1887

Microbiology Society logo

Volume 163, Issue 2

Exploring the parameters of post-segregational killing using heterologous expression of secreted toxin barnase and antitoxin barstar in an case study Free

Abstract

Post-segregational killing (PSK) is a phenotype determined by plasmids using a toxin and an antitoxin gene pair. Loss of the genes depletes the cell's reserve of antitoxin and allows the toxin to act upon the cell. PSK benefits mobile elements when it increases reproductive success relative to other mobile competitors. A side effect of PSK is that plasmids become refractory to displacement from the cell during growth as a monoculture. Most PSK systems use a cytoplasmic toxin, but the external toxins of bacteriocins also have a PSK-like effect. It may be that any toxin and antitoxin gene pair can demonstrate PSK when it is on a plasmid. The secreted ribonuclease barnase and its protein inhibitor barstar have features in common with PSK modules, though their native context is chromosomal. We hypothesized that their recruitment to a plasmid could produce an emergent PSK phenotype. Others had shown that secreted barnase could exert a lethal effect on susceptible bacteria similarly to bacteriocins. However, barnase toxicity did not occur under the conditions tested, suggesting that barnase is toxic to neighbouring cells only under very specific conditions. Bacteriocins are only produced under some conditions, and some conditionality on toxin function or release may be advantageous in general to PSKs with external toxins because it would prevent killing of potential plasmid-naive hosts. Too much conditionality, however, would limit how advantageous the gene pair was to mobile elements, making the genes unlikely to be recruited as a PSK system.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): addiction , barnase , horizontal gene transfer , plasmid competition , post-segregational killing and toxins
© 2017 The Authors
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000395
2017-02-01
2024-04-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/163/2/122.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000395&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Cooper TF, Heinemann JA. Postsegregational killing does not increase plasmid stability but acts to mediate the exclusion of competing plasmids. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000; 97:12643–12648 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Gerdes K, Thisted T, Martinussen J. Mechanism of post-segregational killing by the hok/sok system of plasmid R1: sok antisense RNA regulates formation of a hok mRNA species correlated with killing of plasmid-free cells. Mol Microbiol 1990; 4:1807–1818 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Naito T, Kusano K, Kobayashi I. Selfish behavior of restriction–modification systems. Science 1995; 267:897 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Lehnherr H, Maguin E, Jafri S, Yarmolinsky MB. Plasmid addiction genes of bacteriophage P1: doc, which causes cell death on curing of prophage, and phd, which prevents host death when prophage is retained. J Mol Biol 1993; 233:414–428 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Ghosh SK, Hajra S, Paek A, Jayaram M. Mechanisms for chromosome and plasmid segregation. Annu Rev Biochem 2006; 75:211–241 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Velappan N, Sblattero D, Chasteen L, Pavlik P, Bradbury AR. Plasmid incompatibility: more compatible than previously thought?. Protein Eng Des Sel 2007; 20:309–313 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Cataudella I, Trusina A, Sneppen K, Gerdes K, Mitarai N. Conditional cooperativity in toxin–antitoxin regulation prevents random toxin activation and promotes fast translational recovery. Nucleic Acids Res 2012; 40:6424–6434 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Diago-Navarro E, Hernández-Arriaga AM, Kubik S, Konieczny I, Díaz-Orejas R. Cleavage of the antitoxin of the parD toxin–antitoxin system is determined by the ClpAP protease and is modulated by the relative ratio of the toxin and the antitoxin. Plasmid 2013; 70:78–85 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Kusano K, Naito T, Handa N, Kobayashi I. Restriction–modification systems as genomic parasites in competition for specific sequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1995; 92:11095–11099 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Cooper TF, Heinemann JA. Selection for plasmid post-segregational killing depends on multiple infection: evidence for the selection of more virulent parasites through parasite-level competition. Proc Biol Sci 2005; 272:403 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Cooper TF, Paixão T, Heinemann JA. Within-host competition selects for plasmid-encoded toxin–antitoxin systems. Proc Biol Sci 2010; 277:3149 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Gerdes K, Bech FW, Jørgensen ST, Løbner-Olesen A, Rasmussen PB et al. Mechanism of postsegregational killing by the hok gene product of the parB system of plasmid R1 and its homology with the relF gene product of the E. coli relB operon. EMBO J 1986; 5:2023[PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Gerdes K, Rasmussen PB, Molin S. Unique type of plasmid maintenance function: postsegregational killing of plasmid-free cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1986; 83:3116–3120 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Weaver KE, Reddy SG, Brinkman CL, Patel S, Bayles KW et al. Identification and characterization of a family of toxin–antitoxin systems related to the Enterococcus faecalis plasmid pAD1 par addiction module. Microbiology 2009; 155:2930–2940 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Mruk I, Kobayashi I. To be or not to be: regulation of restriction–modification systems and other toxin–antitoxin systems. Nucleic Acids Res 2014; 42:70–86 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Nakayama Y, Kobayashi I. Restriction–modification gene complexes as selfish gene entities: roles of a regulatory system in their establishment, maintenance, and apoptotic mutual exclusion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95:6442–6447 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Fozo EM, Makarova KS, Shabalina SA, Yutin N, Koonin EV et al. Abundance of type I toxin–antitoxin systems in bacteria: searches for new candidates and discovery of novel families. Nucleic Acids Res 2010; 38:3743–3759 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Leplae R, Geeraerts D, Hallez R, Guglielmini J, Drèze P et al. Diversity of bacterial type II toxin–antitoxin systems: a comprehensive search and functional analysis of novel families. Nucleic Acids Res 2011; 39:5513–5525 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Dy RL, Przybilski R, Semeijn K, Salmond GP, Fineran PC. A widespread bacteriophage abortive infection system functions through a type IV toxin–antitoxin mechanism. Nucleic Acids Res 2014; 42:4590–4605 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Samson JE, Bélanger M, Moineau S. Effect of the abortive infection mechanism and type III toxin/antitoxin system AbiQ on the lytic cycle of Lactococcus lactis phages. J Bacteriol 2013; 195:3947–3956 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Inglis RF, Bayramoglu B, Gillor O, Ackermann M. The role of bacteriocins as selfish genetic elements. Biol Lett 2013; 9: [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Riley MA, Wertz JE. Bacteriocin diversity: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Biochimie 2002; 84:357–364 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Cascales E, Buchanan SK, Duché D, Kleanthous C, Lloubès R et al. Colicin biology. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2007; 71:158–229 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Duport C, Baysse C, Michel-Briand Y. Molecular characterization of pyocin S3, a novel S-type pyocin from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Biol Chem 1995; 270:8920–8927 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Guasch JF, Enfedaque J, Ferrer S, Gargallo D, Regué M. Bacteriocin 28b, a chromosomally encoded bacteriocin produced by most Serratia marcescens biotypes. Res Microbiol 1995; 146:477–483 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Ramos HJ, Souza EM, Soares-Ramos JR, Pedrosa FO. Antibiosis by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens ribonuclease barnase expressed in Escherichia coli against symbiotic and endophytic nitrogen-fixing bacteria. J Biotechnol 2006; 126:291–294 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Ul’yanova VV, Vershinina VI, Kharitonova MA, Sharipova MR. The effect of Spo0A and AbrB proteins on expression of the genes of guanyl-specific ribonucleases from Bacillus intermedius and Bacillus pumilus in Bacillus subtilis recombinant strains. Microbiology 2007; 76:563–568 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Hartley RW. Barnase and barstar. Expression of its cloned inhibitor permits expression of a cloned ribonuclease. J Mol Biol 1988; 202:913–915[PubMed] [CrossRef]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Inouye H, Barnes W, Beckwith J. Signal sequence of alkaline phosphatase of Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol 1982; 149:434–439[PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Chaudhary VK, Xu YH, Fitzgerald D, Adhya S, Pastan I. Role of domain II of Pseudomonas exotoxin in the secretion of proteins into the periplasm and medium by Escherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1988; 85:2939–2943 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Nesmeyanova MA, Tsfasman IM, Karamyshev AL, Suzina NE. Secretion of the overproduced periplasmic PhoA protein into the medium and accumulation of its precursor in phoA-transformed Escherichia coli strains: involvement of outer membrane vesicles. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 1991; 7:394–406 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Hannig G, Makrides SC. Strategies for optimizing heterologous protein expression in Escherichia coli. Trends Biotechnol 1998; 16:54–60 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Ramos HJ, Souza EM, Soares-Ramos JR, Pedrosa FO. A new system to control the barnase expression by a NifA-dependent promoter. J Biotechnol 2005; 118:9–16 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Paddon CJ, Hartley RW. Expression of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens extracellular ribonuclease (barnase) in Escherichia coli following an inactivating mutation. Gene 1987; 53:11–19 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Guzman LM, Belin D, Carson MJ, Beckwith J. Tight regulation, modulation, and high-level expression by vectors containing the arabinose PBAD promoter. J Bacteriol 1995; 177:4121–4130 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Siegele DA, Hu JC. Gene expression from plasmids containing the araBAD promoter at subsaturating inducer concentrations represents mixed populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1997; 94:8168–8172 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Novick A, Weiner M. Enzyme induction as an all-or-none phenomenon. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1957; 43:553–566 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Lee SK, Chou HH, Pfleger BF, Newman JD, Yoshikuni Y et al. Directed evolution of AraC for improved compatibility of arabinose- and lactose-inducible promoters. Appl Environ Microbiol 2007; 73:5711–5715 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Heinemann JA. Looking sideways at the evolution of replicons. In Syvanen M, Kado C. (editors) Horizontal Gene Tansfer London: International Thomson Publishing; 1998 pp. 11–24
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Kuhar I, van Putten JP, Zgur-Bertok D, Gaastra W, Jordi BJ. Codon-usage based regulation of colicin K synthesis by the stress alarmone ppGpp. Mol Microbiol 2001; 41:207–216 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Mulec J, Podlesek Z, Mrak P, Kopitar A, Ihan A et al. A cka-gfp transcriptional fusion reveals that the colicin K activity gene is induced in only 3 percent of the population. J Bacteriol 2003; 185:654–659 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Triplett LR, Shidore T, Long J, Miao J, Wu S et al. AvrRxo1 is a bifunctional type III secreted effector and toxin–antitoxin system component with homologs in diverse environmental contexts. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0158856 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Baquero F, Martínez JL, Cantón R. Antibiotics and antibiotic resistance in water environments. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2008; 19:260–265 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Martínez JL. Natural antibiotic resistance and contamination by antibiotic resistance determinants: the two ages in the evolution of resistance to antimicrobials. Front Microbiol 2012; 3: [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Davies J, Davies D. Origins and evolution of antibiotic resistance. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2010; 74:417–433 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Forsberg KJ, Reyes A, Wang B, Selleck EM, Sommer MO et al. The shared antibiotic resistome of soil bacteria and human pathogens. Science 2012; 337:1107–1111 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Laskaris P, Tolba S, Calvo-Bado L, Wellington EM, Wellington L. Coevolution of antibiotic production and counter-resistance in soil bacteria. Environ Microbiol 2010; 12:783–796 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Miller JH. A Short Course in Bacterial Genetics: Handbook Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; 1992
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Hashimoto-Gotoh T, Franklin FC, Nordheim A, Timmis KN. Specific-purpose plasmid cloning vectors. I. low copy number, temperature-sensitive, mobilization-defective pSC101-derived containment vectors. Gene 1981; 16:227–235 [View Article][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000395
Loading
Exploring the parameters of post-segregational killing using heterologous expression of secreted toxin barnase and antitoxin barstar in an Escherichia coli case study
Microbiology 163, 122 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.000395
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000395
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000395
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error