ReviewThe ISME journal2025
Led astray by 16S rRNA: phylogenomics reaffirms the monophyly of Methylobacterium and lack of support for Methylorubrum as a genus.
Review in The ISME journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Whole genome sequence analysis of Methylorubrum thiocyanatum VRI7-A4: a versatile sulfur-oxidizing bacterium with environmental stress resilience.Antonie van Leeuwenhoek · 2026Article
- Uncovering hidden phylo- and ecogenomic diversity of the widespread methanotrophic genus Methylobacter.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2026Article
- Differential partitioning of seed-inhabiting methylotrophs in the endosphere of wheat plants.BMC biology · 2025Article
- Pink powerhouses: insights into the multifaceted role of Methylobacterium in climate-resilient farming.Folia microbiologica · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although the 16S (and 18S) rRNA gene has been an essential tool in classifying prokaryotes, using a single locus to revise bacteria taxonomy can introduce unwanted artifacts. There was a recent proposition to split the Methylobacterium genus, which contains diverse plant-associated strains and is important for agriculture and biotechnology, into two genera. Resting strongly on the phylogeny of 16S rRNA, 11 species of Methylobacterium were transferred to a newly proposed genus Methylorubrum. Numerous recent studies have independently questioned Methylorubrum as a valid genus, but the prior revision has left discrepancies among taxonomic databases. Here, we review phylogenomic and phenotypic evidence against Methylorubrum as a genus and call for its abandonment. Because Methylobacterium sensu lato forms a consistent and monophyletic genus, we argue for the restoration of the former and consensual Methylobacterium taxonomy. The large genomic, phenotypic, and ecological diversity within Methylobacterium however suggests complex evolutionary and adaptive processes and support the description of the most basal clade of Methylobacterium (group C) as a distinct genus in future work. Overall, this perspective demonstrates the danger of solely relying upon the 16S rRNA gene as a delimiter of genus level taxonomy and that further attempts must include more robust phenotypic and phylogenomic criteria.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.