Salmonella-induced SIRT1 and SIRT3 are crucial for maintaining the metabolic switch in bacteria and host for successful pathogenesis

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:
The current manuscript by Hajra et al deals with the role of the prominent Sirtuins SIRT1 and -3 during infection of macrophages with Salmonella Typhimurium (ST). Apparently, ST infection induces upregulation of host cell SRTs to aid its own metabolism during the intracellular lifestyle and to help reprogramming macrophage polarization. The manuscript has two parts, namely one part that deals with Salmonella infection in cells, where RAW 264.7 murine macrophage-like cells, sharing some features with primary macrophages, were employed. Infected RAW cells displayed a tendency to polarize towards wound-healing M2 and not inflammatory M1 macrophages, which was dependent on SRT. Consequently, the inflammatory response in RAW was more robust in the absence of SRT. Moreover, loss of SRTs leads to impaired bacterial proliferation in these cells, which was attributed to defects in metabolic adaption of the bacteria in the absence of SRT-activity and to the increased M1 inflammatory response.

Unfortunately, the line of argumentation remains incomplete because corresponding assays in mice showed the opposite result as compared to the experiments using RAW 264.7 cells. i.e. loss of SRTs leads to increased bacterial load in animals (versus impaired proliferation in RAW 264.7 cells). The authors cannot explain this discrepancy.

Strengths:
Extensive analysis of Salmonella infection in RAW macrophage-like cells and mice in the context of SRT1/3 function.

Weaknesses:
Lack of connection between the cell-based and organismic data, which are not supportive of each other.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Dipasree Hajra et al demonstrated that Salmonella was able to modulate the expression of Sirtuins (Sirt1 and Sirt3) and regulate the metabolic switch in both host and Salmonella, promoting its pathogenesis. The authors found Salmonella infection induced high levels of Sirt1 and Sirt3 in macrophages, which were skewed toward the M2 phenotype allowing Salmonella to hyper-proliferate. Mechanistically, Sirt1 and Sirt3 regulated the acetylation of HIF-1alpha and PDHA1, therefore mediating Salmonella-induced host metabolic shift in the infected macrophages. Interestingly, Sirt1 and Sirt3-driven host metabolic switch also had an effect on the metabolic profile of Salmonella. Counterintuitively, inhibition of Sirt1/3 led to increased pathogen burdens in an in vivo mouse model. Overall, this is a well-designed study. There are a few comments below that would further strengthen the current study.

Major comments:
In the in vivo study (lines 436-446) - the authors noticed increased pathogen burden in the EX-527 or the 3TYP-treated mice cohorts but decreased pathogen burden within the F4/80+ macrophage population. What are the other cell types that have increased pathogen burden in splenocytes from EX-527 or the 3TYP treated? Can this be further explored and explained?

While the authors indicated that IL-6 cytokine storm and elevated ROS production could result in bacterial dissemination in vivo, one could also argue that Sirt1/3 inhibitors might have an impact on gut function and/or gut microbiota (PMID: 22115311). Did Sirt1/3 inhibitors also lead to increased pathogen burdens in the gut? If so, the potential effect of these in vivo treatments on gut microbiota/colonization resistance should be discussed.

Minor comment:
Sirt1 has been shown to be degraded during Salmonella infection (PMID: 28192515), which is different from the current study. An explanation should be provided for this.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:
In this paper, Hajra et al have attempted to identify the role of Sirt1 and Sirt3 in regulating metabolic reprogramming and macrophage host defense. They have performed gene knockdown experiments in RAW macrophage cell lines to show that depletion of Sirt1 or Sirt3 enhances the ability of macrophages to eliminate Salmonella Typhimurium. However, in mice, inhibition of Sirt1 resulted in dissemination of the bacteria but the bacterial burden was still reduced in macrophages. They suggest that the effect they have observed is due to increased inflammation and ROS production by macrophages. They also try to establish a weak link with metabolism. They present data to show that the switch in metabolism from glycolysis to fatty acid oxidation is regulated by acetylation of Hif1a, and PDHA1.

Strengths:
The strength of the manuscript is that the role of Sirtuins in host-pathogen interactions has not been previously explored in-depth making the study interesting. It is also interesting to see that depletion of either Sirt1 or Sirt3 results in a similar outcome.

Weaknesses:
The major weakness of the paper is the low quality of data, making it harder to substantiate the claims. Also, there are too many pathways and mechanisms being investigated. It would have been better if the authors had focussed on either Sirt1 or Sirt3 and elucidated how it reprograms metabolism to eventually modulate host response against Salmonella Typhimurium. Experimental evidence is also lacking to prove the proposed mechanisms. For instance, they show correlative data that the knockdown of Sirt1-mediated shift in metabolism is due to HIF1a acetylation but this needs to be proven with further experiments.