The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Towards a Genome-Based Taxonomy for Prokaryotes
Open accessAbstract
The ranks higher than the species in the prokaryotic taxonomy are primarily designated based on phylogenetic analysis of the 16S rRNA gene sequences, but no definite standards exist for the absolute relatedness (measured by 16S rRNA or other means) between the ranks. Accordingly, it remains unknown how comparable the ranks are between different organisms. To gain insights into this question, we studied the relationship between shared gene content and genetic relatedness for 175 fully sequenced strains, using as a robust measure of relatedness the average amino acid identity (AAI) of the shared genes. Our results reveal that adjacent ranks (e.g., phylum versus class) frequently show extensive overlap in terms of genetic and gene content relatedness of the grouped organisms, and hence, the current system is of limited predictive power in this respect. The overlap between nonadjacent ranks (e.g., phylum versus family) is generally limited and attributable to clear inconsistencies of the taxonomy. In addition to providing means for standardizing taxonomy, our AAI-based approach provides a means to evaluate the robustness of alternative genetic markers for phylogenetic purposes. For instance, the 23S rRNA gene was found to be as good a marker as the 16S rRNA gene, while several of the widely distributed protein-coding genes, such as the RNA polymerase and gyrase subunits, show a strong phylogenetic signal, albeit less strong than the rRNA genes (0.78 > R 2 > 0.69 for the protein-coding genes versus R 2 = 0.84 for the rRNA genes). The AAI approach outlined here could contribute significantly to a genome-based taxonomy for all microbial organisms.
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
Cites
Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs
Altschul, S. (1997) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/25.17.3389 · Cited by 73,302
Cited by
Parks, D. H., Imelfort, M., Skennerton, C. T., Hugenholtz, P., & Tyson, G. W. (2015) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.186072.114 · Cited by 12,496
A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life
Parks, D. H., Chuvochina, M., Waite, D. W., Rinke, C., Skarshewski, A., Chaumeil, P.-A., & Hugenholtz, P. (2018) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.4229 · Cited by 3,603
Zheng, J., Wittouck, S., Salvetti, E., Franz, C. M. A. P., Harris, H. M. B., Mattarelli, P., O’Toole, P. W., Pot, B., Vandamme, P., Walter, J., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology · doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.004107 · Cited by 3,313
TYGS is an automated high-throughput platform for state-of-the-art genome-based taxonomy
Meier-Kolthoff, J. P., & Göker, M. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-10210-3 · Cited by 3,276
Toward Automatic Reconstruction of a Highly Resolved Tree of Life
Ciccarelli, F. D., Doerks, T., von Mering, C., Creevey, C. J., Snel, B., & Bork, P. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1123061 · Cited by 1,663
Metadata
- Authors
- Konstantinidis, K. T., & Tiedje, J. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Bacteriology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2005-09-15
- Volume
- 187
- Issue
- 18
- Pages
- 6258-6264
- ISSN
- 0021-9193 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5530
- OpenAlex
- W2128777911
- Cited by
- 1,155
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Towards a Genome-Based Taxonomy for Prokaryotes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jb.187.18.6258-6264.2005
- The paper
- Konstantinidis, K. T., & Tiedje, J. M. (2005). Towards a Genome-Based Taxonomy for Prokaryotes. Journal of Bacteriology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.187.18.6258-6264.2005
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.