Cited by 145Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionBiofuel production and bioconversion

Comparison of single-molecule sequencing and hybrid approaches for finishing the genome of Clostridium autoethanogenum and analysis of CRISPR systems in industrial relevant clostridia

Open access
Brown, Steven D, Nagaraju, Shilpa, Utturkar, Sagar, De Tissera, Sashini, Segovia, Simón, Mitchell, Wayne, Land, Miriam L, Dassanayake, Asela +1 more·2014·Biotechnology for Biofuels

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clostridium autoethanogenum strain JA1-1 (DSM 10061) is an acetogen capable of fermenting CO, CO2 and H2 (e.g. from syngas or waste gases) into biofuel ethanol and commodity chemicals such as 2,3-butanediol. A draft genome sequence consisting of 100 contigs has been published. RESULTS: A closed, high-quality genome sequence for C. autoethanogenum DSM10061 was generated using only the latest single-molecule DNA sequencing technology and without the need for manual finishing. It is assigned to the most complex genome classification based upon genome features such as repeats, prophage, nine copies of the rRNA gene operons. It has a low G + C content of 31.1%. Illumina, 454, Illumina/454 hybrid assemblies were generated and then compared to the draft and PacBio assemblies using summary statistics, CGAL, QUAST and REAPR bioinformatics tools and comparative genomic approaches. Assemblies based upon shorter read DNA technologies were confounded by the large number repeats and their size, which in the case of the rRNA gene operons were ~5 kb. CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Paloindromic Repeats) systems among biotechnologically relevant Clostridia were classified and related to plasmid content and prophages. Potential associations between plasmid content and CRISPR systems may have implications for historical industrial scale Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol (ABE) fermentation failures and future large scale bacterial fermentations. While C. autoethanogenum contains an active CRISPR system, no such system is present in the closely related Clostridium ljungdahlii DSM 13528. A common prophage inserted into the Arg-tRNA shared between the strains suggests a common ancestor. However, C. ljungdahlii contains several additional putative prophages and it has more than double the amount of prophage DNA compared to C. autoethanogenum. Other differences include important metabolic genes for central metabolism (as an additional hydrogenase and the absence of a phophoenolpyruvate synthase) and substrate utilization pathway (mannose and aromatics utilization) that might explain phenotypic differences between C. autoethanogenum and C. ljungdahlii. CONCLUSIONS: Single molecule sequencing will be increasingly used to produce finished microbial genomes. The complete genome will facilitate comparative genomics and functional genomics and support future comparisons between Clostridia and studies that examine the evolution of plasmids, bacteriophage and CRISPR systems.

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 · 10.1186/1754-6834-7-40

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, S. D., Nagaraju, S., Utturkar, S., De Tissera, S., Segovia, S., Mitchell, W., Land, M. L., Dassanayake, A., & Köpke, M.
Affiliations
  • Oak Ridge National Laboratory (US)
  • LanzaTech (New Zealand) (NZ)
  • University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
Corresponding author
  • Brown, Steven D
  • Köpke, Michael
Venue
Biotechnology for Biofuels
Published
2014-03-21
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
40-40
ISSN
1754-6834 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2151208862
Cited by
145
References
88
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 8
FWCI
8.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biotechnology for Biofuels (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy (AC05-00OR22725, DE--AC05--00OR22725, DE-AC05?, under Contract DE-AC05-00OR22725, 00OR22725)
  • Battelle (DE-AC05- 00OR22725, AC05-00OR22725, DE-AC05)
  • UT-Battelle (DE-AC05, DEAC05-00OR22725, Contract DE-AC05-00OR22725, AC05-00OR22725)
  • Office of Science (DEAC05- 00OR22725, AC05-00OR22725)
  • Oak Ridge National Laboratory (AC05-00OR22725, DE-AC05-00OR22725)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
Keywords
Clostridium autoethanogenum, Clostridium ljungdahlii, genome finishing, single-molecule sequencing, PacBio, hybrid sequencing, genome assembly comparison, CRISPR systems, prophages, plasmids, acetone-butanol-ethanol fermentation, acetogenic bacteria, hydrogenase, comparative genomics, industrial fermentation

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