Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Bacteriology, November 2003, p. 6513-6521, Vol. 185, No. 22
0021-9193/03/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JB.185.22.6513-6521.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Institute for Plant Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Quality Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 76100,1 The Volcani Center, Agricultural Research Organization, Bet Dagan 50250,2 Department of Membrane Research, The Institute of Microbiology, The Hebrew University-Hadassah Medical School, Jerusalem 91120, Israel3
Received 14 July 2003/ Accepted 18 August 2003
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
Since the phytoplasma is restricted to the phloem tissue, its concentration in infected plants is very low. Furthermore, in contrast to mycoplasmas, phytoplasmas cannot be cultured in vitro. Therefore, phytoplasmal DNA is obtained with a high host (plant or insect) background, hampering attempts to study structural features and genome organization. In the last 15 years, some progress has been made towards enabling the enrichment of phytoplasmal fractions from extracts of infected plants and insects (4, 20, 21, 42, 47, 48). In some cases, it became possible to produce phytoplasma-specific polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies, greatly facilitating diagnosis (6, 9). However, as detailed below, only a few phytoplasmal genes have been characterized. Currently, phytoplasma detection and characterization are based predominantly on PCR amplification of rRNA genes (rDNAs), especially the 16S rDNA (1, 11, 15, 19, 25, 48, 51).
The preferred methods for phytoplasma classification have become restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis and sequence analysis of rDNA. Sequence analysis of 16S rDNA revealed that phytoplasmas form a monophyletic clade within the mycoplasma phylogenetic tree. This method also allowed, for the first time, a comprehensive phytoplasma classification as the basis for an emerging taxonomy. Under the provisional status Candidatus, six species have been defined to date (16, 19, 26, 28, 49, 50, 55).
Extraction and purification of phytoplasmal DNA are critical and essential steps towards understanding the molecular biology of these unique microorganisms. Since the source of phytoplasmal genomic DNA is an infected plant or insect (and not cultured bacterial cells), resulting in a high background of host DNA, a preparation containing sufficient amount of phytoplasma DNA representing the entire phytoplasma genome was critically sought. At least two groups have made considerable, yet unpublished, progress in isolating and characterizing the phytoplasmal genome of the Western X phytoplasma (L. Leifting and B. Kirkpatrick, Abstr. 14th Int. Congr. Int. Org. Mycoplasmol., abstr. 29, p. 27, 2002) and the apple proliferation phytoplasma (E. Seemuller, personal communication). However, only a few phytoplasmal non-tRNA or non-rRNA genes have been hitherto described in published papers (3-5, 10, 16, 18-20, 27, 28, 30, 33, 34, 37, 46, 54, 57); additional, as-yet-unpublished genes can be found in the GenBank database.
Recently, for the purposes of demonstrating the vector's ability to transmit phytoplasma, we devised a method of collecting insect saliva and showed, by PCR analysis of rRNA genes, that phytoplasmal DNA can be easily detected in that saliva (53). Based on those findings, we describe a novel approach to isolating phytoplasmas and their genomic DNAs and validate it by isolating and characterizing 78 new putative phytoplasmal open reading frames (ORFs).
|
|
|---|
Isolation of phytoplasmal fractions from insect saliva. We adapted a method of phytoplasma isolation from artificial feeding medium (J. Zhang, S. Miller, C. Hoy, X. Zhou, and L. Nault, Phytopathology 88, abstr. S84, 1998), described by Tanne et al. (53), whereby phytoplasmas are isolated from the insect vector's saliva and their genomic DNA is extracted. White microcentrifuge tubes (1.5 ml) were used as insect chambers. The white tube caps were removed and replaced with insect-attracting yellow ones. The cylindrical cups in the yellow caps were filled with 200 µl of 5% sucrose in TE (10 mM Tris [pH 8.0], 1 mM EDTA) and sealed with Parafilm. The microcentrifuge tubes were then capped with the yellow caps carrying the sucrose-TE feeding medium. The bottom ends of the microcentrifuge tubes were cut, an individual insect was placed in each, and the cut end was sealed with cotton wool. Each tube, containing an individual leafhopper, was kept at 23 to 25°C for 48 to 72 h in a horizontal position with the cap facing a light source to attract the insects to the feeding medium.
Isolation of phytoplasmal genomic DNA. Phytoplasma particles were pelleted out of the feeding solution by centrifugation at 12,000 x g for 15 min. Genomic DNA was extracted by adding 10 µl of 0.5 M NaOH, followed by the addition of 20 µl of 1 M Tris-HCl (pH 8.0) containing 1% sodium dodecyl sulfate and 20 mM EDTA. The mixture was incubated at 65°C for 15 min, precipitated with 2 volumes of ethanol, redissolved in 30 µl of TE, and kept at -80°C.
Molecular typing of phytoplasmal DNA. A sample of the isolated phytoplasmal DNA was subjected to PCR analysis with various type-specific 16S rDNA primers. The DNA reacted positively only with the AY-specific primers (data not shown). Phytoplasma typing results were corroborated by RFLP of the PCR amplicon with four distinct restriction enzymes (26, 36) (data not shown).
Construction of a phytoplasmal genomic library. DNAs from 100 individual feeding tubes were pooled for the construction of a genomic library. The DNA was cleaved with the restriction enzyme EcoRI and ligated into the phagemid Lambda-Zap Express (Stratagene). Ligation and packaging were performed according to the manufacturer's protocol. About 5,000 plaques were obtained in this process, and blue-white selection indicated about 70% insert-carrying recombinant clones. Plasmids were excised from the phagemids by the addition of a helper phage as directed by the manufacturer. The recombinant plasmids were purified, and the nucleotide sequences of their inserts were determined by using the dideoxy chain termination method (44) with the automatic dye-terminator cycle sequencing model ABI PRISMA 377 sequencer (Perkin-Elmer, Foster City, Calif.). Sequence data were analyzed by using the BlastN, BlastX, and ORF finder programs from the National Center for Biotechnology Information and the FASTA program from the Genetics Computer Group.
Southern and Northern blot analyses. Total genomic DNA was extracted from plants as described by Maixner et al. (29). Leaf tissue was ground in extraction buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 3% cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide, 1.4 M NaCl, 20 mM EDTA, 0.2% 2-mercaptoethanol) at a tissue/buffer ratio of 1:5 (wt/vol). The slurry was incubated for 20 min at 65°C and then centrifuged for 10 min at 3,000 x g. The supernatant fluid was collected and extracted with an equal volume of chloroform-isoamylalcohol (24:1, vol/vol), followed by centrifugation, collection of the aqueous phase, and precipitation with 1 volume of isopropanol. The DNA pellet was washed with 70% ethanol, resuspended in 50 µl of 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0)-1 mM EDTA. Total cell RNA was extracted from plant leaves with Tri reagent (Sigma) according to the manufacturer's protocol.
DNA was cleaved with the restriction enzyme HindIII, electrophoresed, and blotted onto nitrocellulose membranes. RNA was electrophoresed in formamide-formaldehyde gels and blotted onto membranes. Southern and Northern blot procedures were carried out by standard protocols (43).
Probes for the Southern and Northern blot hybridizations were prepared from selected clones with the Prime a Gene labeling kit (Promega). Due to the high A-T content of the phytoplasmal DNA, hybridization was carried out at 56°C, and the membranes were washed at medium stringency, i.e., at 56°C in 0.5x SSC (1x SSC is 0.15 M NaCl plus 0.015 M sodium citrate [pH 7.2]).
PCR. Primers were designed from the nucleotide sequences of clones A10, A182, A244, and A380. The nucleotide sequences of the primers are shown in Table 1. Plant or leafhopper DNA (100 ng) served as a template. The reaction mixture was incubated at 95°C for 10 min and then subjected to 40 PCR cycles (denaturation at 92°C for 30 s, annealing for 30 s, and elongation and 72°C for 30 s), followed by 7 min of incubation at 72°C. The available amount of leafhopper DNA extracted from a single insect was scarce. To increase sensitivity and specificity, a nested PCR step was added to the analysis of DNA from several insects. For nested PCR, a sample from the primary PCR was diluted 1:100 and 2 µl of it served as a template for the nested PCR stage. PCR products were electrophoresed in 1.2% agarose gels and stained with ethidium bromide.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Primers used for PCR in this study.
|
|
|
|---|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Summary of the characterized phytoplasmal (AY) clonesa
|
![]() View larger version (40K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Schematic illustration of the translation of three phytoplasmal clones according to the mycoplasma-mitochondrion codon usage table and to the general codon usage table.
|
Analysis of the phytoplasmal ORFs revealed that 12 ORFs code for ribosomal proteins, enzymes, and factors involved in protein synthesis, rRNA processing, and tRNA acylation. Eight ORFs putatively code for enzymes involved in energy metabolism (hydrogen transfer and oxidative phosphorylation). Five ORFs code for components of RNA and DNA polymerases and for enzymes involved in DNA modification and integration. Three ORFs code for retroelements (either retrotransposons or retroviruses) and for a protein reacting with a product of the nef retrogene. The other reported putative phytoplasmal ORFs code for metabolic enzymes, surface and signal peptides, and various other proteins; some of these are discussed below. Notably, 25 of the 78 ORFs have no match in the GenBank database and are designated hypothetical proteins (Table 2). Four other ORFs putatively code for proteins similar to those found in other organisms but with no as-yet-defined function.
Although it is premature to draw conclusions about the phytoplasmal genome organization, it should be noted that, based on the presently reported sequences, the gene density is very high: 27,407 bases, out of a total of 32,753 bases sequenced (83.7%), are ORFs. Several clones carry partially overlapping ORFs at different frames, some of which are positioned on opposite strands.
Specificity of the phytoplasma clones. The following tests were carried out in order to ascertain that the above-described clones were of phytoplasmal origin and did not represent host sequences of plants, insects, or other microorganisms. Genomic DNAs or RNAs of noninfected, Stolbur-infected, and AY-phytoplasma-infected plants [periwinkle; Catharantus roseus (L.) G. Don] were subjected to Southern or Northern blot analysis with several inserts of selected clones as probes. An example of a Southern blot analysis is given in Fig. 2, and an example of a Northern analysis is given in Fig. 3. In both analyses, the probes reacted with DNA (Fig. 2A) or with total RNA (Fig. 3A) from AY-infected plants and not with that from noninfected plants. In the Southern analysis, the A1 clone also reacted faintly with DNA from plants infected with Stolbur (a phytoplasma related to AY). When the insert of clone A2 served as the probe in the Northern blot analysis, a complex hybridization pattern was observed, which could be attributed to the fact that 12 putative ORFs (Table 2) were identified on that clone. In order to verify equal loading of the various lanes, hybridization with the housekeeping ß-tubulin gene is shown for the Southern analysis, and an ethidium bromide-stained total RNA gel (prior to hybridization), showing the rRNA bands, is shown for the Northern analysis.
![]() View larger version (58K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Southern blot analysis of periwinkle DNA. Chromosomal periwinkle DNA (12 µg) was digested with HindIII restriction enzyme, subjected to Southern blot hybridization, and probed with 32P-labeled clone A1 (A) or with a 670-bp PCR product representing a conserved region of the tubulin gene (B). The size of the hybridization band is indicated on the left. The exposure time was 3 weeks (A) or 3 days (B). DNA was from healthy plants (lanes 1 and 2), from a Stolbur-infected plant (lanes 3), or from an AY-infected plant (lanes 4).
|
![]() View larger version (90K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Northern blot analysis of periwinkle RNA. Total cellular RNAs were extracted, electrophoresed (15 µg per lane), subjected to Northern blot hybridization, and probed with 32P-labeled clone A2 (A) or stained with ethidium bromide (B). RNA was from healthy plants (lanes 1) or from an AY-infected plant (lanes 2). The base lengths of RNA are indicated on the left.
|
![]() View larger version (89K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. PCR analysis of periwinkle chromosomal DNA (100 ng per reaction). PCR primers were derived from clone A380 (Tables 1 and 2), amplifying a 500-bp region. Template DNA was from a healthy plant (lane 1), from an AY-infected plant (lane 2), from a Stolbur-infected plant (lane 3), or from clone A380 as a positive control (lane 4), Lane M, molecular size markers.
|
![]() View larger version (46K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. PCR analysis of leafhopper DNA (100 ng per reaction). PCR primers derived from clones A10, A182, A244, and A380 (A380 is the same primer as was used for the plant PCR assay for Fig. 4) were used to amplify a segment of DNA extracted from leafhoppers. All reactions except that with A380 primers were nested PCR. Lanes 2, 5, 8, and 11, PCRs with template DNAs from phytoplasma-carrying leafhoppers. Lanes 3, 6, 9, and 12, PCRs with template DNAs from phytoplasma-free leafhoppers. Lanes 1, 4, 7, and 10, positive controls (with the cloned DNAs serving as templates) for PCRs with A182, A244, A380, and A10, respectively.
|
|
|
|---|
Sequence analysis of the phytoplasmal clones indicated some unique mycoplasma-like features: they have a low GC content (less than 35% in most cases), and the best ORF designation was obtained through the mycoplasma-mitochondrion codon usage table. These features, in addition to the lack of a cell wall, small genome size, and intracellular location in the host tissues, indicate that phytoplasmas might be evolutionarily related to mycoplasmas. The entire genomes of five mycoplasma species are known (8, 12, 13, 17, 45). Surprisingly, however, only one of the presently reported phytoplasmal ORFs was found to be homologous, at a reasonable score, to a mycoplasmal gene (clone A448, ORF 1, is homologous to the mycoplasmal ribosomal protein S8 [rpS8] gene, albeit at a lesser score than to the same gene from Listeria innocuus). Furthermore, none of the phytoplasmal ORFs reported by others is homologous to mycoplasmal genes. It was also reported that phytoplasmas are phylogenetically closer to acholeplasmas than to mycoplasmas (33). The organization of the highly conserved ribosomal protein genes in these species also adds to the confusion. The gene order in clone A182 (rpL18, rpS5, rpL15) and in A448 (rpS8, rpL6) is similar to the gene order in Mycoplasma genitalium. On the other hand, the gene order in clone A115 (EF-G, rpS10, rpL3) resembles that of Bacillus (EF-G, EF-Tu, rpS10, rpL3) rather than those of mycoplasmas (M. genitalium and Mycoplasma pneumoniae, EF-G, rpS6, ssb, rpS18; Mycoplasma pulmonis, EF-G, EF-Tu, hypothetical protein, hypothetical protein). Analysis of the complete S10-spc operon of the onion yellows phytoplasma (33) also led to the conclusion that phytoplasmal genes resemble those of acholeplasmas and Bacillus more than those of other Mollicutes. These data indicate that the phytoplasma phylogenetic association is still an unresolved matter, and the question of the relatedness of phytoplasmas to mycoplasmas remains open.
Previous papers (see, for instance, reference 28) have indicated that phytoplasmas employ the general codon usage table. These findings were based on analysis of only a few ribosomal protein genes and the tuf gene. We analyzed 78 ORFs, and in about half of them (including all ribosomal protein genes) it did not matter which codon usage table was employed for translation. This may explain the previous reports of the use of the general codon table by phytoplasmas. However, in 16 out of the 32 reported clones (30 out of the reported 78 ORFs) a better translation was obtained with the mitochondrion-mycoplasma codon usage, while in the rest of the clones it did not matter which codon usage table was employed. This indicated that phytoplasmas use the mitochondrion-mycoplasma codon usage table, where UGA is read as tryptophan (three such cases are shown in Fig. 1). This is a large enough sample to allow a preliminary conclusion that at least the AY phytoplasma reads UGA as tryptophan. However, it uses this triplet infrequently, so that in many cases it does not matter which codon usage table is in effect.
Ten of the aforementioned ORFs are homologous to nonmitochondrial eukaryotic genes, and two ORFs (clones A352 and A526) are homologous to viral genes. It is worth noting that in addition to the eight eukaryotic genes mentioned above, four of the eukaryote-homologous ORFs are retroelements, implying the presence of transposons, or retrovirus infection, in phytoplasmas.
The eukaryote-homologous ORFs are not contaminants brought into the system from insect cells, as they are of low GC content and some are positioned on the same clone with prokaryote-homologous ORFs (for example, clones A2, A239, and A450). The close intracellular relationship between phytoplasmas and their host cells might have resulted from exchanges of genetic material (perhaps due to recombination) between the host and the pathogen. The host-homologous genes were adapted by the pathogen and underwent modifications (for instance, although they remain homologous to eukaryotic genes, they exhibit a low GC content in the phytoplasma). In this regard, it is worth mentioning that several ORFs are homologous to insect genes (mitochondrial or unassigned genes), and none (except for clone A340, which carries transposable elements) is of plant origin. The baculovirus-homologous ORF (clone A526) is also of special interest. This ORF is homologous to fusolin (also known as spindle-body protein or GP37 [38]). Fusolin has been found in baculoviruses and in insect-infecting poxviruses and has been shown to enhance infection by a factor of 104. Fusolins are missing from poxviruses that do not infect insects (32, 52). It is of special interest that some fusolins bear distant homology to chitin- and cellulose-binding proteins (38). The insect's peritrophic membrane is composed of protein and chitin, and a major component of plant cell walls is cellulose. Phytoplasmas are pathogens of both insects and plants, and it is possible that a fusolin-like protein is required for establishing phytoplasmal infection. It is also worth noting that a gene for a caspase (caspases are cysteine proteases involved in apoptosis following mitochondrial signaling [7, 24]) was found in phytoplasma (clone A352). In eukaryotic cells caspases are recruited as antibacterial agents (14); however, their origin is believed to be prokaryotic (2, 23).
Currently, phylogenetic analyses of phytoplasmas and their assignment to taxons and clades are based on the similarity or diversity found in their rDNA sequences, the gene for elongation factor Tu (tuf gene), and some ribosomal protein genes (16, 26, 28, 30, 49). For better reliability, taxonomy should rely on similarities and diversities in more than a single operon. In this respect, it is noteworthy that none of the sequences found for the isolated genes of the presently reported AY phytoplasma are homologous at their highest score to other phytoplasmal genes. Similar observations, which might challenge the present rDNA-based classification, were also made with other systems. The immunodominant membrane proteins from two phytoplasmas belonging to the same clade (as determined by 16S rDNA analysis) were found to be highly divergent in their hydrophilic region (3), and phytoplasmas diagnosed by 16S rDNA analysis as various types of apple proliferation were also found to be quite variable when PCR-RFLP analysis was performed on a nonribosomal fragment (18).
To validate the results, a determination of gene order for some other clones is also important. For example, all three ORFs in clone A380 are of mitochondrial origin (cyclophilin-D is a mitochondrial protein [56]).
Phytoplasma diagnoses are currently based on rDNA analyses. In this report, we provide PCR analyses, specific to AY, that are based on non-rDNA sequences. The information gathered here, and more sequences to come, will allow a better classification of phytoplasmas.
Many phytoplasmal clones carry ORFs in different frames and even in opposite orientations. This is to be expected when a relatively large amount of information is condensed into a small genome. This is consistent with the situation in M. genitalium. Almost every clone (accession numbers U39679 to U39729) carries overlapping ORFs in different frames, and short overlaps in opposite orientations are quite common. In some cases, longer opposite overlaps are also found; for example, the gene for O-sialoglycoprotein endopeptidase and that for signal recognition particle protein (accession no. U39684) overlap for 230 bp in opposite orientations. When two ORFs are partially overlapping and are located in opposite orientations, a sense-antisense silencing of expression, due to the formation of double-stranded RNA (39), probably takes place, unless the expression of each ORF is regulated at a different time.
The expected size of the phytoplasma genome is only 500 to 1,200 kb (50). Therefore, the above-described genomic library (about 5,000 clones with an average insert size of approximately 2,000 bp) seems to be representative of the entire phytoplasmal genome, allowing the launch of a project to decipher the entire phytoplasmal genome.
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»