Characterization and optimization of antifungal production in Streptomyces sp. RMIT01 from the Australian mangrove rhizosphere


Abstract

Background. Mangroves are dynamic coastal ecosystems that provide a rich habitat for diverse microorganisms. Streptomyces strain RMIT01 was isolated from the rhizosphere of the mangrove Avicennia marina located in Jawbone Sanctuary, Williamstown, Victoria, Australia. This study aimed to characterise RMIT01’s genomic and biochemical traits, optimize its antifungal production, and explore its biosynthetic gene clusters to predict potential antifungal compounds. Methods. The RMIT01 strain was characterised using International Streptomyces Project (ISP) media series to observe morphological traits over a 21-day period, comparing results with standard species and colour charts. Micromorphological features were examined through light and scanning electron microscopy. Growth tolerance was assessed across various temperatures, pH levels, and NaCl concentrations in ISP2 medium, along with testing carbon and nitrogen source utilisation using standard kits. Whole genome sequencing was conducted using the Illumina platform, and AntiSMASH 8.0 was employed to predict secondary metabolite biosynthetic gene clusters, aiding in the identification of potential antimicrobial compounds. Results. The strain exhibited morphological and biochemical characteristics consistent with the genus Streptomyces possessing a Gram-positive cell wall and square shaped spores. Genomic analysis revealed a size of 7,609,141 bp and a GC content of 72%. The average nucleotide identity between strain RMIT01 and the closest related species- Streptomyces sindenensis JCM 4164 T , Streptomyces parvus JCM 4069 T , and Streptomyces YPW6- were 92.19%, 92.45%, and 98.22% respectively. Given the 95% cutoff for species delineation, RMIT01 is likely to represent a new species, as Streptomyces YPW6 has not yet been officially described or named. RMIT01 demonstrated antifungal properties against Candida albicans. Antifungal optimization experiments showed that incubation of RMIT01 in starch casein medium with Sigma TM sea salt at 25 oC for 6 days under aerobic conditions yielded a maximum inhibition zone diameter of 20.9 mm. The RMIT01 genome harbours unique biosynthetic gene clusters for bafilomycin B1; thiazostatin, watasemycins, and 2-hydroxyphenylthiazoline; enantiopyochelin and isopyochelin; tylactone; inthomycin; desulfoclethramycin/clethramycin; and niphimycin, several showing low similarity to known biosynthetic gene clusters . Conclusions. These findings highlight the significant potential of Streptomyces sp. RMIT01 as a source of antifungal agents, emphasizing the importance of exploring mangrove ecosystems for biotechnological applications.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].