# Phylogenomic analysis of 589 metagenome-assembled genomes encompassing all major prokaryotic lineages from the gut of higher termites

Vincent Hervé, Pengfei Liu, Carsten Dietrich, David Sillam-Dussès, Petr Stiblik, Jan Šobotník, Andreas Brune

► To cite this version:

Vincent Hervé, Pengfei Liu, Carsten Dietrich, David Sillam-Dussès, Petr Stiblik, et al.. Phylogenomic analysis of 589 metagenome-assembled genomes encompassing all major prokaryotic lineages from the gut of higher termites. PeerJ, 2020, 8, pp.e8614. 10.7717/peerj.e8614. hal-03701727

HAL Id: hal-03701727

https://hal.science/hal-03701727

Submitted on 9 Jan 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Phylogenomic analysis of 589 metagenome-assembled genomes encompassing all major prokaryotic lineages from the gut of higher termites

Vincent Hervé, Pengfei Liu, Carsten Dietrich, David Sillam-Dussès, Petr Stiblik, Jan Šobotník, Andreas Brune

► To cite this version:

Vincent Hervé, Pengfei Liu, Carsten Dietrich, David Sillam-Dussès, Petr Stiblik, et al.. Phylogenomic analysis of 589 metagenome-assembled genomes encompassing all major prokaryotic lineages from the gut of higher termites. PeerJ, 2020, 8, pp.e8614. 10.7717/peerj.e8614. hal-03701727

HAL Id: hal-03701727

https://hal.science/hal-03701727v1

Submitted on 9 Jan 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Phylogenomic analysis of 589 metagenome-assembled genomes encompassing all major prokaryotic lineages from the gut of higher termites

Vincent Hervé<fnref n="1" />, Pengfei Liu<fnref n="1" />, Carsten Dietrich<fnref n="1" />, David Sillam-Dussès<fnref n="2" />, Petr Stiblik<fnref n="3" />, Jan Šobotník<fnref n="3" /> and Andreas Brune<fnref n="1" />

## ABSTRACT

"Higher" termites have been able to colonize all tropical and subtropical regions because of their ability to digest lignocellulose with the aid of their prokaryotic gut microbiota. Over the last decade, numerous studies based on 16S rRNA gene amplicon libraries have largely described both the taxonomy and structure of the prokaryotic communities associated with termite guts. Host diet and microenvironmental conditions have emerged as the main factors structuring the microbial assemblages in the different gut compartments. Additionally, these molecular inventories have revealed the existence of termite-specific clusters that indicate coevolutionary processes in numerous prokaryotic lineages. However, for lack of representative isolates, the functional role of most lineages remains unclear. We reconstructed 589 metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) from the different gut compartments of eight higher termite species that encompass 17 prokaryotic phyla. By iteratively building genome trees for each clade, we significantly improved the initial automated assignment, frequently up to the genus level. We recovered MAGs from most of the termite-specific clusters in the radiation of, for example, Planctomycetes, Fibrobacteres, Bacteroidetes, Euryarchaeota, Bathyarchaeota, Spirochaetes, Saccharibacteria, and Firmicutes, which to date contained only few or no representative genomes. Moreover, the MAGs included abundant members of the termite gut microbiota. This dataset represents the largest genomic resource for arthropod-associated microorganisms available to date and contributes substantially to populating the tree of life. More importantly, it provides a backbone for studying the metabolic potential of the termite gut microbiota, including the key members involved in carbon and nitrogen biogeochemical cycles, and important clues that may help cultivating representatives of these understudied clades.

Submitted 29 August 2019

Accepted 21 January 2020

Published 13 February 2020

Corresponding authors

Vincent Hervé,

vincent.herve8@gmail.com

Andreas Brune,

brune@mpi-marburg.mpg.de

Academic editor

Donovan Parks

Additional Information and Declarations can be found on page 18

DOI 10.7717/peerj.8614

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Copyright

2020 Hervé et al.

Distributed under
Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0

OPEN ACCESS

**Subjects** Bioinformatics, Ecology, Genomics, Microbiology

**Keywords** Metagenome-assembled genomes, Gut microbiology, Higher termites, Bacteria, Archaea, Phylogenomics, Metagenomics, Spirochaetes, Fibrobacteres, Bathyarchaeota

<footnote n="1">¹ Research Group Insect Gut Microbiology and Symbiosis, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Laboratory of Experimental and Comparative Ethology EA 4443, Université Paris 13, Villetaneuse, France</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic</footnote>
# Phylogenomic analysis of 589 metagenome-assembled genomes encompassing all major prokaryotic lineages from the gut of higher termites

Vincent Hervé<fnref n="1" />, Pengfei Liu<fnref n="1" />, Carsten Dietrich<fnref n="1" />, David Sillam-Dussès<fnref n="2" />, Petr Stiblik<fnref n="3" />, Jan Šobotník<fnref n="3" /> and Andreas Brune<fnref n="1" />

Submitted 29 August 2019

Accepted 21 January 2020

Published 13 February 2020

Corresponding authors

Vincent Hervé,

vincent.herve8@gmail.com

Andreas Brune,

brune@mpi-marburg.mpg.de

Academic editor

Donovan Parks

Additional Information and Declarations can be found on page 18

DOI 10.7717/peerj.8614

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Copyright

2020 Hervé et al.

Distributed under
Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0

OPEN ACCESS

## ABSTRACT

"Higher" termites have been able to colonize all tropical and subtropical regions because of their ability to digest lignocellulose with the aid of their prokaryotic gut microbiota. Over the last decade, numerous studies based on 16S rRNA gene amplicon libraries have largely described both the taxonomy and structure of the prokaryotic communities associated with termite guts. Host diet and microenvironmental conditions have emerged as the main factors structuring the microbial assemblages in the different gut compartments. Additionally, these molecular inventories have revealed the existence of termite-specific clusters that indicate coevolutionary processes in numerous prokaryotic lineages. However, for lack of representative isolates, the functional role of most lineages remains unclear. We reconstructed 589 metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) from the different gut compartments of eight higher termite species that encompass 17 prokaryotic phyla. By iteratively building genome trees for each clade, we significantly improved the initial automated assignment, frequently up to the genus level. We recovered MAGs from most of the termite-specific clusters in the radiation of, for example, Planctomycetes, Fibrobacteres, Bacteroidetes, Euryarchaeota, Bathyarchaeota, Spirochaetes, Saccharibacteria, and Firmicutes, which to date contained only few or no representative genomes. Moreover, the MAGs included abundant members of the termite gut microbiota. This dataset represents the largest genomic resource for arthropod-associated microorganisms available to date and contributes substantially to populating the tree of life. More importantly, it provides a backbone for studying the metabolic potential of the termite gut microbiota, including the key members involved in carbon and nitrogen biogeochemical cycles, and important clues that may help cultivating representatives of these understudied clades.

**Subjects** Bioinformatics, Ecology, Genomics, Microbiology

**Keywords** Metagenome-assembled genomes, Gut microbiology, Higher termites, Bacteria, Archaea, Phylogenomics, Metagenomics, Spirochaetes, Fibrobacteres, Bathyarchaeota

<footnote n="1">¹ Research Group Insect Gut Microbiology and Symbiosis, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Laboratory of Experimental and Comparative Ethology EA 4443, Université Paris 13, Villetaneuse, France</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic</footnote>
## INTRODUCTION

Termites (Blattodea: Termitoidae) are eusocial insects that have predominantly and successfully colonized tropical and subtropical areas across the world. One of the keys to this success is their rare ability to degrade lignocellulose, a very abundant but recalcitrant complex carbon substrate (Cragg et al., 2015). As major decomposers, termites play an important role in carbon cycling (Yamada et al., 2005; Dahlsjö et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2015; Griffiths et al., 2019). Lignocellulose digestion by termites is attributed to the presence of a specific microbiota colonizing the different gut compartments of the host (Brune, 2014). Even though termites produce endogenous cellulases in the labial glands and/or midgut (Tokuda et al., 2004; Fujita, Miura & Matsumoto, 2008), the digestive processes in the hindgut are the result of microbial activities.

"Lower" termites feed almost exclusively on wood, whereas "higher" termites (Termitidae family) diversified their diet and extended it from wood to plant litter, humus, and soil (Donovan, Eggleton & Bignell, 2001). Higher termites represent the most diverse and taxon-rich clade and form about 85% of the termite generic diversity (Krishna et al., 2013). Their gut morphology is more complex than that of the basal clades, and is characterized by the presence of a mixed-segment and an enlarged proctodeal segment P1. Moreover, the gut displays strong variations in pH and oxygen partial pressure along the anterior-posterior axis, which creates microenvironments within the gut (Brune, 2014).

Termites harbor a specific and complex gut microbiota (Brune & Dietrich, 2015; Bourguignon et al., 2018). Over the last decade, numerous studies targeting the 16S rRNA gene have cataloged the prokaryotic diversity of the termite gut microbiota. By analyzing the structure and composition of these microbial communities, the roles of host taxonomy (Dietrich, Köhler & Brune, 2014; Abdul Rahman et al., 2015), host diet (Mikaelyan et al., 2015a), and microenvironments found in the different gut compartments (Mikaelyan, Meuser & Brune, 2017) have emerged as the main factors shaping the termite gut microbiota. These studies have also highlighted patterns of dominant taxa associated with specific diet and/or gut compartment (Mikaelyan, Meuser & Brune, 2017). For instance, Spirochaetes tend to be the dominant phylum in the gut of wood/grass feeders, whereas their abundance is lower in litter, humus, and soil feeders, in which Firmicutes are much more abundant. The accumulated 16S rRNA gene reads have revealed the existence of termite-specific clusters among both bacterial and archaeal phyla (e.g., among Fibrobacteres, Clostridia, Spirochaetes, and Euryarchaeota).

All these studies focusing on the 16S rRNA gene have helped microbiologists in answering the question “who is there?,” but the following questions “what are they doing?” and “who is doing what?” remain open. Attempts to answer the latter questions have been made, for example, by analyzing different fractions of the gut content of Nasutitermes spp., which led to the identification of fiber-associated cellulolytic bacterial taxa (Mikaelyan et al., 2014), or by focusing on the diversity of individual functional marker genes, such as nifH (Ohkuma, Noda & Kudo, 1999) or formyl-tetrahydrofolate synthetase (Ottesen & Leadbetter, 2011). The latter approach, however, is problematic because the organismal origin of the respective genes is often obfuscated by frequent horizontal gene transfers
INTRODUCTION

Termites (Blattodea: Termitoidae) are eusocial insects that have predominantly and successfully colonized tropical and subtropical areas across the world. One of the keys to this success is their rare ability to degrade lignocellulose, a very abundant but recalcitrant complex carbon substrate (Cragg et al., 2015). As major decomposers, termites play an important role in carbon cycling (Yamada et al., 2005; Dahlsjö et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2015; Griffiths et al., 2019). Lignocellulose digestion by termites is attributed to the presence of a specific microbiota colonizing the different gut compartments of the host (Brune, 2014). Even though termites produce endogenous cellulases in the labial glands and/or midgut (Tokuda et al., 2004; Fujita, Miura & Matsumoto, 2008), the digestive processes in the hindgut are the result of microbial activities.

"Lower" termites feed almost exclusively on wood, whereas "higher" termites (Termitidae family) diversified their diet and extended it from wood to plant litter, humus, and soil (Donovan, Eggleton & Bignell, 2001). Higher termites represent the most diverse and taxon-rich clade and form about 85% of the termite generic diversity (Krishna et al., 2013). Their gut morphology is more complex than that of the basal clades, and is characterized by the presence of a mixed-segment and an enlarged proctodeal segment P1. Moreover, the gut displays strong variations in pH and oxygen partial pressure along the anterior–posterior axis, which creates microenvironments within the gut (Brune, 2014).

Termites harbor a specific and complex gut microbiota (Brune & Dietrich, 2015; Bourguignon et al., 2018). Over the last decade, numerous studies targeting the 16S rRNA gene have cataloged the prokaryotic diversity of the termite gut microbiota. By analyzing the structure and composition of these microbial communities, the roles of host taxonomy (Dietrich, Köhler & Brune, 2014; Abdul Rahman et al., 2015), host diet (Mikaelyan et al., 2015a), and microenvironments found in the different gut compartments (Mikaelyan, Meuser & Brune, 2017) have emerged as the main factors shaping the termite gut microbiota. These studies have also highlighted patterns of dominant taxa associated with specific diet and/or gut compartment (Mikaelyan, Meuser & Brune, 2017). For instance, Spirochaetes tend to be the dominant phylum in the gut of wood/grass feeders, whereas their abundance is lower in litter, humus, and soil feeders, in which Firmicutes are much more abundant. The accumulated 16S rRNA gene reads have revealed the existence of termite-specific clusters among both bacterial and archaeal phyla (e.g., among Fibrobacteres, Clostridia, Spirochaetes, and Euryarchaeota).

All these studies focusing on the 16S rRNA gene have helped microbiologists in answering the question “who is there?,” but the following questions “what are they doing?” and “who is doing what?” remain open. Attempts to answer the latter questions have been made, for example, by analyzing different fractions of the gut content of *Nasutitermes* spp., which led to the identification of fiber-associated cellulolytic bacterial taxa (*Mikaelyan et al.*, 2014), or by focusing on the diversity of individual functional marker genes, such as *nifH* (*Ohkuma, Noda & Kudo, 1999*) or formyl-tetrahydrofolate synthetase (*Ottesen & Leadbetter, 2011*). The latter approach, however, is problematic because the organismal origin of the respective genes is often obfuscated by frequent horizontal gene transfers
<table><caption>**Table 1** Recovery of metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) from the 30 termite gut metagenomes analyzed in this study. The host termite, its mitochondrial genome accession number, dietary preference, and the originating gut compartments are indicated. C crop (foregut), M midgut, P1–P5 proctodeal compartments (hindgut). The sample codes used for the metagenomes are the combination of host ID and gut compartment.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Termite species</th><th rowspan="2">ID</th><th rowspan="2">Mitogenome</th><th rowspan="2">Diet</th><th colspan="6">Number of MAGs</th></tr><tr><th>C</th><th>M</th><th>P1</th><th>P3</th><th>P4</th><th>P5</th><th>Total</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Microcerotermes parvus</td><td>Mp193</td><td>KP091690</td><td>Wood</td><td>-<sup>a</sup></td><td>-</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>4</td><td>-</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Nasutitermes corniger</td><td>Nc150</td><td>KP091691</td><td>Wood</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>3</td><td>6</td><td>9</td><td>1</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Cornitermes sp.</td><td>Co191</td><td>KP091688</td><td>Litter</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>32</td><td>22</td><td>7</td><td>-</td><td>61</td></tr><tr><td>Neocapritermes taracua</td><td>Nt197</td><td>KP091692</td><td>Humus</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6</td><td>70</td><td>11</td><td>-</td><td>87</td></tr><tr><td>Termes hospes</td><td>Th196</td><td>KP091693</td><td>Humus</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6</td><td>64</td><td>27</td><td>-</td><td>97</td></tr><tr><td>Embiratermes neotenicus</td><td>Emb289</td><td>KY436202</td><td>Humus</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>45</td><td>52</td><td>21</td><td>-</td><td>118</td></tr><tr><td>Labiotermes labralis</td><td>Lab288</td><td>KY436201</td><td>Soil</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>66</td><td>72</td><td>31</td><td>-</td><td>169</td></tr><tr><td>Cubitermes ugandensis</td><td>Cu122</td><td>KP091689</td><td>Soil</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>3</td><td>18</td><td>31</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Note:**

between prokaryotes. Thus, it has been suggested that genome-centric instead of gene-centric approaches are much more relevant for elucidation of soil or gut microbiotas (Prosser, 2015). Unfortunately, the number of available isolates of termite gut microbiota and their genomes (Zheng & Brune, 2015; Yuki et al., 2018) are low compared to those from other environments. However, modern culture-independent methods, namely metagenomics and single-cell genomics have recently allowed the generation of numerous metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) and single-amplified genomes (SAGs), respectively, from uncultivated or difficult to cultivate organisms (Albertsen et al., 2013; Woyke, Doud & Schulz, 2017). MAGs are becoming increasingly more prominent in the literature (Bowers et al., 2017) and populate the tree of life (Parks et al., 2017). Additionally, MAGs offer the opportunity to explore the metabolic potential of these organisms and to link it with their ecology.

To date, only a limited number of MAGs and SAGs of uncultured bacteria have been recovered from the guts of higher termites; these represent termite-specific lineages of Fibrobacteres (Abdul Rahman et al., 2016) and Cyanobacteria (Utami et al., 2018). Here, we applied a binning algorithm to 30 metagenomes from different gut compartments of eight higher termite species encompassing different feeding groups to massively recover hundreds of prokaryotic MAGs from these samples. After quality filtering, all these MAGs were taxonomically identified within a phylogenomic framework and are discussed in the context of insect gut microbiology and symbiosis.

# MATERIALS AND METHODS

## Metagenomic datasets

To cover a wide range of microbial diversity, we used 30 metagenomic datasets representing the main gut compartments (crop, midgut, P1–P5 proctodeal compartments of the hindgut) and main feeding groups present in higher-termites (see Table 1).

<footnote><sup>a</sup> Not sequenced.</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 1** Recovery of metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) from the 30 termite gut metagenomes analyzed in this study. The host termite, its mitochondrial genome accession number, dietary preference, and the originating gut compartments are indicated. C crop (foregut), M midgut, P1-P5 proctodeal compartments (hindgut). The sample codes used for the metagenomes are the combination of host ID and gut compartment.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Termite species</th><th rowspan="2">ID</th><th rowspan="2">Mitogenome</th><th rowspan="2">Diet</th><th colspan="6">Number of MAGs</th></tr><tr><th>C</th><th>M</th><th>P1</th><th>P3</th><th>P4</th><th>P5</th><th>Total</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Microcerotermes parvus</td><td>Mp193</td><td>KP091690</td><td>Wood</td><td>-<sup>a</sup></td><td>-</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>4</td><td>-</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Nasutitermes corniger</td><td>Nc150</td><td>KP091691</td><td>Wood</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>3</td><td>6</td><td>9</td><td>1</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Cornitermes sp.</td><td>Co191</td><td>KP091688</td><td>Litter</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>32</td><td>22</td><td>7</td><td>-</td><td>61</td></tr><tr><td>Neocapritermes taracua</td><td>Nt197</td><td>KP091692</td><td>Humus</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6</td><td>70</td><td>11</td><td>-</td><td>87</td></tr><tr><td>Termes hospes</td><td>Th196</td><td>KP091693</td><td>Humus</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6</td><td>64</td><td>27</td><td>-</td><td>97</td></tr><tr><td>Embiratermes neotenicus</td><td>Emb289</td><td>KY436202</td><td>Humus</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>45</td><td>52</td><td>21</td><td>-</td><td>118</td></tr><tr><td>Labiotermes labralis</td><td>Lab288</td><td>KY436201</td><td>Soil</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>66</td><td>72</td><td>31</td><td>-</td><td>169</td></tr><tr><td>Cubitermes ugandensis</td><td>Cu122</td><td>KP091689</td><td>Soil</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>3</td><td>18</td><td>31</td></tr></tbody></table>

Note:

between prokaryotes. Thus, it has been suggested that genome-centric instead of gene-centric approaches are much more relevant for elucidation of soil or gut microbiotas (Prosser, 2015). Unfortunately, the number of available isolates of termite gut microbiota and their genomes (Zheng & Brune, 2015; Yuki et al., 2018) are low compared to those from other environments. However, modern culture-independent methods, namely metagenomics and single-cell genomics have recently allowed the generation of numerous metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) and single-amplified genomes (SAGs), respectively, from uncultivated or difficult to cultivate organisms (Albertsen et al., 2013; Woyke, Doud & Schulz, 2017). MAGs are becoming increasingly more prominent in the literature (Bowers et al., 2017) and populate the tree of life (Parks et al., 2017). Additionally, MAGs offer the opportunity to explore the metabolic potential of these organisms and to link it with their ecology.

To date, only a limited number of MAGs and SAGs of uncultured bacteria have been recovered from the guts of higher termites; these represent termite-specific lineages of Fibrobacteres (Abdul Rahman et al., 2016) and Cyanobacteria (Utami et al., 2018). Here, we applied a binning algorithm to 30 metagenomes from different gut compartments of eight higher termite species encompassing different feeding groups to massively recover hundreds of prokaryotic MAGs from these samples. After quality filtering, all these MAGs were taxonomically identified within a phylogenomic framework and are discussed in the context of insect gut microbiology and symbiosis.

# MATERIALS AND METHODS

## Metagenomic datasets

To cover a wide range of microbial diversity, we used 30 metagenomic datasets representing the main gut compartments (crop, midgut, P1-P5 proctodeal compartments of the hindgut) and main feeding groups present in higher-termites (see Table 1).

<footnote><sup>a</sup> Not sequenced.</footnote>
Eight species of higher termites, identified by both morphological criteria and analysis of the mitogenome, were considered: *Cornitermes* sp., *Cubitermes ugandensis*, *Microcerotermes parvus*, *Nasutitermes corniger*, *Neocapritermes taracua*, *Termes hospes* (Dietrich & Brune, 2016), *Labiotermes labralis*, and *Embiratermes neotenicus* (Hervé & Brune, 2017). Field experiments were approved by the French Ministry for the Ecological and Solidarity Transition (UID: ABSCH-CNA-FR-240495-2; permit TREL1902817S/118). Processing of the termite samples and DNA extraction and purification were described previously (Rossmassler et al., 2015). Metagenomic libraries were prepared, sequenced, quality controlled, and assembled at the Joint Genome Institute (Walnut Creek, CA, USA). DNA was sequenced using Illumina HiSeq 2000 or Illumina HiSeq 2500 (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). Quality-controlled reads were assembled and uploaded to the Integrated Microbial Genomes (IMG/M ER) database (Markowitz et al., 2014). Accession numbers and information about these 30 metagenomes can be found in Table S1.

## Genome reconstruction

For each metagenomic dataset, both quality-controlled (QC) and assembled (contigs) reads were downloaded from IMG/M ER in August 2017. To obtain coverage profile of contigs from each metagenomic assembly, the QC reads were mapped to contigs using BWA v0.7.15 with the bwa-mem algorithm (Li & Durbin, 2009). This generated SAM files that were subsequently converted into BAM files using SAMtools v1.3 (Li et al., 2009). Combining coverage profile and tetranucleotide frequency information, genomes were reconstructed from each metagenome with MetaBAT version 2.10.2 with default parameters (Kang et al., 2019). Quality of the reconstructed genomes was estimated with CheckM v1.0.8 (Parks et al., 2015). Only MAGs that were at least 50% complete and with less than 10% contamination, were retained for subsequent analyses. These MAGs have been deposited at the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under the BioProject accession number PRJNA560329; genomes are available with accession numbers SRR9983610-SRR9984198 (Table S2). Additionally, the MAGs have been deposited at the NCBI's Assembly Database under the accessions WQRH00000000-WRNX00000000 (Table S2).

For each MAG, CheckM was also used to extract 16S rRNA gene sequences as well as a set of 43 phylogenetically informative marker genes consisting primarily of 29 ribosomal proteins (PF00466, PF03946, PF00298, PF00572, PF00238, PF00252, PF00861, PF00687, PF00237, PF00276, PF00831, PF00297, PF00573, PF00281, PF00673, PF00411, PF00164, PF00312, PF00366, PF00203, PF00318, PF00189, PF03719, PF00333, PF00177, PF00410, PF00380, PF03947, PF00181), nine RNA polymerase domains (PF04563, PF04997, PF00623, PF05000, PF04561, PF04565, PF00562, PF04560, PF01192), two tRNA ligases (TIGR00344 and TIGR00422), a signal peptide binding domain (PF02978), a translation-initiation factor 2 (PF11987) and a TruB family pseudouridylate synthase (PF01509). Finally, CheckM was also used for a preliminary taxonomic classification of the MAGs by phylogenetic placement of the MAGs into the CheckM reference genome tree.
Eight species of higher termites, identified by both morphological criteria and analysis of the mitogenome, were considered: *Cornitermes* sp., *Cubitermes ugandensis*, *Microcerotermes parvus*, *Nasutitermes corniger*, *Neocapritermes taracua*, *Termes hospes* (Dietrich & Brune, 2016), *Labiotermes labralis*, and *Embiratermes neotenicus* (Hervé & Brune, 2017). Field experiments were approved by the French Ministry for the Ecological and Solidarity Transition (UID: ABSCH-CNA-FR-240495-2; permit TREL1902817S/118). Processing of the termite samples and DNA extraction and purification were described previously (Rossmassler et al., 2015). Metagenomic libraries were prepared, sequenced, quality controlled, and assembled at the Joint Genome Institute (Walnut Creek, CA, USA). DNA was sequenced using Illumina HiSeq 2000 or Illumina HiSeq 2500 (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). Quality-controlled reads were assembled and uploaded to the Integrated Microbial Genomes (IMG/M ER) database (Markowitz et al., 2014). Accession numbers and information about these 30 metagenomes can be found in Table S1.

## Genome reconstruction

For each metagenomic dataset, both quality-controlled (QC) and assembled (contigs) reads were downloaded from IMG/M ER in August 2017. To obtain coverage profile of contigs from each metagenomic assembly, the QC reads were mapped to contigs using BWA v0.7.15 with the bwa-mem algorithm (Li & Durbin, 2009). This generated SAM files that were subsequently converted into BAM files using SAMtools v1.3 (Li et al., 2009). Combining coverage profile and tetranucleotide frequency information, genomes were reconstructed from each metagenome with MetaBAT version 2.10.2 with default parameters (Kang et al., 2019). Quality of the reconstructed genomes was estimated with CheckM v1.0.8 (Parks et al., 2015). Only MAGs that were at least 50% complete and with less than 10% contamination, were retained for subsequent analyses. These MAGs have been deposited at the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under the BioProject accession number PRJNA560329; genomes are available with accession numbers SRR9983610-SRR9984198 (Table S2). Additionally, the MAGs have been deposited at the NCBI's Assembly Database under the accessions WQRH00000000-WRNX00000000 (Table S2).

For each MAG, CheckM was also used to extract 16S rRNA gene sequences as well as a set of 43 phylogenetically informative marker genes consisting primarily of 29 ribosomal proteins (PF00466, PF03946, PF00298, PF00572, PF00238, PF00252, PF00861, PF00687, PF00237, PF00276, PF00831, PF00297, PF00573, PF00281, PF00673, PF00411, PF00164, PF00312, PF00366, PF00203, PF00318, PF00189, PF03719, PF00333, PF00177, PF00410, PF00380, PF03947, PF00181), nine RNA polymerase domains (PF04563, PF04997, PF00623, PF05000, PF04561, PF04565, PF00562, PF04560, PF01192), two tRNA ligases (TIGR00344 and TIGR00422), a signal peptide binding domain (PF02978), a translation-initiation factor 2 (PF11987) and a TruB family pseudouridylate synthase (PF01509). Finally, CheckM was also used for a preliminary taxonomic classification of the MAGs by phylogenetic placement of the MAGs into the CheckM reference genome tree.
## Phylogenomic analysis

In order to improve the initial CheckM classification, genome trees were built for each clade of interest (from kingdom to family level). Using this initial CheckM classification and when available, the 16S rRNA gene classification, genomes of closely related organisms and relevant outgroups were manually selected and downloaded from NCBI and IMG/M ER. These genomes were subjected to a similar CheckM analysis to extract a set of 43 single-copy marker genes, to translate them into amino acid sequences, and to create a concatenated fasta file (6,988 positions). For each clade of interest, the amino acid sequences from the MAGs, their relatives, and outgroups were aligned with MAFFT v7.305b and the FFT-NS-2 method (Katoh & Standley, 2013), and the resulting alignment was filtered using trimAl v1.2rev59 with the gappyout method (Capella-Gutierrez et al., 2009). Smart Model Selection (Lefort, Longueville & Gascuel, 2017) was used to determine the best model of amino acid evolution of the filtered alignment based on Akaike Information Criterion. Subsequently, a maximum-likelihood phylogenetic tree was built with PhyML 3.0 (Guindon et al., 2010). Branch supports were calculated using a Chi2-based parametric approximate likelihood-ratio test (aLRT) (Anisimova & Gascuel, 2006). Finally, each tree was visualized and edited with iTOL (Letunic & Bork, 2019). Following the procedure described above, a genome tree containing only the MAGs generated in the present study was also built and visualized with GraPhlAn version 0.9.7 (Asnicar et al., 2015).

## Placement of MAGs in a 16S rRNA-based phylogenetic framework

All 16S rRNA gene sequences recovered from the respective bins were classified using the phylogenetic framework of the current SILVA reference database (SSURef NR 99 release 132) (Quast et al., 2013). The database was manually curated to extend the taxonomic outline of all relevant lineages to genus level by linking the taxonomy to the termite-specific groups to that of the DictDb v3 database (Mikaelyan et al., 2015b). 16S rRNA gene sequences contained in the MAGs were aligned with SINA version 1.2.11 (Pruesse, Peplies & Glöckner, 2012) and imported into the reference database. Sequences longer than >100 bp were added to the reference trees using the parsimony tool of ARB version 6.0.6 (Ludwig et al., 2004). If none of the MAGs in a cluster contained a 16S rRNA gene longer than 100 bp, or if the placement of the 16S rRNA genes in the bin conflicted with the results of the phylogenomic analysis (indicating a contamination), the phylogenomic classification was used.

## Estimation of the relative abundance of the MAGs in each metagenome

For each metagenome, raw reads were mapped against MAGs using BWA (Li & Durbin, 2009) with default parameters. Unmapped reads and reads mapped to more than one location were removed by using SAMtools (Li et al., 2009) with parameters: F 0x904. Reads mapped to each MAGs were summarized using the "pileup.sh" script (BBmap 38.26) (Bushnell, 2014). The relative abundance of each MAG was calculated as the total number of reads mapped to a MAG divided by the total number of reads in the corresponding metagenome sample, as described in Hua et al. (2019). Similarly, the MAG coverage was
## Phylogenomic analysis

In order to improve the initial CheckM classification, genome trees were built for each clade of interest (from kingdom to family level). Using this initial CheckM classification and when available, the 16S rRNA gene classification, genomes of closely related organisms and relevant outgroups were manually selected and downloaded from NCBI and IMG/M ER. These genomes were subjected to a similar CheckM analysis to extract a set of 43 single-copy marker genes, to translate them into amino acid sequences, and to create a concatenated fasta file (6,988 positions). For each clade of interest, the amino acid sequences from the MAGs, their relatives, and outgroups were aligned with MAFFT v7.305b and the FFT-NS-2 method (Katoh & Standley, 2013), and the resulting alignment was filtered using trimAl v1.2rev59 with the gappyout method (Capella-Gutierrez et al., 2009). Smart Model Selection (Lefort, Longueville & Gascuel, 2017) was used to determine the best model of amino acid evolution of the filtered alignment based on Akaike Information Criterion. Subsequently, a maximum-likelihood phylogenetic tree was built with PhyML 3.0 (Guindon et al., 2010). Branch supports were calculated using a Chi2-based parametric approximate likelihood-ratio test (aLRT) (Anisimova & Gascuel, 2006). Finally, each tree was visualized and edited with iTOL (Letunic & Bork, 2019). Following the procedure described above, a genome tree containing only the MAGs generated in the present study was also built and visualized with GraPhlAn version 0.9.7 (Asnicar et al., 2015).

## Placement of MAGs in a 16S rRNA-based phylogenetic framework

All 16S rRNA gene sequences recovered from the respective bins were classified using the phylogenetic framework of the current SILVA reference database (SSURef NR 99 release 132) (Quast et al., 2013). The database was manually curated to extend the taxonomic outline of all relevant lineages to genus level by linking the taxonomy to the termite-specific groups to that of the DictDb v3 database (Mikaelyan et al., 2015b). 16S rRNA gene sequences contained in the MAGs were aligned with SINA version 1.2.11 (Pruesse, Peplies & Glöckner, 2012) and imported into the reference database. Sequences longer than >100 bp were added to the reference trees using the parsimony tool of ARB version 6.0.6 (Ludwig et al., 2004). If none of the MAGs in a cluster contained a 16S rRNA gene longer than 100 bp, or if the placement of the 16S rRNA genes in the bin conflicted with the results of the phylogenomic analysis (indicating a contamination), the phylogenomic classification was used.

## Estimation of the relative abundance of the MAGs in each metagenome

For each metagenome, raw reads were mapped against MAGs using BWA (Li & Durbin, 2009) with default parameters. Unmapped reads and reads mapped to more than one location were removed by using SAMtools (Li et al., 2009) with parameters: F 0x904. Reads mapped to each MAGs were summarized using the "pileup.sh" script (BBmap 38.26) (Bushnell, 2014). The relative abundance of each MAG was calculated as the total number of reads mapped to a MAG divided by the total number of reads in the corresponding metagenome sample, as described in Hua et al. (2019). Similarly, the MAG coverage was
estimated by multiplying the mapped reads by the read length and dividing it by the MAG length.

## Statistical analyses

Statistical analyses were performed with R version 3.4.4 (R Development Core Team, 2019), and data were visualized with the *ggplot2* (Wickham, 2016) package. Correlations between quantitative variables were investigated with Pearson's product moment correlation coefficient.

# RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

## Metagenomes and MAGs overview

Metagenomic reads were generated from the P1, P3, and P4 proctodeal compartments of the gut of the two termite species *E. neotenicus* and *L. labralis*. These six metagenomes were combined with 24 previously published metagenomes from the gut of higher termites (*Rossmassler et al., 2015*) in order to obtain data encompassing different gut compartments from eight species of higher termites feeding on different lignocellulosic substrates ranging from wood to soil (Table 1). Metagenomic binning of these 30 termite gut metagenomes yielded 1,732 bins in total (Table S1). For further analysis, we selected only those bins that represented high-quality (135 bins, >90% complete, and <5% contamination) and medium-quality (454 bins, >50% complete, and <10% contamination) MAGs (Table 1; Table S1). The present study focused on these 589 MAGs, which showed on average a 38.6-fold coverage (Table S2).

The number of MAGs recovered from the different metagenomes did not show a Gaussian distribution. Instead, we found a significant and positive relationship between the number of metagenome-assembled reads and the number of MAGs recovered (*r* = 0.85, *p* < 0.0001), indicating that assembly success and sequencing depth were important predictors of genome reconstruction success (Fig. 1). This is in agreement with benchmarking reports on metagenomic datasets (*Sczyrba et al., 2017*) and underscore that a good quality assembly is a prerequisite for high binning recovery, which is important to consider when designing a metagenomic project for the purpose of binning. A significantly higher number of assembled reads and of MAGs recovered was observed in the current dataset compared to the *Rossmassler et al. (2015)* dataset (Wilcoxon test, *p* < 0.005), highlighting the importance of this new dataset (Fig. 1).

## MAGs taxonomy and abundance

We investigated the phylogenomic context of the 589 MAGs. An initial automated classification of the MAGs using CheckM and when available, the taxonomic assignment of the 16S rRNA gene, identified representatives of 15 prokaryotic phyla (Table S3). Initially, 142 MAGs (24% of the dataset) remained unclassified at the phylum level, and key taxa of the termite microbiota, such as Fibrobacteres and *Treponema*, were absent or only poorly represented. This is partly explained by the lack of representative genomes for certain taxa in the reference genome tree provided in the current version of CheckM (e.g., only one Fibrobacteres genome and one Elusimicrobia genome, and an
estimated by multiplying the mapped reads by the read length and dividing it by the MAG length.

## Statistical analyses

Statistical analyses were performed with R version 3.4.4 (R Development Core Team, 2019), and data were visualized with the *ggplot2* (Wickham, 2016) package. Correlations between quantitative variables were investigated with Pearson's product moment correlation coefficient.

# RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

## Metagenomes and MAGs overview

Metagenomic reads were generated from the P1, P3, and P4 proctodeal compartments of the gut of the two termite species *E. neotenicus* and *L. labralis*. These six metagenomes were combined with 24 previously published metagenomes from the gut of higher termites (*Rossmassler et al., 2015*) in order to obtain data encompassing different gut compartments from eight species of higher termites feeding on different lignocellulosic substrates ranging from wood to soil (Table 1). Metagenomic binning of these 30 termite gut metagenomes yielded 1,732 bins in total (Table S1). For further analysis, we selected only those bins that represented high-quality (135 bins, >90% complete, and <5% contamination) and medium-quality (454 bins, >50% complete, and <10% contamination) MAGs (Table 1; Table S1). The present study focused on these 589 MAGs, which showed on average a 38.6-fold coverage (Table S2).

The number of MAGs recovered from the different metagenomes did not show a Gaussian distribution. Instead, we found a significant and positive relationship between the number of metagenome-assembled reads and the number of MAGs recovered (*r* = 0.85, *p* < 0.0001), indicating that assembly success and sequencing depth were important predictors of genome reconstruction success (Fig. 1). This is in agreement with benchmarking reports on metagenomic datasets (*Sczyrba et al., 2017*) and underscore that a good quality assembly is a prerequisite for high binning recovery, which is important to consider when designing a metagenomic project for the purpose of binning. A significantly higher number of assembled reads and of MAGs recovered was observed in the current dataset compared to the *Rossmassler et al. (2015)* dataset (Wilcoxon test, *p* < 0.005), highlighting the importance of this new dataset (Fig. 1).

## MAGs taxonomy and abundance

We investigated the phylogenomic context of the 589 MAGs. An initial automated classification of the MAGs using CheckM and when available, the taxonomic assignment of the 16S rRNA gene, identified representatives of 15 prokaryotic phyla (Table S3). Initially, 142 MAGs (24% of the dataset) remained unclassified at the phylum level, and key taxa of the termite microbiota, such as Fibrobacteres and *Treponema*, were absent or only poorly represented. This is partly explained by the lack of representative genomes for certain taxa in the reference genome tree provided in the current version of CheckM (e.g., only one Fibrobacteres genome and one Elusimicrobia genome, and an
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1** Relationship between the number of MAGs recovered and the number of assembled reads in the respective metagenomes. The linear regression line and the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) are shown for the entire dataset.
Full-size ☰ DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-1</figcaption></figure>

absence of Bathyarchaeota and Kiritimatiellaeota genomes). New tools incorporating larger databases, such as GTDB-Tk (Parks et al., 2018; Chaumeil et al., 2019), will probably resolve such issues.

We improved the taxonomic resolution of the classification by iteratively constructing genome trees for each clade of interest that included all recently published reference genomes. This approach allowed the successful classification of all 589 MAGs, in some cases down to the genus level (Table S2). Thirty-eight MAGs were from the archaeal domain, and 551 MAGs were from the bacterial domain, which together represented a total of 17 prokaryotic phyla (Fig. 2). The taxonomic diversity of MAGs recovered is broadly representative of that observed in previously published 16S rRNA surveys, suggesting good taxonomic coverage of termite-associated prokaryotes from the different gut compartments and host diets (Figs. S1 and S2).

The MAG taxonomy was further refined by placing all 16S rRNA genes recovered from the bins into the phylogenetic framework of the current SILVA reference database, which allowed classifying most of the MAGs down to genus level (Table S2). When we compared the taxa represented by the MAGs to the distribution of the corresponding taxa in amplicon libraries of the bacterial gut microbiota of a representative selection of higher termites that were classified using the same framework (Lampert, Mikaelyan & Brune, 2019), we found a high level of congruence between the datasets. The MAGs represented 15 of the 19 bacterial phyla in the amplicon libraries that comprised >0.1% of all reads, including all core phyla (represented in >80% of all host species) with the exception of Verrucomicrobia (Fig. 3). A high representation in the amplicon libraries of the taxa represented by MAGs was confirmed at all taxonomic ranks down to the genus level
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1** Relationship between the number of MAGs recovered and the number of assembled reads in the respective metagenomes. The linear regression line and the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) are shown for the entire dataset.

Full-size ☰ DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-1</figcaption></figure>

absence of Bathyarchaeota and Kiritimatiellaeota genomes). New tools incorporating larger databases, such as GTDB-Tk (Parks et al., 2018; Chaumeil et al., 2019), will probably resolve such issues.

We improved the taxonomic resolution of the classification by iteratively constructing genome trees for each clade of interest that included all recently published reference genomes. This approach allowed the successful classification of all 589 MAGs, in some cases down to the genus level (Table S2). Thirty-eight MAGs were from the archaeal domain, and 551 MAGs were from the bacterial domain, which together represented a total of 17 prokaryotic phyla (Fig. 2). The taxonomic diversity of MAGs recovered is broadly representative of that observed in previously published 16S rRNA surveys, suggesting good taxonomic coverage of termite-associated prokaryotes from the different gut compartments and host diets (Figs. S1 and S2).

The MAG taxonomy was further refined by placing all 16S rRNA genes recovered from the bins into the phylogenetic framework of the current SILVA reference database, which allowed classifying most of the MAGs down to genus level (Table S2). When we compared the taxa represented by the MAGs to the distribution of the corresponding taxa in amplicon libraries of the bacterial gut microbiota of a representative selection of higher termites that were classified using the same framework (Lampert, Mikaelyan & Brune, 2019), we found a high level of congruence between the datasets. The MAGs represented 15 of the 19 bacterial phyla in the amplicon libraries that comprised >0.1% of all reads, including all core phyla (represented in >80% of all host species) with the exception of Verrucomicrobia (Fig. 3). A high representation in the amplicon libraries of the taxa represented by MAGs was confirmed at all taxonomic ranks down to the genus level
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2** Distribution of the 589 MAGs among bacterial and archaeal phyla. This maximum-likelihood tree was inferred from a concatenated alignment (amino acids) of 43 protein-coding genes (6,801 positions) using the LG+G+I model of evolution. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-2</figcaption></figure>

(Table S4), underscoring that the present dataset covers the majority of lineages that colonize the higher-termite gut.

We computed the relative abundance of each MAG. These abundances ranged from 0.005% to 4.03% (Table S2), with a mean value of 0.19%. These values indicated that the present dataset includes major taxonomic groups of the termite gut microbiota, which was confirmed when we looked at the taxonomic distribution of the MAGs. Considering the MAG relative abundance and not only their presence within samples, we could observe an effect of the host diet on the taxonomic distribution (Fig. 4). Indeed, similarities were observed when we compared taxonomic patterns of the MAG relative abundance with previously published 16S rRNA gene amplicon-based surveys (Abdul Rahman et al., 2015; Mikaelyan, Meuser & Brune, 2017). For instance, Spirochaetes were the most abundant phylum within the wood-feeding termite *N. corniger*, and their proportion decreases along the humification gradient, being less abundant in the gut of humus feeders and litter feeders and even less abundant in soil feeders, in the favor of other phyla such as Firmicutes. Fibrobacteres were preferentially abundant within wood- and litter-feeder samples (Fig. 4). Interestingly, a significant and negative relationship between the number of metagenome-assembled reads in a sample and the MAG relative abundances within this sample ($r = -0.33, p < 0.0001$) was observed across all the samples. This could be partly explained by the fact that increasing sequencing depth would increase the number of metagenome-assembled reads and thus allow the
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2** Distribution of the 589 MAGs among bacterial and archaeal phyla. This maximum-likelihood tree was inferred from a concatenated alignment (amino acids) of 43 protein-coding genes (6,801 positions) using the LG+G+I model of evolution. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-2</figcaption></figure>

(Table S4), underscoring that the present dataset covers the majority of lineages that colonize the higher-termite gut.

We computed the relative abundance of each MAG. These abundances ranged from 0.005% to 4.03% (Table S2), with a mean value of 0.19%. These values indicated that the present dataset includes major taxonomic groups of the termite gut microbiota, which was confirmed when we looked at the taxonomic distribution of the MAGs. Considering the MAG relative abundance and not only their presence within samples, we could observe an effect of the host diet on the taxonomic distribution (Fig. 4). Indeed, similarities were observed when we compared taxonomic patterns of the MAG relative abundance with previously published 16S rRNA gene amplicon-based surveys (Abdul Rahman et al., 2015; Mikaelyan, Meuser & Brune, 2017). For instance, Spirochaetes were the most abundant phylum within the wood-feeding termite *N. corniger*, and their proportion decreases along the humification gradient, being less abundant in the gut of humus feeders and litter feeders and even less abundant in soil feeders, in the favor of other phyla such as Firmicutes. Fibrobacteres were preferentially abundant within wood- and litter-feeder samples (Fig. 4). Interestingly, a significant and negative relationship between the number of metagenome-assembled reads in a sample and the MAG relative abundances within this sample ($r = -0.33, p < 0.0001$) was observed across all the samples. This could be partly explained by the fact that increasing sequencing depth would increase the number of metagenome-assembled reads and thus allow the
<table><caption>**Figure 3** Phylum-level representation of MAGs among the bacterial gut microbiota of higher termites. The average abundance of the corresponding lineages in 16S rRNA amplicon libraries of higher termites from different diet groups is shown for comparison. Core lineages represented in at least 80% of these samples are marked. For an interactive spreadsheet resolving each lineage to genus level, see Supplemental Information (Table S4). Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-3</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Phylum</th><th colspan="3">MAGs</th><th rowspan="2">Core</th><th colspan="5">16S rRNA amplicon libraries</th></tr><tr><th>Total number</th><th>with 16S gene</th><th>Rel. abd. (%)</th><th>All</th><th colspan="5">Average abundance (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Acidobacteria</td><td>4</td><td>2</td><td>0.4</td><td>●</td><td>0.5</td><td>0.7</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.2</td></tr><tr><td>Actinobacteria</td><td>71</td><td>22</td><td>3.0</td><td>●</td><td>3.1</td><td>2.0</td><td>1.8</td><td>2.1</td><td>5.2</td><td>3.9</td></tr><tr><td>Bacteroidetes</td><td>33</td><td>5</td><td>2.7</td><td>●</td><td>17.5</td><td>7.6</td><td>22.1</td><td>18.5</td><td>12.1</td><td>28.7</td></tr><tr><td>Chloroflexi</td><td>8</td><td>5</td><td>0.1</td><td>●</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.0</td></tr><tr><td>Cloacimonetes</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>0.2</td><td>●</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.2</td><td>1.6</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.0</td></tr><tr><td>Deferribacteres</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>●</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.1</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td>Elusimicrobia</td><td>9</td><td>2</td><td>0.4</td><td>●</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.1</td><td>1.4</td><td>1.9</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Epsilonproteobacteria</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>●</td><td>1.5</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.2</td><td>6.1</td></tr><tr><td>Fibrobacteres</td><td>13</td><td>2</td><td>6.6</td><td>●</td><td>3.2</td><td>8.5</td><td>6.8</td><td>0.6</td><td>0.1</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td>Firmicutes</td><td>237</td><td>73</td><td>9.2</td><td>●</td><td>33.5</td><td>13.1</td><td>26.0</td><td>41.0</td><td>56.2</td><td>28.7</td></tr><tr><td>Fusobacteria</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>●</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.7</td></tr><tr><td>Kiritimatiellaeota</td><td>5</td><td>3</td><td>0.3</td><td>●</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.9</td><td>0.1</td></tr><tr><td>Microgenomates</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>0.6</td><td>●</td><td>0.6</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.4</td><td>2.3</td></tr><tr><td>Planctomycetes</td><td>12</td><td>8</td><td>0.7</td><td>●</td><td>1.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.6</td><td>3.7</td></tr><tr><td>Proteobacteria</td><td>67</td><td>23</td><td>9.8</td><td>●</td><td>7.8</td><td>3.5</td><td>8.0</td><td>7.7</td><td>9.4</td><td>10.6</td></tr><tr><td>Saccharibacteria</td><td>15</td><td>12</td><td>0.1</td><td>●</td><td>2.2</td><td>0.4</td><td>3.1</td><td>1.9</td><td>0.8</td><td>5.2</td></tr><tr><td>Spirochaetes</td><td>68</td><td>10</td><td>3.0</td><td>●</td><td>24.5</td><td>62.1</td><td>27.5</td><td>21.1</td><td>8.1</td><td>4.7</td></tr><tr><td>Synergistetes</td><td>6</td><td>1</td><td>0.3</td><td>●</td><td>1.5</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.5</td><td>1.2</td><td>3.2</td><td>1.5</td></tr><tr><td>Verrucomicrobia</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>●</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.6</td><td>0.6</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Bacteria</strong></td><td><strong>551</strong></td><td><strong>170</strong></td><td><strong>36.7</strong></td><td></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Bathyarchaeota</td><td>15</td><td>10</td><td>1.2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Euryarchaeota</td><td>23</td><td>6</td><td>0.5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Archaea</strong></td><td><strong>38</strong></td><td><strong>16</strong></td><td><strong>1.7</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Total</strong></td><td><strong>589</strong></td><td><strong>187</strong></td><td><strong>38.4</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

binning of sequences from less abundant organisms. However, since quantity of metagenome-assembled reads and relative abundance are not independent variables, it also implies that MAG relative abundances can not be directly quantitatively compared between samples but only within a single sample. Thus, proportions of taxa within a sample using relative abundance can be used to describe such sample.

## Archaea

The archaeal domain was represented by members of the phyla Euryarchaeota and Bathyarchaeota (Fig. 5; Fig. S3). Euryarchaeota were represented by 23 MAGs that were classified as members of the genera *Methanobrevibacter* (family *Methanobacteriaceae*; three MAGs) and, *Methanimicrococcus* (family *Methanosarcinaceae*; three MAGs), and members of the family *Methanomethylophilaceae* (16 MAGs), nine of them in the genus *Candidatus* Methanoplasma. MAGs assigned as Euryarchaeota encompassed three (*Methanobacteriales*, *Methanosarcinales*, and *Methanomassiliicoccales*) of the four orders of methanogens found in termite guts (Brune, 2019); *Methanomicrobiales* were absent from the present dataset. This genomic resource will be extremely valuable for a better understanding of the genomic basis of methanogenesis in the termite gut and more generally for investigating the functional role of archaea in arthropod guts. Indeed, Euryarchaeota have been found to be present in virtually all termite species investigated (Brune, 2019), and a global 16S rRNA gene survey has revealed that this phylum is the most abundant archaeal clade in arthropod-associated microbiota (Schloss et al., 2016). Bathyarchaeota were represented by 15 MAGs, which formed a termite-specific cluster,
<table><caption>**Figure 3** Phylum-level representation of MAGs among the bacterial gut microbiota of higher termites. The average abundance of the corresponding lineages in 16S rRNA amplicon libraries of higher termites from different diet groups is shown for comparison. Core lineages represented in at least 80% of these samples are marked. For an interactive spreadsheet resolving each lineage to genus level, see Supplemental Information (Table S4). Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-3</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Phylum</th><th colspan="3">MAGs</th><th rowspan="2">Core</th><th colspan="5">16S rRNA amplicon libraries</th></tr><tr><th>Total number</th><th>with 16S gene</th><th>Rel. abd. (%)</th><th>All</th><th colspan="5">Average abundance (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Acidobacteria</td><td>4</td><td>2</td><td>0.4</td><td>●</td><td>0.5</td><td>0.7</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.2</td></tr><tr><td>Actinobacteria</td><td>71</td><td>22</td><td>3.0</td><td>●</td><td>3.1</td><td>2.0</td><td>1.8</td><td>2.1</td><td>5.2</td><td>3.9</td></tr><tr><td>Bacteroidetes</td><td>33</td><td>5</td><td>2.7</td><td>●</td><td>17.5</td><td>7.6</td><td>22.1</td><td>18.5</td><td>12.1</td><td>28.7</td></tr><tr><td>Chloroflexi</td><td>8</td><td>5</td><td>0.1</td><td>●</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.0</td></tr><tr><td>Cloacimonetes</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>0.2</td><td>●</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.2</td><td>1.6</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.0</td></tr><tr><td>Deferribacteres</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>●</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.1</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td>Elusimicrobia</td><td>9</td><td>2</td><td>0.4</td><td>●</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.1</td><td>1.4</td><td>1.9</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Epsilonproteobacteria</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>●</td><td>1.5</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.2</td><td>6.1</td></tr><tr><td>Fibrobacteres</td><td>13</td><td>2</td><td>6.6</td><td>●</td><td>3.2</td><td>8.5</td><td>6.8</td><td>0.6</td><td>0.1</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td>Firmicutes</td><td>237</td><td>73</td><td>9.2</td><td>●</td><td>33.5</td><td>13.1</td><td>26.0</td><td>41.0</td><td>56.2</td><td>28.7</td></tr><tr><td>Fusobacteria</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>●</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.7</td></tr><tr><td>Kiritimatiellaeota</td><td>5</td><td>3</td><td>0.3</td><td>●</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.9</td><td>0.1</td></tr><tr><td>Microgenomates</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>0.6</td><td>●</td><td>0.6</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.4</td><td>2.3</td></tr><tr><td>Planctomycetes</td><td>12</td><td>8</td><td>0.7</td><td>●</td><td>1.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.0</td><td>0.6</td><td>3.7</td></tr><tr><td>Proteobacteria</td><td>67</td><td>23</td><td>9.8</td><td>●</td><td>7.8</td><td>3.5</td><td>8.0</td><td>7.7</td><td>9.4</td><td>10.6</td></tr><tr><td>Saccharibacteria</td><td>15</td><td>12</td><td>0.1</td><td>●</td><td>2.2</td><td>0.4</td><td>3.1</td><td>1.9</td><td>0.8</td><td>5.2</td></tr><tr><td>Spirochaetes</td><td>68</td><td>10</td><td>3.0</td><td>●</td><td>24.5</td><td>62.1</td><td>27.5</td><td>21.1</td><td>8.1</td><td>4.7</td></tr><tr><td>Synergistetes</td><td>6</td><td>1</td><td>0.3</td><td>●</td><td>1.5</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.5</td><td>1.2</td><td>3.2</td><td>1.5</td></tr><tr><td>Verrucomicrobia</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>●</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.6</td><td>0.6</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Bacteria</strong></td><td><strong>551</strong></td><td><strong>170</strong></td><td><strong>36.7</strong></td><td></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td><td><strong>100</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Bathyarchaeota</td><td>15</td><td>10</td><td>1.2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Euryarchaeota</td><td>23</td><td>6</td><td>0.5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Archaea</strong></td><td><strong>38</strong></td><td><strong>16</strong></td><td><strong>1.7</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Total</strong></td><td><strong>589</strong></td><td><strong>187</strong></td><td><strong>38.4</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

binning of sequences from less abundant organisms. However, since quantity of metagenome-assembled reads and relative abundance are not independent variables, it also implies that MAG relative abundances can not be directly quantitatively compared between samples but only within a single sample. Thus, proportions of taxa within a sample using relative abundance can be used to describe such sample.

## Archaea

The archaeal domain was represented by members of the phyla Euryarchaeota and Bathyarchaeota (Fig. 5; Fig. S3). Euryarchaeota were represented by 23 MAGs that were classified as members of the genera *Methanobrevibacter* (family *Methanobacteriaceae*; three MAGs) and, *Methanimicrococcus* (family *Methanosarcinaceae*; three MAGs), and members of the family *Methanomethylophilaceae* (16 MAGs), nine of them in the genus *Candidatus* Methanoplasma. MAGs assigned as Euryarchaeota encompassed three (*Methanobacteriales*, *Methanosarcinales*, and *Methanomassiliicoccales*) of the four orders of methanogens found in termite guts (Brune, 2019); *Methanomicrobiales* were absent from the present dataset. This genomic resource will be extremely valuable for a better understanding of the genomic basis of methanogenesis in the termite gut and more generally for investigating the functional role of archaea in arthropod guts. Indeed, Euryarchaeota have been found to be present in virtually all termite species investigated (Brune, 2019), and a global 16S rRNA gene survey has revealed that this phylum is the most abundant archaeal clade in arthropod-associated microbiota (Schloss et al., 2016). Bathyarchaeota were represented by 15 MAGs, which formed a termite-specific cluster,
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4** Relative abundance of the MAGs from different phyla among the respective metagenomes.
Circle size indicates the relative abundance of the MAGs among the respective metagenome sample; color indicates host diet. To estimate the relative abundance of each MAG, the total number of reads mapped to a MAG was divided by the total number of reads in the corresponding metagenome sample.</figcaption></figure>

Full-size

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-4

with Bathyarchaeota reconstructed from sediments of the White Oak River (WOR) estuary (NC, USA) as next relatives (Lazar et al., 2016) (Fig. 5). Bathyarchaeota is a lineage formerly known as Miscellaneous Crenarchaeota Group (MCG), which has been reported to occur in the gut of soil-feeding termites (Friedrich et al., 2001). To date, MAGs of Bathyarchaeota have been mostly derived from aquatic environments (Zhou et al., 2018). Here, we identify the members of the termite gut lineage as Bathyarchaeota and provide the first genomes from this environment. Interestingly, Bathyarchaeota MAGs were particularly abundant in humus-, litter-, and soil-feeding termites (Fig. 4); a genomic characterization, combined with analyses of their abundance and localization, should shed light on the metabolic potential of these organisms and their functional role in termite guts.

## Firmicutes

Firmicutes was by far the phylum with the highest number of MAGs, but also the phylum with the highest average relative abundance (33.5%) in 16S rRNA gene-based surveys (Fig. 3). The 237 MAGs (40% of the total dataset) represented three classes (*Bacilli*, *Clostridia*, and *Erysipelotrichia*) and ten families, including four members of *Streptococcaceae* (*Bacilli*) and three members of *Turicibacteraceae* (*Erysipelotrichia*). *Clostridia* was the most diverse and rich class (229 MAGs), in which *Ruminococcaceae* (95 MAGs), *Defluviitaleaceae* (67 MAGs), *Lachnospiraceae* (four MAGs), *Peptococcaceae*
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4** Relative abundance of the MAGs from different phyla among the respective metagenomes.</figcaption></figure>

Circle size indicates the relative abundance of the MAGs among the respective metagenome sample; color indicates host diet. To estimate the relative abundance of each MAG, the total number of reads mapped to a MAG was divided by the total number of reads in the corresponding metagenome sample.

Full-size

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-4

with Bathyarchaeota reconstructed from sediments of the White Oak River (WOR) estuary (NC, USA) as next relatives (Lazar et al., 2016) (Fig. 5). Bathyarchaeota is a lineage formerly known as Miscellaneous Crenarchaeota Group (MCG), which has been reported to occur in the gut of soil-feeding termites (Friedrich et al., 2001). To date, MAGs of Bathyarchaeota have been mostly derived from aquatic environments (Zhou et al., 2018). Here, we identify the members of the termite gut lineage as Bathyarchaeota and provide the first genomes from this environment. Interestingly, Bathyarchaeota MAGs were particularly abundant in humus-, litter-, and soil-feeding termites (Fig. 4); a genomic characterization, combined with analyses of their abundance and localization, should shed light on the metabolic potential of these organisms and their functional role in termite guts.

## Firmicutes

Firmicutes was by far the phylum with the highest number of MAGs, but also the phylum with the highest average relative abundance (33.5%) in 16S rRNA gene-based surveys (Fig. 3). The 237 MAGs (40% of the total dataset) represented three classes (*Bacilli*, *Clostridia*, and *Erysipelotrichia*) and ten families, including four members of *Streptococcaceae* (*Bacilli*) and three members of *Turicibacteraceae* (*Erysipelotrichia*). *Clostridia* was the most diverse and rich class (229 MAGs), in which *Ruminococcaceae* (95 MAGs), *Defluviitaleaceae* (67 MAGs), *Lachnospiraceae* (four MAGs), *Peptococcaceae*
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

**Figure 5** Phylogenomic tree of the archael domain. This maximum-likelihood tree was inferred from a concatenated alignment of 43 proteins (6,682 positions) using the LG+G+I+F model of amino-acid evolution. Branch supports were calculated using a Chi2-based parametric approximate likelihood-ratio test. Names in bold included MAGs recovered in the present study. Clusters shaded in brown consist exclusively of MAGs from termite guts and clusters shaded in gray contain genomes from termite guts. The Asgard group was used as outgroup.

Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-5

(16 MAGs), *Christensenellaceae* (nine MAGs), *Eubacteriaceae* (two MAGs), Family XIII *incertae sedis* (six MAGs), and Clostridiales vadinBB60 group (22 MAGs) families were identified. These high numbers of *Ruminococcaceae* and *Defluviitaleaceae* MAGs were reflected by high relative abundances of these two families in 16S rRNA gene-based surveys (15.9% and 3.1% for the *Ruminococcaceae* and *Defluviitaleaceae*, respectively; Table S4). Interestingly, among the *Defluviitaleaceae*, the genomes were mainly recovered from the P1 compartment (53 MAGs, i.e., 79% of the family members) whereas *Ruminococcaceae* were predominantly recovered from the P3 compartment (59 MAGs, i.e., 62% of the family members). Further studies should investigate the potential metabolic specialization of these two families in relation to the gut physicochemical properties. A fourth class-level lineage could not be further classified for lack of reference genomes. In a recent global 16S rRNA gene-based survey, it has been suggested that many novel lineages of Firmicutes in insect-associated metagenomes are hidden (*Schulz et al., 2017*). Our present study confirms this idea but our genome trees also provide evidence of new lineages. Here, we report the first genomes of uncultured termite-specific lineages (Table S4) that were already detected in previous 16S rRNA gene-based surveys (*Bourguignon et al., 2018*). For example, the phylogenomic tree of the most abundant
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

**Figure 5** Phylogenomic tree of the archael domain. This maximum-likelihood tree was inferred from a concatenated alignment of 43 proteins (6,682 positions) using the LG+G+I+F model of amino-acid evolution. Branch supports were calculated using a Chi2-based parametric approximate likelihood-ratio test. Names in bold included MAGs recovered in the present study. Clusters shaded in brown consist exclusively of MAGs from termite guts and clusters shaded in gray contain genomes from termite guts. The Asgard group was used as outgroup.

Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-5

(16 MAGs), *Christensenellaceae* (nine MAGs), *Eubacteriaceae* (two MAGs), Family XIII *incertae sedis* (six MAGs), and Clostridiales vadinBB60 group (22 MAGs) families were identified. These high numbers of *Ruminococcaceae* and *Defluviitaleaceae* MAGs were reflected by high relative abundances of these two families in 16S rRNA gene-based surveys (15.9% and 3.1% for the *Ruminococcaceae* and *Defluviitaleaceae*, respectively; Table S4). Interestingly, among the *Defluviitaleaceae*, the genomes were mainly recovered from the P1 compartment (53 MAGs, i.e., 79% of the family members) whereas *Ruminococcaceae* were predominantly recovered from the P3 compartment (59 MAGs, i.e., 62% of the family members). Further studies should investigate the potential metabolic specialization of these two families in relation to the gut physicochemical properties. A fourth class-level lineage could not be further classified for lack of reference genomes. In a recent global 16S rRNA gene-based survey, it has been suggested that many novel lineages of Firmicutes in insect-associated metagenomes are hidden (*Schulz et al., 2017*). Our present study confirms this idea but our genome trees also provide evidence of new lineages. Here, we report the first genomes of uncultured termite-specific lineages (Table S4) that were already detected in previous 16S rRNA gene-based surveys (*Bourguignon et al., 2018*). For example, the phylogenomic tree of the most abundant
family *Ruminococcaceae* (Fig. S4) showed various termite-specific clusters, including a cluster of 18 MAGs closely related to *Sporobacter termitidis* isolated from *Nasutitermes lujae* (Grech-Mora et al., 1996). *Lachnospiraceae*, *Ruminococcaceae*, *Turicibacteraceae* (previously classified as *Erysipelotrichaceae*), and *Defluviitaleaceae* (previously classified as *Lachnospiraceae*) have been reported among the dominant taxa in termite guts (Mikaelyan, Meuser & Brune, 2017), but most of them remain uncultivated and/or with few representative genomes. As such, many questions regarding their ecology and metabolism remain open. With 237 Firmicutes MAGs recovered from different gut compartments and from hosts with different diets, the present study provides the material for further genomic exploration of the role of these bacteria in plant polysaccharide degradation, based for instance on CAZyme distribution (Lombard et al., 2014). Since diet has been shown to be the main factor shaping gut community composition in higher termites (Mikaelyan et al., 2015a), one might hypothesize the existence of different arsenals of lignocellulolytic enzymes, potentially reflecting the host diet specificity (balance between cellulose, lignin, and hemicelluloses). More generally, Firmicutes and especially *Ruminococcaceae* are also abundant and metabolically important in rumen systems (Svartström et al., 2017; Söllinger et al., 2018; Stewart et al., 2018). At a broader scale, our dataset will allow comparative studies between intestinal tract microbiota of ruminants and phytophagous or xylophagous invertebrates, which would allow a better understanding of plant polysaccharide degradation across the tree of life.

## Actinobacteria

Actinobacteria was the second most abundant phylum with 71 MAGs, including members of the classes *Acidimicrobiia*, *Actinobacteriia*, *Coriobacteriia*, and *Thermoleophilia* (Fig. S5). Eleven families were represented, namely *Propionibacteriaceae* (12 MAGs), *Promicromonosporaceae* (three MAGs), *Clostridiales incertae sedis* (16 MAGs), *OPB41* (16 MAGs) *Cellulomonadaceae* (seven MAGs), *Frankiaceae* (one MAG), *Sanguibacteriaceae* (four MAGs), *Microbacteriaceae* (two MAGs), *Nocardioidaceae* (two MAGs), *Acidimicrobiaceae* (one MAG), *Nocardiaceae* (one MAG), and *Conexibacteraceae* (one MAG). Among these 71 MAGs, 36 were recovered from humus feeders, 33 from soil feeders but only two from wood feeders, which suggests a higher prevalence in termites with a more humified diet. This phylum is known to be present and of significant abundance in both the nest (Sujada, Sungthong & Lumyong, 2014) and gut of termites (Le Roes-Hill, Rohland & Burton, 2011), but to be more abundant in the nest (Moreira et al., 2018). This was for instance the case for the families *Acidimicrobiaceae*, *Nocardiaceae*, *Promicromonosporaceae*, *Microbacteriaceae*, *Nocardioidaceae*, and *Propionibacteriaceae*, which were more abundant in the nest than in the gut of workers or soldiers of *Procornitermes araujoi* (Moreira et al., 2018). Therefore, one of the key questions regarding this phylum concerns their effective role in lignocellulose degradation in the termite guts. Are they just present in the surrounding environment of the termite and thus sometimes transit from the gut or are they actively involved in food digestion? The MAGs obtained in the present study will allow to address such questions by
family *Ruminococcaceae* (Fig. S4) showed various termite-specific clusters, including a cluster of 18 MAGs closely related to *Sporobacter termitidis* isolated from *Nasutitermes lujae* (Grech-Mora et al., 1996). *Lachnospiraceae*, *Ruminococcaceae*, *Turicibacteraceae* (previously classified as *Erysipelotrichaceae*), and *Defluviitaleaceae* (previously classified as *Lachnospiraceae*) have been reported among the dominant taxa in termite guts (Mikaelyan, Meuser & Brune, 2017), but most of them remain uncultivated and/or with few representative genomes. As such, many questions regarding their ecology and metabolism remain open. With 237 Firmicutes MAGs recovered from different gut compartments and from hosts with different diets, the present study provides the material for further genomic exploration of the role of these bacteria in plant polysaccharide degradation, based for instance on CAZyme distribution (Lombard et al., 2014). Since diet has been shown to be the main factor shaping gut community composition in higher termites (Mikaelyan et al., 2015a), one might hypothesize the existence of different arsenals of lignocellulolytic enzymes, potentially reflecting the host diet specificity (balance between cellulose, lignin, and hemicelluloses). More generally, Firmicutes and especially *Ruminococcaceae* are also abundant and metabolically important in rumen systems (Svartström et al., 2017; Söllinger et al., 2018; Stewart et al., 2018). At a broader scale, our dataset will allow comparative studies between intestinal tract microbiota of ruminants and phytophagous or xylophagous invertebrates, which would allow a better understanding of plant polysaccharide degradation across the tree of life.

## Actinobacteria

Actinobacteria was the second most abundant phylum with 71 MAGs, including members of the classes *Acidimicrobiia*, *Actinobacteriia*, *Coriobacteriia*, and *Thermoleophilia* (Fig. S5). Eleven families were represented, namely *Propionibacteriaceae* (12 MAGs), *Promicromonosporaceae* (three MAGs), *Clostridiales incertae sedis* (16 MAGs), *OPB41* (16 MAGs) *Cellulomonadaceae* (seven MAGs), *Frankiaceae* (one MAG), *Sanguibacteriaceae* (four MAGs), *Microbacteriaceae* (two MAGs), *Nocardioidaceae* (two MAGs), *Acidimicrobiaceae* (one MAG), *Nocardiaceae* (one MAG), and *Conexibacteraceae* (one MAG). Among these 71 MAGs, 36 were recovered from humus feeders, 33 from soil feeders but only two from wood feeders, which suggests a higher prevalence in termites with a more humified diet. This phylum is known to be present and of significant abundance in both the nest (Sujada, Sungthong & Lumyong, 2014) and gut of termites (Le Roes-Hill, Rohland & Burton, 2011), but to be more abundant in the nest (Moreira et al., 2018). This was for instance the case for the families *Acidimicrobiaceae*, *Nocardiaceae*, *Promicromonosporaceae*, *Microbacteriaceae*, *Nocardioidaceae*, and *Propionibacteriaceae*, which were more abundant in the nest than in the gut of workers or soldiers of *Procornitermes araujoi* (Moreira et al., 2018). Therefore, one of the key questions regarding this phylum concerns their effective role in lignocellulose degradation in the termite guts. Are they just present in the surrounding environment of the termite and thus sometimes transit from the gut or are they actively involved in food digestion? The MAGs obtained in the present study will allow to address such questions by
evaluating gene expression of these organisms using metatranscriptomic data from higher
termites (*He et al., 2013; Marynowska et al., 2017*).

Spirochaetes

The phylum Spirochaetes was represented by 68 MAGs from wood-, soil-, litter-, and
humus-feeding termites. It has long been known that Spirochaetes are a diverse and
important lineage in termite gut (Paster et al., 1996; Lilburn, Schmidt & Breznak, 1999),
especially because of their involvement in reductive acetogenesis (Leadbetter et al., 1999;
Ohkuma et al., 2015) and in hemicellulose degradation (Tokuda et al., 2018). In terms
of abundance, Spirochaetes are among the dominant phyla in termite guts (Fig. 3) and may
represent more than half of the bacterial relative abundance in some species (Diouf et al.,
2018a). Three Spirochaetes orders, namely Brevinematales (one MAG), Leptospirales
(four MAGs) and Spirochaetales (59 MAGs), were identified (Fig. 6; Fig. S6). In the latter
order, 54 MAGs recovered from the P1, P3, and P4 compartments of wood-, litter-,
humus-, and soil-feeding hosts were assigned to the termite-specific cluster Treponema I
(Ohkuma, Iida & Kudo, 1999; Lilburn, Schmidt & Breznak, 1999) and represent the first
genomes of this cluster from higher termites. Indeed, to date only two Treponema I
genomes are available, and both were recovered from isolates, namely Treponema
azotonutricium and Treponema primitia, from the hindgut of the lower termite
Zootermopsis angusticollis (Graber, Leadbetter & Breznak, 2004). Thus, our dataset
significantly expands the genomic resources for this taxonomic group. Subclusters of this
clade have been identified on a dedicated genome tree (Fig. 6). The genome tree topology is
in agreement with a previous phylogenomic Spirochaetes study (Gupta, Mahmood &
Adeolu, 2013). Regarding Spirochaetes classification, our tree topology suggests that the
genus Treponema could be elevated at least to the family rank due to the presence of
distinct Treponema clusters (Fig. 6). This observation is also in agreement with the recent
Genome Taxonomy Database, which now proposes a Treponemataceae family and a
Treponematales order (Parks et al., 2018; Chaumeil et al., 2019).

Fibrobacteres

Members of the phylum Fibrobacteres are abundant in the hindgut of wood-feeding
higher termites (Fig. 3) (Hongoh et al., 2006), where they have been identified as
fiber-associated cellulolytic bacteria (Mikaelyan et al., 2014). Here, 13 members of the
Fibrobacteres phylum were recovered from the P1, P3, and P4 compartments of wood-,
litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding termites. These genomes encompass the three orders,
namely *Chitinispirillales* (Sorokin et al., 2016), previously known as TG3 subphylum 1
(Hongoh et al., 2006, five MAGs), *Chitinivibrianales* (previously known as TG3
subphylum 2; two MAGs), and *Fibrobacterales* (six MAGs). While a previous study of
termites guts had already provided MAGs of *Chitinivibrionaceae* and *Fibrobacteraceae*
and documented their fiber-degrading capacities (Abdul Rahman et al., 2016), the
present study provides the five first genomes of the termite-associated members of
*Chitinispirillaceae* (Fig. 7).
evaluating gene expression of these organisms using metatranscriptomic data from higher
termites (*He et al., 2013; Marynowska et al., 2017*).

Spirochaetes

The phylum Spirochaetes was represented by 68 MAGs from wood-, soil-, litter-, and humus-feeding termites. It has long been known that Spirochaetes are a diverse and important lineage in termite gut (Paster et al., 1996; Lilburn, Schmidt & Breznak, 1999), especially because of their involvement in reductive acetogenesis (Leadbetter et al., 1999; Ohkuma et al., 2015) and in hemicellulose degradation (Tokuda et al., 2018). In terms of abundance, Spirochaetes are among the dominant phyla in termite guts (Fig. 3) and may represent more than half of the bacterial relative abundance in some species (Diouf et al., 2018a). Three Spirochaetes orders, namely *Brevinematales* (one MAG), *Leptospirales* (four MAGs) and *Spirochaetales* (59 MAGs), were identified (Fig. 6; Fig. S6). In the latter order, 54 MAGs recovered from the P1, P3, and P4 compartments of wood-, litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding hosts were assigned to the termite-specific cluster *Treponema* I (Ohkuma, Iida & Kudo, 1999; Lilburn, Schmidt & Breznak, 1999) and represent the first genomes of this cluster from higher termites. Indeed, to date only two *Treponema* I genomes are available, and both were recovered from isolates, namely *Treponema azotonutricium* and *Treponema primitia*, from the hindgut of the lower termite *Zootermopsis angusticollis* (Graber, Leadbetter & Breznak, 2004). Thus, our dataset significantly expands the genomic resources for this taxonomic group. Subclusters of this clade have been identified on a dedicated genome tree (Fig. 6). The genome tree topology is in agreement with a previous phylogenomic Spirochaetes study (Gupta, Mahmood & Adeolu, 2013). Regarding Spirochaetes classification, our tree topology suggests that the genus *Treponema* could be elevated at least to the family rank due to the presence of distinct *Treponema* clusters (Fig. 6). This observation is also in agreement with the recent Genome Taxonomy Database, which now proposes a *Treponemataceae* family and a *Treponematales* order (Parks et al., 2018; Chaumeil et al., 2019).

Fibrobacteres

Members of the phylum Fibrobacteres are abundant in the hindgut of wood-feeding
higher termites (Fig. 3) (Hongoh et al., 2006), where they have been identified as
fiber-associated cellulolytic bacteria (Mikaelyan et al., 2014). Here, 13 members of the
Fibrobacteres phylum were recovered from the P1, P3, and P4 compartments of wood-
litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding termites. These genomes encompass the three orders,
namely *Chitinispirillales* (Sorokin et al., 2016), previously known as TG3 subphylum 1
(Hongoh et al., 2006, five MAGs), *Chitinivibrionales* (previously known as TG3
subphylum 2; two MAGs), and *Fibrobacterales* (six MAGs). While a previous study of
termites guts had already provided MAGs of *Chitinivibrionaceae* and *Fibrobacteraceae*
and documented their fiber-degrading capacities (Abdul Rahman et al., 2016), the
present study provides the five first genomes of the termite-associated members of
*Chitinispirillaceae* (Fig. 7).
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

**Figure 6** Phylogenomic tree of the Spirochaetes phylum. This maximum-likelihood tree was inferred from a concatenated alignment of 43 proteins (6,741 positions) using the LG+G+I+F model of amino-acid evolution. Branch supports were calculated using a Chi2-based parametric approximate likelihood-ratio test. Names in bold included MAGs recovered in the present study. Clusters shaded in brown consist exclusively of genomes from termite guts and clusters shaded in gray contain genomes from termite guts. Elusimicrobia and Cyanobacteria were used as outgroup.

Full-size

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-6

Phylogenomic analysis indicates that the MAGs classified as Fibrobacterales represent a termite-specific cluster among *Fibrobacteraceae* that comprises *Candidatus* Fibromonas termitidis and forms a sister group to the genus *Fibrobacter* (Fig. 7; Fig. S7). This is in agreement with a previous study that identified the same lineage (but classified as family *Fibromonadaceae*) by 16S rRNA gene-based and phylogenomic analyses (Abdul Rahman et al., 2016). None of the MAGs fell into the genus *Fibrobacter*, which was absent also in all 16S rRNA gene-based surveys of termite gut microbiota (Hongoh et al., 2006; Mikaelyan et al., 2015b; Bourguignon et al., 2018). Members of this genus have been isolated from the gastrointestinal tracts of mammals and bird herbivores (Neumann, McCormick & Suen, 2017), where they are potentially involved in cellulose and hemicellulose degradation (Neumann & Suen, 2018). This suggests co-evolutionary patterns among different Fibrobacteres clades within animal hosts with a lignocellulose-based diet.
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

**Figure 6** Phylogenomic tree of the Spirochaetes phylum. This maximum-likelihood tree was inferred from a concatenated alignment of 43 proteins (6,741 positions) using the LG+G+I+F model of amino-acid evolution. Branch supports were calculated using a Chi2-based parametric approximate likelihood-ratio test. Names in bold included MAGs recovered in the present study. Clusters shaded in brown consist exclusively of genomes from termite guts and clusters shaded in gray contain genomes from termite guts. Elusimicrobia and Cyanobacteria were used as outgroup.

Full-size

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-6

Phylogenomic analysis indicates that the MAGs classified as Fibrobacterales represent a termite-specific cluster among *Fibrobacteraceae* that comprises *Candidatus* Fibromonas termitidis and forms a sister group to the genus *Fibrobacter* (Fig. 7; Fig. S7). This is in agreement with a previous study that identified the same lineage (but classified as family *Fibromonadaceae*) by 16S rRNA gene-based and phylogenomic analyses (Abdul Rahman et al., 2016). None of the MAGs fell into the genus *Fibrobacter*, which was absent also in all 16S rRNA gene-based surveys of termite gut microbiota (Hongoh et al., 2006; Mikaelyan et al., 2015b; Bourguignon et al., 2018). Members of this genus have been isolated from the gastrointestinal tracts of mammals and bird herbivores (Neumann, McCormick & Suen, 2017), where they are potentially involved in cellulose and hemicellulose degradation (Neumann & Suen, 2018). This suggests co-evolutionary patterns among different Fibrobacteres clades within animal hosts with a lignocellulose-based diet.
<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

**Figure 7** Phylogenomic tree of the *Fibrobacteres phylum*. This maximum-likelihood tree was inferred from a concatenated alignment of 43 proteins (6,516 positions) using the LG+G+I+F model of amino-acid evolution. Branch supports were calculated using a Chi2-based parametric approximate likelihood-ratio test. Names in bold included MAGs recovered in the present study. Clusters shaded in brown consist exclusively of genomes from termite guts and clusters shaded in gray contain genomes from termite guts. Bacteroidetes were used as outgroup.
Full-size 🐶 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-7

## Proteobacteria and Bacteroidetes

Sixty-seven MAGs of Proteobacteria belonging to *Alphaproteobacteria* (23 MAGs), *Gammaproteobacteria* (20 MAGs), and *Deltaproteobacteria* (24 MAGs) were recovered from all hindgut compartments of litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding termites. Among the *Deltaproteobacteria*, seven orders were identified, namely *Desulfobacterales* (four MAGs, all assigned to *Desulfobulbus*), *Desulfovibrionales* (five MAGs, all *Desulfovibrionaceae*), *Desulfuromonadales* (one MAG), *Myxococcales* (five *Myxococcaceae* and four *Polyangiaceae*), *Adiutricales* (one MAG), *Syntrophobacterales* (one MAG), and MBNT15 group (two MAGs). *Desulfovibrionaceae* (*Desulfovibrionales*) members of gut and termite-gut clusters have been found to be highly prevalent in termite guts (Bourguignon *et al.*, 2018). Similarly, we identified three *Desulfovibrionaceae* MAGs that form a monophyletic clade and two *Desulfovibrionaceae* MAGs that fall into a cluster of gut-associated genomes (Fig. S8). This family, among others, is composed of various sulfate-reducing bacteria; this functional group has already been identified in different termite species (Kuhnigk *et al.*, 1996). Thus, these MAGs could provide new genomic resources to further investigate this metabolism in the termite gut.

Our dataset comprises 33 MAGs of Bacteroidetes (Fig. S9), including members of the families Cluster V (four MAGs), RC9 gut group (six MAGs), *Paludibacteraceae* (two MAGs, both assigned to the *Paludibacter* genus), *Rikenellaceae* (nine MAGs), *Marinilabiliaceae* (one MAG), and *Prolixibacteraceae* (one MAG). These Bacteroidetes were found in the P1, P3, and P4 compartments and in wood-, litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding termites. In Blattodea guts, different clusters of *Alistipes* (Bacteroidetes) have been found in a 16S rRNA gene survey (Mikaelyan *et al.*, 2015b). Two MAGs from *L. labralis* belonging to the *Rikenellaceae* family and closely related to *Alistipes* have been identified. Additionally, among Bacteroidetes, four MAGs, all originating from P4 compartments, fall into the Cluster V family that contains symbionts of flagellates from guts of lower termites (Hongoh *et al.*, 2008b; Yuki *et al.*, 2015). We also recovered two MAGs assigned to *Paludibacter*; *Paludibacter propionicigenes* and *Paludibacter jiangxiensis* are both strictly anaerobic, propionate-producing bacteria isolated from rice paddy field (Ueki *et al.*, 2006; Qiu *et al.*, 2014). Propionate is produced by fermenting bacteria in the
<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

**Figure 7** Phylogenomic tree of the *Fibrobacteres phylum*. This maximum-likelihood tree was inferred from a concatenated alignment of 43 proteins (6,516 positions) using the LG+G+I+F model of amino-acid evolution. Branch supports were calculated using a Chi2-based parametric approximate likelihood-ratio test. Names in bold included MAGs recovered in the present study. Clusters shaded in brown consist exclusively of genomes from termite guts and clusters shaded in gray contain genomes from termite guts. Bacteroidetes were used as outgroup.
Full-size 🐶 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8614/fig-7

## Proteobacteria and Bacteroidetes

Sixty-seven MAGs of Proteobacteria belonging to *Alphaproteobacteria* (23 MAGs), *Gammaproteobacteria* (20 MAGs), and *Deltaproteobacteria* (24 MAGs) were recovered from all hindgut compartments of litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding termites. Among the *Deltaproteobacteria*, seven orders were identified, namely *Desulfobacterales* (four MAGs, all assigned to *Desulfobulbus*), *Desulfovibrionales* (five MAGs, all *Desulfovibrionaceae*), *Desulfuromonadales* (one MAG), *Myxococcales* (five *Myxococcaceae* and four *Polyangiaceae*), *Adiutricales* (one MAG), *Syntrophobacterales* (one MAG), and MBNT15 group (two MAGs). *Desulfovibrionaceae* (*Desulfovibrionales*) members of gut and termite-gut clusters have been found to be highly prevalent in termite guts (Bourguignon *et al.*, 2018). Similarly, we identified three *Desulfovibrionaceae* MAGs that form a monophyletic clade and two *Desulfovibrionaceae* MAGs that fall into a cluster of gut-associated genomes (Fig. S8). This family, among others, is composed of various sulfate-reducing bacteria; this functional group has already been identified in different termite species (Kuhnigk *et al.*, 1996). Thus, these MAGs could provide new genomic resources to further investigate this metabolism in the termite gut.

Our dataset comprises 33 MAGs of Bacteroidetes (Fig. S9), including members of the families Cluster V (four MAGs), RC9 gut group (six MAGs), *Paludibacteraceae* (two MAGs, both assigned to the *Paludibacter* genus), *Rikenellaceae* (nine MAGs), *Marinilabiliaceae* (one MAG), and *Prolixibacteraceae* (one MAG). These Bacteroidetes were found in the P1, P3, and P4 compartments and in wood-, litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding termites. In Blattodea guts, different clusters of *Alistipes* (Bacteroidetes) have been found in a 16S rRNA gene survey (Mikaelyan *et al.*, 2015b). Two MAGs from *L. labralis* belonging to the *Rikenellaceae* family and closely related to *Alistipes* have been identified. Additionally, among Bacteroidetes, four MAGs, all originating from P4 compartments, fall into the Cluster V family that contains symbionts of flagellates from guts of lower termites (Hongoh *et al.*, 2008b; Yuki *et al.*, 2015). We also recovered two MAGs assigned to *Paludibacter*; *Paludibacter propionicigenes* and *Paludibacter jiangxiensis* are both strictly anaerobic, propionate-producing bacteria isolated from rice paddy field (Ueki *et al.*, 2006; Qiu *et al.*, 2014). Propionate is produced by fermenting bacteria in the
gut of termites (*Odelson & Breznak, 1983*); these bacteria utilize glucose generated by
cellulose degradation to form succinate and propionate (*Tokuda et al., 2014*).

*P. propionicigenes* might be involved in nitrogen fixation, as *nifH* transcripts assigned to this species are the most abundant in the gut of the wood-feeding beetle *Odontotaenius disjunctus* (*Ceja-Navarro et al., 2014).

## Saccharibacteria, Synergistetes and Planctomycetes

Fifteen MAGs of *Candidatus* Saccharibacteria (also known as candidate division TM7) were reconstructed from the P1, P3, and P4 compartments of wood-, litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding termites (Fig. S10). Most of them originated from humus feeders (11 MAGs), especially from the P3 compartment (eight out of these 11 MAGs). Similarly, six MAGs of Synergistetes, all belonging to the *Synergistaceae* family that contains a termite/cockroach cluster (*Mikaelyan et al., 2015b*), were recovered from the P3 and P4 compartments of humus- and soil-feeding termites (Fig. S11). Both Saccharibacteria and Synergistetes were recently highlighted as numerically important clades of the termite gut microbiota, with some OTUs being present in the gut of the majority of 94 termite species collected across four continents (*Bourguignon et al., 2018*). They were also contributing to the core microbiota of higher termites (Fig. 3). Genomic analysis of these MAGs should help in understanding the roles of these bacteria in termite gut and also provide clues for designing successful isolation media to study their physiology.

Twelve MAGs were assigned to the phylum Planctomycetes, including four to the class *Phycisphaerae* (and among them two classified as *Tepidisphaerales* CPla-3 termite group), one to class vadinHA49 and seven to the class *Planctomycetia* (all classified as *Pirellulaceae*) (Fig. S12). These MAGs were recovered from the P3, P4, and P5 compartments and were restricted to humus- and soil-feeding termites. The recovery of Planctomycetes was expected, especially from the *Pirellulaceae* family, which also contains termite/cockroach clusters (*Mikaelyan et al., 2015b*). Interestingly, we found three MAGs from the P4 and P5 compartments of *C. ugandensis*, with one 16S rRNA gene sequence assigned to the Rs-B01 termite group, described in a previous study investigating the gut microbiota of the same termite species (*Köhler et al., 2008*). When such 16S rRNA gene information is available, it will allow the direct linkage between prokaryotic taxonomy and potential metabolisms.

## Other phyla

Nine members of the phylum Elusimicrobia were identified, including members of the class *Endomicrobia* (eight members) and *Elusimicrobia* (one member) (Fig. S13). These were found in all hindgut compartments and were restricted to humus- and soil-feeding termites. Currently, only three complete genomes of Elusimicrobia from insect guts are available: *Elusimicrobium minutum* from the gut of a humivorous scarab beetle larva (*Herlemann et al., 2009*), and *Endomicrobium proavitum* (*Zheng & Brune, 2015*) and *Candidatus* Endomicrobium trichonymphae (*Hongoh et al., 2008a*) from the termite gut. Here, we provided nine additional genomes from the guts of humus- and soil-feeding termites.
gut of termites (*Odelson & Breznak, 1983*); these bacteria utilize glucose generated by
cellulose degradation to form succinate and propionate (*Tokuda et al., 2014*).

*P. propionicigenes* might be involved in nitrogen fixation, as *nifH* transcripts assigned to this species are the most abundant in the gut of the wood-feeding beetle *Odontotaenius disjunctus* (*Ceja-Navarro et al., 2014).

## Saccharibacteria, Synergistetes and Planctomycetes

Fifteen MAGs of *Candidatus* Saccharibacteria (also known as candidate division TM7) were reconstructed from the P1, P3, and P4 compartments of wood-, litter-, humus-, and soil-feeding termites (Fig. S10). Most of them originated from humus feeders (11 MAGs), especially from the P3 compartment (eight out of these 11 MAGs). Similarly, six MAGs of Synergistetes, all belonging to the *Synergistaceae* family that contains a termite/cockroach cluster (*Mikaelyan et al., 2015b*), were recovered from the P3 and P4 compartments of humus- and soil-feeding termites (Fig. S11). Both Saccharibacteria and Synergistetes were recently highlighted as numerically important clades of the termite gut microbiota, with some OTUs being present in the gut of the majority of 94 termite species collected across four continents (*Bourguignon et al., 2018*). They were also contributing to the core microbiota of higher termites (Fig. 3). Genomic analysis of these MAGs should help in understanding the roles of these bacteria in termite gut and also provide clues for designing successful isolation media to study their physiology.

Twelve MAGs were assigned to the phylum Planctomycetes, including four to the class *Phycisphaerae* (and among them two classified as *Tepidisphaerales* CPla-3 termite group), one to class vadinHA49 and seven to the class *Planctomycetia* (all classified as *Pirellulaceae*) (Fig. S12). These MAGs were recovered from the P3, P4, and P5 compartments and were restricted to humus- and soil-feeding termites. The recovery of Planctomycetes was expected, especially from the *Pirellulaceae* family, which also contains termite/cockroach clusters (*Mikaelyan et al., 2015b*). Interestingly, we found three MAGs from the P4 and P5 compartments of *C. ugandensis*, with one 16S rRNA gene sequence assigned to the Rs-B01 termite group, described in a previous study investigating the gut microbiota of the same termite species (*Köhler et al., 2008*). When such 16S rRNA gene information is available, it will allow the direct linkage between prokaryotic taxonomy and potential metabolisms.

## Other phyla

Nine members of the phylum Elusimicrobia were identified, including members of the class *Endomicrobia* (eight members) and *Elusimicrobia* (one member) (Fig. S13). These were found in all hindgut compartments and were restricted to humus- and soil-feeding termites. Currently, only three complete genomes of Elusimicrobia from insect guts are available: *Elusimicrobium minutum* from the gut of a humivorous scarab beetle larva (*Herlemann et al., 2009*), and *Endomicrobium proavitum* (*Zheng & Brune, 2015*) and *Candidatus* Endomicrobium trichonymphae (*Hongoh et al., 2008a*) from the termite gut. Here, we provided nine additional genomes from the guts of humus- and soil-feeding termites.
The Chloroflexi phylum was represented by eight MAGs (all *Dehalococcoidia*), including seven belonging to the family *Dehalococcoidaceae* and one to the family *Dehalobiaceae*, found exclusively in the P3 and P4 compartments of humus- and soil-feeding termites (Fig. S10). Their function in termite gut remains unclear, but Chloroflexi, including *Dehalococcoidia*, were found to be enriched in lignin-amended tropical forest soil (DeAngelis et al., 2011), where oxygen concentration and redox potential are highly variable, as in the termite gut (Brune, 2014). Therefore, their ability to use oxygen as final electron acceptor and their potential involvement in lignin degradation could be investigated by comparative genomics.

Minor phyla were also present in our dataset. Two MAGs assigned as Cloacimonetes (Fig. S14) and five MAGs assigned as Kiritimatiellaeota were recovered from the P3 compartment of the two humus-feeding termites *N. taracua* and *T. hospes* (Fig. S15). Kiritimatiellaeota have been reported to be present in the digestive tract of various animals (Spring et al., 2016). The few clones obtained from termite guts, which had been tentatively classified as uncultured Verrucomicrobia, were mostly obtained with planctomycete-specific primers (Köhler et al., 2008), underscoring the potential biases in amplicon-based studies toward certain taxa. Similarly, one MAG of Microgenomates (also known as candidate division OP11), which probably represents a lineage of Pacebacteria that was discovered only in a recent amplicon-based analysis but occurs in the majority of termites investigated (Bourguignon et al., 2018), was reconstructed from the P3 compartment of *T. hospes* (Fig. S10).

Finally, four MAGs classified as Acidobacteria were reconstructed from either the P3 or P4 compartments of humus- and soil-feeding termites (Fig. S16), which show a moderately alkaline or circumneutral pH in comparison to the highly alkaline P1. Of these four genomes, two were assigned to the M1PL1-36 termite group within the family *Holophagaceae* and one to the *Acidobacteriaceae* family. Acidobacteria can represent a significant fraction of the termite gut microbiota, especially in wood-feeding termites (Hongoh et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2016; Bourguignon et al., 2018). In the gut of higher termites, this phylum is present in the core microbiota (Fig. 3). Moreover, *Holophagaceae* and *Acidobacteriaceae* have been reported to be present in moderately acidic lignocellulosic substrates, such as peatland soil (Schmidt et al., 2015) and decaying wood (Hervé et al., 2014). Genomic analysis should help us in identifying the metabolic potential of these MAGs for lignocellulose degradation.

## Phyla not represented by MAGs

Several bacterial phyla and one archaeal phylum containing prominent taxa that have been identified in previous 16S rRNA gene surveys of termite guts were not represented among the MAGs recovered in the present study. They include Cyanobacteria (class *Melainabacteria*; Utami et al., 2018), Lentisphaerae (Köhler et al., 2012; Sabree & Moran, 2014), Verrucomicrobia (Wertz et al., 2012), and Thaumarchaeota (Friedrich et al., 2001; Shi et al., 2015). Also intracellular symbionts of termite tissues, such as *Wolbachia* (Proteobacteria) (*Diouf et al., 2018b*) were not recovered. Possible reasons are a low relative abundance and/or a high phylogenetic diversity of the respective lineages.
The Chloroflexi phylum was represented by eight MAGs (all *Dehalococcoidia*), including seven belonging to the family *Dehalococcoidaceae* and one to the family *Dehalobiaceae*, found exclusively in the P3 and P4 compartments of humus- and soil-feeding termites (Fig. S10). Their function in termite gut remains unclear, but Chloroflexi, including *Dehalococcoidia*, were found to be enriched in lignin-amended tropical forest soil (DeAngelis et al., 2011), where oxygen concentration and redox potential are highly variable, as in the termite gut (Brune, 2014). Therefore, their ability to use oxygen as final electron acceptor and their potential involvement in lignin degradation could be investigated by comparative genomics.

Minor phyla were also present in our dataset. Two MAGs assigned as Cloacimonetes (Fig. S14) and five MAGs assigned as Kiritimatiellaeota were recovered from the P3 compartment of the two humus-feeding termites *N. taracua* and *T. hospes* (Fig. S15). Kiritimatiellaeota have been reported to be present in the digestive tract of various animals (Spring et al., 2016). The few clones obtained from termite guts, which had been tentatively classified as uncultured Verrucomicrobia, were mostly obtained with planctomycete-specific primers (Köhler et al., 2008), underscoring the potential biases in amplicon-based studies toward certain taxa. Similarly, one MAG of Microgenomates (also known as candidate division OP11), which probably represents a lineage of Pacebacteria that was discovered only in a recent amplicon-based analysis but occurs in the majority of termites investigated (Bourguignon et al., 2018), was reconstructed from the P3 compartment of *T. hospes* (Fig. S10).

Finally, four MAGs classified as Acidobacteria were reconstructed from either the P3 or P4 compartments of humus- and soil-feeding termites (Fig. S16), which show a moderately alkaline or circumneutral pH in comparison to the highly alkaline P1. Of these four genomes, two were assigned to the M1PL1-36 termite group within the family *Holophagaceae* and one to the *Acidobacteriaceae* family. Acidobacteria can represent a significant fraction of the termite gut microbiota, especially in wood-feeding termites (Hongoh et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2016; Bourguignon et al., 2018). In the gut of higher termites, this phylum is present in the core microbiota (Fig. 3). Moreover, *Holophagaceae* and *Acidobacteriaceae* have been reported to be present in moderately acidic lignocellulosic substrates, such as peatland soil (Schmidt et al., 2015) and decaying wood (Hervé et al., 2014). Genomic analysis should help us in identifying the metabolic potential of these MAGs for lignocellulose degradation.

## Phyla not represented by MAGs

Several bacterial phyla and one archaeal phylum containing prominent taxa that have been identified in previous 16S rRNA gene surveys of termite guts were not represented among the MAGs recovered in the present study. They include Cyanobacteria (class *Melainabacteria*; Utami et al., 2018), Lentisphaerae (Köhler et al., 2012; Sabree & Moran, 2014), Verrucomicrobia (Wertz et al., 2012), and Thaumarchaeota (Friedrich et al., 2001; Shi et al., 2015). Also intracellular symbionts of termite tissues, such as *Wolbachia* (Proteobacteria) (*Diouf et al., 2018b*) were not recovered. Possible reasons are a low relative abundance and/or a high phylogenetic diversity of the respective lineages.
Although larger metagenomes should improve the chances of their recovery in the medium- and high-quality bins, targeted single-cell based approaches have proven to be quite effective in recovering these genomes (Ohkuma et al., 2015; Yuki et al., 2015; Utami et al., 2019).

## CONCLUSIONS

The 589 MAGs reported here represent the largest genomic resource for arthropod-associated microorganisms available to date. We recovered representatives of almost all major prokaryotic lineages previously identified in 16S rRNA gene amplicon-based surveys of the gut of higher termites from the metagenomes. This provides the foundations for studying the metabolism of the prokaryotic gut microbiota of higher termites, including the key members involved in carbon and nitrogen biogeochemical cycles, and important clues that may help in cultivating representatives of these understudied clades.

## ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank all JGI staff, particularly their project manager Tijana Glavina del Rio, for their excellent service. The technical assistance of Katja Meuser is highly appreciated. We also thank the three anonymous reviewers and the editor for their helpful and constructive comments.

## ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DECLARATIONS

### Funding

This study was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft in the collaborative research center SFB 987 (Microbial Diversity in Environmental Signal Response) and by the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. The work conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, a DOE Office of Science User Facility, is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Petr Stiblik and Jan Šobotník were supported by grant "EVA4.0," No. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000803 financed by OP RDE. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

### Grant Disclosures

The following grant information was disclosed by the authors:
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft in the collaborative research center SFB 987 (Microbial Diversity in Environmental Signal Response).
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft.
U.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, a DOE Office of Science User Facility.
Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy: DE-AC02-05CH11231.
OP RDE "EVA4.0": CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000803.

### Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Although larger metagenomes should improve the chances of their recovery in the medium- and high-quality bins, targeted single-cell based approaches have proven to be quite effective in recovering these genomes (Ohkuma et al., 2015; Yuki et al., 2015; Utami et al., 2019).

## CONCLUSIONS

The 589 MAGs reported here represent the largest genomic resource for arthropod-associated microorganisms available to date. We recovered representatives of almost all major prokaryotic lineages previously identified in 16S rRNA gene amplicon-based surveys of the gut of higher termites from the metagenomes. This provides the foundations for studying the metabolism of the prokaryotic gut microbiota of higher termites, including the key members involved in carbon and nitrogen biogeochemical cycles, and important clues that may help in cultivating representatives of these understudied clades.

## ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank all JGI staff, particularly their project manager Tijana Glavina del Rio, for their excellent service. The technical assistance of Katja Meuser is highly appreciated. We also thank the three anonymous reviewers and the editor for their helpful and constructive comments.

## ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DECLARATIONS

### Funding

This study was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft in the collaborative research center SFB 987 (Microbial Diversity in Environmental Signal Response) and by the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. The work conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, a DOE Office of Science User Facility, is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Petr Stiblik and Jan Šobotník were supported by grant "EVA4.0," No. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000803 financed by OP RDE. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

### Grant Disclosures

The following grant information was disclosed by the authors:
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft in the collaborative research center SFB 987 (Microbial Diversity in Environmental Signal Response).
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft.
U.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, a DOE Office of Science User Facility.
Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy: DE-AC02-05CH11231.
OP RDE "EVA4.0": CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000803.

### Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
## Author Contributions

* Vincent Hervé conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Pengfei Liu performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Carsten Dietrich conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* David Sillam-Dussès performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Petr Stiblik performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Jan Šobotník performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Andreas Brune conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

## Field Study Permissions

The following information was supplied relating to field study approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

Field experiments were approved by the French Ministry for the Ecological and Solidarity Transition (UID: ABSCH-CNA-FR-240495-2) (TREL1902817S/118).

## Data Availability

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The data are available at BioProject: PRJNA560329. Genomes are available at: SRR9983610-SRR9984198. The MAGs are available at the NCBI's Assembly Database: WQRH00000000-WRNX00000000 (Table S2).

## Supplemental Information

Supplemental information for this article can be found online at http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8614#supplemental-information.

## REFERENCES

* **Abdul Rahman N, Parks DH, Vanwonterghem I, Morrison M, Tyson GW, Hugenholtz P. 2016.** A phylogenomic analysis of the bacterial phylum Fibrobacteres. *Frontiers in Microbiology* 6(149):5 DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01469.

* **Abdul Rahman N, Parks DH, Willner DL, Engelbrektson AL, Goffredi SK, Warnecke F, Scheffrahn RH, Hugenholtz P. 2015.** A molecular survey of Australian and North American termite genera indicates that vertical inheritance is the primary force shaping termite gut microbiomes. *Microbiome* 3:5 DOI 10.1186/s40168-015-0067-8.

* **Albertsen M, Hugenholtz P, Skarshewski A, Nielsen KL, Tyson GW, Nielsen PH. 2013.** Genome sequences of rare, uncultured bacteria obtained by differential coverage binning of multiple metagenomes. *Nature Biotechnology* 31(6):533-538 DOI 10.1038/nbt.2579.
## Author Contributions

* Vincent Hervé conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Pengfei Liu performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Carsten Dietrich conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* David Sillam-Dussès performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Petr Stiblik performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Jan Šobotník performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

* Andreas Brune conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

## Field Study Permissions

The following information was supplied relating to field study approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

Field experiments were approved by the French Ministry for the Ecological and Solidarity Transition (UID: ABSCH-CNA-FR-240495-2) (TREL1902817S/118).

## Data Availability

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The data are available at BioProject: PRJNA560329. Genomes are available at: SRR9983610-SRR9984198. The MAGs are available at the NCBI's Assembly Database: WQRH00000000-WRNX00000000 (Table S2).

## Supplemental Information

Supplemental information for this article can be found online at http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8614#supplemental-information.

## REFERENCES

* **Abdul Rahman N, Parks DH, Vanwonterghem I, Morrison M, Tyson GW, Hugenholtz P. 2016.** A phylogenomic analysis of the bacterial phylum Fibrobacteres. *Frontiers in Microbiology* 6(149):5 DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01469.

* **Abdul Rahman N, Parks DH, Willner DL, Engelbrektson AL, Goffredi SK, Warnecke F, Scheffrahn RH, Hugenholtz P. 2015.** A molecular survey of Australian and North American termite genera indicates that vertical inheritance is the primary force shaping termite gut microbiomes. *Microbiome* 3:5 DOI 10.1186/s40168-015-0067-8.

* **Albertsen M, Hugenholtz P, Skarshewski A, Nielsen KL, Tyson GW, Nielsen PH. 2013.** Genome sequences of rare, uncultured bacteria obtained by differential coverage binning of multiple metagenomes. *Nature Biotechnology* 31(6):533-538 DOI 10.1038/nbt.2579.
**Anisimova M, Gascuel O. 2006.** Approximate likelihood-ratio test for branches: a fast, accurate, and powerful alternative. *Systematic Biology* 55(4):539–552 DOI 10.1080/10635150600755453.

**Asnicar F, Weingart G, Tickle TL, Huttenhower C, Segata N. 2015.** Compact graphical representation of phylogenetic data and metadata with GraPhlAn. *PeerJ* 3:e1029 DOI 10.7717/peerj.1029.

**Bourguignon T, Lo N, Dietrich C, Šobotník J, Sidek S, Roisin Y, Brune A, Evans TA. 2018.** Rampant host switching shaped the termite gut microbiome. *Current Biology* 28(4):649–654.e2 DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2018.01.035.

**Bowers RM, Kyrpides NC, Stepanauskas R, Harmon-Smith M, Doud D, Reddy TBK, Schulz F, Jarett J, Rivers AR, Eloe-Fadrosh EA, Tringe SG, Ivanova NN, Copeland A, Clum A, Becraft ED, Malmstrom RR, Birren B, Podar M, Bork P, Weinstock GM, Garrity GM, Dodsworth JA, Yooseph S, Sutton G, Glöckner FO, Gilbert JA, Nelson WC, Hallam SJ, Jungbluth SP, Ettema TJG, Tighe S, Konstantinidis KT, Liu W-T, Baker BJ, Rattei T, Eisen JA, Hedlund B, McMahon KD, Fierer N, Knight R, Finn R, Cochrane G, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Tyson GW, Rinke C, Lapidus A, Meyer F, Yilmaz P, Parks DH, Murat Eren A, Schriml L, Banfield JF, Hugenholtz P, Woyke T. 2017. Minimum information about a single amplified genome (MISAG) and a metagenome-assembled genome (MIMAG) of bacteria and archaea. *Nature Biotechnology* 35:725–731 DOI 10.1038/nbt.3893.

**Brune A. 2014.** Symbiotic digestion of lignocellulose in termite guts. *Nature Reviews Microbiology* 12(3):168–180 DOI 10.1038/nrmicro3182.

**Brune A. 2019.** Methanogenesis in the digestive tracts of insects and other arthropods. In: Stams AJM, Sousa DZ, eds. *Biogenesis of Hydrocarbons, Handbook of Hydrocarbon and Lipid Microbiology*. Cham: Springer, 229–260 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-78108-2_13.

**Brune A, Dietrich C. 2015.** The gut microbiota of termites: digesting the diversity in the light of ecology and evolution. *Annual Review of Microbiology* 69(1):145–166 DOI 10.1146/annurev-micro-092412-155715.

**Bushnell B. 2014.** BBMap: a fast, accurate, splice-aware aligner. United States. Available at https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1241166.

**Capella-Gutierrez S, Silla-Martinez JM, Gabaldon T, Capella-Gutiérrez S, Silla-Martínez JM, Gabaldón T. 2009.** trimAl: a tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. *Bioinformatics* 25(15):1972–1973 DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp348.

**Ceja-Navarro JA, Nguyen NH, Karaoz U, Gross SR, Herman DJ, Andersen GL, Bruns TD, Pett-Ridge J, Blackwell M, Brodie EL. 2014.** Compartmentalized microbial composition, oxygen gradients and nitrogen fixation in the gut of *Odontotaenius disjunctus*. *ISME Journal* 8:6–18 DOI 10.1038/ismej.2013.134.

**Chaumeil P-A, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. 2019.** GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the Genome Taxonomy Database. Epub ahead of print 15 November 2019. *Bioinformatics* DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz848.

**Cragg SM, Beckham GT, Bruce NC, Bugg TD, Distel DL, Dupree P, Etxabe AG, Goodell BS, Jellison J, McGeehan JE, McQueen-Mason SJ, Schnorr K, Walton PH, Watts JE, Zimmer M. 2015.** Lignocellulose degradation mechanisms across the Tree of Life. *Current Opinion in Chemical Biology* 29:108–119 DOI 10.1016/j.cbpa.2015.10.018.

**Dahlsjö CAL, Parr CL, Malhi Y, Meir P, Chevarria OVC, Eggleton P. 2014.** Termites promote soil carbon and nitrogen depletion: results from an in situ macrofauna exclusion experiment, Peru. *Soil Biology and Biochemistry* 77:109–111 DOI 10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.05.033.
**Anisimova M, Gascuel O. 2006.** Approximate likelihood-ratio test for branches: a fast, accurate, and powerful alternative. *Systematic Biology* 55(4):539–552
DOI 10.1080/10635150600755453.

**Asnicar F, Weingart G, Tickle TL, Huttenhower C, Segata N. 2015.** Compact graphical representation of phylogenetic data and metadata with GraPhlAn. *PeerJ* 3:e1029
DOI 10.7717/peerj.1029.

**Bourguignon T, Lo N, Dietrich C, Šobotník J, Sidek S, Roisin Y, Brune A, Evans TA. 2018.** Rampant host switching shaped the termite gut microbiome. *Current Biology* 28(4):649–654.e2
DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2018.01.035.

**Bowers RM, Kyrpides NC, Stepanauskas R, Harmon-Smith M, Doud D, Reddy TBK, Schulz F, Jarett J, Rivers AR, Eloe-Fadrosh EA, Tringe SG, Ivanova NN, Copeland A, Clum A, Becraft ED, Malmstrom RR, Birren B, Podar M, Bork P, Weinstock GM, Garrity GM, Dodsworth JA, Yooseph S, Sutton G, Glöckner FO, Gilbert JA, Nelson WC, Hallam SJ, Jungbluth SP, Ettema TJG, Tighe S, Konstantinidis KT, Liu W-T, Baker BJ, Rattei T, Eisen JA, Hedlund B, McMahon KD, Fierer N, Knight R, Finn R, Cochrane G, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Tyson GW, Rinke C, Lapidus A, Meyer F, Yilmaz P, Parks DH, Murat Eren A, Schriml L, Banfield JF, Hugenholtz P, Woyke T. 2017. Minimum information about a single amplified genome (MISAG) and a metagenome-assembled genome (MIMAG) of bacteria and archaea. *Nature Biotechnology* 35:725–731 DOI 10.1038/nbt.3893.

**Brune A. 2014.** Symbiotic digestion of lignocellulose in termite guts. *Nature Reviews Microbiology* 12(3):168–180 DOI 10.1038/nrmicro3182.

**Brune A. 2019.** Methanogenesis in the digestive tracts of insects and other arthropods. In: Stams AJM, Sousa DZ, eds. *Biogenesis of Hydrocarbons, Handbook of Hydrocarbon and Lipid Microbiology*. Cham: Springer, 229–260 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-78108-2_13.

**Brune A, Dietrich C. 2015.** The gut microbiota of termites: digesting the diversity in the light of ecology and evolution. *Annual Review of Microbiology* 69(1):145–166
DOI 10.1146/annurev-micro-092412-155715.

**Bushnell B. 2014.** BBMap: a fast, accurate, splice-aware aligner. United States. Available at
https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1241166.

**Capella-Gutierrez S, Silla-Martinez JM, Gabaldon T, Capella-Gutiérrez S, Silla-Martínez JM, Gabaldón T. 2009.** trimAl: a tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. *Bioinformatics* 25(15):1972–1973 DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp348.

**Ceja-Navarro JA, Nguyen NH, Karaoz U, Gross SR, Herman DJ, Andersen GL, Bruns TD, Pett-Ridge J, Blackwell M, Brodie EL. 2014.** Compartmentalized microbial composition, oxygen gradients and nitrogen fixation in the gut of *Odontotaenius disjunctus*. *ISME Journal* 8:6–18
DOI 10.1038/ismej.2013.134.

**Chaumeil P-A, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. 2019.** GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the Genome Taxonomy Database. Epub ahead of print 15 November 2019. *Bioinformatics* DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz848.

**Cragg SM, Beckham GT, Bruce NC, Bugg TD, Distel DL, Dupree P, Etxabe AG, Goodell BS, Jellison J, McGeehan JE, McQueen-Mason SJ, Schnorr K, Walton PH, Watts JE, Zimmer M. 2015.** Lignocellulose degradation mechanisms across the Tree of Life. *Current Opinion in Chemical Biology* 29:108–119 DOI 10.1016/j.cbpa.2015.10.018.

**Dahlsjö CAL, Parr CL, Malhi Y, Meir P, Chevarria OVC, Eggleton P. 2014.** Termites promote soil carbon and nitrogen depletion: results from an in situ macrofauna exclusion experiment, Peru. *Soil Biology and Biochemistry* 77:109–111 DOI 10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.05.033.
DeAngelis KM, Allgaier M, Chavarria Y, Fortney JL, Hugenholtz P, Simmons B, Sublette K, Silver WL, Hazen TC. 2011. Characterization of trapped lignin-degrading microbes in tropical forest soil. PLOS ONE 6(4):e19306 DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0019306.

Dietrich C, Brune A. 2016. The complete mitogenomes of six higher termite species reconstructed from metagenomic datasets (*Cornitermes* sp., *Cubitermes ugandensis*, *Microcerotermes parvus*, *Nasutitermes corniger*, *Neocapritermes taracua*, and *Termes hospes*). Mitochondrial DNA 27(6):3903–3904 DOI 10.3109/19401736.2014.987257.

Dietrich C, Köhler T, Brune A. 2014. The cockroach origin of the termite gut microbiota: patterns in bacterial community structure reflect major evolutionary events. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 80(7):2261–2269 DOI 10.1128/AEM.04206-13.

Diouf M, Hervé V, Mora P, Robert A, Frechault S, Rouland-Lefèvre C, Miambi E. 2018a. Evidence from the gut microbiota of swarming alates of a vertical transmission of the bacterial symbionts in *Nasutitermes arborum* (Termitidae, Nasutitermitinae). *Antonie van Leeuwenhoek* 111:573–587 DOI 10.1007/s10482-017-0978-4.

Diouf M, Miambi E, Mora P, Frechault S, Robert A, Rouland-Lefèvre C, Hervé V. 2018b. Variations in the relative abundance of *Wolbachia* in the gut of *Nasutitermes arborum* across life stages and castes. *FEMS Microbiology Letters* 365(7):5 DOI 10.1093/femsle/fny046.

Donovan SE, Eggleton P, Bignell DE. 2001. Gut content analysis and a new feeding group classification of termites. *Ecological Entomology* 26(4):356–366 DOI 10.1046/j.1365-2311.2001.00342.x.

Friedrich MW, Schmitt-Wagner D, Lueders T, Brune A. 2001. Axial differences in community structure of Crenarchaeota and Euryarchaeota in the highly compartmentalized gut of the soil-feeding termite *Cubitermes orthognathus*. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 67(10):4880–4890 DOI 10.1128/AEM.67.10.4880-4890.2001.

Fujita A, Miura T, Matsumoto T. 2008. Differences in cellulose digestive systems among castes in two termite lineages. *Physiological Entomology* 33(1):73–82 DOI 10.1111/j.1365-3032.2007.00606.x.

Graber JR, Leadbetter JR, Breznak JA. 2004. Description of *Treponema azotonutricium* sp. nov. and *Treponema primitia* sp. nov., the first spirochetes isolated from termite guts. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 70(3):1315–1320 DOI 10.1128/AEM.70.3.1315-1320.2004.

Grech-Mora I, Fardeau M-L, Patel BKC, Ollivier B, Rimbault A, Prensier G, Garcia J-L, Garnier-Sillam E. 1996. Isolation and characterization of *Sporobacter termitidis* gen. nov., sp. nov., from the digestive tract of the wood-feeding termite *Nasutitermes lujae*. *International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology* 46:512–518 DOI 10.1099/00207713-46-2-512.

Griffiths HM, Ashton LA, Evans TA, Parr CL, Eggleton P. 2019. Termites can decompose more than half of deadwood in tropical rainforest. *Current Biology* 29(4):R118–R119 DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2019.01.012.

Guindon S, Dufayard JF, Lefort V, Anisimova M, Hordijk W, Gascuel O. 2010. New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. *Systematic Biology* 59(3):307–321 DOI 10.1093/sysbio/syq010.

Gupta RS, Mahmood S, Adeolu M. 2013. A phylogenomic and molecular signature based approach for characterization of the phylum Spirochaetes and its major clades: proposal for a taxonomic revision of the phylum. *Frontiers in Microbiology* 4:217 DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00217.

He S, Ivanova N, Kirton E, Allgaier M, Bergin C, Scheffrahn RH, Kyrpides NC, Warnecke F, Tringe SG, Hugenholtz P. 2013. Comparative metagenomic and metatranscriptomic analysis
DeAngelis KM, Allgaier M, Chavarria Y, Fortney JL, Hugenholtz P, Simmons B, Sublette K, Silver WL, Hazen TC. 2011. Characterization of trapped lignin-degrading microbes in tropical forest soil. PLOS ONE 6(4):e19306 DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0019306.

Dietrich C, Brune A. 2016. The complete mitogenomes of six higher termite species reconstructed from metagenomic datasets (*Cornitermes* sp., *Cubitermes ugandensis*, *Microcerotermes parvus*, *Nasutitermes corniger*, *Neocapritermes taracua*, and *Termes hospes*). Mitochondrial DNA 27(6):3903–3904 DOI 10.3109/19401736.2014.987257.

Dietrich C, Köhler T, Brune A. 2014. The cockroach origin of the termite gut microbiota: patterns in bacterial community structure reflect major evolutionary events. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 80(7):2261–2269 DOI 10.1128/AEM.04206-13.

Diouf M, Hervé V, Mora P, Robert A, Frechault S, Rouland-Lefèvre C, Miambi E. 2018a. Evidence from the gut microbiota of swarming alates of a vertical transmission of the bacterial symbionts in *Nasutitermes arborum* (Termitidae, Nasutitermitinae). *Antonie van Leeuwenhoek* 111:573–587 DOI 10.1007/s10482-017-0978-4.

Diouf M, Miambi E, Mora P, Frechault S, Robert A, Rouland-Lefèvre C, Hervé V. 2018b. Variations in the relative abundance of *Wolbachia* in the gut of *Nasutitermes arborum* across life stages and castes. *FEMS Microbiology Letters* 365(7):5 DOI 10.1093/femsle/fny046.

Donovan SE, Eggleton P, Bignell DE. 2001. Gut content analysis and a new feeding group classification of termites. *Ecological Entomology* 26(4):356–366 DOI 10.1046/j.1365-2311.2001.00342.x.

Friedrich MW, Schmitt-Wagner D, Lueders T, Brune A. 2001. Axial differences in community structure of Crenarchaeota and Euryarchaeota in the highly compartmentalized gut of the soil-feeding termite *Cubitermes orthognathus*. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 67(10):4880–4890 DOI 10.1128/AEM.67.10.4880-4890.2001.

Fujita A, Miura T, Matsumoto T. 2008. Differences in cellulose digestive systems among castes in two termite lineages. *Physiological Entomology* 33(1):73–82 DOI 10.1111/j.1365-3032.2007.00606.x.

Graber JR, Leadbetter JR, Breznak JA. 2004. Description of *Treponema azotonutricium* sp. nov. and *Treponema primitia* sp. nov., the first spirochetes isolated from termite guts. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 70(3):1315–1320 DOI 10.1128/AEM.70.3.1315-1320.2004.

Grech-Mora I, Fardeau M-L, Patel BKC, Ollivier B, Rimbault A, Prensier G, Garcia J-L, Garnier-Sillam E. 1996. Isolation and characterization of *Sporobacter termitidis* gen. nov., sp. nov., from the digestive tract of the wood-feeding termite *Nasutitermes lujae*. *International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology* 46:512–518 DOI 10.1099/00207713-46-2-512.

Griffiths HM, Ashton LA, Evans TA, Parr CL, Eggleton P. 2019. Termites can decompose more than half of deadwood in tropical rainforest. *Current Biology* 29(4):R118–R119 DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2019.01.012.

Guindon S, Dufayard JF, Lefort V, Anisimova M, Hordijk W, Gascuel O. 2010. New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. *Systematic Biology* 59(3):307–321 DOI 10.1093/sysbio/syq010.

Gupta RS, Mahmood S, Adeolu M. 2013. A phylogenomic and molecular signature based approach for characterization of the phylum Spirochaetes and its major clades: proposal for a taxonomic revision of the phylum. *Frontiers in Microbiology* 4:217 DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00217.

He S, Ivanova N, Kirton E, Allgaier M, Bergin C, Scheffrahn RH, Kyrpides NC, Warnecke F, Tringe SG, Hugenholtz P. 2013. Comparative metagenomic and metatranscriptomic analysis
of hindgut paunch microbiota in wood- and dung-feeding higher termites. *PLOS ONE* 8:e61126
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0061126.

Herlemann DPR, Geissinger O, Ikeda-Ohtsubo W, Kunin V, Sun H, Lapidus A, Hugenholtz P, Brune A. 2009. Genomic analysis of "Elusimicrobium minutum," the first cultivated representative of the phylum "Elusimicrobia" (formerly termite group 1). *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 75:2841-2849 DOI 10.1128/AEM.02698-08.

Hervé V, Brune A. 2017. The complete mitochondrial genomes of the higher termites *Labiotermes labralis* and *Embiratermes neotenicus* (Termitidae: Syntermitinae). *Mitochondrial DNA Part B* 2(1):109-110 DOI 10.1080/23802359.2017.1289349.

Hervé V, Le Roux X, Uroz S, Gelhaye E, Frey-Klett P. 2014. Diversity and structure of bacterial communities associated with *Phanerochaete chrysosporium* during wood decay. *Environmental Microbiology* 16(7):2238-2252 DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.12347.

Hongoh Y, Deevong P, Hattori S, Inoue T, Noda S, Noparatnaraporn N, Kudo T, Ohkuma M. 2006. Phylogenetic diversity, localization, and cell morphologies of members of the candidate phylum TG3 and a subphylum in the phylum Fibrobacteres, recently discovered bacterial groups dominant in termite guts. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 72:6780-6788 DOI 10.1128/AEM.00891-06.

Hongoh Y, Deevong P, Inoue T, Moriya S, Trakulnaleamsai S, Ohkuma M, Vongkaluang C, Noparatnaraporn N, Kudo T. 2005. Intra- and interspecific comparisons of bacterial diversity and community structure support coevolution of gut microbiota and termite host. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 71:6590-6599 DOI 10.1128/AEM.71.11.6590-6599.2005.

Hongoh Y, Sharma VK, Prakash T, Noda S, Taylor TD, Kudo T, Sakaki Y, Toyoda A, Hattori M, Ohkuma M. 2008a. Complete genome of the uncultured Termite Group 1 bacteria in a single host protist cell. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* 105:5555-5560 DOI 10.1073/pnas.0801389105.

Hongoh Y, Sharma VK, Prakash T, Noda S, Toh H, Taylor TD, Kudo T, Sakaki Y, Toyoda A, Hattori M, Ohkuma M. 2008b. Genome of an endosymbiont coupling N2 fixation to cellulolysis within protist cells in termite gut. *Science* 322:1108-1109 DOI 10.1126/science.1165578.

Hua Z-S, Wang Y-L, Evans PN, Qu Y-N, Goh KM, Rao Y-Z, Qi Y-L, Li Y-X, Huang M-J, Jiao J-Y, Chen Y-T, Mao Y-P, Shu W-S, Hozzein W, Hedlund BP, Tyson GW, Zhang T, Li W-J. 2019. Insights into the ecological roles and evolution of methyl-coenzyme M reductase-containing hot spring Archaea. *Nature Communications* 10:4574 DOI 10.1038/s41467-019-12574-y.

Kang DD, Li F, Kirton E, Thomas A, Egan R, An H, Wang Z. 2019. MetaBAT 2: an adaptive binning algorithm for robust and efficient genome reconstruction from metagenome assemblies. *PeerJ* 7(11):e7359 DOI 10.7717/peerj.7359.

Katoh K, Standley DM. 2013. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. *Molecular Biology and Evolution* 30(4):772-780 DOI 10.1093/molbev/mst010.

Köhler T, Dietrich C, Scheffrahn RH, Brune A. 2012. High-resolution analysis of gut environment and bacterial microbiota reveals functional compartmentation of the gut in wood-feeding higher termites (Nasutitermes spp.). *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 78(13):4691-4701 DOI 10.1128/AEM.00683-12.

Köhler T, Stingl U, Meuser K, Brune A. 2008. Novel lineages of Planctomycetes densely colonize the alkaline gut of soil-feeding termites (Cubitermes spp.). *Environmental Microbiology* 10(5):1260-1270 DOI 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2007.01540.x.
of hindgut paunch microbiota in wood- and dung-feeding higher termites. *PLOS ONE* 8:e61126
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0061126.

Herlemann DPR, Geissinger O, Ikeda-Ohtsubo W, Kunin V, Sun H, Lapidus A, Hugenholtz P, Brune A. 2009. Genomic analysis of "Elusimicrobium minutum," the first cultivated representative of the phylum "Elusimicrobia" (formerly termite group 1). *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 75:2841-2849 DOI 10.1128/AEM.02698-08.

Hervé V, Brune A. 2017. The complete mitochondrial genomes of the higher termites *Labiotermes labralis* and *Embiratermes neotenicus* (Termitidae: Syntermitinae). *Mitochondrial DNA Part B* 2(1):109-110 DOI 10.1080/23802359.2017.1289349.

Hervé V, Le Roux X, Uroz S, Gelhaye E, Frey-Klett P. 2014. Diversity and structure of bacterial communities associated with *Phanerochaete chrysosporium* during wood decay. *Environmental Microbiology* 16(7):2238-2252 DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.12347.

Hongoh Y, Deevong P, Hattori S, Inoue T, Noda S, Noparatnaraporn N, Kudo T, Ohkuma M. 2006. Phylogenetic diversity, localization, and cell morphologies of members of the candidate phylum TG3 and a subphylum in the phylum Fibrobacteres, recently discovered bacterial groups dominant in termite guts. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 72:6780-6788 DOI 10.1128/AEM.00891-06.

Hongoh Y, Deevong P, Inoue T, Moriya S, Trakulnaleamsai S, Ohkuma M, Vongkaluang C, Noparatnaraporn N, Kudo T. 2005. Intra- and interspecific comparisons of bacterial diversity and community structure support coevolution of gut microbiota and termite host. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 71:6590-6599 DOI 10.1128/AEM.71.11.6590-6599.2005.

Hongoh Y, Sharma VK, Prakash T, Noda S, Taylor TD, Kudo T, Sakaki Y, Toyoda A, Hattori M, Ohkuma M. 2008a. Complete genome of the uncultured Termite Group 1 bacteria in a single host protist cell. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* 105:5555-5560 DOI 10.1073/pnas.0801389105.

Hongoh Y, Sharma VK, Prakash T, Noda S, Toh H, Taylor TD, Kudo T, Sakaki Y, Toyoda A, Hattori M, Ohkuma M. 2008b. Genome of an endosymbiont coupling N2 fixation to cellulolysis within protist cells in termite gut. *Science* 322:1108-1109 DOI 10.1126/science.1165578.

Hua Z-S, Wang Y-L, Evans PN, Qu Y-N, Goh KM, Rao Y-Z, Qi Y-L, Li Y-X, Huang M-J, Jiao J-Y, Chen Y-T, Mao Y-P, Shu W-S, Hozzein W, Hedlund BP, Tyson GW, Zhang T, Li W-J. 2019. Insights into the ecological roles and evolution of methyl-coenzyme M reductase-containing hot spring Archaea. *Nature Communications* 10:4574 DOI 10.1038/s41467-019-12574-y.

Kang DD, Li F, Kirton E, Thomas A, Egan R, An H, Wang Z. 2019. MetaBAT 2: an adaptive binning algorithm for robust and efficient genome reconstruction from metagenome assemblies. *PeerJ* 7(11):e7359 DOI 10.7717/peerj.7359.

Katoh K, Standley DM. 2013. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. *Molecular Biology and Evolution* 30(4):772-780 DOI 10.1093/molbev/mst010.

Köhler T, Dietrich C, Scheffrahn RH, Brune A. 2012. High-resolution analysis of gut environment and bacterial microbiota reveals functional compartmentation of the gut in wood-feeding higher termites (Nasutitermes spp.). *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 78(13):4691-4701 DOI 10.1128/AEM.00683-12.

Köhler T, Stingl U, Meuser K, Brune A. 2008. Novel lineages of Planctomycetes densely colonize the alkaline gut of soil-feeding termites (Cubitermes spp.). *Environmental Microbiology* 10(5):1260-1270 DOI 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2007.01540.x.
**Krishna K, Grimaldi DA, Krishna V, Engel MS. 2013.** Treatise on the isoptera of the world. *Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History* **377**(7):2433-2705 DOI **10.1206/377.7**

**Kuhnigk T, Branke J, Krekeler D, Cypionka H, König H. 1996.** A feasible role of sulfate-reducing bacteria in the termite gut. *Systematic and Applied Microbiology* **19**(2):139-149 DOI **10.1016/S0723-2020(96)80039-7**

**Lampert N, Mikaelyan A, Brune A. 2019.** Diet is not the primary driver of bacterial community structure in the gut of litter-feeding cockroaches. *BMC Microbiology* **19**(1):238 DOI **10.1186/s12866-019-1601-9**

**Lazar CS, Baker BJ, Seitz K, Hyde AS, Dick GJ, Hinrichs K-U, Teske AP. 2016.** Genomic evidence for distinct carbon substrate preferences and ecological niches of Bathyarchaeota in estuarine sediments. *Environmental Microbiology* **18**(4):1200-1211 DOI **10.1111/1462-2920.13142**

**Le Roes-Hill M, Rohland J, Burton S. 2011.** Actinobacteria isolated from termite guts as a source of novel oxidative enzymes. *Antonie van Leeuwenhoek* **100**(4):589-605 DOI **10.1007/s10482-011-9614-x**

**Leadbetter JR, Schmidt TM, Graber JR, Breznak JA. 1999.** Acetogenesis from H₂ plus CO₂ by spirochetes from termite guts. *Science* **283**:686-689.

**Lefort V, Longueville J-E, Gascuel O. 2017.** SMS: smart model selection in PhyML. *Molecular Biology and Evolution* **6**(9):461-464 DOI **10.1093/molbev/msx149**

**Letunic I, Bork P. 2019.** Interactive tree of life (iTOL) v4: recent updates and new developments. *Nucleic Acids Research* **47**(W1):W256-W259 DOI **10.1093/nar/gkz239**

**Li H, Durbin R. 2009.** Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform. *Bioinformatics* **25**(14):1754-1760 DOI **10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324**

**Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, Fennell T, Ruan J, Homer N, Marth G, Abecasis G, Durbin R, 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup. 2009.** The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. *Bioinformatics* **25**(16):2078-2079 DOI **10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352**

**Lilburn TG, Schmidt TM, Breznak JA. 1999.** Phylogenetic diversity of termite gut spirochaetes. *Environmental Microbiology* **1**(4):331-345 DOI **10.1046/j.1462-2920.1999.00043.x**

**Liu G, Cornwell WK, Cao K, Hu Y, Van Logtestijn RSP, Yang S, Xie X, Zhang Y, Ye D, Pan X, Ye X, Huang Z, Dong M, Cornelissen JHC. 2015.** Termites amplify the effects of wood traits on decomposition rates among multiple bamboo and dicot woody species. *Journal of Ecology* **103**:1214-1223 DOI **10.1111/1365-2745.12427**

**Lombard V, Golaconda Ramulu H, Drula E, Coutinho PM, Henrissat B. 2014.** The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy) in 2013. *Nucleic Acids Research* **42**(D1):D490-D495 DOI **10.1093/nar/gkt1178**

**Ludwig W, Strunk O, Westram R, Richter L, Meier H, Yadhukumar, Buchner A, Lai T, Steppi S, Jobb G, Förster W, Brettske I, Gerber S, Ginhart AW, Gross O, Grumann S, Hermann S, Jost R, König A, Liss T, Lüssmann R, May M, Nonhoff B, Reichel B, Strehlow R, Stamatakis A, Stuckmann N, Vilbig A, Lenke M, Ludwig T, Bode A, Schleifer K-H. 2004.** ARB: a software environment for sequence data. *Nucleic Acids Research* **32**:1363-1371 DOI **10.1093/nar/gkh293**

**Markowitz VM, Chen I-MA, Palaniappan K, Chu K, Szeto E, Pillay M, Ratner A, Huang J, Woyke T, Huntemann M, Anderson I, Billis K, Varghese N, Mavromatis K, Pati A, Ivanova NN, Kyrpides NC. 2014.** IMG 4 version of the integrated microbial genomes comparative analysis system. *Nucleic Acids Research* **42**:D560-D567 DOI **10.1093/nar/gkt963**

**Marynowska M, Goux X, Sillam-Dussès D, Rouland-Lefèvre C, Roisin Y, Delfosse P, Calusinska M. 2017.** Optimization of a metatranscriptomic approach to study the
**Krishna K, Grimaldi DA, Krishna V, Engel MS. 2013.** Treatise on the isoptera of the world. *Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History* **377**(7):2433-2705 DOI **10.1206/377.7**

**Kuhnigk T, Branke J, Krekeler D, Cypionka H, König H. 1996.** A feasible role of sulfate-reducing bacteria in the termite gut. *Systematic and Applied Microbiology* **19**(2):139-149 DOI **10.1016/S0723-2020(96)80039-7**

**Lampert N, Mikaelyan A, Brune A. 2019.** Diet is not the primary driver of bacterial community structure in the gut of litter-feeding cockroaches. *BMC Microbiology* **19**(1):238 DOI **10.1186/s12866-019-1601-9**

**Lazar CS, Baker BJ, Seitz K, Hyde AS, Dick GJ, Hinrichs K-U, Teske AP. 2016.** Genomic evidence for distinct carbon substrate preferences and ecological niches of Bathyarchaeota in estuarine sediments. *Environmental Microbiology* **18**(4):1200-1211 DOI **10.1111/1462-2920.13142**

**Le Roes-Hill M, Rohland J, Burton S. 2011.** Actinobacteria isolated from termite guts as a source of novel oxidative enzymes. *Antonie van Leeuwenhoek* **100**(4):589-605 DOI **10.1007/s10482-011-9614-x**

**Leadbetter JR, Schmidt TM, Graber JR, Breznak JA. 1999.** Acetogenesis from H₂ plus CO₂ by spirochetes from termite guts. *Science* **283**:686-689.

**Lefort V, Longueville J-E, Gascuel O. 2017.** SMS: smart model selection in PhyML. *Molecular Biology and Evolution* **6**(9):461-464 DOI **10.1093/molbev/msx149**

**Letunic I, Bork P. 2019.** Interactive tree of life (iTOL) v4: recent updates and new developments. *Nucleic Acids Research* **47**(W1):W256-W259 DOI **10.1093/nar/gkz239**

**Li H, Durbin R. 2009.** Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform. *Bioinformatics* **25**(14):1754-1760 DOI **10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324**

**Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, Fennell T, Ruan J, Homer N, Marth G, Abecasis G, Durbin R, 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup. 2009.** The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. *Bioinformatics* **25**(16):2078-2079 DOI **10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352**

**Lilburn TG, Schmidt TM, Breznak JA. 1999.** Phylogenetic diversity of termite gut spirochaetes. *Environmental Microbiology* **1**(4):331-345 DOI **10.1046/j.1462-2920.1999.00043.x**

**Liu G, Cornwell WK, Cao K, Hu Y, Van Logtestijn RSP, Yang S, Xie X, Zhang Y, Ye D, Pan X, Ye X, Huang Z, Dong M, Cornelissen JHC. 2015.** Termites amplify the effects of wood traits on decomposition rates among multiple bamboo and dicot woody species. *Journal of Ecology* **103**:1214-1223 DOI **10.1111/1365-2745.12427**

**Lombard V, Golaconda Ramulu H, Drula E, Coutinho PM, Henrissat B. 2014.** The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy) in 2013. *Nucleic Acids Research* **42**(D1):D490-D495 DOI **10.1093/nar/gkt1178**

**Ludwig W, Strunk O, Westram R, Richter L, Meier H, Yadhukumar, Buchner A, Lai T, Steppi S, Jobb G, Förster W, Brettske I, Gerber S, Ginhart AW, Gross O, Grumann S, Hermann S, Jost R, König A, Liss T, Lüssmann R, May M, Nonhoff B, Reichel B, Strehlow R, Stamatakis A, Stuckmann N, Vilbig A, Lenke M, Ludwig T, Bode A, Schleifer K-H. 2004.** ARB: a software environment for sequence data. *Nucleic Acids Research* **32**:1363-1371 DOI **10.1093/nar/gkh293**

**Markowitz VM, Chen I-MA, Palaniappan K, Chu K, Szeto E, Pillay M, Ratner A, Huang J, Woyke T, Huntemann M, Anderson I, Billis K, Varghese N, Mavromatis K, Pati A, Ivanova NN, Kyrpides NC. 2014.** IMG 4 version of the integrated microbial genomes comparative analysis system. *Nucleic Acids Research* **42**:D560-D567 DOI **10.1093/nar/gkt963**

**Marynowska M, Goux X, Sillam-Dussès D, Rouland-Lefèvre C, Roisin Y, Delfosse P, Calusinska M. 2017.** Optimization of a metatranscriptomic approach to study the
lignocellulolytic potential of the higher termite gut microbiome. *BMC Genomics* **18**(1):681
DOI 10.1186/s12864-017-4076-9.

**Mikaelyan A, Dietrich C, Köhler T, Poulsen M, Sillam-Dussès D, Brune A. 2015a.** Diet is the primary determinant of bacterial community structure in the guts of higher termites. *Molecular Ecology* **24**(20):5284-5295 DOI 10.1111/mec.13376.

**Mikaelyan A, Köhler T, Lampert N, Rohland J, Boga H, Meuser K, Brune A. 2015b.** Classifying the bacterial gut microbiota of termites and cockroaches: a curated phylogenetic reference database (DictDb). *Systematic and Applied Microbiology* **38**(7):472-482 DOI 10.1016/j.syapm.2015.07.004.

**Mikaelyan A, Meuser K, Brune A. 2017.** Microenvironmental heterogeneity of gut compartments drives bacterial community structure in wood- and humus-feeding higher termites. *FEMS Microbiology Ecology* **93**(1):fiw210 DOI 10.1093/femsec/fiw210.

**Mikaelyan A, Strassert JFH, Tokuda G, Brune A. 2014.** The fibre-associated cellulolytic bacterial community in the hindgut of wood-feeding higher termites (Nasutitermes spp.). *Environmental Microbiology* **16**(9):2711-2722 DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.12425.

**Moreira EA, Alvarez TM, Persinoti GF, Paixão DAA, Menezes LR, Cairo JPF, Squina FM, Costa-Leonardo AM, Carrijo T, Arab A. 2018.** Microbial communities of the gut and nest of the humus- and litter-feeding termite *Procornitermes araujoi* (Syntermitinae). *Current Microbiology* **75**(12):1609-1618 DOI 10.1007/s00284-018-1567-0.

**Neumann AP, McCormick CA, Suen G. 2017.** Fibrobacter communities in the gastrointestinal tracts of diverse hindgut-fermenting herbivores are distinct from those of the rumen. *Environmental Microbiology* **19**(9):3768-3783 DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.13878.

**Neumann AP, Suen G. 2018.** The phylogenomic diversity of herbivore-associated *Fibrobacter* spp. is correlated to lignocellulose-degrading potential. *mSphere* **3**(6):e00593-18 DOI 10.1128/mSphere.00593-18.

**Odelson DA, Breznak JA. 1983.** Volatile fatty acid production by the hindgut microbiota of xylophagous termites. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* **45**:1602-1613.

**Ohkuma M, Iida T, Kudo T. 1999.** Phylogenetic relationships of symbiotic spirochetes in the gut of diverse termites. *FEMS Microbiology Letters* **181**:123-129.

**Ohkuma M, Noda S, Hattori S, Iida T, Yuki M, Starns D, Inoue J, Darby AC, Hongoh Y. 2015.** Acetogenesis from H₂ plus CO₂ and nitrogen fixation by an endosymbiotic spirochete of a termite-gut cellulolytic protist. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* **112**:10224-10230 DOI 10.1073/pnas.1423979112.

**Ohkuma M, Noda S, Kudo T. 1999.** Phylogenetic diversity of nitrogen fixation genes in the symbiotic microbial community in the gut of diverse termites. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* **65**:4926-4934.

**Ottesen EA, Leadbetter JR. 2011.** Formyltetrahydrofolate synthetase gene diversity in the guts of higher termites with different diets and lifestyles. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* **77**(10):3461-3467 DOI 10.1128/AEM.02657-10.

**Parks DH, Chuvochina M, Waite DW, Rinke C, Skarshewski A, Chaumeil P-A, Hugenholtz P. 2018.** A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life. *Nature Biotechnology* **36**(10):996-1004 DOI 10.1038/nbt.4229.

**Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. 2015.** CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. *Genome Research* **25**(7):1043-1055 DOI 10.1101/gr.186072.114.
lignocellulolytic potential of the higher termite gut microbiome. *BMC Genomics* **18**(1):681
DOI 10.1186/s12864-017-4076-9.

**Mikaelyan A, Dietrich C, Köhler T, Poulsen M, Sillam-Dussès D, Brune A. 2015a.** Diet is the primary determinant of bacterial community structure in the guts of higher termites. *Molecular Ecology* **24**(20):5284-5295 DOI 10.1111/mec.13376.

**Mikaelyan A, Köhler T, Lampert N, Rohland J, Boga H, Meuser K, Brune A. 2015b.** Classifying the bacterial gut microbiota of termites and cockroaches: a curated phylogenetic reference database (DictDb). *Systematic and Applied Microbiology* **38**(7):472-482 DOI 10.1016/j.syapm.2015.07.004.

**Mikaelyan A, Meuser K, Brune A. 2017.** Microenvironmental heterogeneity of gut compartments drives bacterial community structure in wood- and humus-feeding higher termites. *FEMS Microbiology Ecology* **93**(1):fiw210 DOI 10.1093/femsec/fiw210.

**Mikaelyan A, Strassert JFH, Tokuda G, Brune A. 2014.** The fibre-associated cellulolytic bacterial community in the hindgut of wood-feeding higher termites (Nasutitermes spp.). *Environmental Microbiology* **16**(9):2711-2722 DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.12425.

**Moreira EA, Alvarez TM, Persinoti GF, Paixão DAA, Menezes LR, Cairo JPF, Squina FM, Costa-Leonardo AM, Carrijo T, Arab A. 2018.** Microbial communities of the gut and nest of the humus- and litter-feeding termite *Procornitermes araujoi* (Syntermitinae). *Current Microbiology* **75**(12):1609-1618 DOI 10.1007/s00284-018-1567-0.

**Neumann AP, McCormick CA, Suen G. 2017.** Fibrobacter communities in the gastrointestinal tracts of diverse hindgut-fermenting herbivores are distinct from those of the rumen. *Environmental Microbiology* **19**(9):3768-3783 DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.13878.

**Neumann AP, Suen G. 2018.** The phylogenomic diversity of herbivore-associated *Fibrobacter* spp. is correlated to lignocellulose-degrading potential. *mSphere* **3**(6):e00593-18 DOI 10.1128/mSphere.00593-18.

**Odelson DA, Breznak JA. 1983.** Volatile fatty acid production by the hindgut microbiota of xylophagous termites. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* **45**:1602-1613.

**Ohkuma M, Iida T, Kudo T. 1999.** Phylogenetic relationships of symbiotic spirochetes in the gut of diverse termites. *FEMS Microbiology Letters* **181**:123-129.

**Ohkuma M, Noda S, Hattori S, Iida T, Yuki M, Starns D, Inoue J, Darby AC, Hongoh Y. 2015.** Acetogenesis from H₂ plus CO₂ and nitrogen fixation by an endosymbiotic spirochete of a termite-gut cellulolytic protist. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* **112**:10224-10230 DOI 10.1073/pnas.1423979112.

**Ohkuma M, Noda S, Kudo T. 1999.** Phylogenetic diversity of nitrogen fixation genes in the symbiotic microbial community in the gut of diverse termites. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* **65**:4926-4934.

**Ottesen EA, Leadbetter JR. 2011.** Formyltetrahydrofolate synthetase gene diversity in the guts of higher termites with different diets and lifestyles. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* **77**(10):3461-3467 DOI 10.1128/AEM.02657-10.

**Parks DH, Chuvochina M, Waite DW, Rinke C, Skarshewski A, Chaumeil P-A, Hugenholtz P. 2018.** A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life. *Nature Biotechnology* **36**(10):996-1004 DOI 10.1038/nbt.4229.

**Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. 2015.** CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. *Genome Research* **25**(7):1043-1055 DOI 10.1101/gr.186072.114.
Parks DH, Rinke C, Chuvochina M, Chaumeil P-A, Woodcroft BJ, Evans PN, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. 2017. Recovery of nearly 8,000 metagenome-assembled genomes substantially expands the tree of life. *Nature Microbiology* 2(11):1533–1542 DOI 10.1038/s41564-017-0012-7.

Paster BJ, Dewhirst FE, Cooke SM, Fussing V, Poulsen LK, Breznak JA. 1996. Phylogeny of not-yet-cultured spirochetes from termite guts. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 62:347–352.

Prosser JI. 2015. Dispersing misconceptions and identifying opportunities for the use of omics in soil microbial ecology. *Nature Reviews Microbiology* 13(7):439–446 DOI 10.1038/nrmicro3468.

Pruesse E, Peplies J, Glöckner FO. 2012. SINA: accurate high-throughput multiple sequence alignment of ribosomal RNA genes. *Bioinformatics* 28(14):1823–1829 DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts252.

Qiu YL, Kuang XZ, Shi XS, Yuan XZ, Guo RB. 2014. *Paludibacter jiangxiensis* sp. nov., a strictly anaerobic, propionate-producing bacterium isolated from rice paddy field. *Archives of Microbiology* 196(3):149–155 DOI 10.1007/s00203-013-0951-1.

Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, Peplies J, Glöckner FO. 2013. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. *Nucleic Acids Research* 41(D1):D590–D596 DOI 10.1093/nar/gks1219.

R Development Core Team. 2019. *R: A language and environment for statistical computing*. Vienna: The R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at http://www.R-project.org/.

Rossmassler K, Dietrich C, Thompson C, Mikaelyan A, Nonoh JO, Scheffrahn RH, Sillam-Dussès D, Brune A. 2015. Metagenomic analysis of the microbiota in the highly compartmented hindguts of six wood- or soil-feeding higher termites. *Microbiome* 3(1):56 DOI 10.1186/s40168-015-0118-1.

Sabree ZL, Moran NA. 2014. Host-specific assemblages typify gut microbial communities of related insect species. *SpringerPlus* 3(1):138 DOI 10.1186/2193-1801-3-138.

Schloss PD, Girard RA, Martin T, Edwards J, Thrash JC. 2016. Status of the archaeal and bacterial census: an update. *mBio* 7(3):e00201-16 DOI 10.1128/mBio.00201-16.

Schmidt O, Horn MA, Kolb S, Drake HL. 2015. Temperature impacts differentially on the methanogenic food web of cellulose-supplemented peatland soil. *Environmental Microbiology* 17(3):720–734 DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.12507.

Schulz F, Eloe-Fadrosh EA, Bowers RM, Jarett J, Nielsen T, Ivanova NN, Kyrpides NC, Woyke T. 2017. Towards a balanced view of the bacterial tree of life. *Microbiome* 5(1):140 DOI 10.1186/s40168-017-0360-9.

Sczyrba A, Hofmann P, Belmann P, Koslicki D, Janssen S, Dröge J, Gregor I, Majda S, Fiedler J, Dahms E, Bremges A, Fritz A, Garrido-Oter R, Jørgensen TS, Shapiro N, Blood PD, Gurevich A, Bai Y, Turaev D, DeMaere MZ, Chikhi R, Nagarajan N, Quince C, Meyer F, Balvočiūtė M, Hansen LH, Sørensen SJ, Chia BKH, Denis B, Froula JL, Wang Z, Egan R, Don Kang D, Cook JJ, Deltel C, Beckstette M, Lemaitre C, Peterlongo P, Rizk G, Lavenier D, Wu Y-W, Singer SW, Jain C, Strous M, Klingenberg H, Meinicke P, Barton MD, Lingner T, Lin H-H, Liao Y-C, Silva GGZ, Cuevas DA, Edwards RA, Saha S, Piro VC, Renard BY, Pop M, Klenk H-P, Göker M, Kyrpides NC, Woyke T, Vorholt JA, Schulze-Lefert P, Rubin EM, Darling AE, Rattei T, McHardy AC. 2017. Critical assessment of metagenome interpretation—a benchmark of metagenomics software. *Nature Methods* 14:1063–1071 DOI 10.1038/nmeth.4458.

Shi Y, Huang Z, Han S, Fan S, Yang H. 2015. Phylogenetic diversity of Archaea in the intestinal tract of termites from different lineages. *Journal of Basic Microbiology* 55(8):1021–1028 DOI 10.1002/jobm.201400678.
Parks DH, Rinke C, Chuvochina M, Chaumeil P-A, Woodcroft BJ, Evans PN, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. 2017. Recovery of nearly 8,000 metagenome-assembled genomes substantially expands the tree of life. *Nature Microbiology* 2(11):1533–1542 DOI 10.1038/s41564-017-0012-7.

Paster BJ, Dewhirst FE, Cooke SM, Fussing V, Poulsen LK, Breznak JA. 1996. Phylogeny of not-yet-cultured spirochetes from termite guts. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 62:347–352.

Prosser JI. 2015. Dispersing misconceptions and identifying opportunities for the use of omics in soil microbial ecology. *Nature Reviews Microbiology* 13(7):439–446 DOI 10.1038/nrmicro3468.

Pruesse E, Peplies J, Glöckner FO. 2012. SINA: accurate high-throughput multiple sequence alignment of ribosomal RNA genes. *Bioinformatics* 28(14):1823–1829 DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts252.

Qiu YL, Kuang XZ, Shi XS, Yuan XZ, Guo RB. 2014. *Paludibacter jiangxiensis* sp. nov., a strictly anaerobic, propionate-producing bacterium isolated from rice paddy field. *Archives of Microbiology* 196(3):149–155 DOI 10.1007/s00203-013-0951-1.

Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, Peplies J, Glöckner FO. 2013. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. *Nucleic Acids Research* 41(D1):D590–D596 DOI 10.1093/nar/gks1219.

R Development Core Team. 2019. *R: A language and environment for statistical computing*. Vienna: The R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at http://www.R-project.org/.

Rossmassler K, Dietrich C, Thompson C, Mikaelyan A, Nonoh JO, Scheffrahn RH, Sillam-Dussès D, Brune A. 2015. Metagenomic analysis of the microbiota in the highly compartmented hindguts of six wood- or soil-feeding higher termites. *Microbiome* 3(1):56 DOI 10.1186/s40168-015-0118-1.

Sabree ZL, Moran NA. 2014. Host-specific assemblages typify gut microbial communities of related insect species. *SpringerPlus* 3(1):138 DOI 10.1186/2193-1801-3-138.

Schloss PD, Girard RA, Martin T, Edwards J, Thrash JC. 2016. Status of the archaeal and bacterial census: an update. *mBio* 7(3):e00201-16 DOI 10.1128/mBio.00201-16.

Schmidt O, Horn MA, Kolb S, Drake HL. 2015. Temperature impacts differentially on the methanogenic food web of cellulose-supplemented peatland soil. *Environmental Microbiology* 17(3):720–734 DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.12507.

Schulz F, Eloe-Fadrosh EA, Bowers RM, Jarett J, Nielsen T, Ivanova NN, Kyrpides NC, Woyke T. 2017. Towards a balanced view of the bacterial tree of life. *Microbiome* 5(1):140 DOI 10.1186/s40168-017-0360-9.

Sczyrba A, Hofmann P, Belmann P, Koslicki D, Janssen S, Dröge J, Gregor I, Majda S, Fiedler J, Dahms E, Bremges A, Fritz A, Garrido-Oter R, Jørgensen TS, Shapiro N, Blood PD, Gurevich A, Bai Y, Turaev D, DeMaere MZ, Chikhi R, Nagarajan N, Quince C, Meyer F, Balvočiūtė M, Hansen LH, Sørensen SJ, Chia BKH, Denis B, Froula JL, Wang Z, Egan R, Don Kang D, Cook JJ, Deltel C, Beckstette M, Lemaitre C, Peterlongo P, Rizk G, Lavenier D, Wu Y-W, Singer SW, Jain C, Strous M, Klingenberg H, Meinicke P, Barton MD, Lingner T, Lin H-H, Liao Y-C, Silva GGZ, Cuevas DA, Edwards RA, Saha S, Piro VC, Renard BY, Pop M, Klenk H-P, Göker M, Kyrpides NC, Woyke T, Vorholt JA, Schulze-Lefert P, Rubin EM, Darling AE, Rattei T, McHardy AC. 2017. Critical assessment of metagenome interpretation—a benchmark of metagenomics software. *Nature Methods* 14:1063–1071 DOI 10.1038/nmeth.4458.

Shi Y, Huang Z, Han S, Fan S, Yang H. 2015. Phylogenetic diversity of Archaea in the intestinal tract of termites from different lineages. *Journal of Basic Microbiology* 55(8):1021–1028 DOI 10.1002/jobm.201400678.
Söllinger A, Tveit AT, Poulsen M, Noel SJ, Bengtsson M, Bernhardt J, Frydendahl Hellwing AL, Lund P, Riedel K, Schleper C, Højberg O, Urich T. 2018. Holistic assessment of rumen microbiome dynamics through quantitative metatranscriptomics reveals multifunctional redundancy during key steps of anaerobic feed degradation. *mSystems* 3:e00038-18
DOI 10.1128/mSystems.00038-18.

Sorokin DY, Rakitin AL, Gumerov VM, Beletsky AV, Sinninghe Damsté JS, Mardanov AV, Ravin NV. 2016. Phenotypic and genomic properties of *Chitinispirillum alkaliphilum* gen. nov., sp. nov., a haloalkaliphilic anaerobic chitinolytic bacterium representing a novel class in the phylum Fibrobacteres. *Frontiers in Microbiology* 7:407 DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00407.

Spring S, Bunk B, Spröer C, Schumann P, Rohde M, Tindall BJ, Klenk H-P. 2016. Characterization of the first cultured representative of Verrucomicrobia subdivision 5 indicates the proposal of a novel phylum. *ISME Journal* 10(12):2801-2816 DOI 10.1038/ismej.2016.84.

Stewart RD, Auffret MD, Warr A, Wiser AH, Press MO, Langford KW, Liachko I, Snelling TJ, Dewhurst RJ, Walker AW, Roehe R, Watson M. 2018. Assembly of 913 microbial genomes from metagenomic sequencing of the cow rumen. *Nature Communications* 9:870 DOI 10.1038/s41467-018-03317-6.

Sujada N, Sungthong R, Lumyong S. 2014. Termite nests as an abundant source of cultivable Actinobacteria for biotechnological purposes. *Microbes and Environments* 29(2):211-219 DOI 10.1264/jsme2.ME13183.

Svartström O, Alneberg J, Terrapon N, Lombard V, De Bruijn I, Malmsten J, Dalin A-M, El Muller E, Shah P, Wilmes P, Henrissat B, Aspeborg H, Andersson AF. 2017. Ninety-nine de novo assembled genomes from the moose (*Alces alces*) rumen microbiome provide new insights into microbial plant biomass degradation. *ISME Journal* 11:2538-2551 DOI 10.1038/ismej.2017.108.

Tokuda G, Lo N, Watanabe H, Arakawa G, Matsumoto T, Noda H. 2004. Major alteration of the expression site of endogenous cellulases in members of an apical termite lineage. *Molecular Ecology* 13(10):3219-3228 DOI 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02276.x.

Tokuda G, Mikaelyan A, Fukui C, Matsuura Y, Watanabe H, Fujishima M, Brune A. 2018. Fiber-associated spirochetes are major agents of hemicellulose degradation in the hindgut of wood-feeding higher termites. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* 115:E11996-E12004 DOI 10.1073/pnas.1810550115.

Tokuda G, Tsuboi Y, Kihara K, Saitou S, Moriya S, Lo N, Kikuchi J. 2014. Metabolomic profiling of ¹³C-labelled cellulose digestion in a lower termite: insights into gut symbiont function. *Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences* 281:20140990 DOI 10.1098/rspb.2014.0990.

Ueki A, Akasaka H, Suzuki D, Ueki K. 2006. *Paludibacter propionicigenes* gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel strictly anaerobic, Gram-negative, propionate-producing bacterium isolated from plant residue in irrigated rice-field soil in Japan. *International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology* 56:39-44 DOI 10.1099/ijs.0.63896-0.

Utami YD, Kuwahara H, Igai K, Murakami T, Sugaya K, Morikawa T, Nagura Y, Yuki M, Deevong P, Inoue T, Kihara K, Lo N, Yamada A, Ohkuma M, Hongoh Y. 2019. Genome analyses of uncultured TG2/ZB3 bacteria in 'Margulisbacteria' specifically attached to ectosymbiotic spirochetes of protists in the termite gut. *ISME Journal* 13:455-467 DOI 10.1038/s41396-018-0297-4.

Utami YD, Kuwahara H, Murakami T, Morikawa T, Sugaya K, Kihara K, Yuki M, Lo N, Deevong P, Hasin S, Boonriam W, Inoue T, Yamada A, Ohkuma M, Hongoh Y. 2018. Phylogenetic diversity and single-cell genome analysis of Melainabacteria, a non-photosynthetic
Söllinger A, Tveit AT, Poulsen M, Noel SJ, Bengtsson M, Bernhardt J, Frydendahl Hellwing AL, Lund P, Riedel K, Schleper C, Højberg O, Urich T. 2018. Holistic assessment of rumen microbiome dynamics through quantitative metatranscriptomics reveals multifunctional redundancy during key steps of anaerobic feed degradation. *mSystems* 3:e00038-18
DOI 10.1128/mSystems.00038-18.

Sorokin DY, Rakitin AL, Gumerov VM, Beletsky AV, Sinninghe Damsté JS, Mardanov AV, Ravin NV. 2016. Phenotypic and genomic properties of *Chitinispirillum alkaliphilum* gen. nov., sp. nov., a haloalkaliphilic anaerobic chitinolytic bacterium representing a novel class in the phylum Fibrobacteres. *Frontiers in Microbiology* 7:407 DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00407.

Spring S, Bunk B, Spröer C, Schumann P, Rohde M, Tindall BJ, Klenk H-P. 2016. Characterization of the first cultured representative of Verrucomicrobia subdivision 5 indicates the proposal of a novel phylum. *ISME Journal* 10(12):2801–2816 DOI 10.1038/ismej.2016.84.

Stewart RD, Auffret MD, Warr A, Wiser AH, Press MO, Langford KW, Liachko I, Snelling TJ, Dewhurst RJ, Walker AW, Roehe R, Watson M. 2018. Assembly of 913 microbial genomes from metagenomic sequencing of the cow rumen. *Nature Communications* 9:870 DOI 10.1038/s41467-018-03317-6.

Sujada N, Sungthong R, Lumyong S. 2014. Termite nests as an abundant source of cultivable Actinobacteria for biotechnological purposes. *Microbes and Environments* 29(2):211–219 DOI 10.1264/jsme2.ME13183.

Svartström O, Alneberg J, Terrapon N, Lombard V, De Bruijn I, Malmsten J, Dalin A-M, El Muller E, Shah P, Wilmes P, Henrissat B, Aspeborg H, Andersson AF. 2017. Ninety-nine de novo assembled genomes from the moose (*Alces alces*) rumen microbiome provide new insights into microbial plant biomass degradation. *ISME Journal* 11:2538–2551 DOI 10.1038/ismej.2017.108.

Tokuda G, Lo N, Watanabe H, Arakawa G, Matsumoto T, Noda H. 2004. Major alteration of the expression site of endogenous cellulases in members of an apical termite lineage. *Molecular Ecology* 13(10):3219–3228 DOI 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02276.x.

Tokuda G, Mikaelyan A, Fukui C, Matsuura Y, Watanabe H, Fujishima M, Brune A. 2018. Fiber-associated spirochetes are major agents of hemicellulose degradation in the hindgut of wood-feeding higher termites. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* 115:E11996–E12004 DOI 10.1073/pnas.1810550115.

Tokuda G, Tsuboi Y, Kihara K, Saitou S, Moriya S, Lo N, Kikuchi J. 2014. Metabolomic profiling of ¹³C-labelled cellulose digestion in a lower termite: insights into gut symbiont function. *Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences* 281:20140990 DOI 10.1098/rspb.2014.0990.

Ueki A, Akasaka H, Suzuki D, Ueki K. 2006. *Paludibacter propionicigenes* gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel strictly anaerobic, Gram-negative, propionate-producing bacterium isolated from plant residue in irrigated rice-field soil in Japan. *International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology* 56:39–44 DOI 10.1099/ijs.0.63896-0.

Utami YD, Kuwahara H, Igai K, Murakami T, Sugaya K, Morikawa T, Nagura Y, Yuki M, Deevong P, Inoue T, Kihara K, Lo N, Yamada A, Ohkuma M, Hongoh Y. 2019. Genome analyses of uncultured TG2/ZB3 bacteria in 'Margulisbacteria' specifically attached to ectosymbiotic spirochetes of protists in the termite gut. *ISME Journal* 13:455–467 DOI 10.1038/s41396-018-0297-4.

Utami YD, Kuwahara H, Murakami T, Morikawa T, Sugaya K, Kihara K, Yuki M, Lo N, Deevong P, Hasin S, Boonriam W, Inoue T, Yamada A, Ohkuma M, Hongoh Y. 2018. Phylogenetic diversity and single-cell genome analysis of Melainabacteria, a non-photosynthetic
cyanobacterial group, in the termite gut. *Microbes and Environments* 33:50-57
DOI 10.1264/jsme2.ME17137.

**Wang Y, Su L, Huang S, Bo C, Yang S, Li Y, Wang F, Xie H, Xu J, Song A. 2016.** Diversity and resilience of the wood-feeding higher termite *Mironasutitermes shangchengensis* gut microbiota in response to temporal and diet variations. *Ecology and Evolution* 6:8235-8242
DOI 10.1002/ece3.2497.

**Wertz JT, Kim E, Breznak JA, Schmidt TM, Rodrigues JLM. 2012.** Genomic and physiological characterization of the Verrucomicrobia isolate *Diplosphaera colitermitum* gen. nov., sp. nov., reveals microaerophily and nitrogen fixation genes. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 78(5):1544-1555 DOI 10.1128/AEM.06466-11.

**Wickham H. 2016.** ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4.

**Woyke T, Doud DFR, Schulz F. 2017.** The trajectory of microbial single-cell sequencing. *Nature Methods* 14(11):1045-1054 DOI 10.1038/nmeth.4469.

**Yamada A, Inoue T, Wiwatwitaya D, Ohkuma M, Kudo T, Abe T, Sugimoto A. 2005.** Carbon mineralization by termites in tropical forests, with emphasis on fungus combs. *Ecological Research* 20:453-460.

**Yuki M, Kuwahara H, Shintani M, Izawa K, Sato T, Starns D, Hongoh Y, Ohkuma M. 2015.** Dominant ectosymbiotic bacteria of cellulolytic protists in the termite gut also have the potential to digest lignocellulose. *Environmental Microbiology* 17:4942-4953
DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.12945.

**Yuki M, Sakamoto M, Nishimura Y, Ohkuma M. 2018.** *Lactococcus reticulitermitis* sp. nov., isolated from the gut of the subterranean termite *Reticulitermes speratus*. *International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology* 68(2):596-601 DOI 10.1099/ijsem.0.002549.

**Zheng H, Brune A. 2015.** Complete genome sequence of *Endomicrobium proavitum*, a free-living relative of the intracellular symbionts of termite gut flagellates (phylum *Elusimicrobia*).
*Genome Announcements* 3(4):e00679-15 DOI 10.1128/genomeA.00679-15.

**Zhou Z, Pan J, Wang F, Gu J-D, Li M. 2018.** Bathyarchaeota: globally distributed metabolic generalists in anoxic environments. *FEMS Microbiology Reviews* 42(5):639-655
DOI 10.1093/femsre/fuy023.
cyanobacterial group, in the termite gut. *Microbes and Environments* 33:50-57
DOI 10.1264/jsme2.ME17137.

**Wang Y, Su L, Huang S, Bo C, Yang S, Li Y, Wang F, Xie H, Xu J, Song A. 2016.** Diversity and resilience of the wood-feeding higher termite *Mironasutitermes shangchengensis* gut microbiota in response to temporal and diet variations. *Ecology and Evolution* 6:8235-8242
DOI 10.1002/ece3.2497.

**Wertz JT, Kim E, Breznak JA, Schmidt TM, Rodrigues JLM. 2012.** Genomic and physiological characterization of the Verrucomicrobia isolate *Diplosphaera colitermitum* gen. nov., sp. nov., reveals microaerophily and nitrogen fixation genes. *Applied and Environmental Microbiology* 78(5):1544-1555 DOI 10.1128/AEM.06466-11.

**Wickham H. 2016.** ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4.

**Woyke T, Doud DFR, Schulz F. 2017.** The trajectory of microbial single-cell sequencing. *Nature Methods* 14(11):1045-1054 DOI 10.1038/nmeth.4469.

**Yamada A, Inoue T, Wiwatwitaya D, Ohkuma M, Kudo T, Abe T, Sugimoto A. 2005.** Carbon mineralization by termites in tropical forests, with emphasis on fungus combs. *Ecological Research* 20:453-460.

**Yuki M, Kuwahara H, Shintani M, Izawa K, Sato T, Starns D, Hongoh Y, Ohkuma M. 2015.** Dominant ectosymbiotic bacteria of cellulolytic protists in the termite gut also have the potential to digest lignocellulose. *Environmental Microbiology* 17:4942-4953
DOI 10.1111/1462-2920.12945.

**Yuki M, Sakamoto M, Nishimura Y, Ohkuma M. 2018.** *Lactococcus reticulitermitis* sp. nov., isolated from the gut of the subterranean termite *Reticulitermes speratus*. *International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology* 68(2):596-601 DOI 10.1099/ijsem.0.002549.

**Zheng H, Brune A. 2015.** Complete genome sequence of *Endomicrobium proavitum*, a free-living relative of the intracellular symbionts of termite gut flagellates (phylum *Elusimicrobia*).
*Genome Announcements* 3(4):e00679-15 DOI 10.1128/genomeA.00679-15.

**Zhou Z, Pan J, Wang F, Gu J-D, Li M. 2018.** Bathyarchaeota: globally distributed metabolic generalists in anoxic environments. *FEMS Microbiology Reviews* 42(5):639-655
DOI 10.1093/femsre/fuy023.