Draft Genome Sequence of Antagonistic Agent Lysobacter antibioticus 13-6

Zhou, Lihong; Li, Miao; Yang, Jun; Wei, Lanfang; Ji, Guanghai

doi:10.1128/genomea.00566-14

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(Cheah et al ., 2000), Streptomyces sp. (Cheah et al ., 2001; Lee et al ., 2008), Heteroconium chaetospira (Lahlali et al ., 2014), Streptomyces platensis (Shakeel et al ., 2016), Bacillus subtilis (Guo et al ., 2015; Zhao et al ., 2016), Zhihengliuella aestuarii B18 (Luo et al ., 2017), Paenibacillus kribbensis (Xu et al ., 2014) and Lysobacter antibioticus (Zhou et al ., 2014). Most of these organisms were isolated from rhizosphere soil or root endosphere.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil microbiota influences clubroot disease by modulatingPlasmodiophora brassicaeandBrassica napustranscriptomes

Daval

Gazengel

Belcour

et al. 2020

Microbial Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The contribution of surrounding plant microbiota to disease development has led to the 'pathobiome' concept, which represents the interaction between the pathogen, the host plant and the associated biotic microbial community, resulting or not in plant disease. The aim herein is to understand how the soil microbial environment may influence the functions of a pathogen and its pathogenesis, and the molecular response of the plant to the infection, with a dual-RNAseq transcriptomics approach. We address this question using Brassica napus and Plasmodiophora brassicae, the pathogen responsible for clubroot. A time-course experiment was conducted to study interactions between P. brassicae, two B. napus genotypes and three soils harbouring high, medium or low microbiota diversities and levels of richness. The soil microbial diversity levels had an impact on disease development (symptom levels and pathogen quantity). The P. brassicae and B. napus transcriptional patterns were modulated by these microbial diversities, these modulations being dependent on the host genotype plant and the kinetic time. The functional analysis of gene expressions allowed the identification of pathogen and plant host functions potentially involved in the change of plant disease level, such as pathogenicity-related genes (NUDIX effector) in P. brassicae and plant defence-related genes (glucosinolate metabolism) in B. napus.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil microbiota influences clubroot disease by modulatingPlasmodiophora brassicaeandBrassica napustranscriptomes

Daval

Gazengel

Belcour

et al. 2020

Microbial Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only 1,861 genes were assigned functions, while 2,019 were considered to code for hypothetical proteins. The G+C content of X2-3 is 66.79%, which is similar to that of L. capsici YC5194 T (65.4%), L. capsici AZ78 (66.43%), and Lysobacter antibioticus 13-6 (67.14%) ( 3 , 8 , 9 ).…”

Section: Genome Announcementmentioning

confidence: 57%

Draft Genome Sequence of the Bacterium Lysobacter capsici X2-3, with a Broad Spectrum of Antimicrobial Activity against Multiple Plant-Pathogenic Microbes

Wang

et al. 2015

Genome Announc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The genome analysis predicted its ability to also digest hemicelluloses, such as xylans, mannans and xyloglucans, and this fact was confirmed experimentally (McBride et al ., ). Finally, Lysobacter produces a broad range of proteases and antibiotics, thus representing a source of biocontrol agents (Pasternak et al ., ; Zhou et al ., ; Pereira et al ., ).…”

Section: Genomes Transcriptomes and Comparative Genomics Of Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Bacterial predation: 75 years and counting!

Pérez

Moraleda‐Muñoz

Marcos‐Torres

et al. 2016

Environmental Microbiology

207

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe first documented study on bacterial predation was carried out using myxobacteria three quarters of a century ago. Since then, many predatory strains, diverse hunting strategies, environmental consequences and potential applications have been reported by groups all over the world. Now we know that predatory bacteria are distributed in a wide variety of environments and that interactions between predatory and non-predatory populations seem to be the most important factor in bacterial selection and mortality in some ecosystems. Bacterial predation has now been proposed as an evolutionary driving force. The structure and diversity of the predatory bacterial community is beginning to be recognized as an important factor in biodiversity due to its potential role in controlling and modelling bacterial populations in the environment. In this paper, we review the current understanding of bacterial predation, going over the strategies used by the main predatory bacteria to kill their prey. We have also reviewed and integrated the accumulated advances of the last 75 years with the interesting new insights that are provided by the analyses of genomes, predatomes, predatosomes and other comparative genomics studies, focusing on potential applications that derive from all of these areas of study.

show abstract

Draft Genome Sequence of Antagonistic Agent Lysobacter antibioticus 13-6

Cited by 12 publications

References 3 publications

Soil microbiota influences clubroot disease by modulatingPlasmodiophora brassicaeandBrassica napustranscriptomes

Soil microbiota influences clubroot disease by modulatingPlasmodiophora brassicaeandBrassica napustranscriptomes

Draft Genome Sequence of the Bacterium Lysobacter capsici X2-3, with a Broad Spectrum of Antimicrobial Activity against Multiple Plant-Pathogenic Microbes

Bacterial predation: 75 years and counting!

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About