Jump to content

Pseudomonadota

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Pseudomonadota
Escherichia coli
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Domain: Bacteria
Phylum: Pseudomonadota
Garrity et al. 2021[1]
Classes
Synonyms
  • "Proteobacteria" Stackebrandt et al. 1988[6]
  • "Proteobacteria" Gray and Herwig 1996[7]
  • "Proteobacteria" Garrity et al. 2005[8]
  • "Proteobacteria" Cavalier-Smith 2002[9]
  • Alphaproteobacteraeota Oren et al. 2015
  • "Alphaproteobacteriota" Whitman et al. 2018
  • "Caulobacterota" corrig. Garrity et al. 2021
  • "Neoprotei" Pelletier 2012
  • Rhodobacteria Cavalier-Smith 2002

Pseudomonadota (synonym Proteobacteria) is a major phylum of Gram-negative bacteria.[10] Currently, they are considered the predominant phylum within the realm of bacteria.[11] They are naturally found as pathogenic and free-living (non-parasitic) genera.[11] The phylum comprises six classes Acidithiobacillia, Alphaproteobacteria, Betaproteobacteria, Gammaproteobacteria, Hydrogenophilia, and Zetaproteobacteria.[11] The Pseudomonadota are widely diverse, with differences in morphology, metabolic processes, relevance to humans, and ecological influence.[11]

Classification

American microbiologist Carl Woese established this grouping in 1987, calling it informally the "purple bacteria and their relatives".[12] The group was later formally named the 'Proteobacteria' after the Greek god Proteus, who was known to assume many forms.[13] In 2021 the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes designated the synonym Pseudomonadota, and renamed many other prokaryotic phyla as well.[1] This renaming of several prokaryote phyla in 2021, including Pseudomonadota, remains controversial among microbiologists, many of whom continue to use the earlier name Proteobacteria, of long standing in the literature.[14] The phylum Pseudomonadota encompasses classes Acidithiobacillia, Alphaproteobacteria, Betaproteobacteria, Gammaproteobacteria, Hydrogenophilia, and Zetaproteobacteria.[11] The phylum includes a wide variety of pathogenic genera, such as Escherichia, Salmonella, Vibrio, Yersinia, Legionella, and many others.[15] Others are free-living (non-parasitic) and include many of the bacteria responsible for nitrogen fixation.[16]

Previously, the Pseudomonadota phylum included two additional classes, namely Deltaproteobacteria and Oligoflexia. However, further investigation into the phylogeny of these taxa through genomic marker analysis demonstrated their separation from the Pseudomonadota phylum.[17] Deltaproteobacteria has been identified as a diverse taxonomic unit, leading to a proposal for its reclassification into distinct phyla: Desulfobacterota (encompassing Thermodesulfobacteria), Myxococcota, and Bdellovibrionota (comprising Oligoflexia).[17]

The class Epsilonproteobacteria was additionally identified within the Pseudomonadota phylum. This class is characterized by its significance as chemolithotrophic primary producers and its metabolic prowess in deep-sea hydrothermal vent ecosystems.[18] Noteworthy pathogenic genera within this class include Campylobacter, Helicobacter, and Arcobacter. Analysis of phylogenetic tree topology and genetic markers revealed the direct divergence of Epsilonproteobacteria from the Pseudomonadota phylum.[18] Limited outgroup data and low bootstrap values support these discoveries. Despite further investigations, consensus has not been reached regarding the monophyletic nature of Epsilonproteobacteria within Proteobacteria, prompting researchers to propose its taxonomic separation from the phylum. The proposed reclassification of the name Epsilonproteobacteria is Epsilonbacteraeota,[18] later revised to Campylobacterota in 2018.[19]

Taxonomy

The currently accepted taxonomy is based on the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LSPN)[20] and the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI).[21]

The group Pseudomonadota is defined based on ribosomal RNA (rRNA) sequencing, and are divided into several subclasses. These subclasses were regarded as such for many years, but are now treated as various classes of the phylum. These classes are monophyletic.[22][23][24] The genus Acidithiobacillus, part of the Gammaproteobacteria until it was transferred to class Acidithiobacillia in 2013,[2] was previously regarded as paraphyletic to the Betaproteobacteria according to multigenome alignment studies.[25] In 2017, the Betaproteobacteria was subject to major revisions and the class Hydrogenophilalia was created to contain the order Hydrogenophilales[4]

Pseudomonadota classes with validly published names include some prominent genera:[26] e.g.:

according to ARB living tree, iTOL, Bergey's and others. 16S rRNA based LTP_12_2021[27][28][29] 120 single copy marker proteins based GTDB 08-RS214[30][31][32]

"Caulobacteria" (Alphaproteobacteria)

"Mariprofundia" (Zetaproteobacteria)

"Magnetococcia"

"Pseudomonadia"

clade 1

"Foliamicales"

clade 3

Immundisolibacterales

clade 5

"Acidithiobacillidae" (Acidithiobacillia)

"Neisseriidae" (Betaproteobacteria & nested Hydrogenophilalia)

"Pseudomonadidae" (Gammaproteobacteria)

Characteristics

Pseudomonadota are a diverse group. Though some species may stain Gram-positive or Gram-variable in the laboratory, they are nominally Gram-negative. Their unique outer membrane is mainly composed of lipopolysaccharides, which helps differentiate them from the Gram-positive species.[33] Most Pseudomonadota are motile and move using flagella. Many move about using flagella, but some are nonmotile, or rely on bacterial gliding.[34]

Pseudomonadota have a wide variety of metabolism types. Most are facultative or obligate anaerobes, chemolithoautotrophs, and heterotrophs, though numerous exceptions exist. A variety of distantly related genera within the Pseudomonadota obtain their energy from light through conventional photosynthesis or anoxygenic photosynthesis.[34]

The Acidithiobacillia contain only sulfur, iron, and uranium-oxidizing autotrophs. The type order is the Acidithiobacillaceae, which includes five different Acidithiobacillus species used in the mining industry. In particular, these microbes assist with the process of bioleaching, which involves microbes assisting in metal extraction from mining waste that typically extraction methods cannot remove.[35]

Some Alphaproteobacteria can grow at very low levels of nutrients and have unusual morphology within their life cycles. Some form stalks to help with colonization, and form buds during cell division. Others include agriculturally important bacteria capable of inducing nitrogen fixation in symbiosis with plants. The type order is the Caulobacterales, comprising stalk-forming bacteria such as Caulobacter.[36] The mitochondria of eukaryotes are thought to be descendants of an alphaproteobacterium.[37]

The Betaproteobacteria are highly metabolically diverse and contain chemolithoautotrophs, photoautotrophs, and generalist heterotrophs. The type order is the Burkholderiales, comprising an enormous range of metabolic diversity, including opportunistic pathogens. These pathogens are primary for both humans and animals, such as the horse pathogen Burkholderia mallei, and Burkholderia cepacia which causes respiratory tract infections in people with cystic fibrosis.[38]

The Gammaproteobacteria are one of the largest classes in terms of genera, containing approximately 250 validly published names.[25] The type order is the Pseudomonadales, which include the genera Pseudomonas and the nitrogen-fixing Azotobacter, along with many others. Besides being a well-known pathogenic genus, Pseudomonas is also capable of biodegradation of certain materials, like cellulose.[36]

The Hydrogenophilalia are thermophilic chemoheterotrophs and autotrophs.[39] The bacteria typically use hydrogen gas as an electron donor, but can also use reduced sulfuric compounds. Because of this ability, scientists have begun to use certain species of Hydrogenophilalia to remove sulfides that contaminate industrial wastewater systems. The type order is the Hydrogenophilaceae which contains the genera Thiobacillus, Petrobacter, Sulfuricella, Hydrogenophilus and Tepidiphilus. Currently, no members of this class have been identified as pathogenic.[40]

The Zetaproteobacteria are the iron-oxidizing neutrophilic chemolithoautotrophs, distributed worldwide in estuaries and marine habitats.[34] This group is so successful in its environment due to their microaerophilic nature. Because they require less oxygen than what is present in the atmosphere, they are able to compete with the abiotic iron(II) oxidation that is already occurring in the environment.[41] The only confirmed type order for this class is the Mariprofundaceae, which does not contain any known pathogenic species.[42]

Transformation

Transformation, a process in which genetic material passes from one bacterium to another,[43] has been reported in at least 30 species of Pseudomonadota distributed in the classes alpha, beta, and gamma.[44] The best-studied Pseudomonadota with respect to natural genetic transformation are the medically important human pathogens Neisseria gonorrhoeae (class beta), and Haemophilus influenzae (class gamma).[45] Natural genetic transformation is a sexual process involving DNA transfer from one bacterial cell to another through the intervening medium and the integration of the donor sequence into the recipient genome. In pathogenic Pseudomonadota, transformation appears to serve as a DNA repair process that protects the pathogen's DNA from attack by their host's phagocytic defenses that employ oxidative free radicals.[45]

Habitat

Due to the distinctive nature of each of the six classes of Pseudomonadota, this phylum occupies a multitude of habitats. These include:

  • Human oral cavity[46]
  • Microbial mats in the deep sea[47]
  • Marine sediments[7]
  • Thermal sulfur springs[48]
  • Agricultural soil[48]
  • Hydrothermal vents[49]
  • Stem nodules of legumes[11]
  • Within aphids as endosymbionts[11]
  • Gastrointestinal tract of warm-blooded species[11]
  • Brackish, estuary waters[11]
  • Microbiomes of shrimp and mollusks[11]
  • Human vaginal tract[10]
  • Potato rhizosphere microbiome[50]

Significance

Human health

Studies have suggested Pseudomonadota as a relevant signature of disease in the human gastrointestinal (GI) tract, by operating as a marker for microbiota instability.[10] The human gut microbiome consists mainly of four phyla: Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Actinobacteria, and Pseudomonadota.[10] Microorganism gut colonization is dynamic from birth to death, with stabilization at the first few years of life, to higher diversity in adults, to reduced diversity in the elderly.[10] The gut microbiome conducts processes like nutrient synthesis, chemical metabolism, and the formation of the gut barrier.[10] Additionally, the gut microbiome facilitates host interactions with its surrounding environment through regulation of nutrient absorption and bacterial intake. In 16s rRNA and metagenome sequencing studies, Proteobacteria have been identified as bacteria that prompts endotoxemia (an inflammatory gut response) and metabolic disorders in human GI tracts.[10] Another study by Michail et al. showed a correlation of microbial composition in children with and without nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), wherein patients with NAFLD have a higher abundance of Gammaproteobacteria than patients without the disease.[51]

Classes Betaproteobacteria and Gammaproteobacteria are prevalent within the human oral cavity, and are markers for good oral health.[46] The oral microbiome consists of 11 habitats, including the tongue dorsum, hard palate, tonsils, throat, saliva, and more.[52] Changes in the oral microbiome are due to endogenous and exogenous factors like host lifestyle, genotype, environment, immune system, and socioeconomic status.[52] Considering diet as a factor, high saturated fatty acid (SAF) content, achieved through poor diet, has been correlated to increased abundance of Betaproteobacteria in the oral cavity.[52]

Economic value

Pseudomonadota bacteria have a symbiotic or mutualistic association with plant roots, an example being in the rhizomes of potato plants.[53] Because of this symbiotic relationship, farmers have the ability to increase their crop yields.[53] Healthier root systems can lead to better nutrient uptake, improved water retention, increased resistance to diseases and pests, and ultimately higher crop yields per acre.[54] Increased agricultural output can spark economic growth, contribute to food security, and lead to job creation in rural areas.[55]

As briefly mentioned in previous sections, members of Pseudomonadota have vast metabolic abilities that allow them to utilize and produce a variety of compounds. Bioleaching, done by various Thiobacillus species, are a primary example of this.[56] Any iron and sulfur oxidizing species has the potential to uncover metals and low-grade ores that conventional mining techniques were unable to extract. At present, they are most often used for recovering copper and uranium, but researchers are looking to expand this field in the future. The downside of this method is that the bacteria produce acidic byproducts that end up in acid mine drainage. Bioleaching has significant economic promise if it can be controlled and not cause any further harm to the environment.[35]

Ecological impact

Pseudomonadota are microbes commonly found within soil systems.[53] Microbes play a crucial role in the surrounding ecosystem by performing functions such as nutrient cycling, carbon dioxide fixation, decomposition, and nitrogen fixation.[57] Pseudomonadota can be described as phototrophs, heterotrophs, and lithotrophs. As heterotrophs (examples Pseudomonas and Xanthomonas) these bacteria are effective in breaking down organic matter, contributing to nutrient cycling.[57] Additionally, photolithotrophs within the phylum are able to perform photosynthesis using sulfide or elemental sulfur as electron donors, which enables them to participate in carbon fixation and oxygen production even in anaerobic conditions.[57] These Pseudomonadota bacteria are also considered copiotrophic organisms, meaning they can be found in environments with high nutrient availability.[57] These environments have ample sources of carbon and other nutrients, environments like fertile soils, compost, and sewage. These copiotrophic bacteria are able to enhance soil health by performing nutrient cycling and waste decomposition.[57]

Because this phylum are able to form a symbiotic relationship with plant roots, incorporating Pseudomonadota into agricultural practices aligns with principles of sustainable farming.[58][53] These bacteria contribute to soil health and fertility, promote natural pest management, and enhance the resilience of crops to environmental stressors.[58]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Oren A, Garrity GM (October 2021). "Valid publication of the names of forty-two phyla of prokaryotes". International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 71 (10): 5056. doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.005056. PMID 34694987. S2CID 239887308.
  2. ^ a b c Williams KP, Kelly DP (August 2013). "Proposal for a new class within the phylum Proteobacteria, Acidithiobacillia classis nov., with the type order Acidithiobacillales, and emended description of the class Gammaproteobacteria". International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 63 (Pt 8): 2901–2906. doi:10.1099/ijs.0.049270-0. PMID 23334881. S2CID 39777860.
  3. ^ Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T (2005). "Class I. Alphaproteobacteria class. nov.". In Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, Garrity GM (eds.). Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Vol. 2 (Proteobacteria), Part C (The Alpha-, Beta-, Delta- and Epsilonproteobacteria) (2nd ed.). Springer. p. 1. doi:10.1002/9781118960608.cbm00041. ISBN 978-1-118-96060-8.
  4. ^ a b c Boden R, Hutt LP, Rae AW (May 2017). "Reclassification of Thiobacillus aquaesulis (Wood & Kelly, 1995) as Annwoodia aquaesulis gen. nov., comb. nov., transfer of Thiobacillus (Beijerinck, 1904) from the Hydrogenophilales to the Nitrosomonadales, proposal of Hydrogenophilalia class. nov. within the 'Proteobacteria', and four new families within the orders Nitrosomonadales and Rhodocyclales". International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 67 (5): 1191–1205. doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.001927. hdl:10026.1/8740. PMID 28581923.
  5. ^ Emerson D, Rentz JA, Lilburn TG, Davis RE, Aldrich H, Chan C, et al. (August 2007). "A novel lineage of proteobacteria involved in formation of marine Fe-oxidizing microbial mat communities". PLOS ONE. 2 (7): e667. Bibcode:2007PLoSO...2..667E. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000667. PMC 1930151. PMID 17668050.
  6. ^ Stackebrandt E, Murray RG, Trüper HG (1988). "Proteobacteria classis nov., a name for the phylogenetic taxon that includes the "purple bacteria and their relatives"". International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology. 38 (3): 321–325. doi:10.1099/00207713-38-3-321.
  7. ^ a b Gray JP, Herwig RP (November 1996). "Phylogenetic analysis of the bacterial communities in marine sediments". Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 62 (11): 4049–4059. Bibcode:1996ApEnM..62.4049G. doi:10.1128/aem.62.11.4049-4059.1996. PMC 168226. PMID 8899989.
  8. ^ Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T (2005). "Phylum XIV. Proteobacteria phyl. nov.". In Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, Garrity GM (eds.). Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Vol. 2 (Proteobacteria), Part B (Gammaproteobacteria) (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer. p. 1.
  9. ^ Cavalier-Smith T (January 2002). "The neomuran origin of archaebacteria, the negibacterial root of the universal tree and bacterial megaclassification". International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 52 (Pt 1): 7–76. doi:10.1099/00207713-52-1-7. PMID 11837318.
  10. ^ a b c d e f g Rizzatti G, Lopetuso LR, Gibiino G, Binda C, Gasbarrini A (2017). "Proteobacteria: A Common Factor in Human Diseases". BioMed Research International. 2017: 9351507. doi:10.1155/2017/9351507. PMC 5688358. PMID 29230419.
  11. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Kersters K, De Vos P, Gillis M, Swings J, Vandamme P, Stackebrandt E (2006). "Introduction to the Proteobacteria". In Dworkin M, Falkow S, Rosenberg E, Schleifer KH (eds.). The Prokaryotes. Vol. 5: Proteobacteria: Alpha and Beta Subclasses. New York, NY: Springer. pp. 3–37. doi:10.1007/0-387-30745-1_1. ISBN 978-0-387-30745-9. Retrieved 2024-04-12.
  12. ^ Woese CR (June 1987). "Bacterial evolution". Microbiological Reviews. 51 (2): 221–271. doi:10.1128/MMBR.51.2.221-271.1987. PMC 373105. PMID 2439888.
  13. ^ Moon CD, Young W, Maclean PH, Cookson AL, Bermingham EN (October 2018). "Metagenomic insights into the roles of Proteobacteria in the gastrointestinal microbiomes of healthy dogs and cats". MicrobiologyOpen. 7 (5): e00677. doi:10.1002/mbo3.677. PMC 6182564. PMID 29911322.
  14. ^ Robitzski D (4 January 2022). "Newly Renamed Prokaryote Phyla Cause Uproar". The Scientist.
  15. ^ Slonczewski JL, Foster JW, Foster E (2020). Microbiology: An Evolving Science (5th ed.). WW Norton & Company.
  16. ^ Sah S, Krishnani S, Singh R (December 2021). "Pseudomonas mediated nutritional and growth promotional activities for sustainable food security". Current Research in Microbial Sciences. 2: 100084. doi:10.1016/j.crmicr.2021.100084. PMC 8645841. PMID 34917993.
  17. ^ a b Waite DW, Chuvochina M, Pelikan C, Parks DH, Yilmaz P, Wagner M, et al. (November 2020). "Proposal to reclassify the proteobacterial classes Deltaproteobacteria and Oligoflexia, and the phylum Thermodesulfobacteria into four phyla reflecting major functional capabilities". International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 70 (11): 5972–6016. doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.004213. PMID 33151140.
  18. ^ a b c Waite DW, Vanwonterghem I, Rinke C, Parks DH, Zhang Y, Takai K, et al. (2017). "Comparative Genomic Analysis of the Class Epsilonproteobacteria and Proposed Reclassification to Epsilonbacteraeota (phyl. nov.)". Frontiers in Microbiology. 8: 682. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2017.00682. PMC 5401914. PMID 28484436.
  19. ^ Oren A, Garrity GM (2021). "Valid publication of the names of forty-two phyla of prokaryotes". Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 71 (10): 5056. doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.005056. PMID 34694987. S2CID 239887308.
  20. ^ Euzéby JP. "Pseudomonadota". List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN). Retrieved 2016-03-20.
  21. ^ Sayers. "Proteobacteria". National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) taxonomy database. Retrieved 2016-03-20.
  22. ^ Krieg NR, Brenner DJ, Staley JT (2005). Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Vol. 2: The Proteobacteria. Springer. ISBN 978-0-387-95040-2.
  23. ^ Ciccarelli FD, Doerks T, von Mering C, Creevey CJ, Snel B, Bork P (March 2006). "Toward automatic reconstruction of a highly resolved tree of life". Science. 311 (5765): 1283–1287. Bibcode:2006Sci...311.1283C. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.381.9514. doi:10.1126/science.1123061. PMID 16513982. S2CID 1615592.
  24. ^ Yarza P, Ludwig W, Euzéby J, Amann R, Schleifer KH, Glöckner FO, et al. (October 2010). "Update of the All-Species Living Tree Project based on 16S and 23S rRNA sequence analyses". Systematic and Applied Microbiology. 33 (6): 291–299. Bibcode:2010SyApM..33..291Y. doi:10.1016/j.syapm.2010.08.001. PMID 20817437.
  25. ^ a b Williams KP, Gillespie JJ, Sobral BW, Nordberg EK, Snyder EE, Shallom JM, et al. (May 2010). "Phylogeny of gammaproteobacteria". Journal of Bacteriology. 192 (9): 2305–2314. doi:10.1128/JB.01480-09. PMC 2863478. PMID 20207755.
  26. ^ "Interactive Tree of Life". Heidelberg, DE: European Molecular Biology Laboratory. Archived from the original on 2022-02-23. Retrieved 2022-02-23.
  27. ^ "The All-Species Living Tree (LTP) Project". Retrieved 2021-02-23.
  28. ^ "LTP_all tree in newick format". Retrieved 2021-02-23.
  29. ^ "LTP_12_2021 Release Notes" (PDF). Retrieved 2021-02-23.
  30. ^ "GTDB release 08-RS214". Genome Taxonomy Database. Retrieved 2023-05-10.
  31. ^ "bac120_r214.sp_label". Genome Taxonomy Database. Retrieved 2023-05-10.
  32. ^ "Taxon History". Genome Taxonomy Database. Retrieved 2023-05-10.
  33. ^ Silhavy TJ, Kahne D, Walker S (1 May 2010). "The Bacterial Cell Envelope". Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology. 2 (5): a000414. doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a000414. ISSN 1943-0264. PMC 2857177. PMID 20452953.
  34. ^ a b c "Pseudomonadota Garrity et al., 2021". www.gbif.org. Retrieved 2024-04-18.
  35. ^ a b Kelly DP, Wood AP (2014), Rosenberg E, DeLong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E (eds.), "The Family Acidithiobacillaceae", The Prokaryotes: Gammaproteobacteria, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 15–25, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38922-1_250, ISBN 978-3-642-38922-1, retrieved 2024-04-18
  36. ^ a b Bandopadhyay S, Shade A (2024), "Soil bacteria and archaea", Soil Microbiology, Ecology and Biochemistry, Elsevier, pp. 41–74, doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-822941-5.00003-x, ISBN 978-0-12-822941-5, retrieved 2024-04-18
  37. ^ Roger AJ, Muñoz-Gómez SA, Kamikawa R (November 2017). "The Origin and Diversification of Mitochondria". Current Biology. 27 (21): R1177–R1192. Bibcode:2017CBio...27R1177R. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2017.09.015. ISSN 0960-9822. PMID 29112874.
  38. ^ Coenye T (2014), Rosenberg E, DeLong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E (eds.), "The Family Burkholderiaceae", The Prokaryotes: Alphaproteobacteria and Betaproteobacteria, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 759–776, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30197-1_239, ISBN 978-3-642-30197-1, retrieved 2024-04-18
  39. ^ Wakai S, Masanari M, Ikeda T, Yamaguchi N, Ueshima S, Watanabe K, et al. (April 2013). "Oxidative phosphorylation in a thermophilic, facultative chemoautotroph, H ydrogenophilus thermoluteolus , living prevalently in geothermal niches". Environmental Microbiology Reports. 5 (2): 235–242. Bibcode:2013EnvMR...5..235W. doi:10.1111/1758-2229.12005. ISSN 1758-2229. PMID 23584967.
  40. ^ Orlygsson J, Kristjansson JK (2014), Rosenberg E, DeLong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E (eds.), "The Family Hydrogenophilaceae", The Prokaryotes: Alphaproteobacteria and Betaproteobacteria, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 859–868, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30197-1_244, ISBN 978-3-642-30197-1, retrieved 2024-04-18
  41. ^ McAllister SM, Moore RM, Gartman A, Luther GW, Emerson D, Chan CS (2019). "The Fe(II)-oxidizing Zetaproteobacteria: Historical, ecological and genomic perspectives". FEMS Microbiology Ecology. 95 (4). doi:10.1093/femsec/fiz015. PMC 6443915. PMID 30715272. Retrieved 2024-04-18.
  42. ^ Moreira AP, Meirelles PM, Thompson F (2014), Rosenberg E, DeLong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E (eds.), "The Family Mariprofundaceae", The Prokaryotes: Deltaproteobacteria and Epsilonproteobacteria, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 403–413, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39044-9_378, ISBN 978-3-642-39044-9, retrieved 2024-04-18
  43. ^ Johnston C, Martin B, Fichant G, Polard P, Claverys JP (March 2014). "Bacterial transformation: distribution, shared mechanisms and divergent control". Nature Reviews. Microbiology. 12 (3): 181–196. doi:10.1038/nrmicro3199. PMID 24509783. S2CID 23559881.
  44. ^ Johnsborg O, Eldholm V, Håvarstein LS (December 2007). "Natural genetic transformation: prevalence, mechanisms and function". Research in Microbiology. 158 (10): 767–778. doi:10.1016/j.resmic.2007.09.004. PMID 17997281.
  45. ^ a b Michod RE, Bernstein H, Nedelcu AM (May 2008). "Adaptive value of sex in microbial pathogens". Infection, Genetics and Evolution. 8 (3): 267–285. Bibcode:2008InfGE...8..267M. doi:10.1016/j.meegid.2008.01.002. PMID 18295550.
  46. ^ a b Leão I, de Carvalho TB, Henriques V, Ferreira C, Sampaio-Maia B, Manaia CM (February 2023). "Pseudomonadota in the oral cavity: a glimpse into the environment-human nexus". Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 107 (2–3): 517–534. doi:10.1007/s00253-022-12333-y. PMC 9842593. PMID 36567346.
  47. ^ Williams KP, Kelly DP (August 2013). "Proposal for a new class within the phylum Proteobacteria, Acidithiobacillia classis nov., with the type order Acidithiobacillales, and emended description of the class Gammaproteobacteria". International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 63 (Pt 8): 2901–2906. doi:10.1099/ijs.0.049270-0. PMID 23334881.
  48. ^ a b Boden R, Hutt LP, Rae AW (May 2017). "Reclassification of Thiobacillus aquaesulis (Wood & Kelly, 1995) as Annwoodia aquaesulis gen. nov., comb. nov., transfer of Thiobacillus (Beijerinck, 1904) from the Hydrogenophilales to the Nitrosomonadales, proposal of Hydrogenophilalia class. nov. within the 'Proteobacteria', and four new families within the orders Nitrosomonadales and Rhodocyclales". International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 67 (5): 1191–1205. doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.001927. hdl:10026.1/8740. PMID 28581923.
  49. ^ Emerson D, Rentz JA, Lilburn TG, Davis RE, Aldrich H, Chan C, et al. (August 2007). "A novel lineage of proteobacteria involved in formation of marine Fe-oxidizing microbial mat communities". PLOS ONE. 2 (7): e667. Bibcode:2007PLoSO...2..667E. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000667. PMC 1930151. PMID 17668050.
  50. ^ García-Serquén AL, Chumbe-Nolasco LD, Navarrete AA, Girón-Aguilar RC, Gutiérrez-Reynoso DL (17 February 2024). "Traditional potato tillage systems in the Peruvian Andes impact bacterial diversity, evenness, community composition, and functions in soil microbiomes". Scientific Reports. 14 (1): 3963. Bibcode:2024NatSR..14.3963G. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-54652-2. ISSN 2045-2322. PMC 10874408. PMID 38368478.
  51. ^ Michail S, Lin M, Frey MR, Fanter R, Paliy O, Hilbush B, et al. (February 2015). "Altered gut microbial energy and metabolism in children with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease". FEMS Microbiology Ecology. 91 (2): 1–9. doi:10.1093/femsec/fiu002. PMC 4358749. PMID 25764541.
  52. ^ a b c Jia G, Zhi A, Lai PF, Wang G, Xia Y, Xiong Z, et al. (March 2018). "The oral microbiota - a mechanistic role for systemic diseases". British Dental Journal. 224 (6): 447–455. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.217. PMID 29569607.
  53. ^ a b c d García-Serquén AL, Chumbe-Nolasco LD, Navarrete AA, Girón-Aguilar RC, Gutiérrez-Reynoso DL (17 February 2024). "Traditional potato tillage systems in the Peruvian Andes impact bacterial diversity, evenness, community composition, and functions in soil microbiomes". Scientific Reports. 14 (1): 3963. Bibcode:2024NatSR..14.3963G. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-54652-2. ISSN 2045-2322. PMC 10874408. PMID 38368478.
  54. ^ Hartman K, Schmid MW, Bodenhausen N, Bender SF, Valzano-Held AY, Schlaeppi K, et al. (31 July 2023). "A symbiotic footprint in the plant root microbiome". Environmental Microbiome. 18 (1): 65. Bibcode:2023EMicb..18...65H. doi:10.1186/s40793-023-00521-w. ISSN 2524-6372. PMC 10391997. PMID 37525294.
  55. ^ Mozumdar L, Mozumdar L (2012). "Agricultural productivity and food security in the developing world". Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Economics. 35. doi:10.22004/AG.ECON.196764.
  56. ^ Bosecker K (July 1997). "Bioleaching: metal solubilization by microorganisms". FEMS Microbiology Reviews. 20 (3–4): 591–604. doi:10.1111/j.1574-6976.1997.tb00340.x.
  57. ^ a b c d e Gupta A, Gupta R, Singh RL (2017), Singh RL (ed.), "Microbes and Environment", Principles and Applications of Environmental Biotechnology for a Sustainable Future, Singapore: Springer Singapore: 43–84, doi:10.1007/978-981-10-1866-4_3, ISBN 978-981-10-1865-7, PMC 7189961
  58. ^ a b Mapelli F, Mengoni A, Riva V, Borin S (January 2023). "Bacterial culturing is crucial to boost sustainable agriculture". Trends in Microbiology. 31 (1): 1–4. doi:10.1016/j.tim.2022.10.005. hdl:2434/945499.
Wikispecies has information related to Pseudomonadota.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pseudomonadota&oldid=1258740815"