Open Access

Non contiguous-finished genome sequence of Pseudomonas syringae pathovar syringae strain B64 isolated from wheat

  • Alexey Dudnik
  • and Robert Dudler

DOI: 10.4056/sigs.3997732

Received: 30 July 2013

Accepted: 30 July 2013

Published: 30 July 2013


The Gram-negative gammaproteobacterium Pseudomonas syringae is one of the most wide-spread plant pathogens and has been repeatedly reported to cause significant damage to crop plantations. Research on this pathogen is very intensive, but most of it is done on isolates that are pathogenic to Arabidopsis, tomato, and bean. Here, we announce a high-quality draft genome sequence of Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae B64 which is the first published genome of a P. syringae strain isolated from wheat up to date. The genome sequence will assist in gaining insights into basic virulence mechanisms of this pathogen which has a relatively small complement of type III effectors.


Pseudomonas syringaegenomesyringolinwheatplant-pathogen interactions


Pseudomonas syringae strains have been isolated from more than 180 host species [1] across the entire plant kingdom, including many agriculturally important crops, such as bean, tomato, cucumber, as well as kiwi, stone fruit, and olive trees. Strains are divided into more than 50 pathovars primarily based on host-specificity, disease symptoms, and biochemical profiles [2-4]. The first strain of this species was isolated from a lilac tree (Syringa vulgaris), which gave origin to its name [5].The observed wide host range is reflected in a relatively large genetic heterogeneity among different pathovars. This is most pronounced in the complement of virulence factors, which is also assumed to be the key factor defining host specificity [6]. For successful survival and reproduction, both epiphytic and endophytic P. syringae strains deploy different sets of type III and type VI secretion system effectors, phytotoxins, EPS, and other types of secreted molecules [6-11]. Currently, there are three completely sequenced P. syringae genomes published: pathovar syringae strain B728a which causes brown spot disease of bean [12], pathovar tomato strain DC3000 which is pathogenic to tomato and Arabidopsis [13], and pathovar phaseolicola strain 1448A, causal agent of halo blight on bean [14]. There are also a number of incomplete genomes of various qualities available for other strains.

Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae strain B64 was isolated from hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum) in Minnesota, USA [15]. The strain has been deployed in several studies mainly addressing phylogenetic diversity of P. syringae varieties [15-18], but never as an infection model for wheat. The genome sequencing of the B64 strain and its comparison with the other published genomes should reveal wheat-specific adaptations and give insights in virulence strategies for colonizing monocot plants.

Classification and features

Pseudomonas syringae belongs to class Gammaproteobacteria. Detailed classification of this species is still under heavy debate. Young and colleagues have proposed to group all plant-pathogenic oxidase-negative and fluorescent Pseudomonas strains into a single species, P. syringae, which is to be further sub-divided into pathovars [4,19]. Several DNA hybridization studies have shown a large genetic heterogeneity among the groups, however biochemical characteristics, with a few exceptions, did not allow elevating those into distinct species [20,21]. Currently, the species is divided into five phylogenetic clades based on MLST analysis. P. syringae pv. syringae (Pss) strains belong to group II within this nomenclature [22]. The basic characteristics of Pss B64 are summarized in Table 1, while its phylogenetic position is depicted in Figure 1.

Table 1

Classification and the general features of P. syringae pv. syringae B64 according to the MIGS recommendations [23]




   Evidence codea

   Domain Bacteria

   TAS [24]

   Phylum Proteobacteria

   TAS [25]

   Class Gammaproteobacteria

   TAS [26,27]

    Current classification

   Order Pseudomonadales

   TAS [28,29]

   Family Pseudomonadaceae

   TAS [30,31]

   Genus Pseudomonas

   TAS [30-34]

   Species Pseudomonas syringae

   TAS [30,35]

   Pathovar syringae

   TAS [36]

   Strain B64

   TAS [15,16]

    Gram stain


   TAS [37]

    Cell shape


   TAS [37]



   TAS [37]



   TAS [37]

    Temperature range


   TAS [38]

    Optimum temperature


   TAS [38]




   TAS [37]

    Carbon source


   TAS [36]

    Energy metabolism


   TAS [37]




   TAS [17,36,37]



   Not reported


    Extrachromosomal elements




    Estimated Size

   5.93 Mb



    Biotic relationship






   TAS [19]


   Triticum aestivum

   TAS [15,17]

    Host taxa ID


    Cell arrangement



    Biosafety level



    Isolation source




    Geographic location

   Minnesota, USA

   TAS [15]


    Sample collection time

   Not reported



   Not reported



   Not reported



   Not reported



   Not reported

aEvidence codes - IDA: Inferred from Direct Assay (first time in publication); TAS: Traceable Author Statement (a direct report exists in the literature); NAS: Non-traceable Author Statement (not directly observed for the living, isolated sample, but based on a generally accepted property of the species, or anecdotal evidence). These evidence codes are from the Gene Ontology project [39].

Figure 1

Phylogenetic tree constructed using neighbor-joining method using MLST approach [40] and MEGA 5.10 software suit [41] with 1,000 bootstraps. The tree features the three completely sequenced P. syringae model strains Pto DC3000, Pss B728a, and Pph 1448A, the strain Pss B64 itself, as well as another wheat-isolated strain Pss SM. The model strains represent the major phylogenetic clades of P. syringae: I, II and III respectively. P. fluorescens Pf0-1 was used as an outgroup. The analysis confirms placement of Pss B64 into clade II.

Pss B64 has similar physiological properties as other representatives of its genus. It can grow in complex media such as LB [42] or King’s B [43], as well as in various defined minimal media: HSC [44], MG-agar [45], PMS [46], AB-agar [47], and SRMAF [48]. Even though the optimal growth temperature is 28°C, the bacterium can also replicate at 4°C. Growth is completely inhibited above 35°C. Pss B64 is capable of endophytic growth in the wheat leaf mesophyll, but does not seem to cause any symptoms unless a very high inoculation dose is applied.

The bacterium has a weak resistance to ampicillin (25 mg/L) and chloramphenicol (10 mg/L). It is also possible to develop spontaneous rifampicin-resistant mutants. In addition, the genomic sequence predicts this strain to be polymyxin B insensitive due to presence of the arn gene cluster.

Genome sequencing information

Genome project history

The organism was selected for sequencing because it has been identified to have a syringolin biosynthesis gene cluster [49]. Syringolin is a proteasome inhibitor produced by some strains of pathovar syringae. As a consequence of proteasome inactivation a number of plant intracellular pathways are being inhibited, including the entire salicylic acid-dependent defense pathway, thus promoting the entry of bacteria into leaf tissue and subsequent endophytic growth [9]. Since up to now it has not been possible to establish an infection model for syringolin in the model plant Arabidopsis, it was decided to explore another common research target and one of the most important crop plants, bread wheat (Triticum aestivum). The genome project has been deposited in the Genbank Database (ID 180994) and the genome sequence is available under accession number ANZF00000000. The version described in this paper is the first version, ANZF01000000. The details of the project are shown in Table 2.

Table 2

Genome sequencing project information





   Finishing quality

    High-quality draft


   Libraries used

    3kb paired-end library


   Sequencing platform

    Roche Genome Sequencer FLX+


   Sequencing coverage




    Newbler 2.5.3





   Gene calling method

    RAST server

   NCBI project ID


   NCBI accession number


   Date of release

    January 18, 2013



   Database: IMG/ER


   Project relevance

    Plant-pathogen interactions, model for syringolin effects

Growth conditions and DNA isolation

P. syringae pv. syringae strain B64 was grown in 40 mL of LB medium at 28°C, 220 rpm until OD600 of ~1.0. Genomic DNA was isolated from the pelleted cell using a Qiagen Genomic-tip 100/G column (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Genome sequencing and assembly

A 3kb paired-end library was generated and sequenced at the Functional Genomics Center Zurich on a Roche Genome Sequencer FLX+ platform. A total of 872,570 high-quality filtered reads with a total of 188,465,376 bases were obtained, resulting in 31.8-fold average sequencing coverage. The obtained reads were assembled de novo using Newbler 2.5.3. This resulted in 150 contigs combined into one 6 Mb-long super-scaffold and 3 smaller scaffolds of 5.29 kb, 2.84 kb and 2.74 kb in size. The largest of the minor scaffolds constituted a ribosomal RNA operon, the other two showed sequence similarity to non-ribosomal peptide synthase modules. A portion of intra-scaffold gaps have been closed by sequencing of PCR products using Sanger technology, decreasing the total number of contigs to 41 with a contig N50 value of 329.4 kb, the longest contig being 766.5 kb long. Note that the Genbank record contains 42 contigs due to fact that one of the contigs was split into two parts in order to start the assembly with the dnaA gene. While closing gaps it became possible to allocate the positions of all ribosomal operons by sequence overlap and thus to incorporate the largest of the minor scaffolds. However, it was not possible to precisely map the remaining two minor scaffolds. These must be located within two distinct remaining large gaps, but due to insignificance to the project they have been excluded from the assembly.

Genome annotation

Initial open-reading frame (ORF), tRNA, and rRNA prediction and functional annotation has been performed using the RAST (Rapid Annotation using Subsystem Technology) server [50]. For the purpose of comparison, the genome has also been annotated using Prokka [51], which utilizes Prodigal [52] for ORF prediction (the RAST server utilizes a modified version of Glimmer [53]). Start codons of all the predicted ORFs were further verified manually, using the position of potential ribosomal binding sites and BLASTP [54] alignments with homologous ORFs from other P. syringae strains as a reference. Functional annotations have also been refined for every ORF using BLASTP searches against the non-redundant protein sequence database (nr) and the NCBI Conserved-Domain search engine [55]. Functional category assignment and signal peptide prediction was done using the Integrated Microbial Genomes/Expert reviews (IMG/ER) system [56].

Genome properties

The genome of the strain B64 is estimated to be comprised of 5,930,035 base pairs with an average GC-content of 58.55 % (Table 3 and Figure 2), which is similar to what is observed in other P. syringae strains [12,13,53]. Of the 5,021 predicted genes, 4,947 were protein coding genes, 4 ribosomal RNA operons, and 61 tRNA genes; 78 were identified to be pseudo-genes. The majority of the protein-coding genes (83.65 %) were assigned a putative function, while the remaining ones were annotated as hypothetical proteins. The distribution of genes into COGs functional categories is presented in Table 4.

Table 3

Genome Statistics



   % of Total

Estimated genome size (bp)



Estimated total gap length (bp)



DNA coding region (bp)



DNA G+C content (bp)



Number of replicons



Extra-chromosomal elements



Total genes



Protein-coding genesa



RNA genes



rRNA genes






16S rRNA



23S rRNA



tRNA genes



rRNA operons






Protein coding genes with function prediction



without function predictiona



Protein coding genes with COGs



with KOGs



with Pfam



with TIGRfam



in paralog clusters



Proteins with signal peptides



Proteins with transmembrane helices



aexcluding pseudo-genes; therefore percentage values differ from those displayed at the IMG/ER

Figure 2

Graphical map of the chromosome. From outside to the center: genes on forward strand (colored by COG categories), genes on reverse strand (colored by COG categories), RNA genes: tRNAs - green, rRNAs - red, other RNAs - black, GC content, and GC skew

Table 4

Number of genes associated with the 25 general COG functional categories












   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

The genome contains a complete canonical type III secretion system and ten known effector proteins: AvrE1, HopAA1, HopI1, HopM1, HopAH1, HopAG1, HopAI1, HopAZ1, HopBA1, and HopZ3. Out of these ten, the first five are present in all other sequenced P. syringae strains, thereby constituting the effector core, whereas the latter five could be host-determinants for wheat. That there is such a small number of effectors is not something unusual, and is seen in other strains of clade II [22]. In addition, there are two complete type VI secretion system gene clusters and nine putative effector proteins belonging to the VgrG and Hcp1 families. Pss B64 genome also encodes gene clusters for biosynthesis of four phytotoxin: syringomycin, syringopeptin, syringolin, and mangotoxin. All of the above-mentioned genome components have been previously demonstrated to be involved in virulence, epiphytic fitness of P. syringae, as well as in competition with other microbial species [7-10,57-59]. Additional identified virulence-associated traits are: exopolysaccharides alginate, Psl, and levan biosynthesis, surfactant syringofactin, type VI pili, large surface adhesins, siderophores pyoverdine and achromobactin, proteases and other secreted hydrolytic enzymes, RND-type transporters (including putative mexAB, mexCD, mexEF, and mexMN homologs [60,61]), all of which are found in other P. syringae strains. It is also notable that inaZ gene encoding ice-nucleation protein is truncated by a frameshift, thus making this strain ice-negative. The latter contradicts results of a previous study by Hwang and colleagues [16] in which Pss B64 has been identified to be ice-positive. This could be due to an assembly error, or the frameshift could have been introduced at a later point during propagation.



The authors would like to thank Dr. Daria Zhurina for her useful suggestions on the gap closure and the annotation procedures. This project was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (31003A-134936) and the Foundation for Research in Science and the Humanities at the University of Zurich.

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. Bradbury JF. Guide to Plant Pathogenic Bacteria Kew, England: CAB International Mycological Institute; 1985:175–177.
  2. González AJ, Landeras E and Mendoza MC. Pathovars of Pseudomonas syringae causing bacterial brown spot and halo blight in Phaseolus vulgaris L. are distinguishable by ribotyping. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000; 66:850-854 View ArticlePubMed
  3. Qi M, Wang D, Bradley CA and Zhao Y. Genome sequence analyses of Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. glycinea and subtractive hybridization-based comparative genomics with nine pseudomonads. PLoS ONE. 2011; 6:e16451 View ArticlePubMed
  4. Young JM. Taxonomy of Pseudomonas syringae Journal of Plant Pathology 2010;92:S1.5–S1.14. Available at: Accessed March 20, 2013.Web Site
  5. Palleroni N. Genus I. Pseudomonas In: Garrity G, Brenner D, Krieg N, Staley J, eds. Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part B. Springer; 2005:374.
  6. Lindeberg M, Cunnac S and Collmer A. The evolution of Pseudomonas syringae host specificity and type III effector repertoires. Mol Plant Pathol. 2009; 10:767-775 View ArticlePubMed
  7. Haapalainen M, Mosorin H, Dorati F, Wu RF, Roine E, Taira S, Nissinen R, Mattinen L, Jackson R, Pirhonen M and Lin NC. Hcp2, a secreted protein of the phytopathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000, is required for fitness for competition against bacteria and yeasts. J Bacteriol. 2012; 194:4810-4822 View ArticlePubMed
  8. Lindeberg M, Cunnac S and Collmer A. Pseudomonas syringae type III effector repertoires: last words in endless arguments. Trends Microbiol. 2012; 20:199-208 View ArticlePubMed
  9. Schellenberg B, Ramel C and Dudler R. Pseudomonas syringae Virulence Factor Syringolin A Counteracts Stomatal Immunity by Proteasome Inhibition. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2010; 23:1287-1293 View ArticlePubMed
  10. Bender CL, Alarcón-Chaidez F and Gross DC. Pseudomonas syringae phytotoxins: mode of action, regulation, and biosynthesis by peptide and polyketide synthetases. Microbiology and molecular biology reviews. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 1999; 63:266-292PubMed
  11. Denny TP. Involvement of bacterial polysaccharides in plant pathogenesis. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 1995; 33:173-197 View ArticlePubMed
  12. Feil H, Feil WS, Chain P, Larimer F, DiBartolo G, Copeland A, Lykidis A, Trong S, Nolan M and Goltsman E. Comparison of the complete genome sequences of Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae B728a and pv. tomato DC3000. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005; 102:11064-11069 View ArticlePubMed
  13. Buell CR, Joardar V, Lindeberg M, Selengut J, Paulsen IT, Gwinn ML, Dodson RJ, Deboy RT, Durkin AS and Kolonay JF. The complete genome sequence of the Arabidopsis and tomato pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003; 100:10181-10186 View ArticlePubMed
  14. Joardar V, Lindeberg M, Jackson RW, Selengut J, Dodson R, Brinkac LM, Daugherty SC, Deboy R, Durkin AS and Giglio MG. Whole-genome sequence analysis of Pseudomonas syringae pv. phaseolicola 1448A reveals divergence among pathovars in genes involved in virulence and transposition. J Bacteriol. 2005; 187:6488-6498 View ArticlePubMed
  15. Denny TP. Phenotypic Diversity in Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato. Microbiology. 1988; 134:1939-1948 View Article
  16. Hwang MSH, Morgan RL, Sarkar SF, Wang PW and Guttman DS. Phylogenetic characterization of virulence and resistance phenotypes of Pseudomonas syringae. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005; 71:5182-5191 View ArticlePubMed
  17. Sundin GW, Demezas DH and Bender CL. Genetic and plasmid diversity within natural populations of Pseudomonas syringae with various exposures to copper and streptomycin bactericides. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1994; 60:4421-4431PubMed
  18. Denny TP, Gilmour MN and Selander RK. Genetic Diversity and Relationships of Two Pathovars of Pseudomonas syringae. J Gen Microbiol. 1988; 134:1949-1960PubMed
  19. Young JM, Dye DW, Bradbury JF, Panagopoulos CG and Robbs CF. A proposed nomenclature and classification for plant pathogenic bacteria. N Z J Agric Res. 1978; 21:153-177 View Article
  20. Gardan L, Shafik H, Belouin S, Broch R, Grimont F and Grimont PAD. DNA relatedness among the pathovars of Pseudomonas syringae and description of Pseudomonas tremae sp. nov. and Pseudomonas cannabina sp. nov. (ex Sutic and Dowson 1959). Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1999; 49:469-478 View ArticlePubMed
  21. Gardan L, Bollet C, Abu Ghorrah M, Grimont F and Grimont PAD. DNA Relatedness among the Pathovar Strains of Pseudomonas syringae subsp. savastanoi Janse (1982) and Proposal of Pseudomonas savastanoi sp. nov. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1992; 42:606-612 View Article
  22. Baltrus DA, Nishimura MT, Romanchuk A, Chang JH, Mukhtar MS, Cherkis K, Roach J, Grant SR, Jones CD and Dangl JL. Dynamic evolution of pathogenicity revealed by sequencing and comparative genomics of 19 Pseudomonas syringae isolates. PLoS Pathog. 2011; 7:e1002132 View ArticlePubMed
  23. Field D, Garrity G, Gray T, Morrison N, Selengut J, Sterk P, Tatusova T, Thomson N, Allen MJ and Angiuoli SV. The minimum information about a genome sequence (MIGS) specification. Nat Biotechnol. 2008; 26:541-547 View ArticlePubMed
  24. Woese CR. 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
  25. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Phylum XIV. Proteobacteria phyl. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT (eds), Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part B, Springer, New York, 2005, p. 1.
  26. Validation of publication of new names and new combinations previously effectively published outside the IJSEM. List no. 106. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2005; 55:2235-2238 View Article
  27. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Class III. Gammaproteobacteria class. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT (eds), Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part B, Springer, New York, 2005, p. 1.
  28. Skerman VBD, McGowan V and Sneath PHA. Approved Lists of Bacterial Names. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1980; 30:225-420 View Article
  29. Orla-Jensen S. The main lines of the natural bacterial system. J Bacteriol. 1921; 6:263-273PubMed
  30. Garrity G, Bell J, Lilburn T. Order IX. Pseudomonales In: Garrity G, Brenner D, Krieg N, Staley J, eds. Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part B. Springer, New York; 2005:323.
  31. Winslow CEA, Broadhurst J, Buchanan RE, Krumwiede C, Rogers LA and Smith GH. The Families and Genera of the Bacteria: Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Society of American Bacteriologists on Characterization and Classification of Bacterial Types. J Bacteriol. 1917; 2:505-566PubMed
  32. Migula W. Über ein neues System der Bakterien. Arb. Bakteriol. Inst. Karlsruhe. 1894; 1:235-238
  33. Doudoroff M, Palleroni NJ. Genus Pseudomonas Migula 1894, 237; Nom. cons. Opin. 5, Jud. Comm. 1952, 121. In: Buchanan RE, Gibbons NE (eds), Bergey's Manual of Determinative Bacteriology, Eighth Edition, The Williams and Wilkins Co., Baltimore, 1974, p. 217-243.
  34. . Opinion 5: Conservation of the Generic Name Pseudomonas Migula 1894 and Designation of Pseudomonas Aeruginosa (Schroeter) Migula 1900 as Type Species. Int Bull Bacteriol Nomencl Taxon. 1952; 2:121-122
  35. van Hall CJJPD. Dissertation, University of Amsterdam, 1902, p. 198.
  36. Palleroni N. Genus I. Pseudomonas In: Garrity G, Brenner D, Krieg N, Staley J, eds. Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part B. Springer, New York; 2005:373–377.
  37. Palleroni N. Genus I. Pseudomonas In: Garrity G, Brenner D, Krieg N, Staley J, eds. Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part B. Springer, New York; 2005:323–357.
  38. Young JM, Luketina RC and Marshall AM. The Effects on Temperature on Growth in vitro of Pseudomonas syringae and Xanthomonas pruni. J Appl Bacteriol. 1977; 42:345-354 View ArticlePubMed
  39. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS and Eppig JT. Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat Genet. 2000; 25:25-29 View ArticlePubMed
  40. Sarkar SF and Guttman DS. Evolution of the Core Genome of Pseudomonas syringae, a Highly Clonal, Endemic Plant Pathogen. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004; 70:1999-2012 View ArticlePubMed
  41. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M and Kumar S. MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol. 2011; 28:2731-2739 View ArticlePubMed
  42. Bertani G. Studies on lysogenesis. I. The mode of phage liberation by lysogenic Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol. 1951; 62:293-300PubMed
  43. King EO, Ward M and Raney D. Two simple media for the demonstration of pyocyanin and fluorescin. J Lab Clin Med. 1954; 44:301-307PubMed
  44. Palmer DA and Bender CL. Effects of Environmental and Nutritional Factors on Production of the Polyketide Phytotoxin Coronatine by Pseudomonas syringae pv. Glycinea. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1993; 59:1619-1626PubMed
  45. Feil H, Feil WS, Chain P, Larimer F, DiBartolo G, Copeland A, Lykidis A, Trong S, Nolan M and Goltsman E. Crown Gall of Stone Fruit II. Identification and Nomenclature of Agrobacterium Isolates. Aust J Biol Sci. 1970; 23:585-596
  46. Gasson MJ. Indicator Technique for Antimetabolic Toxin Production by Phytopathogenic Species of Pseudomonas. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1980; 39:25-29PubMed
  47. Clark DJ and Maaløe O. DNA replication and the division cycle in Escherichia coli. J Mol Biol. 1967; 23:99-112 View Article
  48. Mo YY and Gross DC. Plant signal molecules activate the syrB gene, which is required for syringomycin production by Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae. J Bacteriol. 1991; 173:5784-5792PubMed
  49. Amrein H, Makart S, Granado J, Shakya R, Schneider-Pokorny J and Dudler R. Functional analysis of genes involved in the synthesis of syringolin A by Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae B301 D-R. Molecular plant-microbe interactions. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2004; 17:90-97 View ArticlePubMed
  50. Aziz RK, Bartels D, Best AA, DeJongh M, Disz T, Edwards RA, Formsma K, Gerdes S, Glass EM and Kubal M. The RAST Server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genomics. 2008; 9:75 View ArticlePubMed
  51. Seemann T. Prokka: Prokaryotic Genome Annotation System. 2012. Available at: Web Site
  52. Hyatt D, Chen GL, Locascio PF, Land ML, Larimer FW and Hauser LJ. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics. 2010; 11:119 View ArticlePubMed
  53. Delcher AL, Bratke KA, Powers EC and Salzberg SL. Identifying bacterial genes and endosymbiont DNA with Glimmer. Bioinformatics. 2007; 23:673-679 View ArticlePubMed
  54. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW and Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990; 215:403-410PubMed
  55. Marchler-Bauer A, Lu S, Anderson JB, Chitsaz F, Derbyshire MK, DeWeese-Scott C, Fong JH, Geer LY, Geer RC and Gonzales NR. CDD: a Conserved Domain Database for the functional annotation of proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011; 39:D225-D229 View ArticlePubMed
  56. Markowitz VM, Mavromatis K, Ivanova NN, Chen IMA, Chu K and Kyrpides NC. IMG ER: a system for microbial genome annotation expert review and curation. Bioinformatics. 2009; 25:2271-2278 View ArticlePubMed
  57. Groll M, Schellenberg B, Bachmann AS, Archer CR, Huber R, Powell TK, Lindow S, Kaiser M and Dudler R. A plant pathogen virulence factor inhibits the eukaryotic proteasome by a novel mechanism. Nature. 2008; 452:755-758 View ArticlePubMed
  58. Cunnac S, Chakravarthy S, Kvitko BH, Russell AB, Martin GB and Collmer A. Genetic disassembly and combinatorial reassembly identify a minimal functional repertoire of type III effectors in Pseudomonas syringae. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011; 108:2975-2980 View ArticlePubMed
  59. Arrebola E, Cazorla FM, Codina JC, Gutiérrez-Barranquero JA, Pérez-García A, De Vicente A. Contribution of mangotoxin to the virulence and epiphytic fitness of Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae. International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology 2009;12:87–95.
  60. Poole K. Multidrug efflux pumps and antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa and related organisms. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol. 2001; 3:255-264PubMed
  61. Mima T, Sekiya H, Mizushima T, Kuroda T and Tsuchiya T. Gene cloning and properties of the RND-type multidrug efflux pumps MexPQ-OpmE and MexMN-OprM from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbiol Immunol. 2005; 49:999-1002PubMed