| Literature DB >> 34093458 |
Fatin Iffah Rasyiqah Mohamad Zoolkefli1, Kazuki Moriguchi1,2, Yunjae Cho3, Kazuya Kiyokawa2, Shinji Yamamoto1, Katsunori Suzuki1,2.
Abstract
Conjugal transfer is a major driving force of genetic exchange in eubacteria, and the system in IncP1-type broad-host-range plasmids transfers DNA even to eukaryotes and archaea in a process known as trans-kingdom conjugation (TKC). Although conjugation factors encoded on plasmids have been extensively analyzed, those on the donor chromosome have not. To identify the potential conjugation factor(s), a genome-wide survey on a comprehensive collection of Escherichia coli gene knockout mutants (Keio collection) as donors to Saccharomyces cerevisiae recipients was performed using a conjugal transfer system mediated by the type IV secretion system (T4SS) of the IncP1α plasmid. Out of 3,884 mutants, three mutants (ΔfrmR, ΔsufA, and ΔiscA) were isolated, which showed an increase by one order of magnitude in both E. coli-E. coli and E. coli-yeast conjugations without an increase in the mRNA accumulation level for the conjugation related genes examined. The double-knockout mutants for these genes (ΔfrmRΔsufA and ΔiscAΔfrmR) did not show synergistic effects on the conjugation efficiency, suggesting that these factors affect a common step in the conjugation machinery. The three mutants demonstrated increased conjugation efficiency in IncP1β-type but not in IncN- and IncW-type broad-host-range plasmid transfers, and the homologous gene knockout mutants against the three genes in Agrobacterium tumefaciens also showed increased TKC efficiency. These results suggest the existence of a specific regulatory system in IncP1 plasmids that enables the control of conjugation efficiency in different hosts, which could be utilized for the development of donor strains as gene introduction tools into bacteria, eukaryotes, and archaea.Entities:
Keywords: IncP1-type plasmid; genome-wide screening; horizontal gene transfer; trans-kingdom conjugation; type IV secretion system
Year: 2021 PMID: 34093458 PMCID: PMC8174662 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.620535
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Strains used in this study.
| Keio collection | An in-frame single-gene knockout mutant collection derived from BW25113, KmR | NBRP Japan |
| BW25113Δ | This study | |
| BW25113Δ | i | This study |
| BW25113Δ | This study | |
| BW25113Δ | This study | |
| BW25113 | NBRP Japan | |
| SY327 ( | NBRP Japan | |
| S17-1 ( | NBRP Japan | |
| C58C1 | pTiC58-cured and RifR derivative of C58 | |
| C58C1Δ | This study | |
| C58C1Δ | This study | |
| C58C1Δ | This study | |
| BY4742 | Invitrogen |
Plasmids used in this study.
| pK18mobsacB | Mobilizable plasmid; | |
| pK18mobsacB- | Partial | This study |
| pK18mobsacB- | Partial | This study |
| pK18mobsacB- | This study | |
| pK18mobsacBΔ | This study | |
| pK18mobsacBΔ | This study | |
| pK18mobsacBΔ | This study | |
| pJP5603sacBGmR | Mobilizable plasmid; | This study *LC599391 |
| pJP5603sacBGmR_ | Partial | This study |
| pJP5603sacBGmR_ | This study | |
| pJP5603sacBGmR_ | Partial | This study |
| pBBR122Δ | Derivative of a commercially provided plasmid vector pBBR122; | |
| RP4 | IncP1α-type conjugative broad host range plasmid; | |
| pSa | IncW-type conjugative broad host range plasmid; | |
| R46 | IncN-type conjugative broad host range plasmid; | |
| pRH220 | Helper plasmid; | *AB526840 |
| pDPT51 | Helper plasmid; | |
| pRS316: | Mobilizable plasmid; | |
| pAY205 | Mobilizable plasmid; | *AB526841 |
| pYN402 | Mobilizable plasmid; | *AB531984 |
FIGURE 1Effect of frmR, sufA, and iscA mutations in Escherichia coli on IncP1α conjugations. (A) TKC efficiency of IncP1α transfer from E. coli to yeast within four experimental replicates (n = 4). (B) Conjugation efficiency of IncP1α transfer from E. coli to E. coli within seven experimental replicates (n = 7). Both conjugation reactions were performed for 1 h (white bar) and 6 h (black bar). Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM). Different letters indicate significant differences between mutants and wild-type control at p < 0.05 using Tukey HSD multiple comparison analysis. BY4742 and SY327 were used as the recipients. BW25113 parental strain was used as the control.
FIGURE 2Confirmation analysis of the high conjugation efficiency in frmR, sufA, and iscA mutants. (A) Effect of formaldehyde (250 μM) on the conjugation efficiency of IncP1α plasmid transfer by ΔfrmR mutants and wild-type control to E. coli recipient within five experimental replicates (n = 5). (B) TKC efficiency of IncP1α transfer by genes-deficient E. coli donor, belonging to the same operon (frm operon) within five experimental replicates (n = 5). (C) TKC efficiency of IncP1α transfer by genes-deficient E. coli donor, belonging to the different operons. This experiment was performed within 12 experimental replicates (n = 12) for single-KO mutants and wild-type control, while five experimental replicates were performed for double-KO mutants (n = 5). (B,C) BY4742 was used as the recipient. Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM). Asterisks (∗∗∗) indicate statistically significant difference at p < 0.001 (two-tailed t-test) compared to wild-type control. No significant difference is indicated as “n.s.” between treated and non-treated ΔfrmR with formaldehyde. Different letters indicate significant differences between mutants and wild-type control at p < 0.05 using Tukey HSD multiple comparison analysis. BW25113 parental strain was used as the control. All conjugation reactions were performed for 1 h.
FIGURE 3Expression analysis of conjugation-related and up-mutant genes by qRT-PCR. (A) Expression of traI, traJ, traK, and trbL genes within the helper plasmid, IncP1α-pRH220, harbored in the up-mutants and wild-type control donor strains, within triplicate experiments (n = 3). (B) Expression of frmR, sufA, and iscA genes within the up-mutant and wild-type control donor strains, within six experimental replicates (n = 6). Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM). Asterisk (∗) indicates statistically significant differences at p < 0.05 (two-tailed t-test) compared to wild-type control. BW25113 parental strain was used as the control.
FIGURE 4Generality assessment of frmR, sufA, and iscA mutations on the conjugation of broad host range plasmids. (A) Conjugation efficiency of IncN (R46) plasmid transfer to E. coli recipient cells within five experimental replicates (n = 5). (B) Conjugation efficiency of IncW (pSa) plasmid transfer to E. coli recipient cells within seven experimental replicates (n = 7). (C) Conjugation efficiency of IncP1β (pDPT51)-mediated shuttle vector (pAY205) transfer to E. coli and (D) yeast within triplicate experiments (n = 3). BY4742 and SY327 were used as the recipients. All conjugation reactions were performed for 1 h. Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM). Different letters indicate significant differences between mutants and wild-type control at p < 0.05 using Tukey HSD multiple comparison analysis. BW25113 parental strain was used as the control.
FIGURE 5Effect of up-mutant homologs gene-knockout in A. tumefaciens on IncP1-type conjugation. The conjugation reaction was performed for 1 h. Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) within six experimental replicates (n = 6). Different letters indicate significant differences between mutants and wild-type control at p < 0.05 using Tukey HSD multiple comparison analysis. BY4742 was used as the recipient. C58C1 parental strain was used as the control.
FIGURE 6Possible model mechanisms of the FrmR, SufA, and IscA protein interactions within E. coli donor in repressing the conjugation of IncP1α plasmid. (A) Feedback regulation of frm operon. FrmR is a transcriptional repressor of the frm operon. The accumulation of ligands (e.g., formaldehyde) causes the inactivation of FrmR repressor activity by binding to the ligands, consequently activates the transcriptional activity of this operon. This transcriptional activation leads to the expression of the downstream genes, frmA and frmB, which encode FrmA and FrmB for formaldehyde detoxification. (B,C) FrmR is also predicted to be a transcriptional repressor on the operon of another target factor (activator) within the E. coli donor which represents as factor Z. IscA and SufA are predict to work in repressing the activators (factors V and U, respectively) either by directly or indirectly (B) or directly activate the repressors (factors S and T, respectively) (C). At the same time, both of these activators may form a complex with the FrmR target factor (Z) in order to activate conjugation (B) or the repressor may form a complex with other factor (factor R) repressed by factor Z either directly or indirectly, resulting to the repression of conjugation (C), either by directly or indirectly. Based on these model mechanisms, the FrmR, SufA, and IscA proteins are possible to repress the conjugation at the identical step(s) of IncP1 conjugation machinery.