Name: Tenacibaculum maritimum (Wakabayashi et al. 1986) Suzuki et al. 2001

Category: Species

Proposed as: comb. nov.

Basonym: Flexibacter maritimus Wakabayashi et al. 1986

Etymology: ma.ri’ti.mum. L. neut. adj. maritimum, of the sea, maritime

Pronunciation, gender: ma-RI-ti-mum, neuter

Type strain: ATCC 43398; CCUG 35198; CIP 103528; DSM 17995; IFO 15946; JCM 21157; LMG 11612; NBRC 15946; NCIMB 2154; NCMB 2154; R2

See detailed strain information at

Conduct genome-based taxonomy at

16S rRNA gene: AB078057 Analyse FASTA

Valid publication: Suzuki M, Nakagawa Y, Harayama S, Yamamoto S. Phylogenetic analysis and taxonomic study of marine Cytophaga-like bacteria: proposal for Tenacibaculum gen. nov. with Tenacibaculum maritimum comb. nov. and Tenacibaculum ovolyticum comb. nov., and description of Tenacibaculum mesophilum sp. nov. and Tenacibaculum amylolyticum sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001; 51:1639-1652.

IJSEM list: Anonymous. Notification list. Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 51, part 5 of the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001; 51:1947-1948.

Nomenclatural status: validly published under the ICNP

Taxonomic status: correct name (and explicitly recommended for medical use)

Risk group: 1

• Synonyms:

  • Name	Kind
    Flexibacter maritimus Wakabayashi et al. 1986	homotypic synonym, validly published under the ICNP
    Cytophaga marina (ex Hikida et al. 1979) Reichenbach 1989	homotypic synonym, validly published under the ICNP, illegitimate name

• Notes:
  • 🥇 Nomenclatural type of the genus Tenacibaculum Suzuki et al. 2001. Publication: Suzuki M, Nakagawa Y, Harayama S, Yamamoto S. Phylogenetic analysis and taxonomic study of marine Cytophaga-like bacteria: proposal for Tenacibaculum gen. nov. with Tenacibaculum maritimum comb. nov. and Tenacibaculum ovolyticum comb. nov., and description of Tenacibaculum mesophilum sp. nov. and Tenacibaculum amylolyticum sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001; 51:1639-1652.
  • 😢 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. Contrasting the term "chemotaxonomic" with "phenotypic" is not recommended. Using the term "phylogenetic data" (or equivalent) for sequence data is not advocated. 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 Belgium has been imported on 2024-02-05. The full classification is: risk group = 1, note = "animal pathogen - biological class of risk animal: 2". — The risk group for Canada has been imported on 2024-02-27. The full classification is: risk group = 1, note = "Animal classification RG: 1 - Security sensitive biological agent: No - Terrestrial animal pathogen under Canadian Food Inspection Agency authority: No - Containment level: Containment Level 1". — The risk group for Germany has been imported on 2023-10-29. The full classification is: risk group = 1, note = "t2". — If in doubt, use the risk group given in the regulations for your country and, if these are not available, use the risk group given in the catalogue of the culture collection from which you have obtained or intend to obtain the strain.
  • 🎓 Name mentioned 104 times in PubMed until 2025-06-04.
  • 🙆 This name is on the List of Recommended Names for bacteria of medical importance (LoRN) as the name to be applied to this species. The name is on LoRN because of the recorded risk group of the species itself.
  • 🧍 The phylogenetic position of this species was determined in a genome-scale analysis by García-López et al. (2019). Publication: Garcia-Lopez M, Meier-Kolthoff JP, Tindall BJ, Gronow S, Woyke T, Kyrpides NC, Hahnke RL, Goker M. Analysis of 1,000 Type-Strain Genomes Improves Taxonomic Classification of Bacteroidetes. Front Microbiol 2019; 10:2083.
  • 🧍 According to Rules 27(3) and 30, this name is not validly published because the effective publication only documents deposit of the type strain in a single recognized culture collection. However, according to the Judicial Opinion 81, Tenacibaculum maritimum (Wakabayashi et al. 1986) Suzuki et al. 2001 is to be considered to be validly published. Publication: Judicial Commission. Judicial Opinion No. 81. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2008; 58:1755-1763.
  • 🧍 In the paper by Suzuki et al. 2001 the type strain NCIMB 2154 is incorrectly cited as NCIMB 2514. Publication: Euzeby JP, Tindall BJ. Status of strains that contravene Rules 27(3) and 30 of the Bacteriological Code. Request for an opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2004; 54:293-301.

Parent taxon: Tenacibaculum Suzuki et al. 2001

Assigned by: Suzuki M, Nakagawa Y, Harayama S, Yamamoto S. Phylogenetic analysis and taxonomic study of marine Cytophaga-like bacteria: proposal for Tenacibaculum gen. nov. with Tenacibaculum maritimum comb. nov. and Tenacibaculum ovolyticum comb. nov., and description of Tenacibaculum mesophilum sp. nov. and Tenacibaculum amylolyticum sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001; 51:1639-1652.

Linking: To permanently link to this page, use https://lpsn.dsmz.de/species/tenacibaculum-maritimumCopy to clipboardLink copied to clipboard

Record number: 782402