Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About IAI
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Infection and Immunity
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About IAI
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Bacterial Infections

Pheromone Cross-Inhibition betweenStaphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis

Michael Otto, Hartmut Echner, Wolfgang Voelter, Friedrich Götz
Michael Otto
Mikrobielle Genetik,and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hartmut Echner
Physiologisch-chemisches Institut, Abteilung für Physikalische Biochemie, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wolfgang Voelter
Physiologisch-chemisches Institut, Abteilung für Physikalische Biochemie, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Friedrich Götz
Mikrobielle Genetik,and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/IAI.69.3.1957-1960.2001
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Cross-inhibition by quorum-sensing pheromones betweenStaphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis was investigated using all known S. aureus agr pheromone subgroups. All S. aureus subgroups were sensitive towards the S. epidermidis pheromone, with the exception of the recently identified subgroup 4. The subgroup 4 pheromone was also the only S. aureus pheromone able to inhibit the S. epidermidis agr response. The close relation of subgroup 4 to subgroup 1 suggests that subgroup 4 might have evolved from subgroup 1 by mutation under the selective pressure of competition with S. epidermidis. The competition between S. aureus and S. epidermidis by means of quorum-sensing cross talk seems to be generally in favor of S. epidermidis, which might explain the predominance of S. epidermidis on the skin and in infections on indwelling medical devices.

Quorum-sensing systems, which sense and signal the state of cell density, are of high importance for the survival of bacteria, as they enable them to respond to changing environmental conditions (14). The agr system of staphylococci is a quorum-sensing system which controls the expression of exoproteins and surface proteins in a growth phase-dependent manner (10). The extracellular signal, which is used by the staphylococcal agr system, is a small peptide pheromone that harbors an unusual posttranslational modification (2). For Staphylococcus aureus andStaphylococcus epidermidis, it has been shown that this posttranslational modification is an intramolecular thioester, which links the thiol group of a central cysteine to the C-terminal carboxy group (5, 8). Interestingly, the primary sequence of the pheromones of different species and also of different pheromone subgroups within one species varies completely. Only the central cysteine and its distance to the C terminus are conserved (5, 8). For three S. aureus subgroups it has been demonstrated that the corresponding pheromones can inhibit the agr response of foreign subgroups (1). We have shown that this is also the case between different staphylococcal species, as the S. epidermidis pheromone has proven to be an efficient inhibitor of the agr response ofS. aureus strain Newman (9). agrcontrols the expression of several important virulence factors inS. aureus, such as alpha-toxin, beta-toxin, delta-toxin, serine protease, DNase, fibrinolysin, enterotoxin B, and toxic shock syndrome toxin 1 (12). Suppression of the agrresponse in S. aureus by the above-mentioned pheromones also suppresses the expression of various virulence factors in in vitro studies (5, 9). Furthermore, the development of S. aureus-induced lesions in mice was efficiently suppressed when the infecting strain was injected subcutaneously together with the inhibiting pheromone of a foreign subgroup (5). Therefore,agr pheromones and their derivatives have been proposed as new antistaphylococcal drugs, especially in the treatment of infections by S. aureus and S. epidermidis, which rank among the most important pathogens in nosocomial infections (11).

S. aureus causes many acute severe infections, such as impetigo, wound infections, or in toxic shock syndrome, whereas chronic infections tend to be caused in a higher relative proportion byS. epidermidis (13). The prevalence of S. epidermidis in many nosocomial infections, among them infections on indwelling medical devices, raises the question about the advantage that S. epidermidis possesses in these situations compared to S. aureus. Among the infections predominantly caused by S. epidermidis one can often find the involvement of biofilms (15), which constitute a high-density population. This led us to the assumption that the more frequent participation of S. epidermidis in these infections might be due to interspecies concurrence based on cell density control mechanisms. It has been proposed that the inhibiting properties of the staphylococcal pheromones serve as weapons in a struggle between different staphylococcal strains (1). To address the question of interspecies concurrence, we added synthetic naturalS. epidermidis pheromone to S. aureus strains of subgroups 1 to 4 and synthetic pheromones of S. aureussubgroups to S. epidermidis. S. aureus subgroup 4 has only recently been discovered independently by us and by G. Lina (G. Lina, personal communication). In a previous study, we investigated 15S. epidermidis strains by sequencing the DNA coding for the AgrD prepheromone and found only a single S. epidermidispheromone sequence, DSVCASYF (8), suggesting that there is only one S. epidermidis agr pheromone group or that this one is by far the most frequent. All pheromones and pheromone derivatives were prepared by solid-phase synthesis as previously described (8) and are shown in Fig.1. The staphylococcal strains used wereS. epidermidis ATCC 14990, S. aureus strains A950227 (subgroup 1), A950085 (subgroup 2), A920226 (subgroup 3), A970377 (subgroup 4), A970392 (subgroup 4), A850484 (subgroup 4), and 1527/97 (subgroup 4). All S. aureus strains are clinical isolates. Strain 1527/97 was kindly provided by W. Witte, Robert-Koch Institut, Berlin, Germany, and classified as subgroup 4 strain in our laboratory by DNA sequencing; the otherS. aureus strains were kindly provided by G. Lina, Centre Hospitalier et Universitaire de Lyon, Lyon, France, and were classified by G. Lina.

Fig. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Synthetic agr pheromone and derivatives used in this study.

Inhibition of the agr system was monitored as we have previously described (7). Briefly, delta-toxin expression was determined by a high-performance liquid chromatography assay using a Pharmacia Resource PHE column and a water-acetonitrile gradient with 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid. Main cultures that were inoculated 1:100 from precultures were grown for 8 h, with pheromone addition at the time of inoculation. Afterwards, the samples were centrifuged and the supernatant was injected onto the column. Delta-toxin is encoded within the gene for the regulatory RNAIII, which is the intracellular effector of the agr system (6). Its expression is therefore a means to measure the activity of the agr system.

As shown in Fig. 2A, using pheromone concentrations ranging from 25 nM to 1 μM, the synthetic peptide corresponding to the natural S. epidermidis pheromone was very active against S. aureus subgroup 3. It had considerable activity against subgroups 1 and 2, but it was inactive against subgroup 4. On the other hand, S. epidermidis was insensitive to S. aureus pheromones from subgroups 1 to 3 and showed moderate sensitivity against S. aureus pheromone of subgroup 4 (Fig. 2B). This sensitivity was lower than that of theS. aureus subgroups 1 to 3 towards the S. epidermidis pheromone. At the very high pheromone concentration of 10 μM, the S. epidermidis pheromone completely inhibited delta-toxin expression in S. aureus subgroups 1, 2, and 3 but showed no effect on subgroup 4. At this concentration, the pheromone of S. aureus subgroup 4 was able to entirely suppress delta-toxin expression by S. epidermidis, whereas the pheromones of S. aureus subgroups 1 to 3 still did not show any inhibiting effect (data not shown).

Fig. 2.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Cross-inhibition of S. epidermidis andS. aureus by agr pheromones. The amount of delta-toxin in 500 μl of supernatant was determined by high-performance liquid chromatography after 8 h of growth and under the influence of different concentrations of added pheromone or pheromone derivatives. Pheromones were diluted in dimethyl sulfoxide; the control received only dimethyl sulfoxide. Cultures were grown in basic medium (1% tryptone [Difco], 0.5% yeast extract [Gibco BRL], 0.5% NaCl, 0.1% K2HPO4, 0.1% glucose) with shaking at 37°C. (A) Effect of the S. epidermidispheromone on delta-toxin production of S. aureus agrsubgroups. (B) Effect of the pheromones of different S. aureus agr subgroups on delta-toxin production of S. epidermidis.

These difference are most likely best explained by the more or less tight interaction of the pheromones with their receptor, the histidine kinase membrane enzyme AgrC. The third extracellular loop of this enzyme has been demonstrated to interact with the pheromone (4). It remains unclear if this interaction is a covalent one (by a trans-acylation reaction), as has been proposed (5). The charge of the pheromones does not correlate with the observed inhibiting properties, as the S. epidermidispheromone and S. aureus pheromones of subgroups 1 and 3 have a net charge of zero, whereas the other tested pheromones harbor one positive charge. Therefore, other structural properties might be responsible for the differing interaction of the various pheromones with AgrC.

The most interesting result is the complete inactivity of the S. epidermidis pheromone against S. aureus subgroup 4 and the fact that only the pheromone of S. aureus subgroup 4 showed activity against S. epidermidis. We have tested three more subgroup 4 strains, which also proved to be completely insensitive to the S. epidermidis pheromone (data not shown).

Recently it has been observed that subgroup 4 strains are often involved in infections leading to scalded skin syndrome (G. Lina, personal communication). This means that these strains live on the skin, where they come into close contact and concurrence withS. epidermidis, which normally is the predominant strain on the skin (3). The subgroup 4 pheromone differs from that of subgroup 1 only by one amino acid (primary sequence YSTCYFIM instead of YSTCDFIM). It is therefore tempting to speculate that subgroup 4 might have evolved from subgroup 1 in order to be able to compete with S. epidermidis.

Activity of S. epidermidis pheromone derivatives against S. aureus agr subgroups.Among the tested S. epidermidis pheromone derivatives are lactone and lactam derivatives (derivatives 3 and 4) and derivatives with different lengths of the N-terminal tail, adjacent to the thiolactone-bearing ring structure (derivatives 1 and 2). Derivative 2 was slightly less active than the natural pheromone against subgroups 1, 2, and 3. This is in accordance with earlier data by which we could also show a reduced activity against S. aureus Newman (9), which belongs to subgroup 1. Derivative 1 exhibited an activity similar to that of the natural pheromone against subgroups 1 and 3 but was less active against subgroup 2. Both derivatives were inactive against subgroup 4. The derivatives in which the thiolactone structure was replaced by a lactone (derivative 3) or a lactam (derivative 4) showed a slightly further reduced activity against all subgroups, as already reported for subgroup 1 (9), but again no activity against subgroup 4 (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

Inhibition of the agr response in S. aureus agr subgroups by S. epidermidis pheromone derivatives. The amount of delta-toxin in the supernatants of S. aureus agr subgroup strains after addition of the S. epidermidis pheromone derivatives was determined as outlined in the legend for Fig. 2. Symbols used for S. aureus agrsubgroups are the same as in Fig. 2A. Structures of the derivatives are shown in Fig. 1.

In summary, the S. epidermidis pheromone seems to be a more potent inhibitor of the S. aureus agr system, compared to the activity of S. aureus pheromones against S. epidermidis. The predominance of S. epidermidis on the skin and in chronic infections, for example, on indwelling medical devices, might be due to this advantage. As a normal resident of the skin's microflora, S. epidermidis might contribute to the body's barrier to colonization by the pathogenic S. aureusvia quorum-sensing cross-inhibition. An interesting exception isS. aureus subgroup 4, which seems to have escaped from this unfortunate situation by mutation, probably because of close contact with S. epidermidis on the skin.

As far as agr pheromones are concerned in terms of potential therapeutics, our results show that an agr pheromone or a derivative may have strongly varying activity against different staphylococcal strains. It is therefore not easy to evaluate their therapeutic use in a patient who normally carries a lot of different staphylococcal strains. Furthermore, selection of resistant strains may quickly occur, as might have occurred already during the competition between staphylococcal strains during evolution, as our results with subgroup 4 suggest.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Vera Augsburger for excellent technical assistance and Gérard Lina and Wolfgang Witte for providing S. aureussubgroup strains.

Notes

Editor: S. H. E. Kaufmann

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 30 August 2000.
    • Returned for modification 13 October 2000.
    • Accepted 20 November 2000.
  • Copyright © 2001 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Ji G.,
    2. Beavis R.,
    3. Novick R. P.
    Bacterial interference caused by autoinducing peptide variants.Science276199720272030
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Ji G.,
    2. Beavis R. C.,
    3. Novick R. P.
    Cell density control of staphylococcal virulence mediated by an octapeptide pheromone.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA9219951205512059
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Kloos W. E.,
    2. Schleifer K.-H.,
    3. Götz F.
    The genus Staphylococcus The prokaryotes, a handbook on the biology of bacteria: ecophysiology, isolation, identification, application 2nd ed. Balows A., Trüper H. G., Dworkin M., Harder W., Schleifer K.-H. II 1992 1369 1420 Springer-Verlag New York, N.Y
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Lina G.,
    2. Jarraud S.,
    3. Ji G.,
    4. Greenland T.,
    5. Pedraza A.,
    6. Etienne J.,
    7. Novick R. P.,
    8. Vandenesch F.
    Transmembrane topology and histidine protein kinase activity of AgrC, the agr signal receptor in Staphylococcus aureus.Mol. Microbiol.281998655662
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.↵
    1. Mayville P.,
    2. Ji G.,
    3. Beavis R.,
    4. Yang H.,
    5. Goger M.,
    6. Novick R. P.,
    7. Muir T. W.
    Structure-activity analysis of synthetic autoinducing thiolactone peptides from Staphylococcus aureus responsible for virulence.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA96199912181223
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Novick R. P.,
    2. Ross H. F.,
    3. Projan S. J.,
    4. Kornblum J.,
    5. Kreiswirth B.,
    6. Moghazeh S.
    Synthesis of staphylococcal virulence factors is controlled by a regulatory RNA molecule.EMBO J.12199339673975
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    1. Otto M.,
    2. Götz F.
    Analysis of quorum sensing activity in staphylococci by RP-HPLC of staphylococcal delta-toxin.BioTechniques28200010881090, 1092, 1096.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Otto M.,
    2. Süssmuth R.,
    3. Jung G.,
    4. Götz F.
    Structure of the pheromone peptide of the Staphylococcus epidermidis agr system.FEBS Lett.42419988994
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    1. Otto M.,
    2. Süssmuth R.,
    3. Vuong C.,
    4. Jung G.,
    5. Götz F.
    Inhibition of virulence factor expression in Staphylococcus aureus by the Staphylococcus epidermidis agr pheromone and derivatives.FEBS Lett.4501999257262
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  10. 10.↵
    1. Peng H. L.,
    2. Novick R. P.,
    3. Kreiswirth B.,
    4. Kornblum J.,
    5. Schlievert P.
    Cloning, characterization, and sequencing of an accessory gene regulator (agr) in Staphylococcus aureus.J. Bacteriol.170198843654372
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Raad I.,
    2. Alrahwan A.,
    3. Rolston K.
    Staphylococcus epidermidis: emerging resistance and need for alternative agents.Clin. Infect. Dis.26199811821187
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. 12.↵
    1. Recsei P.,
    2. Kreiswirth B.,
    3. O'Reilly M.,
    4. Schlievert P.,
    5. Gruss A.,
    6. Novick R. P.
    Regulation of exoprotein gene expression in Staphylococcus aureus by agr.Mol. Gen. Genet.20219865861
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. 13.↵
    1. Rupp M. E.,
    2. Archer G. D.
    Coagulase-negative staphylococci: pathogens associated with medical progress.Clin. Infect. Dis.191994231245
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. 14.↵
    1. Swift S.,
    2. Throup J. P.,
    3. Williams P.,
    4. Salmond G. P. C.,
    5. Stewart G. S. A. B.
    Quorum sensing: a population-density component in the determination of bacterial phenotype.Trends Biochem. Sci.211996214219
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.↵
    1. von Eiff C.,
    2. Heilmann C.,
    3. Herrmann M.,
    4. Peters G.
    Basic aspects of the pathogenesis of staphylococcal polymer-associated infections.Infection27 (Suppl. 1)1999710
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Pheromone Cross-Inhibition betweenStaphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis
Michael Otto, Hartmut Echner, Wolfgang Voelter, Friedrich Götz
Infection and Immunity Mar 2001, 69 (3) 1957-1960; DOI: 10.1128/IAI.69.3.1957-1960.2001

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Infection and Immunity article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Pheromone Cross-Inhibition betweenStaphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Infection and Immunity
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Infection and Immunity.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Pheromone Cross-Inhibition betweenStaphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis
Michael Otto, Hartmut Echner, Wolfgang Voelter, Friedrich Götz
Infection and Immunity Mar 2001, 69 (3) 1957-1960; DOI: 10.1128/IAI.69.3.1957-1960.2001
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • Notes
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Pheromones
signal transduction
Staphylococcus aureus
Staphylococcus epidermidis
Trans-Activators

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About IAI
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #IAIjournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0019-9567; Online ISSN: 1098-5522