Identification of Critical Staphylococcal Genes Using Conditional

Download Report

Transcript Identification of Critical Staphylococcal Genes Using Conditional

Identification of Critical
Staphylococcal Genes Using
Conditional Phenotypes
Generated by Antisense RNA
Ji, et al
Shannon Davis & Tim Miller
Question
I've fractionated the H. pylori genome (rather
than S. aureus) and isolated a gene that is
homologous to rplN, a 50S ribosomal protein.
If I grow my colony on TSA-ERM with ATc,
what phenotype will I get?
Defect or Growth Defective
Staphylococcus aureus
Genome is approximately 2.8 Mb
Gram positive
Spherical bacterium
Appear in pairs, short chains, or bunched, grape-like clusters
Scanning electron micrograph of Staphylococcus aureus
Staph infections
Staph is in air, water, milk, food, humans, and
animals
Humans and animals are the primary reservoirs

present in the nasal passages, throats, hair and skin of
~50% of healthy individuals
Most common cause of hospital infections
Sickens over 2 million people per year
Some strains produce a heat-stable protein toxin that
causes illness in humans
Enterotoxins produce Staph food poisoning


caused by less than 1.0 microgram of toxin or 100,000 S.
aureus per gram
usually from meat, poultry, egg, milk and dairy
Antisense regulation
Developed ~10 years ago by Dr. Meng-Chao Yao
Used to analyze physiological consequences associated with
selective elimination of a particular protein
A complimentary (antisense [AS]) RNA sequence binds to a
(sense [S]) mRNA, thus preventing transcription of the mRNA
 specifically blocks the normal process of gene expression
without affecting the expression of other genes
 selectively turns off production of certain proteins because
ribosomes
cannot access dsRNA
Not siRNA
or RNAi!!
The experiment
Created a randomly cloned library of 200 – 800 bp fragments
tetR = tet Repressor
Colony selection
Library was replica plated and screened with ATc –
androtetracycline

ATc is a weak tet analog
Selected colonies that grew without ATc but were
absent or growth defective in ATc
L – lethal colony
D – growth
defective colony
Phenotype confirmation
Selected 600 colonies (3%) and rescreened them
Single colonies were restreaked, isolated and
transformed into wt S. aureus and tested with ATc
YJ335 (wt)
JY12 (L)
JY57 (L)
ATc
(mg/ml)
0.0
1.0
Identify cell viability fragments
600 plasmids were PCR’d (from 20,000)
Database comparisons (?) showed 1/3 of the colonies
contained AS fragments from different ORF regions

Remaining 2/3 contained S ORFs, non-ORFs, AS non-ORFs,
or a mix of S/AS chimeric fragments
This method allows for isolation and maintenance of
conditional strain
Identified 150 critical staph genes



Table 1
40% homologs to known essential bacteria genes
30% homologs to functional bacteria genes
 includes transcription, translation, & biochem activities like methyl/acyl
transferases

30% critical genes with unknown function
More gene identification
Several L colonies are known virulence factors



YJ69-1 fibronectin binding protein
YJ15-9 virulence extracellular factor
JSB162 ABC transporter
Selecting D colonies allows detection of important
nonessential genes


suboptimal AS efficiency would not result in L colonies
some essential genes may not be detected
Inducible & titratible vector
system in vitro
AS colonies were induced by dose-dependent ATc

Shows gene product relevance to cell viability
 wt
Inducible & titratible vector
system in vivo
Used pyelonephritis model – localized kidney infection
that bacteria are easily recovered from
Mice were injected with 10,000,000 CFU  ATc and
kidneys recovered 72 H later
All wt and ATc– mice recovered 500,000 CFU
Mice treated with increasing ATc showed a dosedependent effect on recoverable bacteria
ATc treated mice
Mice treated with increasing ATc showed a dosedependent effect on recoverable bacteria
Criticisms
Antisense technology is still somewhat controversial.

unreliable and results unpredictable
Where are the statistics??
Why didn’t they show if the mice lived or died after
infections with  ATc?
Criticisms cont’d
They are equating gene expression with cell viability
yet they never show any gene expression

How about a Northern?
A paper they cited showed that as ATc is increased,
the expression of their reporter decreased
And more criticisms
Why not use transposons (until they hop into the L
genes) to prove these genes really cause cell death?

Or any other test to show these genes are essential
Aren’t papers designed so that results can be
repeated??

How can “Bioinformatics was used” be repeated?
References
http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~mow/chap3.html
http://www.bact.wisc.edu/Bact330/lecturestaph
http://www.fhcrc.org/pubs/center_news/1996/Jul3/Antisense.htm