Bisgaardia miroungae sp. nov., a new member of the family Pasteurellaceae isolated from the oral cavity of northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris), and emended description of the genus Bisgaardia

Abstract

A total of 17 bacterial isolates from northern elephant seals, tentatively classified within the family Pasteurellaceae, were further characterized by genotypic and phenotypic tests. Phylogenetic analysis of partial 16S rRNA and rpoB gene sequences showed that the isolates investigated formed a monophyletic group, closely related to the genus Bisgaardia within the family Pasteurellaceae. The rpoB gene sequence similarity was 97.2-100 % within the group and 16S rRNA gene sequence comparisons showed 99.2-99.8 % similarity within the group. According to 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis, the most closely related species with a validly published name was Bisgaardia hudsonensis with 96.9 % similarity and the most closely related species based on rpoB sequence comparison was Bisgaardia genomospecies 1 with an rpoB sequence similarity of 90.9 %. All the isolates investigated exhibited the phenotypic characteristics of the family Pasteurellaceae. However, these isolates could be separated from existing species of the genus Bisgaardia by the following characteristics: ability to grow at 42 6C, and acid production from lactose, melibiose, raffinose and L-rhamnose, but not from D-mannitol or trehalose. On the basis of both phylogenetic and phenotypic evidence, it is proposed that the strains should be classified as representatives of a novel species within the genus Bisgaardia: Bisgaardia miroungae sp. nov. The type strain, Wildatric T (5CCUG 65148

Polar bear‐adapted Ursidibacter maritimus are remarkably conserved after generations in captivity

“…In contrast, our study generated data on the evolutionary path that microorganisms may endure during the process from wild to captive of their host. Pasteurellaceae species are steadily found to exhibit a commensal lifestyle in the oral cavity of wildlife, including captive marsupials and wild and captive pinnipeds (Hansen et al, 2012, 2017; Hansen, Bertelsen, et al, 2015), reptiles such as captive turtles (Hansen et al, 2016) and wild Komodo dragons (Montgomery et al, 2002). The study in Komodo dragons is to our knowledge the only previous work comparing the oral microbiota of wild and captive animals, where Pasteurellaceae were found sporadically in the wild group only, using a culture‐based approach.…”

“…While most members of this family generally have a commensal lifestyle, some species can be highly pathogenic (Bonaventura et al, 2010). Importantly, with the exception of Pasteurella multocida (potential pathogen of multiple phylogenetically unrelated hosts), Pasteurellaceae taxa are associated to a single group of closely related host species (Hansen et al, 2012, 2015, 2016, 2017; Sinclair et al, 2019). Such associations include the closely‐related Ursidibacter maritimus and Ursidibacter arcticus colonising the oral cavity of polar and brown bears, respectively (Hansen, Strom Braaten, et al, 2015), Gallibacterium anatis in the respiratory and genital tract of galliform birds (Johnson et al, 2013), Mannheimia haemolytica in ruminants (Larsen et al, 2007), and Lonepinella sp.…”

Draft Genome Sequence of Chelonobacter oris Strain 1662 T , Associated with Respiratory Disease in Hermann's Tortoises

“…Pasteurellaceae , with few exceptions, are primarily opportunistic pathogens. Until 2011, the Pasteurellaceae family included 15 genera ( 1 ); however, new genera isolated from various animal species are continuously added to the family Pasteurellaceae ( 2 – 6 ). Most Pasteurellaceae species are host-specific and only occasionally may be transmitted between different hosts ( 7 ).…”

Ursidibacter maritimus gen. nov., sp. nov. and Ursidibacter arcticus sp. nov., two new members of the family Pasteurellaceae isolated from the oral cavity of bears

“…Table 1. Phenotypic characteristics that distinguish Ursidibacter gen. nov. from other genera of the family Pasteurellaceae Genera: 1, Ursidibacter gen. nov. (data from this study); 2 Haemophilus sensu stricto (Nørskov-Lauritsen et al, 2005); 3, Actinobacillus sensu stricto ; 4, Lonepinella (Osawa et al, 1995); 5, Mannheimia (Angen et al, 1999); 6, Pasteurella sensu stricto (Christensen & Bisgaard, 2006); 7, Phocoenobacter (Foster et al, 2000); 8, Gallibacterium (Bisgaard et al, 2009); 9, Volucribacter ; 10, Histophilus (Angen et al, 2003a); 11, Avibacterium (Blackall et al, 2005); 12, Nicoletella (Kuhnert et al, 2004); 13, Bibersteinia (Blackall et al, 2007);14, Aggregatibacter (Nørskov-Lauritsen & Kilian, 2006;Patel et al, 2004); 15, Basfia (Kuhnert et al, 2010); 16, Chelonobacter (Gregersen et al, 2009); 17, Necropsobacter (Christensen et al, 2011b); 18, Bisgaardia (Foster et al, 2011;Hansen et al, 2015);19, Otariodibacter (Hansen et al, 2012); 20, Frederiksenia (Korczak et al, 2014); 21, Mesocricetibacter (Christensen et al, 2014b); 22, Cricetibacter (Christensen et al, 2014b);23, Vespertiliibacter (Mühldorfer et al, 2014). +, Only positive reactions occur; 2, only negative reactions occur; d, positive or negative; ND, no data available.…”