Comment on the Reinstatement of Xanthomonas citri (ex Hasse 1915) Gabriel et al. 1989 and X. phaseoli (ex Smith 1897) Gabriel et al. 1989: Indication of the Need for Minimal Standards for the Genus Xanthomonas

Young, J. M.; Bradbury, J. F.; Gardan, Louis; Gvozdyak, R. I.; Stead, D. E.; Takikawa, Yuichi; Vidaver, Anne K.

doi:10.1099/00207713-41-1-172

Cited by 24 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…citri) is illegitimate. Following the reinstatement of X. citri (ex Hasse 1915) Gabriel et al [9] as a validly published name, Young et al [34] wrote that the reinstatement of this epithet was based on a description that was inadequate in terms of modern practice for the purpose of formal classification. This report was subsequently summarized by the International Committee on the Systematics of Bacteria (ICSB) Subcommittee on the Taxonomy of the Genus Pseudomonas and Related Organisms [32] as implying rejection of the epithet, which the Subcommittee itself appeared to endorse.…”

Section: Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emended classification of xanthomonad pathogens on citrus

Schaad

Postnikova

Lacy

et al. 2006

Systematic and Applied Microbiology

212

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emended classification of xanthomonad pathogens on citrus

Schaad

Postnikova

Lacy

et al. 2006

Systematic and Applied Microbiology

212

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, it is possible that DNA-DNA homology analyses may not reveal the elements of a genome which are taxonomically significant (21). This again accentuates the importance of a polyphasic approach that also incorporates phenotypic properties (22,45).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…For classification purposes it is now also considered necessary to calibrate techniques for the differentiation of strains against DNA-DNA hybridization, the conventional method used for the delineation of species (40). Furthermore, it is suggested that minimal standards for the genus Xanthomonas should include tests for generic identity (45). However, it is possible that DNA-DNA homology analyses may not reveal the elements of a genome which are taxonomically significant (21).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reinterpretation of the Taxonomic Position of Xanthomonas maltophilia and Taxonomic Criteria in This Genus: Request for an Opinion

Zyl

Steyn²

1992

International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The inclusion of "Pseudomonas maltophiliu" Hugh 1981 in the genus Xanthomonas as Xanthomonas maltophilia (Hugh 1981) Swings et al. 1983 is questioned in view of the significant differences between these two taxa. This reclassification is not acceptable if practical means of differentiation in this genus are considered. The proposed alteration of the description of the genus Xanthomonas is also questionable because of the implications for everyday phytobacteriology. In view of the natural similarities, as well as the profound differences, between X . maltophiZiu and the genus Xanthomonas, we propose that a new genus should be created for X. maltophilia, which could be placed together with the genus Xanthomonas in a separate natural group.The taxonomic position of Xanthomonas maltophilia (Hugh 1981) Swings et al. 1983 has been the subject of much debate (1, 7, 16, 18, 25, 26,28,35,37,38). Initially isolated from pleural fluid in 1943 and named "Bacterium bookerii," this ubiquitous bacterium was reclassified as "Pseudomonas maltophilia" by Hugh and Ryschenkow in 1961 (15). As b b P . maltophilia" and species of the genus Xanthomonas exhibit substantial levels of rRNA homology (28), it appeared to be appropriate to assign this species to the genus Xanthomonas (26). A number of arguments in the literature also support this view, and consequently Swings et al. (37) proposed the transfer of P. maltophilia Hugh 1981 to the genus Xanthomonas as Xanthomonas maltophilia (Hugh 1981) comb. nov .In view of the significant differences between these two taxa, this reclassification remains questionable (27), partly because of the redefinition of the genus Xanthomonas that would be required to accommodate X . maltophilia (1, 26).As our own results (39) also argue against inclusion of X . maltophilia in the genus Xanthomonas, the purposes of this paper are to question some of the assumptions made by Swings et al. (37), to summarize the latest information on this subject, and to request an opinion.The arguments below proceed from the reclassification proposed by Swings et al. (37) and should be considered together with their corresponding discussions.DNA-rRNA hybridization. The taxonomic value and reliability of DNA-rRNA hybridization for classifying bacteria on generic and suprageneric levels have been demonstrated by several workers (4-8, 12, 22). However, the data discussed below from the reclassification proposed by Swings et al. (37) conditions and the same Xanthomonas campestris NCPPB 528T (T = type strain) reference rRNA. Therefore, the range determined for X . maltophilia by Swings et al. (37) (76.5 to 78.0"C) (7, 37) almost overlapped the range for the genus Xanthomonas, whereas De Vos and De Ley (7) found that X . maltophilia was removed from the genus Xanthomonas at a T,(,, of 3°C under the conditions used. This placed the X . maltophilia cluster close to the genus Xanthomonas, but still not in the genus. This finding was confirmed by Van den Mooter and Swings (38), who found an X . maltophilia Tmce) range of 77...

show abstract

“…While the current taxonomic assignment of Xac-A to the species X. axonopodis has recently been called into question , and the designation to species status of X. citri by Gabriel et al ) was rejected (Young et al 1991), the need to rapidly and accurately identify the pathogen, irrespective of its ultimate taxonomic designation, still exists. Currently, $175M is targeted towards canker eradication in Florida;…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nucleic Acid-Based Detection and Identification of Bacterial and Fungal Plant Pathogens - Final Report

Kingsley¹

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comment on the Reinstatement of Xanthomonas citri (ex Hasse 1915) Gabriel et al. 1989 and X. phaseoli (ex Smith 1897) Gabriel et al. 1989: Indication of the Need for Minimal Standards for the Genus Xanthomonas

Cited by 24 publications

References 15 publications

Emended classification of xanthomonad pathogens on citrus

Emended classification of xanthomonad pathogens on citrus

Reinterpretation of the Taxonomic Position of Xanthomonas maltophilia and Taxonomic Criteria in This Genus: Request for an Opinion

Nucleic Acid-Based Detection and Identification of Bacterial and Fungal Plant Pathogens - Final Report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About