Editing Mycoplasma genitalium (section)

==History==
''Mycoplasma genitalium'' was originally isolated in 1980 from [[urethra]]l [[Biological specimen|specimen]]s of two male patients with [[non-gonococcal urethritis]] in the genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinic at [[St Mary's Hospital, London|St Mary's Hospital, Paddington]], London.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Taylor-Robinson |first1=D. |last2=Horner |first2=P. J. |title=The role of ''Mycoplasma genitalium'' in non-gonococcal urethritis |journal=Sexually Transmitted Infections |year=2001 |volume=77 |issue=4 |pages=229–231 |doi=10.1136/sti.77.4.229 |pmid=11463919 |pmc=1744340}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Daley |first1=G. |last2=Russell |first2=D. |last3=Tabrizi |first3=S. |last4=McBride |first4=J. |title=''Mycoplasma genitalium'': a review |journal=International Journal of STD & AIDS |year=2014 |volume=25 |issue=7 |pages=475–487 |doi=10.1177/0956462413515196 |pmid=24517928 |s2cid=206582691}}</ref> It was reported in 1981 by a team led by Joseph G. Tully.<ref name=tully81/> Under [[electron microscopy]], it appears as a flask-shaped cell with a narrow terminal portion that is crucial for its attachment to the host cell surfaces.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Taylor-Robinson |first1=D |title=The Harrison Lecture. The history and role of ''Mycoplasma genitalium'' in sexually transmitted diseases |journal=Genitourinary Medicine |year=1995 |volume=71 |issue=1 |pages=1–8 |pmid=7750946 |pmc=1195360 |doi=10.1136/sti.71.1.1}}</ref> The bacterial cell is slightly elongated, somewhat like a vase, and measures 0.6–0.7 μm in length, 0.3–0.4 μm at the broadest region, and 0.06–0.08 μm at the tip. The base is broad while the tip is stretched into a narrow neck, which terminates with a cap. The terminal region has a specialised region called nap, which is absent in other mycoplasmas. [[Serological testing|Serological tests]] indicated that the bacterium was not related to known species of ''Mycoplasma''. The comparison of genome sequences with other urinogenital bacteria, such as ''[[Mycoplasma hominis|M. hominis]]'' and ''[[Ureaplasma parvum]]'', revealed that ''M. genitalium'' is significantly different, especially in the [[Metabolic pathways|energy-generating pathways]], although it shared a core genome of ~250 protein-encoding genes.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Blanchard |first1=Alain |last2=Bébéar |first2=Cécile |title=The evolution of ''Mycoplasma genitalium'' |journal=Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences |year=2011 |volume=1230 |issue=1 |pages=E61–E64 |doi=10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06418.x |pmid=22417108 |bibcode=2011NYASA1230E..61B |s2cid=32057598}}</ref>

In 2018, Gupta et al. proposed to change the name of ''Mycoplasma genitalium'' to ''Mycoplasmoides genitalium'' on phylogenetic grounds, reflecting the existing knowledge that ''M. genitalium'' is not very related to other ''Mycoplasma''.<ref name=":5" /> The change became [[correct name]] under the [[International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes]] (ICNP, "Code") with Validation List 184, published by the [[International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes|ICSP]] ("Committee").<ref name="ipsn_gen">{{cite web |title=Genus: Mycoplasmoides |url=https://lpsn.dsmz.de/genus/mycoplasmoides |website=lpsn.dsmz.de |language=en}}</ref> Mycoplasmaologists working in the field generally oppose this renaming. In 2019, they published an opinion paper arguing that even though the phylogenetic methods are valid, Gupta's renaming scheme causes too many changes, which is impractical and confusing.<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal |last1=Balish |first1=Mitchell |last2=Bertaccini |first2=Assunta |last3=Blanchard |first3=Alain |last4=Brown |first4=Daniel |last5=Browning |first5=Glenn |last6=Chalker |first6=Victoria |last7=Frey |first7=Joachim |last8=Gasparich |first8=Gail |last9=Hoelzle |first9=Ludwig |last10=Knight |first10=Tom |last11=Knox |first11=Christine |last12=Kuo |first12=Chih-Horng |last13=Manso-Silván |first13=Lucia |last14=May |first14=Meghan |last15=Pollack |first15=J. Dennis |date=2019 |title=Recommended rejection of the names Malacoplasma gen. nov., Mesomycoplasma gen. nov., Metamycoplasma gen. nov., Metamycoplasmataceae fam. nov., Mycoplasmoidaceae fam. nov., Mycoplasmoidales ord. nov., Mycoplasmoides gen. nov., Mycoplasmopsis gen. nov. [Gupta, Sawnani, Adeolu, Alnajar and Oren 2018] and all proposed species comb. nov. placed therein |journal=International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology |volume=69 |issue=11 |pages=3650–3653 |doi=10.1099/ijsem.0.003632 |pmid=31385780 |issn=1466-5034|doi-access=free |hdl=11585/720151 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> They cite some essential principles of the Code, such as "no unnecessary new names", "aim at stability of names", and "avoid or reject the use of names which may cause error or confusion".<ref name=":6" /> However, the 2019 argument for preserving old names was rejected by the Committee in Opinion 122 of 2022,<ref name=Arahal>{{cite journal |last1=Arahal |first1=David R. |last2=Busse |first2=Hans-Jürgen |last3=Bull |first3=Carolee T. |last4=Christensen |first4=Henrik |last5=Chuvochina |first5=Maria |last6=Dedysh |first6=Svetlana N. |last7=Fournier |first7=Pierre-Edouard |last8=Konstantinidis |first8=Konstantinos T. |last9=Parker |first9=Charles T. |last10=Rossello-Mora |first10=Ramon |last11=Ventosa |first11=Antonio |last12=Göker |first12=Markus |title=Judicial Opinions 112–122 |journal=International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology |date=10 August 2022 |volume=72 |issue=8 |doi=10.1099/ijsem.0.005481 |pmid=35947640 |s2cid=251470203 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362626093}}</ref> where it was ruled that the argument incorrectly cited the Code.<ref name="ipsn_gen"/> The Opinion emphasizes that use of an older [[validly published name]] remains acceptable under the Code.<ref name=Arahal/>