| Literature DB >> 30905293 |
Anne Chevallereau1, Sean Meaden1, Stineke van Houte1, Edze R Westra1, Clare Rollie1.
Abstract
CRISPR-Cas immune systems are present in around half of bacterial genomes. Given the specificity and adaptability of this immune mechanism, it is perhaps surprising that they are not more widespread. Recent insights into the requirement for specific host factors for the function of some CRISPR-Cas subtypes, as well as the negative epistasis between CRISPR-Cas and other host genes, have shed light on potential reasons for the partial distribution of this immune strategy in bacteria. In this study, we examined how mutations in the bacterial mismatch repair system, which are frequently observed in natural and clinical isolates and cause elevated host mutation rates, influence the evolution of CRISPR-Cas-mediated immunity. We found that hosts with a high mutation rate very rarely evolved CRISPR-based immunity to phage compared to wild-type hosts. We explored the reason for this effect and found that the higher frequency at which surface mutants pre-exist in the mutator host background causes them to rapidly become the dominant phenotype under phage infection. These findings suggest that natural variation in bacterial mutation rates may, therefore, influence the distribution of CRISPR-Cas adaptive immune systems. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'The ecology and evolution of prokaryotic CRISPR-Cas adaptive immune systems'.Entities:
Keywords: CRISPR-Cas adaptive immunity; bacteria; evolution; genetic variation; mutation rate; phage
Year: 2019 PMID: 30905293 PMCID: PMC6452272 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2018.0094
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8436 Impact factor: 6.237
Figure 1.DMS3vir viral titre from 0 to 11 dpi of PA14 WT (a), PA14 ΔmutS (c) or PA14 CRISPR-KO (e) hosts. Bacterial titres during the course of the experiment were also measured for the same hosts (b), (d) and (f), respectively. The average (N = 6) phage (g) and bacterial (h) titres are displayed with error bars that represent 95% confidence intervals (CI). (i) Survival analysis of phage in different host backgrounds over the course of the experiment. (j) The immunity profile for each host at 3 dpi, showing the proportion of bacterial clones that evolved resistance by surface modification (sm) or CRISPR-Cas as well as those that did not evolve resistance (sensitive). Error bars represent 95% CI.
Figure 2.(a) Frequency of spontaneously generated surface mutants (sm) per cell for different PA14 hosts (N = 15). First and third quartiles are shown and whiskers represent 1.5× interquartile range. (b) Fluctuation test result calculated from data in (a) using a maximum-likelihood method showing estimated mutation rates of strains tested, error bars represent standard deviation (s.d.). (c) Relative fitness of BIM of WT or ΔmutS hosts that had evolved CRISPR-mediated resistance through the acquisition of two spacers against phage DMS3vir. These hosts were competed again a surface mutant (sm) in the presence of 0, 104, 107, 109 pfus of phage DMS3vir. Data represent fitness at 1 dpi, N = 6, and error bars correspond to 95% CI.