Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Infection and Immunity, December 2005, p. 7869-7877, Vol. 73, No. 12
0019-9567/05/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/IAI.73.12.7869-7877.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Department of Microbiology and Immunology,1 Center for the Study of Biological Complexity, Medical College of Virginia at Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia 23298-0678,3 Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland2
Received 15 March 2005/ Returned for modification 26 July 2005/ Accepted 28 August 2005
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
22-kDa, surface-exposed, plasmid-encoded lipoprotein (7, 17, 27). Crystal structures have been determined for three OspC proteins (4, 15). The protein is largely helical and has five alpha helices connected by variable loops. The loops have been postulated to form ligand binding domains (4, 15). Evidence suggests that OspC may facilitate translocation of spirochetes from the tick midgut by serving as an adhesin that binds to unidentified receptors in the salivary gland (24). Orthologs of OspC have been identified in several species belonging to the relapsing fever group, raising the possibility that the OspC-related proteins have a similar role in other Borrelia species (18, 19). OspC expression is environmentally regulated and is induced by tick feeding, and OspC is a dominant antigen during early infection in mammals (2, 29, 31). Transcription is regulated, at least in part, by the RpoN/S regulatory network (14). It should be noted that there are conflicting reports regarding the precise details of the temporal nature of OspC expression during transmission and during early infection (23, 29). OspC exhibits significant genetic and antigenic diversity (33, 34). Twenty-one OspC phyletic groups (referred to below as OspC types) have been delineated (30, 36). OspC types are differentiated by letter designations (types A through U). Analysis of several hundred OspC amino acid sequences that are in databases indicated that the divergence between OspC types can be as high as 30%, while within a type the divergence is generally less than 6%. Seinost et al. hypothesized that there is a correlation between ospC types A, B, I, and K and invasive infections in humans (30). Lagal et al. also reported that specific ospC variants, as defined by single-strand conformation polymorphism analysis, correlate with invasive human infections (16). However, a recent study by Alghaferi and colleagues has called into question the strength of this correlation (1). The influence of the OspC type or sequence on function and the host-pathogen interaction is an important and fertile area of investigation. OspC has been investigated for use in Lyme disease vaccine development (3, 8, 9, 25, 34, 37). However, OspC variation and our limited knowledge of the antigenic structure of OspC have complicated these efforts. OspC has protective capability, but only against the same strain (3, 9, 10, 25, 37). This suggests that the protective epitopes reside in regions of the protein that have highly variable sequences.
The goals of this study were severalfold. First, we sought to further assess the putative correlation between OspC types and invasive infection by determining the OspC types of invasive and noninvasive isolates recovered from a defined patient population in Maryland. Second, in an attempt to better understand the antibody response to OspC, we sought to determine if this response is type specific. Finally, we sought to define the antigenic structure of OspC by identifying epitopes that elicit an antibody response during infection in mice. The data presented here indicate that the number of OspC types associated with invasive infection is greater than previously postulated (30). In addition, we identified two previously uncharacterized epitopes and demonstrated that the antibody response to OspC appears to be type specific. These analyses provide important information that enhances our understanding of the role of OspC in Lyme disease pathogenesis and that will facilitate construction of an OspC-based vaccine.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
SDS-PAGE and immunoblot analyses. Proteins were separated in 12.5% Criterion precast gels (Bio-Rad) by sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) and were immunoblotted onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Millipore) as previously described (26). Expression of recombinant proteins was confirmed using S-Protein-horseradish peroxidase (HRP) conjugate (Novagen), which detected the N-terminal S-Tag fusion that was carried by all recombinant proteins employed in this study. The HRP-conjugated S-Protein was used at a dilution of 1:10,000. For immunoblot analyses, serum collected from infected mice was used at a dilution of 1:1,000. HRP-conjugated goat anti-mouse immunoglobulin (IgG) served as the secondary antibody (Pierce) and was used at a dilution of 1:10,000. The general immunoblot methods used have been described previously (22).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Sequence analyses of OspC have delineated 21 distinct OspC types (30), and it has been postulated that only four of these (types A, B, I, and K) are associated with invasive infections in humans (30). However, a recent study has called into question this putative correlation (1). To address this further, the OspC types of invasive and noninvasive Lyme disease isolates recovered from human patients in Maryland were determined. To accomplish this, the full-length ospC gene was PCR amplified and sequenced, and comparative sequence analyses were performed. These analyses revealed that the OspC types associated with invasive human infections in this patient population also included types C, D, and N. While it has been suggested that type I OspC-producing strains are a dominant type associated with invasive human infections (30), none of the invasive isolates identified in the Maryland patient population carried a type I ospC gene. Similarly, Alghaferi et al. also did not detect type I OspC-producing strains (1). Collectively, these two studies identified 18 invasive isolates in the greater Baltimore area, with the following breakdown: type A, 5 isolates; type B, 2 isolates; type C, 1 isolate; type D, 1 isolate; type H, 1 isolate; type K, 3 isolates; and type N, 6 isolates. Hence, in this geographic area it appears that OspC type A- and N-producing invasive isolates predominate. These data argue against the hypothesis that only four OspC types are associated with invasive infections in humans. Additional analyses of isolates recovered from larger patient populations from different geographic regions are necessary to further assess the validity of the OspC type-invasive infection correlation and to determine if there are differences in the prevalence of specific OspC types in defined geographic regions.
The variable protection offered by vaccination with OspC in conjunction with the delineation of distinct OspC types (30) raises the possibility that the antibody response could be type specific. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that vaccination with OspC has been found to provide protection only against the same strain (3, 9, 25). Until this report, the type specificity of the antibody response to OspC during infection had not been directly assessed. To address this, a series of full-length recombinant type A, B, C, D, H, K, and N OspC proteins were screened with infection serum generated in mice with clonal populations expressing known OspC types. The use of infection serum is important as it allows focused assessment of the antibody response to epitopes that are specifically presented by the bacterium in vivo. These analyses revealed that in spite of strong sequence conservation in the N- and C-terminal domains of OspC, the antibody responses to the OspC types analyzed were type specific. For example, serum from mice infected with type A or D strains was immunoreactive in a type-specific manner, and there was little or no cross-immunoreactivity with other OspC types. Although the antibody responses to all 21 OspC types were not analyzed, the data presented above suggest that the conserved domains are not immunodominant and that the linear epitopes of OspC presented by the bacterium during infection are contained in the variable domains (i.e., type-specific domains) of the protein.
To date, there have been only a few studies that have sought to localize or identify the epitopes of OspC. Both linear and conformational epitopes have been identified. Gilmore and Mbow demonstrated that independent N-terminal deletions beyond the leader peptide as short as six residues and C-terminal truncations of 13 residues abolish the binding of monoclonal antibody B5 (10, 11). From this finding it was concluded that the B5 monoclonal antibody recognizes a conformationally defined epitope (10). The precise residues that comprise the antibody recognition site within this conformationally defined epitope were not identified. In contrast to the findings obtained with monoclonal antibody B5, our analysis of the polyclonal antibody response to cell-associated, native OspC revealed that deletion of the last 10 C-terminal residues of OspC or of extended regions of the N terminus did not abolish recognition of OspC by IgG elicited during infection. The difference in the results is presumably a reflection of the focus on polyclonal versus monoclonal antibodies. Our data, which certainly do not preclude the existence of conformational epitopes, clearly demonstrate that there are linear epitopes in OspC as well. In a previous study, Mathiesen et al. also reported on a linear epitope in OspC (20). They found that the C-terminal seven residues of OspC constitute a linear epitope that is recognized by IgM in serum collected from European neuroborreliosis patients. While IgM binding was not assessed in this study, deletion of the C-terminal 10 residues of OspC did not abolish IgG binding. Epitopes that are recognized by infection-induced IgG appear to be localized at several sites in the protein. However, this does not suggest that a C-terminal epitope does not exist or is not recognized by antibody elicited during infection; rather, it suggests that there are additional epitopes that are located elsewhere in OspC.
Immunblot analysis of shorter OspC fragments allowed more precise localization of OspC epitopes. The antigenic regions of OspC were localized to two regions. One of these regions spans residues 136 to 150, and the other spans residues 168 to 210. Structural models generated using coordinates from X-ray diffraction analyses placed residues 136 to 150 largely within a surface-exposed loop, termed loop 5 (15). Loop 5 is surface exposed in both the mono- and dimeric models of OspC and is located within a prominent bend. While it has been demonstrated that recombinant OspC does in fact form dimers, it has not yet been determined if native OspC forms dimers or larger oligomers in vivo. The dimeric model for OspC indicates that there is a significant buried interface that comprises more than 30% of the protein. A buried interface of this extent suggests that there is a tight interaction between the monomers and is considered to be an indication that the dimeric form of the protein is the biologically active form. In the OspC dimer, residues within loop 5 are predicted to be part of a putative conformationally defined ligand binding pocket that may have biological significance. This charged pocket is lined by amino acids containing carbonyl groups, such as glutamate and aspartate. Crystal structures for representative proteins of types A, I, and E have been determined (4). In the type A and I proteins, the solvent structures of the putative binding pocket are remarkably well conserved. The accessibility of loop 5 to antibody in infection serum supports the postulate that this domain may be surface exposed and potentially available for ligand binding. In spite of strong intertype structural conservation of loop 5 and the putative ligand binding pocket, the sequence of this domain is highly variable at the intertype level. The sequence of the alpha 5 domain spanning residues 168 to 210 is also variable at the intertype level, with the exception of the last 20 residues, which are highly conserved. To determine if there is sufficient conservation at the intratype level to allow construction of a chimeric OspC vaccine consisting of a series of type-specific epitopes, OspC sequences were aligned and a dendrogram was constructed. Through these analyses the OspC type was determined for 227 sequences (data not shown). Both the loop 5 and alpha 5 epitopes were found to be well conserved at the intratype level. For example, the loop 5 epitopes of type A OspC proteins were identical in 53 of 57 sequences, while the alpha 5 epitope was conserved in 42 of 43 type A sequences. Significant conservation of these domains in the other OspC types was noted as well, with types C through I, M, T, and O exhibiting absolute intratype conservation within the loop 5 and alpha 5 epitopes.
In this study we demonstrated that there is greater OspC diversity among invasive isolates than has previously been recognized. In addition, we demonstrated that the antibody response to OspC in mice is largely type specific and is defined by previously uncharacterized loop 5 and alpha 5 epitopes. Previous studies and the data presented here clearly demonstrate that a single OspC protein does not or is not likely to convey protection against diverse strains (3). One possible vaccination approach is to exploit the epitopes identified in this report in the development of a recombinant chimeric OspC vaccinogen. The loop 5 epitope or a combination of loop 5 and alpha 5 epitopes may offer the most promise if they also prove to be consistently antigenic in humans. These epitopes are relatively short, linear, and highly conserved at the intratype level. In light of these features it should prove to be technically feasible to construct a loop 5-alpha 5 chimeric vaccinogen that can provide protection against highly diverse Lyme disease isolates. Efforts are now under way to construct such a vaccine and to assess the antibody response to loop 5 and helix 5 in human Lyme disease patients.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was supported in part by grants from the NIH NIAID to R.T.M.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Alghaferi, M. Y., J. M. Anderson, J. Park, P. G. Auwaerter, J. N. Aucott, D. E. Norris, and J. S. Dumler. 2005. Borrelia burgdorferi ospC heterogeneity among human and murine isolates from a defined region of northern Maryland and southern Pennsylvania: lack of correlation with invasive and noninvasive genotypes. J. Clin. Microbiol. 43:1879-1884. |
| 2. | Alverson, J., S. F. Bundle, C. D. Sohaskey, M. C. Lybecker, and D. S. Samuels. 2003. Transcriptional regulation of the ospAB and ospC promoters from Borrelia burgdorferi. Mol. Microbiol. 48:1665-1677.[CrossRef][Medline] |
| 3. | Bockenstedt, L. K., E. Hodzic, S. Feng, K. W. Bourrel, A. de Silva, R. R. Montgomery, E. Fikrig, J. D. Radolf, and S. W. Barthold. 1997. Borrelia burgdorferi strain-specific OspC-mediated immunity in mice. Infect. Immun. 65:4661-4667.[Abstract] |
| 4. | Eicken, C., C. Sharma, T. Klabunde, R. T. Owens, D. S. Pikas, M. Hook, and J. C. Sacchettini. 2001. Crystal structure of Lyme disease antigen outer surface protein C from Borrelia burgdorferi. J. Biol. Chem. 276:10010-10015. |
| 5. | Fingerle, V., U. Hauser, G. Liegl, B. Petko, V. Preac-Mursic, and B. Wilske. 1995. Expression of outer surface proteins A and C of Borrelia burgdorferi in Ixodes ricinus. J. Clin. Microbiol. 33:1867-1869.[Abstract] |
| 6. | Fraser, C., S. Casjens, W. M. Huang, G. G. Sutton, R. Clayton, R. Lathigra, O. White, K. A. Ketchum, R. Dodson, E. K. Hickey, M. Gwinn, B. Dougherty, J. F. Tomb, R. D. Fleischman, D. Richardson, J. Peterson, A. R. Kerlavage, J. Quackenbush, S. Salzberg, M. Hanson, R. Vugt, N. Palmer, M. D. Adams, J. Gocayne, J. Weidman, T. Utterback, L. Watthey, L. McDonald, P. Artiach, C. Bowman, S. Garland, C. Fujii, M. D. Cotton, K. Horst, K. Roberts, B. Hatch, H. O. Smith, and J. C. Venter. 1997. Genomic sequence of a Lyme disease spirochaete, Borrelia burgdorferi. Nature 390:580-586.[CrossRef][Medline] |
| 7. | Fuchs, R., S. Jauris, F. Lottspeich, V. Preac-Mursic, B. Wilske, and E. Soutschek. 1992. Molecular analysis and expression of a Borrelia burgdorferi gene encoding a 22 kDa protein (pC) in Escherichia coli. Mol. Microbiol. 6:503-509.[Medline] |
| 8. | Gilmore, R. D., R. M. Bacon, A. M. Carpio, J. Piesman, M. C. Dolan, and M. L. Mbow. 2003. Inability of outer-surface protein C (OspC)-primed mice to elicit a protective anamnestic immune response to a tick-transmitted challenge of Borrelia burgdorferi. J. Med. Microbiol. 52:551-556. |
| 9. | Gilmore, R. D., K. J. Kappel, M. C. Dolan, T. R. Burkot, and B. J. B. Johnson. 1999. Outer surface protein C (OspC) but not P39 is a protection immunogen against a tick-transmitted Borrelia burgdorferi challenge: evidence for a conformational protective epitope in OspC. Infect. Immun. 64:2234-2239. |
| 10. | Gilmore, R. D., and M. L. Mbow. 1999. Conformational nature of the Borrelia burgdorferi B31 outer surface protein C protective epitope. Infect. Immun. 67:5463-5469. |
| 11. | Gilmore, R. D. J. 1998. A monoclonal antibody generated by antigen inoculation via tick bite is reactive to the Borrelia burgdorferi Rev. protein, a member of the 2.9 gene family locus. Infect. Immun. 66:980-986. |
| 12. | Grimm, D., K. Tilly, R. Byram, S. P. E., J. G. Krum, D. M. Bueschel, T. G. Schwan, P. F. Policastro, A. F. Elias, and P. A. Rosa. 2004. Outer surface protein C of the Lyme disease spirochetes: a protein induced in ticks for infection in mammals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:3142-3147. |
| 13. | Hovis, K., J. V. McDowell, L. Griffin, and R. T. Marconi. 2004. Identification and characterization of a linear plasmid-encoded factor H-binding protein (FhbA) of the relapsing fever spirochete, Borrelia hermsii. J. Bacteriol. 186:2612-2618. |
| 14. | Hubner, A., X. Yang, D. M. Nolen, T. G. Popova, F. C. Cabello, and M. V. Norgard. 2001. Expression of Borrelia burgdorferi OspC and DbpA is controlled by a RpoN-RpoS regulatory pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98:12724-12729. |
| 15. | Kumaran, D., S. Eswaramoorthy, B. J. Luft, S. Koide, J. J. Dunn, C. L. Lawson, and S. Swaminathan. 2001. Crystal structure of outer surface protein C (OspC) from the Lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi. EMBO J. 20:971-978.[CrossRef][Medline] |
| 16. | Lagal, V., D. Postic, E. Ruzic-Sabljic, and G. Baranton. 2003. Genetic diversity among Borrelia strains determine by single-stranded conformation polymorphism analysis of the ospC gene and its association with invasiveness. J. Clin. Microbiol. 41:5059-5065. |
| 17. | Marconi, R. T., D. S. Samuels, and C. F. Garon. 1993. Transcriptional analyses and mapping of the ospC gene in Lyme disease spirochetes. J. Bacteriol. 175:926-932. |
| 18. | Marconi, R. T., D. S. Samuels, T. G. Schwan, and C. F. Garon. 1993. Identification of a protein in several Borrelia species which is related to OspC of the Lyme disease spirochetes. J. Clin. Microbiol. 31:2577-2583. |
| 19. | Margolis, N., D. Hogan, W. J. Cieplak, T. G. Schwan, and P. A. Rosa. 1994. Homology between Borrelia burgdorferi OspC and members of the family of Borrelia hermsii variable major proteins. Gene 143:105-110.[CrossRef][Medline] |
| 20. | Mathiesen, M. J., A. Holm, M. Christiansen, J. Blom, K. Hansen, S. Ostergard, and M. Theisen. 1998. The dominant epitope of Borrelia garinii outer surface protein C recognized by sera from patients with neuroborreliosis has a surface exposed conserved structural motif. Infect. Immun. 66:4073-4079. |
| 21. | McDowell, J. V., S. Y. Sung, L. T. Hu, and R. T. Marconi. 2002. Evidence that the variable regions of the central domain of VlsE are antigenic during infection with the Lyme disease spirochetes. Infect. Immun. 70:4196-4203. |
| 22. | Metts, S., J. V. McDowell, M. Theisen, P. R. Hansen, and R. T. Marconi. 2003. Analysis of the OspE determinants involved in the binding of factor H and OspE targeting antibodies elicited during infection in mice. Infect. Immun. 71:3587-3596. |
| 23. | Ohnishi, J., J. Piesman, and A. M. de Silva. 2001. Antigenic and genetic heterogeneity of Borrelia burgdorferi populations transmitted by ticks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98:670-675. |
| 24. | Pal, U., X. Yang, M. Chen, L. K. Bockenstedt, J. F. Anderson, R. A. Flavell, M. V. Norgard, and E. Fikrig. 2004. OspC faciliates Borrelia burgdorferi invasion of Ixodes scapularis salivary glands. J. Clin. Investig. 113:220-230.[CrossRef][Medline] |
| 25. | Probert, W. S., and R. B. LeFebvre. 1994. Protection of C3H/HeN mice from challenge with Borrelia burgdorferi through active immunization with OspA, OspB, or OspC but not with OspD or the 83-kilodalton antigen. Infect. Immun. 62:1920-1926. |
| 26. | Roberts, D., M. Caimano, J. McDowell, M. Theisen, A. Holm, E. Orff, D. Nelson, S. Wikel, J. Radolf, and R. Marconi. 2002. Environmental regulation and differential expression of members of the Bdr protein family of Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect. Immun. 70:7033-7041. |
| 27. | Sadziene, A., B. Wilske, M. S. Ferdows, and A. G. Barbour. 1993. The cryptic ospC gene of Borrelia burgdorferi B31 is located on a circular plasmid. Infect. Immun. 61:2192-2195. |
| 28. | Schwan, T. G., and B. J. Hinnebusch. 1998. Bloodstream- versus tick-associated variants of a relapsing fever bacterium. Science 280:1938-1940. |
| 29. | Schwan, T. G., J. Piesman, W. T. Golde, M. C. Dolan, and P. A. Rosa. 1995. Induction of an outer surface protein on Borrelia burgdorferi during tick feeding. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92:2909-2913. |
| 30. | Seinost, G., D. E. Dykhuizen, R. J. Dattwyler, W. T. Golde, J. J. Dunn, N. Wang, G. P. Wormser, M. E. Schriefer, and B. J. Luft. 1999. Four clones of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto cause invasive infection in humans. Infect. Immun. 67:3518-3524. |
| 31. | Stevenson, B., T. G. Schwan, and P. Rosa. 1995. Temperature-related differential expression of antigens in the Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect. Immun. 63:4535-4539.[Abstract] |
| 32. | Sung, S. Y., J. McDowell, J. A. Carlyon, and R. T. Marconi. 2000. Mutation and recombination in the upstream homology box-flanked ospE-related genes of the Lyme disease spirochetes result in the development of new antigenic variants during infection. Infect. Immun. 68:1319-1327. |
| 33. | Theisen, M., M. Borre, M. J. Mathiesen, B. Mikkelsen, A. M. Lebech, and K. Hansen. 1995. Evolution of the Borrelia burgdorferi outer surface protein OspC. J. Bacteriol. 177:3036-3044. |
| 34. | Theisen, M., B. Frederiksen, A.-M. Lebech, J. Vuust, and K. Hansen. 1993. Polymorphism in ospC gene of Borrelia burgdorferi and immunoreactivity of OspC protein: implications for taxonomy and for use of OspC protein as a diagnostic antigen. J. Clin. Microbiol. 31:2570-2576. |
| 35. | Thompson, J. D., T. J. Gibson, F. Plewniak, F. Jeanmougin, and D. G. Higgins. 1997. The ClustalX Windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 24:4876-4882. |
| 36. | Wang, I. N., D. E. Dykhuizen, W. Qiu, J. J. Dunn, E. M. Bosler, and B. J. Luft. 1999. Genetic diversity of ospC in a local population of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto. Genetics 151:15-30. |
| 37. | Wilske, B., U. Busch, V. Fingerle, S. Jauris-Heipke, V. Preac-Mursic, D. Robler, and G. Will. 1996. Immunological and molecular variability of OspA and OspC: implications for Borrelia vaccine development. Infection 24:208-212.[CrossRef][Medline] |
| 38. | Wilske, B., V. Preac-Mursic, S. Jauris, A. Hofmann, I. Pradel, E. Soutschek, E. Schwab, G. Will, and G. Wanner. 1993. Immunological and molecular polymorphisms of OspC, an immunodominant major outer surface protein of Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect. Immun. 61:2182-2191. |
| 39. | Zhang, H., A. Raji, M. Theisen, P. R. Hansen, and R. T. Marconi. 2005. bdrF2 of the Lyme disease spirochetes is coexpressed with a series of cytoplasmic proteins and is produced specifically during early infection. J. Bacteriol. 187:175-184. |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| J. Bacteriol. | J. Virol. | Eukaryot. Cell |
|---|
| Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. | Clin. Vaccine Immunol. | All ASM Journals |
|---|