Here, we announce the draft genome sequences of two Clostridium strains, C8-1-8 and C2-6-12, isolated from the cecal contents of commercial broiler chickens (in Athens, GA). These strains may represent potentially novel species within the genus Clostridium, and these draft genomes allow further investigation into potential probiotics for poultry.
ABSTRACT
Here, we announce the draft genome sequences of two Clostridium strains, C8-1-8 and C2-6-12, isolated from the cecal contents of commercial broiler chickens (in Athens, GA). These strains may represent potentially novel species within the genus Clostridium, and these draft genomes allow further investigation into potential probiotics for poultry.
ANNOUNCEMENT
The taxonomy and systematics of the genus Clostridium are complex and unresolved, but a total of 231 recognized species belonging to the genus Clostridium were reported as of 2019 (http://www.bacterio.net/clostridium.html). We isolated two Clostridium strains, designated strains C8-1-8 and C2-6-12, from the ceca of commercial broiler chickens collected in Athens, Georgia. These strains may represent potentially novel species, as suggested by a comparison based on whole-genome sequencing. The strains were isolated from cecal contents treated with 3% chloroform to eliminate vegetative bacterial cells (1, 2) and cultured in an anaerobic environment on gut microbiota medium (3). Single colonies were subsequently propagated overnight in Luria-Bertani broth for DNA extraction from cultures using the MO BIO UltraClean microbial DNA isolation kit. Initial characterizations of the isolates were completed by Gram staining followed by 16S rRNA gene sequence analyses. The genomes of both strains were sequenced using the Illumina NovaSeq platform through the Institute for Integrative Genome Biology Genomics Core, University of California, Riverside.
Libraries with a fragment length of 150 bp were constructed using the plexWell 96 library preparation kit for Illumina sequencing platforms (seqWell, Inc., Beverly, MA, USA), and totals of 9,074 and 9,415 Mb of paired-end (150-bp) reads were generated for strains C8-1-8 and C2-6-12, respectively. Default parameters for all software were used during analyses unless otherwise specified. Quality filtering of the reads was performed using Trimmomatic v0.39 (4). High-quality reads were used for de novo genome assembly with SPAdes v3.12.0 using the careful assembly method (5). Scaffolds were filtered for a minimum of 200-bp read length and 30× coverage. The quality of the subsequent assemblies was assessed using QUAST (6). Genome completeness was found to be 99.1% for both strains, using the CheckM lineage (7) and Microbial Genomes Atlas (MiGA) (http://microbial-genomes.org) (8) workflows. The species identification tool specI, based on 40 universal single-copy marker genes (9), confirmed that both genomes could not be assigned to any species cluster. Similarly, neither genome could be assigned to a species when compared against reference genomes from the NCBI RefSeq database using MiGA (8). The results of assembly quality analysis by the MiGA workflow based on 106 essential genes were rated as intermediate and high for C8-1-8 and C2-6-12, respectively. The assembled genomes were annotated using the IMG/MER pipeline (10), and average coverage was calculated using the BBMap tool. Assembly and annotation metrics are presented in Table 1.
TABLE 1.
Assembly and annotation metrics
| Statistic | Data for strain: |
|
|---|---|---|
| C8-1-8 | C2-6-12 | |
| No. of quality-filtered paired-end reads | 11,102,701 | 10,624,933 |
| No. of scaffolds | 116 | 121 |
| N50 (bp) | 177,332 | 126,571 |
| Largest scaffold length (bp) | 442,315 | 352,209 |
| Assembly length (bp) | 6,053,167 | 6,076,981 |
| Avg genome coverage (×) | 448 | 471 |
| G+C content (%) | 31.6 | 29.02 |
| No. of rRNA genes | 14 | 10 |
| No. of tRNA genes | 47 | 57 |
| No. of functional protein-coding genes | 3,956 | 4,254 |
| No. of hypothetical protein-coding genes | 1,413 | 1,373 |
| No. of genes associated with KEGG pathways | 1,209 | 1,354 |
| No. of genes associated with KEGG orthology | 3,091 | 2,350 |
| GenBank accession no. | JAABNO000000000 | JAABNP000000000 |
| SRA accession no. | SRR10903102 | SRR10903103 |
Based on the compare genome analysis function in IMG, which uses the genome-wide average nucleotide identity (ANI), the maximum pairwise ANI of strain C8-1-8 with available Clostridium genomes (n = 756) was 92.6% with Clostridium sp. strain CT4 (GenBank accession number CP025746; aligned fraction [AF], 79.7%). The maximum ANI of strain C2-6-12 with known Clostridium genomes was 84.8% with Clostridium puniceum DSM 2619 (GenBank accession number LZZM00000000.1; IMG genome identification number 2703719317; AF, 53.8%). Comparing our genomes to all available genomes of Clostridium type strains (n = 80), the maximum ANI for strain C8-1-8 was 73.3% with Clostridium fallax DSM 2631 (AF, 17.8%) and the maximum ANI for strain C2-6-12 was 84.8% (AF, 53.8%) with C. puniceum BL70/20. The ANI between our two isolates was only 72.57%, suggesting that strains C8-1-8 and C2-6-12 are distantly related to each other.
Data availability.
The draft genome and raw read sequences for both strains have been deposited in DDBJ/EMBL/GenBank under the accession numbers listed in Table 1.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Funding was provided by USDA NIFA grants (1015210 and 1011327) to Western University of Health Sciences College of Veterinary Medicine and B.B.O. R.C. was supported by a Non-U.S. (Visiting) Scholar Grant from the Fulbright Visiting Scholar Program (grant 68130564), Council for International Exchange of Scholars, Institute of International Education, and hosted by B.S.S. and B.B.O. at the Richard B. Russell Agricultural Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, USDA (Athens, GA) (ARS CRIS project 6612-32000-060).
REFERENCES
- 1.Itoh K, Mitsuoka T. 1980. Production of gnotobiotic mice with normal physiological functions. I. Selection of useful bacteria from feces of conventional mice. Z Versuchstierkd 22:173–178. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Atarashi K, Tanoue T, Shima T, Imaoka A, Kuwahara T, Momose Y, Cheng G, Yamasaki S, Saito T, Ohba Y, Taniguchi T, Takeda K, Hori S, Ivanov II, Umesaki Y, Itoh K, Honda K. 2011. Induction of colonic regulatory T cells by indigenous Clostridium species. Science 331:337–341. doi: 10.1126/science.1198469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Goodman AL, Kallstrom G, Faith JJ, Reyes A, Moore A, Dantas G, Gordon JI. 2011. Extensive personal human gut microbiota culture collections characterized and manipulated in gnotobiotic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:6252–6257. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1102938108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. 2014. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30:2114–2120. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.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]
- 6.Gurevich A, Saveliev V, Vyahhi N, Tesler G. 2013. QUAST: quality assessment tool for genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 29:1072–1075. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt086. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. 2015. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res 25:1043–1055. doi: 10.1101/gr.186072.114. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Rodriguez-R LM, Gunturu S, Harvey WT, Rosselló-Mora R, Tiedje JM, Cole JR, Konstantinidis KT. 2018. The Microbial Genomes Atlas (MiGA) webserver: taxonomic and gene diversity analysis of Archaea and Bacteria at the whole genome level. Nucleic Acids Res 46:W282–W288. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky467. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Mende DR, Sunagawa S, Zeller G, Bork P. 2013. Accurate and universal delineation of prokaryotic species. Nat Methods 10:881–884. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2575. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Chen IA, Chu K, Palaniappan K, Pillay M, Ratner A, Huang J, Huntemann M, Varghese N, White JR, Seshadri R, Smirnova T, Kirton E, Jungbluth SP, Woyke T, Eloe-Fadrosh EA, Ivanova NN, Kyrpides NC. 2019. IMG/M v.5.0: an integrated data management and comparative analysis system for microbial genomes and microbiomes. Nucleic Acids Res 47:D666–D677. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The draft genome and raw read sequences for both strains have been deposited in DDBJ/EMBL/GenBank under the accession numbers listed in Table 1.
