Next Article in Journal
iTRAQ-based Quantitative Proteomics Analysis Identifies Host Pathways Modulated during Toxoplasma gondii Infection in Swine
Previous Article in Journal
The Cytomegalovirus Protein Kinase pUL97: Host Interactions, Regulatory Mechanisms and Antiviral Drug Targeting
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Phenotype, Virulence and Immunogenicity of Edwardsiella piscicida Cyclic AMP Receptor Protein (Crp) Mutants in Catfish Host

1
Department of Aquatic Animal Medicine, College of Fisheries, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
2
College of Food Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
3
Department of Infectious Disease and Immunology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32608, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Microorganisms 2020, 8(4), 517; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8040517
Submission received: 1 March 2020 / Revised: 23 March 2020 / Accepted: 2 April 2020 / Published: 4 April 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Molecular Microbiology and Immunology)

Abstract

:
Edwardsiella piscicida, a facultative aerobic pathogen belonging to the Enterobacteriaceae family, is the etiological agent of edwardsiellosis that causes significant economic loses in the aquaculture industry. cAMP receptor protein (CRP) is one of the most important transcriptional regulators, which can regulate large quantities of operons in different bacteria. Here we characterize the crp gene and report the effect of a crp deletion in E. piscicida. The crp-deficient mutant lost the capacity to utilize maltose, and showed significantly reduced motility due to the lack of flagella synthesis. We further constructed a ΔPcrp mutant to support that the phenotype above was caused by the crp deletion. Evidence obtained in fish serum killing assay and competitive infection assay strongly indicated that the inactivation of crp impaired the ability of E. piscicida to evade host immune clearance. More importantly, the virulence of the crp mutant was attenuated in both zebrafish and channel catfish, with reductions in mortality rates. In the end, we found that crp mutant could confer immune protection against E. piscicida infection to zebrafish and channel catfish, indicating its potential as a live attenuated vaccine.

1. Introduction

Edwardsiella piscicida is a facultative anaerobe and Gram-negative enteric pathogen that generally causes lethal edwardsiellosis, which is a systematic enterohemorrhagic septicemic disease that can lead to high stock mortality in fresh and marine fish [1,2]. E. piscicida infection induces symptoms including emphysematous putrefactive disease with swelling skin lesions, as well as gill ulceration and necrosis in internal organs such as kidney, liver, spleen, and musculature [2,3].
To date, antimicrobial susceptibility testing shows that E. piscicida strains isolated from different hosts and geographical regions are susceptible to most commonly used antibiotics for the treatment of edwardsiellosis [4]. However antibiotic abuse represents a problematic method of treating bacterial infections in the aquaculture industry and has led to the evolution of multi-drug resistance strains [5]. Plasmid-mediated multi-drug resistant has been previously reported in E. piscicida [6]. In response to this potential, vaccination is an important disease control strategy that has significantly contributed to reduction of outbreaks and antibiotics use in aquaculture [7]. It is worth noting that intracellular bacterial vaccines evoke cellular mediated immune responses that “kill” and eliminate infected cells [7]. The intracellular lifestyle of E. piscicida has been gradually revealed. This pathogen could successfully survive and replicate within fish phagocytes [8]. In summary, the above attributes make E. piscicida a promising candidate to be developed as a live attenuated vaccine against edwardsiellosis.
The cyclic AMP receptor protein (Crp), also called catabolite gene activator protein (CAP), is member of the CRP-FNR (fumarate nitrate reductase regulator) superfamily of transcription factors [9]. In the lack of a preferred carbon source (e.g., glucose), the Crp-cAMP complex contributes to the phenomenon of catabolite repression, inducing catabolic pathways for growth on alternative substrates [10]. Crp enhances the ability of the RNA polymerase holoenzyme to bind and initiate the transcription of specific sets of genes. In Escherichia coli, there are currently estimated to be more than 100 operons and ~500 genes under the control of Crp-cAMP [11]. The Crp-cAMP complex also contributes to the regulation of virulence gene expression in many pathogenic bacteria including Salmonella, Vibrio cholerae, Yersinia, and Mycobacterium tuberculosis [12,13,14,15]. crp deletion mutants have been successfully developed as live attenuated bacterial vaccines to protect various animal species against different bacterial pathogens [12,16,17,18]. In fish pathogens, mutation of crp in Aeromonas salmonicida attenuated its virulence as ~6 times in Oncorhynchus mykiss. And the Δcrp mutant could confer protective immunity against the intraperitoneal challenge with A. salmonicida wild type [19]. And in E. ictaluri, crp mutant was also attenuated and conferred immune protection against E. ictaluri challenge to zebrafish (Danio rerio) and catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) [20]. In this study, we investigated the effects of a crp gene deletion on E. piscicida physiology, virulence and ability to confer immune protection to fish hosts.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Ethics Statement

All animal experimental work was approved by the Laboratory Animal Monitoring Committee of Huazhong Agricultural University. Procedures conducted involving in animals were in accordance with the suggestions of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of Hubei Province, China.

2.2. Bacterial Strains and Growth Conditions

The bacterial strains used in the study are listed in Table 1. E. piscicida was routinely cultured in Luria broth (LB) or on Luria agar (LA) plates (Difco, Detroit, MI, USA) at 28 °C. When necessary, 0.2% arabinose was supplemented to activate the PBAD. Escherichia coli χ7213 was used for mutant plasmid harvest and was cultured in LB broth at 37 °C, supplemented with diaminopimelic acid (50 g/L) (Sigma, St. Louis, MO, USA). When necessary, ampicillin (Sigma, St. Louis, MO, USA) and chloramphenicol (Sigma, St. Louis, MO, USA) were supplemented at final concentrations of 100 and 50 μg/mL, respectively.

2.3. Sequence Analysis

The crp nucleic acid and Crp amino acid sequences from various bacteria species were downloaded from NCBI. The accession numbers were provided in the supplementary data. MAFFT 7 and ESPript 3 were used for multiple sequence alignment. The neighbor-joining method in Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis package (MEGA 7.0) was used to construct a phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the p-distance model. The E. piscicida Crp 3D structure was predicted using the Iterative Threading ASSEmbly Refinement (I-TASSER) server [21].

2.4. Construction and Characterization of Crp Mutants

Primers and plasmids used in this experiment are listed in Table 1 and Table 2. The procedures for mutant construction were described previously [22]. The Primers P1/P2 and P3/P4 were used in amplifications of upstream or downstream flanking fragments of crp via PCR respectively. Then, the upstream and downstream homologous arms were fused by overlap PCR using primers P1/P4, and ligated into the suicide plasmid pRE112 at the XbaI/SacI sites. The resulting plasmid pRE112-crp was transformed into E. coli χ7213 for mobilization into E. piscicida via conjugation. Strains containing single-crossover plasmid insertions were isolated on LA media containing chloramphenicol. Loss of the suicide vector after the second recombination between homologous regions was selected by using the sacB-based sucrose-sensitivity counter-selection system. Resulting strain was selected on LA plates containing chloramphenicol. PCR identification via primers P1/P4 and direct DNA sequencing of the mutation sites using genomic DNA preparations were conducted to verify that the construction of the crp gene deletion strain was completed.
We further constructed ΔPcrp by replacing the promoter of crp gene with the arabinose-regulated araC PBAD promoter. The procedures were described previously [23]. A 557-bp DNA fragment containing the region upstream of the crp promoter was PCR amplified as a template with primers P5/P6 (Table 2). The PCR-amplified fragment was digested with BglII/HindIII and cloned into the vector pYA3700 (Table 1). A 595-bp PCR fragment, including 583-bp of crp gene and its original Shine-Dalgarno sequence was amplified using primers P7/P8 (Table 2). The PCR fragment was digested with XhoI/KpnI and inserted into the intermediate plasmid described above. The resulting construct was confirmed by DNA sequence analysis. Then, a 2.5-kb DNA fragment including araC PBAD, Pcrp 5’ and 3’ flanking regions were excised from the plasmid by digestion with KpnI/XmaI and inserted into pRE112, resulting in plasmid pRE112-ΔPcrp. The following procedure was the same as that in Δcrp mutant construction.
To determine the growth kinetics of different strains, 1:100 diluted overnight cultures were cultured in LB medium at 28 °C. Samples were taken hourly, and the optical densities were measured at 600 nm (OD600nm). In addition, on 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h, 12 h, 24 h, 36 h post inoculation, the numbers of CFU in cultures were determined by serial dilutions and plating.
In order to study whether CRP is involved in the process of maltose utilization, the growth of crp mutant strains and parent strain were observed on MacConkey agar supplemented with maltose (1%). Swimming motility was measured on LA plates that were prepared with 0.3% (w/v) agar according to the method described previously [20]. To increase flagella synthesis, the bacterial samples were collected from motility agar plates. Negative staining method was used to observe the bacteria morphology under transmission electron microscopy (TEM; Hitachi H-7000FA, Tokyo, Japan). Ten microliters of the resuspension of each strain was applied to Formvar-coated copper grids and negatively stained for 1 min with 1% uranyl acetate [20].

2.5. Resistance Against Host Clearance of E. piscicida

To investigate resistance of the parent J118 strain and Δcrp against serum killing, a catfish serum survival assays was accomplished as previously described [24]. Blood was withdrawn from the caudal vein of channel catfish (average weight, 500 g) by sterile injector and placed on ice immediately. The blood was allowed for clotting over night at 4 °C. For serum survival assay, the serum was treated with or without heating at 56 °C for 1h. A mid-log growth phase inoculum of 5.0 × 105 CFU bacteria in 100 μL was mixed with 400 μL serum. The mixtures were incubated at 28 °C for 1h. Then, the numbers of CFU were determined by serial dilutions and plating. The survival percentage was subsequently calculated as follows: (CFUs after co-incubation /CFUs in PBS control group) × 100%. E. coli DH5α strain was used as a sensitive control strain in this assay. The experiments were repeated three times independently.
To determine the persistent carrier state of J118 and Δcrp strains in host, the competitive assay was performed as previously described [22]. J118 and Δcrp strains grown to mid-exponential phase in LB were harvested by centrifugation, washed and resuspended in PBS to a bacterial density of 5.0 × 106 CFU/mL, respectively. In three independent assays, a total of eleven channel catfish were injected by the intracoelomic (i.c.) route with 200 μL volume of 1:1 Δcrp mutant – J118 mixture (1.0 × 106 CFU/fish). Twenty-four hours later, fish were euthanized and the blood, ascites, liver, spleen, trunk kidney and head kidney samples were collected. Homogenates were serially diluted and plated on MacConkey agar with maltose (1%) at 37 °C for 24 h. The parent strain is red and the Δcrp mutant is white on the plate, respectively. Bacterial counts titers were calculated by dividing the weights of the tissues from the bacteria loads in the samples.

2.6. Virulence of E. piscicida Δcrp in Zebrafish and Catfish Fingerlings

The zebrafish (average weight, 300 mg) used in this study were from the Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (Wuhan, China). The zebrafish were acclimatized for 2 weeks before injection. They were fed with commercial feed for aquatic animal twice per day under natural photoperiod. The water temperature was maintained at 24–26 °C during cultivation. Zebrafish are divided into 12 groups, each group of 10, infected with J118 strain and Δcrp respectively (doses: 102 CFU/fish, 103 CFU/fish, 104 CFU/fish, 105 CFU/fish, 106 CFU/fish, and 107 CFU/fish). Chanel catfish (average weight, 800 mg) from a local aquaculture farm were acclimatized and monitored for 2 weeks before infection. Catfish were fed daily with commercially produced food pellets (Haida, China) under natural photoperiod. Water temperature was maintained at 23–25 °C. Catfish are divided into 10 groups, each group of 10, i.c. infected with J118 strain and the Δcrp mutant, respectively (doses: 104 CFU/fish, 105 CFU/fish, 106 CFU/fish, 107 CFU/fish, and 108 CFU/fish). The clinical symptoms and mortality of infected fish were observed for 14 days. The LD50 was calculated by Karber’s methods [25].

2.7. Immune Protection of E. piscicida Δcrp Mutant in Zebrafish and Catfish Fingerlings

We further evaluated the immune protection mediated by Δcrp in zebrafish and catfish fingerlings. Fish were divided into immunized group and control group, with 10 zebrafish in each group and 20 catfish fingerling in each group. Zebrafish and catfish were i.c. immunized with 103 CFU/fish and 104 CFU/fish of Δcrp, respectively. Subsequent booster immunization was given at day 14 post-primary immunization. At 2 weeks post-booster immunization, zebrafish and catfish were challenged i.c. with 10-times LD50 E. piscicida J118. The fish were observed for clinical symptoms and mortalities for 14 days.

2.8. Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed by GraphPad Prism 6 (Graph Pad Software, Inc., Graph Pad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). Survival data were analyzed with the log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test. The statistical p values were calculated by the two-tailed Mann-Whitney t test. Differences were considered significant at p < 0.05 and highly significant at p < 0.01.

3. Results

3.1. Sequence Analysis

The catabolic and virulence regulator crp gene is wide spread not only between enteric pathogens, including E. piscicida, but also within other bacterial domains (Figure 1). The phylogenetic tree clearly showed crp genes in Enterobacteriaceae, Aeromonadaceae, Vibrionaceae and Pasteurellaceae, belonging to γ-Proteobacteria, were clustered in clade A. The closely related clade B includes other Proteobacteria, while the clade C includes Cyanobacteria, Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes, with a more distantly evolutionary relationship. Especially, crp genes in enteric fish pathogens including two Aeromonas species and two Edwardsiella species showed close genetic relationship according to this phylogenetic tree.
Sequence and structural alignment between functional representative bacterial Crp proteins revealed that 189 amino acid residues (90%) are strictly conserved out of 210 residues in E. piscicida Crp (Figure 2A). E. piscicida Crp has 100.0%, 99.0%, 98.6%, and 89.0% amino acid similarity to the Crp of Escherichia coli, E. ictaluri, Yersinia pestis and Aeromonas hydrophila, respectively. The conserved cAMP binding amino acid residues: Gly72, Glu73, Arg83, Ser84, Thr128, and Ser129 (Figure 2A) of E. piscicida Crp is similar to other Gram-negative Crp-family members. The E. piscicida Crp 3-D predicted structure exhibits the flexible hinge required for Crp dimerization and the F-helix & C-helix that interacts with the DNA (Figure 2B). Thus, above results shows that Crp is conserved and indicates its function is conserved through the evolution of the Enterobacteriaceae family, including enteric fish pathogens.

3.2. Construction and Characterization of Crp Mutants

To investigate the role of Crp in the pathogenesis of E. piscicida, a crp deletion mutant was constructed by allelic replacement in parent strain J118 (Figure 3A). The growth of E. piscicida strains was quantified over time by measuring the OD600nm and CFUs in cultures (Figure 3B). Although the OD600nm growth curve showed growth defect of Δcrp in LB broth, the CFUs showed no differences between Δcrp mutant strain and parent strain, which indicated that the mutation of crp affected the secretion of bacterial extracellular products. The phenotype by growth on MacConkey agar supplemented with maltose (1%) shows that the Δcrp mutant does not utilize maltose, indicating that the genes related to maltose utilization is under the positive regulation by Crp (Figure 4A). Except for involvement in catabolic functions, the Crp regulatory complex is also necessary for the flagella synthesis. We evaluated the motility of the Δcrp mutant in LB broth supplemented with 0.3% agar and flagella synthesis by TEM. The results showed that the Δcrp mutant loses motility (Figure 4B) due to the lack of flagella synthesis (Figure 4C), indicating that Crp positively regulates flagella synthesis in E. piscicida.
We further constructed a ΔPcrp mutant by replacing the promoter of crp gene with the arabinose-regulated araC PBAD promoter (Figure 3A). The transcription of crp is dependent upon arabinose availability. The ΔPcrp showed similar phenotypes with Δcrp mutant in the absence of arabinose (Figure 3B, Figure 4A,B). However, when supplemented with arabinose, the defects in growth, maltose utilization and motility were all well complemented (Figure 3B, Figure 4A,B). Above results verify that crp mutation, instead of other random mutation, contributes to the phenotypes differences.

3.3. Resistance Against Host Clearance of E. piscicida Δcrp

To investigate the role of crp in E. piscicida resistance against innate immune responses, we first examined the abilities of the strains to survive in a channel catfish serum survival assay. When E. piscicida J118 strain was incubated with catfish serum, the survival rate of the bacteria was found to be 104.3%, revealing that parent strain resisted the bactericidal effect of catfish serum. Δcrp mutant had showed a significantly reduced survival rate (40.0%) compared with the parent strain (Figure 5A). The survival rate of E. coli DH5α, a serum-sensitive laboratory strain incubated under the same condition, was 0%. When incubated with inactivated serum, the Δcrp mutant showed an increased survival rate of 71.6%, but still lower than parent strain. Above results suggested that the crp mutant could poorly resist the killing by bactericidal substances in fish serum, and then could not effectively evade the host clearance.
To test this idea, we performed a competitive infection assay. An approximately 1:1 mixture of J118 and Δcrp bacteria was inoculated by the intracoelomic (i.c.) route into channel catfish. Twenty-four hours later, blood, ascites, liver, spleen, trunk kidney and head kidney samples were collected after the fish were euthanized. Comparing to the parent strain, Δcrp colonized at significantly lower levels in all the samples (Figure 5B), which confirmed that the crp mutation impaired the resistance ability of E. piscicida against innate immune clearance in vivo.

3.4. Virulence of E. piscicida Δcrp in Zebrafish and Catfish Fingerling

The ideal live attenuated bacterial vaccine should be totally attenuated. Zebrafish have been developed as an easy and powerful model to test pathogenesis of E. piscicida. The LD50 of the parent strain J118 was 7.94 × 103 CFU, while the LD50 of the Δcrp mutant increased up to 3.16 × 105 CFU, nearly 40-fold compared to the parental strain (Table 3). For the zebrafish infected with J118, the death occurred immediately during the first 24 h, while it was quite delayed in the Δcrp infection group (Figure 6A). The E. piscicida Δcrp mutant was further evaluated in the channel catfish host. We found that the Δcrp mutant applied by the i.c. route was attenuated with an estimated 10-times LD50 increase over the parent strain (Table 4). Catfish fingerlings that were infected with J118 developed the typical symptoms of enteric septicemia, skin lesions and distended abdomen, while the ones infected with the Δcrp mutant exhibited mild symptoms (Figure 6B). Taken together, these results indicate that Crp significantly contributed to the virulence of E. piscicida.

3.5. Immune Protection of E. piscicida Δcrp Mutant in Zebrafish and Catfish Fingerling

Previous results indicate that the E. piscicida Δcrp mutant had reduced virulence and that the host is able to control the infection. We further evaluated the immune protection mediated by the Δcrp mutant in zebrafish and catfish fingerlings. At 2 weeks post-booster immunization, zebrafish were challenged i.c. with 10-times LD50 E. piscicida J118. The Δcrp mutant applied by the i.c. route was immune protective in the zebrafish host, with 70% survival while only 10% survival in the PBS control group (Figure 7A). A challenge study was also performed to determine whether the Δcrp mutant induces protective immunity in catfish fingerlings. At 2 weeks post-booster immunization, catfish fingerlings were challenged i.c. with 2-times LD50 E. piscicida J118. The Δcrp mutant showed a 90% survival rate against J118 infection, which is significantly higher than that of PBS (Figure 7B).

4. Discussion

cAMP receptor protein (CRP; also known as catabolite activator protein, CAP) is a regulatory protein in bacteria. The binding with cAMP causes a conformation change that allows CRP to bind tightly to the DNA site in the promoters of the genes it controls and interact with RNA polymerase [26,27]. Crp is widely distributed among the bacteria and relatively conserved, indicating its regulation of similar gene families related to carbohydrate metabolism [10,28], competence, growth, and virulence determinants [20,29,30,31].
E. piscicida is a facultative aerobic pathogen belonging to the Enterobacteriaceae family, with a wide ecological niche and host range including various species of fish [1]. In this study, a crp gene deletion mutant (Δcrp) and a crp promoter mutant (ΔPcrp) of E. piscicida were constructed in order to investigate the role of the crp gene in E. piscicida physiology, virulence and ability to confer immune protection to fish hosts. Replacement of the promoter of crp gene by the arabinose-regulated araC PBAD promoter, yielding ΔPcrp in which crp transcription was arabinose dependent. In this study, ΔPcrp was used as complement strain when the arabinose was added. Firstly, the Δcrp mutant exhibited impaired growth in vitro. The growth delay in crp mutants seem common in diverse bacteria species, relating to its role as a global regulator [9]. Secondly, lacking of Crp, E. piscicida could not utilize maltose, which means that Crp does regulate the genes related to carbohydrate utilization and influence metabolism(s) in E. piscicida. In E. coli, the cAMP-CRP complex is required for malT expression, the transcriptional activator of five transcriptional units related to the maltose regulon [32]. The regulation mechanism between Crp and maltose operon in E. piscicida still needs further investigation. Thirdly, the Δcrp mutant also loses motility which is conferred by flagella of bacterial pathogens [33]. Motility is critical for cell invasion and is associated with chemotaxis and secretion of effector proteins that act as virulence factors [34,35].
Considering this, we conducted a competitive infection assay and a fish serum suvival assay to compare systemic infection capacity of Δcrp and the parent strains. The Δcrp mutant showed poor colonization in different tissues and a weakened survival rate against catfish serum, indicating its attenuated evasion capacity against host immune clearance. In further virulence assessment assays, the LD50s of the Δcrp mutant in zebrafish and channel catfish increased by 40-fold and 10-fold, respectively, comparing to the parent strain, and Δcrp mutant infection group exhibited a delayed death (in the zebrafish) and mild symptoms (in the channel catfish). This was consistent with previous study that E. piscicida CK216, a Δcrp mutant strain exhibits 1000-fold attenuation comparing to wild type strain in gold fish [36]. Indeed, recent unpublished work in our laboratory indicates that Δcrp mutant could evoke host controllable inflammation which could effectively contribute to bacterial clearance, while J118 strain infection evoked excessive inflammatory cytokine production in the susceptible organ liver and trunk kidney, leading to severe tissue injury. Therefore, the above results support that Crp contributes to the virulence of E. piscicida and that the Δcrp mutant is attenuated.
Being a mucosal facultative intracellular pathogen, E. piscicida is an ideal candidate to develop a live attenuated vaccine for the aquaculture industry, which could elicit both humoral and cellular immune responses [37]. We further evaluated the immune protection mediated by the Δcrp mutant in zebrafish and catfish fingerlings. And as expected, the Δcrp mutant group had a significantly higher survival rate than the PBS control group. We determined that the Δcrp mutant could elicit host immune responses and offer moderate protection in zebrafish and catfish. Thence, the introduction of a Δcrp mutation could be considered as part of genetic plan to construct an E. piscicida live attenuated vaccine in further studies.

5. Conclusions

In summary, we conclude that Crp is involved in the regulation of maltose utilization and is required for flagella synthesis in E. piscicida. More importantly, Crp is also required for E. piscicida resistance against host immune elimination and that it contributes to the systemic dissemination and virulence of this bacterium. Finally, the Δcrp mutant could be a promising vaccine candidate for further genetic modification to control the E. piscicida infections.

Supplementary Materials

The NCBI accession numbers of Crps were as follows: Edwardsiella piscicida (WP_000242755.1); Edwardsiella ictaluri (WP_000242758.1); Escherichia coli (NP_417816.1); Enterobacter cloacae (WP_000242758.1); Shigella flexneri (NP_709132.1); Salmonolla Typhimurium (NP_462369.1); Salmonolla Gallinarum (WP_000242751.1); Citrobacter freundii (WP_000242758.1); Yersinia pestis (YP_002345259.1); Yersinia ruckeri (WP_004718520.1);Yersinia pseudotubercuiosis (WP_002212297.1); Aeromonas hydrophila (YP_855526.1); Aeromonas salmonicida (WP_005311762.1); Klebsiella pneeumoniae (WP_000242758.1); Shigella flexneri (NP_709132.1); Vibrio cholera (WP_000242749.1); Proteus mirabilis (WP_004246872.1); Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (WP_005618610.1); Pasteurella multocida (WP_005723550.1); Haemophilus influenza (NP_439118.1); Pseudomonas aerugibosa (YP_006960515.1); Xanthomonas campestris (NP_635866.1); Flavobacterium psychrophilum (YP_001295622.1); Microcystis aeruginosa (WP_002793798.1); Clostridium perfringens (WP_003455357.1); Staphylococcus aureus (WP_000138218.1); Bacillus cereus (NP_830249.1); Mycobacterium tuberculosis (NP_218193.1); Methylobacterium extorquens (WP_012255086.1).

Author Contributions

Data curation, P.Z., X.H., X.Y. and Q.X.; Funding acquisition, R.C.I. and Y.Z.; Software, F.Z. and T.Y.; Supervision, R.C.I. and Y.Z.; Writing—original draft, X.H. and Y.Z.; Writing—review & editing, Y.-A.Z. and R.C.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31772889), the USDA/NIFA grant (2017-05723), the National Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program for College Students (201810504102), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2662017JC040, 2662016QD010).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abayneh, T.; Colquhoun, D.J.; Sorum, H. Edwardsiella piscicida sp. Nov., a novel species pathogenic to fish. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2013, 114, 644–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Mohanty, B.R.; Sahoo, P.K. Edwardsiellosis in fish: A brief review. J. Biosci. 2007, 32, 1331–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Loch, T.P.; Hawke, J.P.; Reichley, S.R.; Faisal, M.; Del Piero, F.; Griffin, M.J. Outbreaks of edwardsiellosis caused by Edwardsiella piscicida and Edwardsiella tarda in farmed barramundi (Lates calcarifer). Aquaculture 2017, 481, 202–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bujan, N.; Toranzo, A.E.; Magarinos, B. Edwardsiella piscicida: A significant bacterial pathogen of cultured fish. Dis. Aquat. Organ. 2018, 131, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Ma, R.; Yang, G.; Xu, R.; Liu, X.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, Y.; Wang, Q. Pattern analysis of conditional essentiality (PACE)-based heuristic identification of an in vivo colonization determinant as a novel target for the construction of a live attenuated vaccine against Edwardsiella piscicida. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2019, 90, 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wang, Q.; Yang, M.; Xiao, J.; Wu, H.; Wang, X.; Lv, Y.; Xu, L.; Zheng, H.; Wang, S.; Zhao, G.; et al. Genome sequence of the versatile fish pathogen Edwardsiella tarda provides insights into its adaptation to broad host ranges and intracellular niches. PLoS ONE 2009, 4, e7646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Munang’andu, H.M. Intracellular bacterial infections: A challenge for developing cellular mediated immunity vaccines for farmed fish. Microorganisms 2018, 6, E33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Yamasaki, M.; Araki, K.; Maruyoshi, K.; Matsumoto, M.; Nakayasu, C.; Moritomo, T.; Nakanishi, T.; Yamamoto, A. Comparative analysis of adaptive immune response after vaccine trials using live attenuated and formalin-killed cells of Edwardsiella tarda in ginbuna crucian carp (Carassius auratus langsdorfii). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2015, 45, 437–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Green, J.; Stapleton, M.R.; Smith, L.J.; Artymiuk, P.J.; Kahramanoglou, C.; Hunt, D.M.; Buxton, R.S. Cyclic-AMP and bacterial cyclic-AMP receptor proteins revisited: Adaptation for different ecological niches. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2014, 18, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Colton, D.M.; Stabb, E.V. Rethinking the roles of CRP, cAMP, and sugar-mediated global regulation in the Vibrionaceae. Curr. Genet. 2016, 62, 39–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Shimada, T.; Fujita, N.; Yamamoto, K.; Ishihama, A. Novel roles of cAMP receptor protein (CRP) in regulation of transport and metabolism of carbon sources. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e20081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Curtiss, R.; Kelly, S.M. Salmonella typhimurium deletion mutants lacking adenylate cyclase and cyclic AMP receptor protein are avirulent and immunogenic. Infect. Immun. 1987, 55, 3035–3043. Available online: https://iai.asm.org/content/55/12/3035 (accessed on 1 December 1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Skorupski, K.; Taylor, R.K. Cyclic AMP and its receptor protein negatively regulate the coordinate expression of cholera toxin and toxin-coregulated pilus in Vibrio cholerae. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1997, 94, 265–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Petersen, S.; Young, G.M. Essential role for cyclic AMP and its receptor protein in Yersinia enterocolitica virulence. Infect. Immun. 2002, 70, 3665–3672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Stapleton, M.; Haq, I.; Hunt, D.M.; Arnvig, K.B.; Artymiuk, P.J.; Buxton, R.S.; Green, J. Mycobacterium tuberculosis cAMP receptor protein (Rv3676) differs from the Escherichia coli paradigm in its cAMP binding and DNA binding properties and transcription activation properties. J. Biol. Chem. 2010, 285, 7016–7027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Kennedy, M.J.; Yancey, R.J.; Sanchez, M.S.; Rzepkowski, R.A.; Kelly, S.M.; Curtiss, R. Attenuation and immunogenicity of Δcya Δcrp derivatives of Salmonella choleraesuis in pigs. Infect. Immun. 1999, 67, 4628–4636. Available online: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10456909 (accessed on 12 June 2019). [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. Sheoran, A.S.; Timoney, J.F.; Tinge, S.A.; Sundaram, P.; Curtiss, R. Intranasal immunogenicity of a Δcya Δcrp-pabA mutant of Salmonella enterica serotype Typhimurium for the horse. Vaccine 2001, 19, 3787–3795. Available online: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11395214 (accessed on 12 June 2019). [CrossRef]
  18. Rosu, V.; Chadfield, M.S.; Santona, A.; Christensen, J.P.; Thomsen, L.E.; Rubino, S.; Olsen, J.E. Effects of crp deletion in Salmonella enterica serotype Gallinarum. Acta Vet. Scand. 2007, 49, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Valderrama, K.; Saravia, M.; Santander, J. Phenotype of Aeromonas salmonicida sp. salmonicida cyclic adenosine 3’,5’-monophosphate receptor protein (Crp) mutants and its virulence in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). J. Fish Dis. 2017, 40, 1849–1856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Santander, J.; Mitra, A.; Curtiss, R. Phenotype, virulence and immunogenicity of Edwardsiella ictaluri cyclic adenosine 3’,5’-monophosphate receptor protein (Crp) mutants in catfish host. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2011, 31, 1142–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhang, Y. I-TASSER server for protein 3D structure prediction. BMC Bioinform. 2008, 9, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Ji, Y.; Li, J.; Qin, Z.; Li, A.; Gu, Z.; Liu, X.; Lin, L.; Zhou, Y. Contribution of nuclease to the pathogenesis of Aeromonas hydrophila. Virulence 2015, 6, 515–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Kong, Q.; Liu, Q.; Roland, K.L.; Curtiss, R. Regulated delayed expression of rfaH in an attenuated Salmonella enterica serovar typhimurium vaccine enhances immunogenicity of outer membrane proteins and a heterologous antigen. Infect. Immun. 2009, 77, 5572–5582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Chen, D.D.; Li, J.H.; Yao, Y.Y.; Zhang, Y.A. Aeromonas hydrophila suppresses complement pathways via degradation of complement C3 in bony fish by metalloprotease. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2019, 94, 739–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Behreans, A.L.; Karber, L. Determination of LD50. In Screening Methods in Pharmacology; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1953; p. 60. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kolb, A.; Busby, S.; Bue, H.; Garges, S.; Adhya, S. Transcriptional regulation by cAMP and its receptor protein. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1993, 62, 749–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Weber, I.T.; Steitz, T.A. Structure of a complex of catabolite gene activator protein and cyclic AMP refined at 2.5 Å resolution. J. Mol. Biol. 1987, 198, 311–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Gorke, B.; Stulke, J. Carbon catabolite repression in bacteria: Many ways to make the most out of nutrients. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2008, 6, 613–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Botsford, J.L.; Harman, J.G. Cyclic AMP in prokaryotes. Asm. J. 1992, 56, 100–122. Available online: https://mmbr.asm.org/content/56/1/100 (accessed on 1 March 1992). [CrossRef]
  30. Busby, S.; Ebright, R.H. Transcription activation by catabolite activator protein (CAP). J. Mol. Biol. 1999, 293, 199–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Chandler, M.S. The gene encoding cAMP receptor protein is required for competence development in Haemophilus influenzae Rd. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1992, 89, 1626–1630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Chagneau, C.; Heyde, M.; Alonso, S.; Portalier, R.; Laloi, P. External-pH-dependent expression of the maltose regulon and ompF gene in Escherichia coli is affected by the level of glycerol kinase. J. Bacteriol. 2001, 183, 5675–5683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Liang, W.; Pascual-Montano, A.; Silva, A.J.; Benitez, J.A. The cyclic AMP receptor protein modulates quorum sensing, motility and multiple genes that affect intestinal colonization in Vibrio cholera. Microbiology 2007, 153, 2964–2975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Barrero-Tobon, A.M.; Hendrixson, D.R. Flagellar biosynthesis exerts temporal regulation of secretion of specific Campylobacter jejuni colonization and virulence determinants. Mol. Microbiol. 2014, 93, 957–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Josenhans, C.; Suerbaum, S. The role of motility as a virulence factor in bacteria. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2002, 291, 605–614. Available online: http://www.urbanfischer.de/journals/ijmm (accessed on 1 March 2002). [CrossRef]
  36. Choe, Y.; Park, J.; Yu, J.E.; Oh, J.I.; Kim, S.; Kang, H.Y. Edwardsiella piscicida lacking the cyclic AMP receptor protein (Crp) is avirulent and immunogenic in fish. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2017, 68, 243–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Xiao, J.; Chen, T.; Liu, B.; Yang, W.; Wang, Q.; Qu, J.; Zhang, Y. Edwardsiella tarda mutant disrupted in type III secretion system and chorismic acid synthesis and cured of a plasmid as a live attenuated vaccine in turbot. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2013, 35, 632–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Phylogenetic tree of crp gene. The evolutionary history was inferred using Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) 7.0 with neighbor-joining method. The tree is drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The analysis involved 26 nucleotide sequences. E. piscicida crp was marked with ★.
Figure 1. Phylogenetic tree of crp gene. The evolutionary history was inferred using Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) 7.0 with neighbor-joining method. The tree is drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The analysis involved 26 nucleotide sequences. E. piscicida crp was marked with ★.
Microorganisms 08 00517 g001
Figure 2. Multiple alignments of Crp and 3-D predicted structure. (A) Secondary structure of E. piscicida Crp and alignment between representative Crp proteins. The secondary structure at the top of the alignment corresponds to the E. piscicida Crp (spirals represent α-helix; arrows represent β-sheet). Conserved amino acids residues are indicated in red. The stars indicate the amino acid residues required for cAMP binding. (B) E. piscicida Crp monomer structure. The helixes required for DNA binding and dimer Crp formation are indicated (C-helix, F-helix, and hinge). The N- and C-termini are indicated in a red circle.
Figure 2. Multiple alignments of Crp and 3-D predicted structure. (A) Secondary structure of E. piscicida Crp and alignment between representative Crp proteins. The secondary structure at the top of the alignment corresponds to the E. piscicida Crp (spirals represent α-helix; arrows represent β-sheet). Conserved amino acids residues are indicated in red. The stars indicate the amino acid residues required for cAMP binding. (B) E. piscicida Crp monomer structure. The helixes required for DNA binding and dimer Crp formation are indicated (C-helix, F-helix, and hinge). The N- and C-termini are indicated in a red circle.
Microorganisms 08 00517 g002
Figure 3. Construction and growth curves of crp mutants. (A) Strategy for construction of Δcrp and ΔPcrp by homologous recombination. (B) Growth curves in LB medium over a 30 h period. Data are presented as the averages ± the standard deviations for three replicates.
Figure 3. Construction and growth curves of crp mutants. (A) Strategy for construction of Δcrp and ΔPcrp by homologous recombination. (B) Growth curves in LB medium over a 30 h period. Data are presented as the averages ± the standard deviations for three replicates.
Microorganisms 08 00517 g003
Figure 4. Phenotype characterization of crp mutants. (A) Phenotype verification on MacConkey agar plates supplemented with 1% maltose and with or without 0.2% arabinose. (B) Swimming zones through 0.3% LB agar with or without 0.2% arabinose. (C) Negative staining-transmission electron microscopy of E. piscicida parent strain J118 (scale bar = 1 μm) and crp mutant (scale bar = 500 nm).
Figure 4. Phenotype characterization of crp mutants. (A) Phenotype verification on MacConkey agar plates supplemented with 1% maltose and with or without 0.2% arabinose. (B) Swimming zones through 0.3% LB agar with or without 0.2% arabinose. (C) Negative staining-transmission electron microscopy of E. piscicida parent strain J118 (scale bar = 1 μm) and crp mutant (scale bar = 500 nm).
Microorganisms 08 00517 g004
Figure 5. Effect of Crp deletion on resistance against host clearance. (A) Percentage of CFUs following 1 h of incubation with catfish serum, or heat-inactivated catfish serum. (B) Colonization of channel catfish tissues by E. piscicida J118 and Δcrp mutant in competitive infection assay. The data was a combination the three independent assays. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Figure 5. Effect of Crp deletion on resistance against host clearance. (A) Percentage of CFUs following 1 h of incubation with catfish serum, or heat-inactivated catfish serum. (B) Colonization of channel catfish tissues by E. piscicida J118 and Δcrp mutant in competitive infection assay. The data was a combination the three independent assays. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Microorganisms 08 00517 g005
Figure 6. (A) Survival curves for zebrafish challenged with E. piscicida J118 and Δcrp mutant (1.0 × 106 CFU). (B) Catfish fingerlings i.c. infected with E. piscicida J118 and Δcrp mutant (1.0 × 106 CFU).
Figure 6. (A) Survival curves for zebrafish challenged with E. piscicida J118 and Δcrp mutant (1.0 × 106 CFU). (B) Catfish fingerlings i.c. infected with E. piscicida J118 and Δcrp mutant (1.0 × 106 CFU).
Microorganisms 08 00517 g006
Figure 7. Immunization with Δcrp protects zebrafish (A) and channel catfish (B) against lethal challenges with parent strain. The data shown are representative of the results of one of three independent experiments; the survival data were analyzed using the log rank (Mantel-Cox) test.
Figure 7. Immunization with Δcrp protects zebrafish (A) and channel catfish (B) against lethal challenges with parent strain. The data shown are representative of the results of one of three independent experiments; the survival data were analyzed using the log rank (Mantel-Cox) test.
Microorganisms 08 00517 g007
Table 1. Strains and plasmids used in this study.
Table 1. Strains and plasmids used in this study.
DescriptionSource or reference
Strains
Edwardsiella piscicida
EIB202
J118
Δcrp
ΔPcrp
Escherichia coli
 

CCTCC M208068, Colr, Cmr, pla+
pEIB202 curing derivative of EIB202, Colr, Cms, pla
crp deletion mutant
ΔPcrpTT araC PBAD crp TT
 
 
[6]
Lab stocking
J118
J118
χ7213thr-1 leuB6 fhuA21 lacY1 glnV44 recA1 ΔasdA4 Δ(zhf-2::Tn10) thi-1[16]
Plasmids
pYA3700
pRE112
 
TT araC PBAD cassette plasmid; Apr
Suicide vector, sacB, mob(RP4)R6K ori, Cmr
[23]
pRE112-crp
pRE112-ΔPcrp
pRE112 derivative, designed for knockout of crp, Cmr
pRE112 derivative, designed for replacement of crp promoter, Cmr
pRE112
pRE112
Colr stands for Colistin-resistant. Cmr stands for Chloramphenicol-resistant. Apr stands for Ampicillin-resistant.
Table 2. Primers used in this study.
Table 2. Primers used in this study.
PrimerSequence (5’-3’)Product Size (bp)TmTarget GeneSource or Reference
P1CGCTCTAGACCACAGGACAAACCAAAACC59358Upstream fragment for ΔcrpThis study
P2TGCTGGAGGATCAGAACCTGATCTCGGCACACGGTAAAACconstruction
P3CAGGTTCTGATCCTCCAGCAGTTGGATCTGTTTGCGGTTT57958Downstream fragment for ΔcrpThis study
P4CCCGAGCTCAGAGACGCTGGATAGCCTGAconstruction
P5CCCAGATCTTCTATACCCGCTTCATTCCA55758Upstream fragment for ΔPcrpThis study
P6CGCAAGCTTCCCCGGGCCGTCCAATATCGAATACCAconstruction
P7CGCCTCGAGGGATAATAGCGAATGGTTCTC59558Downstream fragment for ΔPcrpThis study
P8CGCCTCGAGGGATAATAGCGAATGGTTCTCconstruction
Table 3. Calculations of LD50s of J118 and Δcrp mutant strains in zebrafish.
Table 3. Calculations of LD50s of J118 and Δcrp mutant strains in zebrafish.
Dose of Challenge CFUNumber of Death/TotalSurvival Rate (%)
J118ΔcrpJ118Δcrp
1.0 × 107-10/10-0
1.0 × 10610/106/10040
1.0 × 1058/103/102070
1.0 × 1046/101/104090
1.0 × 1032/100/1080100
1.0 × 1020/10-100-
LD50*7.94 × 1033.16 × 105
* The LD50 was calculated according to Karber’s method.
Table 4. Calculations of LD50s of J118 and Δcrp mutant strains in channel catfish.
Table 4. Calculations of LD50s of J118 and Δcrp mutant strains in channel catfish.
Dose of Challenge CFUNumber of Death/TotalSurvival Rate (%)
J118ΔcrpJ118Δcrp
1.0 × 108-10/10-0
1.0 × 10710/107/10030
1.0 × 1065/100/1050100
1.0 × 1052/10-80-
1.0 × 1040/10-100-
LD50*6.31 × 1056.31 × 106
* The LD50 was calculated according to Karber’s method.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhou, P.; Han, X.; Ye, X.; Zheng, F.; Yan, T.; Xie, Q.; Zhang, Y.-A.; Curtiss, R., III; Zhou, Y. Phenotype, Virulence and Immunogenicity of Edwardsiella piscicida Cyclic AMP Receptor Protein (Crp) Mutants in Catfish Host. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 517. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8040517

AMA Style

Zhou P, Han X, Ye X, Zheng F, Yan T, Xie Q, Zhang Y-A, Curtiss R III, Zhou Y. Phenotype, Virulence and Immunogenicity of Edwardsiella piscicida Cyclic AMP Receptor Protein (Crp) Mutants in Catfish Host. Microorganisms. 2020; 8(4):517. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8040517

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhou, Peng, Xueqing Han, Xiang Ye, Feifei Zheng, Ting Yan, Quan Xie, Yong-An Zhang, Roy Curtiss, III, and Yang Zhou. 2020. "Phenotype, Virulence and Immunogenicity of Edwardsiella piscicida Cyclic AMP Receptor Protein (Crp) Mutants in Catfish Host" Microorganisms 8, no. 4: 517. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8040517

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop