- Methodology article
- Open Access
Tn5/7-lux: a versatile tool for the identification and capture of promoters in Gram-negative bacteria
© Bruckbauer et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015
- Received: 22 December 2014
- Accepted: 19 January 2015
- Published: 4 February 2015
The combination of imaging technologies and luciferase-based bioluminescent bacterial reporter strains provide a sensitive and simple non-invasive detection method (photonic bioimaging) for the study of diverse biological processes, as well as efficacy of therapeutic interventions, in live animal models of disease. The engineering of bioluminescent bacteria required for photonic bioimaging is frequently hampered by lack of promoters suitable for strong, yet stable luciferase gene expression.
We devised a novel method for identification of constitutive native promoters in Gram-negative bacteria. The method is based on a Tn5/7 transposon that exploits the unique features of Tn5 (random transposition) and Tn7 (site-specific transposition). The transposons are designed such that Tn5 transposition will allow insertion of a promoter-less bacterial luxCDABE operon downstream of a bacterial gene promoter. Cloning of DNA fragments from luminescent isolates results in a plasmid that replicates in pir + hosts. Sequencing of the lux-chromosomal DNA junctions on the plasmid reveals transposon insertion sites within genes or operons. The plasmid is also a mini-Tn7-lux delivery vector that can be used to introduce the promoter-lux operon fusion into other derivatives of the bacterium of interest in an isogenic fashion. Alternatively, promoter-containing sequences can be PCR-amplified from plasmid or chromosomal DNA and cloned into a series of accompanying mini-Tn7-lux vectors. The mini-Tn5/7-lux and mini-Tn7-lux vectors are equipped with diverse selection markers and thus applicable in numerous Gram-negative bacteria. Various mini-Tn5/7-lux vectors were successfully tested for transposition and promoter identification by imaging in Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, and Burkholderia pseudomallei. Strong promoters were captured for lux expression in E. coli and A. baumannii. Some mini-Tn7-lux vectors are also equipped with attB sites for swapping of the lux operon with other reporter genes using Gateway technology.
Although mini-Tn5-lux and mini-Tn7-lux elements have previously been developed and used for bacterial promoter identification and chromosomal insertion of promoter-lux gene fusions, respectively, the newly developed mini-Tn5/7-lux and accompanying accessory plasmids streamline and accelerate the promoter discovery and bioluminescent strain engineering processes. Availability of vectors with diverse selection markers greatly extend the host-range of promoter probe and lux gene fusion vectors.
- Bioluminescent bacteria
- Host range
- Mini-Tn5/7-Lux vectors
- Lux fusion vectors
- Gram-negative bacteria
The combination of recent advances in imaging technologies and development of luciferase-based bioluminescent reporter strains provide a sensitive and simple non-invasive detection method (biophotonic imaging) for the study of diverse biological processes, as well as efficacy of therapeutic interventions, in live animal models of human and animal disease [1-6]. In vivo bioluminescence can be employed to determine initial locations of infections and spatial migration of bioluminescently labeled pathogens over a period of several days to weeks. This technology has been applied to study chronic soft-tissue Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus biofilm infections [7-10], P. aeruginosa and Proteus mirabilis urinary tract infections , as well as catheter-associated endovascular infections , and others [13-16]. Biophotonic imaging also allows assessments of the in vivo efficacy of antibiotic therapy in real time in living animals [9,11,13,17-20]. Some caveats of biophotonic imaging are: 1) luciferase-catalyzed reactions require energy (in the form of ATP and FMNH2), oxygen and a specific fatty acid substrate  and therefore allow the detection of only live, metabolically active cells. Because of the oxygen requirement of luciferases, bacterial cells expressing luciferase in strictly anaerobic environments such as the gut were in some instances found to be non-luminescent [1,2,16]. However, such instances are rare and bioluminescence can be detected in harvested organs exposed to oxygen . Furthermore, other authors reported luciferase expression in anaerobic bacteria, e.g. Bifidobacterium breve grown in vitro and in vivo , and luciferase-tagged bacteria in anaerobic environments such as tumors ; 2) to ensure stable maintenance during the course of infections in animals, the bioluminescent reporter must be integrated into the chromosome of the respective bacteria. Replicating plasmids carrying the lux operon have been evaluated for bioimaging studies, but their use is limited because they only allow short-term (<48 h) infections to be accurately monitored in vivo in animals due to plasmid loss or dilution in the absence of antibiotic selection . Chromosomal integration of plasmids via homologous recombination has been employed for construction of bioluminescent strains but the resulting strains are potentially unstable in the absence of antibiotic selection . Initially, stable chromosomal integration was achieved by random transposition of a mini-Tn5-luxCDABE element [7,11] or another suitable transposon carrying the lux operon , followed by antibiotic resistance selection and screening for cells exhibiting strong expression of luciferase activity from a chromosomal promoter. Consequences of employing random transposition are: 1) need for investment of considerable efforts to determine transposon insertion sites and fitness of the mutant bacteria; 2) integrated transposons cannot easily be recovered or transferred between different mutant backgrounds for meaningful comparative analyses because most bacteria lack efficient chromosomal gene transfer procedures, except for those for which transducing phages are available or that are naturally transformable ; and 3) lack of a universal promoter for lux gene expression across either Gram-negative or Gram-positive bacteria necessitates development of new bioluminescent strains for each bacterial species to be studied with this technology.
In some bacteria the first two issues have been largely addressed and can be circumvented by use of site-specific insertion elements [25-30]. However, construction of bioluminescent reporter strains is still one of the limiting factors of biophotonic imaging. The major unmet need is lack of suitable promoters for luciferase expression in different bacteria. In Gram-positive bacteria development of synthetic promoters for luciferase gene expression have been successful in some cases [22,27]. However, previous attempts by our laboratory to engineer synthetic promoters based on, for example, the Escherichia coli lac operon-trp operon hybrid promoter Ptac  for use in non-enteric bacteria were largely unsuccessful mostly because of the instability of many of the synthetic promoters. We have successfully used the P1 integron promoter [32,33] for driving luciferase gene expression in Burkholderia species  indicating that this promoter may be useful for high-level constitutive gene expression in other non-enteric bacteria.
The purpose of this study was to create a simple to use, yet highly versatile series of plasmids for use in Gram-negative bacteria that facilitate promoter discovery and capture, as well as the creation of stable, bioluminescent strains of bacteria. To do this, we combined several features of transposons Tn5  and Tn7 .
Tn5 transposes randomly in bacteria. Minimal requirements for transposition are a transposase that can be provided in trans, mosaic ends (MEs) and an antibiotic resistance selection marker . A mini-Tn5 transposon contains the 19 bp MEs flanking the selection marker and is located on a delivery plasmid that contains the transposase gene tnpA outside of the mini-Tn5 element . Cargo cloned on the mini-Tn5 can be randomly transposed into bacterial chromosomes. In contrast to Tn5, Tn7 transposes site-specifically in Gram-negative bacteria, notably to chromosomal attTn7 sites in the presence of the site-specific transposition pathway composed of TnsABCD . Most Gram-negative bacteria contain only a single attTn7 site associated with the essential glmS gene (encoding glucosamine-6-phosphate synthase) [37-41]. However, some contain multiple glmS genes and thus multiple attTn7 sites [37,42,43]. In one instance, Proteus mirabilis, one glmS- and one non-glmS-associated attTn7 site was documented . Minimal requirements for Tn7 transposition are a transposase that can be provided in trans, Tn7 left and right ends (Tn7L and Tn7R) and an antibiotic resistance selection marker [35,37,45]. Cargo cloned on the mini-Tn7 element can be site- and orientation-specifically transposed into bacterial chromosomes in the presence of a plasmid that transiently expresses the Tn7 transposase subunits TnsABCD .
In this study, we constructed and tested mini-Tn5/7-lux elements with diverse selection markers that allow promoter identification by random Tn5-mediated transposition into the chromosomes of diverse target bacteria and screening for cells exhibiting strong expression of luciferase activity from a chromosomal promoter. The promoters can then be captured by self-ligation of chromosomal DNA fragments which creates a plasmid carrying a mini-Tn7 element that serves as a template for promoter identification by DNA sequencing, or by PCR amplification of promoter-containing fragments. In some instances, e.g. in the presence of short chromosomal DNA inserts or when recombination-deficient recipient strains are available, the mini-Tn7-lux elements can be transposed into other bacteria without further modification. Alternatively, promoter-containing DNA fragments can be subcloned into a series of accompanying mini-Tn7-lux delivery vectors with diverse selection markers.
Overview of the mini-Tn5/7-lux promoter identification, capture, and mini-Tn7-lux tagging procedures
The captured promoter transcribing the lux gene operon can be used to derive bioluminescent bacteria by tagging with mini-Tn7-lux elements in two ways. The choice of method is in part affected by the target bacterium’s recombination status and the size of promoter-containing DNA fragment. First, the mini-Tn5/7-lux delivery plasmid used for promoter identification and capture is designed such that the plasmid recovered in step 3 of the promoter identification and capture procedure illustrated in Figure 1 is a functional mini-Tn7 delivery plasmid which in some instances (e.g. when the plasmid contains short regions of promoter-containing chromosomal DNA or when RecA-deficient target strains are available) may be used to directly transpose site-specifically into the glmS gene-associated Tn7 attachment site (attTn7) in the chromosome of the bacterium under study to obtain luminescent derivatives. For site-specific transposition, mini-Tn7 elements require the Tn7 transposase complex, which is encoded by a helper plasmid containing the tnsABCD genes specifying the site-specific Tn7 transposition pathway. Second, the plasmid recovered in step 3 of the promoter identification and capture procedure illustrated in Figure 1 may be used as a source for promoter-containing DNA fragments that can be PCR amplified, cloned into other mini-Tn7-lux elements, and be employed for obtaining bioluminescent bacteria after site-specific mini-Tn7-lux transposition as described above. This procedure is advised when the plasmid obtained in the promoter recovery step contains larger (several kb) regions of promoter-containing chromosomal DNA or when RecA-deficient target strains are not available. In these instances, chromosomal integration via homologous recombination is favored over site-specific mini-Tn7 integration. Examples for both mini-Tn7-lux tagging scenarios are presented below. Direct tagging with a mini-Tn7-lux element containing the captured promoter transcribing the lux operon is illustrated in a recA E. coli strain. A wild-type Acinetobacter baumannii strain is presented as an example for a bacterium tagged with a mini-Tn7-lux element where lux operon transcription is driven by a promoter which was identified during using mini-Tn5/7-lux mediated identification and capture, and then subcloned in a mini-Tn7 element harboring a promoter-less lux operon.
It should be reiterated at this point that, as noted above, most Gram-negative bacteria contain only one chromosomal glmS-associated attTn7 site [37-41] with the exception of Proteus mirabilis . In contrast, the majority of Burkholderia species examined to date contain multiple glmS genes and thus multiple attTn7 sites, ranging from two sites in B. thailandensis  and B. mallei  to three sites in B. pseudomallei . Although insertions in these bacteria can occur at all sites, most insertions are usually at one, preferred attTn7 site. In B. mallei, analysis of 24 randomly selected insertions showed that 96% of the insertions were at the glmS1-associated attTn7 site. By contrast, only 8% of the insertions were at the glmS2-associated attTn7 site. Only 4% of the transformants had insertions at both glmS1 and glmS2 . In B. pseudomallei, >65% of observed insertions occur at the glmS2-associated attTn7 site, but there is no obvious preference for either the glmS1- or glmS3-associated attTn7 sites. While double insertions in two separate attTn7 sites are fairly common (10 to 20% with some strains), triple insertions are rarely observed . Presence of multiple attTn7 sites is not an impediment because sites of insertions can be readily differentiated by multiplex PCR. An example for insertion site analysis in B. pseudomallei is illustrated in Additional file 1: Figure S3.
Tn5/7-lux-based promoter capture in E. coli DH5α
Construction of next generation lux vectors
GenBank accession no.
Pertinent features a,b
Gmr; luxCDEBA operon transcribed from P PA4974 contained on DraIII fragment
Gmr; DraIII fragment containing P PA4974 replaced with DraIII fragment containing P ompA c
Kmr; pTn7xLuxG0 with BamHI and PstI sites deleted by partial digestion
Kmr; pTn7xLuxG3 with Gmr encoding aacC1 gene replaced with Kmr encoding nptII gene from pFKM4
Kmr; pTn7xLuxK3 with DraIII fragment containing P PA4974 replaced with DraIII fragment containing B. pseudomallei P ompA
Kmr; pTn7xLuxK3 with DraIII fragment containing P PA4974 replaced with DraIII fragment containing B. pseudomallei P tolC
Kmr; pTn7xLuxK3 with StuI-DraIII fragment containing P PA4974 replaced with StuI-DraIII fragment containing Tn5 transposase gene tnpA and flanking mosaic ends
Gmr; pTn7oLuxG0 with BamHI multiple cloning site fragment deleted
Kmr; pTn7oLuxG4 with Gmr encoding aacC1 gene replaced with Kmr encoding nptII gene from pFKM4
Tpr; pTn7oLuxG4 with Gmr encoding aacC1 gene replaced with Tpr encoding dhfRII gene from pFTP2
Gmr; pTn7oLuxG4 with StuI-DraIII fragment containing P ompA replaced with StuI-DraIII fragment containing Tn5 transposase gene tnpA and flanking mosaic ends
Kmr; pTn7oLuxK4 with StuI-DraIII fragment containing P ompA replaced with StuI-DraIII fragment containing Tn5 transposase gene tnpA and flanking mosaic ends
Tpr; pTn7oLuxT4 with with StuI-DraIII fragment containing P ompA replaced with StuI-DraIII fragment containing Tn5 transposase gene tnpA and flanking mosaic ends
Kmr; pTn5/7LuxK4 with tnpA gene transcribed from P S12
Tpr; pTn5/7LuxT4 with tnpA gene transcribed from P S12
Tpr; pTn5/7LuxT5 with attB1 inserted at DraIII site
Gmr; pTn5/7LuxT6 with Tpr encoding dhfRII gene replaced with Gmr encoding aacC1 gene from pFGM1
Kmr; pTn5/7LuxT6 with Tpr encoding dhfRII gene replaced with Kmr encoding nptII gene from pFKM4
Tcr; pTn5/7LuxT6 with Tpr encoding dhfRII gene replaced with Tcr encoding tetA gene from pFTC2
pTn7P DH51 -lux
Kmr; captured DH5α rbsC::Tn5/7LuxK3 insertion on mini-Tn7 delivery plasmid obtained by religation of chromosomal Acc65I fragment
pTn7P rbs LuxK4
Kmr; E. coli rbs promoter (P rbs ) cloned into pTn7LuxK4
pTn7P H1A LuxK5
Kmr; A. baumannii A1S_0945 gene promoter (P H1A ) cloned into pTn7LuxK5
Tn5/7-lux based promoter capture in A. baumannii
Genotype or relevant features
F−φ80 lacZΔM15 Δ(lacZYA-argF)U169 deoR recA1 endA1 hsdR17(rK −mK +) phoA glnV44
F−φ80 lacZΔM15 Δ(lacZYA-argF)U169 deoR recA1 endA1 hsdR17(rK −mK +) phoA glnV44 attTn7::pir116+
thi-1 thr-1 leuB26 tonA21 lacY1 supE44 recA integrated RP4-2 Tcr::Mu (λpir + )Δasd::FRT ΔaphA::FRT
attTn7::pir116 + thi-1 thr-1 leuB26 tonA21 lacY1 supE44 recA integrated RP4-2 Tcr::Mu (λpir +)Δasd::FRT ΔaphA::FRT
DH5α attTn7::mini-Tn7-P DH51 -lux
DH5α attTn7::mini-Tn7-P rbs -lux
Bp82.27 attTn7::mini-Tn7-P ompA -lux (glmS1)
Bp82.27 attTn7::mini-Tn7-P tolC -lux (glmS1)
Bp82.27attTn7::mini-Tn7-P PA4974 -lux (glmS2 + glmS3)
Bp82.27attTn7::mini-Tn7-P ompA -lux (glmS1 + glmS2)
Bp82.27 attTn7::mini-Tn7-P ompA -lux (glmS1)
Bp82.27 attTn7::mini-Tn7-P ompA -lux (glmS2 + glmS3)
Bp82.27 attTn7::mini-Tn7-P ompA -lux (glmS2)
Bp82.27 attTn7::mini-Tn7-P ompA -lux (glmS3)
American Type Culture Collection
ATCC19606 A1S_0947::mini-Tn5/7LuxK5 and A1S_2736::Tn5/7LuxK5
ATCC19606 attTn7::mini-Tn7-P H1A -LuxK5
Luminescence from mini-Tn7-lux elements in bacteria with multiple attTn7 sites is insertion site dependent
Noting that bacteria which contain multiple mini-Tn7-lux insertions due to the presence of multiple Tn7 insertion (attTn7) sites exhibit differential luminescence we decided to examine light emission from bacteria which naturally contain more than one mini-Tn7 insertion site and in which luminescence is thus either insertion site-dependent or due to multiple insertions.
The mini-Tn5/7-lux vectors were employed to successfully identify, capture and clone promoters capable of producing significant amounts of light in E. coli and A. baumannii under laboratory conditions. While in this study efforts were focused on vector construction and evaluation in vitro, future efforts must include studies aimed at promoter activity evaluation in suitable in vivo model systems, especially with pathogens such as A. baumannii and others. In E. coli, the ribose operon promoter was the strongest promoter we identified in this study. This was somewhat surprising because expression from this promoter is normally repressed by the ribose operon repressor RbsR and induced in the presence of the inducer D-ribose . In this promoter-capture proof-of-concept study, we only examined P rbs -lux gene expression in LB-grown cells which must represent at least partially inducing conditions but the utility of this promoter for in vivo imaging of E. coli infections remains uncertain absent of expression studies in bacteria grown in vivo, e.g. animal infection or cell culture experiments, or in vitro studies employing various conditions encountered by bacteria during infections (e.g. cell-density, defined nutrient sources, etc.). The same is true for the A. baumannii P H1A promoter identified and characterized using in vitro laboratory conditions, i.e. LB-grown bacteria. In addition to E. coli and A. baumannii, mini-Tn5/7-lux vectors were also used to identify strong promoters capable of driving lux operon expression in LB-grown cells of B. pseudomallei. Luminescent isolates could be readily identified suggesting that the system will be useful for promoter identification in diverse bacteria. Two promoters that were identified in B. pseudomallei were the put (proline utilization) and paa (phenylacetic acid degradation) operon promoters but since promoters for construction of bioluminescent B. pseudomallei suitable for in vitro and in vivo bioimaging studies, e.g. P ompA  and P tolC , are already available, the put and paa operon promoters were not further pursued.
Promoter identification in E. coli, A. baumannii and B. pseudomallei using the mini-Tn5/7-lux system identified a frequent scenario encountered with bacteria which is insertion in promoter-distal genes in operons. In practice, this makes direct use of mini-Tn7-lux elements with captured promoter regions for isolation of bioluminescent bacteria problematic in recA + strain backgrounds as the sometimes large regions of homology carried by the transposable element promote recombination into the chromosome instead of site-specific integration via Tn7-transposition. While this undoubtedly diminishes the novelty of the mini-Tn5/7-lux system, i.e. the combination of the mini-Tn5-lux and mini-Tn7-lux systems which existed separately before, the newly developed method has several advantages over the separate systems: 1) the newly constructed pTn7Lux vectors exhibit expanded repertoire and utility with respect to cloning of promoter-containing DNA fragments when compared to previously constructed mini-Tn7-lux vectors; and 2) in some instances, e.g. where short promoter-containing chromosomal DNA regions are present or recombination-deficient strains are either available or can be readily constructed, the combination of the Tn5 and Tn7 transposon allows quick isolation and site-specific insertion of the promoter-lux fusion constructs in naturally occurring Tn7 attachment site(s) in strains transiently expressing the Tn7 TnsABCD transposase complex.
In the course of the present study we also noted that in the few instances where bacteria contain more than one chromosomal attTn7 site one must be aware of copy number and position effects on reporter gene expression. For instance, incorporation of the same mini-Tn7-P ompA -lux reporter into one or more of the three attTn7 sites in the B. pseudomallei genome resulted in differential levels of light emission. In general, insertions into the glmS1-associated attTn7 site emitted more light than mini-Tn7 insertions in either of the other two attTn7 sites. Although we have no experimental evidence that would explain these observations, insertion site effects may at least be partially responsible for differential lux transcription from constructs integrated at different Tn7 integration sites. The three attTn7 sites found in B. pseudomallei are located in the intergenic regions of glmS1, glmS2 and glmS3 and the respective downstream genes which in all cases are divergently transcribed from glmS (Additional file 1: Figure S3) . The mini-Tn7-lux elements insert at these sites such that the lux gene is in the same orientation as these downstream genes which may lead to partial read-through lux transcription from the downstream gene promoters. This may be exacerbated by the fact that insertions at glmS1 occur in the predicted transcriptional terminator that seems to be shared by glmS1 and the divergently transcribed downstream gene. In contrast, insertions at the glmS2- and glmS3-associated attTn7 sites do not disrupt the transcriptional terminators of the respective divergently transcribed genes. To minimize transcriptional read-through effects from promoters of adjacent genes, transcriptional terminators could be included inside the Tn7 left and right ends, but this was not pursued in the present studies. As expected, isolates with double insertions produced more light than those with single insertions and levels were comparable with isolates that contained single insertions at the glmS1-associated attTn7 site. Isolates with mini-Tn7 insertions at all three attTn7 sites resulting from a single transposition experiment are generally rare and were not observed in this study.
We created a suite of vectors that comprise a versatile system for promoter identification, capturing, cloning and construction of bioluminescent Gram-negative bacterial strains that contain the reporter genes stably integrated in the bacterial chromosome. The mini-Tn5/7-lux vectors incorporate the random transposition property of Tn5 catalyzed by transient expression of Tn5 transposase TnpA in a wide range of bacteria and combines it with the site-specific transposition property of Tn7 catalyzed by transient expression of the Tn7 TnsABCD transposase complex in Gram-negative bacteria. The system was created with versatility and customization in mind. For example, the vectors are equipped with diverse selection markers to expand their host range to bacteria, which may exhibit intrinsic resistance to some antibiotics commonly used for selection of recombinants. Antibiotic resistance markers are flanked by 48-bp FRT sites which allow exchange of the resident antibiotic marker with other FRT cassettes using unique XbaI restriction sites in each FRT. All vectors possess unique StuI and DraIII restriction sites that allow for the deletion of tnpA and its flanking mosaic ends for orientation-controlled insertion of promoter sequences for lux operon transcription. In this study we exclusively tested Tn5/7Lux and Tn7Lux vectors for purposes of promoter identification, capturing and cloning for construction of bioluminescent clones. However, their uses extend well beyond these applications. For instance, attB1 and attB2 sites bordering luxCDABE facilitate exchange of the resident lux operon for other reporter genes such as gfp via Gateway BP clonase recombination. Vectors on which gfp-transcription is driven from the same promoter(s) identified and used for lux gene expression can then be employed for construction of fluorescent instead of luminescent strains. Availability of isogenic bioluminescent and fluorescent strains of the same species has several applications. For instance, they can be employed in bioluminescence, fluorescence, and optical density based real-time assays can to determine the bacteriostatic or bacteriocidal effects of antibiotics . Furthermore, such strains can be used to differentiate effects of antimicrobials on metabolism. Luciferase activity is dependent on availability of metabolites such as ATP, FMNH2 and a specific fatty acid substrate  and its activity thus adversely affected by inhibitors of metabolism whereas GFP activity is not prone to such inhibition. Lastly, strain labeling with luciferase or GFP reporters – or dual labeling with both – broadens the repertoire for imaging of various biological processes [5,54].
These capabilities allow for tailoring the plasmids to investigators’ needs. The tools developed in this study should prove to be useful as their customizability allows for an extremely wide array of uses in diverse Gram-negative bacteria.
Bacterial strains, media and growth conditions
Table 2 lists the bacterial strains used in this study. Bacteria were routinely grown in liquid or agar solidified Lennox Luria Bertani (LB) (MO BIO Laboratories, Carlsbad, CA). E. coli conjugation strains RHO3 and RHO5 were grown in LB medium supplemented with diaminopimelic acid (DAP; LL-, DD-, and meso-isomers) which was used at 400 μg/ml for agar plates and 200 μg/ml for liquid cultures. Lennox (5 g/L NaCl) LB cultures of B. pseudomallei Bp82 were supplemented with 80 μg/ml adenine. Media were supplemented with antibiotics at the following final concentrations. For E. coli, gentamicin (Gm), 10 μg/mL and 15 μg/ml for broth cultures and agar plates, respectively; kanamycin (Km), 35 μg/mL; tetracycline (Tc), 10 μg/ml; trimethoprim (Tp), 100 μg/mL. For B. pseudomallei, Km, 35 μg/ml for Bp82.27 and 500 μg/ml for Bp82. For A. baumannii, Km was used at a concentration of 35 μg/ml.
Chromosomal DNA was isolated using the Puregene Core Kit A (Gentra Systems, Qiagen, Valencia, CA) and plasmid DNA was purified from bacterial cultures using the GeneJET Plasmid MiniPrep Kit (Fermentas, Glen Burnie, MD). Restriction enzymes were purchased from New England Biolabs (Ipswich, MA) and used according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. Ligation reactions were conducted using T4 DNA ligase from Invitrogen (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA) and the supplied T4 DNA ligase buffer. DNA sequencing was conducted using an ABI 3130xL Genetic Analyzer (Applied Biosystems, Carlsbad, CA) at the Colorado State University Proteomics and Metabolomics Facility.
Transformation and conjugation procedures
Plasmid transformation of E. coli was done either by using standard electroporation or chemical transformation procedures . Bacterial conjugations were conducted as bi-parental matings with E. coli mobilizer strains RHO3 or RHO5 using previously described methods [51,56]. A modified mating procedure was used for conjugations with A. baumannii. Cultures of donor and recipient were grown overnight. Thirty μl of the donor culture was sub-cultured into 3 ml of LB broth and the culture was grown at 37°C with shaking to an OD600 of 0.6-0.7. Meanwhile, 3 ml of pre-warmed 20 mM NaNO3 was added to the overnight recipient culture which was then incubated at 42°C without shaking for at least three hours. Donor and recipient cultures were then harvested by centrifugation, washed twice with fresh LB, concentrated 5-fold, and 60 μl of donor and 10 μl of recipient culture were combined on a filter disk. The remainder of the procedure follows previously described protocols.
Construction and identification of mini-Tn7-lux containing B. pseudomallei strains
Sequence (5′ → 3′) a
H1-A StuI F
H1A DraIII R3
Relative luminescence was imaged using a Bio-Rad Universal Hood II ChemiDocXRS using high sensitivity chemiluminescence settings and a 10–30 s exposure time. Quantification of light production was performed using an IVIS Spectrum (Xenogen, Alameda, CA). An open emission filter with no excitation was utilized to measure the signal.
Tn5/7-lux promoter capture procedure
To recover random mini-Tn5/7-lux chromosomal insertions, the Tn5/7-lux vector containing the appropriate antibiotic resistance marker was first transformed into the E. coli donor strain RHO3. A bi-parental mating was then performed with the donor and desired recipient strain and antibiotic resistant exconjugants were selected. Exconjugants were either patched onto an LB agar plate with the respective antibiotic used for selection of exconjugants or inoculated into 96-well microtiter plates containing LB medium with 10% glycerol and antibiotic supplement. After overnight growth at 37°C, patches or wells were observed over a period of four days to identify bright and stable luminescent clones. Chromosomal DNA was isolated from selected mini-Tn5/7-lux containing colonies and 1 μg digested in separate reactions using restriction enzymes Acc65I, EcoRI or NotI. (Note: these enzymes were empirically chosen to work with most bacteria we study but others can be used as well.) The digestions were terminated by heat-inactivation at 68°C and cleaned either by using the Gen Elute Gel Extraction Kit (Sigma-Aldrich) or by heat-inactivating the restriction enzyme and drop dialyzing the DNA on a Millipore“V” series (VMWP) filter with a 0.05 μm pore size over distilled and deionized water for 20 min. Digested DNA (1 μg) was ligated overnight using T4 DNA Ligase and ligations were drop dialyzed for 20–25 min. The entire sample was removed from the filter and immediately used for transformation of the pir-116 + E. coli strain MaH1. (Note: other pir + strains are equally suited for transformation. We routinely employ this strain because it increases the copy number of plasmid with the R6K origin of replication and thus yields more plasmid DNA .) Transformants were grown overnight and plasmid DNA was isolated. The mini-Tn5/7-lux insertion site was then determined by sequencing using primer P2385.
The resulting plasmid now constitutes a mini-Tn7 delivery plasmid (Figure 1) which was used for two purposes.
First, the plasmid was sometimes used to isolate chromosomal mini-Tn7-lux insertions in the host of interest. This was achieved by electroporation into the pir-116 + E. coli mobilizer strain RHO5 (electroporation was chosen over transformation due to the unknown, but presumably quite large, size of the recovered mini-Tn5/7-lux containing plasmid). The mini-Tn7-lux plasmid was then introduced into the target bacterium chromosome by co-conjugation with the Tn7 site-specific transposition pathway expressing pTNS3. Exconjugants were selected on LB plates with appropriate antibiotics and screened for light production. The presence of mini-Tn7-lux insertions was verified by PCR employing species specific primer pairs, e.g. P2372 & P2373 for E. coli, P478 & P1354 for A. baumannii, and P479 & P1509, P479 & P1510, and P479 & P1511 for B. pseudomallei. To distinguish Tn7 insertions at attTn7 sites from homologous recombination events a PCR using primer pairs P536 & P537 was also performed to confirm the absence of the plasmid-borne oriT in the recipient chromosome. All confirmatory PCRs were done using DNA templates obtained via from boiling preparations. Briefly, individual colonies were transferred to 30 μl of sterile distilled and deionized water and the cell suspension was boiled for 10 min. The resulting lysates were then centrifuged for 30 s at 12,000 × g at room temperature in a microcentrifuge and the supernatants transferred to a clean microcentrifuge tube. Six μl of supernatant were used a template in 50 μl PCR mixes containing the respective primers and Taq DNA polymerase (New England Biolabs).
Second, the mini-Tn7-lux plasmid was used as source for promoter-containing DNA fragments. Putative promoter regions were first predicted based on the genomic context of the insertion and using the Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project Neural Network Promoter Prediction and prokaryotic settings (http://www.fruitfly.org/seq_tools/promoter.html). Putative promoters were mapped onto the genome and the most likely promoter region was chosen based on number of possible promoters in the area and how close they were to the Tn5 insertion. In general, oligonucleotides were designed to PCR amplify the promoter region and add DraIII and StuI restriction sites to either end to control the direction of the promoter upon cloning into the desired Tn5/7-lux vector (in each case the cloned promoter region replaced the Tn5 transposase gene tnpA and flanking MEs). Transformants were chosen based on degree of luminescence and the presence of the correct plasmids was confirmed by a DraIII + StuI restriction digest and/or PCR amplification of the promoter region from the plasmid, followed by DNA sequencing. Mini-Tn7-lux insertions were then obtained and confirmed as described above.
Funding was provided by indirect cost recovery returns made possible by several extramural National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases research grants and the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award F32 AI088884 to Brian Kvitko. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We would like to thank Carolina Lopez for constructing pPS2305 and pFTC2, and Katie Quinn for constructing pFTP2. We also thank Colin Manoil, University of Washington, for providing pLG107 and Brad Borlee, Colorado State University, for the modified conjugation protocol.
- Contag CH, Contag PR, Mullins JI, Spilman SD, Stevenson DK, Benaron DA. Photonic detection of bacterial pathogens in living hosts. Mol Microbiol. 1995;18:593–603.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Contag CH, Bachmann MH. Advances in in vivo bioluminescence imaging of gene expression. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2002;4:235–60.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Piwnica-Worms D, Schuster DP, Garbow JR. Molecular imaging of host-pathogen interactions in intact small animals. Cell Microbiol. 2004;6:319–31.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kadurugamuwa JL, Francis KP. Bioluminescent imaging of bacterial biofilm infections in vivo. Methods Mol Biol. 2008;431:225–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kong Y, Shi Y, Chang M, Akin AR, Francis KP, Zhang N, et al. Whole-body imaging of infection using bioluminescence. Curr Prot Microbiol. 2011;Chapter 2:Unit 2C 4.Google Scholar
- Baban CK, Cronin M, Akin AR, O’Brien A, Gao X, Tabirca S, et al. Bioluminescent bacterial imaging in vivo. J Vis Exp. 2012;69:e4318.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kadurugamuwa JL, Sin L, Albert E, Yu J, Francis K, DeBoer M, et al. Direct continuous method for monitoring biofilm infection in a mouse model. Infect Immun. 2003;71:882–90.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kadurugamuwa JL, Sin LV, Yu J, Francis KP, Kimura R, Purchio T, et al. Rapid direct method for monitoring antibiotics in a mouse model of bacterial biofilm infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47:3130–7.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kadurugamuwa JL, Sin LV, Yu J, Francis KP, Purchio TF, Contag PR. Noninvasive optical imaging method to evaluate postantibiotic effects on biofilm infection in vivo. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48:2283–7.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Engelsman AF, van der Mei HC, Francis KP, Busscher HJ, Ploeg RJ, van Dam GM. Real time noninvasive monitoring of contaminating bacteria in a soft tissue implant infection model. J Biomed MaterRes B Appl Biomater. 2009;88(1):123–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kadurugamuwa JL, Modi K, Yu J, Francis KP, Purchio T, Contag PR. Noninvasive biophotonic imaging for monitoring of catheter-associated urinary tract infections and therapy in mice. Infect Immun. 2005;73:3878–87.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Xiong YQ, Willard J, Kadurugamuwa JL, Yu J, Francis KP, Bayer AS. Real-time in vivo bioluminescent imaging for evaluating the efficacy of antibiotics in a rat Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49:380–7.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Francis KP, Yu J, Bellinger-Kawahara C, Joh D, Hawkinson MJ, Xiao G, et al. Visualizing pneumococcal infections in the lungs of live mice using bioluminescent Streptococcus pneumoniae transformed with a novel gram-positive lux transposon. Infect Immun. 2001;69:3350–8.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hardy J, Francis KP, DeBoer M, Chu P, Gibbs K, Contag CH. Extracellular replication of Listeria monocytogenes in the murine gall bladder. Science. 2004;303:851–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kuklin NA, Pancari GD, Tobery TW, Cope L, Jackson J, Gill C, et al. Real-time monitoring of bacterial infection in vivo: development of bioluminescent staphylococcal foreign-body and deep-thigh-wound mouse infection models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47:2740–8.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wiles S, Pickard KM, Peng K, MacDonald TT, Frankel G. In vivo bioluminescence imaging of the murine pathogen Citrobacter rodentium. Infect Immun. 2006;74:5391–6.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhao M, Yang M, Baranov E, Wang X, Penman S, Moossa AR, et al. Spatial-temporal imaging of bacterial infection and antibiotic response in intact animals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98:9814–8.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Demidova TN, Gad F, Zahra T, Francis KP, Hamblin MR. Monitoring photodynamic therapy of localized infections by bioluminescence imaging of genetically engineered bacteria. J Photochem Photobiol B. 2005;81(1):15–25.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Niska JA, Shahbazian JH, Ramos RI, Pribaz JR, Billi F, Francis KP, et al. Daptomycin and tigecycline have broader effective dose ranges than vancomycin as prophylaxis against a Staphylococcus aureus surgical implant infection in mice. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(5):2590–7.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Niska JA, Shahbazian JH, Ramos RI, Francis KP, Bernthal NM, Miller LS. Vancomycin-rifampin combination therapy has enhanced efficacy against an experimental Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic joint infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57(10):5080–6.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Meighen EA. Genetics of bacterial bioluminescence. Annu Rev Genet. 1994;28:117–39.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cronin M, Sleator RD, Hill C, Fitzgerald GF, van Sinderen D. Development of a luciferase-based reporter system to monitor Bifidobacterium breve UCC2003 persistence in mice. BMC Microbiol. 2008;8:161.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cronin M, Akin AR, Collins SA, Meganck J, Kim JB, Baban CK, et al. High resolution in vivo bioluminescent imaging for the study of bacterial tumour targeting. PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e30940.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Francis KP, Joh D, Bellinger-Kawahara C, Hawkinson MJ, Purchio TF, Contag PR. Monitoring bioluminescent Staphylococcus aureus infections in living mice using a novel luxABCDE construct. Infect Immun. 2000;68:3594–35600.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Warawa JM, Long D, Rosenke R, Gardner D, Gherardini FC. Bioluminescent diagnostic imaging to characterize altered respiratory tract colonization by the Burkholderia pseudomallei capsule mutant. Front Microbiol. 2011;2:133.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shen H, Gold SE, Tamaki SJ, Keen NT. Construction of Tn7-lux system for gene expression studies in Gram-negative bacteria. Gene. 1992;122:27–34.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Riedel CU, Monk IR, Casey PG, Morrissey D, O’Sullivan GC, Tangney M, et al. Improved luciferase tagging system for Listeria monocytogenes allows real-time monitoring in vivo and in vitro. Appl Env Microbiol. 2007;73(9):3091–4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Owen SJ, Batzloff M, Chehrehasa F, Meedeniya A, Casart Y, Logue CA, et al. Nasal-associated lymphoid tissue and olfactory epithelium as portals of entry for Burkholderia pseudomallei in murine melioidosis. J Infect Dis. 2009;199(12):1761–70.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Massey S, Johnston K, Mott TM, Judy BM, Kvitko BH, Schweizer HP, et al. In vivo bioluminescence imaging of Burkholderia mallei respiratory infection and treatment in the mouse model. Front Microbiol. 2011;2:174.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Damron FH, McKenney ES, Barbier M, Liechtie GW, Schweizer HP, Goldberg JB. Construction of mobilizable mini-Tn7 vectors for bioluminescent detection and single copy promoter lux reporter analysis in Gram-negative bacteria. Appl Env Microbiol. 2013;79:4149–53.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- de Boer HA, Comstock LJ, Vasser M. The tac promoter: a functional hybrid derived from the trp and lac promoters. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983;80:21–5.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Levesque C, Brassard S, Lapointe J, Roy P. Diversity and relative strength of tandem promoters for the antibiotic resistance genes of several integrons. Gene. 1994;142:49–54.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Deshazer D, Woods DE. Broad-host-range cloning and cassette vectors based on the R388 trimethoprim resistance gene. Biotechniques. 1996;20:762–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Reznikoff WS. The Tn5 transposon. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1993;47:945–63.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Peters JE, Craig NL. Tn7: smarter than we thought. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2001;2:806–14.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- de Lorenzo V, Herrero M, Jakubzik U, Timmis KN. Mini-Tn5 transposon derivatives for insertion mutagenesis, promoter probing, and chromosomal insertion of cloned DNA in Gram-negative bacteria. J Bacteriol. 1990;172:6568–72.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Choi K-H, Gaynor JB, White KG, Lopez C, Bosio CM, Karkhoff-Schweizer RR, et al. A Tn7-based broad-range bacterial cloning and expression system. Nat Methods. 2005;2:443–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Choi K-H, Schweizer HP. mini-Tn7 insertion in bacteria with single attTn7 sites: example Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Nat Protocols. 2006;1:153–61.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- McKenzie GJ, Craig NL. Fast, easy and efficient: site-specific insertion of transgenes into enterobacterial chromosomes using Tn7 without need for selection of the insertion event. BMC Microbiol. 2006;6:39.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kumar A, Dalton C, Cortez-Cordova J, Schweizer HP. Mini-Tn7 vectors as genetic tools for single copy gene cloning in Acinetobacter baumannii. J Microbiol Methods. 2010;82:296–300.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Crepin S, Harel J, Dozois CM. Chromosomal complementation using Tn7 transposon vectors in Enterobacteriaceae. Appl Env Microbiol. 2012;78(17):6001–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Choi K-H, DeShazer D, Schweizer HP. mini-Tn7 insertion in bacteria with multiple glmS-linked attTn7 sites: example Burkholderia mallei ATCC 23344. Nat Protocols. 2006;1:162–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Choi K-H, Mima T, Casart Y, Rholl D, Kumar A, Beacham IR, et al. Genetic tools for select agent compliant manipulation of Burkholderia pseudomallei. Appl Env Microbiol. 2008;74:1064–75.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Choi K-H, Schweizer HP. mini-Tn7 insertion in bacteria with secondary, non-glmS-linked attTn7 sites: example Proteus mirabilis HI4320. Nat Protocols. 2006;1:170–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Parks AR, Peters JE. Tn7 elements: engendering diversity from chromosomes to episomes. Plasmid. 2009;61(1):1–14.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Herrero M, De Lorenzo V, Timmis KN. Transposon vectors containing non-antibiotic resistance selection markers for cloning and stable chromosomal insertion of foreign genes in Gram-negative bacteria. J Bacteriol. 1990;172:6557–67.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shimada T, Kori A, Ishihama A. Involvement of the ribose operon repressor RbsR in regulation of purine nucleotide synthesis in Escherichia coli. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2013;344(2):159–65.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Katzen F. Gateway recombinational cloning: a biological operating system. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2007;2:571–89.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Liss L. New M13 host: DH5αF’ competent cells. Focus. 1987;9:13.Google Scholar
- Kvitko BH, Bruckbauer S, Prucha J, McMillan I, Breland EJ, Lehman S, et al. A simple method for construction of pir + Enterobacterial hosts for maintenance of R6K replicon plasmids. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:157.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lopez CM, Rholl DA, Trunck LA, Schweizer HP. Versatile dual-technology system for markerless allele replacement in Burkholderia pseudomallei. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009;75(20):6496–503.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Propst KL, Mima T, Choi KH, Dow SW, Schweizer HP. A Burkholderia pseudomallei ΔpurM mutant is avirulent in immune competent and immune deficient animals: candidate strain for exclusion from Select Agent lists. Infect Immun. 2010;78:3136–43.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lehtinen J, Jarvinen S, Virta M, Lilius EM. Real-time monitoring of antimicrobial activity with the multiparameter microplate assay. J Microbiol Methods. 2006;66(3):381–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kong Y, Akin AR, Francis KP, Zhang N, Troy TL, Xie H, et al. Whole-body imaging of infection using fluorescence. Curr Prot Microbiol. 2011;Chapter 2:Unit 2C 3.Google Scholar
- Sambrook J, Russell DW. Molecular Cloning. 3rd ed. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2001.Google Scholar
- Kvitko BH, McMillan IA, Schweizer HP. An improved method for oriT-directed cloning and functionalization of large bacterial genomic regions. Appl Env Microbiol. 2013;79:4869–78.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.