Genome Report | Genome Report
Microbiol. Biotechnol. Lett. 2024; 52(3): 339-341
https://doi.org/10.48022/mbl.2407.07018
Su-Hyeon Kim, Jaein Choe, and Mi-Kyung Park*
School of Food Science and Biotechnology, and Food and Bio-industry Research Institute, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea
Correspondence to :
Mi-Kyung Park, parkmik@knu.ac.kr
In a previous study, Salmonella Typhimurium-specific phage vB_SalA_KFSST3, which possess antibiofilm activity, was isolated and purified from wastewater used in slaughterhouses. This study aimed to perform bioinformatic analyses to investigate the genes associated with its antibiofilm activity. Phage genome consisted of a single chromosome of 156,555 bp with a GC content of 44.8%. Among its 202 open reading frames (ORFs), three tail spike proteins (TSPs; orf141, orf142, orf143) were identified with high confidence. All TSPs were predicted to encode putative depolymerase activities, including two endoglycosidases and one endorhamnosidase. The genome has been deposited in GenBank under the accession number PP_994976.1.
Keywords: Bacteriophage, antibiofilm activity, tail spike protein, depolymerase, whole genome sequencing
Biofilms, which are bacterial aggregates embedded in a self-secreted matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), significantly contribute to most bacterial infections by enhancing microbial survival and antibiotic resistance [1]. A promising strategy to combat biofilms involves the use of bacteriophages (phages) with antibio-film activities. Phages are host-specific viruses, which infect and kill target bacteria through a lytic pathway, and control biofilms primarily via depolymerase activity [2]. This enzyme, often encoded within the same open reading frames (ORFs) as the tail spike protein (TSP), degrades the EPS matrix of biofilms [3]. Consequently, TSPs with depolymerase activity play a crucial role in inhibiting biofilm formation, penetrating existing bio-films, or degrading already-formed biofilms. In our previous study, we isolated and purified
The genomic DNA of vB_SalA_KFSST3 was extracted using a Phage DNA Isolation Kit (Norgen Biotek Co., Canada), following the manufacturer’s instructions. Subsequently, the purity of phage DNA was assessed using a Qubit 3.0 fluorometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) and a NanoDrop spectrophotometer (Bio-Rad, USA). Whole-genome sequencing of vB_SalA_KFSST3 was conducted at SANIGEN Co. (Republic of Korea) using Illumina Miseq platform with paired-end reads of 2 × 300 bp size. Error correction and trimming of the generated raw reads were conducted using FastQC version 0.11.5 (https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/project/fastqc/). De novo assembly was performed using SPAdes version 3.15.0 (Illumina Inc., USA) and annotation was carried out using the BLASTP and the Rapid Annotations Systems Technology (RAST) server [5]. Subsequently, hypothetical proteins located near TSPs were compared with other TSPs listed in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) database by alignment of their amino acid sequences using SnapGene software (http://www.snapgene.com/). For further bioinformatic analyses of TSPs (
The genome of vB_SalA_KFSST3 consisted of a linear dsDNA with size of 156,555 bp and a GC content of 44.8%. Phage genome contained 48 functional ORFs, 154 hypothetical ORFs, and 5 tRNAs. There are no genes encoding to antibiotic resistance, virulence factors, lysogenic properties, and allergenicity. Based on the RAST database, it is confirmed that two TSPs were encoded by
Table 1 . In silico genetic characterization of tail spike proteins in phage genome.
Gene | Size (aa1)) | Molecular weight (kDa) | Isoelectric point | Domain possessing enzymatic activity (accession) | Probability | E-value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tail spike protein (TSP1, | 675 | 71.6 | 5.1 | β-helix, endoglycosidase (6NW9) | 99.95 | 1.3e-24 |
Tail spike protein (TSP2, | 708 | 75.3 | 5.2 | β-helix, endorhamnosidase (3RIQA) | 100.00 | 3.6e-80 |
Tail spike protein (TSP3, | 1,109 | 117.4 | 4.7 | β-helix, endoglycosidase (6NW9) | 99.90 | 1.7e-20 |
1) AA: amino acid.
From the in silico genetic characterization of three TSPs (Table 1), the molecular weights of TSP1, TSP2, and TSP3 were predicted to be 71.6, 75.3, and 117.4 kDa, respectively. Their isoelectric points were similar, with values of 5.1 for TSP1, 5.2 for TSP2, and 4.7 for TSP3. Furthermore, NCBI conserved domain and HHpred analyses predicts the domain organization of the three TSPs of vB_SalA_KFSST3 with high confidence (Table 1). Residues 29−504 of TSP1 and 344−971 of TSP3 matched putative endoglycosidase (6NW9B) from phage CBA120 with a probability of 99.95% (E-value of 1.3e-24) and 99.90% (E-value of 1.7e-20), respectively. In addition, residues 156−706 of TSP2 matched endorhamnosidase (3RIQA) from phage 9NA with a probability of 100% (E-value 3.6e-80). Consistent with previous findings about the antibiofilm activity of vB_SalA_KFSST3 [4], domains possessing depolymerase activity were found in the ORFs of each TSP. The predicted depolymerases, endoglycosidases and endorhamnosidase have been reported to catalyze the hydrolysis of glycosides and rhamnosides, respectively, in polysaccharides [8, 9]. Consequently, these genes could influence the antibiofilm activity of vB_SalA_KFSST3, as these biofilm dispersal enzymes play a crucial role in degrading the exopolysaccharides of biofilm matrices. This study serves as a basis for further investigations into genes related to the antibiofilm activity of phages and contributes to a better understanding of their functionality.
The complete genome of vB_SalA_KFSST3 has been deposited in the GenBank database under an accession number PP_994976.1.
The authors have no financial conflicts of interest to declare.
Su-Hyeon Kim and Mi-Kyung Park
Microbiol. Biotechnol. Lett. 2023; 51(4): 562-565 https://doi.org/10.48022/mbl.2311.11017Kanika Mahra, Tino Bashizi, and Jae-Ho Shin
Microbiol. Biotechnol. Lett. 2024; 52(4): 490-492 https://doi.org/10.48022/mbl.2409.09015Haneol Yang, Yong-Sik Kim, and Doo-Sang Park
Microbiol. Biotechnol. Lett. 2023; 51(4): 566-568 https://doi.org/10.48022/mbl.2311.11016