Ancient Viral DNA: From Genome Invaders to Gene Whisperers

Over the past decade, scientists discovered how bacteria defend themselves against viruses using CRISPR, a system that has revolutionized gene editing. But what if bacteria and viruses have been repurposing their own genetic tools for entirely different functions? A new study published in Nature by Columbia postdocs Tanner Wiegand, Egill Richard and Chance Meers uncovers a surprising twist in this evolutionary story: ancient genes, once used by viruses and mobile DNA elements called transposons, have evolved into RNA-guided transcriptional regulators – natural gene regulators that operate much like the immune system CRISPR, but without cutting DNA.

Bacteria are constantly in an evolutionary arms race with viruses. The mobile DNA pieces transposons have played a major role in bacterial evolution by jumping between locations in the genome and spreading genes. One of these genes, TnpB, was long thought to function only as a simple DNA-cutting enzyme, helping transposons move around. However, scientists have now discovered that some TnpB-derived proteins have lost their cutting ability and instead evolved into RNA-guided transcription factors – proteins that turn genes on or off by blocking access to DNA.

Wiegand and colleagues named this new class of proteins TldRs (TnpB-like nuclease-dead repressors). Unlike CRISPR proteins, which evolved from transposon-related genes to protect bacteria from viruses, TldRs appear to have been repurposed independently for gene regulation. These proteins rely on small RNA molecules to guide them to specific sequences in bacterial genomes, where they bind and shut down target genes by preventing transcription.

One of the most fascinating discoveries in the study is how viruses have co-opted TldRs to manipulate their bacterial hosts. The researchers found that some bacteriophages – viruses that infect bacteria – carry TldR genes along with a bacterial gene called fliC, which encodes flagellin, the protein that makes up the bacterial flagellum (a whip-like structure used for movement).

Normally, bacteria express their own version of fliC to build flagella, which are crucial for swimming and sensing the environment. However, in bacteria infected with certain bacteriophages, the viral version of fliC (fliCᴾ) replaces the host’s version. The study shows that TldRs, guided by their RNA molecules, specifically silence the bacterial fliC gene while allowing the viral version to be expressed. This means that the bacterium’s flagella are partially “rewired” to contain viral proteins instead of its own (Figure 1).

Why would a virus want to do this? In their study, Wiegand et al. propose a few possibilities:

  • Evading the immune system – Many bacterial flagellins are recognized by immune cells, and replacing them with a different version could help bacteria (and their resident viruses) go unnoticed.
  • Avoiding other viral infections – Some bacteriophages recognize flagella as entry points to infect bacteria. By altering flagellar proteins, the virus controlling the bacterium might block access to competing viruses.
  • Affecting bacterial motility – Flagella are primarily involved in motility. Changing their structure could alter how bacteria swim in various environments.

Figure 1: Schematic representation of the repression of the bacterial fliC gene by the RNA-guided viral-encoded TldR and consequent expression of the viral version of the flagellum gene, fliCp. Figure from the original paper. 

One of the most exciting aspects of this discovery of this new class of gene regulators is their potential for biotechnology tools development. CRISPR-based gene editing relies on programmable RNA-guided proteins, and TldRs appear to work on the same principle – but without the need to cut DNA. Instead, they act as natural gene “dimmer switches”, fine-tuning expression levels in a targeted way. Because TldRs are much smaller than CRISPR-Cas proteins, they could be useful for future genetic engineering applications where space is limited, such as in gene therapy or synthetic biology. Unlike traditional CRISPR editing, which involves cutting DNA (which can lead to unwanted mutations), TldRs could provide a more precise way to repress or regulate genes without permanent genome changes.

This study is a striking reminder of evolution’s endless innovations and how nature continuously repurposes molecular tools over evolutionary time. The same transposon-derived genes that gave rise to CRISPR have now been independently adapted to regulate gene expression in bacteria. It also underscores how much we still have to learn about the diversity of RNA-guided systems beyond CRISPR, which could lead to new technologies inspired by nature’s own innovations.

With further research, TldRs might become a new class of programmable genetic tools, opening new doors in medicine, synthetic biology, and biotechnology. As we continue to explore these hidden layers of microbial evolution, who knows what other surprises nature has in store?

Reviewed by: Temistocles Molinar, Saheli Chowdhury

CRISPR versus acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is an aggressive form of cancer arising from malignant transformation of immature cells that were otherwise fated to become white blood cells, or lymphocytes. ALL occasionally affects adults but is more commonly a pediatric cancer: children under the age of 5 have the highest risk of being affected. Upon diagnosis, it is possible to treat ALL with an aggressive regimen of multiple chemotherapy drugs that is successful for over 80% of patients. Unfortunately, when tumors reappear after initial treatment, in relapse, the cases become extremely difficult to treat. Additionally, the cellular landscape of ALL in relapse has a high degree of genetic heterogeneity and variability between different patients. Oncologists and cancer biologists suspect it is this genetic complexity that makes ALL in relapse especially hard to fight in the clinic. 

In a study published in Nature Cancer last year, Dr. Jessie Brown and colleagues set out to improve outcomes for patients with ALL by clarifying how mutational complexity in relapsed tumors interacts with chemotherapy drugs to resist treatment. To this end, the team first employed extensive genetic sequencing on ALL samples collected upon diagnosis, remission, and relapse in order to identify the mutational landscape that distinguishes relapse tumors from the others. Samples were collected from 175 patients in total – 149 from pediatric cases and 26 from adults. Next, in order to functionally characterize the mutations they identified, the authors used a genome-wide genetic screening strategy to identify drug–gene interactions and determine why the relapse-specific mutational landscape is less responsive to chemotherapy. The screen was carried out in a representative model ALL cell line using CRISPR, a genetic editing tool used to specifically activate or inhibit the expression of single genes. 

Fig 1. Schematic of experimental design for CRISPR-based screen in ALL model cell line. A library of targeting molecules called guide RNAs (gRNAs) was used to activate or inhibit genes identified to have mutations associated with ALL in relapse. Figure adapted from Oshima, Zhao, Durán, Brown, et al. 2020.

Between these two approaches, the team succeeded in characterizing relapse-specific mutations that arise during the administration of chemotherapy itself, a process known as clonal evolution. Additionally, the number of mutations they identified increased with patient age at diagnosis, a finding that allowed the researchers to establish that the most recent commonality between the mutant cells present at diagnosis versus later at relapse often develops early, years before the leukemia is officially diagnosed. Importantly, this finding is consistent with the hypothesized fetal origin of many pediatric ALLs, which postulates that chromosomal abnormalities leading to cancer are already present at birth. It is also consistent with the higher rate of relapse previously observed in adult patients.

When the mutations uniquely acquired during relapse were further investigated using CRISPR screening in an ALL model cell line, a strong positive selection was revealed for those that conferred chemotherapy resistance. By using CRISPR to manipulate the expression of genes affected by each mutation of interest and assessing how the ALL model cells fared in each experiment, the researchers were able to analyze the relationships between the effect of the mutation and application of each drug. Of the drugs investigated, functional overlaps in the cellular mechanisms mediating the activity of each were identified between several groups of them. The significance of this finding is two-fold. First, it helps researchers and medical providers understand why the presently used multi-drug regimen might be effective for ALL in the first place. Second, it suggests that other drugs acting via similar mechanisms of action could be effective treatments in the future. Moving forward, ALL in relapse might be treated not just with combinatorial chemotherapy, but with specific combinations, doses, and schedules of drugs that meet the personalized genetic vulnerabilities of specific ALL cases. 

One inhibitor tested in the study’s cell-based CRISPR screen, an inhibitor called ABT-199, also known as Venetoclax, is already being tested for inclusion as a new therapeutic. If approved, it could become part of the arsenal of drugs used to compose personalized chemotherapeutic cocktails for patients with ALL in relapse. According to co-first author Dr. Brown, “it is currently in Phase I/II clinical trials for relapsed ALL and other malignancies and we hope that this work and our follow-up studies can further underscore the mechanisms of action of this inhibitor in combination with commonly used chemotherapies.” 

Altogether, this study identified a number of mutations that make relapsed ALL distinct from ALL before treatment with chemotherapy and functionally characterized the interactions of these mutations with multiple chemotherapy drugs. While ALL is not a common cancer – it accounts for less than 0.05% of all incidences of cancer in the United States – those affected must be treated with aggressive chemotherapy that can negatively affect the lives and health of patients in many ways. Because of this, understanding how to better target ALL at diagnosis and treatment-resistant ALL in relapse is a high priority for researchers. The findings of this work help to identify targets for reversing chemotherapy resistance and improving treatment outcomes for pediatric and adult patients alike. 

Dr. Jessie Brown is a postdoctoral research fellow in the Ferrando Lab at Columbia University Irving Medical Center studying therapeutic resistance in relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia.  

Follow this blog

Get every new post delivered right to your inbox.