The DOI matches its Crossref record.
16S rRNA and amoA-based phylogeny of 12 novel betaproteobacterial ammonia-oxidizing isolates: extension of the dataset and proposal of a new lineage within the nitrosomonads
Abstract
The phylogenetic relationship of 12 ammonia-oxidizing isolates (eight nitrosospiras and four nitrosomonads), for which no gene sequence information was available previously, was investigated based on their genes encoding 16S rRNA and the active site subunit of ammonia monooxygenase (AmoA). Almost full-length 16S rRNA gene sequences were determined for the 12 isolates. In addition, 16S rRNA gene sequences of 15 ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB) published previously were completed to allow for a more reliable phylogeny inference of members of this guild. Moreover, sequences of 453 bp fragments of the amoA gene were determined from 15 AOB, including the 12 isolates, and completed for 10 additional AOB. 16S rRNA gene and amoA-based analyses, including all available sequences of AOB pure cultures, were performed to determine the position of the newly retrieved sequences within the established phylogenetic framework. The resulting 16S rRNA gene and amoA tree topologies were similar but not identical and demonstrated a superior resolution of 16S rRNA versus amoA analysis. While 11 of the 12 isolates could be assigned to different phylogenetic groups recognized within the betaproteobacterial AOB, the estuarine isolate Nitrosomonas sp. Nm143 formed a separate lineage together with three other marine isolates whose 16S rRNA sequences have not been published but have been deposited in public databases. In addition, 17 environmentally retrieved 16S rRNA gene sequences not assigned previously and all originating exclusively from marine or estuarine sites clearly belong to this lineage.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Microbial processes influencing performance of treatment wetlands: A review
Faulwetter, J. L., Gagnon, V., Sundberg, C., Chazarenc, F., Burr, M. D., Brisson, J., Camper, A. K., & Stein, O. R. (2009) · Ecological Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2008.12.030 · Cited by 788
Hayatsu, M., Tago, K., & Saito, M. (2008) · Soil Science and Plant Nutrition · doi:10.1111/j.1747-0765.2007.00195.x · Cited by 665
Why is metabolic labour divided in nitrification?
Costa, E., Pérez, J., & Kreft, J.-U. (2006) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2006.03.006 · Cited by 489
Santoro, A. E., Francis, C. A., De Sieyes, N. R., & Boehm, A. B. (2008) · Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1462-2920.2007.01547.x · Cited by 355
Wells, G. F., Park, H., Yeung, C., Eggleston, B., Francis, C. A., & Criddle, C. S. (2009) · Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1462-2920.2009.01958.x · Cited by 263
Metadata
- Authors
- Purkhold, U., Wagner, M., Timmermann, G., Pommerening-Röser, A., & Koops, H.-P.
- Venue
- International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology
- Publisher
- Microbiology Society
- Published
- 2003-09-01
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1485-1494
- ISSN
- 1466-5026 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-5034
- OpenAlex
- W2105350030
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: 16S rRNA and amoA-based phylogeny of 12 novel betaproteobacterial ammonia-oxidizing isolates: extension of the dataset and proposal of a new lineage within the nitrosomonads. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1099/ijs.0.02638-0
- The paper
- Purkhold, U., Wagner, M., Timmermann, G., Pommerening-Röser, A., & Koops, H.-P. (2003). 16S rRNA and amoA-based phylogeny of 12 novel betaproteobacterial ammonia-oxidizing isolates: extension of the dataset and proposal of a new lineage within the nitrosomonads. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.02638-0
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.