Recreating in silico the Natural History of Antibiotic Resistance Daniel Barker Rosanna AldersonJohn Mitchell.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LG 4 Outline Evolutionary Relationships and Classification
Advertisements

Phylogenetic Tree A Phylogeny (Phylogenetic tree) or Evolutionary tree represents the evolutionary relationships among a set of organisms or groups of.
1 Orthologs: Two genes, each from a different species, that descended from a single common ancestral gene Paralogs: Two or more genes, often thought of.
Bioinformatics Phylogenetic analysis and sequence alignment The concept of evolutionary tree Types of phylogenetic trees Measurements of genetic distances.
Enzyme Evolution John Mitchell, February Theories of Enzyme Evolution.
 Aim in building a phylogenetic tree is to use a knowledge of the characters of organisms to build a tree that reflects the relationships between them.
1 General Phylogenetics Points that will be covered in this presentation Tree TerminologyTree Terminology General Points About Phylogenetic TreesGeneral.
Phylogenetic Trees Understand the history and diversity of life. Systematics. –Study of biological diversity in evolutionary context. –Phylogeny is evolutionary.
Phylogeny and Systematics
Pfam(Protein families )
Phylogenetic reconstruction
Molecular Evolution Revised 29/12/06
5.4 Cladistics Nature of science:
BIOE 109 Summer 2009 Lecture 4- Part II Phylogenetic Inference.
Identifying functional residues of proteins from sequence info Using MSA (multiple sequence alignment) - search for remote homologs using HMMs or profiles.
Dispersal models Continuous populations Isolation-by-distance Discrete populations Stepping-stone Island model.
5.4 Cladistics The ancestry of groups of species can be deduced by comparing their base or amino acid sequences.
Topic : Phylogenetic Reconstruction I. Systematics = Science of biological diversity. Systematics uses taxonomy to reflect phylogeny (evolutionary history).
CIS786, Lecture 8 Usman Roshan Some of the slides are based upon material by Dennis Livesay and David.
Genome Evolution: Duplication (Paralogs) & Degradation (Pseudogenes)
Phylogeny Estimation: Traditional and Bayesian Approaches Molecular Evolution, 2003
CRB Journal Club February 13, 2006 Jenny Gu. Selected for a Reason Residues selected by evolution for a reason, but conservation is not distinguished.
Phylogenetic Analysis. General comments on phylogenetics Phylogenetics is the branch of biology that deals with evolutionary relatedness Uses some measure.
Multiple Alignment and Phylogenetic Trees Csc 487/687 Computing for Bioinformatics.
Lecture 25 - Phylogeny Based on Chapter 23 - Molecular Evolution Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education Inc.
The Chemistry of Protein Catalysis
3- RIBOSOMAL RNA GENE RECONSTRUCITON  Phenetics Vs. Cladistics  Homology/Homoplasy/Orthology/Paralogy  Evolution Vs. Phylogeny  The relevance of the.
Bioinformatics 2011 Molecular Evolution Revised 29/12/06.
John Mitchell Bioinformatics Chemoinformatics Computational Chemistry Theoretical Chemistry.
 Read Chapter 4.  All living organisms are related to each other having descended from common ancestors.  Understanding the evolutionary relationships.
Evolution of Genomes Evolution of the eukaryotic cell Human evolution.
Eidhammer et al. Protein Bioinformatics Chapter 4 1 Multiple Global Sequence Alignment and Phylogenetic trees Inge Jonassen and Ingvar Eidhammer.
Introduction to Phylogenetics
Calculating branch lengths from distances. ABC A B C----- a b c.
Chapter 24: Molecular and Genomic Evolution CHAPTER 24 Molecular and Genomic Evolution.
GENE 3000 Fall 2013 slides wiki. wiki. wiki.
5.4 Cladistics Essential idea: The ancestry of groups of species can be deduced by comparing their base or amino acid sequences. The images above are both.
Daniel E. Almonacid, Gemma L. Holliday, Gail J. Bartlett, Noel M. O’Boyle, Peter Murray-Rust, Janet M. Thornton and John B. O. Mitchell Enzyme Mechanism.
Ayesha M.Khan Spring Phylogenetic Basics 2 One central field in biology is to infer the relation between species. Do they possess a common ancestor?
V diagonal lines give equivalent residues ILS TRIVHVNSILPSTN V I L S T R I V I L P E F S T Sequence A Sequence B Dot Plots, Path Matrices, Score Matrices.
V diagonal lines give equivalent residues ILS TRIVHVNSILPSTN V I L S T R I V I L P E F S T Sequence A Sequence B Dot Plots, Path Matrices, Score Matrices.
Ch. 26 Phylogeny and the Tree of Life. Opening Discussion: Is this basic “tree of life” a fact? If so, why? If not, what is it?
This refers to natural classification: How organisms truly grouped together in nature  Identifying unknown organisms, using.
5.4 Cladistics The images above are both cladograms. They show the statistical similarities between species based on their DNA/RNA. The cladogram on the.
Taxonomy & Phylogeny. B-5.6 Summarize ways that scientists use data from a variety of sources to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary.
Topic Cladistics.
Section 2: Modern Systematics
Phylogeny and the Tree of Life
WRKY transcription factors in potato genome factors in potato genome
Evolutionary genomics can now be applied beyond ‘model’ organisms
Carlos Chuquillanqui1 • Ian Barker1
Section 2: Modern Systematics
Evolutionary history of related organisms
Carlos Chuquillanqui1 • Ian Barker1
Systematics: Tree of Life
Topic Cladistics.
Julián Mateus1 • Stef de Haan2 Carlos Chuquillanqui2
Julián Mateus1 • Stef de Haan2 Carlos Chuquillanqui2
WRKY transcription factors in potato genome factors in potato genome
Systematics: Tree of Life
Recreating in silico the Natural History of Antibiotic Resistance
Phylogeny and Systematics
Julián Mateus1 • Stef de Haan2 Carlos Chuquillanqui2
Chapter 19 Molecular Phylogenetics
Gautam Dey, Tobias Meyer  Cell Systems 
by Jacob O. Brunkard, Anne M. Runkel, and Patricia C. Zambryski
A bacterial antibiotic resistance gene with eukaryotic origins
Julián Mateus1 • Stef de Haan2 Carlos Chuquillanqui2
S protein sequence-based phylogenetic analyses of alphacoronaviruses.
A bacterial antibiotic resistance gene with eukaryotic origins
Presentation transcript:

Recreating in silico the Natural History of Antibiotic Resistance Daniel Barker Rosanna AldersonJohn Mitchell

β-lactamase superfamily The metallo-β-lactamase superfamily β-lactam hydrolysis Metallo-β-lactamase classification

β-lactamase superfamily β-lactam hydrolysis Metallo-β-lactamase classification CATH code Very diverse in range of substrate type. Overall chemical mechanism for both  - lactamases and glyoxalases is hydrolysis catalysed via a metal ion, commonly zinc, that activates a water molecule. Superfamily also includes the flavoproteins in which a beta-lactamase domain has joined onto a flavodoxin domain. “  -lactamase” superfamily: An homologous superfamily of evolutionarily related proteins of similar structure, but with functional diversity – not all are  -lactamases.

β-lactamase superfamily β-lactam hydrolysis Metallo-β-lactamase classification β-lactam water substituted β-amino acid c c Moxalactam Hydrolysis (S. maltophilia L1) Spencer, J. et al (2005): scheme 1

β-lactamase superfamily β-lactam hydrolysis Metallo-β-lactamase classification M0015 1znb (B1) M0258 1sml (B3)

β-lactamase superfamily β-lactam hydrolysis Metallo-β-lactamase classification β- lactamases B3 B1

β-lactamase superfamily β-lactam hydrolysis Metallo-β-lactamase classification subclass B1 subclass B2 subclass B3 Class A Class B Class C Class D β- lactamases subclass B1 subclass B2 subclass B3 The subclasses B1/B2 and B3 should be considered as distinct as the major classes of lactamase e.g. the serine lactamases to reflect their relative diversity in sequence and structure.

Were there two independent evolutionary origins of β-lactam hydrolysis in the metallo-β- lactamase superfamily?

What was the likely function of the common ancestor of the B1 & B3 subclasses? … Is it likely that lactam hydrolysis evolved independently more than once in this superfamily?

A simplistic analogy …

… what do these people have in common?

Andy SMITH Terry SMITH Anne SMITH

Going back a number of generations, individuals will share common ancestors …

Warning: the following diagram is purely illustrative. No real family trees were harmed in the making of this diagram.

Was this common ancestor a Smith …

… or did the trait “Smith” originate independently more than once in the same lineage?

MRCA not a Smith “Smith” arises independently multiple times

Previous Work Building trees and the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) approach Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach MAFFT- amino acid alignment Estimate parameters for tree building from data Maximum Likelihood trees built in PhyML (100 bootstrap replicates WAG+G+I) Orthologous sequences chosen, double no. of each functional class from UniProtKB database Profile aligned against ‘FunTree’ alignment low gap penalty

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach Flavoproteins B1 lactamases B2 lactamases B3 lactamases Glyoxalases Ribonucleases ? We reconstruct the phylogeny 100 times using randomised bootstrap replicates

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach Flavoproteins B1 lactamases B2 lactamases B3 lactamases Glyoxalases Ribonucleases ? If we got an unambiguous tree topology, we could study a single MRCA …

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach Flavoproteins B1 lactamases B2 lactamases B3 lactamases Glyoxalases Ribonucleases ? … but the order of branching is not clearly resolved

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach > iplp------plsdg--vy-yvwld eftgfgag pltgllv--- ypdgri------li----d-----pvcgeggthgllnwg-apg-----klgr klkyilithghgdhigglwgllkir--ga tvygp ggtrallprg--g eytlflkggwpdcyy---pga hycd rwivwlpeg-rvllg g---ccfgyrf---avp--gkl gd--ltlacd ftavlvhe y wpktiddyr--sk--- -fdqvaelg---gvkklipghgd ggq-----g--lllkayr---dff > lldg--vy flgfslg ry-lwi--yyprgcv lf----d-----pgcgegtphllkhigfapg-----vigr glkyillthghgdhvgglkelleif--ga tvygp agtaallarg--glmfpy-gl eytlllgrgwpdfyy---plp gcd rlihpgpgdtrvflg d---clfgyhl---dpg--gtl gd--iclacdp--egirgpdvlcgd rc f wpktle--k--ds---- fdkikelpkcdglkcllgghgg ygrq-----glkllirkyr---elf > iy-yglld gfagfgav lt-lwv--- tpdgli------lf----d-----ggcgdgtphllldwg-vpg-----pigk klkyilithghgdhigglgllgcrr--ga yvygp gggrlllpkg--g ddtlllgggwpdfyy---pga hwpd rvirwlpeg-rvllg g---cvftarl---tlg--gtl gc--ltwpckgldglkpgcdvlvge y y ypgliddyr--hr--- -fpqaralp---gclillpghgg ggq-----g--lllkeyl---ely ASR So we went back to our 100 bootstrap reconstructed trees …

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach > iplp------plsdg--vy-yvwld eftgfgag pltgllv--- ypdgri------li----d-----pvcgeggthgllnwg-apg-----klgr klkyilithghgdhigglwgllkir--ga tvygp ggtrallprg--g eytlflkggwpdcyy---pga hycd rwivwlpeg-rvllg g---ccfgyrf---avp--gkl gd--ltlacd ftavlvhe y wpktiddyr--sk--- -fdqvaelg---gvkklipghgd ggq-----g--lllkayr---dff > lldg--vy flgfslg ry-lwi--yyprgcv lf----d-----pgcgegtphllkhigfapg-----vigr glkyillthghgdhvgglkelleif--ga tvygp agtaallarg--glmfpy-gl eytlllgrgwpdfyy---plp gcd rlihpgpgdtrvflg d---clfgyhl---dpg--gtl gd--iclacdp--egirgpdvlcgd rc f wpktle--k--ds---- fdkikelpkcdglkcllgghgg ygrq-----glkllirkyr---elf > iy-yglld gfagfgav lt-lwv--- tpdgli------lf----d-----ggcgdgtphllldwg-vpg-----pigk klkyilithghgdhigglgllgcrr--ga yvygp gggrlllpkg--g ddtlllgggwpdfyy---pga hwpd rvirwlpeg-rvllg g---cvftarl---tlg--gtl gc--ltwpckgldglkpgcdvlvge y y ypgliddyr--hr--- -fpqaralp---gclillpghgg ggq-----g--lllkeyl---ely ASR … and obtained the sequence of the putative MRCA of B1, B2 & B3 in each tree.

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach H SS S FF {H, S} S {S, F} S We had reconstructed the sequence probabilistically for each node of the tree for each of our 100 runs. So we had 100 putative MRCA sequences.

100 MRCAs 47 match IPR do not match 47 of the 100 MRCA sequence predictions hit InterPro signature IPR001018, “Beta-lactamase, class-B, conserved site.” Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

100 MRCAs 47 match IPR do not match A match to IPR001018, “Beta-lactamase, class-B, conserved site,” indicates the presence of some key zinc binding and catalytic residues. MRCA approach Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees

100 MRCAs 47 match IPR do not match However, it should be considered necessary but not sufficient to indicate that the protein actually has the catalytic capability of hydrolysing  -lactams. MRCA approach Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees

100 MRCAs 47 match IPR do not match So we need to find another way of looking for catalytic capability. We want to build 3D homology model structures of these putative ancestral proteins. Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach 47 match IPR  -lactamase signature Cluster at sequence ID of 60% 15 clusters.

Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach Take 1 representative from each cluster … 47 match IPR  -lactamase signature

47 match IPR … and build an homology model of it (I-Tasser). Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

15 cluster representative sequences 15 Homology models (I-Tasser). Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

Remember that matching sequence signature IPR is considered necessary but not sufficient to indicate that the protein can hydrolyse  -lactams. We design a 3D template model, a match to which would provide stronger evidence of  -lactamase activity. We built separate templates for B1, B2 and B3. So we look for matches to those templates in the 15 homology models … Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

… and we find that one MRCA homology model hits our B3 template, but that there are no other matches. Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

47 match IPR  -lactamase signature The homology modelled MRCA that hits our B3 template is from a singleton cluster and hence represents only 1 of the 100 independent runs. Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

Discussion How do we understand and interpret these results? Previous Work Unresolved consensus tree… Building trees MRCA approach

Interpretation 1 (Occam’s Razor) We have found a feasible evolutionary trajectory in structure and sequence space that allows both B1/B2 and B3 metallo-  -lactamases to evolve from a common ancestor with  - lactamase activity. Since originating the same catalytic functionality twice in the same superfamily seems complex and difficult, we should prefer the simpler, more parsimonious, explanation. This interpretation implies a single evolutionary origin of  - lactamase activity in this superfamily.

Interpretation 2 (statistical) Only 1 out of 100 of our simulated reconstructed MRCAs corresponds to a protein with (presumptive) metallo-  - lactamase activity. So in 99% of cases we recreate an MRCA that is not a  -lactamase. The scenario where the MRCA is not a  -lactamase is supported by a 99:1 majority of trials. This interpretation implies two separate evolutionary origins in the same superfamily.

In Support of Interpretation 1 We would need to convince ourselves that we are happy despite finding the catalytically competent ancestor in only 1 of 100 trials. Excuses might be … Our models don’t reproduce the selective pressure that real evolution operates under and hence driving force for the in silico ancestral sequences for be functional fitness-enhancing proteins is lacking; Ancient enzymes may have had a useful level of  -lactamase activity without hitting the ‘modern’ 3D template. So we might have missed the functional active site of an ancestor because it doesn’t look like what we were expecting for a  -lactamase.

In Support of Interpretation 2 Beyond the 99:1 statistical argument … There are indeed several reported cases of the same function evolving twice in a given superfamily. Previous work by Hall et al. supported two separate origins, B1 & B2 gaining  - lactamase function 1 billion years ago, and B3 acquiring it 2 billion years ago.

Sitting on the fence: We don’t want to graft a simplistic interpretation onto the study. Supporters of either theory could find encouragement from our results.

Mitchell group – BSRC & EaStCHEM School of Chemistry Purdie Building rooms 150 &152 Ava Sih-Yu Chen Rosanna Alderson Neetika Nath James McDonagh Luna De Ferrari Rachael Skyner John Mitchell