Sym­biont Ex­change in the Aphid·Buchnera Sym­bio­sis (2|2)

by Christoph

Sym­biont Ex­change in the Lab

What's pos­si­ble in the wild – sym­biont ex­change, see last week's part 1 – should also be pos­si­ble to achieve in the lab. Less for com­pet­ing with nature's in­ge­nu­ity but more with the aim to study the sep­a­rate con­tri­bu­tions of sym­bi­otic part­ners, of course. So, af­ter be­ing suc­cess­ful ear­lier in trans­fer­ring sec­ondary, fac­ul­ta­tive (=non-ob­lig­ate) en­dosym­bionts be­tween aphid hosts, the Moran lab de­vel­oped a pro­ce­dure to ex­change the ob­lig­ate Buch­n­era aphidi­cola en­dosym­bionts in the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum (Fig. 1).

Fig­ure 1. Pea aphid (A. pisum), adult with nymphs on pea leave. Size of adults: 2.5 – 5 mm. CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 Shipher, 2009

As a re­cip­i­ent host, they chose a vi­vip­a­rous, par­the­no­ge­ne­tic (=all-fe­male) A. pisum lin­eage, LSR1, whose Buch­ne­ra en­dosym­bionts carry a known point mu­ta­tion that con­fers tem­per­a­ture-sen­si­tiv­ity, i.e., it leads to rapid loss of the Buch­n­era and thus fi­nally to the death of the aphid host. As donor they used an­other A. pisum lin­eage, 5AY, that con­tains Buch­n­era with the heat-tol­er­ant al­lele (Fig. 2). While the choice of the partheno­genetic LSR1 lin­eage would pro­vide a 'clean' (=iso­genic) back­ground of both hosts, donor and re­cip­i­ent, in fu­ture ex­per­i­ments – i.e., a ge­netic back­ground not messed-up by sex­ual re­pro­duc­t­ion cy­cles – tem­per­a­ture-sen­si­tiv­ity would al­low a suc­cess­ful re­place­ment of its en­dosym­bionts by read­ily se­lec­table 5AYs. For the ac­tual trans­fec­tion ex­per­i­ment, they im­i­tated the known process of trans­mis­sion as closely as pos­si­ble: Bac­te­ri­o­cytes and ovar­i­oles con­tain­ing de­vel­op­ing em­bryos are lo­cated near one an­other within the mother's ab­domen. Buch­n­era cells are ex­o­cy­tosed from ma­ter­nal bac­te­ri­o­cytes in the vicin­ity of a bla­s­tu­la-stage em­bryo. The Buch­n­era cells be­come ex­tra­cel­lu­lar within the he­mo­coel, and some are en­do­cy­tosed by the pos­te­rior syn­cy­tial cy­to­plasm of the em­bryo in which they are later pack­aged into the em­bry­onic bac­te­ri­o­cytes. Thus, in­tro­duc­ing a ho­mogenate of 5AY ab­dom­i­nal cells by mi­croin­jec­tion into heat-treated LSR in­di­vid­u­als and their re­cov­ery from this 'surgery' would come close to the nat­u­rally oc­cur­ring process.

Fig­ure 2. Ex­per­i­men­tal ap­proach for re­pla­ce­ment of the na­tive Buch­n­era sym­bionts within an A. pisum ma­tri­line. The re­cip­i­ent line (LSR1) con­tains a heat-sen­si­tive Buch­n­era geno­type, and the donor (5AY) con­tains a heat-tol­er­ant Buch­n­era geno­type. Na­tive Buch­n­era are de­ple­ted by heat in the re­cip­i­ent line, and mi­cro­in­jec­t­ion is used to flood the he­mo­coel with donor Buch­n­era. Most em­bryos are suc­cess­fully co­lo­nized by the donor sym­bionts. In some cases, com­plete re­place­ment oc­curs in the prog­eny of in­jected fe­males. In other cases, prog­eny have a mixed Buch­n­era pop­u­la­tion, which can be shifted com­pletely to the donor type through fur­ther heat ex­po­sure. Source

Be­cause Buch­n­era cells re­leased from their bac­te­ri­o­cytes quickly de­cay in the he­mo­coel – they vir­tu­ally burst – if they do not en­ter an em­bryo soon, the time win­dow for the mi­croin­jec­tion was nar­row, and the tech­nique it­self needs ex­pert hands (and eyes). Moran and Yun per­for­med mi­croin­jec­tions on two sets of ~30 LSR1 in­di­vid­u­als each, from which 4 and 6, re­spec­tively, sur­vived the 'pre-op­er­a­tion' heat-shock treat­ment and sub­se­quent 'surgery', al­beit at the cost of no­tably de­layed de­ve­lop­ment to adult­hood. From the nine 'sur­vivors' that fi­nally re­pro­duced as adults, two had com­pletely lost the tem­per­a­ture-sen­si­tive (ts) LSR1-type Buch­n­era and ac­quired the 5AY-type, one had re­tained the orig­i­nal LSR1-type Buch­n­era, and 6 showed a mix of both. For the lat­ter six, they achieved a com­plete and sta­bly in­her­ited shift to the donor type by a sec­ond heat ex­po­sure (Fig. 2). Lastly, they con­firmed the en­dosym­biont type by RFLP analy­sis – also rou­tine in foren­sics for hu­man DNA sam­ples to­day – of a marker that is un­linked to the ts-mu­ta­tion.

Al­though suc­cess­ful and a proof-of-prin­ci­ple the method of en­dosym­biont re­place­ment de­vel­oped by Moran and Yun may seem quite in­ef­fi­cient. But wait: trans­for­ma­tion of E. coli can come up with 108 – 1010 trans­for­mants per mi­cro­gram plas­mid, yet such stun­ning num­bers make it easy to over­look that hardly ever more than 10 – 30% of the cells sur­vive the trans­for­ma­tion pro­ce­du­re – de­pend­ing on the trans­for­ma­tion pro­to­col – while those that are ac­tu­ally trans­formed are an even smaller per­cent­age, around 0.01%. Now com­pare that to the 8 suc­cess­fully trans­fec­ted aphids out of 60 treated. Not so bad, af­ter all, but clearly not a 'high through­put screen­ing' (HTS) method.

What seems more im­por­tant than num­bers games is the ob­ser­va­tion that the orig­i­nal LSR1 line and a LSR1 de­riv­a­tive line now har­bor­ing the 5AY-de­rived Buch­n­era be­haved quite dif­fer­ent in stan­dard­ized and care­fully con­trolled growth and re­pro­duc­tion tests (de­vel­op­men­tal tim­ing, adult weight, and fe­cun­dity, among oth­ers). When tested at a con­stant growth tem­per­a­ture of 20°C, both types had a sim­i­lar per­for­mance. But dur­ing growth at 20°C in­ter­rupted by a 4 h heat ex­po­sure at 35°C on day 2 af­ter birth, the LSR1 aphids took longer to ma­ture, were smaller, and had lower fe­cun­dity than the LSR1 aphids har­bor­ing the 5AY-de­rived Buch­n­era. "Thus, the re­place­ment of its Buch­n­era greatly in­creased heat tol­er­ance of the A. pisum LSR1 aphid ma­tri­line, which demon­strates a ma­jor ef­fect of sym­biont geno­type on host fit­ness" con­clude Moran and Yun, and con­tinue "po­ten­tially, the ap­proach could be com­bined with mu­ta­ge­n­e­sis to ex­plore ef­fects of Buch­n­era mu­ta­tions on the symbiont·host in­ter­face". Sounds like we can ex­pect deeper in­sights into the aphid·Buch­n­era sym­bio­sis in the very near fu­ture.

 

Other Posts