Open Access

Draft genome sequence of marine alphaproteobacterial strain HIMB11, the first cultivated representative of a unique lineage within the Roseobacter clade possessing an unusually small genome

  • Bryndan P. Durham,
  • , Jana Grote,
  • , Kerry A. Whittaker,
  • , Sara J. Bender,
  • , Haiwei Luo
  • , Sharon L. Grim,
  • , Julia M. Brown,
  • , John R. Casey,
  • , Antony Dron,
  • , Lennin Florez-Leiva,
  • , Andreas Krupke,
  • , Catherine M. Luria,
  • , Aric H. Mine,
  • , Olivia D. Nigro,
  • , Santhiska Pather,
  • , Agathe Talarmin,
  • , Emma K. Wear,
  • , Thomas S. Weber,
  • , Jesse M. Wilson,
  • , Matthew J. Church,
  • , Edward F. DeLong,
  • , David M. Karl,
  • , Grieg F. Steward,
  • , John M. Eppley,
  • , Nikos C. Kyrpides,
  • , Stephan Schuster,
  • and Michael S. Rappé,
Corresponding author

Received: 15 March 2014

Accepted: 15 March 2014

Published: 15 June 2014

Abstract

Strain HIMB11 is a planktonic marine bacterium isolated from coastal seawater in Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Hawaii belonging to the ubiquitous and versatile Roseobacter clade of the alphaproteobacterial family Rhodobacteraceae. Here we describe the preliminary characteristics of strain HIMB11, including annotation of the draft genome sequence and comparative genomic analysis with other members of the Roseobacter lineage. The 3,098,747 bp draft genome is arranged in 34 contigs and contains 3,183 protein-coding genes and 54 RNA genes. Phylogenomic and 16S rRNA gene analyses indicate that HIMB11 represents a unique sublineage within the Roseobacter clade. Comparison with other publicly available genome sequences from members of the Roseobacter lineage reveals that strain HIMB11 has the genomic potential to utilize a wide variety of energy sources (e.g. organic matter, reduced inorganic sulfur, light, carbon monoxide), while possessing a reduced number of substrate transporters.

Keywords:

marine bacterioplanktonRoseobacteraerobic anoxygenic phototrophdimethylsulfoniopropionate

Introduction

Bacteria belonging to the Roseobacter lineage of marine Alphaproteobacteria account for a substantial fraction (ranging ~10 – 25%) of bacterioplankton cells in surface ocean seawater [1-4], making them one of a relatively small number of suitable targets for scientists investigating the ecology of abundant marine bacterial groups. Focused genome sequencing efforts have provided significant insights into the functional and ecological roles for this group [5-7]. In 2004, the first member of this group to have its genome sequenced, Ruegeria pomeroyi (basonym Silicibacter pomeroyi) strain DSS-3 [8], revealed strategies used by the Roseobacter group for nutrient acquisition in the marine environment. To date, over 40 genomes have been sequenced from members of the Roseobacter lineage. Comparative analysis among 32 of these genomes indicates that members of this group are ecological generalists, having relatively plastic requirements for carbon and energy metabolism, which may allow them to respond to a diverse range of environmental conditions [9]. For example, members of the Roseobacter lineage have the genomic potential to obtain energy via oxidation of organic substrates, oxidation of inorganic compounds, and/or sunlight-driven electron transfer via bacteriochlorophyll a, proteorhodopsin, or xanthorhodopsin phototrophic systems. Genome analyses as well as culture experiments have also revealed a variety of mechanisms by which roseobacters may associate and interact with phytoplankton and other eukaryotes. These include genes involved in uptake of compounds produced by algae such as peptides, amino acids, putrescine, spermidine, and DMSP [10,11], as well as genes for chemotaxis, attachment, and secretion [12].

Strain HIMB11 was isolated from surface seawater collected from Kaneohe Bay off the coast of Oahu, Hawaii, USA in May, 2005. Subsequent 16S rRNA gene sequence comparisons revealed it to be a member of the Roseobacter clade of marine bacterioplankton [13] that was highly abundant after a storm-induced phytoplankton bloom in the bay [14]. Here, we present a preliminary set of features for strain HIMB11, a description of the draft genome sequence and annotation, and a comparative analysis with 35 other genome sequences from members of the Roseobacter lineage. Genome annotation revealed strain HIMB11 to have the genetic potential for bacteriochlorophyll-based aerobic anoxygenic phototrophic (AAnP) metabolism and degradation of the algal-derived compound DMSP along with production of the climate-relevant gas dimethylsulfide (DMS), and oxidation of the greenhouse gas carbon monoxide (CO). Collectively, these features indicate the potential for strain HIMB11 to participate in the biogeochemical cycling of sulfur and carbon, and concomitantly affect global climate processes.

Classification and features

Strain HIMB11 was isolated by a high-throughput, dilution-to-extinction approach [15] from surface seawater collected near the coast of Oahu, Hawaii, USA, in the tropical North Pacific Ocean. The strain was isolated in seawater sterilized by tangential flow filtration and amended with low concentrations of inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus (1.0 µM NH4Cl, 1.0 µM NaNO3, and 0.1 µM KH2PO4).

Comparative analysis of the HIMB11 16S rRNA gene sequence to those from cultured, sequenced roseobacters indicates that HIMB11 occupies a unique lineage that is divergent from the 16S rRNA gene sequences of Roseobacter strains already in culture (Figure 1). Based on the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) non-redundant database, the HIMB11 16S rRNA gene sequence is most similar (~99% nucleotide identity) to a large number of environmental gene clones obtained from various marine environments that exclusively fall in the Roseobacter lineage of Alphaproteobacteria.

Figure 1

Phylogenetic relationships between HIMB11 and bacterial strains belonging to the Roseobacter clade. SSU rRNA gene sequences were aligned with version 111 of the ‘All-Species Living Tree’ project SSU rRNA gene database [16] using the ARB software package [17]. The phylogeny was constructed from nearly full-length gene sequences using the RAxML maximum likelihood method [18] within ARB, filtered to exclude alignment positions that contained gaps or ambiguous nucleotides in any of the sequences included in the tree. Bootstrap analyses were determined by RAxML [19] via the raxmlGUI graphical front end [20]. The scale bar corresponds to 0.05 substitutions per nucleotide position. Open circles indicate nodes with bootstrap support between 50-80%, while closed circles indicate bootstrap support >80%, from 500 replicates. A variety of Archaea were used as outgroups.

Because of the significant sequence variation in 16S rRNA genes (up to 11%) and the prevalence of horizontal gene transfer within the clade, establishing a taxonomic framework for roseobacters remains a challenge [9]. When genome sequence data is available, it is often more informative to perform a phylogenomic analysis based on shared orthologs versus 16S rRNA phylogenetic analysis alone [9,21]. A maximum likelihood tree constructed using 719 shared orthologous protein sequences supported the 16S rRNA gene-based analysis by revealing that HIMB11 formed a unique sublineage of the Roseobacter clade (Figure 2).

Figure 2

Maximum likelihood phylogenomic tree derived from a concatenation of 719 shared single-copy orthologous protein sequences from strain HIMB11, 40 other Roseobacter members, and the SAR116 clade member Ca. Puniceispirillum marinum IMCC1322 (outgroup) using the RAxML maximum likelihood method [18]. After a reciprocal BLAST search [22] was performed for all possible genome pairs at the amino acid level using an E value of 10-6, orthologous genes in each of the genome pairs were identified using the MSOAR software [23], which assigns orthologs by considering both sequence similarity and gene context information. One genome was picked at random as the reference genome, and pairwise orthologs were linked to the reference. Values at the nodes show the number of times the clade defined by that node appeared in the 100 bootstrapped data sets. The scale bar indicates number of substitutions per site. Bootstrap values lower than 50% were not displayed.

HIMB11 cells are short, irregular rods (0.3-0.5 x 0.8 µm) that are generally smaller in size than previously reported for other cultured Roseobacter strains (e.g. described taxa in Bergey’s Manual range from 0.5-1.6 – 1.0-4.0 µm) [24] (Figure 3). HIMB11 is likely motile, as the genes necessary to build flagella are present (e.g. fli, flg). Based on the ability of HIMB11 to grow in dark or light on a medium consisting solely of sterile seawater amended with inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus, and the absence any of the known pathways for inorganic carbon fixation, the strain is presumed to acquire carbon and energy via the oxidation of components of the dissolved organic carbon pool in natural seawater. Based on the presence of carbon-monoxide-oxidizing genes (i.e. coxL, forms I and II) [25,26] as well as bacteriochlorophyll-based phototrophy genes (e.g. puf, puh, bch) [27,28], HIMB11 is hypothesized to oxidize both organic and inorganic compounds as well as obtain energy from light [5]. A summary of these and other features is shown in Table 1.

Figure 3

Scanning electron micrograph of strain HIMB11. For scale, the membrane pore size is 0.2 μm in diameter.

Table 1

Classification and general features of strain HIMB11 according to the MIGS recommendations [29].

MIGS ID

      Property

       Term

      Evidence codea

      Current classification

       Domain Bacteria

      TAS [30]

       Phylum Proteobacteria

      TAS [31]

       Class Alphaproteobacteria

      TAS [32,33]

       Order Rhodobacterales

      TAS [32,34]

       Family Rhodobacteraceae

      TAS [32,35]

       Genus not assigned

       Species not assigned

       Strain HIMB11

      Gram stain

       Negative

      NAS

      Cell shape

       Short irregular rods

      IDA

      Motility

       Flagella

      NAS

      Sporulation

       Non-sporulating

      NAS

      Temperature range

       Mesophile

      IDA

      Optimum temperature

       Unknown

      Carbon source

       Ambient seawater DOC

      TAS [36]

      Energy source

       Mixotrophic

      NAS

      Terminal electron receptor

MIGS-6

      Habitat

       Seawater

      IDA

MIGS-6.3

      Salinity

       ~35.0 ‰

      IDA

MIGS-22

      Oxygen

       Aerobic

      NAS

MIGS-15

      Biotic relationship

       Free-living

      TAS [36]

MIGS-14

      Pathogenicity

       None

      NAS

MIGS-4

      Geographic location

       Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii

      TAS [14]

MIGS-5

      Sample collection time

       18 May, 2005

      TAS [14]

MIGS-4.1

      Latitude - Longitude

       21.44, -157.78

      TAS [14]

MIGS-4.2

MIGS-4.3

      Depth

       ~1 m

      TAS [14]

MIGS-4.4

      Altitude

a) 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 [37].

Genome sequencing information

Genome project history

The genome of strain HIMB11 was selected for sequencing based on its phylogenetic affiliation with the widespread and ecologically important Roseobacter clade of marine bacterioplankton and its periodically high abundance in coastal Hawaii seawater [14]. The genome sequence was completed on May 25, 2011, and presented for public access on September 15, 2013. The genome project is deposited in the Genomes OnLine Database (GOLD) as project Gi09592. The Whole Genome Shotgun project has been deposited at DDBJ/EMBL/GenBank under the accession number AVDB00000000. The version described in this paper is version AVBD01000000. Table 2 presents the main project information and its association with MIGS version 2.0 compliance [29].

Table 2

Project information

MIGS ID

     Property

     Term

MIGS-31

     Finishing quality

     Draft

MIGS-28

     Libraries used

     One standard 454 pyrosequence titanium library

MIGS-29

     Sequencing platforms

     454 GS FLX Titanium

MIGS-31.2

     Fold coverage

     121× pyrosequence

MIGS-30

     Assemblers

     Newbler version 2.5.3

MIGS-32

     Gene calling method

     Prodigal 1.4, GenePRIMP

     Genome Database release

     IMG; 2506210027

     Genbank ID

     AVDB00000000

     Genbank Date of Release

     September 15, 2013

     GOLD ID

     Gi09592

     Project relevance

     Environmental

Growth conditions and DNA isolation

Strain HIMB11 was grown at 27 °C in 60 L of coastal Hawaii seawater sterilized by tangential flow filtration and supplemented with 10 µM NH4Cl, 1.0 µM KH2PO4, and 1.0 µM NaNO3 (final concentrations). Cells from the liquid culture were collected on a membrane filter, and DNA was isolated using a standard phenol/chloroform/isoamyl alcohol extraction protocol. A total of 50 μg of DNA was obtained.

Genome sequencing and assembly

The HIMB11 genome was sequenced at the Pennsylvania State University Center for Comparative Genomics and Bioinformatics (University Park, PA, USA) using a 454 GS FLX platform and Titanium chemistry from 454 Life Sciences (Branford, CT, USA). The sequencing library was prepared in accordance with 454 instructions and was carried out on a full 454 picotiter plate. This yielded 1,550,788 reads with an average length of 359 bp, totaling 556,821,617 bp. A subset of 1,336,895 reads was ultimately assembled using the Newbler assembler version 2.5.3, yielding a final draft genome of 34 contigs representing 3,098,747 bp. This provided 121× coverage of the genome.

Genome annotation

Genes were identified using Prodigal 1.4 [38] as part of the genome annotation pipeline in the Integrated Microbial Genomes Expert Review (IMG-ER) system [39,40] developed by the Joint Genome Institute (Walnut Creek, CA, USA). Predicted coding sequences were translated and used as queries against the NCBI non-redundant database and UniProt, TIGRFam, Pfam, PRIAM, KEGG, COG, and InterPro databases. The tRNAScanSE tool [41] was used to identify tRNA genes, and ribosomal RNAs were identified using RNAmmer [42]. Other non-coding RNAs were found by searching the genome for corresponding Rfam profiles using INFERNAL [43]. Additional gene prediction analysis and manual functional annotation was performed within the IMG-ER platform.

Genome properties

The HIMB11 draft genome is 3,098,747 bp long and comprises 34 contigs ranging in size from 454 to 442,822 bp, with an overall GC content of 49.73% (Table 3). Of the 3,237 predicted genes, 3,183 (98.33%) were protein-coding genes, and 54 were RNAs. Most (78%) protein-coding genes were assigned putative functions, while the remaining genes were annotated as hypothetical proteins. The distribution of genes into COG functional categories is presented in Table 4.

Table 3

Nucleotide content and gene count levels of the genome

Attribute

       Value

      % of totala

Genome size (bp)

       3,098,747

      100.00

DNA coding region (bp)

       2,812,982

      90.78

DNA G+C content (bp)

       1,541,077

      49.73

Total genes

       3,237

      100.00

RNA genes

       54

      1.67

Protein-coding genes

       3,183

      98.33

Genes in paralog clusters

Genes assigned to COGs

       2,523

      77.94

1 or more conserved domains

2 or more conserved domains

3 or more conserved domains

4 or more conserved domains

Genes with signal peptides

       919

      28.39

Genes with transmembrane helices

       654

      20.20

Paralogous groups

a) The total is based on either the size of the genome in base pairs or the total number of protein coding genes in the annotated genome.

Table 4

Number of genes associated with the 25 general COG functional categories

Code

      Value

       %agea

        Description

J

      158

       5.6

        Translation

A

      0

       0

        RNA processing and modification

K

      159

       5.7

        Transcription

L

      104

       3.7

        Replication, recombination and repair

B

      3

       0.1

        Chromatin structure and dynamics

D

      24

       0.9

        Cell cycle control, mitosis and meiosis

Y

      0

       0

        Nuclear structure

V

      22

       0.8

        Defense mechanisms

T

      74

       2.6

        Signal transduction mechanisms

M

      133

       4.7

        Cell wall/membrane biogenesis

N

      40

       1.4

        Cell motility

Z

      0

       0

        Cytoskeleton

W

      0

       0

        Extracellular structures

U

      38

       1.4

        Intracellular trafficking and secretion

O

      118

       4.2

        Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones

C

      196

       7.0

        Energy production and conversion

G

      165

       5.9

        Carbohydrate transport and metabolism

E

      334

       11.9

        Amino acid transport and metabolism

F

      73

       2.6

        Nucleotide transport and metabolism

H

      157

       5.6

        Coenzyme transport and metabolism

I

      154

       5.5

        Lipid transport and metabolism

P

      112

       4.0

        Inorganic ion transport and metabolism

Q

      123

       4.4

        Secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism

R

      379

       13.5

        General function prediction only

S

      238

       8.5

        Function unknown

-

      714

       22.06

        Not in COGs

a) The total is based on the total number of protein coding genes in the annotated genome.

Insights from the Genome Sequence

Metabolism of HIMB11

Major pathways of carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur acquisition, as well as alternative metabolisms and means of energy acquisition (e.g. light, CO), were annotated based on the presence and absence of key genes involved in these processes. A summary is provided in Figure 4. HIMB11 appears to possess an incomplete glycolysis pathway (pfkC and pgm are absent), yet it possesses the genes necessary for gluconeogenesis. HIMB11 harbors genes for the Entner-Doudoroff and pentose phosphate pathways, as well as pyruvate carboxylase to perform anaplerotic CO2 fixation. HIMB11 does not appear to use inorganic forms of nitrogen other than ammonium, as there are no genes present that are involved in nitrogen fixation, nitrate or nitrite reduction, nitric oxide reduction, nitrous oxide reduction, hydroxylamine oxidation, or nitroalkane denitrification. Instead, HIMB11 is hypothesized to rely solely on reduced and organic nitrogen sources; there are transporters for ammonium (amtB) and a variety of other nitrogen-containing substrates (e.g. amino acids, polyamines, glycine betaine, taurine), as well as genes for urease (ureABC). Strain HIMB11 possesses a high-affinity phosphate transporter accompanied by regulatory genes (pstSCAB, phoUBR) and alkaline phosphatase (phoA), suggesting that it can utilize both inorganic and organic forms of phosphorus; it does not harbor low-affinity phosphate transport (pitA) or the genes for phosphonate utilization (phnGHIJKLM).

Figure 4

Proposed mechanisms for the acquisition of carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, and energy in HIMB11. Substrates that are hypothesized to be transported and used by HIMB11 are in bold. Genes that designate these mechanisms are indicated. DMSP, dimethylsulfoniopropionate; DMS, dimethylsulfide; DON, dissolved organic nitrogen; C-O-P, phosphoesters; C-P, phosphonates; Pi, phosphate.

HIMB11 possesses genes for assimilatory sulfate reduction (cys) and for the metabolism of reduced, organic sulfur compounds (e.g. amino acids, DMSP). DMSP is an osmolyte produced by certain phytoplankton, including dinoflagellates and coccolithophores [44,45], and acts as a major source of both carbon and sulfur for marine bacterioplankton in ocean surface waters [46-49]. Roseobacters are frequently abundant during DMSP-producing algal blooms [1], and members of this group have become models for the study of bacterial transformations of DMSP [50]. There are two competing pathways for DMSP degradation: the demethylation pathway that leads to assimilation of sulfur (dmdA, -B, -C, -D), and the cleavage pathway that leads to the release of DMS (dddD, -L, -P, -Q, -W, -Y) [51]. DMS is a climate-active gas that has been implicated in the formation of atmospheric-cooling aerosols and clouds. The genome of HIMB11 harbors versions of both sides of the pathway (dmdA, -B, -C, -D’ and dddP, -D).

The HIMB11 genome contains genes that encode for a diverse array of energy acquisition strategies. The presence of the sox gene cluster indicates that HIMB11 is putatively capable of oxidizing reduced inorganic sulfur compounds [8] as a mechanism for lithoheterotrophic growth. Additional modes of energy acquisition encoded by the HIMB11 genome include pathways for CO oxidation to CO2 via carbon monoxide dehydrogenase (i.e. cox operons, including coxL, forms I and II) [25,26], degradation of aromatics (i.e. gentisate, benzoate, phenylacetic acid), and bacteriochlorophyll-based anoxygenic photosynthesis. Photosynthetic genes are organized in a photosynthesis gene cluster (PGC) and include genes for the photosynthetic reaction center (puf and puh), light harvesting complexes, biosynthesis of bacteriochlorphyll a and carotenoids, and regulatory factors (bch and crt). Two conserved regions within the PGC that were identified in a recent study examining the structure and arrangement of PGCs in ten AAnP bacterial genomes of different phylogenies, bchFNBHLM-LhaA-puhABC and crtF-bchCXYZ [28], were also found to be conserved in the HIMB11 genome. The arrangement of the puf genes (pufQBALMC) as well as the puh genes (puhABC-hyp-ascF-puhE) in HIMB11 is very similar to what has been described before for other Roseobacter strains [28]. Putative genes containing the sensor domain BLUF (blue-light-utilizing flavin adenine dinucleotide) were also found in HIMB11. BLUF sensor domains have been hypothesized to be involved in a light-dependent regulation of the photosynthesis operon and may enable light sensing for phototrophy [5,52].

Genome comparisons with other members of the Roseobacter clade

A regression model was used to estimate the genome size of HIMB11 based on the genomes of 40 Roseobacter strains (Figure 5). The model considers the number of nucleotides sequenced versus the ratio of the number of conserved single-copy genes universally present in Roseobacter genomes to the number of predicted protein-encoding genes. These data were fit to an exponential regression model (R2=0.94), which estimates the genome coverage of the draft HIMB11 genome to be 90.6% and the full genome size to be 3.42 Mb. This is relatively small compared to most cultured Roseobacter genomes (median 4.35 Mb) with only one notable exception (Roseobacter member HTCC2255, 2.21 Mb).

Figure 5

Regression model for strain HIMB11 genome size estimation based on the genomes of 40 cultured Roseobacter strains. The x-axis shows the ratio of the number of conserved single-copy genes universally present in fully sequenced Roseobacter genomes to the number of predicted protein-encoding genes. The y-axis is the number of nucleotides sequenced. The data were fit to an exponential regression model (R2=0.94), and the model was used to estimate the genome size of HIMB11 to be 3.42 Mb.

At the time of this analysis, 35 other Roseobacter genomes were publically available in the IMG-ER database (Table 5). The effect of a reduced genome size is readily apparent with respect to the transporter content of the HIMB11 genome: it possesses a highly reduced number of genes devoted to ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters and tripartite ATP-independent periplasmic (TRAP) transporters. ABC transporters use energy from ATP hydrolysis to transport a wide range of substrates across the membrane (e.g. ions, amino acids, peptides, sugars). While the 35 public Roseobacter genomes contain on average 279 genes involved in ABC transport (171 to 443 per genome), HIMB11 has only 169 genes for ABC transport systems. TRAP transporters are also underrepresented in the HIMB11 genome. These are a large prokaryotic family of solute transporters that contain a substrate binding protein (DctP) and two membrane proteins (DctQ and DctM). By relying on electrochemical ion gradients rather than ATP for transport [53], they mediate the uptake of a number of different substrates (e.g. succinate, malate, fumarate, pyruvate, taurine, ectoine, DMSP). Roseobacter genomes contain on average 60 genes devoted to TRAP transporter systems (23 to 135 genes per genome), while the HIMB11 genome harbors 26 TRAP transporter genes.

Table 5

Publicly available Roseobacter clade genomes use for comparative analysis with strain HIMB11, as of IMG release 3.4.

Organism name

      Status

      Size (bp)

      Gene Count

       GC%

Citreicella sp. SE45

      Draft

      5,523,231

      5,499

       67

Dinoroseobacter shibae DFL-12, DSM 16493

      Finished

      4,417,868

      4,271

       66

Jannaschia sp. CCS1

      Finished

      4,404,049

      4,339

       62

Loktanella sp. CCS2

      Draft

      3,497,325

      3,703

       55

Loktanella vestfoldensis SKA53

      Draft

      3,063,691

      3,117

       60

Maritimibacter alkaliphilus HTCC2654

      Draft

      4,529,231

      4,763

       64

Oceanibulbus indolifex HEL-45

      Draft

      4,105,524

      4,208

       60

Oceanicola batsensis HTCC2597

      Draft

      4,437,668

      4,261

       66

Oceanicola granulosus HTCC2516

      Draft

      4,039,111

      3,855

       70

Octadecabacter antarcticus 238

      Draft

      5,393,715

      5,883

       55

Octadecabacter antarcticus 307

      Draft

      4,909,025

      5,544

       55

Pelagibaca bermudensis HTCC2601

      Draft

      5,425,920

      5,519

       66

Phaeobacter gallaeciensis 2.10

      Draft

      4,157,399

      4,017

       60

Phaeobacter gallaeciensis BS107

      Draft

      4,232,367

      4,136

       60

Rhodobacterales sp. HTCC2083

      Draft

      4,018,415

      4,226

       53

Rhodobacterales sp. HTCC2150

      Draft

      3,582,902

      3,713

       49

Rhodobacterales sp. Y4I

      Draft

      4,344,244

      4,206

       64

Rhodobacterales sp. HTCC2255

      Draft

      2,224,475

      2,209

       37

Roseobacter denitrificans OCh 114

      Finished

      4,331,234

      4,201

       59

Roseobacter sp. AzwK-3b

      Draft

      4,178,704

      4,197

       62

Roseobacter sp. MED193

      Draft

      4,652,716

      4,605

       57

Roseobacter sp. SK209-2-6

      Draft

      4,555,826

      4,610

       57

Roseovarius nubinhibens ISM

      Draft

      3,668,667

      3,605

       64

Roseovarius sp. 217

      Draft

      4,762,632

      4,823

       61

Roseovarius sp. TM1035

      Draft

      4,209,812

      4,158

       61

Ruegeria pomeroyi DSS-3

      Finished

      4,601,053

      4,355

       64

Ruegeria sp. KLH11

      Draft

      4,487,498

      4,338

       58

Ruegeria sp. TM1040

      Finished

      4,153,699

      3,964

       60

Sagittula stellata E-37

      Draft

      5,262,893

      5,121

       65

Silicibacter lacuscaerulensis ITI-1157

      Draft

      3,523,710

      3,677

       63

Silicibacter sp. TrichCH4B

      Draft

      4,689,084

      4,814

       59

Sulfitobacter sp. EE-36

      Draft

      3,547,243

      3,542

       60

Sulfitobacter sp. GAI101

      Draft

      4,527,951

      4,258

       59

Sulfitobacter sp. NAS-14.1

      Draft

      4,002,069

      4,026

       60

Thalassiobium sp. R2A62

      Draft

      3,487,925

      3,744

       55

In contrast, drug/metabolite transporters (DMTs), which are another abundant group of transporters found in roseobacters [5], are abundant in HIMB11. DMTs are a ubiquitous superfamily (containing 14 families, six of which are prokaryotic) of drug and metabolite transporters, of which few are functionally characterized [54]. In prokaryotes, most act as pumps for the efflux of drugs and metabolites. On average, individual Roseobacter genomes harbor 27 genes for DMTs (19 to 37 per genome). HIMB11 has 33 DMT genes, which is further elevated when normalized to its small genome size. Thus, the reductive trend for ABC and TRAP transporters is reversed in the DMT family of transporters, potentially a result of selective pressure for the efflux of toxins/metabolites.

Conclusion

HIMB11 represents a member of the Roseobacter lineage that is phylogenomically distinct from other cultured, sequenced members of the Roseobacter clade. This uniqueness is further supported by its small genome and cell size relative to other members of this group that have been similarly investigated. These characteristics, taken together with the atypical transporter inventories, the presence of many alternative methods of energy acquisition (e.g. CO, light), and the periodic abundance of HIMB11 in Kaneohe Bay, suggest that stain HIMB11 is an opportunist in the environment, persisting on relatively few reduced substrates and alternative energy metabolism until conditions arise that are favorable for rapid growth (e.g. a phytoplankton bloom). Consistent with other members of this lineage is the potential for HIMB11 to play an important role in the cycling of the climatically important gases DMS, CO, and CO2, warranting further study in both the laboratory and field.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We thank the entire C-MORE staff and visiting scientists for support and instruction during the 2011 Summer Course in Microbial Oceanography. Dr. Mary Ann Moran at the University of Georgia provided invaluable instruction on Roseobacter genomics and bioinformatic analyses. We gratefully acknowledge the support of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, which funded the sequencing of this genome. Annotation was performed as part of the 2011 C-MORE Summer Course in Microbial Oceanography (Web Site), with support by the Agouron Institute, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the University of Hawaii and Manoa School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST), and the Center for Microbial Oceanography: Research and Education (C-MORE), a National Science Foundation-funded Science and Technology Center (award No. EF0424599).


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. González JM, Simó R, Massana R, Covert JS, Casamayor EO, Pedrós-Alió C and Moran MA. Bacterial community structure associated with a dimethylsulfoniopropionate-producing North Atlantic algal bloom. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000; 66:4237-4246 View ArticlePubMed
  2. Suzuki MT, Béjà O, Taylor LT and DeLong EF. Phylogenetic analysis of ribosomal RNA operons from uncultivated coastal marine bacterioplankton. Environ Microbiol. 2001; 3:323-331 View ArticlePubMed
  3. Giebel HA, Brinkhoff T, Zwisler W, Selje N and Simon M. Distribution of Roseobacter RCA and SAR11 lineages and distinct bacterial communities from the subtropics to the Southern Ocean. Environ Microbiol. 2009; 11:2164-2178 View ArticlePubMed
  4. Selje N, Simon M and Brinkhoff T. A newly discovered Roseobacter cluster in temperate and polar oceans. Nature. 2004; 427:445-448 View ArticlePubMed
  5. Moran MA, Belas R, Schell MA, González JM, Sun F, Sun S, Binder BJ, Edmonds J, Ye W and Orcutt B. Ecological genomics of marine roseobacters. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007; 73:4559-4569 View ArticlePubMed
  6. Slightom RN and Buchan A. Surface colonization by marine roseobacters: integrating genotype and phenotype. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009; 75:6027-6037 View ArticlePubMed
  7. Luo H, Löytynoja A and Moran MA. Genome content of uncultivated marine roseobacters in the surface ocean. Environ Microbiol. 2011; 14:41-51 View ArticlePubMed
  8. Moran MA, Buchan A, González JM, Heidelberg JF, Whitman WB, Kiene RP, Henriksen JR, King GM, Belas R and Fuqua C. Genome sequence of Silicibacter pomeroyi reveals adaptations to the marine environment. Nature. 2004; 432:910-913 View ArticlePubMed
  9. Newton RJ, Griffin LE, Bowles KM, Meile C, Gifford S, Givens CE, Howard EC, King E, Oakley CA and Reisch CR. Genome characteristics of a generalist marine bacterial lineage. ISME J. 2010; 4:784-798 View ArticlePubMed
  10. Lee C, Jørgensen NOG and May N. Seasonal cycling of putrescine and amino acids in relation to biological production in a stratified coastal salt pond. Biogeochemistry. 1995; 29:131-157 View Article
  11. Kiene RP and Linn LJ. The fate of dissolved dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSP) in seawater: tracer studies using 35S-DMSP. Geochim Cosmochim Acta. 2000; 64:2797-2810 View Article
  12. Geng H and Belas R. Molecular mechanisms underlying roseobacter-phytoplankton symbioses. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2010; 21:332-338 View ArticlePubMed
  13. Moran MA, González JM and Kiene RP. Linking a bacterial taxon to sulfur cycling in the sea: studies of the marine Roseobacter group. Geomicrobiol J. 2003; 20:375-388 View Article
  14. Yeo SK, Huggett MJ, Eiler A and Rappé MS. Coastal bacterioplankton community dynamics in response to a natural disturbance. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8:e56207 View ArticlePubMed
  15. Rappé MS, Connon SA, Vergin KL and Giovannoni SJ. Cultivation of the ubiquitous SAR11 marine bacterioplankton clade. Nature. 2002; 418:630-633 View ArticlePubMed
  16. Yarza P, Richter M, Peplies J, Euzeby J, Amann R, Schleifer KH, Ludwig W, Glöckner FO and Rosselló-Móra R. The All-Species Living Tree project: a 16S rRNA-based phylogenetic tree of all sequenced type strains. Syst Appl Microbiol. 2008; 31:241-250 View ArticlePubMed
  17. Ludwig W, Strunk O, Westram R, Richter L, Meier H, Yadhukumar J, Buchner A, Lai T, Steppi S and Jobb G. ARB: a software environment for sequence data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004; 32:1363-1371 View ArticlePubMed
  18. Stamatakis A. RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics. 2006; 22:2688-2690 View ArticlePubMed
  19. Stamatakis A, Hoover P and Rougemont J. A rapid bootstrap algorithm for the RAxML Web servers. Syst Biol. 2008; 57:758-771 View ArticlePubMed
  20. Silvestro D and Michalak I. raxmlGUI: a graphical front-end for RAxML. Org Divers Evol. 2012; 12:335-337 View Article
  21. Brinkhoff T, Giebel HA and Simon M. Diversity, ecology, and genomics of the Roseobacter clade: a short overview. Arch Microbiol. 2008; 189:531-539 View ArticlePubMed
  22. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schäffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W and Lipman DJ. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. [<jrn>]. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997; 25:3389-3402 View ArticlePubMed
  23. Chen X, Zheng J, Fu Z, Nan P, Zhong Y, Lonardi S and Jiang T. Assignment of orthologous genes via genome rearrangement. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinformatics. 2005; 2:302-315 View ArticlePubMed
  24. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn TG. Family I. Rhodobacteraceae fam. nov. In: Garrity GM, Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT (eds), Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 2, Part C, 2005, p. 161.
  25. Cunliffe M. Correlating carbon monoxide oxidation with cox genes in the abundant marine Roseobacter clade. ISME J. 2011; 5:685-691 View ArticlePubMed
  26. Cunliffe M. Physiological and metabolic effects of carbon monoxide oxidation in the model marine bacterioplankton Ruegeria pomeroyi DSS-3. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013; 79:738-740 View ArticlePubMed
  27. Wagner-Döbler I and Biebl H. Environmental biology of the marine Roseobacter lineage. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2006; 60:255-280 View ArticlePubMed
  28. Zheng Q, Zhang R, Koblížek M, Boldareva EN, Yurkov V, Yan S and Jiao N. Diverse arrangement of photosynthetic gene clusters in aerobic anoxygenic phototrophic bacteria. PLoS ONE. 2011; 6:e25050 View ArticlePubMed
  29. 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
  30. 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
  31. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn TG. 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.
  32. . 07. List of new names and new combinations previously effectively, but not validly, published. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2006; 56:1-6 View ArticlePubMed
  33. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn TG. 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.
  34. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn TG. Order III. Rhodobacterales 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. 161.
  35. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn TG. Family I. Rhodobacteraceae fam. 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. 161.
  36. Brandon M. High-throughput isolation of pelagic marine bacteria from the coastal subtropical Pacific Ocean. MS thesis. Univ of Hawaii at Manoa. 2006:p. 58.
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. 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
  40. . Web Site
  41. 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
  42. Lagesen K, Hallin P, Rødland EA, Stærfeldt HH, Rognes T and Ussery DW. RNAmmer: consistent and rapid annotation of ribosomal RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007; 35:3100-3108 View ArticlePubMed
  43. Griffiths-Jones S, Moxon S, Marshall M, Khanna A, Eddy SR and Bateman A. Rfam: annotating non-coding RNAs in complete genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005; 33:D121-D124 View ArticlePubMed
  44. Kiene RP. Production of methanethiol from dimethylsulfoniopropionate in marine surface waters. Mar Chem. 1996; 54:69-83 View Article
  45. Sunda W, Kieber DJ, Kiene RP and Huntsman S. An antioxidant function for DMSP and DMS in marine algae. Nature. 2002; 418:317-320 View ArticlePubMed
  46. Kiene RP, Linn LJ and Bruton JA. New and important roles for DMSP in marine microbial communities. J Sea Res. 2000; 43:209-224 View Article
  47. Kiene RP and Linn LJ. Distribution and turnover of dissolved DMSP and its relationship with bacterial production and dimethylsulfide in the Gulf of Mexico. Limnol Oceanogr. 2000; 45:849-861 View Article
  48. Yoch DC. Dimethylsulfoniopropionate: its sources, role in the marine food web, and biological degradation to dimethylsulfide. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002; 68:5804-5815 View ArticlePubMed
  49. Tripp HJ, Kitner JB, Schwalbach MS, Dacey JWH, Wilhelm LJ and Giovannoni SJ. SAR11 marine bacteria require exogenous reduced sulphur for growth. Nature. 2008; 452:741-744 View ArticlePubMed
  50. Moran MA, Reisch CR, Kiene RP and Whitman WB. Genomic insights into bacterial DMSP transformations. Annu Rev Mar Sci. 2012; 4:523-542 View ArticlePubMed
  51. Reisch CR, Moran MA and Whitman WB. Bacterial catabolism of dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSP). Front Microbiol. 2011; 2:172 View ArticlePubMed
  52. Fuchs BM, Spring S, Teeling H, Quast C, Wulf J, Schattenhofer M, Yan S, Ferriera S, Johnson J and Glöckner FO. Characterization of a marine gammaproteobacterium capable of aerobic anoxygenic photosynthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007; 104:2891-2896 View ArticlePubMed
  53. Mulligan C, Fischer M and Thomas GH. Tripartite ATP-independent periplasmic (TRAP) transporters in bacteria and archaea. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2011; 35:68-86 View ArticlePubMed
  54. Jack DL, Yang NMH and Saier M. The drug/metabolite transporter superfamily. Eur J Biochem. 2001; 268:3620-3639 View ArticlePubMed