Virus Genes

, Volume 55, Issue 2, pp 218–226 | Cite as

Genomic and biological characterization of the Vibrio alginolyticus-infecting “Podoviridae” bacteriophage, vB_ValP_IME271

  • Fei Li
  • Shaozhen Xing
  • Kaifei Fu
  • Shuping Zhao
  • Jianfei Liu
  • Yigang TongEmail author
  • Lijun ZhouEmail author


As an opportunist pathogen, Vibrio alginolyticus (V. alginolyticus), causes disease in marine animals. Bacterial contamination of seafood is not uncommon, and phage therapy is considered a safe way to decontaminate such foods to control the emergence of vibriosis. Here, we report on the isolation of a new, virulent phage called vB_ValP_IME271 (designated phage IME271), which infects V. alginolyticus and was isolated from seawater. Phage IME271 displayed good pH (7–9) and temperature tolerance (< 40 °C) and had a broad host range against Vibrio isolates, including 7 strains of V. alginolyticus and11 strains of V. parahaemolyticus. The IME271 genome was sequenced and annotated, the results of which showed that this phage is a Podoviridae family member with a genome length of 50,345 base pairs. The complete genome is double-stranded DNA with a G+C content of 41.4%. Encoded within the genome are 67 putative proteins, of which only 22 coding sequences have known functions, and no tRNAs are present. The BLASTn results for IME271 showed that it only shares similarity with the Vibrio phage VPp1 (sequence identity score of 96% over 87% of the genome) whose host is V. parahaemolyticus. Comparative analysis showed that IME271 and VPp1 share a similar genomic structure, and the structural proteins are highly similar (> 95% similarity score). In summary, our work identified a new lytic Podoviridae bacteriophage, which is infective to V. alginolyticus and V. parahaemolyticus. This bacteriophage could potentially be used to control V. alginolyticus and V. parahaemolyticus infections in marine animals.


Vibrio alginolyticus Bacteriophage Biological characteristics Genome 



We thank Sandra Cheesman, PhD, from Liwen Bianji, Edanz Group China (, for editing the English text of a draft of this manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Author contributions

LZ and YT conceived and designed the experiments and critically evaluated the manuscript. FL and TM isolated and identified the phage and conducted the biological characterization experiments. ZX was responsible for the data and sequence analyses and wrote the manuscript. KF, SZ, and JL collected the clinical bacteria and carried out the experiments.


This research was supported by a grant from The National Key Research and Development Program of China (2015AA020108), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31400107 and 81621005), and the State Key Laboratory of Pathogen and biosecurity (SKLPBS1518 and 14J004).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This research does not contain any studies with human participants or animals that were performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

11262_2018_1622_MOESM1_ESM.docx (61 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 61 KB)


  1. 1.
    Hartley JW, West E, Gothard WP, Hanan HW (1991) Vibrio alginolyticus in the UK. J Infect 23:223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balebona MC, Andreu MJ, Bordas MA, Zorrilla I, Moriñigo MA, Borrego JJ (1998) Pathogenicity of Vibrio alginolyticus for cultured gilt-head sea bream (Sparus aurata L.). Appl Environ Microbiol 64:4269–4275Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cai X (2005) Pathogenicity and drug resistance analysis of V. Parahaemolyticus. J Lab Med ClinGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liu PC, Lin JY, Chuang WH, Lee KK (2004) Isolation and characterization of pathogenic Vibrio harveyi (V. carchariae) from the farmed marine cobia fish Rachycentron canadum L. with gastroenteritis syndrome. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 20:495–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zaidenstein R, Sadik C, Lerner L, Valinsky L, Kopelowitz J, Yishai R, Agmon V, Parsons M, Bopp C, Weinberger M (2008) Clinical characteristics and molecular subtyping of Vibrio vulnificus illnesses, Israel. Emerg Infect Dis 14:1875–1882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ramamurthy T, Chowdhury G, Pazhani GP, Shinoda S (2014) Vibrio fluvialis: an emerging human pathogen. Front Microbiol 5:91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hörmansdorfer S, Wentges H, Neugebaurbüchler K, Bauer J (2000) Isolation of Vibrio alginolyticus from seawater aquaria. Int J Hyg Environ Health 203:169–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hernández-Robles MF, Álvarez-Contreras AK, Juárez-García P, Natividad-Bonifacio I, Curiel-Quesada E, Vázquez-Salinas C, Quiñones-Ramírez EI (2016) Virulence factors and antimicrobial resistance in environmental strains of Vibrio alginolyticus. Int Microbiol 19:191Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lima-Mendez G, Toussaint A, Leplae R (2007) Analysis of the phage sequence space: the benefit of structured information. Virology 365:241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kutter E (2009) Phage host range and efficiency of plating. Methods Mol Biol 501:141–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ellis EL, Max D (1939) The growth of bacteriophage. J Gen Physiol 22:365–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stalin N, Srinivasan P (2016) Characterization of Vibrio parahaemolyticus and its specific phage from shrimp pond in Palk Strait, South East coast of India. Biologicals 44:526–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stephenson FH (2010) Chap. 4—working with bacteriophages. Elsevier Inc., AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brabban AD, Hite E, Callaway TR (2005) Evolution of foodborne pathogens via temperate bacteriophage-mediated gene transfer. Foodborne Pathog Dis 2:287–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lu S, Le S, Tan Y, Zhu J, Li M, Rao X, Zou L, Li S, Wang J, Jin X (2013) Genomic and proteomic analyses of the terminally redundant genome of the Pseudomonas aeruginosa phage PaP1: establishment of genus PaP1-like phages. PLoS ONE 8:e62933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wilcox SA, Toder R, Foster JW (1996) Rapid isolation of recombinant lambda phage DNA for use in fluorescence in situ hybridization. Chromosome Res 4:397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Werner T (2010) Next generation sequencing in functional genomics. Brief Bioinform 11:499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kot W, Hansen LH, Neve H, Hammer K, Jacobsen S, Pedersen PD, Sørensen SJ, Heller KJ, Vogensen FK (2014) Sequence and comparative analysis of leuconostoc dairy bacteriophages. International J Food Microbiol 176:29–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Aziz RK, Daniela B, Best AA, Matthew DJ, Terrence D, Edwards RA, Kevin F, Svetlana G, Glass EM, Michael K (2008) The RAST server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genom 9:75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S (2013) MEGA6: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol 30:2725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sullivan MJ, Petty NK, Beatson SA (2011) Easyfig: a genome comparison visualizer. Bioinformatics 27:1009–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Birge EA (1994) Bacterial and bacteriophage genetics. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Olia AS, Prevelige PE Jr, Johnson JE, Cingolani G (2011) Three-dimensional structure of a viral genome-delivery portal vertex. Nat Struct Mol Biol 18:597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sun S, Gao S, Kondabagil K, Xiang Y, Rossmann MG, Rao VB (2012) Structure and function of the small terminase component of the DNA packaging machine in T4-like bacteriophages. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:817–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Abrescia NG, Bamford DH, Grimes JM, Stuart DI (2012) Structure unifies the viral universe. Ann Rev Biochem 81:795–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nasir A, Caetano-Anollés G (2015) A phylogenomic data-driven exploration of viral origins and evolution. Sci Adv 1:e1500527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li M, Jin Y, Lin H, Wang J, Jiang X (2018) Complete genome of a novel lytic Vibrio parahaemolyticus Phage VPp1 and characterization of its endolysin for antibacterial activities. J Food Protect 81:1117–1125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yele AB, Thawal ND, Sahu PK, Chopade BA (2012) Novel lytic bacteriophage AB7-IBB1 of Acinetobacter baumannii: isolation, characterization and its effect on biofilm. Arch Virol 157:1441–1450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Biswas B, Adhya S, Washart P, Paul B, Trostel AN, Powell B, Carlton R, Merril CR (2002) Bacteriophage therapy rescues mice bacteremic from a clinical isolate of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium. Infect Immun 70:204–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chadha P, Katare OP, Chhibber S (2016) In vivo efficacy of single phage versus phage cocktail in resolving burn wound infection in BALB/c mice. Microbial Pathog 99:68–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    SPS AV-R, Campbell SA, Inglis NF, Scortti M, Foley S, Vázquez-Boland JA (2013) Genome and proteome analysis of phage E3 infecting the soil-borne actinomycete Rhodococcus equi. Environ Microbiol Rep 5:170–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Central LaboratoryNavy General HospitalBeijingChina
  3. 3.Clinical LaboratoryTaian City Central HospitalTaianChina
  4. 4.State Key Laboratory of Pathogen and BiosecurityBeijing Institute of Microbiology and EpidemiologyBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations