Analysis of CRISPR-Cas Loci and their Targets in Levilactobacillus brevis.
CRISPR-Cas loci
In silico analysis
Levilactobacillus brevis
Journal
Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences
ISSN: 1867-1462
Titre abrégé: Interdiscip Sci
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101515919
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
06
10
2022
accepted:
15
02
2023
revised:
15
02
2023
medline:
28
7
2023
pubmed:
1
3
2023
entrez:
28
2
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The CRISPR‒Cas system acts as a bacterial defense mechanism by conferring adaptive immunity and limiting genetic reshuffling. However, under adverse environmental hazards, bacteria can employ their CRISPR‒Cas system to exchange genes that are vital for adaptation and survival. Levilactobacillus brevis is a lactic acid bacterium with great potential for commercial purposes because it can be genetically manipulated to enhance its functionality and nutritional value. Nevertheless, the CRISPR‒Cas system might interfere with the genetic modification process. Additionally, little is known about the CRISPR‒Cas system in this industrially important microorganism. Here, we investigate the prevalence, diversity, and targets of CRISPR‒Cas systems in the genus Levilactobacillus, further focusing on complete genomes of L. brevis. Using the CRISPRCasFinder webserver, we identified 801 putative CRISPR-Cas systems in the genus Levilactobacillus. Further investigation focusing on the complete genomes of L. brevis revealed 54 putative CRISPR-Cas systems. Of these, 46 were orphan CRISPRs, and eight were CRISPR‒Cas systems. The type II-A CRISPR‒Cas system is the most common in Levilactobacillus and L. brevis complete genomes. Analysis of the spacer's target showed that the CRISPR‒Cas systems of L. brevis mainly target the enterococcal plasmids. Comparative analysis of putative CRISPR-Cas loci in Levilactobacillus brevis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36849628
doi: 10.1007/s12539-023-00555-1
pii: 10.1007/s12539-023-00555-1
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
349-359Subventions
Organisme : the Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality
ID : 19430750600
Organisme : the Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality
ID : 19JC1413000
Informations de copyright
© 2023. International Association of Scientists in the Interdisciplinary Areas.
Références
Terns MP, Terns RM (2011) CRISPR-based adaptive immune systems. Curr Opin Microbiol 14:321–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mib.2011.03.005
doi: 10.1016/j.mib.2011.03.005
pubmed: 21531607
pmcid: 3119747
Deveau H, Garneau JE, Moineau S (2010) CRISPR/Cas system and its role in phage-bacteria interactions. Annu Rev Microbiol 64:475–493. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.micro.112408.134123
doi: 10.1146/annurev.micro.112408.134123
pubmed: 20528693
van der Oost J, Westra ER, Jackson RN, Wiedenheft B (2014) Unravelling the structural and mechanistic basis of CRISPR–Cas systems. Nat Rev Microbiol 12:479–492. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro3279
doi: 10.1038/nrmicro3279
pubmed: 24909109
pmcid: 4225775
Mojica FJM, Díez-Villaseño C, García-Martínez J, Soria E (2005) Intervening sequences of regularly spaced prokaryotic repeats derive from foreign genetic elements. J Mol Evol 60:174–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00239-004-0046-3
doi: 10.1007/s00239-004-0046-3
pubmed: 15791728
Pourcel C, Salvignol G, Vergnaud G (2005) CRISPR elements in Yersinia pestis acquire new repeats by preferential uptake of bacteriophage DNA, and provide additional tools for evolutionary studies. Microbiology (N Y) 151:653–663. https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.27437-0
doi: 10.1099/mic.0.27437-0
León LM, Park AE, Borges AL et al (2021) Mobile element warfare via CRISPR and anti-CRISPR in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Nucleic Acids Res 49:2114–2125. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkab006
doi: 10.1093/nar/gkab006
pubmed: 33544853
pmcid: 7913775
Wheatley RM, MacLean RC (2021) CRISPR-Cas systems restrict horizontal gene transfer in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. ISME J 15:1420–1433. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-020-00860-3
doi: 10.1038/s41396-020-00860-3
pubmed: 33349652
O’Driscoll J, Glynn F, Fitzgerald GF, van Sinderen D (2006) Sequence analysis of the lactococcal plasmid pNP40: a mobile replicon for coping with environmental hazards. J Bacteriol 188:6629–6639. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.00672-06
doi: 10.1128/JB.00672-06
pubmed: 16952955
pmcid: 1595478
O’Driscoll J, Glynn F, Cahalane O et al (2004) Lactococcal plasmid pNP40 encodes a novel, temperature-sensitive restriction-modification system. Appl Environ Microbiol 70:5546–5556. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.70.9.5546-5556.2004
doi: 10.1128/AEM.70.9.5546-5556.2004
pubmed: 15345443
pmcid: 520859
Rollie C, Chevallereau A, Watson BNJ et al (2020) Targeting of temperate phages drives loss of type I CRISPR–Cas systems. Nature 578:149–153. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-1936-2
doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-1936-2
pubmed: 31969710
pmcid: 7007301
Jiang W, Maniv I, Arain F et al (2013) Dealing with the Evolutionary Downside of CRISPR Immunity: Bacteria and Beneficial Plasmids. PLoS Genet 9:e1003844. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003844
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003844
pubmed: 24086164
pmcid: 3784566
Bikard D, Hatoum-Aslan A, Mucida D, Marraffini LA (2012) CRISPR interference can prevent natural transformation and virulence acquisition during in vivo bacterial infection. Cell Host Microbe 12:177–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.003
doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.003
pubmed: 22901538
Zaayman M, Wheatley RM (2022) Fitness costs of CRISPR-Cas systems in bacteria. Microbiology (Reading). https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.001209
doi: 10.1099/mic.0.001209
pubmed: 35849532
Kandler O (1983) Carbohydrate metabolism in lactic acid bacteria. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 49:209–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00399499
doi: 10.1007/BF00399499
pubmed: 6354079
Salvetti E, Torriani S, Felis GE (2012) The genus Lactobacillus: a taxonomic update. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 4:217–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-012-9117-8
doi: 10.1007/s12602-012-9117-8
pubmed: 26782181
Ricci A, Allende A, Bolton D et al (2017) Scientific Opinion on the update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA†. EFSA J. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4664
doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4664
pubmed: 32625393
pmcid: 7009892
Bampidis V, Azimonti G, de Bastos ML et al (2021) Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Levilactobacillus brevis (formerly Lactobacillus brevis ) DSM 12835 EU for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co KG). EFSA J. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6900
doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6900
pubmed: 34976164
pmcid: 8681880
Silva MS, Ramos CL, González-Avila M et al (2017) Probiotic properties of Weissella cibaria and Leuconostoc citreum isolated from tejuino—A typical Mexican beverage. LWT 86:227–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2017.08.009
doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2017.08.009
Lee N-K, Kim W-S, Paik H-D (2019) Bacillus strains as human probiotics: characterization, safety, microbiome, and probiotic carrier. Food Sci Biotechnol 28:1297–1305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-019-00691-9
doi: 10.1007/s10068-019-00691-9
pubmed: 31695928
pmcid: 6811671
Lee N-K, Han KJ, Son S-H et al (2015) Multifunctional effect of probiotic Lactococcus lactis KC24 isolated from kimchi. LWT Food Sci Technol 64:1036–1041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2015.07.019
doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2015.07.019
Yang L, Li W, Ujiroghene OJ et al (2020) Occurrence and Diversity of CRISPR Loci in Lactobacillus casei Group. Front Microbiol 11:624. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.00624
doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.00624
pubmed: 32322250
pmcid: 7156538
Schuster JA, Vogel RF, Ehrmann MA (2019) Characterization and distribution of CRISPR-Cas systems in Lactobacillus sakei. Arch Microbiol 201:337–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-019-01619-x
doi: 10.1007/s00203-019-01619-x
pubmed: 30635671
Crawley AB, Henriksen ED, Stout E et al (2018) Characterizing the activity of abundant, diverse and active CRISPR-Cas systems in lactobacilli. Sci Rep 8:11544. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-29746-3
doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-29746-3
pubmed: 30068963
pmcid: 6070500
Pei Z, Sadiq FA, Han X et al (2021) Comprehensive scanning of prophages in Lactobacillus : distribution, diversity, antibiotic resistance genes, and linkages with CRISPR-Cas systems. mSystems. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSystems.01211-20
doi: 10.1128/mSystems.01211-20
pubmed: 34060909
pmcid: 8269257
Seemann T (2013) barrnap 0.9 : rapid ribosomal RNA prediction. In: https://github.com/tseemann/barrnap
Sievers F, Higgins DG (2018) Clustal Omega for making accurate alignments of many protein sequences. Protein Sci 27:135–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.3290
doi: 10.1002/pro.3290
pubmed: 28884485
Minh BQ, Schmidt HA, Chernomor O et al (2020) IQ-TREE 2: new models and efficient methods for phylogenetic inference in the genomic era. Mol Biol Evol 37:1530–1534. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa015
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msaa015
pubmed: 32011700
pmcid: 7182206
Letunic I, Bork P (2021) Interactive Tree of Life (iTOL) v5: an online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation. Nucl Acids Res 49:W293–W296. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkab301
doi: 10.1093/nar/gkab301
pubmed: 33885785
pmcid: 8265157
Zhang Y, Zhao G, Ahmed FYH et al (2020) In silico method in CRISPR/Cas system: an expedite and powerful booster. Front Oncol 10:584404. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.584404
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.584404
pubmed: 33123486
pmcid: 7567020
Pourcel C, Touchon M, Villeriot N et al (2019) CRISPRCasdb a successor of CRISPRdb containing CRISPR arrays and cas genes from complete genome sequences, and tools to download and query lists of repeats and spacers. Nucl Acids Res. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkz915
doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz915
pmcid: 7145573
Couvin D, Bernheim A, Toffano-Nioche C et al (2018) CRISPRCasFinder, an update of CRISRFinder, includes a portable version, enhanced performance and integrates search for Cas proteins. Nucl Acids Res 46:W246–W251. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky425
doi: 10.1093/nar/gky425
pubmed: 29790974
pmcid: 6030898
Sullivan MJ, Petty NK, Beatson SA (2011) Easyfig: a genome comparison visualizer. Bioinformatics 27:1009–1010. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr039
doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr039
pubmed: 21278367
pmcid: 3065679
Biswas A, Gagnon JN, Brouns SJJ et al (2013) CRISPRTarget: bioinformatic prediction and analysis of crRNA targets. RNA Biol 10:817–827. https://doi.org/10.4161/rna.24046
doi: 10.4161/rna.24046
pubmed: 23492433
pmcid: 3737339
Alkhnbashi OS, Meier T, Mitrofanov A et al (2020) CRISPR-Cas bioinformatics. Methods 172:3–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2019.07.013
doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2019.07.013
pubmed: 31326596
Heigwer F, Kerr G, Boutros M (2014) E-CRISP: fast CRISPR target site identification. Nat Methods 11:122–123. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2812
doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2812
pubmed: 24481216
Wang M, Goh Y-X, Tai C et al (2022) VRprofile2: detection of antibiotic resistance-associated mobilome in bacterial pathogens. Nucl Acids Res. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkac321
doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac321
pubmed: 36533443
pmcid: 9881174
Li X, Xie Y, Liu M et al (2018) oriTfinder: a web-based tool for the identification of origin of transfers in DNA sequences of bacterial mobile genetic elements. Nucl Acids Res 46:W229–W234. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky352
doi: 10.1093/nar/gky352
pubmed: 29733379
pmcid: 6030822
Kahraman Ilıkkan Ö (2022) Analysis of probiotic bacteria genomes: comparison of CRISPR/Cas systems and spacer acquisition diversity. Indian J Microbiol 62:40–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12088-021-00971-1
doi: 10.1007/s12088-021-00971-1
pubmed: 35068602
Panahi B, Majidi M, Hejazi MA (2022) Genome mining approach reveals the occurrence and diversity pattern of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats/CRISPR-associated systems in Lactobacillus brevis Strains. Front Microbiol 13:911706. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.911706
doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.911706
pubmed: 35722276
pmcid: 9204096
Wittouck S, Wuyts S, Meehan CJ et al (2019) A genome-based species taxonomy of the Lactobacillus Genus Complex. mSystems. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSystems.00264-19
doi: 10.1128/mSystems.00264-19
pubmed: 31481601
pmcid: 6722421
Hanchi H, Mottawea W, Sebei K, Hammami R (2018) The genus Enterococcus: between probiotic potential and safety concerns-an update. Front Microbiol 9:1791. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.01791
doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01791
pubmed: 30123208
pmcid: 6085487
Franz CMAP, Huch M, Abriouel H et al (2011) Enterococci as probiotics and their implications in food safety. Int J Food Microbiol 151:125–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.08.014
doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.08.014
pubmed: 21962867
Mahillon J, Chandler M (1998) Insertion Sequences. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 62:725–774. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.62.3.725-774.1998
doi: 10.1128/MMBR.62.3.725-774.1998
pubmed: 9729608
pmcid: 98933
Harmer CJ, Hall RM (2019) An analysis of the IS6/IS26 family of insertion sequences is it a single family? Microb Genom. https://doi.org/10.1099/mgen.0.000291
doi: 10.1099/mgen.0.000291
pubmed: 31486766
pmcid: 6807381
Hasman H, Aarestrup FM, Dalsgaard A, Guardabassi L (2006) Heterologous expression of glycopeptide resistance vanHAX gene clusters from soil bacteria in Enterococcus faecalis. J Antimicrob Chemother 57:648–653. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkl033
doi: 10.1093/jac/dkl033
pubmed: 16476725
Chow JW, Kak V, You I et al (2001) Aminoglycoside resistance genes aph(2")-Ib and aac(6′)-Im detected together in strains of both Escherichia coli and Enterococcus faecium. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 45:2691–2694. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.45.10.2691-2694.2001
doi: 10.1128/AAC.45.10.2691-2694.2001
pubmed: 11557456
pmcid: 90718
Lin YT, Tseng SP, Hung WW et al (2020) A possible role of insertion sequence IS1216V in dissemination of multidrug-resistant elements MESPM1 and MES6272–2 between Enterococcus and ST59 Staphylococcus aureus. Microorganisms. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8121905
doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8121905
pubmed: 33419265
pmcid: 7824166
Tsai J-C, Hsueh P-R, Chen H-J et al (2005) The erm(T) gene is flanked by IS1216V in inducible erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus gallolyticus subsp. pasteurianus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 49:4347–4350. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.49.10.4347-4350.2005
doi: 10.1128/AAC.49.10.4347-4350.2005
pubmed: 16189118
pmcid: 1251499
Preethi C, Thumu SCR, Halami PM (2017) Occurrence and distribution of multiple antibiotic-resistant Enterococcus and Lactobacillus spp. from Indian poultry: in vivo transferability of their erythromycin, tetracycline and vancomycin resistance. Ann Microbiol 67:395–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13213-017-1270-6
doi: 10.1007/s13213-017-1270-6
Mater DDG, Langella P, Corthier G, Flores M-J (2008) A Probiotic Lactobacillus Strain can acquire vancomycin resistance during digestive transit in mice. Microb Physiol 14:123–127. https://doi.org/10.1159/000106091
doi: 10.1159/000106091
Shah SA, Erdmann S, Mojica FJM, Garrett RA (2013) Protospacer recognition motifs: mixed identities and functional diversity. RNA Biol 10:891–899. https://doi.org/10.4161/rna.23764
doi: 10.4161/rna.23764
pubmed: 23403393
pmcid: 3737346
Sternberg SH, Redding S, Jinek M et al (2014) DNA interrogation by the CRISPR RNA-guided endonuclease Cas9. Nature 507:62–67. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13011
doi: 10.1038/nature13011
pubmed: 24476820
pmcid: 4106473
Rybnicky GA, Fackler NA, Karim AS et al (2022) Spacer2PAM: A computational framework to guide experimental determination of functional CRISPR-Cas system PAM sequences. Nucl Acids Res 50:3523–3534. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkac142
doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac142
pubmed: 35258601
pmcid: 8990532
Yi H, Huang L, Yang B et al (2020) AcrFinder: genome mining anti-CRISPR operons in prokaryotes and their viruses. Nucl Acids Res 48:W358–W365. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkaa351
doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaa351
pubmed: 32402073
pmcid: 7319584