| Literature DB >> 33947754 |
Agnieszka Latka1,2, Sebastien Lemire3, Dennis Grimon1, Dorien Dams1, Barbara Maciejewska2, Timothy Lu3,4,5,6,7,8, Zuzanna Drulis-Kawa9, Yves Briers10.
Abstract
The high specificity of bacteriophages is driven by their receptor-binding proteins (RBPs). Many Klebsiella bacteriophages target the capsular exopolysaccharide as the receptor and encode RBPs with depolymerase activity. The modular structure of these RBPs with an N-terminal structural module to attach the RBP to the phage tail, and a C-terminal specificity module for exopolysaccharide degradation, supports horizontal transfer as a major evolutionary driver for Klebsiella phage RBPs. We mimicked this natural evolutionary process by the construction of modular RBP chimeras, exchanging N-terminal structural modules and C-terminal specificity modules. All chimeras strictly follow the capsular serotype specificity of the C-terminal module. Transplanting chimeras with a K11 N-terminal structural RBP module in a Klebsiella phage K11 scaffold results in a capsular serotype switch and corresponding host range modification of the synthetic phages, demonstrating that horizontal transfer of C-terminal specificity modules offers Klebsiella phages an evolutionary highway for rapid adaptation to new capsular serotypes.IMPORTANCE The antimicrobial resistance crisis has rekindled interest in bacteriophage therapy. Phages have been studied over a century as therapeutics to treat bacterial infections, but one of the biggest challenges for the use of phages in therapeutic interventions remains their high specificity. In particular, many Klebsiella phages have a narrow spectrum constrained by the high diversity of exopolysaccharide capsules that shield access to the cells. In this work, we have elaborated how Klebsiella phages deal with this high diversity by exchanging building blocks of their receptor-binding proteins.Entities:
Keywords: Klebsiella; bacteriophage; depolymerase; horizontal transfer; receptor-binding protein
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33947754 PMCID: PMC8262889 DOI: 10.1128/mBio.00455-21
Source DB: PubMed Journal: mBio Impact factor: 7.867
FIG 1VersaTile method. Tiles provided with position tags corresponding to positions 1, 2, and 3 are cloned in the pVTEIII entry vector. Subsequently, they are mixed with the pVTD2 destination vector (possessing the sacB gene as a negative selective marker). This mixture is subjected to restriction (BsaI) and ligation (T4 DNA ligase) cycles in one tube. Tiles are subsequently assembled into the destination vector pVTD2 in the designed order according to the position tags.
FIG 2Modular architecture of Klebsiella phage RBPs and their chimeras. (A) Overview of the genomic context of the RBPs of phages KP32, KP34, KP36, and K11, along with their modeled RBP architectures. The different anchor domains are labeled A, preceded by the protein number. This A domain is predicted to anchor the RBP to the virion, and all anchor domains differ substantively in amino acid sequence, except for 1A and 5A, which share 88% similarity at the amino acid level. The enzymatic domains with depolymerase activity are labeled E, preceded by the protein number. The colors correspond to the capsule serotype specificity. The first and second RBP of phage KP32 are KP32gp37 (YP_003347555.1) and KP32gp38 (YP_003347556.1). The intermediate anchor protein and the RBP of phage KP34 are KP34gp49 (YP_003347643.1) and KP34gp57 (YP_003347651.1), respectively, whereas the single RBP of phage KP36 is KP36gp50 (YP_009226011.1). The white blocks in phage KP34 correspond to intervening, non-RBP genes. The RBP structure of phage K11 (belonging to group A of the KP32 viruses, Przondovirus; 16, 35–37) follows a pattern similar to that of phage KP32 with a first (K11gp17; YP_002003830.1) and second (K11 ASC_0043; YP_002003831.1) RBP. (B) Preparation of a tile repository. Each tile contains a coding sequence for either an anchor or enzymatic domain, flanked by position tags for position 1 (anchors), position 2 (enzymatic domains), and position 3 (hexahistidine tag for protein purification). (C) Overview of the chimeric RBPs combining cognate and noncognate anchor (position 1) and enzyme (position 2) domains, followed by a C-terminal hexahistidine tag (position 3). (D) The tail spike of Salmonella phage P22 (PDB entry 2XC1) illustrates a typical modular RBP structure and guided the construction of chimeras. The RBP has an N-terminal dome-like anchor domain (A), a central β-helical domain for host recognition and enzymatic activity, and a C-terminal domain responsible for protein trimerization and/or receptor recognition (E) (24, 54, 55). The tiles corresponding to the anchor domains (1A, 3A, 4A, and 5A) included both the N-terminal dome-like domain and the long α-helix that physically separates both functions of the RBP (red frame), while the tiles of the enzymatic domains 1E, 4E, and 5E combine the remaining parts (green frame). Phyre2 analyses were used to predict the long α-helix in 1A, 3A, 4A, and 5A. Based on this prediction, the anchor domain ends were delineated after 178, 170, 135, and 178 aa for 1A, 3A, 4A, and 5A, respectively.
FIG 3Capsule serotype specificity of chimeric RBPs. All chimeras and control proteins were expressed and examined on bacterial lawns of Klebsiella strains with the K3 serotype (host of phage KP32), K21 serotype (host of phage KP32), and K63 serotype (host of phages KP34 and KP36). The chimeric proteins (Table S3) and their modular structure are represented in different colors and shades. The presence of visible halos on a particular strain is highlighted. In all cases, there was a strict correlation between the enzymatic domain (when present) and the capsule serotype, except when the chaperone domain was deleted in 1E and when using the 3A wild-type protein, which has only an anchoring function and no enzymatic domain. A plus sign between domains in the code name means that the chimeric protein is the result of VersaTile assembly. When there is no plus sign between the anchor (A) and enzyme (E) domain (for example, 1AE WT), the wild-type (WT) depolymerase was prepared, as done for the native sequence, without a cloning scar between the anchor and enzyme domain. VersaTile-assembled chimeras have an intervening linker of two amino acids between both domains, resulting from the position tag.
FIG 4Modifications of phage K11. (A) Overview of synthetic K11 phages with a chimeric RBP constructed in this work in the order of appearance in the text. (B) Synthetic phage K115A4E could not be successfully rebooted. The subscripts indicate the chimeric RBP that replaces the native first RBP of phage K11 (K11gp17) (Tables S3 and S4). The second putative RBP of phage K11 is shown transparently because its presence could not be confirmed experimentally, as its receptor is unknown.
FIG 5Specificity of the constructed synthetic phages against Klebsiella strains with different capsular serotypes. The construction of synthetic phages is presented in Table S4 with the respective codes. WT, wild-type phage.
Phages used in this study
| Phage | Accession no. | Taxonomy | Source | Specificity to capsular serotype | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KP32 |
| DPBI UWr | K3, K21 | 271, 358, 968 | |
| KP34 |
| DPBI UWr | K63 | 77, 486 | |
| KP36 |
| DPBI UWr | K63 | 77, 486 | |
| K11 |
| SBG MIT | K11 | 390 |
DPBI UWr, Department of Pathogen Biology and Immunology, University of Wroclaw, Poland. SBG MIT, Synthetic Biology Group, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
K. pneumoniae strains used in this study
| Source | Capsular serotype | Phage susceptibility | |
|---|---|---|---|
| DPBI UWr | K3 | KP32 | |
| SBG MIT | K11 | K11 | |
| DPBI UWr | K21 | KP32 | |
| DPBI UWr | K21 | KP32 | |
| DPBI UWr | K63 | KP34, KP36 | |
| DPBI UWr | K63 | KP34, KP36 |
DPBI UWr, Department of Pathogen Biology and Immunology, University of Wroclaw, Poland. SBG MIT, Synthetic Biology Group, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.