Next Article in Journal
Effects of Halophyte Root Exudates and Their Components on Chemotaxis, Biofilm Formation and Colonization of the Halophilic Bacterium Halomonas Anticariensis FP35T
Next Article in Special Issue
Genetic Markers in S. Paratyphi C Reveal Primary Adaptation to Pigs
Previous Article in Journal
The Controversial Role of Human Gut Lachnospiraceae
Previous Article in Special Issue
Spheres of Influence: Insights into Salmonella Pathogenesis from Intestinal Organoids
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Microorganisms
Volume 8
Issue 4
10.3390/microorganisms8040576
microorganisms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Salmonella Pathogenicity Island 1 (SPI-1): The Evolution and Stabilization of a Core Genomic Type Three Secretion System

by
Nicole A. Lerminiaux
1,2,
Keith D. MacKenzie
1,2 and
Andrew D. S. Cameron
1,2,*
1
Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Regina, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Canada
2
Institute for Microbial Systems and Society, Faculty of Science, University of Regina, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Microorganisms 2020, 8(4), 576; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8040576
Submission received: 5 March 2020 / Revised: 10 April 2020 / Accepted: 10 April 2020 / Published: 16 April 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Salmonella: Pathogenesis and Host Restriction)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Salmonella Pathogenicity Island 1 (SPI-1) encodes a type three secretion system (T3SS), effector proteins, and associated transcription factors that together enable invasion of epithelial cells in animal intestines. The horizontal acquisition of SPI-1 by the common ancestor of all Salmonella is considered a prime example of how gene islands potentiate the emergence of new pathogens with expanded niche ranges. However, the evolutionary history of SPI-1 has attracted little attention. Here, we apply phylogenetic comparisons across the family Enterobacteriaceae to examine the history of SPI-1, improving the resolution of its boundaries and unique architecture by identifying its composite gene modules. SPI-1 is located between the core genes fhlA and mutS, a hotspot for the gain and loss of horizontally acquired genes. Despite the plasticity of this locus, SPI-1 demonstrates stable residency of many tens of millions of years in a host genome, unlike short-lived homologous T3SS and effector islands including Escherichia ETT2, Yersinia YSA, Pantoea PSI-2, Sodalis SSR2, and Chromobacterium CPI-1. SPI-1 employs a unique series of regulatory switches, starting with the dedicated transcription factors HilC and HilD, and flowing through the central SPI-1 regulator HilA. HilA is shared with other T3SS, but HilC and HilD may have their evolutionary origins in Salmonella. The hilA, hilC, and hilD gene promoters are the most AT-rich DNA in SPI-1, placing them under tight control by the transcriptional repressor H-NS. In all Salmonella lineages, these three promoters resist amelioration towards the genomic average, ensuring strong repression by H-NS. Hence, early development of a robust and well-integrated regulatory network may explain the evolutionary stability of SPI-1 compared to T3SS gene islands in other species.

1. Introduction

Bacterial genomes are highly dynamic, able to gain and lose genes over short evolutionary times. Comparative genomics enables the differentiation of genes that are shared by all members of a species (core genes) from the genes with variable distributions across a species (accessory genes). Escherichia coli is a prime example of genomic variability. Although gene content ranges from 3744 to 6844 open reading frames in individual E. coli isolates, only 1000 genes are shared by the over 21,000 whole genome sequences that represent this species and are currently available in GenBank [1]. As accessory genes constitute the bulk of an average bacterial genome, understanding their evolutionary histories and genetic dynamics is central to understanding bacterial functions, and capabilities.
Accessory genes often become physically linked on contiguous segments of DNA, and these islands can range from two to dozens of genes. Horizontal gene transfer (HGT) is a driver of this coalescence because a physical connection between functionally linked genes increases the frequency of successful transfer [2,3,4]. HGT disconnects the phylogenetic history of a genomic island from that of its host genome [5], which can be reflected in islands having nucleotide and codon frequencies that differ from a genomic average [6,7,8]. Further signatures of HGT are that islands often insert adjacent to genetic elements that facilitate recombination, such as tRNA genes and mobile genetic elements [8,9,10,11].
Acquisition of genomic islands can provide new ecological functions and facilitate the invasion of new niches, enabling evolutionary leaps and even speciation [12]. Examples of biological functions that mobilize as genomic islands include sugar catabolism [13], plant symbioses [14], antibiotic resistance [15], virulence factors [6], and other pathogenicity determinants [8]. The contributions of “pathogenicity islands” to bacterial evolution and niche adaptation is best understood in the model pathogen Salmonella. A total of 24 pathogenicity islands have been identified in this genus, though not all of these islands have been experimentally validated to contribute to virulence phenotypes [16,17,18]. The largest is Salmonella Pathogenicity Island 1 (SPI-1) [19], which encodes a type three secretion system (T3SS) and type three secretion effectors (T3SEs) that mediate intracellular invasion of intestinal cells in animal hosts [20,21,22,23].
Acquisition of SPI-1 is a defining event in the evolution of Salmonella, occurring after divergence from the common ancestor with Escherichia over 100 million years ago [24,25,26]. The boundaries of SPI-1 were initially determined through DNA hybridization, then later through alignment with E. coli DNA sequence [21,22,23] (Figure 1A). Homologous T3SS and T3SE genes have been acquired by lineages of E. coli, but these are rare and a prominent example in E. coli O157:H7 is losing functionality [27]. Broader phylogenetic comparisons have identified homologous T3SS in facultative human pathogens such as Yersinia, Chromobacterium, and Shigella, and plant pathogens such as Pantoea (Table 1) [28,29,30,31,32,33,34]. These T3SSs are found only in select members of each genus. For example, PSI-2 appears to be undergoing frequent HGT and loss in the genus Pantoea [32]. Similarly, Yersinia YSA is present in Yersinia enterocolitica but is absent from Yersinia pestis [35]. The Mxi-Spa T3SS has entered the Shigella clade multiple times on several types of pINV plasmids [36,37,38].
Despite its prominence as the archetypal pathogenicity island and intensive research attention for several decades, little is known about why SPI-1 is uniquely stable among T3SS genomic islands in Enterobacteriaceae. Previous studies of T3SS genetic architecture have included cursory analyses of the evolutionary transitions that differentiate T3SS-containing gene islands in bacteria [27,28,31,32,39,40,41,42]. Pathogenicity islands can have mosaic structures arising from the merger of smaller islands that were acquired at different points in evolutionary history [8]. While several studies have suggested that SPI-1 has a mosaic structure [43,44], an in-depth evolutionary analysis of the island’s history has not yet been conducted.
The most robust approach to find genomic islands and their boundaries is through comparative genomics. xenoGI is a recently released comparative genomics program that identifies genomic islands that are shared by a clade of bacteria as well as islands that are unique to certain strains by grouping genes by origin on a phylogenetic tree [45]. Using this locus-based approach, the objectives of our study were to: (1) identify the genomic islands of SPI-1, (2) examine the evolutionary history of the SPI-1 locus, and (3) evaluate the evolutionary history of SPI-1-encoded transcriptional regulators hilA, hilC, and hilD. Tracking how genomic islands originate, spread, and decay is key to determining how islands enable genomic diversification and adaptation. Connecting the evolutionary history of an infection-relevant pathogenicity island, SPI-1, to extensive experimental characterization of its molecular components helps develop and improve our understanding of pathogen emergence.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Bacterial Strains

Table 2 has a complete list of 29 bacterial strains and accession numbers included in xenoGI analysis. These strains were chosen to capture phylogenetic and GC content diversity. Unless otherwise specified, all gene and ortholog names will be as annotated as in Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium LT2 to avoid confusion over different annotations for the same genes. All genome sequence files and corresponding annotations were downloaded from NCBI Genbank. Several other strains that were used for genomic comparison but not included in xenoGI analysis are S. Senftenberg strain N17-509 (accession: CP026379.1), E. coli ISCII (accession: CBWP010000030.1), and E. coli O104:H11 strain RM14721 plasmid RM14721 (accession: NZ_CP027106.1). Strains with genomes at the NCBI assembly level of “complete” (gapless chromosome) were selected over draft genomes due to the higher quality and ability to distinguish independent units such as plasmids.

2.2. Whole-Genome Phylogenetic Tree Building for xenoGI Input

The phylogenetic tree was built using PATRIC 3.4.2 [49], which constructs trees based on coding sequence similarity. All bacteria strains listed in Table 1 were the focal group, except for Pseudomonas aeruginosa which was used as the outgroup (Supplementary Figure S1).

2.3. xenoGI Parameters

Analysis was run using default parameters in xenoGI v2.2.0 [45] with the following exceptions: rootFocalClade was set to i26 (Figure S1) and evalueThresh was set to 1e-8. Computing time took approximately 3 h with 29 strains. Bed files were generated from xenoGI scripts and were used to visualize islands in Integrated Genome Browser version 9.1.0 [50] and Easyfig version 2.2.3 [51]. Analysis of islands was done with the interactiveAnalysis.py script. Annotations used to determine gene function were obtained from the Genbank flat files (.gbff) and SalCom (Table 1) [46,47,52]. Raw analysis output from xenoGI is found in Supplementary Table S1.

2.4. AT Content Analysis

AT content was calculated from the Genbank flat files (.gbff) for select strains in Table 1 using Geneious R11 (https://www.geneious.com) [53] and plotted as a heatmap. The average GC content for each nucleotide position was determined using a 100 base sliding window.

2.5. Hil Phylogenies

We used blastx 2.10.0+ [54] to search for hil gene homologs in other bacteria excluding the Salmonella clade (taxid:590) and filtering for hits that covered > 80% of the query sequence. Salmonella enterica serotype Typhimurium LT2 HilA (AAL21756.1), HilC (NP_461788.1), and HilD (NP_461796.1) were used as the query sequences. Because S. enterica Typhimurium LT2 HilC and HilD have high sequence similarity (36.4 % identity over 88 % query coverage, e-value < 3e-51, bit score = 168), we chose a 80% query cut-off filter when searching for HilC and HilD homologs to capture both regulators of interest and sufficient diversity. In other words, when searching in the Salmonella clade using HilC as a query with these settings, HilD would return as a hit and vice versa. The accession numbers included in the phylogenetic analysis for HilA are listed in Supplementary Table S2 and accession numbers for HilC/D are listed in Supplementary Table S3. Salmonella bongori NCTC 12419 HilA (CCC31553.1), HilC (WP_000243993.1) and HilD (WP_000432692.1) and Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi CT18 HilA (CAD05983.1) were included as representatives in the phylogenetic trees. Multiple protein alignments were done using MUSCLE [55] in MEGA 7 [56]. Maximum likelihood trees were constructed using the LG+G amino acid substitution model for HilA in Figure 6, the LG+G+I amino acid substitution model for HilA in Supplementary Figure S2 and the JTT+G amino acid substitution model for HilC/D in MEGA X [57]. The maximum-likelihood phylogenies were supported with 1000 bootstrap replicates. Tree visualization was done with iTOL [58].

3. Results

3.1. SPI-1 is a Mosaic of Gene Islands

We conducted a fine scale analysis of gene content and architecture at the fhlA/-/mutS locus using xenoGI, a program based explicitly on phylogenetic comparisons to identify islands. Briefly, xenoGI sorts genes into families, then sorts families into islands based on synteny or location within a genome, while also accounting for amino acid similarity. Many genomic island-finding programs exist [reviewed in [62,63]], but unlike other methodologies, xenoGI requires a phylogenetic tree for input. The phylogeny is used to determine which islands are shared by a clade and to identify at which branch they were acquired [45].
The core chromosomal genes that have been previously defined as the boundaries of the SPI-1 locus are fhlA, encoding the formate hydrogenlyase transcriptional activator, and mutS, encoding a DNA mismatch repair protein, as noted previously from direct comparison of E. coli K-12 to S. Typhimurium [23,64] (Figure 1A). Comparing this locus in Salmonella to homologs in closely related genera Citrobacter, Escherichia, Shigella, Enterobacter and Klebsiella confirmed that fhlA and mutS define the boundaries of a plastic locus across these Enterobacteriaceae. In the reference Salmonella Typhimurium genome, xenoGI divided SPI-1 into three gene islands, which are coloured in Figure 1B: sitABCD (orange), avrA-invH (green), and pigA-STM2908 (purple & blue). The distinct nature of these three islands is reflected in their independent transcriptional output in infection-relevant conditions [46,48] (Figure 1C). Each of these islands is examined separately below.

3.2. A Cohesive SPI-1 Gene Set is Highly Conserved in Salmonella

To evaluate SPI-1 conservation across the genus Salmonella, we selected representative strains from both species (S. enterica and S. bongori), three S. enterica subspecies (arizonae, diarizonae, and enterica), and four serotypes of model pathogens (Typhimurium, Typhi, Paratyphi, and Enteritidis). This selection includes the deepest branches within the genus [65] and a range of genome sizes (4.46-5.26 Mbp). Figure 1B shows that the avrA-invH island (green), which encodes the T3SS and associated effectors (T3SE), is conserved across all eight Salmonella genomes but is absent from this locus in other Enterobacteriaceae.
A single gene in the avrA-invH island is not conserved across the eight representative Salmonella genomes. The effector gene avrA is absent in S. enterica Typhi, S. enterica Paratyphi and S. enterica arizonae (Figure 1B). The frequent loss of avrA in independent lineages of Salmonella is illustrated more comprehensively in the analysis 445 Salmonella strains by Worley and colleagues [66]. We note that avrA expression is unchanged during macrophage infection (Figure 1C), suggesting its dispensability is reflected in low integration into the SPI-1 regulatory network.

3.3. The ygbA and sitABCD Islands Predate Core SPI-1

The sitABCD island identified by xenoGI is conserved across Salmonella, Citrobacter, and Klebsiella (orange genes in Figure 1B). Hypothetical protein ygbA at this locus was classified into two islands: one in Salmonella, Citrobacter, Escherichia and Enterobacter lignolyticus and one in Klebsiella where is has a reverse orientation at the other side of the sitABCD operon (Figure 1B, blue). The simplest interpretation of this phylogeny is that the common ancestor of these Enterobacteriaceae had ygbA and sitABCD at this locus, but the sitABCD operon was subsequently lost from the Escherichia/Shigella clade and some minor reorganization has placed ygbA in two alternate positions either adjacent to sitD or sitA. Furthermore, the ygbA and sitABCD islands predate the insertion of the avrA-invH (T3SS) island in the Salmonella ancestor.
To test whether E. coli strains might encode the sitABCD operon at other genomic locations, we used blastx to search for orthologs in whole genome sequences. Shigella flexneri strain 2a 301 and E. coli IAI39 have ygbA at the fhlA/-/mutS locus and sitABCD at another location in their genome. We also examined a small number of species from sister families in the order Enterobacterales. The sitABCD operon is present in these bacterial families located either at chromosomal locations separate from mutS in Sodalis glossinidius and Sodalis praecaptivus (Pectobacteriaceae) and Yersinia pestis (Yersiniaceae), or on a plasmid in Pantoea ananatis (Erwiniaceae) (Figure 2). These species all lack ygbA homologs.
In E. coli K12, ygbA is the only gene located between the core genes fhlA and mutS (Figure 1A). However, the broader phylogenetic comparison in Figure 2 shows the presence of ygbA and sitABCD at this locus in the deepest-branching E. coli considered here (strain ISC11). This evidence further supports the supposition that many lineages of E. coli have lost sitABCD while in others the operon has relocated.

3.4. The Highly Variable mutS-Proximal Region

The region adjacent to the mutS gene promoter is highly variable in gene content, demonstrating gene gain and loss in all Enterobacteriaceae lineages examined here (Figure 1B). In the reference Salmonella genome, S. enterica Typhimurium, this region encodes several pathogenicity island genes (pig genes) and mobile elements (Figure 3). Several of the pig genes are regulated by SPI-1-encoded HilC, but they do not seem to contribute to Salmonella’s virulence phenotype and their specific functions remain unknown [43]. Reconstructing the temporal events in gene gain and loss in the representative Salmonella suggests an initial gain of pigC, pigD, pphB (purple) and a transposase (pink). This was followed by gain of pigA, pigB and an insertion element (blue) then loss of these elements by S. Enteritidis and S. Paratyphi. The S. Enteritidis and S. Paratyphi lineage acquired four hypothetical proteins (red) (Figure 3). No pig genes are found at the fhlA/-/mutS locus in other Enterobacteriaceae. pphB encodes a serine phosphatase that is ancestral at this locus but is located on the opposing side of mutS in E. coli (Figure 1A).

3.5. Decay and Loss of SPI-1

The core SPI-1 island is exceptional among related T3SS-T3SE systems in its long-term residency and stability in a bacterial clade. Nevertheless, SPI-1 can be lost, as observed in S. enterica serotype Senftenberg [67,68,69,70,71,72]. S. Senftenberg ATCC 43845 was included in the analysis presented in Figure 1B. However, the presence of pseudogenes in the avrA-invH island, including the SPI-1 regulator hilD, indicates genetic decay that is expected to cause loss of invasion functions.
To understand the genetic changes associated with the loss of SPI-1, we aligned S. Senftenberg ATCC 43845 to S. Senftenberg strain N17-509, a strain that has lost SPI-1 [72]. S. Senftenberg N17-509 has lost the entire SPI-1 core region (avrA-invH) but retains homologs to the ygbA, sitABCD and pig genes (Figure 4). Another gene island containing mobile elements, a toxin-antitoxin system, and a restriction endonuclease has inserted between the pig genes and mutS (Figure 4).

3.6. The fhlA/-/mutS Locus is a Hotspot for Island Acquisition

Our analysis shows that SPI-1 inserted at a highly plastic locus that is a hotspot for the acquisition of small and large gene islands. In S. enterica subsp. diarizonae and subsp. arizonae, a second island exists in each strain between invH and mutS (blue and gold, respectively, in Figure 1B). These islands consist largely of hypothetical proteins and encode mobile elements such as integrases (S. enterica subsp. arizonae) and transposases (S. enterica subsp. diarizonae).
Various Escherichia species and strains were included in the xenoGI analysis to capture lineage diversity (Table 2). S. flexneri has two integrases encoded between ygbA and mutS, but no other genes. Several Escherichia strains (E. albertii, E. fergusonii and E. coli IAI39) have a single transcriptional regulator modE located between fhlA and ygbA. E. coli O104:H4 2011C-3493 has a hypothetical protein between ygbA and mutS. E. coli K12 and E. coli O157:H7 are identical at this locus. Of the Escherichia species included in the xenoGI analysis, only Escherichia fergusonii had islands larger than single genes inserted at the fhlA/-/mutS locus; these contain genes for metabolism functions and sugar transport.
Representatives of two Klebsiella species, K. oxytoca and K. pneumoniae, were included in xenoGI analysis. Both strains have multiple gene islands inserted between fhlA and mutS, and two islands are shared by both species (Figure 1B, green and purple). The shared islands encode genes for an iron transport system and homologs of the sugar translocation proteins EIIB and EIIC in the phosphotransferase system, suggesting that these islands enable nutrient acquisition in Klebsiella.

3.7. AT Nucleotide Content and the Evolution of Transcriptional Control

A paradigm in bacterial genomics is that AT-rich DNA is a signature of horizontally acquired genes [73]. SPI-1 has been resident in Salmonella for many tens of million years, yet the island has a high AT content that has resisted amelioration to match the nucleotide composition of the core genome [65]. AT-richness of SPI-1 is maintained by a higher GC-to-AT substitution rate compared to a higher AT-to-GC substitution rate in core genes [65]. Protein-DNA interactions in gene regulatory networks may explain nucleotide frequencies that resist amelioration to genomic averages [65]. In bacteria, several global transcription factors favour the nucleotide composition and physical properties of AT-rich DNA [73,74]. One such protein is the nucleoid-associated protein H-NS, a global repressor of gene expression [75,76]. The strong repression of SPI-1 gene expression by H-NS suggest that SPI-1 resists amelioration to remain within the H-NS regulon.
We compared AT content at SPI-1 in the eight representative Salmonella genomes, which confirmed the expectation that all eight lineages have maintained an amazingly consistent pattern of high AT content (Supplementary Figure S3). This heatmap of nucleotide composition shows the level of conservation and resilience of the high AT content of SPI-1. Moreover, it illustrates how gene islands can be internally consistent in nucleotide composition and can differ dramatically from neighbouring islands, which is especially apparent in the cases of the GC-rich islands in Klebsiella (Supplementary Figure S3).
Two regions in SPI-1 are very AT-rich: the hilD-hilA and hilC loci (Figure 5A). This pattern fits particularly well with the model that AT content is selected to maintain membership in the H-NS regulon. Transcriptional activation of SPI-1 begins with antagonism of H-NS repression by the transcriptional activators HilC and HilD [77,78,79] (Figure 5B). When active in DNA binding, HilC and HilD activate their own promoters to create a feed-forward signal that counteracts H-NS silencing of the hilA promoter [80]. HilA, in turn, activates transcription of the regulator invF and acts directly at the T3SS and T3SE gene promoters.

3.8. Evolution of Transcriptional Control: Acquisition of hilA

HilA, a DNA binding protein in the OmpR/ToxR family of transcription factors, is the master activator of SPI-1 transcription. HilA binds to the invF and prgH promoters, triggering the activation of T3SS and T3SE genes [81,82,83]. A recent survey of T3SS in ~20,000 bacterial genomes classified SPI-1 according to gene conservation and synteny into what the authors termed category II [31]. Category II T3SS are scattered among Gammaproteobacteria and Betaproteobacteria, but hilA is missing from most genomes with a category II T3SS [31], suggesting this regulatory module is a relatively recent addition within this family of homologous T3SSs. We examined the evolutionary connection between hilA, T3SS, and T3SE genes in Proteobacteria (Figure 6, Supplementary Figure S2). The HilA phylogeny does not recapitulate organismal phylogeny, consistent with the role of HGT in distributing T3SS across diverse strains and species. The dynamic architecture of SPI-1 homologs is further illustrated by aligning genes according to the largest conserved island, spaS-invF. This alignment helps illustrate how the T3SS and T3SE components are genetically divisible into distinct islands, orgCBA-prgKJIH, hilA-iagB, iacP-sipADCB-sicA, and spaSRQPO-invJICBAEGF (Figure 6). These constituent islands are illustrated at the bottom of Figure 6, and correspond approximately to the microsynteny blocks described by Hu and colleagues [31]: MSB1+orgC, MSB5+iacP/sipA, and MSB3+MSB4+MSB2 is island spaSRQPO/invJICBAEGF. The shuffled orientation and composition of these blocks means that no two genera possess the same island architecture.
hilA is contiguous with T3SS genes in 26 of 30 representative genomes we examined. In the other four genomes, (three strains of Escherichia and one strain of Chromobacterium vaccinii), hilA is either located alone on the chromosome or is absent from the genome (Figure 6). In E. coli O42 and E. coli O157:H7, an alternate transcription factor, ygeH, occupies the approximate location of hilA, adjacent to the T3SS genes (Figure 6). YgeH has low (29%) similarity to HilA, yet the E. coli O42 YgeH can functionally replace HilA in Salmonella and like HilA, its expression is regulated by H-NS [84,85].
The E. coli O157:H7 ETT2 is undergoing mutational attrition and becoming a cryptic gene island [27,84]. The accumulation of pseudogenes is accompanied by a loss of hilA, and the ygeH ortholog is non-functional as a transcription factor [84]. Sodalis presents another genus where the evolutionary stages in the decline of T3SS can be observed through comparative genomics. Members of this genus encode two T3SS homologs of SPI-1: SSR1 and SSR2. In Sodalis praecaptivus, SSR1 lacks hilA and SSR2 encodes a truncated hilA (Figure 6). In the endosymbiont Sodalis glossinidius, no hilA is present in the genome, and SSR1 and SSR2 are accumulating pseudogenes, consistent with a loss of island function due to the host occupying a highly specialized and obligate niche in tsetse flies.

3.9. Evolution of Transcriptional Control: Addition of the HilC/D Paralogs

Regulation of SPI-1 by the AraC-family proteins HilC and HilD appears to be unique because related T3SS and T3SE islands in Enterobacteriaceae do not include hilC or hilD homologs (Figure 6, Table 1). We reconstructed the evolutionary history of hilC and hilD by searching for all homologs in GenBank that are similar across 80% or more of the length of each query protein. With this search parameter, using HilC as a query recovers HilD, and vice versa, because the two proteins are closely related (36.4 % identity over 88 % query coverage, e-value < 3e-51). hilC and hilD are core elements of SPI-1 (Figure 1B), and so a GenBank search for homologs was conducted after excluding all Salmonella genomes from the search. Seventy-two non-redundant proteins were identified when either HilC or HilD served as a query sequence, whereas each individual query identified four unique proteins. Although HilC and HilD are ubiquitous in Salmonella (except for the case of S. Senftenberg that has lost SPI-1), searching all non-Salmonella genome sequences in GenBank revealed that HilC and HilD homologs are rare and sporadically distributed, occurring in only five genera outside Salmonella (Figure 7, Supplementary Figure S4). Moreover, each genome outside of Salmonella has a single HilC/D homolog, highlighting another unique feature of the SPI-1 regulatory network.
A HilC/D phylogeny has low bootstrap support that prevents ordering the deepest branches (illustrated as a polytomy in Figure 7). Nevertheless, the ubiquity of HilC and HilD in Salmonella compared to the sporadic distribution of homologs is consistent with the two genes arising from gene duplication in Salmonella. The phylogeny is consistent with a series of horizontal gene transfer events that spread HilD to Edwardsiella, Enterobacter, and Escherichia. The largest number of homologs were detected in incomplete Escherichia genomes in GenBank.
In most Escherichia, HilC/D homologs are located adjacent to type IV pilus genes and plasmid-specific genes. For example, the complete genome of E. coli O104:H11 strain RM14721 includes a 106 kb plasmid, and a HilC/D homolog labeled as CofS is found on the plasmid [86] (Figure 7). This protein is part of the cof operon, which encodes a type 4b pilus colonization factor antigen in enterotoxigenic E. coli and is used to attach to host cells [87]. A homolog of HilC/D in Enterobacter lignolyticus was also found located near type IV pilus genes, albeit on a chromosome. A small number of HilC/D homologs were found in Citrobacter, Edwardsiella, and Hafnia (Figure 7). Most of these strains have complete genome sequence available, and the HilC/D homolog appears to be in the same chromosomal location across these genera. Of these genomes, only one C. freundii strain has a T3SS, which is located at a different position in the chromosome from the HilC/D homolog. Based on GenBank annotations, the T3SS genes are converting to pseudogenes as mutations accumulate, suggesting that this is most likely a non-functional gene island.

4. Discussion

In bacteria, the forces of horizontal gene transfer and recombination have significant impacts on genome content and organization, accelerating evolution and community diversity. The consequences are etched across bacterial genomes in the form of vast numbers of accessory genes and gene islands, each with distinct phylogenetic histories. Genomic islands are born from HGT: physical linkage between cooperative genes is beneficial for the simultaneous transfer of the genetic information required to assemble a cellular machine or perform a metabolic process. For example, contiguity increases the odds of successful transfer of large islands, like the genomic island replacement and serogroup conversion that drove the emergence of pathogenic Vibrio cholerae O139 [88].
Specific genomic regions can be hotspots for the gain and loss of islands. The plasticity of a genomic region is often attributed to the presence of DNA sequences that facilitate the integration or excision of mobile genetic elements. Prominent examples include sequences that facilitate intramolecular and intermolecular recombination such as direct repeat sequences, inverted repeat sequences, bacteriophage attachment sites, and the 3′ end of tRNA genes [9,42,89]. SPI-1 is located in a hotspot for island insertion, as revealed in our comparative analysis across multiple genera of Enterobacteriaceae (Figure 1B). However, the genetic features such as tRNA sites, phage integration sites and repeat sequence elements associated with high recombination rates are not apparent at the SPI-1 locus [23].
Even in the absence of recognizable DNA elements that facilitate recombination, mutS and the surrounding region are known to have high rates of horizontal exchange relative to other regions in Salmonella and E. coli genomes [43,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97]. A defective mutS results in higher recombination rates, which can be beneficial in times of stress but can also have long-term negative consequences on the cell [93,94,98]. As a result of higher recombination rates, there is a more frequent changing of mutS alleles, which increases the likelihood that a defective mutS allele will be rescued by a new, functioning allele [90,93]. As the mutS region favours horizontal gene transfer, Salmonella may have concurrently acquired a mutS allele and a T3SS that rose to dominance in the population.
The sporadic distribution of gene islands related to SPI-1 outside the genus Salmonella suggests that many independent gain and loss events have scattered variant SPI-1-like islands across Proteobacteria (Figure 6). In Shigella, Pantoea, and Yersinia, T3SSs are located on plasmids, which helps explain their sporadic distribution [32,35,36,37,38,59,99]. SPI-1 has different GC content, genetic organization and phylogenetic histories than the plasmid-borne islands in Yersinia and Shigella, indicating that these plasmids were not the original source of SPI-1 in Salmonella [64]. Alternatively, it is unlikely that SPI-1 represents a progenitor that has been subdivided after transfer from a Salmonella donor to other Proteobacteria (Figure 6). Salmonella HilA form a distinct, highly-supported clade, providing further evidence that Salmonella is not the ancestral source of HilA and linked T3SS islands in other Proteobacteria.
Even archetypal islands like SPI-1 are themselves mosaics composed of smaller islands. For example, as part of the validation of xenoGI, Bush and colleagues evaluated the SPI-2 locus in Salmonella and found that it is composed of several smaller gene islands. SPI-2 is composed of a T3SS gene island and a tetrathionate reductase operon island [45]. These findings are consistent with a previous analysis of genetic flux in Salmonella that identified the ttr gene island as a more ancient acquisition than the SPI-2 T3SS gene island [100]. Similarly, three phylogenetically distinct T3SS islands –including homologs of SPI-1 and SPI-2– are distributed sporadically across the Pantoea genus, and each island is a composite of reassorting subcomponents [31,32].
During macrophage infection, the distinct transcriptional profiles of gene modules in and around SPI-1 confirms the phylogenetic evidence for the locus being an archipelago of smaller islands with distinct evolutionary histories and regulatory programs (Figure 1C). In the macrophage vacuole, transcription of ygbA and sitABCD is very high, whereas transcription of genes in the avrA-invH island is repressed. In contrast, transcription of genes STM2901-STM2908 is largely unchanged between laboratory and intracellular environments [48] (Figure 1C). Thus, the genes that contribute to shared cellular functions, such as the T3SS or metal ion import, are co-regulated. Additional examples of island-specific transcriptional responses in and around SPI-1 can be visualized in the Salmonella compendium of transcriptomic data [46], further confirming that the boundaries between differentially regulated transcriptional units align well with the xenoGI assignment of gene islands based on evolutionary histories.
Another aspect of the mosaicism within a genomic island is the gain and loss of transcription factors. This is pertinent in the study of SPI-1 because it encodes an unusually high number of transcription factors (five), at least four of which are required to activate transcription of SPI-1 genes. HilA is a central regulator of SPI-1 transcription, but most homologous T3SSs do not have HilA (Table 1) [31]. Some lineages in Figure 6 have lost HilA, but this is always correlated with mutational attrition of the T3SS and T3SE genes, suggesting HilA is dispensable only after its regulatory targets have lost their biological function. Although HilA is a diffusible trans-acting factor, it is almost always contiguous with the T3SS genes it regulates, further highlighting how selection for effective HGT builds and maintains the composition of genomic islands.
Xenogeneic silencing of transcription at genomic islands by H-NS and counter-silencing by transcriptional activators like HilC and HilD has been thoroughly reviewed elsewhere [73,79]. Scientists have observed that winged helix-turn-helix proteins like HilA are effective activators of horizontally-acquired AT-rich DNA because their low specificity for DNA binding sites enables competition and displacement of H-NS across broad regions of gene promoters [101]. Less well understood are the mechanisms and evolutionary steps through which local-acting dedicated transcription factors, like HilA, HilC, and HilD are gained and integrated into a functionally cohesive island. We posit that the unusually long-term stability of SPI-1 is Salmonella arises from the fine-tuning of transcriptional activation only when ecologically appropriate. Further, we suspect that integration is reinforced by coordination of SPI-1 expression with core housekeeping functions by regulators like H-NS, in addition to development of cross-talk between SPI-1 regulators and the transcriptional control of other genomic islands [102]
SPI-1 has many features consistent with the classical model of a genomic island: a history of insertion revealed by comparative genomics plus a high AT content exceeding the genomic average. Yet in other respects, SPI-1 is unusual as a genomic island. For example, unlike its related islands that demonstrate short residency times in bacterial strains, SPI-1 has been resident in its host for many tens of millions of years. The average residency time of a genomic island is difficult to estimate due to the absence of a calibrated evolutionary record in the vast majority of bacteria. In laboratory conditions, pathogenicity islands have natural deletion frequencies ranging from 10−4 to 10−7 [reviewed in [103]], including several pathogenicity islands (PAIs) in uropathogenic E. coli [104] and the High-Pathogenicity Island (HPI) in Yersinia [105]. Residency and lasting integration will depend on organismal biology, stochastic molecular genetic events, and broader ecological pressures acting on the host organism and the host’s ability to use the genetic potential in the island.
The sitABCD genes are traditionally treated as members of the SPI-1 island. Yet they have been previously been suggested to have an alternate history than the other SPI-1 genes based on the similarity of their AT content to the genomic average, which contrasts with the AT-rich SPI-1 [44] (Supplementary Figure S3). Our analysis supports this hypothesis, as the sitABCD genes are found at the same locus in Klebsiella and at other locations in other Enterobacteriaceae (Figure 2). There are conflicting reports on whether sitABCD is essential for SPI-1 virulence, but the majority argue that is it required for infection [44,106,107,108]. Although sitABCD may be useful for iron and/or manganese acquisition during infection, this operon was present at the fhlA/-/mutS locus prior to acquisition of the structural T3SS genes. If sitABCD and SPI-1 do cooperate during infection, their physical proximity on the genome may be purely coincidence.
xenoGI is an easy-to-use program that was able to conduct our multi-genome analysis in under three hours. Basing comparative analysis on a phylogenetic tree makes xenoGI a powerful tool to analyze the history of genomic islands. When released, xenoGI was validated with several examples using similar clades of bacteria to our analysis (Salmonella and Escherichia, with Klebsiella and Serratia used as outgroups) [45]. Our analysis covers a larger phylogenetic breadth than previously tested, and xenoGI resolved sitABCD, fhlA, and mutS gene conservation consistent with the whole genome phylogenies. xenoGI is constrained to the analysis of coding sequences from complete genomes, meaning that it is unable to recognize small RNAs and promoter sequences. There is a small RNA, invR, adjacent to invH that is an important regulator of SPI-1 [109], but it was not considered in this analysis for this reason.
SPI-1 can almost be considered a core gene set in Salmonella, but it fails the bioinformatic definition of a “core” genetic element due to its loss from some members of the genus. Similar to the loss from strains of S. Senftenberg [67,68,69,70,71,72], isolates of S. Litchfield have also lost SPI-1 [68,71]. These strains were isolated from environmental samples, not from animals or human infections [68,71]. These strains remain able to invade animal cells, albeit at a reduced rate [69]. After many millions of years of integration and a near ubiquity in extant members of the diverse Salmonella genus, SPI-1 is expected to perform key ecological functions, including in the less-studied species S. bongori. The natural loss of SPI-1 presents a test case for predicting ecological functions based on gene content [110]. Specifically, a reduced ability to colonize animal hosts may be accompanied by a loss of metabolic pathways for host-derived nutrients. Loss of SPI-1 may not be strongly selected against in some niches, but the lineages lacking SPI-1 may be evolutionary dead ends [111].

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/8/4/576/s1, Figure S1: Cladogram of bacterial strains used as input for xenoGI analysis, Figure S2: AT content values of the fhlA/-/mutS locus overlaid as a heatmap on genomic islands in Enterobacteriaceae, Figure S3: HilA phylogeny alongside genomic context for hilA in various T3SSs, Figure S4: Unrooted HilCD phylogeny of homologs found outside the Salmonella clade, Table S1: Summary of xenoGI island classification for genes at the fhlA/-/mutS locus, Table S2: HilA homolog accession list from representative species, Table S3: HilC/D homolog accession list from best blastx hits.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.A.L. and A.D.S.C.; Formal analysis, N.A.L and A.D.S.C.; Funding acquisition, N.A.L., K.D.M. and A.D.S.C.; Investigation, N.A.L.; Methodology, N.A.L.; Visualization, N.A.L., K.D.M. and A.D.S.C.; Writing—original draft, N.A.L., K.D.M. and A.D.S.C.; Writing—review & editing, N.A.L., K.D.M. and A.D.S.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC); N.A.L. is supported by NSERC Canadian Graduate Scholarship - Doctoral, K.D.M. is supported by an NSERC Postdoctoral Fellowship, and A.D.S.C. is supported by NSERC Discovery grant number 2019-07135.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Charles Dorman and three anonymous reviewers for their comments that helped improve the quality of this manuscript. We thank Eliot Bush, Chris Yost, Illona Monkman, and Emre Islam for helpful discussions.

Conflicts of Interest

The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Gonzalez-Alba, J.; Baquero, F.; Cantón, R.; Galán, J.E. Stratified reconstruction of ancestral Escherichia coli diversification. BMC Genom. 2019, 20, 936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Maddamsetti, R.; Lenski, R.E. Analysis of bacterial genomes from an evolution experiment with horizontal gene transfer shows that recombination can sometimes overwhelm selection. PLoS Genet. 2018, 14, e1007199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Ochman, H.; Lawrence, J.G.; Groisman, E.A. Lateral gene transfer and the nature of bacterial innovation. Nature 2000, 405, 299–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Summers, A.O. Genetic linkage and horizontal gene transfer, the roots of the antibiotic multi-resistance problem. Anim. Biotechnol. 2006, 17, 125–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Hacker, J.; Carniel, E. Ecological fitness, genomic islands and bacterial pathogenicity. EMBO Rep. 2001, 21, 376–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Hacker, J.; Blum-Oehler, G.; Tschäpe, H.; Mühldorfer, I. Pathogenicity islands of virulent bacteria: Structure, function and impact on microbial evolution. Mol. Microbiol. 1996, 23, 1089–1097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Juhas, M.; van der Meer, J.R.; Gaillard, M.; Harding, R.M.; Hood, D.W.; Crook, D.W. Genomic islands: Tools of bacterial horizontal gene transfer and evolution. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2009, 33, 376–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Schmidt, H.; Hensel, M. Pathogenicity islands in bacterial pathogenesis. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2004, 17, 14–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Gal-Mor, O.; Finlay, B.B. Pathogenicity islands: A molecular toolbox for bacterial virulence. Cell. Microbiol. 2006, 8, 1707–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hacker, J.; Kaper, J. Pathogenicity islands and the evolution of microbes. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 2000, 54, 641–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Ou, H.-Y.; Chen, L.-L.; Lonnen, J.; Chaudhuri, R.R.; Thani, A.; Smith, R.; Garton, N.J.; Hinton, J.; Pallen, M.; Barer, M.R.; et al. A novel strategy for the identification of genomic islands by comparative analysis of the contents and contexts of tRNA sites in closely related bacteria. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006, 34, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Groisman, E.A.; Ochman, H. Pathogenicity islands: Bacterial evolution in quantum leaps. Cell 1996, 87, 791–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Hochhut, B.; Jahreis, K.; Lengeler, J.W.; Schmid, K. CTnsct94, a conjugative transposon found in Enterobacteria. J. Bacteriol. 1997, 179, 2097–2102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Sullivan, J.T.; Trzebiatowski, J.R.; Cruickshank, R.W.; Gouzy, J.; Brown, S.D.; Elliot, R.M.; Fleetwood, D.J.; McCallum, N.G.; Rossbach, U.; Stuart, G.S.; et al. Comparative sequence analysis of the symbiosis island of Mesorhizobium loti strain R7A. J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 3086–3095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Novick, R.P.; Schlievert, P.; Ruzin, A. Pathogenicity and resistance islands of staphylococci. Microbes Infect. 2001, 3, 585–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Fookes, M.; Schroeder, G.N.; Langridge, G.C.; Blondel, C.J.; Mammina, C.; Connor, T.R.; Seth-Smith, H.; Vernikos, G.S.; Robinson, K.S.; Sanders, M.; et al. Salmonella bongori provides insights into the evolution of the Salmonellae. PLoS Pathog. 2011, 7, e1002191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Hayward, M.R.; AbuOun, M.; La Ragione, R.M.; Tchórzewska, M.A.; Cooley, W.A.; Everest, D.J.; Petrovska, L.; Jansen, V.; Woodward, M.J. SPI-23 of S. Derby: Role in adherence and invasion of porcine tissues. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e107857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Urrutia, I.M.; Fuentes, J.A.; Valenzuela, L.M.; Ortega, A.P.; Hidalgo, A.A.; Mora, G.C. Salmonella Typhi shdA: Pseudogene or allelic variant? Infect. Genet. Evol. 2014, 26, 146–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wisner, A.; Desin, T.; White, A.; Köster, W. The Salmonella pathogenicity island-1 and -2 encoded type III secretion systems. In Salmonella—A Diversified Superbug; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2012; pp. 469–494. [Google Scholar]
  20. Fàbrega, A.; Vila, J. Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium skills to succeed in the host: Virulence and regulation. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2013, 26, 308–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Galán, J.E. Molecular genetic bases of Salmonella entry into host cells. Mol. Microbiol. 1996, 20, 263–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hensel, M.; Shea, J.E.; Gleeson, C.; Jones, M.D.; Dalton, E.; Holden, D.W. Simultaneous identification of bacterial virulence genes by negative selection. Science 1995, 269, 400–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Mills, D.M.; Bajaj, V.; Lee, C.A. A 40 kB chromosomal fragment encoding Salmonella typhimurium invasion genes is absent from the corresponding region on the Escherichia coli K-12 chromosome. Mol. Microbiol. 1995, 15, 749–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Bäumler, A.J. The record of horizontal gene transfer in Salmonella. Trends Microbiol. 1997, 5, 318–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Doolittle, R.; Feng, D.; Tsang, S.; Cho, G.; Little, E. Determining divergence times of the major kingdoms of living organisms with a protein clock. Science 1996, 26, 470–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Ochman, H.; Wilson, A. Evolution in bacteria: Evidence for a universal substitution rate in cellular genomes. J. Mol. Evol. 1987, 26, 74–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Ren, C.-P.; Chaudhuri, R.R.; Fivian, A.; Bailey, C.M.; Antonio, M.; Barnes, W.M.; Pallen, M.J. The ETT2 gene cluster, encoding a second type III secretion system from Escherichia coli, is present in the majority of strains but has undergone widespread mutational attrition. J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 3547–3560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Betts, H.J.; Chaudhuri, R.R.; Pallen, M.J. An analysis of type-III secretion gene clusters in Chromobacterium violaceum. Trends Microbiol. 2004, 12, 476–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Dale, C.; Jones, T.; Pontes, M. Degenerative evolution and functional diversification of type-III secretion systems in the insect endosymbiont Sodalis glossinidius. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2005, 22, 758–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Haller, J.C.; Carlson, S.; Pederson, K.J.; Pierson, D.E. A chromosomally encoded type III secretion pathway in Yersinia enterocolitica is important in virulence. Mol. Microbiol. 2000, 36, 1436–1446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Hu, Y.; Huang, H.; Cheng, X.; Shu, X.; White, A.; Stavrinides, J.; Köster, W.; Zhu, G.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, Y. A global survey of bacterial type III secretion systems and their effectors. Environ. Microbiol. 2017, 19, 3879–3895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kirzinger, M.W.B.; Butz, C.J.; Stavrinides, J. Inheritance of Pantoea type III secretion systems through both vertical and horizontal transfer. Mol. Genet. Genom. 2015, 290, 2075–2088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Ménard, R.; Prévost, M.C.; Gounon, P.; Sansonetti, P.; Dehio, C. The secreted Ipa complex of Shigella flexneri promotes entry into mammalian cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1996, 93, 1254–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Batista, J.; da Silva Neto, J. Chromobacterium violaceum pathogenicity: Updates and insights from genome sequencing of novel Chromobacterium species. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Parkhill, J.; Wren, B.W.; Thomson, N.R.; Titball, R.; Holden, M.; Prentice, M.B.; Sebaihia, M.; James, K.; Churcher, C.; Mungall, K.; et al. Genome sequence of Yersinia pestis, the causative agent of plague. Nature 2001, 413, 523–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Lan, R.; Lumb, B.; Ryan, D.; Reeves, P.R. Molecular evolution of large virulence plasmid in Shigella and enteroinvasive Escherichia coli. Infect. Immun. 2001, 69, 6303–6309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. The, H.C.; Thanh, D.P.; Holt, K.E.; Thomson, N.R.; Baker, S. The genomic signatures of Shigella evolution, adaptation and geographical spread. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2016, 14, 235–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Yang, J.; Nie, H.; Chen, L.; Zhang, X.; Yang, F.; Xu, X.; Zhu, Y.; Yu, J.; Jin, Q. Revisiting the molecular evolutionary history of Shigella spp. J. Mol. Evol. 2007, 64, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Burkinshaw, B.J.; Strynadka, N.C.J. Assembly and structure of the T3SS. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2014, 1843, 1649–1663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Correa, V.R.; Majerczak, D.R.; Ammar, E.-D.; Merighi, M.; Pratt, R.C.; Hogenhout, S.A.; Coplin, D.L.; Redinbaugh, M.G. The bacterium Pantoea stewartii uses two different type III secretion systems to colonize its plant host and insect vector. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2012, 78, 6327–6336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Foultier, B.; Troisfontaines, P.; Müller, S.; Opperdoes, F.R.; Cornelis, G.R. Characterization of the ysa pathogenicity locus in the chromosome of Yersinia enterocolitica and phylogeny analysis of type III secretion systems. J. Mol. Evol. 2002, 55, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Hueck, C.J. Type III protein secretion systems in bacterial pathogens of animals and plants. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 1998, 62, 379–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Pancetti, A.; Galán, J.E. Characterization of the mutS-proximal region of the Salmonella typhimurium SPI-1 identifies a group of pathogenicity island-associated genes. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2001, 197, 203–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Zhou, D.; Hardt, W.D.; Galán, J.E. Salmonella typhimurium encodes a putative iron transport system within the centisome 63 pathogenicity island. Infect. Immun. 1999, 67, 1974–1981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Bush, E.C.; Clark, A.E.; DeRanek, C.A.; Eng, A.; Forman, J.; Heath, K.; Lee, A.B.; Stoebel, D.M.; Wang, Z.; Wilber, M.; et al. xenoGI: Reconstructing the history of genomic island insertions in clades of closely related bacteria. BMC Bioinform. 2018, 19, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Kröger, C.; Colgan, A.; Srikumar, S.; Händler, K.; Sivasankaran, S.K.; Hammarlöf, D.L.; Canals, R.; Grissom, J.E.; Conway, T.; Hokamp, K.; et al. An infection-relevant transcriptomic compendium for Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. Cell Host Microbe 2013, 14, 683–695. [Google Scholar]
  47. O’Leary, N.A.; Wright, M.W.; Brister, J.R.; Ciufo, S.; Haddad, D.; McVeigh, R.; Rajput, B.; Robbertse, B.; Smith-White, B.; Ako-Adjei, D.; et al. Reference sequence (RefSeq) database at NCBI: Current status, taxonomic expansion, and functional annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016, 44, D733–D745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Srikumar, S.; Kröger, C.; Hébrard, M.; Colgan, A.; Owen, S.; Sivasankaran, S.K.; Cameron, A.; Hokamp, K.; Hinton, J. RNA-seq brings new insights to the intra-macrophage transcriptome of Salmonella Typhimurium. PLoS Pathog. 2015, 11, e1005262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Wattam, A.R.; Davis, J.J.; Assaf, R.; Boisvert, S.; Brettin, T.; Bun, C.; Conrad, N.; Dietrich, E.M.; Disz, T.; Gabbard, J.L.; et al. Improvements to PATRIC, the all-bacterial Bioinformatics Database and Analysis Resource Center. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017, 45, D535–D542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Freese, N.H.; Norris, D.C.; Loraine, A.E. Integrated genome browser: Visual analytics platform for genomics. Bioinformatics 2016, 32, 2089–2095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Sullivan, M.; Petty, N.K.; Beatson, S. Easyfig: A genome comparison visualizer. Bioinformatics 2011, 27, 1009–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Galán, J.E.; Lara-Tejero, M.; Marlovits, T.C.; Wagner, S. Bacterial type III secretion systems: Specialized nanomachines for protein delivery into target cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 68, 415–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Kearse, M.; Moir, R.; Wilson, A.; Stones-Havas, S.; Cheung, M.; Sturrock, S.; Buxton, S.; Cooper, A.; Markowitz, S.; Duran, C.; et al. Geneious Basic: An integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics 2012, 15, 1647–1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Altschul, S.F.; Madden, T.L.; Schäffer, A.A.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, Z.; Miller, W.; Lipman, J.L. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: A new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997, 25, 3389–3402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  55. Edgar, R. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004, 32, 1792–1797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Tamura, K. MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetic Analysis Version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2016, 33, 1870–1874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Li, M.; Knyaz, C.; Tamura, K. MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across computing platforms. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2018, 35, 1547–1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Letunic, I.; Bork, P. Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL) v4: Recent updates and new developments. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019, 47, W256–W259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Venkatesan, M.M.; Goldberg, M.B.; Rose, D.J.; Grotbeck, E.J.; Burland, V.; Blattner, F.R. Complete DNA sequence and analysis of the large virulence plasmid of Shigella flexneri. Infect. Immun. 2001, 69, 3271–3285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Matsumoto, H.; Young, G. Proteomic and functional analysis of the suite of Ysp proteins exported by the Ysa type III secretion system of Yersinia enterocolitica Biovar 1B. Mol. Microbiol. 2005, 59, 689–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Walker, K.; Miller, V.L. Regulation of the Ysa Type III secretion system of Yersinia enterocolitica by YsaE/SycB and YrsS/YsrR. J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 4056–4066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Bertelli, C.; Tilley, K.; Brinkman, F. Microbial genomic island discovery, visualization and analysis. Brief. Bioinform. 2019, 20, 1685–1698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Lu, B.; Leong, H.W. Computational methods for predicting genomic islands in microbial genomes. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 2016, 14, 200–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  64. Groisman, E.A.; Ochman, H. Cognate gene clusters govern invasion of host epithelial cells by Salmonella typhimurium and Shigella flexneri. EMBO J. 1993, 12, 3779–3787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Desai, P.; Porwollik, S.; Long, F.; Cheng, P.; Wollam, A.; Clifton, S.W.; Weinstock, G.M.; McClelland, M. Evolutionary genomics of Salmonella enterica subspecies. mBio 2013, 4, e00579-12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Worley, J.; Meng, J.; Allard, M.; Brown, E.W.; Timme, R. Salmonella enterica phylogeny based on whole-genome sequencing reveals two new clades and novel patterns of horizontally acquired genetic elements. mBio 2018, 9, e02303-18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. El Ghany, M.; Shi, X.; Li, Y.; Ansari, H.; Hill-Cawthorne, G.; Ho, Y.; Naeem, R.; Pickard, D.; Klena, J.; Xu, X.; et al. Genomic and phenotypic analyses reveal the emergence of an atypical Salmonella enterica serovar Senftenberg variant in China. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2016, 54, 2014–2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Ginocchio, C.; Rahn, K.; Clarke, R.; Galán, J.E. Naturally occurring deletions in the centisome 63 pathogenicity island of environmental isolates of Salmonella spp. Infect. Immun. 1997, 65, 1267–1272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Hu, Q.; Coburn, B.; Deng, W.; Li, Y.; Shi, X.; Lan, Q.; Wang, B.; Coombes, B.K.; Finlay, B.B. Salmonella enterica serovar Senftenberg human clinical isolates lacking SPI-1. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2008, 46, 1330–1336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Morita, M.; Shimada, K.; Baba, H.; Morofuji, K.; Oda, S.; Izumiya, H.; Ohnishi, M. Genome sequence of a Salmonella enterica serotype Senftenberg strain lacking Salmonella Pathogenicity Island-1 and isolated in Japan. Microbiol. Resour. Announc. 2019, 9, e00653-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Rahn, K.; De Grandis, S.; Clarke, R.; McEwen, S.A.; Galán, J.E.; Ginocchio, C.; Curtiss III, R.; Gyles, C. Amplification of an invA gene sequence of Salmonella typhimurium by polymerase chain reaction as a specific method of detecting Salmonella. Mol. Cell. Probes 1992, 6, 271–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Stevens, M.; Zurfluh, K.; Althaus, D.; Corti, S.; Lehner, A.; Stephan, R. Complete and assembled genome sequence of Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serotype Senftenberg N17-509, a strain lacking Salmonella Pathogen Island 1. Genome Announc. 2018, 6, e00156-18. [Google Scholar]
  73. Singh, K.; Milstein, J.; Navarre, W. Xenogeneic silencing and its impact on bacterial genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016, 70, 199–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Dillon, S.C.; Cameron, A.; Hokamp, K.; Lucchini, S.; Hinton, J.; Dorman, C.J. Genome-wide analysis of the H-NS and Sfh regulatory networks in Salmonella Typhimurium identifies a plasmid-encoded transcription silencing mechanism. Mol. Microbiol. 2010, 76, 1250–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Lucchini, S.; Rowley, G.; Goldberg, M.B.; Hurd, D.; Harrison, M.; Hinton, J. H-NS mediates the silencing of laterally acquired genes in bacteria. PLoS Pathog. 2006, 2, e81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Navarre, W.; Porwollik, S.; Wang, Y.; McClelland, M.; Rosen, H.; Libby, S.J.; Fang, F.C. Selective silencing of foreign DNA with low GC content by the H-NS protein in Salmonella. Science 2006, 313, 236–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Cameron, A.; Dorman, C.J. A fundamental regulatory mechanism operating through OmpR and DNA topology that controls expression of Salmonella pathogenicity islands SPI-1 and SPI-2. PLoS Genet. 2012, 8, e1002615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Schechter, L.M.; Lee, C.A. AraC/XylS family members, HilC and HilD, directly bind and derepress the Salmonella typhimurium hilA promoter. Mol. Microbiol. 2001, 40, 1289–1299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Will, W.; Navarre, W.; Fang, F.C. Integrated circuits: How transcriptional silencing and counter-silencing facilitate bacterial evolution. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2015, 23, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Olekhnovich, I.; Kadner, R. Crucial roles of both flanking sequences in silencing of the hilA promoter in Salmonella enterica. J. Mol. Biol. 2006, 357, 373–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Bajaj, V.; Hwang, C.; Lee, C.A. hilA is a novel ompR/toxR family member that activates the expression of Salmonella typhimurium invasion genes. Mol. Microbiol. 1995, 18, 715–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Daly, R.; Lostroh, C. Genetic analysis of the Salmonella transcription factor HilA. Can. J. Microbiol. 2008, 54, 854–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Lostroh, C.; Bajaj, V.; Lee, C.A. The cis requirements for transcriptional activation by HilA, a virulence determinant encoded on SPI-1. Mol. Microbiol. 2000, 37, 300–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  84. Hüttener, M.; Dietrich, M.; Paytubi, S.; Juárez, A. HilA-like regulators in Escherichia coli pathotypes: The YgeH protein from the enteroaggregative strain 042. BMC Microbiol. 2014, 14, 268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  85. Pallen, M.J.; Francis, M.; Fütterer, K. Tetratricopeptide-like repeats in type-III-secretion chaperones and regulators. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2003, 223, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Carter, M.; Pham, A. Complete genome sequence of a natural Escherichia coli O145:H11 isolate that belongs to phylogroup A. Genome Announc. 2018, 6, e00349-18. [Google Scholar]
  87. Taniguchi, T.; Akeda, Y.; Haba, A.; Yasuda, Y.; Yamamoto, K.; Honda, T.; Tochikubo, K. Gene cluster for assembly of pilus colonization factor antigen III of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli. Infect. Immun. 2001, 69, 5864–5873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Blokesch, M.; Schoolnik, G. Serogroup conversion of Vibrio cholerae in aquatic reservoirs. PLoS Pathog. 2007, 3, e81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Reiter, W.; Palm, P.; Yeats, S. Transfer RNA genes frequently serve as integration sites for prokaryotic genetic elements. Nucleic Acids Res. 1989, 17, 1907–1914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Brown, E.W.; LeClerc, E.; Li, B.; Payne, W.L.; Cebula, T.A. Phylogenetic evidence for horizontal transfer of mutS alleles among naturally occurring Escherichia coli strains. J. Bacteriol. 2001, 183, 1631–1644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Brown, E.W.; Mammel, M.K.; LeClerc, E.; Cebula, T.A. Limited boundaries for extensive horizontal gene transfer among Salmonella pathogens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 15676–15681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. Cao, G.; Meng, J.; Strain, E.; Stones, R.; Pettengill, J.; Zhao, S.; McDermott, P.; Brown, E.; Allard, M. Phylogenetics and differentiation of Salmonella Newport lineages by whole genome sequencing. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e55687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Denamur, E.; Lecointre, G.; Darlu, P.; Tenaillon, O.; Acquaviva, C.; Sayada, C.; Sunjevaric, I.; Rothstein, R.; Elion, J.; Taddei, F.; et al. Evolutionary implications of the frequent horizontal transfer of mismatch repair genes. Cell 2000, 103, 711–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Funchain, P.; Yeung, A.; Stewart, J.L.; Lin, R.; Slupska, M.M.; Miller, J.H. The consequences of growth of a mutator strain of Escherichia coli as measured by loss of function among multiple gene targets and loss of fitness. Genetics 2000, 154, 959–970. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  95. Kotewicz, M.L.; Li, B.; Levy, D.D.; LeClerc, E.; Shifflet, A.W.; Cebula, T.A. Evolution of multi-gene segments in the mutS-rpoS intergenic region of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium LT2. Microbiology 2002, 148, 2531–2540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Herbelin, C.; Chirillo, S.; Melnick, K.; Whittam, T.S. Gene conservation and loss in the mutS-rpoS genomic region of the pathogenic Escherichia coli. J. Bacteriol. 2000, 182, 5381–5390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  97. Brown, E.W.; Kotewicz, M.L.; Cebula, T.A. Detection of recombination among Salmonella enterica strains using the incongruence length difference test. Mol. Phylogenetics Evol. 2002, 24, 102–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. LeClerc, J.; Li, B.; Payne, W.L.; Cebula, T.A. High mutation frequencies among Escherichia coli and Salmonella pathogens. Science 1996, 274, 1208–1211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Duong, D.A.; Stevens, A.M.; Jensen, R.V. Complete genome assembly of Pantoea stewartii subsp. stewartii DC283, a corn pathogen. Genome Announc. 2017, 5, e00435-17. [Google Scholar]
  100. Vernikos, G.S.; Thomson, N.R.; Parkhill, J. Genetic flux over time in the Salmonella lineage. Genome Biol. 2007, 8, R100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Dorman, C.J.; Dorman, M. Control of virulence gene transcription by indirect readout in Vibrio cholerae and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. Environ. Microbiol. 2017, 19, 3834–3845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Bustamante, V.; Martínez, L.; Santana, F.; Knodler, L.; Steele-Mortimer, O.; Puente, J.L. HilD-mediated transcriptional cross-talk between SPI-1 and SPI-2. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 14591–14596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  103. Hacker, J.; Blum-Oehler, G.; Mühldorfer, I.; Tschäpe, H. Pathogenicity islands of virulent bacteria: Structure, function and impact on microbial evolution. Mol. Microbiol. 1997, 23, 1089–1097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Blum, G.; Ott, M.; Lischewski, A.; Ritter, A.; Imrich, H.; Tschäpe, H.; Hacker, J. Excision of large DNA regions termed pathogenicity islands from tRNA-specific loci in the chromosome of an Escherichia coli wild-type pathogen. Infect. Immun. 1994, 62, 606–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  105. Bach, S.; Buchrieser, C.; Prentice, M.; Guiyoule, A.; Msadek, T.; Carniel, E. The High-Pathogenicity Island of Yersinia enterocolitica Ye8081 undergoes low-frequency deletion but not precise excision, suggesting recent stabilization in the genome. Infect. Immun. 1999, 67, 5091–5099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  106. Fisher, C.R.; Davies, N.; Wyckoff, E.E.; Feng, Z.; Oaks, E.V.; Payne, S.M. Genetics and virulence association of the Shigella flexneri Sit iron transport system. Infect. Immun. 2009, 77, 1992–1999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Janakiraman, A.; Slauch, J.M. The putative iron transport system SitABCD encoded on SPI1 is required for full virulence of Salmonella typhimurium. Mol. Microbiol. 2000, 35, 1146–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  108. Sun, W.-S.W.; Syu, W.-J.; Ho, W.-L.; Lin, C.-N.; Tsai, S.-F.; Wang, S.-H. SitA contributes to the virulence of Klebsiella pneumoniae in a mouse infection model. Microbes Infect. 2014, 16, 161–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Pfeiffer, V.; Sittka, A.; Tomer, R.; Tedin, K.; Brinkmann, V.; Vogel, J. A small non-coding RNA of the invasion gene island (SPI-1) represses outer membrane protein synthesis from the Salmonella core genome. Mol. Microbiol. 2007, 66, 1174–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Shapiro, B.; Polz, M.F. Ordering microbial diversity into ecologically and genetically cohesive units. Trends Microbiol. 2014, 22, 235–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Redfield, R.J.; Findlay, W.; Bossé, J.; Kroll, J.; Cameron, A.; Nash, J. Evolution of competence and DNA uptake specificity in the Pastuerellaceae. BMC Evol. Biol. 2006, 6, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Microorganisms 08 00576 g001 550
Figure 1. Comparative genomic analysis of Salmonella Pathogenicity Island 1 (SPI-1). (A) Alignment of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium LT2 SPI-1 to the same locus in Escherichia coli K12. Genes are coloured by function based on annotations in Genbank and SalCom [46,47]. Grey bars represent sequence homology determined by blastx (minimum length 100 bp, e-value < 0.00001). (B) Alignment of the SPI-1 locus in Salmonella, Escherichia, Citrobacter, and Klebsiella. Whole-genome phylogeny was constructed with PATRIC. Gene colouring corresponds to different gene clusters identified by xenoGI [45]: fhlA (dark brown), ygbA (blue), sitABCD (orange), avrA – invH (green), pig genes and pphB (light blue/purple) and mutS (grey). S. enterica Senftenberg strain ATCC 43845 is included in this figure. Small open reading frames (white) between sitD and hilA in S. enterica Enteriditis, S. enterica Paratyphi, S. enterica Senftenberg may be due to different annotation pipelines and will not be examined here. (C) The transcriptional response to the intra-macrophage environment by S. Typhimurium 4/74 reflects that SPI-1 is an island composed of transcriptionally-cohesive modules. Genes are coloured according to the fold differences quantified by RNA-seq in the macrophage vacuole compared to early stationary phase in Lennox broth; data from [48].
Figure 1. Comparative genomic analysis of Salmonella Pathogenicity Island 1 (SPI-1). (A) Alignment of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium LT2 SPI-1 to the same locus in Escherichia coli K12. Genes are coloured by function based on annotations in Genbank and SalCom [46,47]. Grey bars represent sequence homology determined by blastx (minimum length 100 bp, e-value < 0.00001). (B) Alignment of the SPI-1 locus in Salmonella, Escherichia, Citrobacter, and Klebsiella. Whole-genome phylogeny was constructed with PATRIC. Gene colouring corresponds to different gene clusters identified by xenoGI [45]: fhlA (dark brown), ygbA (blue), sitABCD (orange), avrA – invH (green), pig genes and pphB (light blue/purple) and mutS (grey). S. enterica Senftenberg strain ATCC 43845 is included in this figure. Small open reading frames (white) between sitD and hilA in S. enterica Enteriditis, S. enterica Paratyphi, S. enterica Senftenberg may be due to different annotation pipelines and will not be examined here. (C) The transcriptional response to the intra-macrophage environment by S. Typhimurium 4/74 reflects that SPI-1 is an island composed of transcriptionally-cohesive modules. Genes are coloured according to the fold differences quantified by RNA-seq in the macrophage vacuole compared to early stationary phase in Lennox broth; data from [48].
Microorganisms 08 00576 g001
Microorganisms 08 00576 g002 550
Figure 2. Genomic positions of ygbA and sitABCD relative to mutS in select Enterobacterales. The whole-genome phylogeny was constructed by PATRIC [49]. Variations of the ygbA and sitABCD gene clusters are coloured for ygbA (blue) and sitABCD (orange). Chromosome lengths are drawn to scale.
Figure 2. Genomic positions of ygbA and sitABCD relative to mutS in select Enterobacterales. The whole-genome phylogeny was constructed by PATRIC [49]. Variations of the ygbA and sitABCD gene clusters are coloured for ygbA (blue) and sitABCD (orange). Chromosome lengths are drawn to scale.
Microorganisms 08 00576 g002
Microorganisms 08 00576 g003 550
Figure 3. Alignment of the SPI-1 downstream boundary across the Salmonella clade. Whole-genome phylogeny was constructed with PATRIC [49]. Gene colouring corresponds to different gene clusters identified by xenoGI [45]: invAEGFH (green), pigAB and insertion element (blue), pigCD (purple), transposase (pink), pphB (purple), hypothetical coding sequences (red, grey). S. enterica Senftenberg strain ATCC 43845 is included in this figure. Grey bars represent sequence homology determined by blastx (min length 100 bp, e-value < 0.00001). IS, insertion element; Tr, transposase.
Figure 3. Alignment of the SPI-1 downstream boundary across the Salmonella clade. Whole-genome phylogeny was constructed with PATRIC [49]. Gene colouring corresponds to different gene clusters identified by xenoGI [45]: invAEGFH (green), pigAB and insertion element (blue), pigCD (purple), transposase (pink), pphB (purple), hypothetical coding sequences (red, grey). S. enterica Senftenberg strain ATCC 43845 is included in this figure. Grey bars represent sequence homology determined by blastx (min length 100 bp, e-value < 0.00001). IS, insertion element; Tr, transposase.
Microorganisms 08 00576 g003
Microorganisms 08 00576 g004 550
Figure 4. Alignment of the SPI-1 locus in S. enterica Typhimurium LT2, S. enterica Senftenberg strains ATCC 43845 and N17-590 and Escherichia coli K12. Gene colouring corresponds to different gene clusters identified by xenoGI [45]: fhlA (dark brown), ygbA (blue), sitABCD (orange), avrA – invH (green), pig genes and pphB (light blue/purple) and mutS (grey). Genomic island in S. Senftenberg N17-509 with no homology to SPI-1 is coloured beige. Grey bars represent sequence homology determined by blastx (min length 100 bp, e-value < 0.00001).
Figure 4. Alignment of the SPI-1 locus in S. enterica Typhimurium LT2, S. enterica Senftenberg strains ATCC 43845 and N17-590 and Escherichia coli K12. Gene colouring corresponds to different gene clusters identified by xenoGI [45]: fhlA (dark brown), ygbA (blue), sitABCD (orange), avrA – invH (green), pig genes and pphB (light blue/purple) and mutS (grey). Genomic island in S. Senftenberg N17-509 with no homology to SPI-1 is coloured beige. Grey bars represent sequence homology determined by blastx (min length 100 bp, e-value < 0.00001).
Microorganisms 08 00576 g004
Microorganisms 08 00576 g005 550
Figure 5. Nucleotide composition and gene regulation in SPI-1. (A) AT content schematic of hil gene promoters across eight Salmonella strains. AT content was overlaid as a heatmap on the regions surrounding hilC, hilD and hilA. Heatmap values were generated with a 100 base sliding window using Geneious R11 [53]. (B) Core elements of the SPI-1 transcriptional regulatory network.
Figure 5. Nucleotide composition and gene regulation in SPI-1. (A) AT content schematic of hil gene promoters across eight Salmonella strains. AT content was overlaid as a heatmap on the regions surrounding hilC, hilD and hilA. Heatmap values were generated with a 100 base sliding window using Geneious R11 [53]. (B) Core elements of the SPI-1 transcriptional regulatory network.
Microorganisms 08 00576 g005
Microorganisms 08 00576 g006 550
Figure 6. HilA phylogeny and genetic context for hilA in T3SS islands. Best blastx hits covering at least 80% of the query (S. enterica Typhimurium LT2 HilA) were identified and one representative protein sequence was selected from each species to capture phylogenetic diversity. Protein sequences were aligned using MUSCLE [55] and phylogeny was built using a maximum-likelihood model LG+G with 1000 bootstrap replicates [57]. hilA is illustrated in bold with white and red hashes and genes are coloured according to function (see Figure 1 legend). Conserved gene modules in T3SSs with hilA are identified at the bottom of the figure. Two strains (bottom) were included in xenoGI analysis but not the phylogenetic tree. Both have a T3SS but are either missing hilA (E. coli O157:H7 Sakai) or have a truncated hilA (S. praecaptivus). For a more detailed reconstruction of hilA evolution, see Supplementary Figure S2.
Figure 6. HilA phylogeny and genetic context for hilA in T3SS islands. Best blastx hits covering at least 80% of the query (S. enterica Typhimurium LT2 HilA) were identified and one representative protein sequence was selected from each species to capture phylogenetic diversity. Protein sequences were aligned using MUSCLE [55] and phylogeny was built using a maximum-likelihood model LG+G with 1000 bootstrap replicates [57]. hilA is illustrated in bold with white and red hashes and genes are coloured according to function (see Figure 1 legend). Conserved gene modules in T3SSs with hilA are identified at the bottom of the figure. Two strains (bottom) were included in xenoGI analysis but not the phylogenetic tree. Both have a T3SS but are either missing hilA (E. coli O157:H7 Sakai) or have a truncated hilA (S. praecaptivus). For a more detailed reconstruction of hilA evolution, see Supplementary Figure S2.
Microorganisms 08 00576 g006
Microorganisms 08 00576 g007 550
Figure 7. HilCD phylogeny. Nodes with bootstrap support below 0.70 are condensed to polytomies, and branches are coloured by genus. The number of strains in each collapsed node is indicated on the figure. S. bongori and S. enterica Typhimurium HilC and HilD sequences were included as representatives from the Salmonella clade. The top 100 best blastx hits covering at least 80% of the query for S. enterica Typhimurium LT2 HilC and HilD sequences were aligned using MUSCLE [55] and the phylogeny was inferred using a maximum-likelihood model JTT+G with 1000 bootstrap replicates [57]. For the full unrooted phylogeny, see Supplementary Figure S4.
Figure 7. HilCD phylogeny. Nodes with bootstrap support below 0.70 are condensed to polytomies, and branches are coloured by genus. The number of strains in each collapsed node is indicated on the figure. S. bongori and S. enterica Typhimurium HilC and HilD sequences were included as representatives from the Salmonella clade. The top 100 best blastx hits covering at least 80% of the query for S. enterica Typhimurium LT2 HilC and HilD sequences were aligned using MUSCLE [55] and the phylogeny was inferred using a maximum-likelihood model JTT+G with 1000 bootstrap replicates [57]. For the full unrooted phylogeny, see Supplementary Figure S4.
Microorganisms 08 00576 g007
Table
Table 1. Nomenclature of genes in T3SSs related to SPI-1 1.
Table 1. Nomenclature of genes in T3SSs related to SPI-1 1.
Salmonella SPI-1Pantoea PSI-2Shigella Mxi-SpaEscherichia ETT2Escherichia LEEYersinia YSAYersinia YSCSodalis SSR1Sodalis SSR2Pseudomonas Psc/Pcr/Pop/ExsChromobacterium CPI-1Universal 2Function 3
avrA yopP Effector
sprB Regulator
hilC S0103 Regulator
orgC corC Effector
orgB mxiL/mxiNorgBescLYE3555yscL orgAbpscLcorBsctLNeedle assembly
orgA mxiKorgA YE3554yscK orgApscKcorAsctKNeedle assembly
prgKpsaJmxiJ/yscJeprKescJysaJyscJysaJprgKpscJcprKsctJInner mb ring
prgJpsaImxiIeprJescIysaIyscIysaIprgJpscIcprJsctINeedle subunit
prgIpsaGmxiHeprIescFYE3551yscFysaGprgIpscFcprIsctFNeedle subunit
prgHpsaFmxiGeprHescDYE3550yscDysaFprgHpscDcprHsctDInner mb ring
hilD Regulator
hilA ygeH hilA cilA Regulator
iagBpsaHipgFipgFetgAysaH ysaH iagB Transglosylase
sptP yspPyopH CV0974 Effector
sicPpsa7 Chaperone
iacPpsaC/acpMipgG acpY ysaC iacP Acyl carrier
STM2880 Unknown
sipA ipaA yspA yspA cipA Effector
sipDpspDipaD espAyspDlcrVyspD pcrVcipD Tip complex
sipCpspCipaC espByspCyopDyspC popDcipC Effector
sipBpspBipaB espDyspByopByspB popBcipB Effector
sicApchAipgCygeGcesDsycBsycDsycBsicApcrHcicA Chaperone
spaSpsaUspa40epaSescUysaUyscUysaUspaSpscUcpaSsctUExport apparatus
spaRpsaTspa29epaRescTysaTyscTysaTspaRpscTcpaRsctTExport apparatus
spaQpsaSspa9epaQescSysaSyscSysaSspaQpscScpaQsctSExport apparatus
spaPpsaRspa24epaPescRysaRyscRysaRspaPpscRcpaPsctRExport apparatus
spaOpsaQspa33epaOescQ/sepQysaQyscQysaQspaOpscQ/hrcQcpaOsctQCytoplasmic ring
invJpsaPspa32/spaNeivJescP/orf16yspNyscPysaPspaNpscPcpaNsctPNeedle assembly
invIpsaOspa13/spaMeivIescO/escA/orf15YE3543AyscOysaOspaMpscOcpaMsctONeedle assembly
invC/spaLpsaNspa47/spaLeivCescNysaNyscNysaNinvCpscNcivCsctNATPase
invBpsaKspa15/spaK ysaK ysaKinvB civB Chaperone
invApsaVmxiAeivAescVysaVyscV/lcrDysaVinvApcrDcivAsctVExport apparatus
invEpsaWmxiCeivEsepL/sepDysaWyopN/tyeAysaWinvEpopNcivEsctWExport regulator
invGpsaCmxiDeivGescCysaCyscCysaCinvGpscCcivGsctCOuter mb ring
invFmxiE/ysaEmxiEeivF ysaEvirFysaEinvFexsAcivF Regulator
invH mxiM yscW exsB Export apparatus
pigA Unknown
pigB Unknown
STM2903 Insertion element
pigC Unknown
pigD Unknown
STM2906 Transposase
pphB Phosphatase
STM2908 Unknown
1 Gene names curated for Pantoea PSI-2 [32,40], Shigella Mxi-Spa [39,41,59], Escherichia ETT2 Sakai [27], Escherichia EPEC LEE [39], Yersinia YSA [30,40,41,60,61], Yersinia YSC [39,42], Sodalis SSR1 [29,40], Sodalis SSR2 [29], Pseudomonas aeruginosa Psc/Pcr/Pop/Exs [39,42], Chromobacterium CPI-1 [28]. 2 Universal gene names from [31,52]. 3 Functions from [46,47,52]. Mb = membrane.
Table
Table 2. List of bacterial strains and genome assembly versions used in xenoGI analysis.
Table 2. List of bacterial strains and genome assembly versions used in xenoGI analysis.
GenusSpeciesStrain% GCMbpGenbank AccessionGenbank Assembly Version
CitrobacterfreundiiCFNIH152.25.09NZ_CP007557.1GCA_000648515.1_ASM64851v1
CitrobacterkoseriATCC BAA-89553.84.72NC_009792.1GCA_000018045.1_ASM1804v1
Enterobactercloacae subsp. cloacaeATCC 1304752.475.32NC_014121.1GCA_000025565.1_ASM2556v1
EnterobacterlignolyticusSCF157.24.81NC_014618.1GCA_000164865.1_ASM16486v1
EscherichiaalbertiiKF149.74.7NZ_CP007025.1GCA_000512125.1_ASM51212v1
EscherichiacoliO157:H7 Sakai50.455.59NC_002695.1GCA_000008865.1_ASM886v1
EscherichiacoliK12 MG165550.84.64NC_000913.3GCA_000005845.2_ASM584v2
EscherichiacoliIAI3950.65.13NC_011750.1GCA_000026345.1_ASM2634v1
EscherichiacoliO104:H4 str 2011C-349350.635.44NC_018658.1GCA_000299455.1_ASM29945v1
EscherichiafergusoniiATCC 3546949.884.64NC_011740.1GCA_000026225.1_ASM2622v1
Klebsiellapneumoniae subsp. pneumoniaeHS1128657.145.68NC_016845.1GCA_000240185.2_ASM24018v2
KlebsiellaoxytocaCAV137455.267.23NZ_CP011636.1GCA_001022195.1_ASM102219v1
PantoeaagglomeransIG155.025.12NZ_CP016889.1GCA_001709315.1_ASM170931v1
PantoeaananatisLMG 534253.44.14NC_016816.1GCA_000283875.1_ASM28387v1
PantoeastewartiiDC28354.24.53NZ_CP017581.1GCA_002082215.1_ASM208221v1
PseudomonasaeruginosaPAO166.66.26NC_002516.2GCA_000006765.1_ASM676v1
SalmonellabongoriNCTC 1241951.34.46NC_015761.1GCA_000252995.1_ASM25299v1
Salmonellaenterica subsp. enterica EnteritidisP12510952.24.69NC_011294.1GCA_000009505.1_ASM950v1
Salmonellaenterica subsp. enterica TyphiCT1851.885.13NC_003198.1GCA_000195995.1_ASM19599v1
Salmonellaenterica subsp. enterica TyphimuriumLT252.224.95NC_003197.2GCA_000006945.2_ASM694v2
Salmonellaenterica subsp. enterica Paratyphi CRKS459452.214.89NC_012125.1GCA_000018385.1_ASM1838v1
Salmonellaenterica subsp. enterica SenftenbergATCC 4384551.935.26CP019194.1GCA_000486525.2_ASM48652v2
Salmonellaenterica subsp. arizonae62z23 RSK298051.44.6NZ_CP006693.1GCA_000018625.1_ASM1862v1
Salmonellaenterica subsp. diarizonaeHZS15451.45.09CP023345.1GCA_002794415.1_ASM279441v1
Shigellaflexneri2a 30150.674.83NC_004337.2GCA_000006925.2_ASM692v2
Sodalisglossinidiusmortisans54.514.29NC_007712.1GCA_000010085.1_ASM1008v1
SodalispraecaptivusHS157.134.29NZ_CP006569.1GCA_000517425.1_ASM51742v1
Yersiniaenterocolitica subsp. enterocolitica808147.254.68NC_008800.1GCA_000009345.1_ASM934v1
YersiniapestisCO9247.614.83NC_003143GCA_000009065.1_ASM906v1

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lerminiaux, N.A.; MacKenzie, K.D.; Cameron, A.D.S. Salmonella Pathogenicity Island 1 (SPI-1): The Evolution and Stabilization of a Core Genomic Type Three Secretion System. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 576. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8040576

AMA Style

Lerminiaux NA, MacKenzie KD, Cameron ADS. Salmonella Pathogenicity Island 1 (SPI-1): The Evolution and Stabilization of a Core Genomic Type Three Secretion System. Microorganisms. 2020; 8(4):576. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8040576

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lerminiaux, Nicole A., Keith D. MacKenzie, and Andrew D. S. Cameron. 2020. "Salmonella Pathogenicity Island 1 (SPI-1): The Evolution and Stabilization of a Core Genomic Type Three Secretion System" Microorganisms 8, no. 4: 576. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8040576

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop