Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 433

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phylogenomics and systematics in Pseudomonas

Open access
Gomila, Margarita, Peña, Arantxa, Mulet, Magdalena, Lalucat, Jorge, García-Valdés, Elena·2015·Frontiers in Microbiology

Abstract

The genus Pseudomonas currently contains 144 species, making it the genus of Gram-negative bacteria that contains the largest number of species. Currently, multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA) is the preferred method for establishing the phylogeny between species and genera. Four partial gene sequences of housekeeping genes (16S rRNA, gyrB, rpoB, and rpoD) were obtained from 112 complete or draft genomes of strains related to the genus Pseudomonas that were available in databases. These genes were analyzed together with the corresponding sequences of 133 Pseudomonas type strains of validly published species to assess their correct phylogenetic assignations. We confirmed that 30% of the sequenced genomes of non-type strains were not correctly assigned at the species level in the accepted taxonomy of the genus and that 20% of the strains were not identified at the species level. Most of these strains had been isolated and classified several years ago, and their taxonomic status has not been updated by modern techniques. MLSA was also compared with indices based on the analysis of whole-genome sequences that have been proposed for species delineation, such as tetranucleotide usage patterns (TETRA), average nucleotide identity (ANIm, based on MUMmer and ANIb, based on BLAST) and genome-to-genome distance (GGDC). TETRA was useful for discriminating Pseudomonas from other genera, whereas ANIb and GGDC clearly separated strains of different species. ANIb showed the strongest correlation with MLSA. The correct species classification is a prerequisite for most diversity and evolutionary studies. This work highlights the necessity for complete genomic sequences of type strains to build a phylogenomic taxonomy and that all new genome sequences submitted to databases should be correctly assigned to species to avoid taxonomic inconsistencies.

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 · 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00214

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 433

Metadata

Authors
Gomila, M., Peña, A., Mulet, M., Lalucat, J., & García-Valdés, E.
Venue
Frontiers in Microbiology
Published
2015-03-18
Volume
6
Pages
214-214
ISSN
1664-302X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2061578584
Cited by
433
References
3
FWCI
13.51
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: Phylogenomics and systematics in Pseudomonas. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fmicb.2015.00214
The paper
Gomila, M., Peña, A., Mulet, M., Lalucat, J., & García-Valdés, E. (2015). Phylogenomics and systematics in Pseudomonas. Frontiers in Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.00214

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.