Bacterial phyla
phyla or divisions of the domain Bacteria
Bacterial phyla constitute the major lineages of the domain Bacteria. While the exact definition of a bacterial phylum is debated, a popular definition is that a bacterial phylum is a monophyletic lineage of bacteria whose 16S rRNA genes share a pairwise sequence identity of ~75% or less with those of the members of other bacterial phyla.
It has been estimated that ~1,300 bacterial phyla exist. As of May 2020, 41 bacterial phyla are formally accepted by the LPSN, 89 bacterial phyla are recognized on the Silva database, dozens more have been proposed, and hundreds likely remain to be discovered. As of 2017, approximately 72% of widely recognized bacterial phyla were candidate phyla (i.e. have no cultured representatives).
The rank of phylum has been included in the rules of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes, using the ending –ota for phylum names that must be based on the name of a genus as its nomenclatural type.
List of bacterial phyla
The following is a list of bacterial phyla that have been validly published as of December 2023.
The following is a list of candidate phyla that have not been cultured.
Supergroups
Despite the unclear branching order for most bacterial phyla, several groups of phyla consistently cluster together and are referred to as supergroups or superphyla.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Bacterial phyla” is phyla or divisions of the domain Bacteria. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Bacterial, phyla and divisions, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “phyla or divisions of the domain Bacteria” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2376866. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2020, 2017 and 2023.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Bacterial phyla”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Bacterial phyla primary sources, Bacterial phyla archive and Bacterial research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Bacterial phyla”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Bacterial phyla” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.