
doi: 10.1099/ijs.0.000090
pmid: 25634949
Bacterial classification is a long-standing problem for taxonomists and species definition itself is constantly debated among specialists. The classification of strict intracellular bacteria such as members of the order Chlamydiales mainly relies on DNA- or protein-based phylogenetic reconstructions because these organisms exhibit few phenotypic differences and are difficult to culture. The availability of full genome sequences allows the comparison of the performance of conserved protein sequences to reconstruct Chlamydiales phylogeny. This approach permits the identification of markers that maximize the phylogenetic signal and the robustness of the inferred tree. In this study, a set of 424 core proteins was identified and concatenated to reconstruct a reference species tree. Although individual protein trees present variable topologies, we detected only few cases of incongruence with the reference species tree, which were due to horizontal gene transfers. Detailed analysis of the phylogenetic information of individual protein sequences (i) showed that phylogenies based on single randomly chosen core proteins are not reliable and (ii) led to the identification of twenty taxonomically highly reliable proteins, allowing the reconstruction of a robust tree close to the reference species tree. We recommend using these protein sequences to precisely classify newly discovered isolates at the family, genus and species levels.
DNA, Bacterial, Chlamydiales, Gene Transfer, Horizontal, Sequence Analysis, DNA, RNA, Ribosomal, 23S, Bacterial Proteins, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Amino Acid Sequence, Sequence Alignment, Conserved Sequence, Genome, Bacterial, Phylogeny
DNA, Bacterial, Chlamydiales, Gene Transfer, Horizontal, Sequence Analysis, DNA, RNA, Ribosomal, 23S, Bacterial Proteins, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Amino Acid Sequence, Sequence Alignment, Conserved Sequence, Genome, Bacterial, Phylogeny
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 62 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
