Dictyostelium transcriptional responses to Pseudomonas aeruginosa: common and specific effects from PAO1 and PA14 strains

BACKGROUND: Pseudomonas aeruginosa is one of the most relevant human opportunistic bacterial pathogens. Two strains (PAO1 and PA14) have been mainly used as models for studying virulence of P. aeruginosa. The strain PA14 is more virulent than PAO1 in a wide range of hosts including insects, nematodes and plants. Whereas some of the differences might be attributable to concerted action of determinants encoded in pathogenicity islands present in the genome of PA14, a global analysis of the differential host responses to these P. aeruginosa strains has not been addressed. Little is known about the host response to infection with P. aeruginosa and whether or not the global host transcription is being affected as a defense mechanism or altered in the benefit of the pathogen. Since the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum is a suitable host to study virulence of P. aeruginosa and other pathogens, we used available genomic tools in this model system to study the transcriptional host response to P. aeruginosa infection. RESULTS: We have compared the virulence of the P. aeruginosa PAO1 and PA14 using D. discoideum and studied the transcriptional response of the amoeba upon infection. Our results showed that PA14 is more virulent in Dictyostelium than PA01using different plating assays. For studying the differential response of the host to infection by these model strains, D. discoideum cells were exposed to either P. aeruginosa PAO1 or P. aeruginosa PA14 (mixed with an excess of the non-pathogenic bacterium Klebsiella aerogenes as food supply) and after 4 hours, cellular RNA extracted. A three-way comparison was made using whole-genome D. discoideum microarrays between RNA samples from cells treated with the two different strains and control cells exposed only to K. aerogenes. The transcriptomic analyses have shown the existence of common and specific responses to infection. The expression of 364 genes changed in a similar way upon infection with one or another strain, whereas 169 genes were differentially regulated depending on whether the infecting strain was either P. aeruginosa PAO1 or PA14. Effects on metabolism, signalling, stress response and cell cycle can be inferred from the genes affected. CONCLUSION: Our results show that pathogenic Pseudomonas strains invoke both a common transcriptional response from Dictyostelium and a strain specific one, indicating that the infective process of bacterial pathogens can be strain-specific and is more complex than previously thought.