Draft genome sequences of 12 Vibrio Harveyi clade isolates from Hong Kong coastal waters
A. J. Hu, A. N. H. Cheung, K. M. Leung, G. K. K. Lai, S. D. J. Griffin

TL;DR
This paper presents draft genome sequences of 12 Vibrio isolates from Hong Kong coastal waters, including four species with genome sizes and G+C content reported.
Contribution
The study provides new draft genome sequences for four Vibrio species from Hong Kong coastal waters.
Findings
Twelve Vibrio Harveyi clade isolates were identified and sequenced.
The isolates included V. harveyi, V. owensii, V. campbellii, and V. parahaemolyticus.
Genome sizes ranged from 4.9 to 6.2 Mbp with G+C content between 44.5% and 45.8%.
Abstract
Twelve Vibrio Harveyi clade isolates were obtained from Hong Kong coastal waters. Their draft genome sequences were assembled and found to comprise V. harveyi (×2), Vibrio owensii (×5), Vibrio campbellii (×2), and Vibrio parahaemolyticus (×3), with estimated genome sizes 4.9–6.2 Mbp (44.5%–45.8% G + C).
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
| Strain | ANHC.C1D | TX.TDP18 | TX.T19 | TX.T17 | TX.TSW12 | TX.TDP14 | AYW.12 | TX.TDP6 | TX.T18 | DVW.05 | DVW.10 | ANHC.C2L |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Genbank accession |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| est. genome size (Mbp) | 5.68 | 5.68 | 5.85 | 5.90 | 5.95 | 6.18 | 5.81 | 5.66 | 5.16 | 5.26 | 5.69 | 4.92 |
| % G + C | 44.96 | 45.04 | 45.63 | 45.59 | 45.59 | 45.62 | 45.77 | 45.32 | 44.52 | 45.64 | 45.31 | 45.37 |
|
| ||||||||||||
| Biosample accession |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Sampling date | 2023-09-17 | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-23 | 2021-07-05 | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-23 | 2021-04-13 | 2021-04-13 | 2023-09-17 |
| GPS | 22.286017, | 22.244551, | 22.237610, | 22.237610, | 22.220735, | 22.244551, | 22.247517, | 22.244551, | 22.237610, | 22.283347, | 22.283347, | 22.286017, |
| Location | Central Ferry | Deepwater Bay | Island Road | Island Road | Stanley | Deepwater Bay | Aberdeen | Deepwater Bay | Island Road | Causeway Bay | Causeway Bay | Central Ferry |
| Sample type | Surface | Surface | Surface | Surface | Surface | Surface | Sediment | Surface | Surface | Seawater | Seawater | Surface |
| Appearance of colonies on ChromAgar Vibrio | Pale purple | Purple | Blue | Blue | White | Purple-blue | Blue | Purple | Blue | White | White | White (purple tinge) |
|
| ||||||||||||
| Sequencing platform | NovaSeq | Miseq | Miseq | Miseq | Miseq | Miseq | Miseq | Miseq | Miseq | Miseq | Miseq | NovaSeq |
| SRA accession |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| # raw reads | 8,739,546 | 1,762,840 | 2,244,022 | 2,034,566 | 1,863,654 | 1,729,116 | 949,460 | 2,250,898 | 2,158,530 | 760,268 | 1,747,670 | 9,087,148 |
| Mean read 3length (bp) | 250 | 231 | 216 | 232 | 235 | 233 | 205 | 222 | 203 | 236 | 176 | 250 |
| Total (Mbp) | 2,185 | 407.2 | 484.7 | 472.0 | 438.0 | 402.9 | 194.6 | 499.7 | 438.2 | 179.4 | 307.6 | 2272 |
| Mean read coverage | 352 | 72 | 83 | 81 | 74 | 65 | 34 | 88 | 85 | 34 | 54 | 447 |
|
| ||||||||||||
| # contigs | 80 | 151 | 130 | 108 | 111 | 264 | 331 | 365 | 111 | 472 | 451 | 64 |
| N50 | 649,009 | 66,985 | 91,572 | 113,681 | 118,285 | 60,209 | 32,098 | 42,073 | 98,912 | 24,154 | 22,665 | 388,288 |
| Completeness % | 99.38 | 98.50 | 99.34 | 99.40 | 100 | 100 | 99.74 | 99.87 | 99.34 | 97.00 | 95.52 | 98.72 |
| Contamination % | 4.18 | 4.85 | 1.37 | 1.37 | 1.16 | 1.29 | 0.85 | 0.09 | 0.48 | 4.16 | 4.59 | 1.03 |
|
| ||||||||||||
| # CDS (coding) | 5,064 | 5,104 | 5,160 | 5,132 | 5,246 | 5,470 | 5,161 | 5,017 | 4,535 | 4,770 | 5,254 | 4,386 |
| rRNA genes (5S + 16S + 23S) | 1, 1, 3 | 1, 1, 1 | 1, 1, 3 | 1, 1, 3 | –, 2, 4 | –, 3, 2 | 1, 3, 3 | 2, 3, 3 | 2, 1, 3 | 1, 3, 2 | 1, 2, 2 | 3, 3, 4 |
| tRNA genes | 102 | 94 | 104 | 103 | 96 | 98 | 79 | 98 | 78 | 81 | 66 | 94 |
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
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
TopicsVibrio bacteria research studies · Aquaculture disease management and microbiota · Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
ANNOUNCEMENT
The Gram-negative, motile marine bacteria, Vibrio harveyi, Vibrio owensii, Vibrio campbellii, and Vibrio parahaemolyticus are core members of the Harveyi clade (1) and commonly found in surface waters and sediments (2) and also marine debris (3). Though host-associated and sometimes commensal, they are frequently mutualistic bioluminescent symbionts (4). Nevertheless, their excessive environmental abundance is a broad indicator of pollution (5), and virulent strains are responsible for diseases affecting aquaculture and corals (6, 7), as well as acute gastroenteritis in humans (2). The 12 free-living strains introduced here were isolated from water and sediment samples from Hong Kong coastal waters (see Table 1) as part of a broad survey of cross-species gene transfer.
Sediment (1 g) was vortexed (20 s) in 3.5% saline (19 mL) and allowed to settle (5 min) before a 100 µL aliquot of the clearer supernatant was spread onto CHROMagar Vibrio agar (CHROMagar, Paris, France; 100 µL aliquots of seawater samples were spread without dilution). Following overnight incubation, selected colonies were purified by single-colony streaking (≥5 times) on Luria agar (11). For DNA extraction, a single colony was streaked on this medium to harvest overnight growth from the plate (DNeasy PowerSoil Pro kit, Qiagen GmbH, Hilden, Germany). All incubations were at 27°C for 24 hours.
UV absorbance (BioDrop µLITE, Biochrom Ltd., UK) and PicoGreen assays (12) were used for DNA quality/quantity evaluations before using Illumina MiSeq (v3 chemistry) or Illumina NovaSeq 6000 platforms to sequence paired-end short-read sequencing libraries, prepared and barcoded using, respectively, the NexteraXT DNA Library Preparation Kit or NovaSeqX Series 10B Reagent Kit (Illumina Inc., USA). Reads were quality-filtered and trimmed using TrimGalore! v0.6.7 (https://github.com/FelixKrueger/TrimGalore; stringency:3; -e:0.2) and assembled by Unicycler v.0.5.0 (9). Default parameters were used for all software unless otherwise specified. Sequencing data and analysis for all 12 isolates, including CheckM v1.2.3 metrics for completeness/contamination (8), are given in Table 1.
Genomes were annotated by RASTtk v1.9.1 in BV-BRC v3.46.3 (10) and by NCBI PGAP v6.9 (13). NCBI BLAST and JSpeciesWS v4.2.1 (14, 15), as well as a codon tree generated in BV-BRC by RAxML v8 (16), were used for species identification, thus classifying the twelve strains as V. harveyi (×2), V. owensii (×5), V. campbellii (×2), and V. parahaemolyticus (×3). All strains carry the luminescence operon transcriptional activator luxR, a Harveyi clade-specific virulence factor (17), as well as genes encoding the arsenite efflux transporter, acr3 (18), and the tupABC-mobAB tungstate-uptake system (19, 20). The species-linked distribution of the leukocidin family pore-forming toxin lukAB and of avrD (21), the cholera toxin transcriptional activator toxR (22), and class A beta-lactamase blaCARB-18 (23) is shown in Table 1.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1Ke H-M, Prachumwat A, Yu C-P, Yang Y-T, Promsri S, Liu K-F, Lo C-F, Lu M-Y, Lai M-C, Tsai IJ, Li W-H. 2017. Comparative genomics of Vibrio campbellii strains and core species of the Vibrio Harveyi clade. Sci Rep 7:41394. doi:10.1038/srep 4139428145490 PMC 5286417 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 2Almagro-Moreno S, Pukatzki S. 2023. Vibrio spp. infections. In Advances in experimental medicine and biology. Vol. 1404. Springer Cham.10.1007/978-3-031-22997-8_136792868 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 3Wright RJ, Erni-Cassola G, Zadjelovic V, Latva M, Christie-Oleza JA. 2020. Marine plastic debris: a new surface for microbial colonization. Environ Sci Technol 54:11657–11672. doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c 0230532886491 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 4Essock-Burns T, Bongrand C, Goldman WE, Ruby EG, Mc Fall-Ngai MJ. 2020. Interactions of symbiotic partners drive the development of a complex biogeography in the squid-vibrio symbiosis. M Bio 11:e 00853-20. doi:10.1128/m Bio.00853-2032457244 PMC 7251207 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 5Purgar M, Gavrilović A, Kapetanović D, Klanjšček J, Jug-Dujaković J, Kolda A, Žunić J, Kazazić S, Vardić Smrzlić I, Vukić Lušić D, Pikelj K, Listeš E, El-Matbouli M, Lillehaug A, Lončarević S, Knežević D, Hengl B, Geček S, Klanjscek T. 2023. Assessment of Vibrio spp. abundance as a water quality indicator: insights from Mali Ston Bay in the Adriatic Sea. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 295:108558. doi:10.1016/j.ecss.2023.108558 · doi ↗
- 6Vandeputte M, Kashem MA, Bossier P, Vanrompay D. 2024. Vibrio pathogens and their toxins in aquaculture: a comprehensive review. Reviews in Aquaculture 16:1858–1878. doi:10.1111/raq.12926 · doi ↗
- 7Mohamad N, Amal MNA, Yasin ISM, Zamri Saad M, Nasruddin NS, Al-saari N, Mino S, Sawabe T. 2019. Vibriosis in cultured marine fishes: a review. Aquaculture 512:734289. doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2019.734289 · doi ↗
- 8Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. 2015. Check M: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res 25:1043–1055. doi:10.1101/gr.186072.11425977477 PMC 4484387 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
