Several microbes are polyploid, meaning they contain several copies of their chromosome. Cyanobacteria, while holding great potential as photosynthetic cell factories of various products, are found among them. In these clades the diversity of genetic elements that serve within the basic molecular toolbox is often limiting. To assist mining for the latter, we present here a method for the generation of fully segregated genomic libraries, specifically designed for polyploids. We provide proof-of-principle for this method by generating a fully segregated genomic promoter library in the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. This new tool was first analyzed through fluorescence activated cell sorting (FACS) and then a fraction was further characterized regarding promoter sequence. The location of libraries on the chromosome provides a better reflection of the behavior of its elements. Our work presents the first method for constructing fully segregated genomic libraries in polyploids, which may facilitate their usage in synthetic biology applications.
Several microbes are polyploid, meaning they contain several copies of their chromosome. Cyanobacteria, while holding great potential as photosynthetic cell factories of various products, are found among them. In these clades the diversity of genetic elements that serve within the basic molecular toolbox is often limiting. To assist mining for the latter, we present here a method for the generation of fully segregated genomic libraries, specifically designed for polyploids. We provide proof-of-principle for this method by generating a fully segregated genomic promoter library in the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. This new tool was first analyzed through fluorescence activated cell sorting (FACS) and then a fraction was further characterized regarding promoter sequence. The location of libraries on the chromosome provides a better reflection of the behavior of its elements. Our work presents the first method for constructing fully segregated genomic libraries in polyploids, which may facilitate their usage in synthetic biology applications.
A genomic
library is a collection
of DNA fragments, ideally representing the entire DNA content of the
genome from which the library was derived.[1] Genomic libraries are useful to screen for target DNA fragments
contributing to desired complex phenotypes (e.g.,
chemical tolerance), which are normally difficult to be rationally
engineered.[2,3] Furthermore, genetic elements, such as promoters,
that are indispensable in genetic engineering can also be identified.
These include promoters not only with different strengths but also
with different inducible properties.[4] Thus
far, genomic libraries were mostly constructed either on a replicative
plasmid or integrated in the chromosome of monoploid microorganisms
(i.e., organisms containing a single chromosome copy).[5] While for polyploid microorganisms, large genomic
libraries have only been developed to explore native DNA fragments,
such as promoters through a reporter (e.g., fluorescence),
on a replicative plasmid.[4] Because the
copy number of the replicative plasmid may vary under the cultivation
conditions tested,[6] this might compromise
the correlation between the activity of the reporter and the promoter
strength. For polyploid microorganisms as well, genomic libraries
directly located on the chromosomes would have a relatively stable
copy number in comparison to the ones located on replicative plasmids.
But clearly, integrating such a library on all the chromosomes of
a polyploid microorganism is a major challenge, without going through
the regular time-consuming segregation steps for a limited number
of representatives.[7] How can one ensure
that the genomic library integrated on the chromosomes of polyploid
microorganisms is fully segregated? In other words, how can one ensure
that all existing copies of the chromosome contain the intended fragment?We decided to tackle this challenge by constructing a fully segregated
chromosomal genomic library in polyploid microorganisms using a counter-selection
approach (Figure ).
This approach includes a positive selection (via antibiotic
resistance genes) and a counter (negative) selection (via conditional expression of toxic genes). Specifically, both selection
cassettes need first to be fully integrated into the target genomic
locus of the targeted polyploid microorganism. This is achieved by
the positive selection with increasing dosage of the antibiotic through
possibly several rounds of segregation. During the positive selection
process, the toxic gene for counter-selection is regulated as nonfunctional
(e.g., noninduced or no substrate available). This
polyploid microorganism, with fully integrated chromosomal selection
cassette, is served as the background strain ready for transformation.
Then, the genomic DNA fragments are prepared either through partial
enzymatic digestion or mechanical forces to a target size range. Those
fragments will later be inserted into a nonreplicative vector, flanking
with upstream and downstream homologous regions of the target genomic
locus of the background strain, resulting in a plasmid library. After
introducing the plasmid library into the background strain, the selection
cassette will be replaced with a random DNA fragment though double
crossover at the target genomic locus, by homologous recombination.
With controlled functional expression of the toxic gene (e.g., adding an inducer or substrate) for counter-selection, only the
cells with fully replaced chromosomes can survive. This would lead
to fully segregated chromosomal genomic libraries created in polyploid
microorganisms.
Figure 1
A schematic drawing of the construction of fully segregated
genomic
libraries in polyploid microorganisms. The full segregation of the
genomic libraries is enabled through a counter-selection strategy,
where a positive selection (via antibiotic resistance
genes) and a counter (negative) selection (via conditional
toxic genes) are implemented. Specifically, target genomic locus of
the microorganism needs first to be fully integrated with both positive
and counter selection genes via antibiotic selection
and segregation (light green background). Then the prepared genomic
DNA fragments are ligated to the nonreplicative vector flanking with
upstream and downstream homologous regions of the target genomic locus,
resulting in a plasmid library (light yellow background). After introducing
the plasmid library into the microorganism, double crossover occurring
at the target genomic locus will replace the selection genes with
the DNA fragments. Cells with only fully replaced chromosomes can
survive under counter-selection. Hence, the fully segregated genomic
libraries are created in polyploid microorganisms (light purple background).
NS, neutral site; UHR, upstream homologous region; DHR, downstream
homologous region; AbR, antibiotic resistance gene; Toxin,
conditional toxic gene. Five chromosomes inside the cells are depicted
only to mimic the polyploidy.
A schematic drawing of the construction of fully segregated
genomic
libraries in polyploid microorganisms. The full segregation of the
genomic libraries is enabled through a counter-selection strategy,
where a positive selection (via antibiotic resistance
genes) and a counter (negative) selection (via conditional
toxic genes) are implemented. Specifically, target genomic locus of
the microorganism needs first to be fully integrated with both positive
and counter selection genes via antibiotic selection
and segregation (light green background). Then the prepared genomic
DNA fragments are ligated to the nonreplicative vector flanking with
upstream and downstream homologous regions of the target genomic locus,
resulting in a plasmid library (light yellow background). After introducing
the plasmid library into the microorganism, double crossover occurring
at the target genomic locus will replace the selection genes with
the DNA fragments. Cells with only fully replaced chromosomes can
survive under counter-selection. Hence, the fully segregated genomic
libraries are created in polyploid microorganisms (light purple background).
NS, neutral site; UHR, upstream homologous region; DHR, downstream
homologous region; AbR, antibiotic resistance gene; Toxin,
conditional toxic gene. Five chromosomes inside the cells are depicted
only to mimic the polyploidy.To test this approach, polyploid cyanobacteria—promising
photosynthetic microbial hosts that can be employed to directly convert
atmospheric CO2 to biochemical compounds[8]—were chosen. As one of the model cyanobacterial
species, Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 (hereafter, Synechocystis), which has multiple chromosome copies, was
selected as a case study. The chromosome copy number in Synechocystis is variable and can be affected by growth phase and by physical
and chemical factors.[9−11] Nevertheless, despite the variation, the copy number
of chromosomes in polyploid cyanobacteria is reported to be much smaller
and less variable than the copy number of exogenous plasmids. This
has been observed in the expression levels obtained through plasmid
expression in comparison with chromosomal expression in Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803,[12−14]Synechococcus sp. PCC 7000,[15] and Synechococcus elongatus PCC 7942.[16]Despite the efforts
to identify native promoters in cyanobacteria,
the number of well characterized constitutive and inducible native
promoters is still considered to be somewhat small.[17−20] Because a large number of the
promoters that have been applied in the cyanobacterial studies come
directly from other model organisms such as Escherichia
coli,[19] we deemed that
a fully segregated chromosomal genomic library would be useful in
order to mine the native cyanobacterial promoters.Overall,
in this work we successfully constructed a fully segregated
genomic library on the chromosomes of Synechocystis (Figure A). As a
conceptual framework, we screened and characterized in total 72 native
promoters with their sequences analyzed. Our work marks the first
report of construction of a fully segregated chromosomal genomic library
in polyploid microorganisms, without going through the time-consuming
segregation step of only a small number of representatives.[7] This library could in principle be exploited
either for fundamental research (e.g., detailing
complex phenotypes) or synthetic biology applications (e.g., mining genetic elements).
Figure 2
Construction of a fully segregated genomic promoter
library in Synechocystis. (A) The whole process can
be divided as three
main modules (as indicated with different color backgrounds): (1)
inserting the enzymatic digested genomic DNA fragments to the integrative
vector targeting the slr0168 genomic locus of Synechocystis; (2) transforming Synechocystis with the plasmids containing DNA fragments to obtain the fully segregated
promoter library on the Synechocystis chromosome;
(3) characterizing the promoter library in Synechocystisvia the fluorescence intensity. (B) PCR verification
of a few representative E. coli colonies harboring the genomic library. The gel picture shows that
the size of genomic DNA fragments generated to create the promoter
library are ranging roughly from 200 to 1000 bp. Blue arrows indicate
the position of the primers.
Construction of a fully segregated genomic promoter
library in Synechocystis. (A) The whole process can
be divided as three
main modules (as indicated with different color backgrounds): (1)
inserting the enzymatic digested genomic DNA fragments to the integrative
vector targeting the slr0168 genomic locus of Synechocystis; (2) transforming Synechocystis with the plasmids containing DNA fragments to obtain the fully segregated
promoter library on the Synechocystis chromosome;
(3) characterizing the promoter library in Synechocystisvia the fluorescence intensity. (B) PCR verification
of a few representative E. coli colonies harboring the genomic library. The gel picture shows that
the size of genomic DNA fragments generated to create the promoter
library are ranging roughly from 200 to 1000 bp. Blue arrows indicate
the position of the primers.To initialize, Synechocystis genomic DNA was isolated
and partially digested by Sau3AI to a size of approximately 200 bp
to 1 kb (Figure B).
Those DNA fragments were inserted on a suicide plasmid (at the BglII restriction site) that integrates at the slr0168 genomic locus (neutral site) of Synechocystis.
Between the homologous regions, and downstream of the DNA fragments
inserted, a ribosome binding site, a fluorescence reporter (eYFP),
and a terminator were attached (Figure A). This enables the screening and quantitation of
the promoter strength using the fluorescence intensity as a proxy.
Additionally, a kanamycin resistance gene is included in this vector
for propagation purposes. To introduce this plasmid library containing
random DNA fragments into Synechocystis, and ensure
their complete segregation, we adopted a counter-selection strategy
that has been developed for markerless genetic modification.[21] To implement this strategy, we first build a Synechocystis strain, that has a fully segregated mazF (toxic) cassette, expressed under the strict control
of a nickel-inducible promoter, at the slr0168 genomic
locus. This was done by selection using spectinomycin. Cultures of
this Synechocystis strain were then incubated with
the plasmid library in a shake flask without antibiotics for 24 h.
Then, kanamycin was added to ensure the integration of the promoter
library targeting the slr0168 genomic locus (replacing
the mazF cassette) and pushing the cells toward the
direction of complete segregation. After a few days, nickel was added
in the shake flask to select the cells with fully segregated inserts.
In order to have a representative promoter library, it is critical
to determine the timing of adding nickel. This should not be too soon
to avoid killing the cells that were not yet fully segregated, but
should also not be too late, which would favor fast growers to take
over the population, reducing library representativeness. We tested
the effect of adding nickel at different days after adding kanamycin,
and more varied colonies with fully segregated chromosomes (verified
by PCR in Figure S1) were obtained when
nickel was added after 4 days (data not shown here).The strength
of each randomly inserted DNA fragment with promoter
activity was then checked by fluorescent activated cell sorting (FACS)
(Figure A). The Synechocystis strain without any DNA fragment insertion
serves as the negative control (important to set the lower threshold
of fluorescence). While the strain carrying a strong constitutive
promoter (PcpcBA) was used as the positive control.[22] Our results indicated that a small proportion (∼12.2%)
of the total cells analyzed (50 000) sparked fluorescence at
different intensities. For the rest of the cells the fluorescence
was below the threshold, indicating the DNA fragments inserted did
not drive eYFP expression. For the cells displaying significant fluorescence,
it is of course interesting to characterize the underlying sequence
responsible for its intensity. Therefore, cells that displayed fluorescence
above the set threshold were collected by FACS and spread on BG11
plates to isolate single colonies. To first have an overview of the
colony heterogeneity, we performed a colony PCR to specifically amplify
the DNA fragment inserted. Our results (Figure S2) showed that for a sample of 18 colonies tested, the size
of the DNA fragment varies, but always falls into the expected range
(200 bp to 1 kb). This again corroborates the idea that our approach
is feasible and can lead to the successful construction of a genomic
promoter library directly on the chromosomes.
Figure 3
Characterization of the Synechocystis genomic
promoter library via fluorescence intensity measurement
either by FACS (A) or microplate (B). For FACS, the promoterless strain
that was unable to express eYFP was used as negative control and also
to determine the fluorescence threshold (indicated by the white line).
The strain expressing eYFP driven by the strong constitutive PcpcBA
promoter was used as positive control. Individual colonies that display
fluorescence below the threshold were assigned the color blue, while
the ones above the threshold were shown in yellow color. The Synechocystis cells transformed with the genomic promoter
library showed heterogeneity in the fluorescence intensity, with low
or mild expression in most of the population. In the microplate, the
fluorescence intensity represents the transcriptional strength of
the 72 promoters sequenced, in the order of Table S1, compared with the strength of PcpcBA. Fluorescence was
normalized by OD730 of the cultures. The error bars indicate
the standard deviation of three replicates.
Characterization of the Synechocystis genomic
promoter library via fluorescence intensity measurement
either by FACS (A) or microplate (B). For FACS, the promoterless strain
that was unable to express eYFP was used as negative control and also
to determine the fluorescence threshold (indicated by the white line).
The strain expressing eYFP driven by the strong constitutive PcpcBA
promoter was used as positive control. Individual colonies that display
fluorescence below the threshold were assigned the color blue, while
the ones above the threshold were shown in yellow color. The Synechocystis cells transformed with the genomic promoter
library showed heterogeneity in the fluorescence intensity, with low
or mild expression in most of the population. In the microplate, the
fluorescence intensity represents the transcriptional strength of
the 72 promoters sequenced, in the order of Table S1, compared with the strength of PcpcBA. Fluorescence was
normalized by OD730 of the cultures. The error bars indicate
the standard deviation of three replicates.As a proof-of-principle validation of our approach in terms of
mining native promoters, we picked in total 72 colonies from the plate
for further characterization. To measure the fluorescence of each
colony, we applied a 96-well plate method.[23] The results showed a wide distribution of the fluorescence from
all the colonies, which reflects the diverse promoter strength of
the respective DNA fragments (Figure B). We next sequenced the inserted DNA fragment acting
as promoters in those 72 colonies (Table S1). The results indicated that all the fragments with promoter activity
had unique DNA sequences, though some colonies have overlapping sequences
that cover the same region of the chromosomal locus (specifically,
colonies 11, 13, 22, 35, and 39 in Table S1). Some sequences showed the typical promoter location (5′
UTR region), other sequences were part of a gene, and others overlap
two neighbor genes. The ones located as part of a gene suggest that
some regions of the annotated genes could also be regulatory elements
of other flaking coding sequences, or the promoters driving the expression
of sRNAs.[24,25] Some of the promoters found belong to regions
of the genes coding for proteins involved in replication and transcription
such as ligase, DNA gyrase, and transcriptional regulators. Others
were part of genes coding for important metabolic enzymes such as
ATP synthase, NADH dehydrogenase, phosphorylases, transferases, synthases,
and dehydrogenases. The promoters that were related with photosynthesis
were part of genes coding for phycocyanin, plastocyanin, and thioredoxin.
Furthermore, some sequences found are part of the genes encoding for
hypothetical proteins. This can be an indication of the regulatory
role of the regions that are not coding for known proteins, or that
are still not well characterized. Overall, these findings validate
the potential of constructing a promoter library on the chromosome
to identify native promoters that can modulate different levels of
target gene expression for genetic engineering purposes.Genomic
libraries serve as an important tool that can be utilized
to map important DNA fragments/genes for both fundamental and applied
research.[26] In terms of exploring native
promoters in polyploid microorganisms, a genomic library integrated
on the chromosome is more preferred (although challenging) than on
a replicative plasmid. This is because the copy number of the chromosome
is relatively stable, while the replicative plasmid copy number may
vary more. This may be due mostly to the independent replication system
of the replicative plasmid such that its replication is loosely controlled
by the cells. Furthermore, it is also difficult for cells to equally
distribute the replicative plasmids to the daughter cells via the plasmid partition mechanism during cell division.[27,28] Therefore, when cells have different copy numbers of the replicative
plasmid, the reporter gene dosage is expected to be different. Under
this situation, it would be problematic to directly estimate the promoter
strength based on the activity of the reporter (e.g., fluorescence). In this work, we tackled this challenge using a
counter-selection approach and successfully constructed a fully segregated
genomic library on the chromosomes of the cyanobacterium Synechocystis as a case study. As a conceptual validation, we screened in total
72 native promoters that showed a wide distribution of promoter strength.
Because cyanobacteria hold great promise to be developed as photosynthetic
cell factories, the native promoters mined here through a genomic
library may greatly facilitate various synthetic biology implementations.
This approach to construct a fully segregated genomic library is also
applicable to other polyploid microorganisms, where desired DNA fragments
contributing to target phenotypes can be reliably mapped for both
fundamental and applied research.
Methods
General Cultivation
Conditions
E. coli strain
DH5α was used as the host for plasmid molecular cloning.
It was grown at 37 °C in Lysogeny Broth medium (LB) in an incubator
with a shaking speed of 200 rpm or on LB plates containing 1.5% (w/v)
agar. The concentration of antibiotics used were 50 μg mL–1 for kanamycin and 50 μg mL–1 for spectinomycin. Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 (glucose
tolerant, obtained from D. Bhaya, Stanford University, USA) was cultivated
at 30 °C in liquid BG-11 medium supplemented with 10 mM TES-KOH
(pH = 8), in a shaking incubator at 120 rpm (Innova 44, New Brunswick
Scientific) under constant moderate red light illumination (∼30
μmol photons m–2s–1), or
on BG-11 agar plates supplemented with 10 mM TES-KOH and 0.3% (w/v)
sodium thiosulfate, in an incubator with white light (∼30 μmol
photons m–2 s–1) and 1% CO2. For Synechocystis mutant construction,
kanamycin, spectinomycin, or nickel sulfate were added to the medium
with a final concentration of 50 μg mL–1,
20 μg mL–1, and 15 μM, respectively.
Biomass concentration in the cultures was measured by optical density
at 730 nm (OD730) in a spectrophotometer (Lightwave II,
Biochrom).
Plasmid and Strain Construction
All plasmids, strains,
and primers are listed in the Table S2.
To construct the required plasmids, both homologous regions of slr0168 were amplified from the genomic DNA of Synechocystis, using Herculase II polymerase (Agilent) and primers designed to
introduce restriction sites for KpnI in the 5′
of the upstream region, HindIII in the 3′
of the downstream region, and XbaI in between the two regions. The
fragments were fused together and completely amplified using Pfu DNA Polymerase (Thermo Scientific). After gel extraction
and purification (Thermo Scientific), the fused fragment was inserted
in the vector (prepared by digestion of the plasmid pFL-XN with KpnI and HindIII). This resulted in the
new plasmid pFLXN, serving as the background plasmid for the following
constructs. To construct the plasmid pFLXN-MAZF, kanamycin resistant
fragment from the selection cassette of the pWD42 plasmid was first
replaced with the spectinomycin resistant fragment, resulting in the
plasmid pWD007. Then, the new selection cassette was cut from pWD007
by double digestion with SpeI and AvrII, and inserted into the pFLXN
plasmid digested by XbaI.To generate the CPC-YFP cassette,
the region containing the PcpcBA promoter (including the RBS), eYFP,
terminator BB0014 and kanamycin resistant cassette (KanR) was first PCR amplified from pHKH-cpcBA-YFP. Then, this fragment
was further prepared by XbaI and NheI digestion and inserted into
the pFLXN plasmid digested by XbaI, resulting in the plasmid pFLXN-CPC-YFP.
To generate the RBS-YFP cassette, only the region containing the ribosome
binding site from the PcpcBA promoter (excluding the promoter region),
eYFP, terminator BB0014, and KanR was PCR amplified from
pHKH-cpcBA-YFP and then inserted into the pFLXN plasmid following
the same above approach. This resulted in the plasmid pFLXN-RBS-YFP.
For the construction of the pFLXN-LIB-YFP plasmid, a BglII site was additionally added before the RBS during the PCR amplification
of the RBS-YFP cassette, to allow later introduction of the genomic
DNA fragments of the library. All the fragments amplified in this
study were confirmed by Sanger sequencing at Macrogen Europe (The
Netherlands).Synechocystis mutants Syn-MAZF,
Syn-RBS-YFP, and
Syn-CPC-YFP were created by natural transformation of the corresponding
plasmid to Synechocystis wild type as described previously.[29] Fully segregation of each mutant was verified
by PCR using the genomic DNA as the template for 35 cycles. To obtain
a fully segregated genomic library integrated in the Synechocystis chromosomes, we adopted a liquid transformation approach to introduce
the promoter library to Syn-MAZF. First, fresh Syn-MAZF cells were
collected from 20 mL liquid culture (OD730 ≈ 1).
After being washed twice with fresh BG11 medium through centrifugation
(3900 rpm, 10 min), cells were further concentrated to a total volume
of 200 μL. The pFLXN-LIB-YFP plasmids were mixed with these
cells to reach a final plasmid concentration of 30 μg mL–1, and then incubated at 30 °C with moderate light
intensity (white light, 30 μmol photons m–2 s–1) for 5 h. Next, the mixture was inoculated
in 20 mL of BG11 (without antibiotic) and incubated at 30 °C
in a shaking incubator at 120 rpm (Innova 44, New Brunswick Scientific)
under constant moderate red-light illumination (∼30 μmol
photons m–2 s–1). After further
incubation for about 24 h, kanamycin was added to the cultures at
a final concentration of 50 μg mL–1. After
another 4 days of incubation, nickel sulfate was added to the cultures
at a final concentration of 15 μM. When the cultures reached
OD730 ≈ 1–1.5, a sample was collected to
perform FACS analysis and the rest was concentrated to make glycerolstocks.
Genomic DNA Promoter Library Construction, Fluorescence Analysis
Authors: Jan Mitschke; Jens Georg; Ingeborg Scholz; Cynthia M Sharma; Dennis Dienst; Jens Bantscheff; Björn Voss; Claudia Steglich; Annegret Wilde; Jörg Vogel; Wolfgang R Hess Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-01-18 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Matthias Kopf; Stephan Klähn; Ingeborg Scholz; Jasper K F Matthiessen; Wolfgang R Hess; Björn Voß Journal: DNA Res Date: 2014-06-16 Impact factor: 4.458
Authors: Wei Du; Joeri A Jongbloets; Coco van Boxtel; Hugo Pineda Hernández; David Lips; Brett G Oliver; Klaas J Hellingwerf; Filipe Branco Dos Santos Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 6.040