Draft genome sequences of Brucella melitensis from human and animal sources in India
Haris Ayoub, M. Suman Kumar, Rishabh Mehta, Prasad Thomas, Himani Dhanze, K. N. Bhilegaonkar, Vibha Singh, Harith M. Salih, Raghavendra G. Amachawadi

TL;DR
This paper provides draft genome sequences of Brucella melitensis from human and animal sources in India, offering a valuable resource for genomic research.
Contribution
The study presents new draft genome sequences of Brucella melitensis isolates from India with consistent genome size and GC content.
Findings
The genome size of isolates is predominantly 3.207 M.
The GC content is uniformly 57.24% across all isolates.
Accession numbers and sequencing data are provided for further genomic studies.
Abstract
We present the draft genome sequences of 23 Brucella melitensis isolates derived from human and animal sources across India with genome size predominantly at 3.207 M and uniform GC content (57.24%) across isolates. The accession numbers and detailed sequencing data enhance the utility of this resource for further genomic studies.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
| Lab ID | Host/source | Total reads (M) | Filtered reads (M) | Genome size (Mb) | Genome coverage | No. contigs | N50 | Genome fraction | GC content (%) | Genome assembly accession no. | SRA accession no. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VPH-06–01 | Sheep/Semen | 7.347044 | 7.15822 | 3.251 | 332.5 | 26 | 249,280 | 99.561 | 57.22 |
|
|
| VPH-08–01 | Sheep/unknown | 6.596996 | 6.410628 | 3.251 | 297.8 | 25 | 249,280 | 99.561 | 57.22 |
|
|
| VPH-08–02 | Sheep/unknown | 6.681382 | 6.527074 | 3.248 | 303.4 | 69 | 91,417 | 99.394 | 57.22 |
|
|
| VPH-19–01 | Human/bone marrow | 11.298194 | 11.199012 | 3.207 | 527.3 | 25 | 276,315 | 99.169 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-19–02 | Human/unknown | 11.943824 | 11.836264 | 3.207 | 557.3 | 24 | 293,115 | 99.168 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-19–03 | Human/bone marrow | 6.416248 | 6.238506 | 3.067 | 307.1 | 25 | 249,285 | 93.937 | 57.22 |
|
|
| VPH-19–04 | Human/blood | 14.560218 | 14.313068 | 3.204 | 674.6 | 27 | 293,077 | 99.105 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-19–05 | Human/blood | 12.62483 | 12.38699 | 3.207 | 583.2 | 24 | 293,091 | 99.171 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-19–06 | Human/blood | 12.559194 | 12.426234 | 3.206 | 585.3 | 25 | 293,148 | 99.143 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-19–07 | Human/blood | 12.068372 | 11.959162 | 3.207 | 563.1 | 24 | 293,115 | 99.168 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-20–01 | Human/blood | 10.706906 | 10.519896 | 3.207 | 495.3 | 24 | 293,091 | 99.171 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-20–02 | Human/blood | 14.377688 | 14.236112 | 3.207 | 670.3 | 24 | 293,099 | 99.168 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-20–03 | Human/blood | 10.443702 | 10.298964 | 3.206 | 485.1 | 33 | 193,986 | 99.135 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-20–04 | Human/blood | 13.697438 | 13.511842 | 3.207 | 636.2 | 24 | 293,100 | 99.171 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-21–01 | Human/blood | 9.389988 | 9.257616 | 3.206 | 436 | 25 | 293,140 | 99.146 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-21–02 | Human/blood | 12.795494 | 12.650802 | 3.205 | 596 | 26 | 249,289 | 99.143 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-22–01 | Human/blood | 13.931106 | 13.763442 | 3.206 | 648.2 | 25 | 293,168 | 99.146 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-22–02 | Human/blood | 10.566106 | 10.458546 | 3.206 | 492.6 | 25 | 293,147 | 99.146 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-22–03 | Human/blood | 10.114012 | 9.966226 | 3.207 | 469.3 | 24 | 293,076 | 99.166 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-22–04 | Human/blood | 9.959466 | 9.845878 | 3.206 | 463.7 | 24 | 293,092 | 99.165 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-22–05 | Human/blood | 12.842948 | 12.69338 | 3.206 | 597.8 | 25 | 293,164 | 99.144 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-23–01 | Human/blood | 11.036014 | 10.940654 | 3.207 | 515.1 | 24 | 293,091 | 99.168 | 57.25 |
|
|
| VPH-23–02 | Human/blood | 13.860822 | 13.745732 | 3.207 | 647.2 | 24 | 293,091 | 99.168 | 57.25 |
|
|
- —U.S. Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch/Multistate Project
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
TopicsBrucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment · Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology · Animal Diversity and Health Studies
ANNOUNCEMENT
Brucellosis is recognized as one of the world’s leading neglected zoonoses. It is caused by members of the genus Brucella, which exhibit a wide host range, with B. melitensis being the most virulent member implicated in causing human disease (1–3). The pathogen poses a significant threat to both animal and public health across the globe with an estimated incidence of 2.1 million cases annually (4–6). A total of 23 B. melitensis isolates, comprising 20 from human patients and 3 from small ruminants (Sheep) received at the Brucella Lab, Division of VPH, ICAR-IVRI, were included in the study. Primary cultivation of all isolates was carried out by inoculating the samples onto Brucella agar and incubating under 10% CO_2_ at 37°C for up to 7 days, as described in reference (7). The identity of the isolates was confirmed using appropriate biochemical tests and species-specific PCR (AMOS PCR) (8), and the reference strain B. melitensis 16M was used as a positive control.
Isolates were subcultured in Trypticase Soy agar at 37°C for 42 hours, and genomic DNA was extracted with the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (QIAGEN) as per the manufacturer’s protocol. Whole-genome sequencing of the extracted DNA was performed using the Illumina MiSeq platform (miBiome Therapeutics LLP, Mumbai, India) generating 150 bp paired-end reads. The quality assessment and preprocessing of the raw reads were done using FastP v0.23.2 (9), and genome assembly was conducted using Unicycler v0.5.0 (10). The assembled genomes were evaluated for completeness using BUSCO v5.4.6 (11), and genome assembly quality was checked with QUAST v5.2.0 (12). NCBI-PGAP v6.6 (13) was employed for genome annotation. The genomes were analyzed for the presence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes using multiple databases, including ResFinder v4.1.5 (14), NCBI AMRFinderPlus v3.11.26 (15), ARG-ANNOT v1.0.1 (16), and CARD v3.1.2 (17). Default parameters were used for all software unless otherwise specified. The draft genome sequences exhibited high completeness and quality, with genomic characteristics, such as genome size, number of contigs, N50, genome fraction, genome coverage, and GC content, being within expected ranges (Table 1). The genomic analysis of the 23 samples revealed overall consistency, with an average genome size of 3.21 Mb, with coverage ranging from 303.4 to 674.6, and a GC content of approximately 57.24%. Notably, the isolate VPH-08-02 showed higher fragmentation with 69 contigs and a unique N50 of 91,417 bp. Isolate VPH-19-03 revealed a lower genome fraction (93.94%) and may represent a unique genome.
The average number of coding sequences was approximately 3,097, accompanied by three rRNA and around 49 tRNA annotations per isolate. Analysis of AMR genes provided insights into the potential resistance profiles of these B. melitensis isolates. The AMR gene B.suis_mprF was identified in all isolates. The isolates were typed as ST8 on multilocus sequence typing analysis based on MLST 9 (18) and MLST 21 (19) schemas.
This study presents valuable genomic information on B. melitensis isolates from India, shedding light on their genetic diversity, and antimicrobial resistance. The data will contribute to a better understanding of Brucella genomics.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1Franc KA, Krecek RC, Häsler BN, Arenas-Gamboa AM. 2018. Brucellosis remains a neglected disease in the developing world: a call for interdisciplinary action. BMC Public Health 18:125. doi:10.1186/s 12889-017-5016-y 29325516 PMC 5765637 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 2Corbel MJ. 2006. Brucellosis in humans and animals. World Health Organization.
- 3N. Xavier M, A. Paixao T, B. den Hartigh A, M. Tsolis R, L. Santos R. 2010. Pathogenesis of Brucella spp. Open Vet Sci J 9:109–118. doi:10.2174/1874318801004010109 · doi ↗
- 4Khan MZ, Zahoor M. 2018. An overview of brucellosis in cattle and humans, and its serological and molecular diagnosis in control strategies. Trop Med Infect Dis 3:65. doi:10.3390/tropicalmed 302006530274461 PMC 6073575 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 5Kang GJ, Gunaseelan L, Abbas KM. 2014. Epidemiological modeling of bovine brucellosis in India. Proc IEEE Int Conf Big Data 2014:6–10. doi:10.1109/Big Data.2014.7004420 PMC 453729126280026 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 6Laine CG, Johnson VE, Scott HM, Arenas-Gamboa AM. 2023. Global estimate of human brucellosis incidence. Emerg Infect Dis 29:1789–1797. doi:10.3201/eid 2909.23005237610167 PMC 10461652 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 7Alton GG, Jones LM, Pietz DE. 1975. Laboratory techniques in brucellosis. World Health Organization. Vol. 55.812265 · pubmed ↗
- 8Bricker BJ, Halling SM. 1994. Differentiation of Brucella abortus bv. 1, 2, and 4, Brucella melitensis, Brucella ovis, and Brucella suis bv. 1 by PCR. J Clin Microbiol 32:2660–2666. doi:10.1128/jcm.32.11.2660-2666.19947852552 PMC 264138 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
