Back

Enterococcus faecalis Influences the Transcription and Metabolism of Pathogenic Escherichia coli when Grown in Co-Culture

Hogins, J.; Mekala, S.; Resendiz, J.; Vedula, S.; Nelapolu, A.; Liu, Y.; Ganjali, M.; Zimmern, P. E.; Wolfe, A.; Freddolino, L.; Reitzer, L.

2025-12-08 microbiology
10.64898/2025.12.08.692790 bioRxiv
Show abstract

UTI involves bacterial growth in the disparate environments of the bladder and within uroepithelial cells. The bladder is a low-nutrient environment that nonetheless supports rapid growth. Phylogenetic group B2 Escherichia coli (Ec) is frequently isolated from urinary tract infection (UTI) patients. Non-B2 strains have also been isolated and are often co-isolated with Enterococcus faecalis (Ef). We characterized the interaction between three co-isolated Ec-Ef pairs and other Ec-Ef combinations in a nutrient-rich medium which was intended to emulate the rapid growth condition of the bladder. In this medium, Ef had little effect on Ec growth but resulted in major transcriptome differences. Ef affected the non-B2 and B2 strains differently. For the non-B2 Ec strains, Ef induced transcript for genes whose products degrade ornithine via putrescine to succinate which is subsequently metabolized by the TCA cycle. For a control B2 Ec strain, Ef induced transcripts for growth rate-associated genes of macromolecular synthesis, and for similar metabolic enzymes, except for those that degrade putrescine to succinate. Unexpectedly, Ef induced transcripts for glyoxylate shunt enzymes in both non-B2 and B2 Ec strains. The bacterial disparate and constantly changing environments during UTI suggest the potential for different types of Ec-Ef interactions. Our results provide evidence for nutrient cross-feeding as one type of Ec-Ef interaction.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.