| Literature DB >> 34696512 |
Gabriele Martino1, Dominique Holtappels2, Marta Vallino1, Marco Chiapello1, Massimo Turina1, Rob Lavigne2, Jeroen Wagemans2, Marina Ciuffo1.
Abstract
Bacterial kiwifruit vine disease (Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae, Psa) and halo blight of bean (P. syringae pv. phaseolicola, Pph) are routinely treated with copper, leading to environmental pollution and bacterial copper resistance. An alternative sustainable control method could be based on bacteriophages, as phage biocontrol offers high specificity and does not result in the spread of toxic residues into the environment or the food chain. In this research, specific phages suitable for phage-based biocontrol strategies effective against Psa and Pph were isolated and characterized. In total, sixteen lytic Pph phage isolates and seven lytic Psa phage isolates were isolated from soil in Piedmont and Veneto in northern Italy. Genome characterization of fifteen selected phages revealed that the isolated Pph phages were highly similar and could be considered as isolates of a novel species, whereas the isolated Psa phages grouped into four distinct clades, two of which represent putative novel species. No lysogeny-, virulence- or toxin-related genes were found in four phages, making them suitable for potential biocontrol purposes. A partial biological characterization including a host range analysis was performed on a representative subset of these isolates. This analysis was a prerequisite to assess their efficacy in greenhouse and in field trials, using different delivery strategies.Entities:
Keywords: Pph; Psa; Pseudomonas syringae; bean; bean halo blight; biocontrol; kiwifruit; kiwifruit canker; phage
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34696512 PMCID: PMC8537276 DOI: 10.3390/v13102083
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Viruses ISSN: 1999-4915 Impact factor: 5.048
Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae and pv. phaseolicola strains properties and their phage sensitivity profiles. The key to phage efficiency of plating (EOP) is shown at the right end of the table. Red color indicates an EOP comparable to the one measured in the isolation strain (K7#8 for psageA1, psageK4, psageK4e, psageB1 and psage B2; Pph Cuneo #6_18 for pphageB1, pphageB21, pphageBV72, pphageT12 and pphageT21; Pph Cuneo #6_18 is arbitrarily chosen as reference for MR8). The other colors represent different levels of EOP with darker colors indicating a greater efficiency in their lytic activity. “-“ symbols represent cases for which plaques have not been observed at any concentration of the crude lysate. * Variety deliciosa; $ Phytosanitary Inspection Service.
| Identification | Origin | Geographical Origin | Source | Bacterial Strains | Year | pphageB1 | pphageB21 | pphageBV72 | pphage T12 | pphage T21 | psage A1 | psage K4 | psage K4e | psage B1 | psage B2 | MR8 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Piedmont | Agrion | K7#1 | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - | EOP | |||||||||
| Piedmont | Agrion | K7#8 | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - |
| |||||||||
| Piedmont | Agrion | K4#3 | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - |
| |||||||||
| Piedmont | Agrion | K4#6 | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| |||||||
| Piedmont | Agrion | K4#7 | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - |
| |||||||||
| Piedmont | Agrion | K4#9 | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| ||||||||
| Piedmont | Agrion | K4#10 | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| |||||||
| Veneto | PIS $ | #5712.19 | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - |
| |||||||||
| Veneto | PIS $ | #5726.19 | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Veneto | PIS $ | #5747.19 | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
| Veneto | PIS $ | #5846.19 | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Veneto | PIS $ | #5847.19 | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
| Veneto | PIS $ | #5850.19 | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #298a | 2019 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #391a | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #392a | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #453d | 2016 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #453e | 2016 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #454d | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #454e | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #509c | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #509d | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
| Piedmont | PIS $ | #509e | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
|
| Piedmont | PIS $ | Pph PSS | 2015 | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
|
| China | Private company | Pph #9 | 2015 | - | |||||||||||||
|
| China | Private company | Pph #13 | 2015 | - | - | ||||||||||||
|
| China | Private company | Pph #14 | 2015 | - | - | ||||||||||||
|
| Piedmont | IPSP | Pph Cuneo | 2016 | - | - | - | |||||||||||
|
| Piedmont | Agrion | Pph Cuneo #6_17 | 2017 | - | - | - | |||||||||||
|
| Piedmont | Agrion | Pph Cuneo #6_18 | 2018 | - | - | ||||||||||||
|
| Piedmont | Agrion | Pph Cuneo #7 | 2018 | - | - | ||||||||||||
|
| Piedmont | Agrion | Pph Cuneo #13 | 2017 | - | - | - | |||||||||||
|
| Water | France | INRAe | UB197 | 2010 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
|
| Water | France | INRAe | UB210 | 2010 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||
|
| Water | France | INRAe | UB246 | 2010 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||
|
| Water | United States | INRAe | USA052 | 2010 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||
|
| Water | France | INRAe | CC1504 | 2010 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
|
| Water | France | INRAe | SZ030 | 2010 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
|
| Water | France | INRAe | SZ122 | 2010 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
|
| Water | France | INRAe | SZ131 | 2010 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||
|
| Lombardia | UNIMI | Pss ML#1 | 2018 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Summary of the main features of phages isolated in this study. The classification of the phages is based on their phylogeny (Figure 4).
| Phage Name | Source | Origin a | Field Species and Cultivar | Source | Region | Year | Plaque Morphology (LBLS 0.6%) b | Classification c |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| psageK4 | Soil | Manta (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 1 mm |
| |
| psageK4e | Soil | Manta (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2019 | Clear, 1 mm |
| |
| psageK9 | Soil | Borgo d’Ale (VC) | IPSP | Piedmont | 2019 | clear or turbid 2 mm |
| |
| psageA1 | Soil | Manta (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 1–2 mm |
| |
| psageA2 | Soil | Manta (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 1–2 mm |
| |
| psageB1 | Soil | Manta (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 2 mm |
| |
| psageB2 | Soil | Manta (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear or turbid, 2 mm |
| |
| pphageB1 | Soil | Boves (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageB12 | Soil | Boves (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2019 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageB13 | Soil | Boves (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2020 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageB21 | Soil | Boves (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageB51 | Soil | Boves (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageB101 | Soil | Boves (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageT11 | Soil | Tetti Pesio (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageT12 | Soil | Tetti Pesio (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2019 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageT13 | Soil | Tetti Pesio (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2020 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageT21 | Soil | Tetti Pesio (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageT22 | Soil | Tetti Pesio (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageT23 | Soil | Tetti Pesio (CN) | Agrion | Piedmont | 2018 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageBV2 | Soil | Verona (VR) | Phytosanitary Inspection Service | Veneto | 2019 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageBV4 | Soil | Verona (VR) | Phytosanitary Inspection Service | Veneto | 2019 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageBV71 | Soil | Verona (VR) | Phytosanitary Inspection Service | Veneto | 2019 | Clear, 5 mm |
| |
| pphageBV72 | Soil | Verona (VR) | Phytosanitary Inspection Service | Veneto | 2019 | Clear, 5 mm |
|
a The letters in brackets indicate the province. CN stands for Cuneo, VC for Vercelli and VR for Verona. b For Psa strains the reference strain used for this assay was K7#8, and for Pph strains, Cuneo #6_18. c The classification in the last column of the table was either through high identity with taxonomically classified phages already present in the database for the 15 phages that were sequenced in their whole genome, or for the other 8, identical TEM observed morphology was confirmed with specific primers designed on the sequenced isolates.
Figure 1Plaque morphology and electron microscopy images of the three phages representing putative new species: (A) pphageB1 capsid has an icosahedric head with a short tail and clear fibers, typical for a podovirus morphology; (B) psageA1 has an icosahedral head and a putative contractile tail typical for the myovirus morphology; (C) psageB1 shows a long and flexible non-contractile tail linked to an icosahedral head, a typical siphovirus morphology.
Summary of the characteristic of the genomes of selected phages.
| Phage Name | Accession Number | Bacterial Host | Genome Length | GC Content (%) | ORFs | Hypothetical Proteins | Proteins with Predicted Function | ORFans | tRNAs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| psageA1 | MT740307 | Psa K7 #8 | 98,780 bp | 48.79% | 176 | 76 | 51 | 49 | 14 |
| psageB1 | MT354569 | Psa K7 #8 | 112,269 bp | 56.47% | 161 | 105 | 40 | 16 | 4 |
| pphageB1 | MT354570 | Pph Cuneo #6_18 | 41,714 bp | 56.63% | 52 | 23 | 25 | 4 | 0 |
| psageK4 | MZ348426 | Psa K7 #8 | 98,440 bp | 60.44% | 179 | 112 | 51 | 16 | 18 |
| psageB2 | MZ348425 | Psa K7 #8 | 50,739 bp | 58.51% | 77 | 47 | 26 | 4 | 0 |
Figure 2Genome organization of pphageB1 phage compared with MR18 (A), psageB1 compared with nickie (B), psageA1 (C), psageK4 compared with psageK4e and phiPsa267 (D), and psageB2 compared with phiPsa1 (E). The arrows indicate annotated ORFs; and the asterisks, annotated tRNA sequences. Yellow arrows indicate ORFs associated with structural proteins, blue DNA- and metabolism-associated ORF, red ORFs that encode for lysis associated proteins, and purple ORFs homologues to terminases. The intensity of the color between two compared sequences indicates percentages of BLASTn similarity.
Figure 3The charts show the viability of pphageB1, psageK4, psageB1 and psageA1 phages under exposure to different pHs (A), or temperatures (B), for one hour, and to different times of UV-C irradiation (C). The number of replicates for every condition is four, and the error bars indicate the standard error. The statistical significance was calculated through the agricolae R package and consists of ANOVA (ANOVA p-values are shown under every plot) and Kruskal–Wallis analysis (significant differences indicated by letters over the bars). Different lower-case letters above each bar plot represent statistically different values.
Figure 4Phylogenetic analysis of a selected number of Major Capsid Protein (MCP) sequences similar to the MCP of pphageB1 phage (A), of a selected number of DNA ligases similar to the DNA ligase of psageA1, psageK4 and psageK4e phages (B), and of a selected number of MCP similar to the psageB1 MCP (C). The Escherichia virus T7 MCP and DNA ligase were used as an outgroup for psageB1 and psageA1. The N4 phage MCP sequence was used as an outgroup for pphageB1 tree. The maximum likelihood methodology was used to obtain the best tree. After comparisons, the chosen best model of substitution was WAG+G4 for the pphageB1 and psageB1 trees and Blosum62+G4 for the psageA1 tree. Consensus trees were constructed from 1000 bootstrap trees. PphageB1, psageA1 and psageB1 are indicated in bold characters. At the nodes, the bootstrap values, expressed in percentages, are indicated.