INTRODUCTION
Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are gram-positive, low-G + C bacteria defined by their common ability to produce lactic acid as the main metabolic product of carbohydrate fermentation. Intensive genetic and molecular research carried out on LAB, mainly
Lactococcus lactis and some species of the
Lactobacillus genus (before reclassification), has revealed that these strains can be used as immunostimulants or bacterial carriers of compounds with therapeutic or prophylactic effects (
1 – 4). As vaccine vectors, they allow immunization through the mucosal route, which increases effectiveness against pathogens that use the mucosa as the main route of entry into the human or animal body. Administration of LAB strains leads to the induction of an immune response in both mucous membranes and a systemic immune response against expressed heterologous antigens, with a low response against carrier strain antigens (
5). The attractiveness of lactic acid bacteria in immunoprophylaxis or therapy is also determined by their resistance to the low pH of gastric juice and their ability to adhere to intestinal epithelial cells (
6 – 8). Additionally, the safety of these preparations is a key issue. Many LAB (including species:
Lactobacillus,
Lactiplantibacillus,
Ligilactobacillus,
Lactococcus, and
Leuconostoc) have been granted Qualified Safety Presumption status by the European Food Safety Authority and GRAS status (generally recognized as safe) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. This recognition is attributed to their extensive history of safe use in fermented foods and their presence in the normal intestinal and urogenital microbiota of both humans and animals (
9,
10). Furthermore, some LAB species are acknowledged as probiotics, organisms whose short-term presence or colonization positively influence many elements of the host’s physiology. The undoubted advantage is also the low production costs of this type of vaccine and the possibility of freeze-drying and storage of the preparation at room temperature (
5,
11).
Since the first report on the use of lactic acid bacteria as a carrier for vaccine antigens, many studies have been published (
12). Attempts have been made to use recombinant LAB strains in immunoprophylaxis against gastrointestinal pathogens (
Salmonella,
Helicobacter,
Yersinia), bacteria that cause respiratory infections (
Streptococcus pneumoniae) (
5), as well as against numerous viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 (
13), Human Papilloma Virus (
14), rotavirus (
15), Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus (
16,
17), and subgroup J Avian Leukosis Virus (
18). Various strategies have been developed to efficiently express genes encoding heterologous antigens in LAB strains, mainly of the genera
Lactococcus and
Lactobacillus. The effectiveness of the preparations varied and was dependent on many parameters, such as the type of antigen (bacterial, parasitic, or viral), carrier strain, amount of antigen, its location, route of administration, and the immunization schedule (
17,
19 – 22).
Our research group has been working to construct an efficient chicken anti-
Campylobacter vaccine, using LAB strains as delivery vectors for
Campylobacter antigens. Our previous work documented the possibility of using the
L. lactis strain as a delivery vector for the
C. jejuni antigen (
23). However, since
L. lactis does not colonize the chicken intestinal tract, we decided to use as a carrier the
Ligilactobacillus salivarius strain isolated from chicken feces (
24). As it is well known that the amount of antigen has an impact on vaccine efficacy, this study was intended to identify new promising candidates for promoter controlling the expression of heterologous proteins in
L. salivarius. During colonization processes, lactobacilli often face stressful conditions such as temperature changes, acidity, osmolarity, and oxidative conditions. It should be noted that strains of lactic bacteria colonizing chickens can encounter a wide temperature range (chicken body temperature: 42°C); therefore, it is crucial that the promoter strength is not decreased by this factor. Comparison of the transcriptomes of
L. salivarius IBB3154 cells grown at two different temperatures (37°C and 42°C) allowed the identification of 11 genes whose expression was higher at 42°C and five genes whose expression was very high at both temperatures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Bacterial strains, primers, plasmids, media, and growth conditions
Bacterial strains, plasmids, and primers used in this study are listed in Supplementary Material (
Tables S1 and S2). The
Ligilactobacillus salivarius IBB3154 strain was routinely cultured in de Man, Rogosa, and Sharpe (MRS) broth or MRS agar (solidified with 1.5% agar) medium (Oxoid) at 37°C without shaking under microaerobic conditions provided by Anoxomat Mark II OP (MART Microbiology B.V.). The
Escherichia coli strains, used as hosts for the construction of recombinant plasmids, were grown under standard conditions unless otherwise indicated. The
E. coli strain MC1061 (
recA +) was used for cloning purposes in pNZ8008. When needed, the medium was supplemented with antibiotics at the following final concentrations: for
E. coli, 20 µg/mL chloramphenicol, 100 µg/mL ampicillin, and for
L. salivarius, 10 µg/mL chloramphenicol.
Bacterial genome sequencing
Whole genome sequencing of the
L. salivarius IBB3154 strain was carried out in the DNA Sequencing and Synthesis Facility in the Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Total genomic DNA was isolated using the cetyltrimethylammonium bromide/lysozyme method (
25) with minor modifications. The bacterial cell wall was digested enzymatically before lysis with sodium dodecyl sulfate using lysozyme (20 mg/mL; Sigma-Aldrich, Dorset, UK) and mutanolysin (5 U/mL; A&A Biotechnology, Gdańsk, Poland) for 15 min at 37°C. After isolation, DNA integrity was checked by electrophoresis on a standard 1% agarose gel and by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis on a CHEF-DR III apparatus (Biorad Laboratories, Hercules, CA). Genomic DNA concentration was measured by fluorimetry using a Qubit 2.0 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA). The DNA sample was sheared into approximately 20 kb fragments using a Covaris gTUBE (Covaris Ltd., Brighton, UK), and the sequencing library was constructed using a SMRTbell template prep kit version 1.0. The library sample was loaded into a single single-molecule real-time cell and sequenced on the RS II instrument (Pacific Biosciences, Menlo Park, CA). Additionally, the bacterial genome was sequenced using Illumina technology. Genomic DNA was mechanically sheared to an appropriate size by nebulization and used for Paired-End TruSeq-like library construction using the KAPA Library preparation kit (KAPA/Roche, Basel, Switzerland) following the manufacturer’s instructions. The bacterial genome was sequenced in paired-end mode (v3, 600 cycle chemistry kit) using the MiSeq instrument (Illumina, San Diego, CA). Illumina sequence reads were filtered for quality using the FastX toolkit (
http://hannonlab.cshl.edu/fastx_toolkit/). PacBio reads were assembled into contigs using Canu v1.6 (
26). The Canu assembly was further polished using Illumina reads and Pilon v1.22 (
27). The remaining sequence gaps and ambiguities in genome assembly were closed and verified by the PCR amplification of DNA fragments, followed by Sanger sequencing with an ABI3730xl Genetic Analyzer (Life Technologies, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA), using BigDye Terminator Mix v. 3.1 Chemistry (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA). The genome was manually closed using Seqman software (DNAStar, USA) to obtain a complete nucleotide sequence of the bacterial genome.
RNA extraction and RNA-seq
RNA extraction and RNA-seq were performed in the DNA Sequencing and Synthesis Facility in the Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Bacterial cells were inoculated in triplicate in 100 mL of MRS broth. Each triplicate was incubated at 37°C and 42°C for 5 h (OD600 ~ 1). Cells were harvested as rapidly as possible by centrifugation at 5,000 rpm for 10 min. The growth medium was removed, and the cells were resuspended in StayRNA reagent (A&A Biotechnology, Gdańsk, Poland), aliquoted into 2 mL portions, and incubated overnight in the freezer. After overnight incubation, the StayRNA reagent was removed by centrifugation, and the bacterial cell pellets were stored at −70°C. After thawing, the bacterial cells were resuspended in 50 µL of Tris-EDTA buffer containing 10 mg/mL of lysozyme (Sigma, USA) and 1 U/mL of mutanolysin (A&A Biotechnology, Gdańsk, Poland) and incubated for 15 min at 37°C. The cells were then centrifuged, and the enzyme cocktail was removed prior to lysis with Fenozol reagent (A&A Biotechnology, Gdańsk, Poland). Total RNA was extracted using the Total RNA Mini Plus kit (A&A Biotechnology, Gdańsk, Poland). The RNA was treated with Rnase-free Dnase (A&A Biotechnology, Gdańsk, Poland) to remove any contaminating genomic DNA, according to the manufacturer’s protocols. RNA quality was assessed using the Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer system and the RNA 6000 Nano Chip (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, USA). The quantity of RNA was measured by fluorimtery using a Qubit2.0 fluorimeter (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA). Ribosomal RNA species were depleted using the RiboZero rRNA (Bacteria) Removal Kit (Illumina, San Diego, USA). The quality of the RNA and the absence of the 16S and 23S rRNA species were quality checked on an Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100 using the RNA 6000 Pico kit.
Six independent RNA-seq libraries were constructed with the KAPA Stranded RNA-Seq kit (KAPA-Roche, Basel, Switzerland) following the manufacturer’s protocol. The quality and quantity of purified libraries were checked using the Agilent 2100 Bionalyzer, Qubit2.0 (Life Technologies, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA), and the KAPA Library qPCR Quantification Kit (KAPA-Roche, Basel, Switzerland) and subsequently sequenced on an Illumina NextSeq 500 instrument with 75 nucleotide single-end reads. The raw reads were trimmed for quality using the FastX toolkit (
http://hannonlab.cshl.edu/fastx_toolkit/) and the remaining Illumina adapters were removed using cutadapt (
https://github.com/marcelm/cutadapt). Cleaned sequencing reads were mapped to the
L. salivarius 3,154 genome with CLC Genomics Workbench 9.0.1 (
https://www.qiagenbioinformatics.com/), and the rest of the analysis was done with this software package. The statistics of the RNA-seq data set have been presented in the Supplementary Material (
Table S3). The abundance of gene expression was normalized by fragments per kilobase of exon per million mapped fragments. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified, with the threshold set to 1.8-fold change and a
P-value <0.05 as the criteria for a significant difference in gene expression.
General DNA manipulations
Standard DNA manipulations were performed as described in the Sambrook manual (
28) or according to the manufacturer’s instructions (A&A Biotechnology, Poland). The chromosomal DNA of
L. salivarius IBB3154 used for PCR reactions was isolated using a commercial kit and protocol (A&A Biotechnology, Poland). Cells were pretreated with mutanolysin for 1 h. PCRs were performed with HotStar HiFidelity Polymerase (Qiagen) or PrimeStar HS DNA Polymerase (Takara) under standard conditions. Synthetic oligonucleotide synthesis and DNA sequencing for cloning experiments were performed by Genomed S.A. (Warsaw, Poland). The DNA fragments containing
Ligilactobacillus promoters were synthesized by GeneCust (France).
Construction of recombinant plasmids
The DNA fragments containing the promoter of the sas1 gene (P sas1 ) and the promoter of the sas2 gene (P sas2 ) were synthesized by GeneCust and cloned into pBluescript II SK + digested with PstI and XhoI, generating the plasmids pUWM1476 and pUWM1477, respectively. Then pUWM1477 was digested with BglII and EcoRI, and a 0.5-kb DNA fragment was inserted into pNZ8008/BglII and EcoRI, resulting in pUWM1481. To introduce new sites recognized by restriction enzymes, the DNA fragment containing (P sas1 ) was amplified from pUWM1476 with the pair of primers pUWM1476_BglII and pUWM1476_PstI and cloned into pJET 1.2 (Thermofisher, USA). Subsequently, the resulting plasmid, pUWM1486, was digested with BglII and PstI, and a 0.5-kb DNA fragment was inserted into pNZ8008/BglII and PstI, generating the plasmid pUWM1491.
The 0.28-kb DNA fragment that contains the promoter of the
usp45 gene was amplified from the
L. lactis subsp.
Lactis IL1403 chromosome (GenBank accession number
AE005176) [PrimeStar HS DNA Polymerase (TaKaRa)] using the primer pairs Usp45_BglII and Usp45_PstI. The PCR product was purified and cloned into pJet1.2/blunt to generate pUWM1553. Subsequently, the BglII-PstI DNA fragments of pUWM1553 and pNZ8008 digested with the same enzymes were ligated. The resulting plasmid, designated pUWM1565, contains fragment DNA that includes the promoter of the
usp45 gene.
The plasmid containing fragment DNA with the promoter of the fructose-bisphosphate aldolase (P fbaA ) gene was created in a similar way. Briefly, the 0.5-kb DNA fragment containing the promoter of the fbaA gene was amplified from the chromosome of L. salivarius IBB3154 [HS DNA Polymerase (TaKaRa)] using the primer pairs Faldo_BglII and Faldo_PstI. The PCR product was purified and cloned into pJet1.2/blunt to generate pUWM1488. Subsequently, the BglII-PstI DNA fragments of pUWM1488 and pNZ8008 digested with the same enzymes were ligated. The resulting plasmid was designated pUWM1498.
Transformation of E. coli and L. salivarius
E. coli was transformed as previously described (
29). Recombinant plasmids pUWM1481, pUWM1491, pUWM1498, and pUWM1565 were introduced into
L. salivarius cells by electroporation (
30). To prepare the competent
Ligilactobacillus strain cells, an overnight culture was inoculated 1:50 in MRS containing 1% glycine and incubated at 37°C under microaerobic conditions until an OD
600 of 0.5 was reached. Bacteria were collected (4,000 rpm, 10 min, 4°C), and the pellet was washed three times in electroporation buffer (1 M sucrose, 3.5 mM MgCl
2). The bacteria were resuspended 1:100 in the same solution, and a volume of 20 µL was immediately electroporated or kept at −70°C for further use.
L. salivarius competent cells were electroporated at 2.5 kV, 400 Ω, and 25 µF in 0.2 cm cuvettes using a BioRad GenePulser (BioRad, Life Science Research Products, CA, USA). After electroporation,
Ligilactobacillus cells were resuspended in MRS broth containing 0.5 M sucrose and 100 mM MgCl
2 and incubated at 37°C for 3 h. After incubation, bacteria were plated on MRS supplemented with chloramphenicol (10 µg/mL). The plates were incubated at 37°C for 2 days.
β-Glucuronidase activity assay
For the β-glucuronidase (GUS) activity assay, L. salivarius IBB3154 cells carrying plasmids encoding β-glucuronidase under the control of tested promoters were used. Ligilactobacillus strains were grown in MRS broth supplemented with chloramphenicol and bile salts (0%, 0.05%, 0.1%, and 0.2%) under microaerobic conditions at 37°C or 42°C (25 mL). After reaching log phase growth (A600 = 0.6), cells were harvested by centrifugation (4°C, 5 min, 8,600 × g) and washed twice in ice-cold GUS buffer (4 mL; 100 mM Na3PO4 and 2.5 mM EDTA, pH 6.0). Subsequently, the cell pellet was thoroughly suspended in 1 mL of GUS buffer and disrupted by beating the beads for three 1 min cycles, with intervals of at least 1 min, during which the cells were kept on ice (FastPrep Instrument; MP Biomedicals, Santa Ana, CA). After centrifugation (8,600 × g, 2 min, 4°C), cell-free extracts were stored on ice and used immediately. Protein concentrations were determined using the bicinchoninic acid protein assay kit (BCA kit; Sigma-Aldrich).
For the determination of β-glucuronidase activity, 100 µL of each cell extract (0.1 mg/mL) were transferred to a black 96-well plate and incubated for 1 min at 37°C. Then, 100 µL of 2 mM MUG (4-methylumbelliferyl-beta-D-glucuronide), a fluorogenic substrate of β-glucuronidase (Sigma-Aldrich), was added, and the mixture was incubated for 10 min at 37°C. After incubation at 37°C for 10 min, 50 µL of 3.2 M Na2CO3 was added to stop the reaction. Subsequently, fluorescence intensity was measured using a 96-well plate reader at 355 nm excitation and 460 nm emission (Synergy HTX, BioTek). For each experiment, standards were prepared for the GUS assay. To obtain a standard curve (0–250 nM 4-MU), 1 mM 4-MU (4-methylumbelliferyl) stock was diluted to 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, and 200 nM in GUS/Stop buffer (buffer GUS:3.2 M Na2CO3, 4:1, vol:vol).
Units of GUS activity were described as nanomoles of 4-methylumbelliferone released per minute per milligram of protein. Three biological replicates were performed for all experiments.
Bioinformatic analyses
Open reading frames (
orfs) and noncoding RNAs were annotated using the RAST server
[http://rast.nmpdr.org/ (
31)] and, when needed, checked by BLAST analysis. BASYs
[https://www.basys.ca/ (
32)] software was used to construct Clusters of Orthologous Groups (COGs) of predicted proteins. Possible bacteriophages were identified using PHAST
[http://phast.wishartlab.com/ (
33)]. The Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat (CRISPR) loci were searched using the CRISPRFinder tool
[http://crispr.i2bc.paris-saclay.fr/ (
34)]. Genome visualization was performed using the CGView server
[http://cgview.ca/ (
35)]. Antibiotic resistance genes were searched using the Comprehensive Antibiotic Resistance Database (CARD) Resistance Gene Identifier (RGI) (
36).
Statistical analysis
Differences in β-glucuronidase activities in tested strains were analyzed with GraphPad Prism 7.0 software (GraphPad Software, CA, USA) using one-way analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction. P-values below 0.05 were considered significant.
DISCUSSION
Representatives of the
Ligilactobacillus genus exhibit significant physiological and genetic diversity. The selection of an appropriate strain for use as an antigen carrier is a task that requires special care. Strains should not harbor any acquired antimicrobial resistance genes to clinically relevant antimicrobial compounds. The presence of genes conferring antibiotic resistance in the genome carries the risk of spreading resistance within the microbiome of animals' gastrointestinal tracts and in the environment in general. An example of the transfer of tetracycline resistance genes from
L. plantarum and
Lactobacillus delbruekii subsp. Bulgaricus to the pathogenic
Listeria monocytogenes has been documented by Yang and Yu (
54).
L. salivarius IBB3154 strain has the ability to effectively colonize the gastrointestinal tract of chickens, making it a potential candidate for use as a live bacterial vector in these animals (
24). In the genome of the IBB3154 strain, only a gene conferring resistance to vancomycin was identified (according to the CARD database). It is worth noting that vancomycin resistance is characteristic of many strains of lactic acid bacteria. This resistance is intrinsic, chromosomally encoded, and not inducible or transferable.
In the construction of an effective vaccine, the amount of antigen produced may play a key role. For protein expression in LAB, constitutive promoters, e.g., P
ldhl (lactate dehydrogenase promoter), P
slpA (promoter of the gene encoding the protein SlpA), and P
tu (Ef-Tu promoter) (
55 – 58), are often used. Induced promoters provide control over gene expression, which is important when the gene product is toxic to the host. One of the best-known examples is the promoter used in the Nisin-Controlled Gene Expression System, induced by the addition of the anti-bacterial peptide nisin to the medium. However, its drawback is the inability to use nisin
in vivo, which results in antigen production occuring only during the strain preparation (
59). Carbohydrate-induced promoters have also been identified (P
fos , P
tre ). Attention is drawn to the promoter activated by the presence of fructoligosaccharide (P
fos ), a prebiotic that stimulates the development of intestinal microbiota (
60). An alternative may be promoters induced by stress conditions prevailing in the host’s digestive tract (
1,
61,
62). A very good example is the P
groESL promoter, which was used to develop a new inductive gene expression system called SICE (Stress-Inducible Expression System). The same research group developed an
in vivo LIVE-induced system (
Lactobacilli In Vivo Expression System), which was used to express anti-inflammatory interleukin 10 (IL-10) and glucan-binding protein B
Streptococcus mutans (GbpB) (
63).
The presented study was intended to identify promoters that could be used to control the expression of heterologous proteins in
Ligilactobacillus cells. Therefore, the strength of promoters, selected on the basis of a comparison of the transcriptomes of the
L. salivarius IBB3154 strain grown at 37°C and 42°C, was investigated. For those analyses, we selected P
sasA1 , P
sasA2 , and P
fab promoters, as they showed higher potency at 42°C, which corresponds to the body temperature of the birds. Additionally, we analyzed the P
fab promoter, as the transcriptome analyses indicated a high level of its expression, both at 37°C and 42°C. To evaluate whether the screened promoters can be used to enhance transcription of genes encoding antigens, the three promoters were separately integrated upstream of the reporter gene
gusA. As the base module for the creation of constructs, we used the pNZ8008 plasmid, which contains the broad-host range replicon and harbors the strong and nisin-inducible P
nis promoter controlling the expression of β-glucuronidase. The P
usp45 promoter was used as a positive control (
64). The tests were carried out at two temperature variants: 37°C and 42°C. The presented results show that the P
sasA1 and P
sasA2 promoters are characterized by the highest activity under the tested conditions. At 37°C, an enhanced strength of the promoter of the gene encoding the SasA1 protein is observed, while at 42°C, the P
sasA2 promoter seems to be more active. We assume that both promoters (P
sasA1 and P
sasA2 ) are strong enough to place genes encoding hybrid proteins under their control, but their strength is not affected by temperature.
In the digestive tract, lactic acid bacteria are exposed to acids and bile salts. Bile salt concentrations in the small intestine fluctuate between 0.2 and 2%, resulting in lower concentrations in the large intestine (
65). Some LABs have the ability to survive under these conditions and to colonize the gut, which is important in the production of orally administered vaccines. The activity of promoters in the presence of bile salts is crucial for the production of heterologous proteins by lactic acid bacteria. What is more, as these genes encode proteins most likely arising at the adhesion site, the strength of their promoters in the presence of bile salts was analyzed. Bile salts at concentrations of 0.05%, 0.1%, and 0.2% were used in the research. The results show that bile salts and their concentration have an impact on the strength of the tested promoters. The decrease in the activity of these promoters is already observed at 0.05% salt concentration, while at 0.1% concentration, inhibition of the
gusA reporter gene expression is observed in the case of P
fab and P
usp45 promoters. P
sasA1 and P
sasA2 promoters were most potent among the studied genes, as in the experiment with temperature variants; however, bile salts did not induce the increased activity of the tested promoters. It is worth noticing that Martínez-Fernández et al. (
66) identified bile salt-induced promoters in
Lactobacillus casei BL23 and
Lactobacillus plantarum WCFS1. The authors constructed the pNZ vector:16090-aFP, which could be used as a gene carrier and be utilized in the construction of vaccines administered to the mucous membranes. The same salt concentrations were selected for the tests as in the presented work, i.e., 0.05%, 0.1%, and 0.2%. Induction of the
L. casei BL23-derived P16090 promoter was observed in the starting strain
L. casei BL23 as well as in
L. plantarum WCFSI,
L. rhamnosus, and
L. reuteri, i.e., in the strains most often used in the probiotic industry (
66).
A similar approach was applied in the cases of
L. salivarius and
Ligilactobacillus agilis. In the study conducted by Wang et al. (
67), the primary objective was to identify genes whose expression changes in response to the presence of bile salts. Among the genes whose expression increased were those encoding ABC transporters, genes encoding enzymes involved in surface charge modification, and enzymes necessary for maintaining redox homeostasis. These studies serve as an excellent starting point for both elucidating the molecular mechanisms associated with the response to bile stress and searching for a strong promoter active in the gastrointestinal tract (
67). Vezina et al. (
68) also employed transcriptomics to identify strong constitutive promoters in
L. agilis cells. The most abundant transcripts originated from genes encoding glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH), translational Ef-Tu, enolase, a putatively secreted protein, and a cell wall-associated hydrolase (
68). It is worth noting that three of these genes were also identified in our own research.
Techniques such as RNA-seq, DNA microarrays, or proteomics allow the development of inducible, repressive, or constitutive expression vectors, but in this case, the analysis using the reporter’s gene did not confirm the results obtained from the comparison of the transcriptome of the L. salivarius strain at 37°C and 42°C. The P sasA2 promoter exhibits diminished activity at elevated bile salt concentrations (0.1% and 0.2%) at both 37°C and 42°C, while the activity of P sasA1 , although slightly lower at 42°C, remained at a relatively high level. These results suggest the potential utility of the sasA1 gene promoter for the expression of Campylobacter genes encoding immunogenic proteins.