Tri­choplax & Com­pany I.

by Christoph

These tiny an­i­mals not only look like potato chips, they also pack a crunch when it comes to what's in­side them.
—Nicole Du­bilier

Take a few thou­sand small eu­kary­otic cells, al­low for a few dif­fer­ent cell types, and sea­son them ge­ner­ously with en­dosym­bionts (no, not mi­tochondria, they al­ready have these!). Let the cells self-or­ga­nize into a patty – or a potato chip, if you're more into a ve­gan lifestyle – with a dia­meter of ap­proximately 0.5–1.0 mm, and a mere 25 µm thick. Et voilà, you now have a min­i­mal, an ani­mal of the most ba­sic bau­plan imag­in­able.

A Whiff of Zo­ol­ogy

Your mini·mal com­prises six dif­fer­ent cell types (dedi­ca­ted stem cells are not yet known). It shows no signs of left/right sid­ed­ness as is typ­i­cal for bi­la­te­ri­ans, and thus lacks a de­tectable head or tail. No shell, no exo- or endo-skele­ton, no neu­rons, no mus­cles, no mouth or anus, no di­ges­tive sys­tem. So, just two lay­ers of ep­ithe­lial cells, ven­tral and dor­sal, the ven­tral layer dot­ted with gland cells, and with fiber cells in be­tween the two lay­ers (Fi­gure 1). Mul­ti­cel­lu­lar­ity with a tad more cell‑to‑cell ad­he­rence than you find in the Choanofla­gel­lates when they form rosettes, or in the Amoe­bo­zoa when they form fruit­ing bod­ies, think Dic­tyo­stelium. Porifera (sponges), Cnidaria (corals, jel­ly­fish) and Ctenophora (comb jel­lies) come to mind, and your patty from the phy­lum Pla­co­zoa (flat an­i­mals) com­petes with the for­mer for the basal places of the an­i­mal branch (Meta­zoa) in the Tree of Life. A fi­nal judge­ment is pend­ing, that is, hotly deba­ted among zo­ol­o­gists.

Fig­ure 1. Tri­choplax cell types and body plan. A thick ven­tral plate faces the sub­strate (be­low) and is com­posed of ven­tral ep­ithe­lial cells (VEC; light yel­low), each bear­ing a cil­ium and mul­ti­ple micro­villi; lipophil cells (brown­ish) that con­tain large lipophilic in­clu­sions, in­cluding a very large spher­i­cal in­clu­sion near the ven­tral sur­face (la­vender); and gland cells (pale green), distin­gui­s­h­ed by their con­tents of se­cre­tory gran­ules and preva­lence near the mar­gin. Dor­sal ep­ithe­lial cells (DEC; tan) form a roof across the top from which their cell bod­ies are sus­pended, surroun­ded by a fluid-filled space. In be­tween the dor­sal ep­ithe­lium and ven­tral plate are fiber cells with branch­ing processes that con­tact each of the other cell types. A crys­tal cell (pale blue) con­tain­ing a bi­ref­ringent (=hav­ing two dif­fer­ent re­frac­tive in­dices) crys­tal lies un­der the dor­sal epi­thelium near the rim. Source. Frontis­piece: Tri­choplax H2 eat­ing (no scale given). Im­age credit Michael Had­field, Uni­versity of Hawaii. Source

Tri­choplax

The name of your mini·mal is Tri­choplax ad­haerens, and it was first de­tected in 1883 in a sea­wa­ter aquar­ium at the Zo­o­log­i­cal In­sti­tute in Graz, Aus­tria, by Ger­man zoo­logist Franz E. Schulze. Its some­what pompous-sound­ing name is the usual crude mix of an­cient Greek with Latin, and trans­lates to the more mun­dane "hairy platelet stick­ing to" ...glassy slides and pipettes used to han­dle it, that is. Its genome se­quence was de­ter­mined in 2008, which made the ear­lier (rather vague) as­sump­tion that Tricho­plax is the lar­val stage of an uniden­tified cnidar­ian ob­so­lete. With a size of ~50 Mb (hap­loid), the Tri­choplax genome is rather com­pact. Sri­vas­tava et al. iden­ti­fied 11,514 ORFs, or pro­tein cod­ing genes (yeast ~12 Mb, ~5,400 ORFs; E. coli ~4.5 Mb, ~4,250 ORFs). Al­most 87% of the pre­dicted Tri­choplax genes have de­tectable se­quence sim­i­lar­ity to genes from other an­i­mals. Analy­sis of the exon-in­­tron struc­ture of or­thol­o­gous genes re­vealed a high de­gree of con­ser­va­tion in Tri­choplax rel­a­tive to eu­meta­zoans – in­ter­est­ingly more con­ser­va­tion rel­a­tive to mam­mals (H. sapi­ens) than to ne­ma­tods (C. el­e­gans) or arthro­pods (Drosophila).

Fig­ure 2. Ex­tra­cor­po­real food up­take by T. ad­haerens. Source

Tri­choplax an­i­mals can swim pro­pelled by their cilia but mostly slide smoothly across sur­faces at a speed of ~15 µm/s−1 when search­ing for food. This is com­pa­ra­ble to the speed that hu­man macrophages achieve while craw­ling through tis­sue, but rather slow when com­pared to the swim­ming speed of ~600 µm/s−1 of the cham­pion, the bac­terium Thiovo­lum ma­jus. Like all an­i­mals T. ad­haerens is a het­erotroph, and feed­ing ex­per­i­ments in the lab showed that it ap­pre­ci­ates a mixed diet of Porphyri­dium cru­en­tum, Rhodomonas salina, and Chlorella sp. al­gae. When they en­counter food on any kind of sur­face – al­gal and bac­terial mats are a feast! – they slow down to ~5 µm/s−1. In slow mode, the an­i­mals stretch out and con­tract pe­ri­od­i­cally, which al­lows them to har­vest food (Fig­ure 2). Har­vest­ing here means that the ven­tral gland and ep­ithe­lial cells se­crete di­ges­tive en­zymes, which decom­po­se the al­gae and/or bac­te­ria, and ab­sorb the re­leased nu­tri­ents. Vicki Buchs­baum Pearse found that Tri­choplax grows in the lab at 23°C and, when well fed, has a dou­bling time of 1–3. days.

How does Tri­choplax co­or­di­nate its move­ment? We don't know ex­actly. How­ever, Tri­choplax cells se­crete a num­ber of small pep­tides, which act much like the neu­ropep­tides used by neu­rons to com­mu­ni­cate with each other (not to be con­fused with small-mol­e­cule neu­ro­trans­mit­ters). These pep­tides are thought to trig­ger the be­hav­ior of in­di­vid­ual cells within the patty, thus mak­ing the Tri­choplax move­ment not un­like that of star­lings mur­mu­ra­tion.

How does Tri­choplax re­pro­duce? Sex­ual re­pro­duc­tion has not been ob­served in the lab yet. What is read­ily ob­served is re­pro­duc­tion by fis­sion. An an­i­mal rips it­self in two, with both parts go­ing their sep­a­rate ways with­out be­ing par­tic­u­larly im­pressed by this trau­matic(?) event. You can see this clearly in a su­perb video (start at 1:52) from the Prakash lab at Stan­ford Uni­ver­sity. An aside: you may have heard of the Fold­scope or the Pa­perfuge from the same lab – they are ob­vi­ously gifted tin­ker­ers with a fo­cus on cre­at­ing af­ford­able tech­nolo­gies for health­care labs in develop­ing coun­tries (as they are of­ten called in a some­what con­de­scend­ing man­ner).

Tri­choplax sym­bionts

In 1971, the Ger­man pro­tis­tol­o­gist Karl G. Grell – a trained zo­ol­o­gist spe­cial­iz­ing in pro­to­zoa, and long-time ed­i­tor of the jour­nal Archiv für Pro­tistenkunde – pub­lished his ob­ser­va­tion of Rick­ettsia-like (endo)sym­bionts in the fiber cells of Tri­choplax ad­haerens. This ini­tial ob­ser­va­tion was confir­med, or more pre­cisely, the pu­ta­tive sym­biont iden­ti­fied as a mem­ber of the Midichlo­ria branch of the Rick­ettsiales (the lat­ter the most likely source of the mi­to­chon­dria in eu­kary­otes). Now, two in­ter­na­tional teams of re­searchers, one led by Kai Kamm, the other led by Har­ald Gru­ber-Vod­icka and Niko­laus Leisch, took a closer look at Tri­choplax and its sym­bionts. Both ex­cel­lent stud­ies come to largely the same conclu­sions, and would have de­served to be pub­lished back-to-back in the same jour­nal. I will fo­cus on the study of Gru­ber-Vod­icka et al. I do this, not be­cause it was pub­lished first and not be­cause they were able to de­tect two en­dosym­bionts. I choose it be­cause the au­thors pin-down both en­dosymbionts to spe­cific host cell types and cell com­part­ments.

Sym­biont #1: Grel­lia in­can­tans

Gru­ber-Vod­icka et al. found in metagenomes ob­tained from sin­gle Tri­choplax H2 an­i­mals the 16S (mito­chondrial, bac­te­r­ial) and 18S (nu­clear) rRNA-spe­cific se­quences of Tri­choplax and, at high fre­quency, se­quences that matched well with known 16S rRNA se­quences of alphaproteo­bacteria from the fam­ily Midichlo­ri­aceae (Rick­ettsiales). A more de­tailed 16S rRNA analy­sis showed that the Tri­choplax H2 midichlo­rian phy­lo­type is con­tained within an un­named lin­eage of se­quences reco­vered from di­verse in­ver­te­brate hosts and from sub­sur­face sed­i­ment sam­ples. Within this lin­eage, the se­quences had pair­wise iden­ti­ties of 98.4–99.4%, and were well sep­a­rated from the lin­eage that con­tained the Tri­choplax ad­haerens H1 RETA1 midichlo­rian phy­lo­type. The au­thors re­cov­ered a high-qual­ity 1.26 Mb MAG (metagenome-as­sem­bled genome) for the Tricho­plax H2 midichlo­rian phy­lo­type. By phy­loge­nomic analy­ses based on 43 con­served marker genes they are con­fi­dent to have iden­ti­fied a new genus within the Midichlo­ri­aceae; they named the new species 'Ca. Grel­lia in­can­tans' in honor of Karl G. Grell.

Fig­ure 3. TEM im­age of a cross-sec­tion of Tri­cho­plax H2 with en­dosym­bionts G. in­cantans and R. elu­dens indi­cated in false color. Source

Gru­ber-Vod­icka et al. adressed the phys­i­ol­ogy of G. in­can­tans and found that its genome en­codes the hall­mark fea­ture for in­tra­cel­lu­lar en­ergy par­a­sites that is present in all Ric­kett­siales genomes: a fully func­tional AD­P/ATP-translo­case for im­port­ing ATP from its host. How­ever, no tran­scripts or re­spec­tive pep­tides of the AD­P/ATP-tran­s­lo­case were found in G. in­can­tans. In­stead, the bac­terium gen­er­ates ATP with an ATP syn­thase, and the sub­units a and b were highly ex­pressed in the G. in­can­tans proteo­me. Com­pare the typ­i­cal en­ergy-par­a­sitic lifestyle of cy­tosolic Rick­ettsiales that rely on ATP im­ported from their hosts, to the abil­ity of G. in­can­tans to syn­the­size ATP by it­self, which may lower its detri­men­tal im­pact on the host.

High tran­scrip­tion of key genes of the ox­ida­tive TCA cy­cle and the pres­ence of a com­plete elec­tron trans­port chain in the genome, with some of its sub­units among the most highly ex­pressed genes, sug­gests that the pro­ton gra­di­ent for ATP syn­the­sis is fu­eled by ox­ida­tive phos­pho­ry­la­tion. An in­complete gly­col­y­sis path­way and sev­eral im­porters for α‑ketoacids and C4-di­car­boxy­lates sug­gest that the metabo­lites respired in the TCA cy­cle are im­ported from the host. The genome and tran­scriptome of G. in­can­tans re­vealed a strong host de­pen­dence on both amino acid and nu­cleotide sup­ply. In con­trast, the tran­scrip­tion pro­file sug­gested that it may sup­ply its host with ri­boflavin (vi­t­a­min B2), a vi­t­a­min that can­not be syn­the­sized by most meta­zoans.

The au­thors lo­cal­ized G. in­can­tans ex­clu­sively in the fi­bre cells of Tri­choplax by flu­o­res­cence in situ hy­bridiza­tion (FISH) and trans­mis­sion elec­tron mi­croscopy (TEM). They cal­cu­lated 2−20 sym­biont cells per fi­bre cell, a very low num­ber, too low to pre­sume that it's a pro­lif­er­at­ing in­tra­cel­lu­lar pa­tho­gen. The most in­trigu­ing find­ing, how­ever, was the pres­ence of G. in­can­tans cells (thin and rod-shaped, size ≤1.2 × 0.30 μm) in the rough en­do­plas­matic retic­u­lum (RER) of the fi­bre cells (RER is the part of the ER that is densely pop­u­lated with ri­bo­somes on the cy­to­plas­mic side). Sym­bionts re­sid­ing within the RER were first ob­served by Grell & Ben­witz (1971) in other Tri­choplax lin­eages, but it is known, for ex­am­ple that the in­tra­cel­lu­lar hu­man pathogens Bru­cella and Le­gionella, and also the amoe­bal midichlo­ri­acean par­a­site 'Ca. Jidaibac­ter' re­model the sur­face of the phagoso­mes in which they re­side such that they be­come cov­ered by host ri­bo­somes as an ef­fec­tive stra­tegy for avoid­ing di­ges­tion by their hosts. To de­ter­mine whether the struc­tures sur­round­ing the sym­biont cells were re­mod­elled phago­somes or RER they used high-res­o­lu­tion 3D TEM tomo­gra­phy. This re­vealed that the ri­bo­some-cov­ered mem­branes, in which G. in­can­tans re­side, form net­works that are con­nected to the nu­clear en­ve­lope, in­di­cat­ing that these struc­ture are in fact RER (see here).

In an ear­lier STC post, I had called the Rickettsia/Pela­gi­bacter/Wolbachia clade X of the Alphapro­teo­bacteria a Pandora's box when it comes to strate­gies for in­tra­cel­lu­lar sur­vival and prop­a­ga­tion in eu­kary­otes: no cel­lu­lar com­part­ment or or­ganelle seems to be safe from oc­cu­pa­tion by at least one of them. Grel­lia in­can­tans now adds the RER to the grow­ing, al­most com­plete list.

Sym­biont #2: Ruth­man­nia elu­dens

Note: the 'Sym­biont #2' part and the re­main­der of the ar­ti­cle will go on­line next Thurs­day.

 

Ref­er­ences

Driscoll T, Gille­spie JJ, Nord­berg EK, Azad AF, So­bral BW. (2013). Bac­te­r­ial DNA sifted from the Tri­choplax ad­haerens (An­i­malia: Pla­co­zoa) genome project re­veals a pu­ta­tive rick­ettsial en­dosym­biont. Genome Biol Evol, 5 (4), 621–645. PMID 23475938 (Open Ac­cess PDF)

Grell KG, Ben­witz G. (1971). Die Ul­tra­struk­tur von Tri­choplax ad­haerens F.E. Schulze. Cy­to­bi­olo­gie, 4, 216–240.

Gru­ber-Vod­icka HR, Leisch N, Kleiner M, Hinzke T, Liebeke M, Mc­Fall-Ngai M, Had­field MG, Du­bilier N. (2019). Two in­tra­cel­lu­lar and cell type-spe­cific bac­te­r­ial sym­bionts in the pla­co­zoan Tri­choplax H2. Nat Mi­cro­biol, 4 (9), 1465–1474. PMID 31182796 (Open Ac­cess PDF)

Kamm K, Os­i­gus HJ, Stadler PF, De­Salle R, Schier­wa­ter B. (2018). Tri­choplax genomes re­veal pro­found admix­ture and sug­gest sta­ble wild pop­u­la­tions with­out bi­sex­ual re­pro­duc­tion. Sci Rep, 8 (1), 11168. PMID 30042472 (Open Ac­cess PDF)

Kamm K, Os­i­gus HJ, Stadler PF, De­Salle R, Schier­wa­ter B. (2019). Genome analy­ses of a pla­co­zoan rick­ettsial en­dosym­biont show a com­bi­na­tion of mu­tu­al­is­tic and par­a­sitic traits. Sci Rep, 9 (1), 17561. PMID 31772223 (Open Ac­cess PDF)

Smith CL, Varo­queaux F, Kit­tel­mann M, Az­zam RN, Cooper B, Win­ters CA, Ei­tel M, Fasshauer D, Reese TS. (2014). Novel cell types, neu­rose­cre­tory cells, and body plan of the early-di­verg­ing meta­zoan Tri­choplax ad­haerens. Curr Biol, 24 (14), 1565–1572. PMID 24954051 (Open Ac­cess PDF)

­ 

Other Posts

  • "S" is for Self

    by Elie & Rachel Diner — For all things alive, from No­bel lau­re­ates to mi­crobes, defin­ing one's "sense of self" is cru­cial for suc­cess and sur­vival. This al­lows every or­gan­ism to dis­tin­guish it­self from for­eign and po­ten­tially harm­ful agents. But to be of ben­e­fit, sim­ply iden­ti­fy­ing de­struc­tive agents is not enough. Iden­ti­fi­ca­tion must ul­ti­mately lead to...

  • A Vi­ral Pyra­mid Scheme

    by Merry Youle — In or­der to re­lease their newly as­sem­bled viri­ons, most viruses lyse the cells that have fed and housed them. This ly­sis is not a hap­haz­ard af­fair. Some phages, for ex­am­ple, em­ploy a holin-en­dolysin sys­tem to rup­ture their host's cell mem­brane and di­gest the cell wall at a pre­cisely con­trolled…

  • Mak­ing it Per­sonal

    by Amy Cheng Vollmer — Here we are look­ing at the be­gin­ning of an­other aca­d­e­mic year! Like many fac­ulty mem­bers, my teach­ing load in­cludes courses in my area of ex­per­tise (mi­cro­bi­ol­ogy) and also some out­side of my true com­fort zone (in­tro­duc­tory bi­ol­ogy). Over the years, my at­ti­tude to­ward teach­ing...

  • The "Mi­crobe Hunters" by Paul DeKruif

    A Ma­jor Force in Mi­cro­bi­o­log­i­cal His­tory by Elio — The chances are good that when you ask a se­nior mi­cro­bi­ol­o­gist how he or she got into this sci­ence, they will tell you that they were in­flu­enced as teenagers by read­ing "Mi­crobe Hunters." I was about 14 years old when I did, and I be­came trans­fixed by the glo­ri­ous and...

  • The Most Abun­dant Small Things Con­sid­ered

    by Merry Youle & Gemma Reguera — The pi­o­neer­ing se­quenc­ing of en­vi­ron­men­tal 16S rRNA bac­te­r­ial genes from Sar­gasso Sea sam­ples, re­ported by Gio­van­noni and col­leagues in a 1990 'Na­ture' pa­per, re­vealed a great ge­netic di­ver­sity of ma­rine bac­te­ria. It also iden­ti­fied the most abun­dant rRNA se­quences as be­long­ing to a group of bac­te­ria with no cul­ti­vated rep­re­sen­ta­tives...