↓ Skip to main content

Genome-Based Reclassification of Fusobacterium nucleatum Subspecies at the Species Level

Overview of attention for article published in Current Microbiology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Genome-Based Reclassification of Fusobacterium nucleatum Subspecies at the Species Level
Published in
Current Microbiology, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00284-017-1296-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joong-Ki Kook, Soon-Nang Park, Yun Kyong Lim, Eugene Cho, Eojin Jo, Hansung Roh, Yeseul Shin, Jayoung Paek, Hwa-Sook Kim, Hongik Kim, Jeong Hwan Shin, Young-Hyo Chang

Abstract

Fusobacterium nucleatum is classified as four subspecies, subsp. nucleatum, polymorphum, vincentii, and animalis, based on DNA-DNA hybridization (DDH) patterns, phenotypic characteristics, and/or multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA). The gold standards for classification of bacterial species are DDH and 16S ribosomal RNA gene (16S rDNA) sequence homology. The thresholds of DDH and 16S rDNA similarity for delineation of bacterial species have been suggested to be >70 and 98.65%, respectively. Average nucleotide identity (ANI) and genome-to-genome distance (GGD) analysis based on genome sequences were recently introduced as a replacement for DDH to delineate bacterial species with ANI (95-96%) and GGD (70%) threshold values. In a previous study, F. hwasookii was classified as a new species based on MLSA and DDH results. 16S rDNA similarity between F. hwasookii type strain and F. nucleatum subspecies type strains was higher than that between F. nucleatum subspecies type strains. Therefore, it is possible that the four F. nucleatum subspecies can be classified as Fusobacterium species. In this study, we performed ANI and GGD analyses using the genome sequences of 36 F. nucleatum, five F. hwasookii, and one Fusobacterium periodonticum strain to determine whether the four F. nucleatum subspecies could be classified as species using OrthoANI and ANI web-based softwares provided by ChunLab and Kostas lab, respectively, and GGD calculator offered by German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures. ANI values calculated from OrthoANI and ANI calculators between the type strains of F. nucleatum subspecies ranged from 89.80 to 92.97 and from 90.40 to 91.90%, respectively. GGD values between the type strains of F. nucleatum subspecies ranged from 42.3 to 46.0%. ANI and GGD values among strains belonging to the same F. nucleatum subspecies, subsp. nucleatum, subsp. polymorphum, subsp. vincentii, and subsp. animalis were >96 and >68.2%, respectively. These results strongly suggest that F. nucleatum subsp. nucleatum, subsp. polymorphum, subsp. vincentii, and subsp. animalis should be classified as F. nucleatum, F. polymorphum, F. vincentii, and F. animalis, respectively.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 23%
Unspecified 5 19%
Other 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 31%
Unspecified 7 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 23%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 July 2017.
All research outputs
#9,381,517
of 12,229,156 outputs
Outputs from Current Microbiology
#1,024
of 1,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,809
of 264,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Microbiology
#14
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,229,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,376 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,776 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.