
==== Front
J Bacteriol
J Bacteriol
jb
Journal of Bacteriology
0021-9193
1098-5530
American Society for Microbiology 1752 N St., N.W., Washington, DC

39140751
jb00116-24
10.1128/jb.00116-24
jb.00116-24
Minireview
bacteriologyBacteriologyHitchhiker’s Guide to Borrelia burgdorferi
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9037-8418
Bourgeois Jeffrey S. 1 *
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1659-5558
Hu Linden T. 1 linden.hu@tufts.edu
*
1 Department of Molecular Biology and Microbiology, Tufts University Lyme Disease Initiative, Tufts University School of Medicine , Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Editor Shank Elizabeth Anne University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School , Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

Address correspondence to Linden T. Hu, linden.hu@tufts.edu
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

9 2024
14 8 2024
14 8 2024
206 9 e00116-24Copyright © 2024 Bourgeois and Hu.
2024
Bourgeois and Hu
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

ABSTRACT

Don’t Panic. In the nearly 50 years since the discovery of Lyme disease, Borrelia burgdorferi has emerged as an unlikely workhorse of microbiology. Interest in studying host-pathogen interactions fueled significant progress in making the fastidious microbe approachable in laboratory settings, including the development of culture methods, animal models, and genetic tools. By developing these systems, insight has been gained into how the microbe is able to survive its enzootic cycle and cause human disease. Here, we discuss the discovery of B. burgdorferi and its development as a model organism before diving into the critical lessons we have learned about B. burgdorferi biology at pivotal stages of its lifecycle: gene expression changes during the tick blood meal, colonization of a new vertebrate host, and developing a long-lasting infection in that vertebrate until a new tick feeds. Our goal is to highlight the advancements that have facilitated B. burgdorferi research and identify gaps in our current understanding of the microbe.

KEYWORDS

Lyme disease
Borrelia
Borrelia burgdorferi
Borreliella burgdorferi
genetics
immunology
host-pathogen interactions
history
spirochetes
HHS | NIH | National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) F32AI179104 Bourgeois Jeffrey S. HHS | NIH | National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) R01AI152210, R01AI150157, R01AI178725 Hu Linden T. cover-dateSeptember 2024
==== Body
pmcINTRODUCING BORRELIA BURGDORFERI, AN ATYPICAL MODEL SYSTEM

We begin this review with a simple truth: B. burgdorferi is unusual. Unlike many of its prokaryotic cousins featured in the flagship series (1–6), each spirochete houses several copies of both its linear chromosome and numerous other replicons (both circular and linear) (7–9)—many of which can be shed sporadically during laboratory cultivation (10). Analysis of the B. burgdorferi genome shows evidence of genome shrinkage, including loss of core metabolism pathways (11), which aligns both with its obligate host-associated lifestyle and with the highly enriched media required to keep the microbe growing in laboratory settings. Furthermore, no traditional virulence factors have been discovered, suggesting that B. burgdorferi has a very limited repertoire to manipulate or evade host immunity during infection. Yet, despite these limitations, B. burgdorferi is able to stably colonize rodent (12–14) and tick (15) hosts for months to years.

These unique attributes notwithstanding, B. burgdorferi has become a “model organism” for understanding other bacteria that occupy similar niches. B. burgdorferi is well-studied among spirochetes (searching PubMed on 8 May 2024 revealed 11,465 results for B. burgdorferi or Borreliella burgdorferi, 3,489 results for Leptospira interrogans, and 6,886 results for Treponema pallidum), and some researchers have used the microbe as a launching point to understand cell biology in the Spirochaetes phylum, particularly the structure and function of periplasmic flagella [reviewed in references (16–18)]. These unique flagella are important to many key aspects of spirochete biology, and in B. burgdorferi, they enable its characteristic spiral shape (19) and colonization of vertebrate and invertebrate hosts (20, 21). B. burgdorferi has also served as an effective ectopic expression system to understand T. pallidum protein biology and immunogenicity (22, 23). Beyond spirochetes, B. burgdorferi is also a general model of vector-borne disease—the relative ease of studying B. burgdorferi discussed below makes it an attractive option for understanding pressures on microbes during invertebrate-vertebrate-invertebrate transmission. However, as with all models, some caution should be used when overinterpreting “universal” lessons from B. burgdorferi. While Monod and others have noted that “What’s true for Escherichia coli is true for the elephant” to describe the robustness of the E. coli molecular biology model (3), when trying to compare biology across bacterial species, one may be better served considering George E. P. Box’s famous advice: “All models are wrong, but some are useful.”

In the text below, we will discuss the identification of B. burgdorferi, key developments in the field, and what we have learned about B. burgdorferi enzootic cycling and pathogenesis over the last 50 years.

DISCOVERY OF B. BURGDORFERI AND ITS ENZOOTIC CYCLE

Identification of a tick-borne, spirochetal illness

The identification of Lyme disease began with a cluster of arthritis among otherwise healthy children in Old Lyme and Lyme, Connecticut in the early 1970s (24). Early reports from Polly Murray and Judith Mensch, who had noted unusual symptoms in children and local families, led to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sending a young Epidemic Intelligence Officer, Dr. David Snydman, to investigate. Given the rheumatological symptoms noted, Dr. Snydman requested assistance from Yale University and involved a rheumatology fellow, Dr. Allen Steere, on the team. Following the mapping of reported cases (Fig. 1A), painstaking epidemiological work determined that juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, a genetic disorder with an attack rate of 1 in 10,000 (25), was unlikely to be the cause of the cluster, and they quickly focused on potential infectious causes. The pattern of disease was most consistent with a vector-borne disease (24). A key clue in the investigation that would eventually lead to the discovery of the causative organism was that approximately one-quarter of the afflicted children had recalled a distinctive circular or oval rash prior to the onset of arthritis.

Fig 1 Epidemiological studies identify a cluster of Ixodes scapularis-associated arthritis in the Lyme, Connecticut, region. (A) Original mapping of cases in Old Lyme, Connecticut, performed by Dr. David Snydman after being deployed as an Epidemic Intelligence Officer. Reproduced with permission from Dr. Snydman. (B) Work by Steere and colleagues demonstrated a clear regional bias for cases east of the Connecticut River, a temporal bias for summer and fall months, and patients with Lyme disease had increased interactions with ticks (26). Work by Wallis and colleagues demonstrated that I. scapularis, specifically, was far more common in humans and other mammals (deer, Peromyscus rodents) east of the river (27).

During a presentation of some of these patients at a dermatology case conference at Yale, there was a serendipitous event where a visiting Danish dermatology resident noted that the rash was similar to those seen in Europe in patients with a tick-borne disease called Bannwarth’s syndrome (personal communication, Allen Steere). The European patients often presented with a rash called erythema migrans (EMs). The association between European EM and Ixodes ticks had been established by Afzelius in 1909 (28), and the connection between a rash (presumed to be erythema migrans), neurological illness, and Ixodes was made by 1922 (29). One 1951 report from Sweeden reported “using the spirochetal stain evolved by him, Lennhoff has succeeded in demonstrating organisms resembling spirochaetes in biopsy specimens taken from the erythematous lesions” (30). This led to penicillin, which was effective for the treatment of another spirochetal disease, syphilis, becoming a common and effective treatment for EM (30, 31). While the European patients did not have the arthritis seen in the cases in Old Lyme, the similarity to EM led to additional epidemiological work by Steere, Robert Wallis, and others that implicated the “deer tick” or “black-legged tick” I. scapularis (formerly also called Ixodes dammini), as the probable vector of “Lyme disease” (Fig. 1B) (26, 27).

Following the identification of a probable vector of disease, Steere and others began attempting to treat Lyme disease with penicillin and found that it reduced both the duration of EM and the likelihood of developing arthritis (32). During a presentation of the data for the treatment of Lyme disease with penicillin, Dr. Alan Barbour, a young infectious disease physician who was about to start a post-doctoral fellowship at the NIH’s Rocky Mountain Laboratories studying spirochetes, became interested in the disease. He convinced his mentor, Dr. Willy Burgdorfer, to look for spirochetes in ticks from Lyme disease endemic areas that had been collected and sent by Dr. Jorge Benach at Stony Brook University. This led to the identification of a spirochete found in ticks from endemic regions in 1982 (33) that would later also be isolated from Lyme disease patients (34). For a more comprehensive description of the history surrounding the identification of B. burgdorferi, we refer the reader to a recent first-person narrative by Drs. Barbour and Benach (35).

Following the discovery of B. burgdorferi in North America, EMs (and arthritis, carditis, and neurological illnesses that follow them) in both North America and Europe were confirmed to be caused by B. burgdorferi spirochetes (36, 37). Notably, while most North American Lyme disease is caused by B. burgdorferi sensu stricto [recently changed to Borreliella burgdorferi based on genomic analyses (38), though some researchers have objected to the new name (39)], European Lyme disease is caused by a collection of related genospecies called B. burgdorferi sensu lato (which includes B. burgdorferi sensu stricto) (40). All further use of the term B. burgdorferi in this review will refer exclusively to B. burgdorferi sensu stricto.

Focusing on North American Lyme disease, it is interesting to contrast the gaps in time between the recruitment of health officials to Lyme, Connecticut (1975), the first peer-reviewed manuscript on Lyme disease (1977) (24), the implication of I. scapularis as the vector (1978) (26, 27), and the tentative identification of a causal agent (1982) (33) with the 12-day separation between the first reports in 2019 of pneumonia in Wuhan, China and the release of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Technological advances in metagenomic sequencing account for a large component of the different timescales here—however, additional factors likely slowed early research on B. burgdorferi. The organism is sparse in most sites in infected humans—particularly in the joint where live organisms have never been recovered (a single prior report proved to be erroneous)—and requires very specific growth culture media to grow in vitro, making it difficult to fully fulfill Koch’s postulates even with modern technologies.

Understanding B. burgdorferi spread in nature

After confirming I. scapularis [and its west coast North American cousin I. pacificus (41)] were the primary culprits in spreading Lyme disease in North America, a key question became how the ticks themselves become colonized with B. burgdorferi. B. burgdorferi transovarian (mother-to-offspring) spread does not occur to any significant degree (42), though early studies did observe some passage of spirochetes across generations that led to confounding narratives (15, 43). It was subsequently recognized that Ixodes ticks can be co-colonized with the transovarially passed spirochete, Borrelia miyamotoi [summarized in reference (42)]. Notably, even though B. burgdorferi was originally believed to have some tick-to-tick spread, Burgdorfer and others noted in their work that the rates of viable spirochetes passed to offspring were far too low to account for the abundance of B. burgdorferi in nature. This paired with other research from the same period that noted extremely high (“universal,” according to the original authors) B. burgdorferi colonization of the white-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopus (44), which is highly abundant in North America and serves as one of the critical hosts for Ixodes ticks, particularly larvae in the northeastern and midwestern United States (45), led to a hypothesis that ticks acquire B. burgdorferi from vertebrate reservoirs. Later work would experimentally confirm P. leucopus “reservoir competency”—or the ability for P. leucopus to become colonized by and spread the spirochete to ticks (13). While numerous models and studies demonstrate that P. leucopus is a critical reservoir species for B. burgdorferi, it is not the only important reservoir (46–49). Notably, shrews may help to promote B. burgdorferi abundance (46, 47)—particularly in the absence of high P. leucopus density. Other species such as squirrels can “dilute” B. burgdorferi abundance by feeding ticks without enabling B. burgdorferi spread (46). Furthermore, certain strains of B. burgdorferi sensu stricto (50) and sensu lato (51), particularly Borrelia garinii which is found in Europe, appear better adapted to birds than to Peromyscus.

There is no reproducible evidence supporting mammal-to-mammal B. burgdorferi spread. This means that in order for B. burgdorferi to persist, it depends on an enzootic cycle, through which B. burgdorferi continuously cycles between its vertebrate reservoir species and invertebrate vectors (Fig. 2). Thus, B. burgdorferi must routinely adapt to and persist in dramatically different hosts—while only utilizing fewer than 1,400 protein-coding genes.

Fig 2 Understanding B. burgdorferi spread in nature. B. burgdorferi vectors, Ixodes ticks, take three blood meals throughout their lifetimes over the course of 2 years: once as larvae, once as nymphs, and once as adults. In spring, the nymphal I. scapularis blood meal enables B. burgdorferi to spread into reservoir hosts, typically small mammals or birds. Later in the year, larvae feed on these colonized reservoirs, which results in the acquisition of the spirochete by new ticks. Finally, in the fall adult Ixodes feed on larger vertebrates. Notably, the infection status of the tick has very little impact on the spread of B. burgdorferi in the adult stage, as the hosts that adult I. scapularis feed on are typically non-permissive or dead-end hosts for B. burgdorferi. Instead, this stage is important for the continued propagation of the tick vector. Red animals represent B. burgdorferi colonization, and the red arrows represent the direction of B. burgdorferi spread at each tick life stage. The adult tick is represented as both gray and red to represent that both colonized and B. burgdorferi-free adult ticks contribute to I. scapularis reproduction.

KEY MILESTONES IN MODELS OF LYME DISEASE

Since the discovery of Lyme disease in Connecticut, substantial progress has been made in understanding B. burgdorferi pathogenesis and bacteriology (Fig. 3). In the text below, we will discuss some of the most notable advances that have enabled B. burgdorferi study.

Fig 3 Advances in B. burgdorferi sensu stricto (B.b.) research. Clinical advances in B. burgdorferi research include the first research publication on Lyme disease (24), the suggestion that it was transmitted through Ixodes ticks (26, 27), the first use of antibiotics to treat the disease (32), isolation of B. burgdorferi from humans (34), standardization of Lyme disease testing (52), the development of human OspA vaccines (53, 54), the use of doxycycline as a prophylactic treatment (55), and completion of a Lyme disease human genome-wide association study (56, 57). Basic science advances in B. burgdorferi research include identification of the spirochete in ticks (33), experimentally modeling the B. burgdorferi enzootic cycle with P. leucopus (13), development of the first Mus musculus models for Lyme disease (58, 59), transformation of DNA into B. burgdorferi for recombination (60), cloning of genetic mutants by antibiotic selection (60), publication of the first genome drafts (7, 8), transformation of the first autonomously replicating artificial plasmid (61), generation of stable B. burgdorferi-specific shuttle vectors (62, 63), effective use of GFP in B. burgdorferi (63, 64), development of a B. burgdorferi DNA microarray (65, 66), use of genome-wide transposon mutagenesis for B. burgdorferi (67), the use of RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) for B. burgdorferi (68–70), CRISPRi in B. burgdorferi (71), and the use of metabolomic technologies with B. burgdorferi (72).

Cultivation of B. burgdorferi in vitro

A major development in the study of B. burgdorferi was the ability to cultivate the spirochete from ticks in 1982 using a modified Kelly’s medium, which included the addition of CMRL-medium (developed at Connaught Medical Research Laboratories) and yeastolate (33). In his historical perspective (35), Alan Barbour notes that the formulation of this modified (originally “fortified”) Kelly’s medium (73) was critical for growing the bacteria from ticks. This highlights the lengths early researchers went to in order to culture Borrelia spp., including providing substantial nutrient supplementation (including serum, bovine albumin, N-acetylglucosamine, and glucose), adding gelatin which modifies B. burgdorferi motility behavior, and minimization of oxygen exposure and carbon dioxide loss [reviewed in reference (74)]. These formulations have been continuously improved, leading to two predominant media formulations: Barbour-Stonner-Kelley Medium II (BSK-II) (75) and a commercially available derivative BSK-H (76). Notably, the complexities of these media have led to a variety of problems. First, batch-to-batch variability plagues both BSK-II and the commercial BSK-H [for example, see references (77, 78)], meaning media must undergo quality control prior to use (79). Second, for reasons that remain obscure, differences in BSK-II and BSK-H drive numerous differences in B. burgdorferi biology at the molecular level (80) and in the ability to infect rodents (78). Despite the technical ease of BSK-H, many groups—including the authors of this review—remain committed to making their own BSK-II based on higher rates of successful B. burgdorferi cultivation.

The ability to culture an otherwise obligate host-associated bacterium in vitro unlocks substantial experimental manipulation, ranging from direct observation and manipulation of the microbe for microbiological assays to being able to prepare clonal isolates of bacteria for animal challenge. However, BSK-based media are complex, and the exact requirements for B. burgdorferi cultivation remain unknown. This makes it difficult to modify the medium to examine specific questions involving metabolism, though some success has been had removing specific components (e.g., glucose) and adding alternative components (e.g., chitobiose) in excess (81). Other studies have attempted to biochemically alter certain components of the medium [e.g., delipidation of bovine serum albumin, serum, and yeast extract (82) and chelation of metals (83)] in order to ask targeted metabolic questions. While functional, a deeper understanding of B. burgdorferi biology may require the development of a truly defined medium more amenable to biochemical and metabolic experiments—though this has not been successful despite attempts by multiple groups.

Establishing animal models infection with B. burgdorferi

Soon after the successful culture of B. burgdorferi in vitro, attempts to test and develop animal models of infection were initiated. B. burgdorferi was found to be capable of infecting multiple small animals including but not limited to laboratory strains of inbred Mus musculus (58, 59), rats (84), P. leucopus (13), hamsters (13, 85, 86), gerbils (87, 88), and rabbits (33, 89, 90). The focus during these early studies was in finding an animal model that mimicked the stages of human Lyme disease; however, it was soon apparent that none of the animals could produce a perfect match. Among small mammals, only rabbits developed the classic erythema migrans rash seen in humans with early disease (33). Although all laboratory mice were able to be infected with B. burgdorferi, different strains of inbred mice developed varying levels of carditis and arthritis (58), and none developed significant signs of meningitis [during the early evaluations; subsequent studies have shown invasion of the dura mater of mice by the organism but minimal inflammatory signs (91)]. Three strains of mice became the dominant animal models for studying Lyme disease—C57BL/6, C3H, and BALB/c—each of which has particular characteristics that make it attractive as a model. C57BL/6 has been labeled as “resistant” to Lyme disease manifestations as they develop only mild carditis and arthritis in response to infection (58). C3H mice develop more severe arthritis and carditis (58), and BALB/c develops inoculum dose-dependent inflammatory responses to B. burgdorferi (92). Forward genetic studies have identified genetic loci involved in the differential inflammatory responses seen in C57BL/6 and C3H strains of mice (93, 94), which drive an increased type I interferon response in C3H mice (95), although the genes identified are not clearly the same as ones that may be involved in controlling the level of inflammation in humans. Of note, all mouse strains will largely resolve signs of inflammation without antibiotic treatment despite the continued presence of the organism (96). In some ways, these models parallel the course of Lyme disease in humans infected with B. burgdorferi. Before the adoption of antibiotics for treatment, it was noted that patients can spontaneously clear erythema migrans (32), as well as inflammatory manifestations of Lyme disease such as facial palsy and heart block (carditis) without antibiotics (97, 98). Some patients, particularly children, can also spontaneously resolve arthritis (24)—though this resolution can take up to 5 years and recurrences are common in the first years after the development of Lyme arthritis.

Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) has been utilized as a model for Lyme disease, as early studies noted that the monkeys develop both early and late signs of infection that are similar to human disease with some infected animals displaying erythema migrans, transient bradycardia, and infiltration of immune cells into cerebral spinal fluid (99). Unlike rodent models, some M. mulatta appear to develop signs of neuroborreliosis, including lethargy, peripheral neuritis, and peripheral demyelination (99, 100). The variability in these symptoms may recapitulate the variability seen in human manifestations of the disease. There have also been attempts to use M. mulatta for the study of antibiotic-refractory disorders (101, 102); however, it remains unclear whether non-human primates are suitable models for these disease manifestations (103).

Additional work has utilized laboratory models to study the interactions of B. burgdorferi with its native hosts where colonization generates minimal to no symptoms. P. leucopus and Peromyscus maniculatus have near identical husbandry requirements to M. musculus, making them an approachable and realistic model for enzootic cycling (13, 104–110) as well as host-tick interaction studies (111, 112). These studies have been aided by a growing number of repositories and stock centers that can provide Peromyscus and Ixodes ticks to labs for enzootic studies. The study of avian (106, 113–116) and reptilian (117, 118) hosts and their reservoir capacity for B. burgdorferi and B. burgdorferi sensu lato strains are less common due to their more unique husbandry requirements but are growing in usage.

Regardless of species, laboratory infection of animals with B. burgdorferi typically occurs through one of two methods: needle injection of a pure culture (typically via subcutaneous or intradermal injection to mimic a tick bite, though other injection schema including intraperitoneal and intraarticular injections do also result in successful infection) or use of B. burgdorferi-colonized nymphal I. scapularis—which are typically generated by feeding uninfected larvae on needle infected rodents and housing the ticks through their first molt. Alternatively, ticks can be artificially colonized with B. burgdorferi through immersion in a pure culture and then subsequently used to infect animals (119). Needle infection, while more artificial, is substantially more approachable and less time consuming than tick-based infections and often does successfully uncover phenotypes associated with bacteria transmitted by the tick [for example, efficacy of OspA-based vaccines against B. burgdorferi infection (120) or the requirement for ospC during infection (121)]. However, this is not universally the case, and numerous genes have been identified to be required for B. burgdorferi virulence when transmitted by a tick but not when transmitted by needle [for instance bba07 (122)]. Differences in bacterial gene expression in in vitro grown vs tick grown B. burgdorferi and differences in inoculating doses may explain some of these disparities (123, 124), which are supported by very high infectivity of “primed” B. burgdorferi isolated from fed ticks (125). Additionally, tick-host interactions also change the requirements for B. burgdorferi survival during infection. During tick-mediated infection, Ixodes salivary proteins that have immunomodulatory properties [discussed further below and recently reviewed in reference (126)] are injected into the host alongside the bacteria—meaning that B. burgdorferi at a needle injection site are experiencing a dramatically different immune landscape than those transmitted by ticks. An interesting case where needle inoculation led to erroneous conclusions was the development of decorin-binding protein A (DbpA) as a vaccine candidate. While vaccination with DbpA protected against needle infections with B. burgdorferi, it failed to protect against infection through feeding of colonized ticks due to the lack of expression of DbpA while the organism resides in the tick—leading to the failure of a vaccine that had progressed to advanced stages of development (127). As with all models, choosing the correct animal host and infection model requires assessing the costs and benefits of each option, informed by the specific question being asked in each individual experiment.

Deciphering the B. burgdorferi genome

The first B. burgdorferi genome was partially sequenced in 1997 (7), though it would take until 2000 before the final extrachromosomal elements were fully sequenced (8). This initial genome provided the framework to study the roughly 900 kilobase linear chromosome and over 600 kilobases of linear and circular plasmids [spread across 21 plasmids in the originally sequenced strain B31 (8)]. The exact plasmid number and the exact genes located on each plasmid differs across B. burgdorferi strains [most recently demonstrated across 299 isolates in (128)] and even different in vitro passaged lineages can differ in plasmid content due to spontaneous plasmid loss (10). Another notable aspect of the genome is that it is highly adenine and thymine rich, with the chromosome containing 28.6% guanine and cytosine content and the plasmids ranging from 23.1% to 32.3% guanine and cytosine content. This can lead to challenges when expressing non-native genes in B. burgdorferi as careful codon optimization is necessary to avoid toxicity (129) and enable expression (130).

Current bioinformatic tools estimate that there are 1,391 protein-coding genes, 37 RNA genes, and 135 pseudogenes present across the B31 chromosome and plasmids (131), as well as over a thousand small non-coding RNA (68, 69). Of these, 124 genes (8.9%) are predicted to be lipoproteins (132, 133), which is exceptional when compared to the predicted ~90 lipoproteins present among the ~4,328 protein-coding genes in the E. coli genome (2.1%) (134). Of the B. burgdorferi lipoproteins, 88% (79 proteins) of studied plasmid-encoded lipoproteins appear to traffic to the B. burgdorferi surface, while 19% (7 proteins) of studied chromosomal lipoproteins are present on the surface, and only 39 lipoproteins in total were found to traffic to the periplasm (132). It should be noted that this study did depend on the overexpression of each lipoprotein, which could affect localization. However, if this is an accurate representation of non-overexpressed lipoproteins, this differs from E. coli where most lipoproteins are found in the periplasm (134). This pairs with experimental work that has highlighted a key role for lipoproteins in interfacing with vertebrates and invertebrates during the enzootic cycle [reviewed in reference (135)]. In striking contrast to the high abundance of lipoproteins, B. burgdorferi lacks many metabolic pathways (7, 11), including pathways for the tricarboxylic acid cycle, oxidative phosphorylation, fatty acid synthesis and degradation, amino acid synthesis, the urea cycle, polyamine synthesis, and nucleotide synthesis. Instead, B. burgdorferi encodes an array of transporter proteins that appear to capture critical nutrients from its environment. This aligns well with the abundant nutrients required for the cultivation of the microbe in vitro.

While sequencing the B31 genome provided a wealth of information, studies predating the assembled genome had spent considerable effort quantifying the number of plasmids present in B. burgdorferi (136)—including the identification of several highly related circular plasmids that are each roughly 32 kilobases [circular plasmid (cp)32] (137, 138). This finding was surprising given the overall minimal B. burgdorferi genome. Later studies would go on to confirm hypotheses proposed by Casjens et al. (138) that this plasmid family encodes a prophage (139) which is produced in the tick host (124) and coupled to RpoS expression (140). Recently, it was confirmed that these cp32 phages could not only transduce cp32 (141) but also other plasmids and even regions of the linear chromosome (142)—indicating a potential mechanism for horizontal gene transfer in B. burgdorferi.

Manipulating the B. burgdorferi genome

B. burgdorferi is, with some effort, a genetically tractable organism. The history and nuances behind genetic manipulation in B. burgdorferi have been thoroughly reviewed elsewhere (143), but it is worth noting that many of the advances are rooted in discoveries made by investigators at the Rocky Mountain Laboratories at the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [select examples include references (60, 62, 67, 144–146)] who were given the freedom to take on these difficult and time consuming tasks that ultimately allowed the field to make major leaps forward. Briefly, the first genetic manipulation of the spirochete was described in 1994 by Samuels and colleagues following the introduction of a coumermycin-resistance allele into the chromosome via homologous recombination (60). Spontaneous single-point mutations leading to resistance to coumermycin made it a difficult selectable marker to use, but it was subsequently followed by other more durable resistance markers in the aminoglycoside class. The first autonomously replicating artificial B. burgdorferi plasmid was described in 2000 (61) using a broad-host-range shuttle vector, though the vector has a variety of issues that have made it unpopular for use. Instead, seminal work in 2001 by Stewart et al. described the first Borrelia-specific shuttle vector by incorporating aspects of the endogenous cp9 plasmid into the artificial construct (62). Shortly thereafter, a second plasmid was generated using a region of cp32 (63). These vectors have stood the test of time and are cornerstones of B. burgdorferi molecular biology. These and other genetic manipulations can be introduced through electroporation using very high concentrations of DNA (147, 148), although plasmids are often lost during passage in ticks or mammals in the absence of additional strategies (121, 149). While it is possible to transform plasmids into fully wild-type B. burgdorferi, restriction-modification systems in B. burgdorferi act as a substantial barrier to transformation, particularly the predicted type IV restriction-modification enzymes carried on linear plasmid (lp)25 and lp56 (bbe02 and bbq67, respectively) (150–153). Even in strains where one or both of these plasmids are initially present, the transformation of recombinant plasmids can inadvertently select for clones that have lost these barriers to transformation (150). While lp56 is dispensable for rodent infections (154), lp25 is required for both tick colonization and rodent infection due to the nicotinamidase gene pncA (bbe22) (154, 155). Other genes on lp25 are also required for tick colonization including [but likely not limited to (156)] bptA (bbe16) (157). Thus, many approaches for targeted mutagenesis use clones that are specifically disrupted for bbe02. Another strategy when genetically modifying the genome is to replace bbe02 [for example, replacement of bbe02 with lacI (158) or luciferase (159)]. Alternatively, groups exclusively interested in vertebrate stages of infection can transform B. burgdorferi lacking lp25 with plasmids containing pncA alongside genes of interest in order to enable (i) efficient transformation and (ii) long-term plasmid retention during murine infection due to the presence of pncA (149).

Transformation and homologous recombination have laid the foundations of molecular biology in B. burgdorferi: knock-out, knock-in, and complementation experiments are now feasible and, in fact, routine. The number of experiments possible with these techniques has grown with the number of tools optimized for B. burgdorferi, including inducible promoters [IPTG-inducible (130, 158), tetracycline-inducible (160), IPTG-use has been utilized in vivo (158, 161)], constitutive promoters (162), antibiotic resistance cassettes (144, 145, 162, 163), and fluorescent proteins (63, 64, 162, 164, 165). Additional advances in genetic manipulation include transposon mutagenesis (67) and more recently CRISPR-based technologies (71, 129, 166). The efficiency of transposon mutagenesis remains poor, and the largest transposon mutant library has transpositions in only approximately 790 genes, with many non-essential genes lacking insertions. However, even this suboptimal library has led to insights into gene function using transposon-sequencing (Tn-seq) strategies (167) to identify genes involved in diverse functions for the bacteria including carbohydrate utilization (168), reactive oxygen species or reactive nitrogen species resistance (169, 170), surviving the larval I. scapularis blood meal (171), and the role of sRNA in mouse infection (172). With the currently available tools, it is anticipated that a CRISPRi library may be available in the near future which will improve the ability to perform whole-genome loss-of-function screens.

Modeling B. burgdorferi interactions with its hosts

Early attempts to understand how B. burgdorferi adapts to its different hosts were focused on changing the environment of in vitro-grown organisms and examining their responses. Alterations in growth conditions such as temperature and pH led to important insights into gene regulation by the organism (65, 66, 173–179) including one of the central tenets of B. burgdorferi biology—that different gene sets are expressed to survive in tick vs mammalian hosts. However, with improvements in technologies for studies of the organism in situ, it became clear that these simple changes to in vitro culture all failed to capture the complexity of the B. burgdorferi response to its native hosts (123).

BSK-media warmed to 37°C has served as a major model for “mammalian-like” gene expression, in part because B. burgdorferi is present at extremely low numbers in host tissue—making it difficult to directly measure gene expression in those tissues. Targeted assays (e.g., reverse transcription quantitative PCR [RT-qPCR]) have had some success measuring bacterial processes in rodent tissues (180), and these approaches have been expanded to a significant degree—including quantifying expression of 137 lipoprotein genes during mammalian infection (181). Another solution for transcriptomic screening in mammalian hosts utilized dialysis membrane chambers filled with media containing B. burgdorferi that were (i) embedded in the peritoneum of rats or mice, (ii) allowed to incubate in the rodent, and (iii) retrieved for gene expression measurement (65, 182, 183). This approach revealed numerous differences in gene expression compared to what was observed by culturing B. burgdorferi in BSK-media at 37°C (65, 183), underscoring that temperature is not the only signal B. burgdorferi senses in the vertebrate host. However, a drawback of the model is that it does not accurately mimic the effects of direct contact with cells. We note that, currently, no study has successfully leveraged untargeted RNA sequencing to measure global transcript abundance in mammalian tissues.

Transcriptomic studies in the tick lagged behind rodent studies. Again, the major obstacle was the low number of organisms found inside the tick, which made targeted approaches feasible (183–185) but untargeted approaches difficult. However, in 2015, Iyer et al. successfully employed amplification-based enrichment of B. burgdorferi transcripts with DNA microarray to examine gene expression in fed ticks (123). A more recent study combined antibody pulldown of whole bacteria followed by lysis and RNA sequencing to thoroughly map the B. burgdorferi transcriptome across different stages of tick feeding (124). A separate approach successfully enriched B. burgdorferi transcripts following RNA isolation using biotinylated probes to compare the transcriptome of wild-type B. burgdorferi, ΔrpoS, and strains with altered c-di-GMP synthesis or signaling in fed nymphs (161).

Another popular model of B. burgdorferi biology is measuring interactions with host cells ex vivo or in vitro. This falls into two categories: (i) stimulation of host cells with B. burgdorferi to understand host signaling in response to the microbe [examples include references (186–192)] and (ii) attempts to co-culture host cells and B. burgdorferi to measure bacterial responses to host cells [examples include references (193–195)]. While the former has had great success in identifying innate immune pathways that contribute to B. burgdorferi-induced inflammation, the latter is limited by the different nutrient requirements for B. burgdorferi and common cell lines—usually resulting in altered physiology of either the host or microbe.

Beyond transcriptomic approaches, considerable progress has been made in developing tools to understand B. burgdorferi behavior during an animal model of infection. This includes intravital imaging of fluorescently labeled bacteria during murine infection (196–200) and luciferase reporter based in vivo imaging (130, 201, 202). Additionally, while quantitative PCR (qPCR) or RT-qPCR have long served as the gold standard for quantifying B. burgdorferi burden (by DNA or RNA, accordingly), we note that approaches using either luciferase-based (201) or digital-droplet PCR-based (203) approaches are becoming increasingly common.

SELECTED INSIGHTS FROM THE USE OF B. BURGDORFERI MODELS OF INFECTION

The advances chronicled above have yielded a powerful set of tools for dissecting host–pathogen interactions in Lyme disease. In the following sections, we will discuss how the different models of B. burgdorferi infection have been used to reveal the fundamental biology of this organism. Space limitations prevent us from detailing all the studies resulting from the use of these models, so we will focus on just a few key thematic elements of B. burgdorferi pathogenesis.

Shifting transcriptomic profiles allows environmental adaptation and survival in different hosts

Considerable attention has been paid to how B. burgdorferi gene expression is regulated across different hosts [reviewed in reference (204, 205)]. An early discovery was that B. burgdorferi expresses the outer surface protein ospA in unfed ticks, but the population shifts to begin expressing the outer surface protein ospC following the blood meal (173). This mimics the requirements for each protein: ospA is required for the colonization of ticks (206, 207), while ospC is required for mammalian infection (208). This can be recapitulated in vitro as OspC protein expression is higher in BSK-media when temperature is shifted to 37°C and downregulated when shifted to lower temperatures (173). Further replicating in vivo studies (209), single-cell studies using flow cytometry have demonstrated that a lower proportion of spirochetes express OspA at 37°C, while some spirochetes remain OspA+OspC- or OspA+OspC+ at high temperatures—though examining of RNA abundance in these OspA+ spirochetes suggest that they are beginning to downregulate ospA (210). These expression patterns of ospA and ospC established a paradigm with which to understand host-specific gene expression in B. burgdorferi. As the tools for manipulating B. burgdorferi improved and the ability to identify gene regulation in native hosts expanded, it became clear that OspA and OspC were just two components of larger networks of gene regulation responding to environmental conditions.

A primary gatekeeper of vertebrate-associated gene expression, including ospC, in B. burgdorferi is the alternative sigma factor RpoS, which itself is transcriptionally activated by a second alternative sigma factor RpoN (178, 211). rpoS is induced during tick feeding (183) and is required for successful migration from the tick midgut to the salivary glands for infection of the vertebrate host (185, 212). This process is, perhaps unsurprisingly, activated by numerous factors, most notably Rrp2 (BB0763) (213) and BosR (BB0647) (214–216). Completing the loop, RpoS is also able to suppress tick-associated gene expression, including ospA (217), by binding to the promoter region (218). Interestingly, while recent work has shown that BosR positively regulates RpoS by stabilizing RNA transcripts (219), the protein may also serve to directly repress ospA genes by binding near the ospAB promoter (220). Notably, while critical, RpoN-RpoS make up only one of three regulatory systems that facilitate appropriate gene signaling throughout the enzootic cycle. The cyclic dimeric GMP (c-di-GMP) producing Hk1/Rrp1 two-component system (221–223) and the RelBbu/dksA-mediated stringent response (224–227) also facilitate survival in rodent and/or tick hosts. Interestingly, these pathways appear to feedback into one another, as Rrp1/c-di-GMP (228, 229) and RelBbu (225, 227) regulate RpoS.

Numerous models have been proposed for how these proteins work in concert to sense which host the spirochete is preparing to inhabit, and here, we will focus on two non-mutually exclusive hypotheses. First, DNA supercoiling at lower temperatures (such as in ticks) is thought to promote ospA and impair ospC expression (230). However, shifting unfed, B. burgdorferi-colonized nymphs to high temperatures (37°C) is insufficient to induce ospC expression in the midgut (173), demonstrating that this cannot be the only mechanism at play. Second, B. burgdorferi are able to sense their replication rate—which is informed by nutrients and temperature, two major signals that differentiate a starved and feeding tick, to regulate OspC expression (231)—though growth rate does not appear to regulate ospA expression. While we note that these hypotheses are well supported, additional levels of ospA and ospC regulation are possible, if not probable.

B. burgdorferi parasitizes host processes during colonization

In addition to encoding a limited number of metabolic processes, the B. burgdorferi genome has only a small toolkit for interfacing with a host and indeed lacks traditional virulence factors. Despite this, the spirochete takes advantage of invertebrate and vertebrate host processes to facilitate its enzootic cycle.

In order to escape the tick and enter a new host, B. burgdorferi must depart the tick midgut, where it resides after colonizing a larval tick, and make its way to the salivary glands (232–234). Live-cell fluorescent microscopy studies during the nymphal blood meal show a “biphasic mode of dissemination” in which non-motile, proliferating B. burgdorferi penetrate the epithelium before transitioning to a motile state capable of penetrating the basement layer into the hemocoel (the body compartment in ticks containing hemolymph) and swimming to the salivary glands (235). From there, the bacteria enter the vertebrate host as the tick injects its saliva during feeding. After arriving in the vertebrate, host B. burgdorferi must contend with a hostile environment as the wound from the tick bite site recruits neutrophils in rodents (236, 237) and humans (238). In order to survive this initial introduction to the vertebrate innate immune system, B. burgdorferi takes advantage of proteins secreted by I. scapularis to modulate the host immune response (239). I. scapularis secrete these proteins to enable a stealthy and prolonged blood meal, but these proteins are also utilized by B. burgdorferi. Indeed, early studies demonstrated that simply co-injecting tick saliva and B. burgdorferi into mice gave the bacteria a substantial colonization advantage (240), though curiously this is highly species specific—I. scapularis saliva protected B. burgdorferi but not Borrelia lusitaniae, while Ixodes ricinus saliva protected B. lusitaniae without protecting B. burgdorferi. A recent ex vivo study demonstrated that tick saliva actively suppressed human macrophage and neutrophil migration toward invading B. burgdorferi, which correlated with increased B. burgdorferi density (238). More mechanistic studies have identified roles for numerous saliva proteins in promoting B. burgdorferi transmission, including Salp15-mediated protection from serum (241, 242) and CD4 T cell activation (243), IxsS17- and TSLPI-mediated protection from complement (244, 245), and IsC1ql3-mediated suppression of the interferon-γ response (246). Together, these co-opted components of tick saliva enable the initial B. burgdorferi landing party to successfully exit the tick and spread into the mammalian host tissue.

A major danger to B. burgdorferi during both early- and late-vertebrate infection is the antibody response paired with the complement cascade. Interestingly, this threat begins even before transitioning into the vertebrates and extends after exiting back into the tick, as antibody and complement within the tick blood meal can bind and kill B. burgdorferi. The ability of antibody to kill B. burgdorferi in ticks appears to be both complement dependent and independent—complement kills antibody-bound B. burgdorferi in larval ticks but is not thought to be required for the bactericidal activity in nymphal ticks (247). B. burgdorferi complement-independent antibody killing is thought to occur by osmolytic stress (248).

While there are many ways B. burgdorferi resists complement [recently reviewed in reference (249)], one notable way it escapes destruction is by co-opting the host complement inhibitor, Factor H, during pathogenesis (250–254). Interesting recent work has examined a hypothesis that different reservoir tropisms across different Borrelia species could be credited to differences in the ability of each Borrelia species to resist complement in preferred hosts—in part through factor H binding [reviewed in reference (255)]. A recent study by Marcinkiewicz et al. provided mechanistic data to support this hypothesis, demonstrating that natural variation in CspZ (BBH06) directly impacts the ability of B. burgdorferi to bind mouse or quail complement inhibiting protein factor H and survive in the blood of either species (256). Similarly, new work on eastern fence lizards (Sceloporus undulatus), a relatively rare host for the spirochete, found that while the reptilian complement was extremely potent at killing B. burgdorferi, a small number of strains were able to survive following exposure (257). Using this natural diversity as a launching point, Nowak et al. were able to identify ospE variation as contributing to differential survival in the lizard serum via binding of S. undulatus factor H. Together, these studies demonstrate that complement likely shapes B. burgdorferi evolution and transmission in nature. Furthermore, they raise questions about the evolutionary constraints and directions that B. burgdorferi is likely to undergo in the future: specifically, whether a given B. burgdorferi lineage is more fit when adapted to a specific host (mammalian, avian, or reptilian) or is more advantaged remaining as a generalist. The answer to this question likely depends on a variety of biotic and abiotic factors, which may differ across geographical space. This makes B. burgdorferi an excellent model to understand host-microbe co-evolution and adaptation.

B. burgdorferi hides from host immunity to establish long-term infection

The lack of known virulence factors means that B. burgdorferi has a limited arsenal for attacking host immune responses directly. But, as an organism that is able to persist in its tick and vertebrate hosts for long periods of time, it has evolved an array of tactics for evading or outsmarting host immunity. First, these speedy spirochetes [for motility in the skin, see reference (196), Movie S1; for motility in the dura mater, see reference (91), Movie S1] are dramatically faster than neutrophils (which are faster than most immune cells) (258), making them difficult to actually catch and phagocytose. To the bacteria’s benefit, this likely synergizes with the immune response shifting from a neutrophil-dominant response (~6 hours post-infection) to a slower-moving macrophage-dominant response (~16 hours post-infection) in mice (259). These findings are supported by human reports in which the erythema migrans rash appears enriched for macrophages but depleted of neutrophils (260). While B. burgdorferi can escape early immune responses upon entry, this does not mean every spirochete does. Disruption of innate immunity [e.g., TLR2 knockout (186) and MyD88 knockout (261)] leads to orders of magnitude higher B. burgdorferi burdens in mice during early infection, demonstrating that many, if not most, spirochetes are successfully cleared by the innate immune response.

Upon establishing infection in a new vertebrate host, the bacteria downshift into stealth mode and begin to downregulate many of their outer surface proteins, going from expressing >100 lipoproteins during the first 10 days of infection to expressing fewer than 40 lipoproteins by 33 days post infection (181). A plausible hypothesis is that this downregulation provides the immune system with fewer targets for antibodies. This is supported by data that have shown that while OspC is absolutely required for early murine infection, the bacteria need to downregulate the expression of the protein during late infection, and constitutive ospC expression results in clearance by the adaptive immune system (180, 262).

Another strategy used by B. burgdorferi is not just to reduce the number of potential antibody targets but to continually change them (263–265). B. burgdorferi vlsE (bbf0041) encodes a major lipoprotein that undergoes continuous recombination during mammalian infection (266) but not during in vitro cultivation (267). The disruption of the vls locus in ways that prevent recombination results in only transient infection in immunocompetent hosts with clearance of the organism once the adaptive immune system responds (268–270). vlsE provided on a complementing plasmid in trans could not rescue clearance of the pathogen—which overall supports the idea that the actual recombination of this locus is key to antigenic switching and B. burgdorferi retention in immunocompetent hosts (268). Recent developments in sequencing have allowed an enhanced understanding of vlsE switching, as well as uncovered a role for error-prone DNA replication at the vls locus in contributing to antigenic variability (271, 272). The exact role of the vls locus and VlsE in immunoevasion is not fully understood (268).

A final strategy used by B. burgdorferi to evade host immune systems involves co-opting pathways the host has developed to prevent continual immune activation. In some ways, this draws parallels to host responses to commensal organisms. After initial contact with B. burgdorferi, professional immune cells, including macrophages and T cells, are greatly dampened in their responses to B. burgdorferi with greater activation of anti-inflammatory rather than proinflammatory pathways (191, 203, 273–276). In this way, B. burgdorferi is able to hide from the immune system by being treated as a tissue-invasive “commensal” organism. Additionally, while there is a robust antibody response against B. burgdorferi, this response is short-lived following antibiotic treatment in M. musculus (277) and overall characterized by a failure to maintain long-lived germinal centers (278, 279). As discussed with the innate immune system, while these evasion methods prevent eradication of the spirochete, studies from severe combined immunodeficiency mice (280) or B cell depleted mice (281) demonstrate that the adaptive immune system is still able to suppress B. burgdorferi burden during infection.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Harnessing B. burgdorferi natural diversity

Like all microbial pathogenesis fields, the B. burgdorferi community has benefited from selecting a small number of “wild-type” strains—often B31 (the genetic “type” strain), N40, 297, JD1, or Sh-2–82. This has allowed researchers across institutions to more directly compare results, overall making the literature more coherent and facilitating the establishment of a fundamental set of facts for the field (including most of what is listed above). However, there is much to be learned from studying diverse strains of the organism. Cross-species studies have long since revealed that different strains of Borrelia are linked to different disease manifestations in humans [e.g., B. garinii and neurological disease and Borrelia afzelli and late skin infections (282)], and now multi-strain studies have already provided interesting insights into host-specific adaptations of B. burgdorferi to specific reservoirs (106, 257) as well as insight into inter-strain competition (283) and subsequent infection dynamics (104, 283, 284). Notably, many of these studies used traditional genotyping of the ospC locus (285) to select “representative” strains from different clades of B. burgdorferi. However, as larger banks of strains have become available (particularly larger banks of sequenced strains), recent work has begun leveraging a wider view of B. burgdorferi genetic diversity. One such study tested 11 strains for their ability to colonize and disseminate in C3H/HeJ mice, as well as be aquired by I. scapularis (286). A second study sequenced 299 B. burgdorferi isolates in an attempt to correlate clinical outcomes with B. burgdorferi genotypes (128). These types of diversity studies will likely be critical to enhancing our understanding of both how B. burgdorferi spreads in nature and how it causes illness in human patients. We expect that the use of a diverse population of strains for study will become standard in the coming years.

Determine the frequency and impacts of stochastic heterogeneity in B. burgdorferi

Interestingly, not all diversity in B. burgdorferi is genetically based. Heterogeneity in gene expression is commonly seen in B. burgdorferi that is (presumably) genetically identical. How and why this diversity is generated is not well understood. For example, upregulation of OspC and downregulation of OspA in response to temperature in vitro do not occur equally across clonal cells, as demonstrated by flow cytometric measurements of Osp expression (210). We note that while DNA methylation has historically been a popular hypothesis for non-genetically encoded natural diversity in other species (287), the search for widespread impacts of DNA methylation on the B. burgdorferi transcriptome has yielded variable results (288, 289), and we are unaware of any study that has specifically attempted to associate methylation and heterogeneity in gene expression. Regardless of the mechanism, it is tempting to hypothesize that generation of non-genetic diversity may be beneficial to an organism that traverses many different hosts and requires different strategies to survive in hosts as diverse as birds, lizards, and rodents.

Probing B. burgdorferi-host interactions in infected tissues

As discussed above, considerable work has been done examining host-pathogen interactions in vitro or in vivo, but the vast majority of these techniques have examined interactions in bulk, e.g., what host or bacterial genes, pathways, or cells influence B. burgdorferi survival or burden. While these studies have been extremely important in understanding B. burgdorferi pathogenesis, they ignore the relatively complex interactions that B. burgdorferi has with cells as a motile extracellular pathogen. Little is known about how host cells (immune cells, fibroblasts, keratinocytes, cardiomyocytes, and synoviocytes) that directly interact with B. burgdorferi respond to the pathogen, or how neighboring “bystander cells” react to the changes this causes in the tissue microenvironment. While these studies are technically challenging, technological advances are paving the path for these experiments to become possible. First, as discussed above, there have been numerous successful attempts to visualize B. burgdorferi in mice using live imaging (91, 196–200). These studies could be linked with fluorescent reporters of host gene expression to dissect some of these questions using live imaging. Additionally, the dissection of B. burgdorferi infected tissues and the use of spatial transcriptomics (290) could allow an enhanced understanding of heterogeneity in cellular responses to B. burgdorferi.

Generating a broader understanding of bacterial cell biology

As covered in another review in this series (291), there is a need for “‘non-model’ model bacterial systems.” While the ability of E. coli to model bacterial cell and molecular biology has been drawn into question in numerous fields [even some genetic circuits between E. coli and the closely related Salmonella genus show a high degree of divergence (292, 293)], the ability to model B. burgdorferi using E. coli can perhaps best be summarized by the immortal words of Dr. Ben Adler “Spirochetes do it differently!” There is considerable interest in understanding how metabolism, motility, protein secretion, chromosome segregation, replication, cellular growth, and numerous other base processes occur in B. burgdorferi that will only be answered through continued basic science studies utilizing the microbe itself. We note that while there is hope that understanding how these processes occur in B. burgdorferi will illuminate how they occur in other spirochetes (particularly Leptospira and Treponema species), the unique aspects of B. burgdorferi genome organization (7–9, 294) and its biphasic host-associated lifestyle may drive specific adaptations to some of these universal biological problems.

Harnessing the awesome power of human genetics

Finally, we note that while natural genetic diversity in mouse strains has been leveraged to understand genes that contribute to different disease outcomes following B. burgdorferi infection (93, 94), few studies have successfully identified human genetic variants that contribute to Lyme disease outcomes. Appropriate use of human genetics can not only explain natural diversity in disease outcomes but also reveal molecular mechanisms of pathogenesis and identify targets for potential therapeutic interventions (295). One targeted genetic study identified the single nucleotide polymorphism rs5743618, which results in an amino acid change in the Toll-like receptor 1 (TLR1), that associated with susceptibility for antibiotic refractory Lyme arthritis (192). Recently, the first human genome-wide association study (GWAS) was published, which identified three loci that associate with Lyme disease: rs9276610 in the HLA locus, the TLR1/6/10 expression quantitative trait locus rs17616434, and a missense variant rs2232950 in Secretoglobin family 1D member 2 (SCGB1D2) (56). Follow-up studies confirmed that SCGB1D2 has antimicrobial properties that are reduced by the rs2232950 risk allele, which results in a leucine at amino acid position 53 of SCGB1D2, providing a potential mechanism for the genetic association data. A second GWAS published shortly later replicated the rs2232950 hit and identified rs1061632—an expression quantitative trait locus for KCTD20 and ETV7, as associated with Lyme borreliosis (57). While these studies shine new light on human susceptibility to Lyme disease, there are likely many more common genetic variants that contribute to susceptibility and severity during infection, and thus, additional study of natural human diversity during B. burgdorferi infection is warranted.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank David Snydman for sharing the original epidemiological maps used for Fig. 1. The iconography used in Fig. 1 and 2 was licensed from Adobe Stock software and modified in Adobe Illustrator. We thank the Hu Lab for helpful discussions during the formulation of the review, particularly in the development of Fig. 2 and 3.

The National Institutes of Health support J.S.B. (F32AI179104) and L.T.H. (R01AI152210, R01AI150157, and R01AI178725).

Jeffrey S. Bourgeois received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Biology from the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, MA (Undergraduate Research Advisor: Dr. Julia Paxson), then earned a PhD from Duke University in Dr. Dennis Ko’s laboratory studying host-pathogen interactions and human genetics using the Salmonella enterica model pathogen. Jeff has been a postdoc studying B. burgdorferi in Dr. Linden Hu’s lab at the Tufts University Lyme Disease Initiative since April 2022. During his graduate and postdoctoral studies, Jeff has been fascinated by diversity in the natural world and is currently examining how host and bacterial natural diversity affect the B. burgdorferi enzootic cycle.

Linden T. Hu, MD, earned his A.B. and M.D. from Brown University, Providence, RI, where he had no intention of becoming a microbiologist. However, during subsequent training in Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases at Tufts, where he was introduced to both clinical and bench research in Lyme disease under the tutelage of Drs. Mark Klempner and Allen Steere, he quickly embraced the elegance and reproducibility of the study of bacterial pathogens compared with the technical difficulty of clinical research. Strangely, this recognition did not lead to his moving to studies of a more reliably reproducible organism than B. burgdorferi. He now spends his time working on translational approaches to taking advantage of B. burgdorferi’s uniquely vulnerable biology to target the organism in its human and wild hosts.
==== Refs
REFERENCES

1 Barrows JM, Goley ED. 2023. Synchronized swarmers and sticky stalks: Caulobacter crescentus as a model for bacterial cell biology. J Bacteriol 205 :e0038422. doi:10.1128/jb.00384-22 36715542
2 Sparks IL, Derbyshire KM, Jacobs WR, Morita YS. 2023. Mycobacterium smegmatis: the vanguard of mycobacterial research. J Bacteriol 205 :e0033722. doi:10.1128/jb.00337-22 36598232
3 Ruiz N, Silhavy TJ. 2022. How Escherichia coli became the flagship bacterium of molecular biology. J Bacteriol 204 :e0023022. doi:10.1128/jb.00230-22 35916528
4 Schlimpert S, Elliot MA. 2023. The best of both worlds-Streptomyces coelicolor and Streptomyces venezuelae as model species for studying antibiotic production and bacterial multicellular development. J Bacteriol 205 :e0015323. doi:10.1128/jb.00153-23 37347176
5 Brown PJB, Chang JH, Fuqua C. 2023. Agrobacterium tumefaciens: a transformative agent for fundamental insights into host-microbe interactions, genome biology, chemical signaling, and cell biology. J Bacteriol 205 :e0000523. doi:10.1128/jb.00005-23 36892285
6 Stülke J, Grüppen A, Bramkamp M, Pelzer S. 2023. Bacillus subtilis, a Swiss army knife in science and biotechnology. J Bacteriol 205 :e0010223. doi:10.1128/jb.00102-23 37140386
7 Fraser CM, Casjens S, Huang WM, Sutton GG, Clayton R, Lathigra R, White O, Ketchum KA, Dodson R, Hickey EK, et al. . 1997. Genomic sequence of a Lyme disease spirochaete, Borrelia burgdorferi. Nature 390 :580–586. doi:10.1038/37551 9403685
8 Casjens S, Palmer N, van Vugt R, Huang WM, Stevenson B, Rosa P, Lathigra R, Sutton G, Peterson J, Dodson RJ, Haft D, Hickey E, Gwinn M, White O, Fraser CM. 2000. A bacterial genome in flux: the twelve linear and nine circular extrachromosomal DNAs in an infectious isolate of the Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi. Mol Microbiol 35 :490–516. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2000.01698.x 10672174
9 Takacs CN, Wachter J, Xiang Y, Ren Z, Karaboja X, Scott M, Stoner MR, Irnov I, Jannetty N, Rosa PA, Wang X, Jacobs-Wagner C. 2022. Polyploidy, regular patterning of genome copies, and unusual control of DNA partitioning in the Lyme disease spirochete. Nat Commun 13 :7173. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-34876-4 36450725
10 Schwan TG, Burgdorfer W, Garon CF. 1988. Changes in infectivity and plasmid profile of the Lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi, as a result of in vitro cultivation. Infect Immun 56 :1831–1836. doi:10.1128/iai.56.8.1831-1836.1988 3397175
11 Gwynne PJ, Stocks K-LK, Karozichian ES, Pandit A, Hu LT. 2023. Metabolic modeling predicts unique drug targets in Borrelia burgdorferi. mSystems 8 :e0083523. doi:10.1128/msystems.00835-23 37855615
12 Hofmeister EK, Ellis BA, Glass GE, Childs JE. 1999. Longitudinal study of infection with Borrelia burgdorferi in a population of Peromyscus leucopus at a Lyme disease-enzootic site in Maryland. Am J Trop Med Hyg 60 :598–609. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1999.60.598 10348235
13 Donahue JG, Piesman J, Spielman A. 1987. Reservoir competence of white-footed mice for Lyme disease spirochetes. Am J Trop Med Hyg 36 :92–96. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1987.36.92 3812887
14 Moody KD, Terwilliger GA, Hansen GM, Barthold SW. 1994. Experimental Borrelia burgdorferi infection in Peromyscus leucopus. J Wildl Dis 30 :155–161. doi:10.7589/0090-3558-30.2.155 8028098
15 Burgdorfer W, Hayes SF, Benach JL. 1988. Development of Borrelia burgdorferi in ixodid tick vectors. Ann N Y Acad Sci 539 :172–179. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1988.tb31851.x 3190091
16 Charon NW, Cockburn A, Li C, Liu J, Miller KA, Miller MR, Motaleb MA, Wolgemuth CW. 2012. The unique paradigm of spirochete motility and chemotaxis. Annu Rev Microbiol 66 :349–370. doi:10.1146/annurev-micro-092611-150145 22994496
17 Motaleb MA, Liu J, Wooten RM. 2015. Spirochetal motility and chemotaxis in the natural enzootic cycle and development of Lyme disease. Curr Opin Microbiol 28 :106–113. doi:10.1016/j.mib.2015.09.006 26519910
18 Chang Y, Liu J. 2019. Architecture and assembly of periplasmic flagellum. Microbiol Spectr 7 . doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.psib-0030-2019
19 Motaleb MA, Corum L, Bono JL, Elias AF, Rosa P, Samuels DS, Charon NW. 2000. Borrelia burgdorferi periplasmic flagella have both skeletal and motility functions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 97 :10899–10904. doi:10.1073/pnas.200221797 10995478
20 Sultan SZ, Manne A, Stewart PE, Bestor A, Rosa PA, Charon NW, Motaleb MA. 2013. Motility is crucial for the infectious life cycle of Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 81 :2012–2021. doi:10.1128/IAI.01228-12 23529620
21 Sultan SZ, Sekar P, Zhao X, Manne A, Liu J, Wooten RM, Motaleb MA. 2015. Motor rotation is essential for the formation of the periplasmic flagellar ribbon, cellular morphology, and Borrelia burgdorferi persistence within Ixodes scapularis tick and murine hosts. Infect Immun 83 :1765–1777. doi:10.1128/IAI.03097-14 25690096
22 Chan K, Nasereddin T, Alter L, Centurion-Lara A, Giacani L, Parveen N. 2016. Treponema pallidum lipoprotein TP0435 expressed in Borrelia burgdorferi produces multiple surface/periplasmic Isoforms and mediates adherence. Sci Rep 6 :25593. doi:10.1038/srep25593 27161310
23 Parveen N, Fernandez MC, Haynes AM, Zhang R-L, Godornes BC, Centurion-Lara A, Giacani L. 2019. Non-pathogenic Borrelia burgdorferi expressing Treponema pallidum TprK and Tp0435 antigens as a novel approach to evaluate syphilis vaccine candidates. Vaccine 37 :1807–1818. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.02.022 30797635
24 Steere AC, Malawista SE, Snydman DR, Shope RE, Andiman WA, Ross MR, Steele FM. 1977. Lyme arthritis: an epidemic of oligoarticular arthritis in children and adults in three connecticut communities. Arthritis Rheum 20 :7–17. doi:10.1002/art.1780200102 836338
25 Lites TD, Foster AL, Boring MA, Fallon EA, Odom EL, Seth P. 2023. Arthritis among children and adolescents aged <18 years - United States, 2017-2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 72 :788–792. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm7229a3 37471260
26 Steere AC, Broderick TF, Malawista SE. 1978. Erythema chronicum migrans and Lyme arthritis: epidemiologic evidence for a tick vector. Am J Epidemiol 108 :312–321. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112625 727200
27 Wallis RC, Brown SE, Kloter KO, Main AJ. 1978. Erythema chronicum migrans and lyme arthritis: field study of ticks. Am J Epidemiol 108 :322–327. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112626 727201
28 Dammin GJ. 1989. Erythema migrans: a chronicle. Rev Infect Dis 11 :142–151. doi:10.1093/clinids/11.1.142 2644687
29 Garin C, Bujadoux A. 1993. Paralysis by ticks. 1922. Clin Infect Dis 16 :168–169. doi:10.1093/clinids/16.1.168 8448296
30 Hollström E. 1951. Successful treatment of erythema migrans afzelius. ACTA Derm Venereol 31 :235–243. doi:10.2340/0001555531235243 14829185
31 Hollström E. 1958. Penicillin treatment of erythema chronicum migrans afzelius. ACTA Derm Venereol 38 :285–289. doi:10.2340/0001555538285289
32 Steere AC, Malawista SE, Newman JH, Spieler PN, Bartenhagen NH. 1980. Antibiotic therapy in Lyme disease. Ann Intern Med 93 :1–8. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-93-1-1 6967272
33 Burgdorfer W, Barbour AG, Hayes SF, Benach JL, Grunwaldt E, Davis JP. 1982. Lyme disease-a tick-borne spirochetosis? Science 216 :1317–1319. doi:10.1126/science.7043737 7043737
34 Benach JL, Bosler EM, Hanrahan JP, Coleman JL, Habicht GS, Bast TF, Cameron DJ, Ziegler JL, Barbour AG, Burgdorfer W, Edelman R, Kaslow RA. 1983. Spirochetes isolated from the blood of two patients with Lyme disease. N Engl J Med 308 :740–742. doi:10.1056/NEJM198303313081302 6828119
35 Barbour AG, Benach JL. 2019. Discovery of the Lyme disease agent. mBio 10 :e02166-19. doi:10.1128/mBio.02166-19 31530679
36 Pfister HW, Einhäupl K, Preac-Mursic V, Wilske B, Schierz G. 1984. The spirochetal etiology of lymphocytic meningoradiculitis of Bannwarth (Bannwarth's syndrome). J Neurol 231 :141–144. doi:10.1007/BF00313682 6481420
37 Ryberg B, Nilsson B, Burgdorfer W, Barbour AG. 1983. Antibodies to Lyme-disease spirochaete in European lymphocytic meningoradiculitis (Bannwarth's syndrome). Lancet 2 :519. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(83)90552-4
38 Gupta RS. 2019. Distinction between Borrelia and Borreliella is more robustly supported by molecular and phenotypic characteristics than all other neighbouring prokaryotic genera: response to Margos' et al. "The genus Borrelia reloaded" (PLoS ONE 13(12): e0208432). PLoS One 14 :e0221397. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0221397 31454394
39 Margos G, Castillo-Ramirez S, Cutler S, Dessau RB, Eikeland R, Estrada-Peña A, Gofton A, Graña-Miraglia L, Hunfeld K-P, Krause A, Lienhard R, Lindgren P-E, Oskam C, Rudolf I, Schwartz I, Sing A, Stevenson B, Wormser GP, Fingerle V. 2020. Rejection of the name Borreliella and all proposed species comb. nov. placed therein. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 70 :3577–3581. doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.004149 32320380
40 Rudenko N, Golovchenko M, Grubhoffer L, Oliver JH. 2011. Updates on Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato complex with respect to public health. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 2 :123–128. doi:10.1016/j.ttbdis.2011.04.002 21890064
41 Burgdorfer W, Lane RS, Barbour AG, Gresbrink RA, Anderson JR. 1985. The western black-legged tick, Ixodes pacificus: a vector of Borrelia burgdorferi. Am J Trop Med Hyg 34 :925–930. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1985.34.925 3898886
42 Rollend L, Fish D, Childs JE. 2013. Transovarial transmission of Borrelia spirochetes by Ixodes scapularis: a summary of the literature and recent observations. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 4 :46–51. doi:10.1016/j.ttbdis.2012.06.008 23238242
43 Lane RS, Burgdorfer W. 1987. Transovarial and transstadial passage of Borrelia burgdorferi in the western black-legged tick, Ixodes pacificus (Acari: Ixodidae). Am J Trop Med Hyg 37 :188–192. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1987.37.188 3605502
44 Levine JF, Wilson ML, Spielman A. 1985. Mice as reservoirs of the Lyme disease spirochete. Am J Trop Med Hyg 34 :355–360. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1985.34.355 3985277
45 Keirans JE, Hutcheson HJ, Durden LA, Klompen JS. 1996. Ixodes (Ixodes) scapularis (Acari:Ixodidae): redescription of all active stages, distribution, hosts, geographical variation, and medical and veterinary importance. J Med Entomol 33 :297–318. doi:10.1093/jmedent/33.3.297 8667375
46 LoGiudice K, Ostfeld RS, Schmidt KA, Keesing F. 2003. The ecology of infectious disease: effects of host diversity and community composition on Lyme disease risk. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100 :567–571. doi:10.1073/pnas.0233733100 12525705
47 Goethert Heidi K, Mather TN, O’Callahan A, Telford Iii SR. 2023. Host-utilization differences between larval and nymphal deer ticks in northeastern U.S. sites enzootic for Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 14 :102230. doi:10.1016/j.ttbdis.2023.102230 37481967
48 Goethert HK, Mather TN, Buchthal J, Telford SR. 2021. Retrotransposon-based blood meal analysis of nymphal deer ticks demonstrates spatiotemporal diversity of Borrelia burgdorferi and Babesia microti reservoirs. Appl Environ Microbiol 87 :e02370-20. doi:10.1128/AEM.02370-20 33158895
49 Tsao JI, Wootton JT, Bunikis J, Luna MG, Fish D, Barbour AG. 2004. An ecological approach to preventing human infection: vaccinating wild mouse reservoirs intervenes in the Lyme disease cycle. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101 :18159–18164. doi:10.1073/pnas.0405763102 15608069
50 Combs MA, Tufts DM, Adams B, Lin YP, Kolokotronis SO, Diuk-Wasser MA. 2023. Host adaptation drives genetic diversity in a vector-borne disease system. PNAS Nexus 2 :pgad234. doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad234 37559749
51 Humair PF. 2002. Birds and Borrelia. Int J Med Microbiol 291 Suppl 33 :70–74. doi:10.1016/s1438-4221(02)80015-7 12141764
52 Centers for Disease C, Prevention. 1995. Recommendations for test performance and interpretation from the Second National Conference on Serologic Diagnosis of Lyme Disease. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 44 :590–591. doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03530120023018 7623762
53 Steere AC, Sikand VK, Meurice F, Parenti DL, Fikrig E, Schoen RT, Nowakowski J, Schmid CH, Laukamp S, Buscarino C, Krause DS. 1998. Vaccination against Lyme disease with recombinant Borrelia burgdorferi outer-surface lipoprotein A with adjuvant. N Engl J Med 339 :209–215. doi:10.1056/NEJM199807233390401 9673298
54 Sigal LH, Zahradnik JM, Lavin P, Patella SJ, Bryant G, Haselby R, Hilton E, Kunkel M, Adler-Klein D, Doherty T, Evans J, Molloy PJ, Seidner AL, Sabetta JR, Simon HJ, Klempner MS, Mays J, Marks D, Malawista SE. 1998. A vaccine consisting of recombinant Borrelia burgdorferi outer-surface protein A to prevent Lyme disease. Recombinant outer-surface protein A Lyme disease vaccine study consortium. N Engl J Med 339 :216–222. doi:10.1056/NEJM199807233390402 9673299
55 Nadelman RB, Nowakowski J, Fish D, Falco RC, Freeman K, McKenna D, Welch P, Marcus R, Agüero-Rosenfeld ME, Dennis DT, Wormser GP, Tick Bite Study Group. 2001. Prophylaxis with single-dose doxycycline for the prevention of Lyme disease after an Ixodes scapularis tick bite. N Engl J Med 345 :79–84. doi:10.1056/NEJM200107123450201 11450675
56 Strausz S, Abner E, Blacker G, Galloway S, Hansen P, Feng Q, Lee BT, Jones SE, Haapaniemi H, Raak S, Nahass GR, Sanders E, Soodla P, Võsa U, Esko T, Sinnott-Armstrong N, Weissman IL, Daly M, Aivelo T, Tal MC, Ollila HM, FinnGen, Estonian Genome Centre, Estonian Biobank Research Team. 2024. SCGB1D2 inhibits growth of Borrelia burgdorferi and affects susceptibility to Lyme disease. Nat Commun 15 :2041. doi:10.1038/s41467-024-45983-9 38503741
57 Vrijmoeth HD, Ursinus J, Botey-Bataller J, Kuijpers Y, Chu X, van de Schoor FR, Scicluna BP, Xu C-J, Netea MG, Kullberg BJ, van den Wijngaard CC, Li Y, Hovius JW, Joosten LAB. 2024. Genome-wide analyses in Lyme borreliosis: identification of a genetic variant associated with disease susceptibility and its immunological implications. BMC Infect Dis 24 :337. doi:10.1186/s12879-024-09217-z 38515037
58 Barthold SW, Beck DS, Hansen GM, Terwilliger GA, Moody KD. 1990. Lyme borreliosis in selected strains and ages of laboratory mice. J Infect Dis 162 :133–138. doi:10.1093/infdis/162.1.133 2141344
59 Schaible UE, Kramer MD, Justus CW, Museteanu C, Simon MM. 1989. Demonstration of antigen-specific T cells and histopathological alterations in mice experimentally inoculated with Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 57 :41–47. doi:10.1128/iai.57.1.41-47.1989 2462540
60 Samuels DS, Mach KE, Garon CF. 1994. Genetic transformation of the Lyme disease agent Borrelia burgdorferi with coumarin-resistant gyrB. J Bacteriol 176 :6045–6049. doi:10.1128/jb.176.19.6045-6049.1994 7928965
61 Sartakova M, Dobrikova E, Cabello FC. 2000. Development of an extrachromosomal cloning vector system for use in Borrelia burgdorferi. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 97 :4850–4855. doi:10.1073/pnas.080068797 10781091
62 Stewart PE, Thalken R, Bono JL, Rosa P. 2001. Isolation of a circular plasmid region sufficient for autonomous replication and transformation of infectious Borrelia burgdorferi. Mol Microbiol 39 :714–721. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2001.02256.x 11169111
63 Eggers CH, Caimano MJ, Clawson ML, Miller WG, Samuels DS, Radolf JD. 2002. Identification of loci critical for replication and compatibility of a Borrelia burgdorferi cp32 plasmid and use of a cp32-based shuttle vector for the expression of fluorescent reporters in the lyme disease spirochaete. Mol Microbiol 43 :281–295. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.02758.x 11985709
64 Carroll JA, Stewart PE, Rosa P, Elias AF, Garon CF. 2003. An enhanced GFP reporter system to monitor gene expression in Borrelia burgdorferi. Microbiology (Reading) 149 :1819–1828. doi:10.1099/mic.0.26165-0 12855733
65 Revel AT, Talaat AM, Norgard MV. 2002. DNA microarray analysis of differential gene expression in Borrelia burgdorferi, the Lyme disease spirochete. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99 :1562–1567. doi:10.1073/pnas.032667699 11830671
66 Ojaimi C, Brooks C, Casjens S, Rosa P, Elias A, Barbour A, Jasinskas A, Benach J, Katona L, Radolf J, Caimano M, Skare J, Swingle K, Akins D, Schwartz I. 2003. Profiling of temperature-induced changes in Borrelia burgdorferi gene expression by using whole genome arrays. Infect Immun 71 :1689–1705. doi:10.1128/IAI.71.4.1689-1705.2003 12654782
67 Stewart PE, Hoff J, Fischer E, Krum JG, Rosa PA. 2004. Genome-wide transposon mutagenesis of Borrelia burgdorferi for identification of phenotypic mutants. Appl Environ Microbiol 70 :5973–5979. doi:10.1128/AEM.70.10.5973-5979.2004 15466540
68 Popitsch N, Bilusic I, Rescheneder P, Schroeder R, Lybecker M. 2017. Temperature-dependent sRNA transcriptome of the Lyme disease spirochete. BMC Genomics 18 :28. doi:10.1186/s12864-016-3398-3 28056764
69 Adams PP, Flores Avile C, Popitsch N, Bilusic I, Schroeder R, Lybecker M, Jewett MW. 2017. In vivo expression technology and 5' end mapping of the Borrelia burgdorferi transcriptome identify novel RNAs expressed during mammalian infection. Nucleic Acids Res 45 :775–792. doi:10.1093/nar/gkw1180 27913725
70 Arnold WK, Savage CR, Brissette CA, Seshu J, Livny J, Stevenson B. 2016. RNA-Seq of Borrelia burgdorferi in multiple phases of growth reveals insights into the dynamics of gene expression, transcriptome architecture, and noncoding RNAs. PLoS One 11 :e0164165. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0164165 27706236
71 Takacs Constantin N, Scott M, Chang Y, Kloos ZA, Irnov I, Rosa PA, Liu J, Jacobs-Wagner C. 2021. A CRISPR interference platform for selective downregulation of gene expression in Borrelia burgdorferi Appl Environ Microbiol 87 :e02519-20. doi:10.1128/AEM.02519-20 33257311
72 Drecktrah D, Hall LS, Crouse B, Schwarz B, Richards C, Bohrnsen E, Wulf M, Long B, Bailey J, Gherardini F, Bosio CM, Lybecker MC, Samuels DS. 2022. The glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenases GpsA and GlpD constitute the oxidoreductive metabolic linchpin for Lyme disease spirochete host infectivity and persistence in the tick. PLoS Pathog 18 :e1010385. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1010385 35255112
73 Stoenner HG, Dodd T, Larsen C. 1982. Antigenic variation of Borrelia hermsii. J Exp Med 156 :1297–1311. doi:10.1084/jem.156.5.1297 7130900
74 Barbour AG, Hayes SF. 1986. Biology of Borrelia species. Microbiol Rev 50 :381–400. doi:10.1128/mr.50.4.381-400.1986 3540570
75 Barbour AG. 1984. Isolation and cultivation of Lyme disease spirochetes. Yale J Biol Med 57 :521–525.6393604
76 Pollack RJ, Telford SR, Spielman A. 1993. Standardization of medium for culturing Lyme disease spirochetes. J Clin Microbiol 31 :1251–1255. doi:10.1128/jcm.31.5.1251-1255.1993 8501226
77 Babb K, El-Hage N, Miller JC, Carroll JA, Stevenson B. 2001. Distinct regulatory pathways control expression of Borrelia burgdorferi infection-associated OspC and Erp surface proteins. Infect Immun 69 :4146–4153. doi:10.1128/IAI.69.6.4146-4153.2001 11349090
78 Wang G, Iyer R, Bittker S, Cooper D, Small J, Wormser GP, Schwartz I. 2004. Variations in Barbour-Stoenner-Kelly culture medium modulate infectivity and pathogenicity of Borrelia burgdorferi clinical isolates. Infect Immun 72 :6702–6706. doi:10.1128/IAI.72.11.6702-6706.2004 15501807
79 Zückert WR. 2007. Laboratory maintenance of Borrelia burgdorferi. Curr Protoc Microbiol Chapter 12 :1. doi:10.1002/9780471729259.mc12c01s4
80 Yang X, Popova TG, Goldberg MS, Norgard MV. 2001. Influence of cultivation media on genetic regulatory patterns in Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 69 :4159–4163. doi:10.1128/IAI.69.6.4159-4163.2001 11349092
81 Lackum K, Stevenson B. 2005. Carbohydrate utilization by the Lyme borreliosis spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi. FEMS Microbiol Lett 243 :173–179. doi:10.1016/j.femsle.2004.12.002 15668016
82 Gwynne PJ, Clendenen LH, Turk SP, Marques AR, Hu LT. 2022. Antiphospholipid autoantibodies in Lyme disease arise after scavenging of host phospholipids by Borrelia burgdorferi. J Clin Invest 132 :e152506. doi:10.1172/JCI152506 35289310
83 Posey JE, Gherardini FC. 2000. Lack of a role for iron in the Lyme disease pathogen. Science 288 :1651–1653. doi:10.1126/science.288.5471.1651 10834845
84 Barthold SW, Moody KD, Terwilliger GA, Duray PH, Jacoby RO, Steere AC. 1988. Experimental Lyme arthritis in rats infected with Borrelia burgdorferi. J Infect Dis 157 :842–846. doi:10.1093/infdis/157.4.842 3258003
85 Johnson RC, Marek N, Kodner C. 1984. Infection of Syrian hamsters with Lyme disease spirochetes. J Clin Microbiol 20 :1099–1101. doi:10.1128/jcm.20.6.1099-1101.1984 6520220
86 Schmitz JL, Schell RF, Hejka A, England DM, Konick L. 1988. Induction of lyme arthritis in LSH hamsters. Infect Immun 56 :2336–2342. doi:10.1128/iai.56.9.2336-2342.1988 3410540
87 Mursic VP, Wilske B, Schierz G, Holmburger M, Süss E. 1987. In vitro and in vivo susceptibility of Borrelia burgdorferi. Eur J Clin Microbiol 6 :424–426. doi:10.1007/BF02013102 3665899
88 Preac Mursic V, Patsouris E, Wilske B, Reinhardt S, Gross B, Mehraein P. 1990. Persistence of Borrelia burgdorferi and histopathological alterations in experimentally infected animals. A comparison with histopathological findings in human Lyme disease. Infection 18 :332–341. doi:10.1007/BF01646399 2076905
89 Benach JL, Bosler EM, Coleman JL, Habicht GS. 1984. Experimental transmission of the Lyme disease spirochete to rabbits. J Infect Dis 150 :786–787. doi:10.1093/infdis/150.5.786-a
90 Burgdorfer W. 1984. The New Zealand white rabbit: an experimental host for infecting ticks with Lyme disease spirochetes. Yale J Biol Med 57 :609–612.6393612
91 Casselli T, Divan A, Vomhof-DeKrey EE, Tourand Y, Pecoraro HL, Brissette CA. 2021. A murine model of Lyme disease demonstrates that Borrelia burgdorferi colonizes the dura mater and induces inflammation in the central nervous system. PLoS Pathog 17 :e1009256. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1009256 33524035
92 Ma Y, Seiler KP, Eichwald EJ, Weis JH, Teuscher C, Weis JJ. 1998. Distinct characteristics of resistance to Borrelia burgdorferi-induced arthritis in C57BL/6N mice. Infect Immun 66 :161–168. doi:10.1128/IAI.66.1.161-168.1998 9423853
93 Ma Ying, Bramwell KKC, Lochhead RB, Paquette JK, Zachary JF, Weis JH, Teuscher C, Weis JJ. 2014. Borrelia burgdorferi arthritis-associated locus Bbaa1 regulates Lyme arthritis and K/BxN serum transfer arthritis through intrinsic control of type I IFN production. J Immunol 193 :6050–6060. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1401746 25378596
94 Li J, Ma Y, Paquette JK, Richards AC, Mulvey MA, Zachary JF, Teuscher C, Weis JJ. 2022. The Cdkn2a gene product p19 alternative reading frame (p19ARF) is a critical regulator of IFNbeta-mediated Lyme arthritis. PLoS Pathog 18 :e1010365. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1010365 35324997
95 Miller JC, Ma Y, Bian J, Sheehan KCF, Zachary JF, Weis JH, Schreiber RD, Weis JJ. 2008. A critical role for type I IFN in arthritis development following Borrelia burgdorferi infection of mice. J Immunol 181 :8492–8503. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.181.12.8492 19050267
96 Armstrong AL, Barthold SW, Persing DH, Beck DS. 1992. Carditis in Lyme disease susceptible and resistant strains of laboratory mice infected with Borrelia burgdorferi. Am J Trop Med Hyg 47 :249–258. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1992.47.249 1503192
97 Steere AC, Batsford WP, Weinberg M, Alexander J, Berger HJ, Wolfson S, Malawista SE. 1980. Lyme carditis: cardiac abnormalities of Lyme disease. Ann Intern Med 93 :8–16. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-93-1-8 6967274
98 Clark JR, Carlson RD, Pachner AR, Sasaki CT, Steere AC. 1985. Facial paralysis in Lyme disease. Laryngoscope 95 :1341–1345. doi:10.1288/00005537-198511000-00009 4058212
99 Philipp MT, Aydintug MK, Bohm RP Jr, Cogswell FB, Dennis VA, Lanners HN, Lowrie RC Jr, Roberts ED, Conway MD, Karaçorlu M, Peyman GA, Gubler DJ, Johnson BJ, Piesman J, Gu Y. 1993. Early and early disseminated phases of Lyme disease in the rhesus monkey: a model for infection in humans. Infect Immun 61 :3047–3059. doi:10.1128/iai.61.7.3047-3059.1993 8514412
100 Roberts ED, Bohm RP, Lowrie RC, Habicht G, Katona L, Piesman J, Philipp MT. 1998. Pathogenesis of Lyme neuroborreliosis in the rhesus monkey: the early disseminated and chronic phases of disease in the peripheral nervous system. J Infect Dis 178 :722–732. doi:10.1086/515357 9728541
101 Embers ME, Barthold SW, Borda JT, Bowers L, Doyle L, Hodzic E, Jacobs MB, Hasenkampf NR, Martin DS, Narasimhan S, Phillippi-Falkenstein KM, Purcell JE, Ratterree MS, Philipp MT. 2012. Persistence of Borrelia burgdorferi in rhesus macaques following antibiotic treatment of disseminated infection. PLoS One 7 :e29914. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029914 22253822
102 Crossland NA, Alvarez X, Embers ME. 2018. Late disseminated Lyme disease: associated pathology and spirochete persistence posttreatment in rhesus macaques. Am J Pathol 188 :672–682. doi:10.1016/j.ajpath.2017.11.005 29242055
103 Verschoor YL, Vrijlandt A, Spijker R, van Hest RM, Ter Hofstede H, van Kempen K, Henningsson AJ, Hovius JW. 2022. Persistent Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato infection after antibiotic treatment: systematic overview and appraisal of the current evidence from experimental animal models. Clin Microbiol Rev 35 :e0007422. doi:10.1128/cmr.00074-22 36222707
104 Derdáková M, Dudiòák V, Brei B, Brownstein JS, Schwartz I, Fish D. 2004. Interaction and transmission of two Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto strains in a tick-rodent maintenance system. Appl Environ Microbiol 70 :6783–6788. doi:10.1128/AEM.70.11.6783-6788.2004 15528545
105 Hanincová K, Ogden NH, Diuk-Wasser M, Pappas CJ, Iyer R, Fish D, Schwartz I, Kurtenbach K. 2008. Fitness variation of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto strains in mice. Appl Environ Microbiol 74 :153–157. doi:10.1128/AEM.01567-07 17981941
106 Lin Y-P, Tufts DM, Combs M, Dupuis AP II, Marcinkiewicz AL, Hirsbrunner AD, Diaz AJ, Stout JL, Blom AM, Strle K, Davis AD, Kramer LD, Kolokotronis S-O, Diuk-Wasser MA. 2022. Cellular and immunological mechanisms influence host-adapted phenotypes in a vector-borne microparasite. Proc Biol Sci 289 . doi:10.1098/rspb.2021.2087
107 Lindsay LR, Barker IK, Surgeoner GA, McEwen SA, Campbell GD. 1997. Duration of Borrelia burgdorferi infectivity in white-footed mice for the tick vector Ixodes scapularis under laboratory and field conditions in Ontario. J Wildl Dis 33 :766–775. doi:10.7589/0090-3558-33.4.766 9391960
108 Rynkiewicz EC, Brown J, Tufts DM, Huang C-I, Kampen H, Bent SJ, Fish D, Diuk-Wasser MA. 2017. Closely-related Borrelia burgdorferi (sensu stricto) strains exhibit similar fitness in single infections and asymmetric competition in multiple infections. Parasit Vectors 10 :64. doi:10.1186/s13071-016-1964-9 28166814
109 Rogovskyy AS, Casselli T, Tourand Y, Jones CR, Owen JP, Mason KL, Scoles GA, Bankhead T. 2015. Evaluation of the importance of VlsE antigenic variation for the enzootic cycle of Borrelia burgdorferi. PLoS One 10 :e0124268. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0124268 25893989
110 BourgeoisJS, YouSS, Clendenen LH, ShresthaM, Petnicki-OcwiejaT, SRT III, Hu LT. 2024. Comparative reservoir competence of Peromyscus leucopus, C57Bl/6J, and C3H/HeN for Borrelia burgdorferi B31. Appl Environ Microbiol. doi:10.1128/aem.00822-24
111 Bourgeois JS, McCarthy JE, Turk S-P, Bernard Q, Clendenen LH, Wormser GP, Marcos,LA, Dardick K, Telford III,SR, Marques AR, Hu LT. 2024. Peromyscus leucopus, Mus musculus, and humans have distinct transcriptomic responses to larval Ixodes scapularis bites. bioRxiv 2024 . doi:10.1101/2024.05.02.592193
112 Anderson JM, Moore IN, Nagata BM, Ribeiro JMC, Valenzuela JG, Sonenshine DE. 2017. Ticks, Ixodes scapularis, feed repeatedly on white-footed mice despite strong inflammatory response: an expanding paradigm for understanding tick-host interactions. Front Immunol 8 :1784. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2017.01784 29326693
113 Norte AC, Costantini D, Araújo PM, Eens M, Ramos JA, Heylen D. 2018. Experimental infection by microparasites affects the oxidative balance in their avian reservoir host the blackbird Turdus merula. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 9 :720–729. doi:10.1016/j.ttbdis.2018.02.009 29478884
114 Ginsberg HS, Buckley PA, Balmforth MG, Zhioua E, Mitra S, Buckley FG. 2005. Reservoir competence of native North American birds for the lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorfieri. J Med Entomol 42 :445–449. doi:10.1603/0022-2585(2005)042[0445:RCONNA]2.0.CO;2 15962798
115 Gryczyńska A, Kowalec M. 2019. Different competence as a Lyme borreliosis causative agent reservoir found in two thrush species: the blackbird (Turdus merula) and the song thrush (Turdus philomelos). Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 19 :450–452. doi:10.1089/vbz.2018.2351 30615582
116 Norte AC, Lopes de Carvalho I, Núncio MS, Araújo PM, Matthysen E, Albino Ramos J, Sprong H, Heylen D. 2020. Getting under the birds' skin: tissue tropism of Borrelia burgdorferi s.l. in naturally and experimentally infected avian hosts. Microb Ecol 79 :756–769. doi:10.1007/s00248-019-01442-3 31612324
117 Rulison EL, Kerr KT, Dyer MC, Han S, Burke RL, Tsao JI, Ginsberg HS. 2014. Minimal role of eastern fence lizards in Borrelia burgdorferi transmission in central New Jersey oak/pine woodlands. J Parasitol 100 :578–582. doi:10.1645/14-503.1 24871138
118 Lane RS, Quistad GB. 1998. Borreliacidal factor in the blood of the Western fence Lizard (Sceloporus Occidentalis). J Parasitol 84 :29–34. doi:10.2307/3284524 9488334
119 Policastro PF, Schwan TG. 2003. Experimental infection of Ixodes scapularis larvae (Acari: Ixodidae) by immersion in low passage cultures of Borrelia burgdorferi. J Med Entomol 40 :364–370. doi:10.1603/0022-2585-40.3.364 12943118
120 Gern L, Rais O, Capiau C, Hauser P, Lobet Y, Simoen E, Voet P, Pêtre J. 1994. Immunization of mice by recombinant OspA preparations and protection against Borrelia burgdorferi infection induced by Ixodes ricinus tick bites. Immunol Lett 39 :249–258. doi:10.1016/0165-2478(94)90166-x 8034340
121 Tilly K, Krum JG, Bestor A, Jewett MW, Grimm D, Bueschel D, Byram R, Dorward D, VanRaden MJ, Stewart P, Rosa P. 2006. Borrelia burgdorferi OspC protein required exclusively in a crucial early stage of mammalian infection. Infect Immun 74 :3554–3564. doi:10.1128/IAI.01950-05 16714588
122 Xu H, He M, He JJ, Yang XF. 2010. Role of the surface lipoprotein BBA07 in the enzootic cycle of Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 78 :2910–2918. doi:10.1128/IAI.00372-10 20421380
123 Iyer R, Caimano MJ, Luthra A, Axline D Jr, Corona A, Iacobas DA, Radolf JD, Schwartz I. 2015. Stage-specific global alterations in the transcriptomes of Lyme disease spirochetes during tick feeding and following mammalian host adaptation. Mol Microbiol 95 :509–538. doi:10.1111/mmi.12882 25425211
124 Sapiro AL, Hayes BM, Volk RF, Zhang JY, Brooks DM, Martyn C, Radkov A, Zhao Z, Kinnersley M, Secor PR, Zaro BW, Chou S. 2023. Longitudinal map of transcriptome changes in the Lyme pathogen Borrelia burgdorferi during tick-borne transmission. Elife 12 :RP86636. doi:10.7554/eLife.86636 37449477
125 Kasumba IN, Bestor A, Tilly K, Rosa PA. 2016. Virulence of the Lyme disease spirochete before and after the tick bloodmeal: a quantitative assessment. Parasit Vectors 9 :129. doi:10.1186/s13071-016-1380-1 26951688
126 Kitsou C, Fikrig E, Pal U. 2021. Tick host immunity: vector immunomodulation and acquired tick resistance. Trends Immunol 42 :554–574. doi:10.1016/j.it.2021.05.005 34074602
127 Hagman KE, Yang X, Wikel SK, Schoeler GB, Caimano MJ, Radolf JD, Norgard MV. 2000. Decorin-binding protein A (DbpA) of Borrelia burgdorferi is not protective when immunized mice are challenged via tick infestation and correlates with the lack of DbpA expression by B. burgdorferi in ticks. Infect Immun 68 :4759–4764. doi:10.1128/IAI.68.8.4759-4764.2000 10899883
128 Lemieux JE, Huang W, Hill N, Cerar T, Freimark L, Hernandez S, Luban M, Maraspin V, Bogovič P, Ogrinc K, Ruzič-Sabljič E, Lapierre P, Lasek-Nesselquist E, Singh N, Iyer R, Liveris D, Reed KD, Leong JM, Branda JA, Steere AC, Wormser GP, Strle F, Sabeti PC, Schwartz I, Strle K. 2023. Whole genome sequencing of human Borrelia burgdorferi isolates reveals linked blocks of accessory genome elements located on plasmids and associated with human dissemination. PLoS Pathog 19 :e1011243. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1011243 37651316
129 Murphy BT, Wiepen JJ, He H, Pramanik AS, Peters JM, Stevenson B, Zückert WR. 2023. Inducible CRISPRi-based operon silencing and selective in trans gene complementation in Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 205 :e0046822. doi:10.1128/jb.00468-22 36719218
130 Blevins JS, Revel AT, Smith AH, Bachlani GN, Norgard MV. 2007. Adaptation of a luciferase gene reporter and lac expression system to Borrelia burgdorferi. Appl Environ Microbiol 73 :1501–1513. doi:10.1128/AEM.02454-06 17220265
131 Karp PD, Billington R, Caspi R, Fulcher CA, Latendresse M, Kothari A, Keseler IM, Krummenacker M, Midford PE, Ong Q, Ong WK, Paley SM, Subhraveti P. 2019. The BioCyc collection of microbial genomes and metabolic pathways. Brief Bioinform 20 :1085–1093. doi:10.1093/bib/bbx085 29447345
132 Dowdell AS, Murphy MD, Azodi C, Swanson SK, Florens L, Chen S, Zückert WR. 2017. Comprehensive spatial analysis of the Borrelia burgdorferi lipoproteome reveals a compartmentalization bias toward the bacterial surface. J Bacteriol 199 :e00658-16. doi:10.1128/JB.00658-16 28069820
133 Setubal JC, Reis M, Matsunaga J, Haake DA. 2006. Lipoprotein computational prediction in spirochaetal genomes. Microbiology (Reading) 152 :113–121. doi:10.1099/mic.0.28317-0 16385121
134 Narita S-I, Matsuyama S-I, Tokuda H. 2004. Lipoprotein trafficking in Escherichia coli. Arch Microbiol 182 :1–6. doi:10.1007/s00203-004-0682-4 15221203
135 Radolf JD, Caimano MJ, Stevenson B, Hu LT. 2012. Of ticks, mice and men: understanding the dual-host lifestyle of Lyme disease spirochaetes. Nat Rev Microbiol 10 :87–99. doi:10.1038/nrmicro2714 22230951
136 Barbour AG. 1988. Plasmid analysis of Borrelia burgdorferi, the Lyme disease agent. J Clin Microbiol 26 :475–478. doi:10.1128/jcm.26.3.475-478.1988 3356787
137 Stevenson B, Tilly K, Rosa PA. 1996. A family of genes located on four separate 32-kilobase circular plasmids in Borrelia burgdorferi B31. J Bacteriol 178 :3508–3516. doi:10.1128/jb.178.12.3508-3516.1996 8655548
138 Casjens S, van Vugt R, Tilly K, Rosa PA, Stevenson B. 1997. Homology throughout the multiple 32-kilobase circular plasmids present in Lyme disease spirochetes. J Bacteriol 179 :217–227. doi:10.1128/jb.179.1.217-227.1997 8982001
139 Eggers CH, Samuels DS. 1999. Molecular evidence for a new bacteriophage of Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 181 :7308–7313. doi:10.1128/JB.181.23.7308-7313.1999 10572135
140 Wachter J, Cheff B, Hillman C, Carracoi V, Dorward DW, Martens C, Barbian K, Nardone G, Renee Olano L, Kinnersley M, Secor PR, Rosa PA. 2023. Coupled induction of prophage and virulence factors during tick transmission of the Lyme disease spirochete. Nat Commun 14 :198. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-35897-3 36639656
141 Eggers CH, Kimmel BJ, Bono JL, Elias AF, Rosa P, Samuels DS. 2001. Transduction by phiBB-1, a bacteriophage of Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 183 :4771–4778. doi:10.1128/JB.183.16.4771-4778.2001 11466280
142 Faith DR, Kinnersley M, Brooks DM, Drecktrah D, Hall LS, Luo E, Santiago-Frangos A, Wachter J, Samuels DS, Secor PR. 2024. Characterization and genomic analysis of the Lyme disease spirochete bacteriophage varphiBB-1. PLoS Pathog 20 :e1012122. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1012122 38558079
143 Rosa PA, Jewett MW. 2021. Genetic manipulation of Borrelia. Curr Issues Mol Biol 42 :307–332. doi:10.21775/cimb.042.307 33300496
144 Bono JL, Elias AF, Kupko JJ III, Stevenson B, Tilly K, Rosa P. 2000. Efficient targeted mutagenesis in Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 182 :2445–2452. doi:10.1128/JB.182.9.2445-2452.2000 10762244
145 Elias AF, Bono JL, Kupko JJ, Stewart PE, Krum JG, Rosa PA. 2003. New antibiotic resistance cassettes suitable for genetic studies in Borrelia burgdorferi. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 6 :29–40. doi:10.1159/000073406 14593251
146 Stevenson B, Bono JL, Elias A, Tilly K, Rosa P. 1998. Transformation of the Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi with heterologous DNA. J Bacteriol 180 :4850–4855. doi:10.1128/JB.180.18.4850-4855.1998 9733687
147 Samuels DS, Drecktrah D, Hall LS. 2018. Genetic transformation and complementation. Methods Mol Biol 1690 :183–200. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-7383-5_15 29032546
148 Tilly K, Elias AF, Bono JL, Stewart P, Rosa P. 2000. DNA exchange and insertional inactivation in spirochetes. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 2 :433–442.11075915
149 Lawrenz MB, Wooten RM, Norris SJ. 2004. Effects of vlsE complementation on the infectivity of Borrelia burgdorferi lacking the linear plasmid lp28-1. Infect Immun 72 :6577–6585. doi:10.1128/IAI.72.11.6577-6585.2004 15501789
150 Lawrenz MB, Kawabata H, Purser JE, Norris SJ. 2002. Decreased electroporation efficiency in Borrelia burgdorferi containing linear plasmids lp25 and lp56: impact on transformation of infectious B. burgdorferi. Infect Immun 70 :4798–4804. doi:10.1128/IAI.70.9.4798-4804.2002 12183522
151 Kawabata H, Norris SJ, Watanabe H. 2004. BBE02 disruption mutants of Borrelia burgdorferi B31 have a highly transformable, infectious phenotype. Infect Immun 72 :7147–7154. doi:10.1128/IAI.72.12.7147-7154.2004 15557639
152 Chen Q, Fischer JR, Benoit VM, Dufour NP, Youderian P, Leong JM. 2008. In vitro CpG methylation increases the transformation efficiency of Borrelia burgdorferi strains harboring the endogenous linear plasmid lp56. J Bacteriol 190 :7885–7891. doi:10.1128/JB.00324-08 18849429
153 Rego ROM, Bestor A, Rosa PA. 2011. Defining the plasmid-borne restriction-modification systems of the Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 193 :1161–1171. doi:10.1128/JB.01176-10 21193609
154 Purser JE, Norris SJ. 2000. Correlation between plasmid content and infectivity in Borrelia burgdorferi. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 97 :13865–13870. doi:10.1073/pnas.97.25.13865 11106398
155 Purser JE, Lawrenz MB, Caimano MJ, Howell JK, Radolf JD, Norris SJ. 2003. A plasmid-encoded nicotinamidase (PncA) is essential for infectivity of Borrelia burgdorferi in a mammalian host. Mol Microbiol 48 :753–764. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03452.x 12694619
156 Gilmore RD, Brandt KS, Hyde JA. 2014. pncA and bptA are not sufficient to complement Ixodes scapularis colonization and persistence by Borrelia burgdorferi in a linear plasmid lp25-deficient background. Infect Immun 82 :5110–5116. doi:10.1128/IAI.02613-14 25245809
157 Revel AT, Blevins JS, Almazán C, Neil L, Kocan KM, de la Fuente J, Hagman KE, Norgard MV. 2005. bptA (bbe16) is essential for the persistence of the Lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi, in its natural tick vector. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102 :6972–6977. doi:10.1073/pnas.0502565102 15860579
158 Gilbert MA, Morton EA, Bundle SF, Samuels DS. 2007. Artificial regulation of ospC expression in Borrelia burgdorferi. Mol Microbiol 63 :1259–1273. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2007.05593.x 17257307
159 Chan K, Alter L, Barthold SW, Parveen N. 2015. Disruption of bbe02 by insertion of a luciferase gene increases transformation efficiency of Borrelia burgdorferi and allows live imaging in Lyme disease susceptible C3H mice. PLoS ONE 10 :e0129532. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0129532 26069970
160 Whetstine CR, Slusser JG, Zückert WR. 2009. Development of a single-plasmid-based regulatable gene expression system for Borrelia burgdorferi. Appl Environ Microbiol 75 :6553–6558. doi:10.1128/AEM.02825-08 19700541
161 Grassmann AA, Tokarz R, Golino C, McLain MA, Groshong AM, Radolf JD, Caimano MJ. 2023. BosR and PlzA reciprocally regulate RpoS function to sustain Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks and mammals. J Clin Invest 133 :e166710. doi:10.1172/JCI166710 36649080
162 Takacs CN, Kloos ZA, Scott M, Rosa PA, Jacobs-Wagner C. 2018. Fluorescent proteins, promoters, and selectable markers for applications in the Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi. Appl Environ Microbiol 84 :e01824-18. doi:10.1128/AEM.01824-18 30315081
163 Frank KL, Bundle SF, Kresge ME, Eggers CH, Samuels DS. 2003. aadA confers streptomycin resistance in Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 185 :6723–6727. doi:10.1128/JB.185.22.6723-6727.2003 14594849
164 Babb K, McAlister JD, Miller JC, Stevenson B. 2004. Molecular characterization of Borrelia burgdorferi erp promoter/operator elements. J Bacteriol 186 :2745–2756. doi:10.1128/JB.186.9.2745-2756.2004 15090516
165 Schulze RJ, Zückert WR. 2006. Borrelia burgdorferi lipoproteins are secreted to the outer surface by default. Mol Microbiol 59 :1473–1484. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2006.05039.x 16468989
166 Takacs C.N, Nakajima Y, Haber JE, Jacobs-Wagner C. 2022. Cas9-mediated endogenous plasmid loss in Borrelia burgdorferi. PLoS ONE 17 :e0278151. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0278151 36441794
167 van Opijnen T, Bodi KL, Camilli A. 2009. Tn-seq: high-throughput parallel sequencing for fitness and genetic interaction studies in microorganisms. Nat Methods 6 :767–772. doi:10.1038/nmeth.1377 19767758
168 Troy EB, Lin T, Gao L, Lazinski DW, Lundt M, Camilli A, Norris SJ, Hu LT. 2016. Global Tn-seq analysis of carbohydrate utilization and vertebrate infectivity of Borrelia burgdorferi. Mol Microbiol 101 :1003–1023. doi:10.1111/mmi.13437 27279039
169 Ramsey ME, Hyde JA, Medina-Perez DN, Lin T, Gao L, Lundt ME, Li X, Norris SJ, Skare JT, Hu LT. 2017. A high-throughput genetic screen identifies previously uncharacterized Borrelia burgdorferi genes important for resistance against reactive oxygen and nitrogen species. PLoS Pathog 13 :e1006225. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1006225 28212410
170 Phelan J.P, Bourgeois JS, McCarthy JE, Hu LT. 2023. A putative xanthine dehydrogenase is critical for Borrelia burgdorferi survival in ticks and mice. Microbiology (Reading) 169 :001286. doi:10.1099/mic.0.001286 36748545
171 Phelan James P, Kern A, Ramsey ME, Lundt ME, Sharma B, Lin T, Gao L, Norris SJ, Hyde JA, Skare JT, Hu LT. 2019. Genome-wide screen identifies novel genes required for Borrelia burgdorferi survival in its Ixodes tick vector. PLoS Pathog 15 :e1007644. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1007644 31086414
172 Medina-Pérez DN, Wager B, Troy E, Gao L, Norris SJ, Lin T, Hu L, Hyde JA, Lybecker M, Skare JT. 2020. The intergenic small non-coding RNA ittA is required for optimal infectivity and tissue tropism in Borrelia burgdorferi. PLoS Pathog 16 :e1008423. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1008423 32365143
173 Schwan TG, Piesman J, Golde WT, Dolan MC, Rosa PA. 1995. Induction of an outer surface protein on Borrelia burgdorferi during tick feeding. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 92 :2909–2913. doi:10.1073/pnas.92.7.2909 7708747
174 Stevenson B, Schwan TG, Rosa PA. 1995. Temperature-related differential expression of antigens in the Lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 63 :4535–4539. doi:10.1128/iai.63.11.4535-4539.1995 7591099
175 Tokarz R, Anderton JM, Katona LI, Benach JL. 2004. Combined effects of blood and temperature shift on Borrelia burgdorferi gene expression as determined by whole genome DNA array. Infect Immun 72 :5419–5432. doi:10.1128/IAI.72.9.5419-5432.2004 15322040
176 Carroll JA, Garon CF, Schwan TG. 1999. Effects of environmental pH on membrane proteins in Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 67 :3181–3187. doi:10.1128/IAI.67.7.3181-3187.1999 10377088
177 Tilly K, Elias AF, Errett J, Fischer E, Iyer R, Schwartz I, Bono JL, Rosa P. 2001. Genetics and regulation of chitobiose utilization in Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 183 :5544–5553. doi:10.1128/JB.183.19.5544-5553.2001 11544216
178 Hübner A, Yang X, Nolen DM, Popova TG, Cabello FC, Norgard MV. 2001. Expression of Borrelia burgdorferi OspC and DbpA is controlled by a RpoN-RpoS regulatory pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98 :12724–12729. doi:10.1073/pnas.231442498 11675503
179 Ramamoorthy R, Scholl-Meeker D. 2001. Borrelia burgdorferi proteins whose expression is similarly affected by culture temperature and pH. Infect Immun 69 :2739–2742. doi:10.1128/IAI.69.4.2739-2742.2001 11254645
180 Liang Fang Ting, Yan J, Mbow ML, Sviat SL, Gilmore RD, Mamula M, Fikrig E. 2004. Borrelia burgdorferi changes its surface antigenic expression in response to host immune responses. Infect Immun 72 :5759–5767. doi:10.1128/IAI.72.10.5759-5767.2004 15385475
181 Liang F.T, Nelson FK, Fikrig E. 2002. Molecular adaptation of Borrelia burgdorferi in the murine host. J Exp Med 196 :275–280. doi:10.1084/jem.20020770 12119353
182 Akins DR, Bourell KW, Caimano MJ, Norgard MV, Radolf JD. 1998. A new animal model for studying Lyme disease spirochetes in a mammalian host-adapted state. J Clin Invest 101 :2240–2250. doi:10.1172/JCI2325 9593780
183 Caimano MJ, Iyer R, Eggers CH, Gonzalez C, Morton EA, Gilbert MA, Schwartz I, Radolf JD. 2007. Analysis of the RpoS regulon in Borrelia burgdorferi in response to mammalian host signals provides insight into RpoS function during the enzootic cycle. Mol Microbiol 65 :1193–1217. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2007.05860.x 17645733
184 Hefty PS, Jolliff SE, Caimano MJ, Wikel SK, Radolf JD, Akins DR. 2001. Regulation of OspE-related, OspF-related, and Elp lipoproteins of Borrelia burgdorferi strain 297 by mammalian host-specific signals. Infect Immun 69 :3618–3627. doi:10.1128/IAI.69.6.3618-3627.2001 11349022
185 Dunham-Ems SM, Caimano MJ, Eggers CH, Radolf JD. 2012. Borrelia burgdorferi requires the alternative sigma factor RpoS for dissemination within the vector during tick-to-mammal transmission. PLoS Pathog 8 :e1002532. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1002532 22359504
186 Wooten RM, Ma Y, Yoder RA, Brown JP, Weis JH, Zachary JF, Kirschning CJ, Weis JJ. 2002. Toll-like receptor 2 is required for innate, but not acquired, host defense to Borrelia burgdorferi. J Immunol 168 :348–355. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.168.1.348 11751980
187 Kenefick KB, Lederer JA, Schell RF, Czuprynski CJ. 1992. Borrelia burgdorferi stimulates release of interleukin-1 activity from bovine peripheral blood monocytes. Infect Immun 60 :3630–3634. doi:10.1128/iai.60.9.3630-3634.1992 1500171
188 Habicht GS, Katona LI, Benach JL. 1991. Cytokines and the pathogenesis of neuroborreliosis: Borrelia burgdorferi induces glioma cells to secrete interleukin-6. J Infect Dis 164 :568–574. doi:10.1093/infdis/164.3.568 1908002
189 Beck G, Habicht GS, Benach JL, Coleman JL, Lysik RM, O’Brien RF. 1986. A role for interleukin-1 in the pathogenesis of Lyme disease. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg A 263 :133–136. doi:10.1016/s0176-6724(86)80114-6 3495083
190 Farris LC, Torres-Odio S, Adams LG, West AP, Hyde JA. 2023. Borrelia burgdorferi engages mammalian type I IFN responses via the cGAS-STING pathway. J Immunol 210 :1761–1770. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.2200354 37067290
191 Petnicki-Ocwieja T, DeFrancesco AS, Chung E, Darcy CT, Bronson RT, Kobayashi KS, Hu LT. 2011. Nod2 suppresses Borrelia burgdorferi mediated murine Lyme arthritis and carditis through the induction of tolerance. PLoS One 6 :e17414. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017414 21387014
192 Strle K, Shin JJ, Glickstein LJ, Steere AC. 2012. Association of a Toll-like receptor 1 polymorphism with heightened Th1 inflammatory responses and antibiotic-refractory Lyme arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 64 :1497–1507. doi:10.1002/art.34383 22246581
193 Bugrysheva J, Dobrikova EY, Godfrey HP, Sartakova ML, Cabello FC. 2002. Modulation of Borrelia burgdorferi stringent response and gene expression during extracellular growth with tick cells. Infect Immun 70 :3061–3067. doi:10.1128/IAI.70.6.3061-3067.2002 12010998
194 Georgilis K, Steere AC, Klempner MS. 1991. Infectivity of Borrelia burgdorferi correlates with resistance to elimination by phagocytic cells. J Infect Dis 163 :150–155. doi:10.1093/infdis/163.1.150 1984461
195 Obonyo M, Munderloh UG, Fingerle V, Wilske B, Kurtti TJ. 1999. Borrelia burgdorferi in tick cell culture modulates expression of outer surface proteins A and C in response to temperature. J Clin Microbiol 37 :2137–2141. doi:10.1128/JCM.37.7.2137-2141.1999 10364575
196 Harman MW, Dunham-Ems SM, Caimano MJ, Belperron AA, Bockenstedt LK, Fu HC, Radolf JD, Wolgemuth CW. 2012. The heterogeneous motility of the Lyme disease spirochete in gelatin mimics dissemination through tissue. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109 :3059–3064. doi:10.1073/pnas.1114362109 22315410
197 Kumar D, Ristow LC, Shi M, Mukherjee P, Caine JA, Lee W-Y, Kubes P, Coburn J, Chaconas G. 2015. Intravital imaging of vascular transmigration by the Lyme spirochete: requirement for the integrin binding residues of the B. burgdorferi P66 protein. PLoS Pathog 11 :e1005333. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1005333 26684456
198 Moriarty T.J, Norman MU, Colarusso P, Bankhead T, Kubes P, Chaconas G. 2008. Real-time high resolution 3D imaging of the lyme disease spirochete adhering to and escaping from the vasculature of a living host. PLoS Pathog 4 :e1000090. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000090 18566656
199 Moriarty Tara J, Shi M, Lin Y-P, Ebady R, Zhou H, Odisho T, Hardy P-O, Salman-Dilgimen A, Wu J, Weening EH, Skare JT, Kubes P, Leong J, Chaconas G. 2012. Vascular binding of a pathogen under shear force through mechanistically distinct sequential interactions with host macromolecules. Mol Microbiol 86 :1116–1131. doi:10.1111/mmi.12045 23095033
200 Norman MU, Moriarty TJ, Dresser AR, Millen B, Kubes P, Chaconas G. 2008. Molecular mechanisms involved in vascular interactions of the Lyme disease pathogen in a living host. PLoS Pathog 4 :e1000169. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000169 18833295
201 Hyde Jenny A, Weening EH, Chang M, Trzeciakowski JP, Höök M, Cirillo JD, Skare JT. 2011. Bioluminescent imaging of Borrelia burgdorferi in vivo demonstrates that the fibronectin-binding protein BBK32 is required for optimal infectivity. Mol Microbiol 82 :99–113. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2011.07801.x 21854463
202 Hyde JA, Skare JT. 2018. Detection of bioluminescent Borrelia burgdorferi from in vitro cultivation and during murine Infection. Methods Mol Biol 1690 :241–257. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-7383-5_18 29032549
203 Helble JD, McCarthy JE, Sawden M, Starnbach MN, Hu LT. 2022. The PD-1/PD-L1 pathway is induced during Borrelia burgdorferi infection and inhibits T cell joint infiltration without compromising bacterial clearance. PLoS Pathog 18 :e1010903. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1010903 36265003
204 Samuels DS, Lybecker MC, Yang XF, Ouyang Z, Bourret TJ, Boyle WK, Stevenson B, Drecktrah D, Caimano MJ. 2021. Gene regulation and transcriptomics. Curr Issues Mol Biol 42 :223–266. doi:10.21775/cimb.042.223 33300497
205 Caimano MJ, Drecktrah D, Kung F, Samuels DS. 2016. Interaction of the Lyme disease spirochete with its tick vector. Cell Microbiol 18 :919–927. doi:10.1111/cmi.12609 27147446
206 Yang XF, Pal U, Alani SM, Fikrig E, Norgard MV. 2004. Essential role for OspA/B in the life cycle of the Lyme disease spirochete. J Exp Med 199 :641–648. doi:10.1084/jem.20031960 14981112
207 Pal U, de Silva AM, Montgomery RR, Fish D, Anguita J, Anderson JF, Lobet Y, Fikrig E. 2000. Attachment of Borrelia burgdorferi within Ixodes scapularis mediated by outer surface protein A. J Clin Invest 106 :561–569. doi:10.1172/JCI9427 10953031
208 Grimm D, Tilly K, Byram R, Stewart PE, Krum JG, Bueschel DM, Schwan TG, Policastro PF, Elias AF, Rosa PA. 2004. Outer-surface protein C of the Lyme disease spirochete: a protein induced in ticks for infection of mammals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101 :3142–3147. doi:10.1073/pnas.0306845101 14970347
209 Ohnishi J, Piesman J, de Silva AM. 2001. Antigenic and genetic heterogeneity of Borrelia burgdorferi populations transmitted by ticks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98 :670–675. doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.670 11209063
210 Srivastava SY, de Silva AM. 2008. Reciprocal expression of ospA and ospC in single cells of Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 190 :3429–3433. doi:10.1128/JB.00085-08 18359818
211 Eggers CH, Caimano MJ, Radolf JD. 2004. Analysis of promoter elements involved in the transcriptional initiation of RpoS-dependent Borrelia burgdorferi genes. J Bacteriol 186 :7390–7402. doi:10.1128/JB.186.21.7390-7402.2004 15489451
212 Caimano MJ, Groshong AM, Belperron A, Mao J, Hawley KL, Luthra A, Graham DE, Earnhart CG, Marconi RT, Bockenstedt LK, Blevins JS, Radolf JD. 2019. The RpoS gatekeeper in Borrelia burgdorferi: an Invariant regulatory scheme that promotes spirochete persistence in reservoir hosts and niche diversity. Front Microbiol 10 :1923. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2019.01923 31507550
213 Yang XF, Alani SM, Norgard MV. 2003. The response regulator Rrp2 is essential for the expression of major membrane lipoproteins in Borrelia burgdorferi. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100 :11001–11006. doi:10.1073/pnas.1834315100 12949258
214 Ouyang Z, Deka RK, Norgard MV. 2011. BosR (BB0647) controls the RpoN-RpoS regulatory pathway and virulence expression in Borrelia burgdorferi by a novel DNA-binding mechanism. PLoS Pathog 7 :e1001272. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1001272 21347346
215 Hyde JA, Shaw DK, Smith Iii R, Trzeciakowski JP, Skare JT. 2009. The BosR regulatory protein of Borrelia burgdorferi interfaces with the RpoS regulatory pathway and modulates both the oxidative stress response and pathogenic properties of the Lyme disease spirochete. Mol Microbiol 74 :1344–1355. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2009.06951.x 19906179
216 Ouyang Z, Kumar M, Kariu T, Haq S, Goldberg M, Pal U, Norgard MV. 2009. BosR (BB0647) governs virulence expression in Borrelia burgdorferi. Mol Microbiol 74 :1331–1343. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2009.06945.x 19889086
217 Caimano MJ, Eggers CH, Gonzalez CA, Radolf JD. 2005. Alternate sigma factor RpoS is required for the in vivo-specific repression of Borrelia burgdorferi plasmid lp54-borne ospA and lp6.6 genes. J Bacteriol 187 :7845–7852. doi:10.1128/JB.187.22.7845-7852.2005 16267308
218 Grove AP, Liveris D, Iyer R, Petzke M, Rudman J, Caimano MJ, Radolf JD, Schwartz I. 2017. Two distinct mechanisms govern RpoS-mediated repression of tick-phase genes during mammalian host adaptation by Borrelia burgdorferi, the Lyme disease spirochete. mBio 8 :e01204-17. doi:10.1128/mBio.01204-17 28830947
219 Raghunandanan S, Priya R, Alanazi F, Lybecker MC, Schlax PJ, Yang XF. 2024. A Fur family protein BosR is a novel RNA-binding protein that controls rpoS RNA stability in the Lyme disease pathogen. Nucleic Acids Res 52 :5320–5335. doi:10.1093/nar/gkae114 38366569
220 Wang P, Dadhwal P, Cheng Z, Zianni MR, Rikihisa Y, Liang FT, Li X. 2013. Borrelia burgdorferi oxidative stress regulator BosR directly represses lipoproteins primarily expressed in the tick during mammalian infection. Mol Microbiol 89 :1140–1153. doi:10.1111/mmi.12337 23869590
221 Caimano MJ, Kenedy MR, Kairu T, Desrosiers DC, Harman M, Dunham-Ems S, Akins DR, Pal U, Radolf JD. 2011. The hybrid histidine kinase Hk1 is part of a two-component system that is essential for survival of Borrelia burgdorferi in feeding Ixodes scapularis ticks. Infect Immun 79 :3117–3130. doi:10.1128/IAI.05136-11 21606185
222 Kostick JL, Szkotnicki LT, Rogers EA, Bocci P, Raffaelli N, Marconi RT. 2011. The diguanylate cyclase, Rrp1, regulates critical steps in the enzootic cycle of the Lyme disease spirochetes. Mol Microbiol 81 :219–231. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2011.07687.x 21542866
223 He M, Ouyang Z, Troxell B, Xu H, Moh A, Piesman J, Norgard MV, Gomelsky M, Yang XF. 2011. Cyclic di-GMP is essential for the survival of the lyme disease spirochete in ticks. PLoS Pathog 7 :e1002133. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1002133 21738477
224 Bugrysheva J, Dobrikova EY, Sartakova ML, Caimano MJ, Daniels TJ, Radolf JD, Godfrey HP, Cabello FC. 2003. Characterization of the stringent response and rel(Bbu) expression in Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 185 :957–965. doi:10.1128/JB.185.3.957-965.2003 12533471
225 Drecktrah D, Lybecker M, Popitsch N, Rescheneder P, Hall LS, Samuels DS. 2015. The Borrelia burgdorferi RelA/SpoT homolog and stringent response regulate survival in the tick vector and global gene expression during starvation. PLoS Pathog 11 :e1005160. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1005160 26371761
226 Boyle WK, Groshong AM, Drecktrah D, Boylan JA, Gherardini FC, Blevins JS, Samuels DS, Bourret TJ. 2019. Dksa controls the response of the lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi to starvation. J Bacteriol 201 :e00582-18. doi:10.1128/JB.00582-18 30478087
227 Boyle WK, Richards CL, Dulebohn DP, Zalud AK, Shaw JA, Lovas S, Gherardini FC, Bourret TJ. 2021. DksA-dependent regulation of RpoS contributes to Borrelia burgdorferi tick-borne transmission and mammalian infectivity. PLoS Pathog 17 :e1009072. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1009072 33600418
228 He M, Zhang JJ, Ye M, Lou Y, Yang XF. 2014. Cyclic Di-GMP receptor PlzA controls virulence gene expression through RpoS in Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 82 :445–452. doi:10.1128/IAI.01238-13 24218478
229 Sze CW, Smith A, Choi YH, Yang X, Pal U, Yu A, Li C. 2013. Study of the response regulator Rrp1 reveals its regulatory role in chitobiose utilization and virulence of Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 81 :1775–1787. doi:10.1128/IAI.00050-13 23478317
230 Alverson J, Bundle SF, Sohaskey CD, Lybecker MC, Samuels DS. 2003. Transcriptional regulation of the ospAB and ospC promoters from Borrelia burgdorferi. Mol Microbiol 48 :1665–1677. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03537.x 12791146
231 Jutras BL, Chenail AM, Stevenson B. 2013. Changes in bacterial growth rate govern expression of the Borrelia burgdorferi OspC and Erp infection-associated surface proteins. J Bacteriol 195 :757–764. doi:10.1128/JB.01956-12 23222718
232 Oliver JR, Sinsky RJ, Piesman J. 1990. Growth kinetics of the Lyme disease spirochete (Borrelia burgdorferi) in vector ticks (Ixodes dammini). Am J Trop Med Hyg 42 :352–357. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1990.42.352 2331043
233 De Silva AM, Fikrig E. 1995. Growth and migration of Borrelia burgdorferi in Ixodes ticks during blood feeding. Am J Trop Med Hyg 53 :397–404. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1995.53.397 7485694
234 Ribeiro JM, Mather TN, Piesman J, Spielman A. 1987. Dissemination and salivary delivery of Lyme disease spirochetes in vector ticks (Acari: Ixodidae). J Med Entomol 24 :201–205. doi:10.1093/jmedent/24.2.201 3585913
235 Dunham-Ems SM, Caimano MJ, Pal U, Wolgemuth CW, Eggers CH, Balic A, Radolf JD. 2009. Live imaging reveals a biphasic mode of dissemination of Borrelia burgdorferi within ticks. J Clin Invest 119 :3652–3665. doi:10.1172/JCI39401 19920352
236 Kurokawa C, Narasimhan S, Vidyarthi A, Booth CJ, Mehta S, Meister L, Diktas H, Strank N, Lynn GE, DePonte K, Craft J, Fikrig E. 2020. Repeat tick exposure elicits distinct immune responses in guinea pigs and mice. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 11 :101529. doi:10.1016/j.ttbdis.2020.101529 32993942
237 Krause PJ, Grant-Kels JM, Tahan SR, Dardick KR, Alarcon-Chaidez F, Bouchard K, Visini C, Deriso C, Foppa IM, Wikel S. 2009. Dermatologic changes induced by repeated Ixodes scapularis bites and implications for prevention of tick-borne infection. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 9 :603–610. doi:10.1089/vbz.2008.0091 19196014
238 Strobl J, Mündler V, Müller S, Gindl A, Berent S, Schötta A-M, Kleissl L, Staud C, Redl A, Unterluggauer L, Aguilar González AE, Weninger ST, Atzmüller D, Klasinc R, Stanek G, Markowicz M, Stockinger H, Stary G. 2022. Tick feeding modulates the human skin immune landscape to facilitate tick-borne pathogen transmission. J Clin Invest 132 :e161188. doi:10.1172/JCI161188 36166299
239 Ribeiro JM, Makoul GT, Levine J, Robinson DR, Spielman A. 1985. Antihemostatic, antiinflammatory, and immunosuppressive properties of the saliva of a tick, Ixodes dammini. J Exp Med 161 :332–344. doi:10.1084/jem.161.2.332 2982989
240 Zeidner NS, Schneider BS, Nuncio MS, Gern L, Piesman J. 2002. Coinoculation of Borrelia spp. with tick salivary gland lysate enhances spirochete load in mice and is tick species-specific. J Parasitol 88 :1276–1278. doi:10.1645/0022-3395(2002)088[1276:COBSWT]2.0.CO;2 12537131
241 Ramamoorthi N, Narasimhan S, Pal U, Bao F, Yang XF, Fish D, Anguita J, Norgard MV, Kantor FS, Anderson JF, Koski RA, Fikrig E. 2005. The Lyme disease agent exploits a tick protein to infect the mammalian host. Nature 436 :573–577. doi:10.1038/nature03812 16049492
242 Schuijt TJ, Hovius JWR, van Burgel ND, Ramamoorthi N, Fikrig E, van Dam AP. 2008. The tick salivary protein Salp15 inhibits the killing of serum-sensitive Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato isolates. Infect Immun 76 :2888–2894. doi:10.1128/IAI.00232-08 18426890
243 Anguita J, Ramamoorthi N, Hovius JWR, Das S, Thomas V, Persinski R, Conze D, Askenase PW, Rincón M, Kantor FS, Fikrig E. 2002. Salp15, an ixodes scapularis salivary protein, inhibits CD4(+) T cell activation. Immunity 16 :849–859. doi:10.1016/s1074-7613(02)00325-4 12121666
244 Schuijt TJ, Coumou J, Narasimhan S, Dai J, Deponte K, Wouters D, Brouwer M, Oei A, Roelofs JJTH, van Dam AP, van der Poll T, Van’t Veer C, Hovius JW, Fikrig E. 2011. A tick mannose-binding lectin inhibitor interferes with the vertebrate complement cascade to enhance transmission of the lyme disease agent. Cell Host Microbe 10 :136–146. doi:10.1016/j.chom.2011.06.010 21843870
245 Nguyen T-T, Kim TH, Bencosme-Cuevas E, Berry J, Gaithuma ASK, Ansari MA, Kim TK, Tirloni L, Radulovic Z, Moresco JJ, Yates JR, Mulenga A. 2024. A tick saliva serpin, IxsS17 inhibits host innate immune system proteases and enhances host colonization by Lyme disease agent. PLoS Pathog 20 :e1012032. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1012032 38394332
246 Tang X, Arora G, Matias J, Hart T, Cui Y, Fikrig E. 2022. A tick C1q protein alters infectivity of the Lyme disease agent by modulating interferon gamma. Cell Rep 41 :111673. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2022.111673 36417869
247 Rathinavelu S, Broadwater A, de Silva AM. 2003. Does host complement kill Borrelia burgdorferi within ticks? Infect Immun 71 :822–829. doi:10.1128/IAI.71.2.822-829.2003 12540562
248 LaRocca TJ, Holthausen DJ, Hsieh C, Renken C, Mannella CA, Benach JL. 2009. The bactericidal effect of a complement-independent antibody is osmolytic and specific to Borrelia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106 :10752–10757. doi:10.1073/pnas.0901858106 19549817
249 Skare JT, Garcia BL. 2020. Complement evasion by Lyme disease spirochetes. Trends Microbiol 28 :889–899. doi:10.1016/j.tim.2020.05.004 32482556
250 Hellwage J, Meri T, Heikkilä T, Alitalo A, Panelius J, Lahdenne P, Seppälä IJ, Meri S. 2001. The complement regulator factor H binds to the surface protein OspE of Borrelia burgdorferi. J Biol Chem 276 :8427–8435. doi:10.1074/jbc.M007994200 11113124
251 Kenedy MR, Vuppala SR, Siegel C, Kraiczy P, Akins DR. 2009. CspA-mediated binding of human factor H inhibits complement deposition and confers serum resistance in Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 77 :2773–2782. doi:10.1128/IAI.00318-09 19451251
252 Kraiczy P, Hellwage J, Skerka C, Becker H, Kirschfink M, Simon MM, Brade V, Zipfel PF, Wallich R. 2004. Complement resistance of Borrelia burgdorferi correlates with the expression of BbCRASP-1, a novel linear plasmid-encoded surface protein that interacts with human factor H and FHL-1 and is unrelated to Erp proteins. J Biol Chem 279 :2421–2429. doi:10.1074/jbc.M308343200 14607842
253 Haupt K, Kraiczy P, Wallich R, Brade V, Skerka C, Zipfel PF. 2007. Binding of human factor H-related protein 1 to serum-resistant Borrelia burgdorferi is mediated by borrelial complement regulator-acquiring surface proteins. J Infect Dis 196 :124–133. doi:10.1086/518509 17538892
254 Hartmann K, Corvey C, Skerka C, Kirschfink M, Karas M, Brade V, Miller JC, Stevenson B, Wallich R, Zipfel PF, Kraiczy P. 2006. Functional characterization of BbCRASP-2, a distinct outer membrane protein of Borrelia burgdorferi that binds host complement regulators factor H and FHL-1. Mol Microbiol 61 :1220–1236. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2006.05318.x 16925556
255 Lin YP, Diuk-Wasser MA, Stevenson B, Kraiczy P. 2020. Complement evasion contributes to Lyme borreliae-host associations. Trends Parasitol 36 :634–645. doi:10.1016/j.pt.2020.04.011 32456964
256 Marcinkiewicz AL, Brangulis K, Dupuis AP, Hart TM, Zamba-Campero M, Nowak TA, Stout JL, Akopjana I, Kazaks A, Bogans J, Ciota AT, Kraiczy P, Kolokotronis S-O, Lin Y-P. 2023. Structural evolution of an immune evasion determinant shapes pathogen host tropism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 120 :e2301549120. doi:10.1073/pnas.2301549120 37364114
257 Nowak TA, Lown LA, Marcinkiewicz AL, Sürth V, Kraiczy P, Burke R, Lin Y-P. 2023. Outer surface protein E (OspE) mediates Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto strain-specific complement evasion in the eastern fence lizard, Sceloporus undulatus. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 14 :102081. doi:10.1016/j.ttbdis.2022.102081 36403322
258 Malawista SE, de Boisfleury Chevance A. 2008. Clocking the Lyme spirochete. PLoS One 3 :e1633. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001633 18286190
259 Xu Q, Seemanapalli SV, Reif KE, Brown CR, Liang FT. 2007. Increasing the recruitment of neutrophils to the site of infection dramatically attenuates Borrelia burgdorferi infectivity. J Immunol 178 :5109–5115. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.178.8.5109 17404293
260 Salazar JC, Pope CD, Sellati TJ, Feder HM Jr, Kiely TG, Dardick KR, Buckman RL, Moore MW, Caimano MJ, Pope JG, Krause PJ, Radolf JD, Lyme Disease Network. 2003. Coevolution of markers of innate and adaptive immunity in skin and peripheral blood of patients with erythema migrans. J Immunol 171 :2660–2670. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.171.5.2660 12928420
261 Bolz DD, Sundsbak RS, Ma Y, Akira S, Kirschning CJ, Zachary JF, Weis JH, Weis JJ. 2004. MyD88 plays a unique role in host defense but not arthritis development in Lyme disease. J Immunol 173 :2003–2010. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.173.3.2003 15265935
262 Xu Q, Seemanapalli SV, McShan K, Liang FT. 2006. Constitutive expression of outer surface protein C diminishes the ability of Borrelia burgdorferi to evade specific humoral immunity. Infect Immun 74 :5177–5184. doi:10.1128/IAI.00713-06 16926410
263 Norris SJ. 2014. vls Antigenic variation systems of Lyme disease Borrelia: eluding host immunity through both random, segmental gene conversion and framework heterogeneity. Microbiol Spectr 2 . doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0038-2014
264 Bankhead T. 2016. Role of the VlsE lipoprotein in immune avoidance by the Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi. Forum Immun Dis Ther 7 :191–204. doi:10.1615/ForumImmunDisTher.2017019625
265 Chaconas G, Castellanos M, Verhey TB. 2020. Changing of the guard: how the Lyme disease spirochete subverts the host immune response. J Biol Chem 295 :301–313. doi:10.1074/jbc.REV119.008583 31753921
266 Zhang J-R, Hardham JM, Barbour AG, Norris SJ. 1997. Antigenic variation in Lyme disease borreliae by promiscuous recombination of VMP-like sequence cassettes. Cell 89 :275–285. doi:10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80206-8 9108482
267 Zhang JR, Norris SJ. 1998. Kinetics and in vivo induction of genetic variation of vlsE in Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 66 :3689–3697. doi:10.1128/IAI.66.8.3689-3697.1998 9673250
268 Bankhead T, Chaconas G. 2007. The role of VlsE antigenic variation in the Lyme disease spirochete: persistence through a mechanism that differs from other pathogens. Mol Microbiol 65 :1547–1558. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2007.05895.x 17714442
269 Dresser AR, Hardy PO, Chaconas G. 2009. Investigation of the genes involved in antigenic switching at the vlsE locus in Borrelia burgdorferi: an essential role for the RuvAB branch migrase. PLoS Pathog 5 :e1000680. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000680 19997508
270 Lin T, Gao L, Edmondson DG, Jacobs MB, Philipp MT, Norris SJ. 2009. Central role of the Holliday junction helicase RuvAB in vlsE recombination and infectivity of Borrelia burgdorferi. PLoS Pathog 5 :e1000679. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000679 19997622
271 Verhey TB, Castellanos M, Chaconas G. 2018. Antigenic variation in the Lyme spirochete: insights into recombinational switching with a suggested role for error-prone repair. Cell Rep 23 :2595–2605. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2018.04.117 29847791
272 Verhey TB, Castellanos M, Chaconas G. 2018. Analysis of recombinational switching at the antigenic variation locus of the Lyme spirochete using a novel PacBio sequencing pipeline. Mol Microbiol 107 :104–115. doi:10.1111/mmi.13873 29105221
273 Diterich I, Rauter C, Kirschning CJ, Hartung T. 2003. Borrelia burgdorferi-induced tolerance as a model of persistence via immunosuppression. Infect Immun 71 :3979–3987. doi:10.1128/IAI.71.7.3979-3987.2003 12819085
274 Barriales D, Martín-Ruiz I, Carreras-González A, Montesinos-Robledo M, Azkargorta M, Iloro I, Escobés I, Martín-Mateos T, Atondo E, Palacios A, et al. . 2021. Borrelia burgdorferi infection induces long-term memory-like responses in macrophages with tissue-wide consequences in the heart. PLoS Biol 19 :e3001062. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001062 33395408
275 Petnicki-Ocwieja T, McCarthy JE, Powale U, Langston PK, Helble JD, Hu LT. 2023. Borrelia burgdorferi initiates early transcriptional re-programming in macrophages that supports long-term suppression of inflammation. PLoS Pathog 19 :e1011886. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1011886 38157387
276 Helble JD, Walsh MJ, McCarthy JE, Smith NP, Tirard AJ, Arnold BY, Villani A-C, Hu LT. 2023. Single-cell RNA sequencing of murine ankle joints over time reveals distinct transcriptional changes following Borrelia burgdorferi infectionon. iScience 26 :108217. doi:10.1016/j.isci.2023.108217 37953958
277 Elsner RA, Hastey CJ, Olsen KJ, Baumgarth N. 2015. Suppression of long-lived humoral immunity following Borrelia burgdorferi infection. PLoS Pathog 11 :e1004976. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1004976 26136236
278 Hastey CJ, Elsner RA, Barthold SW, Baumgarth N. 2012. Delays and diversions mark the development of B cell responses to Borrelia burgdorferi infection. J Immunol 188 :5612–5622. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1103735 22547698
279 Hammond EM, Olsen KJ, Ram S, Tran GVV, Hall LS, Bradley JE, Lund FE, Samuels DS, Baumgarth N. 2023. Antigen-specific CD4 T cell and B cell responses to Borrelia burgdorferi. J Immunol 211 :994–1005. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.2200890 37556156
280 Koloski CW, Hurry G, Foley-Eby A, Adam H, Goldstein S, Zvionow P, Detmer SE, Voordouw MJ. 2024. Male C57BL/6J mice have higher presence and abundance of Borrelia burgdorferi in their ventral skin compared to female mice. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 15 :102308. doi:10.1016/j.ttbdis.2024.102308 38215632
281 Belperron AA, Dailey CM, Booth CJ, Bockenstedt LK. 2007. Marginal zone B-cell depletion impairs murine host defense against Borrelia burgdorferi infection. Infect Immun 75 :3354–3360. doi:10.1128/IAI.00422-07 17470546
282 van Dam AP, Kuiper H, Vos K, Widjojokusumo A, de Jongh BM, Spanjaard L, Ramselaar AC, Kramer MD, Dankert J. 1993. Different genospecies of Borrelia burgdorferi are associated with distinct clinical manifestations of Lyme borreliosis. Clin Infect Dis 17 :708–717. doi:10.1093/clinids/17.4.708 7903558
283 Hofmeister EK, Glass GE, Childs JE, Persing DH. 1999. Population dynamics of a naturally occurring heterogeneous mixture of Borrelia burgdorferi clones. Infect Immun 67 :5709–5716. doi:10.1128/IAI.67.11.5709-5716.1999 10531219
284 Devevey G, Dang T, Graves CJ, Murray S, Brisson D. 2015. First arrived takes all: inhibitory priority effects dominate competition between co-infecting Borrelia burgdorferi strains. BMC Microbiol 15 :61. doi:10.1186/s12866-015-0381-0 25887119
285 Wang IN, Dykhuizen DE, Qiu W, Dunn JJ, Bosler EM, Luft BJ. 1999. Genetic diversity of ospC in a local population of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto. Genetics 151 :15–30. doi:10.1093/genetics/151.1.15 9872945
286 Zinck CB, Raveendram Thampy P, Uhlemann E-ME, Adam H, Wachter J, Suchan D, Cameron ADS, Rego ROM, Brisson D, Bouchard C, Ogden NH, Voordouw MJ. 2023. Variation among strains of Borrelia burgdorferi in host tissue abundance and lifetime transmission determine the population strain structure in nature. PLoS Pathog 19 :e1011572. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1011572 37607182
287 Casadesús J, Sánchez-Romero MA. 2022. DNA methylation in prokaryotes. Adv Exp Med Biol 1389 :21–43. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-11454-0_2 36350505
288 Wachter J, Martens C, Barbian K, Rego ROM, Rosa P. 2021. Epigenomic landscape of Lyme disease spirochetes reveals novel motifs. mBio 12 :e0128821. doi:10.1128/mBio.01288-21 34156261
289 Casselli T, Tourand Y, Scheidegger A, Arnold WK, Proulx A, Stevenson B, Brissette CA. 2018. DNA methylation by restriction modification systems affects the global transcriptome profile in Borrelia burgdorferi. J Bacteriol 200 :e00395-18. doi:10.1128/JB.00395-18
290 Williams CG, Lee HJ, Asatsuma T, Vento-Tormo R, Haque A. 2022. An introduction to spatial transcriptomics for biomedical research. Genome Med 14 :68. doi:10.1186/s13073-022-01075-1 35761361
291 Sit B, Lamason RL. 2024. Pathogenic Rickettsia spp. as emerging models for bacterial biology. J Bacteriol 206 :e0040423. doi:10.1128/jb.00404-23 38315013
292 Wada T, Hatamoto Y, Kutsukake K. 2012. Functional and expressional analyses of the anti-FlhD4C2 factor gene ydiV in Escherichia coli. Microbiology (Reading) 158 :1533–1542. doi:10.1099/mic.0.056036-0 22461489
293 Soutourina OA, Bertin PN. 2003. Regulation cascade of flagellar expression in Gram-negative bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Rev 27 :505–523. doi:10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00064-0 14550943
294 Schwartz I, Margos G, Casjens SR, Qiu W-G, Eggers CH. 2022. Multipartite genome of Lyme disease Borrelia: structure, variation and prophages. Curr Issues Mol Biol 42 :409–454. doi:10.21775/cimb.042.409
295 Gibbs KD, Schott BH, Ko DC. 2022. The awesome power of human genetics of infectious disease. Annu Rev Genet 56 :41–62. doi:10.1146/annurev-genet-080320-010449 35697043
