Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Infection and Immunity, February 2005, p. 1161-1170, Vol. 73, No. 2
0019-9567/05/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/IAI.73.2.1161-1170.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Section of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Illinois, West Side VA Medical Center,1 Department of Pathology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois2
Received 30 April 2004/ Returned for modification 9 June 2004/ Accepted 30 September 2004
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
-actinin, ezrin, talin, and other cytoskeletal proteins (41, 53). The EPEC genes that confer virulence are located on a 35-kb pathogenicity island called the locus of enterocyte effacement (LEE) (20). The LEE encodes a type III secretion apparatus, secreted proteins, chaperones, and an outer membrane protein called intimin (20). One of the secreted proteins, EspA, forms hollow filaments through which EPEC delivers effector molecules directly into host cells (32, 33). One effector, Tir (translocated intimin receptor), is inserted into the host plasma membrane, where it serves as a receptor for the outer bacterial protein intimin (30, 52). The LEE-encoded proteins EspF, EspG, EspH, and Map (mitochondrion-associated protein) are believed to be effector molecules that are translocated into host cells and contribute to pathogenesis (11, 19, 31, 40, 66).
EPEC infection triggers physiological changes in the intestinal epithelium, including altered ion transport (25, 26), increased paracellular permeability (60), and initiation of inflammatory responses (54, 55). These physiological perturbations are likely due to the subversion by EPEC of host signaling pathways, including myosin light-chain kinase (74, 76), tyrosine kinases (51), inositol phosphate fluxes (6), protein kinase C (12, 56), mitogen-activated protein kinases (14, 15, 57), and NF-
B (54). While the activation of some of these pathways has been related to physiological alterations induced by EPEC, the activation of most has not.
Despite progress made during the last decade regarding the study of EPEC pathogenesis, relatively little is known about EPEC-induced physiological changes. In order to adequately define these changes, an animal model is needed. Animal models have been used to study host responses to EPEC homologues; these models include rabbits infected with rabbit EPEC (REPEC) (1, 63) and mice infected with Citrobacter rodentium (17, 23, 27, 36, 45). Although REPEC-induced disease in rabbits is similar to EPEC-induced disease (1, 63, 70), there are limitations to the use of this model, such as a paucity of genetic and immunological resources (1). Mouse models have the advantage of allowing the use of genetically modified animals for further studies. Murine models of C. rodentium infection have been used to study host responses to this related A/E lesion-forming enteric pathogen (23, 27, 36, 45). However, despite genetic similarities between EPEC and the mouse pathogen C. rodentium, there are significant pathophysiological differences between these two organisms (16, 36). For example, unlike EPEC, C. rodentium appears to possess a primary adhesin, rather than relying on A/E lesion formation to mediate host cell attachment (29). In addition, C. rodentium-infected mice develop mucosal hyperplasia, which is not seen in EPEC-infected hosts (36). Previously published data revealed that EPEC infection of the C57BL/6J mouse induced physiological alterations (26, 39). The aims of this study therefore were to assess the ability of EPEC to colonize the intestine of the C57BL/6J mouse and to determine the resulting clinical and histological changes.
(This work was presented in preliminary form at the annual meeting of the American Gastroenterological Association Digestive Disease Week in New Orleans, La., on 18 May 2004.)
|
|
|---|
Bacterial strains and infection of intestinal epithelial cells in tissue cultures.
EPEC wild-type strain E2348/69 and a bfp deletion (
bfp) mutant were obtained from James Kaper (University of Maryland, Baltimore). Overnight bacterial cultures grown in Luria-Bertani broth were diluted (1:33) in serum- and antibiotic-free tissue culture medium containing 0.5% mannose and grown at 37°C to the mid-log growth phase (optical density at 600 nm,
0.4). Confluent human and mouse intestinal epithelial cell monolayers were infected with 4 x 107 organisms per well in 24-well plates for various times.
In vitro adherence assay.
The method used for the adherence assay was previously described by Cue and Cleary (13). Monolayers infected with EPEC or the
bfp mutant for 1 and 3 h were washed three times with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and trypsinized with 0.25% trypsin for 15 min. Trypsinized cells were resuspended in distilled water and placed on ice for 15 min after vigorous pipetting and vortexing in order to lyse the epithelial cells and disperse the attached organisms. Aliquots were diluted (1:104 and 1:105) and plated on Luria-Bertani agar plates. All plates were incubated overnight at 37°C, and bacterial colonies were counted the next day.
Immunofluorescence staining of host actin and bacterial LPS.
Immunofluorescence staining was performed on monolayers of CMT-93 cells infected for 3 h with wild-type EPEC and the
bfp mutant. Monolayers were fixed in 3.7% paraformaldehyde (pH 7.4) in PBS for 15 min, rinsed with PBS, permeabilized with 0.2% Triton X-100 for 15 min, and blocked with 1% bovine serum albumin in PBS. Monolayers were incubated with fluorescein isothiocyanate-phalloidin (Molecular Probes, Eugene, Oreg.) and antibody against E. coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (Sigma, St. Louis, Mo.) for 1 h. Detection of the anti-LPS primary antibody was performed by use of an anti-rabbit secondary antibody conjugated with Alexa 568 (Molecular Probes). After monolayers were washed, they were mounted with Vectashield (Molecular Probes) and assessed by use of a Nikon Opti-Phot microscope. Images were captured by use of a Zeiss-RT digital imaging system.
Infection of mice. Six- to 8-week-old C57BL/6J mice were purchased from Jackson Laboratories and allowed to acclimate for 3 days in the Biological Resources Laboratory at the University of Illinois, Chicago. All experiments involving mice were approved by the University of Illinois, Chicago, Animal Care Committee in accordance with National Institutes of Health standards. Approximately 2 x 108 EPEC organisms resuspended in 200 µl of PBS were introduced into animals by gavage with a 4-cm-long curved needle with a steel ball at the tip. Control animals received 200 µl of sterile PBS. Over the course of infection, animals were observed daily for activity level and water intake, and weight was measured. At various times following infection, animals were sacrificed, and intestinal tissues were processed for further analysis.
Determination of in vivo adherence. To determine the numbers of EPEC organisms in mouse stool and adherent to the intestinal epithelium, C57BL/6J mice were infected with EPEC and sacrificed after 3 days. The small and large intestines were resected, and the stool was removed and diluted in sterile PBS. The small intestine, cecum, and colon were separated, washed vigorously with PBS, and homogenized in PBS containing 1% Triton X-100. Aliquots of diluted stool and homogenized intestinal tissues were plated on agar plates containing ampicillin, to which wild-type EPEC is resistant (Ampr) because of the ampicillin gene inserted in plasmid pMAR. Bacterial colonies from diluted stool represented nonadherent EPEC, while colonies grown from plated homogenized tissues represented adherent EPEC.
PCR analysis of selected bacterial colonies. Bacterial colonies grown on ampicillin-containing agar plates were further assessed to confirm that they were EPEC. Samples from randomly selected Ampr bacterial colonies were added to a PCR mixture, which was prepared according to the manufacturer's protocol (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, Calif.) to yield final concentrations of 1x PCR buffer, 200 µM each nucleotide, 400 µM dUTP, 5.5 mM MgCl2, 1.25 U of AmpliTaq DNA polymerase, and 200 nM each primer for EPEC gene espB (5'-TATTATGAATACTATCGA and 3'-AATTACCCAGCTAAGCGAG). E. coli laboratory strain HB101 was used as a negative control, and wild-type EPEC was used as a positive control. The terminal cycling conditions included 95°C for 10 min and 40 cycles of amplification consisting of denaturation at 95°C for 15 s and annealing-extension at 60°C for 1 min. These primers generated a 960-bp product on a 1% agarose gel.
TEM.
C57BL/6J mice infected with EPEC were sacrificed, and the distal small intestine and the proximal colon were cut into
2-mm-long pieces and fixed in 4% glutaraldehyde. Further routine processing for transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was performed in the Electron Microscopy Facility at the University of Illinois, Chicago.
Immunofluorescence staining of actin and EPEC protein intimin in intestinal tissues. Mice infected with EPEC for 5 days were sacrificed, and tissues were rinsed with PBS, fixed in 10% formalin, processed with a Tissue-Tek VIP5 processor (Sakura Finetek, Torrance, Calif.), and embedded in paraffin. Tissue sections 5 µm thick were fixed in ice-cold acetone for 10 min, blocked with 1% bovine serum albumin, and incubated with a rabbit anti-intimin primary antibody (a gift from Jorge Giron, University of Arizona, Tucson) for 60 min. Following extensive washing with PBS, tissue sections were incubated with the anti-rabbit secondary antibody conjugated with Alexa 568. Host cell filamentous actin was stained with Alexa 488-conjugated phallodin (Molecular Probes). Samples were mounted with ProLong (Molecular Probes) and assessed by use of a Nikon Opti-Phot microscope. Images were captured by use of a Zeiss-RT digital imaging system.
Histological analysis. For histological analysis, colon tissues of control and EPEC-infected mice were washed with PBS, fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin, processed by use of a Tissue-Tek VIP 5 processor (Sakura Finetek, Torrance, Calif.), and embedded in paraffin. Tissue sections 5 µm thick were cut by use of a microtome (Sakura Finetek) and stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) or periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) solutions. Images were acquired by use of a DMLB microscope equipped with Fluotar objectives (Leica Microsystems Inc., Bannockburn, Ill.) and a Micropublisher 5.0 camera (Q Imaging, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada). Images were collected by use of QCapture software 2.6. Images were processed postacquisition by use of Photoshop 7.0 (Adobe Systems Inc., San Jose, Calif.).
Statistical analysis.
All data are presented as the mean and standard error of the mean. Data comparisons were made with Student's t test. Differences were considered significant when the P value was
0.05.
|
|
|---|
bfp mutant and the attachment of wild-type EPEC to CMT-93 cells. Figure 1A shows that in contrast to wild-type EPEC, the
bfp mutant adhered to mouse CMT-93 cells more efficiently than to human T84 cells. However, the adherence of wild-type EPEC to both CMT-93 and T84 cells was greater than the adherence of the
bfp mutant (Fig. 1B). Immunofluorescence staining of control and infected CMT-93 monolayers for host actin and bacterial LPS revealed that actin rearrangement corresponds to attached bacterial organisms (Fig. 1C). Additionally, the adherence of wild-type EPEC microcolonies was greater than the adherence of
bfp as single organisms. Overall, these studies demonstrated that EPEC adheres to mouse intestinal epithelial cells in vitro and that, in contrast to previously published data, deletion of the bfp gene did not increase adherence. We therefore focused on wild-type EPEC in the in vivo studies.
![]() View larger version (20K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. EPEC adheres to mouse intestinal epithelial cells in vitro. (A) Monolayers of human intestinal T84 cells and mouse intestinal CMT-93 cells were infected for 3 h with wild-type EPEC and a bfp mutant. Adherence assays showed that while wild-type EPEC and the bfp mutant adhered to both cell lines, the adherence of wild-type EPEC was greater. (B) EPEC adherence to mouse CMT-93 cells progresses during infection. Mouse intestinal CMT-93 cell monolayers were infected for 1 and 3 h with wild-type EPEC and the bfp mutant. The adherence of both organisms increased over time, with EPEC adherence being greater than that of the bfp mutant. Data in panels A and B represent the mean and standard error of the mean for one of four experiments (n = 4); the P value was <0.05 for all comparisons between T84 and CMT-93 cells as well as between wild-type EPEC and the bfp mutant. (C) Immunofluorescence staining of host actin and bacterial LPS in mouse intestinal CMT-93 cell monolayers that were uninfected (a) or infected with wild-type EPEC (b) or bfp (c) for 3 h. Wild-type EPEC attached to mouse intestinal epithelial cells as microcolonies, whereas the bfp mutant attached as single organisms.
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. EPEC colonizes and adheres to the intestinal epithelium of C57BL/6J micea
|
bfp mutant and C. rodentium were also monitored for comparison. Although infection with C. rodentium induced retardation in growth, no changes in body weight were detected in C57BL/6J mice after 10 days of infection. Also, reduced activity and ruffled fur were observed in EPEC-infected animals at the end of this period.
Effect of EPEC infection on the mouse intestine.
To define host responses to EPEC infection, the mouse intestine was examined. The colon of uninfected mice contained formed pellets of stool beginning just distal to the cecum. However, the proximal colon of animals infected with EPEC for 10 days contained semisolid stool, and formed stool pellets were not seen until the distal colon (Fig. 2). Also, the cecum appeared to be slightly engorged in EPEC- and
bfp mutant-infected animals. In order to quantitate the size of the cecum, samples of resected intestine were placed on a flat surface with centimeter markers, and digital images were obtained. The perimeters of ceca of control animals and EPEC-,
bfp mutant-, and C. rodentium-infected animals were measured and expressed as lengths in centimeters. There was a significant difference between the cecum of control mice and the cecum of EPEC-infected mice (5.2 ± 0.3 and 6.7 ± 0.4 cm, respectively; n = 4; P = 0.02). The cecum of
bfp mutant-infected mice was also significantly larger than the cecum of control mice (6.3 ± 0.7 cm; n = 3; P = 0.6) but was not different from the cecum of EPEC-infected mice. In contrast, while the colon of mice infected with C. rodentium showed a similar distribution of stool pellets, the cecum was contracted and empty, as described previously (36).
![]() View larger version (91K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Whole intestines of control mice and mice infected with EPEC for 10 days. The intestine of control mice showed semisolid stool in the distal small intestine and fully formed pellets of stool in the proximal colon immediately adjacent to the cecum. In contrast, in EPEC-infected mice, semisolid stool was present in the proximal half of the colon, with stool pellets forming only in the distal colon. Additionally, the cecum appeared to be significantly engorged in EPEC- and bfp-infected animals. In mice infected with C. rodentium, the colon showed similar changes, except that the cecum was contracted and empty.
|
bfp mutant-infected mice was no different from that in control mice. |
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Colon weights in control and infected micea
|
bfp mutant induced distortion and loss of microvillous actin rootlets as well as microvillous fragmentation and effacement in the small intestine and colon. Infection with C. rodentium, as a positive control, induced similar changes in the microvillous architecture of the colon of infected mice. Although intimately attached organisms and classic A/E lesions, such as those demonstrated in cultured epithelial cells (18), were not readily found, the drastic degree of microvillous effacement was quite consistent with changes induced by EPEC and C. rodentium infections.
![]() View larger version (137K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. EPEC induces microvillous effacement in the intestinal epithelium of infected mice. C57BL/6J mice infected with EPEC were sacrificed after 5 days, and the distal small intestine and proximal colon were examined by TEM. Areas of effaced microvilli and disorganized actin rootlets are highlighted by arrows. The intestinal epithelium of the small intestine (a, x20,000) and colon (g, x30,000) in control mice displayed normal microvilli, while that in mice infected with wild-type EPEC (small intestine: b, x15,000; and c, x40,000; colon: h, x1,200; i, x10,000; and j, x30,000) or the bfp mutant (small intestine: d, x80,000; e, x20,000; and f, x80,000; colon: k, x25,000) showed dramatic effacement of microvilli. Colon tissue infected with C. rodentium (l, x60,000) was used as a positive control for microvillous effacement. In some areas, normal microvilli can be seen immediately adjacent to microvilli that have been effaced.
|
![]() View larger version (67K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. EPEC induces actin rearrangement in the mouse intestinal epithelium. Colon tissues of uninfected C57BL/6J mice and those infected with EPEC or bfp for 5 days were stained for host cell actin (green) and the EPEC outer membrane protein intimin (red) (original magnification, x400). In control colonic tissue, actin staining was not accompanied by EPEC intimin staining, as expected. In contrast, in infected animals, attached bacteria represented by intimin staining (red) were seen on the surface of epithelial cells and colocalized with areas of actin aggregates.
|
![]() View larger version (166K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. EPEC infection induces an inflammatory response in the colon of C57BL/6J mice. The proximal colon of C57BL/6J mice infected with EPEC for 10 days was examined following H&E staining and PAS staining. In control mice, H&E staining of the colon revealed normal mucosal morphology (magnifications: A, x400; and C, x1,000). Arrows in panels A and C indicate sparse IEL and lamina propria PMNs in control tissue. However, the colon of EPEC-infected mice showed increases in the numbers of intestinal IELs (B) (magnification, x400) and lamina propria PMNs (arrows) with crypt abscesses (D) (magnification, x1,000). PAS staining of goblet cell mucin revealed increased numbers of goblet cells in EPEC-infected colon (F) compared to controls (E) (magnification, x400). The images shown in panels A and E and B and F were from the same fields. Scale bars in all images represented 25 µm.
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. Numbers of PMNs, IELs, and goblet cells are increased in the colon of EPEC-infected C57BL/6J micea
|
|
|
|---|
We demonstrated in this study that EPEC adheres to both cultured and native mouse intestinal epithelia. The initial attachment of EPEC to the host cell occurs through the BFP (18, 22). We showed that EPEC with a deletion of the bfp gene adheres more efficiently to mouse CMT-93 cells than to human T84 cells, consistent with data reported previously by Tobe and Sasakawa (64). In contrast to that report, however, we found that wild-type EPEC adheres more efficiently than the
bfp mutant to mouse CMT-93 cells. The importance of the BFP in the attachment of A/E lesion-forming pathogens to host cells is not clear in that EHEC, which lacks the BFP, still attaches to the human intestinal epithelium (44). Furthermore, the mouse pathogen C. rodentium possesses a type IV pilus gene cluster required for colonization (42) and does not rely on the BFP for initial attachment (29). The data presented here showed not only that wild-type EPEC adheres to cultured mouse intestinal epithelial cells but also that EPEC adheres to and colonizes intestinal epithelial cells of C57BL/6J mice as well. The relatively small number of EPEC colonies recovered from the intestine of C57BL/6J mice correlates with the CFU of C. rodentium found in several mouse strains at early time points after infection (68). Others have demonstrated that EPEC induces A/E lesions in other hosts, such as rabbits and piglets (41, 50, 67), and that REPEC colonizes the mouse intestinal epithelium as well (49). In contrast, Frankel et al. reported that no EPEC colonies could be cultured from the intestine of Swiss NIH mice at 15 days postinfection (21). It is possible that the use of different mouse strains, the age of the animals, and the period of time chosen to assay colonization account for these discrepancies.
The effect of EPEC infection on the clinical status of mice included reduced activity and ruffled fur but no change in water intake or growth. Similar signs of illness have been reported in mice infected with C. rodentium (36). Although retarded growth has been reported in mice infected with C. rodentium (69), this feature was not observed in our studies. Also, the increase in colon weight was not significant in our study, in contrast to a previous study (69). These discrepancies could be due to the fact that younger C57BL/6J mice (3 to 4 weeks old) infected for a longer period of time (14 days) were used in the previous studies, while we used older animals (6 to 8 weeks old) infected for only 10 days. Although EPEC-infected animals did not develop diarrhea, the proximal colon of EPEC-infected animals contained semisolid stool, and formed stool was present only in the distal colon. Also, there was a trend toward higher colon weight in EPEC-infected animals than in control animals, although this finding was not statistically significant. The changes that we observed in the intestine of mice infected with C. rodentium, such as a rigid distal colon devoid of formed stool and an often empty and contracted cecum, are consistent with a previous study (36).
Histological examination of the colon of EPEC-infected mice demonstrated mild diffuse inflammation, including increased numbers of lamina propria PMNs, IELs, and goblet cells. Occasional crypt abscesses were also present in EPEC-infected mice. All of these changes are consistent with the intestinal inflammation seen in humans infected with EPEC (44). We previously reported that infection of cultured human intestinal epithelial cells with EPEC induced the transepithelial migration of acute inflammatory PMNs (55), suggesting that inflammation is a common host response to this pathogen. Increased numbers of goblet cells may represent an intestinal epithelial response to the inflammation induced by EPEC infection. Increased numbers of goblet cells have been shown in other instances of injury (7, 10, 61, 65), leading some to propose that this adaptive response allows goblet cell-secreted mucin to form a viscous gel that traps microorganisms and irritants and limits their access to the epithelium (4). In chemically induced intestinal inflammation, the expression and secretion of mucin increased with disease progression and differed in the proximal colon and the distal colon (48). Also, in the same model of inflammation, a loss of crypts and surface epithelium and the subsequent loss of goblet cells in some areas (47) were partly compensated for by increases in the numbers of goblet cells in elongated crypts and surface epithelium in other areas (48). Furthermore, it has been reported that the overproduction and secretion of mucins are associated with inflammation caused by bacterial infection (59).
In conclusion, our data provide evidence that EPEC adheres to mouse intestinal epithelial cells in vitro and in vivo and induces A/E lesions, crypt abscesses, increased numbers of lamina propria and intraepithelial inflammatory cells, and increased numbers of goblet cells. The data therefore suggest that the C57BL/6J mouse can be used as an animal model to study host responses, at least the inflammatory response, to the human enteric pathogen EPEC. This mouse model may also be useful for the study of other host intestinal epithelial responses to EPEC infection, including ion transport and barrier function. Additionally, this model will allow the contribution of each of these pathophysiological events to EPEC-induced diarrhea to be elucidated. The use of genetically modified mice as hosts will allow the involvement of specific intestinal epithelial factors in EPEC-mediated disease to be defined. This model will also provide a tool to assess the role of specific bacterial effectors in EPEC-induced disease.
|
|
|---|
B in intestinal epithelial cells by enteropathogenic Escherichia coli. Am. J. Physiol. 273:C1160-C1167.
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»