Manipulating the microbiome alters regenerative outcomes in Xenopus laevis tadpoles via lipopolysaccharide signalling

• Published in: Wound repair and regeneration Vol. 30; no. 6; pp. 636 - 651
• Main Authors: Chapman, Phoebe A., Gilbert, Campbell B., Devine, Thomas J., Hudson, Daniel T., Ward, Joanna, Morgan, Xochitl C., Beck, Caroline W.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.11.2022
• Subjects: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Larva - physiology; Lipopolysaccharides - pharmacology; Microbiota; Original ‐Regeneration Science; RNA, Ribosomal, 16S; Toll-Like Receptor 4 - metabolism; Wound Healing; Xenopus laevis - genetics; Xenopus laevis - metabolism
• ISSN: 1067-1927; 1524-475X
• DOI: 10.1111/wrr.13003

Xenopus laevis tadpoles can regenerate functional tails, containing the spinal cord, notochord, muscle, fin, blood vessels and nerves, except for a brief refractory period at around 1 week of age. At this stage, amputation of the tadpole's tail may either result in scarless wound healing or the activation of a regeneration programme, which replaces the lost tissues. We recently demonstrated a link between bacterial lipopolysaccharides and successful tail regeneration in refractory stage tadpoles and proposed that this could result from lipopolysaccharides binding to Toll‐like receptor 4 (TLR4). Here, we have used 16S rRNA sequencing to show that the tadpole skin microbiome is highly variable between sibships and that the community can be altered by raising embryos in the antibiotic gentamicin. Six Gram‐negative genera, including Delftia and Chryseobacterium, were over‐represented in tadpoles that underwent tail regeneration. Lipopolysaccharides purified from a commensal Chryseobacterium spp. XDS4, an exogenous Delftia spp. or Escherichia coli, could significantly increase the number of antibiotic‐raised tadpoles that attempted regeneration. Conversely, the quality of regeneration was impaired in native‐raised tadpoles exposed to the antagonistic lipopolysaccharide of Rhodobacter sphaeroides. Editing TLR4 using CRISPR/Cas9 also reduced regeneration quality, but not quantity, at the level of the cohort. However, we found that the editing level of individual tadpoles was a poor predictor of regenerative outcome. In conclusion, our results suggest that variable regeneration in refractory stage tadpoles depends at least in part on the skin microbiome and lipopolysaccharide signalling, but that signalling via TLR4 cannot account for all of this effect.