A Whiff of Tax­on­omy – Bios­trati­cola tofi

by Christoph

No, Bios­trati­cola tofi is not a "flag­ship bac­terium" of mol­e­c­u­lar bi­ol­ogy like E. coli, which was re­cently cel­e­brated by Roberto. In fact, it's hardly known even among hard­core micro­bio­lo­gists! Yet this species is a close rel­a­tive of E. coli, loosely speak­ing a first cousin. But as it goes in star-stud­ded fam­i­lies, older and younger sib­lings or cousins are rarely in the spot­light. Ex­cept right here now.

Fig­ure 1. Field view of the Wes­ter­höfer Bach. B Samp­ling site WB2.2, the start­ing point of ac­tive tu­fa de­po­si­tion (close to where Bios­trati­cola tofi was iso­lated). Source. Fron­ti­spiece: De­tail from Fi­gure 2

Ver­barg et al. (2008) iso­lated Bios­trati­cola tofi as part of the DFG-funded project "Mi­cro­bial con­trol of min­er­al­iza­tion processes in non-ma­rine biofilms." The project aimed at a bet­ter un­der­stand­ing of mi­cro­bial ef­fects on biofilm calcif­ication, and am­bi­ent wa­ter chem­istry in a highly cal­cium-sat­u­rated set­ting (West­er­höfer Bach, Harz Moun­tains (Lo­wer Sax­ony, Ger­ma­ny; Fig­ure 1). They had iso­lated bac­te­ria from a biofilm of a tufa de­posit in a rivulet ─ think of stro­matolites ─ and plated them un­der het­erotrophic and aer­o­bic con­di­tions for two days at 18°C. Se­lect­ing against Cyanobac­te­ria, roughly half of the strains iso­lated from the rivulet were Flavobac­te­ri­ales, while strains with dif­fer­ent phe­no­types were af­fil­i­ated to Fir­mi­cutes (40%), Actino­bac­teria (14%), and dif­fer­ent classes of Pro­teobac­te­ria (24%). One iso­late of the lat­ter, iso­late BF36, turned out to be a soli­taire in their col­lec­tion of ~2,000 strains, and 16S rRNA phy­lo­typ­ing re­vealed that it is af­fil­i­ated with the En­ter­obac­te­ri­aceae.

Dur­ing ex­po­nen­tial growth, BF36 cells showed a typ­i­cal Gram-neg­a­tive cell wall ar­chi­tec­ture (Fig­ure 2b), and from ul­tra­thin sec­tions when ana­lyzed us­ing trans­mis­sion elec­tron mi­cro­scopy (TEM) they ap­peared as rods with a mean length of 1.64 µm and mean width of 0.9 µm.

Characteris­tically, many cells showed ex­pres­sion of outer mem­brane blebs (Fig­ure 2a). The cell mor­phol­ogy of­ten ap­peared ir­regular in size and shape, which may be in­di­ca­tive of os­mo­sensitivity (Fig­ure 2). Cells tended to or­ga­nize in loose con­sortia and were coated by a mas­sive slime layer (Fig­ure 2c). Ver­barg et al. sum­ma­rized their mi­cro­bi­o­log­i­cal characteri­zation of iso­late BF36 in the de­scrip­tion of a novel genus:

De­scrip­tion of Bios­trati­cola gen. nov.

Bios­trati­cola [Bi.o.stra.tí.co.la; Gr. n. bios life, L. neut. n. stra­tum layer, L. masc. suf­fix n. -cola (de­rived from in­cola) in­hab­i­tant, N.L. masc. n. Bios­trati­cola in­hab­i­tant of a biofilm].

Gram-neg­a­tive, non­motile, non-spore-form­ing, and rod­shaped. Cata­lase pos­i­tive and ox­i­dase neg­a­tive. Fac­ul­ta­tively anaer­o­bic. Fer­men­ta­tion of a wide range of carbo­hy­dra­tes. No gas from glu­cose. Ma­jor fatty acid methyl es­ters are C16:0 and C16:1x7. Isopren­oids are ubiquinone Q8 and menaquinone MK8. The mol% G+C of DNA is 54.2. Other es­sen­tial char­ac­ter­is­tics of this genus are given in the de­scrip­tion of Bios­trati­cola tofi. Phy­lo­ge­net­i­cally a mem­ber of the Enterobac­teria­ceae. The type species is Bios­trati­cola tofi.

 

Fig­ure 2. Bio­st­r­a­­ti­cola tofi strain BF36T. Ultra­thin­sec­tio­ned cells (a) and cell wall ar­chi­tec­ture (b). The cell sur­face ap­pears stud­ded with blebs (bl). Om, outer mem­brane; cm, cy­toplasmic mem­brane; m = murein. © Sh­a­d­ow-casted cells of nearly pleo­mor­phic shape. Sl, slime layer; fl, fla­gellum. Source

The genus Bios­trati­cola is de­scribed above as non-motile but cells of the type species Bio­stra­ti­co­la to­fi BF36T oc­ca­sion­ally sport fla­gella, as seen in Fig­ure 2c. A con­tra­dic­tion? Well, yes, as it is well known that the syn­the­sis of fla­gella is gen­er­ally de­pen­dent of growth con­di­tions. Thus, a charac­terization of the en­tire genus as "non-motile" is ques­tion­able. More prob­lem­at­i­cally, the genus Bios­trati­cola is de­scribed as "Phy­lo­ge­net­i­cally a mem­ber of the En­ter­obac­te­ri­aceae."

The phy­lo­ge­net­ics of the or­der En­ter­obac­terales is any­thing but clear. Its di­vi­sion into (taxo­no­mic) fam­i­lies ex­plored by Ade­olu et al. (2016) gave con­flict­ing re­sults de­pend­ing on whether tree-build­ing and group­ing was done us­ing 16S rRNA se­quences, whole‑genome se­quences, con­cate­nated ribosomal‑protein se­quences, con­cate­nated "core" pro­teins, or con­served sig­nature in­dels (CSI). Their con­sen­sus model of seven fam­i­lies places Bio­stra­ti­co­la in the Entero­bacteriaceae, that is, in the same fam­ily as E. coli. But I will show that a group­ing into the fa­mily Pec­to­bac­te­ri­aceae, which in­cludes the gen­era So­dalis, Pec­to­bac­ter­i­um, Lons­dalea, Bren­neria, and Dick­eya, seems more rea­son­able (see here for the seven fa­milies de­fined by Ade­olu et al.; Bios­trati­cola and So­dalis are marked by blue ar­rows). Since the genome se­quence (~4.3 Mb) of B. tofi is known, I looked at its repli­ca­tion ini­tia­tor pro­tein, DnaA, and its chro­mo­so­mal repli­ca­tion ori­gin, oriC (full dis­clo­sure: I have been study­ing the process of repli­ca­tion ini­ti­a­tion in bac­te­ria for a long time and am not done with it).

Fig­ure 3. BLAST-style man­ual align­ment of the mnmG-mioC in­ter­genic re­gion con­­taining the chro­mo­so­mal rep­lication ori­gin, oriC, for S. glossini­d­ius str. 'morsi­tans' [LN854557.1], B. tofi DSM 19580 [SMCR01000005.1], and E. coli K‑12 MG­1655 [U00096.2]. green, mnmG start co­don (ccw); red, mioC stop codon (ccw); or­ange, SIST pre­dic­tion for the DNA un­winding el­e­ment (DUE), vi­o­let, DnaA-trio mo­tif ((NAN)x); red, 9‑mer rev DnaA box (5'-TGTGNAWAA); blue, 9‑mer fwd DnaA box (5'-TTWT­NCACA): dark blue, cen­tral base of IHF-bind­ing site; un­derline, GATC sites. By the au­thor

For the ini­ti­a­tion of chro­mo­some repli­ca­tion, DnaA binds to and acts on oriC. The DnaA pro­teins of B. tofi, S. glossinidi­us, and E. coli are 100% iden­ti­cal (ex­cept for the no­to­ri­ously highly vari­able and prob­a­bly un­struc­tured do­main 2) and are there­fore not suited for de­tec­ting phy­logenetically sig­nificant dif­fer­ences. The oriCs of B. tofi, S. glossini­d­ius, and E. coli are dif­fer­ent enough to pro­vide a phy­lo­ge­netic sig­nal (Fig­ure 3). By BLASTn sim­i­lar­ity search, the So­dalis and Bio­straticola oriCs are 76% iden­ti­cal, the best BLAST hit when search­ing all Enterobacte­rales DnaA se­quences. But BLASTn sim­i­lar­ity of both with E. coli oriC did not ex­ceed 71%, a sig­nif­i­cant dif­fer­ence (also with an un­trained eye, you can spot more and longer con­served se­quence patches be­tween B. tofi and So­dalis than for E. coli). How­ever, the main struc­tural el­e­ments ─ the "DNA un­wind­ing el­e­ment" (DUE) where ori­gin un­wind­ing oc­curs dur­ing ini­tiation, the DnaA-trio mo­tif for sin­gle-stranded DNA bind­ing of DnaA, and the DnaA box clus­ters for double‑stranded DNA-bind­ing ─ are very well con­served, in­clud­ing their spac­ing. This is just a de­tail and not a thor­ough analy­sis. But it does indi­cate that B. tofi fits bet­ter into the fam­ily in which also So­dalis is grouped.

The genus Bios­trati­cola is just one of 68 validly de­scribed gen­era of the En­ter­obac­terales, and the only de­scribed species of the genus, Bios­trati­cola tofi, has no known prop­er­ties that would make it stand out. There are way too many "stars" in the or­der En­ter­obac­terales al­ready, and these have been stud­ied for decades (not just E. coli, mind you!). Here's a re­fresher from the ba­sic clin­i­cal mi­crobiology course: En­ter­obac­terales are the path­o­genic E. coli, and gen­era con­taining pathogen­ic species: Shigella, Sal­mo­nella, Kleb­siella, En­te­ro­bac­ter, Ser­ra­tia, and Yersinia. And there are numer­ous im­por­tant and well-stud­ied plant pathogens in the or­der En­ter­obac­terales, Er­winia, Pectobac­terium, Dick­eya and Pan­toea among them.

En­ter­obac­terales aren't all pathogens but they are ubiq­ui­tous. You find them as com­men­sals in/on plants and an­i­mals (in­sects, arthro­pods, verte­brates), or free-liv­ing in soil and fresh­wa­ter ─ like B. tofi ─ and in coastal sea­wa­ter. Quite a few path­o­genic species have been tamed by their eu­kar­yo­tic hosts and now serve as mu­tu­al­is­tic sym­bionts or endo­sym­bionts. Var­i­ous Ser­ra­tia and So­dalis species should be men­tioned here, and we re­cently fea­tured the Plau­tia staliPan­toea sp. symbio­sis. For some en­dosym­bionts with re­duced genomes and highly skewed AT-con­tent, it is vir­tu­ally im­pos­si­ble to track from which free‑living species of En­ter­obac­terales they evolved, think Buchne­ra, Stam­mera, Nar­donella, and Wiggles­worthia among some 30 other 'Can­di­da­tus' species. So, un­less an endo­sym­biont is found, by chance, with "fam­ily ties" to Bios­trati­cola tofi all that re­mains for this bac­terium to­day is: the cur­tain.

 

Other Posts