whole genome sequencing indicates corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Wcg
SKa
b
a
ARRA
KGSPCCC
I
temelmm
Pf
h1
International Journal of Medical Microbiology 304 (2014) 1001–1010
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Medical Microbiology
j ourna l h o mepage: www.elsev ier .com/ locate / i jmm
hole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeiumomprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominantenomospecies among clinical isolates
tephen J. Salipantea,∗, Dhruba J. Senguptaa, Lisa A. Cummingsa, Aaron Robinsona,yoko Kurosawaa, Daniel R. Hoogestraata, Brad T. Cooksona,b
Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USADepartment of Microbiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
r t i c l e i n f o
rticle history:eceived 27 March 2014eceived in revised form 11 July 2014ccepted 20 July 2014
eywords:enomicspeciationhylogenylinical testinglassificationorynebacterium jeikeium
a b s t r a c t
Corynebacterium jeikeium is an opportunistic pathogen which has been noted for significant genomicdiversity. The population structure within this species remains poorly understood. Here, we explorethe relationships among 15 clinical isolates of C. jeikeium (reference strains K411 and ATCC 43734, and13 primary isolates collected over a period of 7 years) through genetic, genomic, and phenotypic stud-ies. We report a high degree of divergence among strains based on 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) geneand rpoB gene sequence analysis, supporting the presence of genetically distinct subgroups. Wholegenome sequencing indicates genomic-level dissimilarity among subgroups, which qualify as four sep-arate and distinct Corynebacterium species based on an average nucleotide identity (ANIb) thresholdof <95%. Functional distinctions in antibiotic susceptibilities and metabolic profiles characterize two ofthese genomospecies, allowing their differentiation from others through routine laboratory testing. Theremaining genomospecies can be classified through a biphasic approach integrating phenotypic testingand rpoB gene sequencing. The genomospecies predominantly recovered from patient specimens doesnot include either of the existing C. jeikeium reference strains, implying that studies of this pathogen
would benefit from examination of representatives from the primary disease-causing group. The clin-ically dominant genomospecies also has the smallest genome size and gene repertoire, suggesting thepossibility of increased virulence relative to the other genomospecies. The ability to classify isolates to oneof the four C. jeikeium genomospecies in a clinical context provides diagnostic information for tailoringantimicrobial therapy and may aid in identification of species-specific disease associations.ntroduction
Corynebacterium jeikeium is a clinically important opportunis-ic pathogen capable of causing a wide range of disorders includingndocarditis, septicemia, joint infection, pneumonia, osteomyelitis,eningitis, and soft tissue infection (Cazanave et al., 2012; Funke
t al., 1997; Ifantidou et al., 2010; Tleyjeh et al., 2005), particu-arly in immunocompromised patients or those with indwelling
edical devices. It is recognized as the most frequently recoverededically significant Corynebacterium species among patients in
∗ Corresponding author at: University of Washington Medical Center, 1959 NEacific, NW120, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. Tel.: +1 206 598 6131;ax: +1 206 598 6189.
E-mail address: [email protected] (S.J. Salipante).
ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmm.2014.07.003438-4221/© 2014 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.
© 2014 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.
intensive care facilities, with the capacity for nosocomial dissemi-nation (Funke et al., 1997; Tauch et al., 2005).
Previous work (Riegel et al., 1994) has sought to investigate therange of genomic, physiological, and phenotypic differences dis-played by this organism. Although DNA–DNA hybridization (DDH)studies revealed considerable genomic diversity among C. jeikeiumisolates, biochemical testing was unable to further delineate groupsamong C. jeikeium strains (Riegel et al., 1994). All isolates in thatstudy were consequently assigned to a single species under one offour “genomic groups.” Nevertheless, it was noted that some groupsdisplayed differences in their antibiotic susceptibilities (Riegelet al., 1994), hinting at dissimilarities in underlying physiology.To the best of our knowledge, the genomic diversity and popula-
tion structure of C. jeikeium has not been revisited in the 20 yearssubsequent to that publication.Recently, whole genome sequencing technologies have madeit possible to more comprehensively explore the genomic content
![Page 2: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
1 of Medical Microbiology 304 (2014) 1001–1010
aaoqattKtatpctr(
M
I
oaujwdetaf
1
wuvpee
W
3(aBB0paAGcTpaCApCo(
cal i
sola
tes
and
asse
mbl
y
stat
isti
cs.
e
Sou
rce
Yea
r
isol
ated
Bas
esas
sem
bled
N50
stat
isti
c(b
p)
Nu
mbe
r
ofco
nti
gsEs
tim
ated
%
GC
Esti
mat
ed
fold
cove
rage
Gen
ban
kac
cess
ion
for
dra
ft
gen
ome
Gen
ban
k
acce
ssio
nfo
r
par
tial
16S
rRN
A
sequ
ence
Gen
ban
k
acce
ssio
nfo
r
par
tial
rpoB
sequ
ence
Blo
od(c
ath
eter
)20
06
2,42
1,04
2
72,2
98
139
61.4
5 15
4
JFC
M00
0000
00
KJ5
2626
8
KJ5
2629
0
Un
know
n
2009
2,33
6,58
2
119,
061
71
61.8
9
98
JFC
F000
0000
0
KJ5
2626
9
KJ5
2628
2U
nkn
own
2009
2,33
5,86
9
142,
412
68
61.7
1
113
JFC
G00
0000
00
KJ5
2627
0
KJ5
2628
8Sp
ine
2010
2,36
1,51
5
133,
002
72
61.8
105
JFC
I000
0000
0
KJ5
2627
1
KJ5
2628
1H
um
eral
mem
bran
e20
10
2,28
1,62
3
93,3
69
165
61.9
31
JFC
J000
0000
0
KJ5
2627
2
KJ5
2628
3
Blo
od(c
ath
eter
)20
11
2,51
3,21
7
101,
031
142
61.3
3
125
JFC
O00
0000
00
KJ5
2628
0
KJ5
2629
1
Un
know
n
2011
2,43
1,35
7
55,4
84
401
61.8
5
55
JFC
K00
0000
00
KJ5
2627
8
KJ5
2628
4V
erte
bral
dis
ksp
ace
2011
2,25
8,81
9
134,
848
58
62.9
5
64
JFC
R00
0000
00
KJ5
2627
4
KJ5
2628
9
Dec
ubi
tus
ulc
er
2011
2,38
6,73
3
80,5
71
121
61.6
3
116
JFC
N00
0000
00
KJ5
2627
3
KJ5
2629
3K
nee
burs
a
2012
2,30
4,26
5
257,
322
41
61.9
3
124
JFC
Q00
0000
00
KJ5
2627
5
KJ5
2628
5U
nkn
own
2012
2,31
0,14
3
170,
201
59
62.0
3
121
JFC
P000
0000
0
KJ5
2627
9
KJ5
2628
6Pl
eura
l flu
id20
12
2,39
3,24
9
175,
261
94
61.5
8
84
JFC
L000
0000
0
KJ5
2627
6
KJ5
2628
7Pl
eura
l flu
id
2012
2,43
0,05
6
100,
676
97
62.3
3
131
JFC
H00
0000
00
KJ5
2627
7
KJ5
2629
2A
TCC
Blo
od(e
nd
ocar
dit
is)
1987
2,42
6,46
1*
26,0
91
93
61.6
*
N/A
#A
CY
W01
0000
00
CJU
8782
3
AC
YW
0100
0000
*
K41
1
Axi
lla
1984
2,46
2,49
9*N
/A
N/A
61.4
0*
N/A
CR
9319
97
CR
9319
97*
CR
9319
97*
g
gen
ome
asse
mbl
y.bl
e.
002 S.J. Salipante et al. / International Journal
nd population structure of bacteria (Chan et al., 2012; Georgiadesnd Raoult, 2010), allowing for the robust classification of prokary-tes into meaningful taxonomic groups based on discrete anduantitative metrics (Richter and Roselló-Móra, 2009). Suchpproaches would be beneficial in the exploration of the evolu-ionary relationships among C. jeikeium strains, however, at thisime only the complete genome of C. jeikeium reference strain411(Tauch et al., 2005) and an incomplete genome of ATCC
ype strain 43734 (Jackman et al., 1987; Peterson et al., 2009)re available for such analyses. To better understand the popula-ion structure and diversity of C. jeikeium strains, here we haveerformed whole genome sequencing of 13 C. jeikeium primarylinical isolates. We use genomic and phenotypic data to explorehe relationships among available strains and to revisit the cur-ent classification of C. jekeium in light of genomic-era techniquesRichter and Roselló-Móra, 2009).
aterials and methods
solates
C. jeikeium strains were isolated from patients in our hospital orther hospitals in the US Pacific Northwest (Table 1), representingll C. jeikeium isolates sent to our laboratory for diagnostic molec-lar identification from the years 2006 to 2012. Reference strain C.
eikeium K411 (Kerry-Williams and Noble, 1984; Tauch et al., 2005)as obtained from the National Collection of Type Cultures (Lon-on, United Kingdom). C. jeikeium ATCC type strain 43734 (Jackmant al., 1987) was obtained from the American Type Culture Collec-ion (Manassas, Virginia, United States). All strains were culturederobically at 37 ◦C on sheep blood agar plates. DNA was extractedrom isolates using Ultraclean Microbial DNA Isolation kit (MoBio).
6S rRNA and rpoB gene sequencing
Taxonomically informative 16S rRNA and rpoB gene fragmentsere PCR amplified from bacterial genomic DNA and sequencedsing the Sanger method to establish gene sequences for 16S rRNAariable regions V1–V3 (first ∼500 bp) and a fragment of RNAolymerase subunit gene, rpoB as described elsewhere (Khamist al., 2005; Pottumarthy et al., 2003), or analogous sequences werextracted from published sequence data (Table 1).
hole genome sequencing
A total of 100 ng of each genomic DNA was digested for 2 h at7 ◦C in a 10 �L volume using 0.3 �L NEBNext dsDNA FragmentaseNew England Biolabs). DNA was simultaneously end-repairednd A-tailed in a 40 �L reaction containing 1× Rapid Ligationuffer (Enzymatics Inc.), 0.1675 mM each dNTP (New Englandiolabs), 0.1 �L E. coli DNA polymerase I (New England Biolabs),.5 �L T4 PNK (New England Biolabs), and 0.02 �L Taq DNAolymerase (New England Biolabs), incubated at 37 ◦C for 30 minnd 72 ◦C for 20 min. Annealed Y-adaptors (5′-ACACTCTTTCCCT-CACGACGCTCTTCCGATCT-3′ and 5′-P GATCGGAAGAGCGGTTCA-CAGGAATGCCGAG-3′, P = phosphorylation) were added at aoncentration of 0.2 �M and ligated at 25 ◦C for 20 min using4 DNA ligase in Rapid Ligation Buffer (Enzymatics Inc.). Afterurification with AmPure beads (Agencourt), the library was PCRmplified with KAPA HiFi HotStart ReadyMix using primer PRE-AP FWD AMP COMMON (5′-AATGATACGGCGACCACCGAGATCT-CACTCTTTCCCTACACGACGC-3′) and sample-specific barcoded
rimers (5′-CAAGCAGAAGACGGCATACGAGATXXXXXXXXCGGTCT-GGCATTCCTGCTGAACCG-3′), where Xs indicate the positionf an 8 bp sample-specific index. Cycling conditions were95 ◦C for 3 min, 10 cycles of 98 ◦C for 20 seconds, 65 ◦C for Table
1Pr
imar
y
clin
i
Isol
ate
nam
Cj4
7447
Cj1
4566
Cj1
6348
Cj1
9409
Cj2
1382
Cj4
7445
Cj3
0184
Cj3
0952
Cj4
7446
Cj3
7130
Cj3
8002
Cj4
7453
Cj4
7444
C.
jeik
eium
4373
4C.
jeik
eium
*Fro
m
exis
tin
#N
ot
app
lica
![Page 3: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
of Medical Microbiology 304 (2014) 1001–1010 1003
17b2Ao
D
(aasfiuwpI((Survtrmgvua(av
Ms
tBcPo
S
dthhS
R
P
tricfi
A.
B.
C.
0.002
0.005
Cj30952
Cj4744
44
3
Cj47447
Cj47445
C. jeikeium K411
C. jeikeium ATCC 43734
2
Cj47446C
j47453
Cj3
7130Cj30184
Cj3
8002
Cj14566
Cj16348
Cj2
1382
Cj19409
1
0.1
Cj4744
7
C. jeikeium K411
Cj47445
Cj30952
Cj47444Cj47
446
Cj37130
Cj30184
Cj38002
Cj1
4566
Cj16348
Cj2
1382
Cj19409
Cj47453
C. jeike
ium ATCC 43734
Cj47447
Cj47445
Cj47444
Cj47446
Cj30184
Cj37130Cj38002
Cj1
4566
Cj1
6348
Cj21
382
Cj19409C
j30952
C. jeikeium K411
C. jeikeium ATCC 43734
Cj4745
3
Fig. 1. Genetic and genomic phylogenies of primary C. jeikeium isolates and ref-erence strains K411 and ATCC 43734. (A) Phylogeny constructed from partial 16SrRNA gene sequence (regions V1–V2). (B) Phylogeny constructed from partial rpoBgene sequence. (C) Phylogeny constructed from whole genome variation. Brackets
S.J. Salipante et al. / International Journal
5 seconds, and 72 ◦C for 1 min, followed by one cycle of2 ◦C for 5 min). PCR product was purified with AmPureeads, pooled, and sequenced on a MiSeq (Illumina) using50 bp paired-end reads with a custom index primer (5′-GATCGGAAGAGCGGTTCAGCAGGAATGCCGAGACCG-3′). Allligonucleotides were synthesized by IDT.
ata analysis
Adaptors were trimmed using the program Fastq-Mcfhttp://code.google.com/p/ea-utils/) with skew filtering dis-bled and other parameters at their default. Draft genomes weressembled using AbySS v1.3.5 (Simpson et al., 2009). The N50tatistic (the length of which half of all contigs are equal to or larger)or assemblies was calculated using AbySS. Average nucleotidedentity, by BLAST, (ANIb) values were calculated for draft genomessing jSpecies v1.2.1 (Richter and Roselló-Móra, 2009). Variantsere called by aligning short read data from sequenced strains andublished sequence read data from C. jeikeium ATCC 43734 (SRA
D numbers SRX037287 and SRX 002393) against C. jekeium K411GenBank accession no CR931997.1) using BWA version 0.6.1-r104Li and Durbin, 2009) and SAMtools version 0.1.18 (Li et al., 2009).ingle nucleotide variant and indel calling were next performedsing VarScan version 2.3.6 (Koboldt et al., 2012) with a minimumead depth (defined as the number of sequence reads covering aariant site) of 5 and a minimum variant frequency (defined ashe fraction of reads contain a given variant) of 0.75. Estimatedead depth per strain was estimated by the Lander–Watermanethod (Lander and Waterman, 1988). Neighbor-joining phylo-
enetic trees for single gene targets and whole genome sequenceariants were generated by SplitsTree4 (Huson and Bryant, 2006),sing 1000 bootstrap replicates to estimate reliability. Compar-tive genomic analyses were visualized using BRIG version 0.95Alikhan et al., 2011) with default parameters. Gene prediction andnnotation for assemblies was performed using the RAST serverersion 4.0 (Aziz et al., 2008) with default parameters.
ass spectrometry, biochemical characterization, and antibioticusceptibility profiling
Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight spec-rometric classification of strains was performed using the MALDIiotyper system and Biotypes software (Bruker Daltonics). Bio-hemical testing of isolates was performed using the RapIDTM CBlus system (Remel). Antibiotic susceptibility testing was carriedut using the Etest® method (Biomerieux).
equence data availability
Sanger sequence from 16S rRNA and rpoB gene fragments, andraft genome assemblies for all isolates are publically availablehrough GenBank (Table 1). Sequence data generated for this studyave been submitted to the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA;ttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sra) under study accession numberRP045192.
esults
hylogenetic analysis of 16S rRNA and rpoB gene sequences
We examined all C. jeikeium isolates identified by our labora-ory over a period of 7 years, which should therefore comprise a
elatively unbiased and representative sampling of the taxon ast is encountered clinically. Prior to initiation of these studies, thelassification of all isolates as C. jeikeium was confirmed to high con-dence (score ≥ 2.0) by mass spectrometry. We initially examinedindicate distinct genomospecies as defined in Table 2. Scale bars for each phylogenyare indicated below the corresponding letter code, and are expressed in “changesper site”. Nodes overlaid with a black dot indicate a bootstrap value of <75%.
the strain collection through targeted sequencing of taxonomi-cally informative genes, comparing our results to those of the fullysequenced reference strain K411 (Tauch et al., 2005) and partiallysequenced reference ATCC type strain 43734 (Jackman et al., 1987).The 16S rRNA gene is a useful target for classifying bacterial species(Clarridge, 2004), and phylogenetic analysis of partial 16S rRNAgene sequence data from our isolates suggested the presence of
genetically distinct C. jeikeium subdivisions (Fig. 1A), with one cladeencompassing most of the clinical isolates. Nevertheless, 16S rRNAgene sequence data can sometimes prove misleading or unreliablein inferring bacterial population structure (Georgiades and Raoult,![Page 4: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
1 of Medical Microbiology 304 (2014) 1001–1010
2gagaPs(ta
W
asSnCmiA
pi(wba(wcsovaaCdts
tnMgeis2iclreatt
C
tGia
b
valu
es
base
d
on
wh
ole
gen
ome
dat
a.
Gen
omos
pec
ies
1
2
3
4
Isol
ate
Cj3
7130
Cj3
0184
Cj2
1382
Cj1
4566
Cj1
6348
Cj3
8002
Cj4
7453
Cj1
9409
Cj4
7446
C.
jeik
eium
K41
1
C.
jeik
eium
ATC
C43
734
Cj4
7447
Cj4
7445
Cj3
0952
Cj4
7444
ecie
s
1
Cj3
7130
100*
97.7
8
97.6
9
97.5
5
97.4
3
97.7
6
97.1
4
97.6
4
97.1
4
85.8
7
85.6
3
85.8
7
86.0
1
86.0
4
86.0
2C
j301
84
97.3
4
100
97.5
97.1
5
97.4
7
98.3
9
96.8
3 97
.34
97.0
3
85.7
7
85.5
2
85.7
8
85.9
4
86.1
9
86.1
8C
j213
82
97.6
97.7
1
100
97.4
3
97.5
4
97.5
1
96.9
6 97
.59
97.2
6
85.7
5
85.8
6
85.7
7
85.8
4
86
85.9
2C
j145
66
97.5
3
97.5
6
97.5
3
100
97.5
5
97.5
97.2
1
97.6
2
97.2
6
85.8
6
85.5
8
85.9
86.0
1
86.1
4
86.0
5C
j163
48
97.3
6
97.6
5
97.4
9
97.4
6
100
97.4
4
97.0
3
97.5
5
97.2
4
85.8
3
85.7
7
86.1
4
86.1
85.9
9
86.0
9C
j380
02
97.6
5
98.6
9
97.4
9
97.4
2
97.4
5
100
97.0
6
97.5
3
97.1
85.9
6
85.7
4
85.8
3
86.1
7
86.2
9
86.2
2C
j474
53
96.9
6
96.9
5
96.9
8
96.9
4
96.9
6
96.8
4 10
0
97.1
4
96.5
9
86.1
1
85.8
5
86.1
2
86.2
6
86.2
5
86.0
8C
j194
09
97.5
1
97.6
2
97.6
3
97.4
8
97.5
5
97.4
8
97.1
3
100
97.2
4
85.6
9
85.5
5
85.8
5
85.9
1
86.0
1
85.8
3C
j474
46
97.1
3
97.0
1
97.0
6
97.2
1
97.0
7
97.0
7
96.5
2
97.0
6
100
86.3
1
86.0
7
86.5
86.6
86.2
4
86.4
52
C.
jeik
eium
K41
185
.62
85.6
7
85.6
4
85.6
85.7
6 85
.71
85.8
4
85.5
9
86.4
100
96.3
5
96.0
8
96.2
3
91.6
4
91.9
7
C.
jeik
eium
ATC
C43
734
85.2
8
85.4
2
85.6
6
85.2
8
85.5
6
85.4
8
85.4
8
85.3
7
85.7
3
96.4
7
100
96.4
5
96.7
1
91.5
5
91.4
3
Cj4
7447
85.8
2
85.9
1
85.9
9
85.8
86.0
8
85.7
5
86.1
9
85.9
86.6
6
96.1
4
96.5
1
100
98.0
3
91.8
7
92.2
5C
j474
45
85.8
3
85.8
6
85.8
7
85.8
8
85.9
4
86.0
6
86.0
9
85.8
6
86.7
5
96.2
8
96.6
1
97.9
2
100
91.8
4
92.5
33
Cj3
0952
86.0
2
86.1
3
86.1
1
86.0
5
86.2
2
86.2
7
86.1
8
86.1
1
86.2
6
91.7
6
91.5
5
91.7
5
91.8
2
100
93.9
64
Cj4
7444
86.0
4
86.1
2
86.1
6 86
.09
86.3
1
86.1
7
86.1
7
86
86.4
9
92.1
5
91.5
3
92.3
9
92.5
7
93.9
9
100
cate
s
AN
Ib
valu
es
grea
ter
than
95%
004 S.J. Salipante et al. / International Journal
010), especially among Corynebacterium species, where 16S rRNAene diversity tends to be relatively low (Khamis et al., 2005). As anlternative approach, we therefore sequenced rpoB, a housekeepingene that has proven informative for the molecular identificationnd classification of Corynebacterium isolates (Khamis et al., 2005).hylogenetic analysis of rpoB also revealed substantial populationtructure suggesting the presence of genetically distinct groupsFig. 1B) although placement of strains to particular clades withinhe larger trees was not fully consistent when comparing 16S rRNAnd rpoB gene targets.
hole genome sequencing and identification of genomospecies
To more thoroughly explore the genomic differences displayedmong the collected strains, we next performed whole genomeequencing and de novo genome assembly of each clinical isolate.equencing was performed to an average read depth of 100 × (ando less than an average of 30 × per sample) with respect to the. jeikeium reference genome. For all isolates considered, the esti-ated GC content and number of nucleotides assembled for clinical
solates were similar to reported values for C. jeikeium K411 andTCC 43734 (Table 1).
A phylogeny based on variants (single nucleotide polymor-hisms and indels) identified across the whole genomes of strains
ndependently supported division of isolates among distinct taxaFig. 1C). Both broad partitions, as well as finer-scale relationshipsithin the partitions, were all supported by high confidence (>75%)
ootstrap values. In the genomic phylogeny, reference strains K411nd ATCC 43734 formed a clade along with two primary isolatesCj47447 and Cj47445). Two other strains (Cj30952 and Cj47444)ere related to this group, but together constituted a separate
lade. The remaining nine isolates, representing the majority oftrains examined, formed a distinct group more distantly related tother clades. The structure of the tree deduced from whole genomeariation closely resembled that of the rpoB-based tree (Fig. 1B),dding corroborating support for these partitions. Further, compar-tive genomic analysis of sequenced isolates against the completed. jeikeium K411 reference genome (Fig. 2A) demonstrated variableegrees of divergence, and variable regions of divergence, amonghe clinical strains which seemingly partitioned isolates among theame groups identified by the genomic phylogeny (Fig. 2B).
In order to formally circumscribe potential subdivisions amonghe isolates based on whole genome data, we performed an averageucleotide identity by BLAST (ANIb) analysis (Richter and Roselló-óra, 2009) (Table 2). Pairwise ANIb values of less than 95% are
enerally accepted as the cutoff for defining separate species (Gorist al., 2007; Richter and Roselló-Móra, 2009), and by that criterionsolates in this study were sharply delineated into four separatepecies, which we have designated C. jeikeium genomospecies 1,, 3, and 4. The species most genomically divergent from exist-
ng reference strains (genomospecies 1) is predominant among thelinical isolates we have encountered, representing 9 of the 15 iso-ates included in this study. The other 3 genomospecies have fewerepresentatives: the group containing both existing C. jeikeium ref-rence strains K411 and ATCC 43734 (genomospecies 2) bears twodditional clinical isolates from our study, whereas the remainingwo species (genomospecies 3 and 4) have only a single represen-ative each.
omparative gene content of C. jeikieum genomospecies
Differences among genomospecies were also manifested in
heir predicted gene content and core genome content (Table 3).enomospecies 1 harbored significantly fewer predicted cod-ng sequences (2-tailed t-test, p value = 0.009) and functionallynnotated coding sequences (2-tailed t-test, p value = 3.3 × 10−7) Ta
ble
2Pa
irw
ise
AN
I
Gen
omos
p
*B
old
Ind
i
![Page 5: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
S.J. Salipante
et al.
/ International
Journal of
Medical
Microbiology
304 (2014)
1001–1010
1005
Table 3Comparative gene content of C. jeikeium genomospecies and core genome content.
Genomospecies 1 2 3 4
Isolate Cj37130 Cj30184 Cj21382 Cj14566 Cj16348 Cj38002 Cj47453 Cj19409 Cj47446 C.jeikeiumK411
C.jeikeiumATCC43734
Cj47447 Cj47445 Cj30952 Cj47444
Number codingsequences
2039 2136 1992 2063 2053 2036 2117 2080 2086 2211 2293 2148 2202 2001 2161
Functionally-annotatedcodingSequences
1382 1369 1374 1375 1365 1382 1378 1392 1374 1423 1435 1432 1434 1397 1452
Functionally-annotatedcodingsequencesshared withK411
1362 1341 1355 1353 1347 1363 1358 1367 1351 1423 1401 1412 1408 1385 1408
% K411functionally-annotatedcodingsequencespresent
95.71 94.24 95.22 95.08 94.66 95.78 95.43 96.06 94.94 100.00 98.45 99.23 98.95 97.33 98.95
Estimatednumber of coregenes forgenomospecies
1139 1384 N/A* N/A*
*Not applicable, only one representative of the genomospecies available.
![Page 6: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
1006 S.J. Salipante et al. / International Journal of Medical Microbiology 304 (2014) 1001–1010
K411GC content
GC skewNegativePositive
100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj37130100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj30184100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj21382100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj14566100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj16348100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj38002100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj47453100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj19409100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj47446
100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj47447
C. jeikeium K4112462499 bp
100% identity70% identity50% identity
ATCC 43734100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj47445100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj30952100% identity70% identity50% identity
Cj47444
1
2 3 4
A.
B.
2400 kbp
200 kbp
400 kbp
600 kbp
800 kbp
1000 kbp
1200 kbp1400 kbp
1600 kbp
1800 kbp
2000 kbp
2200 kbp
Fig. 2. Circular plot of genome diversity in sequenced C. jeikeium clinical isolates. (A) The map, GC content, and GC skew (either positive [enrichment of G over C] or negative[enrichment of C over G]) of the fully sequenced C. jeikeium K411 reference genome is depicted in the innermost three rings. The white and colored regions of outer ringsindicate sequences absent and present, respectively, in the draft genomes of clinical isolates and type strain ATCC 43734 relative to the C. jeikeium K411 reference. Intensityof coloration in outer rings indicates the degree of sequence identity relative to the reference genome. With the exception of the K411 reference strain, rings are groupedaccording to the genomospecies defined in Table 2. Strains are listed by genomospecies, from left to right, in the order that they occur when moving from the innermost tot a is bed .
tgicg
sosgsb
he outermost ring (key). (B) Example of a divergent genomic region. Enlarged areivergence is observed that distinguishes group 1 (inner 9 rings) from other groups
han isolates from genomospecies 2. The representative fromenomospecies 3 had the fewest predicted coding sequences of anysolate, regardless, the number of functionally annotated predictedoding sequences was within the range exhibited by members ofenomospecies 2.
The overlap in gene content between isolates and the fullyequenced K411 reference strain mirrored the calculated degreef genomic divergence measured by ANIb: isolates from genomo-
pecies 1 had the smallest percentage of predicted orthologousenes shared with K411 (Table 3), whereas members of genomo-pecies 2 had the highest. Although a core genome size could note estimated for genomospecies 3 and 4, because these groupstween 800 and 1000 kbp in the K411 reference genome, as indicated. A pattern of
were represented by only a single isolate, the number of genesidentified in isolate Cj47444 of genomospecies 4 which werenot present in the sequenced reference strain (44 genes) wassignificantly higher than the number observed for other isolates(average of 21 genes, z-test p value = 1), suggesting a significantdegree of additional genomic content for that genomospecies.
Phenotypic characterization of C. jeikieum genomospecies
We next investigated whether any of the genomospecies weredistinguishable on the basis of phenotype. We performed a bat-tery of standard biochemical tests used for the clinical classification
![Page 7: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
S.J. Salipante
et al.
/ International
Journal of
Medical
Microbiology
304 (2014)
1001–1010
1007
Table 4Biochemical testing results.
Carbohydrate utilization Glycosidase substrates
Genomospecies Isolate Glucose Sucrose Ribose Maltose p-nitrophenyl-�-D-glucoside
p-nitrophenyl-�-D-glucoside
p-nitrophenyl-N-acetyl-�-D-glucosaminide
p-nitrophenylglycoside
o-nitrophenyl-�-D-galactopyranoside
1 Cj37130 + –/+* + – – – −/+ – –Cj30184 + – + – – – – – –Cj21382 + – + – – + – – -Cj14566 + – + – – – – – –Cj16348 + – + – – – – – –Cj38002 + – + – – – −/+ – –Cj47453 + – + – – – – – –Cj19409 + – + – – – – – –Cj47446 + – + – – −/+ – – –
2 C. jeikeium K411 + – – – – −/+ – – –C. jeikeium ATCC43734
+ – −/+ – – – – – –
Cj47447 + – + – – – – – –Cj47445 + – + – – −/+ – – –
3 Cj30952 – – – – – – – – –4 Cj47444 + – + – – −/+ – – –
Aminopeptidase substrates Single-enzyme or phenotypic tests
Genomospecies Isolate Proline-�-naphthylamide
Tryptophan-�-naphthylamide
Pyrrolidine-�-naphthylamine
Leucyl-glycine-�-naphthylamide
Leucine-�-naphthylamide
Urease Nitrasereductase
Catalase Yellowpigment
Phosphatase Esterase
1 Cj37130 – + – + + – – + – + +Cj30184 – + – + + – – + – + +Cj21382 −/+ + – + + – – + – + +Cj14566 – + – + + – – + – + +Cj16348 – + – + + – – + – + +Cj38002 −/+ + – −/+ + – – + – + +Cj47453 – + – + + – – + – + +Cj19409 – + – + + – – + – + +Cj47446 – + – + + – – + – + +
2 C. jeikeiumK411
– + – + + – – + – + +
C. jeikeiumATCC 43734
– −/+ – + + – – + – + +
Cj47447 – + – + + – – + – + +Cj47445 – + – + + – – + – + +
3 Cj30952 – −/+ – −/+ −/+ – – + – + +4 Cj47444 – + – + + – – + – + +
* Weak positive.
![Page 8: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
1 of Medical Microbiology 304 (2014) 1001–1010
olsIpog�ipw
cacicfadradagtgvor
D
d(asosdvima22pgivnts
“piiatgfco
scep
tibi
lity
pro
file
s.
ies
Isol
ate
Cef
tria
xon
e
Cip
rofl
oxac
in
Cli
nd
amyc
in
Eryt
hro
myc
in
Gen
tam
icin
Pen
icil
lin
Van
com
ycin
Tetr
acyc
lin
e
Trim
eth
opri
m-
sulf
amet
hox
azol
e
Cj3
7130
16#
0.25
>256
4
0.25
8
2
0.25
0.25
/4.8
Cj3
0184
16
0.25
2*
0.5
0.12
5
>32
1
0.5
1/19
Cj2
1382
16
0.25
>256
8 0.
125
>32
2
0.5
0.5/
9.5
Cj1
4566
32
0.25
>256
32
0.12
5
8
2
0.5
1/19
Cj1
6348
16
8
>256
8
0.12
5
16
1
0.5
0.5/
9.5
Cj3
8002
32
>32
4
0.25
0.25
8
2
0.5
0.12
5/2.
4C
j474
53
8
0.25
>256
4
2
8
2
0.5
1/19
Cj1
9409
16
0.12
5
>256
16
0.25
4
1
0.5
1/19
Cj4
7446
>32
>32
>256
64
1
>32
2
2
8/15
2C.
jeik
eium
K41
1
>32
0.5
>256
>256
>102
4
>32
1
8*
>32/
608
C.
jeik
eium
ATC
C
4373
4>3
2
0.25
256
4
>102
4
>32
2
>256
16/3
04C
j474
47
>32
>32
>256
>256
512
>32
1
64
>32/
608
Cj4
7445
>32
>32
>256
32
>102
4
>32
1
32
>32/
608
Cj3
0952
>32
>32
>256
>256
0.12
5
>32
1
0.5
1/19
Cj4
7444
>32
>32
>256
>256
0.12
5
32
1
0.5
>32/
608
por
ted
in
mg/
L.s
full
resi
stan
ce, *
ind
icat
es
inte
rmed
iate
resi
stan
ce.
008 S.J. Salipante et al. / International Journal
f bacteria in patient samples, comprising four carbohydrate uti-ization tests, five glycosidase substrate tests, five aminopeptidaseubstrate tests, and six single-enzyme or phenotypic tests (Table 4).solate Cj30952, the sole representative of genomospecies 3, dis-layed a markedly different biochemical profile compared withther isolates, being uniquely characterized by an inability to utilizelucose and reduced aminopeptidase activity against leucine--naphthylamide. These characteristics separated this particular
solate from all other isolates in all other genomospecies. Metabolicrofiles within and among the remaining genomospecies, however,ere not distinct.
Similarly, we sought to determine whether the antibiotic sus-eptibilities of the genomospecies could be used to differentiatemong them. All isolates tested were marked by resistance to peni-illin and ceftriaxone, and were found to be either resistant or haventermediate resistance to clindamycin, and were sensitive to van-omycin (Table 5). Genomospecies 2 was uniquely distinguishablerom other groups both in displaying resistance to gentamicin andlso elevated resistance to tetracycline. Although not a uniquelyefining characteristic, all members of genomospecies 2 also car-ied resistance to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Interestingly,lthough C. jeikeium strain K411 was initially identified as a multi-rug resistant strain from a hospitalized patient (Kerry-Williamsnd Noble, 1984), it appears that its resistance profile represents aeneral characteristic of genomospecies 2, rather than unique fea-ure of the original K411 isolate. It was not possible to define otherenomospecies based on their pattern of antibiotic susceptibilities:ariable levels of resistance to ciprofloxacin and erythromycin werebserved within genomospecies 1, and no consistent differences inesistance profiles distinguished among genomospecies 1, 3, and 4.
iscussion
The genus Corynebacterium, in general, is diverse and is notablyifficult to speciate using phenotypic identification approachesRoux et al., 2004), posing challenges for the task of distinguishingmong isolates using standard biochemical and phenotypic clas-ifiers. Further, available DNA–DNA hybridization data, althoughnce considered a “gold standard” for circumscribing species, areomewhat difficult to interpret for C. jeikeium because the proce-ure utilized was noted to yield lower-than-average hybridizationalues (Grimont et al., 1980; Riegel et al., 1994). Advancementsn genetic and whole genome sequencing technologies have now
ade it possible to infer intra-species population structure moreccurately based on quantitative genomic information (Chan et al.,012; Georgiades and Raoult, 2010; Richter and Roselló-Móra,009), enabling more comprehensive studies of Corynebacteriumopulation structure. In this work, we examined the genetic andenomic relationships among primary C. jeikeium clinical isolatesdentified through routine clinical workup in our laboratory, pro-iding an unselected sampling of pathogenic strains collected overearly a decade. Taken together, these data provide evidence thathe 15 isolates considered here constitute four separate and distinctpecies.
Our findings are consistent with the earlier description of 4genomic groups” within the C. jeikeium taxon (Riegel et al., 1994),roviding corroborating evidence for the conclusions presented
n the present work. Nevertheless, our use of genomic sequenc-ng data has enabled us to formally circumscribe these “groups”s true genomospecies based on quantitative metrics (Table 2),o precisely define the phylogenomic relationships among those
enomospecies (Fig. 1), and to explore the differences in genomiceatures that distinguishes them (Table 3). These investigations,oupled with phenotypic testing information and the generationf 13 new draft genome sequences derived from members of each Table
5A
nti
biot
ic
su
Gem
nop
ec
1 2 3 4
#A
ll
valu
es
reB
old
ind
icat
e
![Page 9: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
of Med
ggtat
lssostdcGbln2dtims
s(gfittaptic
ttcrstgspiot
phrhTfbcabaicdfiw
S.J. Salipante et al. / International Journal
enomospecies (Table 1), significantly expand knowledge of theenomic and phenotypic variation within the taxon. In light ofhese results, we advocate that C. jeikeium should be recognizeds four separate species in order to accurately reflect the taxon’srue population structure.
Genomospecies 1, which comprises the majority of clinical iso-ates, has both a significantly smaller genome and significantlymaller gene repertoire than that of the other C. jekieum genomo-pecies (Table 3). Evidence suggests that the virulence potentialf pathogenic bacteria is inversely proportional to overall genomeize and gene content (Georgiades and Raoult, 2011), an observa-ion which has been broadly demonstrated for phylogeneticallyissimilar intracellular (Moran, 2002; Wixon, 2001) and extra-ellular (Georgiades and Raoult, 2011) disease-causing agents.enome size itself has been shown to be a better predictor ofacterial virulence than the absolute number of classical “viru-
ence factor” genes in comparing pathogenic bacteria compared toon-virulent or less-virulent counterparts (Georgiades and Raoult,011; Merhej et al., 2013), likely reflecting the process of gene lossuring host adaptation (Merhej et al., 2009). Given this correla-ion, it is probable that genomospecies 1 is not overrepresentedn our dataset due to chance sampling, but rather because it
ore frequently causes human disease than do the other genomo-pecies.
Of particular note, both of the extant C. jeikeium referencetrains, K411 and ATCC 43734, belong to a single genomospeciesgenomospecies 2), which is distinct from the clinically dominantenomospecies identified in our study (genomospecies 1). Thisnding has two major implications. First, it suggests that much ofhe genomic diversity present among members of the C. jeikeiumaxon has not previously been represented through the two avail-ble reference strains. Secondly, it argues that studies of C. jeikeiumathogenesis may benefit from investigation of isolates classifiedo genomospecies 1, as existing C. jeikeium reference strains are notn a group responsible for the majority of infections encounteredlinically.
Available data suggest that two of the four genomically dis-inct species can be distinguished using routine clinical laboratoryechniques: the sole representative of genomospecies 3 is uniquelyharacterized through negative glucose utilization (Table 4) whileesistance to gentamicin can distinguish members of genomo-pecies 2 from others (Table 5). In the absence of additional testing,he only reliable primary mean to classify representatives fromenomospecies 1 and 4 is through the use of whole genomeequence analysis (Fig. 1C). However, a biphasic approach shouldrove tractable to many clinical laboratories: first, phenotypic test-
ng may be used to classify an unknown isolate to genomospecies 2r 3 (Tables 4 and 5), followed as necessary by rpoB gene sequencingo differentiate among species 1 and 4 (Fig. 1B).
Given that one genomospecies (genomospecies 1) has dispro-ortionately high representation among the clinical isolates weave studied, and that two of the other genomospecies are poorlyepresented in this survey, we cannot know at this time whether weave fully sampled all species previously classified as C. jeikeium.he isolates examined here represent a comprehensive collectionrom our laboratory, but are nevertheless limited in absolute num-er and potentially geographical scope. It is possible that genomicharacterization of supplementary isolates as they become avail-ble will delineate additional species, including those that maye less prevalent pathogens. Efforts should be taken to recognizend incorporate such groups into the Corynebacterium taxonomy,f they do indeed exist. Regardless, even now the proposed spe-
iation of the C. jeikeium taxon carries with it important clinicaliagnostic information about expected antibiotic resistance pro-les of isolates classified to a particular group (Table 5). Futureork may uncover additional clinically relevant distinctions amongical Microbiology 304 (2014) 1001–1010 1009
these species, such as preferred sites of infection or the severity ofdisease course caused by infection, shedding light on other poten-tially characterizing biological properties of these agents that aretaxon specific and not possible to assay by conventional laboratorytesting.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported in part by the National Center forAdvancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes ofHealth [grant number UL1TR000423].
References
Alikhan, N.F., Petty, N.K., Ben Zakour, N.L., Beatson, S.A., 2011. BLAST Ring ImageGenerator (BRIG): Simple prokaryote genome comparisons. BMC Genomics 12,402.
Aziz, R.K., Bartels, D., Best, A.A., DeJongh, M., Disz, T., Edwards, R.A., Formsma, K.,Gerdes, S., Glass, E.M., Kubal, M., Meyer, F., Olsen, G.J., Olson, R., Osterman, A.L.,Overbeek, R.A., McNeil, L.K., Paarmann, D., Paczian, T., Parrello, B., Pusch, G.D.,Reich, C., Stevens, R., Vassieva, O., Vonstein, V., Wilke, A., Zagnitko, O., 2008. TheRAST Server: Rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genomics9, 75.
Cazanave, C., Greenwood-Quaintance, K.E., Hanssen, A.D., Patel, R., 2012. Corynebac-terium prosthetic joint infection. J. Clin. Microbiol. 50, 1518–1523.
Chan, J.Z., Halachev, M.R., Loman, N.J., Constantinidou, C., Pallen, M.J., 2012. Definingbacterial species in the genomic era: Insights from the genus Acinetobacter. BMCMicrobiol. 12, 302.
Clarridge 3rd, J.E., 2004. Impact of 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis for identificationof bacteria on clinical microbiology and infectious diseases. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.17, 840–862.
Funke, G., von Graevenitz, A., Clarridge 3rd, J.E., Bernard, K.A., 1997. Clinical micro-biology of coryneform bacteria. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 10, 125–159.
Georgiades, K., Raoult, D., 2010. Defining pathogenic bacterial species in the genomicera. Front. Microbiol. 1, 151.
Georgiades, K., Raoult, D., 2011. Genomes of the most dangerous epidemicbacteria have a virulence repertoire characterized by fewer genes but moretoxin–antitoxin modules. PloS One 6, e17962.
Goris, J., Konstantinidis, K.T., Klappenbach, J.A., Coenye, T., Vandamme, P., Tiedje, J.M.,2007. DNA–DNA hybridization values and their relationship to whole-genomesequence similarities. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 57, 81–91.
Grimont, P.A.D., Popoff, M.Y., Grimont, F., Coynault, C., Lemelin, M., 1980. Repro-ductibility and correlation study of three deoxyribonucleic acid hybridizationprocedures. Curr. Microbiol. 4, 325–330.
Huson, D.H., Bryant, D., 2006. Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionarystudies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23, 254–267.
Ifantidou, A.M., Diamantidis, M.D., Tseliki, G., Angelou, A.S., Christidou, P., Papa,A., Pentilas, D., 2010. Corynebacterium jeikeium bacteremia in a hemodialyzedpatient. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 14 (Suppl 3), e265–e268.
Jackman, P.J.H., Pitcher, D.G., Pelczynska, S., Borman, P., 1987. Classification ofcorynebacteria associated with endocarditis (group JK) as Corynebacteriumjeikeium sp. nov. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 9, 83–90.
Kerry-Williams, S.M., Noble, W.C., 1984. Plasmid-associated bacteriocin productionin a JK-type coryneform bacterium. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 25, 179–182.
Khamis, A., Raoult, D., La Scola, B., 2005. Comparison between rpoB and 16SrRNA gene sequencing for molecular identification of 168 clinical isolates ofCorynebacterium. J. Clin. Microbiol. 43, 1934–1936.
Koboldt, D.C., Zhang, Q., Larson, D.E., Shen, D., McLellan, M.D., Lin, L., Miller, C.A.,Mardis, E.R., Ding, L., Wilson, R.K., 2012. VarScan 2: Somatic mutation and copynumber alteration discovery in cancer by exome sequencing. Genome Res. 22,568–576.
Lander, E.S., Waterman, M.S., 1988. Genomic mapping by fingerprinting randomclones: A mathematical analysis. Genomics 2, 231–239.
Li, H., Durbin, R., 2009. Fast and accurate short read alignment withBurrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 25, 1754–1760.
Li, H., Handsaker, B., Wysoker, A., Fennell, T., Ruan, J., Homer, N., Marth, G., Abeca-sis, G., Durbin, R., 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup, 2009. TheSequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079.
Merhej, V., Georgiades, K., Raoult, D., 2013. Postgenomic analysis of bacterialpathogens repertoire reveals genome reduction rather than virulence factors.Brief. Funct. Genomics 12, 291–304.
Merhej, V., Royer-Carenzi, M., Pontarotti, P., Raoult, D., 2009. Massive compara-tive genomic analysis reveals convergent evolution of specialized bacteria. Biol.Direct 4, 13.
Moran, N.A., 2002. Microbial minimalism: Genome reduction in bacterial pathogens.Cell 108, 583–586.
Peterson, J., Garges, S., Giovanni, M., McInnes, P., Wang, L., Schloss, J.A., Bonazzi, V.,McEwen, J.E., Wetterstrand, K.A., Deal, C., Baker, C.C., Di Francesco, V., Howcroft,T.K., Karp, R.W., Lunsford, R.D., Wellington, C.R., Belachew, T., Wright, M., Giblin,C., David, H., Mills, M., Salomon, R., Mullins, C., Akolkar, B., Begg, L., Davis, C.,Grandison, L., Humble, M., Khalsa, J., Little, A.R., Peavy, H., Pontzer, C., Portnoy,
![Page 10: Whole genome sequencing indicates Corynebacterium jeikeium comprises 4 separate genomospecies and identifies a dominant genomospecies among clinical isolates](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022080501/5750a7e71a28abcf0cc4963a/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
1 of Med
P
R
R
R
010 S.J. Salipante et al. / International Journal
M., Sayre, M.H., Starke-Reed, P., Zakhari, S., Read, J., Watson, B., Guyer, M., 2009.The NIH Human Microbiome Project. Genome Res. 19, 2317–2323.
ottumarthy, S., Limaye, A.P., Prentice, J.L., Houze, Y.B., Swanzy, S.R., Cookson,B.T., 2003. Nocardia veterana, a new emerging pathogen. J. Clin. Microbiol. 41,1705–1709.
ichter, M., Roselló-Móra, R., 2009. Shifting the genomic gold standardfor the prokaryotic species definition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106,19126–19131.
iegel, P., de Briel, D., Prévost, G., Jehl, F., Monteil, H., 1994. Genomic diversityamong Corynebacterium jeikeium strains and comparison with biochemi-
cal characteristics and antimicrobial susceptibilities. J. Clin. Microbiol. 32,1860–1865.oux, V., Drancourt, M., Stein, A., Riegel, P., Raoult, D., La Scola, B., 2004. Corynebac-terium species isolated from bone and joint infections identified by 16S rRNAgene sequence analysis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 42, 2231–2233.
ical Microbiology 304 (2014) 1001–1010
Simpson, J.T., Wong, K., Jackman, S.D., Schein, J.E., Jones, S.J.M., Birol, I., 2009. ABySS:A parallel assembler for short read sequence data. Genome Res. 19, 1117–1123.
Tauch, A., Kaiser, O., Hain, T., Goesmann, A., Weisshaar, B., Albersmeier, A., Bekel,T., Bischoff, N., Brune, I., Chakraborty, T., Kalinowski, J., Meyer, F., Rupp, O.,Schneiker, S., Viehoever, P., Pühler, A., 2005. Complete genome sequence andanalysis of the multiresistant nosocomial pathogen Corynebacterium jeikeiumK411, a lipid-requiring bacterium of the human skin flora. J. Bacteriol. 187,4671–4682.
Tleyjeh, I.M., Qutub, M.O., Bakleh, M., Sohail, M.R., Virk, A., 2005. Corynebacterium
jeikeium prosthetic joint infection: Case report and literature review. Scand. J.Infect. Dis. 37, 151–153.Wixon, J., 2001. Featured organism: Reductive evolution in bacteria: Buchnera sp.,Rickettsia prowazekii and Mycobacterium leprae. Comp. Funct. Genomics 2,44–48.