We have examined the draft genomes of five isolates from two different Klebsiella species obtained from intensive care unit patients at two geographically distributed hospitals to examine the genomic diversity of hospital acquired organisms in this understudied population.
ABSTRACT
We have examined the draft genomes of five isolates from two different Klebsiella species obtained from intensive care unit patients at two geographically distributed hospitals to examine the genomic diversity of hospital-acquired organisms in this understudied population.
ANNOUNCEMENT
This study was undertaken to examine the genomic variation of multiple species of isolates obtained from perirectal samples from patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Patients who were admitted to an ICU at one of two hospitals—one in Baltimore, MD, and one in Torrance, CA—between September 2017 and April 2019 were enrolled in the study. Samples were collected under University of Maryland School of Medicine protocol HP-00066759. These patients had a prior surveillance or clinical Klebsiella pneumoniae culture within 7 days of enrollment in a study design similar to that described by O’Hara et al. (1). Each swab was cultured overnight on CHROMagar KPC to identify K. pneumoniae and other Klebsiella species (2). Antibiotic susceptibility testing was performed for all single-colony selected isolates by disk diffusion and interpreted in accordance with CLSI guidelines (3). A total of five isolates were examined by genome sequencing in this study, four isolates of Klebsiella variicola and one isolate of Klebsiella quasipneumoniae.
Genomic DNA was isolated from cultures grown in lysogeny broth overnight at 37°C with shaking. DNA was extracted in a 96-well format from 100 μl of sample using the MagAttract PowerMicrobiome DNA/RNA kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) automated on a Hamilton Microlab STAR robotic platform. Bead disruption was conducted on a TissueLyser II (20 Hz for 20 min) instrument in a 96-deep-well plate in the presence of 200 μl phenol-chloroform. Genomic DNA was eluted in 90 μl of water after magnetic bead cleanup. The resulting genomic DNA was quantified with PicoGreen. The sequencing libraries were generated with the KAPA HyperPrep kit (catalog number KK8504) and sequenced on the Illumina NovaSeq 6000 system using a 150-bp × 2 paired-end kit.
The total numbers of reads and bases and the genome coverage generated for each isolate are listed in Table 1. All software was used with default values. Raw sequencing reads were filtered to remove contaminating phiX reads using BBDuk of the BBTools software suite (https://sourceforge.net/projects/bbmap/). The raw reads were also filtered to remove contaminating Illumina adaptor sequences and quality trimmed using Trimmomatic v.0.36 (4). The resulting reads were assembled using SPAdes v.3.13.0 (5). The assemblies were filtered to contain only contigs longer than 500 bp with a k-mer coverage of ≥5×. Genomes containing greater than 500 contigs or an aberrant GC content were removed from further analysis. Relevant statistics (contig number, genome size, GC content, and N50 value), including GenBank accession and SRA links for each genome assembly, are included in Table 1. The genomes were annotated with PGAP v.4.12 (6). Further analysis will reveal the genome dynamics of these important species in the health care setting, as well as genetic determinants of transmission via health care worker interactions.
TABLE 1.
Genome metrics
| Isolate | Species | Hospital | No. of reads | No. of bases sequenced | Genome coverage (×) | No. of contigs | Genome size (bp) | % GC | N50 (bp) | GenBank accession no. | SRA accession no. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CRE135 | Klebsiella variicola | University of Maryland Medical Center | 2,751,678 | 415,503,378 | 71 | 64 | 5,854,485 | 57.13 | 272,686 | JABKRN000000000 | SRR11819346 |
| CRE165 | Klebsiella variicola | University of Maryland Medical Center | 3,717,514 | 561,344,614 | 103 | 53 | 5,448,709 | 57.52 | 185,995 | JABKRM000000000 | SRR11819345 |
| CRE180 | Klebsiella variicola | University of Maryland Medical Center | 6,381,124 | 963,549,724 | 173 | 58 | 5,574,578 | 57.35 | 185,995 | JABKRL000000000 | SRR11819344 |
| CRE184 | Klebsiella variicola | University of Maryland Medical Center | 4,741,274 | 715,932,374 | 127 | 42 | 5,633,553 | 57.31 | 310,605 | JABKRK000000000 | SRR11819343 |
| CRE607 | Klebsiella quasipneumoniae | UCLA Harborview | 6,227,888 | 940,411,088 | 180 | 48 | 5,211,910 | 57.63 | 264,029 | JABKKR000000000 | SRR11819342 |
Data availability.
All data have been made publicly available and are deposited under the accession numbers listed in Table 1.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This project was funded in part by federal funds from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, under grant numbers U19AI110820, 5K24AI079040, and R01AI121146.
REFERENCES
- 1.O’Hara LM, Calfee DP, Miller LG, Pineles L, Magder LS, Johnson JK, Morgan DJ, Harris AD. 2019. Optimizing contact precautions to curb the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in hospitals: a multicenter cohort study to identify patient characteristics and healthcare personnel interactions associated with transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis 69:S171–S177. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciz621. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Genc O, Aksu E. 2018. Chromogenic culture media or rapid immunochromatographic test: which is better for detecting Klebsiella pneumoniae that produce OXA-48 and can they be used in blood and urine specimens. J Microbiol Methods 148:169–173. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2018.04.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2020. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, 30th ed Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. 2014. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30:2114–2120. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Nurk S, Bankevich A, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Korobeynikov A, Lapidus A, Prjibelski AD, Pyshkin A, Sirotkin A, Sirotkin Y, Stepanauskas R, Clingenpeel SR, Woyke T, McLean JS, Lasken R, Tesler G, Alekseyev MA, Pevzner PA. 2013. Assembling single-cell genomes and mini-metagenomes from chimeric MDA products. J Comput Biol 20:714–737. doi: 10.1089/cmb.2013.0084. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Tatusova T, DiCuccio M, Badretdin A, Chetvernin V, Nawrocki EP, Zaslavsky L, Lomsadze A, Pruitt KD, Borodovsky M, Ostell J. 2016. NCBI Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline. Nucleic Acids Res 44:6614–6624. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw569. [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
All data have been made publicly available and are deposited under the accession numbers listed in Table 1.
