Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PDF Biology of Rhodococcus Hector M Alvarez Ebook Full Chapter
PDF Biology of Rhodococcus Hector M Alvarez Ebook Full Chapter
PDF Biology of Rhodococcus Hector M Alvarez Ebook Full Chapter
Alvarez
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/biology-of-rhodococcus-hector-m-alvarez/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
https://textbookfull.com/product/biology-12th-edition-peter-h-
raven/
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-glossary-of-literary-terms-m-
h-abrams/
https://textbookfull.com/product/immortal-
protectors-0-5-immortal-spartan-2nd-edition-h-m-mcqueen-mcqueen-
h-m/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-biology-of-mammalian-
spermatogonia-1st-edition-jon-m-oatley/
The Molecular Biology of Photorhabdus Bacteria 1st
Edition Richard H. Ffrench-Constant (Eds.)
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-molecular-biology-of-
photorhabdus-bacteria-1st-edition-richard-h-ffrench-constant-eds/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-zebrafish-cellular-and-
developmental-biology-part-a-cellular-biology-4th-edition-h-
william-detrich/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-zebrafish-cellular-and-
developmental-biology-part-b-developmental-biology-4th-edition-h-
william-detrich/
https://textbookfull.com/product/environmental-
nanotechnology-1st-edition-m-h-fulekar/
https://textbookfull.com/product/earth-frequency-first-edition-
melissa-alvarez/
Microbiology Monographs
Series Editor: Alexander Steinbüchel
Biology of
Rhodococcus
Second Edition
Microbiology Monographs
Volume 16
Series Editor
Alexander Steinbüchel
Münster, Germany
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/7171
Héctor M. Alvarez
Editor
Biology of Rhodococcus
Second Edition
Editor
Héctor M. Alvarez
INBIOP, Universidad Nacional de la
Patagonia San Juan Bosco (UNPSJB) and
CONICET
Comodoro Rivadavia, Chubut, Argentina
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Preface
v
vi Preface
I would like to express my thanks to all of the authors, who contributed with high-
quality reviews of each topic, to the series editor, Alexander Steinbüchel, and to the
staff at Springer Nature, especially Bibhuti Sharma, for supporting the second
edition of this book.
I hope that this volume will serve as a guidebook for researchers and students and
will open new avenues for future research.
vii
viii Contents
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
List of Contributors
ix
x List of Contributors
Contents
1 Historical Perspective and Recent Developments in the Traditional Classification
of Rhodococci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 Reclassification of R. equi as Prescottella equi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3 Is the Name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 “Legitimate”? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4 Insights from Phylogenomic Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5 Concluding Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Abstract The genus Rhodococcus has had a long and complicated taxonomic
history. With the advent of 16S rRNA gene sequence analyses and, subsequently,
whole genome-based phylogenomic studies, the heterogeneity within the genus has
become progressively more apparent and better resolved. We here review recent
advances in the systematics of the genus, which currently contains more than
50 described species. Important developments include the proposed reclassifications
of Rhodococcus equi and Rhodococcus kunmingensis into novel genera as
Prescottella equi and Aldersonia kunmingensis, respectively. Notably,
phylogenomic studies consistently resolve the genus Rhodococcus into multiple
species-groups of coherent composition which thus likely merit separate genus status
alongside Rhodococcus sensu stricto. In particular, a well-sampled group of plant-
associated species we here define as the “Rhodococcus fascians assemblage” likely
represents a novel genus.
The rhodococci are remarkable organisms: interest in their ecology and biological
activities (and the pathogenicity of some strains) has sustained thousands of scien-
tific studies, including what is now two editions of this monograph (Alvarez 2010,
2018). Consequently, it is all the more remarkable that we haven’t yet answered
definitively the question “are they all actually rhodococci”? This chapter will review
progress in clarifying the systematics of the genus Rhodococcus in the light of new
knowledge and will provide a convincing answer to that question.
The long and intricate taxonomic history of the genus Rhodococcus has been the
subject of several comprehensive reviews (Bousfield and Goodfellow 1976;
Goodfellow and Wayne 1982; Goodfellow et al. 1998; Gürtler and Seviour 2010)
and hence will only be considered briefly here. The genus was proposed by Zopf
(1891) for two species of red-coloured bacteria that had been classified in the genus
Micrococcus by Overbeck (1891). Early classifications based upon form and func-
tion are difficult to navigate as “rhodococci” were assigned to 11 genera, including
Bacillus, Micrococcus, Mycobacterium and Nocardia. The reintroduction of the
epithet “rhodochrous” for members of this extensive taxonomic diaspora by Gordon
and Mihm (1959) represented an important milestone in rhodococcal systematics as
the strains belonging to this taxon were considered to represent a definitive species,
albeit one that was tentatively classified in the genus Mycobacterium. However, it
soon became apparent from a succession of studies based on chemotaxonomic and
numerical phenetic methods that this taxon merited generic status (Bousfield and
Goodfellow 1976). Following an extensive numerical taxonomic study by
Goodfellow and Alderson (1977), the genus Rhodococcus was reintroduced for
“rhodochrous” strains with Rhodococcus rhodochrous (Zopf 1891) Tsukamura
1974 as the type species, along with nine additional species. Several of the latter
have since been assigned to the genus Gordonia (http://www.bacterio.net/
rhodococcus.html).
The taxonomic status of most of the 32 validly named Rhodococcus species
considered by Gürtler and Seviour (2010) and in the current edition of Bergey’s
Manual of Systematic Bacteriology (Jones and Goodfellow 2012) is underscored by
a combination of genotypic and phenotypic data, although it is clear from associated
16S rRNA gene sequence studies that the genus is heterogeneous. Indeed, Jones and
Goodfellow (2012) assigned the type strains of 30 rhodococcal species to three
lineages, the Rhodococcus equi, Rhodococcus erythropolis and R. rhodochrous
subclades. Similar intra-generic structure was also evident in other studies, although
the position of R. equi strains tended to be unstable (Rainey et al. 1995; Goodfellow
et al. 1998; McMinn et al. 2000; Gürtler et al. 2004; Gürtler and Seviour 2010). At
the time of publication of Gürtler and Seviour (2010), the genus contained 32 validly
Refined Systematics of the Genus Rhodococcus Based on Whole Genome Analyses 3
named species. Since then, an additional 22 Rhodococcus species with either validly
or effectively published names have been described (Table 1). In addition to the
description of these new species, it has also been demonstrated that the biotechno-
logically important strain Rhodococcus sp. RHA1 (Yam et al. 2011; Ceniceros et al.
2017) belongs to the species Rhodococcus jostii (Jones et al. 2013a), whereas
Rhodococcus jialingiae is a later synonym of Rhodococcus qingshengii (Táncsics
et al. 2014). Furthermore, recent genome sequence data have been used to emend the
descriptions of 23 rhodococcal species with more precise measures of genomic DNA
G + C content and estimated genome sizes (Nouioui et al. 2018).
It is evident from 16S rRNA gene sequence analyses (as exemplified in Fig. 1)
that the type strains of most of these species can be assigned to several multi-
membered clades that correspond to a sister clade that encompasses representative
Nocardia type strains. Genotypic data acquired from the analyses of nucleic acids
and associated phenotypic data from chemotaxonomic and other expressed features
(polyphasic taxonomy) has led to considerable improvements in the classification of
rhodococci and other mycolic acid containing Actinobacteria classified in the order
Corynebacteriales (Goodfellow and Jones 2012). Nevertheless, problems remain,
notably the difficulty of distinguishing between genera within this taxon and
between closely related species within individual genera (Goodfellow and Jones
2012; Baek et al. 2018). 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis in particular has played
an important role in improving the classification of the genus although it is equally
clear that this marker lacks sufficient resolution for distinguishing between closely
related taxa. Classifications based on whole genome sequences and associated
bioinformatic methods are proving to be effective ways of addressing such chal-
lenges, as they are based upon massively expanded amounts of sequence data,
thereby providing a step change not only in information but also in reliability
(Sangal et al. 2014b; Whitman 2014; Chun et al. 2018; Baek et al. 2018). However,
it is important that whole genome sequence-based classifications (phylogenomics;
see below) adhere to both minimal standards for sequencing quality (Chun et al.
2018) and sound taxonomic practices, such as the need to follow the nomenclatural
type concept and the requirement to deposit type strains in a minimum of two public
collections in different countries (Parker et al. 2019).
In addition to the application of whole genome sequence analysis to systematics,
future improvements to the classification and identification of rhodococci will likely
also derive from the refinement and implementation of matrix-assisted laser desorp-
tion ionisation-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry methods for rapidly
phenotyping bacteria (Hsueh et al. 2014; Schumann and Maier 2014; Pasciak et al.
2015; de Alegria Puig et al. 2017). The integration of phylogenomic and high-
throughput MALDI-TOF-based approaches has much potential for microbial sys-
tematics generally (Ramasamy et al. 2014) and in application to the rhodococci and
relatives specifically.
4 V. Sangal et al.
Table 1 (continued)
16S rRNA
Type accession
Name strain number Source Reference
Rhodococcus CMAA KY317932 Rhizosphere of Deschampsia Silva et al.
psychrotoleransa 1533T antarctica (2018)
Rhodococcus JC435T LT630357 Marine coral reef Ramaprasad
electrodiphilus et al. (2018)
Rhodococcus Z1T MH205096 Petroleum-contaminated soil Wang et al.
daqingensisa (2018)
a
Effectively published name at the time of writing
Based on 16S rRNA gene trees, it is now clear that R. equi represents a distinct
phylogenetic lineage, although as noted above its position is unstable with regard to
other members of the genus Rhodococcus. Indeed, Gürtler and Seviour (2010) noted
that “whether R. equi should continue to be placed in the genus Rhodococcus or
moved to a separate or alternative existing genus still awaits resolution”, while Jones
and Goodfellow (2012) raised the question as to “whether it should be recognized as
a genus in its own right”. This matter was addressed with the proposed
reclassification of R. equi as the type species of the genus Prescottia (Jones et al.
2013b), although the rules of nomenclate required that it was necessary subsequently
to propose the replacement of the illegitimate genus name Prescottia with
Prescottella (Jones et al. 2013c), with the type species Prescottella equi. The
justification for the reclassification was based upon extensive phylogenetic, molec-
ular fingerprinting and numerical taxonomic analyses (Jones et al. 2013b), which
have since been supported by phylogenomic data (Sangal et al. 2016; see below).
However, the question of the correct nomenclature has been complicated by the
formal reclassification of R. equi into the species Rhodococcus hoagii (Kämpfer
et al. 2014). This move has been challenged in a “Request for an Opinion” from the
Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes,
which requested the retention of the species epithet equi (Garrity 2014). Until such
an Opinion is issued, the correct name of the taxon remains R. hoagii, and the species
name P. equi cannot be validated. As reviewed in Goodfellow et al. (2015), a
pragmatic solution is to refer to the organism as “Rhodococcus equi (Rhodococcus
hoagii/Prescottella equi)” at first usage in scientific communications, while the
matter is under consideration by the Judicial Commission. We note that the com-
munity can use any of these names although currently R. hoagii is the “correct” one
(Tindall 2014a).
While 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis recovered 26 R. equi strains in a single
cluster, the molecular fingerprinting and numerical taxonomic analyses of Jones
et al. (2013b) suggested that the species could be resolved into two subclusters.
However, subsequent genomic analysis has indicated a high degree of relatedness
6 V. Sangal et al.
between strains of R. equi (Sangal et al. 2014a, 2016; Anastasi et al. 2016),
indicative of a clonal population, although six sub-clades were evident (Anastasi
et al. 2016). Similarly, a multilocus sequence typing scheme for R. equi based on
seven housekeeping loci (https://pubmlst.org/rhodococcus/) supported a clonal pop-
ulation structure and identified 37 sequence types within the species, 16 of which
could be grouped into 6 clonal complexes (Duquesne et al. 2017).
Apart from the above complications regarding the nomenclature of R. equi, Tindall
(2014b) has reported that the genus name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 is illegitimate
under the rules of nomenclatural priority in the International Code of Nomenclature
of Prokaryotes (Parker et al. 2019), as it post-dates the establishment of the algal
genus Rhodococcus Hansgirg 1884. However, the algal genus Rhodococcus
Hansgirg 1884 is currently regarded as synonymous with the earlier cyanobacterial
genus Chroococcus Nägeli 1849 (http://www.algaebase.org/search/genus/detail/?
genus_id¼42893). Thus, the legitimacy (or otherwise) of the bacterial name
Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 will ultimately depend on both confirming the assignment
of Rhodococcus Hansgirg 1884 to Chroococcus Nägeli 1849 and also on complex
revisions to both the International Code of Nomenclature of Algae, Fungi and Plants
(ICNafp) and International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes regarding which
rules should apply to cyanobacteria (Tindall 2014b; Oren and Ventura 2017). Such
revisions will undoubtedly be time-consuming, and so, in the meantime, it seems
prudent that researchers studying members of the current genus Rhodococcus
maintain the use of this name until these matters are resolved (e.g. by the Interna-
tional Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes and its sister committees governing
nomenclature). Ironically, the reclassification of various rhodococcal species-groups
into new genera (see below) will help to provide these new taxa with legitimate
names, so long as the rules of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes
are correctly followed.
Gürtler et al. (2004) posed the question “Can whole genome analysis refine the
taxonomy of the genus Rhodococcus?” It is now clear that this question can be
answered in the affirmative. Four phylogenomic studies have defined several robust
8 V. Sangal et al.
2
nsis
ii gate 1
1
n
01T
s
53
ta A
5 0
15
58
ccu HU 18
2
r ma
T
03
15
M4
RC
04
70
2
S
B
bifo
10
C
06
36
T
ra
sN
TC
10
is D
ella
e
IF
A
05
it
3
T
G5
id
is
06
H2 E1
ica
00
ns
10
BR
LM
in
16 T
GU
5f 625
R.
Tom
lie
C
N
c
J3
1
si
R
fa
R.
ica
ar
A2
as
3
a
f
B
GIC26
0 31
nii
rg
HA1
br
N
R7
o R. fascians
sp
scia
ns MG 6
a
s
ns GIC36
od
20 T
ige
T
r
di
R. fascia
C1
c
si 5T
k
r
us
. B
026
cia s L -51
P
rh
R.
a
ria
29
c
en
S
3T
532
R.
IF 205
ac
cy R. sp. PML F7
R.
s
BR 16
16
oc rdia tero
vi fas
R.
36
R. hodnii
fas ian 04 d2
-1
ia R. fascian
No unmin Sma
N ca
la C 14 cia
op
R. s s 05-3 5
8T
p. B 39
0
R. . fas cian
rd
s R
sis 43
824
R. sp. JG-3
R. fasccianss A21
R.
R. sp. JVH
eN
ns
774 -1
ti B 49 RC
R. sp. DK17
ca
R. jostii R
R. fascians D188
ien SM
No A7
6
00
ra ii N 4 M 44 s NB
ma
R. fascians LMG 3605
21
C
10
av D 13 RK
. w ost us B DS cen
R R.
to
R. fascians LMG 3623T
t isl us M2 sis 0
CASM 15477
R . j ac is as
83
a c
ia
N
R. . imopac
SK1 B-16
55 100 R. fascians
R op ens on
gii J
9
wr pa cus hen D6
R
0
R. ore arin
96
8 k m R. fascians LMG 3602
43
R. R. o opa tec us P
R. tr
LMG 3616
10 9
is R13 R. R. R. fascia
10
polis RRL 9T
hropol R. s ns A3b
AJR001
0
99
R. fasc
p. A ia
100
ns A78
R. eryt opolis XP
W25
0
R. erythr polis PR4 M09
rythro lis
ery thro
10
2b
R.
3a
R. erythropol
R. opacus is CCM2595
A2
R. sp. P27
R. sp.
1 00
R.
R. eqingshe
ns
R. erythropolis NBR
R. e rythrop nlis
sA
R. e rythropoolis
R. erythropo NIO-1
n
R. e nclensis JCM9622i
R. sp. ARP2
fa scia
ia
100
10 99
R. erythropolis BG43 0 R. fasc
97
R. erythropolis DN1
1 D C H E R. RR. fa
10
0
R . sc
86
99 00
R
100 100 . s sp ia
R. rhodochrous
99
p. . n s
R. . fa
ATCC 17895
97
R.
R.
1 00 11 29M 02- E2
qin
51
fa sci
R.
n
1 00 4M F T 8 1 5
99
ba
gs R.
sc an
k
10
ia s
he
0 yu
rh
FT su3
iko
yo
ng
R.
10 F nn su .1
s 0 A4
nu
0
to
ii T
1 00
81
10 an 3.
R. . glo
re
2- 4a
1
oc
90 0 1 00
UH
ne
b
62 en 6c
ns
hr
H-
ns
is
si
s
12
ou
is
R.
97
10 10
0 J
JC
0 NB
od erulu
R. cory
sN
M
s
kr ne
R. sp. AD45
RC
R sp. 4J2A2
CM
10 10
0
RR
0
18
R. oppe bacte
36
L
rio 10
23
ns
NB
0.2
80
R. sp.
G 10 30
1
B-
21
0 sp UN tedt ides D
. i 83
RC
13
SM T
1T
95 M C23 i DS
0
1 00
M
6
10 1 00 201
14
EB MF
0 Cr 44 5 1T
06 9
53
81
R. sp 94 4 ub
1.1 08T
1T
10
0
R. tr . RD6.2 Gord
10 iatom
0 R. ae B o
t u K S Go nia po
A R. R. sp kisam
ma . U
15-1
4 Wil Go rdonia lyisopre
B R. liam rdo
nia bron nivo
99
def an NC uensis ran
sh 363 sV
99
luv W sia s KT chiali H2
100
0 R. ii C an MF JCM illi s D
10 en Tsu am p. AR R9 SM
100 s
.
ho a11
T is 5.1 11308 s P
e
R. zopfii NBRC 100606T
ag
ii DS T 10 ia s 1
432
47
M 0 p.
DS 44
R. phenolicus DSM 44812T M
D3
R
i
67
0 5T
R .e
20
10
1
29
S
R . eq qui
i 1 13 CC
5T
03 0 3
100 Se egnil
100 00 0
R. pyridinivorans SB3094
R.
qu ui N AT 288
89
R . e u C7
S 1 37
82
R . eq qu i N1 295
R . e qu i N1 T
R. arhodoc R. gnil iparu
94
100
R. pyrid
07
77
rh ipa sr
inivoran
o
R. s DSM 44
555T R. a etherivhrous A od ru
97
R. sp. C
R. s etheriv orans TCC 21 ni s ru tundu
iN g s
sp hr-9
.
py
DS
rub
R. s p. BC orans IcdP1 198 RR osu
R.
p. BCP M
P5
er
rid
1 L s A
2 EsDP1 44
R. s p .
R. rube
8 B- 98
ini
16 TCC 5
P2
vo
53
5
R. R. sp. P1
R4
ra
5T BA
4
B2 10 A-
R. coprop
ns
0
R. ruber Cho
r BKS
97
R. rhodoch
Co
4
R. gordonia
l-4
R. sp. R1101
Co ryne
AK
B1 ry b
37
rous
R. ruber IEGM 231
ne acte
20-38
ba riu
m
hilus NB
R. ruber DSM 43338
ct dip
T
er
rous BKS6
DSM
iu ht h
m eria
-46
di eN
ph
4324
R. rhodoch e DSM 44689T
CT
RC 1006
th C
Refined Systematics of the Genus Rhodococcus Based on Whole Genome Analyses
1T
er 03
ia
e 52
03T
NC 9
TC
05
01
1
Fig. 2 Phylogenomic analysis of members of the genus Rhodococcus and representatives of related genera in the order Corynebacteriales. The genome
9
sequence data were obtained from the GenBank and re-annotated using RAST server (Aziz et al. 2008). The phylogenetic tree was constructed from the protein
sequences using PhyloPhlAn (Segata et al. 2013). PhyloPhlAn extracts a subset of amino acids from 400 universal proteins and constructs a maximum
likelihood tree from the concatenated amino acid sequence alignment. The scale bar shows a normalised fraction of the total branch lengths as described by
Segata et al. (2013)
Table 2 Data on rhodococcal and outgroup genomes analysed in this study
10
Taxon no. Organism Strain Accession no. Genome size (Mb) GC% Group
1 Corynebacterium diphtheriae NCTC 03529 AJGI00000000 2.48 53.6 –
2 Corynebacterium diphtheriae NCTC 05011 AJVH00000000 2.38 53.6 –
3 Gordonia sp. KTR9 NC_018581 5.44 67.8 –
4 Gordonia bronchialis DSM 43247 NC_013441 5.21 67.1 –
5 Gordonia polyisoprenivorans VH2 NC_016906 5.67 67.0 –
6 Nocardia asteroides NBRC 15531 BAFO02000000 6.96 69.9 –
7 Nocardia brasiliensis ATCC 700358 NC_018681 9.44 68.1 –
8 Nocardia cyriacigeorgica GUH2 NC_016887 6.19 68.4 –
9 Nocardia farcinica IFM 10152 NC_006361 6.02 70.8 –
10 Rhodococcus aetherivorans IcdP1 NZ_CP011341.1 5.92 70.6 B (B1)
11 Rhodococcus aetherivorans BCP1 AVAE00000000 6.23 70.4 B (B1)
12 Rhodococcus baikonurensis JCM 18801 BBBO00000000 6.82 62.4 D
13 Rhodococcus coprophilus NBRC 100603T BDAM00000000 4.55 66.9 B (B2)
14 Rhodococcus corynebacterioides DSM 20151T LPZL00000000 3.9 70.3 F
15 Rhodococcus defluvii Ca11T JPOC00000000 5.14 68.7 A
16 Rhodococcus enclensis NIO-1009T FMBB00000000 7.48 62.3 D
17 Rhodococcus equi 103S NC_014659 5.04 68.8 A
18 Rhodococcus equi N1288 LRQY00000000 5.17 68.8 A
19 Rhodococcus equi N1295 LRQZ00000000 5.31 68.7 A
20 Rhodococcus equi N1301 LRRA00000000 5.65 68.5 A
21 Rhodococcus equi ATCC 33707 NZ_CM001149 5.26 68.8 A
22 Rhodococcus equi C7T APJC00000000 5.2 68.8 A
23 Rhodococcus erythropolis SK121 ACNO00000000 6.79 62.5 D
24 Rhodococcus erythropolis CAS922i LDPN01000000 7.21 62.3 D
25 Rhodococcus erythropolis PR4 NC_012490 6.52 62.3 D
26 Rhodococcus erythropolis CCM2595 NC_022115 6.28 62.5 D
V. Sangal et al.
27 Rhodococcus erythropolis BG43 NZ_CP011295.1 6.33 62.4 D
28 Rhodococcus erythropolis NBRC 15567T BCRM00000000 6.59 62.4 D
29 Rhodococcus erythropolis JCM 6824 BBLL01000000 7.02 62.3 D
30 Rhodococcus erythropolis NRRL B-16532 JOIL01000000 6.94 62.4 D
31 Rhodococcus erythropolis XP AGCF00000000 7.23 62.3 D
32 Rhodococcus erythropolis DN1 AUZK00000000 6.55 62.4 D
33 Rhodococcus erythropolis R138 ASKF01000000 6.77 62.3 D
34 Rhodococcus fascians A22b JOKB01000000 5.91 64.3 E (E1)
35 Rhodococcus fascians A44a JMEX01000000 5.95 64.5 E (E1)
36 Rhodococcus fascians A73a JMEW01000000 5.93 64.4 E (E1)
37 Rhodococcus fascians 02-815 JMFF01000000 6.24 64.3 E (E1)
38 Rhodococcus fascians 02-816c JMFE01000000 6.08 64.5 E (E1)
39 Rhodococcus fascians A76 JMEV01000000 6.03 64.6 E (E2)
40 Rhodococcus fascians 05-339-1 JMFC01000000 5.73 64.7 E (E2)
41 Rhodococcus fascians 04-516 JMFD01000000 5.82 64.2 E (E2)
42 Rhodococcus fascians A21d2 JMFA01000000 5.98 64.1 E (E2)
43 Rhodococcus fascians A25f JMEZ01000000 5.87 64.1 E (E2)
44 Rhodococcus fascians LMG 3625 JMEM01000000 5.94 64.1 E (E2)
45 Rhodococcus fascians F7 LFDS01000000 5.25 64.7 E (E2)
46 Rhodococcus fascians A3b JMEY01000000 6.03 64.2 E (E2)
47 Rhodococcus fascians A78 JMEU01000000 6 64.3 E (E2)
48 Rhodococcus fascians GIC26 JMES01000000 5.34 64.5 E (E2)
49 Rhodococcus fascians GIC36 JMER01000000 5.56 64.5 E (E2)
50 Rhodococcus fascians D188 JMET01000000 5.44 64.6 E (E2)
Refined Systematics of the Genus Rhodococcus Based on Whole Genome Analyses
Taxon no. Organism Strain Accession no. Genome size (Mb) GC% Group
54 Rhodococcus fascians LMG 3623T JMEN01000000 5.78 64.4 E (E2)
55 Rhodococcus globerulus NBRC 14531T BCWX00000000 6.74 61.7 D
56 Rhodococcus gordoniae DSM 44689T LPZN00000000 4.82 67.9 B (B2)
57 Rhodococcus hoagii DSM 20295T LRRF00000000 4.97 68.8 A
58 Rhodococcus imtechensis RKJ300T AJJH00000000 8.23 67.2 C
59 Rhodococcus jostii RHA1 NC_008268 7.8 67.5 C
60 Rhodococcus jostii NBRC 16295T BCWY00000000 9.73 66.9 C
61 Rhodococcus koreensis DSM 44498T FNSV00000000 10.31 67.4 C
62 Rhodococcus kroppenstedtii DSM 44908T LPZO00000000 3.91 70.1 F
63 Rhodococcus kunmingensis DSM 45001T LRRB00000000 5.62 66.2 Aldersonia
64 Rhodococcus kyotonensis JCM 23211T FZOW00000000 6.31 64.2 E2
65 Rhodococcus maanshanensis DSM 44675T FOAW00000000 5.67 69.2 G
66 Rhodococcus marinonascens NBRC 14363T BCXB00000000 4.92 64.4 C
67 Rhodococcus opacus DSM 43205T LRRG00000000 8.53 67.3 C
68 Rhodococcus opacus B4 NC_012522 7.91 67.9 C
69 Rhodococcus opacus M213 AJYC00000000 9.2 67.0 C
70 Rhodococcus opacus R7 CP008947.1 8.47 67.2 C
71 Rhodococcus opacus PD630 AGVD00000000 9.16 67.0 C
72 Rhodococcus opacus NRRL B-24011 JOIM01000000 6.38 62.4 D
73 Rhodococcus phenolicus DSM 44812T LRRH00000000 6.28 68.4 B
74 Rhodococcus pyridinivorans SB3094 NC_023150 5.23 68.0 B (B2)
75 Rhodococcus pyridinivorans AK37 AHBW00000000 5.25 67.9 B (B2)
76 Rhodococcus pyridinivorans DSM 44555T LRRI00000000 5.18 67.9 B (B2)
77 Rhodococcus qingshengii BKS 20-40 AODN00000000 6.6 62.4 D
78 Rhodococcus qingshengii TUHH-12 JNCU01000000 7.43 61.7 D
V. Sangal et al.
79 Rhodococcus qingshengii JCM 15477T LRRJ00000000 7.26 62.4 D
80 Rhodococcus rhodnii LMG 5362 APMY00000000 4.39 69.7 H
81 Rhodococcus rhodnii NRRL B-16535T JOAA01000000 12.42 66.3 See main text
82 Rhodococcus rhodnii NBRC 100604 BCXD00000000 4.46 69.7 H
83 Rhodococcus rhodochrous ATCC 21198 AZHI00000000 6.48 70.2 B (B1)
84 Rhodococcus rhodochrous DSM 43241T LRRK00000000 5.18 68.2 B (B2)
85 Rhodococcus rhodochrous BKS6-46 AGVW00000000 6.22 67.4 B (B2)
86 Rhodococcus rhodochrous ATCC 17895 ASJJ00000000 6.87 62.3 D
87 Rhodococcus rhodochrous NRRL B-1306 JNWS01000000 6.78 61.7 D
88 Rhodococcus ruber DSM 43338T LRRL00000000 5.3 70.7 B (B1)
89 Rhodococcus ruber IEGM 231 CCSD01000000 5.99 70.2 B (B1)
90 Rhodococcus ruber P25 LDUF01000000 5.73 70.5 B (B1)
91 Rhodococcus ruber Chol-4 ANGC00000000 5.4 70.6 B (B1)
92 Rhodococcus ruber BKS 20-38 AOEX00000000 6.13 69.7 B (B1)
93 Rhodococcus sp. BCP1 AVAE00000000 6.21 70.4 B (B1)
94 Rhodococcus sp. EsD8 CAVJ000000000 6.63 70.1 B (B1)
95 Rhodococcus sp. P14 AJFC00000000 5.68 70.4 B (B1)
96 Rhodococcus sp. R1101 AJVB00000000 4.66 67.9 B (B2)
97 Rhodococcus sp. Chr-9 JTIZ01000000 5.35 67.7 B (B2)
98 Rhodococcus sp. R4 AFAQ00000000 8.86 69.5 B (B2)
99 Rhodococcus sp. P52 JPJJ01000000 5.29 67.9 B (B2)
100 Rhodococcus sp. JVH1 AKKP00000000 9.18 67.0 C
101 Rhodococcus sp. DK17 AJLQ00000000 9.11 67.1 C
102 Rhodococcus sp. 311R CFHW01000000 6.35 62.6 D
Refined Systematics of the Genus Rhodococcus Based on Whole Genome Analyses
Taxon no. Organism Strain Accession no. Genome size (Mb) GC% Group
106 Rhodococcus sp. AD45 JYOP01000000 6.79 61.7 D
107 Rhodococcus sp. 4J2A2 CEDU01000000 6.45 61.8 D
108 Rhodococcus sp. 114MFTsu3.1 ARTN00000000 5.55 64.7 E (E1)
109 Rhodococcus sp. 29MFTsu3.1 ARND00000000 5.58 64.6 E (E1)
110 Rhodococcus sp. BS-15 BAOX01000000 5.51 64.4 E (E2)
111 Rhodococcus sp. B7740 NZ_CP010797.1 5.34 64.9 E (E2)
112 Rhodococcus sp. PML 026 JZIS01000000 5.17 64.7 E (E2)
113 Rhodococcus sp. JG-3 AXVF00000000 5.27 64.6 E (E2)
114 Rhodococcus sp. AW25M09 CAPS00000000 5.64 64.1 E (E2)
115 Rhodococcus sp. UNC23MFCrub1.1 JMLQ01000000 4.7 68.5 F
116 Rhodococcus sp. MEB064 JXQS01000000 4.67 67.0 F
117 Rhodococcus sp. UNC363MFTsu5.1 JMLO01000000 5.67 69.3 G
118 Rhodococcus sp. RD6.2 CVQP01000000 5.57 68.4 G
119 Rhodococcus triatomae BKS 15-14 AODO00000000 5.83 69.0 G
120 Rhodococcus triatomae NBRC 103116T BCXF00000000 4.74 68.7 H
121 Rhodococcus tukisamuensis JCM 11308T FNAB00000000 5.49 69.8 G
122 Rhodococcus wratislaviensis IFP 2016 ANIU00000000 9.7 66.9 C
123 Rhodococcus wratislaviensis NBRC 100605T BAWF01000000 10.41 66.8 C
124 Rhodococcus yunnanensis NBRC 103083T BCXH00000000 6.37 63.9 E2
125 Rhodococcus zopfii NBRC 100606T BCXI00000000 6.3 68.2 B
126 Segniliparus rotundus DSM 44985 NC_014168 3.16 66.8 –
127 Segniliparus rugosus ATCC BAA-974 ACZI00000000 3.57 68.1 –
128 Smaragdicoccus niigatensis DSM 44881 AQXZ00000000 5.32 64.3 –
129 Tomitella biformata AHU 1821 BAVQ00000000 4.71 68.1 –
130 Williamsia sp. ARP1 JXYP00000000 4.75 68.6 –
131 Williamsia sp. D3 AYTE00000000 5.62 64.6 –
V. Sangal et al.
Type strains are labelled T. Genomes in bold were not included in the analysis presented in Sangal et al. (2016)
Refined Systematics of the Genus Rhodococcus Based on Whole Genome Analyses 15
Rhodococcus lineage, the type strains were resolved into eight lineages in exact
agreement with groups A–H in Table 3. However, similar to Fig. 2, R. kunmingensis
DSM 45001T was recovered as a singleton well separated from any of these species-
groups, showing a poorly supported relationship with Skermania piniformis. Con-
sequently, Nouioui et al. (2018) have proposed the reclassification of
R. kunmingensis DSM 45001T as the type species representing a novel genus,
Aldersonia kunmingensis gen. nov., comb. nov.
It is notable that all of the above phylogenomic analyses recover well-supported
species-groups of very similar composition (Table 3). R. equi strains, along with the
type strain of R. defluvii, are recovered in a well-separated group corresponding to
the proposed genus Prescottella (Jones et al. 2013b, c; Sangal et al. 2015, 2016).
Group B (Fig. 2) contains the type strain of R. rhodochrous, the type species of the
genus, and can therefore be defined as Rhodococcus sensu stricto. The formal
proposal of novel genera in addition to Aldersonia and Prescottella may require
further analyses (notably of genomes of as yet unsequenced rhodococcal type
strains). However, it is already evident that Group E (Fig. 2) containing soil and
plant-associated strains related to the R. fascians (Clades 1 and 2 sensu Creason et al.
2014) should be reclassified into at least one novel genus containing R. fascians,
Rhodococcus kyotonensis, Rhodococcus yunnanensis and multiple novel species
(Creason et al. 2014; Sangal et al. 2016). Indeed, multilocus sequence analysis
combined with ANI analyses of a larger collection of plant-associated strains that
map onto Group E indicated that Clades 1 and 2 may contain at least 13 novel
species in addition to R. fascians (Savory et al. 2017). For now, we refer to these
strains as the R. fascians assemblage. It is notable that Savory et al. (2017) also
concluded that this grouping contains R. kyotonensis and is well separated from
other rhodococci (R. yunnanensis was not included in their analysis). Their
multilocus sequence analysis of 199 Rhodococcus strains (based on translated
sequences for ftsY, infB, rpoB, rsmA, secY, tsaD and ychF) yielded a maximum
likelihood tree with major groupings strikingly concordant with Groups A–H in
Table 3 and also highlighted the distant relationship of R. kunmingensis DSM
45001T to the rhodococci.
It is evident from the above, and Table 3, that several independent research groups
using differing phylogenomic methodologies have all delineated at least eight groups
of species currently classified in the genus Rhodococcus, aside from the
reclassification of R. kunmingensis into the genus Aldersonia (Nouioui et al. 2018).
As expanding our analysis from 100 to 116 strains, mostly with genome data for type
strains, has not added to the number of clusters identified within the genus, it is likely
that as further strains are sequenced and analysed they will fit mainly into the eight
species-groups defined in Table 3. Indeed, the consistent association in 16S rRNA
gene sequence trees (e.g. Fig. 1) of some species that have yet to have representative
genomes sequenced with taxa already assigned to species-groups A–H strongly
predicts that these species will eventually be assigned to the corresponding groups
(Table 3). For example, 16S rRNA gene analyses (e.g. Guo et al. 2015; Li et al. 2015;
Chaudhary and Kim 2018; Fig. 1) consistently indicate that Rhodococcus
agglutinans and Rhodococcus soli are probably members of the genus Prescottella.
Refined Systematics of the Genus Rhodococcus Based on Whole Genome Analyses 17
Similarly, 16S rRNA gene analyses (e.g. Silva et al. 2018; Táncsics et al. 2017)
consistently associate Rhodococcus cerastii, Rhodococcus cercidiphylli and
Rhodococcus sovatensis with R. fascians, R. kyotonensis and R. yunnanensis, as in
Fig. 1.
5 Concluding Comments
Clearly, remarkable progress has been made recently in resolving the complex
systematics of the genus Rhodococcus, in particular through the application of
phylogenomic approaches. The heterogeneity within the genus is confirmed and
the separation of two pathogenic species into the genus Prescottella (associated with
animal hosts) and the R. fascians assemblage (plant-associated) is especially notable.
A wealth of genomic data are now available for rhodococcal strains, including more
than 50% of the currently recognised type strains. Completion of genome sequenc-
ing data for the remaining rhodococcal type strains will no doubt bring further
insights into the groupings described herein (Table 3), along with important insights
into their biology and defining characteristics. The division of Rhodococcus into
multiple genera may be considered controversial as one persons’ phylogenomically
defined genus is another’s intra-genus “species-group”. Nevertheless, the taxonomic
status of Rhodococcus seems to be currently poised like a game of Jenga: once
blocks such as Aldersonia, Prescottella and the R. fascians assemblage have been
moved, the tower will tumble into multiple genera, as was the case with the aerobic
endospore-forming bacilli and, more recently, Mycobacterium (Gupta et al. 2018).
Thus, it seems likely that a future edition of this monograph will need to be called
“Biology of Rhodococcus, Prescottella and closely related genera”.
References
Nach dem Frühstück stieg ich den schlüpfrigen Berg hinab in das
Dorf und stattete der Sitt Ferīdeh und ihrem Manne einen Besuch
ab. Ich fand ein zweites christliches Paar dort; der Mann war der
Sāhib es Sanduk, wohl eine Art Schatzmeister. Die beiden Männer
sprachen über die Lage der syrischen Armen. Nach der Meinung
des Feldmessers brauchte keiner Hungers zu sterben, wie das von
ihm aufgestellte Budget des Durchschnittsbauern bestätigte. Selbst
der ärmste Fellahīn kann im Jahre 1000–1500 Piaster verdienen
(140–220 Mark), hat aber außer der Kopfsteuer und der
Entschädigungssumme für seinen militärischen Ersatzmann keinen
Pfennig Geld auszugeben. Fleisch ist ein unbekannter Luxus; ein
Faß Semen (ranzige Butter) kostet höchstens 8–10 Mark und genügt
auf Monate hinaus, um den Burghul und andre Mehlgerichte
schmackhaft zu machen. Werden die Körnerfrüchte und der Semen
knapp beim Bauer, so braucht er nur in das Gebirge oder in das
flache Land hinabzugehen, das noch herrenloses Gebiet ist, und
sich eßbare Kräuter zu sammeln oder nach Wurzeln zu graben. Sein
Haus baut er sich eigenhändig, den Platz, auf dem es steht, hat er
umsonst, Geräte und Möbel braucht er nicht hinein. Und Kleidung?
Da ist ihm wenig genug vonnöten: einige Leinenhemden, alle 2–3
Jahre ein wollenes Gewand und ein Baumwollentuch um den Kopf.
Selten nur bleiben die Alten und Kranken ohne Pflege; haben sie
noch eine Familie, so sorgt diese für sie, sind sie aber ganz ohne
Angehörige, so können sie ihr Leben leicht durch Betteln fristen,
denn kein Orientale weist die Bitte um eine kleine Gabe zurück,
wenn der Arme auch nur selten Geld geben kann. Wenige Fellahīn
besitzen eigenes Land, sondern sie arbeiten um Tagelohn auf den
Gütern der Reicheren. Die Hauptgrundbesitzer um Kal'at el Husn
gehören der aus Tripoli stammenden Familie der Danādischeh an.
Noch bis vor kurzem war die Burg nicht Eigentum der Regierung,
sondern gehörte dem Geschlecht der Zabieh, in deren Besitz sie
zwei Jahrhunderte gewesen, und deren Nachkommen noch jetzt
eine Wohnung am äußeren Wall innehaben. Hier fiel der
Schatzmeister mit der Bemerkung ein, daß selbst der
mohammedanischen Bevölkerung die ottomanische Herrschaft
verhaßt wäre, und daß sie sich viel lieber von einem Fremden
regieren lassen würden — möge er immerhin ein Ungläubiger sein
— am liebsten von den Engländern, denn Ägyptens Wohlfahrt hätte
einen tiefen Eindruck auf die Syrer gemacht.
An diesem Abend ließ mich der Kāimakām fragen, ob ich allein
zu speisen wünschte, oder ob ich ihm und seiner Frau die Ehre
geben wollte. Ich bat um den letzteren Vorzug. Trotz seines wahrhaft
rührenden Bemühens, mir ein guter Wirt zu sein, war er doch still
und traurig zu Beginn des Diners, bis wir endlich ein Thema
anschnitten, das ihn seinem Kummer einigermaßen entzog. Die
großen Toten kamen uns zu Hilfe und trugen Worte auf ihren Lippen,
die schon Menschengeschlecht um Menschengeschlecht Balsam ins
sinkende Herz geträufelt haben. Der Kāimakām war wohlvertraut mit
der arabischen Literatur; er kannte die Meister der Wüstendichtung
auswendig und trug Lied um Lied vor, sobald er erfahren, daß ich sie
zwar hochschätzte, aber nur wenig von ihnen kannte. Sein eigner
Geschmack freilich neigte sich mehr modernerer Dichtung zu; einer
seiner Lieblingsdichter schien der dem zehnten Jahrhundert
angehörende Mutanabbi zu sein. Noch glüht etwas vom Feuer der
Alten in Mutanabbis Zeilen, und hell lohte es wieder auf, als der
Kāimakām die berühmte Ode zitierte, in der der Dichter Abschied
von den Freuden der Jugend nimmt: