Next Article in Journal
Genomic Insights and Synthetic Biology Applications of Marine Actinomycete Streptomyces griseoincarnatus HNS054
Previous Article in Journal
Extracellular Vesicles from Cerebrospinal Fluid of Leptomeningeal Metastasis Patients Deliver MiR-21 and Induce Methotrexate Resistance in Lung Cancer Cells
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Bacteriophages of Thermophilic ‘Bacillus Group’ Bacteria—A Systematic Review, 2023 Update

by
Piotr M. Skowron
1,*,
Beata Łubkowska
2,3,
Ireneusz Sobolewski
1,
Agnieszka Zylicz-Stachula
1,
Monika Šimoliūnienė
4 and
Eugenijus Šimoliūnas
4,5
1
Department of Molecular Biotechnology, Faculty of Chemistry, University of Gdansk, Wita Stwosza 63, 80-308 Gdansk, Poland
2
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport, K. Gorskiego 1, 80-336 Gdansk, Poland
3
Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Cagliari, 09124 Cagliari, Italy
4
Department of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology, Institute of Biochemistry, Life Sciences Center, Vilnius University, Sauletekio Av. 7, LT-10257 Vilnius, Lithuania
5
Department of Microbiology and Biotechnology, Institute of Bioscience, Life Sciences Center, Vilnius University, Sauletekio Av. 7, LT-10257 Vilnius, Lithuania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25(6), 3125; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25063125
Submission received: 25 January 2024 / Revised: 27 February 2024 / Accepted: 28 February 2024 / Published: 8 March 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Molecular Microbiology)

Abstract

:
Bacteriophages associated with thermophiles are gaining increased attention due to their pivotal roles in various biogeochemical and ecological processes, as well as their applications in biotechnology and bionanotechnology. Although thermophages are not suitable for controlling bacterial infections in humans or animals, their individual components, such as enzymes and capsid proteins, can be employed in molecular biology and significantly contribute to the enhancement of human and animal health. Despite their significance, thermophages still remain underrepresented in the known prokaryotic virosphere, primarily due to limited in-depth investigations. However, due to their unique properties, thermophages are currently attracting increasing interest, as evidenced by several newly discovered phages belonging to this group. This review offers an updated compilation of thermophages characterized to date, focusing on species infecting the thermophilic bacilli. Moreover, it presents experimental findings, including novel proteomic data (39 proteins) concerning the model TP-84 bacteriophage, along with the first announcement of 6 recently discovered thermophages infecting Geobacillus thermodenitrificans: PK5.2, PK2.1, NIIg10.1, NIIg2.1, NIIg2.2, and NIIg2.3. This review serves as an update to our previous publication in 2021.

1. Introduction

Bacteriophages, or phages, are viruses that infect bacteria. Earth is estimated to harbor over 1031 bacteriophages, making them the most abundant organisms on the planet. These viruses can be discovered and isolated wherever their host bacteria are present, spanning various environments such as soil, oceans, lakes, the bodies of humans and animals, as well as hot springs and hydrothermal vents [1].
In recent years, there has been a growing interest in utilizing bacteriophages and bacteriophage-derived components. Enzymes originating from phages have been indispensable tools in research since the early days of molecular biology. The proteins found in the capsids of bacteriophages have been utilized in the development of peptide vaccines using bacteriophage-based virus-like particles [2]. Biomaterials based on modified bacteriophages, used as drug delivery vehicles, have the potential to overcome the constraints associated with traditional drug delivery systems [3]. Such biomaterials present numerous benefits as drug carriers, including their high specificity for targeting bacterial cells, minimal toxicity, and the capacity for engineering to express specific proteins or peptides, thereby improving targeting precision and drug delivery efficiency [3].
Currently, an expanding number of research teams are investigating bacteriophages that infect thermophilic bacteria. These phages serve as an exceptionally abundant reservoir of novel proteins with distinctive properties and potential applications [4]. The characteristics of proteins obtained from thermophages, including inherent stability and functionality at elevated temperatures, provide significant benefits compared to their mesophilic counterparts in both industrial and molecular biology applications [4].
It is worth noting that the majority of commercially utilized viral enzymes originate from a restricted pool of cultivated viruses. Considering the vast diversity and abundance of viruses disclosed by metagenomic analysis, the exploration of genomes from uncultivated viruses emerges as a comprehensive and unexplored reservoir of new genes [4].
The growing interest in phage-based applications, advances in sequencing technology, and the prominence of microbiome research have prompted a significant shift in phage taxonomy [5,6]. The proposed approach advocates for the family level to represent a genomic unit of diversity, aligning taxonomy with the actual genetic composition of phages, and postulates the elimination of the order Caudovirales and the families Myoviridae, Podoviridae, and Siphoviridae, replacing them with monophyletic, genome-based families to create a taxonomy that can withstand future developments. However, the use of morphotype terminology, such as myovirus, podovirus, and siphovirus, remains relevant and is recommended for use in publications and annotated sequence records. The definition of species within this context considers two phages as part of the same species if their genomes exhibit more than 95% identity at the nucleotide level across their entire genome length, tested reciprocally.
For tailed phages, exemplified by the majority of Geobacillus (G.)/Parageobacillus (P.) phages, this reorganization of taxonomy has led to the introduction of the class Caudoviricetes, forming the foundation for defining new orders according to evolutionary relationships [5].
This review is an update of our previous article [7], which centered on bacteriophages, infecting a diverse group of thermophilic bacilli, comprising moderate thermophiles and thermophiles, such as Geobacillus and Parageobacillus, among others.
Prior to 2001, Geobacillus and Parageobacillus were classified as thermophilic variants of Bacillus spp. based on the analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequences [8]. Initially, the genus Bacillus encompassed five distinct phylogenetic groups, with some Geobacillus/Parageobacillus species falling into group 5 [8]. However, subsequent reclassification occurred, considering physiological characteristics, 16S rRNA gene sequences, fatty acid composition analyses, G-C contents, and DNA–DNA homology studies. Geobacillus/Parageobacillus species were then collectively reclassified as Geobacillus gen. nov. [9]. In 2016, Aliyu and colleagues conducted research leading to the separation of Parageobacillus from Geobacillus [10]. Their phylogenomic analysis of sixty-three Geobacillus strains with available genome sequences identified two clades based on differences in nucleotide base composition: clade I (comprised Geobacillus species) and clade II (comprised Parageobacillus species). Several species initially classified under Geobacillus, such as P. caldoxylosilyticus, P. thermoglucosidasius, P. thermantarcticus, P. toebii, and P. genomospecies 1 (NUB3621), were moved to Parageobacillus [10]. Further support for this classification was presented in 2020 by Najar and colleagues, who proposed including two additional species, G. galactosidasius and G. yumthangensis, in the genus Parageobacillus [11].
The aim of this review is to offer an updated compilation of the isolated and characterized bacteriophages that target this important group of thermophilic bacteria.

2. Review Data Search Methods

We performed a comprehensive search in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to retrieve studies on thermophilic bacteriophages infecting thermophilic Geobacillus and Parageobacillus. Additionally, we searched bacteriophage collections and databases: DSMZ https://www.dsmz.de/ (accessed on 31 December 2023), ATTC (https://www.atcc.org/ (accessed on 31 December 2023), The Bacillus phage database http://bacillus.phagesdb.org/ (accessed on 31 December 2023), Virus-Host DB https://www.genome.jp/virushostdb (accessed on 31 December 2023) and PhageScope https://phagescope.deepomics.org/database (accessed on 31 December 2023).
We conducted the search by combining search terms related to thermophilic bacteriophages (thermophages, thermophilic viruses, thermophilic bacteriophages, Siphoviridae, Siphoviruses), thermostable enzymes (thermostable endolysins, thermostable polymerases, thermostable phage proteins), and thermophilic Bacillus species (Geobacillus, thermophilic Bacillus, Bacillus stearothermophilus, Parageobacillus, thermophilic bacteria).
The search was limited to publications published before 31 December 2023. Most of them were in English (with one exception).
This review includes all studies that addressed bacteriophages infecting moderately thermophilic and extremely thermophilic ‘Bacillus Group’ bacteria meeting the following criteria: they were research articles, review articles, conference abstracts, book chapters, or theses.

3. Chronological Review—2023 Update

This review provides an update to our earlier publication on bacteriophages targeting the thermophilic ‘Bacillus group’ bacteria [7]. The update comprises a total of 72 species (including 13 recently discovered), documented in varying detail in original publications (Table 1). These bacteriophages target a range of thermophilic bacilli, including those previously categorized as Bacillus, such as ‘G. stearothermophilus’, Acyclobacillus acidocaldarius, Acidithiobacillus caldus, B. caldotenax, G. caldolyticus, G. kaustophilus, Parabacillus thermoglucosidasius, G. icigianus, G. thermodenitrificans, A. pseudoalcaliphilus, A. bogoriensis, A. pseudofirmus, G. thermocatenulatus, B. cohnii, as well as undefined Bacillus and Aeribacillus species.

4. Results and Discussion (Figure 1)

4.1. TP-84 (Caudoviricetes, Saundersvirus Tp84, Siphovirus morphotype, Host G. stearothermophilus)—2023 Update

Bacteriophage TP-84, discovered in 1952 in greenhouse soil, exhibits notable specificity for its host, particularly thriving in G. stearothermophilus strain 10 [18]. Other hosts, including (i) two unclassified thermophilic Bacillus strains (T-27 and 194); (ii) G. stearothermophilus strain 4 and 2184; (iii) two Parageobacillus genomosp. strains (NUB3621 and NUB3621R); and (iv) G. thermoleovorans 10 strain (accessible from Bacillus Genetic Stock Center; BGSCID 9A21) were found to support TP-84 infection to a varying extent [18,46]. Interestingly, G. thermoleovorans strain 10 (also known as G. stearothermophilus strain 10 [47]) is essentially identical to G. stearothermophilus strain 10 used by Saunders and Campbell [18], as the TP-84 bacterial host. It has a 52.6% GC genome, which is very close to the TP-84 GC content of 54.4%. It suggests a long history of this host–thermophage relationship. In contrast, P. genomosp. strains (NUB3621 and NUB3621R), which poorly support TP-84 growth, exhibit a distant GC content of 44.3%. The TP-84 bacteriophage temperature growth range of 31–80 °C [48], with an optimal range of 55–60 °C, aligns with the hosts’ growth range.
Figure 1. Systematic review flow diagram, detailing the database searches, the number of abstracts screened and the full texts retrieved.
Figure 1. Systematic review flow diagram, detailing the database searches, the number of abstracts screened and the full texts retrieved.
Ijms 25 03125 g001
The genome of TP-84 is a double-stranded DNA molecule consisting of 47,718 bp with a GC content of 43.9%. All 81 coding sequences (CDSs) are oriented in the same direction, and no RNA or DNA polymerase-coding genes were identified, indicating reliance on the host’s transcription and replication enzymes [49]. The genome, characterized by closely spaced and overlapping CDSs, contains putative promoter-like sequences and rho-independent terminators. In vitro translation experiments, cloning, and proteomic analysis have identified 73 (39 new, Table 2) TP-84-encoded proteins so far, including those involved in DNA replication/packaging, cell membrane disintegration, recombination processes, and envelope disintegration. Ten TP-84 genes have been cloned and expressed in E. coli so far, including endolysin (TP84_28) [50], depolymerase (glycosyl hydrolase (TP84_26) [48,51], major capsid protein (TP84_12), minor capsid protein (TP84_08), capsid portal protein (TP84_06), single-strand binding proteins (SSB) (TP84_54, TP84_63, TP84_66), helicase (TP84_59), and transcriptional regulator (TP84_52). The 39 new confirmed TP-84 proteins shown in Table 2 were determined by molecular cloning of the corresponding open reading frames (ORFs), transcription–translation in vitro, and LC-MS analysis. Further details are to be published elsewhere. Supplementary Figure S1 shows a genome map of TP-84 with updated proteomic confirmation of the bioinformatically characterized ORFs ([49] and this work). Only 8 ORFs, potentially coding for very small proteins, remain to be confirmed as active in protein biosynthesis.

4.2. AcaML1 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Myoviridae morphotype, Host Acidithiobacillus caldus ATCC 51756)

The existence of the temperate phage AcaML1 was discovered through the bioinformatic examination of the genome sequence of the moderately thermophilic Acidithiobacillus caldus ATCC 51756 [35]. The phage exhibits inducible characteristics and has the potential to infect and transfer genetic material to members of the Acidithiobacillus genus. Its genome consists of 59,353 bp with a GC content of 64.5%, surpassing the host’s average GC content of 61.6%. The genome contains 72 ORFs, organized into 10 clusters. Among these, 52.8% share sequence similarities with known proteins, 34.4% are hypothetical, and 12.8% bear no resemblance to any previously reported proteins. Gene clusters 1 and 2 encompass key proteins implicated in lysogeny establishment, as well as the regulation and control of the lysogeny–lytic switch, such as integrase, excisionase, regulators, primase, RNase endonuclease, and methyltransferases. Gene clusters 3 to 9 are dedicated to encoding products involved in viral particle formation and assembly, including procapsid shell and maturation protease, baseplate, contractile tail tube, tail fibers, DNA packaging components like terminase and portal protein, and factors contributing to host lysis for viral particle release, such as holin and endolysin. The terminal gene module in AcaML1 comprises three genes coding for an McrBC DNA restriction system, along with an associated modification enzyme (cytosine methylase), and two insertion sequences (IS5, IS21). The full genome sequence of AcaML1 is accessible in GenBank with the accession number JX507079.

4.3. GR1 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotype, Host G. stearothermophilus ATCC 10149)

Phage GR1 was isolated from roadside soil in Seoul using G. stearothermophilus ATCC 10149 as a host [41]. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) revealed its distinctive features, including an icosahedral head with a diameter of 88 ± 9 nm (n = 10) and a noncontractile tail measuring 187 ± 44 nm (n = 10). Notably, GR1 exhibited strong infectivity against its host strain, forming large, clear plaques, and demonstrated specificity by only infecting three out of seven strains of G. stearothermophilus. GR1 displayed no infectivity towards other Gram-positive or Gram-negative bacteria, underscoring its high host specificity. The complete genome of GR1 consists of 79,387 base pairs of double-stranded DNA, with an average G + C content of 32.34%. It harbors 108 putative ORFs and one tRNA. Through BLASTN analysis, it was determined that GR1 is a novel phage with no genetically similar counterparts. This conclusion would corroborate with the very distance from its host GC content of 52.43%, which may indicate a relatively new establishment of this host–bacteriophage system and/or mosaic nature of the GR1, acquiring genes from various sources and adopting to infect G. stearothermophilus. The GR1 ORFs were classified into six distinct groups based on their functions: phage DNA packaging, phage structure, host lysis, nucleotide metabolism, additional functions, and hypothetical proteins. Noteworthy genes, such as integrase, imply that GR1 functions as a temperate phage. Additionally, genes encoding the major capsid protein, putative adhesin, terminase large subunit, and endolysin were identified in the phage. The endolysin coding gene was cloned and expressed in E. coli. Subsequently, the recombinant LysGR1 protein and its truncated derivatives were purified and subjected to biochemical and functional characterization. LysGR1 proved to be highly effective in eliminating G. stearothermophilus biofilms and exhibited notable thermostability, maintaining approximately 70% of its lytic activity, even after a 15 min incubation at 70 °C [41].

4.4. vB_GthS_PT9.1 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotype, Host Geobacillus thermodenitrificans)

Bacteriophage vB_GthS_PT9.1 (referred to here by its shorter name, PT9.1) was isolated from soil samples collected from compost heaps, using a soil-isolated G. thermodenitrificans strain PT-9 as a host [42]. The host range determination experiments demonstrated that out of 46 thermophilic Bacillus-group bacterial strains (including 41 local isolates), 9 strains of G. thermodenitrificans were sensitive to PT9.1. The phage infected its host cells from 45 to 80 °C. The PT9.1 formed plaques with a clear center (up to 3.2 mm in diameter) surrounded by an opaque halo zone (up to 9.4 mm in diameter), indicating the presence of phage-encoded enzyme, depolymerase. The TEM analysis revealed that the phage exhibited an icosahedral head with a diameter of 62.72 ± 2.34 nm, and a noncontractile tail of 143.15 ± 8.47 nm in length and 10.44 ± 1.03 nm in width, thus, apparently demonstrating the morphology of siphovirus (Figure 2). The genome of PT9.1 is a double-stranded (dsDNA) molecule consisting of 38,373 bp with a GC content of 43.9%. Similar to other dsDNA bacteriophages, the genome of PT9.1 is close-packed—94.2% of the genome is coded for proteins. The bioinformatics analysis revealed the presence of 75 probable protein-encoding genes and no genes for tRNA. Notably, all PT9.1 CDSs were oriented in the same direction. Bioinformatics analysis revealed that only ORF60 encoded unique proteins that had no reliable identity (E-values > 0.001) to the database entries. With the exception of gp03, which demonstrated 100% amino acid identity to hypothetical protein (WP_157778131.1) from P. thermoglucosidasius, all PT9.1 gene products showed the highest similarity to proteins from phages that infect bacteria from the genera Geobacillus (68), Bacillus (2), and Paenibacillus (1). Based on their homology to biologically defined proteins, 34 ORFs of PT9.1 were given a putative functional annotation. As observed in other siphoviruses, the PT9.1 genome appeared to have a modular organization, with genes for DNA packaging, structure/morphogenesis, lysis, phage–host interactions, and DNA replication/recombination/repair (DNA RRR) clustered together. It seems that temperate phages are more prone to modular evolution. Also, genes-coding proteins related to transcription, translation, nucleotide metabolism, and modification were presented in the genome of PT9.1. On the other hand, no RNA or DNA polymerase-coding genes were detected in the genome of this phage suggesting that PT9.1 most likely uses a number of DNA RRR proteins, including RNA or DNA polymerase, of the host cell [42]. Notably, none of the predicted gene products showed sequence homology with antibiotic resistance determinants or integration-related proteins. A proteomic analysis led to the experimental identification of three virion proteins, including major capsid protein (gp07), tape measure protein (gp16), and distal tail protein (gp17), which were predicted by bioinformatics approaches. A comparative total proteome comparison using the ViPTree web service demonstrated that PT9.1 was the most closely related to Geobacillus phage vB_GthS_NIIg9.7 (NIIg9.7). The nucleotide-based virus’s overall nucleotide sequence identity in between PT9.1 and NIIg9.7 was 82.5%, which suggests that these two phages are the members of a potential new viral genus [42]. A comparison of functional genome maps of (Para)geobacillus bacteriophages PT9.1, NII9.7, PK5.1, PK3.5, PK3.6, and NII3.2 is shown in Supplementary Figure S2.

4.5. vB_GthS_NIIg9.7 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotype, Host G. thermodenitrificans)

Bacteriophage vB_GthS_NIIg9.7 (referred to here by its shorter name, NIIg9.7) was isolated from soil samples collected from compost heaps, using a soil-isolated G. thermodenitrificans strain NIIg-9 as a host [42]. The host range determination experiments revealed that phage NIIg9.7 infected nine G. thermodenitrificans strains (out of 46 thermophilic Bacillus-group bacterial strains tested). The phage propagation temperature was from 50 to 78 °C. The plaques formed by NIIg9.7 had a clear center (up to 3.0 mm in diameter) surrounded by an opaque halo zone (up to 11.4 mm in diameter). Based on the morphological characteristics, NIIg9.7 is a siphovirus characterized by an isometric head (63.81 ± 3.95 nm in diameter) and a noncontractile tail (143.16 ± 4.19 nm in length, and 9.93 ± 1.62 nm in width) (Figure 2). The NIIg9.7 contains dsDNA consisting of 39,016 bp with a GC content of 44.4%. The 93.9% of the genome is coded for proteins. The 76 probable protein-encoding genes and no genes for tRNA were detected in the genome of NIIg9.7. With the exception of ORF40 encoding a ribbon–helix–helix domain-containing protein, all other NIIg9.7 ORFs have been predicted to be transcribed from the same DNA strand. Based on the results of bioinformatics analysis, only two NIIg9.7 ORFs, which are ORF41 and ORF67, encoded unique proteins that had no reliable identity to the database entries. With the exception of gp35 and gp45, which demonstrated 61% and 64% amino acid identity to hypothetical protein (WP_098417325.1) from Bacillus cereus and DUF559 domain-containing protein (WP_236934102.1) from G. thermodenitrificans, accordingly, all NIIg9.7 gene products showed similarity to viral proteins. The highest similarity was to proteins from phages that infect bacteria from the genera Geobacillus (66), Bacillus (3), Brevibacillus (1), Virgibacillus (1) and Thermus (1). Based on their homology to biologically defined proteins, 35 ORFs of NIIg9.7 were functionally annotated. The genes-coding proteins for DNA packaging, structure/morphogenesis, lysis, phage–host interactions, DNA replication/recombination/repair, transcription, translation, and nucleotide metabolism/modification were detected in the genome of NIIg9.7. On the other hand, no RNA or DNA polymerase-coding genes and no genes-coding antibiotic resistance determinants or integration-related proteins were detected in the genome of NIIg9.7. Mass spectrometry analysis led to the experimental identification of four virion proteins, including major capsid protein (gp06), tape measure protein (gp15), distal tail protein (gp16), and tail fiber protein (gp17) that were predicted by bioinformatics approaches. A comparative total proteome comparison using the ViPTree web service demonstrated that the closest relative of NIIg9.7 was Geobacillus phage PT9.1. The nucleotide-based virus overall nucleotide sequence identity of NIIg9.7 vs. PT9.1 was 82.5% [42]. A comparison of functional genome maps of (Para)geobacillus bacteriophages PT9.1, NII9.7, PK5.1, PK3.5, PK3.6, and NII3.2 is shown in Supplementary Figure S2.

4.6. vB_GthS_PK5.1 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotype, Host G. thermodenitrificans)

Bacteriophage vB_GthS_PK.1 (referred to here by its shorter name, PK5.1) was isolated from soil samples collected from compost heaps, using a soil-isolated G. thermodenitrificans strain PK-5 as a host [42]. Phage PK5.1 demonstrated a narrow host range: it infected only two G. thermodenitrificans strains (out of 46 thermophilic Bacillus-group bacterial strains tested). Phage propagation temperature was from 48 to 80 °C. The PK5.1 formed plaques with a clear center (up to 3.7 mm in diameter) surrounded by an opaque halo zone (up to 7.2 mm in diameter). The TEM analysis revealed siphovirus morphotype: PK5.1 possesses an icosahedral head with a diameter of 62.91 ± 3.20 nm, and a tail of 145.74 ± 14.88 nm in length and 10.10 ± 1.42 nm in width (Figure 2). The genome of PK5.1 consists of 38,161 bp dsDNA with a GC content of 43.6%. Also, 92.4% of the genome is coded for proteins. The bioinformatics analysis revealed the presence of 64 probable protein-encoding genes and no genes for tRNA. Notably, all CDSs were oriented in the same direction. All PK5.1 ORFs encoded proteins that had a reliable identity to the database entries. With the exception of gp33, which demonstrated 65% amino acid identity to hypothetical protein (WP_043904680.1) from Parageobacillus genomosp. 1, all PK5.1 gene products had reliable identity to viral proteins: it showed the highest similarity to proteins from phages that infect bacteria from the genera Geobacillus (59), Bacillus (3), and Lactobacillus (1). In total, 37 ORFs of PK5.1 were given a putative functional annotation. Genes coding for DNA packaging, structure/morphogenesis, lysis, phage–host interactions, DNA RRR, transcription, translation, nucleotide metabolism, and modification proteins were presented in the genome of PK5.1. On the other hand, no RNA or DNA polymerase-coding genes as well as no genes-coding antibiotic resistance determinants or integration-related proteins were detected. Proteomic analysis led to the identification of three virion structure/morphogenesis-related proteins including Clp protease (gp04), major capsid protein (gp05), tape measure protein (gp14), and structural protein (gp16). A comparative total proteome comparison using the ViPTree web service demonstrated that PK5.1. was in between Geobacillus phages PT9.1-NIIg9.7 and PK3.5-PK3.6. The nucleotide-based virus overall nucleotide sequence identity between PK5.1 and its closest relatives revealed a 57.9%, 56.8%, 54.4%, and 48.5% identity with PK3.5, PK3.6, NIIg9.7, and PT9.1, accordingly. These results suggest that Geobacillus phage PK5.1 has no close identity to phages deposited in the NCBI database to date and potentially represents a new genus within siphoviruses. A comparison of functional genome maps of (Para)geobacillus bacteriophages PT9.1, NII9.7, PK5.1, PK3.5, PK3.6, and NII3.2 is shown in Supplementary Figure S2.

4.7. vB_GthS_PK3.5 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotype, Host G. thermodenitrificans)

Phage vB_GthS_PK3.5 (PK3.5) was isolated from soil samples collected from compost heaps, using a G. thermodenitrificans strain PK-3 as a host [42]. PK3.5 infected 4 G. thermodenitrificans strains (out of 46 thermophilic Bacillus-group bacterial strains tested). The phage demonstrated an ability to infect its host cells from 50 to 78 °C. Clear plaques (up to 1.5 mm in diameter) were surrounded by a turbid halo zone (up to 4.92 mm in diameter). Based on the results of TEM analysis, PK3.5 is a siphovirus characterized by an icosahedral head with a diameter of 65.18 ± 3.27 nm, and a tail of 149.98 ± 15.01 nm in length and 10.84 ± 1.92 nm in width (Figure 2). PK3.5 contains a genome of 38,788 bp dsDNA with a GC content of 43.5%. The coding capacity of the genome is 92.7%. A total number of 76 probable protein-encoding genes and no genes for tRNA were detected in the genome of PK3.5. All ORFs have been predicted to be transcribed from the same DNA strand. Notably, the vast majority (71 out of 76) PK3.5 ORFs encoded proteins that had a reliable identity to the database entries. For PK3.5 ORFs that encoded proteins with matches to those in other sequenced viral genomes, it showed the highest similarity to proteins from phages that infect bacteria from the genera Geobacillus (63), Lysinibacillus (1), and Psychrobacillus (1), Ochrobactrum (1), and Streptococcus (1). In total, 37 ORFs of PK3.5 were given a putative functional annotation including genes coding for DNA packaging, structure/morphogenesis, lysis, phage–host interactions, DNA RRR, transcription, translation, nucleotide metabolism, and modification. On the other hand, no RNA or DNA polymerase-coding genes were detected. Also, no predicted genes-coding antibiotic resistance determinants or integration-related proteins were detected in the genome of PK3.5. Proteomic analysis of the structural proteins of phage PK3.5 virions using a modified filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) protocol, followed by Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), led to the identification of five virion structural proteins including major capsid protein (gp05), putative tail component (gp09), tape measure protein (gp14), distal tail protein (gp15) and putative tail fiber protein (gp16). Neighbor-joining tree analysis based on the alignment of the amino acid sequences of major capsid protein, terminase large subunit, tape measure protein, and helicase, as well as a comparative total proteome comparison using the ViPTree web service, demonstrated that PK3.5 was the most closely related to Geobacillus phage vB_GthS_PK3.6 (PK3.6). The nucleotide-based virus’s overall nucleotide sequence identity in between PK3.5 and PK3.6 was 48.5%. These results suggest that these two phages are the members of a potential new viral genus within siphoviruses [42]. A comparison of functional genome maps of (Para)geobacillus bacteriophages PT9.1, NII9.7, PK5.1, PK3.5, PK3.6, and NII3.2 is shown in Supplementary Figure S2.

4.8. vB_GthS_PK3.6 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotype, Host G. thermodenitrificans)

Bacteriophage vB_GthS_PK3.6 (referred to here by its shorter name, PK3.6) was isolated from soil samples collected from compost heaps, using a soil-isolated G. thermodenitrificans strain PK-3 as a host [42]. Phage infected only 2 out of 46 thermophilic Bacillus-group bacterial strains tested (including 41 local isolates). Phage propagated in a temperature range from 50 to 80 °C. The PK3.6 formed plaques with a clear center (up to 3.0 mm in diameter) surrounded by an opaque halo zone (up to 8.4 mm in diameter). The bacteriophage demonstrated the morphology of siphovirus: it has an icosahedral head with a diameter of 66.93 ± 4.24 nm, and a noncontractile tail of 137.32 ± 5.75 nm in length and 9.41 ± 1.84 nm in width (Figure 2). The PK3.6 contains dsDNA (38,405 bp) with a GC content of 44.8% and a coding capacity of 92.0%. In total, 68 probable protein-encoding genes and no genes for tRNA were detected in the genome of PK3.6. Notably, all CDSs were oriented in the same direction. All PK3.6 ORFs encoded proteins that had a reliable identity to the database entries. Notably, all CDSs were oriented in the same direction. All PK5.1 ORFs encoded proteins that had reliable identity to viral proteins deposited in NCBI database: it showed the highest similarity to proteins from phages that infect bacteria from the genera Geobacillus (59), Anoxybacillus (2), Bacillus (1), and Psychrobacillus (1), Enterococcus (1), Lactococcus (1), and Sporosarcina (1). In total, 36 ORFs of PK3.6 were given a putative functional annotation. Genes coding for DNA packaging, structure/morphogenesis, lysis, phage–host interactions, DNA RRR, transcription, translation, nucleotide metabolism, and modification proteins were detected in the genome of PK3.6. In contrast, none of the predicted gene products showed sequence homology with RNA or DNA polymerase-coding genes, as well as no genes-coding antibiotic resistance determinants or integration-related proteins, were presented. Three virion proteins, including major capsid protein (gp05), tape measure protein (gp14), and tail fiber protein (gp16), were experimentally evaluated by MS analysis. Neighbor-joining tree analysis based on the alignment of the amino acid sequences of the individual proteins most often used for the analysis of the evolutionary relationships among bacteriophages, as well as a comparative total proteome comparison using the ViPTree web service demonstrated that PK3.6 was the most closely related to Geobacillus phage PK3.6. The nucleotide-based virus’s overall nucleotide sequence identity in between PK3.6 and its closest relative, that is, PK3.5, was 84.2%. A comparison of functional genome maps of (Para)geobacillus bacteriophages PT9.1, NII9.7, PK5.1, PK3.5, PK3.6, and NII3.2 is shown in Supplementary Figure S2.

4.9. vB_PtoS_NIIg3.2 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotype, Host G. thermodenitrificans)

Bacteriophage vB_PtoS_NIIg3.2 (referred to here by its shorter name, NIIg3.2) was isolated from the compost heaps using the enrichment of phages in the source material technique, with the local isolate Parageobacillus toebii strain NIIg-3 as a host [43]. In addition, four G. thermodenitrificans strains (PT-4, NIIg-2, PK-11, and PK-3) were sensitive to NIIg3.2 (out of 46 thermophilic Bacillus-group bacterial strains tested). The phage infected its host cells from 50 to 80 °C. The NIIg3.2 formed plaques with a clear center (up to 0.6 mm in diameter) surrounded by an opaque halo zone (up to 2 mm in diameter). TEM analysis revealed siphovirus morphology: phage is characterized by an icosahedral head with a diameter of 62.08 ± 3.96 nm, and a long, noncontractile tail of 218.37 ± 12.53 nm in length, and 10.44 ± 1.03 nm in width (Figure 2). Phage NIIg3.2 has a dsDNA genome consisting of 38,970 bp with a GC content of 42.2% and a coding capacity of 94.6%. Phage contains 71 probable protein-encoding genes and no genes for tRNA. With the exception of ORF24-ORF26, encoding proteins potentially related to the lysogenic module of NIIg3.2, all other ORFs were oriented in the same DNA strand. Based on the results of bioinformatics analysis, only ORF31 encoded unique proteins that had no reliable identity to the NCBI database entries. Interestingly, even 14 ORFs encoded proteins with reliable identity exceptionally for bacterial proteins. The NIIg3.2 ORFs that encoded proteins with reliable identity to viral homologs showed the highest similarity to proteins from phages that infect bacteria from the broad-range genera including Geobacillus (32), Bacillus (11), Thermus (4), Clostridium (2), Paenibacillus (2), Virgibacillus (2), Anoxybacillus (1), Brevibacillus (1), and Staphylococcus (1). Based on homology to biologically defined proteins, 29 ORFs of NIIg3.2 were given a putative functional annotation including genes coding for DNA packaging, structure/morphogenesis, phage–host interactions, lysis, and DNA replication/repair. Also, the lysogeny module of NIIg3.2 was found downstream of the lysis cassette, whereas gp50 encoded the potential auxiliary metabolic gene (AGM) related to pathogenicity–YopX family protein containing YopX (pfam09643) conserved domain. No RNA or DNA polymerase-coding genes were detected in the genome of this phage. Proteomic analysis confirmed five NIIg3.2 structural proteins identified by comparative genomics and/or HMM profile comparisons: prohead protease (gp05), major capsid protein (gp06), tape measure protein (gp15), tail hube protein (gp16), and tail fiber protein (gp17). Neighbor-joining tree analysis based on the alignment of the amino acid sequences of major capsid protein, terminase large subunit, portal protein, and tape measure protein as well as a comparative total proteome comparison using the ViPTree web service revealed that NIIg3.2 had no close phylogenetic relationships to viral homologs to date. The nucleotide-based virus overall nucleotide sequence identity between NIIg3.2 and its closest relatives was quite low and ranged from 15.5% (NIIg3.2 vs. PK5.1) to 9.6% (NIIg3.2 vs. PK3.6) indicating that NIIg3.2 represents an evolutionarily distant lineage within the bacterial viruses. A comparison of functional genome maps of (Para)geobacillus bacteriophages PT9.1, NII9.7, PK5.1, PK3.5, PK3.6, and NII3.2 is shown in Supplementary Figure S2.

4.10. vB_GthS_PK5.2, vB_GthS_PK2.1, vB_GthS_NIIg10.1, vB_GthS_NIIg2.1, vB_GthS_NIIg2.2, vB_GthS_NIIg2.3 (Unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotype, Host G. thermodenitrificans)

Bacteriophages vB_GthS_PK5.2, vB_GthS_PK2.1, vB_GthS_NIIg10.1, vB_GthS_NIIg2.1, vB_GthS_NIIg2.2, and vB_GthS_NIIg2.3 (referred to here by their shorter names, PK5.2, PK2.1, NIIg10.1, NIIg2.1, NIIg2.2, and NIIg2.3, accordingly) were isolated from soil samples collected from compost heaps at Vilnius University Botanical Garden, Vingis Park, Vilnius, Lithuania, using the enrichment of phages in the source material technique. G. thermodenitrificans strains PK-5, PK-2, and NIIg-10 were used as the host for PK5.2, PK2.1, and NIIg10.1 isolation, propagation, and phage growth experiments, accordingly. G. thermodenitrificans strain NIIg-2 was used as a host for NIIg2.1, NIIg2.2, and NIIg2.3 experiments. TEM analysis revealed that all phages are siphoviruses characterized by an isometric head and a noncontractile tail (Figure 2). All bacteriophages contain dsDNA. Complete genome sequences and annotation of genomic DNA of phages PK5.2 and PK2.1 have now been deposited in the NCBI database under accession numbers OP341629.1 and OP341625.1, accordingly. Preliminary bioinformatics and phylogenetics analysis suggest that phage PK2.1 is closely related to Geobacillus phage TP-84; meanwhile, PK5.2 has no close viral homologs to date and potentially represents a new genus within siphoviruses.

5. Perspective

Thermophilic bacteriophages, with their unique properties and adaptability to extreme temperatures, hold significant promise in biotechnology. Their diverse applications, from bioprocessing to antimicrobial strategies and bioremediation, underscore their potential as valuable tools in various biotechnological processes. Thus, from a practical perspective, thermophilic Bacillus species are key bacterial entities in industrial fermentation processes—along with their bacteriophages. In general, thermophages, not only those from the ‘Bacillus group’, present a novel reservoir of diversified genetic material and enzymes, holding significant potential for applications in both industry and scientific research [7]. For example, G. stearothermophilus is a spore-forming Gram-positive bacterium that causes flat sour spoilage in low-acid canned foods. To address this problem, G. stearothermophilus-infecting phage GR1 was isolated from the soil, and its endolysin LysGR1 was characterized [41]. Considering the high thermal stability, broad lytic activity, and biofilm reduction efficacy of LysGR1 and its enzymatically active domain, it is suggested that these enzymes could act as promising biocontrol agents against G. stearothermophilus and foodborne pathogens [41]. Thermophilic bacteriophages may be useful for bioremediation purposes, particularly in the removal of thermotolerant bacterial contaminants from environmental sources, biofilms, and industrial wastewater, just like their mesophilic equivalents [52,53] or, to the contrary, they may negatively affect high-temperature biological treatments of raw sewage sludge by infecting employed thermophilic bacteria [4,54]. Despite advances in modern technologies, various foodborne outbreaks have continuously threatened food safety. The overuse and misuse of antibiotics have escalated this threat due to the prevalence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens. Therefore, the development of new methodologies for controlling microbial contamination is extremely important to ensure food safety [55]. As an alternative to conventional antibiotics, bacteriophages and their derived endolysins have emerged as promising, effective, and safe antimicrobial agents [56]. Thermophages have also shown potential as antimicrobial agents against thermotolerant pathogens. For example, the thermophilic bacteriophage TSP4 has been investigated for its antibacterial activity against antibiotic-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus [57]. Another health-related application includes the potential for the construction of novel types of vaccine nanocarriers and drug delivery vehicles by employing SMV1 coat protein from unclassified Bicaudaviridae SMV1, infecting Sulfolobus monocaudavirus. The protein has shown in vivo stability without inflammatory response in mice and human intestinal organoids [58]. Thermophilic or thermotolerant bacteriophages may be used to control bacterial contaminants, including both high- and moderate-temperature food processing environments. For instance, the thermophilic bacteriophage DZ1 may be used as a biocontrol agent for Bacillus cereus contamination during industrial food production [59]. These novel biological entities and their enzymes are increasingly being explored for their potential to prevent and eradicate bacterial contaminants, even within the intricate settings of foods and food processing facilities [55,56,60]. Bacteriophage-coded thermostable enzymes are also important tools in molecular biology technologies and molecular diagnostics, such as, for example, (i) 3173 DNA polymerase cloned as a metagenomic fragment from ‘Pyrovirus’ (Yellowstone) with unique features of proofreading DNA-dependent DNA polymerase activity and reverse transcriptase activity with optimum at 77 °C and half-life of 11 min. at 94 °C. The enzyme is used as ‘one-enzyme’ RT-PCR [61]; (ii) Magma DNA polymerase–recombinant chimera of metagenomic thermophage DNA polymerase and thermophilic bacteria Thermus aquaticus Taq DNA polymerase, exhibiting an extremely low replication error level of 1 per 106 nucleotides, and are thus used for high fidelity PCR [62]; (iii) NrS-1 primase-polymerase from unclassified siphovirus NrS-1–multifunctional enzyme possessing DNA polymerase, primase, and helicase activity with optimum at 50 °C. Used for primer-less DNA synthesis for whole genome amplification [63]; and (iv) TS2126 RNA/ssDNA ligase from unclassified Thermus bacteriophage Ph2119) exhibits very high specificity—30× higher than mesophilic T4 bacteriophage RNA ligase with optimum at 65 °C [64]. Commercialized for cDNA ligation and circularization of linear nucleic acids.
The increasing number of discoveries of thermophages, including those infecting thermophilic ‘Bacillus group’ species, provides a more complete understanding of thermophiles’ biology, the mechanisms of biochemical adaptations needed for life in high temperatures, and the evolution of thermophilic host–bacteriophage relationships. Especially interesting is the recent characterization of numerous thermophages that were isolated from compost heaps using G. thermodenitrificans and Parageobacillus strains as hosts for bacteriophage propagation [42,43].

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms25063125/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.M.S., B.Ł. and E.Š.; methodology, I.S., E.Š. and M.Š.; investigation, I.S., E.Š., M.Š. and B.Ł.; resources, P.M.S. and E.Š.; writing—original draft preparation, P.M.S., B.Ł., E.Š. and A.Z.-S.; writing—review and editing, P.M.S. and A.Z.-S.; supervision, P.M.S. and E.Š.; project administration, P.M.S. and E.Š.; funding acquisition, P.M.S. and B.Ł. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by a TECHMATSTRATEG2/410747/11/NCBR/2019 Grant to the University of Gdansk, Faculty of Chemistry, Molecular Biotechnology Department.

Acknowledgments

Paweł Cięszczyk (Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport) is highly appreciated for providing funds for the manuscript publication.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Liu, H.; Kheirvari, M.; Tumban, E. Potential Applications of Thermophilic Bacteriophages in One Health. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 8222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Tumban, E. (Ed.) Bacteriophage Virus-like Particles: Platforms for Vaccine Design. In Bacteriophages: Methods and Protocols; Humana: New York, NY, USA, 2024; Volume 2738, pp. 411–423. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aljabali, A.A.A.; Aljbaly, M.B.M.; Obeid, M.A.; Shahcheraghi, S.H.; Tambuwala, M.M. The Next Generation of Drug Delivery: Harnessing the Power of Bacteriophages. In Bacteriophages: Methods and Protocols; Tumban, E., Ed.; Humana: New York, NY, USA, 2024; Volume 2738, pp. 279–315. [Google Scholar]
  4. Doss, R.K.; Palmer, M.; Mead, D.A.; Hedlund, B.P. Functional Biology and Biotechnology of Thermophilic Viruses. Essays Biochem. 2023, 67, 671–684. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  5. Turner, D.; Kropinski, A.M.; Adriaenssens, E.M. A Roadmap for Genome-Based Phage Taxonomy. Viruses 2021, 13, 506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Turner, D.; Shkoporov, A.N.; Lood, C.; Millard, A.D.; Dutilh, B.E.; Alfenas-Zerbini, P.; van Zyl, L.J.; Aziz, R.K.; Oksanen, H.M.; Poranen, M.M.; et al. Abolishment of Morphology-Based Taxa and Change to Binomial Species Names: 2022 Taxonomy Update of the ICTV Bacterial Viruses Subcommittee. Arch. Virol. 2023, 168, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Łubkowska, B.; Jeżewska-Frąckowiak, J.; Sobolewski, I.; Skowron, P.M. Bacteriophages of Thermophilic ‘Bacillus Group’ Bacteria-A Review. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ash, C.; Farrow, J.A.E.; Wallbanks, S.; Collins, M.D. Phylogenetic Heterogeneity of the Genus Bacillus Revealed by Comparative Analysis of Small-subunit-ribosomal RNA Sequences. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 1991, 13, 202–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nazina, T.N.; Tourova, T.P.; Poltaraus, A.B.; Novikova, E.V.; Grigoryan, A.A.; Ivanova, A.E.; Lysenko, A.M.; Petrunyaka, V.V.; Osipov, G.A.; Belyaev, S.S.; et al. Taxonomic Study of Aerobic Thermophilic Bacilli: Descriptions of Geobacillus subterraneus Gen. Nov., Sp. Nov. and Geobacillus uzenensis Sp. Nov. from Petroleum Reservoirs and Transfer of Bacillus stearothermophilus, Bacillus thermocatenulatus, Bacillus thermoleovorans, Bacillus kaustophilus, Bacillus thermodenitrificans to Geobacillus as the New Combinations G. stearothermophilus, G. Th. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 2001, 51, 433–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Aliyu, H.; Lebre, P.; Blom, J.; Cowan, D.; De Maayer, P. Phylogenomic Re-Assessment of the Thermophilic Genus Geobacillus. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 2016, 39, 527–533, Erratum in Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 2018, 41, 529–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Najar, I.N.; Das, S.; Thakur, N. Reclassification of Geobacillus galactosidasius and Geobacillus yumthangensis as Parageobacillus galactosidasius Comb. Nov. and Parageobacillus yumthangensis Comb. Nov., Respectively. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 2020, 70, 6518–6523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Koser, S.A. Action of the Bacteriophage on a Thermophilic Bacillus. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 1926, 24, 109–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Adant, M. Les Bacteriophages Des Microbes Thermophiles. Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. 1928, 99, 1244–1245. [Google Scholar]
  14. White, R.; Georgi, C.E.; Militzer, W. Heat Studies on a Thermophilic Bacteriophage. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 1954, 85, 137–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. White, R.; Georgi, C.E.; Militzer, W.E. Characteristics of a Thermophilic Bacteriophage. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 1955, 88, 373–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Onodera, N. On Some Characteristics of a Newly Isolated Thermophilic Bacteriophage and Consideration of Its Thermostability. J. Electron. Microsc. 1961, 10, 91–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Saunders, G.F.; Campbell, L.L.; Postgate, J.R. Abstract. In Proceedings of the 148th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Chicago, IL, USA, 30 August–4 September 1964. [Google Scholar]
  18. Saunders, G.F.; Campbell, L.L. Characterization of a Thermophilic Bacteriophage for Bacillus stearothermophilus. J. Bacteriol. 1966, 91, 340–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Shafia, F.; Thompson, T.L. Isolation and Preliminary Characterization of Bacteriophage Phi-Mu-4. J. Bacteriol. 1964, 87, 999–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Welker, N.E.; Campbell, L.L. Biochemical Changes in Lysogenic Bacillus stearothermophilus after Bacteriophage Induction. J. Bacteriol. 1965, 90, 1129–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Welker, N.E.; Campbell, L.L. Induction and Properties of a Temperate Bacteriophage from Bacillus stearothermophilus. J. Bacteriol. 1965, 89, 175–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Carnevali, F.; Donelli, G. Some Properties of a Thermophilic Phage DNA. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1968, 125, 376–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Egbert, L.N.; Mitchell, H.K. Characteristics of Tphi3, a Bacteriophage for Bacillus. J. Virol. 1967, 1, 610–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Egbert, L.N. Characteristics of the Deoxyribonucleic Acid of T Phi 3, a Bacteriophage for Bacillus stearothermophilus. J. Virol. 1969, 3, 528–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Humbert, R.D.; Fields, M.L. Study of Two Bacteriophages of Bacillus stearothermophilus Strain NCA1518. J. Virol. 1972, 9, 397–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ljunger, C.; Edebo, M. The Influence of Inorganic Ions on the Heat Stability of a Thermophilic Bacteriophage. Physiol. Plant 1972, 27, 182–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Reanney, D.C.; Marsh, S.C.N. The Ecology of Viruses Attacking Bacillus stearothermophilus in Soil. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 1973, 5, 399–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sakaki, Y.; Oshima, T. A New Lipid-Containing Phage Infecting Acidophilic Thermophilic Bacteria. Virology 1976, 75, 256–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Sharp, R.J.; Ahmad, S.I.; Munster, A.; Dowsett, B.; Atkinson, T. The Isolation and Characterization of Bacteriophages Infecting Obligately Thermophilic Strains of Bacillus. Microbiology 1986, 132, 1709–1722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Liu, B.; Wu, S.; Song, Q.; Zhang, X.; Xie, L. Two Novel Bacteriophages of Thermophilic Bacteria Isolated from Deep-Sea Hydrothermal Fields. Curr. Microbiol. 2006, 53, 163–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Liu, B.; Zhang, X. Deep-Sea Thermophilic Geobacillus Bacteriophage GVE2 Transcriptional Profile and Proteomic Characterization of Virions. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2008, 80, 697–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Liu, B.; Zhou, F.; Wu, S.; Xu, Y.; Zhang, X. Genomic and Proteomic Characterization of a Thermophilic Geobacillus Bacteriophage GBSV1. Res. Microbiol. 2009, 160, 166–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Liu, B.; Wu, S.; Xie, L. Complete Genome Sequence and Proteomic Analysis of a Thermophilic Bacteriophage BV1. Acta Oceanol. Sin. 2010, 29, 84–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wang, Y.; Zhang, X. Genome Analysis of Deep-Sea Thermophilic Phage D6E. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 76, 7861–7866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Tapia, P.; Flores, F.M.; Covarrubias, P.C.; Acuña, L.G.; Holmes, D.S.; Quatrini, R. Complete Genome Sequence of Temperate Bacteriophage Aca ML1 from the Extreme Acidophile Acidithiobacillus ATCC 51756. J. Virol. 2012, 86, 12452–12453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Doi, K.; Mori, K.; Martono, H.; Nagayoshi, Y.; Fujino, Y.; Tashiro, K.; Kuhara, S.; Ohshima, T. Draft Genome Sequence of Geobacillus kaustophilus GBlys, a Lysogenic Strain with Bacteriophage ΦOH2. Genome. Announc. 2013, 1, e00634-13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Marks, T.J.; Hamilton, P.T. Characterization of a Thermophilic Bacteriophage of Geobacillus kaustophilus. Arch. Virol. 2014, 159, 2771–2775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. van Zyl, L.J.; Sunda, F.; Taylor, M.P.; Cowan, D.A.; Trindade, M.I. Identification and Characterization of a Novel Geobacillus thermoglucosidasius Bacteriophage, GVE3. Arch. Virol. 2015, 160, 2269–2282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Morozova, V.; Bokovaya, O.; Kozlova, Y.; Kurilshikov, A.; Babkin, I.; Tupikin, A.; Bondar, A.; Ryabchikova, E.; Brayanskaya, A.; Peltek, S.; et al. A Novel Thermophilic Aeribacillus Bacteriophage AP45 Isolated from the Valley of Geysers, Kamchatka: Genome Analysis Suggests the Existence of a New Genus within the Siphoviridae Family. Extremophiles 2019, 23, 599–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Akhwale, J.K.; Rohde, M.; Rohde, C.; Bunk, B.; Spröer, C.; Klenk, H.P.; Boga, H.I.; Wittmann, J. Comparative Genomic Analysis of Eight Novel Haloalkaliphilic Bacteriophages from Lake Elmenteita, Kenya. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0212102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Choi, D.; Kong, M. LysGR1, a Novel Thermostable Endolysin from Geobacillus stearothermophilus Bacteriophage GR1. Front. Microbiol. 2023, 14, 1178748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Šimoliūnas, E.; Šimoliūnienė, M.; Laskevičiūtė, G.; Kvederavičiūtė, K.; Skapas, M.; Kaupinis, A.; Valius, M.; Meškys, R.; Kuisienė, N. Geobacillus Bacteriophages from Compost Heaps: Representatives of Three New Genera within Thermophilic Siphoviruses. Viruses 2023, 15, 1691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Šimoliūnas, E.; Šimoliūnienė, M.; Laskevičiūtė, G.; Kvederavičiūtė, K.; Skapas, M.; Kaupinis, A.; Valius, M.; Meškys, R.; Kuisienė, N. Characterization of Parageobacillus Bacteriophage VB_PtoS_NIIg3.2—A Representative of a New Genus within Thermophilic Siphoviruses. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 13980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sahin, E.; Karaca, B.; Gursoy, G.E.; Coleri Cihan, A. Identification and Molecular Characterization of a Novel Bacteriophage Isolated from Anoxybacillus caldiproteolyticus; GeneBank Submission 19-FEB-2018. Biology; Ankara University: Ankara, Turkey, Unpublished.
  45. Delgado, J.A.; Gonzalez, J.M. Genome of Geobacillus thermoglucosidasius Strain 23.6. MainChromosome + 2 Plasmids + Phage; GeneBank Submission 08-OCT-2020; Instituto de Recursos Naturales y Agrobiologia, IRNAS, Spanish Council for Research, CSIC: Sevilla, Spain, Unpublished.
  46. Welker, N.E. Transduction in Bacillus stearothermophilus. J. Bacteriol. 1988, 170, 3761–3764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Burgess, S.A.; Flint, S.H.; Lindsay, D.; Cox, M.P.; Biggs, P.J. Insights into the Geobacillus stearothermophilus Species Based on Phylogenomic Principles. BMC Microbiol. 2017, 17, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Łubkowska, B.; Czajkowska, E.; Stodolna, A.; Sroczyński, M.; Zylicz Stachula, A.; Sobolewski, I.; Skowron, M.P. A Novel Thermostable TP-84 Capsule Depolymerase: A Method for Rapid Polyethyleneimine Processing of a Bacteriophage-Expressed Proteins. Microb. Cell Factories 2023, 22, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Skowron, P.M.; Kropinski, A.M.; Zebrowska, J.; Janus, L.; Szemiako, K.; Czajkowska, E.; Maciejewska, N.; Skowron, M.; Łoś, J.; Łoś, M.; et al. Sequence, Genome Organization, Annotation and Proteomics of the Thermophilic, 47.7-Kb Geobacillus Stearothermophilus Bacteriophage TP-84 and Its Classification in the New Tp84virus Genus. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0195449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Żebrowska, J.; Żołnierkiewicz, O.; Ponikowska, M.; Puchalski, M.; Krawczun, N.; Makowska, J.; Skowron, P. Cloning and Characterization of a Thermostable Endolysin of Bacteriophage TP-84 as a Potential Disinfectant and Biofilm-Removing Biological Agent. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 7612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Łubkowska, B.; Sobolewski, I.; Adamowicz, K.; Zylicz-Stachula, A.; Skowron, P.M. Recombinant TP-84 Bacteriophage Glycosylase–Depolymerase Confers Activity against Thermostable Geobacillus stearothermophilus via Capsule Degradation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Withey, S.; Cartmell, E.; Avery, L.M.; Stephenson, T. Bacteriophages—Potential for Application in Wastewater Treatment Processes. Sci. Total Environ. 2005, 339, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Chang, C.; Yu, X.; Guo, W.; Guo, C.; Guo, X.; Li, Q.; Zhu, Y. Bacteriophage-Mediated Control of Biofilm: A Promising New Dawn for the Future. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 825828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Astals, S.; Venegas, C.; Peces, M.; Jofre, J.; Lucena, F.; Mata-Alvarez, J. Balancing Hygienization and Anaerobic Digestion of Raw Sewage Sludge. Water Res. 2012, 46, 6218–6227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Lee, C.; Kim, H.; Ryu, S. Bacteriophage and Endolysin Engineering for Biocontrol of Food Pathogens/Pathogens in the Food: Recent Advances and Future Trends. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2023, 63, 8919–8938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Nazir, A.; Xu, X.; Liu, Y.; Chen, Y. Phage Endolysins: Advances in the World of Food Safety. Cells 2023, 12, 2169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Wang, F.; Ji, X.; Li, Q.; Zhang, G.; Peng, J.; Hai, J.; Zhang, Y.; Ci, B.; Li, H.; Xiong, Y.; et al. TsPPHG Lysin from the Extremophilic Thermus Bacteriophage TSP4 as a Potential Antimicrobial Agent against Both Gram-Negative and Gram-Positive Pathogenic Bacteria. Viruses 2020, 12, 192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Uldahl, K.B.; Walk, S.T.; Olshefsky, S.C.; Young, M.J.; Peng, X. SMV1, an Extremely Stable Thermophilic Virus Platform for Nanoparticle Trafficking in the Mammalian GI Tract. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2017, 123, 1286–1297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Huang, Z.; Yuan, X.; Zhu, Z.; Feng, Y.; Li, N.; Yu, S.; Li, C.; Chen, B.; Wu, S.; Gu, Q.; et al. Isolation and Characterization of Bacillus Cereus Bacteriophage DZ1 and Its Application in Foods. Food Chem. 2024, 431, 137128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Hassan, A.Y.; Lin, J.T.; Ricker, N.; Anany, H. The Age of Phage: Friend or Foe in the New Dawn of Therapeutic and Biocontrol Applications? Pharmaceuticals 2021, 14, 199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Moser, M.J.; DiFrancesco, R.A.; Gowda, K.; Klingele, A.J.; Sugar, D.R.; Stocki, S.; Mead, D.A.; Schoenfeld, T.W. Thermostable DNA Polymerase from a Viral Metagenome Is a Potent RT-PCR Enzyme. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e38371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Heller, R.C.; Chung, S.; Crissy, K.; Dumas, K.; Schuster, D.; Schoenfeld, T.W. Engineering of a Thermostable Viral Polymerase Using Metagenome-Derived Diversity for Highly Sensitive and Specific RT-PCR. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019, 47, 3619–3630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhu, B.; Wang, L.; Mitsunobu, H.; Lu, X.; Hernandez, A.J.; Yoshida-Takashima, Y.; Nunoura, T.; Tabor, S.; Richardson, C.C. Deep-Sea Vent Phage DNA Polymerase Specifically Initiates DNA Synthesis in the Absence of Primers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, E2310–E2318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Blondal, T.; Thorisdottir, A.; Unnsteinsdottir, U.; Hjorleifsdottir, S.; Ævarsson, A.; Ernstsson, S.; Fridjonsson, O.H.; Skirnisdottir, S.; Wheat, J.O.; Hermannsdottir, A.G.; et al. Isolation and Characterization of a Thermostable RNA Ligase 1 from a Thermus scotoductus Bacteriophage TS2126 with Good Single-Stranded DNA Ligation Properties. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005, 33, 135–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 2. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) analysis demonstrating the morphology of newly discovered thermophages infecting G. thermodenitrificans. Scale bar represents 100 nm.
Figure 2. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) analysis demonstrating the morphology of newly discovered thermophages infecting G. thermodenitrificans. Scale bar represents 100 nm.
Ijms 25 03125 g002
Table 1. Classification and major data describing ‘Bacillus group’ thermophilic bacteriophages (chronologically as discovered)—updated 12.2023.
Table 1. Classification and major data describing ‘Bacillus group’ thermophilic bacteriophages (chronologically as discovered)—updated 12.2023.
Bacteriophage SpeciesVirus Class, MorphotypeGenBank Accession NumberHost (Used for Propagation)GenomeOriginal Discovery ReferenceIsolate LocationLife CycleGrowth Temperature (°C, Optimal/Range) and pH (Optimal/Range)
Type and Size [bp]ORFsG+C [%]
1‘thermophilic lytic principle’ NDNDB. stearothermophilus T60NDNDNDKoser, 1926 [12]sewage, polluted river water (USA)lytic52–60,
app. 7
2‘thermophilic bacteriophage’ NDNDNDNDNDNDAdant, 1928 [13]NDlytic52–55
3‘thermophilic bacteriophage’NDNDthermophilic bacterium no. 10NDNDNDWhite et al.,
1954, 1955 [14,15]
greenhouse soil (USA)lytic65 (50–70),
7
4‘thermophilic bacteriophage’NDNDBacillus sp.DNA, RNA
(RNA is questionable)
NDNDOnodera 1961 [16]compost (Japan)lytic65 (55–70),
7.2
5TP-84 Caudoviricetes, Saundersvirus, Siphovirus morphotypeKY565347.1B. stearothermophilus strain 10circular, dsDNA,
47,718 bp
8154.5Saunders et al., 1964 [17]
Saunders & Campbell, 1966 [18]
greenhouse soil (USA)lytic58 (43–76),
7.2
6φ μ-4NDNDB. stearothermophilusNDNDNDShafia & Thompson, 1964 [19]NDlytic/lysogenic50–65,
7
7TP-1Siphovirus morphotype
(putative)
NDB. stearothermophilusdsDNA,
18,516 bp,
(MW app. 12.1 MDa)
ND42Welker & Campbell, 1965 [20,21]NDlysogenic/lytic55 (50–65),
7
8ST1Siphovirus
Myovirus
morphotype
(putative)
NDB. stearothermophilus strain S13dsDNAND43Carnevali & Donelli, 1968 [22]NDlytic60,
app. 7
9Tφ3Siphovirus morphotypeNDB. stearothermophilus ATCC 8005 SRds DNA,
app. 35,700 bp
(MW app. 23.2 MDa)
ND40.2Egbert & Mitchel, 1967 [23]
Egbert, 1969 [24]
soil (USA)lytic60,
7.3
10GH5NDNDB. stearothermophilus NCA 1518NDNDNDHumbert & Fields, 1972 [25]greenhouse soil (USA)lytic42.5–67,
app. 7
11GH8Siphovirus
morphotype
NDB. stearothermophilus NCA 1518NDNDNDHumbert & Fields, 1972 [25]greenhouse soli (USA)lytic42.5–67,
app. 7
12PhB1Siphovirus
morphotype
NDBacillus sp. strain BNDNDNDLjunger & Edebo, 1972 [26]farm soil (Sweden)lytic55,
7.3
13D5NDNDB. stearothermophilus NRS T91,
ATCC 7953
NDNDNDReanney & Marsch, 1973 [27]NDlytic45 (30–55),
app. 7
14D6NDNDB. stearothermophilus NRS T91,
ATCC 7953
NDNDNDReanney & Marsch, 1973 [27]NDlytic45 (30–55),
app. 7
15D7NDNDB. stearothermophilus NRS T91,
ATCC 7953
NDNDNDReanney & Marsch, 1973 [27]NDlytic45 (30–55),
app. 7
16D8NDNDB. stearothermophilus NRS T91,
ATCC 7953
NDNDNDReanney & Marsch, 1973 [27]NDlytic45 (30–55),
app. 7
17φNS11Sphaerolipovirus
morphotype
(putative)
NDB.acidocaldarius TA6dsDNANDNDSakaki & Oshima,
1976 [28]
hot spring
(Beppu, Japan)
lytic60,
3.5 (2–5)
18JS001NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]NDlytic/lysogenic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
19JS004NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 239dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]silage lytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
20JS005NDNDB. thermophile RS 239dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]rotting strawlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
21JS006NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 239dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compost lytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
22JS007NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 240dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]silage lytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
23JS008NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 241dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]rotting strawlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
24JS009NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 242dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]stable manurelytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
25JS010NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 242dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compost lytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
26JS011NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 239dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]silage lytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
27JS012NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 239dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compost lytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
28JS013NDNDB. stearothermophilus NCA 1503dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]soillytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
29JS014NDNDB. stearothermophilus NCA 1503dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]rotting strawlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
30JS015NDNDB. stearothermophilus NCA 1503dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compost lytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
31JS017NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compost lytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
32JS018NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]rotting vegetationlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
33JS019NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]rotting vegetationlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
34JS020NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]rotting vegetationlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
35JS021NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]rotting vegetationlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
36JS022NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compostlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
37JS023NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compostlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
38JS024NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compostlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
39JS025NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compostlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
40JS026NDNDB. caldotenaxdsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compostlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
41JS027NDNDBacillus thermophile RS 241dsDNANDNDSharp et al., 1986 [29]compostlytic55 (50–70),
7.3 ± 0.2
42BVW1 (W1)Siphovirus morphotypeNDBacillus sp. w13dsDNA,
app. 18 kb
NDNDLiu et al., 2006 [30]deep-sea hydrothermal fields (West Pacific)lytic60,
7.0
43GVE1 (E1)Siphovirus morphotypeNDGeobacillus sp. E 26323dsDNA,
app. 41 kb
NDNDLiu et al., 2006 [30]deep-sea hydrothermal fields (East Pacific)lytic60,
7.0
44GVE2 (E2)unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus
morphotype
NC_009552.3
DQ453159
Geobacillus sp. E 263linear, dsDNA, 40,863 bp 6244.8Liu & Zhang, 2008 [31]deep sea (China)lysogenic65,
7.0
45GBSV1Caudoviricetes,
Svunavirus
NC_008376Geobacillus sp. 6k512linear, dsDNA, 34,683 bp5444.4Liu et al., 2009, 2010
[32,33]
off-shore hot spring (Xiamen, China)lytic65,
7.2
46BV1Caudoviricetes, Svunavirus sv1NC_009737,
DQ840344
Geobacillus sp. 6k512linear, dsDNA, 35,055 bp5444.4Liu et al., 2009, 2010
[32,33]
off-shore hot spring (Xiamen, China)lytic65,
7.2
47D6Eunclassified CaudoviricetesNC_019544Geobacillus sp. E 26323circular, dsDNA,
49,335 bp
4946Wang & Zhang, 2010
[34]
deep-sea hydrothermal fields (East Pacific)lytic65,
7.0
48AcaML1unclassified Caudoviricetes,
Myovirus
morphotype
JX507079Acidithiobacillus caldus
ATCC 51756
dsDNA
59,363 bp
7264.5Tapia et al., 2012
[35]
coal spoil enrichment culture
(Kingsbury, UK)
lytic/lysogenic45
2.5
49ϕOH2 (phiOH2)unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeAB823818,
NC_021784
G. kaustophilus GBlys,
G. kaustophilus NBRC 102445(T),
lysogenic G. kaustophilus GBlys)
dsDNA,
38,099 bp
6045Doi et al., 2013
[36]
hot spring sediment (Japan)lytic/lysogenic55
50GBK2unclassified Caudoviricetes,
Siphovirus morphotype
KJ159566G. kaustophiluscircularly permuted, dsDNA,
39,078 bp
6243Marks & Hamilton, 2014 [37]compost
(Cary, NC, USA)
lytic55,
7.3
51GVE3 (E3)unclassified Caudoviricetes,
Siphovirus morphotype
NC_029073,
KP144388
G. thermoglucosidasiusdsDNA
141,298 bp
20229.6Van Zyl et al., 2015 [38]NDlytic/lysogenic60,
7.3
52AP45 Caudoviricetes; Kamchatkavirus,
Siphovirus morphotype
KX965989Aeribacillus sp. CEMTC656dsDNA
51,606 bp
7138.3Morozowa et al., 2019
[39]
soil (Valley of Geysers, Kamchatka, Russia)lytic/lysogenic55,
7.5
53vB_Bps-36unclassified CaudoviricetesMH884513B. pseudalcaliphilusdsDNA
50,485 bp
6841.1Akhwale et al., 2019
[40]
Lake Elmenteita (Kenya)lytic/?30–40<
9<
54vB_BpsM-61unclassified CaudoviricetesMH884514B. pseudofirmus
(Alkalihalophilus pseudofirmus)
dsDNA
48,160 bp
7543.5Akhwale et al., 2019
[40]
Lake Elmenteita (Kenya)lytic/?30–40<
9<
55vB_BboS-125Caudoviricetes; ElmenteitavirusNC_048735.1
MH884509
B. bogoriensis
(Alkalihalobacillus borgiensis)
dsDNA
58,528 bp
8148.6Akhwale et al., 2019
[40]
Lake Elmenteita (Kenya)lytic/?30–40<
9<
56vB_BcoS-136unclassified CaudoviricetesMH884508B. cohnii
(Sutcliffiella cohnii)
dsDNA
160,590 bp
24032.2Akhwale et al., 2019
[40]
Lake Elmenteita (Kenya)lytic/?30–40<
9<
57
vB_BpsS-140unclassified CaudoviricetesMH884512B. pseudalcaliphilus
(Alkalihalobacillus pseudalcaliphilus)
dsDNA
55,091 bp
6839.8Akhwale et al., 2019
[40]
Lake Elmenteita (Kenya)lytic/?30–40<
9<
58GR1unclassified Caudoviricetes,
Siphovirus morphotype
OK896991G. stearothermophilus
ATTC 10149
dsDNA
79,387 bp
10832.34Choi &Kong, 2023
[41]
soil
Gyeongchun Line railroad
(Seul, Republic of Korea)
lytic50
7.2
59 vB_GthS_PT9.1unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeOP341630G. thermodenitrificansdsDNA
38,373 bp
7543.9Šimoliūnas et al., 2023a
[42]
compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lytic45–80
60vB_GthS_NIIg9.7unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeOP341624G. thermodenitrificans NIIg-9dsDNA
39,016 bp
7644.4Šimoliūnas et al., 2023a
[42]
compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lytic50–78
61 vB_GthS_PK5.1unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeOP341628G. thermodenitrificansdsDNA
38,161 bp
6443.6Šimoliūnas et al., 2023a
[42]
compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lytic48–80
62vB_GthS_PK3.5unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeOP341626G. thermodenitrificansdsDNA
38,788 bp
7643.5Šimoliūnas et al., 2023a
[42]
compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lytic50–78
63vB_GthS_PK3.6unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeOP341627G. thermodenitrificansdsDNA
38,405 bp
6844.8Šimoliūnas et al., 2023a
[42]
compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lytic50–80
64vB_PtoS_NIIg3.2unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeOP341623P. toebii strain NIIg-3
G. thermodenitrificans
dsDNA
38,970 bp
42.242.2Šimoliūnas et al., 2023b
[43]
compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lytic/lysogenic?50–80
65vB_GthS_PK5.2, unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeOP341629.1G. thermodenitrificansdsDNANDNDŠimoliūnienė et al., unpublished data [44] compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lyticND
66vB_GthS_PK2.1, unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeOP341625.1G. thermodenitrificansdsDNANDNDŠimoliūnienė et al., unpublished data [44] compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lyticND
67vB_GthS_NIIg10.1, unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeNDG. thermodenitrificansdsDNANDNDŠimoliūnienė et al., unpublished data [44] compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lyticND
68vB_GthS_NIIg2.1, unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeNDG. thermodenitrificansdsDNANDNDŠimoliūnienė et al., unpublished data [44] compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lyticND
69vB_GthS_NIIg2.2, unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeNDG. thermodenitrificansdsDNANDNDŠimoliūnienė et al., unpublished data [44] compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lyticND
70vB_GthS_NIIg2.3unclassified Caudoviricetes, Siphovirus morphotypeNDG. thermodenitrificansdsDNANDNDŠimoliūnienė et al., unpublished data [44] compost heaps
(Lithuania)
lyticND
71A403Caudoviricetes; TandoganvirusNC_048701
MG969427
Anoxybacillus caldiproteolyticusdsDNA
40,847 bp
NDNDSahin et al., unpublished data [44]NDNDND
72JGon-2020aNDCP063417P.
thermoglucosidasius 23.6
dsDNA
55,505 bp
NDNDDelgado & Gonzalez,
unpublished data [45]
NDNDND
ND—not determined; ORFs—Open Reading Frames; dsDNA—double-stranded DNA.
Table 2. New (this work) experimentally confirmed functional CDSs of bacteriophage TP-84 genome (updated December 2023).
Table 2. New (this work) experimentally confirmed functional CDSs of bacteriophage TP-84 genome (updated December 2023).
CDS
Name
CDS
Length
(bp)
Location
in the
Genome
(bp)
CDS
Arbitrary
Orientation
Polypeptide Length (aa)Predicted Polypeptide Molecular Weight
(kDa)
Experimentally Determined Polypeptide Molecular
Weight (kDa)
Predicted
Isoelectric Point
Hypothetical Function (Analysis)Confirmed by Proteomic Analysis
TP84_03 6871868–2554+22826.326.39.17DUF3310 domain-containing proteinunknown
TP84_071474799–4945+485.3ND7.94unknownunknown
TP84_092107004–7213+698.2ND4.89putative membrane-associated proteinunknown
TP84_108287441–8268+27531.6ND4.70putative prohead proteaseputative prohead
protease
TP84_1433010,032–10,361+10912.2ND5.16unknownunknown
TP84_1737811,162–11,539+12514.614.65.35tail assembly proteintail assembly protein
TP84_2421019,061–19,270+697.9ND4.59unknownunknown
TP84_28118523,676–24,860+39444.244.29.67endolysinendolysin
TP84_3115626,023–26,178+516.0ND6.15putative membrane proteinputative membrane
protein
TP84_3225526,235–26,489+849.89.79.70unknownunknown
TP84_3425526,884–27,138+849.6ND4.48putative membrane proteinputative membrane
protein
TP84_3623727,353–27,589+789.39.39.91unknownunknown
TP84_3739627,698–28,093+13114.914.86.41unknownunknown
TP84_3820128,090–28,290+667.47.46.73unknownunknown
TP84_3921628,403–28,618+718,1ND7.96unknownunknown
TP84_4021028,615–28,824+698.2ND9.39unknownunknown
TP84_4413229,708–29,839+435.0ND10.62unknownunknown
TP84_4523129,839–30,069+768.5ND9.75unknownunknown
TP84_5015933,468–33,626+525.8ND6.53unknownunknown
TP84_5115933,832–33,990+526.1ND10.41aspartyl-phosphate phosphatase Spo0E family proteinunknown
TP84_5223734,030–34,266+788.5ND5.36transcriptional regulator (HTH_XRE family)transcriptional regulator (HTH_XRE family)
TP84_53101734,238–35,254+33838.5ND5.33RecB-like proteinRecB-like protein
TP84_54102035,270–36,289+33938.8ND5.78DNA single-strand annealing proteinDNA single-strand annealing protein
TP84_5522236,337–36,558+738.8ND4.54unknownunknown
TP84_5618336,924–37,106+607.47.49.25unknownunknown
TP84_5778337,127–37,909+26030.330.48.57conserved phage
C-terminal domain-containing protein (bacterial)
unknown
TP84_6346840,851–41,318+15517.4
(18.3) *
17.4
(18.3) *
5.16single-stranded
DNA-binding protein
single-stranded DNA-binding protein
TP84_6424041,343–41,582+799.39.36.89unknownunknown
TP84_6627041,751–42,020+8910.4ND5.92single-stranded
DNA-binding protein
single-stranded
DNA-binding protein
TP84_6718342,023–42,205+606.9ND4.58unknownunknown
TP84_6898742,209–43,195+32838.638.56.91thymidylate synthasethymidylate synthase
TP84_6950143,200–43,700+16620.020.15.67dUTP diphosphatasedUTP diphosphatase
TP84_7124644,014–44,259+819.4ND10.21unknownunknown
TP84_7250444,246–44,749+16719.3ND7.70Holliday junction-specific endonucleaseHolliday junction-specific endonuclease
TP84_7612645,675–45,800+414.8ND5.54unknownunknown
TP84_7718645,857–46,042+617.2ND9.19unknownunknown
TP84_7820446,047–46,250+677.5ND12.16 unknownunknown
TP84_7935446,380–46,733+11713.413.47.82unknownunknown
TP84_8036646,741–47,106+12114.013.96.82unknownunknown
ND—not determined; CDs—coding sequences; * SDS-PAGE molecular weight determination of the recombinant version of SSB-His-tag protein.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Skowron, P.M.; Łubkowska, B.; Sobolewski, I.; Zylicz-Stachula, A.; Šimoliūnienė, M.; Šimoliūnas, E. Bacteriophages of Thermophilic ‘Bacillus Group’ Bacteria—A Systematic Review, 2023 Update. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 3125. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25063125

AMA Style

Skowron PM, Łubkowska B, Sobolewski I, Zylicz-Stachula A, Šimoliūnienė M, Šimoliūnas E. Bacteriophages of Thermophilic ‘Bacillus Group’ Bacteria—A Systematic Review, 2023 Update. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024; 25(6):3125. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25063125

Chicago/Turabian Style

Skowron, Piotr M., Beata Łubkowska, Ireneusz Sobolewski, Agnieszka Zylicz-Stachula, Monika Šimoliūnienė, and Eugenijus Šimoliūnas. 2024. "Bacteriophages of Thermophilic ‘Bacillus Group’ Bacteria—A Systematic Review, 2023 Update" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 25, no. 6: 3125. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25063125

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop