↓ Skip to main content

Phylogenomic Analyses and Reclassification of Species within the Genus Tsukamurella: Insights to Species Definition in the Post-genomic Era

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Phylogenomic Analyses and Reclassification of Species within the Genus Tsukamurella: Insights to Species Definition in the Post-genomic Era
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01137
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jade L. L. Teng, Ying Tang, Yi Huang, Feng-Biao Guo, Wen Wei, Jonathan H. K. Chen, Samson S. Y. Wong, Susanna K. P. Lau, Patrick C. Y. Woo

Abstract

Owing to the highly similar phenotypic profiles, protein spectra and 16S rRNA gene sequences observed between three pairs of Tsukamurella species (Tsukamurella pulmonis/Tsukamurella spongiae, Tsukamurella tyrosinosolvens/Tsukamurella carboxy-divorans, and Tsukamurella pseudospumae/Tsukamurella sunchonensis), we hypothesize that and the six Tsukamurella species may have been misclassified and that there may only be three Tsukamurella species. In this study, we characterized the type strains of these six Tsukamurella species by tradition DNA-DNA hybridization (DDH) and "digital DDH" after genome sequencing to determine their exact taxonomic positions. Traditional DDH showed 81.2 ± 0.6% to 99.7 ± 1.0% DNA-DNA relatedness between the two Tsukamurella species in each of the three pairs, which was above the threshold for same species designation. "Digital DDH" based on Genome-To-Genome Distance Calculator and Average Nucleotide Identity for the three pairs also showed similarity results in the range of 82.3-92.9 and 98.1-99.1%, respectively, in line with results of traditional DDH. Based on these evidence and according to Rules 23a and 42 of the Bacteriological Code, we propose that T. spongiae Olson et al. 2007, should be reclassified as a later heterotypic synonym of T. pulmonis Yassin et al. 1996, T. carboxydivorans Park et al. 2009, as a later heterotypic synonym of T. tyrosinosolvens Yassin et al. 1997, and T. sunchonensis Seong et al. 2008 as a later heterotypic synonym of T. pseudospumae Nam et al. 2004. With the advancement of genome sequencing technologies, classification of bacterial species can be readily achieved by "digital DDH" than traditional DDH.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 1 3%
Unknown 28 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 17%
Student > Master 5 17%
Other 4 14%
Researcher 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 4 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 August 2022.
All research outputs
#8,670,745
of 26,397,269 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#8,899
of 30,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,229
of 382,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#202
of 487 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,397,269 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,274 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 382,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 487 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.