ArticlemBio2014
Bioinformatic genome comparisons for taxonomic and phylogenetic assignments using Aeromonas as a test case.
Article in mBio, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
102 citing papers in PubMed, 222 citations in OpenAlex.
- An integrated genomic framework forMicrobial genomics · 2026Article
- Expanding the diversity ofInternational journal of systematic and evolutionary microbiology · 2026Article
- Genome Mining and Functional Characterization of Agarases from a Novel Vibrio Species.Marine biotechnology (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Article
- Genome sequencing and comparative genomic analysis of bovine mastitis-associated non-aureus staphylococci and mammaliicocci (NASM) strains from India.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Investigating Additive and Replacing Horizontal Gene Transfers Using Phylogenies and Whole Genomes.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Article
- A coordinated attack by a bacterial secretion system and a small molecule drives prey specificity.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Updates and Current Challenges in Reproductive Microbiome: A Comparative Analysis between Cows and Women.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Review
- Review
- Analysis of globalMicrobial genomics · 2024Article
- Proteus appendicitidis sp. nov., isolated from the appendiceal pus of an appendicitis patient in Yongzhou, China.Archives of microbiology · 2024Article
- Genomic analysis of clinicalMicrobial genomics · 2024Article
- Taxonomic classification of genusFujita medical journal · 2024Article
- Taxonomic resolution of different 16S rRNA variable regions varies strongly across plant-associated bacteria.ISME communications · 2024Article
- In silico analysis of Ffp1, an ancestral Porphyromonas spp. fimbrillin, shows differences with Fim and Mfa.Access microbiology · 2024Article
- Article
- A Class 4-like Chromosomal Integron Found inMicroorganisms · 2023Article
- Article
- Alteromonas salexigens sp. nov., isolated from coastal seawater.Archives of microbiology · 2023Article
- Genomic Characterization ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
unlabelledProkaryotic taxonomy is the underpinning of microbiology, as it provides a framework for the proper identification and naming of organisms. The "gold standard" of bacterial species delineation is the overall genome similarity determined by DNA-DNA hybridization (DDH), a technically rigorous yet sometimes variable method that may produce inconsistent results. Improvements in next-generation sequencing have resulted in an upsurge of bacterial genome sequences and bioinformatic tools that compare genomic data, such as average nucleotide identity (ANI), correlation of tetranucleotide frequencies, and the genome-to-genome distance calculator, or in silico DDH (isDDH). Here, we evaluate ANI and isDDH in combination with phylogenetic studies using Aeromonas, a taxonomically challenging genus with many described species and several strains that were reassigned to different species as a test case. We generated improved, high-quality draft genome sequences for 33 Aeromonas strains and combined them with 23 publicly available genomes. ANI and isDDH distances were determined and compared to phylogenies from multilocus sequence analysis of housekeeping genes, ribosomal proteins, and expanded core genes. The expanded core phylogenetic analysis suggested relationships between distant Aeromonas clades that were inconsistent with studies using fewer genes. ANI values of ≥ 96% and isDDH values of ≥ 70% consistently grouped genomes originating from strains of the same species together. Our study confirmed known misidentifications, validated the recent revisions in the nomenclature, and revealed that a number of genomes deposited in GenBank are misnamed. In addition, two strains were identified that may represent novel Aeromonas species. IMPORTANCE: Improvements in DNA sequencing technologies have resulted in the ability to generate large numbers of high-quality draft genomes and led to a dramatic increase in the number of publically available genomes. This has allowed researchers to characterize microorganisms using genome data. Advantages of genome sequence-based classification include data and computing programs that can be readily shared, facilitating the standardization of taxonomic methodology and resolving conflicting identifications by providing greater uniformity in an overall analysis. Using Aeromonas as a test case, we compared and validated different approaches. Based on our analyses, we recommend cutoff values for distance measures for identifying species. Accurate species classification is critical not only to obviate the perpetuation of errors in public databases but also to ensure the validity of inferences made on the relationships among species within a genus and proper identification in clinical and veterinary diagnostic laboratories.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.