The pathophysiology of Treponema denticola, an oral pathogen associated with both periodontal and endodontic infections, is poorly understood due to its fastidious growth and recalcitrance to genetic manipulations. Counterselectable markers are instrumental in constructing clean and unmarked mutations in bacteria. Here, we demonstrate that pyrF, a gene encoding orotidine-5=-monophosphate decarboxylase, can be used as a counterselectable marker in T. denticola to construct marker-free mutants. T. denticola is susceptible to 5-fluoroorotic acid (5-FOA). To establish a pyrF-based counterselectable knockout system in T. denticola, the pyrF gene was deleted. The deletion conferred resistance to 5-FOA in T. denticola. Next, a single-crossover mutant was constructed by reintroducing pyrF along with a gentamicin resistance gene (aacC1) back into the chromosome of the pyrF mutant at the locus of choice. In this study, we chose flgE, a flagellar hook gene that is located within a large polycistronic motility gene operon, as our target gene. out was free of selection markers (i.e., pyrF and aacC1). Compared to previously constructed flgE mutants that contain an antibiotic selection marker, the deletion of flgE in FlgE out has no polar effect on its downstream gene expression. The system developed here will provide us with a new tool for investigating the genetics and pathogenicity of T. denticola.
Treponema denticola is an obligatory anaerobic and highly motile bacterium that is associated with human periodontitis (for a review, see references 1-3), which is a chronic inflammatory disease that damages the supporting connective tissues around the teeth and ultimately leads to tooth loss. The use of targeted mutagenesis followed by phenotypic characterizations in vitro and in vivo is a routine method for identifying bacterial virulence factors and elucidating their roles in bacterial pathogenicity. Due to its fastidious growth requirements, only a few virulence factors have been characterized in T. denticola (for a review, see references 4 and 5). During the last decade, although tremendous efforts have been devoted to the identification of genetic tools, only a few have been developed for the genetic manipulation of T. denticola (6-10). Even now, genetic manipulation (e.g., gene deletion) of T. denticola is still inefficient and cumbersome (7,11). In addition, all of the current genetic tools for T. denticola are built upon positive selection by inserting an antibiotic resistance marker into a targeted gene on the chromosome (6,8,9,12). The drawback of this method is that the insertion of an antibiotic resistance cassette often impairs downstream gene expression, particularly for a gene within a large polycistronic gene cluster. To precisely interpret the function of a targeted gene, the cognate mutant has to be genetically complemented by reintroducing the targeted gene either back into the chromosome or to the cells through a shuttle vector. However, T. denticola is not amenable to the introduction of exogenous genetic el...