↓ Skip to main content

Pan-genome and phylogeny of Bacillus cereus sensu lato

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pan-genome and phylogeny of Bacillus cereus sensu lato
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12862-017-1020-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam L. Bazinet

Abstract

Bacillus cereus sensu lato (s. l.) is an ecologically diverse bacterial group of medical and agricultural significance. In this study, I use publicly available genomes and novel bioinformatic workflows to characterize the B. cereus s. l. pan-genome and perform the largest phylogenetic and population genetic analyses of this group to date in terms of the number of genes and taxa included. With these fundamental data in hand, I identify genes associated with particular phenotypic traits (i.e., "pan-GWAS" analysis), and quantify the degree to which taxa sharing common attributes are phylogenetically clustered. A rapid k-mer based approach (Mash) was used to create reduced representations of selected Bacillus genomes, and a fast distance-based phylogenetic analysis of this data (FastME) was performed to determine which species should be included in B. cereus s. l. The complete genomes of eight B. cereus s. l. species were annotated de novo with Prokka, and these annotations were used by Roary to produce the B. cereus s. l. pan-genome. Scoary was used to associate gene presence and absence patterns with various phenotypes. The orthologous protein sequence clusters produced by Roary were filtered and used to build HaMStR databases of gene models that were used in turn to construct phylogenetic data matrices. Phylogenetic analyses used RAxML, DendroPy, ClonalFrameML, PAUP*, and SplitsTree. Bayesian model-based population genetic analysis assigned taxa to clusters using hierBAPS. The genealogical sorting index was used to quantify the phylogenetic clustering of taxa sharing common attributes. The B. cereus s. l. pan-genome currently consists of ≈60,000 genes, ≈600 of which are "core" (common to at least 99% of taxa sampled). Pan-GWAS analysis revealed genes associated with phenotypes such as isolation source, oxygen requirement, and ability to cause diseases such as anthrax or food poisoning. Extensive phylogenetic analyses using an unprecedented amount of data produced phylogenies that were largely concordant with each other and with previous studies. Phylogenetic support as measured by bootstrap probabilities increased markedly when all suitable pan-genome data was included in phylogenetic analyses, as opposed to when only core genes were used. Bayesian population genetic analysis recommended subdividing the three major clades of B. cereus s. l. into nine clusters. Taxa sharing common traits and species designations exhibited varying degrees of phylogenetic clustering. All phylogenetic analyses recapitulated two previously used classification systems, and taxa were consistently assigned to the same major clade and group. By including accessory genes from the pan-genome in the phylogenetic analyses, I produced an exceptionally well-supported phylogeny of 114 complete B. cereus s. l. genomes. The best-performing methods were used to produce a phylogeny of all 498 publicly available B. cereus s. l. genomes, which was in turn used to compare three different classification systems and to test the monophyly status of various B. cereus s. l. species. The majority of the methodology used in this study is generic and could be leveraged to produce pan-genome estimates and similarly robust phylogenetic hypotheses for other bacterial groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 159 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 19%
Researcher 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Student > Master 21 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 35 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 43 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 25%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 7%
Computer Science 5 3%
Environmental Science 3 2%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 44 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2022.
All research outputs
#6,498,682
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,439
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,489
of 327,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#41
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.