Bit­ing the Hand That Clothes You

by Merry Youle

Trou­ble­some strains of Staphy­lo­coc­cus au­reus are of­ten trou­ble­some be­cause they carry genes for su­per­anti­gens and mul­ti­ple an­tibi­otic re­sis­tance. But don't blame the bac­te­ria. These genes are hitch­hik­ers that ar­rived by hor­i­zon­tal gene trans­fer, em­bed­ded within mo­bile path­o­genic­ity is­lands known as SaPIs. SaPIs are com­mon; all S. au­reus strains in­ves­ti­gated so far carry at least one. They have also been found in other staph species and a few other Gram-pos­i­tive gen­era. They have gar­nered much re­search at­ten­tion be­cause they rapidly move those clin­i­cally-sig­nif­i­cant genes from host to host. (They re­ceived some at­ten­tion on this blog, too, sev­eral years ago.) The typ­i­cal SaPI is com­posed of 15–17,000 base pairs of DNA that en­code 18–22 pro­teins. Of those pro­teins, nine at most are re­quired for the SaPI life cy­cle. This leaves plenty avail­able to use to ben­e­fit or ma­nip­u­late their host bac­terium.

Fig. 1. This laugh­ing gull is a klep­topar­a­site poised to steal food caught by the brown pel­i­can. Since klep­topar­a­sitism also in­cludes the steal­ing of nest ma­te­r­ial from one an­i­mal by an­other, I would ap­ply it also to the theft of cap­sid pro­teins from a helper phage by a SaPI. Source (dead link in 2023).

SaPIs re­sem­ble tem­per­ate phages in that they travel from host to host within a cap­sid and, upon in­fec­tion, they choose be­tween two op­tions: they can repli­cate im­me­di­ately or they can in­te­grate into a spe­cific site in the host chro­mo­some and as­sume a qui­es­cent state, held in check by a SaPI-en­coded re­pres­sor. You might think of them as de­fec­tive phages be­cause they don't en­code the struc­tural pro­teins re­quired for their own cap­sids, re­ly­ing in­stead on a "helper phage" to sup­ply them. How­ever, these klep­topar­a­sites (see Fig. 1) are no more de­fec­tive than every other so­phis­ti­cated par­a­site that ex­ploits an­other life form to pro­vide some es­sen­tial goods or ser­vices. It isn't sim­ple to be a suc­cess­ful par­a­site. Let's con­sider how SaPIs do it.

One ob­vi­ous re­quire­ment for suc­cess­ful cap­sid theft is that the SaPI must repli­cate its genome when cap­sids are avail­able. This syn­chro­niza­tion can be achieved a cou­ple of ways. For one, co-in­fec­tion by a SAPI and a phage can lead to im­me­di­ate repli­ca­tion of both. Al­ter­na­tively, since most S. au­reus strains also carry at least one prophage, a SaPI can in­te­grate into the host chro­mo­some and wait un­til the prophage is in­duced. In­duc­tion of the res­i­dent prophage also prompts the SaPI to exit from the chro­mo­some and repli­cate. This SaPI repli­ca­tion is just in time to take ad­van­tage of the syn­the­sis of phage cap­sid pro­teins. Syn­chro­niza­tion alone does not guar­an­tee cap­sids for the SaPI. The phage needs to be of the "help­ful" sort, and not all are.

A "help­ful" phage is one whose cap­sid as­sem­bly and DNA pack­ag­ing can be ex­ploited by the SaPI. No al­tru­ism here. Stuff­ing a SaPI genome into a phage cap­sid re­quires sub­vert­ing the phage pack­ag­ing ma­chin­ery that oth­er­wise would pack­age only phage DNA. Pack­ag­ing is done by the phage ter­mi­nase. The small sub­unit of the ter­mi­nase (TerS) rec­og­nizes the phage DNA, while the large sub­unit han­dles the ac­tual pack­ing. SaPIs en­code their own TerS pro­tein, one spe­cific for SaPI DNA. Upon in­duc­tion, SaPI TerS tran­scrip­tion gets un­der­way be­fore the phage's TerS. Not only does this fill some cap­sids with SaPI DNA, but these can even be the ma­jor­ity. On the other hand, if you ex­per­i­men­tally in­ac­ti­vate the SaPI TerS, all cap­sids con­tain only phage DNA.

Fig. 2. Elec­tron mi­cro­graph show­ing both larger helper phage cap­sids and smaller SaPI-con­tain­ing cap­sids. The helper phage viri­ons pos­sess the long, flex­i­ble tails typ­i­cal of mem­bers of the Siphoviri­dae. The SaPI viri­ons are iden­ti­cal to those of the phage ex­cept for the di­men­sions and sym­me­try of their cap­sids. Im­age cour­tesy of Terje Dok­land. Source

Many SaPIs also take ad­van­tage of their smaller genome size (only one third of the size of the helper phage's) and as­sem­ble smaller, SaPI-size cap­sids. This ar­chi­tec­tural sleight-of-hand is pos­si­ble be­cause two dif­fer­ent size icosa­he­dral cap­sids can be as­sem­bled from the same build­ing blocks. The SaPI helper phage as­sem­ble 415 copies of their ma­jor cap­sid pro­tein into a 63 nm cap­sid with T=7 icosa­he­dral sym­me­try, while the SaPIs build smaller, 46 nm cap­sids with T=4 sym­me­try from 240 copies. As­sem­bly of the small cap­sids does re­quire a SaPI-en­coded pro­tein in ad­di­tion to the phage-en­coded build­ing blocks. That SaPI pro­tein is an in­ter­nal scaf­fold­ing pro­tein. Scaf­fold­ing pro­teins func­tion as chap­er­ones; they di­rect cap­sid as­sem­bly and are then dis­carded from the cap­sid when the DNA is pack­aged. The SaPI scaf­fold mim­ics the helper phage's own, but di­rects for­ma­tion of the smaller cap­sids. These small cap­sids may ac­count for 80% of the virionsproduced.The SaPI TerS can also pack­age SaPI DNA into full-sized cap­sids. Since pack­ag­ing uses a head­ful mech­a­nism, three copies of the SaPI genome are now pack­aged in­stead of one, but nev­er­the­less these large SaPI cap­sids are in­fec­tious.

SaPIbov2 uses yet an­other tac­tic to ex­ploit its helper. (The name 'SaPIbov2' tells you this was the sec­ond SaPI found in an S. au­reus strain caus­ing bovine mas­ti­tis.) In ad­di­tion to mak­ing its own TerS, SaPI bov2 also dis­rupts the func­tion­ing of the phage's TerS. The SaPI gene in­volved is aptly named ppi for phage pack­ag­ing inter­fer­ence. To ex­plore this, re­searchers ex­pressed the ppi gene in an S. au­reus strain that car­ried the helper prophage but no SaPI, and then in­duced the prophage. The phage repli­cated its genome, made cap­sid pro­teins, and lysed the host cell as usual, but the lysate con­tained mostly pro­heads and tails in­stead of in­tact viri­ons and the num­ber of phage prog­eny (mea­sured as plaque-form­ing units) de­creased 500-fold.

The re­searchers sus­pected that the ppi gene prod­uct Ppi dis­rupted pack­ag­ing of the phage DNA be­cause dur­ing phage as­sem­bly the DNA has to be pack­aged be­fore the tail can be at­tached to the pro­head. They did more ex­per­i­ments and demon­strated that Ppi in­ter­fered with the phage TerS. For this they iso­lated phage mu­tants that were able to form plaques on Ppi-pro­duc­ing strains, then se­quenced the TerS iso­lated from ten of them. All ten mu­tants had a sin­gle amino acid sub­sti­tu­tion in the re­gion of the pro­tein known to in­ter­act with the large sub­unit of the ter­mi­nase. Us­ing a pull-down as­say they found that Ppi binds to wild-type phage TerS, but not to any of the ten mu­tant TerS pro­teins and not to the SaPI TerS. Clearly, Ppi specif­i­cally binds to the phage TerS and pre­vents it from work­ing. Thus, when SaPIbov2 and its helper phage repli­cate to­gether, vir­tu­ally all DNA in cap­sids is SaPI DNA pack­aged by the SaPI TerS. So far, all known SaPIs carry a ppi gene, but these genes vary in their ef­fec­tive­ness, play­ing more im­por­tant roles in some SaPI-helper phage pairs than oth­ers.

Fig. 3. Ppi in­ter­fer­ence with helper phage 80α. (A) Ap­prox­i­mately 108 bac­te­ria were in­fected with phage 80α, plated on phage bot­tom agar, and in­cu­bated 36–48 h at 32 °C. Plates were stained with 0.1% TTC in TSB and pho­tographed. Genes cloned into pCN51 were in­duced with 1.0 μM CdCl2. (B and C) Elec­tron mi­cro­scopic analy­sis of sed­i­mented par­ti­cles from (B) Phage 80α lysate with­out Ppi show­ing com­plete phage (CP). (C) Phage 80α lysate with Ppi ex­pressed show­ing mostly free phage tails (FT) and phage pro­heads (PH). Source

These same re­searchers also pre­sented pre­lim­i­nary ev­i­dence of yet an­other in­ter­fer­ence tac­tic that in­volves nei­ther small cap­sid pro­duc­tion or ppi. This mech­a­nism is as yet un­known. This will be num­ber four. Likely it won't be the last. Helper ex­ploita­tion has evolved re­peat­edly, em­ploy­ing a va­ri­ety of tac­tics. Ex­ploita­tion of phage P2 by satel­lite phage P4 also in­volves the as­sem­bly of small cap­sids by P4, but the mech­a­nism here is dif­fer­ent. There are also helpers and helpees among the eu­kary­otic viruses (e.g., the adeno-as­so­ci­ated virus and Sput­nik). There are bound to be many more out there just wait­ing to be dis­cov­ered. Klep­topar­a­sitism pays!

 

Ref­er­ence

Ram G, Chen J, Ku­mar K, Ross HF, Ubeda C, Damle PK, Lane KD, Pe­nadés JR, Christie GE, & Novick RP (2012). Staphy­lo­coc­cal path­o­genic­ity is­land in­ter­fer­ence with helper phage re­pro­duc­tion is a par­a­digm of mol­e­c­u­lar par­a­sitism. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 109 (40), 16300–16305. PMID 22991467

 

Other Posts

1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
13 years ago

Thank you for that in­for­ma­tive post, it's too much for a fash­ion de­signer to un­der­stand:) spe­cially the chro­mo­somes and genes , but it helped me fig­ure out.