Evaluating the impacts of stressors of Pseudomonas syringae pathovar tomato on the effectiveness of multi-locus variable number tandem repeat analysis and multi-locus sequence typing in microbial forensic investigations

Investigative Genetics

Jacqueline Fletcher²  Ulrich Melcher¹  Mindy James² 

[1] Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater 74078, OK, USA;Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater 74078, OK, USA

关键词: Bacterial evolution;    Pseduomonas syringae pathovar tomato;    Multi-locus sequence typing;    Multi-locus variable number tandem repeat analysis;    Agricultural biosecurity;    Forensic microbiology;   

Others  :  1133559
DOI  :  10.1186/2041-2223-5-10

 received in 2014-04-23, accepted in 2014-07-14,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Crops in the USA are vulnerable to natural and criminal threats because of their widespread cultivation and lack of surveillance, and because of implementation of growing practices such as monoculture. To prepare for investigation and attribution of such events, forensic assays, including determination of molecular profiles, are being adapted for use with plant pathogens. The use of multi-locus variable number tandem repeat (VNTR) analysis (MLVA) and multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) in investigations involving plant pathogens may be problematic because the long lag periods between pathogen introduction and discovery of associated disease may provide enough time for evolution to occur in the regions of the genome employed in each assay. Thus, more information on the stability of the loci employed in these methods is needed.

Results

The MLVA fingerprints and MLST profiles were consistent throughout the experiment, indicating that, using a specific set of primers and conditions, MLVA and MLST typing systems reliably identify P.s. tomato DC3000. This information is essential to forensic investigators in interpreting comparisons between MLVA and MLST typing profiles observed in P.s. tomato isolates.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that MLVA and MLST typing systems, utilizing the specified primers and conditions, could be employed successfully in forensics investigations involving P.s. tomato. Similar experiments should be conducted in the field and with other high-consequence plant pathogens to ensure that the assays are reliable for pathogens infecting plants in their natural environment and for organisms that may display faster rates of mutation.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 James et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Harl NE: U.S. Agriculture, food production is threatened by bioterrorism attacks. http://www.econ.iastate.edu/faculty/harl/USAgThreatened.pdf webcite
• [2]Madden LV, Wheelis M: The threat of plant pathogens as weapons against U.S. crops. Ann Rev Phytopath 2003, 41:155-176.
• [3]Fletcher J, Bender C, Budowle B, Cobb WT, Gold SE, Ishimaru CA, Luster D, Melcher U, Murch R, Scherm H, Seem RC, Sherwood JL, Sobral BW, Tolin SA: Plant pathogen forensics: capabilities, needs, and recommendations. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2006, 70:450-471.
• [4]Budowle B, Johnson MD, Fraser CM, Leighton TJ, Murch RS, Chakraborty R: Genetic analysis and attribution of microbial forensics evidence. Crit Rev Microbiol 2005, 31:233-254.
• [5]Pattnaik P, Jana AM: Microbial forensics: applications in bioterrorism. Environ Forensics 2005, 6:197-204.
• [6]van Belkum A, Tassios PT, Dijkshoorn L, Haeggman S, Cookson B, Fry NK, Fussing V, Green J, Feil E, Gerner-Smidt P: Guidelines for the validation and application of typing methods for use in bacterial epidemiology. Clin Microbiol Infec 2007, 13(Suppl 3):1-46.
• [7]Vogler AJ, Keys C, Nemoto Y, Colman RE, Jay Z, Keim P: Effect of repeat copy number on variable-number tandem repeat mutations in Escherichia coli O157:H7. J Bacteriol 2006, 188:4253-4263.
• [8]Keim P: Bacterial Pathogens. In Microbial Forensics. Edited by Breeze RG, Budowle B, Schutzer SE. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press; 2005:99-170.
• [9]Lindstedt B: Multiple-locus variable number tandem repeats analysis for genetic fingerprinting of pathogenic bacteria. Electrophoresis 2005, 26:2567-2582.
• [10]Le Fléche P, Jacques I, Grayon M, Al Dahouk S, Bouchon P, Denoeud F, Nöckler K, Neubaruer H, Guilloteau LA, Vergnaud G: Evaluation and selection of tandem repeat loci for Brucella MLVA typing assay. BMC Microbiol 2006, 6:9. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Zhao A, Poulin L, Rodriguez-R LM, Serna NF, Liu S, Wonni I, Szurek B, Verdier V, Leach JE, He Y, Feng J, Koebnik R: Development of variable number of tandem repeats typing scheme for the bacterial rice pathogen Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzicola. Phytopath 2012, 102:948-956.
• [12]Baker C: Strain Typing and Characterization of Sigma54-Dependent Transcriptional Activator Mutants in Pseudomonas Syringae pv. Tomato. Oklahoma State University: Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology; 2009. [PhD Thesis]
• [13]Cooley MB, Carychao D, Nguyen K, Whitehand L, Mandrell R: Effects of environmental stress on stability of tandem repeats in Escherichia coli O157:H7. Appl Environ Microbiol 2010, 76:3398-3400.
• [14]Her M, Kang S, Cho D, Cho Y, Hwang I, Heo Y, Jung S, Yoo H: Application and evaluation of the MLVA typing assay for the Brucella abortus strains isolated in Korea. BMC Microbiol 2009, 9:230. BioMed Central Full Text
• [15]Hopkins KL, Maguire C, Best E, Liebana E, Threlfall EJ: Stability of multiple-locus variable number tandem repeats in Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. J Clin Microbiol 2007, 45:3058-3061.
• [16]Cook CL Jr: Forensic genetic analysis of microorganisms: overview of some important technical concepts and selected genetic typing methods. In Microbial Forensics. Edited by Breeze RG, Budowle B, Schutzer SE. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press; 2005:233-249.
• [17]Keim P, Pearson T, Okinaka R: Microbial forensics: DNA fingerprinting of Bacillus anthracis (anthrax). Anal Chem 2008, 80:4791-4800.
• [18]Sarker SR, Guttman DS: Evolutiion of the core genome of Pseudomonas syringae, a highly clonal, endemic plant pathogen. Appl Environ Microbiol 2004, 70:1999-2012.
• [19]Maiden MCJ, Bygraves JA, Feil E, Morelli G, Russell JE, Urwin R, Zhang Q, Zhao J, Zurth K, Caugant DA, Feavers IM, Achtman M, Spratt BG: Multilocus sequence typing: a portable approach to the identification of clones within populations of pathogenic microorganisms. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998, 95:3140-3145.
• [20]Feil EJ, Maiden MC, Achtman M, Spratt BG: The relative contributions of recombination and mutation to the divergence of clones of Neisseria meningitides. Mol Biol Evol 1999, 16:1496-1502.
• [21]Nutter FW, Madden LV: Plant pathogens as biological weapons against agriculture. In Beyond Anthrax: The Weaponization of Infectious Diseases. Edited by Lutwick LI, Lutwick SM. New York: Humana Press; 2009:335-363.
• [22]Doudoroff M, Palleroni NJ: Genus I: Pseudomonas migula. In Bergey’s Manual of Determinative Bacteriology. 8th edition. Edited by Buchanan RE, Gibbons NE. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Watkins; 1974:217-243.
• [23]Kokalis-Burella N: 2002. In Biological Control of Crop Diseases. Edited by Gnanamanickam SS. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc; 2002:179-190.
• [24]Lin N, Abramovitch RB, Kim YJ, Martin GB: Diverse AvrPtoB homologs from several Pseudomonas syringae pathovars elicit Pto-dependent resistance and have similar virulence activities. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006, 72:702-712.
• [25]Zhao Y, Damicone JP, Demezas DH, Rangaswamy V, Bender CL: Bacterial leaf spot of leafy crucifers in Oklahoma caused by Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola. Plant Dis 2000, 84:1015-1020.
• [26]Schaad NW, Shaw JJ, Vidaver A, Leach J, Erlick BJ: Crop biosecurity. http://www.apsnet.org/publications/apsnetfeatures/Pages/CropBiosecurity.aspx webcite
• [27]Gironde S, Manceau C: Housekeeping gene sequencing and multilocus variable-number tandem-repeat analysis to identify subpopulations with Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola and Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato that correlated with host specificity. Appl Environ Microbiol 2012, 78:3266-3279.
• [28]Yan S, Liu H, Mohr TJ, Jenrette J, Chiodini R, Zaccardelli M, Setubal JC, Vinatzer BA: Role of recombination in the evolution of the model plant pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000, a very atypical tomato strain. Appl Environ Microbiol 2008, 74:3171-3181.
• [29]King EO, Wark MK, Raney DE: Two simple media for the demonstration of pyocyanin and fluorescin. J Lab Clin Med 1954, 44:301-307.
• [30]Budde IP, Rohde BH, Bender CL, Ullrich MS: Growth phase and temperature influence promoter activity, transcript abundance, and protein stability during biosynthesis of the Pseudomonas syringae phytotoxin coronatine. J Bacteriol 1998, 180:1360-1367.
• [31]Keane PJ, Kerr A, New PB: Crown gall of stone fruit. II. Identification and nomenclature of Agrobacterium isolates. Aus J Biol Sci 1970, 23:585-595.
• [32]Scalera SE, Ward OG: A quantitative study of ethyl methanesulfonate-induced alkylation of Vicia faba DNA. Mutat Res 1971, 12:71-79.
• [33]Thomas MD, Leary JV: Mutagenicity and pathogenicity in Pseudomonas syringae pv. glycinea (Pseudomonas glycinea). J Gen Microbiol 1980, 121:349-355.
• [34]Canfield ML, Baca S, Moore LW: Isolation of Pseudomonas syringae from 40 cultivars of diseased woody plants with tip dieback in Pacific Northwest nurseries. Plant Dis 1986, 70:647-650.
• [35]Sawada H, Kanaya S, Tsuda M, Saitous N: Phylogenetic analysis of Pseudomonas syringae pathovars suggests that horizontal transfer of argK and the evolutionary stability of the hrp gene cluster. J Mol Evol 1999, 49:627-644.
• [36]Tamura K, Dudley J, Nei M, Kumar S: MEGA4: molecular evolutionary genetic analysis (MEGA) software version 4.0. Mol Biol Evol 2007, 24:1596-1599.