Klare L Bersch1, Kristen E DeMeester1, Rachid Zagani2, Shuyuan Chen3, Kimberly A Wodzanowski1, Shuzhen Liu3, Siavash Mashayekh1, Hans-Christian Reinecker2,3, Catherine L Grimes1,4. 1. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 19716, United States. 2. Department of Medicine, Gastrointestinal Unit and Center for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, United States. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, and Department of Immunology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5959 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, Texas 75390, United States. 4. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 19716, United States.
Abstract
The human innate immune system responds to both pathogen and commensal bacteria at the molecular level using bacterial peptidoglycan (PG) recognition elements. Traditionally, synthetic and commercially accessible PG monosaccharide units known as muramyl dipeptide (MDP) and N-glycolyl MDP (ng-MDP) have been used to probe the mechanism of innate immune activation of pattern recognition receptors, such as NOD-like receptors. However, bacterial PG is a dynamic and complex structure, with various chemical modifications and trimming mechanisms that result in the production of disaccharide-containing elements. These molecules pose as attractive targets for immunostimulatory screening; however, studies are limited because of their synthetic accessibility. Inspired by disaccharide-containing compounds produced from the gut microbe Lactobacillus acidophilus, a robust and scalable chemical synthesis of PG-based disaccharide ligands was implemented. Together with a monosaccharide PG library, compounds were screened for their ability to stimulate proinflammatory genes in bone-marrow-derived macrophages. The data reveal distinct gene induction patterns for monosaccharide and disaccharide PG units, suggesting that PG innate immune signaling is more complex than a one activator-one pathway program, as biologically relevant fragments induce transcriptional programs to different degrees. These disaccharide molecules will serve as critical immunostimulatory tools to more precisely define specialized innate immune regulatory mechanisms that distinguish between commensal and pathogenic bacteria residing in the microbiome.
The human innate immune system responds to both pathogen and commensal bacteria at the molecular level using bacterial peptidoglycan (PG) recognition elements. Traditionally, synthetic and commercially accessible PG monosaccharide units known as muramyl dipeptide (MDP) and N-glycolyl MDP (ng-MDP) have been used to probe the mechanism of innate immune activation of pattern recognition receptors, such as NOD-like receptors. However, bacterial PG is a dynamic and complex structure, with various chemical modifications and trimming mechanisms that result in the production of disaccharide-containing elements. These molecules pose as attractive targets for immunostimulatory screening; however, studies are limited because of their synthetic accessibility. Inspired by disaccharide-containing compounds produced from the gut microbe Lactobacillus acidophilus, a robust and scalable chemical synthesis of PG-based disaccharide ligands was implemented. Together with a monosaccharide PG library, compounds were screened for their ability to stimulate proinflammatory genes in bone-marrow-derived macrophages. The data reveal distinct gene induction patterns for monosaccharide and disaccharide PG units, suggesting that PG innate immune signaling is more complex than a one activator-one pathway program, as biologically relevant fragments induce transcriptional programs to different degrees. These disaccharide molecules will serve as critical immunostimulatory tools to more precisely define specialized innate immune regulatory mechanisms that distinguish between commensal and pathogenic bacteria residing in the microbiome.
The
human body is responsible for maintaining ∼39 trillion
bacterial cells that constitute the microbiome.[1−3] The gut microflora
is one area of the body teeming with hundreds of species of bacterial
cells.[4−6] The bacteria in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract are
benefactors to the human host, performing essential biological chemical
transformations and producing key essential vitamins and amino acids.[7−10] While many of these organisms serve to maintain a healthy state
for the human host, bacterial pathogenesis disrupts this symbiotic
relationship. Dysbiosis in the human microbiome can lead to a variety
of inflammatory diseases, including ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s
disease (CD), rheumatoid arthritis, GI cancer, and asthma.[11,12] Therefore, the host–microbiome interface is an attractive
target for therapeutic intervention.[13] In
order to develop novel immunotherapies and antibiotics, it is critical
to fully understand the molecular mechanisms by which nature recognizes
and responds to bacteria.Humans have developed host defense
mechanisms to combat infectious
diseases, including the innate immune system, the body’s first
line of defense against invading pathogens such as bacteria.[14] Pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) are programmed
in this system to interact with essential components of bacterial
cells such as flagella, lipopolysaccharide (LPS), lipoteichoic acids,
and bacterial cell wall peptidoglycan (PG) components (Scheme ).[15−18] Since the pioneering PRR discovery,
multiple families of PRRs have been classified, such as toll-like
receptors (TLRs), C-type lectin receptors (CLRs), NOD-like receptors
(NLRs), RIG-I-like receptors (RLRs), AIM2-like receptors (ALRs), peptidoglycan
binding proteins (PGBPs), the SLAM family (SLAMF), and OAS-like receptors
(OLRs).[19−21] How this system provides a tuned innate immune response
toward pathogens while ignoring symbiotic microorganisms that constitute
the microbiome is not fully understood.
Scheme 1
PRR Signaling
Common activation pathways
of proinflammatory cytokine and chemokine production upon stimulation
by molecular signatures known as pathogen-associated molecular patterns
(PAMPs) are depicted.[15] In the advent of
the microbiome, because of similarities between pathogenic and nonpathogenic
organisms, these signals are now called microbe-associated molecular
patterns (MAMPs).[18] Here the model of activation
by PG (and synthetic mimics, MDP and ng-MDP) is shown.
PRR Signaling
Common activation pathways
of proinflammatory cytokine and chemokine production upon stimulation
by molecular signatures known as pathogen-associated molecular patterns
(PAMPs) are depicted.[15] In the advent of
the microbiome, because of similarities between pathogenic and nonpathogenic
organisms, these signals are now called microbe-associated molecular
patterns (MAMPs).[18] Here the model of activation
by PG (and synthetic mimics, MDP and ng-MDP) is shown.The bacterial microbe-associated molecular pattern (MAMP)
PG is
sensed by a variety of PRRs, including NOD1, NOD2, NLRP3, NLRP1, and
PGBPs (Scheme ).[22−33] These ligands are small fragments derived from
a large PG polymer that surrounds the bacterial cell, consisting of
repetitive units of β-1,4-linked N-acetylglucosamine
(GlcNAc) and N-acetylmuramic acid (MurNAc) with short
peptide chains containing both l- and d-amino acids
present on the muramic acid residue (Figure ). Although the bacterial cell wall is highly
conserved among species, differences arise.[34,35] Variations in cross-linking (3–3 vs 3–4 vs 2–4
linkages) as well as substitution of amino acids, primarily at the
third position (e.g., meso-diaminopimelic acid (m-DAP), l-Lys, l-Orn, l-Ala, l-Glu, l-homoserine), are observed in both Gram-positive and Gram-negative
bacteria (Figure ,
shown in blue).[35] Modifications of the
carbohydrate backbone of PG have also been identified in a variety
of bacterial species, including N-deacetylation in Listeria,[36]O-acetylation in Helicobacter pylori,[37]N-glycolylation in Mycobacterium tuberculosis,[38] and muramic δ-lactam in Bacillus subtilis,[39] all of which block PG lytic enzymatic
digestion, leaving the 1,6-anhydro ring[40] as the lytic product (Figure , shown in red). From this knowledge of PG complexity, one
can easily imagine a pool of tunable immunostimulatory fragments that
are critical for mediating host–pathogen interactions. However,
the small-molecule details in this signaling landscape are incomplete
because of the limited amount of biologically significant MAMP PG
chemical probes.
Figure 1
Peptidoglycan structure and modifications. The chemical
functionalities
of the peptide side chain (blue) and carbohydrate backbone (red) in
bacterial PG across species are shown.
Peptidoglycan structure and modifications. The chemical
functionalities
of the peptide side chain (blue) and carbohydrate backbone (red) in
bacterial PG across species are shown.Variations in PG structure among bacterial species have led chemists
to synthesize a variety of small-molecule probes based on monomeric
units of this structure. In particular, many of these building blocks
are now commercially available. For example, N-acetyl
muramyl dipeptide (MDP) is a representative small-molecule PG mimic
for “general” bacteria and has been shown to interact
with NLRs, such as NOD2 and NLRP1, which are associated with a variety
of diseases including irritable bowel diseases (IBDs) and vitiligo
(Scheme ).[24,27,28,31,41,42] In addition,
a “modified” bacterial PG fragment, N-glycolyl MDP (ng-MDP), derived from the hydroxylated PG product
of Mycobacterium, has been heavily
investigated because of the direct link of Mycobacterium
paratuberculosis with CD (Scheme ).[43] Both “general”
and “modified” PG fragments have been shown to stimulate
a potent NOD2-dependent immune response and thus are the primary ligands
of choice for immunologists because of the ligand synthetic simplicity
and commercial availability (Scheme ).[24,44,45]However, MDP and ng-MDP represent only a defined element of
the
PG fragment pool and fail to capture the major PG hydrolase degradation
products, disaccharide muropeptides.[46,47] These disaccharide
PG fragments are synthetically complex, limiting their accessibility
and restricting their analysis in traditional immunostimulatory assays
such as NFκB luciferase-reporter and ELISA screens.[26,41,48−50] Questions in
the field surrounding the natural ligand of NLRs, like NOD2, as well
as the biological influence of other N-acetyl muramic
acid-containing PG fragments still remain unanswered without an expanded
cell wall PG library.[51] In this study,
disaccharide PG-based fragments from the gut microbe Lactobacillus acidophilus(52,53) were identified. Inspired by the generation of these PG products,
a reliable and scalable synthetic route to several PG disaccharide
fragments was implemented, leading to the first fully characterized N-acetylglucosamine N-acetylmuramic acid
tripeptide (GMTP). These disaccharides were combined with a library
of monosaccharide PG derivatives and screened for gene transcription
activation, cytokine production, and phosphorylation profiles using
bone-marrow-derived macrophages (BMDMs). Interestingly, GMTP was discovered
to be a more potent activator for select gene transcriptional programs,
many of which are related to IBD, compared with their monosaccharide
counterparts. Measurements of cytokine production and downstream phosphorylation
programs complement these genetic studies. Gene expression profiles
comparing the disaccharide to the monosaccharide fragments reveal
a complex innate immune signaling pattern, validating a highly intricate
molecular mechanism for sensing of PG fragments.
Results and Discussion
Identification
of Disaccharide PG Fragments from L. acidophilus Cultures
Previous exploration
of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria has led to the identification
of several disaccharide PG fragments that activate an immune response.[24,26,42,54−57] In order to screen for biologically relevant fragments from Gram-positive
bacteria residing in the gut microbiome, a lysozyme degradation assay
of L. acidophilus was implemented (Scheme ). L. acidophilus is a major commensal inhabitant of
the human microbiota in intestinal, oral, and vaginal tracts.[58] Since the 1970s, L. acidophilus has been commercially produced as a probiotic with reported therapeutic
effects.[53,59,60] To screen
this organism for PG small molecule production, L.
acidophilus cultures were treated with lysozyme,[61] a muramidase found in high concentrations in
both the human mouth and gut.[62] The lysed
PG was then subjected to high-resolution liquid chromatography–mass
spectrometry (HR-LCMS) analysis, and four disaccharide PG fragments
were identified: N-acetylglucosamine N-acetylmuramic acid dipeptide (GMDP), N-acetylglucosamine N-acetylmuramic acid tripeptide (GMTP), N-acetylglucosamine N-acetylmuramic acid tetrapeptide
(GMTTP), and N-acetylglucosamine N-acetylmuramic acid pentapeptide (GMPP) (Scheme ). GMTP was observed in high abundance compared
with other disaccharide fragments (SI-Table 2, entry 2, in Supporting Information 1 (SI1)). This result
is in agreement with previously published work in which GMDP, GMTP,
GMTTP, and GMPP were identified with variations at the third amino
acid residue.[42,52,56,61,63−65] However, lack of accessibility to these disaccharides because of
the complexity of chemical synthesis has prevented a rigorous investigation
of their immunological activity. This motivated the synthetic development
of well-characterized disaccharides in larger and more accessible
quantities.
Scheme 2
Lysozyme-Induced PG Degradation of L. acidophilus
L.
acidophilus produces several disaccharide products.
(a) Whole bacterial cells
were treated with lysozyme. (b) Lysed PG was subjected to a 3 kDa
spin filter. (c) PG fragmentation was analyzed by high-resolution
liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (HR-LCMS), and four
fragments were identified (SI-Table 2).
The assay was replicated on three occasions. None of the identified
masses were observed in the controls (medium, wash buffer, and enzymatic
treatment buffer).
Lysozyme-Induced PG Degradation of L. acidophilus
L.
acidophilus produces several disaccharide products.
(a) Whole bacterial cells
were treated with lysozyme. (b) Lysed PG was subjected to a 3 kDa
spin filter. (c) PG fragmentation was analyzed by high-resolution
liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (HR-LCMS), and four
fragments were identified (SI-Table 2).
The assay was replicated on three occasions. None of the identified
masses were observed in the controls (medium, wash buffer, and enzymatic
treatment buffer).
Synthesis and Characterization
of Disaccharide PG Fragments
A total synthesis using Schmidt
glycosylation was implemented to
obtain protected β-1,4-linked intermediate 10 over
13 chemical transformations.[42,66,67] From this intermediate, a modular strategy was utilized to access
PG fragments 1–3 (Scheme ). GMMP (1) was
first produced through global deprotection of the acetyl protecting
groups and the (trimethylsilyl)ethyl ester (TMSE) of compound 10 followed by direct hydrogenation with 20% Pd(OH)2. GMDP (2) was obtained by deprotection of TMSE with
1 N tetra-n-butylammonium fluoride (TBAF) followed
by direct coupling of d-isolgn-OBn to yield intermediate 11, deacetylation of 11 using aqueous LiOH, and
hydrogenation with 20% Pd(OH)2. Finally, to obtain GMTP
(3), by a slightly modified synthesis the protected dipeptide d-isolgn-l-Lys(Z)-OBzl was synthesized over two steps
starting from commercially available H-Lys(Z)-OBzl and Boc-d-glutamic acid α-amide.[68] Then deprotection
of TMSE from 10 followed by direct coupling to d-isolgn-l-Lys(Z)-OBzl yielded 12, which was
then deprotected in two subsequent steps to generate the final product 3. To ensure purity for biological testing, all of the final
compounds were purified via reversed-phase chromatography using a
mass-directed autopurification system. From intermediate 10, compounds 1–3 were obtained in
overall yields of 56% (two steps), 9% (four steps), and 21% (four
steps), respectively. Full NMR characterization and spectral data
are presented for each synthetic compound in the SI1; such data have been unavailable to date for synthetic
fragment 3.[50]
Scheme 3
Synthesis
of PG Fragment Disaccharides
Intermediate 10 was synthesized over 13 chemical steps. GMMP (1): (a)
LiOH, ACN/H2O; (b) 20% Pd(OH)2, H2, THF/H2O; 56% yield over two steps. Compound 11: (c) 1 N TBAF in THF; (d) DIPEA, HBTU, HOBt, d-isogln-OBn,
DMF; 24% yield over two steps. GMDP (2): (e) LiOH, ACN/H2O; (f) 20% Pd(OH)2, H2, THF/H2O; 37% yield over two steps. Compound 12: (g) 1 N TBAF
in THF; (h) DIPEA, HBTU, HOBt, d-isogln-l-Lys(Z)-OBzl,
DMF; 58% yield over two steps. GMTP (3): (i) LiOH, ACN/H2O; (j) 20% Pd(OH)2, H2, THF/H2O; 37% yield over two steps.
Synthesis
of PG Fragment Disaccharides
Intermediate 10 was synthesized over 13 chemical steps. GMMP (1): (a)
LiOH, ACN/H2O; (b) 20% Pd(OH)2, H2, THF/H2O; 56% yield over two steps. Compound 11: (c) 1 N TBAF in THF; (d) DIPEA, HBTU, HOBt, d-isogln-OBn,
DMF; 24% yield over two steps. GMDP (2): (e) LiOH, ACN/H2O; (f) 20% Pd(OH)2, H2, THF/H2O; 37% yield over two steps. Compound 12: (g) 1 N TBAF
in THF; (h) DIPEA, HBTU, HOBt, d-isogln-l-Lys(Z)-OBzl,
DMF; 58% yield over two steps. GMTP (3): (i) LiOH, ACN/H2O; (j) 20% Pd(OH)2, H2, THF/H2O; 37% yield over two steps.The assignment
of 3 was confirmed utilizing a variety
of 2D NMR experiments, including 1H–13C HSQC-TOCSY, 1H–1H COSY, 1H–13C HSQC, and 1H–13C HMBC (Figure and SI1). Upon hydrogenation, the anomeric hydroxyl
mutarotates into a mixture of two α/β isomeric species,
with the α anomer being favored. Through detailed NMR experiments,
the saccharide residues and peptide chains were elucidated, confirming
the structure and purity of the synthetic PG fragments.
Figure 2
1H–13C HSQC-TOCSY spectra of GMTP
(3) with magnification of the anomeric region for the
major and minor isomer carbohydrate ring spin systems. Spectra were
recorded on a 600 MHz Bruker NMR spectrometer at 298 K in D2O with the following settings: D9 = 0.12; O1P =
3 ppm; O2P = 60 ppm; SW= 6 ppm; 1SW = 100 ppm; D1=
2 s; NS= 24.
1H–13C HSQC-TOCSY spectra of GMTP
(3) with magnification of the anomeric region for the
major and minor isomer carbohydrate ring spin systems. Spectra were
recorded on a 600 MHz Bruker NMR spectrometer at 298 K in D2O with the following settings: D9 = 0.12; O1P =
3 ppm; O2P = 60 ppm; SW= 6 ppm; 1SW = 100 ppm; D1=
2 s; NS= 24.
With access to large quantities of compounds 1–3, an investigation of the regulation
programs in mouse BMDMs in response to both mono- and disaccharide
PG fragments was implemented. To investigate gene regulation mediated
by PG units, a qRT-PCR assay was first utilized to analyze the expression
of immune response indicator genes. A subset of nine compounds containing
both synthesized disaccharides 1–3 and six additional monosaccharides were used to stimulate macrophages
(SI-Figure 1). In this initial investigation,
target genes were selected on the basis of previous RNA sequencing
analysis with ng-MDP.[69] From this screen,
the mRNA expression levels of the tested genes increased significantly
in BMDMs treated with GMTP compared with MDP and ng-MDP (Figure A,B and SI-Figure 2). Gene expression regulation was
observed after 4 h of stimulation with 20 μM compound treatment
(Figure A,B and SI-Figure 2). Importantly, this upregulation
was not observed when GlcNAc was removed from the GMTP structure to
yield the monosaccharide N-acetylmuramic acid tripeptide
(MTP), demonstrating that the β-1,4-linked GlcNAc residue plays
a critical role in the observed gene activation (SI-Figures 1 and 2). Additionally, the third amino acid, lysine,
could play a critical role in generating a significant gene response,
as other disaccharide fragments such as GMMP and GMDP did not activate
as robustly (Scheme and SI-Figure 2). Upon further investigation,
GMTP was determined to activate Tnf-α and Cxcl10 significantly more than MDP and ng-MDP (Figure B and SI-Figure 3). Il-1β and Cox2 transcripts were also potently induced by GMTP, whereas
MDP had no activation (Figure B). These results showcase for the first time a specific disaccharide
PG unit that is capable of initiating gene expression programs differently
than the previous monosaccharide PG standards, MDP and ng-MDP.
Figure 3
GMTP induces
proinflammatory cytokine gene production. (A) Molecular
structures of compounds GMTP (3), MDP (4), and ng-MDP (5). (B) Gene expression statistical analysis
of qRT-PCR data for Tnfα, Il-1β, Cox2, and Cxcl10 in BMDMs treated
with 20 μM 3, 4, or 5 or control (water) for 4 h. Total RNA was harvested, and the expression
levels of selected genes were analyzed by qRT-PCR. Individual ΔΔCT
values are shown in SI-Table 1. Error bars
indicate mean ± SEM. Statistical significance was calculated
using the two-tailed Student’s t test (n = 3).
GMTP induces
proinflammatory cytokine gene production. (A) Molecular
structures of compounds GMTP (3), MDP (4), and ng-MDP (5). (B) Gene expression statistical analysis
of qRT-PCR data for Tnfα, Il-1β, Cox2, and Cxcl10 in BMDMs treated
with 20 μM 3, 4, or 5 or control (water) for 4 h. Total RNA was harvested, and the expression
levels of selected genes were analyzed by qRT-PCR. Individual ΔΔCT
values are shown in SI-Table 1. Error bars
indicate mean ± SEM. Statistical significance was calculated
using the two-tailed Student’s t test (n = 3).To more precisely understand
the transcriptional programs upon
PG fragment stimulation and measure the differences observed in the
qRT-PCR analysis, a whole-genome RNA sequencing (RNAseq) study was
performed on BMDMs treated for 18 h with 20 μM GMTP, MDP, MTP,
or ng-MDP (Figure A and SI-Figure 1). Gene regulation in
unstimulated (water) BMDMs was used as a control. DESeq2 and intensity
difference analysis[70,71] revealed significantly regulated
genes in each stimulation group, which were combined for gene set
enrichment and hierarchical clustering in Seqmonk (Supporting Information 2 (SI2), Tables 1–8). Here we
show that GMTP has significantly enhanced immune stimulating capacity
compared with MDP, MTP, and ng-MDP (Figure A and SI2 Table 9). GMTP induced a unique gene expression signature distinct from
that of MDP (Figure A and SI2 Tables 1, 2, 5, and 6). Hierarchical
clustering (HC) analysis identified genes primarily induced by GMTP,
such as Acod1, Ass1, Il6, Gm17300, and Cx3cl (Figure A, cluster 1). Transcriptional
responses to GMTP and MDP similarly induced genes of cluster 2, including Slfn2, Arl5c, Oas2, Gm36161, and Tmem176a (Figure A). In contrast, expression
of S100a4, Rpl39, Rpns27l, Crip1, and Wdr89 was specifically
induced by MDP (and to a lesser extent ng-MDP) but not the other PG
fragments (Figure A, cluster 5; SI2 Tables 1–9).
MTP was less efficient in upregulating genes that were characteristically
induced by GMTP in cluster 1, consistent with the finding that the
GlcNAc component of GMTP is critical for gene activation (SI2 Tables 5 and 7). ng-MDP, the “modified”
PG fragment, induced a strong response of a cluster of genes that
included Ltf, Lcn2, Ngp, Chil3, Mmp8, Mmp9, Cd177, S100a9, S100a8, Il2rb, Lck and Retnlg (cluster 4), but GMTP did not (SI2 Tables 4 and 8), indicating a monosaccharide-specific expression pattern.
Genes in cluster 3 of the analysis were induced by GMTP, MDP, and
MTP (but not the modified PG ng-MDP), representing a core “general”
PG response signature that includes Il1b, Irf7, Slfn5, Slfn8, Icam1, Ifit2, Ifit3, Oas3, Rsad2, Ifi209, and Tmem176b (Figure A). Overall, macrophages responded to different PGs with identifiable
unique gene expression signatures (clusters 1–5) based on their
chemical structures.
Figure 4
RNA sequencing analysis reveals differential gene expression
in
BMDMs after treatment with PG fragments. BMDMs derived from wild-type
mice were treated with PG fragments GMTP, MDP, MTP, or ng-MDP at 20
μM for 18 h (n = 3 biological replicates for
each sample). (A, B) Total RNA was subjected to RNA sequencing analysis.
(A) Heat map of top genes differentially expressed (p < 0.01, FDR < 0.05, and logFC > 1) in BMDMs treated with
water
(control) or PG fragments GMTP, MDP, MTP, or ng-MDP. Hierarchical
clustering separated the genes into five clusters depending on the
PG activation pattern. Color scales represent upregulation (red) or
downregulation (blue) of respective genes. (B) Heat map showing all
of the top IBD gene sets that are upregulated (red) or downregulated
(blue) differentially between GMTP and ng-MDP compared with the control
(water). (C) Concentrations of cytokines (in pg/mL) released by BMDM
+ 20 μM compound treatment for 18 h as determined by Luminex
analysis. Data are represented as mean ± SEM (n = 3 biological replicates).
RNA sequencing analysis reveals differential gene expression
in
BMDMs after treatment with PG fragments. BMDMs derived from wild-type
mice were treated with PG fragments GMTP, MDP, MTP, or ng-MDP at 20
μM for 18 h (n = 3 biological replicates for
each sample). (A, B) Total RNA was subjected to RNA sequencing analysis.
(A) Heat map of top genes differentially expressed (p < 0.01, FDR < 0.05, and logFC > 1) in BMDMs treated with
water
(control) or PG fragments GMTP, MDP, MTP, or ng-MDP. Hierarchical
clustering separated the genes into five clusters depending on the
PG activation pattern. Color scales represent upregulation (red) or
downregulation (blue) of respective genes. (B) Heat map showing all
of the top IBD gene sets that are upregulated (red) or downregulated
(blue) differentially between GMTP and ng-MDP compared with the control
(water). (C) Concentrations of cytokines (in pg/mL) released by BMDM
+ 20 μM compound treatment for 18 h as determined by Luminex
analysis. Data are represented as mean ± SEM (n = 3 biological replicates).GMTP emerged from these experiments as a new and efficient activator
of innate immune responses in macrophages. Remarkably, 31 genes that
were identified by DEseq2 analysis[70,71] as significantly
induced by GMTP have genetic variants associated with either Crohn’s
disease or ulcerative colitis (IBD Exomes Browser, ibd.broadinstitute.org) (Figure B and SI2 Table 10). The relative expression of these
IBD-associated genes and the P values of the highest
IBD-associated variant are shown (Figure B and SI2 Table 10). While a few of these genes were also part of the ng-MDP-induced
pathways, we also identified IBD-associated genes that characterized
the response to ng-MDP, including Mmp8, Mmp9, Il2rb, Lck, and Lcn2 (Figure B and SI2 Table 10). These findings indicate that the
pathway associated with the recognition of GMTP may play an important
role in regulating mucosal immune responses. An ELISA–Luminex-based
assay was used to screen the expression of a panel of inflammation-associated
proteins, and the results showed that IL-1β, CXCL10 (IP10),
KC (IL8 homologue), MIP2, IFN-γ, and TNF-α protein expression
was induced in the PG-fragment-treated macrophages (Figure C), confirming the RNAseq results.We next carried out qRT-PCR analysis of mRNA expression from genes
from cluster 1 (Il6, Isg15, Acod1, and Cxcl9) in three independent
experiments in which BMDMs were treated for 18 h with 20 or 100 μM
GMTP, MDP, MTP, or ng-MDP (Figure A). GMTP induced significantly more Il6, Acod1, and Isg15 mRNA expression
compared with MDP, MTP, and ng-MDP (Figure A). GMTP induced a 33-fold increase in Il6 mRNA expression, while MDP, MTP, and ng-MDP induced
a 7–10-fold increase. Acod1 expression was increased up to
60-fold in the presence of 100 μM GMTP, while the other compounds
achieved an up to 10-fold increase. Remarkably, GMTP and MTP had similar
ability to induce Cxcl9 expression at 20 or 100 μM
compound. Among the studied genes, Isg15 mRNA expression
was significantly induced only by GMTP in these experiments (Figure A). These data emphasize
that even at higher concentrations, different gene programs are activated.
Finally, we measured IL6 secretion in the supernatants of BMDMs after
18 h of stimulation. These experiments confirmed that GMTP induced
significantly higher levels of IL6 compared with MDP, ng-MDP, or MTP
(Figure B). Together,
these results revealed that the synthesized peptidoglycan fragments
were potent innate immune stimuli that were able to induce shared
and fragment-specific gene expression profiles that may be able to
elicit unique immune responses.
Figure 5
Gene expression analysis of cluster 1
genes and cytokine analysis
confirm GMTP’s reactivity. (A) Gene expression and statistical
analysis of qRT-PCR data for Il6, Acod1, Cxcl9, Lcn2, and Isg15 in BMDMs treated with 0, 20, or 100 μM 3, 4, or 5 or control (water) for 18 h. Total RNA
was harvested, and the expression levels of selected genes were analyzed
by qRT-PCR. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and the ordinary
ANOVA test. Error bars represent mean ± SD. (B) IL6 expression
in the supernatant of BMDMs from (A) after 18 h of stimulation with
the indicated peptidoglycan fragments and concentrations. Data were
analyzed using one-way ANOVA and the ordinary ANOVA test. Error bars
represent mean ± SD.
Gene expression analysis of cluster 1
genes and cytokine analysis
confirm GMTP’s reactivity. (A) Gene expression and statistical
analysis of qRT-PCR data for Il6, Acod1, Cxcl9, Lcn2, and Isg15 in BMDMs treated with 0, 20, or 100 μM 3, 4, or 5 or control (water) for 18 h. Total RNA
was harvested, and the expression levels of selected genes were analyzed
by qRT-PCR. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and the ordinary
ANOVA test. Error bars represent mean ± SD. (B) IL6 expression
in the supernatant of BMDMs from (A) after 18 h of stimulation with
the indicated peptidoglycan fragments and concentrations. Data were
analyzed using one-way ANOVA and the ordinary ANOVA test. Error bars
represent mean ± SD.
Cellular Biochemical Characterization
To further extend
this study from the gene to protein level, we next analyzed the activation
(i.e., phosphorylation) of common PG signaling pathways. Phosphorylation
events are an essential component of the downstream production of
cytokines and chemokines upon PG stimulation (Scheme ).[69] Through immunoblot
analysis, STAT1, IRF5, cJUN, and p65 NFκB phosphorylation was
screened (SI-Figure 4). Phosphorylation
was observed for IRF5, cJUN, and P65-NFκB 1 h and 4 h after
treatment with 20 μM MDP, ng-MDP, and GMTP,
confirming that all the three compounds were able to activate these
signaling pathways. The transcriptional activation of immunoregulatory
genes observed for GMTP in combination with the qRT-PCR and RNAseq
analyses (Figures B, 4A,B, and 5) could
be a result of combinatorial activation of these pathways (Figure ) or involve yet
uncharacterized transcriptional regulators. The stability, interaction
strength, or component recruitment of PRRs (Figure ) into the subsequently forming signaling
complexes may be distinct and responsible for the observed fragment-specific
transcriptional responses. The observed gene transcriptional differences
could also be the result of different binding affinities of mono-
and disaccharide PG fragments for their appropriate PRRs. Analysis
of these commonly studied components in peptidoglycan signaling indicates
that the transcriptional regulators and intermediaries that induce
fragment-specific gene expression will need to be further defined.
Future studies probing the potential PRR(s) binding mechanism and
complex components are needed to further understand these PG-associated
innate immune responses.
Conclusion
Key lysozyme products
of the Gram-positive commensal gut bacterium L. acidophilus were identified and confirmed. Corresponding
biologically relevant disaccharide PG fragments were subsequently
synthesized and fully characterized on scale. Whole-genome RNA sequencing
identified GMTP as a key disaccharide PG fragment that serves as a
significant activator of multiple gene transcriptional and cytokine
programs (Figure A,B).
By screening beyond traditional PG fragments for gene activation events,
we have identified unique induction patterns for the production of
a variety of IBD-associated gene transcripts (Figure B). qRT-PCR analysis of mRNA expression of
genes from cluster 1 and cytokine analysis confirmed that the synthesized
peptidoglycan fragments were able to induce shared and fragment-specific
gene expression profiles (Figure ). Finally, the known PG signaling pathways STAT1,
IRF5, cJUN, and p65 NFκB were found to be activated by GMTP,
MDP, and ng-MDP (SI-Figure 4). These results
complement the sophisticated yet limited reports in the field that
use adjuvants other than MDP, such as GMTP–N-dipalmitoylpropylamide (DPG)[72] and mifamurtide,[73] for potent stimulation of PRRs. The knowledge
of these specific activation pathways will allow for more tunable
adjuvants to be compiled.This work indicates that distinct
PG fragments activate shared
pathways with different signaling strengths. Interestingly, we also
observed PG-fragment-specific gene signatures that could be due to
the activation of distinct recognition pathways or the specific recruitment
and activation of additional signaling components. Altogether, the
results shown that innate immune stimulation by bacterial peptidoglycan
is much more complex than previously observed with the small synthetic
PG mimics muramyl dipeptide (MDP) and N-glycolyl
MDP (ng-MDP). These unique molecular signatures of pathogen and commensal
bacteria could enable PRRs to control microbiome-specific homeostasis
and regulate immune responses, as bacteria with modifications (e.g., N-glycolyl) of the carbohydrate backbone of PG are known
to evade immune recognition. A next obvious step forward from this
work is to determine potential PRR(s) required to detect the various
PG fragments, interaction strengths for individual PG fragments therein,
and the signaling mechanism that lead to the distinct gene expression
signatures that may be linked to yet to be determined innate immune
regulation. An important future step will be to catalog all of the
biologically relevant PG components that are generated during microbe–host
interactions. With the structural details and the newly synthesized
molecules now available to the scientific community, harnessing the
mechanisms responsible for this differential PG signaling paradigm
will be essential in developing novel therapeutics and adjuvants to
control inflammation.
Authors: Adrienne L McNees; Diane Markesich; Najah R Zayyani; David Y Graham Journal: Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2015-10-16 Impact factor: 3.869
Authors: Stephen E Girardin; Leonardo H Travassos; Mireille Hervé; Didier Blanot; Ivo G Boneca; Dana J Philpott; Philippe J Sansonetti; Dominique Mengin-Lecreulx Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2003-07-18 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Jinyao Mo; Joseph P Boyle; Christopher B Howard; Tom P Monie; Beckley K Davis; Joseph A Duncan Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: M Sloan Siegrist; Sarah Whiteside; John C Jewett; Arjun Aditham; Felipe Cava; Carolyn R Bertozzi Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2013-01-11 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Ashley R Brown; Kimberly A Wodzanowski; Cintia C Santiago; Stephen N Hyland; Julianna L Follmar; PapaNii Asare-Okai; Catherine Leimkuhler Grimes Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2021-09-10 Impact factor: 4.634