| Literature DB >> 28894437 |
Alfonso Esposito1, Arianna Pompilio2, Clotilde Bettua1, Valentina Crocetta2, Elisabetta Giacobazzi1, Ersilia Fiscarelli3, Olivier Jousson1, Giovanni Di Bonaventura2.
Abstract
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia has been recognized as an emerging multi-drug resistant opportunistic pathogen in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients. We report a comparative genomic and phenotypic analysis of 91 S. maltophilia strains from 10 CF patients over a 12-year period. Draft genome analyses included in silico Multi-Locus Sequence Typing (MLST), Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs), and pangenome characterization. Growth rate, biofilm formation, motility, mutation frequency, in vivo virulence, and in vitro antibiotic susceptibility were determined and compared with population structure over time. The population consisted of 20 different sequence types (STs), 11 of which are new ones. Pangenome and SNPs data showed that this population is composed of three major phylogenetic lineages. All patients were colonized by multiple STs, although most of them were found in a single patient and showed persistence over years. Only few phenotypes showed some correlation with population phylogenetic structure. Our results show that S. maltophilia adaptation to CF lung is associated with consistent genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity. Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infecting multiple hosts likely experiences different selection pressures depending on the host environment. The poor genotype-phenotype correlation suggests the existence of complex regulatory mechanisms that need to be explored in order to better design therapeutic strategies.Entities:
Keywords: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia; cystic fibrosis; evolution; genomics; longitudinal study
Year: 2017 PMID: 28894437 PMCID: PMC5581383 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01590
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strains tested in the present study.
| ZC | 26/12/1988 | – | 1(178) | 1(5) | 4 sequential isolates | 2 sequential isolates (5) | 2(5, 179) | 2(5, 179) | 1(179) | 13 | 3 | 16 | ||||
| CV | 09/09/1988 | 2(5, 180) | – | 5 sequential isolates (5) | – | 1(5) | – | – | 1(29) | 9 | 3 | 15 | ||||
| MS | 11/05/1992 | 2(181) | – | – | 1(5) | – | 1(182) | 1(183) | 3 sequential isolates (4) | 1(92) | 1(5) | 10 | 6 | 11 | ||
| TG | 03/12/1980 | – | 1(91) | 9 sequential isolates (184) | – | – | 5 sequential isolates (184) | 15 | 2 | 24 | ||||||
| FMa | 20/12/2001 | – | – | 2(185) | – | 1 (2) | 6 sequential isolates (185) | 9 | 2 | 4 | ||||||
| AV | 28/06/1995 | – | – | 1(2) | 1(2) | – | – | 1(183) | 1(2) | 4 sequential isolates (5) | 8 | 3 | 10 | |||
| GC | 07/07/2005 | – | – | 2(91) | 1(162) | 8 sequential isolates (91) | 11 | 2 | 3 | |||||||
| MC | 27/02/2009 | 1(5) | 2(183, 184) | 2(186, 187) | 3 sequential isolates (186) | 8 | 5 | 0 | ||||||||
| BB | 13/01/2010 | 1(139) | 2 sequential isolates (188) | 1(139) | 4 | 2 | 0 | |||||||||
| SanG | 09/02/2010 | 2 sequential isolates (188) | 1(5) | 1(84) | 4 | 3 | 0 | |||||||||
| # isolates | 4 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 11 | 9 | 13 | 11 | 7 | ||||
| # ST (first detected) | 5, 180, 181 | 178, 91 | 184, 185, 2 | 179 | 182 | 183, 162 | 4, 139, 188 | 186, 187 | 84, 29, 92 | |||||||
| # ST (cumulative) | 3 | 5 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 12 | 15 | 17 | 17 | 20 | 20 | ||||
Ten chronically infected CF patients were enrolled. S. maltophilia infection was defined as “chronic” if at least 50% of samples taken during 1 year were positive for the microorganism (Pressler et al., .
At first sampling.
Sequential isolates are monophyletic, belonging to the same ST (indicated in brackets).
Main assembly, SNP, and annotation statistics.
| Min | 299841 | 21.4 | 63 | 45004 | 95.4 | 66.0 | 4340930 | 3925 | 132 | 141 | 792 | 18534 | 23524 | 3972 | 3864 | 70 | 6 | |
| Avg | 477042 | 34.1 | 105 | 93888 | 97.1 | 66.4 | 4662510 | 15193 | 338 | 311 | 2687 | 57867 | 76396 | 4330 | 4217 | 74 | 6 | |
| Median | 463220 | 33.1 | 100 | 94682 | 97.1 | 66.4 | 4735262 | 7028 | 261 | 250 | 1348 | 38944 | 47777 | 4403 | 4290 | 74 | 6 | |
| Max | 759185 | 54.2 | 181 | 143022 | 98.2 | 66.8 | 5214241 | 42115 | 753 | 609 | 7110 | 115498 | 166085 | 4881 | 4755 | 82 | 11 | |
Data for each isolate is reported in Supplementary Table .
Complex mutations (for instance rearrangements).
Deletions (with respect to S. maltophilia K279a reference strain).
Insertions.
Multiple Nucleotide Polymorphisms.
Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms.
Coding Sequences.
MLST table resuming allele number of each ST.
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 1 | |
| 2 | 5 | 22 | 9 | 4 | 27 | 5 | 7 | ST-5 | 20 |
| 3 | 1 | 105 | 4 | 28 | 62 | 7 | |||
| 4 | 22 | 26 | 20 | 9 | 4 | 14 | 2 | 1 | |
| 5 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | ST-29 | 1 |
| 6 | 1 | 6 | 7 | 2 | |||||
| 7 | 1 | ||||||||
| 8 | 3 | ||||||||
| 9 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 28 | 19 | 6 | ST-4 | 3 |
| 10 | 1 | 1 | 82 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ST-92 | 1 |
| 11 | 3 | 73 | 89 | 3 | 25 | 80 | 7 | ST-91 | 11 |
| 12 | 14 | ||||||||
| 13 | 5 | 22 | 9 | 75 | 27 | 80 | 7 | 8 | |
| 14 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 3 | 28 | 7 | 1 | ST-2 | 4 |
| 15 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 1 | ST-162 | 1 |
| 16 | 13 | 80 | 5 | ||||||
| 17 | 4 | 57 | 25 | 20 | 1 | ||||
| 18 | 3 | 4 | 110 | 46 | 6 | 38 | 58 | ST-139 | 2 |
| 19 | 1 | 4 | 18 | 3 | 28 | 80 | 72 | 4 | |
| 20 | 3 | 1 | 82 | 3 | 25 | 4 | 62 | ST-84 | 1 |
In bold, the new ones found in this study.
Figure 1eBURST diagram of S. maltophilia population. Each circle represents one ST. Diameter of circles is proportional to the number of isolates belonging to each ST. The thickness and color of the connections between STs represent the number of loci with one or more different allele (thick black link, 1 different allele; thin gray link, 2 different alleles). Black circles represent previously characterized STs which were not found in the present study.
Figure 2Radial cladogram inferred from a Maximum Likelihood analysis of core genome SNPs and including all phenotypic traits. Branches are colored according to ST, and dashed branches represent new STs. Innermost to outermost circles represent: (i) patient IDs (ZC, empty diamond; CV, empty square; MS, empty triangle; TG, empty circle; FMa, empty pentagon; AV, full diamond; GC, full square; MC, full triangle; BB, full circle; SanG, full pentagon); (ii) antibiotic susceptibility profiles (codified as: white-susceptible, orange-intermediate, and black-resistant) for the following antibiotics: TZP, piperacillin/tazobactam; AMK, amikacin; CAZ, ceftazidime; TIM, ticarcillin/clavulanic acid; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CHL, chloramphenicol; SXT, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole; LVX, levofloxacin; DOX, doxicycline; and MIN, minocycline; (iii) biofilm biomass (black), growth rate (green), and mutation frequency (purple), normalized dividing each value by the maximum value (the out-of-range biofilm values of strains 2, 28, and 69 were reported as 1 for visualization issues); (iv) swimming (blue), swarming (orange), and twitching motility (green); (v) G. mellonella virulence scores. Bootstrap support is codified as “*” for >95% and “**” for 75–95%, placed at the nodes of the tree.
Figure 3Heatmap representing the phylogenetic distances as inferred by the SNP data. The clustering pattern reflects the one in Figure 2, but the distance between the two main clusters and the minor ones is highlighted. The monophyletic STs are shown with the same color and line type as in Figure 2.
Figure 4Binary heatmap of the subset of SNP data present only in isolates of patient_ST combination GC_91. Annotations for each SNP are shown on the right panel.
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia trends in expression over time across all phenotypic traits, both in the most prevalent sequence types (STs) and ST_patient combinations.
| 0.042 (0.384) | 0.066 (0.273) | 0.05 (0.342) | 0.128 (0.121) | 0.127 (0.122) | 0.094 (0.186) | |||
| 0.003 (0.859) | 0.094 (0.357) | 0.241 (0.124) | 0.01 (0.766) | 0.196 (0.172) | 0.266 (0.104) | 0.252 (0.115) | 0.308 (0.095) | |
| 0.171 (0.355) | 0.153 (0.384) | 0.544 (0.058) | 0.497 (0.076) | 0.21 (0.3) | 0.340 (0.169) | |||
| 0.193 (0.1) | 0.153 (0.149) | 0.003 (0.835) | 0.002 (0.846) | 0.1 (0.25) | 0.018 (0.625) | 0.204 (0.09) | ||
| 0.003 (0.892) | 0.484 (0.055) | 0.12 (0.4) | 0.036 (0.649) | 0.018 (0.746) | 0.01 (0.809) | ND | 0.438 (0.073) | |
| 0.142 (0.404) | 0.116 (0.454) | 0.32 (0.185) | 0.074 (0.553) | 0.096 (0.496) | 0.074 (0.553) | 0.11 (0.466) | 0.347 (0.163) | |
| 0.074 (0.446) | 0.014 (0.737) | 0.176 (0.226) | 0.21 (0.182) | 0.012 (0.76) | 0.185 (0.214) | |||
| 0.171 (0.355) | 0.153 (0.384) | 0.544 (0.058) | 0.497 (0.076) | 0.21 (0.3) | 0.340 (0.169) | |||
| 0.151 (0.168) | 0.063 (0.386) | 0 (0.959) | 0.023 (0.599) | 0.213 (0.096) | ||||
| 0.003 (0.892) | 0.484 (0.055) | 0.12 (0.4) | 0.036 (0.649) | 0.018 (0.746) | 0.01 (0.809) | ND | 0.438 (0.073) | |
The statistical significance of a trend was assessed by linear regression analysis. r.
ST, sequence type.
Considered as the number of intermediate/resistant isolates.
ND, not determined: virulence score of ST185 isolates was always null.
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia trends in susceptibility (MIC values) to nine antibiotics over time.
| 0.046 (0.358) | 0.082 (0.22) | 0.073 (0.248) | 0.097 (0.18) | 0.013 (0.622) | |||||
| 0.086 (0.408) | 0.199 (0.195) | 0.143 (0.28) | 0.185 (0.214) | 0.187 (0.211) | 0.316 (0.09) | 0.207 (0.185) | |||
| ND | 0.418 (0.116) | ND | 0.391 (0.132) | 0.271 (0.23) | ND | 0.272 (0.229) | 0.367 (0.149) | ND | |
| 0.003 (0.828) | 0.101 (0.246) | 0.004 (0.805) | 0.059 (0.382) | 0.003 (0.828) | 0.028 (0.548) | 0.222 (0.075) | 0.003 (0.828) | ||
| 0.013 (0.783) | 0.031 (0.673) | ND | 0.263 (0.193) | 0.284 (0.173) | 0.034 (0.661) | ND | |||
| ND | 0.406 (0.123) | 0.404 (0.124) | 0.263 (0.238) | ND | 0.371 (0.146) | ND | |||
| 0.169 (0.27) | 0.089 (0.433) | 0.104 (0.395) | 0.131 (0.337) | 0.2 (0.226) | 0.246 (0.174) | ||||
| ND | 0.418 (0.116) | ND | 0.391 (0.132) | 0.271 (0.23) | ND | 0.272 (0.229) | 0.367 (0.149) | ND | |
| ND | 0.103 (0.284) | 0.077 (0.336) | 0.112 (0.24) | ND | 0.027 (0.57) | 0.219 (0.09) | ND | ||
| 0.013 (0.783) | 0.031 (0.673) | ND | 0.263 (0.193) | 0.284 (0.173) | 0.034 (0.661) | ND | |||
The statistical significance of a trend was assessed by linear regression analysis. r.
TZP, piperacillin/tazobactam; LVX, levofloxacin; AMK, amikacin; SXT, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole; MIN, minocycline; TIM, ticarcillin/clavulanic acid; CHL, chloramphenicol; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CAZ, ceftazidime.
ST, sequence type.
ND, not determined: virulence score of ST185 isolates was always null.
Spearman correlation values (upper half) and p-values (lower half) for each pairwise comparison of phenotype values on the whole population (n = 91).
| Biofilm biomass | − | −0.045 | −0.146 | −0.183 | 0.106 | 0.168 | |
| Growth rate | − | 0.005 | |||||
| Swimming | 0.672 | − | −0.044 | ||||
| Twitching | 0.167 | − | −0.023 | ||||
| Swarming | 0.0812 | −0.163 | −0.056 | ||||
| Mutation frequency | 0.143 | 0.126 | −0.069 | ||||
| Virulence score (LD50 + LD100) | 0.109 | 0.958 | 0.674 | 0.827 | 0.597 | 0.511 |
Figure 5The prevalence of each evolutionary change observed in P. aeruginosa—namely transition to a biofilm lifestyle, increased antibiotic resistance, loss of motility, and the emergence of hypermutators (Winstanley et al., 2016)—was calculated for each of the five most abundant S. maltophilia ST. On this basis, adaptation level to CF lung during chronic infection increases from left-to-right. MDR: multidrug resistance.