Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, May 2006, p. 3130-3146, Vol. 72, No. 5
0099-2240/06/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/AEM.72.5.3130-3146.2006
Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Alimentary Pharmabiotic Centre and Department of Microbiology, Bioscience Institute, National University of Ireland, Western Road, Cork, Ireland,1 Department of Genetics, Anthropology and Evolution, University of Parma, Parma, Italy,2 Genomic Sciences Program and Southeast Dairy Foods Research Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina,3 Chr. Hansen, Milwaukee, Wisconsin,4 Department of Nutrition and Health, Cognis, Dusseldorf, Germany,5 Department of Food Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin,6 Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, Utah7
Received 21 December 2005/ Accepted 16 February 2006
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
The increasing number of available bacterial genome sequences has contributed to the understanding of prophage genome distribution and evolution. The mosaic pattern and localized diversity of many different prophage genomes are obvious from comparative analyses of prophage genome content and organization, as well as similarities of orthologous gene products encoded by these elements (26).
Prophage-like elements and prophage remnants have been identified in almost all bacterial genomes sequenced so far (7), suggesting that this group of mobile elements is widespread in bacteria and may be considered to represent a useful tool in order to investigate bacterial evolution. Prophages contribute a substantial share of the mobile DNA of their bacterial hosts and seem to influence the short-term evolution of pathogenic bacteria. In fact, a large part of bacterial DNA is acquired horizontally by transformation, conjugation, or transduction. In this context, phages are the most efficient gene transfer particles developed during evolution and thus may be considered as important vectors for the lateral transfer of DNA between bacterial strains (8).
Recently, the identification of prophage-like elements in genomes of bifidobacteria, which were generally known to be infected by bacteriophages, indicated that prophage sequences could be used to investigate genome bacterial evolution (42).
Sequence data from Lactobacillus phages are available for different species of lactobacilli (Lactobacillus gasseri, L. johnsonii, L. plantarum, Lactobacillus casei, and Lactobacillus delbrueckii). Interestingly, no significant DNA sequence similarity was detected among Lactobacillus phages infecting distinct bacterial species (10), suggesting the presence of a barrier limiting transfer of phage genes across Lactobacillus species. However, this finding may be biased by the limited amount of currently available Lactobacillus prophage sequences.
Prophages are not only important genetic elements that impart bacterial genome variability. In fact, prophages may also confer a diverse array of phenotypic traits to their hosts, including those that govern the course and the pathobiology of bacterial infections. Prophages in pathogenic strains such as S. pyogenes contribute important virulence factors, which are indicated as lysogenic conversion factors to the lysogenic host and which have been demonstrated to contribute to the ecological fitness of the host (6, 7). Based on evolutionary reasoning, prophages are postulated to contribute genes that increase the fitness of lysogenic bacteria in their specific ecological niche (4) as well as genes encoding immunity factors that prevent infection from other bacteriophages. This realization has changed our understanding of the phage-bacterium interaction from being a simple parasite-host relationship to a mutually beneficial genomic coevolution.
Interestingly, comparative genomics identified putative lysogenic conversion genes downstream of the lysis cassette and within the lysogeny module (7, 40, 43). Moreover, transcription studies in L. johnsonii, L. plantarum, L. lactis, and Streptococcus thermophilus prophages demonstrated that these genes, together with those encoding immunity against phage superinfection and those maintaining the lysogenic state, belong to the small number of prophage genes transcribed during the lysogenic state (5, 38, 41, 43).
In prophages of bacterial pathogens, genes predicted to encode virulence factors, including a wide range of superantigens and enzymes possibly involved in pathogenicity (DNase, hyluronidase, and phospholipase [4, 6]) were all located between the lysin and right prophage attachment site.
In the present report, we extend the transcription and genomic knowledge of lactobacilli prophages through analysis of three additional genome sequences. Members of the genus Lactobacillus are common inhabitants of the gastrointestinal environments where they reach high levels of colonization. They have also been isolated in decaying plant material and many fermented food products. L. gasseri, Lactobacillus salivarius, and L. casei species are human gut commensal members or food isolates (14, 17, 18). Sequencing of L. gasseri ATCC 33323 as well as L. salivarius subsp. salivarius UCC 188 and L. casei ATCC 334 allowed the identification and the subsequent analysis of prophage sequences with respect to their gene content, transcription profile, distribution in other Lactobacillus strains, and comparison to other Lactobacillus prophage sequences.
|
|
|---|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Bacterial
strains and their origins
|
Open reading frames (ORFs) were predicted using the ORF Finder (NCBI), taking ATG, GTG, and TTG as possible start codons and requiring a minimum size of 50 amino acids. Nucleotide and predicted amino acid sequences were compared with sequences in public sequence databases (GenBank, EMBL, PIR-Protein, SWISS-PROT, and PROSITE) using BLAST (3), PSI-BLAST, and FASTA (23). A scan for tRNA genes was performed using the tRNAscan-SE program (24). Motif searches were performed by using the Pfam database.
RNA isolation and Northern blot analysis.
Total RNA
was isolated by resuspending bacterial cell pellets in Trizol
(GibcoBRL, United Kingdom), adding glass beads (106 µm; Sigma),
and disrupting cells with a Mini-Beadbeater-8 cell disruptor (Biospec
Products) as described by Ventura et al.
(38). Northern blot
analysis of prophages was carried out using 15-µg aliquots of
RNA isolated from 10 ml of Lactobacillus strains, collected at
an optical density at 600 nm of 0.4, 0.8, and 1.2. The RNA was
separated in a 1.5% agarose-formaldehyde denaturing gel, transferred to
a Zeta-Probe blotting membrane (Bio-Rad, United Kingdom) according to
Sambrook and Russell
(37), and fixed by UV
cross-linking using a Stratalinker 1800 (Stratagene). Prehybridization
and hybridization were carried out at 65°C in 0.5 M
NaHPO4 (pH 7.2), 1.0 mM EDTA, and 7.0% sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS). Following 18 h of hybridization, the membrane
was rinsed twice for 30 min at 65°C in 0.1 M NaHPO4
(pH 7.2), 1.0 mM EDTA, and 1% SDS and twice for 30 min at 65°C
in 0.1 mM NaHPO4 (pH 7.2), 1.0 mM EDTA, and 0.1% SDS; the
membrane was then exposed to X-OMAT autoradiography film (Eastman
Kodak).
Probes for Northern blot hybridization were labeled with
-32P using a random-primed DNA labeling system
(Boehringer Mannheim GmbH) and purified with Nuc-Trap probe
purification columns (Stratagene).
DNA amplification of the attB sites.
A 520-bp PCR fragment corresponding
to the attB region of prophage LgaI was generated using the
primer combination 1612 A and 1674, while PCR fragments corresponding
to the attB region of prophages Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, or Sal4 were
generated using the primer sets Sal1-attB1 and Sal1-attB2, Sal2-attB1
and Sal2-attB2, Sal3-attB1 and Sal3-attB2, and Sal4-attB-uni and
Sal4-attB-rev, respectively (Table
2 gives details of the primer sequences). The 750 bp encompassing the
attB site of Lca1 prophage was generated using the primer set
Lca1-attB-uni and Lca1-attB-rev (Table
2). Finally, all PCR
fragments corresponding to the attB site of LgaI, Sal1, Sal2,
Sal3, Sal4, and Lca1 were verified by sequence analysis on both
strands.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Oligonucleotides
used in this study
|
PFGE and Southern blotting.
Agarose-embedded
bacterial cells were prepared as described by Walker et al.
(44). For digestion with
restriction endonucleases, bacterial cells embedded in agarose blocks
were treated with 50 U of SmaI or XhoI (Roche Molecular, United
Kingdom) as described by the manufacturer. Digestion was stopped by
washing the blocks for 20 min in Tris-EDTA buffer. Pulsed-field gel
electrophoresis (PFGE) was performed by a contour-clamped homogeneous
electric field mode in a CHEF-DRII apparatus (Bio-Rad). All DNA samples
were separated in 1% agarose gels in 0.5x Tris-borate-EDTA
buffer, cooled to 14°C, for 20 h at 6 V/cm with a
ramping pulse time from 1 to 20 s.
Southern blots of agarose gels were performed on Hybond N+ membranes (Amersham, United Kingdom) following the protocols of Sambrook and Russell (37). The filters were hybridized with radiolabeled PCR-generated probes described in the text. Subsequent prehybridization, hybridization, and autoradiography were carried out according to Sambrook and Russell (37). Each filter was hybridized using a set of two probes corresponding to different prophage regions. A specific prophage hybridization signal was identified when both probes gave an identical hybridization signal in terms of size and intensity, whereas a cross-hybridization signal designation was observed when the probes used gave a different hybridization signal in terms of intensity and/or size.
Proteomic tree analysis.
The phylogenetic analysis was
performed as described previously
(35). Every amino acid
sequence, including sequences that encode hypothetical proteins,
deduced from identified ORFs in the LgaI, Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, Sal4, and
Lca1 prophage sequences, was compared to all ORF-derived proteins
deposited in the NCBI phage and prophage genome database, which
contained annotated protein sequences from 476 bacteriophage and
prophage genomes as described previously
(35).
Phylogenetic analysis.
Phylogeny
calculations were performed using the PHYLIP package
(12). The final distance
matrix to build the tree was calculated by the neighbor-joining method
as implemented in the neighbor module of
PHYLIP.
Nucleotide sequence accession numbers.
The sequence of
L. gasseri LgaI prophage has been deposited in the GenBank
database under accession number AAABO02000006.1.
The L. salivarius Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, and Sal4 prophage
sequences are contained in the genome sequences of L.
salivarius subsp. salivarius UCC 118, accession number
CP000233. The L. casei Lca1 prophage
sequence has been deposited under accession number
DQ411856.
|
|
|---|
Genome analysis of prophage LgaI.
The predicted prophage
LgaI extends from ORF 372 (integrase gene) to ORF 1673 on the genome of
L. gasseri ATCC 33323. These ORFs are flanked by a 47-bp
repeat, indicating the existence of attL and attR
sites. Moreover, PCR primers placed in the adjacent ORFs 1612 and 1672
resulted in a 520-bp amplicon with genomic DNA from L. gasseri
ATCC 33323 (Fig.
1b), indicating a low frequency of excision of LgaI, and from other L.
gasseri strains that, based on Southern blot hybridization with
specific LgaI probes, appeared to lack prophage LgaI (data not shown).
The size of the amplicons corresponds exactly to the ATCC 33323 genome
minus the LgaI prophage. Sequencing of this PCR product identified the
presence of a single copy of the 47-bp repeat region, suggesting an
attB site (Fig. 1a and
b). Phage integration complements the 3' end of a
tRNAArg gene. The data thus indicate an
integrase-mediated insertion of prophage LgaI into a tRNAArg
gene that is functionally reconstituted following prophage
integration.
![]() View larger version (47K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. The
integration site of LgaI prophage (a and b) and comparative genome maps
of the LgaI prophage with the Lj771 and EJ-1 prophages (c). (a) Gene
map around the LgaI prophage. The predicted bacterial DNA genes are in
gray and the outermost prophage genes are in black. The attachment
sites attL and attR are represented by a white
vertical bar, and the nucleotide sequence is provided in an enlarged
insert. The core sequences of the attL and attR sites
are underlined. (b) PCR amplifications of the attB site for
LgaI from the indicated Lactobacillus strains. Lane MK, 1-kb
DNA ladder (Gibco BRL). (c) Genome map of the prophage LgaI and
alignment with prophage Lj771 and prophage EJ-1. The modular structure
of the genomes is indicated according to the following scheme: black,
similar to bacterial protein; gray, hypothetical protein; open arrow,
transposase; vertical black line, tRNA gene. The degree of amino acid
identity is indicated by shading: light gray, 40%; dark gray,
41%.
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. Database
matches for LgaI, Sal1, Sal2, Sal2, Sal3, Sal4, and Lca1 prophages
|
Genome analysis of L. salivarius Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, and Sal4 prophages.
Based on the
presumptive prophage genome length, only prophages Sal1 and Sal2 appear
to be complete, whereas Sal3 and Sal4 appear to be prophage remnants.
The exact length of all L. salivarius prophages was determined
by sequencing the PCR product achieved using primers placed in
bacterial genes that flank each of the assumed prophages in strain UCC
118 and/or in other L. salivarius
strains.
Genome analysis of prophage Sal1.
The predicted prophage
Sal1 in L. salivarius subsp. salivarius UCC 118
extends from ORF 729 (integrase gene) to ORF 805 (lysin gene) (Fig.
2a). These ORFs are flanked by a 14-bp repeat, indicating the existence of
putative attL and attR sites. Moreover, PCR-primers
(Sal1-attB1 and Sal1-attB2) placed in the flanking bacterial ORF 808
and ORF 728 genes, encoding an rRNA methylase protein and a
exodeoxyribonuclease V
-chain protein, yielded a 1.6-kb
amplicon with genomic DNA from L. salivarius subsp.
salivarius DSM 20555 and L. salivarius subsp.
salivarius LMG 14447, a size which accords with a chromosome
lacking prophage sequence at this site. Sequencing of this PCR
product identified the presence of a single copy of a 14-bp repeat
region, suggesting an attB site (Fig.
2a). Phage integration
complements the 3' end of a tRNA carrying the anticodon
specific for Ser.
![]() View larger version (25K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Sal1
(a), Sal2 (b), Sal3 (c), and Sal4 (d) prophage integration and PCR
amplification of the attB site of each prophage are indicated
in each panel. The predicted bacterial DNA genes are in shown gray, and
the outermost prophage genes are shown in black. The attachment sites
attL and attR are represented by a black vertical
bar, and the nucleotide sequence is provided. The core sequences of the
attL and attR sites are
underlined.
|
![]() View larger version (41K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Comparative
genome maps of the Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, and Sal4 prophages. Genes sharing
similarity are linked by shading. Probable functions of encoded
proteins identified by bioinformatic analysis are noted. The modular
structure of the genomes is indicated as described in the legend of
Fig. 1. The degree of
amino acid identity is indicated by shading as described in the legend
to Fig. 1.
|
Genome analysis of Sal3 and Sal4 prophages.
Prophage-like element Sal3 extends from
ORF 1648 to ORF 1665, whereas the likely extent of prophage Sal4 is
from ORF 1189 to ORF 1205. Sal3 and Sal4 prophages are flanked by a
19-bp repeat and a 21-bp repeat, respectively. Most of the L.
salivarius strains from our collection yielded a 300-bp or 700-bp
PCR product when primers (the pair Sal3-attB1 and Sal3-attB2 and the
pair Sal4-attB1 and Sal4-attB2) were placed in the bacterial genes that
surround the Sal3 or Sal4 prophage in L. salivarius UCC 118,
respectively. Interestingly, using L. salivarius UCC 118
genomic DNA as a template also generated PCR products using these set
of primers, thereby indicating that a subfraction of an L.
salivarius UCC 118 culture may have been subject to excision of
these phages. These PCR products contained the 19-bp or the 21-bp
sequences, and the sequences to the right and left of these deduced
attB sites were identical to those abutting the likely
attL and attR sites (Fig.
2c and d).
As shown in Fig. 3 and Table 3, the genetic structures of Sal3 and Sal4 appear to have been shaped by multiple DNA deletion and rearrangement events. In fact, their limited lengths and the absence of a region encoding structural phage components suggest that one or more major DNA deletion events may have occurred. Comparison of the Sal3 and Sal4 prophage genome sequences showed significant sequence similarity at the DNA level. Strikingly, the similarity extended to the whole prophage genome in a patchwork fashion (Fig. 3).
Genome analysis of L. casei Lca1 prophage.
The predicted prophage-like element
Lca1 has a genome size of 46,986 bp, extending from ORF 74 (integrase)
to ORF 4 (hypothetical protein). This determination was based on the
observation that ORF 74 and ORF 4 are surrounded by a 27-bp repeat.
Using primers targeting the sequences of the bacterial genes flanking
the prophage, we obtained a 750-bp PCR product apparently from a
possible nonlysogenic L. casei ATCC 334 subpopulation (Fig.
4a and
b), which contained the 27-bp attB sequence that is placed in an
intergenic region.
![]() View larger version (45K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. The
integration site of Lca1 prophage and its defect in excision (a and b)
and genome maps of the Lca1 prophage and alignment with the phage A2
(c). For figure details see the legend to Fig
1.
|
g1e and Listeria phage A118 and may be involved in
the modification of phage and host DNA
(36). Further database
matches allowed a distinction of likely DNA packaging and head
morphogenesis genes, possible head-to-tail joining genes, and putative
tail genes. Interestingly, several genes encoding transposase proteins
are present within the structural region of the genome of Lca1. A lysis
cassette was identified downstream of the tail fiber module, which is
constituted by the classical genetic constellation of holin and lysin
genes. Finally, a small ORF (ORF 4) without any database match is
located between the lysin and the attR site. When the deduced
protein products of the genome of Lca1 were compared to those encoded
by the L. casei A2 phage
(34), protein
similarities were only observed between proteins specified by the tail
and tail fiber modules, as well as the lysogeny module for the
integrase and cI repressor-encoding ORFs. This suggested that,
although they infect the same bacterial host, these phages are
nevertheless very different from a genetic point of
view.
Transcription analysis.
Analysis of the transcription of
prophage genes was conducted by performing Northern blot hybridization
using DNA probes that cover a large portion of the L. gasseri
LgaI and the L. salivarius Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, and Sal4 prophage
genomes (Fig.
5; see also Fig. S1 in the supplemental material). From these results it
is obvious that large regions of these prophage genomes are
transcriptionally silent. No transcription of the cro-like and
the antirepressor genes was detected, which frequently constitute early
or middle lytic transcripts in phages from LAB
(43). Also the DNA
packaging and head morphogenesis, tail, and tail fiber genes did not
appear to be transcribed. In contrast, probes corresponding to parts of
the lysogeny module of these prophages revealed in each case
prophage-specific
transcripts.
![]() View larger version (22K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. Schematic
representation of the transcription pattern of prophage LgaI (a), Sal1
(b), Sal2 (c), and Sal4 (d). The relative position and extent of the
probes used for Northern blot analysis are provided as horizontal lines
just below each of the schematically displayed phage genomes. The thin
arrows just below the probe positions indicate the deduced position and
direction of the transcripts; the numbers above the thin arrows refer
to the estimated length of the
transcripts.
|
Sal1.
The lysogeny module of Sal1 gave rise
to a small number of transcripts (Fig.
5b; see Fig. S1b in the
supplemental material). A probe corresponding to the cI
repressor (ORF 742) yielded a 1.5-kb signal, which was also revealed
with a probe covering the putative superinfection exclusion gene (ORF
740). The 1.5-kb mRNA thus spanned ORFs 742 and 740. The likely
constellation of the transcripts from the lysogeny module of Sal1 is
depicted in Fig. 5b.
Furthermore, a series of mRNAs with sizes ranging from 3.5, 2.9, and
2.0 to 1.5 kb were detected in the lysogeny module when an ORF
733-specific probe was employed (Fig.
5b; see Fig. S1b in the
supplemental material). These messenger RNAs cover only the region
enclosed between the putative sie gene and the integrase gene
since an int-specific probe did not reveal any signals.
Interestingly, when the predicted lysin gene of Sal1 was used as a
probe, a prominent 1.2-kb transcript was detected. No transcripts were
detected when probes were used that correspond to the two predicted
integrase genes (ORF 729 and ORF 765) or genes from the DNA packaging
and structural modules and in the surrounding region of the
lysin-encoding gene (Fig.
5b; see Fig. S1b in the
supplemental material).
Sal2.
Transcription analysis of this prophage
revealed that only the regions at the two extremities of the Sal2
genome are transcribed (Fig.
5c; see Fig. S1c in the
supplemental material). In fact, using an int-specific probe,
a weak transcript of 1.2 kb was detected. The lysogeny module produced
a transcript of 1.3 kb when the cI gene was used as a probe.
On the rightmost end of the Sal2 genome, using a lysin-specific probe,
three transcripts of 4.4 kb, 1.8 kb, and 1.2 kb were detected. In
contrast, no transcripts were identified with probes covering the DNA
replication module or several of the genes representative of the
structural modules (Fig.
5c and data not shown; see
also Fig. S1c in the supplemental
material).
Sal3 and Sal4.
Transcription analysis of the Sal3
prophage using several probes spanning various portions of the Sal3
genome did not reveal any hybridization signal, thus indicating that
the Sal3 genome is transcriptionally silent (data not shown). In
contrast, in the case of Sal4, Northern hybridizations revealed a
2.5-kb-long transcript using probes covering the int gene, the
sie gene, and the cI repressor gene (Fig.
5d; see Fig. S1d in the
supplemental material), indicating that these genes constitute a
polycistronic unit. The remainder of the Sal4 genome appeared to be
transcriptionally silent (data not
shown).
Induction of LgaI prophage.
The inducibility of
LgaI prophage was assessed by exposing an L. gasseri
ATCC 33323 culture to mitomycin C or to 2 mM hydrogen
peroxide (Fig.
6a). The presence of the Lga1 phage sequence in a circular form was verified
using a set of primers annealing with the integrase and the lysogenic
conversion region of LgaI prophage in a PCR approach. Furthermore, in
order to ensure that the lack of any PCR product was attributable to
the absence of circularized phage DNA target rather than a failure of
the amplification reaction, a second pair of primers (1555-uni and
1555-rev) targeting a 1,600-bp region within the prophage genome was
used as a positive control. Specific 450-bp amplicons with primers
running outward from the ends of the linear prophage genomes were
achieved with DNA isolated from cells following the addition of
mitomycin C or hydrogen peroxide (data not shown), indicating that free
circularized phage genomic DNA is present. Spontaneous excision of LgaI
was also observed (data not shown). When the 450-bp amplicon, which
corresponds to the LgaI attP site, was sequenced and aligned
with the LgaI attL, attR, and attB sites, a
common 47 bp with a single variable nucleotide was found (Fig.
6a). In this common core,
DNA strand exchange is expected to occur during phage genome
integration into the bacterial
chromosome.
![]() View larger version (51K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. Induction
of LgaI (a), Sal1 (d), Sal2 (b), Sal3 (e), Sal4 (c), and Lca1 (f)
prophages. Each panel shows the amplification of prophage sequences
from culture filtrate supernatants and from cells after mitomycin C or
hydrogen peroxide treatment (indicated with an asterisk). The amount of
mitomycin C (µg/ml) or hydrogen peroxide (mM) is indicated.
Panels a, b, and c also show the nucleotide sequence alignments of the
regions containing attL, attR, attP, and
attB of the LgaI, Sal2, and Sal4 phages. The conserved regions
representing the core sequences of the att sites are
indicated.
|
Amplicons of 900 bp and 2,100 bp were obtained with primers placed at the periphery of the Sal2 and Sal4 prophages, respectively, which indicates that circularized bacteriophages were obtained after either mitomycin C or hydrogen peroxide treatment (data not shown). In contrast, no such PCR products were obtained when DNA extracted from a noninduced UCC 118 culture was used (data not shown). When the 900-bp amplicon, which corresponds to the Sal2 attP site, was sequenced and aligned with the Sal2 attL, attR, and attB sites, a common 24-bp core region was found (Fig. 6b). In this common core, DNA strand exchange is expected to occur during phage genome integration into the bacterial chromosome. Similarly, when the 2,100-bp PCR product, which corresponds to the attP site of Sal4, was sequenced and aligned with the Sal4 attL, attR, and attB sites, a common 21-bp core region was found (Fig. 6c).
In contrast, no specific amplicons were obtained using primers running out of the Sal1 or Sal3 prophage genome, indicating that free circularized Sal1 and Sal3 phage genomes are not present following mitomycin C or hydrogen peroxide treatment (Fig. 6d and e).
L. casei Lca1 prophage induction.
The
inducibility of Lca1 prophage was assessed using an identical procedure
as outlined for the L. salivarius prophages. A PCR primer pair
(Lca1-attP-uni and Lca1-attP-rev) was designed at each border of the
Lca1 prophage, and each was directed outward from the prophage
sequences. Moreover, another PCR primer pair (64-1 and 66-2)
which targets ORF 64 was used as a PCR positive control. DNA isolated
from cells upon the addition of different concentrations of mitomycin C
or hydrogen peroxide yielded amplicons only with primers placed within
prophage sequences (positive control), whereas no specific amplicons
were achieved using primers running out of the prophage genome,
indicating that no free circularized phage genomes are present (Fig.
6f). Furthermore, no PCR
products suggestive of prophage excision were obtained with primers
running out of the prophage genome in the culture supernatants after
filtration (Fig.
6f).
Distribution of L. gasseri, L. salivarius, and L. casei prophages.
To
analyze the distribution of prophage sequences in different
lactobacillus species, we performed a Southern hybridization of
PFGE-separated chromosomal digests using a set of probes specific for
prophages LgaI, Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, Sal4, and Lca1 (Fig.
7).
![]() View larger version (74K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 7. PFGE
of different Lactobacillus strains and Southern blot
hybridization with PCR probes obtained from the LgaI (a), Sal1 (b),
Sal2 (c), Sal3 (d), Sal4 (e), or Lca1 (f) prophage. The PCR probes used
are indicated below each panel. The restriction fragment containing the
LgaI, Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, Sal4, or Lca1 prophage is indicated in each by
a black arrow. Bands cross-hybridizing with the specific probes are
indicated with white
arrows.
|
Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, and Sal4 prophages.
We used all L. salivarius
strains deposited in several international bacteria collections (i.e.,
ATCC, DSM, LMG, and JCM) to analyze the distribution of the Sal1, Sal2,
Sal3, and Sal4 prophages. All five strains used represented five
different SmaI restriction patterns in PFGE analysis. Two Sal1-specific
probes, located in the lysogeny module (ORF 734) and in the structural
encoding region (ORF 794), hybridized exclusively with a 655-kb
fragment from UCC 118 DNA (Fig.
7b), suggesting the
absence of Sal1-like prophages in the tested strains or at least the
absence of homologous regions of the probes used. A Sal2-specific probe
covering the ORF 294 hybridized exclusively with a 215-kb fragment in
the UCC 118 strain. In contrast, a probe corresponding to the
sie gene (ORF 240) produced hybridization signals with all
four L. salivarius strains (Fig.
7c), suggesting the
presence of prophages containing sie-like genes in these
strains.
A Sal3-specific probe covering the ORF 1656 hybridized with a fragment of about 40 kb from L. salivarius UCC 118 and L. salivarius DSM 20555 and also produced hybridization signals with a fragment of 655 kb in L. salivarius DSM 20492 and L. salivarius DSM 20555 (Fig. 7d). This would therefore indicate that Sal3 prophage-like elements are also present in other L. salivarius strains. Similarly, a Sal4-specific probe (ORF 1190) hybridized with a 655-kb SmaI fragment in L. salivarius UCC 118 as well as in L. salivarius DSM 20554 (Fig. 7e). The latter results therefore suggest that this small prophage is not specific to the UCC 118 strain. Since the prophages in the two strains are found on SmaI fragments of the same size, they might be located at corresponding sites in these strains. PCR across the attL-attR site of Sal4 prophage agreed with this hypothesis (data not shown).
Lca1 prophage.
We selected six L. casei
strains to determine the distribution of Lca1-like prophages in L.
casei species. All these strains were assayed by molecular
fingerprinting using PFGE. The six strains represented six different
XhoI restriction patterns in PFGE, which were different from the
pattern of the reference strain ATCC 334 (Fig.
7f). Two Lca1-specific
probes located in the structural part of the phage genome (ORFs 64 and
66) hybridized with a 51-kb fragment from ATCC 334 DNA (Fig.
7f). A weak 51-kb
hybridization signal was also observed in L. casei strains
NCDO 155, NCDO 1202, NCDO 1205, and IMPC 21060 when a probe specific
for ORF 66 was used, suggesting the presence of a prophage-like
sequence that shares at least some DNA homology with Lca1 (Fig.
7f). This finding is in
agreement with the failure to generate a PCR product using chromosomal
DNA from these L. casei strains as a template with PCR primers
flanking the putative attB site of L. casei ATCC 334,
indicating that a prophage is integrated in this site (Fig.
7f). The other L.
casei strains tested were shown to contain an intact attB
site (Fig. 7f). Moreover,
these strains did not reveal any hybridization signal, suggesting that
they do not contain sequences homologous to the Lca1
prophage.
Phylogenetic analysis of the LgaI, Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, Sal4, and Lca1 prophages.
A sequence-based taxonomic
system has been established for inferring phylogeny among phages and
prophages (35)
through the generation of a proteomic tree. This system is based on the
overall relatedness of both complete phage genomes and prophages
identified within complete bacterial genomes
(35). We performed such a
proteomic tree analysis (Fig.
8a) using the database of phage and prophage sequences which
was updated with the LgaI, Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, Sal4, and Lca1 sequences.
These latter prophage sequences were shown not to group together. The
LgaI prophage is contained in the Enterococcus phage group,
which also includes the S. pneumonia EJ-1 phage and the
partially sequenced L. johnsonii Lj771 prophage. The Lca1
prophage appeared to be phylogenetically related to the L.
casei A2, AT3, and EDTA phages. On the other hand, the L.
salivarius prophages described here are not located within the
same phylogenetic group. In fact, the two largest L.
salivarius prophages, i.e., Sal1 and Sal2, are closely related to
the Bacillus licheniformis phages, whereas the two prophage
remnants Sal3 and Sal4 cluster with a number of Bacillus
subtilis and E. faecalis phages (Fig.
8a).
![]() View larger version (17K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 8. (a)
Phage proteomic tree illustrating the relationship between LgaI, Sal1,
Sal2, Sal3, Sal4, and Lca1 prophages and other sequenced phages and
prophages. (b) Phylogenetic tree based on the 16S rRNA gene from
various Lactobacillus strains. The tree is based on the more
closely related phage and prophage sequences of LgaI, Sal1, Sal2, Sal3,
Sal4, and Lca1 deduced on the basis of a previous proteomic tree based
on 476 sequenced phage genomes and prophages (data not shown). In panel
b, bootstrap values are reported for a total of 1,000
replicates.
|
|
|
|---|
The genome sequencing of L. gasseri ATCC 33323, L. salivarius UCC 118, and L. casei ATCC 334 contributed six new prophage sequences to the already existing repertoire of Lactobacillus prophage sequences (40-41). This extended database will not only substantially increase the volume of the current phage database but also provide a greater phylogenetic breadth to the present database. Interestingly, phylogenetic relationships of currently available Lactobacillus prophage sequences revealed a very different phylogenetic image from that of their bacterial hosts. This indicates that prophage sequences and bacterial hosts have followed a different evolutionary development. These findings are in contrast to the phage-host coevolution hypothesis of Rohwer et al. (35), perhaps as a consequence of the enlarged Lactobacillus phage database. These observations indicate that Lactobacillus prophage sequences are an example of genetic mosaicism apparently arising from nonhomologous recombination between ancestral sequences following a web-like, rather than a tree-like, phylogeny.
Notably, with
respect to overall genome organization, the LgaI, Sal1, Sal2, Sal3,
Sal4, and Lca1 prophages were shown to belong to the group of
Sfi11-like pac site Siphoviridae
(34), which also contain
L. plantarum prophages Lp1 and Lp2
(41), L.
johnsonii prophages Lj928 and Lj965
(40),
g1e
(21), and L.
delbrueckii phage LL-H
(31). However, very
limited sequence similarity was observed between the presumptive
structural phage proteins of these new prophage sequences. The
structural gene cluster of LgaI and Lca1 prophage sequences belonged to
a widely distributed lineage of Sfi11-like phages detected in LAB
genera, e.g., S. pyogenes and L. lactis. Since
sequence-related phages were isolated from different bacterial genera,
it is unlikely that these new Sfi11-like phages have evolved within the
confines of one of these bacterial genera. In fact, Sfi11-like phages
share part of the genome organization and even distant sequence
relatedness with lambdoid phages infecting gram-negative bacteria,
suggesting descent from a structural phage module of a common but
rather distant ancestor
(34).
Interestingly, phages isolated from closely related taxa that occupy very similar ecological niches could be used as a test case in order to investigate lateral gene transfer between Lactobacillus phages. In this context, L. gasseri and L. johnsonii are two closely related species belonging to the L. acidophilus cluster B that share the same ecological niches (gastrointestinal tract of human and animals). The genome similarity shown by the LgaI prophage and by the available partial Lj771 prophage sequence reflects the overall similarity of the genome sequences of their hosts (unpublished results). Comparative phage genomics has suggested that phages may have evolved through exchange of functional modules, individual genes, or gene segments via various genetic recombination events (26). Since L. gasseri and L. johnsonii share the same ecological niche, it is possible that horizontal gene transfer and recombination events may have occurred between some phages of L. gasseri and L. johnsonii origin. Alternatively, a common ancestor phage infecting one species may have acquired the capacity, not necessarily via horizontal gene transfer and/or recombination events, to infect the other bacterial species. The high DNA similarity shown by LgaI and Lj771 (10) and EJ-1 (36) may suggest a capacity for interspecies cross-infection similar to that reported for L. plantarum and L. brevis phages (25). Furthermore, the predicted existence of DNA uptake systems in various sequenced lactobacilli (2, 20, 33) may also have allowed modular exchanges between bacteriophages that infect different species.
Previous phage transcription studies in Streptococcus, Lactococcus, and Lactobacillus have shown that large parts of the prophage genome were transcriptionally silent during the lysogenic state, while genes near either attachment site were highly transcribed (38, 40, 41, 43). A similar pattern was identified for L. gasseri LgaI and L. salivarius Sal1, Sal2, Sal3, and Sal4. Transcription analysis revealed the presence of mRNA encompassing the presumed phage repressor and superinfection exclusion genes and the lack of expression of the cro-like gene. Furthermore, all prophage genome regions corresponding to the structural part of the phage and DNA replication appeared to be transcriptionally silent. Interestingly, the lysin-encoding genes in Sal1 and Sal2 prophages were shown to be transcribed, although the significance of this finding is still unknown in terms of culture lysis. In fact, either the transcript may not be translated in significant amounts or the corresponding enzyme is not functional. Another hypothesis is that it acts as a hok/sok-like portioning system; however, no homology to these systems has been identified. The experimental observations accord with the theoretical expectations in that the genes encoding immunity functions (cI and sie) should be expressed during the lysogenic state. Notably, the genes located between the lysin and the attR (presumed lysogenic conversion region) were highly transcribed in the LgaI prophage. A previous study identified an alternative candidate for the lysogenic conversion region within the lysogeny module (41). Of note, in Sal1 the DNA region encompassing ORFs 448 to 442, which encodes a putative transposase and hypothetical protein, was transcribed during the lysogenic state. In phages infecting bacterial pathogens, this region carries genes that may contribute to a selective advantage to the lysogens (11, 19). In many dairy prophages it has been reported that the transcription of genes located in the lysogenic conversion region is more prominent than that of the phage repressor (38, 43). These observations suggest a physiological function for these prophage genes in the lysogen. So far, the lack of functional characterization to support the bioinformatic predictions for these phage genes makes it difficult to speculate about possible lysogenic conversion phenotypes. Conversely, the LgaI genome contains a small gene within the lysogenic conversion region, which showed a very limited similarity at the amino acid level with peptide toxin Fst encoded by the par toxin-antitoxin stability determinant. These systems have been detected in different bacteria, including in the pau-LA III remnant of L. acidophilus NCFM (2) and in E. coli phage P1 (16, 32). These par systems act in general as a maintenance killer system of prophages or plasmids. However, the identity between the LgaI gene and fst is very low, and therefore no definitive role can be attributed to these genes in this L. gasseri prophage.
Paradoxically, all prophage sequences that have been identified in Lactobacillus genomes appear to be very stable since attempts to induce their excision have failed so far (40, 41). However, LgaI and Sal2 appeared to be complete phages that can be excised from their bacterial host. Interestingly, although the Sal4 prophage-like element appears to represent a deficient bacteriophage, it was shown to be inducible and perhaps constitutes a functional satellite phage that can become mobile in a manner similar to that described for the cryptic mycophages Rv1 and Rv2 (22).
The mobility of Lactobacillus prophage DNA was assessed by PFGE hybridization. As demonstrated in this study, DNA from the majority of a representative set of strains for each of the species tested indicates a narrow range of distribution in L. gasseri, L. salivarius, and L. casei species. This observation confirms a previous study where two L. johnsonii NCC 533 prophages were found to constitute a substantial part of the strain-specific DNA (39). Similarly, prophages of L. plantarum WCFS1 seem to be narrowly distributed within their own bacterial species (41).
A number of additional Lactobacillus genomes are currently being sequenced, making it likely that other prophage sequences will be identified. This increased resource of (Lactobacillus) phage sequences will expand our ability to provide answers by comparative genomics to questions such as those concerning horizontal versus vertical DNA transfer within different species of Lactobacillus.
Genome sequencing of L. gasseri was carried out by the Joint Genome Institute of the U.S. Department of Energy and Fidelity Systems, Inc., in conjunction with the Lactic Acid Bacteria Genome Consortium.
Finally, we thank Paul Ross, Mike Callanan, and Tom Beresford for sharing with us their unpublished results on L. helveticus DPC4571 genome sequences.
Supplemental material for this article may be found at
http://aem.asm.org/. ![]()
|
|
|---|
adh. Gene
236:333-346.[CrossRef][Medline]
g1e: the whole genome
sequence and the putative promoter/repressor system.Gene
187:45-53.[CrossRef][Medline]
JL-1, from a cucumber fermentation. Int. J. Food
Microbiol.
84:225-235.[Medline]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»