Listeria monocytogenes Uses Listeria Adhesion Protein (LAP) To Promote Bacterial Transepithelial Translocation and Induces Expression of LAP Receptor Hsp60

Listeria monocytogenes interaction with the intestinal epithelium is a key step in the infection process. We demonstrated that Listeria adhesion protein (LAP) promotes adhesion to intestinal epithelial cells and facilitates extraintestinal dissemination in vivo. The LAP receptor is a stress response protein, Hsp60, but the precise role for the LAP-Hsp60 interaction during Listeria infection is unknown. Here we investigated the influence of physiological stressors and Listeria infection on host Hsp60 expression and LAP-mediated bacterial adhesion, invasion, and transepithelial translocation in an enterocyte-like Caco-2 cell model. Stressors such as heat (41 degrees C), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) (100 U), and L. monocytogenes infection (10(4) to 10(6) CFU/ml) significantly (P < 0.05) increased plasma membrane and intracellular Hsp60 levels in Caco-2 cells and consequently enhanced LAP-mediated L. monocytogenes adhesion but not invasion of Caco-2 cells. In transepithelial translocation experiments, the wild type (WT) exhibited 2.7-fold more translocation through Caco-2 monolayers than a lap mutant, suggesting that LAP is involved in transepithelial translocation, potentially via a paracellular route. Short hairpin RNA (shRNA) suppression of Hsp60 in Caco-2 cells reduced WT adhesion and translocation 4.5- and 3-fold, respectively, while adhesion remained unchanged for the lap mutant. Conversely, overexpression of Hsp60 in Caco-2 cells enhanced WT adhesion and transepithelial translocation, but not those of the lap mutant. Furthermore, initial infection with a low dosage (10(6) CFU/ml) of L. monocytogenes increased plasma membrane and intracellular expression of Hsp60 significantly, which rendered Caco-2 cells more susceptible to subsequent LAP-mediated adhesion and translocation. These data provide insight into the role of LAP as a virulence factor during intestinal epithelial infection and pose new questions regarding the dynamics between the host stress response and pathogen infection.