Page 64 - Read Online
P. 64

Page 6 of 19                   Kok et al. Microbiome Res Rep 2023;2:30  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/mrr.2023.16

               Table 1. Paenibacillus larvae bacterial strains isolated from New Zealand
                                                               No. of   Size range contigs
                P. larvae strain  Isolation location  MLST ST  GC%                      Accession No.
                                                               contigs  (Kbp)
                Pl-WAI        Wellington       18       44.2%  219    0.128-218         JARDRH000000000
                Pl-TP         Rotorua          18       44.1%  157    0.128-250         JARDRJ000000000
                Pl-CHCH       Christchurch     18       44.1%  163    0.128-218         JARDRI000000000
                PFR-Pl-2017   Auckland         18       44.1%  176    0.128-218         JARDRG000000000
                PFR-Pl-2006   Hamilton         18       44.1%  185    0.128-218         JARDAI000000000
                Pl-F1A        North Canterbury  18      44.1%  175    0.5-191           JARDRL000000000
                Pl-F2B        South Canterbury  18      44.0%  167    0.5-191           JARDRM000000000
                Pl-P1627      Queenstown       23       44.1%  171    0.5-195           JARDRK000000000

               P. Larvae: Paenibacillus larvae.

               DNA was extracted from each of the bacterial isolates and submitted for genome sequencing. Genomes
               were assembled using SPAdes 3.15.3 [24,25]  and then annotated using either RAST 1.073  [26-28]  or Prokka
               1.14.5 . The resulting genome assemblies had a range of 157 to 219 contigs, with sizes varying from 0.12 to
                    [29]
               218 Kbp. These P. larvae strains had GC contents of 44.0% to 44.2% [Table 1].


               Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) was undertaken using PubMLST . MLST for P. larvae consists of the
                                                                          [35]
               following seven housekeeping genes: ftsA (cell division protein), clpC (catabolite control protein A), glpT
               (glycerol-3-phosphate permease), glpF (glycerol uptake facilitator protein), rpoB (RNA polymerase beta
               subunit), Natrans (forward sodium dependant transporter), and sigF (sporulation sigma factor F) as these
                                                          [36]
               offered the most diversity between genomes tested . Seven of the New Zealand isolates belonged to the 18
               MLST ST and one belonged to 23 MLST ST [Table 1]. MLST can also be used to distinguish between the
               ERIC I genotype and the ERIC II genotype. MLST 18 and MLST 23 both belong to the ERIC I genotype [36-38] .

               We used CRISPRFinder to look for detectable CRISPR systems in these eight isolates . Seven of the isolates
                                                                                      [39]
               contained four CRISPR arrays and one isolate contained five. The total number of spacers within the
               CRISPR arrays for each isolate varied from 15-25 spacers [Table 2]. Across all eight isolates, 29 unique
               spacers were observed, Pl-P1627 contained 12 unique spacers that were not found in any of the other
               isolates.


               We also used DefenseFinder [40,41]  to search for known anti-phage systems in our bacterial strains. All eight
               isolates contained the same seven anti-phage systems: both a type I and II restriction-modification
               system , a Gao_let system , two Cas systems (CAS_Class1-Subtype-III-B and CAS_Class1-Subtype-I-
                     [42]
                                       [43]
                                     [45]
                 [44]
               B) , a Wadjet_III system , and a Mokosh_TypeII system .
                                                                 [46]
               Finally, we used Phaster [47,48]  to identify prophages contained within the genomes. Phaster designates
               prophages as either intact, questionable or incomplete by comparing them to a NCBI database of complete
               viral genomes. Potential prophage regions are then given a completeness score; this score is calculated on
               the proportion of phage genes in the identified region. An intact prophage has a score > 90, a questionable
               prophage has a score between 70-90, and an incomplete prophage has a score < 70. All isolates contained at
               least one intact prophage, with six containing two intact prophages. The intact prophages were genomically
                                                               [49]
               similar  to P. larvae Phage Harrison and Phage Vegas . All genomes also contained 3-4 questionable
               prophages and 6-9 incomplete prophages [Table 3].
   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69