Recent attempts to sequence regions of the Rhodomicrobium vannielii ATCC 17100 genome revealed discrepancies with the previously published genome. We report the revised draft genome sequences of the type strains Rhodomicrobium vannielii ATCC 17100 and Rhodomicrobium udaipurense JA643. These revisions will facilitate genetic studies of phototrophic metabolism in these bacteria.
ABSTRACT
Recent attempts to sequence regions of the Rhodomicrobium vannielii ATCC 17100 genome revealed discrepancies with the previously published genome. We report the revised draft genome sequences of the type strains Rhodomicrobium vannielii ATCC 17100 and Rhodomicrobium udaipurense JA643. These revisions will facilitate genetic studies of phototrophic metabolism in these bacteria.
ANNOUNCEMENT
The genus Rhodomicrobium is represented by three species, R. vannielii, R. udaipurense, and R. lacus (1–3). Rhodomicrobium strains are microaerobic to anaerobic, Gram-negative, budding, freshwater, purple nonsulfur bacteria capable of photoheterotrophic and photoautotrophic metabolism, including phototrophic iron oxidation by R. vannielii and R. udaipurense (1, 4–8). To date, six Rhodomicrobium genome sequences are publicly available, including those of R. vannielii ATCC 17100 (GenBank accession number NC_014664.1) and R. udaipurense JA643 (JFZJ00000000). Recent attempts to amplify and sequence regions of the phototrophic iron oxidation (pio) three-gene operon using ATCC 17100 genomic DNA (gDNA) revealed discrepancies between the pioA nucleotide sequence in the published genome and our sequencing data. The previously published ATCC 17100 genome was assembled using Newbler v. 2.3, which performs poorly relative to similar assemblers (9, 10) and contains a bug that reduces its effectiveness (https://cals.arizona.edu/swes/maier_lab/kartchner/documentation/index.php/home/docs/newbler). The use of this assembler might account for the discrepancies we observed. Here, we resequenced the ATCC 17100 and JA643 genomes, as the JA643 assembly used ATCC 17100 as a reference.
The R. vannielii type strain ATCC 17100 was purchased from DSMZ (Leibniz Institute, Braunschweig, Germany). The R. udaipurense type strain JA643 was acquired from the University of Hyderabad (Hyderabad, India). The strains were saved immediately as freezer stocks and regrown for genomic DNA isolation. Cell cultures, prepared in sterile anaerobic Balch tubes, were grown in bicarbonate-buffered anaerobic freshwater medium (6) supplemented with 10 mM sodium acetate and purged with H2-CO2 (80%/20%) to ∼70 kPa in the headspace. The cultures were incubated without shaking at 30°C, at a 30-cm distance from a 60-W incandescent light bulb. Genomic DNA was isolated from logarithmic-phase cultures using the DNeasy blood and tissue kit following the manufacturer’s recommendations (Qiagen, Dusseldorf, Germany). Paired-end 150-bp Illumina sequencing libraries were prepared as follows: 500 ng of gDNA was fragmented using a Covaris E220 sonicator. The DNA was blunt ended and had an A base added to the 3′ ends, and Illumina sequencing adapters were ligated to the ends. The ligated fragments were amplified for eight cycles using primers incorporating unique dual-index tags. The fragments were sequenced on a NovaSeq 6000 S4 instrument (Illumina, Inc.) to >200× coverage for both ATCC 17100 and JA643. The read quality was assessed with FastQC v. 0.11.9 (11), and the reads were trimmed with Trimmomatic v. 0.38 (12). These reads were assembled de novo with CLC Genomics Workbench v. 10.1.2 (Qiagen Bioinformatics) (13). The draft genome sequences were quality assessed with QUAST v. 5.0.2 (14) and submitted for annotation to the NCBI Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline (15). The resequenced genomes were compared to the previous genomes with OrthoANI (16) and BLASTn (17). Default parameters were used for all software.
The genome statistics for the draft genome sequences are found in Table 1. Average nucleotide identity (ANI) analyses confirmed discrepancies with the previously published genomes. The revised ATCC 17100 (AB38) genome has an ANI value of 94.73% compared with the previously published genome, with an average aligned length of 2,222,458 bp, or 55.37% reference coverage. The revised JA643 (AB60) genome has an ANI value of 99.94% compared to JA643, with an average aligned length of 2,634,102 bp, or 75.29% reference coverage. BLASTn alignments show that AB38 shares 88%, 80%, and 89% identities with each of the three pio operon genes, respectively, compared to the previously published ATCC 17100 genome. Importantly, AB38 pioA sequencing products from cultures originating from freezer stocks that we prepared upon receipt of each strain and prior to whole-genome sequencing (WGS) share 100% identity with the revised genome, compared to 88% with the reference. BLASTn alignments between AB60 and JA643 revealed 100% identity for each of the pio operon genes. These revised draft genome sequences will facilitate future efforts to investigate the genetics underlying these organisms’ metabolic strategies.
TABLE 1.
Genome statistics
| Strain | No. of reads | Assembly size (bp) | Coverage (×) | No. of contigs | N50 (bp) | G+C content (%) | Total no. of genes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AB38 | 4,992,886 | 3,849,085 | 185 | 177 | 81,079 | 62.2 | 3,644 |
| AB60 | 15,446,669 | 3,652,920 | 500 | 94 | 113,688 | 62.5 | 3,387 |
Data availability.
The whole-genome shotgun projects for AB38 and AB60 have been deposited in GenBank under the accession numbers JAEMUJ000000000 and JAEMUK000000000, respectively. The raw sequencing reads for AB38 and AB60 have been deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive under the accession numbers SRX9703844 and SRX9703096, respectively. The versions described in this paper are JAEMUJ010000000 and JAEMUK010000000.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank C. Sasikala for contributing strain JA643. We thank the Genome Technology Access Center in the Department of Genetics at the Washington University School of Medicine for help with genomic analysis. The center is partially supported by NCI Cancer Center Support grant number P30 CA91842 to the Siteman Cancer Center and by ICTS/CTSA grant number UL1 TR000448 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research. This publication is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of NCRR or NIH.
This work was supported by David and Lucile Packard Foundation fellowship (201563111); the U.S. Department of Energy (grant number DESC0014613); the U.S. Department of Defense, Army Research Office (grant number W911NF-18-1-0037); the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, National Science Foundation (grant number 2021822); and the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract DEAC5207NA27344 (LLNL-JRNL-812309). A.B. was also funded by a Collaboration Initiation Grant, an Office of the Vice-Chancellor of Research Grant, and an International Center for Energy, Environment, and Sustainability Grant from Washington University in St. Louis. E.J.D. is supported by an Institutional Training Grant in Genomic Science from the NIH (T32 HG000045-18).
REFERENCES
- 1.Duchow E, Douglas HC. 1949. Rhodomicrobium vannielii, a new photoheterotrophic bacterium. J Bacteriol 58:409–416. doi: 10.1128/JB.58.4.409-416.1949. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.G S, Kumar D, Uppada J, Ch S, Ch VR. 2020. Rhodomicrobium lacus sp. nov., an alkalitolerent bacterium isolated from Umiam Lake, Shillong, India. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 70:662–667. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.003813. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Tushar L, Sasikala C, Ramana CV. 2014. Draft genome sequence of Rhodomicrobium udaipurense JA643T with special reference to hopanoid biosynthesis. DNA Res 21:639–647. doi: 10.1093/dnares/dsu026. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Oren A, Xu X-W. 2014. The family Hyphomicrobiaceae, p 247–281. In Rosenberg E, DeLong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E, Thompson F (ed), The prokaryotes: Alphaproteobacteria and Betaproteobacteria. Springer, Berlin, Germany. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Whittenbury R, Dow CS. 1977. Morphogenesis and differentiation in Rhodomicrobium vannielii and other budding and prosthecate bacteria. Bacteriol Rev 41:754–808. doi: 10.1128/BR.41.3.754-808.1977. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Ehrenreich A, Widdel F. 1994. Anaerobic oxidation of ferrous iron by purple bacteria, a new type of phototrophic metabolism. Appl Environ Microbiol 60:4517–4526. doi: 10.1128/AEM.60.12.4517-4526.1994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Gupta D, Sutherland MC, Rengasamy K, Meacham JM, Kranz RG, Bose A. 2019. Photoferrotrophs produce a PioAB electron conduit for extracellular electron uptake. mBio 10:e02668-19. doi: 10.1128/mBio.02668-19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Trentini WC, Starr MP. 1967. Growth and ultrastructure of Rhodomicrobium vannielii as a function of light intensity. J Bacteriol 93:1699–1704. doi: 10.1128/JB.93.5.1699-1704.1967. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kumar S, Blaxter ML. 2010. Comparing de novo assemblers for 454 transcriptome data. BMC Genomics 11:571. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-11-571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Morrison SS, Williams T, Cain A, Froelich B, Taylor C, Baker-Austin C, Verner-Jeffreys D, Hartnell R, Oliver JD, Gibas CJ. 2012. Pyrosequencing-based comparative genome analysis of Vibrio vulnificus environmental isolates. PLoS One 7:e37553. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037553. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Andrews S. 2010. FastQC: a quality control tool for high throughput sequence data. http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/.
- 12.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]
- 13.Qiagen. CLC Genomics Workbench 10.1.2. Qiagen, Redwood City, CA.
- 14.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]
- 15.Tatusova T, DiCuccio M, Badretdin A, Chetvernin V, Nawrocki EP, Zaslavsky L, Lomsadze A, Pruitt KD, Borodovsky M, Ostell J. 2016. NCBI Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline. Nucleic Acids Res 44:6614–6624. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw569. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Lee I, Kim YO, Park S-C, Chun J. 2016. OrthoANI: an improved algorithm and software for calculating average nucleotide identity. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 66:1100–1103. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.000760. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. 1990. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215:403–410. doi: 10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2. [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
The whole-genome shotgun projects for AB38 and AB60 have been deposited in GenBank under the accession numbers JAEMUJ000000000 and JAEMUK000000000, respectively. The raw sequencing reads for AB38 and AB60 have been deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive under the accession numbers SRX9703844 and SRX9703096, respectively. The versions described in this paper are JAEMUJ010000000 and JAEMUK010000000.
