1994
DOI: 10.1099/00207713-44-1-38
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of 16S Ribosomal DNA Sequences of Francisella Strains and Utilization for Determination of the Phylogeny of the Genus and for Identification of Strains by PCR

Abstract: The 16s ribosomal DNAs (rDNAs) of two strains of Franchella dularensis and one strain of Francisella philomiragia were sequenced. On the basis of phylogenetic analysis data, the genus Franciselk was placed in the y subclass of the Proteobacteria. The most closely related organism was the intracellular bacterium Wolbachia persica. The sequenced 16s rDNA molecules of the Francisella species exhibited very high levels of similarity (98.5 to 99.95%). Two variable regions, comprising 390 to 450 nucleotides of the 1… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

8
202
1
4

Year Published

1999
1999
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 250 publications
(215 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
8
202
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The Francisellaceae have no close pathogenic relatives, as inferred from sequence similarity or 16S rRNA phylogenies 14 . Instead, 16S rRNA data suggests that F. tularensis is a sister clade with arthropod endosymbionts like Wolbachia persica 14 and only distantly related to the human pathogens Coxiella burnetii and Legionella.…”
Section: Phylogenymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The Francisellaceae have no close pathogenic relatives, as inferred from sequence similarity or 16S rRNA phylogenies 14 . Instead, 16S rRNA data suggests that F. tularensis is a sister clade with arthropod endosymbionts like Wolbachia persica 14 and only distantly related to the human pathogens Coxiella burnetii and Legionella.…”
Section: Phylogenymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Francisellaceae have no close pathogenic relatives, as inferred from sequence similarity or 16S rRNA phylogenies 14 . Instead, 16S rRNA data suggests that F. tularensis is a sister clade with arthropod endosymbionts like Wolbachia persica 14 and only distantly related to the human pathogens Coxiella burnetii and Legionella. This suggestion is supported by a phylogenomic analysis of more than 200 genes with homologs in F. tularensis and 15 other g-proteobacterial genomes, as previously undertaken for a smaller set of g-proteobacterial genomes 15 .…”
Section: Phylogenymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…16S rDNA sequencing played an important role in the first identification of F. tularensis in the Southern Hemisphere and also in the tularemia outbreak associated with crayfish in Spain [4,69]. For identification of recovered bacterial isolates, the universal 16S rDNA primers as well as the Francisella specific 16S rDNA primers, provide good sequence data [28]. For diagnostic identification of Francisella spp.…”
Section: S Rdna Sequencingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are a number of possibilities for the observed sequence differences. There is evidence of very little diversity of the 16s rDNA sequences of Francisella [26] and Legionella pneumophila [27], whereas for Borrelia burgdorferi strains, up to 1.0% divergence has been demonstrated [28]. Eckloff et al [29] compared the 16s rDNA sequences from five isolates of Helicobacter pylori and found deviations from the consensus sequence at 13 separate positions which could be attributed to clonal origins.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Forsman et al [26] observed unusually high levels of sequence homology between the 16s rRNA sequences of Wolbachia persica and Francisella and suggested that instead of placing K persica within the genus Francisella, the species should be m h e r characterised phenotypically to determine its relationship to Francisella species. In a similar way, although the 16s rDNA sequences of C. granulomatis are closely related to those of Klebsiella, they form a distinct group within the taxon Enterobacteriaceae.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%