| Literature DB >> 35986900 |
Saray Santamaría-Hernando1,2, Lieselotte De Bruyne2, Monica Höfte2, María-Isabel Ramos-González1.
Abstract
The extracellular 373-kDa PehA heme peroxidase of Pseudomonas putida KT2440 has two enzymatic domains which depend on heme cofactor for their peroxidase activity. A null pehA mutant was generated to examine the impact of PehA in rhizosphere colonization competence and the induction of plant systemic resistance (ISR). This mutant was not markedly hampered in colonization efficiency. However, increase in pehA dosage enhanced colonization fitness about 30 fold in the root and 900 fold in the root apex. In vitro assays with purified His-tagged enzymatic domains of PehA indicated that heme-dependent peroxidase activity was required for the enhancement of root tip colonization. Evaluation of live/dead cells confirmed that overexpression of pehA had a positive effect on bacterial cell viability. Following root colonization of rice plants by KT2440 strain, the incidence of rice blast caused by Magnaporthe oryzae was reduced by 65% and the severity of this disease was also diminished in comparison to non-treated plants. An increase in the pehA dosage was also beneficial for the control of rice blast as compared with gene inactivation. The results suggest that PehA helps P. putida to cope with the plant-imposed oxidative stress leading to enhanced colonization ability and concomitant ISR-elicitation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35986900 PMCID: PMC9518985 DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.14123
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microb Biotechnol ISSN: 1751-7915 Impact factor: 6.575
Bacteria and plasmids used
| Strains and plasmids | Relevant characteristics | Reference or source |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| KT2440 (or KT) | Derivative of | Regenhardt et al. ( |
| KT2440 | Kmr, null PP2561 mutant | This study |
| KT2440R (or KTR) | Rifr derivative of KT2440 | Espinosa‐Urgel and Ramos ( |
| KT2440Tn | Smr, site‐specific insertion of miniTn | Matilla et al. ( |
| KT2440RTn | Rfr, Smr, site‐specific insertion of miniTn | Matilla et al. ( |
| KT2440R | Rifr, Kmr, null PP2561 mutant | This study |
| KTRPP2561 | Rifr, Kmr; miniTn | Matilla et al. ( |
|
| ||
| CC118λ | Rifr, λ | Herrero et al. ( |
| DH5α |
| Woodcock et al. ( |
|
| ||
| HB101 | F− Δ | Boyer and Roulland‐Dussoix ( |
|
| Resistant to λ phage, growth in citrate | S. Molin |
| Plasmids | ||
| p34S‐Km3 | Kmr, Apr, | Dennis and Zylstra ( |
| pKNG101 | Smr, | Kaniga et al. ( |
| pLAFR3 | Tcr, derivative from the cosmid pLAFR1, P
| Vanbleu et al. ( |
| to the fragment encoding the α peptide of β‐galactosidase | ||
| pMBL‐T | Apr, PCR cloning vector, P
| Canvax |
| α peptide of β‐galactosidase | ||
| pRK600 | Cmr, | Finan et al. ( |
| pUC18Not | Apr, identical to pUC18 but with two NotI sites flanking pUC18 polylinker | Herrero et al. ( |
| pBBR1MCS‐5 | Gmr, oriRK2 mobRK2 | Kovach et al. ( |
| pBBR1MCS‐2 | Kmr, oriRK2 mobRK2 | Kovach et al. ( |
| pCSSH1 | Tcr, cosmid of | This study |
| pLAFR3, containing the cluster | ||
| pCSSH3 | Tcr, Kmr, derivative of pCSSH1 harbouring | This study |
| pMIR160 | Apr, pMBL‐T with a 1‐kb PCR fragment upstream of | This study |
| obtained using primers 1PehAf and 2PehAr | ||
| pMIR161 | Apr, pMBL‐T with a 0.94‐kb PCR fragment downstream | This study |
| of | ||
| pMIR162 | Apr, 1‐kb SalI/XbaI fragment of pMIR160 | This study |
| cloned at the same sites in pUC18Not | ||
| pMIR163 | Apr, 1‐kb SalI/XbaI fragment of pMIR160 and 0.92‐kb | This study |
| XbaI/SacI fragment of pMIR161 cloned at the same | ||
| sites in pUC18Not | ||
| pMIR164 | Apr, Kmr, | This study |
| of pMIR163 | ||
| pMIR166 | Smr, Kmr, 2.9‐kb NotI fragment of pMIR164 inserted into | This study |
| pKNG101. Plasmid construction to generate the | ||
| chromosomal and cosmid encoded | ||
| pMIR185 | Gmr, | This study |
Abbreviations: Ap, ampicillin; Cm, chloramphenicol; Km, kanamycin; Rif, rifampin; Sm, streptomycin; Tc, tetracycline; MCS, multiple cloning site.
FIGURE 1Genetic organization of the fragment inserted into the pLAFR3‐derivative cosmid pCSSH1. The inserted DNA is a 22.1 kb DNA fragment (2902955–2925123) from Pseudomonas putida KT2440. The NCBI annotation of loci includes PP2555, a ‘putative SAM‐dependent methyltransferase’; PP2556, a ‘chromate transporter’; PP2557, a ‘PAS/PAC sensor‐containing diguanylate cyclase’; PP2558, a ‘outer membrane efflux protein’; PP2559, a ‘a type 1 secretion membrane fusion protein’; PP2560, a ‘T1SS ATPase’; PP2561, a ‘heme peroxidase’; PP2562, a ‘hypothetical protein’; and PP2563, an ‘antibiotic biosynthesis protein’.
FIGURE 2Rhizosphere colonization capacity conferred by pCSSH1 to Pseudomonas putida strains. Proportions of CFUs carrying cosmids pCSSH1 (grey) or pLAFR3 (white) in the initial inoculum (I) and recovered after 6 days in the corn rhizosphere (R) and the root tips (T) are plotted. A. KTRPP2561 (pCSSH1) vs KT2440RTn7‐ΩSm1 (pLAFR3). KTRPP2561 appears as 2561▽minitn5 in this panel. B. KT2440 pehA (pCSSH1) vs KT2440Tn7‐ΩSm1 (pLAFR3). C. KT2440Tn7‐ΩSm1 (pCSSH1) vs KT2440 (pLAFR3). The parental cosmid pLAFR3 was used as control. Data represent the average results from six plants and standard deviation is shown. One‐way analysis of variance coupled to a Bonferroni post hoc test was used to compare means (p < 0.05). Whereas the sizes of bacterial inoculum were similar in the beginning of the experiment, differences between strains were significant at the end.
FIGURE 3Overexpressing pehA provides an advantage to Pseudomonas putida. (A) Colonization capacity of P. putida expressing pehA ectopically in competition with wild type. The index of colonization fitness (Ramos‐González et al., 2013) is measured as 1/[(percentage of recovered KT2440 (pMIR185) vs KT2440 (pBBR1MCS‐2) per plant at 6 days post inoculation)/(percentage KT2440 (pMIR185) vs KT2440 (pBBR1MCS‐2) in the initial inoculum)]. The index of colonization fitness for KT2440 (pBBR1MCS‐5) was 0.98 ± 0.05; thus, this strain and KT2440 (pBBR1MCS‐2) are equally competitive. Gm and km resistance markers allowed strain‐specific selection. Seed adhesion rate was similar for both strains (0.5% attached bacteria after 30 min). Data represent the average results from six plants and standard deviation is shown. (B) Hydrogen peroxide resistance. Bacterial strains were cultivated overnight in liquid LB medium and subsequently adjusted to an OD600nm of 1 in M9 buffer (Sambrook & Russell, 2001). Serially diluted bacterial suspensions (10 μl) ranging from 103–106 as indicated were spotted on agar plates containing plant nutrient solution (PNS) supplemented with Fe‐EDTA and MS micronutrients (Matilla et al., 2007); as C source citrate 15 mM was used. Gm 50 μg/ml was added to select for pBBR1MCS‐5 and pMIR185 and hydrogen peroxide 50 μM was added as stressor. Plates were incubated at 28°C for 36 h.
FIGURE 4Effect of pehA dosage on Pseudomonas putida efficiency and viability. (A) Efficiency conferred by pehA from pCSSH1 to P. putida strains in culture. Pseudomonas putida strains harbouring derivative cosmids of pLAFR3 were individually grown for 16 h in LB medium with the appropriate antibiotics. Each strain was then diluted to an initial OD660 = 0.05 and mixed with a second strain in fresh LB medium supplemented with tetracycline (7.5 μg/ml). At the indicated times samples of the mixed cultures were serially diluted and plated in LB‐agar supplemented with SmTc for selective CFU counting of KT2440Tn7‐ΩSm1 (pCSSH1) (grey) and KmTc for the selective CFU counting of KT2440 (pCSSH3) (white). (B) Percentages of dead cells in strains carrying pCSSH1 (grey), pCSSH3 (white) or pLAFR3 (stripped white) are shown after 9 and 72 h of culture in LB‐medium. Determination was made by counting the number of red cells, considered as dead, in relation to the number of green cells (total). For each data point, at least 300 bacterial cells were measured for viability using fluorescence microscopy. Statistical analysis was carried out using IBM SPSS statistics software (version 19 for windows). One‐way analysis of variance coupled to a Bonferroni post hoc test was used to compare means (p < 0.05). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments and standard deviation is shown.
FIGURE 5Effect of PehA‐derived peptides on colonization capacity of the P. putida null pehA mutant. Two‐day‐old seedlings were incubated with a bacterial suspension for 30 min and subsequently incubated with a protein solution containing 1 μM of his‐tagged PehA‐Nter (A), his‐tagged PehA‐Cter (B), or buffer solution as a control. Bacterial cells were recovered from the root tips (0.7 cm; 10 plants per data point) at 4 days post planting and plated on LB‐medium supplemented with the appropriate antibiotics. Experiments shown in panels (A) and (B) were performed separately. Statistical analysis was carried out using IBM SPSS statistics software (version 19 for windows). After checking normality using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, one‐way analysis of variance with the Bonferroni post hoc test was used to compare means (p < 0.05). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments.
FIGURE 6Quantification of systemic resistance induced by Pseudomonas putida KT2440 derivative strains against Magnaporthe oryzae. Four‐week‐old rice plants were challenged by spraying a spore suspension of virulent M. oryzae isolate Guy11 at 1 × 104 spores/ml. Control plants were treated with saline solution. For chemical induction of blast resistance, plants were sprayed with BTH 3 days before challenge. Disease index was determined 6 days after challenge by counting the number of susceptible‐type lesions per leaf (scale >3) and expressed relative to challenged controls. Averages are shown and represent six independent experiments (with 12 plants per treatment per experiment). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments according to Kruskal–Wallis followed by Wilcoxon comparison tests (ρ = 0.05).
FIGURE 7Influence of root treatments with Pseudomonas putida KT2440 strains containing different pehA doses on rice blast severity. Disease severity was assessed by scoring individual leaves from plants described in the legend of Figure 6. The severity scale (0–6) was measured by assessing the most severe lesion present on each leaf, as described in the experimental procedures. Type 6 lesions were not observed in any of the treatments. The percentage of leaves belonging to each severity group is shown. Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments according to Kruskal–Wallis followed by Wilcoxon comparison tests (ρ = 0.05).