Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, August 2002, p. 3737-3743, Vol. 68, No. 8
0099-2240/02/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/AEM.68.8.3737-3743.2002
Copyright © 2002, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Deepak Bhatnagar,2 Thomas E. Cleveland,2 and Yasuji Koyama1
Research and Development Division, Kikkoman Corporation, 399 Noda, Noda-City 278-0037, Japan,1 Southern Regional Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, New Orleans, Louisiana 701242
Received 13 July 2001/ Accepted 3 January 2002
|
|
|---|
aflR strain of A. parasiticus, derived from a nitrate-nonutilizing, versicolorin A (VERA)-accumulating strain. The A. parasiticus aflR gene (aflRp) transformants produced VERA, but the aflRs transformants did not. Even when aflRs was placed under the control of the amylase gene (amyB) promoter of Aspergillus oryzae, the amy(p)::aflRs transformants did not produce VERA. A chimeric construct containing the aflRs promoter plus the aflRs N- and aflRp C-terminal coding regions could restore VERA production, but a construct containing the aflRp promoter plus the aflRp N- and aflRs C-terminal coding regions could not. These results show that the A. sojae aflR promoter is functional in A. parasiticus and that the HAHA motif does not affect the function of the resulting hybrid AflR. We conclude that the lack of aflatoxin production by A. sojae can be attributed, at least partially, to the premature termination defect in aflRs, which deletes the C-terminal transcription activation domain that is critical for the expression of aflatoxin biosynthetic genes. |
|
|---|
Neither A. sojae nor A. oryzae is known to produce aflatoxins (28), but homologues of several aflatoxin biosynthetic genes have been found in them (1, 12, 17). These genes apparently are not transcribed (16, 20, 27). The molecular mechanisms that prevent production of aflatoxins by A. oryzae isolates have been examined only recently. Kusumoto et al. (15) found that several strains of A. oryzae (groups 2 and 3) have partial deletions in the aflatoxin gene cluster. However, other A. oryzae strains (group 1) with intact aflatoxin gene clusters also were identified. Thus, the molecular mechanisms responsible for nontoxigenicity in A. oryzae appear to be diverse. Several studies have suggested that A. sojae isolates do not produce aflatoxins because of a defect in the aflatoxin pathway regulatory gene homologue, aflR (27). Most recently, Matsushima et al. (19) showed that A. sojae aflR (aflRs) does not elevate the production of aflatoxin precursors in a strain of A. parasiticus but that strains carrying an additional copy of A. parasiticus aflR (aflRp) do produce increased levels of these precursors.
The A. parasiticus aflR gene encodes AflR, a GAL4-type, zinc cluster transcriptional factor of 444 amino acids. AflR and its counterparts in A. flavus and A. nidulans are required for transactivation of the genes located in the aflatoxin and sterigmatocytin gene clusters (3, 4, 8, 21, 30, 32). The A. sojae aflR gene contains a 6-bp duplication and a substitution at position 1145 that results in a pretermination stop codon, TGA. The predicted A. sojae AflR thus has a distinct HAHA motif and is 62 amino acids shorter than the functional A. parasiticus AflR (19, 27).
In the present study, we constructed an A. parasiticus strain whose aflR gene was deleted. We used this strain to determine whether intact A. sojae aflR, the A. sojae aflR coding region fused to the strong inducible promoter of an amylase gene of A. oryzae, and A. parasiticus aflR containing the corresponding aflR carboxy-terminal coding region of A. sojae could complement the aflR deletion.
|
|
|---|
aflR, was used to study aflRs functionality. Potato dextrose agar (PDA) and potato dextrose broth (PDB), which permit aflatoxin production, were purchased from Difco (Detroit, Mich.). PDB supplemented with maltose (1% [wt/vol]) was used for the induction of the A. oryzae amylase gene promoter in the aflR overexpression experiments.
Construction of the aflR disruption vector.
We constructed aflR disruption vector pXHSE (Fig. 1). The 6.7-kb niaD-containing HindIII-XbaI fragment of pXN1 was blunt ended with T4 DNA polymerase, ligated to pACH, pretreated with SmaI and EcoRV, blunt ended again, and dephosphorylated to produce pXHSE. The niaD-selectable marker in pXHSE replaced a large segment of the A. parasiticus aflR coding region corresponding to amino acids 7 to 444 of AflR.
![]() View larger version (29K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Construction of the aflR disruption vector pHXSE. The aflR disruption vector pXHSE was constructed by ligating a 2.8-kb SacI-HindIII fragment of pHX1 containing A. parasiticus aflR (3) into the corresponding sites in pUC18 to generate pACH. A 6.7-kb XbaI fragment of pSL82 (10) was subcloned into the XbaI site of a pUC18 derivative from which the HindIII site had been removed. Then, the HindIII site of a 6.7-kb XbaI fragment in the niaD-niiA intergenic region (2) was eliminated by partial digestion with HindIII and self-ligation, yielding pXN1, which contained only one HindIII site. The 6.7-kb niaD-containing HindIII-XbaI fragment of pXN1 was blunt ended with T4 DNA polymerase, ligated to pACH, pretreated with SmaI and EcoRV, blunt ended, and dephosphorylated to yield pXHSE. EV, EcoRV; H, HindIII; S, SalI; Sm, SmaI; Sp, SphI; X, XbaI.
|
![]() View larger version (34K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Strategy and analysis of disruption of aflR of A. parasiticus. (A) Schematic representation of disruption of aflR in A. parasiticus. At the top is shown the replacement position of the aflR disruption plasmid pHXSE. The bottom of the figure shows the corresponding locus of aflR in A. parasiticus. Arrows show positions of oligonucleotide primers used for confirmation of aflR disruption. (B) Analysis of strains transformed with the aflR disruption plasmid. Insertion of niaD into aflR was confirmed by PCR with the primers fasU7819 and niaDL (lanes 1 and 2), aflR74 and niaU4454 (lanes 3 and 4), and fasU7819 and aflR74 (lane 5 and 6). Templates for PCR were prepared from CS10-N2 aflR (lanes 1, 3, and 5) and CS10-N2 (lanes 2, 4, and 6).
|
Quantitation of aflR gene expression by real-time PCR.
The real-time PCR was performed in a two-step RT-PCR procedure with oligo(dT) as the extension primer. The first-strand cDNA was generated by RT-PCR with the SYBR Green RT-PCR kit (PE Biosystems [P/N 4306225], Foster City, Calif.). The thermal cycling parameters for the RT reactions are incubation at 25°C for 10 min, reverse transcription at 48°C for 30 min, and reverse transcriptase inactivation at 95°C for 5 min. Sample cDNAs were used in three serial dilutions: 1 µl straight, followed by 10e and 100-fold dilutions. The primer pair of A. parasiticus ß-actin gene was used as a positive control for normalization. No template control (NTC) was used as the negative control. The aflR primer pair used was the forward primer 5'-TCCGCCATCTTTTCTCACCA-3' and the reverse primer 5'-CCGAATTCCGAATCGACTGTTA-3'. The ß-actin primers were as follows: forward, 5'-CCGACCGTATGCAGAAGAA-3'; reverse, 5'-ACTGCCCTTGCTCCCTCTTCCATGAA-3'. The aflR primers used in the real-time PCR experiment were designed to not amplify the transcript of second copy aflR. Real-time PCR was performed by using the GeneAmp 5700 Sequence Detection System (PE Biosystems). The thermal cycling parameters consisted of an initial heating at 95°C for 10 min, denaturing at 95°C for 15 s, and annealing and extension at 60°C for 1 min, with an amplification of 40 cycles. The relative quantitation values of aflR transcripts were obtained by using the comparative Ct method (
Ct) as described elsewhere (Relative Quantitation of Gene Expression [User Bulletin No. 2]; PE Biosystems) (22).
Northern blot analysis.
A total of 5 µg of total RNA was fractionated in a 0.4 M formaldehyde-1.2% agarose gel and transferred to a GeneScreen Plus membrane (DuPont NEN Research Products, Boston, Mass.). The membrane was probed with aflatoxin gene DNA probes prepared with a DIG High Prime DNA Labeling and Detection Kit (Roche, Indianapolis, Ind.).
Vectors for aflR genetic complementation.
Vectors containing the A. parasiticus pyrG-selectable marker and the complete aflR genes of A. parasiticus and A. sojae were constructed for genetic complementation experiments. A 2.8-kb BamHI-SalI fragment from pBZ5, which contains the A. parasiticus pyrG gene (23), was cloned into pUC18 to give pPG28. The 2.6-kb HindIII-SphI fragment of pACH containing A. parasiticus aflR and the corresponding 2.6-kb HindIII-SphI fragment of pARH7 containing A. sojae aflR (19) were ligated to the HindIII-SphI-digested pPG28; the resulting constructs were designated pGPR80 and pGSR80, respectively (Fig. 3).
![]() View larger version (29K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Vectors for introducing aflR into A. parasiticus. pGPR80 and pGSR80 contain an aflR fragment from A. parasiticus and A. sojae, respectively. B, BamHI; EV, EcoRV; H, HindIII; S, SalI; Sm, SmaI; Sp, SphI.
|
Chimeric vectors for determining the region responsible for the defect in A. sojae aflR.
The 1.9-kb BglII-HindIII fragment containing the carboxyl-terminal coding region (amino acids 164 to 444) of aflRp in pGPR80 was swapped with the corresponding region of aflRs in pGSR80 to give two chimeric constructs, pNSCP1 and pNPCS2, respectively (Fig. 4). Regions around the BglII site in each vector were sequenced and confirmed.
![]() View larger version (18K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. Construction of chimera aflR between A. sojae and A. parasiticus. aflRs and aflRp were swapped at the BglII site. pNSCP1 consisted of the aflRs promoter, AflRs N-terminal domain, and AflRp C-terminal domain. pNPCS2 consisted of the aflRp promoter, AflRp N-terminal domain, and AflRs C-terminal domain.
|
|
|
|---|
aflR, was used in the subsequent genetic complementation experiments.
Complementation of A. parasiticus CS10
aflR with intact aflR of A. sojae and A. parasiticus.
To determine whether A. sojae aflR (aflRs) could complement the genetic defect of A. parasiticus aflR (aflRp), we transformed pGSR80 or pGPR80 (Fig. 3) into A. parasiticus CS10-N2
aflR. Of the 12 aflRs (pGSR80) transformants examined, none produced VERA on the PDA plates, whereas 8 of 15 aflRp (pGPR80) transformants produced VERA (Table 1).
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Introduction of A. sojae aflR into an A. parasiticus aflR-disrupted strain
|
aflR and its aflRs transformant.
aflR, its aflRs transformant S8, and CS10-N2, which has a functional aflRp. This process was successful because only processed size transcripts of the A. parasiticus ß-tubulin gene (Fig. 5H) were amplified from the first-strand cDNA. If ß-tubulin gene transcripts were processed, primers ßI6F/R and ßE26F/R yielded 346- and 382-bp fragments, respectively, but if left unprocessed they yielded 462- and 691-bp fragments. Moreover, no PCR fragment was obtained from the DNase-treated total RNA. Thus, the template RNA was not contaminated by carryover genomic DNA. The processed sizes of the aflJ transcripts were amplified from cDNA of CS10-N2, CS10-N2
aflR, and CS10-N2aflRs-S8 (Fig. 5A and D). On the other hand, only the unprocessed size of the nor1 transcript was recovered from CS10-N2
aflR and CS10-N2aflRs-S8 (Fig. 5B and E). The omtA transcripts were detected at low levels in CS10-N2 aflRs-S8 (Fig. 5C) but not at all in CS10-N2
aflR (Fig. 5F). RT-PCR analysis detected aflR gene transcripts in both CS10-N2
aflR and CS10-N2 aflRs-S8 that had aflRs integrated at the pyrG locus (Fig. 5G). However, the levels of aflatoxin gene transcripts expressed in CS10-N2
aflR and the afiRs transformant were not detectable by conventional Northern blot analysis (data not shown).
![]() View larger version (46K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. Profile of aflatoxin gene transcripts of CS10 aflR and its aflRs transformant detected by RT-PCR. (A to F) Lane g, genomic DNA of CS10-N2 (control); lane c, cDNA of CS10-N2 (control); lane s, cDNA of CS10-N2 aflRs-S8 (pGSR80); lane d, cDNA of CS10-N2 aflR. (A and D) aflJ unprocessed (expected size of fragment, 441 bp), aflJ processed (380 bp). (B and E) nor1 unprocessed (362 bp) and nor1 processed (299 bp). (C and F) omtA unprocessed (42 0bp) and omtA processed (380 bp). (G) aflR (532 bp). (H) ß-Tubulin gene (control). The processed sizes of the transcripts by primers ß-I6F/R and ß-E26F/R are 346 and 382 bp, respectively. Lane 1, ß-I6F/R, CS10-N2 aflR; lane 2, ß-I6F/R, CS10-N2 aflRs-S8; lane 3, ß-E26F/R, CS10-N2 aflR; lane 4, ß-E26F/R, CS10-N2 aflRs-S8.
|
aflR contains a partially duplicated aflatoxin gene cluster (26). To avoid the detection of transcript from the second copy aflR, we used PCR primers that did not amplify the transcript from the second copy aflR. The data from each sample treatment were normalized against that for the ß-actin positive control. The experimental data are accurate with minimum errors, as demonstrated both by the positive control (ß-actin) and the NTC and by the dissociation curve. Due to the disruption of the aflR gene in the CS10N2
aflR mutant, no aflR transcription was detected. The reaction threshold of the
aflR strain was at ca. 33 cycles, i.e., approximately the same as for the NTC. The level of transcription of aflR in the nondisrupted strain (CS10N2) is about two-thirds (100 versus 147%) the level of that for the A. parasiticus aflR-complemented strain (CS10N2 aflR p-P8) (Table 2). The A. sojae aflR in the A. parasiticus background is expressed well enough to more than half of the level of the nondisrupted strain. |
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Relative expression of Aspergillus sojae aflR to A. parasiticus aflR
|
aflR.
aflR, we constructed pGAmP and pGAmS, in which the aflRp and aflRs coding regions, respectively, were placed under the control of the A. oryzae amylase gene promoter. We chose 20 colonies each of pGAmP and pGAmS transformants at random and transferred them onto PDA plates with or without 1% maltose, which is required for the induction of the amylase gene promoter. Half of the pGAmP (aflRp) transformants activated aflatoxin biosynthetic genes, as judged by VERA production on PDA. VERA production by the transformants was increased by the addition of maltose to the PDA. None of the pGAmS (aflRs) transformants produced VERA on either medium. Promoter function of pGAmS was confirmed by using a chimera vector, exchanging the 1.9-kb BglII-HindIII fragment containing the carboxyl-terminal region of aflRs in pGAmS for that of aflRs in pGAmP. About half of the transformant with the chimera vector produced VERA on PDA (data not shown).
Effect of the aflRs promoter, the HAHA motif, and truncation of the carboxy-terminal 62 amino acids on the function of A. sojae AflR.
There are three differences in the aflR genes of A. sojae and A. parasiticus. One difference is a nucleotide substitution of G for A at position -132 in the aflR promoter (1). There also are two differences between the predicted AflR proteins of A. sojae and A. parasiticus: a duplication of His-Ala and a nonsense mutation give change in the coding region of aflRs, resulting in an AflR protein in A. sojae that is 62 amino acids shorter than the protein from A. parasiticus (27). To examine the effect of these differences on the functions of aflRs and AflRs, we constructed two chimeras (Fig. 4). pNSCP1 consisted of the aflRs promoter and encoded the AflRs N-terminal moiety plus the AflRp C-terminal moiety. pNPCS2 consisted of the aflRp promoter and encoded the AflRp N-terminal moiety and the AflRs C-terminal moiety. Forty percent of the CS10-N2
aflR transformants transformed with pNSCP1 showed transactivation of the aflatoxin biosynthetic genes, based on VERA production. However, pNPCS2 could not complement the aflR mutation of CS10-N2
aflR.
|
|
|---|
The C-terminal domain of active AflR from A. parasiticus or A. flavus is the transcription-activating domain of this protein (5). The AflR homologue from A. sojae (AflRs), if expressed, lacks this domain (27) and has little or no transcriptional activation activity (19). Introduction of an extra copy of aflR in an A. parasiticus wild-type strain increased aflatoxin production (3), but the introduction of aflRs had no discernible effect on the level of aflatoxin production.
It is difficult to separate weak activity attributable to AflRs from background expression from the original copy of aflRp. Moreover, the complete functional loss of AflRp in the host strain while keeping other aflR-related signal transduction intact is important for detecting weak transcriptional activity and for sensitive monitoring of AflR activity. In addition, aflR-deficient strains obtained by UV mutagenesis were not suitable for this experiment because this form of mutagenesis could cause other lesions that could adversely affect the outcome. To avoid background activity from wild-type aflRp, we created aflR-disrupted strains by homologous recombination and examined AflRs functionality in an A. parasiticus
aflR strain that allowed us to monitor AflR activity.
We constructed an aflR-disrupted strain from an A. parasiticus VERA-accumulating mutant (24) to assess the function of aflRs in vivo. VERA is a precursor of aflatoxins; the mutant does not produce any aflatoxin (33). The parent strain, CS10-N2, accumulated VERA, and colonies turned bright yellow on PDA plates. Inactivation of genes in the aflatoxin biosynthetic pathway by the aflR disruption prevented the creation of VERA, and colonies of the
aflR strains remained white. Thus, the
aflR strains were suitable for aflR complementation tests because of their distinguishable phenotype.
A. parasiticus strains have two copies of aflR (18, 26, 27). One is located outside the aflatoxin gene cluster and is inactivated by functional loss resulting from amino acid substitution or insufficient transcription (J. W. Cary, K. C. Ehrlich, M. S. Wright, P.-K. Chang, and D. Bhatnagar, unpublished data). Disruption of the active copy, which is located in the aflatoxin gene cluster, eliminates detectable AflR function from cells. Using PCR, we confirmed that the aflR disruption mutation occurred at the active aflR locus in the aflatoxin gene cluster by double-crossover recombination (Fig. 2A). Real-time PCR did not detect transcript from the first copy aflR of CS10-N2
aflR (Table 2). So the transcript detected by the RT-PCR experiment was derived from the second copy of aflR in CS10-N2
aflR (Fig. 5G). aflJ, nor1, and omtA were also detected by RT-PCR in both CS10-N2
aflR and aflRs transformants, but these strains did not produce VERA, and conventional Northern blot analysis could not detect the transcription of nor1, ver1, or omtA (data not shown). These results suggest that RT-PCR detected the basal-level transcription (25) of genes not activated by functional AflR.
The aflR disruption could be complemented, and these strains could produce VERA after integration of aflRp (pGPR80) at the pyrG locus (data not shown) but not by the integration of aflRs (pGSR80) in the same locus. The transcription level of aflRs in strain CS10N2 aflRs-S8, which has aflRs in its pyrG site, is more than half of that of CS10N2 (Table 2). These results suggest that the failure of aflRs transformants to produce VERA was not caused by gene silencing mediated by a positional effect.
DNA sequence information suggests that aflRs will produce a truncated protein (AflRs) compared to AflRp. Using our chimeric constructs we showed that the aflRs promoter is functional, that the HAHA motif in the AflRs N-terminal domain is probably not involved in the functional loss of AflRs activity, and that the loss of the 62-amino-acid sequence from the C terminus of AflRs is probably responsible for the observed loss of activity.
Matsushima et al. (20) reported that without the expression of aflRs there was no production of aflatoxin in A. sojae in spite of the presence of the toxin pathway genes in this fungus. However, we detected transcription of aflRs, i.e., that the level is equivalent to that of aflRp (CS10-N2), in an A. parasiticus background. The transcription of aflR and other aflatoxin-related genes (aflJ, nor1, and omtA) was also detected by RT-PCR in the A. parasiticus
aflR strain. Thus, the lack of a functional AflRs is insufficient to explain the complete repression of aflRs and other aflatoxin-related genes in A. sojae (20, 27). Kusumoto et al. (14, 16) reported that they did not detect several aflatoxin gene transcripts from A. oryzae, whose aflR does not have nonsense mutations as does aflRs (16, 27). Therefore, we conclude that the nonsense mutation in AflR is a reason for the nonproduction of aflatoxin in A. sojae but that other factors might also be involved. Factors involved in the complete repression of aflRs in A. sojae are still unknown.
It is generally accepted that A. sojae and A. oryzae never produce aflatoxins under any culture conditions (28). We conclude that the lack of aflatoxin production by A. sojae can be attributed, at least in part, to the premature termination defect in aflRs, which deletes the C-terminal transcription activation domain that is critical for the expression of aflatoxin biosynthetic genes. The lack of A. sojae aflR expression in the A. sojae genetic background coupled with its relatively high expression in an A. parasiticus genetic background indicates that an additional defect(s), in addition to the premature termination of the aflR transcript, may occur in the industrial strain A. sojae and reduce even further the potential ability of these strains to synthesize aflatoxins.
Present address: Graduate School of Agricultural Sciences, Tohoku University, 1-1 Amamiya, Tsutsumi-dori, Aoba-ku, Sendai 981-8555, Japan. ![]()
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»