Candida albicans is the major invasive fungal pathogen of humans, with the capacity to cause both disseminated and mucosal infection. Distinct risk factors govern susceptibility to each type of infection (
Enoch et al., 2006,
Edmond et al., 1999). Hence, it is probable that different attributes of
C. albicans may be critical for virulence in each type of infection. Numerous fungal genes and regulatory pathways that contribute to the capacity of
C. albicans to cause disseminated infections have been defined through mutant analysis with animal models and, increasingly, with in vitro cell or tissue interaction systems (
Ramirez et al., 2007,
MacCallum et al., 2006,
Schaller et al., 2005,
Calera et al., 1999). Much less is known about the fungal determinants required for mucosal infection.
Our focus here is oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC), a candidal infection of the oral mucosa. We have recently employed in vitro epithelial cell interaction assays to identify steps in host cell-pathogen interaction that may be critical for establishment of OPC. These steps include the binding of
C. albicans to oral epithelial cells, endocytosis of
C. albicans, and the resulting loss of epithelial cell integrity, or damage (
Park et al., 2005). The overall ability to cause epithelial cell damage in vitro has served empirically as a predictor of the capacity of
C. albicans strains to cause OPC in an immunosuppressed mouse infection model. Such analysis led to our finding that the
C. albicans protein kinases Tpk2 and Cka2 are required for virulence during OPC (
Chiang et al., 2007,
Park et al., 2005). Interestingly, Tpk2 and Cka2 have minor roles in virulence during hematogenously disseminated candidiasis (
Chiang et al., 2007,
Park et al., 2005). These findings support the significance of the in vitro epithelial cell interaction assays and illustrate that distinct
C. albicans genes govern virulence in the context of OPC.
Among the major regulators of the capacity of
C. albicans to cause disease during a disseminated infection are the transcription factors Rim101 and Nrg1 (
Davis et al., 2000a,
Saville et al., 2003). Rim101 is a member of the Rim101/PacC family of C
2H
2 zinc finger transcription factors that govern gene expression responses to extracellular pH (
Penalva et al., 2004). Rim101/PacC family members have diverse roles in virulence of fungal pathogens. In mice,
C. albicans Rim101 and
Aspergillus nidulans PacC are required for virulence during disseminated candidiasis and invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, respectively (
Davis et al., 2000a,
Bignell et al., 2005). In plants,
Sclerotinia sclerotiorum Pac1 and
Colletotrichum acutatum Klap2, a Rim101 homolog, are required for pathogenicity (
Rollins, 2003,
You et al., 2007). However,
Ustilago maydis Rim101 has no detectable role in plant infection, and
Fusarium oxysporum PacC functions as a negative regulator of virulence in plant infection (
Arechiga-Carvajal et al., 2005,
Caracuel et al., 2003). Thus the precise roles of Rim101/PacC family members in infection vary significantly.
Nrg1 is also a C
2H
2 zinc finger transcription factor.
C. albicans Nrg1 is a negative regulator of hyphal formation under in vitro and in vivo growth conditions (
Braun et al., 2001,
Murad et al., 2001,
Saville et al., 2003). The ability to form hyphae is a critical
C. albicans pathogenicity trait in disseminated infection models (
Saville et al., 2003,
Lo et al., 1997), so one might expect an
nrg1Δ/Δ mutant to be hypervirulent. However, the mutant is attenuated in a disseminated infection model (
Murad et al., 2001). These findings suggest that the capacity to produce yeast form cells, as well as hyphae, is required for disseminated infection. In fact, a recent study showed that although hyphae are required for the mortality of a
C. albicans infection, it is the yeast form cells that are most important for disseminating the infection (
Saville et al., 2003).
In one context, Rim101 and Nrg1 have opposite functions: Rim101 promotes hyphal formation in response to neutral or alkaline growth conditions; Nrg1 inhibits hyphal formation under all conditions. In keeping with these observations, of seven hyphal-specific genes that are under positive control by Rim101, four are also under negative control by Nrg1 (
Bensen et al., 2004). However, Bensen et al. have argued that Rim101 and Nrg1 act in parallel hyphal regulatory pathways (
Bensen et al., 2004). This inference was based on the finding that
C. albicans Rim101 does not repress
NRG1 expression, in contrast to the situation in
S. cerevisiae (
Lamb et al., 2003). In addition, a
rim101Δ/Δ nrg1Δ/Δ double mutant was slightly less filamentous than an
nrg1Δ/Δ single mutant in M199 medium at pH 8. The existence of Rim101 targets that are independent of Nrg1 is substantiated by microarray analysis (
Bensen et al., 2004). For example, of ten cell wall genes that are under positive control by Rim101, only one is under negative control by Nrg1. Examination of Rim101 targets that are independent of Nrg1 may yield mechanistic insight into Rim101 functions that are independent of hyphal formation.
In this study, we examine the relationship between Rim101 and Nrg1 in OPC infection models. Our results indicate that the role of Rim101 in the pathogenesis of OPC is independent of Nrg1, thus prompting a focus on Rim101 target genes that are independent of Nrg1. Our findings point to the cell surface as a major mediator of the role of Rim101 in pathogenicity during OPC.