Analysis of the 16S rRNA gene sequences has served as the standard to assess Actinobacteria diversity in nature and to classify Actinobacteria species
[21]. Recently, new specific 16S rRNA gene primers were designed and an Actinobacteria Amplification Resource (
http://microbe2.ncl.ac.uk/MMB/AAR.htm) site was constructed to provide a visual guide to aid in the amplification of actinobacterial 16S rRNA gene in marine and terrestrial environment
[41]. The appeal of these molecules lies in their ubiquitous distribution and relatively slow rate of evolution, which enables comparison among divergent Actinobacteria species. Several authors have noted shortcomings in using 16S rRNA gene sequences for assessing Actinobacteria diversity and for phylogenetic analysis. The lack of informative characters and a slow evolution rate complicates both the differentiation of closely related strains of bacteria as well as the resolution of an evolutionary tree
[42]. 16S rRNA is a multiple copy gene and may be present in 1–6 copies in the subclass Actinobacteridae (
www.genome.jp) with 99.4–100% similarity (). Some of these multiple copies of 16S rRNA gene exhibit different sequences
[4],
[43],
[44]. In this situation, direct sequencing is not suitable for isolate identification because of discrepant results are produced by the different sequences. In the vast majority of bacterial genomes, the divergence between 16S rRNA gene sequence copies is <1%
[45]. Also, the influence of intragenomic heterogeneity displayed by the 16S rRNA gene on bacterial phylogeny was assessed.
Furthermore, despite the perceived reliability of the 16S rRNA gene sequence as a phylogenetic marker, it is known that any single measure of sequence similarity is subject both to simple stochastic variation and to the influence of recombination or HGT
[35],
[46]. Also, examples of HGT of the 16S rRNA in nature have been reported based on patterns of the 16S rRNA gene sequence heterogeneity, but these are limited to relatively closely related organisms, including certain
Actinomycetes [44],
[47],
[48].
MLSA has been proposed as an alternative to 16S rRNA for some genera of the subclass Actinobacteridae such as
Mycobacterium [4]–
[6],
Bifidobacterium [49],
Microbacterium [50],
[51], and
Streptomyces [52]. However, there was no consensus regarding the choice of genes to be used for MLSA amongst these genera and choices have remained empirical. The increasing genomic database was examined to define a rational post-genomic study of a common set of genes that may be useful for the MLSA classification, phylogeny and identification of the species belonging to the subclass Actinobacteridae.
The present study represented a first attempt in the development of a systematic measured approach for proposal of a core set of genes for MLSA useful for the subclass Actinobacteridae. The main objective was the selection of housekeeping genes as candidates that belong to the common set of genes and fulfilled the criteria noted before. The availability of 50 complete genomes of the subclass Actinobacteridae provided the stimulus for selecting the candidate loci. The hypothesis that gene fragment sequence can predict genome conserved region accurately is supported strongly in this study. The 3 gene fragments (
ychF,
rpoB and
secY) selected appeared to be stable and evolved slowly. The phylogenetic tree derived from the concatenation of these 3 fragments is more robust than that derived from the 16S rRNA (). The 3 loci selected were found to be suitable for MLSA as they amplified and could be sequenced in the species of the subclass Actinobacteridae studied. Also, certain loci were linked as in the case of
rpoB and
rpoC (
rpoB always preceding
rpoC). According to the large
rpoB database
[53] and because the
rpoC amplicon (>1300 bp) was sequenced totally only with additional sequence primers (), we proposed to incorporate
rpoB rather than
rpoC in the MLSA. To our knowledge, these 3 loci have not been incorporated in the same MLSA studies and this represents the first time that
ychF gene has been proposed for bacterial taxonomy, phylogeny and identification. Furthermore, the 3 fragments distinguish more the strains of a single species than the 16S rRNA (). Although there are no validated cut-off values to delineate species of the subclass Actinobacteridae, we observed that similarity values of <96.3% for
ychF, <97.8% for
rpoB and <96.9% for
secY effectively delineated the currently recognized species in the subclass Actinobacteridae. Similar threshold (97.7%) has been suggested for the
rpoB by analysing the complete sequence
[53]. However,
M. marinum and
M. ulcerans;
Rhodococcus jostii and
Rhodococcus opacus;
Corynebacterium pseudogenitalium and
Corynebacterium tuberculostearium;
Streptomyces roseosporus and
Streptomyces griseus;
Streptomyces coelicolor and
Streptomyces lividans; Bifidobacterium catenulatum and
Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum seem to belong to the same species.
Contrary to the slow evolution rate of the 16S rRNA gene, these 3 genes belonging to the essential gene set tend to be highly evolutionarily conserved, in terms of both the rate of sequence evolution
[54] and particularly, in terms of wide phyletic spread
[54]–
[56]. It was suggested by Zeigler
[3] that less than five genes might be sufficient to equal or surpass the power of DNA-DNA hybridizations and could predict overall phylogenetic relatedness with high precision. Recently, it was described by Edwards
[57] that it was not so much the multiplicity of genes that was deemed responsible for the success of combining information via concatenation, but rather the multiplicity of characters or sites. We also demonstrated that
rpoB sequence similarity was significantly correlated with DNA-DNA hybridization among two bacterial species
[58] and average nucleotide identity
[59].
Despite the concerns with MLSA due to the difficulties in choosing genes to be compared, the information derived from the common set of genes presented here can complement and extend the utility of the 16S rRNA sequences for resolving issues pertaining to the genetics and evolution of bacterial genomes. Based on the consensus view introduced here, this common set of genes described may serve as a convenient starting point in the logical development of MLSA for other bacterial species and may be useful in construction of a supertree
[60]. In this study, we systematically selected gene fragments of
ychF,
rpoB and
secY as suitable representative candidates to achieve the goal of creating and generating a robust and highly discriminatory supertree which infers phylogeny among members of Actinobacteria species. Moreover, these 3 fragments of genes could potentially reflect the evolution of the whole genome because they are spaced well apart on the genome and their tree heterogeneity is moderate.
Using a common set of genes for MLSA would represent an easier way to standardize the identification and phylogenetical relationships of known and unknown species across the subclass Actinobacteridae. Admittedly, further studies will be necessary needed to assess the intraspecies and the interspecies variability of isolates and reference strains in the different genera to improve some guidelines for the use of the common set of genes
[40]. MLSA would also favour the creation of sequence databases for comparative purposes and would allow taxonomists to compare new taxa at a remote location via the internet. The exchange of reference strains between laboratories could be reduced and this approach could aid the reorganization of the species of the subclass Actinobacteridae, which would be important for misclassified species and unnamed taxa. Finally, the approach described above may have universal application but should be tested with other bacterial subclass. The primer sets will likely have to be adapted for each subclass or bacterial group.
In summary a set of broad range primers were developed that targeted housekeeping genes distributed in the subclass Actinobacteridae. From the data presented, we concluded that MLSA using the common set of genes ychF, rpoB, and secY represented a valid approach for investigating the identification, phylogeny and taxonomy of Actinobacteria genera and may represent an alternative approach to DNA-DNA hybridization.