Draft genome assemblies from seven Bacillaceae isolates from woodland soil
Anna L. McLoon, Julia M. Barker, Gillian M. Churan, Anthony Cucca, Lillian Gardner, Justin Gejo, Francesca Gerbasi, Michaela Higgins, Lillian Kronau, Jalin Le, Alyssa Lunman, Kelly Maune, Veezen Denise Mondelo, Madeline Naef, Caitlin Rigby, Caitlin Spiliotis

TL;DR
This paper presents draft genome sequences of seven soil bacteria from the Bacillaceae family.
Contribution
The study provides new draft genome assemblies for seven Bacillaceae isolates from woodland soil.
Findings
Seven endospore-forming bacteria were isolated and their genomes sequenced.
Draft genome sizes ranged from 3.65 to 5.97 million base pairs with GC content between 34.8% and 41.2%.
Abstract
We isolated seven endospore-forming bacteria from campus woodland and sequenced their genomes using Illumina NextSeq. We share the draft genome assemblies for strains Bacillus wiedmanii_SC129, Bacillus pseudomycoides_SC131, Bacillus pumilis_SC133, Peribacillus butanolivorans_SC135, Bacillus thuringiensis_SC136, Priestia megaterium_SC138, and Bacillus wiedmanii_SC141. Draft genome sizes range from 3,645,032 to 5,969,865 bp, with GC content between 34.8% and 41.2%.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
| Strain | SC129 | SC131 | SC133 | SC135 | SC136 | SC138 | SC141 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site | 42.7204552,–73.7533970 | 42.7198559,–73.7488097 | 42.7198559,–73.7488097 | 42.7198559,–73.7488097 | 42.7198559,–73.7488097 | 42.7204552,–73.7533970 | 42.7204552,–73.7533970 |
| Soil horizon | Organic | Mineral | Organic | Organic | Mineral | Mineral | Mineral |
| Species |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Number of reads | 5,545,784 | 6,877,022 | 6,439,688 | 6,974,014 | 6,648,606 | 5,923,568 | 5,481,716 |
| Number of contigs | 31 | 100 | 40 | 46 | 31 | 41 | 27 |
| Total length (bp) | 5,485,886 | 5,216,294 | 3,645,032 | 5,859,099 | 5,969,865 | 5,853,104 | 5,671,044 |
|
| 781,638 | 195,779 | 218,892 | 299,378 | 634,513 | 903,089 | 927,123 |
| % GC | 35.2 | 35.5 | 41.2 | 37.9 | 34.8 | 37.5 | 35.1 |
| Predicted genes (Prokka via KBase) | 5,742 | 5,258 | 3,695 | 5,635 | 5,953 | 6,063 | 5,762 |
| Predicted genes (GenBank) | 5,639 | 5,387 | 3,706 | 5,771 | 6,062 | 6,084 | 5,861 |
| Number of predicted secondary operons (antiSMASH) | 12 | 12 | 10 | 8 | 16 | 8 | 10 |
| Predicted natural product types (specific known cluster name and similarity) | Terpene (molybdenum cofactor 17%), 4 NRPS (anachelin 10% and bacillibactin 85%), 3 RiPP-like, betalactone (fengycin 40%), LAP, NI-siderophore (petrobactin 100%), cyclic lactone autoinducer/thiopeptide | Lassopeptide (paeninodin 100%), LAP, 5 NRPS (bacillibactin 85% and desmamide A/B/C 18%), lanthipeptide class II (plantaricin W 66%), terpene, betalactone (fengycin 40%), 2 RiPP-like | Two betalactone (fengycin 53%), other (bacilysin 85%), T1PKS (zwittermicin A 18%), NRPS (lichenysin 92%), NI-siderophore (schizokinen 60%), terpene, T3PKS, RRE containing, RiPP-like | Two terpenes, two lassopeptide (paeninodin 100%), betalactone (fengycin 46%), NI-siderophore (schizokinen 60%), LAP, T3PKS | LAP, 6 NRPS (bacillibactin 85%), NI-siderophore (petrobactin 100%), betalactone (fengycin 40%), 2 RiPP-like, NRPS-like, terpene (molybdenum cofactor 17%), ranthipeptide, 2 RRE containing (thuricin CD 100%) | Three terpenes (50% carotenoid and 13% surfactin), phosphonate, RRE-containing, T3PKS, NI-siderophore (62% schizokinen), lanthipeptide class I | LAP, 3 NRPS (bacillibactin 85%), NI-siderophore (petrobactin, 100%), betalactone (fengycin 40%), lassopeptide (paeninodin 100%), terpene, 2 RiPP-like |
| KBase narrative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| BioProject accession |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| SRA accession |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| GenBank accession |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- —National Institutes of Healthhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000002
- —National Science Foundationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100008982
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
TopicsGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies · Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology · Identification and Quantification in Food
ANNOUNCEMENT
Endospore-forming bacteria are frequently found in a variety of environments, including terrestrial soils, and many are considered to be plant growth-promoting (1). We collected two soil cores on January 23, 2024 from wooded areas of a suburban college campus and separated mineral and organic horizons from each core (Table 1 [2]). Strain Bacillus wiedmannii SC129 was isolated from the organic horizon, and strains Priestia megaterium SC138 and Bacillus wiedmannii SC141 were from the mineral horizon from location 42.7205,–73.7534, which is on a wooded slope between campus buildings. Strains Bacillus pumilus SC133 and Peribacillus butanolivorans SC135 were isolated from the organic soil horizon, and strains Bacillus pseudomycoides SC131 and Bacillus thuringiensis SC136 were isolated from the mineral horizon from location 42.7199,–73.7488, which is a wooded area near a small wetland. We isolated the individual endospore-forming bacterial strains by mixing approximately 100 µL of soil with 1 mL of sterile water, vortexing the samples, heating them to 95°C for 10 minutes to ensure the presence of endospores, and then spreading the suspended cells onto tryptic soy agar + 5% sheep blood using a sterile swab. We incubated the plates overnight at 37°C as described previously (3, 4). Isolates were colony purified, and tryptic soy broth cultures were grown for approximately 4 hours. Then DNA was isolated using a Promega DNA Wizard Kit following the digestion of peptidoglycan with 1.15 µg/µL lysozyme in 50 mM EDTA.
Genomic DNA libraries were prepared using the tagmentation-based Illumina DNA Prep Kit and IDT 10 bp unique dual indices and sequenced as paired-end 151 bp reads by SeqCenter (Pittsburgh, PA, USA) using an Illumina NovaSeq X Plus sequencer, who processed reads with bcl-convert version 4.2.4. Sequence reads from each isolate were imported into separate narratives in the KBase environment for analysis (5–7). We checked the read quality with FastQC version 0.12.1, trimmed reads with Trimmomatic version 0.36, assembled genomes de novo using SPAdes version 3.15.3, and annotated the assemblies using RASTtk version 1.073, Prokka version 1.14.5, and DRAM version 0.1.2, and PGAP via GenBank. We determined probable species identities using TYGS and GTDB-Tk, and the results were concordant between programs (Table 1 [8–12]). All programs were run using default parameters. We also ran the draft genome assemblies through the antiSMASH version 7.0 secondary metabolite prediction program (13, 14).
Draft genomes range in size from 3,645,032 to 5,969,865 bp and from 34.8% to 41.2% GC. Each strain is predicted to make 8–16 unique secondary metabolites, including terpenes, RiPPs, non-ribosomally synthesized peptides, and NI-siderophores, among others (Table 1). While many strains are predicted to make at least one well-characterized natural product, including paeninodin and petrobactin, many operons identified have low or no similarity to known secondary metabolites (Table 1 [15–17]). Therefore, these strains and genomes represent useful additions to our knowledge of soil microbes and potential sources of beneficial natural products.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1Tsotetsi T, Nephali L, Malebe M, Tugizimana F. 2022. Bacillus for plant growth promotion and stress resilience: what have we learned? Plants (Basel) 11:2482. doi:10.3390/plants 1119248236235347 PMC 9571655 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 2Dow E, Mc Loon A, Carlos Goller C, Wood-Charlson E, Allen B, Schirmer A, Meier C. 2025. Soil microbiome sample collection protocol (adapted from NEON). Protocols.io. doi:10.17504/protocols.io.yxmvmezk 9g 3p/v 1 · doi ↗
- 3Mc Loon AL, Awad TT, Bogardus MF, Buono MG, Devine KA, Draper RM, Femenella B, Gallagher HM, Morelock LA, Razi M, Rennick JR, Sheridan AK, Thibault RJ, Touchette KL, Zuchowski GE. 2022. Draft genome sequences for 6 isolates of endospore-forming class Bacilli species isolated from soil from a suburban, wooded, developed space. Microbiol Resour Announc 11:e 0087422. doi:10.1128/mra.00874-2236227100 PMC 9670967 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 4Mc Loon AL, Ackaah Asante P, Anderson T, Cahill K, Cochrane D, Cohen K, German J, Hrubes CM, La Croix I, Mc Namee K, Mossakowski A, Nichter AM, Pepe JL, Schofield AT. 2024. Five draft genome assemblies from Bacillaceae isolated from a degraded wetland environment. Microbiol Resour Announc 13:e 0084523. doi:10.1128/mra.00845-2338132715 PMC 10868232 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 5Allen B, Drake M, Harris N, Sullivan T. 2017. Using K Base to assemble and annotate prokaryotic genomes. Curr Protoc Microbiol 46:1E. doi:10.1002/cpmc.3728800158 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 6Arkin 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.416329979655 PMC 6870991 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 7Mc Loon AL, Barker J, Churan G, Cucca A, Gardner L, Gejo J, Gerbasi F, Higgins M, Kronau L, Le J, Lunman A, Maune K, Mondelo VZ, Naef M, Rigby C, Spiliotis C. 2025. Seven soil endospore forming bacteria from campus woodland fragments. K Base Narrative. doi:10.25982/189485.18/2538685 · doi ↗
- 8Chaumeil P-A, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. 2019. GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the genome taxonomy database. Bioinformatics 36:1925–1927. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz 84831730192 PMC 7703759 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
