1887

Microbial Genomics logo

Volume 7, Issue 11

Delving into defence: identifying the Pf-5 gene suite involved in defence against secreted products of fungal, oomycete and bacterial rhizosphere competitors Open Access

Abstract

Competitive behaviours of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) are integral to their ability to colonize and persist on plant roots and outcompete phytopathogenic fungi, oomycetes and bacteria. PGPR engage in a range of antagonistic behaviours that have been studied in detail, such as the production and secretion of compounds inhibitory to other microbes. In contrast, their defensive activities that enable them to tolerate exposure to inhibitory compounds produced by their neighbours are less well understood. In this study, the genes involved in the Pf-5 response to metabolites from eight diverse rhizosphere competitor organisms, , , var. , , QST713, sp. Q2-87, and subspecies , were examined. Proximity induced excreted metabolite responses were confirmed for Pf-5 with all partner organisms through HPLC before culturing a dense Pf-5 transposon mutant library adjacent to each of these microbes. This was followed by transposon-directed insertion site sequencing (TraDIS), which identified genes that influence Pf-5 fitness during these competitive interactions. A set of 148 genes was identified that were associated with increased fitness during competition, including cell surface modification, electron transport, nucleotide metabolism, as well as regulatory genes. In addition, 51 genes were identified for which loss of function resulted in fitness gains during competition. These included genes involved in flagella biosynthesis and cell division. Considerable overlap was observed in the set of genes observed to provide a fitness benefit during competition with all eight test organisms, indicating commonalities in the competitive response to phylogenetically diverse micro-organisms and providing new insight into competitive processes likely to take place in the rhizosphere.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): biocontrol , competition , interkingdom interactions , PGPR , rhizosphere and saturation mutagenesis
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • australian research council (Award DP160103746)
    • Principle Award Recipient: IanT. Paulsen
© 2021 The Authors
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. This article was made open access via a Publish and Read agreement between the Microbiology Society and the corresponding author’s institution.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.000671
2021-11-17
2024-04-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/mgen/7/11/mgen000671.html?itemId=/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.000671&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Karlovsky P. Secondary metabolites in soil ecology. Karlovsky P. ed In Secondary Metabolites in Soil Ecology vol 14 Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2008 pp 1–19
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Takahashi JA, de Castro MM, Souza GG, Lucas EM, Bracarense AA et al. Isolation and screening of fungal species isolated from Brazilian cerrado soil for antibacterial activity against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella typhimurium, Streptococcus pyogenes and Listeria monocytogenes. J Mycol Med 2008; 18:198–204 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Peláez F, Collado J, Arenal F, Basilio A, Cabello A et al. Endophytic fungi from plants living on gypsum soils as a source of secondary metabolites with antimicrobial activity. Mycol Res 1998; 102:755–761 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Allen HK, Donato J, Wang HH, Cloud-Hansen KA, Davies J et al. Call of the wild: antibiotic resistance genes in natural environments. Nat Rev Microbiol 2010; 8:251–259 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Granato ET, Meiller-Legrand TA, Foster KR. The evolution and ecology of bacterial warfare. Curr Biol 2019; 29: R521–R537 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Preston GM. Plant perceptions of plant growth-promoting Pseudomonas. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2004; 359:907–918 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Cattelan A, Hartel P, Fuhrmann J. Screening for plant growth–promoting rhizobacteria to promote early soybean growth. Soil Sci Soc Am J 1999; 63:1670–1680 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Vessey JK. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant and Soil 2003; 255:571–586 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Pallai R, Hynes RK, Verma B, Nelson LM. Phytohormone production and colonization of canola (Brassica napus L.) roots by Pseudomonas fluorescens 6-8 under gnotobiotic conditions. Can J Microbiol 2012; 58:170–178 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Patten CL, Glick BR. Role of Pseudomonas putida indoleacetic acid in development of the host plant root system. Appl Environ Microbiol 2002; 68:3795–3801 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Loper JE, Schroth MN. Influence of bacterial sources of indole-3-acetic acid on root elongation of sugar beet. Phytopathology 1986; 76:386–389 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Loper JE, Hassan KA, Mavrodi DV, Davis EW. Comparative genomics of plant-associated Pseudomonas spp.: insights into diversity and inheritance of traits involved in multitrophic interactions. PLoS Genet 2012; 8:e1002784 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Couillerot O, Prigent‐Combaret C, Caballero‐Mellado J, Moënne‐Loccoz Y. Pseudomonas fluorescens and closely‐related fluorescent pseudomonads as biocontrol agents of soil‐borne phytopathogens. Lett Appl Microbiol 2009; 48:505–512 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Mark GL, Morrissey JP, Higgins P, O’Gara F. Molecular-based strategies to exploit Pseudomonas biocontrol strains for environmental biotechnology applications. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2006; 56:167–177 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Howell C, Stipanovic R. Control of Rhizoctonia solani on cotton seedlings with Pseudomonas fluorescens and with an antibiotic produced by the bacterium. Phytopathology 1979; 69:480–482 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Howell C, Stipanovic R. Suppression of Pythium ultimum-induced damping-off of cotton seedlings by Pseudomonas fluorescens and its antibiotic, pyoluteorin. Phytopathology 1980; 70:712–715 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Kraus J, Loper JE. Lack of evidence for a role of antifungal metabolite production by Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf-5 in biological control of Pythium damping-off of cucumber. Phytopathology 1992; 82:264–271 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Han SH, Lee SJ, Moon JH, Park KH, Yang KY et al. GacS-dependent production of 2R, 3R-butanediol by Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6 is a major determinant for eliciting systemic resistance against Erwinia carotovora but not against Pseudomonas syringae pv. tabaci in tobacco. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 2006; 19:924–930 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Bakker PA, Pieterse CM, Loon V. Induced systemic resistance by fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. Phytopathology 2007; 97:239–243 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Weller DM. Biological control of soilborne plant pathogens in the rhizosphere with bacteria. Annu Rev Phytopathol 1988; 26:379–407 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Nowak-Thompson B, Gould SJ, Kraus J, Loper JE. Production of 2, 4-diacetylphloroglucinol by the biocontrol agent Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf-5. Can J Microbiol 1994; 40:1064–1066 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Loper JE, Henkels MD, Shaffer BT, Valeriote FA, Gross H. Isolation and identification of rhizoxin analogs from Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf-5 by using a genomic mining strategy. Appl Environ Microbiol 2008; 74:3085–3093 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Fabian BK, Tetu SG, Paulsen IT. Application of transposon insertion sequencing to agricultural science. Front Plant Sci 2020; 11:291 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. King EO, Ward MK, Raney DE. Two simple media for the demonstration of pyocyanin and fluorescin. J Lab Clin Med 1954; 44:301–307 [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Fabian BK, Foster C, Asher AJ, Elbourne LDH, Cain AK et al. Elucidating essential genes in plant-associated Pseudomonas protegens Pf-5 using transposon insertion sequencing. J Bacteriol 2021; 203:e00432-20 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Herrero M, de Lorenzo V, Timmis KN. Transposon vectors containing non-antibiotic resistance selection markers for cloning and stable chromosomal insertion of foreign genes in gram-negative bacteria. J Bacteriol 1990; 172:6557–6567 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Barquist L, Mayho M, Cummins C, Cain AK, Boinett CJ et al. The TraDIS toolkit: sequencing and analysis for dense transposon mutant libraries. Bioinformatics 2016; 32:1109–1111 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Barquist L, Boinett CJ, Cain AK. Approaches to querying bacterial genomes with transposon-insertion sequencing. RNA Biol 2013; 10:1161–1169 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. R Core Team R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2018
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Jana B, Cain AK, Doerrler WT, Boinett CJ, Fookes MC et al. The secondary resistome of multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae. Sci Rep 2017; 7:42483 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Cowley LA, Low AS, Pickard D, Boinett CJ, Dallman TJ et al. Transposon insertion sequencing elucidates novel gene involvement in susceptibility and resistance to phages T4 and T7 in Escherichia coli O157. mBio 2018; 9:e00705-18 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Dembek M, Barquist L, Boinett CJ, Cain AK, Mayho M et al. High-throughput analysis of gene essentiality and sporulation in Clostridium difficile. mBio 2015; 6:e02383-14 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Papo N, Shai Y. A molecular mechanism for lipopolysaccharide protection of gram-negative bacteria from antimicrobial peptides. J Biol Chem 2005; 280:10378–10387 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Wu T, Malinverni J, Ruiz N, Kim S, Silhavy TJ et al. Identification of a multicomponent complex required for outer membrane biogenesis in Escherichia coli. Cell 2005; 121:235–245 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Davies J, Davies D. Origins and evolution of antibiotic resistance. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2010; 74:417–433 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Hirai T, Osamura T, Ishii M, Arai H. Expression of multiple cbb3 cytochrome c oxidase isoforms by combinations of multiple isosubunits in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2016; 113:12815–12819 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Comolli JC, Donohue TJ. Pseudomonas aeruginosa RoxR, a response regulator related to Rhodobacter sphaeroides PrrA, activates expression of the cyanide-insensitive terminal oxidase. Mol Microbiol 2002; 45:755–768 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Chaudhuri RR, Morgan E, Peters SE, Pleasance SJ, Hudson DL et al. Comprehensive assignment of roles for Salmonella Typhimurium genes in intestinal colonization of food-producing animals. PLoS Genet 2013; 9:e1003456 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Lies M, Visser BJ, Joshi MC, Magnan D, Bates D. MioC and GidA proteins promote cell division in E. coli. Front Microbiol 2015; 6:516 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Parkins MD, Ceri H, Storey DG. Pseudomonas aeruginosa GacA, a factor in multihost virulence, is also essential for biofilm formation. Mol Microbiol 2001; 40:1215–1226 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Cha JY, Lee DG, Lee JS, Oh J-I, Baik HS. GacA directly regulates expression of several virulence genes in Pseudomonas syringae pv. tabaci 11528. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2012; 417:665–672 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Blumer C, Heeb S, Pessi G, Haas D. Global GacA-steered control of cyanide and exoprotease production in Pseudomonas fluorescens involves specific ribosome binding sites. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1999; 96:14073–14078 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Heeb S, Haas D. Regulatory roles of the GacS/GacA two-component system in plant-associated and other gram-negative bacteria. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 2001; 14:1351–1363 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Latour X. The evanescent GacS signal. Microorganisms 2020; 8:1746 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Duffy BK, Défago G. Controlling instability in gacS-gacA regulatory genes during inoculant production of Pseudomonas fluorescens biocontrol strains. Appl Environ Microbiol 2000; 66:3142–3150 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Bull CT, Duffy B, Voisard C, Défago G, Keel C et al. Characterization of spontaneous gacS and gacA regulatory mutants of Pseudomonas fluorescens biocontrol strain CHA0. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2001; 79:327–336 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  47. van den Broek D, Bloemberg GV, Lugtenberg B. The role of phenotypic variation in rhizosphere Pseudomonas bacteria. Environ Microbiol 2005; 7:1686–1697 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Lalaouna D, Fochesato S, Sanchez L, Schmitt-Kopplin P, Haas D et al. Phenotypic switching in Pseudomonas brassicacearum involves GacS- and GacA-dependent Rsm small RNAs. Appl Environ Microbiol 2012; 78:1658–1665 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Jousset A, Rochat L, Péchy-Tarr M, Keel C, Scheu S et al. Predators promote defence of rhizosphere bacterial populations by selective feeding on non-toxic cheaters. ISME J 2009; 3:666–674 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Driscoll WW, Pepper JW, Pierson LS, Pierson EA. Spontaneous Gac mutants of Pseudomonas biological control strains: cheaters or mutualists?. Appl Environ Microbiol 2011; 77:7227–7235 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Song C, Kidarsa TA, van de Mortel JE, Loper JE, Raaijmakers JM. Living on the edge: emergence of spontaneous gac mutations in Pseudomonas protegens during swarming motility. Environ Microbiol 2016; 18:3453–3465 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Li W, Lu C-D. Regulation of carbon and nitrogen utilization by CbrAB and NtrBC two-component systems in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Bacteriol 2007; 189:5413–5420 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Mavrodi OV, Mavrodi DV, Weller DM, Thomashow LS. Role of ptsP, orfT, and sss recombinase genes in root colonization by Pseudomonas fluorescens Q8r1-96. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006; 72:7111–7122 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Klausen M, Heydorn A, Ragas P, Lambertsen L, Aaes‐Jørgensen A et al. Biofilm formation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa wild type, flagella and type IV pili mutants. Mol Microbiol 2003; 48:1511–1524 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  55. De Boer PA, Crossley RE, Rothfield LI. A division inhibitor and a topological specificity factor coded for by the minicell locus determine proper placement of the division septum in E. coli. Cell 1989; 56:641–649 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Buddelmeijer N, Judson N, Boyd D, Mekalanos JJ, Beckwith J. YgbQ, a cell division protein in Escherichia coli and Vibrio cholerae, localizes in codependent fashion with FtsL to the division site. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002; 99:6316–6321 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Naidu V, Shah B, Kamath KS, Chien A, Nagy S et al. Identification of a novel ciprofloxacin tolerance gene, aciT, which contributes to filamentation in Acinetobacter baumannii. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2021; 65:e01400-20 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Ansari S, Walsh JC, Bottomley AL, Duggin IG, Burke C et al. A newly identified prophage-encoded gene, ymfm, causes SOS-inducible filamentation in Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol 2021; 203:e00646-20
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.000671
Loading
Delving into defence: identifying the Pseudomonas protegens Pf-5 gene suite involved in defence against secreted products of fungal, oomycete and bacterial rhizosphere competitors
M Gen 7, 000671 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1099/mgen.0.000671
/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.000671
/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.000671
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Supplementary material 2

EXCEL

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error