Literature DB >> 28291834

The isolation and characterization of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia T4-like bacteriophage DLP6.

Danielle L Peters1, Paul Stothard2, Jonathan J Dennis1.   

Abstract

Increasing isolation of the extremely antibiotic resistant bacterium Stenotrophomonas maltophilia has caused alarm worldwide due to the limited treatment options available. A potential treatment option for fighting this bacterium is 'phage therapy', the clinical application of bacteriophages to selectively kill bacteria. Bacteriophage DLP6 (vB_SmoM-DLP6) was isolated from a soil sample using clinical isolate S. maltophilia strain D1571 as host. Host range analysis of phage DLP6 against 27 clinical S. maltophilia isolates shows successful infection and lysis in 13 of the 27 isolates tested. Transmission electron microscopy of DLP6 indicates that it is a member of the Myoviridae family. Complete genome sequencing and analysis of DLP6 reveals its richly recombined evolutionary history, featuring a core of both T4-like and cyanophage genes, which suggests that it is a member of the T4-superfamily. Unlike other T4-superfamily phages however, DLP6 features a transposase and ends with 229 bp direct terminal repeats. The isolation of this bacteriophage is an exciting discovery due to the divergent nature of DLP6 in relation to the T4-superfamily of phages.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28291834      PMCID: PMC5349666          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173341

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

The spread and increasing incidence of antibiotic resistance is imminent, with experts suggesting we will face a “post-antibiotic era” in the 21st century [1]. The situation has recently become dire, as a new mechanism of antibiotic resistance towards one of the globally-recognized ‘last-resort’ antibiotics colistin has evolved [2]. The extremely antibiotic resistant bacterium Stenotrophomonas maltophilia has been increasingly identified as a causative agent in both nosocomial and community-acquired infections [3]. Infections associated with S. maltophilia include, but are not limited to pneumonia, bacteremia, meningitis, endocarditis, catheter-related bacteremia/septicemia and acute exacerbations in patients with cystic fibrosis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [3, 4]. Due to the ubiquitous nature of S. maltophilia in the environment and the possibility of spreading this bacterium through cough-generated aerosols, infection prevention has proven to be difficult [3, 5]. Once infected with S. maltophilia, treatment options are limited due to its innate resistance to a broad array of antibiotics including trimethoprim / sulfamethoxazole, β-lactams, macrolides, cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides, carbapenems, chloramphenicol, tetracyclines, and polymyxin. Due to the limited treatment options, alternative strategies are being investigated in order to combat this extremely drug resistant bacterium. The clinical application of bacteriophages to selectively kill infecting bacteria, known as “phage therapy”, is a potential solution to extremely antibiotic resistant bacteria. During the Second World War, Soviet and German armies utilized phage therapy to treat dysentery of their soldiers, while the United States military conducted classified research on it [6]. Additionally, some clinicians worldwide continued to use phage therapy from the 1920s to the early 1950s [6]. Unfortunately, with the advent of broad-spectrum antibiotics and a limited understanding of phage biology, phage therapy was largely abandoned in the West. However, with the recent significant rise in antibiotic resistance in bacterial pathogens throughout the world, interest in the efficacious use of phage therapy has been renewed. Recent studies utilizing phage therapy to treat multi-drug resistant infections in animal models [7-16] and human clinical trials [17-20] have shown that phages can be a successful treatment option. To use phages in the clinical treatment of infections, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires characterization of the phages to prove they do not include moronic genes encoding toxins or other undesirable proteins which could enhance bacterial virulence [21]. Therefore, all phages isolated for use in clinical therapy must be fully characterized through complete genome sequencing and functional analysis. Towards that goal, the isolation and characterization of the novel S. maltophilia phage vB_SmoM-DLP6 (DLP6) is described herein. This phage is related to T4-superfamily of phages and exhibits an interesting combination of T4 and cyanobacteriophage genes.

Materials and methods

Bacterial strains and growth conditions

Five S. maltophilia strains were acquired from the Canadian Burkholderia cepacia complex Research and Referral Repository (CBCCRRR; Vancouver, BC). The S. maltophilia strains used for isolation of phage from soil samples were D1585, D1571, D1614, D1576 and D1568. An additional 22 S. maltophilia strains were gifted from the Provincial Laboratory for Public Health—North (Microbiology), Alberta Health Services, for host range analysis. All strains were grown aerobically overnight at 30°C on half-strength Luria-Bertani (½ LB) solid medium or in ½ LB broth with shaking at 225 RPM.

Phage isolation, propagation, host range analysis and electron microscopy

DLP6 was isolated from planter soil located at the Kinsman Sports Center in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada using strain D1571 and a previously described extraction protocol [22]. Propagation of DLP6 was performed using soft agar overlays: 100 μl liquid culture and 100 μl phage stock were incubated 20 min at room temperature, mixed with 3 ml 0.7% ½ LB top agar, overlaid on a plate of ½ LB solid medium, and incubated at 30°C until plaque formation was complete. High titre stocks were made by overlaying plates with confluent lysis with 3 ml modified SM and the top agar was scraped into a sterile falcon tube. The top agar was pelleted by centrifugation for 5 min at 10,000 × g and the supernatant was removed and filter-sterilized using a Millex-HA 0.45 μm syringe-driven filter unit (Millipore, Billerica, MA), followed by storage at 4°C. Titres were obtained using serial dilutions of phage stock into SM, followed by the soft agar overlay technique described above and incubation at 30°C until plaque formation was complete. Host range analysis was performed using a panel of 27 clinical S. maltophilia and 19 P. aeruginosa strains. Soft-agar overlays containing 100 μl liquid culture were allowed to solidify for 10 minutes at room temperature. Plates were spotted with 10 μl drops of DLP6 at multiple dilutions and assayed for clearing and/or plaque formation after incubation at 30°C for 36 h. For electron microscopy, phage stocks were prepared as described above with the following modifications: ½ LB agarose plates and ½ LB soft agarose were used for overlays, MilliQ-filtered water for phage recovery and a 0.22 μm filter was used for syringe-driven filtration. A carbon-coated copper grid was incubated with lysate for 2 min and stained with 4% uranyl acetate for 30 s. Transmission electron micrographs were captured using a Philips/FEI (Morgagni) transmission electron microscope with charge-coupled device camera at 80 kV (University of Alberta Department of Biological Sciences Advanced Microscopy Facility). The average capsid diameter, tail length and tail width were calculated using Microsoft Excel based on measurements from 10 individual virions.

Phage DNA isolation, RFLP analysis and sequencing

DLP6 genomic DNA was isolated from bacteriophage lysate using the Wizard Lambda DNA purification system (Promega Corp., Madison, WI) with a modified protocol [23, 24]. A 10 ml aliquot of high-titre filter-sterilized phage lysate was treated with 10 μl DNase I (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA), 100 μl 100x DNase I buffer (1 M TrisHCl, 0.25 M MgCl2, 10 mM CaCl2), and 6 μl RNase (Thermo Scientific) and incubated 1 h at 37°C to degrade the bacterial nucleic acids. Following incubation, 400 μl of 0.5 M EDTA and 25 μl of 20 mg/ml proteinase K (Applied Biosystems, Carlsbad, CA) was added and incubated 1 h at 55°C to inactivate DNase I. The lysate was cooled to room temperature and added to 8.4 g of guanidine thiocyanate, along with 1 ml of 37°C resuspended Wizard DNA Clean-Up Resin (Promega Corporation, Madison, WI). This mixture was rocked for 10 min then pelleted by centrifugation for 10 min at 5,000 x g. The supernatant was drawn off until ~5 ml remained. Remaining mixture was resuspended by swirling, transferred to a syringe attached to a Wizard Minicolumn (Promega Corporation). The Wizard Minicolumn was attached to The Vac-Man® Jr. Laboratory Vacuum Manifold (Promega Corporation) and placed under vacuum to remove the supernatant. The column was then washed with 2 ml 80% isopropanol and dried by centrifugation for 2 min at 10,000 x g. Phage DNA was eluted from the column following a 1 min incubation of 100 μl of 80°C nuclease-free water (Integrated DNA Technologies, Coralville, IA) followed by centrifugation for 1 min at 10,000 x g. A NanoDrop ND-1000 spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA) was used to determine purity and concentration of eluted DNA. Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis was used with 18 FastDigest (Thermoscientific) restriction enzymes: BamHI, EcoRI, AciI, HpaII, XbaI, HindIII, KpnI, SmaI, ApaI, SaII, PstI, SpHI, SacI, ClaI, Ndel, SpeI, Xhol and HaeIII. Restriction reactions were set up using 1 μl of FastDigest enzyme, 2 μl of FastDigest restriction buffer, 1 μg of phage DNA and topped up to 20 μl with nuclease free water. Reactions were incubated at 37°C for 20 min and separated on a 1% (wt/vol) agarose gel in 1x TAE (pH 8.0). Sequencing of DLP6 was performed at The Applied Genomics Core at the University of Alberta. Purified DLP6 DNA was prepared for sequencing using a Nextera XT library prep kit, creating a library size of 223 bp. The library was used for paired-end sequencing on a MiSeq (Illumina, San Diego, CA) platform using a MiSeq v2 reagent kit. The Q30 for all reads was 92.5%.

Lifecycle of DLP6

DLP6 resistant colonies of S. maltophilia D1571 were isolated by using the top agar overlay method using a phage stock at a titer of 1x105 PFU/mL. Following overnight incubation at 30°C, a 3 mL aliquot of SM was transferred to each plate, supernatant was collected and used for serial dilutions to obtain superinfection resistant single colonies on ½ LB plates. Individual colonies were picked, washed with SM and used to produce freezer stocks. Superinfection experiments were performed using overnight cultures of the potential lysogens and DLP6 at a 1x105 PFU/mL titer. Single colonies for each potential lysogen or pseudolysogen were used for colony PCR to detect the presence of DLP6. Identifying the temporary presence of DLP6 in the cell during pseudolysogeny was determined using specific sets of internal primers for DLP6.

Pulse Field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE)

Overnight cultures of wild type D1571 and five DLP6 PCR positive single colony isolates were used to generate plugs following the protocol outline by Sueh et al. 2013[25]. A SpeI (New England Biolabs) or XbaI (Thermo Fisher Scientific) restriction digest was set up for all six samples and incubated for 45 min at 37°C. A 1% agarose gel made with TAE was used for the PFGE. Switch time was 50–90 for 12 hrs at 6 V/cm. Ladders used were Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Lambda DNA/HindIII markers (Promega) for comparison of high and low molecular weight DNA. Gels were stained using SYBR Safe DNA Gel Stain (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and visualized with a ChemiDoc MP imaging system and the Image Lab software (Bio-Rad).

Bioinformatics analysis

A single contig was assembled using the CLC Genomics Workbench (Qiagen, Toronto, ON). Although no ambiguous regions in the contig were observed, PCR amplification and sequencing was used to confirm the assembly. All attempts by PCR amplification to identify a DNA segment between the direct repeats or to show genome circularization via direct repeat annealing were negative. Open reading frames (ORFs) were identified with the GLIMMER plugin [26] for Geneious [27] using the Bacteria and Archaea setting, as well as GeneMarkS (http://exon.gatech.edu/GeneMark/genemarks.cgi) for phage [28] and Prodigal [29]. Conserved domain searches were performed using CD-Search [30]. Pfam was used to identify functions for hypothetical protein hits from BLASTP [31]. The contig was annotated and confirmed with an Interactive Remote Invocation Service utilizing the RAST pipeline [32-34]. BLASTN and BLASTP (for full genomes and individual proteins, respectively) was used to gain more information for each RAST annotation, and to identify any potential related phages [35]. BLASTP hits above 1.00E-3 were not recorded and the coding sequence (CDS) was annotated as hypothetical. Rho independent terminators were predicted using ARNold [36-38] searching both strands. Promoters were predicted using PHIRE [39] and plotted using WebLogo 3 [40]. tRNAs were identified using tRNAscan-SE using the general tRNA model [41]. Multiple sequence alignments were performed with the top 250 BLASTP hits for gp20 and from core T4 and cyanophage proteins [42] using the MUSCLE [43] plugin for Geneious [44]. The maximum number of iterations selected was 8, with the anchor optimization option selected. The trees from iterations 1 and 2 were not retained. The distance measure for iteration 1 was kmer6_6, and was pctid_kimura for subsequent iterations. The clustering method was UPGMB for all iterations. An unrooted tree was constructed from MUSCLE alignments with the FastTree 2.1.5 [45] plugin for Geneious [44]. The Jones-Taylor-Thornton model was used with rate category of sites set to 20. A PROmer comparison was conducted with DLP6 and ΦM12 with the following parameters: breaklen = 60, maxgap = 30, mincluster = 10, minmatch = 3 [46].

Results and discussion

Isolation, host range and morphology

Phage DLP6 was isolated from a soil sample using clinical isolate S. maltophilia strain D1571 as the host. Propagation of DLP6 to high titre has proven difficult in liquid cultures, with liquid grown lysate concentrations remaining constant at 106 PFU/ml despite attempts to increase progeny numbers. DLP6 exhibits a unique plaquing inhibition that was previously observed in Burkholderia cepacia complex phages KL1 and AH2 [47], as well as S. maltophlila phages DLP1 and DLP2 [22]. Although high titer stocks (1010 plaque forming units [PFU]/ml) can easily be obtained using the top agar plating method, use of such high titre stock inhibits the plaque formation on a bacterial lawn. Plaquing of DLP6 is inhibited at titers above 106 plaque forming units (PFU/ml). Plaque development occurs readily at 30°C within 24 hr, forming diffuse plaques with irregular boarders and a mean size of 0.8 ± 0.3 mm. Host range analysis of DLP6 revealed a moderate host range within S. maltophilia clinical isolates, infecting 13 out of 27 clinical isolates (S1 Table). Whereas S. maltophilia phages DLP1 and DLP2 exhibited some cross-species infectivity 22, extended host range analysis of DLP6 using P. aeruginosa isolates did not yield successful infections. Initially, we produced evidence to suggest that DLP6 existed in S. maltophilia D1571 as a prophage. However, after extensive experimentation it was determined that DLP6 undergoes only pseudolysogeny. PFGE analysis using SpeI or XbaI separately showed no integration of the DLP6 genome into the S. maltophilia D1571 chromosome, and DLP6-specific PCR indicated the genome’s presence after 2–3 passages, but not after >5 passages. DLP6 is classified in the Myoviridae family of the Caudovirales order due to its icosahedral head and contractile tail (Fig 1). The average capsid height, tail length and width measurements for DLP6 are 99, 144, and 23 nm respectively.
Fig 1

DLP6 phage morphology.

Liquid phage lysate was incubated on a carbon coated copper grid, stained with 4% uranyl acetate and visualized at 180,000-fold magnification by a transmission electron microscope. Scale bar represent 50 nm. The average capsid height measurement for DLP6 was 99 nm, average tail length of 144 nm and average tail width of 23 nm.

DLP6 phage morphology.

Liquid phage lysate was incubated on a carbon coated copper grid, stained with 4% uranyl acetate and visualized at 180,000-fold magnification by a transmission electron microscope. Scale bar represent 50 nm. The average capsid height measurement for DLP6 was 99 nm, average tail length of 144 nm and average tail width of 23 nm.

Genome characterization

Purified DLP6 gDNA was isolated and exposed to a panel of 18 restriction enzymes for RFLP analysis. Even though controls were performed to detect the presence of restriction inhibitors, the DLP6 genome was assembled into a linear scaffold of 168,489 bp with a GC content of 55.8% using 43,112 reads for a mean coverage of 57 reads and an overall Q30 score of 93.1%. The direct terminal repeats are covered by up to 45 reads (S1 Fig). The contig can be found in GenBank with the accession number KU682439.2. The genome is predicted to encode 241 coding DNA sequences and 30 tRNAs of 14 different specificities (Fig 2, S2 and S3 Tables). The genome is arranged in a semi-modular format, with DNA replication/repair genes (dark blue) primarily grouped together, whereas the regulatory genes (light blue) are mainly grouped within the same region as the DNA replication/repair genes. Auxiliary metabolism (black) genes are dispersed throughout the genome, occurring in small pairs rather than a large set. The phage morphogenesis (dark purple) genes are grouped in a cluster, with the exception of gp34 (AAY80_073; long tail fiber). The 30 tRNA genes are grouped together spanning the genome from 92,962–113,834 bp. There is no lysis (red) module in DLP6, rather four genes encoding typical lysis proteins are randomly located throughout the genome.
Fig 2

Genomic map of DLP6.

The scale (in bp) is shown in the outermost periphery of the genome along with late viral promoters (dark green) and terminators (dark red), as predicted by the algorithims in the software programs PHIRE and ARNold, respectively. Assigned functions for each predicted open reading frame are as follows: auxiliary metabolism (black), lysis (red), gene expression (light blue), phage morphogenesis (dark purple), DNA replication/repair (lilac), tRNA (bright green), repeat region (pink) and hypothetical (grey). Due to space constraints, genes are located either inside of or outside the circle thereby reducing overlap. The bp numbering of the circular map takes into account annealing of the direct repeats, reducing the genome length from 168,489 bp (- 229 bp) to 168,260 bp.

Genomic map of DLP6.

The scale (in bp) is shown in the outermost periphery of the genome along with late viral promoters (dark green) and terminators (dark red), as predicted by the algorithims in the software programs PHIRE and ARNold, respectively. Assigned functions for each predicted open reading frame are as follows: auxiliary metabolism (black), lysis (red), gene expression (light blue), phage morphogenesis (dark purple), DNA replication/repair (lilac), tRNA (bright green), repeat region (pink) and hypothetical (grey). Due to space constraints, genes are located either inside of or outside the circle thereby reducing overlap. The bp numbering of the circular map takes into account annealing of the direct repeats, reducing the genome length from 168,489 bp (- 229 bp) to 168,260 bp. Three interesting phage-encoded proteins are ADP-ribosyltransferases (Alt: AAY80_209, ModA: AAY80_029, ADP-ribosyltransferase: AAY80_145) that were identified using the Pfam database. Two of these proteins are orthologs to T4 proteins Alt and ModA. It is known that phage T4 encodes three ADP-ribosyltransferases (Alt, ModA and ModB), each modifying specific groups of host proteins. The Alt protein is a component of the phage head and enters the host cell during the infection process with the phage DNA, ModA and ModB [48]. Following entry into the cell, Alt immediately ADP-ribosylates the host RNA polymerase (RNAP), causing transcription of host genes to stop and transcription from the T4 “early” promoters to be carried out instead [49]. The ModA modification of the host RNAP prevents transcription from T4 early promoters and possibly primes the RNAP for T4-encoded auxiliary factors (gp55, gp33, gp45 and gp44/62) to transcribe middle and late genes [50]. Identification of the previously hypothetical proteins into the Alt and ModA families helps to provide insight into the possible role these proteins play in DLP6 phage infection and transcription initiation and regulation. Phage promoter sequences lack the conserved structure observed in bacterial promoters with -10 and -35 regions; instead, they feature short consensus sequences that are specific to different phages [51]. These short consensus sequences were identified using the phage-specific program PHIRE, and visualized with WebLogo 3 (Fig 3). There are 25 phage promoters identified, with 22 of the phage promoters found repeating in groups of two in front of a gene cluster. A single phage promoter is located upstream of genes AAY80_058 (hypothetical protein) and AAY80_059 (peptidase protein). The next single phage promoter is located upstream of the gene cluster beginning with AAY80_139 (kinase protein) through to AAY80_150 (hypothetical protein). The final single phage promoter is located upstream of a small cluster of hypothetical proteins beginning at AAY80_217 through to AAY80_220. Two phage promoters are found upstream of AAY80_060 (hypothetical protein) in a gene cluster coding for 32 proteins, including DNA primase (AAY80_083) phage tail fiber (AAY80_073), ribonucleotide diphosphate reductase subunit alpha (AAY80_086) and beta (AAY80_089), and many hypothetical proteins (locus tags ending in 060, 063–067, 070–071, 074–077, 079–082, 084–085, 088 and 090). The next set of phage promoters is located upstream of AAY80_092 (hypothetical protein) to AAY80_112 (hypothetical protein). Annotated genes included in this gene cluster are AAY80_098 (RNase H), AAY80_104 (PhoH), AAY80_106 (exonuclease), AAY80_109 (SleB), AAY80_110 (dCMP deaminase) and AAY80_111 (deoxycytidylate deaminase). The next two sets of gene clusters, AAY80_113–120 and AAY80_121–130, encode hypothetical proteins only and both clusters are under control of two promoters each. Gene cluster AAY80_131–138 utilizes two promoter sequences and encodes mainly hypothetical proteins, but also a guanosine 3',5'-bis(diphosphate) 3'-pyrophosphohydrolase (AAY80_131) and a transposase (AAY80_133). The adjacent gene cluster under control of two promoters is upstream of AAY80_151 (hypothetical protein) through to AAY80_158 (hypothetical protein) and contains nine tRNAs. The remaining 21 tRNAs are under control of two promoters upstream of AAY80_159 (hypothetical protein) through to AAY80_180 (hypothetical protein). Two promoters control the next gene cluster spanning from AAY80_181–202 that contains genes encoding many hypothetical proteins and proteins such as DNA ligase (AAY80_192), DNA helicase loader (AAY80_201) and ssDNA binding protein (AAY80_202). Two small gene clusters encoding a total of eight hypothetical proteins (AAY80_213–216 and AAY80_221–224) are both under control of two phage promoters. The last set of double phage promoters controls the gene cluster from AAY80_225 to AAY80_057 where the phage genome is circularized. This final gene cluster contains many proteins involved in DNA replication and homologous recombination.
Fig 3

Predicted promoter sequence in DLP6.

Putative phage promoter consensus sequence identified using PHIRE [39] and plotted using WebLogo 3 [40].

Predicted promoter sequence in DLP6.

Putative phage promoter consensus sequence identified using PHIRE [39] and plotted using WebLogo 3 [40]. Rho-independent transcription termination sites were discovered using ARNold, which utilizes two complementary programs, Erpin [36] and RNAmotif [37]. Of the 54 potential termination sites identified, only 19 were retained as authentic because they had a ΔG of -10 kcal/mol or less (Table 1). The 19 terminators were found downstream of AAY80_018 (precursor of major head subunit), AAY80_042 (triphosphate pyrophosphohydrolase), AAY80_057 (hypothetical protein), AAY80_090 (hypothetical protein), AAY80_091 (RuvC), AAY80_108 (hypothetical protein), AAY80_120 (hypothetical protein), AAY80_138 (hypothetical protein), AAY80_166 (hypothetical protein), AAY80_168 (hypothetical protein), AAY80_175 (endolysin), AAY80_180 (hypothetical protein), AAY80_199 and AAY80_200 (hypothetical proteins), AAY80_202 (ssDNA binding protein), AAY80_203 (lysozyme), AAY80_208 (endonuclease protein), AAY80_209 (hypothetical protein) and AAY80_212 (baseplate tail tube cap protein).
Table 1

Predicted Rho-independent terminators in DLP6.

Rho-independent terminators were identified using the ARNold [36, 37] program and putative terminators with a ΔG value of -10 kcal/mol or less were retained. DNA that is predicted to form the loop in the RNA is in emboldened, whereas DNA that is predicted to encode an RNA stem is underlined.

StartProgramStrandSequence-ΔG
15290both+CAATAAGAGAAGCCGCCGCAAGGCGGCTTTT16.80
32949both+AAGCCAGACAAGCCCCAGGCTCCGCCCTGGGGCTTTT17.50
43682both+TCAACGACTTAGCCCCAGACCCCGTTCTGGGGCTTTT16.10
72171both+CTAATTGGAAAGCCGCCTCCGGGCGGCTTT13.40
72816Rnamotif+GACTTAGCGAAGCCCCCGCCTGGGGGCTTT13.50
80627both+TTGATGGAAAAGGCTCTCTGCGGCTAACCGGCTCAGAGAGCCTTT13.46
85964both+GACTTAGCGAAGCCCCGCCCTGCGGGGCTTT14.80
93801both+CGCCCCTGGAAGCCCGCTTGGTCCGAGTGACTAGGCGGGCTTTT13.32
112696both+GTAATCCAAAAGGGCTGGTGTCCAAGATGCCAGCCCTTTT15.70
113321Rnamotif+CTATCTCGAAAGCCGCCGCAAGGCGGCTTT16.80
117336Rnamotif-ATCCATCTCGTCGAGAAGCAGGTCTTCCTGCTTCTCGTTTT11.70
119975both+TCAACGACTTAGCCCCTGAGCCACCTCAGGGGCTTTTCATTCCTG17.10
128844both+CTGTGAGAAAAGCCCTGCCTTGATCGGCGGGGCTTTTCCTTTGAT17.60
129411Erpin+CTTGACCGAAAAGCCCCGAAAGGGGCTTTTCTTTTGCCCA14.90
131176both-GCAAAGAAAAAGCCCAGGCATTGCGCCTGGGCTTTTCAATTACAT18.20
131178both+GTAATTGAAAAGCCCAGGCGCAATGCCTGGGCTTTTTCTTTGCG17.80
136291both-GATACAAGAAAGGCTCCCTCTCGGGAGCCTTTTGCTTTCACT15.00
136293both+TGAAAGCAAAAGGCTCCCGAGAGGGAGCCTTTCTTGTATCA17.80
139414Rnamotif+GACTTAGCGAAGCCCCCGAAAGGGGGCTTTACTTTTGGG17.60

Predicted Rho-independent terminators in DLP6.

Rho-independent terminators were identified using the ARNold [36, 37] program and putative terminators with a ΔG value of -10 kcal/mol or less were retained. DNA that is predicted to form the loop in the RNA is in emboldened, whereas DNA that is predicted to encode an RNA stem is underlined.

Phylogeny using DLP6 gp20 protein

A BLASTN search using DLP6 genome as a query revealed the closest hits are Sinorhizobium phages ΦN3, ΦM19, ΦM7 and ΦM12. All four phages have coverage of only 4% with a 72% identity. Although initial BLASTP and BLASTN searches indicated DLP6 was more closely related to members of the T4-superfamily of phages, more comparisons were required to classify DLP6 as a T4-superfamily phage. For a commonly used phylogenetic comparison, the protein sequence of portal protein gp20 was used in a BLASTP search to identify 250 of the most similar sequences [52-54]. The most significant hits came from cyanophages grouped into the T4-superfamily. A MUSCLE alignment was completed using the 250 BLASTP results compared to the DLP6 gp20 protein (AAY80_011). This alignment was then used to generate an unrooted tree with the FastTree plugin for Geneious (Fig 4). The generated tree positions DLP6 in a clade with Sinorhizobium phages ΦM12, ΦN3 and Caulobacter phage Cr30 (Fig 4).
Fig 4

Unrooted gp20 (portal vertex protein: AAY80_011) tree.

FastTree was used to generate the tree from a MUSCLE alignment between DLP6 gp20 and the top 250 BLASTP sequences. The local support value for each branch is shown on the tree and the bar is a marker of branch distance length. The clades featuring gp20 of T4 and gp20 of T4-superfamily cyanophages are indicated.

Unrooted gp20 (portal vertex protein: AAY80_011) tree.

FastTree was used to generate the tree from a MUSCLE alignment between DLP6 gp20 and the top 250 BLASTP sequences. The local support value for each branch is shown on the tree and the bar is a marker of branch distance length. The clades featuring gp20 of T4 and gp20 of T4-superfamily cyanophages are indicated.

DLP6 contains features from T4-superfamily enteric bacteriophages and T4-superfamily cyanophages

Genomic organization of DLP6 is similar to the Sinorhizobium transducing phage ΦM12, which has been classified into a new T4-superfamily fusing features of cyanophages and phages of enteric bacteria [42] (Fig 5). A set of “core universal” and “nearly universal” proteins has been determined for T4-superfamily phages [55, 56]. DLP6 contains all of the core and nearly universal proteins common to all T4-superfamily phages (Table 2). A MUSCLE comparison was used to align the T4-superfamily phage core proteins against their respective orthologs from 18 T4-superfamily phages, and their percent identity to each ortholog was determined (Table 2). Similar to ΦM12, DLP6 contains a second copy of gp19 tail tube monomer that was not found in the 17 other phages studied (21% similarity). The order of the gene products presented in Table 2 corresponds to the order they are found within the DLP6 genome. This order differs from the T4-superfamily phages, which start with gp41 (DNA primase-helicase). Results from the MUSCLE alignment reveal that DLP6 core proteins are most similar to their orthologs from cyanophages, with the exception of the UvsX protein, which is most similar to T4-superfamily phages of enteric bacteria. The alignment also shows DLP6 has the highest percent identity to ΦM12 core proteins. The ortholog with the highest similarity to a DLP6 protein was ΦM12 gp23, with 65% similarity. Overall, the most highly conserved proteins between DLP6 and the T4-superfamily cyanophages are RegA (early transcriptional regulator) and gp23 (major capsid protein), with similarity rates averaging 59 and 57% respectively. This suggests that DLP6 is divergent from the T4-superfamily phages. DLP6 does share additional proteins that are found within the T4-superfamily cyanophages or the T4-superfamily enteric phages.
Fig 5

Circos plot of DLP6 and ΦM12 PROmer comparisons.

Green ribbons indicate regions of similarity between the two genomes at the protein level encoded on the same strand, and representing a similarity of greater than 32%, with an average similarity of 56%. Red ribbons indicate regions of similarity at the protein level encoded on opposite strands, representing a similarity of greater than 32%, with an average similarity of 56%. The scale (in kbp) is shown on the periphery of the plots. PROmer parameters: breaklen = 60, maxgap = 30, mincluster = 10, minmatch = 3.

Table 2

MUSCLE alignment percent identity score of full-length protein sequences of DLP6 against universal core and nearly universal core proteins of 18 T4-superfamily phages.

Numbers indicate percent similarity to the related DLP6 protein.

Gene product: functionCyanophagesEnteric phages
ΦM12S-SM2P-SSM4P-Syn1HTVC008MS-Syn9S-Syn19S-ShM2P-Syn33S-SM1P-HM1S-CRM01T4Aeh44 RRKVP 40RB43ΦW-14
gp13: neck protein AAY80_00453.235.534.234.339.136.135.733.535.737.236.122.921.719.420.223.125.222.6
gp14: neck protein AAY80_00543.9172828.826.324.427.223.222.828.618.320.424.726.724.827.724.524.8
gp15: proximal tail sheath stabilization AAY80_0064031.927.93231.533.227.334.834.133.32730.924.326.823.516.623.620.8
gp16: small terminase AAY80_00730.727.625.925.521.429.227.531.126.730.430.430.121.718.616.717.623.215.2
gp17: large terminase AAY80_00842.547.248.147.246.948.548.748.94948.846.142.827.828.527.729.829.832
gp18: tail sheath monomer AAY80_00948.433.337.33543.735.738.113.537.638.834.432.831.731.830.931.531.821.9
gp19: tail tube monomer AAY80_01046.840.133.534.232.633.535.328.233.73430.140.733.330.631.836.834.913.8
gp20: portal vertex protein AAY80_01146.146.747.746.643.249.149.146.746.749.646.240.733.43233.73632.731.2
gp21: prohead core scaffold/protease AAY80_01641.349.347.754.151.649.15049.147.749.149.551.132.132.532.834.632.430
gp22: scaffold prohead core protein AAY80_01722.329.126.529.930.126.526.526.62725.927.825.919.320.222.117.820.611.6
gp23: precursor of major head subunit AAY80_01865.459.655.752.560.557.15856.35855.855.953.834.433.334.83534.344.8
DexA: exonuclease AAY80_01932.532.135.730.533.33534.232.929.322.212.213.711.28.214.611.4
gp3: head proximal tip of tail tube AAY80_02027.331.529.131.418.529.327.628.329.230.929.427.22018.517.817.520.314.8
UsvY: recombination, repair ssDNA binding AAY80_02139.627.13022.429.227.927.231.926.627.728.527.820.818.120.816.719.7
UsvW: helicase AAY80_0224042.944.841.147.947.144.847.245.845.536.839.532.333.932.13631.430.7
gp55: sigma factor, late transcription AAY80_02436.637.343.542.541.640.740.444.138.442.342.537.823.924.82225.422.824.7
gp47: recombination endonuclease subunit AAY80_02542.733.936.734.339.439.240.336.235.539.837.738.527.523.124.927.128.222.4
Gene product: functionCyanophagesEnteric phages
ΦM12S-SM2P-SSM4P-Syn1HTVC008MS-Syn9S-Syn19S-ShM2P-Syn33S-SM1P-HM1S-CRM01T4Aeh44 RRKVP 40RB43ΦW-14
gp46: recombination endonuclease subunit AAY80_02645.742.943.443.244.344.345.94544.945.244.237.831.225.529.22831.320.5
gp45: sliding clamp accessory protein AAY80_03634.243.840.138.642.233.540.835.938.839.640.639282726.936.926.125.8
gp44: clamp loader subunit AAY80_03846.855.754.148.952.956.254.355.354.655.352.448.134.436.635.335.732.532.8
gp62: clamp loader subunit AAY80_04037.131.829.632.135.633.131.642.533.831.637.231.821.118.119.527.32125.5
RegA: early gene translational repressor AAY80_04152.2606059.259.26062.360.86060.86056.249.648.448.448.441.633.1
gp43: DNA polymerase AAY80_05439.742.241.1403842.641.140.94142.641.939.628.731.318.831.329.826.4
UsvX: recombination protein AAY80_05547.923.925.326.425.125.325.324.524.726.125.826.249.952.747.846.135.1
gp41: DNA primase-helicase AAY80_05650.55758.853.754.653.553.756.253.554.353.851.737.440.939.738.638.731
Td: thymidylate synthase AAY80_06211.412.511.312.510.914.412.311.611.911.410.611.49.310.87.412.18.8
gp61: DNA primase AAY80_08344.63435.837.83739.836.237.539.240.83937.531.132.433.431.630.930.6
NrdA: ribonucleotide reductase subunit A AAY80_08646.846.347.445.547.747.346.548.147.947.948.143.629.91744.343.813.1
NrdB: ribonucleotide reductase subunit B AAY80_08944.245.942.644.645.14444.541.244.54441.237.539.318.341.737.719.4
gp33: late promoter transcription factor AAY80_11218.723.322.727.421.323.824.422.622.426.229.926.722.71924.120.714.830.2
NrdC: glutaredoxin AAY80_1733929.529.530.932.225.430.829.528.228.225.629.136.827.325.334.4
gp59: DNA helicase loader AAY80_20134.632.535.529.134.135.228.435.53531.230.123.424.819.321.720.5
gp32: ssDNA binding protein AAY80_20248.848.346.744.544.746.547.14849.548.547.346.734.230.230.633.125.3
gp51: baseplate hub assembly catalyst AAY80_20539.649.137.334.928.933.338.648.331.835.639.6317.18.122.75.59.7
gp26: baseplate hub AAY80_20636.331.134.332.136.135.436.334.435.638.93127.219.12315.824.614.824.3
Gene product: functionCyanophagesEnteric phages
ΦM12S-SM2P-SSM4P-Syn1HTVC008MS-Syn9S-Syn19S-ShM2P-Syn33S-SM1P-HM1S-CRM01T4Aeh44 RRKVP 40RB43ΦW-14
gp4: head completion protein AAY80_21150.346.345.335.138.347.346.644.645.945.346.63038.238.247.439.237.936.9
gp48: baseplate tail tube cap AAY80_2121914.61715.615.917.412.919.819.815.512.815.815.514.714.213.111.122.8
gp53: baseplate wedge AAY80_23029.82120.91723.623.520.123.824.422.415.521.816.119.720.820.21820.9
gp5: baseplate hub and tail lysozyme AAY80_23211.29.49.65.822.28.78.79.298.67.28.716.715.915.722.313.810.3
gp25: baseplate wedge AAY80_2334427.835.133.836.630.829.128.429.926.127.130.125.827.925.627.328.825.2
gp6: baseplate wedge AAY80_23433.126.724.330.531.624.724.723.125.123.529.627.321.521.623.621.822.722.6
gp7: baseplate wedge initiator AAY80_23511.35.346.37.44.74.54.44.34.74.84.411.110.810.510.111.1
gp8: baseplate wedge AAY80_23620.116.419.614.418.319.319.719.719.120.317.418.410.512.11110.911.5

Circos plot of DLP6 and ΦM12 PROmer comparisons.

Green ribbons indicate regions of similarity between the two genomes at the protein level encoded on the same strand, and representing a similarity of greater than 32%, with an average similarity of 56%. Red ribbons indicate regions of similarity at the protein level encoded on opposite strands, representing a similarity of greater than 32%, with an average similarity of 56%. The scale (in kbp) is shown on the periphery of the plots. PROmer parameters: breaklen = 60, maxgap = 30, mincluster = 10, minmatch = 3.

MUSCLE alignment percent identity score of full-length protein sequences of DLP6 against universal core and nearly universal core proteins of 18 T4-superfamily phages.

Numbers indicate percent similarity to the related DLP6 protein. All sequenced T4-superfamily cyanophages feature an accessory core set of 25 gene clusters (T4-GCs) that are not found within enteric bacteria T4-superfamily phages [55]. Of this accessory core, DLP6 encodes six of the core proteins: CobS (porphyrin biosynthetic protein), PhoH (P-starvation inducible protein), T4-CG 313 (hypothetical protein), T4-GC 321 (hypothetical protein), VlrC (predicted structural protein) and MazG (pyrophosphatase) (Table 3). Although DLP6 does contain these T4-superfamily cyanophage accessory core proteins, the DLP6 proteins are again divergent, with the maximum similarity found with the PhoH (P-starvation inducible protein) at 45% similar to P-HM1 cyanophage.
Table 3

MUSCLE alignment percent identity score of DLP6 amino acid sequences against T4-superfamily cyanophage accessory core proteins.

DLP6 contains six of the 25 T4-superfamily cyanophage core proteins. Numbers indicate percent similarity to the related DLP6 protein.

Gene product: functionCyanophages
ΦM12S-SM2P-SSM4Syn1HTVC008MSyn9Syn19S-ShM2Syn33S-SM1P-HM1S-CRM01
CobS: porphyrin biosyntheic protein AAY80_06141.641.943.640.342.241.241.941.541.142.740.7
PhoH: P-starvation inducible protein AAY80_10433.042.544.444.742.844.043.842.243.042.644.839.2
T4 Gc 313: hypothetical protein AAY80_09933.530.631.236.033.130.531.931.430.531.926.428.1
T4 Gc 321: hypothetical protein AAY80_10339.225.317.720.730.424.125.325.317.724.121.014.3
VlrC: predicted structural protein AAY80_23719.314.716.313.017.516.216.415.516.315.814.913.7
MazG: pyrophosphatase AAY80_04216.916.420.616.319.416.916.318.116.916.3

MUSCLE alignment percent identity score of DLP6 amino acid sequences against T4-superfamily cyanophage accessory core proteins.

DLP6 contains six of the 25 T4-superfamily cyanophage core proteins. Numbers indicate percent similarity to the related DLP6 protein. DLP6 was found to contain nine out of the designated 30 non-cyanophage core T4-superfamily proteins. A MUSCLE alignment of these nine proteins indicates that although this phage does contain the proteins, they do not share high amino acid similarities (Table 4). The protein sharing the highest similarity was the RnaseH protein, which had a maximum similarity of 32.6% with the RB43 phage protein. Again, these results demonstrate that DLP6, although classified within the T4-superfamily, it is more divergent than the other accepted members.
Table 4

MUSCLE alignment percent identity score of DLP6 amino acid sequences against T4-superfamily non-cyanophage core proteins.

This table includes 10 of the 32 non-cyanophage core proteins. Numbers indicate percent similarity to the related DLP6 protein.

Gene product: functionEnteric phages
T4Aeh44 RRKVP 40RB43ΦW-14
RnaseH AAY80_09828.932.528.932.232.68.8
gp1: dNMP kinase AAY80_13912.910.81012.38.99.2
dCMP deaminase AAY80_11024.524.622.826.61816
DsbA: ssDNA binding protein AAY80_03528.920.520.522.925.3
gp34: long tail fiber AAY80_07311.911.612.111.611.9
gp30: dna ligase AAY80_19224.723.521.929.724.532.3
Tk: thymidine kinase AAY80_13913.513.51211.413.58.4
GroES: head assembly chaperone with GroEL AAY80_16416.712.814207.6
gp59: loader of gp41 DNA helicase AAY80_20123.424.819.321.720.5

MUSCLE alignment percent identity score of DLP6 amino acid sequences against T4-superfamily non-cyanophage core proteins.

This table includes 10 of the 32 non-cyanophage core proteins. Numbers indicate percent similarity to the related DLP6 protein. Differences between the T4-superfamily superfamily members discussed in this paper as compared to DLP6 are interesting, given that DLP6 contains the complete set of T4-superfamily core group of proteins, six accessory core cyanophage proteins, and nine non-cyanophage accessory core proteins. Moreover, the ends of DLP6 genome feature 229 bp direct terminal repeats, unlike the genomes of other members of the T4-superfamily of phages which are cyclically permuted. This finding is unusual, and suggests that DNA circularization in the host cell occurs at cohesive sites. The direct terminal repeats are located in a region of DNA devoid of ORFs, or homology to known DNA sequences. The average number of tRNAs encoded by the T4-superfamily phages is ten, with the exception of S-CRM01, a freshwater cyanophage that encodes 33 tRNAs [57]. The DLP6 genome contains 30 tRNAs, which is in the high range for the T4-superfamily. DLP6 also encodes a transposase (AAY80_133) (Fig 2, S2 Table).

Conclusions

S. maltophilia bacteriophage DLP6 was isolated from a soil sample using S. maltophilia strain D1571 as the host bacterium. Phage DLP6 exhibits a moderate host range, infecting 13 out of 27 clinical S. maltophilia strains. A phylogenetic comparison of gp20 portal protein against the top 250 BLASTP results places DLP6 in a clade with Sinorhizobium phages ΦM12, ΦN3 and Caulobacter phage Cr30. Although DLP6 does encode all of the T4-superfamily core and nearly universal core orthologs, the similarity between these proteins and their nearest neighbors is typically less than 60%. The DLP6 genome also encodes six T4-superfamily cyanophage core proteins, but again, the nearest neighbor similarity is below 40%. There are nine T4-superfamily non-cyanophage core proteins found within the DLP6 genome, though the similarity between the DLP6 proteins and the T4-superfamily enteric phage orthologs averaged less than 30% similarity. Unlike other T4-superfamily phages, DLP6 possesses 229 bp direct terminal repeats at the ends of its genome instead of circular permutation. Although DLP6 also encodes a transposon, experimental investigation has shown it does not form a stable prophage in S. maltophilia strain D1571. The results presented in this paper suggest DLP6 is a divergent T4-superfamily phage, exhibiting characteristics not yet identified in other T4-superfamily phages.

Illumina pair-end sequencing reads aligning to start (1A) and end (1B) of DLP6 contig.

Geneious was used to map R1 and R2 to DLP6 reference contig. Sensitivity was set to medium sensitivity/fast. Fine-tuning was iterated up to five times. Reads were not trimmed. Coverage at ends was between one and 45. (PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Host range determination of DLP6.

(DOCX) Click here for additional data file.

Bacteriophage DLP6 coding sequences.

(DOCX) Click here for additional data file.

DLP6 tRNA annotations.

(DOCX) Click here for additional data file.
  55 in total

1.  Fast algorithms for large-scale genome alignment and comparison.

Authors:  Arthur L Delcher; Adam Phillippy; Jane Carlton; Steven L Salzberg
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2002-06-01       Impact factor: 16.971

2.  In vitro lung delivery of bacteriophages KS4-M and ΦKZ using dry powder inhalers for treatment of Burkholderia cepacia complex and Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  L Golshahi; K H Lynch; J J Dennis; W H Finlay
Journal:  J Appl Microbiol       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 3.772

3.  Occurrence of a sequence in marine cyanophages similar to that of T4 g20 and its application to PCR-based detection and quantification techniques.

Authors:  N J Fuller; W H Wilson; I R Joint; N H Mann
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Assessing phage therapy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa using a Galleria mellonella infection model.

Authors:  M L Beeton; D R Alves; M C Enright; A T A Jenkins
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 5.283

Review 5.  Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: an emerging global opportunistic pathogen.

Authors:  Joanna S Brooke
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 26.132

6.  Comparative analysis of two phenotypically-similar but genomically-distinct Burkholderia cenocepacia-specific bacteriophages.

Authors:  Karlene H Lynch; Paul Stothard; Jonathan J Dennis
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 3.969

7.  Geneious Basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data.

Authors:  Matthew Kearse; Richard Moir; Amy Wilson; Steven Stones-Havas; Matthew Cheung; Shane Sturrock; Simon Buxton; Alex Cooper; Sidney Markowitz; Chris Duran; Tobias Thierer; Bruce Ashton; Peter Meintjes; Alexei Drummond
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 6.937

8.  RASTtk: a modular and extensible implementation of the RAST algorithm for building custom annotation pipelines and annotating batches of genomes.

Authors:  Thomas Brettin; James J Davis; Terry Disz; Robert A Edwards; Svetlana Gerdes; Gary J Olsen; Robert Olson; Ross Overbeek; Bruce Parrello; Gordon D Pusch; Maulik Shukla; James A Thomason; Rick Stevens; Veronika Vonstein; Alice R Wattam; Fangfang Xia
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Cough-generated aerosols of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and other Gram-negative bacteria from patients with cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  C E Wainwright; M W France; P O'Rourke; S Anuj; T J Kidd; M D Nissen; T P Sloots; C Coulter; Z Ristovski; M Hargreaves; B R Rose; C Harbour; S C Bell; K P Fennelly
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 9.139

10.  The SEED and the Rapid Annotation of microbial genomes using Subsystems Technology (RAST).

Authors:  Ross Overbeek; Robert Olson; Gordon D Pusch; Gary J Olsen; James J Davis; Terry Disz; Robert A Edwards; Svetlana Gerdes; Bruce Parrello; Maulik Shukla; Veronika Vonstein; Alice R Wattam; Fangfang Xia; Rick Stevens
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  8 in total

1.  Isolation and characterization of the novel bacteriophage vB_SmaS_BUCT626 against Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.

Authors:  Fei Li; Lingxing Li; Yong Zhang; Shiyu Bai; Li Sun; Jingli Guan; Wangmeng Zhang; Xiaogang Cui; Jiao Feng; Yigang Tong
Journal:  Virus Genes       Date:  2022-05-28       Impact factor: 2.198

2.  Characterization of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia phage AXL1 as a member of the genus Pamexvirus encoding resistance to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole.

Authors:  Jaclyn G McCutcheon; Andrea Lin; Jonathan J Dennis
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-18       Impact factor: 4.996

3.  Characterization of the Bacteriophage BUCT603 and Therapeutic Potential Evaluation Against Drug-Resistant Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in a Mouse Model.

Authors:  Pengjun Han; Wenjing Zhang; Mingfang Pu; Yahao Li; Lihua Song; Xiaoping An; Mengzhe Li; Fei Li; Shuyan Zhang; Huahao Fan; Yigang Tong
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 6.064

Review 4.  Stenotrophomonas maltophilia as an Emerging Ubiquitous Pathogen: Looking Beyond Contemporary Antibiotic Therapy.

Authors:  Anthony A Adegoke; Thor A Stenström; Anthony I Okoh
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2017-11-30       Impact factor: 5.640

5.  Complete Genome Sequence of Temperate Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Bacteriophage DLP5.

Authors:  Danielle L Peters; Jonathan J Dennis
Journal:  Genome Announc       Date:  2018-03-01

6.  Identification and Characterization of Type IV Pili as the Cellular Receptor of Broad Host Range Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Bacteriophages DLP1 and DLP2.

Authors:  Jaclyn G McCutcheon; Danielle L Peters; Jonathan J Dennis
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 5.048

Review 7.  Overcoming Challenges to Make Bacteriophage Therapy Standard Clinical Treatment Practice for Cystic Fibrosis.

Authors:  Renee N Ng; Anna S Tai; Barbara J Chang; Stephen M Stick; Anthony Kicic
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 5.640

Review 8.  The Potential of Phage Therapy against the Emerging Opportunistic Pathogen Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.

Authors:  Jaclyn G McCutcheon; Jonathan J Dennis
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 5.048

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.