis protein CheY
clpP ATP‐dependent Clp protease proteolytic subunit
clpX ATP‐dependent Clp protease ATP‐binding subunit ClpX
clpY ATP‐dependent protease ATPase subunit ClpY
coaX Type III pantothenate kinase
cooS1 Carbon monoxide dehydrogenase 1
crh HPr‐like protein Crh
csd putative cysteine desulfurase
cysK1 O‐acetylserine sulfhydrylase
cysS Cysteine‐‐tRNA ligase
dcd dCTP deaminase
ddpD putative D%2CD‐dipeptide transport ATP‐binding protein DdpD
der GTPase Der
dmdA 2%2C3‐dimethylmalate dehydratase large subunit
dnaA Chromosomal replication initiator protein DnaA
dnaE DNA polymerase III subunit alpha
drrA Daunorubicin/doxorubicin resistance ATP‐binding protein DrrA
dtd D‐aminoacyl‐tRNA deacylase
dut Deoxyuridine 5'‐triphosphate nucleotidohydrolase
dxs 1‐deoxy‐D‐xylulose‐5‐phosphate synthase
ecfA1 Energy‐coupling factor transporter ATP‐binding protein EcfA1
ecfA2 Energy‐coupling factor transporter ATP‐binding protein EcfA2
ecfT Energy‐coupling factor transporter transmembrane protein EcfT
ecsA ABC‐type transporter ATP‐binding protein EcsA
efp Elongation factor P
eno Enolase
era GTPase Era
fba Fructose‐bisphosphate aldolase
fbp Fructose‐1%2C6‐bisphosphatase class 3
fchA Methenyltetrahydrofolate cyclohydrolase
ffh Signal recognition particle protein
fom3 2‐hydroxyethylphosphonate methyltransferase
frr Ribosome‐recycling factor
ftsH ATP‐dependent zinc metalloprotease FtsH
ftsZ Cell division protein FtsZ
fumA Fumarate hydratase class I%2C aerobic
fusA Elongation factor G
gap Glyceraldehyde‐3‐phosphate dehydrogenase
gatA Glutamyl‐tRNA(Gln) amidotransferase subunit A
gatB Aspartyl/glutamyl‐tRNA(Asn/Gln) amidotransferase subunit B
gatC Aspartyl/glutamyl‐tRNA(Asn/Gln) amidotransferase subunit C
glmM Phosphoglucosamine mutase
glmS Glutamine‐‐fructose‐6‐phosphate aminotransferase [isomerizing]
glnH Glutamine‐binding periplasmic protein
glnS Glutamine‐‐tRNA ligase
glpK Glycerol kinase
gltB Ferredoxin‐dependent glutamate synthase 1
gltD Glutamate synthase [NADPH] small chain
glyA Serine hydroxymethyltransferase
glyQS Glycine‐‐tRNA ligase
gmk Guanylate kinase
gpmI 2%2C3‐bisphosphoglycerate‐independent phosphoglycerate mutase
graR Response regulator protein GraR
groS 10 kDa chaperonin
gtaB UTP‐‐glucose‐1‐phosphate uridylyltransferase
guaA GMP synthase [glutamine‐hydrolyzing]
guaB Inosine‐5'‐monophosphate dehydrogenase
gyrA DNA gyrase subunit A
gyrB DNA gyrase subunit B
hadI 2‐hydroxyisocaproyl‐CoA dehydratase activator
hcp Hydroxylamine reductase
hemL Glutamate‐1‐semialdehyde 2%2C1‐aminomutase
hicd Homoisocitrate dehydrogenase
hinT Purine nucleoside phosphoramidase
hisD Histidinol dehydrogenase
hisF Imidazole glycerol phosphate synthase subunit HisF
hisG ATP phosphoribosyltransferase
hisH Imidazole glycerol phosphate synthase subunit HisH
hisI Phosphoribosyl‐AMP cyclohydrolase
hrb High molecular weight rubredoxin
hslR Heat shock protein 15
hslV ATP‐dependent protease subunit HslV
htpG Chaperone protein HtpG
hup DNA‐binding protein HU
ileS Isoleucine‐‐tRNA ligase
ilvB Acetolactate synthase large subunit
ilvC Ketol‐acid reductoisomerase (NADP(+))
ilvD Dihydroxy‐acid dehydratase
ilvH Putative acetolactate synthase small subunit
ilvK Branched‐chain‐amino‐acid aminotransferase 2
infA Translation initiation factor IF‐1
infC Translation initiation factor IF‐3
iscS Cysteine desulfurase IscS
iscU Iron‐sulfur cluster assembly scaffold protein IscU
ispF 2‐C‐methyl‐D‐erythritol 2%2C4‐cyclodiphosphate synthase
ispG 4‐hydroxy‐3‐methylbut‐2‐en‐1‐yl diphosphate synthase (flavodoxin)
lepA Elongation factor 4
leuB 3‐isopropylmalate dehydrogenase
leuD1 3‐isopropylmalate dehydratase small subunit 1
leuS Leucine‐‐tRNA ligase
livF High‐affinity branched‐chain amino acid transport ATP‐binding protein LivF
livH High‐affinity branched‐chain amino acid transport system permease protein LivH
lon1 Lon protease 1
lptB Lipopolysaccharide export system ATP‐binding protein LptB
lysC Aspartokinase
lysS Lysine‐‐tRNA ligase
map Methionine aminopeptidase 1
metA Homoserine O‐succinyltransferase
metG Methionine‐‐tRNA ligase
metH Methionine synthase
metI D‐methionine transport system permease protein MetI
metN Methionine import ATP‐binding protein MetN
metQ Methionine‐binding lipoprotein MetQ
mgl L‐methionine gamma‐lyase
miaB tRNA‐2‐methylthio‐N(6)‐dimethylallyladenosine synthase
minD Septum site‐determining protein MinD
mnmA tRNA‐specific 2‐thiouridylase MnmA
mnmG tRNA uridine 5‐carboxymethylaminomethyl modification enzyme MnmG
mog Molybdopterin adenylyltransferase
mop Aldehyde oxidoreductase
mprA Response regulator MprA
mraZ Transcriptional regulator MraZ
murAB UDP‐N‐acetylglucosamine 1‐carboxyvinyltransferase 2
nikB Nickel transport system permease protein NikB
nrdD Anaerobic ribonucleoside‐triphosphate reductase
nrdJ Vitamin B12‐dependent ribonucleotide reductase
nrdR Transcriptional repressor NrdR
nspC Carboxynorspermidine/carboxyspermidine decarboxylase
nth Endonuclease III
ntpB V‐type sodium ATPase subunit B
nusA Transcription termination/antitermination protein NusA
nusG Transcription termination/antitermination protein NusG
obg GTPase Obg
oppF Oligopeptide transport ATP‐binding protein OppF
paaK Phenylacetate‐coenzyme A ligase
pduL Phosphate propanoyltransferase
pfkA ATP‐dependent 6‐phosphofructokinase
pgk Phosphoglycerate kinase
pgsA CDP‐diacylglycerol‐‐glycerol‐3‐phosphate 3‐phosphatidyltransferase
pheS Phenylalanine‐‐tRNA ligase alpha subunit
pmpR Transcriptional regulatory protein PmpR
pncB2 Nicotinate phosphoribosyltransferase pncB2
pnp Polyribonucleotide nucleotidyltransferase
ppdK Pyruvate%2C phosphate dikinase
ppiB Peptidyl‐prolyl cis‐trans isomerase B
prfA Peptide chain release factor 1
prfB Peptide chain release factor 2
proA Gamma‐glutamyl phosphate reductase
proS Proline‐‐tRNA ligase
prs Ribose‐phosphate pyrophosphokinase
pstB3 Phosphate import ATP‐binding protein PstB 3
pstC Phosphate transport system permease protein PstC
pstS Phosphate‐binding protein PstS
ptsI Phosphoenolpyruvate‐protein phosphotransferase
purC Phosphoribosylaminoimidazole‐succinocarboxamide synthase
purD Phosphoribosylamine‐‐glycine ligase
purE N5‐carboxyaminoimidazole ribonucleotide mutase
purF Amidophosphoribosyltransferase
purH Bifunctional purine biosynthesis protein PurH
purU Formyltetrahydrofolate deformylase
pyrB Aspartate carbamoyltransferase catalytic subunit
pyrD Dihydroorotate dehydrogenase B (NAD(+))%2C catalytic subunit
pyrE Orotate phosphoribosyltransferase
pyrF Orotidine 5'‐phosphate decarboxylase
pyrG CTP synthase
pyrH Uridylate kinase
pyrI Aspartate carbamoyltransferase regulatory chain
queA S‐adenosylmethionine:tRNA ribosyltransferase‐isomerase
rarA Replication‐associated recombination protein A
recA Protein RecA
recU Holliday junction resolvase RecU
rffG dTDP‐glucose 4%2C6‐dehydratase 2
rhlE ATP‐dependent RNA helicase RhlE
rho Transcription termination factor Rho
ribH 6%2C7‐dimethyl‐8‐ribityllumazine synthase
rlmH Ribosomal RNA large subunit methyltransferase H
rlmL Ribosomal RNA large subunit methyltransferase K/L
rmlA Glucose‐1‐phosphate thymidylyltransferase
rnfC Electron transport complex subunit RnfC
rnfE Electron transport complex subunit RnfE
rnhA Ribonuclease H
rnjA Ribonuclease J1
rny Ribonuclease Y
rph Ribonuclease PH
rplA 50S ribosomal protein L1
rplB 50S ribosomal protein L2
rplC 50S ribosomal protein L3
rplD 50S ribosomal protein L4
rplE 50S ribosomal protein L5
rplF 50S ribosomal protein L6
rplJ 50S ribosomal protein L10
rplK 50S ribosomal protein L11
rplL 50S ribosomal protein L7/L12
rplM 50S ribosomal protein L13
rplN 50S ribosomal protein L14
rplO 50S ribosomal protein L15
rplP 50S ribosomal protein L16
rplQ 50S ribosomal protein L17
rplR 50S ribosomal protein L18
rplS 50S ribosomal protein L19
rplT 50S ribosomal protein L20
rplU 50S ribosomal protein L21
rplV 50S ribosomal protein L22
rplW 50S ribosomal protein L23
rplX 50S ribosomal protein L24
rpmA 50S ribosomal protein L27
rpmB 50S ribosomal protein L28
rpmC 50S ribosomal protein L29
rpmD 50S ribosomal protein L30
rpmE 50S ribosomal protein L31
rpmF 50S ribosomal protein L32
rpmG 50S ribosomal protein L33
rpmI 50S ribosomal protein L35
rpoA DNA‐directed RNA polymerase subunit alpha
rpoB DNA‐directed RNA polymerase subunit beta
rpoC DNA‐directed RNA polymerase subunit beta'
rpoZ DNA‐directed RNA polymerase subunit omega
rpsB 30S ribosomal protein S2
rpsC 30S ribosomal protein S3
rpsD 30S ribosomal protein S4
rpsE 30S ribosomal protein S5
rpsF 30S ribosomal protein S6
rpsG 30S ribosomal protein S7
rpsH 30S ribosomal protein S8
rpsI 30S ribosomal protein S9
rpsJ 30S ribosomal protein S10
rpsK 30S ribosomal protein S11
rpsL 30S ribosomal protein S12
rpsM 30S ribosomal protein S13
rpsO 30S ribosomal protein S15
rpsP 30S ribosomal protein S16
rpsQ 30S ribosomal protein S17
rpsR 30S ribosomal protein S18
rpsS 30S ribosomal protein S19
rpsT 30S ribosomal protein S20
rpsU 30S ribosomal protein S21
rsfS Ribosomal silencing factor RsfS
rsmH Ribosomal RNA small subunit methyltransferase H
rsxA Electron transport complex subunit RsxA
rsxB Electron transport complex subunit RsxB
rsxD Electron transport complex subunit RsxD
ruvB Holliday junction ATP‐dependent DNA helicase RuvB
sbcD Nuclease SbcCD subunit D
secA Protein translocase subunit SecA
secY Protein translocase subunit SecY
serC Phosphoserine aminotransferase
serS Serine‐‐tRNA ligase
sigA RNA polymerase sigma factor SigA
smpB SsrA‐binding protein
soj Sporulation initiation inhibitor protein Soj
speA Arginine decarboxylase
speB Agmatinase
speD S‐adenosylmethionine decarboxylase proenzyme
speE Polyamine aminopropyltransferase
spoIIIE DNA translocase SpoIIIE
spoVG Putative septation protein SpoVG
sucB Dihydrolipoyllysine‐residue succinyltransferase component of 2‐oxoglutarate dehydrogenase complex
tdcB L‐threonine ammonia‐lyase
tgt Queuine tRNA‐ribosyltransferase
thiC Phosphomethylpyrimidine synthase
thiD Hydroxymethylpyrimidine/phosphomethylpyrimidine kinase
thiH 2‐iminoacetate synthase
thiM Hydroxyethylthiazole kinase
thiQ Thiamine import ATP‐binding protein ThiQ
thrZ Threonine‐‐tRNA ligase 2
thyX Flavin‐dependent thymidylate synthase
tktA Transketolase 1
trmL tRNA (cytidine(34)‐2'‐O)‐methyltransferase
trpB Tryptophan synthase beta chain
trpS Tryptophan‐‐tRNA ligase
tsf Elongation factor Ts
typA GTP‐binding protein TypA/BipA
tyrS Tyrosine‐‐tRNA ligase
ung Uracil‐DNA glycosylase
upp Uracil phosphoribosyltransferase
uppP Undecaprenyl‐diphosphatase
uvrA UvrABC system protein A
uvrB UvrABC system protein B
valS Valine‐‐tRNA ligase
walR Transcriptional regulatory protein WalR
xpt Xanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
ybiT putative ABC transporter ATP‐binding protein YbiT
ychF Ribosome‐binding ATPase YchF
ydcP putative protease YdcP
yitJ Bifunctional homocysteine S‐methyltransferase/5%2C10‐methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase
yknY putative ABC transporter ATP‐binding protein YknY
yrrK Putative pre‐16S rRNA nuclease
yxdL ABC transporter ATP‐binding protein YxdL
   

Figure A1.

Figure A1

Extended version of Figure 7 showing the proteins of the three clusters of the WLP

Esposito A, Tamburini S, Triboli L, Ambrosino L, Chiusano ML, Jousson O. Insights into the genome structure of four acetogenic bacteria with specific reference to the Wood–Ljungdahl pathway. MicrobiologyOpen. 2019;8:e938 10.1002/mbo3.938

Alfonso Esposito and Sabrina Tamburini authors are contributed equally to this work.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

All data regarding this analysis were deposited in NCBI under the bioproject https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/PRJNA509931

REFERENCES

  1. Adam, P. S. , Borrel, G. , & Gribaldo, S. (2018). Evolutionary history of carbon monoxide dehydrogenase/acetyl‐CoA synthase, one of the oldest enzymatic complexes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(6), E1166–E1173. 10.1073/pnas.1716667115 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ambrosino, L. , Ruggieri, V. , Bostan, H. , Miralto, M. , Vitulo, N. , Zouine, M. , … Valle, G. (2018). Multilevel comparative bioinformatics to investigate evolutionary relationships and specificities in gene annotations. BMC Bioinformatics, 19(15), 435 10.1186/s12859-018-2420-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Andrews, S. FastQC: A quality control tool for high throughput sequence data. 2010. Retrieved from http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/. doi:citeulike‐article‐id:11583827.
  4. Balch, W. E. , Schoberth, S. , Tanner, R. S. , & Wolfe, R. S. (1977). Acetobacterium, a new genus of hydrogen‐oxidizing, carbon dioxide‐reducing, anaerobic Bacteria. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology, 27(4), 355–361. 10.1099/00207713-27-4-355 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bankevich, A. , Nurk, S. , Antipov, D. , Gurevich, A. A. , Dvorkin, M. , Kulikov, A. S. , … Pyshkin, A. V. (2012). SPAdes: A new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single‐cell sequencing. Journal of Computational Biology, 19(5), 455–477. 10.1089/cmb.2012.0021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bengelsdorf, F. R. , Poehlein, A. , Linder, S. , Erz, C. , Hummel, T. , Hoffmeister, S. , … Dürre, P. (2016). Industrial acetogenic biocatalysts: A comparative metabolic and genomic analysis. Frontiers in Microbiology, 7, 1036 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01036 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Berg, I. A. (2011). Ecological aspects of the distribution of different autotrophic CO2 fixation pathways. Applied and Environment Microbiology, 77(6), 1925–1936. 10.1128/AEM.02473-10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Blin, K. , Wolf, T. , Chevrette, M. G. , Lu, X. , Schwalen, C. J. , Kautsar, S. A. , … Dickschat, J. S. (2017). AntiSMASH 4.0 ‐ improvements in chemistry prediction and gene cluster boundary identification. Nucleic Acids Research, 45(W1), W36–W41. 10.1093/nar/gkx319 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Borrel, G. , Adam, P. S. , & Gribaldo, S. (2016). Methanogenesis and the Wood‐Ljungdahl Pathway: An ancient, verstatile, and fragile association. Genome Biology and Evolution, 8(6), 1706–1711. 10.1093/gbe/evw114 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bratlie, M. S. , Johansen, J. , Sherman, B. T. , Huang, D. W. , Lempicki, R. A. , & Drablos, F. (2010). Gene duplications in prokaryotes can be associated with environmental adaptation. BMC Genomics, 11(1), 588 10.1186/1471-2164-11-588 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Camacho, C. , Coulouris, G. , Avagyan, V. , Ma, N. , Papadopoulos, J. , Bealer, K. , Madden, T. L. (2009). BLAST+: Architecture and applications. BMC Bioinformatics, 10(1), 421 10.1186/1471-2105-10-421 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cavicchioli, R. , Charlton, T. , Ertan, H. , Omar, S. M. , Siddiqui, K. S. , & Williams, T. J. (2011). Biotechnological uses of enzymes from psychrophiles. Microbial Biotechnology, 4(4), 449–460. 10.1111/j.1751-7915.2011.00258.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Drake, H. L. (1994). Acetogenesis (1st ed.). US: Springer; 10.1007/978-1-4615-1777-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Graber, J. R. , & Breznak, J. A. (2004). Physiology and nutrition of Treponema primitia, an H2/CO2‐acetogenic spirochete from termite hindguts. Applied and Environment Microbiology, 70(3), 1307–1314. 10.1128/AEM.70.3.1307-1314.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Guy, L. , Kultima, J. R. , Andersson, S. G. E. , & Quackenbush, J. (2011). GenoPlotR: Comparative gene and genome visualization in R. Bioinformatics, 26(18), 2334–2335. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq413 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Hagberg, A. A. , Schult, D. A. , & Swart, P. J. (2008). Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX. Proc 7th. Python Sci Conf., 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2010.09.003 [DOI]
  17. Huerta‐Cepas, J. , Forslund, K. , Coelho, L. P. , Szklarczyk, D. , Jensen, L. J. , Von Mering, C. , Bork, P. (2017). Fast genome‐wide functional annotation through orthology assignment by eggNOG‐mapper. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 34(8), 2115–2122. 10.1093/molbev/msx148 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Hug, L. A. , Castelle, C. J. , Wrighton, K. C. , Thomas, B. C. , Sharon, I. , Frischkorn, K. R. , … Banfield, J. F. (2013). Community genomic analyses constrain the distribution of metabolic traits across the Chloroflexi phylum and indicate roles in sediment carbon cycling. Microbiome, 1(1), 22 10.1186/2049-2618-1-22 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hughes, A. L. (2005). Gene duplication and the origin of novel proteins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(25), 8791–8792. 10.1073/pnas.0503922102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Huynen, M. A. , & Bork, P. (1998). Measuring genome evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 95(11), 5849–5856. 10.1073/pnas.95.11.5849 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Hwang, S. , Song, Y. , & Cho, B.‐K. (2015). Draft genome sequence of Acetobacterium bakii DSM 8239, a potential psychrophilic chemical producer through syngas fermentation. Genome Announcements, 3(5), e01070–e1115. 10.1128/genomeA.01070-15 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kondrashov, F. A. (2012). Gene duplication as a mechanism of genomic adaptation to a changing environment. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279(1749), 5048–5057. 10.1098/rspb.2012.1108 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Krueger, F. (2016). Trim Galore. In: Babraham Bioinformatics, Retrieved from http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/trimgalore/
  24. Overbeek, R. , Fonstein, M. , D'Souza, M. , Pusch, G. D. , & Maltsev, N. (1999). The use of gene clusters to infer functional coupling. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96(6), 2896–2901. 10.1073/pnas.96.6.2896 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Page, A. J. , Cummins, C. A. , Hunt, M. , Wong, V. K. , Reuter, S. , Holden, M. T. G. , … Parkhill, J. (2015). Roary: Rapid large‐scale prokaryote pan genome analysis. Bioinformatics, 31(22), 3691–3693. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv421 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Poehlein, A. , Schmidt, S. , Kaster, A. K. , Goenrich, M. , Vollmers, J. , Thürmer, A. , … Müller, V. (2012). An ancient pathway combining carbon dioxide fixation with the generation and utilization of a sodium ion gradient for ATP synthesis. PLoS ONE, 7(3), e33439 10.1371/journal.pone.0033439 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Pritchard, L. , Glover, R. H. , Humphris, S. , Elphinstone, J. G. , & Toth, I. K. (2016). Genomics and taxonomy in diagnostics for food security: Soft‐rotting enterobacterial plant pathogens. Analytical Methods, 8(1), 12–24. 10.1039/C5AY02550H [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. R Core Team . R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria; 2012. Retrieved from http://www.r-project.org
  29. Ragsdale, S. W. , & Pierce, E. (2008). Acetogenesis and the Wood‐Ljungdahl pathway of CO2 fixation. Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta (BBA)‐Proteins and Proteomics, 1784(12), 1873–1898. 10.1016/j.bbapap.2008.08.012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Rosenfeld, J. A. , & DeSalle, R. (2012). E value cutoff and eukaryotic genome content phylogenetics. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 63(2), 342–350. 10.1016/j.ympev.2012.01.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Schuchmann, K. , & Mueller, V. (2014). Autotrophy at the thermodynamic limit of life: A model for energy conservation in acetogenic bacteria. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 12(12), 809 10.1038/nrmicro3365 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Schuchmann, K. , & Mueller, V. (2016). Energetics and application of heterotrophy in acetogenic bacteria. Applied and Environment Microbiology, 82(14), 4056–4069. 10.1128/AEM.00882-16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Seemann, T. (2014). Prokka: Rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics, 30(14), 2068–2069. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu153 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Shannon, P. , Markiel, A. , Ozier, O. , Baliga, N. S. , Wang, J. T. , Ramage, D. , et al. (2003). Cytoscape: A software Environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Research, 13(11), 2498–2504. 10.1101/gr.1239303 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Shin, J. , Song, Y. , Jeong, Y. , & Cho, B. K. (2016). Analysis of the core genome and pan‐genome of autotrophic acetogenic bacteria. Frontiers in Microbiology, 7, 1531 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01531 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Shin, J. , Song, Y. , Jin, S. , Lee, J.‐K. , Kim, D. R. , Kim, S. C. , … Cho, B. K. (2018). Genome‐scale analysis of Acetobacterium bakii reveals the cold adaptation of psychrotolerant acetogens by post‐transcriptional regulation. RNA, 24(12), 1839–1855. 10.1261/rna.068239.118 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Simankova, M. V. , Kotsyurbenko, O. R. , Stackebrandt, E. , Kostrikina, N. A. , Lysenko, A. M. , Osipov, G. A. , Nozhevnikova, A. N. (2000). Acetobacterium tundrae sp.nov., a new psychrophilic acetogenic bacterium from tundra soil. Archives of Microbiology, 174(6), 440–447. 10.1007/s002030000229 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Strous, M. , Pelletier, E. , Mangenot, S. , Rattei, T. , Lehner, A. , Taylor, M. W. , … Barbe, V. (2006). Deciphering the evolution and metabolism of an annamox bacterium from a community genome. Nature, 440(7085), 790 10.1038/nature04647 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Tatusov, R. L. , Koonin, E. V. , & Lipman, D. J. (1997). A genomic perspective on protein families. Science, 278(5338), 631–637. 10.1126/science.278.5338.631 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Weiss, M. C. , Sousa, F. L. , Mrnjavac, N. , Neukirchen, S. , Roettger, M. , Nelson‐Sathi, S. , … Martin, W. F. (2016). The physiology and habitat of the last universal common ancestor. Nature Microbiology, 1(9), 16116 10.1038/NMICROBIOL.2016.116 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

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

Data Availability Statement

All data regarding this analysis were deposited in NCBI under the bioproject https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/PRJNA509931


Articles from MicrobiologyOpen are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES