Cited by 181Probiotics and Fermented FoodsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology

Comparative Genome Analysis of Lactococcus lactis Indicates Niche Adaptation and Resolves Genotype/Phenotype Disparity

Open access
Wels, Michiel, Siezen, Roland, van Hijum, Sacha, Kelly, William J., Bachmann, Herwig·2019·Frontiers in Microbiology

Abstract

Lactococcus lactis is one of the most important micro-organisms in the dairy industry for the fermentation of cheese and buttermilk. Besides the conversion of lactose to lactate it is responsible for product properties such as flavor and texture, which are determined by volatile metabolites, proteolytic activity and exopolysaccharide production. While the species Lactococcus lactis consists of the two subspecies lactis and cremoris their taxonomic position is confused by a group of strains that, despite of a cremoris genotype, display a lactis phenotype. Here we compared and analyzed the (draft) genomes of 43 L. lactis strains, of which 19 are of dairy and 24 are of non-dairy origin. Machine-learning algorithms facilitated the identification of orthologous groups of protein sequences (OGs) that are predictors for either the taxonomic position or the source of isolation. This allowed the unambiguous categorization of the genotype/phenotype disparity of ssp. lactis and ssp. cremoris strains. A detailed analysis of phenotypic properties including plasmid-encoded genes indicates evolutionary changes during niche adaptations. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that dairy isolates evolved from plant isolates. The analysis further suggests that genomes of cremoris phenotype strains are so eroded that they are restricted to a dairy environment. Overall the genome comparison of a diverse set of strains allowed the identification of niche and subspecies specific genes. This explains evolutionary relationships and will aid the identification and selection of industrial starter cultures.

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.2019.00004

Cites

112 of 112 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?

  • Recent studies in different microbial species have shown that high growth rates come at the expense of the expression level of metabolic enzymes and/or stress proteins.

    “Recent studies in different microbial species have shown that high growth rates come at the expense of the expression level of metabolic enzymes and/or stress proteins [69,83,84].”

    From Microbiota of Cheese Ecosystems: A Perspective on Cheesemaking (2025) · cites this paper as [84]

    The Results discuss genes associated with growth on particular substrates and with stress tolerance, while the Discussion describes gene loss during niche adaptation. Neither section addresses whether higher growth rates reduce expression of metabolic enzymes or stress proteins; searches for the quoted trade-off and a proteome-allocation paraphrase found no such passage. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Sambrook J. Russell D. W. (2001). Molecular Cloning, 3rd Edn, Vol. 2 New York, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wels, M., Siezen, R., van Hijum, S., Kelly, W. J., & Bachmann, H.
Affiliations
  • TiFN (NL)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Bachmann, Herwig
Venue
Frontiers in Microbiology
Published
2019-01-31
Volume
10
Pages
4-4
ISSN
1664-302X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2914353965
Cited by
181
References
111
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 9
FWCI
23.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Microbiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Keywords
Lactococcus lactis, Lactococcus lactis subsp. cremoris, niche adaptation, comparative genomics, orthogroups, machine learning, plasmid genes, dairy starter cultures, genome erosion

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