* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Mutations of Bacteria From Virus Sensitivity to Virus Resistance
Survey
Document related concepts
Cyanobacteria wikipedia , lookup
Unique properties of hyperthermophilic archaea wikipedia , lookup
Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth wikipedia , lookup
Quorum sensing wikipedia , lookup
Phage therapy wikipedia , lookup
Carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae wikipedia , lookup
Human microbiota wikipedia , lookup
Bacteriophage wikipedia , lookup
Bacterial cell structure wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Mutations of Bacteria From Virus Sensitivity to Virus Resistance S. E. Luria and M. Delbrück Outline • Introduction • Bacteria response to bacteriophage • Proposed mechanisms of survival: short overview of Luria and M. Delbrück’s work • Theoretical model and experiment • Results • Variance • Mutation rate • Conclusions Outline • Introduction • Bacteria response to bacteriophage • Proposed mechanisms of survival: short overview of Luria and M. Delbrück’s work • Theoretical model and experiment • Results • Variance • Mutation rate • Conclusions Bacteria response to bacteriophage When bacteria are mixed with bacteriophage: Bacteria response to bacteriophage When bacteria are mixed with bacteriophage: Bacteria response to bacteriophage When bacteria are mixed with bacteriophage: Bacteria response to bacteriophage • If about a billion bacteria mixed with a particular toxin, nearly all of the bacteria are killed. • A few will survive and give rise to colonies that are permanently and specifically resistant to that particular toxin Proposed mechanisms for survival Do the bacteria have genes and how do they survive an attack? • Small probability of developing resistance upon contact with phage, no genetic component • Lamarckian mechanism: hypothesis of acquired hereditary immunity • Mendelian mechanism: hypothesis of mutation Proposed mechanisms for survival If resistance is produced by physiological adaptation: 1. The proportion of resistant bacteria will stay constant during the attack 2. Resistant bacteria occur as separate and scattered individuals (every resistance is an independent event with no genetic component) Not the case: the proportion of the resistants grows during the attack Proposed mechanisms for survival The researchers were puzzled by ability of bacteria to respond rapidly and adaptively to changes in the environment • In 1943, Salvador E. Luria and Max Delbrück showed that apparent examples of Lamarckian inheritance were actually due to true genetic mutation • in 1946 Edward Tatum and Joshua Lederberg showed that both linkage and recombination could be detected in bacteria Proposed mechanisms for survival 1. Genetic mutation: The proportion of resistant bacteria increases with time Resistant bacteria will occur as groups of closely related individuals – non-Poisson distribtion Proposed mechanisms for survival 2. Acquired hereditary immunity: Resistant bacteria occur as separate and scattered individuals (every resistance is an independent event) Poisson distribution of resistant bacteria Immunity only upon the interaction with the virus Proposed mechanisms for survival Two experimental methods are available: 1. See if the proportion of resistants increases over time 2. Examine groups of related bacteria (colonies) to see if the resistance is correlated with genetic descent Proposed mechanisms for survival • Adaptation hypothesis: each resistant occurs as a separate, random event. No clones of resistants before the attack. Poisson distribution of survivors • Mutation – grows of clones of resistants before the attack. Non-Poisson results Outline • Introduction • Bacteria response to bacteriophage • Proposed mechanisms of survival: short overview of Luria and M. Delbrück’s work • Theoretical model and experiment • Results • Variance • Mutation rate • Conclusions Hypothesis of mutation The bacteria had the resistance ahead of time of the attack. No interaction with virus. No new mutant trees (colonies) during the attack Acquired hereditary immunity Bacteria gets immune during the attack. Mutant trees (colonies) appear only during the attack The main difference between the theories Mutation hypothesis: correlation between the mutants (few colonies before the attack) – nonPoisson distribution Acquired hereditary immunity: random distribution of resistants (many colonies formed during the attack) – Poisson distribution Look at variances Experiment • Start from one bacterium. Grow it for a few generations • Put the same amount in a number of Petri-dish filled with virus • Count how many bacteria survived (count colonies) Experiment Grow bacteria to a few generations in different flasks Spread equal amount from each flask into dishes with the virus D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 … Dn After 24-48 hours count colonies found in the dishes: C C … Total number of bacteria • The number Nt of bacteria in a growing culture follows the equation (time unit: the average division time of the bacteria/ln 2): Nt N 0e t Total number of potential survivors before the attack Mutation hypothesis: Growth rate: at t=0 ρ=0 Total number: d / dt am Nt tam Nt (the proportion grows) am – probability density to mutate Hereditary acquired immunity: aa Nt (fixed proportion) aa – probability density to survive the contact with bacteria The average number of resistant bacteria in each culture: r am Nt ln( Nt Cam ) Nt – number of all bacteria at time t, C – number of similar cultures, and ln( Nt Cam ) t t0 The variance in the mutation hypothesis var Cam N 2 2 t The average compared to the variance: var/ r Nt Cam / ln( Nt Cam ) The ratio between variance and average >> 1, if NtCam >> 1 This will be measured in experiment. It must give var/r >> 1 for non-Poisson distribution Mutation rate ln( p0 ) am Nt N0 p0 – is the fraction of cultures showing no mutation N0 and Nt – initial numbers of bacteria and at time t Outline • Introduction • Bacteria response to bacteriophage • Proposed mechanisms of survival: short overview of Luria and M. Delbrück’s work • Theoretical model and experiment • Results • Variance • Mutation rate • Conclusions Results • The two hypotheses lead to radically different distributions of the number of the resistant bacteria in a series of similar cultures: Hypothesis of acquired immunity: variance equal to the average The mutation hypothesis: variance much greater than the average Results: variance The number of resistant bacteria in series of similar cultures variance InCompare every experiment theto fluctuation of the the average numbers of resistant bacteria is much higher than could be accounted for by the sampling errors and in conflict with the expectations from the hypothesis of acquired immunity Results: mutation rate Values of mutation rate from different experiments Average mutation rate: 2.45×10-8 Outline • Introduction • Bacteria response to bacteriophage • Proposed mechanisms: short overview of Luria and M. Delbrück’s work • Theoretical model • Results • Variance • Comparing experimental and theoretical results • Mutation rate • Conclusions Conclusions • The resistance is due to mutation, independent of virus • The average mutation rate is 2.45×10-8; as rare as in higher organisms • Random gene mutation followed by selection is responsible for the adaptation of bacteria to virus Toda raba! Artificial Nano “T4 Bacteriophage” Size of the artificial nano “T4 Bacteriophage” 10× of the real virus Made of Diamond-like Carbon by Reo Kometani & Shinji Matsui (University of Hyogo) by FIB-CVD (focused ion beam - chemical vapor deposition)