Unlocking Archived Ticks to Investigate a Novel Putative Pathogen
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNLOCKING ARCHIVED TICKS TO INVESTIGATE A NOVEL PUTATIVE PATHOGEN Anna-Sheree Krige A. S. KRIGE This thesis is presented for the degree of Honours in Molecular Biology at Murdoch University 2017 Declaration I declare that this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its main content, work that has not been previously submitted for a degree at any tertiary education institution. ……………………………………………………….. Anna-Sheree Krige i Abstract Ticks, as vectors of disease-causing bacteria, represent a significant threat to human and animal health. Of particular concern is the genus Borrelia, which contains several recognised tick-borne pathogens of global health importance. In 2015, the microbiomes within modern Australian ticks were profiled using next- generation sequencing (NGS). Complex communities of bacterial species were revealed, including a novel Borrelia sp. that was identified within a tick parasitising an Australian echidna, Tachyglossus aculeatus. This bacterium, named ‘Candidatus Borrelia tachyglossi’, after its association with the echidna tick, Bothriocroton concolor, forms the fourth known Borrelia group. Following this first report of Borrelia in native Australian ticks, additional questions have emerged concerning whether this bacterium resides in other echidna-biting ticks, and if it has a historic presence in Australia. Around 1,725 tick specimens from 89 registered echidna hosts were collected between 1928 and 2013. Of these, 850 ticks were selected for examination in this study. A total of eight species from three tick genera were morphologically identified. The most common species was B. concolor (89.2%). Interestingly, Amblyomma fimbriatum (22, 2.6%) and Amblyomma triguttatum (19, 2.2%) ticks were recorded for the first time from echidnas. A NGS survey of the bacterial communities within 66 echidna ticks, targeting the V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene, revealed a diverse range of preserved bacteria. Genera of interest included Borrelia (6, 9.1%), Coxiella (19, 28.8%), Ehrlichia (2, 3.0%), Francisella (5, 7.6%), and Rickettsia (23, 34.8%). While NGS of archived echidna tissue biopsies were negative for Borrelia, genus-specific PCR assays amplified the flaB (378 bp) locus in two skin biopsies (2/34; 5.9%) and nine ticks (9/160; 5.6%), with a 99.5-100% similarity to ‘Candidatus B. tachyglossi’ genotypes B and C. Of these positive samples, six ticks and both skin biopsies (6/9, 66.7%; 2/2, 100%) amplified the longer 16S rRNA (1,087 bp) locus, with a 98.2-99.6% similarity to ‘Candidatus B. tachyglossi’ genotype B. Phylogenetic positioning was consistent with previous reports, suggesting ‘Candidatus B. tachyglossi’ formed the fourth Borrelia clade. ii This is the first morphological audit of echidna ticks and NGS survey of the archived tick microbiome. This study has confirmed ‘Candidatus B. tachyglossi’ in Australian echidna ticks in the recent past and for the first time, revealed Borrelia in echidnas. However, whether echidnas are a reservoir for this bacterium could not be established. Additional tick transmission analyses and the examination of echidna blood samples are necessary for confirmation. iii Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Charlotte Oskam, for your support, advice, and guidance over the course of this research project. There are many people whom I am grateful to for their help and encourgagement. To former research assistant, Annachiara Codello, for ‘showing me the ropes’ in the lab and your kindness. To Kimberly Loh, for introducing me to tick identification and pointing out that ‘those are not eyes’. Also, for your help with Geneious software and providing feedback on one of my earliest drafts, I thank you. To Alexander Gofton, your knowledge and assistance with my library preparation and NGS run was invaluable. Thank you for your time and perseverance with the challenges experienced using this technology. A further thank you goes to the rest of the team at the Vector and Water-Borne Pathogen Research Group for your kind support and advice throughout the year. And to Murdoch University, thank you for granting me a Murdoch University Academic Excellence Award. Finally, I would like to thank my family for their unwavering support and encouragement throughout my honours year. No matter what direction I have decided to pursue, Mum and Dad have always been there to reassure and inspire. And to my two adoring fans and most precious companions, Toby and Lulu, I am so thankful for your company during the many long hours in front of the computer typing up my thesis. Your presence has always given me comfort and to you I dedicate my work. iv Table of Contents Declaration…………………………………………………………………………………………………………i Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….ii Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………………………...iv Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………………………….v List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………………………………ix List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………………………………….xi List of Abbreviations………………………………………………………………………………………...xii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………1 1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………....2 1.1 Ticks……………………………………………………………………………………………………...4 1.1.1 Tick morphology……………………………………………………………………………..5 1.1.2 Tick life cycle…….…………………………………………………………………………….7 1.1.3 Ticks in Australia…………………………………………………………………………….8 1.1.4 Tick hosts………………………………………………………………………………………..9 1.1.4.1 Echidnas and echidna-biting ticks…………………………………………9 1.2 Tick-borne pathogens and the tick microbiome……………………………………..10 1.2.1 Tick-borne diseases (TBDs) – a global perspective …………………………12 1.2.2 TBDs in Australia…………………………………………………………………………..13 1.2.3 The genus Borrelia………………………………………………………………………...14 1.2.4 Borrelia in Australia………………………………………………………………………16 1.2.4.1 Borrelia in Australian animals……………………………………………..17 1.2.4.2 Borrelia in Australian ticks………………………………………………….19 1.3 Detection methods of tick-borne pathogens and the tick microbiome………………………………………………………………………………………….20 1.3.1 Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)………………………………………………….21 1.3.2 Sanger and next-generation sequencing (NGS) – revolutionary methods of DNA detection……………………………………..22 1.4. Museum specimens – an unexplored ‘gold mine’…………………………………...24 1.4.1 Ancient DNA (aDNA)……………………………………………………………………..25 1.4.1.1 aDNA and NGS – a ‘perfect’ pair…………………………………………..27 1.4.2 Using museum specimens to investigate pathogens………………………..28 v 1.4.2.1 Using museum specimens to detect tick-borne pathogens…………………………………………………………………………..28 1.4.3 Non-destructive sampling – a method for historical preservation………………………………………………………………………………….30 1.5. Research Aims and Hypotheses………………………………...……………………........31 CHAPTER TWO: MATERIALS AND METHODS………………………………………………...33 2. Overview…………………………...………………………………………………...………………………34 2.1 Tick collection and preparation…………………………...………………………………..35 2.1.1 Archived ticks with correlating host tissue…………………………...………...36 2.2 Tick identification…………………………...……………………………………………………36 2.3 Sample collection…………………………...…………………………………………………….37 2.4 DNA extraction…………………………...………………………………………………………..37 2.4.1 Archived echidna ticks…………………………...……………………………………...38 2.4.2 Archived echidna tissue…………………………...…………………………………….39 2.5 Library preparation and NGS…………………………...…………………………………...39 2.6 NGS analysis…………………………...……………………………………………….…………...41 2.7 PCR assays…………………………...………………………………………………………………42 2.7.1 16S Mam qPCR assay of echidna tissue…………………………...……………...44 2.7.1.1 16S Mam conventional PCR assay of correlating echidna tissue ticks…………………………...…………………………….….44 2.7.2 Borrelia-specific PCR assays of echidna tissue and ticks…………………..45 2.7.2.1 flaB nested-PCR assay…………………………...……………………………45 2.7.2.2 Borrelia-specific 16S nested-PCR assay…………………………...…..46 2.8 Gel electrophoresis…………………………...………………………………………………….47 2.9 PCR purification…………………………...………………………………………………………47 2.10 Sanger sequencing and BLAST…………………………...……………………………….48 2.11 Phylogenetic analysis…………………………...………………………………………….…49 2.12 Percentage of Borrelia-infected echidna ticks………………………………………50 CHAPTER THREE: RESULTS……………………………………………………………………………51 3. Results…………………………………………………………………………………………………………52 3.1 Morphological identification of archived echidna-biting ticks………………...52 3.1.1 Sample selection for DNA extraction and analyses…………………………..54 vi 3.2 NGS………….…………………………………………………………………………………………..56 3.3 PCR assays………..………………………………………………………………………………….62 3.3.1 16S Mam qPCR assay of echidna tissue………………………..……..…………..62 3.3.1.1 16S Mam PCR assay of correlating tissue ticks…………………..…64 3.3.2 flaB nested-PCR assay……………………………………….……………….…………..66 3.3.2.1 The flaB gene in echidna tissue…………………………………………...68 3.3.2.2 The flaB gene in echidna ticks……………………………………………..70 3.3.3 Borrelia-specific 16S nested-PCR assay………………………………………..…72 3.4 Sanger sequencing and BLAST…………………………………..………………………….72 3.5 Phylogenetic analysis………………………..………………………………………………….73 3.6 Percentage of Borrelia-infected echidna ticks….………………………………….….76 CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION…………………………………………..79 4. Discussion……………………………………………………………………………………………………80 4.1 Morphological identification of archived echidna-biting ticks………………...80 4.2 NGS bacterial profiling of archived echidna-biting ticks…………………………82 4.3 Detecting a novel Borrelia species in archived echidna-biting ticks………...85 4.4 Future directions………………………………………….………………………………………88 4.5 Conclusion………………………………………….………………………………………………..89 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………………………..90 References……………………………………………………………………………………………………....91