Volume 43, Issue 6 pp. 1387-1400
Free Access

A genome-wide strategy for the identification of essential genes in Staphylococcus aureus

R. Allyn Forsyth

R. Allyn Forsyth

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

The first three authors contributed equally to this work.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Robert J. Haselbeck

Robert J. Haselbeck

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

The first three authors contributed equally to this work.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Kari L. Ohlsen

Kari L. Ohlsen

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

The first three authors contributed equally to this work.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Robert T. Yamamoto

Robert T. Yamamoto

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Howard Xu

Howard Xu

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 John D. Trawick

John D. Trawick

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Daniel Wall

Daniel Wall

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Liangsu Wang

Liangsu Wang

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Vickie Brown-Driver

Vickie Brown-Driver

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Jamie M. Froelich

Jamie M. Froelich

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Kedar G. C.

Kedar G. C.

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Paula King

Paula King

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Melissa McCarthy

Melissa McCarthy

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Cheryl Malone

Cheryl Malone

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Brian Misiner

Brian Misiner

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 David Robbins

David Robbins

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Zehui Tan

Zehui Tan

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Zhan-yang Zhu

Zhan-yang Zhu

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Grant Carr

Grant Carr

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Deborah A. Mosca

Deborah A. Mosca

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Carlos Zamudio

Carlos Zamudio

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 J. Gordon Foulkes

J. Gordon Foulkes

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
1 Judith W. Zyskind

Judith W. Zyskind

Elitra Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

Search for more papers by this author
2
First published: 25 April 2002
Citations: 145
*For correspondence. E-mail [email protected]; Tel. (+1) 858 4103053; Fax (+1) 858 4103072.

Summary

To address the need for new approaches to antibiotic drug development, we have identified a large number of essential genes for the bacterial pathogen, Staphylococcus aureus, using a rapid shotgun antisense RNA method. Staphylococcus aureus chromosomal DNA fragments were cloned into a xylose-inducible expression plasmid and transformed into S. aureus. Homology comparisons between 658 S. aureus genes identified in this particular antisense screen and the Mycoplasma genitalium genome, which contains 517 genes in total, yielded 168 conserved genes, many of which appear to be essential in M. genitalium and other bacteria. Examples are presented in which expression of an antisense RNA specifically reduces its cognate mRNA. A cell-based, drug-screening assay is also described, wherein expression of an antisense RNA confers specific sensitivity to compounds targeting that gene product. This approach enables facile assay development for high throughput screening for any essential gene, independent of its biochemical function, thereby greatly facilitating the search for new antibiotics.

Introduction

The spread of antibiotic resistance in bacteria has intensified the need for novel approaches to antimicrobial drug discovery. Antibiotics in current use target about 15 out of the approximately 265–350 essential genes (Hutchison et al., 1999) in bacterial genomes. The need to identify such untapped potential antibiotic targets in bacterial pathogens has fostered innovative approaches for essential gene identification. These include gene disruption or deletion (Joyce and Grindley, 1984; Link et al., 1997; Xia et al., 1999), promoter replacement (Jana et al., 2000; Zhang et al., 2000), saturation transposon mutagenesis in Mycoplasma genomes to deduce essential genes (Hutchison et al., 1999), transposon delivery of conditionally expressed promoters (Chow and Berg, 1988), comparative genomics combined with conditional expression (Arigoni et al., 1998; Freiberg et al., 2001), and approaches that use in vitro transposition in combination with genetic footprinting or with polymerase chain re-action (PCR) and Southern analysis (Akerley et al., 1998; Reich et al., 1999).

Staphylococcus aureus, the most frequent causative agent of nosocomial infections, has become a major public health threat as a result of the increased incidence of drug resistance in this organism. Since the emergence of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) in the 1970s, the only effective antibiotics against such strains are vancomycin and linezolid. In the last few years, new strains of MRSA also resistant to vancomycin (glycopeptide intermediate resistance in S. aureus, GISA) have been isolated, making it very difficult to treat some S. aureus infections.

As a first step towards the development of new anti-biotics to combat such pathogens, we have developed a rapid shotgun antisense procedure for the comprehensive identification of S. aureus genes essential for growth. Inhibition of gene expression by antisense RNA has been observed in natural bacterial systems (Altuvia and Wagner, 2000; Wagner and Simons, 1994) and has been used for silencing gene expression (Engdahl et al., 1997; Ji et al., 1999). Key features of an effective antisense RNA are its stability and accessibility to participate in RNA–RNA duplexes (Zeiler et al., 1998), which are features that are not readily predictable. One major advantage of the genome-wide antisense fragmentation approach described here is that it selects the maximum growth inhibitory activity of antisense RNAs from large random populations. In this approach, essential genes are identified after conditionally expressing random genomic fragments, and then screening for fragments whose expression blocks growth. The genes targeted by anti-sense RNA are identified by DNA sequencing and BLAST analysis against the annotated genome sequence of the S. aureus MRSA strain, N315 (Kuroda et al., 2001). This approach has led to the identification of a comprehensive set of S. aureus essential genes that will enable the discovery of new antimicrobial compounds. In addition, we describe a cell-based assay for discovering new anti-biotics, which uses the expression of an antisense RNA, complementary to the mRNA of an essential gene, to reduce the level of the targeted mRNA and, thereby, target protein levels.

Results

pT5X xylose-inducible promoter: RNAs stability and abundance

The stability and abundance of an antisense RNA can play a critical role in determining its ability to block the expression of a cognate mRNA (Case et al., 1989). To determine the stability of RNA expressed from the pT5X promoter, cells containing the plasmid pEPSA5 (Fig. 1) were treated with 2% xylose for 10 min followed by rifampicin (200 μg ml−1) treatment. Total cellular RNA was isolated at various times, and the half-life of vector RNA transcribed from the pT5X promoter was determined to be >5 min by Northern analysis (data not shown), suggesting that, for a bacterial RNA, this molecule is relatively stable. In addition, the vector RNA transcribed from the pT5X promoter appears to be so abundant to be visible on ethidium bromide-stained agarose gels (data not shown). Given these observations, high steady-state levels of RNA from this promoter in S. aureus should be achievable.

Details are in the caption following the image

The pEPSA5 S. aureus/E. coli shuttle vector.

Shotgun antisense identification of essential genes

An example of the process for shotgun antisense identification of essential genes in S. aureus is described in Fig. 2. Genomic fragments from S. aureus strain RN450 between Å200 and 800 bp were ligated into pEPSA5, downstream of the xylose-inducible promoter pT5X. The genomic library was amplified by passage through Escherichia coli to provide sufficient amounts of DNA, and DNA from the pooled library was then transformed into S. aureus strain RN4220. The inserts of the resulting 3117 xylose-sensitive clones were sequenced, and the identity of the gene source and fragment orientation were determined by BLAST analysis against the annotated genome sequence of the S. aureus MRSA strain, N315 (Kuroda et al., 2001). From this particular screen, 2169 clones were found to contain genomic inserts in an antisense orientation relative to pT5X, representing 658 unique genes. The remaining clones contained inserts representing several classes, including inserts in the sense orientation relative to the promoter, mixed convergent and divergent inserts and intergenic inserts.

Details are in the caption following the image

Flow chart for shotgun antisense gene discovery depicting numbers of clones screened.

Antisense induction resulted in various growth phenotypes ranging from a complete inability to grow to marginal reduction in growth rate (Fig. 3). In some cases, multiple clones targeting the same essential gene showed different levels of inhibition (data not shown). Only clones showing strong growth inhibition upon antisense induction were characterized further.

Details are in the caption following the image

Assessment of growth inhibition of clones on solid agar (A) and in liquid media (B). A. Eight 10-fold dilutions were performed on RN4220 carrying pEPSA5 or S1–760A (produces antisense to rplQ) and replica-plated onto LBG + 2% xylose (inducing medium, +) and LBG (non-inducing medium, –) demonstrating specific growth inhibition of S1–760A. B. Exponential cultures of RN4220 carrying S1–760A were diluted into inducing and non-inducing media as duplicate cultures and the OD600 monitored over 10 h to track growth or its inhibition. Error bars depict the deviation of the duplicate samples.

Saturation analysis

The average size of the inhibitory inserts was 221 basepairs (bp), with 43 bp being the smallest and 854 bp being the largest fragment. Overall, 50% of the recovered fragments were 200–500 bp and 40% were 100–200 bp. Using the average length of the clones found in this screen, 221 bp, and applying the formula n = ln(1-Φf)/ ln(1–f), in which n is the number of clones necessary to obtain a single specific clone, Φ is the probability of obtaining at least one of any possible gene sequence, and f is the fraction of the genome contained in an average-sized cloned insert (Zissel et al., 1992), we calculate that by screening 208 226 inserts, we ensured that we sampled the entire genome with greater than 99.99% confidence.

Nearly 50% of the genes inhibited by antisense in this screen were targeted two or more times (Fig. 4). On average, 3.2 genomic fragments expressed antisense to a given gene. In one extreme example, 31 different antisense fragments to the rpoB gene were recovered. These fragments cover discrete regions of the gene, with a notable absence of fragments mapping to the N-terminal portion of the coding region (Fig. 5). We observed this for other genes identified in this screen, suggesting that there may be preferred sites for antisense inhibitory activity, as well as sites that are not favourable substrates for antisense inhibition. Alternatively, such regions may not be amenable to cloning, possibly because transcription of the DNA in that region is deleterious to E. coli.

Details are in the caption following the image

The frequency with which single genes were targeted by shotgun antisense.

Details are in the caption following the image

Map of the rpoB gene, demonstrating the location and relative size of 31 different cloned antisense fragments.

Demonstration of specific targeting of the antisense RNA

To gain confirming evidence that the primary effect of antisense induction is the specific perturbance of the target mRNA, Real Time PCR (RT-PCR) was used to monitor the fate of target mRNAs and a non-targeted control mRNA early in response to induction of antisense (Fig. 6). The rplQ gene encodes the ribosomal protein L17 of the 50S subunit, and lig codes for DNA ligase, an activity shown to be essential in Bacillus subtilis (Petit and Ehrlich, 2000). RT-PCR revealed that rplQ mRNA decreases by 85% within 15 min of rplQ antisense RNA induction. No effect is observed on the unrelated mRNA of the lig gene. Conversely, lig mRNA decreases nearly 60% after lig antisense RNA induction, with no significant change in the rplQ mRNA.

Details are in the caption following the image

Targeted mRNAs decrease in concentration only with induction of their specific antisense. As measured by RT-PCR, rplQ mRNA decreases in response to induction of rplQ antisense (blue) whereas an unrelated lig mRNA shows no significant change. In the reciprocal case, lig mRNA decreases in response to induction of lig antisense (red) whereas the rplQ mRNA shows no significant change.

Comparison of S. aureus antisense inhibited genes to the M. genitalium gene set

The 658 S. aureus genes identified in this particular screen were compared with the gene set of M. genitalium to examine the efficiency of essential gene identification by antisense. Hutchison and colleagues (Hutchison et al., 1999), mapped most of the non-essential genes in M. genitalium by nearly saturating the genome using transposon mutagenesis. Those genes for which no insertions were recovered were inferred to be essential, thus providing a potential minimal set of 256–350 essential genes in the 517 genes comprising the genome of these bacteria. Comparison of the antisense RNA-inhibited S. aureus genes to the full M. genitalium gene set resulted in 168 Staphylococcus genes with clear Mycoplasma homologues (Table 1). Out of these 168 genes, 146 were not disrupted in the exhaustive transposon mutagenesis screen of the Mycoplasma genome, suggesting that these genes are essential in both organisms. Not surprisingly, M. genitalium and S. aureus share essential genes in most major functional categories; cell envelope pro-cesses, metabolism, DNA replication, RNA synthesis, protein synthesis and a set of unknown genes. Mycoplasma genitalium lacks a functional cell wall, and genes involved in cell wall synthesis are not present in this organism. In contrast, many of these genes were represented in the S. aureus antisense hits (data not shown).

Table 1. Comparison of S. aureus genes essential by shotgun antisense to homologues of M. genitalium.
N315 gene Strain N315 # of independent M. genitalium Presumed essentiality
Class Subclass name gene description clones gene in M. genitalium
I Cell envelope and cellular processes
I-1 Cell wall
murA UDP-N-acetylglucosamine 1-carboxyvinyl transferase 1 7 MG466 Essential
I-2 Transport/binding proteins and lipoproteins
oppF oligopeptide transport ATP-binding protein 1 MG079 Essential
SA0272 similar to transmembrane protein Tmp7 1 MG424 Essential
fruA fructose specific permease 6 MG062 Not essential
SA0675 similar to ABC transporter ATP-binding protein 1 MG467 Not essential
SA0774 ABC transporter ATP-binding protein homologue 1 MG079 Essential
SA1747 similar to ABC transporter, ATP-binding protein 1 MG180 Essential
opuCA glycine betaine/carnitine/choline ABC transporter 2 MG468.1 Essential
opp-1D oligopeptide transporter putative ATPase domain 1 MG079 Essential
SA2434 fructose phosphotransferase system enzyme fruA homolog 1 MG062 Not essential
vraD hypothetical protein, similar to ABC transporter 1 MG180 Essential
I-3 Sensors (signal transduction)
vraS two-component sensor histidine kinase 1 MG397 Essential
I-4 Membrane bioenergetics (electron
transport chain and ATP synthase)
atpF ATP synthase B chain 1 MG403 Essential
I-6 Protein secretion
secA preprotein translocase subunit 6 MG072 Essential
SA1078 signal recognition particle 2 MG297 Essential
ffh signal recognition particle homolog 6 MG048 Essential
secY preprotein translocase SecY subunit 11 MG170 Essential
SA2442 preprotein translocase SecA homolog 3 MG072 Essential
I-7 Cell division
ftsH cell-division protein 1 MG457 Essential
ftsZ cell division protein 9 MG224 Essential
gidA glucose inhibited division protein A 3 MG379 Essential
I-8 Sporulation
obg Spo0B-associated GTP-binding protein 13 MG384 Essential
II Intermediary metabolism
II-1 Metabolism of carbohydrates and related molecules
II-1–1 Specific pathways
fruB fructose 1-phosphate kinase 5 MG063 Essential
glpK glycerol kinase 2 MG038 Essential
SA1523 acetyl-CoA carboxylase transferase beta subunit 3 MG325 Essential
mtlD mannitol-1-phosphate 5-dehydrogenase 2 MG362 Essential
lacA galactose-6-phosphate isomerase LacA subunit 1 MG396 Essential
SA2279 hypothetical protein, similar to phosphomannomutase 1 MG053 Essential
gntK gluconokinase 7 MG038 Essential
II-1–2 Main glycolytic pathways
gap glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase 3 MG301 Essential
eno enolase 4 MG407 Essential
pgi glucose-6-phosphate isomerase A 4 MG111 Essential
phdB pyruvate dehydrogenase E1 component beta subunit 1 MG273 Essential
pdhC dihydrolipoamide S-acetyltransferase component of pyruvate dehydrogenase E2 4 MG272 Essential
pdhD dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase component of pyruvate dehydrogenase E3 5 MG271 Essential
tkt transketolase 3 MG066 Essential
SA1349 dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase 8 MG271 Essential
pykA pyruvate kinase 2 MG216 Essential
pfk 6-phosphofructokinase 4 MG215 Essential
fbaA fructose-bisphosphate aldolase 3 MG023 Essential
II-2 Metabolism of amino acids and related molecules
bmfBB branched-chain alpha-keto acid dehydrogenase E2 9 MG272 Essential
bfmBAB branched-chain alpha-keto acid dehydrogenase E1 7 MG273 Essential
bfmBAA branched-chain alpha-keto acid dehydrogenase E1 16 MG274 Essential
metK S-adenosylmethionine synthetase 2 MG047 Essential
glyA serine hydroxymethyl transferase 1 MG394 Not essential
II-3 Metabolism of nucleotides and nucleic acids
pta phosphotransacetylase 2 MG299 Not essential
pyrC dihydroorotase 1 MG163 Essential
upp uracil phosphoribosyl transferase 2 MG030 Essential
tdk thymidine kinase 1 MG034 Essential
SA1939 deoxyribose-phosphate aldolase 3 MG050 Essential
adk adenylate kinase 6 MG171 Essential
II-4 Metabolism of lipids
cdsA phosphatidate cytidylyltransferase 2 MG437 Essential
II-5 Metabolism of coenzymes and prosthetic groups
dfrA dihydrofolate reductase 1 MG228 Essential
hemC porphobilinogen deaminase 2 MG238 Essential
III Information pathways
III-1 DNA replication
dnaA chromosomal replication initiator protein 12 MG469 Essential
dnaC replicative DNA helicase 5 MG094 Essential
dnaX DNA polymerase III gamma and tau subunits 7 MG420 Essential
polC DNA polymerase III, alpha chain PolC-type 8 MG031 Essential
dnaE DNA polymerase III, alpha chain 1 MG261 Not essential
lig DNA ligase 3 MG254 Essential
pcrA ATP-depentend DNA helicase 1 MG244 Not essential
III-2 DNA replication/modification and repair
uvrA exinuclease ABC subunit A 2 MG421 Not essential
mutS2 MutS-like protein 1 MG159 Essential
III-4 DNA packaging and segregation
gyrB DNA gyrase subunit B 5 MG003 Essential
gyrA DNA gyrase subunit A 12 MG004 Essential
smc chromosome segregation SMC protein 3 MG298 Essential
parE topoisomerase IV subunit B 11 MG203 Essential
parC topoisomerase IV subunit A 6 MG204 Essential
III-5 RNA synthesis
III-5–2 Regulation
hprK HPr kinase/phosphatase 1 MG085 Not essential
III-5–3 Elongation
rpoC RNA polymerase beta-prime chain 27 MG340 Essential
rpoA DNA-directed RNA polymerase alpha chain 9 MG177 Essential
III-6 RNA modification
trmD tRNA 2 MG445 Essential
SA1885 hypothetical protein, similar to ATP-dependent RNA helicase 2 MG425 Essential
III-7 Protein synthesis
III-7–1 Ribosomal proteins
rplA 50S ribosomal protein L1 1 MG082 Essential
rplB 50S ribosomal protein L2 20 MG154 Essential
rplC 50S ribosomal protein L3 5 MG151 Essential
rplD 50S ribosomal protein L4 9 MG152 Essential
rplE 50S ribosomal protein L5 8 MG163 Essential
rplF 50S ribosomal protein L6 2 MG166 Essential
rplI 50S ribosomal protein L9 2 MG093 Not essential
rplJ 50S ribosomal protein L10 7 MG361 Essential
rplK 50S ribosomal protein L11 8 MG081 Essential
rplL 50S ribosomal protein L7/L12 7 MG362 Essential
rplM 50S ribosomal protein L13 7 MG418 Essential
rplN 50S ribosomal protein L14 12 MG161 Essential
rplO 50S ribosomal protein L15 8 MG169 Essential
rplP 50S ribosomal protein L16 5 MG158 Essential
rplQ 50S ribosomal protein L17 7 MG178 Essential
rplR 50S ribosomal protein L18 4 MG167 Essential
rplS 50S ribosomal protein L19 5 MG444 Essentia
rplT 50S ribosomal protein L20 1 MG198 Essential
rplU 50S ribosomal protein L21 3 MG232 Essential
rplV 50S ribosomal protein L22 8 MG156 Essential
rplW 50S ribosomal protein L23 5 MG153 Essentiall
rplX 50S ribosomal protein L24 3 MG162 Essential
rpmH 50S ribosomal protein L34 5 MG466 Essential
rpmJ 50S ribosomal protein L36 2 MG174 Essential
rpsB 30S ribosomal protein S2 7 MG070 Essential
rpsC 30S ribosomal protein S3 9 MG157 Essential
rpsD 30S ribosomal protein S4 6 MG311 Essential
rpsE 30S ribosomal protein S5 10 MG168 Essential
rpsG 30S ribosomal protein S7 6 MG088 Essential
rpsH 30S ribosomal protein S8 2 MG165 Essential
rpsI 30S ribosomal protein S9 8 MG417 Essential
rpsJ 30S ribosomal protein S10 4 MG150 Essential
rpsK 30S ribosomal protein S11 7 MG176 Essential
rpsL 30S ribosomal protein S12 5 MG087 Essential
rpsM 30S ribosomal protein S13 5 MG175 Essential
rpsN 30S ribosomal protein S14 3 MG164 Essential
rpsP 30S ribosomal protein S16 1
rpsQ 30S ribosomal protein S17 2 MG160 Essential
rpsR 30S ribosomal protein S18 6 MG092 Essential
rpsS 30S ribosomal protein S19 9 MG155 Essential
III-7–2 Aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases
metS methionyl-tRNA synthetase 7 MG021 Essential
lysS lysyl-tRNA synthetase 20 MG136 Essential
gltX glutamyl-tRNA synthetase 7 MG462 Essential
argS arginyl-tRNA synthetase 2 MG378 Essential
trpS tryptophanyl-tRNA synthetase 2 MG126 Essential
pheS Phe-tRNA synthetase alpha chain 3 MG194 Essential
pheT Phe-tRNA synthetase beta chain 16 MG195 Essential
ileS Ile-tRNA synthetase 19 MG345 Not essential
alaS alanyl-tRNA synthetase 14 MG292 Essential
aspS aspartyl-tRNA synthetase 8 MG036 Essential
hisS histidyl-tRNA synthetase 6 MG035 Essential
valS valine-tRNA ligase 4 MG334 Essential
thrS threonyl-tRNA synthetase 1 3 MG375 Essential
tyrS tyrosyl-tRNA synthetase 2 MG455 Not essential
SA1563 phenylalanyl-tRNA synthetase (beta subunit) homolog 1 MG449 Essential
leuS leucyl-rRNA synthetase 18 MG266 Essential
SA1715 glutamyl-tRNAGln amidotransferase subunit B 12 MG100 Essential
SA1716 glutamyl-tRNAGln amidotransferase subunit A 16 MG099 Essential
III-7–3 Initiation
infB translation initiation factor IF-2 4 MG142 Essential
infC translation initiation factor IF-3 infC 2 MG196 Essential
infA translation initiation factor IF-1 4 MG173 Essential
III-7–4 Elongation
fus translational elongation factor G 19 MG089 Essential
tufA translational elongation factor TU 18 MG451 Essential
ssrP ssrA-binding protein 1 MG059 Not essential
SA0959 GTP-binding elongation factor 1 MG138 Essential
SA1100 homolog elongation factor TS 3 MG433 Essential
III-7–5 Termination
prfA peptide chain release factor 1 1 MG258 Essential
III-8 Protein modification
ptsH phophocarrier protein HPR 1 MG041 Essential
ptsI phosphoenolpyruvate-protein phosphatase 4 MG429 Essential
SA1063 protein kinase 1 MG109 Essential
SA1854 similar to O-sialoglycoprotein 4 MG046 Essential
IV Other functions
IV-1 Adaption to atypical conditions
clpC endopeptidase 3 MG355 Not essential
clpB ClpB chaperone homologue 1 MG355 Not essential
clpL ATP-dependent Clp proteinase chain ClpL 2 MG355 Not essential
V Similar to unknown proteins
SA0351 hypothetical protein, similar to GTP-binding protein 1 MG024 Not essential
SA0437 conserved hypothetical protein 1 MG134 Essential
SA0447 conserved hypothetical protein 1 MG056 Essential
SA0449 conserved hypothetical protein 3 MG009 Not essential
SA0464 conserved hypothetical protein 2 MG004 Essential
SA0467 conserved hypothetical protein 3 MG084 Essential
SA0722 conserved hypothetical protein 3 MG103 Not essential
SA0940 conserved hypothetical protein 9 MG139 Essential
SA1031 conserved hypothetical protein 2 MG198 Essential
SA1086 conserved hypothetical protein 1 MG442 Not essential
SA1118 conserved hypotehtical protein 5 MG139 Essential
SA1187 conserved hypothetical protein 1 MG247 Essential
SA1252 conserved hypothetical protein 1 MG448 Essential
SA1307 hypothetical protein, similar to GTP binding protein 6 MG329 Essential
SA1445 conserved hypothetical protein 3 MG002 Not essential
SA1449 (5-methylaminomethyl-2- 5 MG295 Not essential
thiouridylate)-methyltransferase
SA0772 conserved hypothetical protein 3 MG355 Not essential
SA1957 conserved hypothetical protein 1 MG265 Essential
SA1966 conserved hypothetical protein 1 MG105 Essential
VI No similarity
SA0732 hypothetical protein 1 MG104 Essential
SA5049 hypothetical protein 1 MG008 Essential

Antisense RNA expression leads to selective cell sensitization

We hypothesize that expression of an inhibitory antisense RNA results in a decrease in concentration of an essential protein, and that this may hypersensitize the cell to drugs that specifically inhibit that protein. The S. aureus clone expressing an antisense RNA to the gene, fab (fabF, yjaY), encoding β-ketoacyl-acyl carrier protein synthase, was examined for sensitivity to cerulenin (Schujman et al., 2001), a specific inhibitor of this enzyme. When the antisense RNA to the fab gene was induced with xylose, cells exhibited increased sensitivity to the inhibitor cerulenin (almost 12-fold, Fig. 7). In contrast, the same cells were not significantly sensitized to a variety of antibiotics that inhibit different protein targets, for example, targets involved in the synthesis of DNA, RNA, proteins, cell wall synthesis or even to triclosan (Slater-Radosti et al., 2001), an inhibitor of another fatty acid synthesis enzyme, enoyl-ACP reductase. All strongly inhibitory antisense clones to known antibiotic targets that we have tested show hypersensitivity to their respective antibiotics (data not shown).

Details are in the caption following the image

Induction of antisense to fab mRNA only sensitizes cells to the specific inhibitor, cerulenin. The average fold increases in sensitivity to various antibiotics exhibited by a S. aureus strain harbouring plasmid S1-1941, which expresses antisense RNA to the fab mRNA encoding β-ketoacyl-acyl carrier protein synthase. The highest concentrations (ng ml–1) of the antibiotics tested were: carbenicillin, 500; cefotaxime, 2000; cloxacillin, 250; oxacillin, 130; phosphomycin, 2000; vancomycin, 2000; coumermycin, 50; norfloxacin, 2000; ofloxacin, 1000; novobiocin, 600; cerulenin, 64 000; hexachlorophene, 1600; triclosan, 1000; clindamycin, 200; doxycycline, 100; erythromycin, 2000; gentamycin, 3000; lincomycin, 1000; roxithromycin, 1000; spectinomycin, 64 000; trimethoprim, 8000; streptolydigin, 64 000; rifampicin, 50; actinomycin D, 2000. The insert shows the effect of cerulenin on cell growth as a percentage of non-drug-treated controls under antisense induced and non-induced conditions.

Discussion

Here, we present a novel shotgun antisense approach used to identify genes essential for growth of S. aureus. An ideal strategy would comprise two main features, the rapid identification of all essential genes without prior knowledge of gene location, size, or function, and the comprehensive creation of conditional lethals as tools to assist in drug discovery.

While this paper was in review, Ji and colleagues (Ji et al., 2001) described a similar approach to ours in which expression of antisense RNA caused either a lethal or growth-inhibitory effect in 150 S. aureus genes, which were identified by their closest B. subtilis homologue. Ji and colleagues (Ji et al., 2001) also demonstrated that expression of antisense RNA directed against two known essential genes prevented infection in an animal model.

Our extensive analysis of the S. aureus genome resulted in a more comprehensive recovery of essential genes. This essential gene list includes representatives from all major essential functional groups such as cell wall biosynthesis, protein synthesis including the entire tRNA synthetase complement, fatty acid biosynthesis, DNA replication and RNA transcription.

We looked for homologues to the 658 unique S. aureus genes (N315 has 2595 genes; Kuroda et al., 2001) in which antisense expression resulted in growth inhibition, in the smaller genome of M. genitalium (517 genes; Fraser et al., 1995; Hutchison et al., 1999). Out of the 168 S. aureus genes sensitive to antisense inhibition and conserved in M. genitalium, 146 (86.4%) are homologues to Mycoplasma genes that have been implicated as essential open reading frames (ORFs) (Hutchison et al., 1999). Among the 22 S. aureus genes that were homologues to Mycoplasma knockouts (non-essential ORFs) are genes that are known to be essential in other bacteria. For example, Gram-positive organisms have two essential genes, polC and dnaE, homologous to the E. coli dnaE gene encoding the α-subunit of DNA polymerase III holoenzyme. Purified PolC contains both polymerase and 3′-5′-exonuclease activity, whereas DnaE has only polymerase activity (Sanjanwala and Ganesan, 1991; Bruck and O´Donnell, 2000; Klemperer et al., 2000). In our screen, we isolated antisense inhibitors to both genes. Both polC and dnaE are also essential in Gram-positive bacteria; (Flett et al., 1999; Tarantino et al., 1999; Dervyn et al., 2001; Inove et al., 2001), however, a transposon mutation was recovered only in the dnaE gene but not in the polC gene of M. genitalium (Hutchison et al., 1999).

Other probable essential genes identified in the Mycoplasma knockouts as non-essential were ileS, tyrS and ribosomal protein L9 (Hutchison et al., 1999). If one curates the putative non-essential gene list by removing these known essentials, which may represent incomplete gene disruptions or other false positives, nearly 90% of the S. aureus genes we isolated with identified homologues in M. genitalium were in the Mycoplasma putative essential list.

Many of the genes recovered by this screen did not have clear homologues in M. genitalium but are known to be essential. The lack of a cell wall in Mycoplasma (Razin et al., 1985) points to clear differences in the complexity of the membranes of both organisms. Consequently, some mur genes, penicillin binding proteins, D-ala-D-ala ligase, and other genes involved in the maintenance of the S. aureus cell wall, do not appear in M. genitalium.

Antisense induction results in a significant decrease in the target mRNA within 15 min of induction whereas a control mRNA exhibited no change (Fig. 6). Several mechanisms of antisense inhibition have been postulated, for example, mRNA decay via double-stranded RNase attack of the RNA duplex, ribosome occlusion resulting in inhibition of translation or premature translation termination. The mechanism of the premature degradation of specific mRNAs induced by antisense is an area of active experimentation (manuscript in preparation).

Antisense inhibition of a polycistronic mRNA may result in the rapid degradation of the entire mRNA, causing loss of expression of all of the proteins encoded on that mRNA, similar to a gene knockout, which may cause polar effects (Link et al., 1997). Thus, expression of an antisense RNA to an apparent non-essential gene might result in the degradation of an entire mRNA, which also may encode an essential gene.

A given antisense RNA also may inhibit a gene family by way of complementarity to a common motif. One example detected by the antisense screen was murA, which encodes the first concerted enzymatic step of cell wall biosynthesis and is represented by two loci, murA and murZ (murA2), in S. aureus and other low GC content Gram-positive bacteria (Du et al., 2000; Kuroda et al., 2001). As both loci must be ablated to cause an essential growth phenotype (Du et al., 2000), growth sensitivity caused by an antisense clone directed to one or the other genes suggests that both transcripts are affected. The S. aureus murA (seven antisense clones) and murZ (one antisense clone) genes have 59% identity at the DNA level, which has been shown in studies of naturally occurring antisense regulation to be sufficient for regulation of more than one locus (Altuvia et al., 2000). Experiments are ongoing to investigate whether there is, indeed, simultaneous antisense regulation of murA and murZ expression.

Shotgun antisense screening of a genome has proven to be readily scalable with robotics and applicable to other bacterial genomes. At present, we are able to screen over 1.5 million clones per month for growth-defective phenotypes. In comparison, the generation of conditional mutations, such as temperature sensitive mutants, requires mapping and sequencing. Furthermore, there is always the concern of mutations at multiple chromosomal locations (Schmid et al., 1989). When applied globally to Salmonella typhimurium, a number of gene products were refractory to temperature-sensitive mutations (Schmid et al., 1989). These considerations make the shotgun antisense approach more rapid and comprehensive.

Another major advantage of this technology is the ability to rapidly identify essential genes in an organism without prior knowledge of gene location, size or function. This removes biases associated with preselecting loci for analysis, a time-consuming and uncertain process. Freiberg and colleagues (Freiberg et al., 2001) found that only six out of 27 genes identified bioinformatically as highly conserved in a range of bacterial pathogens proved to be essential by laboratory experimentation. Arigoni and colleagues (Arigoni et al., 1998) also used a bioinformatic approach to select candidates for gene knockouts with similar results; only six out of 26 highly conserved genes chosen were essential.

The shotgun antisense technology is a very rapid and broadly portable way to identify essential genes in almost any microorganism. In principle, all that is required is an inducible promoter and a plasmid vector. In practice, expression systems and host strains need to be optimized to use this method successfully. Once optimized, we have used the shotgun antisense technology in other Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial pathogens with similar success in identifying essential genes.

The results of our genomic screens are being used to assemble a list of ‘universally conserved’ essential genes in bacteria. Such genes may serve as our optimal target set for the discovery of broad-spectrum antibiotics. Additionally, we are finding genes that are essential only in one or a subgroup of bacteria. These genes may serve as narrow-spectrum targets. An example of the need for a narrow-spectrum antibiotic is the treatment of persistent Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in cystic fibrosis patients.

Over the last 50 years, nearly every major pharmaceutical company has screened their large chemical libraries against bacterial cells in attempt to find new antibiotics, and the limited success of this approach is now apparent. Less potent, but highly specific inhibitors are not readily identified in such screens. Similarly, simply cloning, expressing and purifying essential proteins for use in biochemical screens has also been unsuccessful; in vitro inhibitors are easy to identify but, typically, have failed to exhibit whole cell activity.

It is clear that a novel-screening paradigm is needed to find new antibiotics. By expressing the antisense to essential genes inside the cell, we have shown cells become hypersensitive to inhibitors of that target, with cells becoming 10–100 fold more sensitive to specific inhibitors. We are now using these hypersensitive strains in drug screens to find new classes of inhibitors for novel bacterial targets.

The shotgun antisense approach described here is a facile method to rapidly and comprehensively determine the genes necessary for the growth of microorganisms. This information will aid in the determination of true minimal genome sets and creates conditional lethal strains to be used in the identification of antimicrobial compounds against important pathogens.

Experimental procedures

Bacterial strains and plasmids

Staphylococcus aureus strains used include RN450 and RN4220 (Novick, 1990) and E. coli strains, DH5α and XL1Blue, which were obtained from Gibco-BRL and Stratagene respectively. Plasmids pRN5543 (Novick, 1991), pLEX5BA (Diederich et al., 1994) and pWH942 (Schnappinger et al., 1995) were described previously.

Construction of pEPSA5 containing the pT5X xylose-inducible promoter

The pEPSA5 S. aureus/E. coli shuttle vector (Fig. 1) contains elements that confer autonomous replication and CmR in S. aureus (obtained from the pC194-derived plasmid pRN5548; (Novick 1991). Also included are elements of the multiple cloning site, rrnB T1T2 terminators and the ampicillin resist-ance gene of the plasmid pLEX5BA (Krause et al., 1997), excluding the ColE1 origin of replication, which was exchanged for a NotI cassette containing the lower copy number p15a origin (Diederich et al., 1994). Upstream of the multiple cloning site and terminators is a Gram-positive optimized bacteriophage T5 PN25 promoter (LeGrice, 1990) in context with the operator sequence for the Staphylococcus xylosis XylR repressor protein (Schnappinger et al., 1995), the gene of which is also included as indicated in the map of pEPSA5.

Media and growth conditions

LB, B2 and SOC media and M9 salts were prepared as described (Sambrook et al., 1989). Where indicated, LB was supplemented with 0.2% glucose (LBG). The concentration of antibiotics as selective agents was 100 μg ml−1 for carbenicillin and 15 μg ml−1 for chloramphenicol, unless otherwise indicated.

Electroporation

All electroporations were conducted using a Bio-Rad GenePulser™. Escherichia coli electroporation was carried out according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Staphylococcus aureus electroporations were as described (Schenk and Laddaga, 1992).

Library construction and screening

Genomic DNA was isolated from RN450 using a kit obtained from GENTRA Systems. A final concentration of 50 μg ml−1 of lysostaphin was added during the lysis step, otherwise the isolation was carried out according to the manufacturer’s directions. Genomic DNA was fractionated by DNase I digestion and then blunt-ended with T4-DNA polymerase as described (Sambrook et al., 1989). The resulting genomic fragments were gel-isolated to enrich for fragments in the range of 200–800 basepairs (bp) using a Qiaquick Gel Extraction Kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer’s directions. Resulting genomic fragments were then ligated into the pEPSA5 vector, digested by SmaI and dephosphorylated with calf intestinal alkaline phosphatase (CIP). The resulting ligation was electroporated into E. coli strain DH5α to obtain greater than 1 × 106 individual colonies, which were then combined and subjected to plasmid purification with the use of a Plasmid Maxi Kit (Qiagen). This plasmid library was electroporated into RN4220 to generate approximately 315 000 transformants that were recovered on LBG + 15 μg ml–1 chloramphenicol agar plates. A total of 250 000 S. aureus transformants were arrayed into 384-well plates using the GeneMachine Gel-2-Well™ robot. Following overnight growth at 37°C, 384-well culture plates were replica-plated with a Genomic Solutions Flexys robot onto inducing (LBG + 2% xylose) and non-inducing (LBG) agar medium. Replica plates were incubated overnight at 37°C, and 4452 clones that did not form colonies in the presence of xylose were chosen for re-testing of sensitivity.

Validating clone sensitivity

The sensitivity of the 4452 clones to xylose induction was ranked according to the number of orders of magnitude of growth inhibition. Overnight cultures were diluted 1:100 and grown for 3 h in 96-well microtitre plates (Costar) with shaking at 37°C. Subsequently, cultures were serially diluted 10-fold eight times in 1× M9 salts in 384-well microtitre plates (Costar). Cultures were then robotically replica-plated (Genomic Solution Flexys) onto inducing and non-inducing (LBG + 2% xylose and LBG) media for overnight incubation. Comparative analysis of the number of dilutions that grew in the absence of induction to those that grew in the presence of induction yielded the log inhibition score. A total of 3117 clones had at least three logs of growth inhibition in the presence of xylose induction and was thus considered growth inhibitory.

Clones of interest were also evaluated for growth inhibition in liquid media. Overnight cultures were diluted 1:100 in LBG + 60 μg ml−1 of chloramphenicol. At an approximate OD600 = 0.2 cultures were diluted 1:500 into inducing and non-inducing media in duplicate wells of a 384-well microtitre plate. The OD600 was then followed over time in a SpectraMax plus plate reader.

Bioinformatic analysis

The original genomic location of the sensitive clone inserts was determined by BLASTN analysis of the insert sequences against the recently published S. aureus N315 genome (Kuroda et al., 2001). The identity and orientation of the genes covered were determined by comparison of BLAST hit co-ordinates to the published annotation. The protein sequences of the genes revealed as essential by this shotgun antisense screen were compared with BLAST analysis to the Mycoplasma genitalium proteome (Fraser et al., 1995). Gene products that shared more than 25% identity over more than 70% of the length of an S. aureus polypeptide were con-sidered to be potential homologues. Homologues reported here are the ones with the highest degree of similarity.

RT-PCR analysis

RN4220 carrying either an rplQ antisense clone (S1–760 A) or a lig antisense clone (S1–396 A) were grown to mid-log phase and diluted 1:10 into prewarmed Luria–Bertani (LB) broth. Then, 1 ml was transferred to each of six wells of a 96-deep well plate. Cells were grown to 0.1 OD600 by incubation on an orbital plate shaker at 37°C. Xylose was then added to three of the wells to a final concentration of 2%. After 15 min, the cells were pelleted, and RNA was isolated from each culture using a modified version of the RNeasy 96 RNA purification system (QIAGEN). TaqMan nucleotide primer/probe sets were designed specifically to measure a small segment (typically 100–200 bp) of either the rplQ or lig target mRNAs by Real Time PCR (RT-PCR) (ABI Prism 7700) using a standard curve method (Applied Biosystems). Data were normalized to a 16S rRNA loading control on a well- by-well basis, and +/− induction data was analysed by an unpaired, two-tailed t-test.

Cell-based assay for target-specific inhibitors

An overnight culture of RN4220 carrying plasmid S1- 1941 expressing antisense to the fab gene encoding β- ketoacyl-acyl carrier protein synthase was inoculated into fresh LB plus 34 μg ml−1 of chloramphenicol, and incubated with shaking at 37°C. Exponential cultures were diluted to a final OD600 of 0.002 into two flasks of the same medium containing 0 and 12 mM xylose. After 210 min at 37°C with shaking, the resulting cultures were diluted to an OD600 of 0.00022 into 1.1× LB medium containing either 0 or 12 mM xylose, and 45 μl of each cell suspension was dispensed into 384-well microtitre plates (Matrix Tech Corp.) containing 5 μl of antibiotic compounds or solvent per well.

Each plate contained duplicate sets of antibiotics with six twofold dilutions starting from the highest antibiotic concentration listed (a 7-point series). Antisense-induced and non-induced cells were tested against each set within a microtitre plate to enable direct comparisons of the relative potencies of antibiotics. Plates were sealed, shaken and incubated at 37°C. Cell growth was monitored (OD595) using an UltraMark microtitre plate reader (Bio-Rad Laboratories) for 15 h. IC50 values (concentration of a compound that inhibits growth by 50%) were generated using GRAPHPAD/PRIZM 3.0 to analyse the 7-point dose–response curves. The fold increase in sensitivity was calculated by dividing the IC50 value in the absence of antisense RNA induction, by the IC50 value in the presence of antisense RNA for a given antibiotic.

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Peter Pattee, Steven Projan, Wolfgang Hillen, Walter Messer and Richard Novick for strains and plasmids. We are especially appreciative of the many manuscript improvements suggested by Jeff Winkelman, Moselio Schaechter and Doug Smith. A portion of these studies was supported by National Science Foundation Grant No. MCB-9507209 to J.W.Z. R.A.F. was a Predoctoral Fellow supported by the NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences MARC F31 GM14967-0451 for part of these studies.

    The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.