Cohen et al. (2013) were interested in the potential
for phage therapy treatment of V.
coralliilyticus-based disease outbreaks on the Great Barrier Reef (GBR),
and began by isolating a bacteriophage infectious to the V. coralliilyticus strain P1 (previously isolated from diseased
corals). The phage (named bacteriophage YC) was isolated
from the waters around Magnetic Island on the GBR, where strain P1 was also originally
isolated. A series of enrichments and
plaque assays was conducted, producing a high titre, pure phage stock. The morphology of phage YC was observed as
consistent with the Myoviridae family (indicated via Electron micrograph images),
and the rate of phage absorption on to strain P1 was determined to be rapid (ascertained
by adsorption kinetics experiments). In
order to test how phage YC might influence the affect of strain P1, the authors
grew up various concentrations of strain P1, both without the addition of phage
YC, and with phage added after 0, 2, 8 and 18 h (after the beginning of
bacterial growth), and treated Symbiodinium
cells and coral (Acropora millepora) juveniles with filtered and centrifuged ‘P1
supernatant’.
The authors observed that Symbiodinium treated with P1 supernatant
derived from bacterial cultures incubated with YC phage demonstrate
significantly less photosynthetic inhibition (reduced quantum yield values), compared
to Symbiodinium treated with P1
supernatant derived from bacterial cultures to which YC phage had not been added
(>90% reduction quantum yield), suggesting higher PSII inactivation in this
treatment. Similar results were observed
from the coral juveniles. Expulsion of Symbiodinium, tissue lesions, and
eventual total tissue loss coincided with quantum yield measurements of zero, 9
h after treatment with P1 supernatant produced without the addition of YC
phage. Conversely, in juveniles with P1
supernatant derived from bacterial cultures with YC phage administered after 2
h of growth, no change in appearance or signs of Symbiodinium expulsion were observed, and no decline in quantum
yields was recorded. However, juveniles
treated with P1 supernatant derived from bacterial cultures incubated with YC
phage added after 8, and 18 h of growth suffered a very similar fate to juvenilles
treated with P1 supernatant produced without the addition of YC phage (i.e.
total tissue loss etc).
This investigation is unusual
because: a) the authors applied their isolated phage to the putative pathogen
before applying it to the Symbiodinium/coral
juveniles; b) they actually removed bacterial cells before applying the P1
supernatant to the Symbiodinium/juveniles.
Previous phage therapy investigations
have generally added both the putative bacteria and the phage to the corals,
either together (Efrony et al.,
2006), or with an interval before adding the phage (Efrony et al., 2009). Significantly, the high
densities of V. coralliilyticus
employed in this investigation have been recorded in the coral host,
rather than in seawater, yet in this investigation the role of the host in
bacteria-bacteriophage interaction has been excluded. Additionally, it is hard to imagine a
scenario where the coral host would experience only the secondary metabolites
of a pathogen, rather than the bacterium itself. For these reasons, it appears
that the relevance of these findings to what may occur in the field may be
questionable.
Cohen et al. (2013) conclude that as Zn-metalloprotease production is
known to occur at high V. coralliilyticus
densities, and because the addition of phage was observed to cause
bacterial lysis, the results they observed were due to the presence/absence of
Zn-metalloprotease expression in consequence of the presence/absence of phage
activity. Perhaps the removal of
bacterial cells in this investigation was undertaken in order to provide
evidence for the role of phage in reducing Zn-metalloprotease production. This might be investigated further with the
application of some sort of Zn-metalloprotease assay. It appears that, although the authors have
shown that the phage they isolated was effective against strain P1, more work needs
to be undertaken before the relevance of this finding to the prevention of
coral disease on the GBR can be ascertained.
Cohen, Y., Joseph Pollock, F., Rosenberg, E. & Bourne,
D. G. (2013) Phage therapy treatment of the coral pathogen Vibrio
coralliilyticus. MicrobiologyOpen 2: 64–74.
Hi Jo,
ReplyDeleteI agree, the implications of this study seem limited. Do you think phage therapy is ever going to be a viable option in this field? My understanding in this area is limited and I would be greatful if you could suggest any good reviews you may have read.
Hi Matt,
ReplyDeleteAlthough at first glance the idea of treating an entire reef with phage appears unlikely, Efrony et al (2007) have some interesting calculations: using the results from their experiments, they estimated that 10^3 phages per ml seawater would prevent the spread of coral disease. A titre of 10^11 phages per ml can be reached in a fermentor, and therefore a 100-litre laboratory fermentor can provide 10^16 phages. This, Efrony et al. (2007) stipulate, is enough to treat 10^6 square meters of coral reef to a depth of 10m (a commercial fermentor might be used to scale this up to whole reef (Km) scale). As phages seem infect susceptible bacteria pretty darn fast, it seems to me that as long as phages were administered in a uniform manor, in calm conditions, and at slack tide, there is no reason to suspect that they would not infect susceptible, pathological bacteria.
However, concerns of bacterial resistance to phage infection (which might be overcome by using a 'cocktail' of phages), and the possibility of phage transferring virulence factors to previously innocuous bacteria, are both areas which will need further research before phage therapy is likely to actually be administered. On the other hand, coral diseases are causing incredible amounts of damage, even in previously pristine areas where local anthropogenic stressors (e.g. sedimentation; physical damage) have been prevented. So it might just be that eventually the benefits of phage therapy may be considered to outweigh the risks!
Have a look at this study:
Efrony, R., Loya, Y., Bacharach, E. & Rosenberg, E. Phage therapy of coral disease. Coral Reefs 26, 7–13 (2007).
And this review:
Teplitski, M. & Ritchie, K. How feasible is the biological control of coral diseases? Trends in ecology & evolution 24, 378–85 (2009).
Let me know what you think.
Jo