Skip to main content
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases logoLink to PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
. 2025 Mar 27;19(3):e0012623. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0012623

Itraconazole resistance in Madurella fahalii linked to a distinct homolog of the gene encoding cytochrome P450 14-α sterol demethylase (CYP51)

Isato Yoshioka 1,2, Ahmed Hassan Fahal 3, Satoshi Kaneko 4,5, Wei Cao 2, Takashi Yaguchi 1,*
Editor: Max Carlos Ramírez-Soto6
PMCID: PMC11964275  PMID: 40146733

Abstract

Background

Mycetoma is a deep fungal infection caused by several microorganisms, with Madurella mycetomatis being the most common causative agent. Another related species, Madurella fahalii, is also known to cause eumycetoma. However, unlike M. mycetomatis, M. fahalii exhibits resistance to itraconazole, the standard treatment for eumycetoma, and the underlying cause of this resistance remains unknown. Therefore, understanding the mechanism of this resistance is critical for developing more effective therapies.

Principal Findings

Using the high-quality draft genome sequence of Madurella fahalii IFM 68171, we identified two copies of the gene encoding cytochrome P450 14-α sterol demethylase (CYP51), the target enzyme of itraconazole. These include a gene conserved among Madurella species (Mfcyp51A1) and a M. fahalii-specific gene (Mfcyp51A2). Both genes are actively transcribed in M. fahalii and are upregulated in response to itraconazole. Furthermore, heterologous expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae revealed that transformants carrying the Mfcyp51A2 gene exhibited reduced susceptibility to itraconazole compared to those with Mfcyp51A1.

Conclusion

We demonstrated that itraconazole resistance in M. fahalii may be attributed to the presence of an additional CYP51 gene. This study represents the first report on the physiological characteristics of Madurella species using genetic engineering techniques.

Author summary

Madurella fahalii, a species closely related to M. mycetomatis, the most common cause of eumycetoma, exhibits resistance to itraconazole, the standard treatment for this neglected tropical disease. The underlying mechanism of this resistance remains unclear. Understanding it is essential for improving treatment options for M. fahalii infections. In this study, using genetic engineering techniques and a high-quality genome sequence of M. fahalii, we identified an additional gene associated with itraconazole resistance, which is absent in M. mycetomatis. This discovery could pave the way for more effective treatment strategies for eumycetoma caused by M. fahalii in the future.

Introduction

Mycetoma is a neglected tropical disease with profound medical and socioeconomic consequences, affecting individuals and communities in endemic regions worldwide [1]. This chronic, progressive infection, caused by various microorganisms, can lead to severe deformities, disabilities, and, if left untreated, even death. Mycetoma is classified into two types based on the causative agent: eumycetoma, caused by fungal infections, and actinomycetoma, resulting from bacterial infections [2,3]. Among the numerous pathogens responsible for eumycetoma, Madurella mycetomatis is the most frequently isolated species [2,3]. However, another important species, Madurella fahalii, also plays a critical role in causing eumycetoma [4]. It is of particular concern due to its resistance to itraconazole, the primary drug used in treating this condition [4,5].

The study of azole resistance in fungal pathogens has been well-documented in species such as Aspergillus, Candida, and Cryptococcus [6]. This knowledge has facilitated the development of diagnostic tools and effective treatment strategies. Azole compounds, such as itraconazole, target cytochrome P450 14-α sterol demethylase (CYP51), an enzyme essential for fungal cell membrane synthesis. Resistance to these antifungal agents typically arises from mutations in the cyp51A (ERG11) gene, which encodes CYP51. These mutations decrease the efficacy of azoles by altering the binding affinity of the drug to its target. Numerous studies have highlighted this mechanism as a primary contributor to azole resistance in various fungi [79]

Genetic engineering techniques have been widely applied in fungal research to investigate resistance mechanisms. One commonly used model organism is Saccharomyces cerevisiae, which has proven valuable for studying the molecular basis of drug resistance. These techniques have also been employed in research on pathogenic fungi, aiding in the understanding of how resistance develops and how it can be counteracted [1012]. However, despite the success of genetic engineering in studying drug resistance in other fungal species, no research has yet applied these methods to Madurella species, including M. mycetomatis and M. fahalii. This lack of genetic studies represents a significant gap in mycetoma research, particularly when compared to progress made in understanding other fungal pathogens.

In this study, we aimed to address this gap by investigating the mechanisms of itraconazole resistance in M. fahalii through genome sequencing and genetic engineering approaches. Using S. cerevisiae as a model system, we examined how M. fahalii develops resistance to itraconazole, and how these insights can improve diagnosis and treatment strategies for eumycetoma caused by this species. Our findings not only provide new insights into itraconazole resistance in M. fahalii but also highlight the potential of molecular techniques to advance the study of mycetoma. These results underscore the importance of integrating genetic engineering into mycetoma research, offering a powerful tool for understanding drug efficacy and resistance in neglected fungal diseases.

Materials and methods

Strains and cultivation conditions

Escherichia coli DH-5α was used for gene cloning and plasmid maintenance. The E. coli strain was cultured in LB medium with the addition of 100 mg/L of ampicillin to maintain a plasmid. M. mycetomatis IFM 46458, M. fahalii IFM 68171 (preserved as MRC No.13 at the Mycetoma Research Center, Khartoum, Sudan), IFM 68170 (MRC No.9) and IFM 68242 (MRC No. 25) were grown and maintained on Sabouraud medium (FUJIFILM Wako Pure Chemical Corporation, Osaka, Japan) containing 1.5% (w/v) agar. For itraconazole resistance assays, Sabouraud agar medium with varying concentrations of itraconazole (0, 0.008, 0.032, 0.125, and 2 mg/L) was used. For transcriptional analysis, Sabouraud liquid medium with or without 2 mg/L of itraconazole was employed. These Madurella strains were preserved at the Medical Mycology Research Center, Chiba University, Japan, through the National Biology Resource Project (NBRP). A stock solution of itraconazole (200 mg/L) was prepared by dissolving it in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), and the medium was supplemented to achieve a final DMSO concentration of 1% (v/v).

S. cerevisiae BY4741 (MATa, his3Δ1, leu2Δ0, met15Δ0, ura3Δ0) was obtained from the NBRP-Yeast Collection (deposited as BY23849, https://yeast.nig.ac.jp/yeast/top.xhtml) and maintained in YPD medium. For heterologous expression of the cyp51A gene from Madurella strains, S. cerevisiae TRE11-4741 (derived from BY4741; ERG11:LEU2-PCMV-tTA-TADH1-tetO7-PCYC1-UAS-ERG11) was generated in this study and used as the host strain, as described below. For yeast transformation and maintenance of transformants, SD-Leu broth (Takara Bio, Shiga, Japan) or SD-Ura medium was used, with 2% (w/v) agar added as necessary. SD-Ura was prepared by combining YNB w/ ammonium sulfate (MP Biomedicals, Santa Ana, CA, USA), CSM-URA (MP Biomedicals), and 2% (w/v) glucose. For the cultivation of yeast strains expressing cyp51A heterologously, SG-Ura medium was used, in which 2% (w/v) glucose in SD-Ura was replaced with 2% (w/v) galactose. To knockdown (repress) the endogenous ERG11 gene in the TRE11-4741 strain, 10 mg/L of doxycycline hydrochloride (FUJIFILM Wako Pure Chemical Corporation) was added to the medium.

Itraconazole resistance test of Madurella strains

Itraconazole resistance was assessed following the method described by du Pré et al., with slight modifications [13]. Briefly, mycelial samples from agar plates were cut using the back of a pipette tip and inoculated onto Sabouraud agar medium containing varying concentrations of itraconazole (ranging from 0 to 2 mg/L). The cultures were incubated at 37°C for three weeks.

Preparation of fungal genomic DNA

For genome sequencing of M. fahalii IFM 68171, 5-7 pieces of 5 mm² mycelial samples were transferred to 1 mL of Sabouraud medium in a microtube, then homogenized by vigorous agitation with an inoculating needle and vortexing. The suspension was subsequently inoculated into 50 mL of Sabouraud medium and cultured at 37°C for three days. The mycelia were harvested by filtration using Miracloth (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) and ground into a fine powder with liquid nitrogen. Genomic DNA was extracted from the mycelial powder using a phenol-chloroform method and purified with a Genomic-tip 100/G column (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) [14]. For M. mycetomatis IFM 46458, M. fahalii IFM 68170 and IFM 68242, genomic DNA extraction was performed as previously described [15].

For S. cerevisiae, overnight cultures grown in YPD medium were collected by centrifugation and disrupted in TE buffer using the MagNA Lyser. DNA extraction was then completed using the Maxwell RSC Cultured Cells DNA Kit (Promega, Madison, WI, USA).

Genome sequencing

The genomic sequencing was conducted by Genome-Lead Co., Ltd. (Kagawa, Japan). For short-read sequencing, a DNA library was prepared using the NovaSeq 6000 SP Reagent Kit v1.5 (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA), and paired-end (PE) short reads were generated using the Illumina NovaSeq 6000 platform. For long-read sequencing, genomic DNA treated with Short Read Eliminator XS (Circulomics, Baltimore, MD, USA) was used to prepare a DNA library using the Ligation Sequencing Kit V14 (SQK-LSK114, Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT), Cambridge, UK). Long reads were sequenced using the PromethION platform (ONT) equipped with an R10.4.1 flow cell (FLO-PRO114M, ONT).

Genome assembly and annotation

PE short reads were trimmed and filtered by fastp v.0.23.4 [16] with a minimum length of 40 bp and quality score of ≥10. Additionally, ONT long reads were trimmed with Porechop v.0.2.4 (https://github.com/rrwick/Porechop) using default parameters and filtered using NanoFilt v.2.8 [17] by length (≥1000 bp) and quality (≥10). The mitochondrial genome was then assembled from the filtered PE reads using GetOrganelle v.1.7.7 [18] by setting the target organelle as fungal mitochondria (fungus_mt). Reads from both PE and ONT that were not mapped to the mitochondrial genome were recovered using minimap2 v.2.26 [19] and samtools v1.17 [20]. Genome assembly was conducted using the recovered ONT reads with NECAT v.0.0.1 [21] with a default parameter by setting the genome size as 39 Mb. The corrected and trimmed ONT reads generated by NECAT were also assembled using Flye v.2.9.2 [22], followed by combining these assemblies by Quickmerge [23]. The resultant assembly was polished by Medaka v1.9.1 (https://github.com/nanoporetech/medaka) with the long reads and by NextPolish v1.4.1 [24] with the short reads.

The draft genome sequence was masked using RepeatModeler v.2.0.5 and RepeatMasker v.4.1.5 (https://www.repeatmasker.org/) with default parameters. Genome annotation was performed using BRAKER2 v.2.1.6 and AUGUSTUS v.3.4.0 [25,26] with the flag --fungus using odb10_fungi protein sequences from OrthoDB (https://v100.orthodb.org/download/odb10_fungi_fasta.tar.gz) as protein hints. Functional annotation of protein-coding genes was carried out using eggNOG mapper [27], antiSMASH 7.0 [28], Interproscan 5.68-100 [29], Phobius v.1.01 [30] and SignalP 4.1 [31]. tRNAs and rRNAs were annotated by tRNAscan-SE v.2.0.12 [32] and barrnap v.0.9 (https://github.com/tseemann/barrnap), respectively. These annotation results were integrated using the Funannotate v.1.8.15 pipeline (https://github.com/nextgenusfs/funannotate).

RNA isolation, cDNA preparation and transcriptional analysis

M. fahalii IFM 68171 was pre-cultured following the same method used for genomic DNA extraction. Mycelia were collected by filtration using Miracloth, and 100 mg of wet mycelia were inoculated into 20 mL of Sabouraud medium with or without 2 mg/mL itraconazole. M. mycetomatis IFM 46458 was cultured only in the medium without itraconazole. After 24 h of incubation, the mycelia were recovered using Miracloth and ground in liquid nitrogen. Total RNA was then extracted from the powdered mycelia using the NucleoSpin RNA Plant and Fungi kit (Takara) and cDNA was synthesized using PrimeScript RT reagent Kit with gDNA Eraser (Perfect Real Time) (Takara), following the manufacturer’s protocol. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) was employed to quantify the transcriptional levels of each gene using TB Green Premix Ex Taq II (Tli RNaseH Plus) (Takara), in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. A primer pair, Pr1-Pr2, was used for PCR amplification to detect the entire ORF from genomic DNA and the corresponding cDNA regions. The transcription levels of cyp51A were measured using primer pairs Pr3-Pr4 or Pr5-Pr6, and they were normalized against actin and tubulin, amplified with primer pairs Pr7-Pr8 and Pr9-Pr10, respectively. The primer sequences used in this study are listed in S1 Table.

Construction of plasmids and transformation of yeast

To create a host strain for expressing cyp51A genes, a doxycycline-repressible expression cassette for ERG11 (cyp51A orthologue in S. cerevisiae) was constructed [33], following the approach by Groeneveld et al. [34]. The 5′-flanking region and open reading frame (ORF) of ERG11 were separately amplified from the genomic DNA of strain BY4741 via PCR, using primer pairs Pr11-Pr12 and Pr13-Pr14, respectively. Additionally, a LEU2 fragment was obtained by PCR using primers Pr15-Pr16 from BYP5029 (pGG115 [35]), which was sourced from the NBRP-Yeast collection. In parallel, the doxycycline-regulatable elements (PCMV-tTA-TADH1-tetO7-PCYC1-UAS) were amplified using primers Pr17-Pr18 from plasmid BYP7139 (NBRP-Yeast collection), derived from pCM190 [36]. All PCR fragments were assembled via cloning into EcoRI-digested pUC19 using the In-Fusion HD Cloning Kit (Takara) according to the manufacturer’s instructions, to yield tet-ERG11 cassette consisting of the flanking region of ERG11, LEU2 gene, the doxycycline-regulatable elements and the ORF of ERG11. Subsequently, tet-ERG11 cassette was then amplified from the resulting plasmid using primers Pr11-Pr14 and introduced into strain BY4741 via the Fast Yeast Transformation Kit (G-Biosciences, St. Louis, MO, USA). The transformation mixture was cultured for three days on SD-Leu agar at 30°C, followed by subculturing under the same conditions.

To evaluate the cyp51A genes from Madurella species, their cDNAs were amplified using primer pairs Pr19-Pr21, Pr20-Pr21, and Pr22-Pr23. These PCR fragments were cloned into EcoRI-digested yeast expression vector pYES2 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA, USA) using the In-Fusion HD Cloning Kit. Additionally, the ERG11 gene was amplified from the genomic DNA of S. cerevisiae using primers Pr24-Pr25 and cloned into pYES2 in the same manner. These plasmids were subsequently introduced into strain TRE11-4741 using the Fast Yeast Transformation Kit, and the transformants were grown on SD-Ura agar. Similarly, transformants harboring the empty pYES2 plasmid were prepared as a negative control.

Phenotypic assay and drug resistance testing of yeast transformants

To assess the ability of cyp51A genes to complement ERG11 knockdown, yeast strains harboring pYES2 derivatives were cultured in SG-Ura liquid medium at 30°C overnight to induce cyp51A expression via galactose [37]. The culture broth was serially diluted 10-fold, from 2x107 to 2x104 cells/mL using SG-Ura medium, and 5 µL of each dilution was spotted onto SG-Ura agar with or without doxycycline. The plates were then incubated for three days at 30°C.

Drug resistance testing was performed using a modified broth microdilution method based on the protocol by Martel et al. with slight modifications [10]. Briefly, yeast cells cultured overnight in SG-Ura medium were adjusted to a concentration of 1x104 cells/mL in SG medium containing 10 mg/L of doxycycline and inoculated onto the Dried Plate for Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Yeasts (Eiken Chemicals, Tokyo, Japan). The microtiter plates were incubated at 30°C for three days, after which the optical density at 630 nm for each well was measured using an iMark Microplate Reader (Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., Hercules, CA, USA). The minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) was determined as the concentration that inhibited yeast growth by 80%

Homology modeling and molecular docking

The 3D models of MFCYP51A1 and MFCYP51A2 were generated using AlphaFold2 v.2.3.2 with a default parameter [38]. These models were refined using openMM v.8.2.0 to minimize the local energy [39]. The 3D structure of itraconazole was retrieved from PubChem (ID: 55283), and used for docking simulation by AutoDock Vina v.1.1.2 [40]. The optimal structure of protein-ligand complex was chosen based on the crystal structure of 14-alpha sterol demethylase derived from A. fumigatus Af293, which was retrieved from PDB (ID: 6CR2).

Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations were conducted using AmberTools v.23.4 [41] and GROMACS v.2024.4 [42]. For the force fields, FF19SB was applied to proteins, TIP3P to water molecules, and GAFF2 to itraconazole. Regarding heme, a cofactor located in the active center of CYP51, quantum mechanical calculations were performed by Gaussian v.16 (Gaussian, Inc., Wallingford CT, USA) using the density functional theory (DFT) at the B3LYP/6-31G* level [43], and the resultant model were subsequently integrated into the MD simulations. The system was equilibrated under in the NVT ensemble for 1 ns, followed by NPT equilibration to stabilize the pressure at 1 bar and temperature at 300 K. Finally, the MD simulations were run for 150 ns, during which the temperature was maintained at 300 K using the V-rescale thermostat, and the pressure at 1 bar using the Parrinello−Rahman barostat. Particle Mesh Ewald (PME) was used to calculate electrostatic interactions, with cutoff distances of 10 Å for Coulombic, electrostatic, and van der Waals interactions. For the visualization and analysis of data, PyMOL v.3.0.0 (http://www.pymol.org/pymol) was used. The total binding energy between CYP51 and itraconazole were calculated using gmx_MMPBSA v.1.6.2 [44].

Results

Genome sequencing of Madurella fahalii IFM 68171

After trimming and filtering the sequencing reads, we obtained 36,802,641 PE reads (10.9 Gb) and 491,402 ONT reads (4.07 Gb). The PE reads were used for assembling the mitochondrial genome. For the chromosomal genome assembly, 422,878 ONT reads (3.50 Gb, Coverage x87.4) with an average length of 8.27 kb, along with 34,342,271 PE reads (10.2 Gb), were filtered through mitochondrial genome mapping. This process resulted in a chromosomal genome assembly consisting of six scaffolds with a total length of 40,045,822 bp and an N50 value of 25,195,283 bp. Five of the scaffolds contained telomeric sequences at both ends, while the remaining scaffold a telomeric sequence at one end, as shown in S1 Fig. Genome annotation identified 11,334 protein-coding genes, 180 tRNAs, and 79 rRNAs. The BUSCO v.5.5.0 [45] score based on the eukaryote and sordariomycetes databases were 100% and 99.6%, respectively. These results indicated that a high-quality genome assembly of M. fahalii IFM 68171 was obtained. Additionally, a 40,079 bp mitochondrial genome was assembled. The genomic and mitochondrial sequences have been deposited in DDBJ/EMBL/GenBank under accession numbers BAAFSV010000001 - BAAFSV010000006 and LC843096, respectively.

Identification of cyp51A gene in Madurella fahalii

Genome annotation revealed that M. fahalii IFM 68171 possesses two cyp51A genes encoding cytochrome P450 14-α sterol demethylase (CYP51), the target enzyme of itraconazole. One of these genes (Mfcyp51A1; locus tag MFIFM68171_00517) is conserved in M. mycetomatis [46], while the second gene (Mfcyp51A2; locus tag MFIFM68171_05904) is specific to M. fahalii. The putative coding sequence (CDS) region of Mfcyp51A2 is illustrated in S2 Fig. In addition, genomic and RT-PCR analyses, which amplify the entire ORF (CDS) region, revealed that Mfcyp51A2 was transcribed as shown in Fig 1. Notably, no homologous Mfcyp51A2 gene exists in the genome of M. mycetomatis, although its adjacent gene locus is conserved, as depicted in S3 Fig. Furthermore, Mfcyp51A2 was successfully amplified from the genomic DNA of other M. fahalii strains (IFM 68170 and IFM 68242), while it was not detected in M. mycetomatis IFM 46458, as shown in Fig 2. The amino acid sequence of the protein encoded by Mfcyp51A2 shows 70% similarity to cyp51A from M. mycetomatis strain mm55 (Mmcyp51A; accession number KXX80456.1), which has an identical sequence to strain IFM 46458.

Fig 1. PCR analysis of the Mfcyp51A2 gene in M. fahalii IFM 68171.

Fig 1

(A) Schematic representation of the genomic DNA and cDNA, showing the length of the PCR product amplified using the primer pair Pr1-Pr2. The intron region is depicted in gray. (B) Agarose gel electrophoresis of PCR products. Lanes: M, λ/StyI (Marker 6, Nippon Gene, Toyama, Japan); 1, genomic DNA; 2, cDNA.

Fig 2. Detection of Mfcyp51A2 from the genomic DNAs in Madurella strains.

Fig 2

PCR was performed using the primer pair Pr1-Pr2. Lanes: M, λ/StyI (Marker 6, Nippon Gene); 1, M. fahalii IFM 68171; 2, M. fahalii IFM 68170; 3, M. fahalii IFM 68242; 4, M. mycetomatis IFM 46458.

A BLASTP search in the nr-database for Fungi (taxid: 4751) revealed that MFCYP51A2 shows strong similarity to cyp51A from other fungal species, as summarized in Table 1. Furthermore, as shown in Fig 3, amino acid alignments between MFCYP51A2 and other CYP51 enzymes derived from M. mycetomatis, Chaetomium globosum, Aspergillus fumigatus, Candida albicans, and S. cerevisiae indicate that MFCYP51A2 retains critical domains found in fungal CYP51, including six substrate recognition sites (SRS) and three conserved motifs [47].

Table 1. BLAST search result using MFCYP51A2 as a query.

Annotation Species Max Score Query Cover Identity Accession
14-alpha sterol demethylase Cyp51A Hyaloscypha sp. 946 99% 87% KAH8746640.1
cytochrome P450 Xylariales sp. 929 97% 86% KAH8660298.1
eburicol 14-alpha-demethylase Valsa mali 906 99% 82% KUI72529.1
eburicol 14-alpha-demethylase Valsa mali var. pyri (nom. inval.) 899 96% 84% KUI52487.1
hypothetical protein Colletotrichum jinshuiense 897 96% 86% WYZ43662.1

Fig 3. Amino acids alignment of CYP51 proteins among fungi.

Fig 3

The calculation for alignment and representing the image were performed by Genetyx v.14 (Genetyx Corp. Tokyo Japan). Substrate recognition sites (SRS) and other conservation motifs in fungal CYP51 were highlighted in blue and red boxes, respectively. Abbreviations: Mf1, MFCYP51A1; Mf2, MFCYP51A2; Mm, MMCYP51A; Cg, CYP51 derived from Chaetomium globosum (XP_001220873.1); Af, CYP51A derived from A. fumigatus (XP_752137.1); Ca, Erg11 derived from Candida albicans (XP_716761.1); Sc, Erg11 derived from S. cerevisiae (NP_011871.1).

Itraconazole resistance of M. fahalii IFM 68171

M. fahalii IFM 68171 and M. mycetomatis IFM 46458 were cultivated on Sabouraud media containing varying concentrations of itraconazole to assess the resistance of strain IFM 68171. As shown in Fig 4, M. fahalii exhibited growth even in media containing 2 mg/L of itraconazole, whereas the growth of M. mycetomatis was completely inhibited at a concentration of 0.125 mg/L.

Fig 4. Growth assay of Madurella spp. on Sabouraud medium containing 0, 0.008, 0,032, 0.125 and 2.0 mg/L itraconazole.

Fig 4

MM and MF represent M. mycetomatis IFM 46458 and M. fahalii IFM 68171, respectively.

Itraconazole-induced transcription of cyp51A genes

The transcriptional activity of the Mfcyp51A genes in M. fahalii was analyzed both in the presence and absence of 2 mg/L itraconazole. To estimate the transcriptional levels, two housekeeping genes (actin and tubulin) [13] were used for internal standards. The primer efficiency was determined using cDNA solutions by plotting a standard curve that were serially diluted by 10-fold, as shown in S4 Fig and S2 Table. The results of qPCR was summarized in Table 2. In the absence of itraconazole, the transcriptional level of Mfcyp51A1 was 1.89 times higher than that of Mfcyp51A2. However, upon the addition of itraconazole, transcription levels of Mfcyp51A1 increased by 1.25- or 1.96-fold while those of Mfcyp51A2 increased by 2.00- or 3.14-fold.

Table 2. Transcriptional level changes of Mfcyp51A genes normalized to actin or tubulin gene in the presence of itraconazole.

Gene ΔCt (-azole)1 ΔCt (+azole)1 Relative transcription (= 2-ΔΔCt value) 2
to actin to tubulin to actin to tubulin to actin to tubulin
Mfcyp51A1 0.06 -0.75 -0.26 -1.72 1.25 1.96
Mfcyp51A2 0.98 0.17 -0.02 -1.48 2 3.14

1-azole and +azole represent “cultivation under the condition with no additives” and “cultivation under the condition with 2 mg/L itraconazole”, respectively.

2The ΔΔCt value was calculated by subtracting ΔCt (-azole) from ΔCt (+azole).

Functional analysis of cyp51A derived from Madurella

To evaluate the role of cyp51A genes in itraconazole resistance, we generated a budding yeast strain with the ERG11 gene replaced under the control of a tetO7 promoter. The resulting strain, TRE11-4741, was successfully created, and its growth was tightly suppressed by 10 mg/L of doxycycline (DOX), as shown in S5 Fig. Next, complementation assays were conducted using cyp51A (ERG11) genes derived from S. cerevisiae, M. mycetomatis, and M. fahalii, driven by a galactose-inducible promoter (PGAL1). When Mmcyp51A and Mfcyp51A1 were introduced, the growth repression observed in the control strain harboring the empty vector was relieved, comparable to the strain expressing ERG11, as shown in Fig 5. Additionally, the strain expressing Mfcyp51A2 also showed complementation of ERG11 knockdown, although its growth rate was slightly lower than that of Mfcyp51A1 (Fig 4). Finally, MIC tests revealed that the strain expressing Mfcyp51A2 displayed reduced susceptibility to all tested azoles, including fluconazole (16 mg/L), itraconazole (1 mg/L), voriconazole (0.06 mg/L), and miconazole (1 mg/L), compared to strains expressing Mmcyp51A and Mfcyp51A1, as detailed in Table 3.

Fig 5. Growth assay of S. cerevisiae strains with DOX-regulated ERG11 and harboring plasmid expressing cyp51A (ERG11).

Fig 5

Yeast cells were serially diluted from 105 to 105 by 10-fold and inoculated to media without DOX (-DOX) or with 10 mg/L DOX (+DOX). Abbreviations: NC, pYES2 (empty vector); Sc, ERG11; Mm, Mmcyp51A; Mf1, Mfcyp51A1; Mf2, Mfcyp51A2.

Table 3. MIC values of antifungal drugs in S. cerevisiae strains expressing cyp51A derived from Madurella species.

cyp51A MIC (mg/L)
MCFG CPFG AMPH-B 5-FC FLCZ ITCZ VRCZ MCZ
Mmcyp51A 0.12 0.25 0.5 1 <0.12 <0.015 <0.015 <0.03
Mfcyp51A1 0.12 0.25 0.5 1 <0.12 <0.015 <0.015 <0.03
Mfcyp51A2 0.12 0.25 0.5 1 16 1 0.06 1

Abbreviations: MCFG, micafungin; CPFG, caspofungin; AMPH-B, amphotericin B; 5-FC, 5-fluorocytosine; FLCZ, fluconazole; ITCZ, itraconazole; VRCZ, voriconazole; MCZ, miconazole

MD simulations of CYP51 proteins and itraconazole

The protein models of MFCYP51A1 and MFCYP51A2 were successfully constructed using AlphaFold2 and refined with OpenMM. The results indicated that the active sites of both enzymes are well-conserved, as shown in Fig 6. Docking simulations demonstrated that itraconazole binds to the active sites of both MFCYP51A1 and MFCYP51A2, as shown in Fig 7. However, the orientation of the nitrogen atom in itraconazole relative to the heme iron differs between the two proteins, as shown in Fig 7. Furthermore, MD simulations demonstrated that the average distance between the heme iron and the nitrogen atom in itraconazole was 2.67 Å for MFCYP51A1 and 3.47 Å for MFCYP51A2, as shown in S6 Fig. The total binding energies for itraconazole of MFCYP51A1 and MFCYP51A2 were -71.38 and -71.69 kcal/mol, respectively.

Fig 6. Cartoon representations of modeled CYP51 proteins derived from M. fahalii.

Fig 6

MFCYP51A1 were illustrated in green. The color of MFCYP51A2 changed from blue to red (low to high) based on their RMSD values with the average structure.

Fig 7. Representation of the models of MFCYP51A (A, C) and MFCYP51A2 (B, D).

Fig 7

In each panel, itraconazole and heme are illustrated in a stick representation at the upper and bottom part, respectively. (A) and (B) represent the overall structure of CYP51 proteins. The active centers of (A) and (B) were enlarged with their protein backbones translucent to produce (C) and (D), respectively.

Discussion

M. fahalii is recognized as a causative agent of mycetoma and has been shown to resist itraconazole, the preferred treatment for fungal mycetoma (eumycetoma) [1,4,48]. In this study, we present a high-quality draft genome sequence of M. fahalii IFM 68171 to investigate the mechanisms underlying its resistance to itraconazole. Genome analysis revealed the presence of two copies of the cyp51A gene, encoding cytochrome P450 14-α sterol demethylase (CYP51), the enzyme targeted by itraconazole. This differs from M. mycetomatis, which contains only a single copy of the gene (Mmcyp51A). Transcriptional analysis showed that both cyp51A genes, Mfcyp51A1 and Mfcyp51A2, are transcribed and upregulated in response to itraconazole exposure. Additionally, molecular studies using S. cerevisiae as a model system demonstrated that the CYP51 enzyme encoded by Mfcyp51A2 plays a more significant role in itraconazole resistance compared to Mfcyp51A1 and Mmcyp51A. This marks the first study to directly describe azole resistance in Madurella species using genetic engineering techniques.

Both Mfcyp51A1 and Mfcyp51A2 contain conserved regions essential for CYP51 function, and both rescued the knockdown of ERG11 in S. cerevisiae. Furthermore, transcriptional upregulation of these genes was observed in response to azole treatment. This suggests that both cyp51A genes perform dual roles in ergosterol biosynthesis and in mediating responses to azole-induced stress, consistent with findings in other fungi [49,50]. Notably, it was suggested that Mfcyp51A2 plays a major role in azole stress response because it shows a significantly stronger induction compared to Mfcyp51A1, as shown in Table 2. Regarding protein modeling, the result of MD simulation demonstrated that the distance between heme iron and the nitrogen atom of itraconazole in MFCYP51A2 was greater than MFCYP51A1, while the total binding energies of the two enzymes are nearly equal (Fig 7). Previous studies reported that the iron-nitrogen distance is an important factor to form the Fe-N coordination bond essential for azole inhibition [51,52]. Thus, our result suggests that MFCYP51A2 exhibits a weak interaction with itraconazole in comparison with MFCYP51A1, which is consistent with the differences in itraconazole susceptibility between S. cerevisiae transformants expressing cyp51A genes. Taken together, our results indicate that Mfcyp51A2 is the primary contributor to itraconazole resistance.

A recent study reported the draft genome sequence of M. fahalii CBS 129176, another strain exhibiting itraconazole resistance [53]. This strain harbored a mutation (I152V) in Mfcyp51A1, near the azole-binding site. However, our findings suggest that this mutation does not contribute to resistance, because the yeast transformant expressing this mutated version of Mfcyp51A1 displayed MIC values similar to those of Mmcyp51A. On the other hand, the homologous Mfcyp51A2 gene with 100% identity was present in M. fahalii CBS 129176 (accession no. JAPYLN010000001.1, 1409341 to 1411021), reinforcing the hypothesis that Mfcyp51A2 plays a key role in itraconazole resistance. Moreover, we have confirmed that Mfcyp51A2 is conserved among M. fahalii strains (Fig 2), suggesting that Mfcyp51A2 as well as Mfcyp51A1 could be important targets for discussing azole resistance in this species, such as the variability in azole resistance in clinical isolates and molecular genetic analysis of the existing resistant strains.

This study identifies Mfcyp51A2 as a potential target for itraconazole resistance in M. fahalii. Previous studies on azole resistance in fungi arising from the mutation of CYP51 have focused on enzyme activity [54]. Thus, further research based on the enzymatic properties of fungal CYP51 will be required to analyze and evaluate Mfcyp51A2 to support the development of new drugs and treatment strategies. Another potential mechanism of resistance involves the overexpression of genes encoding azole efflux pumps [5557]. Therefore, it is crucial to investigate the role of efflux pump genes in M. fahalii to understand its resistance to azoles. Additionally, regulatory genes involved in drug resistance should be studied to overcome this challenge [5860]. Future in vivo studies on Madurella species will be essential for improving treatment options. Although transformation methods have been developed for M. mycetomatis [13], similar approaches are needed to explore drug resistance mechanisms in other Madurella species. This study provides the first insights into these mechanisms.

In conclusion, this study successfully identified Mfcyp51A2 as a key gene contributing to itraconazole resistance in M. fahalii through genomic and genetic engineering analyses using S. cerevisiae. These findings highlight the potential of molecular techniques in uncovering drug resistance mechanisms in neglected fungal pathogens like Madurella species.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Primers used in this study.

(XLSX)

pntd.0012623.s001.xlsx (10KB, xlsx)
S2 Table. The properties of standard curves of qPCR primers.

(XLSX)

pntd.0012623.s002.xlsx (11KB, xlsx)
S1 Fig. The genomic scaffold of Madurella fahalii IFM 68171.

The figure was generated using Tapestry (https://github.com/johnomics/tapestry) by mapping long reads, which were used as input for Flye assembly. Regions corresponding to telomeric sequences (CCCTAA/TTAGGG) are indicated in red and the opacity represents the number of telomeric repeats.

(TIF)

pntd.0012623.s003.tif (3.9MB, tif)
S2 Fig. Nucleotides and amino acids sequence of Mfcyp51A2.

Introns were highlighted with gray, and encoded amino acids were represented under the corresponding nucleotide sequences.

(TIF)

pntd.0012623.s004.tif (986KB, tif)
S3 Fig. Comparison of genomic region including cyp51A2 and its flanking genes in M. fahalii IFM 68171 (accession no.: BAAFSV010000003.1) with that of M. mycetomatis m55 (accession no.: LCTW02000001.1).

The amino acids alignment and the generation of the image was performed by Clinker (https://github.com/gamcil/clinker). The homologous protein-coding gene models were drawn as the arrows in the same color and their similarity in amino acids were labeled between them.

(TIF)

pntd.0012623.s005.tif (354.2KB, tif)
S4 Fig. The standard curves of qPCR primers used in this study to amplify (A) actin, (B) tubulin, (C) Mfcyp51A1 and (D) Mfcyp51A2.

cDNA solutions were serially diluted 10-fold and were used as input. The x-axis represents the log10 of the DNA dilution factor, while the y-axis represents the Ct values.

(TIF)

pntd.0012623.s006.tif (471.7KB, tif)
S5 Fig. Growth assay of S. cerevisiae strains BY4741 and TRE11-4741, a tranformant with doxycycline (DOX)-regulable ERG11.

(A) Schematic representation of ERG11 locus in strains BY4741 and TRE11-4741. In the genome of TRE11-4741, LEU2 gene, PCMV -tTA-TADH1 cassette (tetR) and tetO7 -PCYC1 -UAS cassette (Ptet) were integrated into the upstream region of ERG11 ORF in comparison with that of strain BY4741.The genomic region and vector backbone were represented as solid and dotted lines, respectively. The expression of ERG11 by strain TRE11-4741 is repressed by the addition of DOX. (B) Restricted growth of strain TRE11-4741 by the addition of DOX. Yeast cells were serially diluted from 105 to 102 by 10-fold and cultivated on YPD media without DOX (-DOX) or with 10 mg/L DOX (+DOX) for 2 days.

(TIF)

pntd.0012623.s007.tif (1,006.4KB, tif)
S6 Fig. Time-course analysis of the distance between the nitrogen atom in itraconazole and the heme iron during MD simulations of CYP51 proteins.

Green and blue plots represent the data for MFCYP51A1 and MFCYP51A2, respectively.

(TIF)

pntd.0012623.s008.tif (381.2KB, tif)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

This study was supported by AMED under Grant Number JP21jm0510005 in collaboration with FY 2021 International Collaborative Research Program for Tackling the NTDs ( Neglected Tropical Diseases) Challenges in African Countries to SK. This study was also supported by the National Bio-Resource Project, Japan, NBRP_028 to TY. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Zijlstra EE, van de Sande WWJ, Welsh O, Mahgoub ES, Goodfellow M, Fahal AH. Mycetoma: a unique neglected tropical disease. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(1):100–12. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00359-X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Emery D, Denning DW. The global distribution of actinomycetoma and eumycetoma. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2020;14(9):e0008397. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008397 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.van de Sande WWJ. Global burden of human mycetoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2013;7(11):e2550. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002550 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.de Hoog GS, van Diepeningen AD, Mahgoub E-S, van de Sande WWJ. New species of Madurella, causative agents of black-grain mycetoma. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(3):988–94. doi: 10.1128/JCM.05477-11 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.van de Sande WWJ. In vitro susceptibility testing for black grain eumycetoma causative agents. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2021;115(4):343–54. doi: 10.1093/trstmh/traa184 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rogers TR, Verweij PE, Castanheira M, Dannaoui E, White PL, Arendrup MC, et al. Molecular mechanisms of acquired antifungal drug resistance in principal fungal pathogens and EUCAST guidance for their laboratory detection and clinical implications. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2022;77(8):2053–73. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkac161 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Xiang M-J, Liu J-Y, Ni P-H, Wang S, Shi C, Wei B, et al. Erg11mutations associated with azole resistance in clinical isolates of Candida albicans. FEMS Yeast Res. 2013;13(4):386–93. doi: 10.1111/1567-1364.12042 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Chen J, Li H, Li R, Bu D, Wan Z. Mutations in the cyp51A gene and susceptibility to itraconazole in Aspergillus fumigatus serially isolated from a patient with lung aspergilloma. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;55(1):31–7. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkh507 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Sionov E, Chang YC, Garraffo HM, Dolan MA, Ghannoum MA, Kwon-Chung KJ. Identification of a Cryptococcus neoformans cytochrome P450 lanosterol 14α-demethylase (Erg11) residue critical for differential susceptibility between fluconazole/voriconazole and itraconazole/posaconazole. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(3):1162–9. doi: 10.1128/AAC.05502-11 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Martel CM, Parker JE, Warrilow AGS, Rolley NJ, Kelly SL, Kelly DE. Complementation of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae ERG11/CYP51 (sterol 14α-demethylase) doxycycline-regulated mutant and screening of the azole sensitivity of Aspergillus fumigatus isoenzymes CYP51A and CYP51B. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54(11):4920–3. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00349-10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Gast CE, Basso LR Jr, Bruzual I, Wong B. Azole resistance in Cryptococcus gattii from the Pacific Northwest: Investigation of the role of ERG11. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57(11):5478–85. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02287-12 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Toepfer S, Lackner M, Keniya MV, Monk BC. Functional Expression of Recombinant Candida auris Proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Enables Azole Susceptibility Evaluation and Drug Discovery. J Fungi (Basel). 2023;9(2):168. doi: 10.3390/jof9020168 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.du Pré S, Konings M, Schoorl DJA, Fahal AH, Arentshorst M, Ram AFJ, et al. Protoplast-mediated transformation of Madurella mycetomatis using hygromycin resistance as a selection marker. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2024;18(4):e0012092. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0012092 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Yoshioka I, Takahashi H, Kusuya Y, Yaguchi T, Kirimura K. Draft Genome Sequence of Aspergillus tubingensis WU-2223L, a Citric Acid-Producing Filamentous Fungus Belonging to Aspergillus Section Nigri. Microbiol Resour Announc. 2020;9(33):e00702-20. doi: 10.1128/MRA.00702-20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Yoshioka I, Mori Y, Fahal AH, Siddig EE, Kaneko S, Yaguchi T. Specific and sensitive loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) method for Madurella strains, eumycetoma filamentous fungi causative agent. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2023;17(9):e0011644. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011644 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Chen S, Zhou Y, Chen Y, Gu J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(17):i884–90. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty560 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.De Coster W, D’Hert S, Schultz DT, Cruts M, Van Broeckhoven C. NanoPack: visualizing and processing long-read sequencing data. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(15):2666–9. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty149 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Jin J-J, Yu W-B, Yang J-B, Song Y, dePamphilis CW, Yi T-S, et al. GetOrganelle: a fast and versatile toolkit for accurate de novo assembly of organelle genomes. Genome Biol. 2020;21(1):241. doi: 10.1186/s13059-020-02154-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Li H. Minimap2: pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(18):3094–100. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty191 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Danecek P, Bonfield JK, Liddle J, Marshall J, Ohan V, Pollard MO, et al. Twelve years of SAMtools and BCFtools. Gigascience. 2021;10(2):giab008. doi: 10.1093/gigascience/giab008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Chen Y, Nie F, Xie S-Q, Zheng Y-F, Dai Q, Bray T, et al. Efficient assembly of nanopore reads via highly accurate and intact error correction. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):60. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-20236-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Kolmogorov M, Yuan J, Lin Y, Pevzner PA. Assembly of long, error-prone reads using repeat graphs. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;37(5):540–6. doi: 10.1038/s41587-019-0072-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Chakraborty M, Baldwin-Brown JG, Long AD, Emerson JJ. Contiguous and accurate de novo assembly of metazoan genomes with modest long read coverage. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(19):e147. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw654 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Hu J, Fan J, Sun Z, Liu S. NextPolish: a fast and efficient genome polishing tool for long-read assembly. Bioinformatics. 2020;36(7):2253–5. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz891 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Stanke M, Diekhans M, Baertsch R, Haussler D. Using native and syntenically mapped cDNA alignments to improve de novo gene finding. Bioinformatics. 2008;24(5):637–44. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Brůna T, Hoff KJ, Lomsadze A, Stanke M, Borodovsky M. BRAKER2: automatic eukaryotic genome annotation with GeneMark-EP+ and AUGUSTUS supported by a protein database. NAR Genom Bioinform. 2021;3(1):lqaa108. doi: 10.1093/nargab/lqaa108 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Huerta-Cepas J, Szklarczyk D, Heller D, Hernández-Plaza A, Forslund SK, Cook H, et al. eggNOG 5.0: a hierarchical, functionally and phylogenetically annotated orthology resource based on 5090 organisms and 2502 viruses. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(D1):D309–14. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky1085 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Blin K, Shaw S, Augustijn HE, Reitz ZL, Biermann F, Alanjary M, et al. antiSMASH 7.0: new and improved predictions for detection, regulation, chemical structures and visualisation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51: W46–W50. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkad344 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Jones P, Binns D, Chang H-Y, Fraser M, Li W, McAnulla C, et al. InterProScan 5: genome-scale protein function classification. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(9):1236–40. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Käll L, Krogh A, Sonnhammer ELL. A combined transmembrane topology and signal peptide prediction method. J Mol Biol. 2004;338(5):1027–36. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2004.03.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Nielsen H. Predicting Secretory Proteins with SignalP. Methods Mol Biol. 2017;1611:59–73. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-7015-5_6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Chan PP, Lin BY, Mak AJ, Lowe TM. tRNAscan-SE 2.0: improved detection and functional classification of transfer RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49(16):9077–96. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkab688 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Zhang J, Li L, Lv Q, Yan L, Wang Y, Jiang Y. The Fungal CYP51s: Their Functions, Structures, Related Drug Resistance, and Inhibitors. Front Microbiol. 2019;10691. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00691 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Groeneveld P, Rolley N, Kell DB, Kelly SL, Kelly DE. Metabolic control analysis and engineering of the yeast sterol biosynthetic pathway. Mol Biol Rep. 2002;29(1–2):27–9. doi: 10.1023/a:1020342032302 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Akada R, Hirosawa I, Kawahata M, Hoshida H, Nishizawa Y. Sets of integrating plasmids and gene disruption cassettes containing improved counter-selection markers designed for repeated use in budding yeast. Yeast. 2002;19(5):393–402. doi: 10.1002/yea.841 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Garí E, Piedrafita L, Aldea M, Herrero E. A Set of Vectors with a Tetracycline-Regulatable Promoter System for Modulated Gene Expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast. 1997;13(9):837–48. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Funk M, Niedenthal R, Mumberg D, Brinkmann K, Rönicke V, Henkel T. Vector systems for heterologous expression of proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Methods Enzymol. 2002;350248–57. doi: 10.1016/s0076-6879(02)50967-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Jumper J, Evans R, Pritzel A, Green T, Figurnov M, Ronneberger O, et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature. 2021;596(7873):583–9. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Eastman P, Galvelis R, Peláez RP, Abreu CRA, Farr SE, Gallicchio E, et al. OpenMM 8: Molecular Dynamics Simulation with Machine Learning Potentials. J Phys Chem B. 2024;128(1):109–16. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c06662 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Eberhardt J, Santos-Martins D, Tillack AF, Forli S. AutoDock Vina 1.2.0: New Docking Methods, Expanded Force Field, and Python Bindings. J Chem Inf Model. 2021;61(8):3891–8. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00203 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Case DA, Aktulga HM, Belfon K, Cerutti DS, Cisneros GA, Cruzeiro VWD, et al. AmberTools. J Chem Inf Model. 2023;63(20):6183–91. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.3c01153 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Páll S, Zhmurov A, Bauer P, Abraham M, Lundborg M, Gray A, et al. Heterogeneous parallelization and acceleration of molecular dynamics simulations in GROMACS. The Journal of Chemical Physics. 2020;153(13):. doi: 10.1063/5.0018516 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Rassolov VA, Ratner MA, Pople JA, Redfern PC, Curtiss LA. 6‐31G* basis set for third‐row atoms. J Comput Chem. 2001;22(9):976–84. doi: 10.1002/jcc.1058 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Valdés-Tresanco MS, Valdés-Tresanco ME, Valiente PA, Moreno E. gmx_MMPBSA: A New Tool to Perform End-State Free Energy Calculations with GROMACS. J Chem Theory Comput. 2021;17(10):6281–91. doi: 10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00645 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Manni M, Berkeley MR, Seppey M, Simão FA, Zdobnov EM. BUSCO Update: Novel and Streamlined Workflows along with Broader and Deeper Phylogenetic Coverage for Scoring of Eukaryotic, Prokaryotic, and Viral Genomes. Mol Biol Evol. 2021;38(10):4647–54. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msab199 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Nyuykonge B, Siddig EE, Mhmoud NA, Nyaoke BA, Zijlstra EE, Verbon A, et al. Epidemiological cut-off values for itraconazole and ravuconazole for Madurella mycetomatis, the most common causative agent of mycetoma. Mycoses. 2022;65(12):1170–8. doi: 10.1111/myc.13509 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Celia-Sanchez BN, Mangum B, Brewer M, Momany M. Analysis of Cyp51 protein sequences shows 4 major Cyp51 gene family groups across fungi. G3 (Bethesda). 2022;12(11):jkac249. doi: 10.1093/g3journal/jkac249 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Fahal AH, Rahman IA, El-Hassan AM, Rahman MEAEL, Zijlstra EE. The safety and efficacy of itraconazole for the treatment of patients with eumycetoma due to Madurella mycetomatis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2011;105(3):127–32. doi: 10.1016/j.trstmh.2010.11.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Henry KW, Nickels JT, Edlind TD. Upregulation of ERG genes in Candida species by azoles and other sterol biosynthesis inhibitors. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000;44(10):2693–700. doi: 10.1128/AAC.44.10.2693-2700.2000 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Roundtree MT, Juvvadi PR, Shwab EK, Cole DC, Steinbach WJ. Aspergillus fumigatus Cyp51A and Cyp51B Proteins Are Compensatory in Function and Localize Differentially in Response to Antifungals and Cell Wall Inhibitors. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020;64(10):e00735-20. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00735-20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Balding PR, Porro CS, McLean KJ, Sutcliffe MJ, Maréchal J-D, Munro AW, et al. How do azoles inhibit cytochrome P450 enzymes? A density functional study. J Phys Chem A. 2008;112(50):12911–8. doi: 10.1021/jp802087w [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Hargrove TY, Friggeri L, Wawrzak Z, Qi A, Hoekstra WJ, Schotzinger RJ, et al. Structural analyses of Candida albicans sterol 14α-demethylase complexed with azole drugs address the molecular basis of azole-mediated inhibition of fungal sterol biosynthesis. J Biol Chem. 2017;292(16):6728–43. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M117.778308 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Konings M, Gerrits van den Ende B, Raats MWJ, Fahal AH, van de Sande WWJ, Hagen F. Complete Genome Sequence of the Itraconazole Decreased Susceptible Madurella fahalii Type-Strain CBS 129176. Mycopathologia. 2024;189(1):6. doi: 10.1007/s11046-023-00807-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Warrilow AGS, Parker JE, Price CL, Nes WD, Kelly SL, Kelly DE. In Vitro Biochemical Study of CYP51-Mediated Azole Resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(12):7771–8. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01806-15 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Rocha MFG, Bandeira SP, de Alencar LP, Melo LM, Sales JA, Paiva M de AN, et al. Azole resistance in Candida albicans from animals: Highlights on efflux pump activity and gene overexpression. Mycoses. 2017;60(7):462–8. doi: 10.1111/myc.12611 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Fraczek MG, Bromley M, Buied A, Moore CB, Rajendran R, Rautemaa R, et al. The cdr1B efflux transporter is associated with non-cyp51a-mediated itraconazole resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013;68(7):1486–96. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkt075 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Monod M, Feuermann M, Salamin K, Fratti M, Makino M, Alshahni MM, et al. Trichophyton rubrum Azole Resistance Mediated by a New ABC Transporter, TruMDR3. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019;63(11):e00863-19. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00863-19 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Delaveau T, Delahodde A, Carvajal E, Subik J, Jacq C. PDR3, a new yeast regulatory gene, is homologous to PDR1 and controls the multidrug resistance phenomenon. Mol Gen Genet. 1994;244(5):501–11. doi: 10.1007/BF00583901 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Hagiwara D, Miura D, Shimizu K, Paul S, Ohba A, Gonoi T, et al. A Novel Zn2-Cys6 Transcription Factor AtrR Plays a Key Role in an Azole Resistance Mechanism of Aspergillus fumigatus by Co-regulating cyp51A and cdr1B Expressions. PLoS Pathog. 2017;13(1):e1006096. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006096 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Wang K, Zhang Z, Chen X, Sun X, Jin C, Liu H, et al. Transcription factor ADS-4 regulates adaptive responses and resistance to antifungal azole stress. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(9):5396–404. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00542-15 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0012623.r002

Decision Letter 0

Marcio L Rodrigues, Max Carlos Ramírez-Soto

5 Dec 2024

PNTD-D-24-01441

Itraconazole Resistance in Madurella fahalii Linked to a Distinct Homolog of the Gene Encoding Cytochrome P450 14-α Sterol Demethylase (CYP51)

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Dear Dr. Yaguchi,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases's publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript within 60 days Feb 03 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosntds@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pntd/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

* A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. This file does not need to include responses to any formatting updates and technical items listed in the 'Journal Requirements' section below.

* A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

* An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, competing interests statement, or data availability statement, please make these updates within the submission form at the time of resubmission. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Max Carlos Ramírez-Soto, BSc, MPH, PhD, FRSPH

Academic Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Marcio Rodrigues

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-4304-636XX

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-1765-0002

Additional Editor Comments :

I suggest including a paragraph describing and discussing the limitations of your study.

Journal Requirements:

1) Please ensure that the CRediT author contributions listed for every co-author are completed accurately and in full.

At this stage, the following Authors/Authors require contributions: Isato Yoshioka, Ahmed Hassan Fahal, Satoshi Kaneko, and Takashi Yaguchi. Please ensure that the full contributions of each author are acknowledged in the "Add/Edit/Remove Authors" section of our submission form.

The list of CRediT author contributions may be found here: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/authorship#loc-author-contributions

2) We noticed that you used the phrase 'not shown' in the manuscript. We do not allow these references, as the PLOS data access policy requires that all data be either published with the manuscript or made available in a publicly accessible database. Please amend the supplementary material to include the referenced data or remove the references.

3) We do not publish any copyright or trademark symbols that usually accompany proprietary names, eg ©,  ®, or TM  (e.g. next to drug or reagent names). Therefore please remove all instances of trademark/copyright symbols throughout the text, including:

- ® on pages: 7, 10, 12, and 13

- TM on page: 10.

4) We have noticed that Figure S3 is labeled as Figure 4 . Please check the label of the figure and amend it accordingly. 

5) We have noticed that you have uploaded Supporting Information files, but you have not included a list of legends. Please add a full list of legends for your Supporting Information files after the references list.

6) We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: "All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files." Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data: 

1) The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

2) The values used to build graphs;

3) The points extracted from images for analysis..

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories. 

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

7) Please amend your detailed Financial Disclosure statement. This is published with the article. It must therefore be completed in full sentences and contain the exact wording you wish to be published.

1) State the initials, alongside each funding source, of each author to receive each grant. For example: "This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (####### to AM; ###### to CJ) and the National Science Foundation (###### to AM)."

2) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.".

If you did not receive any funding for this study, please simply state: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Reviewers' Comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #1: Methodology is fine, but the genome data are not deposited in a repository and thus are not publicly available.

Reviewer #2: Methods are appropriate; please see comments under "Summary and General Comments"

**********

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #1: No observtions

Reviewer #2: Results are appropriately presented; please see comments under "Summary and General Comments"

**********

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #1: No, they are not

Reviewer #2: Conclusions are appropriately presented; please see comments under "Summary and General Comments"

**********

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Please see comments under "Summary and General Comments"

**********

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #1: The manuscript analyses the impact of a particular gene duplication on itraconazole resistance in Madurella fahalii. This species has limited molecular tools for analysis; so, the authors selected heterologous complementation to characterize this gene.

The starting point of this work was genome sequencing of a member of this species, which is barely mentioned in the manuscript and the authors did not make justice to their own effort. One concern related to the gene duplication phenomenum is whehther this is a strain-specific observation or it is a genetic feature bradly found in this species. The authors are encouraged to assess the presence of these two copies in other isolates of this species. In addition, no effort was shown to assambly contigns and establish loci localization, which is esential to analysis gene syntheny.

Related with the expression assays, there is no evidence nor reference supporting the use of the ACT1 gene to normalize gene expression assays. Actin is a highly dinamic gene and may not of stable, and constant expression in this species. In addition, amplification efficiency of primer pairs used in RT-qPCR should be inclued in as part fo the manuscript.

It is strange that sensitivity assays were not performed following conventional assays in RPMI broth. It is known that growing fungal cells in rich media affect the susceptibility profiles. For both, the complementation assays and the expression analysis, it should be relevant to present the result generated with the other azoles tested. Moreover, a control with a non-azole antifungal drug should also be included in the analysis.

The most relevant issue, the evidence is not solid enough to support the role of this gene copy in itraconazole resistance. Actually, results suggest a modest upregulation in presence of the azole, and the complementation assays showed partial results. A stronger data set is required to link this gene with the itraconazole resistance in Madurella fahalii.

Reviewer #2: Review of PNTD-D-24-01441, “Itraconazole Resistance in Madurella fahalii Linked to a Distinct Homolog of the Gene Encoding Cytochrome P450 14-α Sterol Demethylase (CYP51)”

Authors: Isato Yoshioka, Ahmed Hassan Fahal, Satoshi Kaneko, Takashi Yaguchi

Summary: In this manuscript, the authors present data obtained from the high-quality draft genome sequence of Madurella fahalii IFM 68171 which indicates the presence of two copies of the gene encoding cytochrome P450 14-α sterol demethylase (CYP51), the target enzyme of itraconazole. These two cytochrome P450 gene sequences include a gene conserved among Madurella species (Mfcyp51A1) and a M. fahalii-specific gene 40 (Mfcyp51A2). The authors found that both genes are actively transcribed in M. fahalii and are upregulated in response to itraconazole. Furthermore, they observed that heterologous expression of each gene in Saccharomyces cerevisiae demoenstrated that transformants carrying the Mfcyp51A2 gene exhibited reduced susceptibility to itraconazole compared to those with Mfcyp51A1.

Review:

Major:

1) While this is a well written manuscript describing a novel finding of potential clinical significance, my major concern is that the Mfcyp51A2 gene was only identified in a single strain (maybe two?) of M. fahalii. It is possible that this is a rather anomalous finding and the results presented in this manuscript are not extrapolatable to other M. fahalii strains or clinical variants. Given that the authors know the sequence for the Mfcyp51A2 gene, it should be a simple matter to design specific primers for PCR amplification to test other strains to determine if this gene is common to clinical isolates of M. fahalii. This additional info would greatly enhance the impact of the manuscript.

2) Given the reduced sequence homology between Mfcyp51A1 and Mfcyp51A2 (~70%), the question remains if the enzyme is more inherently resistance to azole inhibition due to differences in the ligand binding site, or if it is simply due to increased expression of the second enzyme. The authors briefly touched on this issue in the Discussion, but it would improve the manuscript for them to comment on this aspect of the study further in their discussion and provide any additional data to support their supposition, should they indeed have it.

3) Since crystal structures are available for fungal CYP51, it could be useful and help to improve the impact of the manuscript, to construct AlphaFold homology models for Mfcyp51A1 and A2 for docking of the azole inhibitors and comparison of the two structures. This would significantly help to round out the manuscript.

4) Figure 1 is quite blurry, at least in my copy of the manuscript. If this figure is to be included in the final manuscript, please be sure that it has significant resolution to be legible.

Minor:

1) In the Materials and Methods, the authors state: “The E. coli strain was cultured in LB medium with the addition of 100 mg/L of ampicillin when necessary” please define the term “when necessary” as this is inherently ambiguous

2) Please check reference format for reference number 39. I could not find the name of the journal in this citation.

3) At four figures, the manuscript is a bit data light for a research manuscript; more indicative of a communication (see point #3 above).

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: Yes:  Héctor M. Mora-Montes

Reviewer #2: Yes:  Jed N Lampe

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

Figure resubmission:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. If there are other versions of figure files still present in your submission file inventory at resubmission, please replace them with the PACE-processed versions.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that authors of applicable studies deposit laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0012623.r004

Decision Letter 1

Marcio L Rodrigues, Max Carlos Ramírez-Soto

17 Feb 2025

Dear Dr. Yaguchi,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Itraconazole Resistance in Madurella fahalii Linked to a Distinct Homolog of the Gene Encoding Cytochrome P450 14-α Sterol Demethylase (CYP51)' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, you will automatically be opted out of early publication. We ask that you notify us now if you or your institution is planning to press release the article. All press must be co-ordinated with PLOS.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Best regards,

Max Carlos Ramírez-Soto, BSc, MPH, PhD, FRSPH

Academic Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Marcio Rodrigues

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-4304-636XX

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-1765-0002

***********************************************************

None

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #1: The authors properly addressed my concerns. The manuscript is now ready for publication.

Reviewer #2: Acceptable

**********

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #1: The authors properly addressed my concerns. The manuscript is now ready for publication.

Reviewer #2: Acceptable

**********

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #1: The authors properly addressed my concerns. The manuscript is now ready for publication.

Reviewer #2: Acceptable

**********

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Acceptable

**********

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #1: The authors properly addressed my concerns. The manuscript is now ready for publication.

Reviewer #2: Acceptable

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: Yes:  Héctor M. Mora-Montes

Reviewer #2: No

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0012623.r005

Acceptance letter

Marcio L Rodrigues, Max Carlos Ramírez-Soto

Dear Dr. Yaguchi,

We are delighted to inform you that your manuscript, "Itraconazole Resistance in Madurella fahalii Linked to a Distinct Homolog of the Gene Encoding Cytochrome P450 14-α Sterol Demethylase (CYP51)," has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

We have now passed your article onto the PLOS Production Department who will complete the rest of the publication process. All authors will receive a confirmation email upon publication.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any scientific or type-setting errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript. Note: Proofs for Front Matter articles (Editorial, Viewpoint, Symposium, Review, etc...) are generated on a different schedule and may not be made available as quickly.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, the early version of your manuscript will be published online unless you opted out of this process. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

Thank you again for supporting open-access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Best regards,

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Primers used in this study.

    (XLSX)

    pntd.0012623.s001.xlsx (10KB, xlsx)
    S2 Table. The properties of standard curves of qPCR primers.

    (XLSX)

    pntd.0012623.s002.xlsx (11KB, xlsx)
    S1 Fig. The genomic scaffold of Madurella fahalii IFM 68171.

    The figure was generated using Tapestry (https://github.com/johnomics/tapestry) by mapping long reads, which were used as input for Flye assembly. Regions corresponding to telomeric sequences (CCCTAA/TTAGGG) are indicated in red and the opacity represents the number of telomeric repeats.

    (TIF)

    pntd.0012623.s003.tif (3.9MB, tif)
    S2 Fig. Nucleotides and amino acids sequence of Mfcyp51A2.

    Introns were highlighted with gray, and encoded amino acids were represented under the corresponding nucleotide sequences.

    (TIF)

    pntd.0012623.s004.tif (986KB, tif)
    S3 Fig. Comparison of genomic region including cyp51A2 and its flanking genes in M. fahalii IFM 68171 (accession no.: BAAFSV010000003.1) with that of M. mycetomatis m55 (accession no.: LCTW02000001.1).

    The amino acids alignment and the generation of the image was performed by Clinker (https://github.com/gamcil/clinker). The homologous protein-coding gene models were drawn as the arrows in the same color and their similarity in amino acids were labeled between them.

    (TIF)

    pntd.0012623.s005.tif (354.2KB, tif)
    S4 Fig. The standard curves of qPCR primers used in this study to amplify (A) actin, (B) tubulin, (C) Mfcyp51A1 and (D) Mfcyp51A2.

    cDNA solutions were serially diluted 10-fold and were used as input. The x-axis represents the log10 of the DNA dilution factor, while the y-axis represents the Ct values.

    (TIF)

    pntd.0012623.s006.tif (471.7KB, tif)
    S5 Fig. Growth assay of S. cerevisiae strains BY4741 and TRE11-4741, a tranformant with doxycycline (DOX)-regulable ERG11.

    (A) Schematic representation of ERG11 locus in strains BY4741 and TRE11-4741. In the genome of TRE11-4741, LEU2 gene, PCMV -tTA-TADH1 cassette (tetR) and tetO7 -PCYC1 -UAS cassette (Ptet) were integrated into the upstream region of ERG11 ORF in comparison with that of strain BY4741.The genomic region and vector backbone were represented as solid and dotted lines, respectively. The expression of ERG11 by strain TRE11-4741 is repressed by the addition of DOX. (B) Restricted growth of strain TRE11-4741 by the addition of DOX. Yeast cells were serially diluted from 105 to 102 by 10-fold and cultivated on YPD media without DOX (-DOX) or with 10 mg/L DOX (+DOX) for 2 days.

    (TIF)

    pntd.0012623.s007.tif (1,006.4KB, tif)
    S6 Fig. Time-course analysis of the distance between the nitrogen atom in itraconazole and the heme iron during MD simulations of CYP51 proteins.

    Green and blue plots represent the data for MFCYP51A1 and MFCYP51A2, respectively.

    (TIF)

    pntd.0012623.s008.tif (381.2KB, tif)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_letter-2.docx

    pntd.0012623.s010.docx (55.7KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES