Letter | Published:

Prophage WO genes recapitulate and enhance Wolbachia-induced cytoplasmic incompatibility

Nature volume 543, pages 243247 (09 March 2017) | Download Citation

Abstract

The genus Wolbachia is an archetype of maternally inherited intracellular bacteria that infect the germline of numerous invertebrate species worldwide. They can selfishly alter arthropod sex ratios and reproductive strategies to increase the proportion of the infected matriline in the population. The most common reproductive manipulation is cytoplasmic incompatibility, which results in embryonic lethality in crosses between infected males and uninfected females. Females infected with the same Wolbachia strain rescue this lethality. Despite more than 40 years of research1 and relevance to symbiont-induced speciation2,3, as well as control of arbovirus vectors4,5,6 and agricultural pests7, the bacterial genes underlying cytoplasmic incompatibility remain unknown. Here we use comparative and transgenic approaches to demonstrate that two differentially transcribed, co-diverging genes in the eukaryotic association module of prophage WO8 from Wolbachia strain wMel recapitulate and enhance cytoplasmic incompatibility. Dual expression in transgenic, uninfected males of Drosophila melanogaster crossed to uninfected females causes embryonic lethality. Each gene additively augments embryonic lethality in crosses between infected males and uninfected females. Lethality associates with embryonic defects that parallel those of wild-type cytoplasmic incompatibility and is notably rescued by wMel-infected embryos in all cases. The discovery of cytoplasmic incompatibility factor genes cifA and cifB pioneers genetic studies of prophage WO-induced reproductive manipulations and informs the continuing use of Wolbachia to control dengue and Zika virus transmission to humans.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    & New hypothesis of the cause of cytoplasmic incompatibility in Culex pipiens L. Nature 232, 657–658 (1971)

  2. 2.

    & Speciation by symbiosis. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27, 443–451 (2012)

  3. 3.

    & Speciation by symbiosis: the microbiome and behavior. MBio 7, e01785–15 (2016)

  4. 4.

    et al. Open release of male mosquitoes infected with a Wolbachia biopesticide: field performance and infection containment. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 6, e1797 (2012)

  5. 5.

    et al. The wMel Wolbachia strain blocks dengue and invades caged Aedes aegypti populations. Nature 476, 450–453 (2011)

  6. 6.

    et al. Wolbachia blocks currently circulating Zika virus isolates in Brazilian Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Cell Host Microbe 19, 771–774 (2016)

  7. 7.

    et al. Wolbachia-induced cytoplasmic incompatibility as a means for insect pest population control. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 15042–15045 (2004)

  8. 8.

    & Eukaryotic association module in phage WO genomes from Wolbachia. Nature Commun. 7, 13155 (2016)

  9. 9.

    et al. Extensive genomic diversity of closely related Wolbachia strains. Microbiology 155, 2211–2222 (2009)

  10. 10.

    & Detection of the Wolbachia protein WPIP0282 in mosquito spermathecae: implications for cytoplasmic incompatibility. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 43, 867–878 (2013)

  11. 11.

    , , & Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes. J. Mol. Biol. 305, 567–580 (2001)

  12. 12.

    et al. The maternal-effect, selfish genetic element Medea is associated with a composite Tc1 transposon. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 10085–10089 (2008)

  13. 13.

    et al. Multiple rescue factors within a Wolbachia strain. Genetics 178, 2145–2160 (2008)

  14. 14.

    , , , & Wolbachia transfer from Drosophila melanogaster into D. simulans: host effect and cytoplasmic incompatibility relationships. Genetics 150, 227–237 (1998)

  15. 15.

    & Male age, host effects and the weak expression or non-expression of cytoplasmic incompatibility in Drosophila strains infected by maternally transmitted Wolbachia. Genet. Res. 80, 79–87 (2002)

  16. 16.

    et al. Dynamics of Wolbachia pipientis gene expression across the Drosophila melanogaster life cycle. G3 5, 2843–2856 (2015)

  17. 17.

    , , & Male development time influences the strength of Wolbachia-induced cytoplasmic incompatibility expression in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 177, 801–808 (2007)

  18. 18.

    Gal4 in the Drosophila female germline. Mech. Dev. 78, 113–118 (1998)

  19. 19.

    Tissue, cell type and stage-specific ectopic gene expression and RNAi induction in the Drosophila testis. Spermatogenesis 2, 11–22 (2012)

  20. 20.

    , , & The genetics and cell biology of Wolbachia-host interactions. Annu. Rev. Genet. 42, 683–707 (2008)

  21. 21.

    , , & Wolbachia-mediated cytoplasmic incompatibility is associated with impaired histone deposition in the male pronucleus. PLoS Pathog. 5, e1000343 (2009)

  22. 22.

    & Cytological analysis of fertilization and early embryonic development in incompatible crosses of Drosophila simulans. Mech. Dev. 57, 47–58 (1996)

  23. 23.

    , , & Mitotic defects associated with cytoplasmic incompatibility in Drosophila simulans. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 67, 55–64 (1996)

  24. 24.

    & Wolbachia and the normal and incompatible eggs of Aedes polynesiensis (Diptera: Culicidae). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 38, 409–418 (1981)

  25. 25.

    & Wolbachia infection influences the development of Culex pipiens embryo in incompatible crosses. Heredity 96, 493–500 (2006)

  26. 26.

    , & in The Development of Drosophila melanogaster (eds & ) Ch. 3 (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 1993)

  27. 27.

    & Still a host of hosts for Wolbachia: analysis of recent data suggests that 40% of terrestrial arthropod species are infected. PLoS ONE 7, e38544 (2012)

  28. 28.

    , , & Asymmetrical reinforcement and Wolbachia infection in Drosophila. PLoS Biol. 4, e325 (2006)

  29. 29.

    , & Wolbachia-induced incompatibility precedes other hybrid incompatibilities in Nasonia. Nature 409, 707–710 (2001)

  30. 30.

    , & A new model and method for understanding Wolbachia-induced cytoplasmic incompatibility. PLoS ONE 6, e19757 (2011)

  31. 31.

    et al. MicroScope: a platform for microbial genome annotation and comparative genomics. Database 2009, bap021 (2009)

  32. 32.

    et al. Phylogenomics of the reproductive parasite Wolbachia pipientis wMel: a streamlined genome overrun by mobile genetic elements. PLoS Biol. 2, e69 (2004)

  33. 33.

    et al. The mosaic genome structure of the Wolbachia wRi strain infecting Drosophila simulans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 5725–5730 (2009)

  34. 34.

    et al. Genome evolution of Wolbachia strain wPip from the Culex pipiens group. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25, 1877–1887 (2008)

  35. 35.

    , , , & Recent genome reduction of Wolbachia in Drosophila recens targets phage WO and narrows candidates for reproductive parasitism. PeerJ 2, e529 (2014)

  36. 36.

    et al. The Wolbachia genome of Brugia malayi: endosymbiont evolution within a human pathogenic nematode. PLoS Biol. 3, e121 (2005)

  37. 37.

    & Rearing Sarcophaga bullata fly hosts for Nasonia (parasitoid wasp). Cold Spring Harb. Protoc. 2009, pdb.prot5308 (2009)

  38. 38.

    & Temperature affects the tripartite interactions between bacteriophage WO, Wolbachia, and cytoplasmic incompatibility. PLoS ONE 6, e29106 (2011)

  39. 39.

    et al. Geneious Basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics 28, 1647–1649 (2012)

  40. 40.

    , , & Detection of the Wolbachia-encoded DNA binding protein, HU beta, in mosquito gonads. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 43, 272–279 (2013)

  41. 41.

    et al. NCBI BLAST: a better web interface. Nucleic Acids Res. 36, W5–W9 (2008)

  42. 42.

    MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 32, 1792–1797 (2004)

  43. 43.

    & A corrected Akaike information criterion for vector autoregressive model selection. J. Time Ser. Anal. 14, 271–279 (1993)

  44. 44.

    , & ProtTest: selection of best-fit models of protein evolution. Bioinformatics 21, 2104–2105 (2005)

  45. 45.

    et al. MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst. Biol. 61, 539–542 (2012)

  46. 46.

    et al. The Pfam protein families database: towards a more sustainable future. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, D279–D285 (2016)

  47. 47.

    , & SMART 7: recent updates to the protein domain annotation resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, D302–D305 (2012)

  48. 48.

    , , , & A phylogenetic analysis of filarial nematodes: comparison with the phylogeny of Wolbachia endosymbionts. Parasitology 122, 93–103 (2001)

  49. 49.

    , , , & Tetracycline antibiotics impair mitochondrial function and its experimental use confounds research. Cancer Res. 75, 4446–4449 (2015)

  50. 50.

    , , & Modulation of gurken translation by insulin and TOR signaling in Drosophila. J. Cell Sci. 125, 1407–1419 (2012)

  51. 51.

    , , & Construction of transgenic Drosophila by using the site-specific integrase from phage phiC31. Genetics 166, 1775–1782 (2004)

  52. 52.

    , & The GAL4 system: a versatile toolkit for gene expression in Drosophila. Cold Spring Harb. Protoc. 2008, pdb.top49 (2008)

  53. 53.

    , & The relative importance of DNA methylation and Dnmt2-mediated epigenetic regulation on Wolbachia densities and cytoplasmic incompatibility. PeerJ 2, e678 (2014)

  54. 54.

    , & NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nature Methods 9, 671–675 (2012)

  55. 55.

    et al. 2016 update of the PRIDE database and its related tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, D447–D456 (2016)

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) R21 HD086833 and National Science Foundation IOS 1456778 to Seth R.B., National Science Foundation DEB-1501398 and NIH 5T32GM008554 training grant support to D.P.L., NIH T32GM07347 training grant support for J.A.M. to the Vanderbilt Medical Scientist Training Program, and NIH AI081322 to A.M.F. Imaging was performed in part through the use of the Vanderbilt University Medical Center Cell Imaging Shared Resource (supported by NIH grants CA68485, DK20593, DK58404, DK59637, and EY08126). We thank K. Jernigan and P. Snider for help with preliminary studies, and A. Brooks for assistance with figure preparation.

Author information

Author notes

    • Daniel P. LePage
    •  & Jason A. Metcalf

    These authors contributed equally to this work.

Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37235, USA

    • Daniel P. LePage
    • , Jason A. Metcalf
    • , Sarah R. Bordenstein
    • , Jungmin On
    • , Jessamyn I. Perlmutter
    • , J. Dylan Shropshire
    • , Emily M. Layton
    • , Lisa J. Funkhouser-Jones
    •  & Seth R. Bordenstein
  2. Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA

    • John F. Beckmann
  3. Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37235, USA

    • Seth R. Bordenstein

Authors

  1. Search for Daniel P. LePage in:

  2. Search for Jason A. Metcalf in:

  3. Search for Sarah R. Bordenstein in:

  4. Search for Jungmin On in:

  5. Search for Jessamyn I. Perlmutter in:

  6. Search for J. Dylan Shropshire in:

  7. Search for Emily M. Layton in:

  8. Search for Lisa J. Funkhouser-Jones in:

  9. Search for John F. Beckmann in:

  10. Search for Seth R. Bordenstein in:

Contributions

D.P.L. performed gene expression and hatch rate assays, embryo cytology, and assayed for transgene and infection status of flies. J.A.M. performed comparative genomics analyses, generated transgenic flies, and drafted the manuscript. Sarah R.B. performed evolutionary and bioinformatic analyses. J.O. performed hatch rates, assayed sex ratios, collected flies for all experiments, and assayed for transgene and infection status of flies. J.I.P. conducted younger brother effect experiments and performed embryo cytology. J.D.S. performed hatch rate assays, collected flies for parallel embryo cytology, and assayed for transgene and infection status of flies. E.M.L. collected flies and performed hatch rate assays. L.J.F.-J. obtained the wVitA transcriptome. J.F.B. obtained the wPip proteome. Seth R.B. supervised the work and contributed to all experimental designs, data analysis, and data interpretation. All authors participated in manuscript preparation, editing, and final approval.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seth R. Bordenstein.

Reviewer Information Nature thanks S. L. O’Neill, W. Sullivan and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Extended data

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    This file contains Supplementary Tables 1-7.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature21391

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.