Hymenobacter agri sp. nov., a novel bacterium isolated from soil
- 30 Downloads
A bacterial isolate was recovered from a soil sample collected in Jeollabuk-do Province, South Korea, and subjected to polyphasic taxonomic assessment. Cells of the isolate, designated strain S1-2-1-2-1T, were observed to be rod-shaped, pink in color, and Gram-stain negative. The strain was able to grow at temperature range from 10 to 30 °C, with an optimum of 25 °C, and growth occurred at pH 6–8. Comparative 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis showed that strain S1-2-1-2-1T belongs to the genus Hymenobacter, with closely related type strains being Hymenobacter daeguensis 16F3Y-2T (95.8% similarity), Hymenobacter rubidus DG7BT (95.8%), Hymenobacter soli PBT (95.7%), Hymenobacter terrenus MIMtkLc17T (95.6%), Hymenobacter terrae DG7AT (95.3%), and Hymenobacter saemangeumensis GSR0100T (95.2%). The genomic DNA G+C content of strain S1-2-1-2-1T was 63.0 mol%. The main polar lipid of this strain was phosphatidylethanolamine, the predominant respiratory quinone was menaquinone-7, and the major fatty acids were C15:0 iso (27.3%), summed feature 3 (C16:1 ω7c/C16:1 ω6c) (16.5%), C15:0 anteiso (15.3%), and C16:0 (14.7%), supporting the affiliation of this strain with the genus Hymenobacter. The results of this polyphasic analysis allowed for the genotypic and phenotypic differentiation of strain S1-2-1-2-1T from recognized Hymenobacter species. On the basis of its phenotypic properties, genotypic distinctiveness, and chemotaxonomic features, strain S1-2-1-2-1T is considered to represent a novel species of the genus Hymenobacter, for which the name Hymenobacter agri sp. nov. is proposed. The type strain is S1-2-1-2-1T (=KCTC 52739T = JCM 32194T).
KeywordsHymenobacter Bacteroidetes Soil bacteria
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Buczolits S, Denner EB, Kämpfer P, Busse HJ (2006) Proposal of Hymenobacter norwichensis sp. nov., classification of ‘Taxeobacter ocellatus’, ‘Taxeobacter gelupurpurascens’ and ‘Taxeobacter chitinovorans’ as Hymenobacter ocellatus sp. nov., Hymenobacter gelipurpurascens sp. nov. and Hymenobacter chitinivorans sp. nov., respectively, and emended description of the genus Hymenobacter Hirsch et al. 1999. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 56:2189–2192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cappuccino JG, Sherman N (2010) Microbiology: a laboratory manual, 9th edn. Benjamin Cummings, San Francisco, USAGoogle Scholar
- Hall TA (1999) BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symp Ser 41:95–98Google Scholar
- Hirsch P, Ludwig W, Hethke C, Sittig M, Hoffmann B, Gallikowski CA (1998) Hymenobacter roseosalivarius gen. nov., sp. nov. from continental Antarctic soils and sandstone: bacteria of the Cytophaga/Flavobacterium/Bacteroides line of phylogenetic descent. Syst Appl Microbiol 21:374–383CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sasser M (1990) Identification of bacteria by gas chromatography of cellular fatty acids. MIDI Technical Note 101. MIDI Inc, NewarkGoogle Scholar
- Smibert RM, Krieg NR (1994) Phenotypic characterization. In: Gerhardt P, Murray RGE, Wood WA, Krieg NR (eds) Methods for general and molecular bacteriology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC, pp 607–654Google Scholar
- Stackebrandt E, Ebers J (2006) Taxonomic parameters revisited: tarnished gold standards. Microbiol Today 33:152–155Google Scholar
- Wilson K (1997) Preparation of Genomic DNA from bacteria. In: Ausubel FM et al (eds) Current protocols in molecular biology, Jonh, New York, pp. 2.4.1–2.4.5Google Scholar