Draft genome sequences of two Gluconobacter strains isolated from spoiled orange juice
Ky Ariano, Tayler Farrington, Paul Schweiger

TL;DR
This paper reports the draft genomes of two Gluconobacter strains from spoiled orange juice to better understand these bacteria for industrial use.
Contribution
The novelty lies in providing new draft genome sequences of Gluconobacter strains from a food spoilage context.
Findings
Two Gluconobacter strains were isolated from spoiled orange juice.
Draft genome sequences of these strains were generated.
The study contributes to understanding acetic acid bacteria diversity.
Abstract
Here, we present the draft genome sequences of two Gluconobacter strains that were isolated from spoiled orange juice. Gluconobacter are members of the acetic acid bacteria and are known for their unique metabolism and use in industry. Understanding acetic acid bacteria diversity is essential for engineering further optimized industrial strains.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
| Strain |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Illumina data | ||
| No. of raw reads generated | 5,519,762 | 6,368,484 |
| No. of raw Mb generated | 811.69 | 936.36 |
| No. of reads after filtering | 5,295,054 | 6,109,328 |
| No. of Mb after filtering | 733.67 | 892.74 |
| Fold coverage | 211.83 | 280.65 |
| SRA ID |
|
|
| Nanopore data | ||
| No. of raw reads generated | 105,690 | 539,216 |
| No. of raw Mb generated | 490.66 | 2137.17 |
| | 11,732 | 7,350 |
| No. of reads after filtering | 105,690 | 539,216 |
| No. of Mb after filtering | 401.46 | 1835.80 |
| Fold coverage | 121.80 | 624.20 |
| SRA ID |
|
|
| Hybrid assembly | ||
| Total length | 3,794,501 | 3,305,620 |
| | 2,287,605 | 2,819,765 |
| | 1 | 1 |
| No. of contigs | 11 | 10 |
| GC content (%) | 56.19 | 58.21 |
| Completeness (%) | 97.93 | 96.01 |
| Contamination (%) | 7.44 | 7.58 |
| Genome annotation | ||
| Protein-coding genes | 3,419 | 3,054 |
| 5S rRNA | 4 | 4 |
| 16S rRNA | 4 | 4 |
| 23S rRNA | 4 | 4 |
| tRNAs | 57 | 58 |
| Taxonomic classification | ||
| Placement reference |
|
|
| Placement taxonomy |
|
|
| Placement ANI | 96.95 | 96.45 |
| Accession numbers | ||
| BioProject accession |
|
|
| Biosample accession |
|
|
| GenBank accession |
|
|
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMicrobial metabolism and enzyme function · Biochemical Acid Research Studies · Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
ANNOUNCEMENT
Acetic acid bacteria (AAB) incompletely oxidize growth substrates using membrane-bound dehydrogenases (1, 2). The byproducts diffuse into the media, which makes them industrially useful for production of vinegar, vitamin C, the antidiabetic drug miglitol, dihydroxyacetone, and many artificial flavorings (3 – 5). To expand upon known AAB diversity and identify new targets for strain design, we sequenced the genomes of two Gluconobacter strains.
These Gluconobacter strains were isolated from spoiled Fit & Active Orange Juice Beverage purchased in Onalaska, WI. Samples were plated onto YG medium (6 g/L yeast extract, 20 g/L glucose, 2.5 g/L MgSO_4_ × 7H_2_O, 1 g/L (NH_4_)2_SO_4, 1 g/L KH_2_PO_4_, pH 6.0) with 50 µg/mL cefoxitin and incubated at 30°C for 3 days. For initial isolation, 20 g/L CaCO_3_ was added to differentiate AAB colonies, and 15 g/L agar was added to make solid media. Isolated colonies producing zones of clearance were selected and passaged to purity. Genomic DNA was isolated from single colonies grown in YG broth using the DNeasy UltraClean Microbial Kit (QIAGEN, Ann Arbor, MI). The 16S rRNA gene was amplified using primers 8FE/1492R and Sanger sequenced by Eurofins Genomics (Louisville, KY) using their 16F primer (CGGTTACCTTGTTACGACTT). Two isolates were identified as Gluconobacter spp. using the NCBI BLAST RefSeq database. The isolates Gluconobacter sp. OJA and OJB best matched G. cerinus (99.90% identity, E-value: 0.0, accession: NR_118192) and G. cerevisiae (99.88% identity, E-value: 0.0, accession: NR_117735).
For whole-genome sequencing, Gluconobacter sp. OJA and OJB were grown on YG agar from 15% glycerol stocks stored at −80°C. Single colonies were inoculated into YG broth with 50 µg/mL cefoxitin at 30°C with 250 rpm shaking overnight. Genomic DNA was isolated as described above. DNA was quantified using the QuantiFlor dsDNA System (Promega, Madison, Wisconsin) and sent to SeqCenter (Pittsburgh, PA) for sequencing. Illumina libraries were prepared using an Illumina DNA Prep Kit and IDT 10 bp UDI indices and sequenced on a NextSeq 2000 producing 2 × 151 bp reads. Demultiplexing and adapter removal used bcl2fastq v.2.20.0.422. Nanopore sample preparation used the Oxford Nanopore Genomic DNA by Ligation kit (SQK-LSK109) and protocol without shearing. Samples were run on a MinION using Nanopore R9 flow cells (R9.4.1). Quality control and basecalling used Guppy v5.0.16 in high-accuracy base mode (6).
Reads were processed and assembled using KBase and the Bacterial and Viral Bioinformatics Resource Center (7, 8). All software used default parameters except where noted. Read libraries were quality checked using FastQC v0.12.1 and Compute Simple Read Library Stats v2.0.2. Low-quality reads and adapter sequences were trimmed using the JGI RQCFilter pipeline (BBTools v38.22) v0.5.0, Trim Galore v0.6.5dev, and CutAdapt v4.2 (9). Trimmed reads were assembled using HybridSPAdes v3.15.3 (minimum contig length: 2,000 bp, K-mer sizes: 21, 33, 55, 77, 99, and 127). The assembled genome was annotated using the NCBI Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline (PGAP) v6.7 and deposited to NCBI (10). Summary statistics and relevant reporting information are given in Table 1.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1Deppenmeier U , Ehrenreich A . 2009. Physiology of acetic acid bacteria in light of the genome sequence of Gluconobacter oxydans. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 16:69–80. doi:10.1159/000142895 18957863 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 2Prust C , Hoffmeister M , Liesegang H , Wiezer A , Fricke WF , Ehrenreich A , Gottschalk G , Deppenmeier U . 2005. Complete genome sequence of the acetic acid bacterium Gluconobacter oxydans. Nat Biotechnol 23:195–200. doi:10.1038/nbt 1062 15665824 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 3Deppenmeier U , Hoffmeister M , Prust C . 2002. Biochemistry and biotechnological applications of Gluconobacter strains. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 60:233–242. doi:10.1007/s 00253-002-1114-5 12436304 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 4da Silva GAR , Oliveira S de S , Lima SF , do Nascimento RP , Baptista A de S , Fiaux SB . 2022. The industrial versatility of Gluconobacter oxydans: current applications and future perspectives. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 38:134. doi:10.1007/s 11274-022-03310-8 35688964 PMC 9187504 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 5Wang EX , Ding MZ , Ma Q , Dong XT , Yuan YJ . 2016. Reorganization of a synthetic microbial consortium for one-step vitamin C fermentation. Microb Cell Fact 15:21. doi:10.1186/s 12934-016-0418-6 26809519 PMC 4727326 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 6Sherathiya VN , Schaid MD , Seiler JL , Lopez GC , Lerner TN . 2021. Gu P Py, a Python toolbox for the analysis of fiber photometry data. Sci Rep 11:24212. doi:10.1038/s 41598-021-03626-9 34930955 PMC 8688475 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 7Arkin AP , Cottingham RW , Henry CS , Harris NL , Stevens RL , Maslov S , Dehal P , Ware D , Perez F , Canon S , et al. . 2018. K Base: the United States department of energy systems biology knowledgebase. Nat Biotechnol 36:566–569. doi:10.1038/nbt.4163 29979655 PMC 6870991 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 8Olson RD , Assaf R , Brettin T , Conrad N , Cucinell C , Davis JJ , Dempsey DM , Dickerman A , Dietrich EM , Kenyon RW , et al. . 2023. Introducing the bacterial and viral bioinformatics resource center (BV-BRC): a resource combining PATRIC, IRD and Vi PR. Nucleic Acids Res 51:D 678–D 689. doi:10.1093/nar/gkac 1003 36350631 PMC 9825582 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
