Etymology:
xe.no’pha.gum. N.L. neut. adj.xenophagum, eating foreign (xenobiotic) compounds; from Gr. masc. n.xenos, foreign; from Gr. inf. v.phageîn, to eat
Valid publication:
Pal R, Bhasin VK, Lal R. Proposal to reclassify [Sphingomonas] xenophaga Stolz et al. 2000 and [Sphingomonas] taejonensis Lee et al. 2001 as Sphingobium xenophagum comb. nov. and Sphingopyxis taejonensis comb. nov., respectively. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:667-670.
IJSEM list:
Euzeby JP. Notification list. Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 56, part 3 of the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:1181-1182.
Nomenclatural status:
validly published under the ICNP
heterotypic synonym, validly published under the ICNP
Emendations:
Feng et al. 2019
Feng GD, Chen MB, Zhang XJ, Wang DD, Zhu HH. Whole genome sequences reveal the presence of 11 heterotypic synonyms in the genus Sphingobium and emended descriptions of Sphingobium indicum, Sphingobium fuliginis, Sphingobium xenophagum and Sphingobium cupriresistens. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:2161-2165.
Oren A, Garrity GM. Notification list. Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 69, part 7 of the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:2963-2965. Notes:
🫂 Emendation accompanied by a proposal regarding the synonymy of the species.
Notes:
⏰ According to Feng et al. (2019), this species is an earlier heterotypic synonym of Sphingobiumhydrophobicum Chen et al. 2016.Publication:
Feng GD, Chen MB, Zhang XJ, Wang DD, Zhu HH. Whole genome sequences reveal the presence of 11 heterotypic synonyms in the genus Sphingobium and emended descriptions of Sphingobium indicum, Sphingobium fuliginis, Sphingobium xenophagum and Sphingobium cupriresistens. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:2161-2165.
🏢 Synonymy of this taxon was mentioned in an IJSEM list.Publication:
Oren A, Garrity GM. Notification list. Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 69, part 7 of the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:2963-2965.
😢 The terminology used by the authors is in line with many other taxonomic studies and does not negatively affect their main results; some improvements may nevertheless be possible. Using the term "phylogenetic data" (or equivalent) for sequence data is not advocated. Whether taxa can have "members" is debatable. See the LPSN phylogeny page for details.Publication:
Göker M. What can genome analysis offer for bacteria? In: Bridge P, Smith D, Stackebrandt E (eds), Trends in the systematics of bacteria and fungi, CAB International, Wallingford, 2021, p. 255-281.
😷 The risk group for Germany has been imported on 2023-10-29. The full classification is: risk group = 1.
🎓 Name mentioned 20 times in PubMed until 2024-03-28.
🧍 The specific epithet xenophagum, should be a "N.L. neut. adj.", not a "N.L. neut. n." as cited in the paper by Pal et al. 2006.Publication:
Euzeby JP. List of Bacterial Names with Standing in Nomenclature: a folder available on the Internet. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1997; 47:590-592.
Assigned by:
Pal R, Bhasin VK, Lal R. Proposal to reclassify [Sphingomonas] xenophaga Stolz et al. 2000 and [Sphingomonas] taejonensis Lee et al. 2001 as Sphingobium xenophagum comb. nov. and Sphingopyxis taejonensis comb. nov., respectively. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:667-670.
Linking:
To permanently link to this page, use https://lpsn.dsmz.de/species/sphingobium-xenophagumLink copied to clipboard