The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genome-Based Taxonomic Classification of the Phylum Actinobacteria
Open accessAbstract
but even so there remains a need to further clarify relationships within a taxon that encompasses organisms of agricultural, biotechnological, clinical, and ecological importance. Classification of the morphologically diverse bacteria belonging to this large phylum based on a limited number of features has proved to be difficult, not least when taxonomic decisions rested heavily on interpretation of poorly resolved 16S rRNA gene trees. Here, draft genome sequences of a large collection of actinobacterial type strains were used to infer phylogenetic trees from genome-scale data using principles drawn from phylogenetic systematics. The majority of taxa were found to be monophyletic but several orders, families, and genera, as well as many species and a few subspecies were shown to be in need of revision leading to proposals for the recognition of 2 orders, 10 families, and 17 genera, as well as the transfer of over 100 species to other genera. In addition, emended descriptions are given for many species mainly involving the addition of data on genome size and DNA G+C content, the former can be considered to be a valuable taxonomic marker in actinobacterial systematics. Many of the incongruities detected when the results of the present study were compared with existing classifications had been recognized from 16S rRNA gene trees though whole-genome phylogenies proved to be much better resolved. The few significant incongruities found between 16S/23S rRNA and whole genome trees underline the pitfalls inherent in phylogenies based upon single gene sequences. Similarly good congruence was found between the discontinuous distribution of phenotypic properties and taxa delineated in the phylogenetic trees though diverse non-monophyletic taxa appeared to be based on the use of plesiomorphic character states as diagnostic features.
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
BLAST+: architecture and applications
Camacho, C., Coulouris, G., Avagyan, V., Ma, N., Papadopoulos, J., Bealer, K., & Madden, T. L. (2009) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-421 · Cited by 22,074
Breiman, L. (1996) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00058655 · Cited by 16,325
Phylogenies and the Comparative Method
Felsenstein, J. (1985) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/284325 · Cited by 9,793
OrthoMCL: Identification of Ortholog Groups for Eukaryotic Genomes
Li, L., Stoeckert, C. J., & Roos, D. S. (2003) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.1224503 · Cited by 5,707
Phylogenomics: The beginning of incongruence?
JEFFROY, O., BRINKMANN, H., DELSUC, F., & PHILIPPE, H. (2006) · Trends in Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.tig.2006.02.003 · Cited by 698
Masco, L., Ventura, M., Zink, R., Huys, G., & Swings, J. (2004) · International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology · doi:10.1099/ijs.0.03011-0 · Cited by 140
Streptomyces clavuligerus sp. nov., a -Lactam Antibiotic Producer
HIGGENS, C. E., & KASTNER, R. E. (1971) · International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology · doi:10.1099/00207713-21-4-326 · Cited by 112
Cited by
Fleishman, J. S., & Kumar, S. (2024) · Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy · doi:10.1038/s41392-024-01811-6 · Cited by 544
(BIOHAZ), E. P. O. B. H., Koutsoumanis, K., Allende, A., Alvarez‐Ordóñez, A., Bolton, D., Bover‐Cid, S., Chemaly, M., Davies, R., De Cesare, A., Hilbert, F., et al. (2021) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6377 · Cited by 445
MITRA, D., MONDAL, R., KHOSHRU, B., SENAPATI, A., RADHA, T. K., MAHAKUR, B., UNIYAL, N., MYO, E. M., BOUTAJ, H., SIERRA, B. E. G., et al. (2022) · Pedosphere · doi:10.1016/s1002-0160(21)60042-5 · Cited by 281
A citizen-science-enabled catalogue of the vaginal microbiome and associated factors
Lebeer, S., Ahannach, S., Gehrmann, T., Wittouck, S., Eilers, T., Oerlemans, E., Condori, S., Dillen, J., Spacova, I., Vander Donck, L., et al. (2023) · Nature Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41564-023-01500-0 · Cited by 181
Liu, J., Li, W., Yao, C., Yu, J., & Zhang, H. (2022) · BMC Microbiology · doi:10.1186/s12866-022-02573-3 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Nouioui, I., Carro, L., García-López, M., Meier-Kolthoff, J. P., Woyke, T., Kyrpides, N. C., Pukall, R., Klenk, H.-P., Goodfellow, M., & Göker, M.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Microbiology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2018-08-22
- Volume
- 9
- Pages
- 2007-2007
- ISSN
- 1664-302X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2888547803
- Cited by
- 769
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 46.69
- 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: Genome-Based Taxonomic Classification of the Phylum Actinobacteria. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02007
- The paper
- Nouioui, I., Carro, L., García-López, M., Meier-Kolthoff, J. P., Woyke, T., Kyrpides, N. C., Pukall, R., Klenk, H.-P., Goodfellow, M., & Göker, M. (2018). Genome-Based Taxonomic Classification of the Phylum Actinobacteria. Frontiers in Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02007
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.