Electrophoretic Mobility of Mycobacterium avium Complex Organisms

2 downloads 0 Views 74KB Size Report
Jan 22, 2004 - colonize in drinking water sources and distribution systems (2,. 6). One survey of ... EPM was measured with a Malvern Zetasizer 4 (Malvern.
APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, Sept. 2004, p. 5667–5671 0099-2240/04/$08.00⫹0 DOI: 10.1128/AEM.70.9.5667–5671.2004

Vol. 70, No. 9

Electrophoretic Mobility of Mycobacterium avium Complex Organisms Darren Lytle,1* Christy Frietch,1 and Terry Covert2 National Risk Management Research Laboratory1 and National Exposure Research Laboratory,2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio Received 22 January 2004/Accepted 20 April 2004

The electrophoretic mobilities (EPMs) of 30 Mycobacterium avium complex organisms were measured. The EPMs of 15 clinical isolates ranged from ⴚ1.9 to ⴚ5.0 ␮m cm Vⴚ1 sⴚ1, and the EPMs of 15 environmental isolates ranged from ⴚ1.9 to ⴚ4.6 ␮m cm Vⴚ1 sⴚ1 at pH 7. M. phlei, Mycobacterium smegmatis, and Mycobacterium microti were compared in acetate-barbiturate solutions from pH 2.5 to 9 (10). EPMs of all cells were identical, despite differences in growth medium, cell age, and chemical treatments. The similarities were attributed to common features of the bacterial cell wall structure. The EPMs of M. bovis BCG Tice cells were measured in phosphate-buffered water (ionic strengths of 0.005 to 0.1 M) with a variety of treatments (12). An isoelectric point of 3.4 to 3.7 was determined, and the authors concluded from chemical treatment tests that the negative surface charge was due to carboxylic acids, phosphoesters, and strong acidic groups, possibly sulfates. The EPMs of representative strains of M. avium-M. intracellulare and Mycobacterium scrofulaceum were measured in buffers of ionic strength 0.05 M (7). The isoelectric point varied from 3.5 to 4.5. The negative charge of the bacterial cell wall was believed to be associated with amino groups and carboxyl and phosphate groups based on chemical and enzymatic tests. The electrokinetic properties of MAC organisms in water have not been reported. Such information would be useful in predicting the ease of their removal during water treatment and the fate of these organisms in drinking water distribution systems. The objective of this study was to measure and compare the EPMs of MAC organisms in aqueous suspensions. The EPMs of MAC organisms were compared to the EPMs of other microbiological pathogens measured under similar experimental conditions. The effect of pH on the EPMs of MAC microorganisms was also examined. Thirty MAC isolates (M. avium, M. intracellulare, and MX) from the USEPA’s culture collection were used in the study (Table 1). The isolates were obtained from studies by Glover et al. (9), Covert et al. (2), and Yoder et al. (17). The isolates were identified by PCR amplification and sequencing regions of the 16S ribosomal gene, AccuProbe, SNAP, or by PCRrestriction fragment polymorphism, as previously described in these studies. The isolates were grown for 21 days (mid-log phase) at 37°C with 10% CO2 in 20 ml of Middlebrook 7H9 broth with ADC enrichment (Difco Laboratories, Inc., Detroit, Mich.). The cells were concentrated by centrifugation (12,857 ⫻ g) (Eppendorf centrifuge 5810R) and washed three times in 9.15 mM KH2PO4 buffered deionized water. The washed pellets were resuspended in 9.15 mM KH2PO4 buffer to an estimated 106 CFU ml⫺1 (McFarland Standard, BioMerieux, Durham, N.C.) and were used for subsequent EPM analyses. EPM was measured with a Malvern Zetasizer 4 (Malvern

Nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) include Mycobacterium species that are not members of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex. Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and MX organisms are NTM, and are included in the Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC). MX organisms are MAC probe positive by the Accuprobe (Gen-Probe, Inc., San Diego, Calif.) or synthetic nucleic acid probe SNAP (Syngene, San Diego, Calif.) nucleic acid probe identification system but M. avium and M. intracellulare probe negative. MAC organisms are considered human pathogens and in recent years have emerged as a major cause of opportunistic infection in AIDS patients and other immune-compromised hosts (3, 6). The most common disseminated bacterial infection in AIDS patients is from MAC organisms and is second only to the AIDS wasting syndrome as the most common cause of death (11). Many of the NTM are free-living saprophytes that have been isolated from numerous environments, such as water, soil, food, and animals. NTM are able to grow, persist, survive, and colonize in drinking water sources and distribution systems (2, 6). One survey of U.S. public drinking water supplies found that NTM were detected in 35% of the samples, suggesting that drinking water may be an important source of human exposure to these organisms (2). MAC organisms have been isolated worldwide from drinking water distribution systems and are believed to be a source of the M. avium organisms infecting immune-compromised hosts (6, 9). In 1999, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) published the “Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List” (CCL), which included MAC organisms due to their clinical significance and their occurrence in drinking water (16). The CCL lists chemical and microbial contaminants that will be considered for future regulatory action. The surface properties of Mycobacterium have been studied to provide more information about the composition of the cell surface and catalase heterogeneity. In a collaborative study, the electrophoretic mobilities (EPMs) of catalases of eight BCG mycobacterial strains and three Mycobacterium phlei and five Mycobacterium fortuitum strains and an M. tuberculosis H37Rv strain were determined by polyacrylamide disk electrophoresis (15). The EPMs of cells of Mycobacterium bovis BCG,

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 W. Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45268. Phone: (513) 569-7432. Fax: (513) 569-7172. E-mail: lytle.darren@epa .gov. 5667

5668

LYTLE ET AL.

APPL. ENVIRON. MICROBIOL. TABLE 1. Measured EPMs of clinical and environmental MAC organisms

MAC organism

Strain no.

M. avium M. avium M. avium M. avium M. avium M. intracellulare M. intracellulare M. intracellulare M. intracellulare M. intracellulare MXc MX MX MX MX M. avium M. avium M. avium M. avium M. avium M. intracellulare M. intracellulare M. intracellulare M. intracellulare M. intracellulare MX MX MX MX MX

CW4 CW9 CW5 W50 W41 CW7-8D CW8 W310 W219 W213 W241 W243 CW3-8A W239 W252 33B F100 CA2 CA7 CA4 CO3AC8A R12N2 DO9BC2 BO3CC8N B12CC2 HO3AN5ST HO3BN4 HO3CN5ST HO4EN1 HO7EN8D

Source (na)

Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Clinical (11) Clinical (9) Clinical (9) Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental, Environmental,

drinking water food (9) food (6) food (9) food (9) drinking water reservoir (9) drinking water drinking water drinking water drinking water drinking water drinking water drinking water drinking water

Mean EPM (␮m cm · V⫺1 s⫺1)b

SD

⫺2.70 ⫺2.42 ⫺2.27 ⫺1.94 ⫺3.72 ⫺2.65 ⫺2.82 ⫺2.53 ⫺4.48 ⫺4.95 ⫺3.78 ⫺3.30 ⫺3.43 ⫺2.85 ⫺2.75 ⫺4.22 ⫺4.58 ⫺3.16 ⫺2.52 ⫺2.64 ⫺4.48 ⫺4.93 ⫺2.31 ⫺4.33 ⫺2.24 ⫺1.87 ⫺2.31 ⫺1.88 ⫺4.59 ⫺3.54

0.12 0.17 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.08 0.16 0.06 0.05 0.20 0.09 0.07 0.11 0.12 0.05 0.16 0.11 0.15 0.11 0.12 0.21 0.07 0.15 0.07 0.09 0.28 0.16

(9)

(9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9)

a

n indicates the number of replicate measurements of the same culture suspension. Isolates suspended in 9.15 mM K2HPO4 buffered deionized water (pH 7.0; ionic strength, 0.7 mM). c MX, MAC probe positive, M. avium and M. intracellulare probe negative by Accuprobe and SNAP. b

Instruments, Ltd., Malvern, England). This system measures EPM in micrometers centimeters per volt per second by laser doppler electrophoresis. Negative EPM values represent bacterial movement toward a positive electrode and a net negative surface charge. The instrument operation was checked daily with a MIN-U-SIL (high-purity, high-quality natural crystalline silica ground powder) solution with known EPM. Samples were injected directly into the 1.5-ml quartz capillary electrophoresis measurement cell with 10-ml disposable syringes. Prior to the measurement of each new sample, at least 20 ml of deionized water, followed by 10 ml of the sample to be measured, was rinsed through the capillary cell. Subsequent replicate measurements (typically four or five, depending on the sample volume) were made in 4-ml increments. These measurements were made at 25 ⫾ 2°C. Acid/base titrations with 0.5 M each HCl and NaOH were used to adjust the sample pH to 7. Statistical comparisons between means of groups were made with unpaired Students’ t tests when data sets passed normality tests or the Mann-Whitney rank sum test when data sets failed normality test (␣ ⫽ 0.05) (4, 8). Normality was tested with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. All statistical calculations were made with Sigmastat (version 2.0) (SPSS, Inc.). The EPMs of 15 clinical strains and 15 environmental MAC organisms suspended in 9.15 mM KH2PO4 buffered deionized water at neutral pH were measured (Table 1). The EPMs of the clinical strains ranged from ⫺1.94 to ⫺4.95 ␮m cm V⫺1 s⫺1, with a mean (⫾ standard deviation) of ⫺3.19 ⫾ 0.83 ␮m

cm V⫺1 s⫺1. The EPMs of the environmental strains ranged from ⫺1.87 to ⫺4.58 ␮m cm V⫺1 s⫺1, with a mean of ⫺3.31 ⫾ 1.11 ␮m cm V⫺1 s⫺1. There was no significant statistical difference between the mean of clinical and environmental MAC isolates (P ⫽ 0.911). The EPMs of the clinical and environmental groups were widely distributed, suggesting differences in the surface properties of strains do exist. The EPMs of MAC organisms were grouped according to species (M. avium, M. intracellulare, and MX) and source (Table 2). Statistical com-

TABLE 2. EPMs of MAC organisms MAC organism

EPM (␮m cm V⫺1 s⫺1)a n

Mean

SD

M. avium Clinical Environmental

45 42

⫺2.86 ⫺3.44

0.83 0.88

M. intracellulare Clinical Environmental

45 45

⫺3.50 ⫺3.66

1.03 1.17

MX Clinical Environmental

47 45

⫺3.21 ⫺2.83

0.43 1.09

a Isolates suspended in 9.15 mM KH2PO4 buffered deionized water (pH 7.0; ionic strength, 0.7 mM).

ELECTROPHORETIC MOBILITY OF M. AVIUM COMPLEX ORGANISMS

VOL. 70, 2004

5669

TABLE 3. Statistical comparisons between the EPMs of MAC species Statistical difference between EPMa MAC organism

Clinical M. avium

Environmental

M. intercellulare

MX

M. avium

M. intercellulare

MX

Yes (P ⬍ 0.001)

Yes (P ⫽ 0.021) No (P ⫽ 0.719)

Yes (P ⬍ 0.001) No (P ⫽ 0.491) No (P ⫽ 0.879)

Yes (P ⬍ 0.001) No (P ⫽ 0.465) No (P ⫽ 0.098)

No (P ⫽ 0.221) Yes (P ⬍ 0.001) Yes (P ⫽ 0.010)

No (P ⫽ 0.637)

Yes (P ⫽ 0.002) Yes (P ⬍ 0.001)

Clinical M. avium M. intercellulare MX

Yes (P ⬍ 0.001) Yes (P ⫽ 0.021)

No (P ⫽ 0.719)

Environmental M. avium M. intercellulare MX

Yes (P ⬍ 0.001) Yes (P ⬍ 0.001) No (P ⫽ 0.221)

No (P ⫽ 0.491) No (P ⫽ 0.465) Yes (P ⬍ 0.001)

No (P ⫽ 0.879) No (P ⫽ 0.098) Yes (P ⫽ 0.010)

No (P ⫽ 0.637) Yes (P ⫽ 0.002)

Yes (P ⬍ 0.001)

a

All data sets were non-normal. The Mann-Whitney rank sum test was used for statistical comparison of group medians. “Yes” indicates there is a statistical difference between the EPM medians of the respective species (P ⬍ 0.05), and “no” indicates there is no statistical difference between the EPM medians of the respective species (P ⬎ 0.05).

parisons between MAC groups (Table 2) were performed with the Mann-Whitney rank sum test. Significant statistical differences between clinical M. avium and clinical M. intracellulare and clinical M. avium and MX organisms existed. Statistical differences between environmental M. avium and MX and M. intracellulare and environmental MX organisms also existed, and statistical differences between clinical and environmental M. avium and clinical and environmental MX organisms were identified (Table 3). The EPMs of microbial surfaces are sensitive to suspension pH since the pH affects the dissociation of chemical groups on the cell wall. The pH of drinking waters varies from 6.5 to 10 depending upon the source water, treatment process, and corrosion control program. This study examined the effect of pH on the EPMs of MAC isolates. The effect of suspension pH (9.15 mM KH2PO4 buffered deionized water) on the EPMs of two environmental M. intracellulare strains is shown in Fig. 1. The EPMs of both strains increased in the negative direction with increasing pH. The greatest EPM change occurred between pH 2 and 7, and both strains had an isoelectric point (zero point of charge) at a pH of approximately 2. Figure 2 shows the impact of pH on the EPMs of two environmental M. avium strains. The EPMs dropped rapidly with decreasing pH. There were differences in EPMs between the two strains throughout the entire pH range. The isoelectric point of both strains was also near 2. The impact of pH on the EPM of a MX strain is shown in Fig. 3. The results were similar to those for the other species. The EPMs of other environmentally important microorganisms suspended in 9.15 mM KH2PO4 buffer at near-neutral pH are shown in Table 4 (13). The majority of the organisms are human pathogens and have been associated with drinking water contamination and waterborne disease outbreaks. Bacillus subtilis endospores have been measured through water treatment trains to determine the overall effectiveness of the water treatment processes (14). Escherichia coli O157:H7 bacteria had the lowest negative EPM, ⫺0.31 ␮m cm V⫺1 s⫺1, and spores of Encephalitozoon intestinalis had the greatest negative EPM, ⫺3.1 ␮m cm V⫺1 s⫺1. The EPMs of 14 clinical and environmental MAC strains measured in this study were more negative than those of all of the organisms listed in Table 4. The EPMs of 10 MAC strains were more than 0.5 ␮m cm V⫺1

s⫺1 more negative than the EPMs of spores of E. intestinalis. These analyses showed the diversity in compositions of microbial cell walls, since EPM reflects the chemical composition of the cell walls. This study shows that the composition of the cell wall of MAC organisms is unique and very different from those of many waterborne pathogens. The relatively large negative EPM measured for M. avium and M. intracellulare reflects the chemistry of the cell wall. Phosphate groups of phosphodiester linkages between the peptidoglycan and the arabinogalactan have been identified as the main components of the cell wall structure of mycobacteria (10). Phosphate groups are highly ionized at pH values measured in drinking waters and could impart a strong negative charge. The large negative charge of NTM may have potential prac-

FIG. 1. Impact of pH on the EPM of environmental M. intracellulare strains measured in 9.15 mM KH2PO4 buffered water (25°C). Error bars represent standard deviations. F, R12N2; Œ, B12CC2.

5670

LYTLE ET AL.

APPL. ENVIRON. MICROBIOL. TABLE 4. EPMs of important environmental microorganisms in 9.15 mM KH2PO4 at 25°C pH

EPM (␮m cm V⫺1 s⫺1)a

Escherichia coli O157:H7 Wild type

7.09 6.95

⫺0.30 ⫺1.20

Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts

7.19

⫺1.50

Bacillus subtilis endospores

6.81

⫺1.53

Vibrio cholerae Rugose Smooth

6.95 7.00

⫺2.10 ⫺2.40

7.50

⫺3.10

Microorganism

Microsporidian Encephalitozoon intestinalis spores a

FIG. 2. Impact of pH on the EPM of environmental M. avium strains measured in 9.15 mM KH2PO4 buffered water (25°C). Error bars represent standard deviations. F, F100; Œ, CA7.

tical water treatment implications. Since the majority of particles and surfaces in natural waters are negatively charged, more negatively charged microorganisms would become theoretically more stable as a result of stronger electrostatic repulsive interactions between surfaces (1). If charge repulsion is the primary force responsible for the stability of microorganisms in water, the results of the study would suggest MAC organisms in aqueous environments would be very stable. Destabilization of MAC organisms during the commonly used drinking water treatment practice of chemical coagulation in a

EPM data were taken from reference 13.

pH region, where charge neutralization is employed, would be more difficult and would require a greater coagulant concentration to achieve charge neutrality. Hydrophobicity of microbial surfaces is also an important factor to consider when predicting the stability of microorganisms in aqueous environments and their ability to be removed during water treatment. Charged hydrophilic microorganisms tend to remain stable in water even after charge neutralization by salt addition. As the charge of hydrophobic microorganisms approaches neutrality, the ability of a microorganism to approach another hydrophobic surface increases. This increases the strength of attractive hydrophobic and van der Waals bonds, making it more likely for the microorganism to aggregate and adsorb to hydrophobic materials. Environmental opportunistic mycobacteria are reported to be among the most hydrophobic cells (5). This contributes to their ability to be aerosolized, form biofilms, and resist disinfection (5). Additional studies are needed to examine the hydrophobicity of MAC organisms in water. Pilot plant studies are needed to determine how well conventional drinking water treatment processes remove these important, opportunistic pathogens. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank Ian Laseke from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for assistance in laboratory work. Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official positions and policies of the USEPA. Any mention of products or trade names does not constitute recommendation for use by the USEPA. REFERENCES

FIG. 3. The impact of pH on the EPM of environmental MX strain H03AN5ST in 9.15 mM KH2PO4-buffered water (25°C). Error bars represent standard deviations.

1. American Water Works Association. 1990. Water quality and treatment, 4th ed. McGraw Hill, Inc., New York, N.Y. 2. Covert, T. C., M. R. Rodgers, A. L. Reyes, and G. N. Stelma, Jr. 1999. Occurrence of nontuberculous mycobacteria in environmental samples. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65:2492–2496. 3. Dailloux, M., C. Laurain, M. Weber, and P. Hartemann. 1999. Water and nontuberculous mycobacteria. Water Res. 33:2210–2228. 4. Daniel, W. W. 1987. Biostatistics: a foundation for analysis in the health sciences, 4th ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York, N.Y. 5. Falkinham, J. O. 2002. Nontuberculous mycobacteria in the environment. Clin. Chest Med. 23:529–551. 6. Falkinham, J. O., III. 1996. Epidemiology of infection by nontuberculous mycobacteria. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 9:177–215. 7. George, K. L., A. T. Pringle, and J. O. Falkinham. 1986. The cell surface of

VOL. 70, 2004

8. 9.

10. 11.

12.

ELECTROPHORETIC MOBILITY OF M. AVIUM COMPLEX ORGANISMS

Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare and M. scrofulaceum: effect of specific chemical modifications on cell surface charge. Microbios 45:199–207. Glantz, S. A. 1992. Primer of biostatistics, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, N.Y. Glover, N., A. Holtzman, T. Aronson, S. Froman, G. Berlin, P. Dominguez, A. Kunkel, G. Overturf, N. Stelma, C. Smith, and M. Yakrus. 1994. The isolation and identification of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) recovered from Los Angeles potable water, a possible source of infection in AIDS patients. Int. J. Health Res. 4:63–72. Hardham, L. E., and A. M. James. 1981. The surface properties of cells of Mycobacterium BCG. Microbios 30:87–96. Hardy, W. D., J. D. Feinberg, M. Finkelstein, M. E. Power, W. He, C. Kaczka, P. T. Frame, M. Holmes, H. Waskin, R. J. Fass, W. G. Powderly, R. T. Steinbigel, A. Zuger, and R. S. Holzman. 1992. A control trial of trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole or aerosolized pentamidine for secondary prophylaxis of Pneumocystis carinii pneumoniae in patients with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 327:1842–1848. Kristensen, S., Y. Tian, M. E. Klegerman, and M. J. Groves. 1992. Origins of

13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

5671

BCG surface charge: effect of ionic strength and chemical modifications on zeta potential of Mycobacterium bovis BCG, TiceTM substrain, cells. Microbios 70:185–198. Lytle, D. A., C. H. Johnson, and E. W. Rice. 2002. A systematic comparison of the electrokinetic properties of environmentally important microorganisms in water. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 24:91–101. Rice, E. W., K. R. Fox, R. J. Miltner, D. A. Lytle, and C. H. Johnson. 1996. Evaluating water treatment performance using a microbiological surrogate system. J. Am. Waterworks Assoc. 88:122–130. Stavri, H., and D. Stavri. 1975. Catalase electrophoretic mobility of some BCG substrains. J. Hyg. Epidemiol. Microbiol. Immun. 19:462–466. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Drinking water contaminant candidate list. Fed. Reg. 63:10274. Yoder, S., C. Argueta, A. Holtzman, T. Aronson, O. G. W. Berlin, P. Tomasek, N. Glover, S. Froman, and G. Stelma, Jr. 1999. PCR comparison of Mycobacterium avium isolates obtained from patients and foods. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65:2650–2653.