Insights into the evolution of IncQ plasmids derived form studies in pRAS3

[摘要] ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Two isogenic plasmids, pRAS3.1 (11,851-bp) and pRAS3.2 (11,823-bp), were identified as tetracycline resistance plasmids occurring within Aeromonas salmonicida subsp. salmonicida and atypical A. salmonicida subsp. salmonicida strains that were isolated from salmon aquaculture farms in Norway (L'Abee-Lund and Sorum, 2002). Although sequence analysis showed that, except for the repC gene, the replication and mobilization genes of the two pRAS3 plasmids are similar to that of the two IncQ-2 plasmids pTF-FC2 and pTC-F14, incompatibility testing during the course of this study revealed that the replicons of the two pRAS3 plasmids were compatible with the replicons of the IncQ-1α, ß] and y plasmids RSF1010, pIE1107 and pIE1130, as well as with the IncQ-2α and ß plasmids, pTF-FC2 and pTC-F14, respectively. Through sequence analysis it was suggested that the repC gene of the ancestral pRAS3 plasmid was probably acquired during a gene exchange event with a yet to be identified plasmid. The difference in the RepC of the pRAS3 plasmids compared to that of the other IncQ-like plasmids against which the pRAS3 plasmids were tested for incompatibility was thus suggested to be a likely reason for the compatibility of the two pRAS3 plasmid replicons with these IncQ-1 and IncQ-2 plasmids.Two previously unidentified genes, encoding two small 108 and 74-aa proteins distantly related to the PemIK (Bravo et al., 1987; Tsuchimoto et al., 1988) and MazEF (Masuda et al., 1993) TA systems, were found to be present between repB and repA genes of the two pRAS3 plasmids. Cloning of these two genes onto an unstable pOU82-test vector increased the stability of the vector from 35 to 98% after ~72 generations, thus suggesting that like the PasABC and PasAB systems of pTF-FC2 and pTC-F14, these two genes encode proteins which function as a toxin-antitoxin (TA) system. Although located in a similar position on the plasmids, the TA system of the two pRAS3 plasmids and the Pas systems of pTF-FC2 and pTC-F14 are unrelated, suggesting that these two types of TA systems were acquired independently from each other. Based on the sequence similarity and genetic organization of pRAS3 compared to the IncQ-2α and ß] plasmids pTF-FC2 and pTC-F14, respectively, but given that the pRAS3 plasmids were compatible with both pTF-FC2 and pTC-F14, as well as other IncQ-like plasmids, it was suggested that the two pRAS3 plasmids be classified into a new IncQ-2y subgroup.A comparison of the sequences of the two pRAS3 plasmids to each other by L'Abee-Lund and Sorum (2002) revealed that, apart from a number of point mutations within the tetAR tetracycline resistance genes of the two plasmids, the only other differences between them are that pRAS3.1 has 4 tandem copies of 22-bp iteron repeats within its origin of vegetative replication (oriV), and 5 tandem copies of CCCCCG 6-bp repeats near the origin of transfer (oriT), while pRAS3.2 has only three and four copies of each of the two repeated sequences, respectively. As the two pRAS3 plasmids are likely to have arisen from the same ancestor, this raised the question of how the copy numbers of these two different types of repeat sequences affected the ability of pRAS3.1 and pRAS3.2 plasmids to compete within a host cell as well as within a population of host cells, and therefore, why both of these isogenic plasmids have managed to persist in the environment. The plasmid copy numbers (PCN) of pRAS3.1 and pRAS3.2 were estimated to be 45 ± 13 and 30 ± 5 plasmids per chromosome, respectively. By creating a series of pRAS3.1 derivative plasmids with 3 to 7 copies of the 22-bp iterons and 4 or 5 copies of the 6-bp repeats, it was shown that an increase in the number of iterons brought about a decrease in PCN, probably due to an increased ability to bind RepC, while an increase in the number of 6-bp repeats from 4 to 5 brought about an increase in repB transcription, and the higher levels of RepB resulted in an increase in PCN. Thus the reason for pRAS3.1 having a ~1.5-fold higher PCN than pRAS3.2, even though it has 4 x 22-bp iterons compared to the 3 x 22-bp iterons of pRAS3.2, was that it had a higher level of repB transcription due to having 5 x 6-bp repeats in its mobB-mobA/repB promoter region compared to the 4 x 6-bp repeats of pRAS3.2. The differences in the number of iterons and 6-bp repeats, and hence PCN, did not have an effect on the stability of the two wild type (WT) plasmids or their derivatives even when the TA system was neutralized by having a copy of the TA genes present on a vector in trans and it was argued that the relatively high PCN of the two pRAS3 plasmids was sufficient to ensure plasmid stability through random distribution. As the two pRAS3 plasmids were mobilized at similar frequencies difference in PCN and mobB-mobA/repB transcription did not seem to affect their mobilization frequency. When pRAS3.1 and pRAS3.2 were competed intracellularly as coresident plasmids, pRAS3.1 was able to displace pRAS3.2 from 98% of the host cells within ~20 generations. The displacement of pRAS3.2 by pRAS3.1 was found to be as a result of pRAS3.1 having 4 x 22-bp iterons, which enabled pRAS3.1 to titrate of the communal pool of available RepC initiator proteins. Plasmids with 5 or 7 x 22-bp iterons, were however less effective at displacing a plasmid with 3 iterons, and it was speculated that plasmids with more than 4 x 22-bp iterons within their oriV were less successful at initiating replication than was a plasmid with 3 iterons within its oriV. A direct correlation was found between the PCN of a pRAS3 plasmid and the metabolic burden it imposed on its host. Thus pRAS3.1, as a result of its ~1.5-fold higher PCN than pRAS3.2 placed a small but significantly higher (~2.8%) metabolic load on its host compared to pRAS3.2. It was concluded that pRAS3.1 had a competitive advantage over pRAS3.2 when these plasmids were coresident within a single host (as would have been when the two plasmids first diverged from each other) as it was able to displace pRAS3.2. However, as a result of pRAS3.2 having a lower PCN, it placed a smaller metabolic burden on an isogenic host and this resulted in pRAS3.2 having an advantage over pRAS3.1 at the population level. Sequence remnants of pRAS3.2 from horizontal gene transfer suggested that pRAS3.2 was the original pRAS3 plasmid and thus that pRAS3.1 evolved from pRAS3.2. As the pRAS3.1 derivative plasmids that were constructed during the course of this study are likely to have been intermediates in the evolution of pRAS3.1 from pRAS3.2, I was able to speculate on the stepwise evolution of pRAS3.1 from pRAS3.2 based on the characteristics of these plasmids, and thus, how both macro- and microevolutionary events have contributed to the evolution of these two plasmids.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University