Vibrio cholerae is one of the most interesting micro-organisms
inhabiting our oceans. When in water, V. cholerae
can often be found in close association with zooplankton, particularly crustaceans
because of the abundance of chitin present. Chitin is essential for Vibrio
species.; it can be used as a sole nutrient source, furthermore, attachment to
chitin causes up-regulation of many genes, and promotes HGT (horizontal gene
transfer). Grazing by protozoans has
previously shown to have significant effects on the V. cholerae life-style by inducing biofilm formation, likely to be
a protective mechanism. However, as V.cholerae
would be found in large abundance in these biofilms, quorum sensing is likely
to have a role. This study by Sun et al.
(2015) aims to elucidate the role of quorum sensing (QS) and chitin metabolism
on grazing resistance in V. cholerae biofilms,
on both biotic and abiotic surfaces.
In order to demonstrate the importance
of QS in chitin metabolism, and hence biofilm formation ΔhapR mutant V. cholerae
were cultured, as were wild type V. cholerae.
The gene, hapR is a ‘master response
regulator’ of QS. To test for grazing resistance these were cultured on microtitre
plates, with and without a carbon source and glucose, (abiotic),
chitin flakes and the exoskeleton of Artemia
(biotic) for 24 hours, reaching a final concentration of 106 cells
ml-1 (determined using MTT staining), before being exposed to the
grazer Rhynchomonas nasuta, a surface
feeding flagellate at a concentration of 104 cells ml-1. To
test whether any toxic products were produced by V. cholerae conferring the avoidance of predation, the cell-free
supernatants of biofilms were collected. R.
nasuta (104 cells ml-1) were exposed to this supernatant
and enumerated microscopically, the ammonia concentration of the supernatant
was also measured. The number of CFUs of V.
cholerae present in glucose and chitin flakes was determined using a flow
cell technique.
Biofilm production on abiotic surfaces was negligible, even when supplemented with a carbon source and glucose for both WT and ΔhapR, likewise no significant decrease in R. nasuta was observed. Abitoic surfaces supplemented with glucose, and chitin flakes did show an increase in the abundance in R. nasuta. However, biofilm formation on chitin flakes was x3053 that of the abiotic surfaces. Compared to the WT, a significant decrease in grazer mortality was noted on biofilms with the ΔhapR colonies present. Biofilms formed on Artemia caused inhibition of grazing by R. nasuta. This was attributed to the ammonium production during chitin metabolism by V. cholerae. Biofilms consisting of ΔhapR mutants showed a decreased grazing resistance compared with the WT (on chitin flakes), suggesting that QS is of some importance during this process. Analysis of the role of QS in chitin utilisation revealed that expression of several genes was significantly reduced in the QS negative ΔhapR mutant, including the entire chitin catabolic operon amongst others.
Biofilm production on abiotic surfaces was negligible, even when supplemented with a carbon source and glucose for both WT and ΔhapR, likewise no significant decrease in R. nasuta was observed. Abitoic surfaces supplemented with glucose, and chitin flakes did show an increase in the abundance in R. nasuta. However, biofilm formation on chitin flakes was x3053 that of the abiotic surfaces. Compared to the WT, a significant decrease in grazer mortality was noted on biofilms with the ΔhapR colonies present. Biofilms formed on Artemia caused inhibition of grazing by R. nasuta. This was attributed to the ammonium production during chitin metabolism by V. cholerae. Biofilms consisting of ΔhapR mutants showed a decreased grazing resistance compared with the WT (on chitin flakes), suggesting that QS is of some importance during this process. Analysis of the role of QS in chitin utilisation revealed that expression of several genes was significantly reduced in the QS negative ΔhapR mutant, including the entire chitin catabolic operon amongst others.
I think this study presents
convincing evidence that QS plays a key role in chitin metabolism, biofilm formation
and grazing protection. However, this study only tested the impact that one
species of grazer has on biofilms composed of singular bacterial species. Therefore
how representative this study is of the interactions that occur in the
environment is questionable. Whilst a number of further projects can arise from
this project, I think examining these interactions in the context of climate
change and disease will be one of the most interesting, applicable and
informative. Climate change is likely to augment many of the interactions that
have been so well documented in the literature; what impact will these changes have
on our biota, populations and ecosystems?
Jack
Jack
Sun, S., Tay, X.M.T.,
Kjelleberg,S., Rice, S.A. and Mcdougald,D. (2015). Quorum sensing-regulated
chitin metabolism provides grazing resistance to Vibrio cholerae biofilms. International
Society for Microbial Ecology. 1751-7362/15, pp1-9.
Hi Jack,
ReplyDeleteAn interesting post showing some of the interactions between grazers and bacteria. I was wondering if you came across any studies which looked at any of these interactions in the field or used multiple bacteria species, it would be interesting to see if the presence of other species would provide differing results. It appears that the level of ammonia could be a controlling factor of R.nasuta grazing according to this study, did you come across any other information about ammonium affects? As you said it would be interesting to see which studies would follow on from this one.
Hi Emma - thanks for your comment!
ReplyDeleteA number of studies examining the interactions between grazers and biofilms exist. However, considerably less information in present on field/multi-bacterial species biofilms are present; especially those with a QS focus. I agree that the influence of other microbial species needs to be considered,
With regards to the ammonium, its effects on eukaryotes has been well documented; it is toxic at high concentrations. This study investigated the dose-response relationship of ammonium in R. nasuta; the lethal dose was around 2mM. V. cholerae WT cultured on chitin flakes produced 3.5mM ammonium. Obviously, this concentration is high enough to kill R. nasuta. I do wonder however about the effects of dilution, and whether the lethal dose would be reached in the natural environement. Additionally, how the ammonium affects R. nasuta is unclear; is it an endocrine disruptor, neurotoxicin, genotoxin etc.?
I hope this helps!
Jack
Hi Jack,
ReplyDeleteReally interesting study! It is quite intriguing that they linked the inhibition of grazing to ammonium production. As you have said and discussed above its difficult to drawn conclusions about the role of this in real communities. However, did the authors mention the possible role of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria in degrading the ammonium produced in real mixed biofilms, so lessening the effect? Do you get the feeling that this would have an impact or is this likely to be non-significant?
Kind Regards
Hi Tom - thanks for your comment!
DeleteThe authors didn't discuss the role of ammonia-oxidizing microbes at all, and in the natural environment I think they could well play an active role in biofilm dynamics, and reduce the anti-grazing performance of V. cholerae.
However, they did mention biofilm formation and chitin utilization by V. cholerae in vertebrates during times of infection, but did not expand upon this really. From this perspective, I think this information may be really useful; rather than targeting V. cholerae itself (with antibiotics) to reduce infection maybe we should be focusing on QS inhibition?
I believe this study needs to be applied in the field in order for really convincing evidence to be produced.
Cheers,
Jack
Hi Jack,
ReplyDeleteThanks for replying so quickly. The matter of ammonia dilution in the natural environment is a very good point. It is areas such as this which cause us to assess the importance of viewing studies along with the bigger picture of the functioning ecosystem. Many features of the surrounding ecosystem could impact ammonia levels (production/dilution) and could result in different outcomes variable to the laboratory study. I believe field observations would be very helpful in addition to this specific study.
Thanks
Emma