Open Access

Complete genome sequence of the Medicago microsymbiont Ensifer (Sinorhizobium) medicae strain WSM419

  • Wayne Reeve
  • , Patrick Chain,
  • , Graham O’Hara
  • , Julie Ardley
  • , Kemanthi Nandesena
  • , Lambert Bräu
  • , Ravi Tiwari
  • , Stephanie Malfatti,
  • , Hajnalka Kiss,
  • , Alla Lapidus
  • , Alex Copeland
  • , Matt Nolan
  • , Miriam Land,
  • , Loren Hauser,
  • , Yun-Juan Chang,
  • , Natalia Ivanova
  • , Konstantinos Mavromatis
  • , Victor Markowitz
  • , Nikos Kyrpides
  • , Margaret Gollagher
  • , Ron Yates,
  • , Michael Dilworth
  • and John Howieson,
Corresponding author

DOI: 10.4056/sigs.43526

Received: 28 January 2010

Published: 28 February 2010


Ensifer (Sinorhizobium) medicae is an effective nitrogen fixing microsymbiont of a diverse range of annual Medicago (medic) species. Strain WSM419 is an aerobic, motile, non-spore forming, Gram-negative rod isolated from a M. murex root nodule collected in Sardinia, Italy in 1981. WSM419 was manufactured commercially in Australia as an inoculant for annual medics during 1985 to 1993 due to its nitrogen fixation, saprophytic competence and acid tolerance properties. Here we describe the basic features of this organism, together with the complete genome sequence, and annotation. This is the first report of a complete genome sequence for a microsymbiont of the group of annual medic species adapted to acid soils. We reveal that its genome size is 6,817,576 bp encoding 6,518 protein-coding genes and 81 RNA only encoding genes. The genome contains a chromosome of size 3,781,904 bp and 3 plasmids of size 1,570,951 bp, 1,245,408 bp and 219,313 bp. The smallest plasmid is a feature unique to this medic microsymbiont.


microsymbiontnon-pathogenicaerobicGram-negative rodroot-nodule bacterianitrogen fixationAlphaproteobacteria


Agricultural systems are nearly always nitrogen deficient, a factor which grossly limits their productivity. In fact, each year some 50 Tg of nitrogen is harvested globally in food crops [3], and must be replaced. External inputs of nitrogen to agriculture may come from mineral fertilizers, the production of which is heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Alternatively, nitrogen can be obtained from symbiotic nitrogen fixation (SNF) by root nodule bacteria (rhizobia) on nodulated legumes [4]. SNF is therefore considered a key biological process on the planet. The commonly accepted figure for global SNF in agriculture is 50-70 million metric tons annually, worth in excess of U.S. $10 billion [5]. Rhizobia associated with forage legumes contribute a substantial proportion of this fixed nitrogen across 400 million ha [5]. The amount fixed annually by the Ensifer (Sinorhizobium)-Medicago symbiosis is estimated to be worth $250 million.

A particular constraint to the formation of this symbiosis is acidity, due mainly to the acid-sensitive nature of the microsymbionts [6]. In laboratory culture, the medic microsymbionts fail to grow below pH 5.6 and are considered to be the most acid-sensitive of all the commercial root nodule bacteria [7]. Many agricultural regions have moderately acidic soils (typically in the pH range of 4.0 to 6.0) and this has prevented the Ensifer-Medicago symbiosis reaching its full potential [8]. Consequently, an effort was initiated in the 1980s to discover more acid-tolerant medic microsymbionts from world regions with acidic soils upon which annual medics had evolved. A particular suite of strains isolated from acidic soils on the Italian island of Sardinia proved to be acid soil tolerant [9], an attribute we now know is related to the presence of a unique set of genes required for acid adaptation [10]. Characterization of these acid-tolerant isolates revealed that they belonged to the species E. medicae and could be symbiotically distinguished from the related species E. meliloti by their unique capacity to fix nitrogen in association with annual acid soil adapted Medicago hosts of worldwide agronomic value [11], as well as with the perennial forage legume M. sativa (alfalfa) [12].

One of the acid-tolerant isolates, E. medicae strain WSM419, was isolated in 1981 from a nodule recovered from the roots of an annual medic (M. murex) growing south of Tempio in Sardinia. WSM419 is of particular interest because it is saprophytically competent in the acidic, infertile soils of southern Australia [9,13], and it is also a highly effective nitrogen fixing microsymbiont of a broad range of annual medics of Mediterranean origin [11,12]. These attributes contributed to the commercialization of the strain in Australia as an inoculant for acid soil medics between 1985 and 1993 [14,15]. Here we present a summary classification and a set of features (Table 1) for E. medicae strain WSM419, together with the description of a complete genome sequence and annotation.

Table 1

Classification and general features of E. medicae WSM419 according to the MIGS recommendations [16].




   Evidence code

  Current classification

   Domain Bacteria

   TAS [17]

   Phylum Proteobacteria

   TAS [18]

   Class Alphaproteobacteria

   TAS [19,20]

   Order Rhizobiales

   TAS [20,21]

   Family Rhizobiaceae

   TAS [22,23]

   Genus Ensifer

   TAS [1,2,24-27]

   Species Ensifer medicae

   TAS [1,2,11,24-28]

   strain WSM419

  Gram stain


   TAS [29]

  Cell shape


   TAS [29]



   TAS [29]



   TAS [29]

  Temperature range


   TAS [29]

  Optimum temperature


   TAS [29]




  Oxygen requirement


   TAS [29]

  Carbon source

   galactose, arabinose, glutamate

   TAS [9,13]

  Energy source


   TAS [9,13]



   Soil, root nodule, host

   TAS [9]


  Biotic relationship

   Free living or symbiotic

   TAS [9]




   TAS [16]

  Biosafety level


   TAS [30]


   Medicago murex root nodule

   TAS [9]


  Geographic location

   Forestry Station 7 km south   of Tempio, Sardinia, Italy

   TAS [9]


  Nodule collection date

   May 1st, 1981

   TAS [31]


  Longitude  Latitude

   9.101915   40.888925

   TAS [31]



   <10 cm

   TAS [31]




   TAS [31]

Evidence codes - IDA: Inferred from Direct Assay (first time in publication); TAS: Traceable Author Statement (i.e., a direct report exists in the literature); NAS: Non-traceable Author Statement (i.e., not directly observed for the living, isolated sample, but based on a generally accepted property for the species, or anecdotal evidence). These evidence codes are from the Gene Ontology project [32]. If the evidence code is IDA, then the property was directly observed for a living isolate by one of the authors or an expert mentioned in the acknowledgements.

Classification and features

E. medicae strain WSM419 forms mucoid colonies that may appear as donut shaped (Figure 1, left) on specific media such as YMA [13]. It is a Gram-negative, non-spore-forming rod (Figure 1, center) that has peritrichous flagellae (Figure 1, right).

Figure 1

Unique colony morphology (Left) and scanning (Center) and transmission (Right) electron micrographs of E. medicae strain WSM419.

In minimal media E. medicae WSM419 has a mean generation time of 4.1 h when grown at 28°C [33]. It is a member of the Rhizobiaceae family of the class Alphaproteobacteria based on phylogenetic analysis. Figure 2 shows the phylogenetic neighborhood of E. medicae strain WSM419 inferred from a 16S rRNA based phylogenetic tree. An intragenic fragment of 1,440 bp was chosen since the 16S rRNA gene has not been completely sequenced in many type strains. A comparison of the entire 16S rRNA gene of WSM419 to completely sequenced 16S rRNA genes of other sinorhizoabia revealed 4 and 18 bp mismatches to the reported sequences of E. meliloti (Sm1021) and E. fredii (YcS2, 15067 and SjzZ4), respectively.

Figure 2

Phylogenetic tree showing the relationships of E. medicae strain WSM419 to type strains in the Rhizobiaceae based on aligned sequences of the 16S rRNA gene (1,440 bp internal region). All sites were informative and there were no gap-containing sites. Phylogenetic analyses were performed using MEGA, version 3.1 [34]. Kimura two-parameter distances were derived from the aligned sequences [35] and a bootstrap analysis [36] as performed with 500 replicates in order to construct a consensus unrooted tree using the neighbor-joining method [37] for each gene alignment separately. Genera in this tree include Bradyrhizobium (B); Mesorhizobium (M); Rhizobium (R); Ensifer (Sinorhizobium) (S). Type strains are indicated with a superscript T. Strains with a genome sequencing project registered in GOLD [31] are in bold red print. Published genomes are designated with an asterisk.


E. medicae and E. meliloti are traditionally separated on the basis of the effective nodulation (Nod+, Fix+) by E. medicae on M. polymorpha [38]. Specific symbiotic characteristics that further distinguish E. medicae WSM419 from E. meliloti include its ability to nodulate and fix nitrogen effectively with a wide range of annual Mediterranean medics, including M. polymorpha, M. arabica, M. murex and M. sphaerocarpos. WSM419 is symbiotically competent with these species when grown in acidic soils [39]. In contrast, WSM419 is Fix- with the alkaline soil species of annual medics such as M. littoralis, M. tornata and hybrids of M. littoralis/M. truncatula [11,40]. WSM419 is also Nod+, Fix+ with the perennial forage legume M. sativa [11,12] but is less effective with this species than are some E. meliloti isolates. However, WSM419 is more effective at fixing nitrogen with M. truncatula than the previously sequenced E. meliloti Sm1021, making it an ideal candidate for inoculation of this model legume [12].

Genome sequencing and annotation

Genome project history

E. medicae WSM419 was selected for sequencing on the basis of its importance as a symbiotic nitrogen fixing bacterium in agriculture, and its tolerance for acidic soils [9,14].This strain was selected for sequencing as part of the Community Sequencing Program of the Joint Genome Institute (JGI) in 2005. The genome project is deposited in the Genomes OnLine Database [31] and the complete genome sequence in GenBank. A summary of the project information is shown in Table 2.

Table 2

Genome sequencing project information of E. medicae WSM419.





  Finishing quality



  Libraries used

   Four Sanger libraries – 3 kb   pUC18, 2 kb pTH1522, 8 kb   pMCL200 and fosmid pCC1Fos


  Sequencing platforms

   ABI3730xl; MegaBACE4500


  Sequencing coverage

   ~13× Sanger





  Gene calling method

   Critica, Generation and Glimmer

  Genbank ID

   CP000738 (Chromosome)a   CP000739 (pSMED01 or pSymB)b   CP000740 (pSMED02 or pSymA)c   CP000741 (pSMED03 or accessory plasmid)d

  Genbank Date of Release

   June 29, 2007



  NCBI project ID


  Database: IMG


  Project relevance

   Symbiotic nitrogen fixation, agriculture

                  a Web Site

                  b Web Site

                  c Web Site

                  d Web Site


                  f Web Site

Growth conditions and DNA isolation

E. medicae strain WSM419 was grown to mid logarithmic phase in TY medium (a rich medium) [41] on a gyratory shaker at 28°C. DNA was isolated from 60 ml of cells using a CTAB (Cetyl trimethylammonium bromide) bacterial genomic DNA isolation method (Web Site).

Genome sequencing and assembly

The genome was sequenced using a Sanger platform. All general aspects of library construction and sequencing performed at the JGI can be found at the JGI website (Web Site). Sequence data statistics from the trace archive for this project are presented in Table 3.

Table 3

Production sequence data for the E. medicae WSM419 genome project (JGI project 4001622).



Insert size(kb)



  q20 (Mb)




























All reads were assembled using the phrap assembler. Possible mis-assemblies were corrected and gaps between contigs were closed by custom primer walks from sub-clones or PCR products. Processing of sequence traces and base calling and assessment of data quality and assembly were performed with the PHRED/PHRAP/CONSED package [42-44]. The initial draft assembly was produced from 84,192 high-quality reads and consisted of 30 contigs (each with at least 20 reads per contig). Gaps in the sequence were primarily identified by mate-pair sequences and then closed by primer walking on gap-spanning library clones or genomic DNA amplified PCR products. True physical gaps were closed by combinatorial and multiplex PCR. All repeated sequences were addressed using mate-pair sequences and PCR data. Sequence finishing and polishing added 638 reads. The final assembly of the main chromosome and 3 plasmids from 84,830 reads produced approximately 13-fold coverage across the genome. Assessment of final assembly quality was completed as described previously [45].

Genome annotation

Automated gene prediction was completed by assessing congruence of gene call results from three independent programs, the Critica [46], Generation, and Glimmer [47] modeling packages, and by comparing the translations to the GenBank nonredundant database using the basic local alignment search tool for proteins (BLASTP). Product description annotations were obtained using searches against the KEGG, InterPro, TIGRFams, PROSITE, and Clusters of Orthologous Groups of protein (COGs) databases. The tRNAScanSE tool [48] was used to find tRNA genes, whereas ribosomal RNAs were found by using BLASTN vs. the 16S and 23S ribosomal RNA databases. Initial comparative analyses of bacterial genomes and gene neighborhoods were completed using the JGI Integrated Microbial Genomes web-based interface (Web Site). Additional gene prediction analysis and functional annotation was performed within the Integrated Microbial Genomes (IMG-ER) platform (Web Site) [49].

Genome properties

The genome is 6,817,576 bp long with 61.15% GC content and comprised of four replicons (Table 4); one circular chromosome of size 3,781,904 bp (Figure 3) and three plasmids of size 1,570,951 bp, 1,245,408 bp and 219,313 bp (Figure 4). Of the 6,599 genes predicted, 6,518 were protein-coding genes, and 81 RNA only encoding genes. In addition, 305 pseudogenes were identified. The majority of the genes (70.4%) were assigned a putative function while those remaining were annotated as hypothetical proteins. The distribution of genes into COGs functional categories is presented in Table 5.

Table 4

Genome Statistics for E. medicae WSM419.



  % of Total

Genome size (bp)



DNA coding region (bp)



DNA G+C content (bp)



Number of replicons



Extrachromosomal elements



Total genes



RNA genes



rRNA operons


Protein-coding genes



Pseudo genes



Genes with function prediction



Genes in paralog clusters



Genes assigned to COGs



Genes assigned Pfam domains



Genes with signal peptides



Genes with transmembrane helices



CRISPR repeats


Figure 3

Graphical circular map of the chromosome and plasmids of E. medicae WSM419. From outside to the center: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted in the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew. The replicons are not drawn to scale.

Table 5

Number of protein encoding genes of E. medicae WSM419 associated with the 21 general COG functional categories.



   % age





   Translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis




   RNA processing and modification








   Replication, recombination and repair




   Chromatin structure and dynamics




   Cell cycle control, mitosis and meiosis




   Nuclear structure




   Defense mechanisms




   Signal transduction mechanisms




   Cell wall/membrane biogenesis




   Cell motility








   Extracellular structures




   Intracellular trafficking and secretion




   Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones




   Energy production and conversion




   Carbohydrate transport and metabolism




   Amino acid transport and metabolism




   Nucleotide transport and metabolism




   Coenzyme transport and metabolism




   Lipid transport and metabolism




   Inorganic ion transport and metabolism




   Secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism




   General function prediction only




   Function unknown




   Not in COGs



This work was performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy's Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Program, and by the University of California, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory under contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC52-07NA27344, and Los Alamos National Laboratory under contract No. DE-AC02-06NA25396. We would like to gratefully acknowledge the funding received from Murdoch University Strategic Research Fund through the Crop and Plant Research Institute (CaPRI), and the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC), to support the National Rhizobium Program (NRP) and the Centre for Rhizobium Studies (CRS) at Murdoch University.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


  1. . The genus name Sinorhizobium Chen et al. 1988 is a later synonym of Ensifer Casida 1982 and is not conserved over the latter genus name, and the species name 'Sinorhizobium adhaerens' is not validly published. Opinion 84. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2008; 58: 1973 View ArticlePubMed
  2. Young JM. The genus name Ensifer Casida 1982 takes priority over Sinorhizobium Chen et al. 1988, and Sinorhizobium morelense Wang et al. 2002 is a later synonym of Ensifer adhaerens Casida 1982. Is the combination Sinorhizobium adhaerens (Casida 1982) Willems et al. 2003 legitimate? Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2003; 53:2107-2110 View ArticlePubMed
  3. Peoples MB, Hauggaard-Nielsen H, Jensen EE. Chapter 13. The potential environmental benefits and risks derived from legumes in rotations. In: Emerich, DW & Krishnan HB (Eds.), Agronomy Monograph 52. Nitrogen Fixation in Crop Production Am Soc Agron, Crop Sci Soc Am & Soil Sci Soc Am 2009, pp. 349-385 Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
  4. Sprent JI. Legume nodulation: a global perspective. 2009. Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell.
  5. Herridge DF, Peoples MB and Boddey RM. Global inputs of biological nitrogen fixation in agricultural systems. Marschner Review. Plant Soil. 2008; 311:1-18 View Article
  6. Robson AD and Loneragan JF. Nodulation and growth of Medicago truncatula on acid soils. II Colonization of acid soils by Rhizobium meliloti. Aust J Agric Res. 1970; 21:435-445 View Article
  7. Graham PH and Parker CA. Diagnostic features in the characterization of the root nodule bacteria of legumes. Plant Soil. 1964; 20:383-396 View Article
  8. Howieson JG. Characteristics of an ideotype acid tolerant pasture legume symbiosis in Mediterranean agriculture. Plant Soil. 1995; 171:71-76 View Article
  9. Howieson JG and Ewing MA. Acid tolerance in the Rhizobium meliloti-Medicago symbiosis. Aust J Agric Res. 1986; 37:55-64 View Article
  10. Reeve WG, Brau L, Castelli J, Garau G, Sohlenkamp C, Geiger O, Dilworth MJ, Glenn AR, Howieson JG and Tiwari RP. The Sinorhizobium medicae WSM419 lpiA gene is transcriptionally activated by FsrR and required to enhance survival in lethal acid conditions. Microbiology. 2006; 152:3049-3059 View ArticlePubMed
  11. Garau G, Reeve WG, Brau L, Deiana P, Yates RJ, James D, Tiwari RP, O’Hara GW and Howieson JG. The symbiotic requirements of different Medicago spp. suggest the evolution of Sinorhizobium meliloti and E. medicae with hosts differentially adapted to soil pH. Plant Soil. 2005; 276:263-277 View Article
  12. Terpolilli JJ, O’Hara GW, Tiwari RP, Dilworth MJ and Howieson JG. The model legume Medicago truncatula A17 is poorly matched for N2 fixation with the sequenced microsymbiont Sinorhizobium meliloti 1021. New Phytol. 2008; 179:62-66 View ArticlePubMed
  13. Howieson JG, Ewing MA and D'Antuono MF. Selection for acid tolerance in Rhizobium meliloti. Plant Soil. 1988; 105:179-188 View Article
  14. Bullard GK, Roughley RJ and Pulsford DJ. The legume inoculant industry and inoculant quality control in Australia: 1953–2003. Aust J Exp Agric. 2005; 45:127-140 View Article
  15. Dilworth MJ, Howieson JG, Reeve WG, Tiwari RP and Glenn AR. Acid tolerance in legume root nodule bacteria and selecting for it. Aust J Exp Agric. 2001; 41:435-446 View Article
  16. Field D, Garrity G, Gray T, Morrison N, Selengut J, Sterk P, Tatusova T, Thomson N, Allen MJ and Angiuoli SV. Towards a richer description of our complete collection of genomes and metagenomes: the “Minimum Information about a Genome Sequence” (MIGS) specification. Nat Biotechnol. 2008; 26:541-547 View ArticlePubMed
  17. Woese CR, Kandler O and Wheelis ML. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1990; 87: 4576-4579 View ArticlePubMed
  18. Garrity GM, Holt JG. The Road Map to the Manual. In: Garrity GM, Boone DR, Castenholz RW (eds), Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 1, Springer, New York, 2001, p. 119-169.
  19. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Class I. Alphaproteobacteria class. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT (eds), Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part C, Springer, New York, 2005, p. 1.
  20. List editor . Validation List No. 107. List of new names and new combinations previously effectively, but not validly, published. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2006; 56: 1-6 View ArticlePubMed
  21. Kuykendall LD. Order VI. Rhizobiales ord. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT (eds), Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part C, Springer, New York, 2005, p. 324.
  22. Skerman VBD, McGowan V and Sneath PHA. Approved Lists of Bacterial Names. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1980; 30: 225-420
  23. Conn HJ. Taxonomic relationships of certain non-sporeforming rods in soil. J Bacteriol. 1938; 36: 320-321
  24. Chen WX, Yan GH and Li JL. Numerical taxonomic study of fast-growing soybean rhizobia and a proposal that Rhizobium fredii be assigned to Sinorhizobium gen. nov. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1988; 38: 392-397
  25. De Lajudie P, Willems A, Pot B, Dewettinck D, Maestrojuan G, Neyra M, Collins MD, Dreyfus B, Kersters K and Gillis M. Polyphasic taxonomy of Rhizobia: emendation of the genus Sinorhizobium and description of Sinorhizobium meliloti comb. nov., Sinorhizobium saheli sp. nov., and Sinorhizobium teranga sp. nov. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1994; 44: 715-733
  26. Willems A, Fernández-López M, Muñoz-Adelantado E, Goris J, De Vos P, Martínez-Romero E, Toro N and Gillis M. Description of new Ensifer strains from nodules and proposal to transfer Ensifer adhaerens Casida 1982 to Sinorhizobium as Sinorhizobium adhaerens comb. nov. Request for an opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2003; 53: 1207-1217 View ArticlePubMed
  27. Lindström K and Martinez-Romero ME. International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes Subcommittee on the taxonomy of Agrobacterium and Rhizobium. Minutes of the meeting, 4 July 2001, Hamilton, Canada. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2002; 52: 2337 View Article
  28. Rome S, Fernandez MP, Brunel B, Normand P and Cleyet-Marel JC. Sinorhizobium medicae sp. nov., isolated from annual Medicago spp. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1996; 46: 972-980PubMed
  29. Kuykendall LD, Hashem F, Wang ET. Genus VII. Sinorhizobium, 2005, pp 358-361. In: Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology Second Edition. Volume 2 The Proteobacteria Part C The Alpha-, Delta-, and Epsilonproteobacteria Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT (Eds.), Garrity GM (Editor in Chief) Springer Science and Business Media Inc, New York, USA.
  30. Biological Agents. Technical rules for biological agents TRBA 466.Web Site
  31. Liolios K, Mavromatis K, Tavernarakis N and Kyrpides NC. The Genomes OnLine Database (GOLD) in 2007: status of genomic and metagenomic projects and their associated metadata. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 36:D475-D479 View ArticlePubMed
  32. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS and Eppig JT. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat Genet. 2000; 25:25-29 View ArticlePubMed
  33. Reeve WG, Tiwari RP, Dilworth MJ and Glenn AR. Calcium affects the growth and survival of Rhizobium meliloti. Soil Biol Biochem. 1993; 25:581-586 View Article
  34. Kumar S, Tamura K and Nei M. MEGA3: integrated software for molecular evolutionary genetics analysis and sequence alignment. Brief Bioinform. 2004; 5:150-163 View ArticlePubMed
  35. Kimura M. A simple model for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol. 1980; 16:111-120 View ArticlePubMed
  36. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution. 1985; 39:783-791 View Article
  37. Saitou N and Nei M. Reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol. 1987; 4:406-425PubMed
  38. Rome S, Fernandez MP, Brunel B, Normand P and Cleyet-Marel JC. Sinorhizobium medicae sp. nov., isolated from annual Medicago spp. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1996; 46:972-980PubMed
  39. Howieson JG and Ewing MA. Annual species of Medicago differ greatly in their ability to nodulate on acid soils. Aust J Agric Res. 1989; 40:843-850 View Article
  40. Howieson JG, Evans P and Nutt B. Estimation of host-strain compatibility for symbiotic N-fixation between Rhizobium meliloti, several annual species of Medicago and Medicago sativa. Plant Soil. 2000; 219:49-55 View Article
  41. Reeve WG, Tiwari RP, Worsely PS, Dilworth MJ, Glenn AR and Howieson JG. Constructs for insertional mutagenesis, transcriptional signal localisation and gene regulation studies in root nodule and other bacteria. Microbiology. 1999; 145:1307-1316 View ArticlePubMed
  42. Ewing B and Green P. Base-calling of automated sequencer traces using phred. II. Error probabilities. Genome Res. 1998; 8:186-194PubMed
  43. Ewing B, Hillier L, Wendl MC and Green P. Base-calling of automated sequencer traces using phred. I. Accuracy assessment. Genome Res. 1998; 8:175-185PubMed
  44. Gordon D, Abajian C and Green P. Consed: a graphical tool for sequence finishing. Genome Res. 1998; 8:195-202PubMed
  45. Chain P, Lamerdin J, Larimer F, Regala W, Lao V, Land M, Hauser L, Hooper A, Klotz M and Norton J. Complete genome sequence of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterium and obligate chemolithoautotroph Nitrosomonas europaea. J Bacteriol. 2003; 185:2759-2773 View ArticlePubMed
  46. Badger JH and Olsen G. CRITICA: coding region identification tool invoking comparative analysis. Mol Biol Evol. 1999; 16:512-524PubMed
  47. Delcher AL, Harmon D, Kasif S, White O and Salzberg SL. Improved microbial gene identification with GLIMMER. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999; 27:4636-4641 View ArticlePubMed
  48. Lowe TM and Eddy SR. tRNAscan-SE: a program for improved detection of transfer RNA genes in genomic sequence. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997; 25:955-964 View ArticlePubMed
  49. Markowitz VM, Szeto E, Palaniappan K, Grechkin Y, Chu K, Chen IMA, Dubchak I, Anderson I, Lykidis A and Mavromatis K. The Integrated Microbial Genomes (IMG) system in 2007: data content and analysis tool extensions. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 36:D528-D533 View ArticlePubMed