| Literature DB >> 28187198 |
A A Shea1, R C Bernhards2, C K Cote2, C J Chase1, J W Koehler1, C P Klimko2, J T Ladner3, D A Rozak1, M J Wolcott1, D P Fetterer4, S J Kern4, G I Koroleva3, S P Lovett3, G F Palacios3, R G Toothman2, J A Bozue2, P L Worsham2, S L Welkos2.
Abstract
Burkholderia pseudomallei (Bp), the agent of melioidosis, causes disease ranging from acute and rapidly fatal to protracted and chronic. Bp is highly infectious by aerosol, can cause severe disease with nonspecific symptoms, and is naturally resistant to multiple antibiotics. However, no vaccine exists. Unlike many Bp strains, which exhibit random variability in traits such as colony morphology, Bp strain MSHR5848 exhibited two distinct and relatively stable colony morphologies on sheep blood agar plates: a smooth, glossy, pale yellow colony and a flat, rough, white colony. Passage of the two variants, designated "Smooth" and "Rough", under standard laboratory conditions produced cultures composed of > 99.9% of the single corresponding type; however, both could switch to the other type at different frequencies when incubated in certain nutritionally stringent or stressful growth conditions. These MSHR5848 derivatives were extensively characterized to identify variant-associated differences. Microscopic and colony morphology differences on six differential media were observed and only the Rough variant metabolized sugars in selective agar. Antimicrobial susceptibilities and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) features were characterized and phenotype microarray profiles revealed distinct metabolic and susceptibility disparities between the variants. Results using the phenotype microarray system narrowed the 1,920 substrates to a subset which differentiated the two variants. Smooth grew more rapidly in vitro than Rough, yet the latter exhibited a nearly 10-fold lower lethal dose for mice than Smooth. Finally, the Smooth variant was phagocytosed and replicated to a greater extent and was more cytotoxic than Rough in macrophages. In contrast, multiple locus sequence type (MLST) analysis, ribotyping, and whole genome sequence analysis demonstrated the variants' genetic conservation; only a single consistent genetic difference between the two was identified for further study. These distinct differences shown by two variants of a Bp strain will be leveraged to better understand the mechanism of Bp phenotypic variability and to possibly identify in vitro markers of infection.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28187198 PMCID: PMC5302386 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171363
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Summary of phenotypic differences of Bp MSHR5848 (BURK178) variants.
| Phenotype | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Morphologic | Gram stain | Yes | GNR | typical |
| PI nucleic acid dye | Yes | positive | negative | |
| Colony morphology | Yes | raised, yellowish, shiny | flat, grey, dry | |
| BCSA Sugar utilization | Yes | alkaline | acid | |
| Biochemical | BiOLOG GENIII | Yes | 4 | |
| BiOLOG GENIII | Yes | |||
| VITEK2™ | No | |||
| SherlockMIDI | No | |||
| Antimicrobial sensitivities | Yes | variable | variable | |
| Phenotype Analyses | GENIII microarray | Yes | 15/15 positive | 7/15 positive |
| PM metabolic activity | Yes | more active (59 significant) | less active (47 significant) | |
| Molecular Analyses | DNA sequences | Yes | WGS difference (chrom 2) | 3-base deletion |
| MLST | No | - | - | |
| Riboprinting | No | - | - | |
| Infection | Macrophage cytotoxicity | Yes | 75% killing | 12.5% killing |
| Macrophage replication | Yes | ≥ fivefold greater uptake | reduced | |
| Mouse virulence (IP) | Yes | less virulent | more virulent | |
| Other | LPS banding pattern | No | type A subtype 3 | Same |
| Persister phenotype | No | positive | Same | |
aThe Smooth morphotype from the solid medium production stock of strain MSHR5848.
bPhenotypes of the Rough variant of the MSHR5848 solid medium production stock are similar to those of the liquid medium production stock of Rough.
cThe species identifications of the variants reported in the GENIII system differed at the 36 h and 48 h readings. VITEK2™ and SherlockMIDI identification systems reported no differences; all variants were B. pseudomallei.
dInter-experimental variation in sensitivities of the Smooth and Rough strains to selected chemicals and antibiotics in manual microtiter assays.
eBased on GENIII plates (94-phenotypes) incubated and analyzed on the Omnilog.™ Of the 15 carbon source substrates differing most consistently between the variants, 15 were strongly metabolized by Smooth and 7 were strongly metabolized by Rough.
fMetabolic activity of variants for 1,920 substrates or inhibitors (20 PM plates) measured during incubation in Biolog Phenotypic Microarray™.
gSequences from WGS libraries of variant Smooth and Rough colonies were obtained using the PacBio and Illumina MiSeq platforms. A 3-base sequence on chromosome 2 of Smooth was absent in Rough and may impact the downstream gene as described in the text.
hThe multilocus sequence type (MLST) was no. 553 for both variants; their Ribotyping Riboprinter™ rRNA patterns were conserved.
iSmooth variant was more cytotoxic than rough in terms of cell killing and MNGC production; and was phagocytosed to a fivefold greater extent and replicated significantly more as detailed in Fig 5 and Table 5.
jLD50 values (days 21 and 60) of MSHR5848 Rough were almost tenfold lower (and had higher dose-related lethality rates) than MSHR5848/Smooth. Fig 6 confirms the more rapid loss of survival of Rough.
kThis phenotype is based on an in vitro model for development of tolerance to high levels of ciprofloxacin. Both strains exhibited persister tolerance.
Fig 1Smooth and Rough variant colony and microscopic morphologies.
A: Sheep blood agar plates. The smooth, glossy, pale yellow colonies are the Smooth morphotype (arrow) and the flat dry grey-white colonies are Rough (arrowhead). B: Ashdown’s agar plates. The raised shiny, smooth deep pink colonies are Smooth (arrow) and the wrinkled dry pink and purple colonies are Rough (arrowhead). C and D: BSCA plates with Rough (lactose-positive, yellow dye) and Smooth (lactose-negative, red dye) growth, respectively. E and F: Gram stains of Smooth and Rough, respectively (100x objective). The Rough cells exhibit a”safety pin” appearance with stained poles and unstained center whereas the Smooth bacteria have a typical gram-negative rod morphology. G–J: The BURK production stock was grown on SBA plates at 37°C for three days. Smooth or Rough colonies were suspended in PBS and the suspensions were dried on microscope slides and stained with the fluorescent DNA binding dye PI. The slides were viewed on an Olympus BX51 microscope with phase contrast (100x, oil immersion objective) or fluorescence (ex. 535 nm/em. 617 nm) microscopy. G: Smooth colony bacteria viewed by phase contrast. H: Smooth colony bacteria stained with PI and viewed with fluorescence. I: Rough colony bacteria viewed by phase contrast. J: Rough colony bacteria stained with PI and viewed with fluorescence.
Fig 5Infection of J774.A1 macrophage cultures with the Smooth and Rough variants of Bp MSHR5848.
The MOIs were 19.4 and 19.1, respectively. The MSHR5848 Smooth was phagocytosed to an almost fivefold greater extent than the MSHR5848 Rough strain, as shown by the 3 h viable counts. The counts recovered from Smooth-infected cells at all three time point were greater than those from Rough-infected macrophages (p < 0.0001).
Cytotoxicity of the Smooth and Rough variants of Bp MSHR5848 in J774.A1 macrophage cultures.
| MNGC or necrotic | MNGC | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variant | % cell loss | % cells dead (TB) | cells (% of total) | nuclei (%) |
| Smooth | 75 | 75 | 17.7 | 67.2 |
| Rough | 15 | 12.5 | 3.6 | 14.5 |
aTB: determined by trypan blue staining and does not include unstained necrotic (dead) cells.
bThe extensive cell loss induced by the Smooth infection minimized the significance of these values.
Fig 6Comparison of the virulence of variants Smooth and Rough in a mouse infection model.
BALB/c mice were challenged IP with five ten-fold dilutions of Smooth (panel A) or Rough (panel B), as described previously [11]. The decline in numbers of mice surviving with time for each dose group (10 mice/group) is shown. Infection with Rough was associated with more lethality/morbidity and a faster loss of survival than infection with Smooth.
Growth conditions used to produce colony morphotype switching in MSHR5848 variant colony stocks.
| 6 | Incubation | Colony reversion | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | Medium | Addition | Temp | Atmosphere | Shaking | Time and sampling | Smooth | Rough |
| 1 | Distilled water | - | 37°C | aerobic | no | 24 h | 0/11 | 0/11 |
| 2 | TSB, pH 7.4 | - | 37°C | aerobic | no | 24 h | " | 2-Feb |
| 3 | TSB, pH 4.0 | - | 37°C | aerobic | no | 24 h | " | 2-Feb |
| 4 | TSB, pH 8.5 | - | 37°C | aerobic | no | 24 h | " | 2-Feb |
| 5 | TSB, pH 7.4 | - | 42°C | aerobic | no | 24 h | " | 2-Feb |
| 6 | TSB, pH 7.4 | 350mM NaCl | 37°C | aerobic | no | 24 h | " | 1-Jan |
| 7 | TSB, pH 7.4 | 50mM NaNO2 | 37°C | aerobic | no | 24 h | " | 1-Jan |
| 8 | TSB, pH 7.4 | 2mM H2O2 | 37°C | aerobic | no | 24 h | " | 0/11 |
| 9 | TSB, pH 7.4 | - | 37°C | aerobic | no | 7 days | " | 4-Apr |
| 10 | TSB, pH 7.4 | - | 37°C | hypoxic | no | 24 h | " | 0/11 |
| 11 | LB | - | 37°C | aerobic | yes | serial plating, 2–72 h | " | 0/11 |
| 12 | SBAP | - | 37°C | aerobic | no | 3 days | " | 0/11 |
| 13 | LB | ciprofloxacin | 37°C | aerobic | no | stationary phase culture | " | 0/11 |
| 14 | TSB, pH 7.4 | - | 37°C | aerobic | yes | 24 h | 6/6 | nd |
aSingle colony stocks of each variant were prepared, 21 of Smooth and 17 of Rough. Growth conditions tested for reversion (#1–14) are described in the Materials and Methods.
bNumber of single colony stocks with revertants to the other type for the total number stocks tested. The mean frequency of reversion to the other type for each condition ranged from 0.8 to 21% (range of 1–75% in individual tests).
cA total of 17/21 Smooth colony stocks were tested in conditions #1–12 and 14; and a maximum of 13/17 Rough colony stocks were tested in conditions #1–13. For conditions 2, 3, and 5–7, the one to two stocks of Rough tested switched to Smooth at very low rates (0.1 to 1.3%).
dIncubated in GasPak jar with an anaerobic gas-generating system.
eAs described by C. Austin et al., 2015
fSerial plating (0 h–30 h) of stationary phase culture, as described by A. Butt et al., Biochem. J., 2014
gPerformed with freshly isolated Smooth revertant from Rough colony stock 1, after the latter had been incubated 7 days at 37°C (condition #9).
hThe six Smooth revertants produced Rough variants in condition #14.
Metabolic profiling of MSHR5848 variants using the 94 GENIII phenotypes.
| Mean threshold values | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Smooth | Rough |
| N-Acetyl-D-Glucosamine | 93 | 33.3 |
| N-Acetyl-D-Galactosamine | 97 | 30 |
| D-Mannose | 93 | 71.7 |
| D-Sorbitol | 90.7 | 57 |
| D-Mannitol | 93 | 47.7 |
| Myo-Inositol | 96 | 59.3 |
| Glycerol | 95 | 16 |
| Glycyl-L-Proline | 47.7 | 8.3 |
| L-Arginine | 96 | 4.7 |
| L-Aspartic Acid | 92.7 | 17 |
| L-Pyroglutamic Acid | 96.3 | 8.7 |
| L-Serine | 94 | 41.7 |
| D-Gluconic Acid | 95.3 | 54.3 |
| Citric Acid | 91.7 | 21.7 |
| α-Keto-Butyric Acid | 94 | 85.7 |
aA total of 32 substrates (of 71 carbon sources and 23 antimicrobial chemicals) differed between the two strains in at least 1 of 3 tests done. Included in the table are the 15 substrates which consistently differed between strains in all 3 tests.
bThe MSHR5848 variants were incubated in GENIII plates on the Omnilog®, and the data were analyzed by the Retrospect software. The respiratory activity, reported as arbitrary OmniLog units (OU), was normalized on a 0–100 scale (threshold values), for differences in metabolism for the chemicals. The threshold cut-off values for each response (“X”) were the following: X < 20 (negative, white), 20 < X < 80 (borderline, light grey), and X ≥ 80 (positive, dark grey)
cThe Rough variant’s values were within 2 units of the cut-off (20) for the threshold negative group.
Differences in responses of MSHR5848 variants to PM substrates.
| PM Plate | No. wells | Substrate | Class or Mode of Action |
| 1 | 6 | L-Threonine | C-Source |
| Citric Acid | C-Source | ||
| L-Asparagine | C-Source | ||
| D-Glucose-1-Phosphate | C-Source | ||
| D-Galactonic Acid-g-Lactone | C-Source | ||
| N-Acetyl-D-Glucosamine | C-Source | ||
| 2 | 3 | L-Pyroglutamic Acid | C-Source |
| Putrescine | C-Source | ||
| D,L Carnitine | C-Source | ||
| 10 | 2 | pH 4.5 | pH, growth at 4.5 |
| pH 4.5 + L-Methionine | pH, decarboxylase | ||
| 13 | 1 | Thallium (I) acetate | toxic cation |
| 14 | 1 | Cadmium Chloride | transport, toxic cation |
| 15 | 1 | Guanidine hydrochloride | membrane, chaotropic agent |
| 16 | 3 | Chloroxylenol | Fungicide, disinfectant |
| Dichlofluanid | fungicide, phenylsulphamide | ||
| Potassium Tellurite | transport, toxic anion | ||
| 17 | 1 | Aminotriazole | histidine biosynthesis, catalase |
| 18 | 3 | Ketoprofen | anti-capsule |
| 2-Phenylphenol | DNA intercalator | ||
| Tinidazole | Mutagen, nitroimidazole | ||
| 19 | 2 | Umbelliferone | DNA intercalator |
| Thioglycerol | reducing agent, thiol, adenosyl methionine antagonist | ||
| 20 | 2 | Captan | fungicide, carbamate, multisite |
| 8-Hydroxyquinoline | chelator, lipophilic | ||
| 4 | 15 | L-Methionine | S-Source |
| N-acetyl-D,L Methionine | S-Source | ||
| L-Cysteine | S-Source | ||
| D-Methionine | S-Source | ||
| L-Methionine Sulfoxide | S-Source | ||
| L-Cysteinyl-Glycine | S-Source | ||
| Glycyl-L-Methionine | S-Source | ||
| Glutathione | S-Source | ||
| Cystathionine | S-Source | ||
| Lanthionine | S-Source | ||
| D-Cysteine | S-Source | ||
| Thiophosphate | S-Source | ||
| Dithiophosphate | S-Source | ||
| L-Djenkolic Acid | S-Source | ||
| D,L-Ethionine | S-Source | ||
| 7 | 5 | tryptophan-Asp | N-source, dipeptide |
| tryptophan-tyrosine | N-source, dipeptide | ||
| tryptophan-phenylalanine | N-source, dipeptide | ||
| phenylalanine-tryptophan | N-source, dipeptide | ||
| phenylalanine-Serine | N-source, dipeptide | ||
| 15 | 1 | Domiphen bromide | membrane, detergent, cationic, fungicide |
| 17 | 1 | Phenylarsine Oxide | tyrosine phosphatase |
| 19 | 3 | Iodonitro Tetrazolium Violet | respiration |
| Coumarin | DNA intercalator | ||
| Harmane | imidazoline binding sites, agonist | ||
Fig 2Phenotypic microarray data.
The 20 PM plates are used to identify strain differences in ability to metabolize different sources of carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus or sulfur; or differences in sensitivity to antimicrobial conditions. Kinetic data were collected every 15 min for 48 h and the variant curves were compared, as shown. Gray: overlapping activity; blue area: greater Smooth response; and red area: greater Rough activity.
Fig 3Western blot of LPS from Bp strains.
Purified LPS from MSHR5848 Smooth and Rough, and Bp strain 1106a, were separated by SDS-PAGE and a western blot was done using monoclonal antibody (mAb) 11G3-1, specific for Bp LPS O polysaccharide (OPS). Unlike the typical Type A banding pattern of most Bp strains (1106a), the variants displayed identical higher molecular weight patterns.
Fig 4Comparison of the MSHR5848 variants to identify WGS differences.
Consensus sequences for Smooth and Rough were aligned to identify significant sequence variations. A three base sequence (TAT) located on MSHR5848 chromosome 2 positions 401,708–401,710, was present in the Smooth but not in the Rough WGS (orange box). The indel is within the presumed promotor region of a gene annotated as a putative lipoprotein (DP65_RS19865/DP65_3853) and nearly identical to a hypothetical protein encoded on the genome of Burkholderia bacteriophage phiE12-2.
Comparison of relative virulence for mice of strains derived from Bp MSHR5848.
| Day 21 | Day 60 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95% Credible Interval | 95% Credible Interval | |||||
| Variant | Dose, CFU | Lower | Upper | Dose, CFU | Lower | Upper |
| Smooth | 5.18 x 103 | 1.67 x 103 | 1.7 x 104 | 1.12 x 102 | 3.58 | 8.98 x 102 |
| Rough | 4.69 x 102 | 1.38 x 102 | 1.42 x 103 | 15.1 | 0.01 | 1.51 x 102 |
aBALB/c mice were challenged by the IP route with the Smooth or Rough variant of B. pseudomallei MSHR5848, and the mice were monitored for morbidity and mortality for 60 days. The day 21 and 60 survival data were evaluated statistically to determine LD50 values and compare virulence potencies by using Bayesian probit analysis as described in the methods.
bBoth the day 21 and day 60 LD50 values of Rough were approximately tenfold less than that of Smooth; and the day 21 LD50 values were significantly different with a probability ≥ 95% by Bayesian probit analysis.