Two Gram-negative bacteria, designated as strains LF1 T and HM2-2 T , were isolated from an artificial pond in a honey farm at Hoengseong-gun, Gangwon-do, Republic of Korea. The 16S rRNA sequence analysis results revealed that strain LF1 T belonged to the genus Lysobacter and had the highest sequence similarity to Lysobacter niastensis GH41-7 T (99.0 %), Lysobacter panacisoli CJ29 T (98.9 %), and Lysobacter prati SYSU H10001 T (98.2 %). Its growth occurred at 20–37 °C, at pH 5.0–12.0, and in the presence of 0–2% NaCl. The major fatty acids were iso-C 15 : 0 , iso-C 16 : 0 , and summed feature 9 (iso-C 17 : 1 ω 9 c and/or C 16 : 0 10-methyl). The major polar lipids were phosphatidylethanolamine, phosphatidylglycerol, and diphosphatidylglycerol. The DNA G+C content was 67.5 mol%. The average nucleotide identity (ANI) and digital DNA–DNA hybridization (dDDH) values between strain LF1 T and species of the genus Lysobacter were 79.1–84.4% and 22.0–27.5 %, respectively. The 16S rRNA sequence analysis results revealed that strain HM2-2 T belonged to the genus Limnohabitans and was most closely related to Limnohabitans planktonicus II-D5 T (98.9 %), Limnohabitans radicicola JUR4 T (98.4%), and Limnohabitans parvus II-B4 T (98.4 %). Its growth occurred at 10–35 °C, at pH 5.0–11.0, and in the presence of 0–2% NaCl. The major fatty acids were C 16 : 0 and summed feature 3 (C 16 : 1 ω 7 c /C 16 : 1 ω 6 c ). The major polar lipid was phosphatidylethanolamine. The DNA G+C content was 59.9 mol%. The ANI and dDDH values between strain HM2-2 T and its closely related strains were 75.1–83.0% and 20.4–26.4 %, respectively. Phenotypic, genomic, and phylogenetic data revealed that strains LF1 T and HM2-2 T represent novel species in the genera Lysobacter and Limnohabitans , for which the names Lysobacter stagni sp. nov. and Limnohabitans lacus sp. nov. are proposed, respectively. The type strain of Lys. stagni is LF1 T (=KACC 23251 T =TBRC 17648 T ), and that of Lim. lacus is HM2-2 T (=KACC 23250 T =TBRC 17649 T ).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jung et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: