In rodents, where chemical signals play a particularly important role in determining intraspecies interactions including social dominance and intersexual relationships, various studies have shown that behavior is sensitive to conspecific odor cues. Mice use urinary scent marks for communication with individual conspecifics in many social contexts. Urinary scent involves genetic information about individuals such as species, sex, and individual identity as well as metabolic information such as social dominance, and reproductive and health status, which are mediated by chemical proteins in scent marks including the major histocompatibility complex and the major urinary proteins. The odor of the predator which can be considered to be a threatening signal for the prey also modulate mouse behavior in which scent marking is suppressed in response to the cat odor exposure in mice. These odorant chemicals are detected and recognized through two olfactory bulbs, the role of which in detection of chemosignals with biological relevant appears to be differential, but partly overlapped. Mice deposit scent marks toward conspecifics to maintain their social relationships, and inhibit scent marking in a context where natural predator, cat odor is contained. This suppression of scent marking is long-lasting (for at least 7 days) and context-dependent, while the odorant signaling to conspecifics tends to appear frequently (over 24h but less than 7 days intervals) depending on the familiarity of each signal-recipient. It has been discussed that scent marking is a communicative behavior associated with territoriality toward conspecifics, indicating that the social signaling within species are sensitive to predator odor cues in terms of vulnerability to predation risk.

A s new environments are explored and technological innovations improve tools for the characterization of microbial biodiversity, insights into bacterial and archaeal diversity are continually emerging 1,2 , including improved understanding of physiological capacity, ecology and evolution of organisms across the tree of life. These advances are based on both cultivation strategies 3,4 and cultivation-independent methods that directly access diversity using single-cell 5,6 or metagenomic sequencing 7-9 (Box 1). Though our ability to culture fastidious microorganisms is improving, success seems to vary depending on the environment. For example, the microbial diversity of host-associated systems such as the human microbiome 11,12 may be more amenable to cultivation compared to some environments such as soil. At present, it seems clear that most archaeal and bacterial diversity remains yet to be cultured 10,13. The reasons are many, but as demonstrated recently by the cultivation of a member of the Asgard archaea 14 , syntrophic interactions, slow growth and media optimization can present formidable challenges. Rules of prokaryotic nomenclature and current challenges Describing biodiversity and identifying organisms are the scientific goals of taxonomy. Taxonomy integrates classification and nomenclature to describe biological diversity. Classification circumscribes and ranks taxa, and nomenclature is the process of assigning names. The commonly used Linnaean nomenclatural system focuses on the recognition of species as the basic unit, which are included in taxa of successively higher ranks (genus, family, order, class and phylum). There is some flexibility on how to circumscribe microbial species using phylogenetic, genotypic and phenotypic data. Once a species is delineated, rules of nomenclature given in the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP or 'the Code' 14 ; see Box 2) guide the creation and assignment of names. This is true of all codes of nomenclature that currently exist-prokaryotes, viruses, animals, algae, fungi and plants-in addition to separate codes for cultivated plants and plant associations. Roadmap for naming uncultivated Archaea and Bacteria The assembly of single-amplified genomes (SAGs) and metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) has led to a surge in genome-based discoveries of members affiliated with Archaea and Bacteria, bringing with it a need to develop guidelines for nomenclature of uncultivated microorganisms. The International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) only recognizes cultures as 'type material', thereby preventing the naming of uncultivated organisms. In this Consensus Statement, we propose two potential paths to solve this nomenclatural conundrum. One option is the adoption of previously proposed modifications to the ICNP to recognize DNA sequences as acceptable type material; the other option creates a nomenclatural code for uncultivated Archaea and Bacteria that could eventually be merged with the ICNP in the future. Regardless of the path taken, we b...

No abstract

BackgroundMicrobial communities that inhabit the mosquito body play an import role in host biology and may have potential for mosquito control. However, the forces that shape these microbial communities are poorly understood.MethodsTo gain a better understanding of how host location influences the composition and diversity of mosquito microbiota, we performed a survey of microbial communities in mosquito samples collected from six USA states using HiSeq sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene.ResultsA total of 284 bacterial operational taxonomic units (OTUs) belonging to 14 phyla were detected in nine mosquito species, with Proteobacteria, Firmicutes and Actinobacteria accounting for 95% of total sequences. OTU richness varied markedly within and between mosquito species. The microbial composition and diversity was heavily influenced by the site of mosquito collection, suggesting that host location plays an important role in shaping the mosquito microbiota.ConclusionsVariation in microbial composition and diversity between mosquitoes from different locations may have important implications on vector competence and transmission dynamics of mosquito-borne pathogens. Future studies should investigate the environmental factors responsible for these variations and the role of key bacteria characterized in this study on mosquito biology and their potential application in symbiotic control of mosquito-borne diseases.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13071-018-3036-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.