This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
The taxonomic position of an actinobacterium isolated from a desert soil sample collected from Badain Jaran Desert, designated as CPCC 204711T, was established using a polyphasic approach. Cells of the isolate were Gram-staining-positive, aerobic, non-motile cocci. Good growth was observed at 28 °C (range 20–40 °C), pH 7.0 (range pH 6.0–8.0) and 0–1 % NaCl concentration (range 0–5 %, w/v). Galactose, arabinose and ribose were detected as the sugar compositions in the whole cell hydrolysates. The peptidoglycan type was A3gamma (ll-Dpm-Gly). MK-9(H4) was detected as the predominant menaquinone, and diphosphatidylglycerol, phosphatidylglycerol, phosphatidylcholine, several unidentified glycolipids, and one unidentified amino-glycolipid were detected as the major polar lipids. The predominant fatty acid was anteiso-C15 : 0. The genomic DNA G+C content was 73.1 mol%. Phylogenetic analysis based on 16S rRNA gene sequences revealed that strain CPCC 204711T affiliated to the family Propionibacteriaceae , in which the strain formed a distinct phylogenetic lineage next to the genus Mariniluteicoccus , with the highest 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity of 96.0 % to Mariniluteicoccus endophyticus YIM 2617T. Both phylogenetic analysis and phenotypic characteristics supported that strain CPCC 204711T represents a novel species of a new genus in the family Propionibacteriaceae , for which the name Desertihabitans aurantiacus gen. nov., sp. nov. is proposed, with CPCC 204711T (=KCTC 39977T=DSM 105431T) as the type strain.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sun et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: