Chaumeil, Pierre-Alain

Publications (4)

Proposal of names for 329 higher rank taxa defined in the Genome Taxonomy Database under two prokaryotic codes

Chuvochina et al. (2023). FEMS Microbiology Letters
Names (43)
“Poriferisulfidales” “Kapaibacteriia” “Cloacimonadaceae” “Cloacimonadales” “Cloacimonadia” “Methylomirabilota” “Desulforudaceae” “Thermobaculales” “Thermobaculaceae” “Tenderiales” “Tenderiaceae” “Saccharimonadales” “Saccharimonadaceae” “Puniceispirillales” “Puniceispirillaceae” “Pseudothioglobaceae” “Promineifilales” “Promineifilaceae” “Obscuribacteraceae” “Nucleicultricaceae” “Muiribacteriia” “Muiribacteriales” “Muiribacteriaceae” “Methylomirabilia” “Methylomirabilales” “Methylomirabilaceae” “Magnetobacteriaceae” “Kapaibacteriales” “Kapaibacteriaceae” “Johnevansiales” “Johnevansiaceae” “Hepatoplasmataceae” “Hepatobacteraceae” “Bipolaricaulia” “Bipolaricaulaceae” “Bipolaricaulales” “Azobacteroidaceae” “Hydrothermaceae” “Hydrothermales” “Hydrothermia” “Binatia” “Binatales” “Binataceae”
Genetics Microbiology Molecular Biology
Abstract The Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) is a taxonomic framework that defines prokaryotic taxa as monophyletic groups in concatenated protein reference trees according to systematic criteria. This has resulted in a substantial number of changes to existing classifications ( In the case of union of taxa, GTDB names were applied based on the priority of publication. The division of taxa or change in rank led to the formation of new Latin names above the rank of genus that were only made publicly available via the GTDB website without associated published taxonomic descriptions. This has sometimes led to confusion in the literature and databases. A number of the provisional GTDB names were later published in other studies, while many still lack authorships. To reduce further confusion, here we propose names and descriptions for 329 GTDB-defined prokaryotic taxa, 223 of which are suitable for validation under the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) and 49 under the Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes Described from Sequence Data (SeqCode). For the latter we designated 23 genomes as type material. An additional 57 taxa that do not currently satisfy the validation criteria of either code are proposed as Candidatus.

Recovery of nearly 8,000 metagenome-assembled genomes substantially expands the tree of life

Parks et al. (2017). Nature Microbiology 2 (11)
Names (2)
Binatus Binatus soli Ts
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology Cell Biology Genetics Immunology Microbiology Microbiology (medical)
AbstractChallenges in cultivating microorganisms have limited the phylogenetic diversity of currently available microbial genomes. This is being addressed by advances in sequencing throughput and computational techniques that allow for the cultivation-independent recovery of genomes from metagenomes. Here, we report the reconstruction of 7,903 bacterial and archaeal genomes from >1,500 public metagenomes. All genomes are estimated to be ≥50% complete and nearly half are ≥90% complete with ≤5% contamination. These genomes increase the phylogenetic diversity of bacterial and archaeal genome trees by >30% and provide the first representatives of 17 bacterial and three archaeal candidate phyla. We also recovered 245 genomes from the Patescibacteria superphylum (also known as the Candidate Phyla Radiation) and find that the relative diversity of this group varies substantially with different protein marker sets. The scale and quality of this data set demonstrate that recovering genomes from metagenomes provides an expedient path forward to exploring microbial dark matter.