Skip to main content

Table 1 Enterococcal species analyzed in this study and relevant features of their genomic sequences

From: Genomic comparative analysis of the environmental Enterococcus mundtii against enterococcal representative species

Organism

BioProject

Status

Size (Mbp)

GC%

Genes

Proteins (PubMed)

Proteins (RAST)

Putative pathogenicity determinantsa

Source

References

E. mundtii CRL1656

PRJNA71221

Scaffolds or contigs

2.87

38.4

2,646

2,589

2,589

659

Cow udder

[7]

E. faecalis V583

PRJNA57669, PRJNA70

Complete

3.36

37.4

3,412

3,264

3,363

1,006

Clinical

[10]

E. faecalis 62

PRJNA159663, PRJNA61185

Complete

3.13

37.4

3,157

3,075

3,075

876

Commensal

[12]

E. faecium XT16 (DO)

PRJNA55353, PRJNA30627

Complete

3.05

37.9

3,209

3,114

2,779

728

Clinical

[13]

E. faecium Com15

PRJNA55725, PRJNA32967

Scaffolds or contigs

2.77

38.2

2,783

2,724

2,773

755

Commensal

[14]

E. italicus DSM 15952

PRJNA61487, PRJNA53039

Scaffolds or contigs

2.31

39.2

2,455

2,405

2,275

700

Cheese

[15]

E. casseliflavus ATCC 12755

PRJNA63559, PRJNA53041

Scaffolds or contigs

3.55

42.4

3,606

3,548

3,415

942

Oral commensal

[14]

E. gallinarum EG2

PRJNA55685, PRJNA32927

Scaffolds or contigs

3.13

40.6

3,079

3,041

3,072

862

Clinical

[16]

E. saccharolyticus ATCC 43076

PRJNA206365, PRJNA191890

Scaffolds or contigs

2.60

36.9

2,625

2,582

2,594

780

Straw bedding

[15]

  1. aAccording to predictions made using the Virulence Factors Data Base (see Methods).