| Literature DB >> 18953401 |
Christiane Hertz-Fowler1, Luisa M Figueiredo, Michael A Quail, Marion Becker, Andrew Jackson, Nathalie Bason, Karen Brooks, Carol Churcher, Samah Fahkro, Ian Goodhead, Paul Heath, Magdalena Kartvelishvili, Karen Mungall, David Harris, Heidi Hauser, Mandy Sanders, David Saunders, Kathy Seeger, Sarah Sharp, Jesse E Taylor, Danielle Walker, Brian White, Rosanna Young, George A M Cross, Gloria Rudenko, J David Barry, Edward J Louis, Matthew Berriman.
Abstract
Subtelomeric regions are often under-represented in genome sequences of eukaryotes. One of the best known examples of the use of telomere proximity for adaptive purposes are the bloodstream expression sites (BESs) of the African trypanosome Trypanosoma brucei. To enhance our understanding of BES structure and function in host adaptation and immune evasion, the BES repertoire from the Lister 427 strain of T. brucei were independently tagged and sequenced. BESs are polymorphic in size and structure but reveal a surprisingly conserved architecture in the context of extensive recombination. Very small BESs do exist and many functioning BESs do not contain the full complement of expression site associated genes (ESAGs). The consequences of duplicated or missing ESAGs, including ESAG9, a newly named ESAG12, and additional variant surface glycoprotein genes (VSGs) were evaluated by functional assays after BESs were tagged with a drug-resistance gene. Phylogenetic analysis of constituent ESAG families suggests that BESs are sequence mosaics and that extensive recombination has shaped the evolution of the BES repertoire. This work opens important perspectives in understanding the molecular mechanisms of antigenic variation, a widely used strategy for immune evasion in pathogens, and telomere biology.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18953401 PMCID: PMC2567434 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003527
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
BES overview.
| BES | TAR clone sequenced |
| Deviation from conserved architecture |
|
| BES could be activated | Genome localisation: type and size (Mb) of chromosome | ||||
|
|
|
| Multiple copies of ESAGs? | Missing ESAGs? | Other | ||||||
| 1 (a) | 40 | 427-2 | 221 | MITat 1.2 | large-scale | - | 70 bp-repeat array (×2) | Yes | - | Yes | MBC-3.0 |
| 2 (a) | 129 | 427-9 | VO2 | MITat 1.9 | 7 (×2) | - | ingi element 3′ of 70-bp repeat | Yes | Yes | Yes | IC-0.325 |
| 3 | 2, 15 | 427-6 | 121 | MITat 1.6 | - | - | Yes | Yes | Yes | MBC-2.05 | |
| 4 | 3, 28 | 427-21 | T3 | MITat 1.21 | 7 (×3) | - | VSG ψ 3′ of 70-bp repeat | Yes | Yes | Yes | IC-0.250 |
| 5 | 98 | 427-18 | 800 | MITat 1.18 | - | - | Yes | No (c) | Yes | MBC-1.95 | |
| 7 | 65 (b), 153 | 427-3 | 224 | MITat 1.3 | 6 (×2) | 7 |
| Yes | Yes | Yes | MBC >3.1 |
| 8 | 64 | 427-14 | - | MITat 1.14 | - | 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,11 | Single | Yes | No (c) | No | MBC >3.1 |
| 10 | 134 | 427-15 | - | MITat 1.15 | - | 1,2,3,4,8,11 | 23 bp trace of 70-bp repeat | No | N/A | N/A | IC-0.450 |
| 11 | 122 | 427-16 | - | MITat 1.16 | 4 (×2) | 1,2,11 | additional | No | N/A | N/A | IC-0.180 |
| 12 | 29 | 427-8 | OD1 | MITat 1.8 | - | 3,4,8 | Yes | Yes | Yes | MBC-1.7 | |
| 13 | 56 | 427-17 | JS1 | MITat 1.17 | 8 (×2) | - | Yes | Yes | Yes | IC-0.180 | |
| 14 | 10 | 427-19 | - | MITat 1.19 | - | 3,4,8 | 2 additional | No | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| 117 (not sequenced) | 427-8 | OD1 | MITat 1.8 | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | MBC >3.1 | |
| 15 (two copies: 15a, 15b) | 126 | 427-11 | bR-2 | MITat 1.11 | - | - |
| Yes (15a & 15b) | Yes | Yes | 2 MBC: 1.35, 1.7 |
| 16 | 128 (d) | 427-2 | 221 | MITat 1.2 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| 17 (a) | 51 (b), 59 | 427-13 | NA1 | MITat 1.13 | - | - | - | Yes | Yes | Yes | IC-0.295 |
In this paper, we propose a new simple and logical VSG nomenclature. The hyphenated name indicates the T. brucei strain, followed by a number that identifies each unique VSG. For very closely related (probably antigenically indistinguishable) members of a VSG family, the number may be followed by a lower-case letter (for example Lister 427-3). When no misunderstanding can occur between strains under discussion in a particular context, the strain information may be omitted and the VSG referred to only by its number (for example, VSG 3). ND: not determined; N/A: not applicable; IC: intermediate chromosome; MBC: Megabase chromosome. (a) BES1, 2 and 17 had been previously cloned in BACs and identified as 221 ES, VO2 ES and Bn-2 ES, respectively [27]. (b) TAR65 and TAR51 were re-classified as belonging to BES group 7 and 17, respectively, based on global alignments showing sequence identity along the length of the sequence. The only differences were found in the promoter region, the target site for recombination during construction of the library. (c) Restriction mapping of the NEO tagged BES suggests the existence of two promoters, whereas the TAR clone has a single promoter. (d) TAR clone 128 is likely to be a recombinant between expression sites belonging to BES groups 1 and 15 (see text).
Summary of the number of TAR clones sequenced, BES identified and BES activated.
| Number | TAR clones or BES | TAR clones or BES missing | |
| TAR clones | 19 | 40, 129, 2, 15, 3, 28, 98, 65, 153, 64, 134, 122, 29, 56, 10, 126, 128, 51, 59 | TAR128 is probably a recombination artifact |
| Unique BES | 14 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17 | TAR2 and TAR3 were duplicates of TAR15 and TAR28, respectively; TAR51 and TAR65 were re-classified |
| All BES | 15 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15a+15b, 17 | BES15 is present in two copies in the genome |
| Tagged BES | 13 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15a+15b, 17 | BES10 and BES11 were not tagged |
| Functional tagged BES | 12 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15a+15b, 17 | BES8 was tagged with NEO gene, but no G418-resistant clones could be obtained. |
Figure 1Chromosomal distribution of BES-resident VSGs.
Red arrows indicate BES randomly tagged in this study with NEO. Open arrows indicate BES activated by [58] and subsequently tagged. Names of VSG genes are indicated at the bottom, using the newly proposed strain-specific numbering (top row) and lab-specific names (bottom row). BES10 and 11 were not tagged in either study. BES14 is represented in two lanes: 14* refers to TAR117 (which was not sequenced and harbours VSG8), whereas 14$ refers to TAR10 (which was sequenced and harbours VSG9).
Figure 2Types of switching mechanisms observed for tagged BES clones in vitro.
A. NEO-tagged clones have PUR in BES1 and NEO in an unknown BES. B. Example of a BES duplication. PFGE analysis of a BES7-tagged clone (17.9), when this BES is silent (S) and after activation. NEO and VSG3 genes were duplicated onto the chromosome that originally contained PUR and VSG221/427-2. C. Quantification of the frequency of the different types of mechanisms. “Other” refers to recombination events that involved more than 2 chromosomes.
Figure 3Overview of T. brucei Lister 427 BES.
BES are drawn to scale and have been aligned at their 5′-most ESAG7 or ESAG6 sequence. The inset shows the regions conserved between the dual promoters present in some of the clones. The VSG indicated in front of the BES label refers to the telomere-proximal VSG.
Figure 4Quantifying the difference in phylogenetic signal along the bloodstream expression site.
A. Three tanglegrams relate the ESAG5 phylogeny with those of ESAG6 (close match), ESAG4 (moderate incongruence) and ESAG1 (severe incongruence). Dashed lines link corresponding expression sites in each tree. Incongruence between trees increases from left to right. B. Comparison of likelihood scores between optimal and constrained tree topologies for ESAG5. The phylogenies of six other ESAG loci (indicated by a cartoon of the expression site) were used to constrain the estimation of the ESAG5 tree; the difference in likelihood score between each of these constrained trees and the optimal ESAG5 tree is plotted along the expression site. Non-significant differences in likelihood are denoted by a dashed circle as evident when constraining the ESAG5 topology with the ESAG6 topology; however, enforcing the topologies of central loci (ESAGs 4 and 8) caused a moderate decrease in likelihood, whilst constraining with ESAGs 2, 11 or 1 caused a larger decrease.