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