Skip to main content
Microbiology Resource Announcements logoLink to Microbiology Resource Announcements
. 2019 Oct 24;8(43):e01167-19. doi: 10.1128/MRA.01167-19

Complete Genome Sequence of Salmonella enterica Serovar Enteritidis Siphophage Seafire

Sarah Hartman a, Chi Zeng b, Chandler O’Leary a, Heather Newkirk a, Rohit Kongari a, Jason Gill a, Mei Liu a,
Editor: Simon Rouxc
PMCID: PMC6813399  PMID: 31649087

Bacteriophages infecting Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Enteritidis may be used as biocontrol agents in food products or animals for preventing foodborne diseases caused by this pathogen. The complete genome sequence of phage Seafire, a T5-like siphophage infecting S. Enteritidis, is described in this report.

ABSTRACT

Bacteriophages infecting Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Enteritidis may be used as biocontrol agents in food products or animals for preventing foodborne diseases caused by this pathogen. The complete genome sequence of phage Seafire, a T5-like siphophage infecting S. Enteritidis, is described in this report.

ANNOUNCEMENT

The Gram-negative bacterium Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Enteritidis is a major cause of gastroenteritis in humans, resulting from the consumption of contaminated eggs or undercooked poultry meat (1). Salmonella infection is characterized by its ability to invade and colonize host epithelial cells (2). The rise of multidrug resistance among Salmonella strains makes phage therapy an attractive control method for this bacterium (3, 4). Here, we present the complete genome sequence of Seafire, a bacteriophage capable of infecting S. Enteritidis.

Siphophage Seafire was isolated from a wastewater treatment plant in College Station, TX, in 2015, using a poultry isolate of S. Enteritidis as the host. Host bacteria were cultured on tryptic soy broth or agar (Difco) at 37°C with aeration. Phages were cultured and propagated by the soft-agar overlay method (5). The phage was identified as a siphophage using negative-stain transmission electron microscopy performed at the Texas A&M University Microscopy and Imaging Center as described previously (6). Phage genomic DNA was prepared using a modified Promega Wizard DNA cleanup kit protocol (6). Pooled indexed DNA libraries were prepared using the Illumina TruSeq Nano LT kit, and the sequence was obtained with the Illumina MiSeq platform using the MiSeq v2 500-cycle reagent kit following the manufacturer’s instructions, producing 605,092 paired-end reads for the index containing the phage Seafire genome. FastQC v0.11.5 (https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/) was used for quality control of reads. The reads were trimmed with FastX Toolkit v0.0.14 (http://hannonlab.cshl.edu/fastx_toolkit/download.html) before being assembled using SPAdes v3.5.0 (7). Contig completion was confirmed by PCR using primers (5′-ACATGATGGACAGCGTGGT-3′ and 5′-GGCACTTTCTCATCAACAACAA-3′) oriented toward the ends of the assembled contig and by Sanger sequencing of the resulting product, with the contig sequence manually corrected to match the resulting Sanger sequencing read. GLIMMER v3.0 (8) and MetaGeneAnnotator v1.0 (9) were used with manual verification to predict protein coding genes, and tRNA genes were predicted with ARAGORN v2.36 (10). Rho-independent termination sites were identified via TransTermHP (http://transterm.cbcb.umd.edu/). Sequence similarity searches were done by BLASTp v2.2.28 (11) with a maximum expectation cutoff of 0.001 against the NCBI non-redundant (nr), UniProt Swiss-Prot (12), and TrEMBL databases. InterProScan v5.15-54.0 (13), LipoP (14), and TMHMM v2.0 (15) were used to predict protein function. HHpred with ummiclust30_2018_08 for multiple sequence alignment (MSA) generation and PDB_mmCIF70 for modeling in the HHsuite v3.0 release were also used for functional prediction (16). All analyses were conducted using default settings via the CPT Galaxy (17) and WebApollo (18) interfaces (https://cpt.tamu.edu/galaxy-pub).

Phage Seafire was assembled at 27.8-fold coverage to a single contig of 111,851 bp containing only one copy of a 9,592-bp direct terminal repeat determined by PhageTerm (19). Seafire exhibits a GC content of 40.0%. Seafire shares 87% and 61% overall sequence identity with Salmonella phages Stitch (GenBank accession no. KM236244) (20) and T5 (GenBank accession no. AY543070), respectively, as determined by BLASTn. T5-like gene clusters (21) were identified in Seafire. These include the pre-early region proteins (A1, A2, and deoxynucleoside-5′-monophosphatase) involved in the first step of transfer of injected DNA (22); the early region proteins involved in DNA replication, repair, and metabolism; and the late region proteins involved in host cell lysis (holin, endolysin, and a spanin pair) and phage assembly.

Data availability.

The genome sequence of phage Seafire was submitted to GenBank under accession no. MK050846. The associated BioProject, SRA, and BioSample accession numbers are PRJNA222858, SRR8771449, and SAMN11233789, respectively.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by funding from the National Science Foundation (awards EF-0949351 and DBI-1565146) and from the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and Texas Beef Cattle. Additional support came from the Center for Phage Technology (CPT), an Initial University Multidisciplinary Research Initiative supported by Texas A&M University and Texas AgriLife, and from the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics at Texas A&M University.

We are grateful for the advice and support of the CPT staff and the Texas A&M University Microscopy and Imaging Center.

This announcement was prepared in partial fulfillment of the requirements for BICH464 Phage Genomics, an undergraduate course at Texas A&M University.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Coburn B, Grassl GA, Finlay BB. 2007. Salmonella, the host and disease: a brief review. Immunol Cell Biol 85:112–118. doi: 10.1038/sj.icb.7100007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Fadl AA, Venkitanarayanan KS, Khan MI. 2002. Identification of Salmonella enteritidis outer membrane proteins expressed during attachment to human intestinal epithelial cells. J Appl Microbiol 92:180–186. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2672.2002.01511.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Doyle ME. 2015. Multidrug-resistant pathogens in the food supply. Foodborne Pathog Dis 12:261–279. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2014.1865. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Egli T, Koster W, Meile L. 2002. Pathogenic microbes in water and food: changes and challenges. FEMS Microbiol Rev 26:111–112. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6976.2002.tb00603.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Adams MK. 1959. Bacteriophages. Interscience Publishers, Inc, New York, NY. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Gill JJ, Berry JD, Russell WK, Lessor L, Escobar-Garcia DA, Hernandez D, Kane A, Keene J, Maddox M, Martin R, Mohan S, Thorn AM, Russell DH, Young R. 2012. The Caulobacter crescentus phage phiCbK: genomics of a canonical phage. BMC Genomics 13:542. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-13-542. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M, Kulikov AS, Lesin VM, Nikolenko SI, Pham S, Prjibelski AD, Pyshkin AV, Sirotkin AV, Vyahhi N, Tesler G, Alekseyev MA, Pevzner PA. 2012. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol 19:455–477. doi: 10.1089/cmb.2012.0021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Delcher AL, Harmon D, Kasif S, White O, Salzberg SL. 1999. Improved microbial gene identification with GLIMMER. Nucleic Acids Res 27:4636–4641. doi: 10.1093/nar/27.23.4636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Noguchi H, Taniguchi T, Itoh T. 2008. MetaGeneAnnotator: detecting species-specific patterns of ribosomal binding site for precise gene prediction in anonymous prokaryotic and phage genomes. DNA Res 15:387–396. doi: 10.1093/dnares/dsn027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Laslett D, Canback B. 2004. ARAGORN, a program to detect tRNA genes and tmRNA genes in nucleotide sequences. Nucleic Acids Res 32:11–16. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh152. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Camacho C, Coulouris G, Avagyan V, Ma N, Papadopoulos J, Bealer K, Madden TL. 2009. BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinformatics 10:421. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-10-421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.The UniProt Consortium. 2018. UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res 46:2699. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky092. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Jones P, Binns D, Chang HY, Fraser M, Li W, McAnulla C, McWilliam H, Maslen J, Mitchell A, Nuka G, Pesseat S, Quinn AF, Sangrador-Vegas A, Scheremetjew M, Yong SY, Lopez R, Hunter S. 2014. InterProScan 5: genome-scale protein function classification. Bioinformatics 30:1236–1240. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Juncker AS, Willenbrock H, Von Heijne G, Brunak S, Nielsen H, Krogh A. 2003. Prediction of lipoprotein signal peptides in Gram-negative bacteria. Protein Sci 12:1652–1662. doi: 10.1110/ps.0303703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Krogh A, Larsson B, von Heijne G, Sonnhammer EL. 2001. Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes. J Mol Biol 305:567–580. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.2000.4315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zimmermann L, Stephens A, Nam SZ, Rau D, Kubler J, Lozajic M, Gabler F, Soding J, Lupas AN, Alva V. 2018. A completely reimplemented MPI Bioinformatics Toolkit with a new HHpred server at its core. J Mol Biol 430:2237–2243. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2017.12.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Cock PJ, Gruning BA, Paszkiewicz K, Pritchard L. 2013. Galaxy tools and workflows for sequence analysis with applications in molecular plant pathology. PeerJ 1:e167. doi: 10.7717/peerj.167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Lee E, Helt GA, Reese JT, Munoz-Torres MC, Childers CP, Buels RM, Stein L, Holmes IH, Elsik CG, Lewis SE. 2013. Web Apollo: a Web-based genomic annotation editing platform. Genome Biol 14:R93. doi: 10.1186/gb-2013-14-8-r93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Garneau JR, Depardieu F, Fortier LC, Bikard D, Monot M. 2017. PhageTerm: a tool for fast and accurate determination of phage termini and packaging mechanism using next-generation sequencing data. Sci Rep 7:8292. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-07910-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Grover JM, Luna AJ, Wood TL, Chamakura KR, Kuty Everett GF. 2015. Complete genome of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium T5-like siphophage Stitch. Genome Announc 3:e01435-14. doi: 10.1128/genomeA.01435-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Wang J, Jiang Y, Vincent M, Sun Y, Yu H, Wang J, Bao Q, Kong H, Hu S. 2005. Complete genome sequence of bacteriophage T5. Virology 332:45–65. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2004.10.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Davison J. 2015. Pre-early functions of bacteriophage T5 and its relatives. Bacteriophage 5:e1086500. doi: 10.1080/21597081.2015.1086500. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

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

Data Availability Statement

The genome sequence of phage Seafire was submitted to GenBank under accession no. MK050846. The associated BioProject, SRA, and BioSample accession numbers are PRJNA222858, SRR8771449, and SAMN11233789, respectively.


Articles from Microbiology Resource Announcements are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES