Open Access

Genome sequence of the Medicago-nodulating Ensifer meliloti commercial inoculant strain RRI128

  • Wayne Reeve
  • , Ross Ballard
  • , Elizabeth Drew
  • , Rui Tian
  • , Lambert Bräu
  • , Lynne Goodwin
  • , Marcel Huntemann
  • , James Han
  • , Reddy Tatiparthi
  • , Amy Chen
  • , Konstantinos Mavrommatis
  • , Victor Markowitz
  • , Krishna Palaniappan
  • , Natalia Ivanova
  • , Amrita Pati
  • , Tanja Woyke
  • and Nikos Kyrpides
Corresponding author

DOI: 10.4056/sigs.4929626

Received: 25 January 2014

Accepted: 25 January 2014

Published: 15 June 2014

Abstract

Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 is an aerobic, motile, Gram-negative, non-spore-forming rod. RRI128 was isolated from a nodule recovered from the roots of barrel medic (Medicago truncatula) grown in the greenhouse and inoculated with soil collected from Victoria, Australia. The strain is used in commercial inoculants in Australia. RRI128 nodulates and forms an effective symbiosis with a diverse range of lucerne cultivars (Medicago sativa) and several species of annual medic (M. truncatula, Medicago littoralis and Medicago tornata), but forms an ineffective symbiosis with Medicago polymorpha. Here we describe the features of E. meliloti strain RRI128, together with genome sequence information and annotation. The 6,900,273 bp draft genome is arranged into 156 scaffolds of 157 contigs, contains 6,683 protein-coding genes and 87 RNA-only encoding genes, and is one of 100 rhizobial genomes sequenced as part of the DOE Joint Genome Institute 2010 Genomic Encyclopedia for Bacteria and Archaea-Root Nodule Bacteria (GEBA-RNB) project.

Keywords:

root-nodule bacterianitrogen fixationrhizobiaAlphaproteobacteria

Introduction

Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 is used in Australia to produce commercial peat cultures (referred to as Group AL inoculants) mainly for the inoculation of lucerne (Medicago sativa L.). Lucerne is sown on about 600, 000 ha annually (A. Humphries pers. com.) and is nearly always inoculated prior to sowing. RRI128 is also used for the inoculation of strand medic (Medicago littoralis Loisel) and disc medic (Medicago tornata (L.) Miller), a hybrid of the two former species, and bokhara clover (Melilotus albus Medik). RRI128 has been used commercially since 2000 when it replaced strain WSM826 [1]. Strain RRI128 was isolated from a nodule from the roots of barrel medic (Medicago truncatula Gaertn) growing in the greenhouse and inoculated with an alkaline sandy soil (pHCaCl2 7.6) collected by J. Slattery, near Tempy, Victoria.

The strain was selected for use in commercial inoculants following assessment of its nitrogen fixation capacity (effectiveness), growth on acidified agar and saprophytic competence in an in-situ soil study [2], with supporting data of satisfactory performance at ten field sites. Additional testing has shown RRI128 to be effective on 28 cultivars of lucerne (Ballard unpub. data). It also forms effective symbiosis with a range of strand and disc medics [2] which show symbiotic affinity with lucerne [3,4].

Soil acidity has long been recognized as a constraint to lucerne nodulation [5] with some evidence that strains of E. meliloti have less acidity tolerance than Ensifer medicae, possibly due to their association with Medicago species that favor neutral to alkaline soils [6]. With RRI128, constraints to lucerne nodulation are observed around pH 5. Nodulation of lucerne seedlings inoculated with RRI128 was 42% at pH 5.0 in solution culture experiments [7] and observed to decline rapidly at field sites where pHCaCl2 was below 4.7 (Ballard, unpub. data). Other strains (e.g. SRDI672) have increased lucerne nodulation in solution culture at pH 4.8 (61% cf. 12% of lucerne seedlings with nodules) but are probably approaching the limit of acidity tolerance for E. meliloti [8].

Stable colony morphology and cell survival on seed make RRI128 amenable to commercial use. RRI128 produces colonies of consistent appearance and with moderate polysaccharide when grown on yeast mannitol agar, enabling easy visual assessment of culture purity. It differs in this regard from the strain it replaced (WSM826) which produced ‘dry’ and ‘mucoid’ colony variants, in common with many of the strains that nodulate lucerne and medic [9]. When applied correctly RRI128 has been shown to survive at more than 10,000 cells per lucerne seed at six weeks after inoculation [10]. Good survival may well be characteristic of E. meliloti, since former inoculant strain WSM826 is equally competent in this regard [11,12].

Here we present a preliminary description of the general features of E. meliloti strain RRI128 together with its genome sequence and annotation.

Classification and general features

Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 is a motile, non-sporulating, non-encapsulated, Gram-negative rod in the order Rhizobiales of the class Alphaproteobacteria. The rod-shaped form varies in size with dimensions of approximately 0.5 μm in width and 1.0-2.0 μm in length (Figure 1A). It is fast growing, forming colonies within 3-4 days when grown on TY [13] or half strength Lupin Agar (½LA) [14] at 28°C. Colonies on ½LA are opaque, slightly domed and moderately mucoid with smooth margins (Figure 1B).

Figure 1

Images of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 using (A) scanning electron microscopy and (B) light microscopy to show the colony morphology on TY plates.

Minimum Information about the Genome Sequence (MIGS) is provided in Table 1. Figure 2 shows the phylogenetic neighborhood of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 in a 16S rRNA gene sequence based tree. This strain has 100% sequence identity (1366/1366 bp) at the 16S rRNA sequence level to the fully sequenced E. meliloti Sm1021 [30] and 99% 16S rRNA sequence (1362/1366 bp) identity to the fully sequenced E. medicae strain WSM419 [31].

Table 1

Classification and general features of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 according to the MIGS recommendations [15,16]

MIGS ID

     Property

       Term

       Evidence code

     Current classification

       Domain Bacteria

       TAS [15,16]

       Phylum Proteobacteria

       TAS [17]

       Class Alphaproteobacteria

       TAS [18]

       Order Rhizobiales

       TAS [19]

       Family Rhizobiaceae

       TAS [20]

       Genus Ensifer

       TAS [21,22]

       Species Ensifer meliloti

       TAS [23,24]

       Strain RRI128

     Gram stain

       Negative

       IDA

     Cell shape

       Rod

       IDA

     Motility

       Motile

       IDA

     Sporulation

       Non-sporulating

       NAS

     Temperature range

       Mesophile

       NAS

     Optimum temperature

       28°C

       NAS

     Salinity

       Non-halophile

       NAS

MIGS-22

     Oxygen requirement

       Aerobic

       IDA

     Carbon source

       Varied

       NAS

     Energy source

       Chemoorganotroph

       NAS

MIGS-6

     Habitat

       Soil, root nodule, on host

       IDA

MIGS-15

     Biotic relationship

       Free living, symbiotic

       IDA

MIGS-14

     Pathogenicity

       Non-pathogenic

       NAS

     Biosafety level

       1

       TAS [25]

     Isolation

       Root nodule

       IDA

MIGS-4

     Geographic location

       Tempy, Vict., Australia

       IDA

MIGS-5

     Soil collection date

       Circa 1995

       IDA

MIGS-4.1MIGS-4.2

     Latitude     Longitude

       -35.1833       142.3833

       IDA       IDA

MIGS-4.3

     Depth

       0-10 cm

       IDA

MIGS-4.4

     Altitude

       Not reported

Evidence codes – IDA: Inferred from Direct Assay; 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 [26].

Figure 2

Phylogenetic tree showing the relationship of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 (shown in bold) with some of the root nodule bacteria in the order Rhizobiales based on aligned sequences of the 16S rRNA gene (1,307 bp internal region). All sites were informative and there were no gap-containing sites. Phylogenetic analyses were performed using MEGA [27], version 5.05. The tree was built using the maximum likelihood method with the General Time Reversible model. Bootstrap analysis [28] with 500 replicates was performed to assess the support of the clusters. Type strains are indicated with a superscript T. Brackets after the strain name contain a DNA database accession number and/or a GOLD ID (beginning with the prefix G) for a sequencing project registered in GOLD [29]. Published genomes are indicated with an asterisk.

Symbiotaxonomy

Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 forms nodules on (Nod+) and fixes N2 (Fix+) with Medicago sativa, Melillotus albus and Trigonella balansae (Boiss. and Reuter). It also forms effective symbiosis with several species of annual medic (M. truncatula, M. littoralis and M. tornata) that happen to be closely related to each other based on their ability to be hybridized [5] and morphological and nucleotide sequence analyses of their relatedness [32]. RRI128 forms ineffective (white) nodules with Medicago polymorpha, a species that is generally recognized to have a more specific rhizobial requirement for effective symbiosis than Medicago sativa and Medicago littoralis [4,33] (Table 2).

Table 2

Compatibility of RRI128 with various Medicago and allied genera for nodulation (Nod) and N2-fixation (Fix).

Species Name

     Cultivar or line

      Common Name

      Growth Type

     Nod

      Fix

       Reference

Medicago sativa

     *28 cultivars

      Lucerne, Alfalfa

      Perennial

     +

      +

        [2]

M. littoralis

     Harbinger, Herald, Angel

      Strand medic

      Annual

     +

      +

        [2]

M. tornata

     Tornafield, Rivoli

      Disc medic

      Annual

     +

      +

        [2]

M. tornata×littoralis

     Toreador

      Hybrid disc medic

      Annual

     +

      +

        [2]

M. truncatula

     Jester

      Barrel medic

      Annual

     +

      +

       IDA

M. polymorpha

     Scimitar

      Burr medic

      Annual

     +(w)

      -

       IDA

Trigonella balansae

     SA5045, SA32999, SA33025

      Sickle fruited fenugreek

      Annual

     +

      +

        [34]

Melilotus albus

     SA19917, SA35627, SA34665

      Bokhara clover

      Biennial

     +

      +

       IDA

* 28 cultivars tested: Aquarius, Aurora, Cropper 9, Cuff 101, Eureka, Genesis, Hallmark, Hunterfield, Hunter River, Jinderra, ML 99, PL 55, PL 60, PL 69, Prime, SARDI Five, SARDI Seven, SARDI Ten, Sceptre, Sequel, Sequel-HR, Siriver, Trifecta, UQL1, Venus, WL525HQ, 54Q53 and 57Q75.

(w) indicates white nodules.

IDA: Inferred from Direct Assay; evidence code from the Gene Ontology project [26]

Genome sequencing and annotation

Genome project history

This organism was selected for sequencing on the basis of its environmental and agricultural relevance to issues in global carbon cycling, alternative energy production, and biogeochemical importance, and is part of the Community Sequencing Program at the U.S. Department of Energy, Joint Genome Institute (JGI) for projects of relevance to agency missions. The genome project is deposited in the Genomes OnLine Database [29] and an improved-high-quality-draft genome sequence in IMG/GEBA. Sequencing, finishing and annotation were performed by the JGI. A summary of the project information is shown in Table 3.

Table 3

Genome sequencing project information for Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128

MIGS ID

     Property

       Term

MIGS-31

     Finishing quality

       High-Quality-Draft

MIGS-28

     Libraries used

       1× Illumina Std library

MIGS-29

     Sequencing platforms

       Illumina HiSeq 2000

MIGS-31.2

     Sequencing coverage

       285× Illumina

MIGS-30

     Assemblers

       with Allpaths, version r39750, Velvet 1.1.04

MIGS-32

     Gene calling methods

       Prodigal 1.4

     Genbank ID

       ATYP00000000

     Genbank Date of Release

       September 5, 2013

     GOLD ID

       Gi08915

     GenBank ID

       X67222

     Database: IMG-GEBA

       2513237091

     Project relevance

       Symbiotic N2 fixation, agriculture

Growth conditions and DNA isolation

Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 was cultured to mid logarithmic phase in 60 ml of TY rich medium on a gyratory shaker at 28°C [35]. DNA was isolated from the cells using a CTAB (Cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide) bacterial genomic DNA isolation method [36].

Genome sequencing and assembly

The genome of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 was sequenced at the Joint Genome Institute (JGI) using Illumina [37] technology. An Illumina standard shotgun library was constructed and sequenced using the Illumina HiSeq 2000 platform, which generated 13,085,546 reads totaling 1,962 Mb of Illumina data.

All general aspects of library construction and sequencing performed at the JGI can be found at the JGI user home [36]. All raw Illumina sequence data was passed through DUK, a filtering program developed at JGI, which removes known Illumina sequencing and library preparation artifacts (Mingkun, L., Copeland, A. and Han, J., unpublished). The following steps were then performed for assembly: (1) filtered Illumina reads were assembled using Velvet [38], version 1.1.04, (2) 1–3 Kb simulated paired end reads were created from Velvet contigs using wgsim [39], (3) Illumina reads were assembled with simulated read pairs using Allpaths–LG [40] (version r39750).

Parameters for assembly steps were:

Velvet (Velvet optimizer params: --v --s 51 --e 71 --i 2 --t 1 --f "-shortPaired -fastq $FASTQ" --o "-ins_length 250 -min_contig_lgth 500")

wgsim (-e 0 -1 76 -2 76 -r 0 -R 0 -X 0,) (3) Allpaths–LG (PrepareAllpathsInputs:PHRED64=1 PLOIDY=1 FRAGCOVERAGE=125 JUMPCOVERAGE=25 LONGJUMPCOV=50, RunAllpath-sLG: THREADS=8 RUN=stdshredpairs TARGETS=standard VAPIWARNONLY=True OVERWRITE=True).

The final draft assembly contained 157 contigs in 156 scaffolds. The total size of the genome is 6.9 Mb and the final assembly is based on 1,962 Mb of Illumina data, which provides an average 285× coverage of the genome.

Genome annotation

Genes were identified using Prodigal [41] as part of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory genome annotation pipeline. The predicted CDSs were translated and used to search the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) non-redundant database, UniProt, TIGRFam, Pfam, PRIAM, KEGG, COG, and InterPro databases. These data sources were combined to assert a product description for each predicted protein. Non-coding genes and miscellaneous features were predicted using tRNAscan-SE [42] RNAMMer [43], Rfam [44], TMHMM [45], and SignalP [46]. Additional gene prediction analyses and functional annotation were performed within the Integrated Microbial Genomes (IMG-ER) platform [47].

Genome properties

The genome is 6,900,273 nucleotides with 61.98% GC content (Table 4) and comprised of 156 scaffolds (Figures 3a,3b,3c,3d,3e). From a total of 6,770 genes, 6,683 were protein encoding and 87 RNA only encoding genes. The majority of genes (78.79%) were assigned a putative function whilst the remaining genes were annotated as hypothetical. The distribution of genes into COGs functional categories is presented in Table 5.

Table 4

Genome Statistics for Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128

Attribute

      Value

     % of Total

Genome size (bp)

      6,900,273

     100.00

DNA coding region (bp)

      5,931,611

     85.96

DNA G+C content (bp)

      4,276,906

     61.98

Number of scaffolds

      156

Number of contigs

      157

Total gene

      6,770

     100.00

RNA genes

      87

     1.29

rRNA operons

      1*

Protein-coding genes

      6,683

     98.71

Genes with function prediction

      5,334

     78.79

Genes assigned to COGs

      5,314

     78.49

Genes assigned Pfam domains

      5,505

     81.31

Genes with signal peptides

      569

     8.40

Genes with transmembrane helices

      1,483

     21.91

CRISPR repeats

      0

*2 copies of 5S, 1 copy of 16S and 1 copy of 23S rRNA

Figure 3a

Graphical map of YU7DRAFT_scaffold_0.1 of the genome of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128. From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 3b

Graphical map of YU7DRAFT_scaffold_1.2 of the genome of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128. From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 3c

Graphical map of YU7DRAFT_scaffold_2.3 of the genome of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128. From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 3d

Graphical map of YU7DRAFT_scaffold_3.4 of the genome of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128. From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Figure 3e

Graphical map of YU7DRAFT_scaffold_4.5 of the genome of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128. From bottom to the top of each scaffold: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories as denoted by the IMG platform), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, sRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Table 5

Number of protein coding genes of Ensifer meliloti strain RRI128 associated with the general COG functional categories

Code

    Value

    %age

    COG Category

J

    202

    3.41

    Translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis

A

    0

    0.00

    RNA processing and modification

K

    520

    8.78

    Transcription

L

    272

    4.59

    Replication, recombination and repair

B

    2

    0.03

    Chromatin structure and dynamics

D

    47

    0.79

    Cell cycle control, mitosis and meiosis

Y

    0

    0.00

    Nuclear structure

V

    61

    1.03

    Defense mechanisms

T

    237

    4.00

    Signal transduction mechanisms

M

    294

    4.97

    Cell wall/membrane biogenesis

N

    75

    1.27

    Cell motility

Z

    0

    0.00

    Cytoskeleton

W

    1

    0.02

    Extracellular structures

U

    116

    1.96

    Intracellular trafficking and secretion

O

    186

    3.14

    Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones

C

    355

    6.00

    Energy production conversion

G

    594

    10.03

    Carbohydrate transport and metabolism

E

    673

    11.37

    Amino acid transport metabolism

F

    108

    1.82

    Nucleotide transport and metabolism

H

    197

    3.33

    Coenzyme transport and metabolism

I

    216

    3.65

    Lipid transport and metabolism

P

    306

    5.17

    Inorganic ion transport and metabolism

Q

    168

    2.84

    Secondary metabolite biosynthesis, transport and catabolism

R

    705

    11.91

    General function prediction only

S

    585

    9.88

    Function unknown

-

    1,456

    21.51

    Not in COGS

Declarations

Acknowledgements

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 gratefully acknowledge the funding received from the Murdoch University Strategic Research Fund through the Crop and Plant Research Institute (CaPRI) 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.

References

  1. 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
  2. Ballard RA, Slattery JF and Charman N. Host range and saprophytic competence of Sinorhizobium meliloti - a comparison of strains for the inoculation of lucerne, strand and disc medics. Aust J Exp Agric. 2005; 45:209-216 View Article
  3. Howieson JG, Nutt B and Evans P. 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
  4. Brockwell J and Hely FW. Symbiotic characteristics of Rhizobium meliloti: an appraisal of the systematic treatment of nodulation and nitrogen fixation interactions between hosts and rhizobia of diverse origins. Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 1966; 17:885-889
  5. Munns DN. Nodulation of Medicago sativa in solution culture. 1. Acid-sensitive steps. Plant Soil. 1968; 28:129-146 View Article
  6. Garau G, Reeve WG, Brau L, Yates RJ, James D, Tiwari R, O'Hara GW and Howieson JG. The symbiotic requirements of different Medicago spp. suggest the evolution of Sinorhizobium meliloti and S. medicae with hosts differentially adapted to soil pH. Plant Soil. 2005; 276:263-277 View Article
  7. Charman N, Ballard RA, Humphries AW and Auricht GC. Improving lucerne nodulation at low pH: contribution of rhizobial and plant genotype to the nodulation of lucerne seedlings growing in solution culture at pH 5. Aust J Exp Agric. 2008; 48:512-517 View Article
  8. Charman N, Humphries A, Smith D, Drew E, Marshall E, Denton M, Hayes R, Venkatanagappa S, Ballard R. Selection of lucerne and rhizobia for improved nodulation at low pH. 15th Australian Nitrogen Fixation Conference Margaret River, Western Australia2009. p 49.
  9. McInnes A, Holford P and Thies JE. Characterisation of dry and mucoid colonies isolated from Australian rhizobial inoculant strains for Medicago species. Anim Prod Sci. 2005; 45:151-159 View Article
  10. Garau G, Yates RJ, Deiana P and Howieson JG. Novel strains of nodulating Burkholderia have a role in nitrogen fixation with Papilionoid herbaceous legumes adapted to acid, infertile soils. Soil Biol Biochem. 2009; 41:125-134 View Article
  11. Gemell LG, Hartley EJ and Herridge DF. Point-of-sale evaluation of preinoculated and custom-inoculated pasture legume seed. Aust J Exp Agric. 2005; 45:161-169 View Article
  12. Hartley E, Gemell G and Deaker R. Some factors that contribute to poor survival of rhizobia on preinoculated legume seed. Crop Pasture Sci. 2012; 63:858-865 View Article
  13. Beringer JE. R factor transfer in Rhizobium leguminosarum. J Gen Microbiol. 1974; 84:188-198 View ArticlePubMed
  14. Howieson JG, Ewing MA and D'antuono MF. Selection for acid tolerance in Rhizobium meliloti. Plant Soil. 1988; 105:179-188 View Article
  15. Field D, Garrity G, Gray T, Morrison N, Selengut J, Sterk P, Tatusova T, Thomson N, Allen M and Angiuoli SV. Towards a richer description of our complete collection of genomes and metagenomes "Minimum Information about a Genome Sequence " (MIGS) specification. Nat Biotechnol. 2008; 26:541-547 View ArticlePubMed
  16. 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
  17. Chen WX, Wang ET, Kuykendall LD. The Proteobacteria New York: Springer - Verlag; 2005.
  18. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Class I. Alphaproteobacteria class. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Kreig NR, Staley JT, editors. Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Second ed: New York: Springer - Verlag; 2005. p 1.
  19. Kuykendall LD. Order VI. Rhizobiales ord. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Kreig NR, Staley JT, editors. Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Second ed: New York: Springer - Verlag; 2005. p 324.
  20. Kuykendall LD. Family I. Rhizobiaceae In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, editors. Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. New York: Springer - Verlag; 2005. p 324.
  21. 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
  22. Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics of P. 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. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 2008;58(Pt 8):1973.
  23. Rome S, Brunel B, Normand P, Fernandez M and Cleyet-Marel JC. Evidence that two genomic species of Rhizobium are associated with Medicago truncatula. Arch Microbiol. 1996; 165 View ArticlePubMed
  24. Rome S, Cleyet-Marel JC, Materon LA, Normand P and Brunel B. Rapid identification of Medicago nodulating strains by using two oligonucleotide probes complementary to 16S rDNA sequences. Can J Microbiol. 1997; 43:854-861 View ArticlePubMed
  25. Biological Agents. Technical rules for biological agents. TRBA ():466.Web Site
  26. 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. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet. 2000; 25:25-29 View ArticlePubMed
  27. 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 Parismony methods. Mol Biol Evol. 2011; 28:2731-2739 View ArticlePubMed
  28. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution. 1985; 39:783-791 View Article
  29. Liolios K, Mavromatis K, Tavernarakis N and Kyrpides NC. The Genomes On Line Database (GOLD) in 2007: status of genomic and metagenomic projects and their associated metadata. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 36:D475-D479 View ArticlePubMed
  30. Galibert F, Finan TM, Long SR, Puhler A, Abola P, Ampe F, Barloy-Hubler F, Barnett MJ, Becker A and Boistard P. The composite genome of the legume symbiont Sinorhizobium meliloti. Science. 2001; 293:668-672 View ArticlePubMed
  31. Reeve W, Chain P, O'Hara G, Ardley J, Nandesena K, Brau L, Tiwari R, Malfatti S, Kiss H and Lapidus A. Complete genome sequence of the Medicago microsymbiont Ensifer (Sinorhizobium) medicae strain WSM419. Stand Genomic Sci. 2010; 2:77-86 View ArticlePubMed
  32. Small E. Alfalfa and Relatives: Evolution and Classification of Medicago Ottawa, Canada: NRC Reserach Press; 2011.
  33. Ballard RA and Charman N. Nodulation and growth of pasture legumes with naturalised soil rhizobia. 1. Annual Medicago spp. Aust J Exp Agric. 2000; 40:939-948 View Article
  34. Howieson JH, Ballard RA, deKoning C, Sandral G, Charman N. Trigonella balansae- a new pasture legume for the alkaline soils of southern Australia. 10th Australian Agronomy Conference. Hobart, Australia.: Australian Society of Agronomy; 2001.
  35. Reeve WG, Tiwari RP, Worsley PS, Dilworth MJ, Glenn AR and Howieson JG. Constructs for insertional mutagenesis, transcriptional signal localization and gene regulation studies in root nodule and other bacteria. Microbiology. 1999; 145:1307-1316 View ArticlePubMed
  36. JGI user home. Web Site
  37. Bennett S. Solexa Ltd. Pharmacogenomics. 2004; 5:433-438 View ArticlePubMed
  38. Zerbino DR. Using the Velvet de novo assembler for short-read sequencing technologies. Current Protocols in Bioinformatics 2010;Chapter 11:Unit 11 5.
  39. wgsim. Web Site
  40. Gnerre S, MacCallum I, Przybylski D, Ribeiro FJ, Burton JN, Walker BJ, Sharpe T, Hall G, Shea TP and Sykes S. High-quality draft assemblies of mammalian genomes from massively parallel sequence data. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011; 108:1513-1518 View ArticlePubMed
  41. 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
  42. Lowe TM and Eddy SR. tRNAscan-SE: a program for improved detection of transfer RNA genes in genomic sequence. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997; 25:955-964PubMed
  43. Lagesen K, Hallin P, Rodland EA, Staerfeldt HH, Rognes T and Ussery DW. RNAmmer: consistent and rapid annotation of ribosomal RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007; 35:3100-3108 View ArticlePubMed
  44. Griffiths-Jones S, Bateman A, Marshall M, Khanna A and Eddy SR. Rfam: an RNA family database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003; 31:439-441 View ArticlePubMed
  45. Krogh A, Larsson B, von Heijne G and Sonnhammer EL. Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes. J Mol Biol. 2001; 305:567-580 View ArticlePubMed
  46. Bendtsen JD, Nielsen H, von Heijne G and Brunak S. Improved prediction of signal peptides: SignalP 3.0. J Mol Biol. 2004; 340:783-795 View ArticlePubMed
  47. Markowitz VM, Mavromatis K, Ivanova NN, Chen IM, Chu K and Kyrpides NC. IMG ER: a system for microbial genome annotation expert review and curation. Bioinformatics. 2009; 25:2271-2278 View ArticlePubMed