INTRODUCTION
The rising threat of multidrug-resistant bacteria is a well-known, global concern (1, 2). In response, modern research has come together to illuminate the problem from multiple angles. The medical sector, where antimicrobial resistance is limiting treatment options and in turn increasing death rates, especially due to
Antimicrobial stewardship programs limiting the use of antibiotics and increasing preventive measures have been shown to shorten hospital stays and reduce treatment costs (7, 8) but were challenged by the recent COVID pandemic which resulted in an increase in antibiotic use (9). Ultimately, while preventive measures are important, antimicrobial resistance is already widespread, calling forth a need for remedial action. One such endeavor is the search for new antibiotics (10, 11) which brings its own challenges, since antibiotics need to target a limited set of cellular processes to avoid cytotoxicity (12) and their development is costly (13). One potential solution to this crisis is bacteriophages.
Phages are viruses capable of specifically and selectively killing bacteria without causing adverse effects in eukaryotes (14, 15). Their earliest medical application was performed in 1919 by Félix Hubert d’Hérelle, who used phages to cure chicken infected with
An application of phage treatments other than cocktails involves the sequential administration of one phage after another in sequence. Such experiments have been performed on
Our goal is to build on previous works utilizing phage sequential treatment (PST) and further optimize phage treatments against bacteria prone to high mutation rates. For this purpose, we tested our treatment approach on
RESULTS
Phage isolation and classification
In order to obtain a vast variety of bacteriophages infecting
Fig 1
Isolation and classification of
Psari100M φ formed medium-sized PFU with a diameter of approximately 5 mm and a distinct border. Observation under transmission electron microscopy (TEM) showed that Psari100M had a 20-nm-long tail and a 50-nm-wide icosahedral head. The presence of a small tail indicated that Psari100M belonged to podoviral phages (31, 32). CL φ formed smaller PFU with a distinct border. TEM images of CL set its head at approximately 65 nm width and tail at 150 nm, resulting in a total length of 215 nm. Since the tail was not retractable, it could be classified as a siphoviridal-like phage. CRC2 φ created the largest PFU with a diameter of 10 mm and fuzzy border. The phage had a 50-nm-wide head and a 70-nm-long tail, indicating siphoviridal morphology as well. Finally, the vsMR phage formed medium-sized to small plaques. Its head was 70 nm wide while its tail was 160 nm long. Like our other tailed bacteriophages, its tail was non-contractile, classifying vsMR as a siphoviridal-like phage. All of them belonged to the newly formed class of Caudoviricetes (33) (Fig. 1B through F).
Sequencing our bacteriophage genomes showed that the
Fig 2
Genome annotation and phylogenetic analysis of
The CL phage, at 73,191 bp, contained a major head protein, DNA and RNA polymerases, a helicase, and nucleases, among others. Protein prediction did not identify an integrase within the genome of CL phage, thus indicating CL to be a lytic rather than a lysogenic phage (Fig. 2B).
Analysis of the
The vsMR phage, with a genome containing 31,346 bp, coded for phage tail tip proteins, DNA polymerase, and several tRNAs, according to protein prediction. Though our prediction was not able to identify all encoded proteins, listing some as hypothetical, we did not find any integrases and would therefore hypothesize that vsMR phage is likely lytic in nature (Fig. 2D).
While our bacteriophages presented as double-stranded DNA viruses with high levels of completeness according to predictions, we could not clearly determine whether their genomes were circular or linear. Regardless, we represented their genomes in a circular fashion for ease of view (Fig. 2).
Taxonomic tree analysis based on nucleotides showed that all four phages were neither identical to each other nor to another published phage genome.
Phage concentration affects bacterial growth
As we have learned previously, the ability of phages to infect a bacterium on solid medium does not guarantee success when infecting its bacterial host in liquid culture (34). Since our goal was to prepare a therapeutic intervention regimen using bacteriophages effective against bacteria in liquid culture and on solid surfaces, we tested infectivity of all our phages in
In case of
Fig 3
Growth analysis of
Adding
Graphs derived from a dilution series of CL φ phage followed the same trends mentioned above (Fig. 3A and B). As such, lower phage concentrations were again linked to higher initial bacterial growth, followed by later resistance formation and lower secondary growth. Addition of a 10−7 dilution, generating low phage concentrations of approximately 4 PFU/µL, resulted in bacterial growth reaching an even higher peak than liquid
When comparing the heights of our first peaks from each phage concentration, we found that they often differed significantly from each other and always showed significant differences compared to our control without phages. Furthermore, we were able to observe again that peak height increased when phages were at lower concentrations (Fig. S2A through D). These results do not however indicate that the highest phage concentration similarly resulted in the lowest overall bacterial load. Instead, our lowest total bacterial loads occurred at MOIs (multiplicities of infection) ranging from one phage per bacterial cell in case of vsMR phage and CRC2 phage to an MOI of 10 in Psari100M phage and MOI of 50 in CL phage (Fig. S2E).
Bacterial resistance
One could argue that the rise in optical density, from which we inferred bacterial load, was a result of interference by debris from lysed bacteria. To test this, we pelleted
Since ODs of both supernatant solutions behaved similarly to our medium control, it does not seem as though cellular debris derived from phage lysis interfered with optical density. Therefore, we hypothesized that bacterial growth was the cause of our observed increase in OD. This would only be possible if
To test for bacterial resistance, we simultaneously re-isolated bacteria at the end of our phage concentration assays (Fig. 3), and investigated their susceptibility to each bacteriophage via spot assays. We compared re-isolated bacteria to negative control
Fig 4
Resistance development in
Interestingly, we were able to observe the formation of small PFU outside of phage spots, indicating remaining phage activity at the end of the growth assay. Additional spotting of
To confirm that our observed lack of infection was not a result of bacterial contamination, we performed spot assays with GFP labeled
To exclude potential artifacts, we performed another round of spot assays similar to those shown Fig. 4A. Specifically, we exposed
Genome sequencing of resistant bacteria revealed that
Mutants resistant to the CL phage presented the same mutation in the HpcH-HpaI domain-containing protein and two novel mutations in the HlyD family secretion protein and Phosphorelay protein LuxU.
Sequential treatment to combat resistance formation
So far, we have shown that, upon exposure to a phage, bacteria became resistant to that one phage while still being susceptible to our other phages (Fig. 4B and D). In addition, administration of a phage cocktail led to resistance formation against all four phages in the same time span it took
Fig 5
Phage sequential treatment of
We tested the efficiency of these phage sequential treatments by comparing each PST to a phage cocktail and monophage treatment, while measuring bacterial growth at OD600. The first phage was added to liquid
Comparing maximum bacterial growth peaks via Tukey’s test showed clearly that the highest peak of PST Sequence 2 was significantly lower than the highest peak observed in all other treatments. Additionally, the highest peak of PST Sequence 1 was significantly lower than peaks caused by our phage cocktail and monophage treatment, thus indicating that phage sequential treatment performed better in terms of avoiding high bacterial density (Fig. 5C).
To gain insight into the impact of phage treatments on the total bacterial load over the course of our experiment, we calculated the area under each curve, finding that PST Sequence 2 performed best at reducing total bacterial growth throughout the entirety of our experiment. Specifically, PST Sequence 2 reduced bacterial growth seven times more compared to untreated
Spot assays performed after completion of this experimental series indicated that phages were still active and capable of lysing unexposed
DISCUSSION
Over the course of this study, we identified four novel bacteriophages, characterized their infection patterns and tested PST as a promising alternative to phage cocktails in an effort to overcome bacterial resistance. These experiments were conducted using
In monophage treatment, initial bacterial growth peaks (5–10 h) were likely caused by phage concentrations too low to kill all bacteria at once. As a consequence, consecutive decreases in bacterial growth may have been caused by increasing numbers of replicating phages. This hypothesis is supported by the lack of an initial peak after concentrating Psari100M phages to an MOI of 500 (Fig. 3A). Since initial bacterial growth peaks were at their lowest using high phage concentrations, one could assume that a higher MOI would automatically perform best at curbing bacterial growth. While we did indeed show that a higher MOI produced the lowest initial growth peaks (Fig. S2A through D), this hypothesis does not hold true in terms of total bacterial load. Instead, the lowest total bacterial load was achieved by MOIs between 1 and 10, as we can show by calculating the AUC (area under the curve) of each phage concentration (Fig. S2E).
Secondary growth peaks (~30 h, Fig. 3) on the other hand were the result of resistance formation. This hypothesis was supported by CFU growing within spots after only 48 h (Fig. 4C). Additionally, we observed resistance development to all four phages in our spot assays (Fig. 4D), which was congruent with observations in other studies, where bacteria were capable of forming resistances to several phages at once (36). Especially in cases of very high phage concentrations such as in
In conclusion, it seems most beneficial to not only reduce initial growth peaks, but to keep bacterial growth curves from fluctuating strongly, which we observed whenever we used an MOI of 1–10. A potential explanation for this may be the arising competition over nutrients between non-resistant bacteria, which made up the first growth peak and resistant bacteria, which account for secondary growth peaks. This concept also applied to our PST, during which we added phages in intervals to keep bacterial growth steadily contained.
This approach seemed to have been successful, since our PST performed better than phage cocktails, as they were more efficient for two reasons; First, maximum growth peaks were reduced the most after PSTs compared to the maximum growth peak we observed after cocktail treatment (Fig. 5B). Comparing both peaks via Tukey’s multiple comparisons test further confirmed that PST outperformed the phage cocktail significantly in terms of subduing bacterial growth (Fig. 5C). Second, we showed that bacterial growth remained stable at a relatively low OD over the course of 95 h in PST, resulting in half as much total bacterial growth, as calculated by AUC, compared to our cocktail treatment (Fig. 5D). Consistently low levels of bacterial growth are especially important in clinical settings, because the immune system has a better chance of dealing with low quantities of bacteria. Additionally, large bursts of bacterial growth followed by lysis as observed in the cocktail treatment can lead to the release of larger amounts of potentially harmful endotoxins (37).
While we highlighted our most successful treatments (Fig. 5B), we observed a high level of diversity in bacterial growth patterns among different phage sequential treatments (Fig. S1C). This was interesting because we added the same phages and concentrations with the only difference being their order of addition. These findings further confirmed observations made by Wright et al. (27), who also concluded that phage order was an important factor in sequential treatments. Our strategy was furthermore substantiated by literature describing similar experiments, alternating between different antibiotics to achieve vulnerability (38), and resistance delay in bacteria (39). While these treatment regimens relied on forcing bacteria to switch between different antibiotic resistance strategies, the same principles applie to phages, assuming our phages use different entry and infection strategies, which mutant analysis seems to imply. As shown in Fig. 4E, where some mutations were shared among resistant
According to UniProt (40), the DEDD-Tnp-IS10 domain protein found in R100M mutants may potentially contribute to DNA-binding. Therefore, the protein may either be responsible for changing bacterial metabolic activity by acting as a transcription factor, or may directly impact the processing of phage DNA. Meanwhile, the phosphorelay protein LuxU found in RCL mutants, is a phosphorelay sensor with potential implications for bacterial chemotaxis with no previously noted involvement in phage infection. The mutation within HpCH-Hpal domain protein belonging to the aldolase/citrate lyase family, was found to be most similar to a sequence from
On the other hand, bacteria resistant to
Another aspect worthy of consideration is the observed ability of phages to increase vulnerability towards antibiotics, as was tested in
Thus, we need to look toward different ways to improve phage treatments and to combat resistance formation. Our experiments have opened multiple avenues for future improvements. One important factor with potential predictive power is phage concentrations because of their ability to impact the height of initial and secondary peaks and thus determine the amount and timing of bacterial growth. While literature does not unanimously claim an ideal phage titer for therapy, phage concentrations below 1 × 104 PFU/µL were shown to be less effective
Further options we have not explored as much include interval times, since we only tested 24 h intervals due to technical limitations. It is possible that different intervals such as 12 h intervals, 30 h intervals, or even mixed intervals may also have an impact on bacterial growth patterns. Nutrients may also influence bacterial growth, though they are more difficult to control for in clinical settings. Another avenue to consider for future experiments is phage receptors, since different bacteriophages use a vast variety of entry points to infect bacteria (46). Recommendations state that phage cocktails that contain phages specifically targeting different entry points of a bacterium may be more efficient (47). This concept would likely also apply to our sequential treatments, such that we could improve upon our combination by specifically searching for bacteriophages targeting different receptors of
When looking at resistant bacterial mutants, their fitness often determines whether a mutation can be exploited for treatment purposes, since gain of bacterial resistance can be part of a trade-off that results in a loss of function alongside resistance formation. Evidence of such tradeoffs has been found in antibiotic-resistant
For future experiments, it might be particularly beneficial to include experiments that select for phages targeting different entry points, to make bacterial resistance formation more challenging while also utilizing improved administration intervals and concentrations and to specifically select for phages that generate mutants with lower fitness and thus lower chances of survival and persistence. All of these factors may improve the success of a phage treatment in clinical settings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Phage collection
Lake water was collected in February, April, September, and November, to collect a number of diverse phages. Samples were warmed up to room temperature (RT) overnight and divided into three 500-mL flasks. One sample was enriched with R2A broth (Neogen), one was enriched with R2A and
Spot assays
Overlay agar was prepared by dissolving 1.2 g Neogen R2A broth and 1.6 g agarose in 400 mL sterile H2O. The solution was autoclaved at 121°C and stored at 50°C. 1 mL of
Phage propagation
Spot assays were prepared using phage solution after collection. Spots were cut out and placed into 2 mL liquid
Phage isolation
Purity of phages was achieved by preparing dilution series of phage mixtures and isolating single PFU during plaque assays. Dilution series were prepared by diluting phage mixtures in R2A, after which 10 µL from each dilution step were added to 4 mL overlay agar and 1 mL
Transmission electron microscopy
About 5 µL of isolated phage solution was collected for morphological characterization via negative staining. Samples were stained with 0.5% (wt/vol) aqueous uranyl acetate (54) and visualized using a FEI Tecnai G2 Spirit BioTWIN transmission electron microscope at 80 kV with a magnification of 40,000–100,000×.
Phage genome extraction
DNA of
Phage genome sequencing and assembly
The genomic DNA was sequenced with the MinION nanopore technology (Oxford Nanopore Technologies, Oxford, UK) using a MinION Flongle Flow Cell (Cat. No. FLO-FLG001) with the Flow Cell Priming Kit (Cat. No. EXP-FLP002) and the Rapid Sequencing Kit (Cat. No. SQK-RAD004), following the manufacturer’s protocols. The super-accurate model of Guppy (Oxford Nanopore Technologies plc., Version 5.0.11 + 2b6dbff, dna_r9.4.1_450bps_sup) was used for basecalling. Raw reads were adapter trimmed with Porechop v0.2.4 (55) and assembled with Canu v2.2 (56), and the contigs were polished twice with Medaka v1.4.3 with model r941_min_sup_g507 (57). Assembly quality and completeness were assessed with CheckV v1.0.1 (58) and manual inspection.
Phage genome annotation
Open reading frame (ORF) prediction and functional annotation of phages were performed using a combination of PHANOTATE (59) Pharokka (60), Prodigal (61), Prokka (62), Bakta (63), GeneMarkS (64) RAST (65), and Balrog (66). Consensus gene calls and best hit predicted protein similarity searches were made using PHROGs (67), eggNOG (68), PFAM (69), PhaLP (70), and ACLAME (71). Databases were curated manually. Putative transfer RNA (tRNA) genes were identified using ARAGORN (72) and tRNAScan-SE (73). The graphical genome map was generated with the CGView server tool (74) and grouped by PHROGs functional categories. The classification into head, neck, and tail proteins of tailed bacteriophages was done with VIRFAM (75).
Phylogenetic tree analysis
Phage solution preparation for concentration assays
Isolated phage solution (see “Phage isolation” above) was added to
Ninety-six-well plate growth assays
Bacterial growth was analyzed via Optical Density measurements at 600 nm using a Spark TECAN plate reader and 96-well plates (CELLSTAR, Greiner bio-one). All experiments were performed with a total of four wells serving as replicates for each treatment (
Phage solution preparation for cocktail and PST
Phage mixture for cocktails was prepared according to the amplification step (see above) and then mixed in a 1:1:1:1 ratio, adding 1 mL of each phage solution. The titers of each phage as obtained via PFU counts consisted of 5 × 109 PFU/µL for 100M phage, 577 × 106 PFU/µL for CL phage, 6.7 × 109 PFU/µL for CRC2 phage, and 1.9 × 109 PFU/µL for vsMR phage. Titers apply to PST experiments as well (Fig. S1C; Fig. 5B). These phage concentrations result in an MOI of 500 for Psari100M phage, an MOI of 58 for CL phage, 670 for CRC2 phage, and an MOI of 190 for vsMR phage.
Mutant picking
About 100 µL of
Bacterial DNA extraction
Mutant sequencing and SNP calling
Statistical analysis
Bacterial growth assays performed at OD600 were analyzed using GraphPad Prism Version 10.2.0 for Windows. Peaks were identified and then compared based on their height using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparisons test. Entire graphs were compared by utilizing an area under the curve calculation with an OD of 0.1 set as the baseline.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Copyright © 2024 Ulrich et al. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
ABSTRACT
Phage therapy is increasing in relevance as an alternative treatment to combat antibiotic resistant bacteria. Phage cocktails are the state-of-the-art method of administering phages in clinical settings, preferred over monophage treatment because of their ability to eliminate multiple bacterial strains and reduce resistance formation. In our study, we compare monophage applications and phage cocktails to our chosen method of phage sequential treatments. To do so, we isolated four novel bacteriophages capable of infecting
IMPORTANCE
WHO declared antimicrobial resistance a top threat to global health; while antibiotics have stood at the forefront in the fight against bacterial infection, the increasing number of multidrug-resistant bacteria highlights a need to branch out in order to address the threat of antimicrobial resistance. Bacteriophages, viruses solely infecting bacteria, could present a solution due to their abundance, versatility, and adaptability. For this study, we isolated new phages infecting a fast-mutating
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer