ReviewMicrobiological reviews1996
Polyphasic taxonomy, a consensus approach to bacterial systematics.
Review in Microbiological reviews, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 299 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
299 citing papers in PubMed.
- DistinguishingmSystems · 2026Article
- Taxonomic description of a novel genus,International journal of systematic and evolutionary microbiology · 2026Article
- Phylogenomic analysis shows underestimated species within Cupriavidus and the new species Cupriavidus phytohabitans sp. nov.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Genomic Insights intoMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Microbial Evolution and Systematics: Archaea and Bacteria.Progress in molecular and subcellular biology · 2026Review
- Integrative bioinformatics and chemotactic insights into p-nitrophenol bioremediation by halotolerant aquatic Pseudomonas sp. strain PNPBRP5(2).Archives of microbiology · 2025Article
- Streptococcus lishijunsis sp. nov. isolated from feces of Apodemus Chevrieri in western china and its genome function analysis.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Polyphasic and phylogenomic reevaluation of Zhongshania and Marortus with the description of Zhongshania aquatica sp. nov.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Microbial diversity and ecological roles of halophilic microorganisms in Dingbian (Shaanxi, China) saline-alkali soils and salt lakes.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial, antibiofilm, cytotoxicity, and anti-DNA topoisomerase activity of Streptomyces sp. 22SH with ADME and in silico study.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Tea seedlings growth promotion by widely distributed and stress-tolerant PGPR from the acidic soils of the Kangra valley.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Identification, Biocontrol and Plant Growth Promotion Potential of Endophytic Streptomyces sp. a13.Current microbiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Extreme thermal environments: reservoirs of industrially important thermozymes.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Synergistic protective effects of TCM formula NRICM102 andFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Multilocus sequencing analysis of the rhizobial symbionts isolated from Acacia salicina (Lindl.) grown in different regions in Tunisia reveals putative novel Bradyrhizobium species.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2024Article
- Unraveling the genomic diversity of the Pseudomonas putida group: exploring taxonomy, core pangenome, and antibiotic resistance mechanisms.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Identification, Safety Assessment, and Antimicrobial Characteristics of Cocci Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolated from Traditional Egyptian Dairy Products.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Demystifying polyphosphate-accumulating organisms relevant to wastewater treatment: A review of their phylogeny, metabolism, and detection.Environmental science and ecotechnology · 2024Review
239 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the last 25 years, a much broader range of taxonomic studies of bacteria has gradually replaced the former reliance upon morphological, physiological, and biochemical characterization. This polyphasic taxonomy takes into account all available phenotypic and genotypic data and integrates them in a consensus type of classification, framed in a general phylogeny derived from 16S rRNA sequence analysis. In some cases, the consensus classification is a compromise containing a minimum of contradictions. It is thought that the more parameters that will become available in the future, the more polyphasic classification will gain stability. In this review, the practice of polyphasic taxonomy is discussed for four groups of bacteria chosen for their relevance, complexity, or both: the genera Xanthomonas and Campylobacter, the lactic acid bacteria, and the family Comamonadaceae. An evaluation of our present insights, the conclusions derived from it, and the perspectives of polyphasic taxonomy are discussed, emphasizing the keystone role of the species. Taxonomists did not succeed in standardizing species delimitation by using percent DNA hybridization values. Together with the absence of another "gold standard" for species definition, this has an enormous repercussion on bacterial taxonomy. This problem is faced in polyphasic taxonomy, which does not depend on a theory, a hypothesis, or a set of rules, presenting a pragmatic approach to a consensus type of taxonomy, integrating all available data maximally. In the future, polyphasic taxonomy will have to cope with (i) enormous amounts of data, (ii) large numbers of strains, and (iii) data fusion (data aggregation), which will demand efficient and centralized data storage. In the future, taxonomic studies will require collaborative efforts by specialized laboratories even more than now is the case. Whether these future developments will guarantee a more stable consensus classification remains an open question.
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.