Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 219

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bioinformatic Genome Comparisons for Taxonomic and Phylogenetic Assignments Using Aeromonas as a Test Case

Open access
Colston, Sophie M., Fullmer, Matthew S., Beka, Lidia, Lamy, Brigitte, Gogarten, J. Peter, Graf, Joerg·2014·mBio

Abstract

Prokaryotic taxonomy is the underpinning of microbiology, as it provides a framework for the proper identification and naming of organisms. The “gold standard” of bacterial species delineation is the overall genome similarity determined by DNA-DNA hybridization (DDH), a technically rigorous yet sometimes variable method that may produce inconsistent results. Improvements in next-generation sequencing have resulted in an upsurge of bacterial genome sequences and bioinformatic tools that compare genomic data, such as average nucleotide identity (ANI), correlation of tetranucleotide frequencies, and the genome-to-genome distance calculator, or in silico DDH ( is DDH). Here, we evaluate ANI and is DDH in combination with phylogenetic studies using Aeromonas , a taxonomically challenging genus with many described species and several strains that were reassigned to different species as a test case. We generated improved, high-quality draft genome sequences for 33 Aeromonas strains and combined them with 23 publicly available genomes. ANI and is DDH distances were determined and compared to phylogenies from multilocus sequence analysis of housekeeping genes, ribosomal proteins, and expanded core genes. The expanded core phylogenetic analysis suggested relationships between distant Aeromonas clades that were inconsistent with studies using fewer genes. ANI values of ≥96% and is DDH values of ≥70% consistently grouped genomes originating from strains of the same species together. Our study confirmed known misidentifications, validated the recent revisions in the nomenclature, and revealed that a number of genomes deposited in GenBank are misnamed. In addition, two strains were identified that may represent novel Aeromonas species. IMPORTANCE Improvements in DNA sequencing technologies have resulted in the ability to generate large numbers of high-quality draft genomes and led to a dramatic increase in the number of publically available genomes. This has allowed researchers to characterize microorganisms using genome data. Advantages of genome sequence-based classification include data and computing programs that can be readily shared, facilitating the standardization of taxonomic methodology and resolving conflicting identifications by providing greater uniformity in an overall analysis. Using Aeromonas as a test case, we compared and validated different approaches. Based on our analyses, we recommend cutoff values for distance measures for identifying species. Accurate species classification is critical not only to obviate the perpetuation of errors in public databases but also to ensure the validity of inferences made on the relationships among species within a genus and proper identification in clinical and veterinary diagnostic laboratories.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/mbio.02136-14

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 219

Metadata

Authors
Colston, S. M., Fullmer, M. S., Beka, L., Lamy, B., Gogarten, J. P., & Graf, J.
Venue
mBio
Published
2014-12-31
Volume
5
Issue
6
Pages
e02136-e02136
ISSN
  • 2150-7511 (ISSN-L)
  • 2161-2129
OpenAlex
W2098969756
Cited by
219
References
5
FWCI
6.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Bioinformatic Genome Comparisons for Taxonomic and Phylogenetic Assignments Using Aeromonas as a Test Case. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/mbio.02136-14
The paper
Colston, S. M., Fullmer, M. S., Beka, L., Lamy, B., Gogarten, J. P., & Graf, J. (2014). Bioinformatic Genome Comparisons for Taxonomic and Phylogenetic Assignments Using Aeromonas as a Test Case. mBio. https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.02136-14

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.