, and are later heterotypic synonyms of .

The current study evaluates the taxonomic positions of , , and . Phylogenomic and genomic comparisons show the four strains are conspecific based on standard species thresholds for this genus (monophyletic and pairwise average nucleotide identities >96 %). Analysis of the 16S rRNA gene sequences provided in original descriptions with genome-derived 16S rRNA gene sequences from the current study showed significant differences in three of the four strains. Variant analysis of the 16S rRNA gene sequences using the genomic data showed that the 16S rRNA gene copies are polyallelic for these species. Previously reported distinguishing phenotypes were re-examined and the strains show phenotype congruence, with the exception of a few variable traits. Based on the rules of priority, , and are later heterotypic synonyms of