Cargando…
Ecophysiological Features Shape the Distribution of Prophages and CRISPR in Sulfate Reducing Prokaryotes
Sulfate reducing prokaryotes (SRP) are a phylogenetically and physiologically diverse group of microorganisms that use sulfate as an electron acceptor. SRP have long been recognized as key players of the carbon and sulfur cycles, and more recently, they have been identified to play a relevant role a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8146710/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33925267 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9050931 |
_version_ | 1783697459215597568 |
---|---|
author | Orellana, Roberto Arancibia, Alejandra Badilla, Leonardo Acosta, Jonathan Arancibia, Gabriela Escar, Rodrigo Ferrada, Gustavo Seeger, Michael |
author_facet | Orellana, Roberto Arancibia, Alejandra Badilla, Leonardo Acosta, Jonathan Arancibia, Gabriela Escar, Rodrigo Ferrada, Gustavo Seeger, Michael |
author_sort | Orellana, Roberto |
collection | PubMed |
description | Sulfate reducing prokaryotes (SRP) are a phylogenetically and physiologically diverse group of microorganisms that use sulfate as an electron acceptor. SRP have long been recognized as key players of the carbon and sulfur cycles, and more recently, they have been identified to play a relevant role as part of syntrophic and symbiotic relations and the human microbiome. Despite their environmental relevance, there is a poor understanding about the prevalence of prophages and CRISPR arrays and how their distribution and dynamic affect the ecological role of SRP. We addressed this question by analyzing the results of a comprehensive survey of prophages and CRISPR in a total of 91 genomes of SRP with several genotypic, phenotypic, and physiological traits, including genome size, cell volume, minimum doubling time, cell wall, and habitat, among others. Our analysis discovered 81 prophages in 51 strains, representing the 56% of the total evaluated strains. Prophages are non-uniformly distributed across the SRP phylogeny, where prophage-rich lineages belonged to Desulfovibrionaceae and Peptococcaceae. Furthermore, our study found 160 CRISPR arrays in 71 SRP, which is more abundant and widely spread than previously expected. Although there is no correlation between presence and abundance of prophages and CRISPR arrays at the strain level, our analysis showed that there is a directly proportional relation between cellular volumes and number of prophages per cell. This result suggests that there is an additional selective pressure for strains with smaller cells to get rid of foreign DNA, such as prophages, but not CRISPR, due to less availability of cellular resources. Analysis of the prophage genes encoding viral structural proteins reported that 44% of SRP prophages are classified as Myoviridae, and comparative analysis showed high level of homology, but not synteny, among prophages belonging to the Family Desulfovibrionaceae. We further recovered viral-like particles and structures that resemble outer membrane vesicles from D. vulgaris str. Hildenborough. The results of this study improved the current understanding of dynamic interactions between prophages and CRISPR with their hosts in both cultured and hitherto-uncultured SRP strains, and how their distribution affects the microbial community dynamics in several sulfidogenic natural and engineered environments. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8146710 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81467102021-05-26 Ecophysiological Features Shape the Distribution of Prophages and CRISPR in Sulfate Reducing Prokaryotes Orellana, Roberto Arancibia, Alejandra Badilla, Leonardo Acosta, Jonathan Arancibia, Gabriela Escar, Rodrigo Ferrada, Gustavo Seeger, Michael Microorganisms Article Sulfate reducing prokaryotes (SRP) are a phylogenetically and physiologically diverse group of microorganisms that use sulfate as an electron acceptor. SRP have long been recognized as key players of the carbon and sulfur cycles, and more recently, they have been identified to play a relevant role as part of syntrophic and symbiotic relations and the human microbiome. Despite their environmental relevance, there is a poor understanding about the prevalence of prophages and CRISPR arrays and how their distribution and dynamic affect the ecological role of SRP. We addressed this question by analyzing the results of a comprehensive survey of prophages and CRISPR in a total of 91 genomes of SRP with several genotypic, phenotypic, and physiological traits, including genome size, cell volume, minimum doubling time, cell wall, and habitat, among others. Our analysis discovered 81 prophages in 51 strains, representing the 56% of the total evaluated strains. Prophages are non-uniformly distributed across the SRP phylogeny, where prophage-rich lineages belonged to Desulfovibrionaceae and Peptococcaceae. Furthermore, our study found 160 CRISPR arrays in 71 SRP, which is more abundant and widely spread than previously expected. Although there is no correlation between presence and abundance of prophages and CRISPR arrays at the strain level, our analysis showed that there is a directly proportional relation between cellular volumes and number of prophages per cell. This result suggests that there is an additional selective pressure for strains with smaller cells to get rid of foreign DNA, such as prophages, but not CRISPR, due to less availability of cellular resources. Analysis of the prophage genes encoding viral structural proteins reported that 44% of SRP prophages are classified as Myoviridae, and comparative analysis showed high level of homology, but not synteny, among prophages belonging to the Family Desulfovibrionaceae. We further recovered viral-like particles and structures that resemble outer membrane vesicles from D. vulgaris str. Hildenborough. The results of this study improved the current understanding of dynamic interactions between prophages and CRISPR with their hosts in both cultured and hitherto-uncultured SRP strains, and how their distribution affects the microbial community dynamics in several sulfidogenic natural and engineered environments. MDPI 2021-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8146710/ /pubmed/33925267 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9050931 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Orellana, Roberto Arancibia, Alejandra Badilla, Leonardo Acosta, Jonathan Arancibia, Gabriela Escar, Rodrigo Ferrada, Gustavo Seeger, Michael Ecophysiological Features Shape the Distribution of Prophages and CRISPR in Sulfate Reducing Prokaryotes |
title | Ecophysiological Features Shape the Distribution of Prophages and CRISPR in Sulfate Reducing Prokaryotes |
title_full | Ecophysiological Features Shape the Distribution of Prophages and CRISPR in Sulfate Reducing Prokaryotes |
title_fullStr | Ecophysiological Features Shape the Distribution of Prophages and CRISPR in Sulfate Reducing Prokaryotes |
title_full_unstemmed | Ecophysiological Features Shape the Distribution of Prophages and CRISPR in Sulfate Reducing Prokaryotes |
title_short | Ecophysiological Features Shape the Distribution of Prophages and CRISPR in Sulfate Reducing Prokaryotes |
title_sort | ecophysiological features shape the distribution of prophages and crispr in sulfate reducing prokaryotes |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8146710/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33925267 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9050931 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT orellanaroberto ecophysiologicalfeaturesshapethedistributionofprophagesandcrisprinsulfatereducingprokaryotes AT arancibiaalejandra ecophysiologicalfeaturesshapethedistributionofprophagesandcrisprinsulfatereducingprokaryotes AT badillaleonardo ecophysiologicalfeaturesshapethedistributionofprophagesandcrisprinsulfatereducingprokaryotes AT acostajonathan ecophysiologicalfeaturesshapethedistributionofprophagesandcrisprinsulfatereducingprokaryotes AT arancibiagabriela ecophysiologicalfeaturesshapethedistributionofprophagesandcrisprinsulfatereducingprokaryotes AT escarrodrigo ecophysiologicalfeaturesshapethedistributionofprophagesandcrisprinsulfatereducingprokaryotes AT ferradagustavo ecophysiologicalfeaturesshapethedistributionofprophagesandcrisprinsulfatereducingprokaryotes AT seegermichael ecophysiologicalfeaturesshapethedistributionofprophagesandcrisprinsulfatereducingprokaryotes |