4.5 Article

The detection and phylogenetic analysis of the alkane 1-monooxygenase gene of members of the genus Rhodococcus

期刊

SYSTEMATIC AND APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
卷 38, 期 1, 页码 1-7

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.syapm.2014.10.010

关键词

Rhodococcus; Alkane 1-monooxygenase; Phylogenetic marker gene

资金

  1. Research Centre of Excellence-8526-5/2014/TUDPOL
  2. Hungarian Academy of Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Naturally occurring and anthropogenic petroleum hydrocarbons are potential carbon sources for many bacteria. The AlkB-related alkane hydroxylases, which are integral membrane non-heme iron enzymes, play a key role in the microbial degradation of many of these hydrocarbons. Several members of the genus Rhodococcus are well-known alkane degraders and are known to harbor multiple alkB genes encoding for different alkane 1-monooxygenases. In the present study, 48 Rhodococcus strains, representing 35 species of the genus, were investigated to find out whether there was a dominant type of alkB gene widespread among species of the genus that could be used as a phylogenetic marker. Phylogenetic analysis of rhodococcal alkB gene sequences indicated that a certain type of alkB gene was present in almost every member of the genus Rhodococcus. These alkB genes were common in a unique nucleotide sequence stretch absent from other types of rhodococcal alkB genes that encoded a conserved amino acid motif: WLG(I/V/L)D(G/D)GL The sequence identity of the targeted WO gene in Rhodococcus ranged from 78.5 to 99.2% and showed higher nucleotide sequence variation at the inter-species level compared to the 165 rRNA gene (93.9-99.8%). The results indicated that the alkB gene type investigated might be applicable for: (i) differentiating closely related Rhodococcus species, (ii) properly assigning environmental isolates to existing Rhodococcus species, and finally (iii) assessing whether a new Rhodococcus isolate represents a novel species of the genus. (C) 2014 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据