Kirdat Kiran, Tiwarekar Bhavesh, Sathe Shivaji, Yadav Amit
National Centre for Cell Science, NCCS Complex, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune, India.
Department of Microbiology, Tuljaram Chaturchand College, Baramati, India.
Front Microbiol. 2023 Mar 9;14:1123783. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1123783. eCollection 2023.
Phytoplasma taxonomy has been a topic of discussion for the last two and half decades. Since the Japanese scientists discovered the phytoplasma bodies in 1967, the phytoplasma taxonomy was limited to disease symptomology for a long time. The advances in DNA-based markers and sequencing improved phytoplasma classification. In 2004, the International Research Programme on Comparative Mycoplasmology (IRPCM)- Phytoplasma/Spiroplasma Working Team - Phytoplasma taxonomy group provided the description of the provisional genus ' Phytoplasma' with guidelines to describe the new provisional phytoplasma species. The unintentional consequences of these guidelines led to the description of many phytoplasma species where species characterization was restricted to a partial sequence of the 16S rRNA gene alone. Additionally, the lack of a complete set of housekeeping gene sequences or genome sequences, as well as the heterogeneity among closely related phytoplasmas limited the development of a comprehensive Multi-Locus Sequence Typing (MLST) system. To address these issues, researchers tried deducing the definition of phytoplasma species using phytoplasmas genome sequences and the average nucleotide identity (ANI). In another attempts, a new phytoplasma species were described based on the Overall Genome relatedness Values (OGRI) values fetched from the genome sequences. These studies align with the attempts to standardize the classification and nomenclature of ' bacteria. With a brief historical account of phytoplasma taxonomy and recent developments, this review highlights the current issues and provides recommendations for a comprehensive system for phytoplasma taxonomy until phytoplasma retains ' status.
在过去二十五年里,植原体分类学一直是一个讨论的话题。自1967年日本科学家发现植原体菌体以来,植原体分类学在很长一段时间内都局限于疾病症状学。基于DNA的标记和测序技术的进步改进了植原体分类。2004年,国际比较支原体学研究计划(IRPCM)——植原体/螺原体工作小组——植原体分类学小组给出了临时属“植原体”的描述以及描述新的临时植原体物种的指南。这些指南带来了一些意外后果,导致许多植原体物种的描述仅将物种特征限定于16S rRNA基因的部分序列。此外,缺乏完整的管家基因序列或基因组序列,以及密切相关的植原体之间的异质性限制了全面的多位点序列分型(MLST)系统的发展。为了解决这些问题,研究人员尝试利用植原体基因组序列和平均核苷酸同一性(ANI)来推断植原体物种的定义。在另一项尝试中,基于从基因组序列中获取的全基因组相关性值(OGRI)描述了一个新的植原体物种。这些研究与规范“细菌”分类和命名的尝试相一致。通过对植原体分类学的简要历史回顾和近期进展,本综述突出了当前问题,并为建立一个全面的植原体分类系统提供建议,直到植原体保持其“地位”。