heterotypic synonym, validly published under the ICNP
According to Volpiano et al. (2021), this species is a later heterotypic synonym of Rhizobiumpisi Ramírez-Bahena et al. 2008.Publication:
Volpiano CG, Sant'Anna FH, Ambrosini A, de Sao Jose JFB, Beneduzi A, Whitman WB, de Souza EM, Lisboa BB, Vargas LK, Passaglia LMP. Genomic Metrics Applied to Rhizobiales (Hyphomicrobiales): Species Reclassification, Identification of Unauthentic Genomes and False Type Strains. Front Microbiol 2021; 12:614957.
Synonymy of this taxon was mentioned in an IJSEM list.Publication:
Oren A, Garrity GM. List of changes in taxonomic opinion no. 35. Notification of changes in taxonomic opinion previously published outside the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72:5164.
The e-mail address of the corresponding author given in the effective publication is not functional any more.
Rhizobiumfabae is the correct name if this species is regarded as a separate species (i.e., if its nomenclatural type is not assigned to another species whose name is validly published, legitimate and not rejected and has priority) within a separate genus Rhizobium.
The phylogenomic assignment score of this taxon is 0.17796 (N = 3).
. Erratum. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 2009; 59:1258.
The correct number of the type strain is JCM 14831, not JCM 14381 as cited in the paper by Tian et al. 2008. — Kudo T. Personal communication, 2009-02-02.