Next Article in Journal
Peroxiporins in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Biomarker Potential and Therapeutic Perspectives
Next Article in Special Issue
Genomic Landscape of Susceptibility to Severe COVID-19 in the Slovenian Population
Previous Article in Journal
Genistein Promotes M2 Macrophage Polarization via Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor and Alleviates Intestinal Inflammation in Broilers with Necrotic Enteritis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Reprogramming in Candida albicans Gene Expression Network under Butanol Stress Abrogates Hyphal Development
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 25
Issue 12
10.3390/ijms25126657
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Distribution of papA and papG Variants among Escherichia coli Genotypes: Association with Major Extraintestinal Pathogenic Lineages

by
Valentina Fernández-Yáñez
1,2,†,
Patricio Suazo
2,†,
Claudia Hormazábal
1,2,
Valentina Ibaceta
2,
Mauricio Arenas-Salinas
3,
Roberto M. Vidal
2,4,
Francisco Silva-Ojeda
5,
Carolina Arellano
2,
Ignacio Muñoz
2 and
Felipe Del Canto
2,*
1
Departamento de Biología, Facultad de Química y Biología, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Av. Libertador Bernardo O’Higgins 3363, Santiago 9170022, Chile
2
Programa de Microbiología y Micología, Instituto de Ciencias Biomédicas, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile, Av. Independencia 1027, Santiago 8380453, Chile
3
Centro de Bioinformática Simulación y Modelado, Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Talca, Av. Lircay s/n, Talca 3460787, Chile
4
Instituto Milenio de Inmunología e Inmunoterapia, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile, Av. Independencia 1027, Santiago 8380453, Chile
5
Servicio de Laboratorio Clínico, Hospital Clínico Universidad de Chile, Av. Dr. Carlos Lorca Tobar 999, Santiago 8380453, Chile
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25(12), 6657; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25126657
Submission received: 24 April 2024 / Revised: 10 June 2024 / Accepted: 11 June 2024 / Published: 17 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genomics: Infectious Disease and Host-Pathogen Interaction 3.0)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The pyelonephritis-associated fimbria (P fimbria) is one of the most recognized adhesion determinants of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli strains (ExPECs). Twelve variants have been described for the gene encoding the P fimbria major structural subunit PapA and three variants for the gene encoding the adhesin subunit PapG. However, their distribution among the ExPEC diversity has not been comprehensively addressed. A complete landscape of that distribution might be valuable for delineating basic studies about the pathogenicity mechanisms of ExPECs and following up on the evolution of ExPEC lineages, particularly those most epidemiologically relevant. Therefore, we performed a massive descriptive study to detect the papA and papG variants along different E. coli genotypes represented by genomic sequences contained in the NCBI Assembly Refseq database. The most common papA variants were F11, F10, F48, F16, F12, and F7-2, which were found in significant association with the most relevant ExPEC genotypes, the phylogroups B2 and D, and the sequence types ST95, ST131, ST127, ST69, ST12, and ST73. On the other hand, the papGII variant was by far the most common followed by papGIII, and both were also found to have a significant association with common ExPEC genotypes. We noticed the presence of genomes, mainly belonging to the sequence type ST12, harboring two or three papA variants and two papG variants. Furthermore, the most common papA and papG variants were also detected in records representing strains isolated from humans and animals such as poultry, bovine, and dogs, supporting previous hypotheses of potential cross-transmission. Finally, we characterized a set of 17 genomes from Chilean uropathogenic E. coli strains and found that ST12 and ST73 were the predominant sequence types. Variants F7-1, F7-2, F8, F9, F11, F13, F14, F16, and F48 were detected for papA, and papGII and papGIII variants were detected for papG. Significant associations with the sequence types observed in the analysis of genomes contained in the NCBI Assembly Refseq database were also found in this collection in 16 of 19 cases for papA variants and 7 of 9 cases for the papG variants. This comprehensive characterization might support future basic studies about P fimbria-mediated ExPEC adherence and future typing or epidemiological studies to monitor the evolution of ExPECs producing P fimbria.

1. Introduction

Extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli strains (ExPECs) are a common cause of morbidity and mortality in humans and other animals [1,2]. The ExPEC group is widely diverse regarding its genotypes and repertoires of virulence factors. It includes several pathotypes capable of causing infections at diverse human body sites, such as uropathogenic E. coli (UPEC), sepsis-associated E. coli (SEPEC), and neonatal meningitis-associated E. coli (NMEC) [3]. In animals, ExPECs can cause diseases such as colibacillosis in chickens and swine and mastitis in cattle, leading to significant economic losses in poultry and the farm industry [4,5,6]. In addition, ExPECs can cause urinary tract infections in cattle and accompaniment pets, such as dogs and cats [7,8,9].
It is well accepted that the main reservoir of ExPECs is the gastrointestinal tract of humans and other animals [10], which is also the reservoir of diarrheagenic E. coli and the habitat of commensal strains [11,12,13,14]. However, in contrast to other pathotypes or commensal strains, ExPECs can colonize, persist, and disseminate into extraintestinal tissues [3]. Several virulence factors are determinants of this capacity, including adherence structures, toxins, iron-capture systems, and the capsule [3].
The wide diversity of ExPECs regarding their genotypes and virulence factor repertoire has hampered the identification and use of specific molecular markers to recognize ExPECs for diagnostic purposes and also in the context of epidemiological studies [10,11]. Numerous attempts performed over several years have allowed for the identification of some common features at the strains’ genotype level. For example, ExPECs correspond mainly to isolates belonging to E. coli phylogroups B2 and D [15]. In addition, in the case of extraintestinal infections in humans, sequence types ST69, ST73, ST95, ST131, and ST393 are the most frequently isolated and have been recognized as pandemic lineages [16]. ST10, ST12, ST14, ST117, ST127, ST141, and ST405 are usually found too, depending on the geographic location [17,18].
The pyelonephritis-associated fimbria (P fimbria) is one of the most recognized ExPEC virulence factors [19]. P fimbria is a structure assembled by the chaperone–usher pathway, composed mainly of thousands of copies of the PapA protein, the major structural subunit, and, in minor proportion, the structural subunits PapK, PapE, and PapF and the tip subunit PapG, to which the adhesin activity is attributed [20]. The assembly process is assisted by the periplasmic chaperone PapD and the usher PapC, an outer membrane porin-like protein in which the polymerization of structural subunits and then the fimbria’s exposition to the cell surface occur [20]. Two other proteins, PapH and PapJ, are also part of the system, but their roles have not been fully established. Data suggest that PapH acts as an anchor protein that helps to maintain the fimbria attached to the bacterium, and PapJ would be a second periplasmic chaperone [21,22].
The relevance of the P fimbria in ExPEC pathogenicity has been established, mainly for the adherence capacity of UPEC strains, which is why it has been proposed as a potential basis for developing anti-virulence therapies [23]. Diversity in the components of P fimbria is one of the obstacles to overcome to gain insights into its molecular mechanisms and move forward with potential applications. Sequence variability has been reported for PapA and PapG, for which 12 and 3 variants have been established, respectively. Variants F7-1, F7-2, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F14, F15, F16, and F48 have been described for PapA [24], while genetic variants papGI, papGII, and papGIII, have been established for papG [25]. A few studies have analyzed the presence and distribution of these variants in separated sets of ExPECs, especially during the last years, in which multiple characterizations have been supported using massive genome sequencing technologies [26,27,28]. However, to our knowledge, the distribution of papA and papG variants among a highly diverse set of E. coli genotypes has yet to be addressed. Given the high relevance of the P fimbria in ExPEC pathogenicity, we believe the current landscape of this diversity should be established. Therefore, in this work, we report the analysis of E. coli genomes contained in databases to find associations between papA and papG variants with the phylogroup and sequence types. In addition, we looked for these associations in a set of newly sequenced UPEC strains isolated in Chile.

2. Results

Among the 35,828 E. coli genomic sequences, 739 were positive, with a blast score ratio ≥ 0.9 (BSR ≥ 0.9) for the detection of the papAHCDJKEFG locus (2.1% of the isolates). Within this group, most of these strains belonged to the D (46.5%, 344 strains) and B2 (42.3%, 317 strains) phylogroups (Figure 1A). ST73 (27.5%), ST69 (27%), ST131 (8.1%), and ST393 (7.44%) were the four most common sequence types (Figure 1B). The screening of pap genes (A to G) using blastn showed a wide range of BSR values for papA and papE, with coefficients of variation of 46.31% and 34.68%, respectively, while the rest of the genes seemed to be more conserved (Figure 1C). The distribution of the BSR values for all the genes was similar after screening with the tblastn algorithm, but the coefficients of variation for papA and papE were lower (Figure 1D). In a second complementary analysis, we established the presence of the pap locus by detecting the papC gene, encoding the usher protein, with a BSR ≥ 0.9 after screening with the tblastn algorithm. Thus, 4005 out of 35,828 were positive (11.18%). With this criterion, most of the strains belonged to the B2 (62.33% of the records) and the D (14.50%) phylogroups (Figure 1E). ST131 (15.35%), ST95 (13.82%), ST73 (9.77%), and ST69 (7.57%) were the most common sequence types (Figure 1F). The BSR values for the screening of pap genes showed a higher variation than the results obtained in the first analysis, with papA and papG showing the highest coefficients of variation regardless of the algorithm used (blastn or tblastn, Figure 1G,H).

2.1. Screening of papA and papG Variants

Given that genetic variants for papA (F7-1, F7-2, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F14, F15, F16, and F48) and papG (papGI, papGII, and papGIII) have been described, we explored the presence of these variants in association with the phylogroups and sequence types of the E. coli genomes. We considered the population of the 4005 records selected according to the criterion of BSR values ≥0.9 (tblastn) for the presence of the papC gene, as this allowed for the inclusion of the ST95 strains, a genotype recognized to be one of the dominants among strains causing extraintestinal infections in humans [16]. Within this universe of strains, variants for papA could be established in 3080 of the records, with a total sum of 4201 hits (BSR ≥ 0.9), which suggested the presence of genomes harboring more than one variant simultaneously. The most common variants were F11 (893 genomes), F10 (511 genomes), F48 (379 genomes), F16 (371 genomes), F12 (287 genomes), and F7-2 (235 genomes). Significant associations were found in twenty-one cases for pairs of a papA variant/phylogroup, including nine different pairs for strains belonging to the B2 phylogroup, four for F, three for D, three for C, one for B1, and one for G (Table 1). No significant associations were detected for the A and E phylogroup strains. The most common associations were F11/B2 (598 genomes), F10/B2 (447 genomes), F48/B2 (272 genomes), F16/D (265 genomes), F12/B2 (203 genomes), and F13/B2 (174 genomes) (Table 1). Forty-two cases of significant associations were found for pairs of papA variant/sequence types. Most cases were found in the most common papA variants, i.e., F7-2, F11, F10, F12, F16, and F48. Among the most frequent sequence types, the highest number of significant associations with different papA variants was detected for ST73 (F7-1, F7-2, F13, and F14) and ST12 (F10, F12, F13, F14, and F16). ST69 was associated with F9 and F16 variants. ST95, ST117, ST127, and ST131 strains were associated with single papA variants. ST95 and ST117 strains were separately associated with the F11 variant only; ST127 strains had a significant association with F48, while ST131 strains were associated with the F10 variant (Table 1).
On the other hand, papG variants were also screened among the 4005 E. coli genome records. Variants were identified in 3459 records, and papGII was the most common by far, followed by papGIII (Table 2). Although papGII and papGIII were detected in strains belonging to all the phylogroups, they were only significantly associated with some of them. The papGII variant was found to be associated with phylogroups B2, D, and G, while papGIII was associated with phylogroup B2 only. The variant papGI was detected in B2 strains only (Table 2). Among the most common sequence types, ST73, ST95, and ST131 strains were found in significant association with both papGII and papGIII, ST12 with papGI and papGIII, ST69 with papGII only, and ST127 with papGIII only.
As expected, papGII and papGIII variants were found to be significantly associated with most of the papA variants. In contrast, the papGI variant was associated with the F13 variant only (Table 2). As it is already known, some strains, such as the prototypic human UPEC strain CFT073, harbor two copies of the pap locus [29].

2.2. Genomes Harboring Two or Three papA Variants

Our analysis identified 177 genomes (4.42% of the 4005 papC-positive genomes) for which 2 or 3 different papA variants were simultaneously detected (Table 3). Most of these genomes represent strains belonging to the B2 phylogroup (91 genomes) and to the ST12 (42 genomes), ST73 (22 genomes), and ST127 (8 genomes) sequence types (Table 3). Among them, the most common pairs identified were F11/F16, F7-2/F13, F7-2/F48, and F7-1/F14, which harbored papGII or the combination papGII/papGIII. In ten cases, from which seven represent ST12 strains, three different papA variants were simultaneously detected in combination with a single papG variant, papGII, or papGIII.
Among the thirty-three strains harboring two or three different papA variants and simultaneously one or two different papG variants, we could establish which pairs are contained within single pap loci only in four cases by exploring genome annotations. Thus, in three ST73 strains, the pairs F7-1/papGII and F14/papGIII (NCBI assembly code GCF_001030435.1), and F7-2/papGII and F13/papGIII (two strains, GCF_000351825.1 and GCF_025946565.1) were found. The other case was an ST12 strain, in which the pairs F9/papGII, and F13/papGIII were identified (GCF_026651165.1). In addition, to establish if strains harboring two or three different papA variants contained complete papAHCDJKEFGH loci, we explored fully sequenced genomes. Only eight records fulfilled these conditions, representing strains belonging to the B2 phylogroup only, more specifically, three sequence types and a non-typeable genome (Table 4). Complete papAHCDJKEFGH loci were found in all the cases, and most of them seemed to be intact, lacking disrupting elements such as premature stop codons or insertion sequences. In only one case, an F7-2 encoding locus from the record GCF_001683435.1, several frameshift mutations are informed in genome annotations, which introduce premature stop codons (Table 4).

2.3. Presence of papA and papG Variants in E. coli Isolated from Humans and Animals

Given that ExPECs can be found in humans and animals, and genetic relatedness among strains has suggested the possibility of transmission between them [30], we explored host information in the genome records representing the most relevant sequence types. ST69, ST73, ST95, ST131, and ST393 were included, as well as ST12, ST117, and ST127, as they were detected among the most frequent genotypes in the selected papC+ group. In seven of the eight sequence types analyzed, most genomes represent strains isolated from humans (Table 5). In fact, no animal strains were observed among ST393 strains. However, among ST12, ST69, ST73, ST95, ST127, and ST131, several records representing animal strains and harboring their main associated papA and/or papG variants were found (Table 5). The most common among these cases were the records representing ST12, ST73, ST127, and ST131 strains obtained from dogs and ST69 and ST95 strains obtained from poultry. On the other hand, ST117 strains were mostly isolated from poultry or bovines, but a minor proportion represented human strains (Table 5).

2.4. Screening of papA and papG Variants in a Collection of Chilean UPEC Strains

Finally, we screened papA and papG variants in a set of 17 genomes from UPEC strains isolated in Santiago, Chile, to explore if the associations found in the whole database could be detected (Table 6). Although this collection is small, representatives of the most common phylogroups and sequence types were identified. Fourteen strains belonged to phylogroup B2 and three to phylogroup D. ST73 (five genomes), ST12 (four genomes), and ST69 (three genomes) were the most frequent sequence types (Table 6). In decreasing order of frequency, papA variants F13, F16, F7-1, F7-2, F8, F48, F9, F11, and F14, were recognized. Variant papGII was detected in all the strains, with the simultaneous detection of papGIII in five cases. The papGI variant was not detected. Significant associations between papA/papG variants and the sequence types identified in NCBI Assembly Refseq genomes were detected in 16 cases within Chilean strains. Only three cases did not match with those associations: one F7-2 variant was found in an ST69 strain (92-UCH), and F13 and F11 variants were found in two different ST12 strains (175-UCH and 207-UCH) (Table 6). Three strains harboring two different papA variants each were identified. The pair F7-1/F48, not observed within the NCBI Assembly Refseq genome database, was detected in an ST73 strain. In addition, the pairs F9/F13 and F11/F16 were detected in two different ST12 strains, which agreed with the pairs previously found in the NCBI Assembly Refseq database (Table 6). Furthermore, loci containing papC and papA-like genes that could not be defined as any of the 12 variants screened were found in six cases. The strains 23-UCH, 151-UCH, 208-UCH, and 253-UCH harbor putative F10 homologs, 177-UCH has a putative F7-1 homolog, and 207-UCH has a putative F12 homolog. In four strains, 29-UCH, 81-UCH, 175-UCH, and 199-UCH, only one papA variant but two different papG variants were found, suggesting that other non-detected papA variants might be present (Table 6). In summary, most features found in the Chilean UPEC strains are consistent with those found in genomes obtained from the RefSeq Assembly database.

3. Discussion

P fimbria is one of the most well-known virulence factors ExPECs produce, causing infections in humans and other animals. Its role in conferring the adherence capacity has been assessed in vitro [31] and in vivo [32,33], so it has been proposed as a target for the development of anti-adherence therapies [23]. ExPECs represent a wide diversity of strains, including several phylogroups and a vast number of different sequence types [11]. This diversity is accompanied by the variability in fimbrial repertoires and the sequences of fimbrial components [19]. In this scenario, our results indicated that the gene encoding the major structural subunit PapA has the highest degree of variation compared to the rest of the genes within the papAHCDEJKEFG locus. This is consistent with the fact that 12 different variants had been described several years ago for PapA [23], a fact that has not been commonly reported among chaperone–usher-assembled fimbriae. Despite the vast diversity of strains, some sequence types are more frequent in extraintestinal infections, with ST69, ST73, ST95, ST131, and ST393 as the top representatives, which have been recognized as pandemic lineages [16]. This is consistent with the more common sequence types we identified within the 4005 genomes harboring papC, which were detected after screening the NCBI Assembly Refseq database of E. coli genomes with a cut-off value of BSR ≥ 0.9. In contrast, the screening of the whole papAHCDEJKEFG locus with the same cut-off value to establish a set of genomes representing a set of strains harboring the P fimbrial system excluded all the ST95 strains. This reflects the complexity of establishing proper cut-off values, particularly for loci containing multiple genes in draft genomes, which represent most of the genome databases today. Indeed, the availability of tools to obtain phylogroups and sequence types from multiple genomic sequences contributed to determining if our selected dataset represented E. coli genotypes associated with extraintestinal infections. In this case, the set of genomes we finally selected to analyze the presence of papA and papG variants included the most common genotypes as the most abundant representatives according to both categories, phylogroups, and sequence types [16,17]. A similar set could have been selected after screening other genes from the papAHCDEJKEFG locus. However, we selected papC, because the usher has previously been considered one of the most conserved components of chaperone–usher fimbrial systems and a basis for a classification scheme [34].
Sequence types such as ST12, ST127, ST117, and ST405 were also detected among those most common in the selected dataset for screening papA and papG variants. These sequence types have been recognized as prevalent in previous studies [17] and were detected at a higher frequency than ST393, one of the recognized pandemic lineages. Nevertheless, the number of genomes representing each one of the eight phylogroups (A to G) and the diversity of sequence types (297 sequence types) seemed to constitute a suitable universe for analyzing the distribution of papA and papG variants. Unavoidably, the number of representatives for each genotype is unequal, as the database represents the sum of genomes obtained in several studies from different geographical origins and with diverse goals. In the case of the phylogroups, the numbers were 43 genomes belonging to phylogroup E, 581 belonging to phylogroup D, and 2479 belonging to the B2 group. In the case of the sequence types, only 7 of them exceeded 100 genomes, and 39 sequence types were represented by 10 or more genomes. Among them, the most important sequence types, according to previous reports (ST10, ST12, ST69, ST73, ST88, ST95, ST117, ST127, ST131, ST393, and ST405) were represented by between 57 and 633 genomes. Regarding the association with papA variants, it is noteworthy that only five sequence types showed significant associations with more than one papA variant. ST12 and ST73 strains were found to be significantly associated with five and four different papA variants, respectively, while ST59, ST69, and ST457 were found to be associated with two variants each. Even the most abundant sequence types, ST131 and ST95, were significantly associated with only one papA variant. Therefore, specific features and/or separate evolutionary events, particularly for ST12 and ST73 strains, might determine that those lineages harbor two or more papA variants. Accordingly, ST73 and ST12 were the only ones among the eleven more frequent sequence types that were found significantly associated with two different papG variants.
Furthermore, in the cases in which two or three different papA and two different papG variants were simultaneously detected, the exploration of complete genomes confirmed the presence of complete papAHCDJKEFG loci. This was the already-known case of the UPEC CFT073 strain [29]. In addition, our results are consistent with the results of a previous report in which the location of the P fimbria locus was analyzed [35]. It is known that the locus might be contained in pathogenicity islands (PAIs) located downstream of tRNA genes or within ula or gln operons. Thus, the location of pap-containing PAIs was found to differ among E. coli genotypes (phylogroups and sequence types). Also, for the strains harboring two or three copies, pap-containing PAIs were found to be inserted in two or three of the hot spots [35]. This observation suggests that P fimbria production could be directed from both loci and coexist at the surface of a single bacterium. In fact, different combinations of papA and papG variants could be generated if the minimum number of genes is functional. One of the complete genomes that we analyzed, corresponding to E. coli BH100 substr. MG2014, has frameshifting mutations on papC and papGIII genes in one of its two papAHCDJKEFG loci, which introduce premature stop codons. Perhaps, for other E. coli genomes that were not explored in this work (NCBI Assembly non-Refseq records), non-functional genes may also be present. If transcription and translation of the intact genes occur, proteins derived from any locus could complement the formation of functional P fimbriae. Further research will be required to determine the presence rate of intact and non-functional genes within papAHCDJKEFG loci as well as the regulation of their expression.
The presence of E. coli strains harboring similar features to those found in human ExPECs, in poultry, in farm animals, and also in accompanying pets such as dogs and cats have raised the hypotheses of a common origin for these strains and also the possibility of zoonotic transmissions in cases of extraintestinal infections in humans [30,36,37]. Consistent with these data, several genomes from strains obtained from human and non-human hosts, belonging to the B2 and D phylogroups and to the ST12, ST69, ST73, ST95, ST127, and ST131 sequence types, were found in the NCBI Assembly RefSeq database. By far, most of the strains that had host information were obtained from humans. However, we detected genomes of animal E. coli strains belonging to these genotypes, which harbor the same papA and papG variants as those isolated from humans. This is consistent with the hypothesis of a common origin and/or transmission among humans and animals and between animals [30]. Noteworthy was the detection of genomes harboring F11 and papGII in ST95 strains from humans and poultry and ST12 strains obtained from dogs harboring F10, F12, or F13 and papGI or papGII. An opposite distribution was observed for ST117 genomes, which mainly represent strains isolated from poultry and bovines but include some representing human strains. Given that the contact between humans and poultry, humans and farm animals, or humans and dogs is common and can be sustained in time, the transmission of ExPECs could be feasible. On the other hand, as it has been suggested, ST73 strains harboring F14 and papGII isolated from orcas likely represent the contamination of the environment by animal strains [38].
As expected, the most common ExPEC genotypes were also found in UPEC strains isolated in Chile. Although this collection is small, most of their papA and papG variants agreed with significant associations detected in the analysis of the genomes contained in the NCBI Assembly Refseq database. Specifically, those associations were found in eight cases distributed along 16 strains. In fact, some of them were found in two cases or more. The profile ST12/F13 was found in four cases, and profiles ST14/F8, ST69/F16, and ST73/F7-1, in two cases each. Only three exceptions for papA variants were noticed, F7-2 in an ST69 strain and F11 in two different ST12 strains. In addition, the variant papGII was detected in ST12 strains, an association that was not observed in the database. Another coincidence is that the strains harboring two different papA variants were ST12 or ST73 strains. Furthermore, in three ST12 strains harboring the F13 variant, two different papG variants were detected, suggesting the presence of two pap loci. However, the sequencing data did not allow for the detection of another papA variant. Overall, this study represents the first characterization of UPEC genomes obtained in Chile. As the databases represent a sum of genomes of strains obtained from diverse geographic sites, it is expected to find variability when local populations are analyzed. Further studies will report other features of these strains regarding antimicrobial resistance and virulence factor profiles.
In summary, this study showed a general picture of the presence of papA and papG variants among E. coli phylogroups and sequence types based on the genomes contained in the NCBI Assembly Refseq database and the genomes of ExPECs isolated in Chile. We hope this descriptive study and the associations found here serve as a general guide for future epidemiological studies to follow up on the distribution of the pap locus among E. coli strains. Our findings can be valuable for characterizing the pandemic ExPEC lineages ST69, ST73, ST95, ST131, and ST393, belonging to phylogroups B2 and D, but also for other potential emerging lineages, which could incorporate the pap locus by horizontal transference. With this scenario, we highlight the relevance and versatility of ST12 strains, found as a common lineage associated with infection and humans but also isolated from canines, that can harbor two or three papAHCDJKEFG loci, including several papA variants. The hypothesis of a functional adaptative advantage conferred by the most common papA and papG variants has been previously raised, and it can certainly be proposed based on our results. Thus, P fimbriae produced by the most common lineages, composed of the PapA variants F11, F10, F48, F16, F12, or F7-2 and papGII-derived tip subunits, would be more efficient in their role of conferring colonization capacities compared to structures harboring the less common variants. Further research could test these hypotheses. Indeed, having a landscape of the current distribution of papA and papG variants might also help to establish directions in the efforts to advance the knowledge of the P fimbria-mediated ExPEC adherence/colonization mechanism and to develop P fimbria-based anti-virulence therapies.

4. Materials and Methods

Screening of pap genes: A total of 35.828 E. coli genomes were obtained from the Assembly Refseq database available in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) of the United States of America (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/, accessed on 8 January 2024) [39]. The presence of the pap locus, encoding the P fimbria, was established in two ways. First, papAHCDJKEFG, as a single DNA sequence, was screened using large-scale blast score ratio (LS-BSR) with the blastn algorithm (available at https://github.com/jasonsahl/LS-BSR, accessed on 8 January 2024) [40]. Genomic sequences with BSR ≥ 0.9 were considered as positive. The sequences obtained from the databases for screening purposes are described in Table S1. Alternatively, the presence of the papC gene (BSR ≥ 0.9), encoding the usher protein, was used as indicative of the presence of the papAHCDJKEFG locus. The genes papA, papH, papC, papD, papJ, papK, papE, papF, and papG were also screened individually using LS-BSR with the blastn and tblastn algorithms [40]. Furthermore, genes encoding the papA variants F7-1, F7-2, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F14, F15, F16, and F48 and papG variants papGI, papGII, and papGIII were screened with LS-BSR using tblastn. Records with BSR ≥ 0.9 were considered positive for a variant, except for F12, F15, and F16, which are highly similar among them. Therefore, BSR ≥ 0.96, BSR ≥ 0.99, and BSR ≥ 0.97, respectively, were considered as cut-off values in those cases. The phylogroup was assigned using EzClermont v0.6.3, and the sequence type was determined using mlst v2.18, according to the Achtman’s scheme [41,42,43]. Graphics, distribution, and association analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism v9 software. Associations were established according to Fisher’s exact test and the Chi-square test, and they were reported when the number of genomes displaying a particular feature was higher or equal to ten (with the only exception of the presence of F8 in association with the papGI variant in Table 2) and when the odds ratio >1.0.
Sequencing of Chilean UPEC Strains: Eleven UPEC strains, isolated from urosepsis cases, were taken from a collection stored at the Programa de Microbiología y Micología, Instituto de Ciencias Biomédicas, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile. All of these strains were isolated from blood cultures in a previous study carried out in three hospitals located in Santiago, Chile: Hospital Dr. Félix Bulnes, Hospital Dr. Exequiel González-Cortés, and Hospital Padre Hurtado [44]. The use of these strains was authorized by JMI Laboratories, the owner of the collection, and also by the Ethics Committee of the Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile (Ethics Approval Document N° 003, issued on 4 May 2023). In addition, six UPEC strains were obtained from routine urine cultures performed at the Hospital Clínico de la Universidad de Chile. The use of these strains was authorized by the Ethics and Scientific Committee of the Hospital Clínico de la Universidad de Chile and the Ethics Committee of the Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile (Ethics Approval Document N° 01, issued on 18 January 2018). Details of the strains are shown in Table 6. The strains were cultured overnight at 37 °C in lysogeny broth (LB, Lennox formula), and genomic DNA was purified using a commercial kit, according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Wizard Genomic DNA Purification kit, Promega, Madison, WI, USA). The integrity of the DNA was checked using electrophoresis in 1% agarose gel and ethidium bromide staining. Sequencing was performed at MicrobesNG (Birmingham, UK) using the Illumina MiSeq platform (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). The details of the sequences obtained are shown in Table S2. The draft genomes obtained after assembly with SPAdes v3.14 [45] were provided and checked by using QUAST v5.0.2 [46] and CheckM v1.2.2 [47]. The species identity was corroborated using “Identify Species” (available at https://pubmlst.org/species-id, accessed on 8 January 2024) [48]. The E. coli phylogroup, sequence types, and the presence of genes encoding P fimbria, including papA and papG variants, were determined as indicated above for the genomic sequences recovered from databases.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms25126657/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization and experimental design: V.F.-Y., P.S., C.H. and F.D.C. Data collection, analysis, and interpretation: V.F.-Y., P.S., C.H., V.I., M.A.-S., R.M.V., F.S.-O., C.A., I.M. and F.D.C. Writing—original draft: V.F.-Y., C.H. and F.D.C. Final edition: F.D.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the FONDO NACIONAL DE DESARROLLO CIENTÍFICO Y TECNOLÓGICO (FONDECYT) grants 1200979, 1211647, and 11150966 from the Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo (ANID), Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología, Conocimiento e Innovación, Gobierno de Chile, and with the support of the LÍNEAS DE APOYO A LA INVESTIGACIÓN DEL INSTITUTO DE CIENCIAS BIOMÉDICAS, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile. VF’s doctoral thesis is supported by BECA DE DOCTORADO NACIONAL 21201275, Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo (ANID), Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología, Conocimiento e Innovación, Gobierno de Chile.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The use of ExPECs already stored at the Programa de Microbiología y Micología, Instituto de Ciencias Biomédicas, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile, was approved by the Ethics Committee for Research on Human Beings, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile (Ethics Approval Document N° 003, issued on 4 May 2023). The use of strains isolated from routine urine cultures at the Hospital Clínico de la Universidad de Chile was authorized by the Ethics and Scientific Committee of the Hospital Clínico de la Universidad de Chile (Ethics Approval Document N° 01, issued on 18 January 2018).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Genomic sequences obtained in this work were deposited in Genbank (National Center for Biotechnology Information, Bethesda, MD, USA) under the BioProject code PRJNA930773.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to JMI Laboratories for providing the ExPEC strains.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. GBD 2019 Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. Global mortality associated with 33 bacterial pathogens in 2019: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 2022, 400, 2221–2248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Mellata, M. Human and avian extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli: Infections, zoonotic risks, and antibiotic resistance trends. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2013, 10, 916–932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Sora, V.M.; Meroni, G.; Martino, P.A.; Soggiu, A.; Bonizzi, L.; Zecconi, A. Extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli: Virulence factors and antibiotic resistance. Pathogens 2021, 10, 1355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Kathayat, D.; Lokesh, D.; Ranjit, S.; Rajashekara, G. Avian Pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC): An overview of virulence and pathogenesis factors, zoonotic potential, and control strategies. Pathogens 2021, 10, 467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Barros, M.M.; Castro, J.; Araújo, D.; Campos, A.M.; Oliveira, R.; Silva, S.; Outor-Monteiro, D.; Almeida, C. Swine colibacillosis: Global epidemiologic and antimicrobial scenario. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Goulart, D.B.; Mellata, M. Escherichia coli mastitis in dairy cattle: Etiology, diagnosis, and treatment challenges. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 928346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Yeruham, I.; Elad, D.; Avidar, Y.; Goshen, T. A herd level analysis of urinary tract infection in dairy cattle. Vet. J. 2006, 171, 172–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Thompson, M.F.; Litster, A.L.; Platell, J.L.; Trott, D.J. Canine bacterial urinary tract infections: New developments in old pathogens. Vet. J. 2011, 190, 22–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dorsch, R.; Teichmann-Knorrn, S.; Lund, H.S. Urinary tract infection and subclinical bacteriuria in cats: A clinical update. J. Feline Med. Surg. 2019, 21, 1023–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Manges, A.R.; Johnson, J.R. Reservoirs of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli. Microbiol. Spectr. 2015, 3, UTI-0006-2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Tourret, J.; Denamur, E. Population phylogenomics of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli. Microbiol. Spectr. 2016, 4, UTI-0010-2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Yu, D.; Banting, G.; Neumann, N.F. A review of the taxonomy, genetics, and biology of the genus Escherichia and the type species Escherichia coli. Can. J. Microbiol. 2021, 67, 553–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Kaper, J.B.; Nataro, J.P.; Mobley, H.L. Pathogenic Escherichia coli. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2004, 2, 123–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Croxen, M.A.; Finlay, B.B. Molecular mechanisms of Escherichia coli pathogenicity. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2010, 8, 26–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Secher, T.; Brehin, C.; Oswald, E. Early settlers: Which, E. coli strains do you not want at birth? Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 2016, 311, G123–G129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Riley, L.W. Pandemic lineages of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2014, 20, 380–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Manges, A.R.; Geum, H.M.; Guo, A.; Edens, T.J.; Fibke, C.D.; Pitout, J.D.D. Global Extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC) lineages. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2019, 32, e00135-18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Salipante, S.J.; Roach, D.J.; Kitzman, J.O.; Snyder, M.W.; Stackhouse, B.; Butler-Wu, S.M.; Lee, C.; Cookson, B.T.; Shendure, J. Large-scale genomic sequencing of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli strains. Genome Res. 2015, 25, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Antão, E.M.; Wieler, L.H.; Ewers, C. Adhesive threads of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli. Gut Pathog. 2009, 1, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Waksman, G. Structural and molecular biology of a protein-polymerizing nanomachine for pilus biogenesis. J. Mol. Biol. 2017, 429, 2654–2666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Båga, M.; Norgren, M.; Normark, S. Biogenesis of E. coli Pap pili: papH, a minor pilin subunit involved in cell anchoring and length modulation. Cell 1987, 49, 241–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Tennent, J.M.; Lindberg, F.; Normark, S. Integrity of Escherichia coli P pili during biogenesis: Properties and role of PapJ. Mol. Microbiol. 1990, 4, 747–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Werneburg, G.T.; Thanassi, D.G. Pili assembled by the chaperone/usher pathway in Escherichia coli and Salmonella. EcoSal Plus 2018, 8, 10-1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Johnson, J.R.; Stell, A.L.; Scheutz, F.; O‘Bryan, T.T.; Russo, T.A.; Carlino, U.B.; Fasching, C.; Kavle, J.; Van Dijk, L.; Gaastra, W. Analysis of the F antigen-specific papA alleles of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli using a novel multiplex PCR-based assay. Infect. Immun. 2000, 68, 1587–1599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Manning, S.D.; Zhang, L.; Foxman, B.; Spindler, A.; Tallman, P.; Marrs, C.F. Prevalence of known P-fimbrial G alleles in Escherichia coli and identification of a new adhesin class. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 2001, 8, 637–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Malberg Tetzschner, A.M.; Johnson, J.R.; Johnston, B.D.; Lund, O.; Scheutz, F. In silico genotyping of Escherichia coli isolates for extraintestinal virulence genes by use of whole-genome sequencing data. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2020, 58, e01269-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Kudinha, T.; Kong, F. Distribution of papG alleles among uropathogenic Escherichia coli from reproductive age women. J. Biomed. Sci. 2022, 29, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Salamzade, R.; McElheny, C.L.; Manson, A.L.; Earl, A.M.; Shaikh, N.; Doi, Y. Genomic epidemiology and antibiotic susceptibility profiling of uropathogenic Escherichia coli among children in the United States. mSphere 2023, 8, e0018423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Welch, R.A.; Burland, V.; Plunkett, G., 3rd; Redford, P.; Roesch, P.; Rasko, D.; Buckles, E.L.; Liou, S.R.; Boutin, A.; Hackett, J.; et al. Extensive mosaic structure revealed by the complete genome sequence of uropathogenic Escherichia coli. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 17020–17024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bélanger, L.; Garenaux, A.; Harel, J.; Boulianne, M.; Nadeau, E.; Dozois, C.M. Escherichia coli from animal reservoirs as a potential source of human extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 2011, 62, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Uhlin, B.E.; Norgren, M.; Båga, M.; Normark, S. Adhesion to human cells by Escherichia coli lacking the major subunit of a digalactoside-specific pilus-adhesin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1985, 82, 1800–1804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Lane, M.C.; Mobley, H.L. Role of P-fimbrial-mediated adherence in pyelonephritis and persistence of uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) in the mammalian kidney. Kidney Int. 2007, 72, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Melican, K.; Sandoval, R.M.; Kader, A.; Josefsson, L.; Tanner, G.A.; Molitoris, B.A.; Richter-Dahlfors, A. Uropathogenic Escherichia coli P and Type 1 fimbriae act in synergy in a living host to facilitate renal colonization leading to nephron obstruction. PLoS Pathog. 2011, 7, e1001298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Nuccio, S.P.; Bäumler, A.J. Evolution of the chaperone/usher assembly pathway: Fimbrial classification goes Greek. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2007, 71, 551–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Biggel, M.; Xavier, B.B.; Johnson, J.R.; Nielsen, K.L.; Frimodt-Møller, N.; Matheeussen, V.; Goossens, H.; Moons, P.; Van Puyvelde, S. Horizontally acquired papGII-containing pathogenicity islands underlie the emergence of invasive uropathogenic Escherichia coli lineages. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 5968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Johnson, J.R.; Stell, A.L.; Delavari, P. Canine feces as a reservoir of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli. Infect. Immun. 2001, 69, 1306–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Stromberg, Z.R.; Johnson, J.R.; Fairbrother, J.M.; Kilbourne, J.; Van Goor, A.; Curtiss, R., 3rd; Mellata, M. Evaluation of Escherichia coli isolates from healthy chickens to determine their potential risk to poultry and human health. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0180599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Melendez, D.; Roberts, M.C.; Greninger, A.L.; Weissman, S.; No, D.; Rabinowitz, P.; Wasser, S. Whole-genome analysis of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC) MDR ST73 and ST127 isolated from endangered southern resident killer whales (Orcinus orca). J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2019, 74, 2176–2180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Sayers, E.W.; Bolton, E.E.; Brister, J.R.; Canese, K.; Chan, J.; Comeau, D.C.; Connor, R.; Funk, K.; Kelly, C.; Kim, S.; et al. Database resources of the national center for biotechnology information. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022, 50, D20–D26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Sahl, J.W.; Caporaso, J.G.; Rasko, D.A.; Keim, P. The large-scale blast score ratio (LS-BSR) pipeline: A method to rapidly compare genetic content between bacterial genomes. PeerJ 2014, 2, e332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Waters, N.R.; Abram, F.; Brennan, F.; Holmes, A.; Pritchard, L. Easy phylotyping of Escherichia coli via the EzClermont web app and command-line tool. Access Microbiol. 2020, 2, acmi000143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Jolley, K.A.; Bray, J.E.; Maiden, M.C.J. Open-access bacterial population genomics: BIGSdb software, the PubMLST.org website and their applications. Wellcome Open Res. 2018, 3, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Seemann, T. mlst. Github. Available online: https://github.com/tseemann/mlst (accessed on 8 January 2024).
  44. Gales, A.C.; Castanheira, M.; Jones, R.N.; Sader, H.S. Antimicrobial resistance among Gram-negative bacilli isolated from Latin America: Results from SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (Latin America, 2008–2010). Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2012, 73, 354–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Prjibelski, A.; Antipov, D.; Meleshko, D.; Lapidus, A.; Korobeynikov, A. Using SPAdes De Novo Assembler. Curr. Protoc. Bioinform. 2020, 70, e102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Gurevich, A.; Saveliev, V.; Vyahhi, N.; Tesler, G. QUAST: Quality assessment tool for genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 2013, 29, 1072–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Parks, D.H.; Imelfort, M.; Skennerton, C.T.; Hugenholtz, P.; Tyson, G.W. CheckM: Assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res. 2015, 25, 1043–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Jolley, K.A.; Bliss, C.M.; Bennett, J.S.; Bratcher, H.B.; Brehony, C.; Colles, F.M.; Wimalarathna, H.; Harrison, O.B.; Sheppard, S.K.; Cody, A.J.; et al. Ribosomal multilocus sequence typing: Universal characterization of bacteria from domain to strain. Microbiology 2012, 158, 1005–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 25 06657 g001
Figure 1. Distribution of E. coli genotypes among genomes positives for detecting the pap locus and screening of pap genes. (A,B) Distribution of phylogroups (A) and sequence types (B) among 739 genomes selected after the detection of papAHCDJKEFG with large-scale blast score ratio software (LS-BSR) using blastn and a cutoff of BSR ≥ 0.9. (C,D) BSR values for the screening of pap genes with blastn (C) or tblastn (D) among the 739 genomes. (E,F) Distribution of phylogroups (E) and sequence types (F) among 4005 genomes selected after the detection of papC with LS-BSR using tblastn and a cutoff of BSR ≥ 0.9. (G,H) BSR values for the screening of pap genes with blastn (C) or tblastn (D) among the 4005 genomes. BSR: blast score ratio, COV: coefficient of variation.
Figure 1. Distribution of E. coli genotypes among genomes positives for detecting the pap locus and screening of pap genes. (A,B) Distribution of phylogroups (A) and sequence types (B) among 739 genomes selected after the detection of papAHCDJKEFG with large-scale blast score ratio software (LS-BSR) using blastn and a cutoff of BSR ≥ 0.9. (C,D) BSR values for the screening of pap genes with blastn (C) or tblastn (D) among the 739 genomes. (E,F) Distribution of phylogroups (E) and sequence types (F) among 4005 genomes selected after the detection of papC with LS-BSR using tblastn and a cutoff of BSR ≥ 0.9. (G,H) BSR values for the screening of pap genes with blastn (C) or tblastn (D) among the 4005 genomes. BSR: blast score ratio, COV: coefficient of variation.
Ijms 25 06657 g001
Table 1. Distribution of papA variants among papC+ E. coli genomes from NCBI Assembly Refseq database.
Table 1. Distribution of papA variants among papC+ E. coli genomes from NCBI Assembly Refseq database.
papA VariantN° of Positive GenomesDistribution among Phylogroups
(Phylogroup: n° Genomes)		Significant Association with Sequence Types: n° Genomes
(n° Genomes per Phylogroup)
F7-162
  • B2: 57 ***
  • D: 2
  • F: 3
  • ST73: 25 *** (25 B2)
  • ST144: 19 *** (19 B2)
F7-2235
  • B2: 170 *
  • D: 61 ***
  • A: 1
  • B1: 1
  • G:1
  • U:1
  • ST73: 136 *** (136 B2)
  • ST38: 37 *** (35 D, 1 G, 1U)
  • ST405: 10 * (10 D)
F859
  • B2: 25
  • F: 21 ***
  • A: 9
  • D: 3
  • G: 1
  • ST14: 23 *** (23 B2)
  • ST59: 20 *** (19 F, 1 G)
F985
  • B2: 37
  • D: 24 **
  • F: 20 ***
  • A: 2
  • G: 2
  • ST69: 19 *** (19 D)
  • ST59: 18 *** (17 F, 1 G)
F10511
  • B2: 447 ***
  • F: 38 **
  • A: 9
  • D: 7
  • B1: 4
  • C: 4
  • Cryptic: 1
  • U: 1
  • ST131: 202 *** (202 B2)
  • ST12: 107 *** (107 B2)
  • ST62: 28 *** (28 F)
  • ST625: 10 *** (10 B2)
F11893
  • B2: 598 **
  • G: 86 ***
  • C: 57 ***
  • B1: 40
  • F: 35
  • A: 33
  • D: 22
  • E: 14
  • U: 8
  • ST95: 477 *** (475 B2, 2 U)
  • ST117: 66 *** (66 G)
  • ST88: 39 *** (39 C)
  • ST457: 22 *** (22 F)
  • ST421: 21 *** (21 B2)
  • ST58: 18 *** (18 B1)
  • ST5935: 17 *** (17 G)
F12287
  • B2: 203 *
  • F: 22 *
  • A: 21
  • B1: 17
  • D: 13
  • G: 5
  • C: 3
  • E: 2
  • Cryptic: 1
  • ST12: 31 *** (31 B2)
  • ST141: 29 *** (29 B2)
  • ST457: 13 *** (13 F)
  • ST961: 11 *** (10 B2, 1 cryptic)
  • ST83: 10 *** (10 B2)
  • ST706: 10 *** (10 B2)
  • ST773: 10 *** (10 A)
F13231
  • B2: 174 ***
  • C: 16 **
  • A: 9
  • B1: 8
  • E: 8
  • F: 8
  • D: 5
  • U: 3
  • ST73: 35 * (34 B2, 1 U)
  • ST12: 24 ** (24 B2)
  • ST372: 22 *** (22 B2)
  • ST410: 16 *** (15 C, 1 U)
  • ST998: 11 *** (11 B2)
F14137
  • B2: 119 ***
  • D: 7
  • A: 4
  • C: 3
  • B1: 2
  • F: 1
  • G: 1
  • ST73: 67 *** (67 B2)
  • ST12: 14 * (14 B2)
F1515
  • B2: 14 *
  • A: 1
  • ND
F16371
  • D: 265 ***
  • B2: 75
  • A: 23
  • F: 5
  • B1: 2
  • G: 1
  • ST69: 182 *** (181 D, 1 G)
  • ST12: 49 *** (49 B2)
  • ST393: 57 *** (57 D)
  • ST10: 16 ** (16 A)
  • ST827: 10 *** (10 B2)
F48379
  • B2: 272 *
  • C: 35 ***
  • B1: 32 ***
  • D: 17
  • A: 15
  • F: 15
  • E: 2
  • G: 1
  • U: 1
  • ST127: 170 *** (169 B2, 1 U)
  • ST648: 13 ** (13 F)
  • ST23: 12 *** (12 C)
U: unassigned phylogroup. ND: not detected. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001, and *** p < 0.0001, according to Fisher’s exact test and the Chi-square test.
Table 2. Distribution of papG variants among papC+ E. coli genomes from NCBI Assembly Refseq database.
Table 2. Distribution of papG variants among papC+ E. coli genomes from NCBI Assembly Refseq database.
papG VariantN° of Positive GenomesDistribution among Phylogroups
(Phylogroup: n° Genomes)		Significant Association with Sequence Types
(ST: n° Genomes per Phylogroup)		Significant Association with papA Variants
(n° Genomes per ST)
papGI26
  • B2: 26 ***
  • ST12: 14 *** (14 B2)
  • F13: 8 ***
papGII2569
  • B2: 1632 *
  • D: 474 ***
  • A: 124
  • F: 108
  • G: 90 *
  • B1: 69
  • C: 34
  • E: 26
  • U: 12
  • ST131: 584 *** (584 B2)
  • ST95: 480 *** (478 B2, 2U)
  • ST73: 295 *** (294 B2, 1 U)
  • ST69: 246 *** (245 D, 1 G)
  • ST405: 83 *** (82 D, 1 G)
  • ST393: 57 *** (57 D)
  • ST38: 48 *** (46 D, 1 G, 1 U)
  • ST62: 35 *** (35 F)
  • ST144: 32 *** (32 B2)
  • ST14: 28 *** (28 B2)
  • ST421: 27 *** (27 B2)
  • ST617: 11 * (A)
  • F11: 623 ***
  • F16: 346 ***
  • F7-2: 223 ***
  • F9: 76 ***
  • F7-1: 59 ***
  • F8: 24 *
papGIII942
  • B2: 787 ***
  • B1: 45
  • F: 42
  • C: 40
  • A: 12
  • D: 6
  • G: 4
  • U: 3
  • E: 2
  • Cryptic: 1
  • ST127: 153 *** (152 B2, 1 U)
  • ST73: 138 *** (138 B2)
  • ST12: 122 *** (122 B2)
  • ST141: 39 *** (39 B2)
  • ST372: 37 *** (37 B2)
  • ST457: 34 *** (34 F)
  • ST410: 19 *** (18 C, 1 U)
  • ST101: 18 *** (18 B1)
  • ST625: 13 *** (13 B2)
  • ST998: 11 *** (11 B2)
  • ST83: 10 *** (10 B2)
  • ST961: 10 *** (9 B2, 1 cryptic)
  • F48: 247 ***
  • F10: 198 ***
  • F12: 192 **
  • F13: 155 ***
  • F14: 90 ***
U: unassigned phylogroup. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001, and *** p < 0.0001, according to Fisher’s exact test and the Chi-square test.
Table 3. Features of E. coli papC+ genomes positives for two or three papA variants.
Table 3. Features of E. coli papC+ genomes positives for two or three papA variants.
papA VariantsN° of GenomesPhylogroups
(Phylogroup: n° Genomes)		Sequence Types
(ST: n° Genomes)		papG Variants
(Variant: n° Genomes)
F7-1/F7-23B2: 3ST73: 3papGII: 3
F7-1/F102B2: 2ST144: 2papGII: 2
F7-1/F121B2: 1ST73: 1papGIII: 1
F7-1/F148B2: 8ST73: 8papGII/papGIII: 8
F7-1/F161B2: 1ST12: 1papGII: 1
F7-2/F104B2: 3ST6355: 3papGII: 2
D: 4ST8767: 1papGII: 1
F7-2/F1311B2: 11ST73: 10papGII: 2
papGII/papGIII: 8
ST131: 1papGII: 1
F7-2/F488B2: 8ST127: 7papGII: 8
ST8312: 1papGIII: 1
F8/F915F: 14ST59: 13papGII: 13
ST6199: 1papGII: 1
G: 1ST59: 1papGII: 1
F8/F141F: 1ST59: 1papGII: 1
F9/F111B2: 1ST12: 1papGII: 1
F9/F121B2: 1ST141: 1ND: 1
F9/F135B2: 5ST12: 5papGII: 1
papGII/papGIII: 4
F9/F151B2: 1ST8118: 1papGII: 1
F11/F132B2: 2ST12: 2papGII/papGIII: 2
F10/F111B2:1ST12: 1papGII: 1
F10/F1233B2: 32ST12: 25papGIII: 24
ND: 1
ST625: 1papGI/papGIII: 1
ST961: 3papGIII: 2
ND: 1
ST2604: 3papGIII: 3
Cryptic: 1ST961: 1papGIII: 1
F10/F131B2: 1ST131: 1papGIII: 1
F10/F141B2: 1ST12: 1papGIII: 1
F10/F1615B2: 15ST12: 15papGII: 15
F11/F132B2: 2ST12: 2papGI/papGIII: 2
F11/F142B2: 1ST12: 1papGII/papGIII: 1
C: 1ST88: 1papGIII: 1
F11/F1625B2: 25ST12: 25papGII: 24
ND: 1
F11/F482A: 1ST10: 1papGII: 1
B2: 1ST131: 1papGIII: 1
F12/F142B2: 2ST12: 1papGIII: 1
ST372: 1papGII/papGIII: 1
F12/F486B2: 6ST144: 6papGII: 6
F13/F145B2: 5ST12: 3papGI/papGIII: 1
papGII/papGIII: 1
ND: 1
ST599: 2papGI/papGIII: 2
F13/F482B2: 2ST555: 2papGII/papGIII: 2
F14/F164B2: 3ST12: 3papGII: 3
D: 1ST69: 1papGII: 1
F15/F162B2: 2ST827: 2papGIII: 2
F7-1/F9/F151B2: 1ST703: 1ND: 1
F7-1/F15/F161B2: 1ST73: 1papGIII: 1
F9/F10/F161B2: 1ST12: 1papGII: 1
F9/F11/F161B2: 1ST12: 1papGII: 1
F10/F11/F163B2: 3ST12: 3papGII: 3
F10/F14/F161B2: 1ST12: 1ND
F13/F14/F162B2: 2ST12: 1ND
ND: 1papGII: 1
ND: not detected.
Table 4. Full E. coli genomes harboring two or three papAHCDEJKEFG loci and their associated papA and papG variants.
Table 4. Full E. coli genomes harboring two or three papAHCDEJKEFG loci and their associated papA and papG variants.
Strain
(NCBI Assembly Code)		Phylogroup/ST1st papA/papG Pair
(pap Locus Coordinates)		2nd papA/papG Pair
(pap Locus Coordinates)		3rd papA/papG Pair
(pap Locus Coordinates)
E. coli GN02350 (GCF_026651165.1)B2/ST12F13/papGII
(c1,566,503–-1,558,580)		F9/papGIII
(c2,122,156–2,114,207)		-
E. coli C 691-04A GCF_025946565.1B2/ST73F7-2/papGIII
(899,304–907,248)		F13/papGIII
(c4,560,907–4,552,986)		-
E. coli CFT073 GCF_014262945.1B2/ST73F7-2/papGII
(c3,448,359–3,440,421)		F7-1/papGII
(c4,959,718–4,951,783)		-
E. coli BH100N substr. MG2017 GCF_002900305.1B2/ST127F48/papGIII
(c3,287,322–3,279,405)		F7-2/papGIII
(c4,881,632–4,873,708)		-
E. coli BH100 substr. MG2014 GCF_002763515.2B2/ST127F48/papGIII
(c3,214,562–3,206,645)		F7-2/papGIII
(c4,824,548–4,816,627) FS		-
E. coli K-15KW01 GCF_001683435.1B2/ST127F7-2/papGIII
(c1,676,021–1,669,148)		F48/papGIII
(c3,310,504–3,302,587)		-
E. coli EC5654 GCF_022919035.1B2/ST12F16/papGII
(878,908–886,816)		F10/papGII
(4,458,416–4,466,350)		F11/papGII
(c4,638,209–4,630,290)
E. coli strain UPEC132 GCF_007833875.1B2/NDF14/papGII
(79,054–86,999)		F16/papGII
(934,430–942,336) 		F13/papGII
(c4,629,322–4,621,398)
FS: frameshifting mutations are reported within papC and papGIII genes.
Table 5. Hosts of ST131, ST95, ST73, ST12, ST127, ST117, and ST393 papC+ E. coli genomes harboring their significantly associated papA and papG variants.
Table 5. Hosts of ST131, ST95, ST73, ST12, ST127, ST117, and ST393 papC+ E. coli genomes harboring their significantly associated papA and papG variants.
Sequence TypepapA/papG VariantN° GenomesN° Genomes with Host InformationN° Genomes per Host
ST131All633531Human: 505
Dog: 16
Others: 10 (6 types)
F14109Human: 8
Porcine: 1
F484339Human: 38
Dog: 1
papGII584487Human: 464
Dog: 14
Others: 9 (6 types)
papGIII4137Human: 34
Dog: 2
Porcine: 1
ST95All570513Human: 427
Poultry: 69
Others: 16 (9 types)
F11477434Human: 350
Poultry: 69
Others: 15 (8 types)
papGII480436Human: 351
Poultry: 69
Others: 16 (9 types)
papGIII8572Human: 71
Non-human primate: 1
ST73All403305Human: 278
Dog: 8
Feline: 3
Others: 16 (10 types)
F7-12925Human: 24
Dog: 1
F7-213562Human: 61
Porcine: 1
F133531Human: 28
Non-human primate: 3
F146765Human: 61
Orca: 4
F481513Human: 9
Dog: 3
Common polecat: 1
papGII295208Human: 199
Orca: 4
Others: 5 (4 types)
papGIII138124Human: 110
Dog: 7
Others: 7 (5 types)
ST69All312261Human: 241
Poultry: 9
Others: 6 (4 types)
F91912Human: 12
F16182149Human: 147
Others: 2 (2 types)
papGII246205Human: 191
Poultry: 8
Others: 6 (4 types)
ST12All192173Human: 140
Dog: 16
Others: 17 (13 types)
F1010792Human: 69
Dog: 9
Others: 14 (12 types)
F123129Human: 20
Dog: 4
Others: 5 (4 types)
F132423Human: 19
Dog: 4
F141413Human: 11
Others: 2 (2 types)
F164945Human: 45
papGI1413Human: 6
Dog: 4
Others: 3 (3 types)
papGIII122108Human: 77
Dog: 16
Others: 15 (11 types)
ST127All186168Human: 144
Dog: 7
Others: 17 (13 types)
F48170153Human: 136
Dog: 4
Others: 13 (9 types)
papGIII153136Human: 118
Dog: 5
Others: 13 (10 types)
ST117All135116Poultry: 69
Bovine: 21
Human: 9
Others: 18 (6 types)
F116661Poultry: 41
Bovine: 8
Human: 5
Others: 7 (3 types)
ST393All5753Human: 53
F165753Human: 53
papGII5753Human: 53
Table 6. Main features of UPEC strains isolated in Chile.
Table 6. Main features of UPEC strains isolated in Chile.
StrainDiagnosisYear of IsolationPhylogroupSequence TypepapA VariantpapG Variant
23-UCHUrosepsis2011B2ST14F8papGII
29-UCHUrosepsis2011B2ST12F13papGII/papGIII
81-UCHUrosepsis2009B2ST12F13papGII/papGIII
92-UCHUrosepsis2009DST69F7-2papGII
104-UCHUrosepsis2009DST69F16papGII
112-UCHUrosepsis2009DST69F16papGII
150-UCHUrosepsis2008B2ST131F48papGII
151-UCHUrosepsis2008B2ST73F7-1/F48papGII
175-UCHUrosepsis2008B2ST12F13papGII/papGIII
176-UCHUrosepsis2008B2ST73F7-2papGII
177-UCHUrosepsis2008B2ST12F9/F13papGII/papGIII
197-UCHUTI2017B2ST73F7-1papGII
199-UCHUTI2017B2ST73F14papGII/papGIII
207-UCHUTI2017B2ST12F11/F16papGII
208-UCHUTI2017B2ST73F13papGII
235-UCHUTI2017B2ST131NDpapGII
253-UCHUTI2017B2ST14F8papGII
UTI: urinary tract infection. ND: not detected.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Fernández-Yáñez, V.; Suazo, P.; Hormazábal, C.; Ibaceta, V.; Arenas-Salinas, M.; Vidal, R.M.; Silva-Ojeda, F.; Arellano, C.; Muñoz, I.; Del Canto, F. Distribution of papA and papG Variants among Escherichia coli Genotypes: Association with Major Extraintestinal Pathogenic Lineages. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 6657. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25126657

AMA Style

Fernández-Yáñez V, Suazo P, Hormazábal C, Ibaceta V, Arenas-Salinas M, Vidal RM, Silva-Ojeda F, Arellano C, Muñoz I, Del Canto F. Distribution of papA and papG Variants among Escherichia coli Genotypes: Association with Major Extraintestinal Pathogenic Lineages. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024; 25(12):6657. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25126657

Chicago/Turabian Style

Fernández-Yáñez, Valentina, Patricio Suazo, Claudia Hormazábal, Valentina Ibaceta, Mauricio Arenas-Salinas, Roberto M. Vidal, Francisco Silva-Ojeda, Carolina Arellano, Ignacio Muñoz, and Felipe Del Canto. 2024. "Distribution of papA and papG Variants among Escherichia coli Genotypes: Association with Major Extraintestinal Pathogenic Lineages" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 25, no. 12: 6657. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25126657

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop