Complete genome sequence of Staphylococcus casei strain DSM 15096

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

We present the first complete genome sequence of the species Staphylococcus casei . Strain DSM 15096 was sequenced with a hybrid approach using Oxford Nanopore Technologies long-read sequencing and Illumina short-read sequencing. The assembled sequences produced a 2 808 898 bp chromosomal molecule containing 2705 predicted genes, plus eight plasmids.

Article activity feed

  1. This is a study that would be of interest to the field and community. In line with the comments provided by both reviewers this genome announcement is acceptable for publication. A minor comment is that the authors may want to provide a genome map and perhaps a phylogeny.

  2. Comments to Author

    The methodological approach taken was rigorous and is clearly described, allowing for replication. Underlying data are available with references to repositories made. Results are clearly and succinctly described. The 'niche' for the work completed is clearly identified, and as such there is a clearly described place for this work in the scientific literature where it will have value for the wider community.

    Please rate the manuscript for methodological rigour

    Very good

    Please rate the quality of the presentation and structure of the manuscript

    Very good

    To what extent are the conclusions supported by the data?

    Strongly support

    Do you have any concerns of possible image manipulation, plagiarism or any other unethical practices?

    No

    Is there a potential financial or other conflict of interest between yourself and the author(s)?

    No

    If this manuscript involves human and/or animal work, have the subjects been treated in an ethical manner and the authors complied with the appropriate guidelines?

    Yes

  3. Comments to Author

    This manuscript is a short communication of the complete genome of Staphylococcus casei strain DSM 15096. The work was completed using both Illumina and ONT chemistries to provide a high quality genome inclusive of 8 plasmids. This is the first (correct) published genome of this strain. 1. Methodological rigour, reproducibility and availability of underlying data The methods used for growth and gDNA extraction are described fully and it is noted that short-read sequencing was performed by MicrobesNG using the HiSeq. Long read sequencing prep is also described though I would like to see which native barcoding kit was used listed as it was for the ligation kit. Importantly, genome quality assessment was carried out and included. All data, including sequencing reads, are available as described. 2. Presentation of results Results in the form of a published genome are given as well as sequencing and assembly statistics. 3. How the style and organization of the paper communicates and represents key findings The key findings here are 1) the complete genome which is publically available now with details to find this given in the manuscript and 2) the confirmation that S. casei is in fact a novel species with only 95.58% similarity to S. succinus. On this second point, it would be interesting, if possible, to include a phylogenetic tree and/or ANI heatmap. 4. Literature analysis or discussion As per the scope of a short communication literature analysis and discussion are minimal. However, the literature and previous research that make publishing this genome relevant are discussed as is the impact on the research community. 5. Any other relevant comments It could also be benificial, if in scope, to provide a genome map.

    Please rate the manuscript for methodological rigour

    Good

    Please rate the quality of the presentation and structure of the manuscript

    Satisfactory

    To what extent are the conclusions supported by the data?

    Strongly support

    Do you have any concerns of possible image manipulation, plagiarism or any other unethical practices?

    No

    Is there a potential financial or other conflict of interest between yourself and the author(s)?

    No

    If this manuscript involves human and/or animal work, have the subjects been treated in an ethical manner and the authors complied with the appropriate guidelines?

    Yes