Skip to main content
PMC home page
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials logoLink to Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
. 2006 Nov 23;5:28. doi: 10.1186/1476-0711-5-28

Multilocus sequence typing method for identification and genotypic classification of pathogenic Leptospira species

Niyaz Ahmed 1,2,✉,#, S Manjulata Devi 1,#, M de los Á Valverde 3, P Vijayachari 4, Robert S Machang'u 5, William A Ellis 6, Rudy A Hartskeerl 2,7
PMCID: PMC1664579  PMID: 17121682

Abstract

Background

Leptospira are the parasitic bacterial organisms associated with a broad range of mammalian hosts and are responsible for severe cases of human Leptospirosis. The epidemiology of leptospirosis is complex and dynamic. Multiple serovars have been identified, each adapted to one or more animal hosts. Adaptation is a dynamic process that changes the spatial and temporal distribution of serovars and clinical manifestations in different hosts. Serotyping based on repertoire of surface antigens is an ambiguous and artificial system of classification of leptospiral agents. Molecular typing methods for the identification of pathogenic leptospires up to individual genome species level have been highly sought after since the decipherment of whole genome sequences. Only a few resources exist for microbial genotypic data based on individual techniques such as Multiple Locus Sequence Typing (MLST), but unfortunately no such databases are existent for leptospires.

Results

We for the first time report development of a robust MLST method for genotyping of Leptospira. Genotyping based on DNA sequence identity of 4 housekeeping genes and 2 candidate genes was analyzed in a set of 120 strains including 41 reference strains representing different geographical areas and from different sources. Of the six selected genes, adk, icdA and secY were significantly more variable whereas the LipL32 and LipL41 coding genes and the rrs2 gene were moderately variable. The phylogenetic tree clustered the isolates according to the genome-based species.

Conclusion

The main advantages of MLST over other typing methods for leptospires include reproducibility, robustness, consistency and portability. The genetic relatedness of the leptospires can be better studied by the MLST approach and can be used for molecular epidemiological and evolutionary studies and population genetics.

Background

Leptospirosis is a zoonotic and an emerging infectious disease caused by the pathogenic Leptospira species and is identified in the recent years as a global public health problem because of its increased mortality and morbidity in different countries. Leptospirosis is frequently misdiagnosed as a result of its protean and non-specific presentation resembling many other febrile diseases, notably viral haemorrhagic fevers such as dengue [1]. There is, for certain, an underestimation of the leptospirosis problem due to lack of awareness and under-recognition through a lack of proper use of diagnostic tools.

The common mode of transmission of the infection in humans is either by direct or indirect contact with the urine of infected animals and may lead to potential lethal disease. A unique feature of this organism is to parasitize in a wide variety of wild and domestic animals [2]. Traditionally, two species have been identified, i.e. Leptospira interrogans and L. biflexa for pathogenic and non-pathogenic leptospires, respectively. The serovar is the basic identifier, characterized on the basis of serological criteria. To date nearly 300 serovars have been identified under the species L. interrogans alone that have been distributed among 25 different serogroups of antigenically similar serovars [3].

Previously a classification system based on DNA-DNA hybridization studies has been introduced, which now comprises 17 Leptospira species [4-7]. Among these, 7 species: L. interrogans, L. borgpetersenii, L. santarosai, L. noguchii, L. weilli, L. kirschneri and L. alexanderi are considered as the main agents of leptospirosis [5,6]. The enormous inventory of serovars, based mainly on an ever-changing surface antigen repertoire, throws an artificial and unreliable scenario of strain diversity. It is therefore difficult to track strains whose molecular identity keeps changing according to the host and the environmental niches they inhabit and cross through.

Other than the serological methods, molecular tools that have been employed so far for sub-classification and cataloguing of leptospiral agents include restriction endonuclease assay (REA) [8,9], pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) [10,11], restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) [12], arbitrarily primed PCR [13], Variable Number of Tandem Repeats (VNTR) analysis [14] and fluorescent amplified fragment length polymorphism (FAFLP) [15]. All these techniques however, suffer from certain disadvantages that include requirement of large quantity of pure and high quality DNA, low discriminatory power, low reproducibility, ambiguous interpretation of data and problems associated with transfer of data between different laboratories [14].

MLST is a simple PCR based technique, which makes use of automated DNA sequencers to assign and characterize the alleles present in different target genes. The method allows one to generate sequence data in a low to high-throughput scale, which is unambiguous and suitable for epidemiological and population studies. The selected loci are generally the housekeeping genes, which evolve very slowly over an evolutionary time-scale [16] and hence qualify as highly robust markers of ancient and modern ancestry. The sequencing of multiple loci provides a balance between technical feasibility and resolution. MLST has been applied to the study of many other bacterial species like Neisseria meningitides [17], Streptococcus pneumoniae [18], Yersinia species [19], Campylobacter jejuni [20] and Helicobacter pylori [21].

Our present study is the first attempt to use the MLST, which currently differentiates the species and examines the intra and interspecies relationships of Leptospira. This method in future could be developed as a highly sophisticated genotyping system based on integrated genome analysis approaches to correctly identify and track leptospiral strains and is expected to greatly facilitate epidemiology of leptospirosis apart from deciphering the origins and evolution of leptospires in a global sense.

Methods

Bacterial strains

Bacterial strains (Table 1) were cultured by the WHO reference laboratory at the KIT Biomedical Research Centre at The Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (all isolates and reference strains labelled RK3) and at the Veterinary Sciences Division (VSD), The Queen's University of Belfast, United Kingdom (reference strains labelled RB3) and the WHO reference centre at Port Blair India (labelled isol 15). A total of 120 strains consisting of 79 isolates and 41 reference strains from different sources and geographical regions were analyzed by MLST. The 41 reference strains included in the study belonged to six Leptospira species (L. interrogans; L. kirschneri; L. noguchii; L. borgpetersenii; L. santarosai and L. alexanderi).

Table 1.

Details of leptospiral strains and isolates used for MLST based

Labels Genome Species Serogroup Serovar Strain Geographical area Source
INT 01 L. interrogans Canicola Sumneri Sumner Malaysia RB3
INT 02 L. interrogans Canicola Portlandvere MY 1039 Jamaica RB3
INT 03 L. interrogans Pomona Pomona Pomona Australia RB3
INT 04 L. interrogans Pomona Proechimys 1161 U Panama RB3
INT 05 L. interrogans Pomona Kenniwicki LT 1026 USA RB3
INT 06 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Grippotyphosa Moskva V Unknown RB4
INT 07 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Muelleri RM 2 Malaysia RB3
INT 08 L. interrogans Sejroe Roumanica LM 294 Roumania RB3
INT 09 L. interrogans Sejroe Saxkoebing Mus 24 Denmark RB3
INT 10 L. interrogans Sejroe Hardjoprajitno Hardjoprajitno Indonesia RB3
INT 11 L. interrogans Icterohaemorrhagiae Lai Lai China RB3
INT 12 L. interrogans Icterohaemorrhagiae Copenhageni M 20 Denmark RB3
INT 13 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Valbuzzi Valbuzzi Australia RB3
INT 14 L. interrogans Pyrogenes Manilae LT 398 Phillipins RB3
INT 15 L. interrogans Australis Australis Ballico Ballico RK3
INT 16 L. interrogans Icterohaemorrhagiae Icterohaemorrhagiae RGA Germany RK3
INT 17 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Ratnapura Field Isolate 1 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 18 L. interrogans Icterohaemorrhagiae Copenhageni Field Isolate 2 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 19 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Ratnapura Field Isolate 3 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 20 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Ratnapura Field Isolate 4 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 21 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Valbuzzi Field Isolate 5 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 22 L. interrogans Icterohaemorrhagiae Copenhageni Field Isolate 6 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 23 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Valbuzzi Field Isolate 7 North Andaman Isol 15
INT 24 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Valbuzzi Field Isolate 8 North Andaman Isol 15
INT 25 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Ratnapura Field Isolate 9 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 26 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Ratnapura Field Isolate 10 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 27 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Ratnapura Field Isolate 11 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 28 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Unknown Field Isolate 12 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 29 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Unknown Field Isolate 13 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 30 L. interrogans Sejroe Sejroe Field Isolate 14 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 31 L. interrogans Pomona Unknown Field Isolate 15 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 32 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Ratnapura Field Isolate 16 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 33 L. interrogans Australis Ramisi Field Isolate 17 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 34 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Unknown Field Isolate 18 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 35 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Valbuzzi Field Isolate 19 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 36 L. interrogans Grippotyphosa Valbuzzi Field Isolate 20 South Andaman Isol 15
INT 37 L. interrogans Hebdomadis Goiano Bovino 131 Brazil RB3
INT 38 L. interrogans Canicola* Canicola* M12/90 Brazil Isol
INT 39 L. interrogans Icterohaemorrhagiae* Copenhageni* M9/99 Brazil Isol
INT 40 L. interrogans Australis* Rushan* L01 Brazil Isol
INT 41 L. interrogans Canicola* Canicola* L02 Brazil Isol
INT 42 L. interrogans Canicola* Canicola* L03 Brazil Isol
INT 43 L. interrogans Canicola* Canicola* L09 Brazil Isol
INT 44 L. interrogans Icterohaemorrhagiae* Copenhageni* L10 Brazil Isol
INT 45 L. interrogans Canicola* Canicola* L14 Brazil Isol
INT 46 L. interrogans Lyme* Lyme* K30B UK Isol
INT 47 L. interrogans Australis* Australis* K9H UK Isol
INT 48 L. interrogans Icterohaemorrhagiae* Copenhageni* Isolate 9 Costa Rica Isol
INT 49 L. interrogans Unknown* Unknown* Isolate 10 Costa Rica Isol
INT 50 L. interrogans Australis* Lora* 1992 Tanzania Isol
INT 51 L. interrogans Australis* Lora* 2324 Tanzania Isol
INT 52 L. interrogans Australis* Lora* 2364 Tanzania Isol
INT 53 L. interrogans Australis* Lora* 2366 Tanzania Isol
INT 54 L. interrogans Ballum* Kenya* 4885 Tanzania Isol
INT 55 L. interrogans Ballum* Kenya* 4883 Tanzania Isol
KIR 01 L. kirschneri Canicola Kuwait 136/2/2 Kuwait RB3
KIR 02 L. kirschneri Canicola Schueffneri Vleermuis 90 C Indonesia RB3
KIR 03 L. kirschneri Pomona Mozdok 5621 Soviet Union (Russia) RB3
KIR 04 L. kirschneri Grippotyphosa Vanderhoedeni Kipod 179 Israel RB3
KIR 05 L. kirschneri Pomona Tsaratsovo B 81/7 Bulgaria RB3
KIR 06 L. kirschneri Grippotyphosa Grippotyphosa Moskva V Russia RK3
KIR 07 L. kirschneri Grippotyphosa Ratnapura Wumalasena Sri Lanka RK3
KIR 08 L. kirschneri Icterohaemorrhagiae* Sokoine* 745 Tanzania Isol
KIR 09 L. kirschneri Icterohaemorrhagiae* Sokoine* 771 Tanzania Isol
KIR 10 L. kirschneri Icterohaemorrhagiae* Mwogolo* 826 Tanzania Isol
KIR 11 L. kirschneri Icterohaemorrhagiae* Mwogolo* 845 Tanzania Isol
KIR 12 L. kirschneri Canicola* Qunjian* 2980 Tanzania Isol
KIR 13 L. kirschneri Icterohaemorrhagiae* Sokoine* 4602 Tanzania Isol
KIR 14 L. kirschneri Sejroe* Ricardi/Saxkoebing* 1499 UK Isol
KIR 15 L. kirschneri Sejroe* Ricardi/Saxkoebing* 1501 UK Isol
KIR 16 L. kirschneri Ballum* Kenya Njenga Kenya RK3
NOG 01 L. noguchii Pyrogenes Myocastoris LSU 1551 USA RB3
NOG 02 L. noguchii Louisiana Louisiana LSU 1945 USA RK3
NOG 03 L. noguchii Panama Panama CZ214k Panama RK3
NOG 04 L. noguchii Pyrogenes* Guaratuba * Isolate 4 Costa Rica Isol
SAN 01 L. santarosai Mini Georgia LT 117 USA RB3
SAN 02 L. santarosai Sejroe Recreo 380 Nicaragua RB3
SAN 03 L. santarosai Pyrogenes Guaratuba An 7705 Brazil RB3
SAN 04 L. santarosai Pyrogenes Varela 1019 Nicaragua RB3
SAN 05 L. santarosai Grippotyphosa Canalzonae CZ188 Panama RK3
SAN 06 L. santarosai Bataviae* Brasiliensis* An 776 Brazil Isol
SAN 07 L. santarosai Sejroe* Guaricura* Bov.G Brazil Isol
SAN 08 L. santarosai Sejroe* Guaricura* M4/98 Brazil Isol
SAN 09 L. santarosai Grippotyphosa* Bananal* 2ACAP Brazil Isol
SAN 10 L. santarosai Grippotyphosa* Bananal* 16CAP Brazil Isol
SAN 11 L. santarosai Pyrogenes* Alexi/Guaratuba/Princestown* Isolate 1 Costa Rica Isol
SAN 12 L. santarosai Sarmin* Weaveri/Rio* Isolate 2 Costa Rica Isol
SAN 13 L. santarosai Tarassovi* Rama* Isolate 3 Costa Rica Isol
SAN 14 L. santarosai Tarassovi* Rama* Isolate 5 Costa Rica Isol
SAN 15 L. santarosai Bataviae* Claytoni* Isolate 6 Costa Rica Isol
SAN 16 L. santarosai Shermani* Shermani/Babudieri/Aguaruna* Isolate 8 Costa Rica Isol
SAN 17 L. santarosai unknown* (putative new serovar)# Isolate 7 Costa Rica Isol
SAN 18 L. santarosai Icterohaemorrhagiae* Copenhageni* K13A UK Isol
ALE 01 L. alexanderi Manhao Manhao L60 China RK3
BOR 01 L. borgpetersenii Sejroe Istarica Bratislava Slovakia RB3
BOR 02 L. borgpetersenii Sejroe Sejroe M 84 Denmark RB3
BOR 03 L. borgpetersenii Javanica Dehong De 10 China RB3
BOR 04 L. borgpetersenii Javanica Javanica Veltrat Batavia Indonesia RB3
BOR 05 L. borgpetersenii Javanica Zhenkang L 82 China RB3
BOR 06 L. borgpetersenii Javanica Poi Poi Italy RK3
BOR 07 L. borgpetersenii Mini Mini Sari Italy RK3
BOR 08 L. borgpetersenii Ballum* Kenya* 153 Tanzania Isol
BOR 09 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 159 Tanzania Isol
BOR 10 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 723 Tanzania Isol
BOR 11 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 766 Tanzania Isol
BOR 12 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 1605 Tanzania Isol
BOR 13 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 1610 Tanzania Isol
BOR 14 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 2062 Tanzania Isol
BOR 15 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 2348 Tanzania Isol
BOR 16 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 2447 Tanzania Isol
BOR 17 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 4880 Tanzania Isol
BOR 18 L. borgpetersenii Ballum * Kenya* 4787 Tanzania Isol
BOR 19 L. borgpetersenii Hebdomadis* Kremastos/Hebdomadis* 873 Ireland Isol
BOR 20 L. borgpetersenii Hebdomadis* Kremastos/Hebdomadis* 871 Ireland Isol
BOR 21 L. borgpetersenii Sejroe* Saxkoebing* 1498 Ireland Isol
BOR 22 L. borgpetersenii Sejroe* Ricardi/Saxkoebing* 1522 UK Isol
BOR 23 L. borgpetersenii Sejroe* Ricardi/Saxkoebing* 1525 UK Isol
BOR 24 L. borgpetersenii Pomona* Kunming* RIM 139 Portugal Isol
BOR 25 L. borgpetersenii Pomona* Kunming* RIM 201 Portugal Isol
BOR 26 L. borgpetersenii Sejroe* Ricardi/Saxkoebing* RIM 156 Portugal Isol
Open in a new tab

* – Unpublished presumptive classification, # – Unpublished putative new serovar, Isol – Isolates, RB – reference strains from Belfast lab, RK – reference strains from KIT. The numbers 3, 4 and 15 refer to the references describing strains or isolates.

Selection and validation of target genes for MLST

The candidate loci sequences were obtained from the strains L. interrogans Fiocruz L1-130 and L. interrogans Lai 56601 strains from the Leptolist server. Six genes, namely adk (Adenylate Kinase), icdA (Isocitrate dehydrogenase), LipL32 (outer membrane lipoprotein LipL32), rrs2 (16S rRNA), secY (pre-protein translocase SecY protein), and LipL41 (outer membrane Lipoprotein LipL41) (Table 2) were selected for MLST analysis. Many sequences of the rrs2, LipL32 and LipL41 are available in the GenBank [2]. PCR primers were designed for these genes based on GenBank records in the conserved regions flanking the variable internal fragments of the target regions. PCR primers for adk, icdA and secY were based on gene sequences of strains Fiocruz L1-130 and Lai 56601 [22,23] (Table 2). The Primer 3 software [24] was used to design the PCR primers for the amplification of the candidate loci. The PCR amplifications of the different MLST target genes were performed using 1.5 mM MgCl2, 200 μM of dNTP's (MBI Fermentas), 25–50 ng template DNA using Gene Amp 9700 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, USA) PCR system.

Table 2.

Details of gene loci and the corresponding primer sequences used for MLST analysis

Gene Locus Gene size (bp) Co-ordinates PCR product size (bp) Size of polymorphic sequence (bp) Function Primer sequences
adk LIC12852 564 3458298–3458861 531 430 Adenylate Kinase F-GGGCTGGAAAAGGTACACAA
R-ACGCAAGCTCCTTTTGAATC
icdA LIC13244 1197 3979829–3981025 674 557 Isocitarate Dehydrogenase F-GGGACGAGATGACCAGGAT
R-TTTTTTGAGATCCGCAGCTTT
LipL41 LIC12966 1068 3603575–3604642 520 518 Outermenbrane Lipoprotein LipL41 F-TAGGAAATTGCGCAGCTACA
R-GCATCGAGAGGAATTAACATCA
rrs2 LIC11508 1512 1862433–1863944 541 452 16S ribosomal RNA F-CATGCAAGTCAAGCGGAGTA
R-AGTTGAGCCCGCAGTTTTC
secY LIC12853 1383 3458869–3460251 549 549 Translocase pre-protein secY F-ATGCCGATCATTTTTGCTTC
R-CCGTCCCTTAATTTTAGACTTCTTC
LipL32 LIC11352 819 1666299–1667117 474 474 Outermenbrane Lipoprotein LipL32 F-ATCTCCGTTGCACTCTTTGC
R-ACCATCATCATCATCGTCCA
Open in a new tab

Amplification parameters included an initial denaturation at 95°C for 5 min followed by 35 cycles of amplification comprising of denaturation (94°C for 30 sec), annealing (58°C for 30 sec) and primer extension (72°C for 1 min) steps and a final extension of 7 min at 72°C. All the amplified fragments were checked on 1.5% or 2% agarose gel with ethidium bromide staining and the amplicons were sequenced in both the directions using Big Dye Terminator cycle sequencing Kit (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, USA) on ABI 3100 DNA sequencers (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, USA).

MLST data analysis

The electropherograms were viewed by using Chromas Lite version 2.01 (Technelysium Pty Ltd, Australia) and the resulting DNA sequences corresponding to both the forward and reverse reads were aligned using the Seqscape software (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, USA). Low quality nucleotide sequences were trimmed from the ends while comparing with the reference sequence of the Fiocruz strain and all the processed sequences were subsequently aligned by Clustal X [25]. The Sequence Type Analysis and Recombinational Test (START) programme [26] was used to determine Guanine-Cytosine content, number of polymorphic sites and the ratio of non-synonymous to synonymous nucleotide substitutions (dN/dS). The phylogenetic analysis was performed using concatenated (2980bp) sequences in the order adk, icdA, LipL32, LipL41, rrs2 and secY for each strain using MEGA 3.1 [27] and the consensus tree was drawn based on 1000 bootstrap replicates with Kimura 2 parameter.

Results

Diversity among the candidate loci analyzed

The 5' parts of rrs2, LipL32, LipL41 and the 3' part of secY were considered for the analysis based on abundance of nucleotide substitution positions found in these regions. The sizes of the fragments analyzed for the selected housekeeping genes ranged between 430bp (adk) and 557bp (icdA). The positions of these MLST loci were scattered throughout the chromosome I of L. interrogans Fiocruz L1-130 (Table 2). Clustal X programme was used to align all the individual sequences separately and we observed that there were no large insertions and deletions in the selected region. According to our analysis the rrs2 gene was found to be highly conserved among all the isolates with the percentage of variable sites being 4.42. Other genes namely LipL32, LipL41, icdA, adk and secY, however, were significantly diverse with the percentages of variable sites being 11.3, 21.04, 22.8, 27.2 and 28.7 respectively. The locus with highest diversity was icdA with 51 different alleles found among the set of 120 different isolates studied. The ratio of non-synonymous (dN) to synonymous substitution (dS) was much less than 1.0 indicating that these genes are not under positive selection pressure (the selection is against the amino acid change), whereas the rrs2 gene showed dN/dS ratio as 1.369 suggesting a high flexibility for amino acid changes. The percentage of G + C content in these loci ranged from 39.16 (secY) to 51.92 (rrs2) (Table 3). The synonymous substitution which, plays a role in the divergence of strains was more frequent in icdA and secY with 126 different synonymous sites. When compared to synonymous substitutions, non-synonymous substitutions were more frequent in all the genes tested, but highest numbers of 429 and 423 were observed in case of icdA and secY respectively (Table 3).

Table 3.

Allelic diversity parameters observed for the six target genes used for MLST analysis of leptospires

Gene G+C% No. of alleles Polymorphic sites Synonymous sites Non-synonymous sites % of variable nucleotide sites dN/dSratio
adk 41.55 40 117 100 329 27.2 0.039
icd1 40.9 51 127 126 429 22.8 0.017
LipL32 46.46 36 54 112 362 11.3 0.091
LipL41 42.88 52 109 123 393 21.04 0.055
rrs2 51.92 29 20 112 338 4.42 1.369
secY 39.16 49 158 126 423 28.7 0.019
Open in a new tab

Clustering analysis of Leptospires based on MLST

The neighbor-joining tree was constructed for representative isolates based on a 'super locus' of 2980bp comprising concatenated sequence of all the six loci. For this, the genes were fused in the order – adk, icdA, LipL32, LipL41, rrs2 and secY. The phylogenetic tree generated five different clusters where L. interrogans (56 samples), L. noguchii (4 samples), L. kirschneri (16 samples), L. santarosai (18 samples), L. alexanderi (1 sample), L. borgpetersenii (26 samples) separated according to their genome species (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Genetic relatedness among Leptospira isolates based on the concatenated sequences of the six housekeeping and candidate gene loci analyzed (see table 1 for detailed information on isolates/strains). * Unpublished presumptive serological classification.

MLST analysis also clearly identified each of the field isolates up to the species level and in general, classification based on these observations corroborated with previous taxonomic status of these isolates determined either by serological criteria or by genomic methods such as FAFLP (data not shown). There are two isolates for which serological classification seemed to be in contrast to MLST identification, i.e. INT 46, L. interrogans serovar Lyme and SAN 18, L. santarosai serovar Copenhageni. It should be noted that in these cases serovar designation is based on preliminary serological analysis, which may be incorrect. L. alexanderi was found to be genomically highly similar to L. santarosai and clustered accordingly. This could therefore be a subspecies of L. santarosai.

L. interrogans isolate SAN 17 from Costa Rica, indicated as putative new serovar (Table 1) along with another L. interrogans member belonging to serovar Muelleri of the serogroup Grippotyphosa, formed an isolated branch under the L. interrogans cluster arguing for a separate taxonomic status, possibly another subspecies of L. interrogans.

Discussion

The present study was a first attempt in the development of MLST for Leptospira species; the main objective being the selection of the housekeeping and candidate genes that are species specific, stable and evolve slowly. The availability of the complete sequence of L. interrogans Lai 56601 and Fiocruz L1-130 helped us in selecting the candidate loci. Genetically diverse group of strains was used for the study to evaluate the sequence diversity among the tested housekeeping genes. The six genes selected and studied here appear to be distinctly resolving to reveal a wide variety of genotypes among the isolates analyzed. This indicates a significant heterogeneity and sequence variation at each locus (Table 3).

The six loci selected were found to be suitable for MLST typing as they can be amplified and sequenced in all the isolates irrespective of species as these loci are unlinked on the L. interrogans chromosome I and exhibit a modest degree of sequence diversity and resolution. A total of 585 polymorphic sites were observed in the 'super locus' of 2980bp. Non-synonymous sites were more abundant as compared to synonymous sites (Table 3) indicating that the amino acid sequence variability possibly represents acclimatization to the specific host and environmental restrictions [2].

Several molecular tools that have been so far described for the characterization of Leptospira are associated with several drawbacks. Methods like PFGE, RFLP, and REA need large quantity of purified DNA, present tedious methodology, have low discriminatory levels, are hard to interpret the data, suffer from lack of reproducibility, require specialized equipment such as counter clamped homogenous electric field electrophoresis systems and give poor data transfer. The VNTR or MLVA technique described by Majed et al [14] and Slack et al [28] are more specific to L. interrogans. MLST overcomes all these disadvantages as this technique is simple, and easy to standardize on an automated DNA sequencer that is more widely available in most of the laboratories and above all the sequence data generated are unambiguous, specific and explicit. The main advantage of MLST is the transfer of data that can be shared and compared between different laboratories easily through the Internet. To date, a large number of organisms have been typed by MLST, which proved to be a highly discriminatory technique [29]. MLST analysis on Leptospira strains showed that the similar serovars and the serogroups of different species are not clustered together (Figure 1). This method is more suitable in identifying the species of leptospires as indicated by the clustering patterns up to species level (Figure 1). The tree generated gives an idea on the phylogenetic organization of the Leptospira. The L. interrogans seems to be like a clonal branch as the isolates are more closely related and emerge from L. kirschneri indicating that they have evolved from this species. The L. interrogans and the L. kirschneri emerge from L. noguchii branch indicating it as a monophyletic group [2]. Due to the greater sequence diversity observed in all the six genes except rrs2, the dendrogram generated could differentiate effectively the L. interrogans, L. kirschneri, L. noguchii, L. santarosai and L. borgpetersenii.

Conclusion

With this new technique of MLST, we believe the issues related to ever-increasing serotype diversity would be effectively addressed via high throughput genome profiling. This will help establish population genetic structure of this pathogen with diverse host range and under different ecological conditions and will provide a scope for genotype-phenotype correlation to be established. Analyses based on the allelic profiles generated by our method may be successfully used to gain insights into the evolution and phylogeographic affinities of leptospires as it has been done for many other organisms. Large-scale, global genotyping, therefore, largely constitutes the essential mandate of studying leptospirosis in different hosts at the population level. Such approaches always generate extremely valuable information that can be translated into a wealth of databases to search for strain specific markers for epidemiology or to construct evolutionary history of the strains for a particular epidemiological catchment area. This task becomes greatly simplified if the genotypic data are categorized, stacked, archived and made electronically portable to facilitate easy access, extensive comparisons, remote access and retrieval in sets.

Competing interests

The author(s) declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

NA and SMD carried out all the experiments related to primer designing, DNA sequencing and phylogenetic analyses and wrote the manuscript. NA and RAH designed the study and edited the manuscript. MDLAV, RSM, PV and WAE performed isolations of Leptospira. WAE and RAH performed serological and (other) molecular characterizations of the isolates, extracted DNA from isolates and reference strains and provided geographic and epidemiological data.

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgements

We thank Prof. Seyed E. Hasnain, University of Hyderabad, India for discussions and helpful suggestions. We thank three anonymous experts who served as referees for this work and their constructive suggestions have helped the manuscript a great deal to become worth publication. We also thank S. A. Vasconcello from the Univesidada de São Paulo, Brazil for providing some of the isolates and staff of the WHO/FAO/OIE Leptospirosis Reference Centre, KIT Biomedical Research for technical and material support in the (provisional) typing of Leptospira isolates. NA would like to thank Dept. of Biotechnology, Govt. of India for the financial support in terms of core grants to CDFD. Authors also acknowledge the financial support of the European Union (Lepto and dengue Project, INCO-Dev ICA4-CT-2001-10086 and RATZOOMAN Project, INCO-Dev ICA4-CT-2002-10056).

Contributor Information

Niyaz Ahmed, Email: niyaz.cdfd@gmail.com.

S Manjulata Devi, Email: manju@cdfd.org.in.

M de los Á Valverde, Email: mvalverde@inciensa.sa.cr.

P Vijayachari, Email: vijayacharip@yahoo.com.

Robert S Machang'u, Email: machangu2001@yahoo.com.

William A Ellis, Email: bill.ellis@dardni.gov.uk.

Rudy A Hartskeerl, Email: r.hartskeerl@kit.nl.

References

  1. Levett PN. Leptospirosis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2001;14:296–326. doi: 10.1128/CMR.14.2.296-326.2001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Haake DA, Suchard MA, Kelley MM, Dundoo M, Alt DP, Zuerner RL. Molecular Evolution and Mosaicism of Leptospiral Outer Membrane Proteins Involves Horizontal DNA Transfer. J Bacteriol. 2004;186:2818–2828. doi: 10.1128/JB.186.9.2818-2828.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Kmety E, Dikken H. Classification of the species Leptospira interrogans and history of its serovars. University Press Groningen The Netherlands; 1993. [Google Scholar]
  4. Brenner DJ, Kaufmann AF, Sulzer KR, Steigerwalt AG, Rogers FC, Weyant RS. Further determination of DNA relatedness between serogroups and serovars in the family Leptospiraceae with a proposal for Leptospira alexanderi sp. nov. and four new Leptospira genomospecies. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1999;49:839–858. doi: 10.1099/00207713-49-2-839. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ramadass P, Jarvis BDW, Corner RJ, Penny D, Marshall RB. Genetic characterization of pathogenic Leptospira species by DNA hybridization. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1992;42:215–219. doi: 10.1099/00207713-42-2-215. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Yasuda BH, Steigerwalt AG, Sulzer LR, Kauhnann AF, Rogers F, Brenner DJ. Deoxyribonucleic acid relatedness between serogroups and serovars in the family Leptospiraceae with proposals for seven new Leptospira species. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1987;37:407–415. [Google Scholar]
  7. Levett PN, Morey RE, Galloway RL, Steigerwalt AG. Leptospira broomii sp. nov., isolated from humans with Leptospirosis. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2006;56:671–673. doi: 10.1099/ijs.0.63783-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Savio ML, Rossi C, Fusi P, Tagliabue S, Pacciarini ML. Detection and identification of Leptospira interrogans serovars by PCR coupled with restriction endonucleas eanalysis of amplified DNA. J Clin Microbiol. 1994;32:935–941. doi: 10.1128/jcm.32.4.935-941.1994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Brown PD, Levett PN. Differentiation of Leptospira species and serovars by PCR-restriction Endonuclease analysis, arbitrarily primed PCR and low-stringency PCR. J Med Microbiol. 1997;46:173–181. doi: 10.1099/00222615-46-2-173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Herrmann JL, Baril C, Belienger E, Perolat P, Baranton G, Girons IS. Genome conservation in isolates of Leptospira interrogans. J Bacteriol. 1991;173:7582–7588. doi: 10.1128/jb.173.23.7582-7588.1991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Herrmann JL, Bellenger E, Perolat P, Baranton G, Girons IS. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis of NotI digests of leptospiral DNA: a new rapid method of serovars identification. J Clin Microbiol. 1992;30:1696–1702. doi: 10.1128/jcm.30.7.1696-1702.1992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Zuerner RL, Herrmann JL, Girons IS. Comparison of geneticmaps for two Leptospira interrogans serovars provides evidence for two chromosomes and intra species heterogeneity. J Bacteriol. 1993;175:5445–5451. doi: 10.1128/jb.175.17.5445-5451.1993. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Perolat P, Merien F, Ellis WA, Baranton G. Characterization of Leptospira isolates from serovars hardjo by Ribotyping, arbitrarily primed PCR, and mapped restriction site polymorphisms. J Clin Microbiol. 1994;32:1949–1957. doi: 10.1128/jcm.32.8.1949-1957.1994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Majed Z, Bellenger E, Postic D, Pourcel C, Baranton G, Picardeau M. Identification of variable-number tandem-repeat loci in Leptospira interrogans sensu stricto. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43:539–545. doi: 10.1128/JCM.43.2.539-545.2005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Vijayachari P, Ahmed N, Sugunan AP, Ghousunnisa S, Rao KR, Hasnain SE, Sehgal SC. Use of Fluorescent Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism for Molecular Epidemiology of Leptospirosis In India. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42:3575–3580. doi: 10.1128/JCM.42.8.3575-3580.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Enright MC, Spratt BG. Multilocus sequence typing. Trends Microbiol. 1999;7:482–487. doi: 10.1016/S0966-842X(99)01609-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Maiden MCJ, Bygraves JA, Spratt BG. Multilocus sequence typing: a portable approach to the identification of clones within populations of pathogenic microorganisms. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;95:3140–3145. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.6.3140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Enright MC, Spratt BG. A multilocus sequence typing scheme for Streptococcus pneumoniae : identification of clones associated with serious invasive disease. Microbiology. 1998;144:3049–3060. doi: 10.1099/00221287-144-11-3049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Kotetishvili M, Kreger A, Wauters G, Morris JG, Sulakvelidze A, Stine OC. Multilocus Sequence Typing for Studying Genetic Relationships among Yersinia Species. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43:2674–2684. doi: 10.1128/JCM.43.6.2674-2684.2005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Dingle KE, Colles FM, Wareing DRA, Ure R, Fox AJ, Bolton FE, Bootsma HJ, Willems RJL, Urwin R, Maiden MCJ. Multilocus sequence typing system for Campylobacter jejuni. J Clin Microbiol. 2001;39:14–23. doi: 10.1128/JCM.39.1.14-23.2001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Devi SM, Ahmed I, Khan AA, Rahman SA, Alvi A, Sechi LA, Ahmed N. Genomes of Helicobacter pylori from native Peruvians suggest admixture of ancestral and modern lineages and reveal a western type cag-pathogenicity island. BMC Genomics. 2006;7:191. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-7-191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ko AI, Reis MG, Dourado CMR, Johnson WD, Jr, Riley LW. Urban epidemic of severe Leptospirosis in Brazil. Lancet. 1999;354:820–825. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)80012-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Nascimento AL, Ko AI, Martins EA, Monteiro-Vitorello CB, Ho PL, Haake DA, Verjovski-Almeida S, Hartskeerl RA, Marques MV, Oliveira MC, Menck CF, Leite LC, Carrer H, Coutinho LL, Degrave WM, Dellagostin OA, El-Dorry H, Ferro ES, Ferro MI, Furlan LR, Gamberini M, Giglioti EA, Goes-Neto A, Goldman GH, Goldman MH, Harakava R, Jeronimo SM, Junqueira-de-Azevedo IL, Kimura ET, Kuramae EE, Lemos EG, Lemos MV, Marino CL, Nunes LR, de Oliveira RC, Pereira GG, Reis MS, Schriefer A, Siqueira WJ, Sommer P, Tsai SM, Simpson AJ, Ferro JA, Camargo LE, Kitajima JP, Setubal JC, Van Sluys MA. Comparative genomics of two Leptospira interrogans pathogenesis. J Bacteriol. 2004;186:2164–2172. doi: 10.1128/JB.186.7.2164-2172.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. http://frodo.wi.mit.edu/
  25. Jeanmougin F, Thompson JD, Gouy M, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ. Multiple sequence alignment with Clustal X. Trends Biochem Sci. 1998;23:403–405. doi: 10.1016/S0968-0004(98)01285-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Jolley KA, Feil EJ, Chan MS, Maiden MC. Sequence type analysis and recombinational tests (START) Bioinformatics. 2001;17:1230–1231. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/17.12.1230. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Kumar S, Tamura K, Nei M. MEGA3: Integrated software for Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis and Sequence Alignment. Brief Bioinfor. 2004;5:150–163. doi: 10.1093/bib/5.2.150. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Slack AT, Dohnt MF, Symonds ML, Smythe LD. Development of a Multiple-Locus Variable number of tandem repeat Analysis (MLVA) for Leptospira interrogans and its application to Leptospira interrogans serovars Australis isolates from Far North Queensland, Australia. Annals Clin Microbiol and Antimicrobiol. 2005;4:10. doi: 10.1186/1476-0711-4-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Maiden MCJ. High-throughput sequencing in the population analysis of bacterial pathogens of humans. Int J Med Microbiol. 2000;290:183–190. doi: 10.1016/S1438-4221(00)80089-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES