CLASSIFICATION OF ACANTHAMOEBA
Acanthamoeba was first described by Castellani when he reported the presence of an ameba in
Cryptococcus pararoseus cultures (
70). The genus
Acanthamoeba was established later by Volkonsky in 1931 (
463), but the actual classification of organisms within this genus is currently under review (
12,
41,
42,
50,
56,
61,
151,
232,
395,
434).
Acanthamoeba has been placed in the Family Acanthamoebidae (Fig.
1). A second genus,
Balamuthia, previously assigned with amebae of uncertain affinities, has recently been included in this family (
91,
378). Studies suggested that the genus
Balamuthia be transferred from the family Leptomyxidae to Acanthamoebidae on the basis of molecular analysis of 16S-like rRNA genes (
12,
434). Furthermore,
Acanthamoeba and
Balamuthia both possess a multilayered microtubule-organizing center and both can cause disease in humans (
345). Identification of
Acanthamoeba at the genus level is relatively easy due to the presence of spiny surface projections, termed acanthopodia, on trophozoites (Fig.
2). However, using morphological criteria, identification of these amebae at the species level has been difficult.
Acanthamoeba spp. have been placed into three morphological groups (I, II, and III) based on cyst size and shape (
340,
363). Species in group I were designated on the basis of having a large cyst in comparison to that of species in the other groups. Species in group II were characterized as having a wrinkled ectocyst and an endocyst which could be stellate, polygonal, triangular, or oval. Species in group III typically exhibited a thin, smooth ectocyst and a round endocyst. Nevertheless, classification of
Acanthamoeba based on morphological characteristics of the cyst wall has proved unreliable because cyst morphology can change depending on culture conditions (
15,
105,
390,
435). Immunological, biochemical, and physiological criteria also have been applied to the identification of different species of
Acanthamoeba (
10,
92,
189,
219,
462,
466,
467). However, many species share antigenic determinants. Therefore, results obtained through immunological approaches such as Western blotting and immunofluorescence have been inconclusive in identifying species. Isoenzyme electrophoresis of different enzyme systems also has been used to compare strains of
Acanthamoeba (
105,
112). Although this method has the potential to provide insight into relationships among species, results have indicated interstrain variation within species as well as similarities between strains of separate species. Furthermore, studies have shown that enzyme patterns change when isolates are grown under different laboratory conditions (
199,
472).
To address these potential confounds, methods for classification of
Acanthamoeba species at the molecular level have been developed (
10,
39,
42,
62,
83,
152,
209,
225,
231,
395). A number of laboratories have applied mitochondrial DNA restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis to cluster strains of
Acanthamoeba (
39,
154,
219,
483). However, Gast et al. (
152) reported that although assessment of mitochondrial DNA was useful for typing
Acanthamoeba isolates, an inherent drawback to this approach was the relatively large number of amebae required for analysis. Johnson et al. (
209) used reverse transcription to determine the partial nucleotide sequences of small-subunit rRNAs of ameba isolates. They reported a high degree of 18S rRNA sequence diversity within the genus
Acanthamoeba. However, subsequent DNA sequencing results from a number of laboratories have not confirmed these observations, and so conclusions regarding large sequence differences among
Acanthamoeba strains appear unwarranted. As opposed to the RNA sequencing approach reported by Johnson et al. (
209), Gast et al. (
152) developed a classification scheme based on nuclear rRNA gene sequences (18S rDNA). The complete gene sequence of nuclear small ribosomal subunit RNA (Rns) was determined. Using this approach, Stothard et al. (
434) classified 53 isolates of
Acanthamoeba species on the basis of 12 rDNA sequence types (Rns genotypes) designated typing units T1 to T12 (Table
1). Additional sequence types may exist (
151). Sequences of either nuclear (Rns) or mitochondrial (rns) rRNA genes are suitable for classifying isolates. Current classification schemes integrate the morphological groups which were established by Pussard and Pons (
363) with the 12 sequence types (Rns genotypes) (T1 to T12) such that group I includes sequence types T7, T8, and T9, group II includes sequence types T3, T4, and T11, and group III includes sequence types T1, T2, T5, T6, T10, and T12. Studies in which clinical isolates have been identified based on sequence types have shown that the majority of strains causing keratitis belong to sequence type 4 (i.e., T4) (
395,
434,
464). Chung et al. (
83) used a riboprinting approach for subgenus classification of
Acanthamoeba. Genomic DNA was extracted, and small-subunit rDNA was amplified by PCR and digested with restriction enzymes for analysis of RFLP. The resultant dendrogram based on riboprinting coincided with the grouping scheme of Pussard and Pons (
363), which was based on morphological criteria, and with that of Stothard et al. (
434), who examined 18S rDNA gene sequence variation (Table
1). In summary, comparison of results for classification of
Acanthamoeba species obtained through DNA-based approaches with those based on morphological and biochemical criteria has revealed major inconsistencies. A revision of the taxonomy of the genus based on sequence comparisons is under way (
42,
61).
ACANTHAMOEBA-BACTERIUM INTERACTIONS
It is becoming increasingly apparent that free-living amebae interact with bacterial species in the environment. The outcome of the interaction of free-living amebae such as
Acanthamoeba with different bacteria is complex. Amebae have been reported to exhibit different capabilities for binding and internalizing different species of bacteria (
358). Bacterium-amebae interactions may lead to the establishment of an endosymbiotic state or, alternatively, to destruction of either the bacterium or the ameba.
Acanthamoeba spp. have been reported to be predators of bacteria and to control the bacterial populations in soil habitats (
376). Soil amebae produce bacteriolytic enzymes which enable the amebae to degrade bacterial cell wall components (
122,
381,
473). In aquatic environments,
Acanthamoeba organisms can be found predominantly at the water-air interface, feeding on bacteria which support their growth (
359). Some genera of bacteria are “edible,” while others are “nonedible” and are not digested, possibly due to the presence of bacterial toxins, toxic pigments, or outer membrane structures (
106,
416,
417). Nonpigmented enterobacteriaceae such as
E. coli K-12 and
Klebsiella aerogenes serve as better food sources for
Acanthamoeba than do bacteria such as
Bacillus subtilis or
Serratia marcescans (
471). Strains of
A. castellanii isolated from soil and water sites exhibit predatory activity on cyanobacteria in culture (
481). The survival and growth of
Acanthamoeba in the presence of specific bacteria appears to be influenced by the species and density of bacteria. At low densities, gram-negative bacteria support the growth of
Acanthamoeba. However, at high densities of bacteria to amebae (i.e., >10 to 1), bacteria such as
Pseudomonas inhibit the growth of
Acanthamoeba (
470). It is not known whether exotoxins produced by bacteria or changes in pH induced by bacterial growth contribute to the death of the amebae.
A number of
Acanthamoeba species appear to harbor endosymbiotic bacteria which divide and survive within their cytoplasm. Proca-Ciobanu et al. (
360) used electron microscopy to describe rod-shaped bacterial endosymbionts in an environmental isolate of
Acanthamoeba. Hall and Voelz (
168) described the growth and reproduction of bacterial endosymbionts in the cytoplasm of
Acanthamoeba spp. No evidence of a phagosomal or phagolysosomal membrane surrounding bacterial inclusions was observed. Additionally,
Acanthamoeba organisms isolated from potable water treatment plants have been shown to harbor Archaea-like endocytobiotic organisms (
183). The occurrence of nonculturable bacterial endosymbionts in
Acanthamoeba isolates also has been reported (
144,
145). In both clinical and environmental
Acanthamoeba isolates, chlamydia-like and rickettsial-related organisms have been identified (
11,
38,
144,
145,
153,
162,
185,
304). In one study, at least 26% of isolates obtained from human corneal specimens and 24% of environmental samples contained intracellular endosymbionts. However, attempts to culture the bacteria apart from amebae were unsuccessful (
144). Horn et al. (
185) studied a novel group of endosymbionts of
Acanthamoeba which included environmental and clinical isolates. Endosymbionts belonging to the α subclass of
Proteobacteria closely related to kappa particles of
Paramecium were identified. Based on 16S rDNA sequence similarities of bacteria, the endosymbionts were assigned tentatively to existing and new genera,
Candidatus Caedibacter acanthamoebae,
Candidatus Paracaedibacter acanthamoebae, and
Candidatus Paracaedibacter symbiosus. Since these bacteria are related to the
Rickettsiaceae, it was suggested that the interaction of
Acanthamoeba with these bacteria might be of clinical significance in the transfer of rickettsia in human disease (
185). Additionally, chlamydia-like endosymbionts of
Acanthamoeba have been implicated in respiratory disease (
38). In addition to bacterial endosymbionts which stably infect amebae, other bacteria apparently utilize
Acanthamoeba as their natural host in the environment, wherein they multiply. The bacteria then lyse the amebae in order to disperse.
The role of
Acanthamoeba spp. as reservoirs or vectors for human pathogens has been examined. Rowbotham studied the interaction of
Acanthamoeba with
Legionella pneumophila, the causative agent of atypical pneumonia in humans (
384). Several strains of
L. pneumophila, normally intracellular pathogens of alveolar macrophages, were found to infect
Acanthamoeba, indicating that free-living amebae could serve as natural hosts of
Legionella. Following phagocytosis by
Acanthamoeba,
Legionella organisms were observed to “escape” into the cytoplasm rather than being sequestered into lysosomal structures and being degraded by hydrolytic enzymes. Following multiplication, the
Legionella organisms lysed the amebae and were released into the surrounding environment. Based on these observations, Rowbotham (
384) suggested that vesicles filled with
Legionella or amebae filled with bacteria, rather than free bacteria, were the source of legionellosis. Consistent with the postulate of an interaction between
Acanthamoeba and
Legionella is the observation that
Legionella and amebae have been isolated from the same aquatic environments (
22,
52,
140,
239). Indeed, amebae isolated directly from river water or soil have been shown to contain
Legionella spp. (
169,
170,
331). Studies have demonstrated that the temperature at which
Legionella and the amebae interact is important.
Legionella-induced lysis of host
Acanthamoeba cells has been observed to occur at an ambient temperature of 37°C. However, at lower temperatures such as 20°C, a converse interaction occurs in that the amebae phagocytize and digest
Legionella (
13).
Since the initial observations of Rowbotham, the interaction of
Legionella with free-living amebae has been widely studied (Fig.
18). Uptake of
Legionella can occur through “coiling” phagocytosis. Bozue and Johnson (
48) indicated that following uptake, inhibition of lysosomal fusion with phagosomes containing
Legionella occurs within
A. castellanii. Subsequently, intracellular multiplication of
Legionella and killing of host macrophages and amebae have been described (
1,
2,
166,
229,
240,
321). However, while
Legionella induces apoptotic cell death in macrophages, it reportedly does not do so in
A. castellanii. Gao and Kwaik (
148), using
L. pneumophila and
A. polyphaga, confirmed that
L. pneumophila does not kill amebae by apoptosis but, rather, does so by necrosis. Necrotic cell death induced by
L. pneumophila and subsequent release of these bacteria from the amebae apparently is mediated by the pore-forming activity of the bacteria. Mutants defective in pore-forming activity fail to exit
Acanthamoeba.The mechanisms for recognition, entry, and intracellular proliferation of bacteria in amebae and in mammalian cells may be similar (
48,
85,
187,
188). Adaptation of such bacteria to both mammalian cells and amebae suggests an interaction which may confer specified functional attributes to the bacteria. Survival and intracellular growth of bacteria in amebae may prime bacteria for intracellular growth in mammalian cells (
24). Cirillo et al. (
86) suggested that survival of
Legionella strains from intracellular digestion in
Acanthamoeba preadapted the bacteria for invasion of human and animal host cells. Recent studies have shown that the interaction of bacteria with amebae may result in changes in the morphology and physiology of the bacteria. For example,
L. pneumophila cells grown in
Acanthamoeba were reported to be smaller than when cultured in vitro, to display different surface properties, and to exhibit enhanced motility (
25,
27,
28,
226). In addition, de novo synthesis of select
L. pneumophila antigens has been demonstrated in bacteria grown in amebae (
436). Also, bacteria grown in amebae are resistant to chemical disinfectants, and vesicles containing
Legionella released from amebae are highly resistant to biocides (
25,
33). Furthermore, it has been reported that growth in
A. castellanii enhances the capacity of
Legionella to invade macrophages and increases the intracellular replication of the bacteria (
84,
85,
312,
328).
Mycobacterium avium grown in
Acanthamoeba also demonstrated enhanced entry and intracellular replication in macrophages (
87).
The interaction of
Legionella with free-living amebae raises intriguing possibilities for a functional relevance regarding human disease. For example,
Legionella-like ameba pathogens (LLAP) which may represent a source of respiratory disease in humans have been identified. These pathogens were first described in 1956 by Drozanski (
121) and later named
Sarcobium lyticum. S. lyticum is an obligate intracellular parasite of small free-living amebae isolated from soil and water and has been shown to enter amebae by phagocytosis, to divide in the cytoplasm, and to result eventually in lysis of the amebae (
123). Comparative sequence analysis of the 16S rRNA gene of
Sarcobium with that of related bacteria revealed the closest relationship to
Legionella species (
147,
423). A number of nonculturable, gram-negative bacilli which multiply intracellularly within amebae have since been isolated and named LLAP 1 through 12 (
3,
386). Analysis of the rRNA of the LLAPs has shown that these organisms are related closely to the
S. lyticum described in 1956 by Drozanski (
147). Since the LLAPs do not grow on conventional artificial media, amebae have been used for isolation and propagation of the organisms. One LLAP was isolated originally by amebal enrichment of a sputum specimen from a patient with pneumonia. The patient demonstrated a fourfold rise in antibody titer to the bacteria from “infected” amebae (
3,
386). Thus, while the role of LLAPs as human pathogens remains unresolved, serum specimens from patients with pneumonia tested for LLAPs suggest that the organisms play a role in community-acquired pneumonia (
275).
Ameba-bacterium interactions may extend to bacteria beyond
Legionella and
Legionella-like species.
Acanthamoeba organisms recovered from environmental or clinical specimens have been shown to harbor bacterial species including
Candidatus Parachlamydia acanthamoebae a member of the
Chlamydiaceae,
Candidatus Odyssella thessalonicensis,
Rickettsia spp.,
Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and
Comamonas acidovoran (
11,
37,
144,
302,
303,
464). Laboratory studies using ameba-bacterium microcosms have shown that a number of clinically relevant bacteria such as
Mycobacterium avium,
M. leprae,
Burkholderia cepacia,
B. pseudomallei,
Simkania negevensis,
E. coli O157:H7,
Helicobacter pylori,
Chlamydia pnuemoniae, and at least three species of
Listeria survive and multiply within
Acanthamoeba (
26,
132,
200,
211,
238,
246,
263,
264,
427,
480). Thom et al. (
443) showed that
Vibrio cholerae strains multiply and survive in
Acanthamoeba. La Scola and Raoult (
250a) demonstrated that under experimental conditions,
Coxiella burnetti is capable of infecting
A. castellanii, within which it undergoes differentiation into spore-like forms. Gaze et al. (
155) reported that in cocultures of
A. polyphaga and
Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, invasion of large contractile vacuoles by bacteria occurred. Barker et al. (
26) reported that lysed
A. polyphaga could serve as a substrate for pathogenic
E. coli O157:H7, the causative agent of hemolytic-uremic syndrome. We have determined that
Helicobacter pylori multiplies within
Acanthamoeba and is released in vesicles (Fig.
19). Additionally,
Pseudomonas aeruginosa was observed in vacuoles when cocultured with
A. polyphaga under laboratory conditions. Encystment of
A. polyphaga occurred after several days of cocultivation, with
Pseudomonas remaining within the cyst compartment (Fig.
20). Steenbergen et al. (
424) indicated that the encapsulated yeast
Cryptococcus neoformans also replicates in
Acanthamoeba and is not degraded by these amebae. Thus, a variety of bacteria, as well as one species of yeast, are able to survive and/or proliferate within
Acanthamoeba.The intracellular growth of bacteria in
Acanthamoeba has been associated with enhanced survival of bacteria in the environment, increased resistance of bacteria to biocides, and increased bacterial virulence. Intracellular survival within the amebae has been postulated as a mode by which bacteria survive in substrate-limiting environmental ecosystems (
227,
240). Intracellular growth of bacteria in amebae apparently also affects the resistance of bacteria to antibiotics (
28). For example,
L. pneumophila grown in
A. polyphaga and
M. avium grown in
A. castellanii were reported to be protected from antimicrobials. Survival studies indicated that
L. pneumophila isolates grown in
Acanthamoeba, and tested after release from these host cells, were approximately 1,000-fold more resistant to rifampin or ciprofloxacin than were
L. pneumophila cells grown exclusively in vitro (
27). Miltner and Bermudez (
308) reported that no significant activity against
M. avium was observed with rifabutin, azithromycin, and clarithromycin when these antimicrobials were employed to treat infected
A. castellanii. In contrast, these antibiotics exhibited significant anti-
M. avium activity when tested against infected U937 macrophage-like cells. These investigators proposed that growth of
M. avium in amebae reduced the effectiveness of these antimicrobials. It has also been shown that amebae survive chlorination and apparently protect engulfed bacteria such as
S. enterica serovar Typhimurium,
Yersinia enterocolitica,
Shigella sonnei, and
Campylobacter jejuni from free chlorine (
227). Such resistance to chlorination could have health implications, especially for treatment regimens applied to “drinking” water. In addition,
Acanthamoeba organisms also appear to protect bacteria when the amebae form cysts (
385). The double wall of the cyst is resistant to many drugs and chemicals (
448). Bacteria which remain in cysts after trophozoites have encysted appear to be protected from chlorine and other disinfectants or biocides (
221).
There are accumulating data which suggest a strong potential for
Acanthamoeba to serve as bacterial reservoirs for human infection. Larkin and Easty (
248) demonstrated experimentally that coinfection of rat corneas with
Corynebacterium and
Acanthamoeba led to suppurative keratitis whereas infection with either alone did not, suggesting that the presence of bacteria played a role in the establishment of corneal infection. It has also been postulated that a bacterium-related inflammatory response occurs in AK as a result of the release of bacterial endosymbionts from amebae (
479). The isolation of
Legionella,
Pseudomonas spp., and
Acanthamoeba from eye wash stations (
343) and of
Acanthamoeba spp. naturally infected with
P. aeruginosa from a contaminated drinking water system in a hospital (
302) further indicates a potential for
Acanthamoeba to serve as reservoirs for human infection.
Acanthamoeba and bacteria were present on shower heads in bathrooms in a hospital setting in Austria (
465). Thermotolerant
Acanthamoeba organisms were identified which contained an ocular pathogen,
Comamonas acidovorans. The presence of a
P. aeruginosa biofilm on the surface of contact lenses has been reported to increase the adsorption of amebic trophozoites to the lens, suggesting an increased opportunity for the development of AK (
415). It has also been shown that of several environmental isolates of
Acanthamoeba, whether obtained through natural or experimental infection, those harboring endosymbiotic bacteria demonstrate CPE on cultured human embryonic fibroblast cells more quickly than do those not containing endosymbionts (
146). Induction of CPE was most rapid on monolayers infected with
Acanthamoeba which included
Chlamydia-like endosymbionts. In addition, specific antibodies to chlamydia-related organisms, as well as DNA sequences, have been detected in patients with respiratory disease (
38). In summary, a body of data indicates that
Acanthamoeba spp. have the potential to act as cofactors in human infection or as reservoirs for a number of bacterial pathogens.