Summary: Elements that excise and integrate, such as prophages, and transfer by conjugation, such as plasmids, have been found in various bacteria. These elements appear to have a diversified set of characteristics including cell‐to‐cell contact using pili or cell aggregation, transfer of single‐stranded or double‐stranded DNA, low or high specificity of integration and serine or tyrosine recombinases. This has led to a highly heterogeneous nomenclature, including conjugative transposons, integrative ‘plasmids’, genomic islands and numerous unclassified elements. However, all these elements excise by site‐specific recombination, transfer the resulting circular form by conjugation and integrate by recombination between a specific site of this circular form and a site in the genome of their host. Whereas replication of the circular form probably occurs during conjugation, this replication is not involved in the maintenance of the element. In this review, we show that these elements share very similar characteristics and, therefore, we propose to classify them as integrative and conjugative elements (ICEs). These elements evolve by acquisition or exchanges of modules with various transferable elements including at least ICEs and plasmids. The ICEs are probably widespread among the bacteria.

This review discusses the various types of bacterial genomic islands that can be transferable by conjugation, their intra- and intercellular mobility, and the m

Conjugation is a key mechanism of bacterial evolution that involves mobile genetic elements. Recent findings indicated that the main actors of conjugative transfer are not the well-known conjugative or mobilizable plasmids but are the integrated elements. This paper reviews current knowledge on “integrative and mobilizable elements” (IMEs) that have recently been shown to be highly diverse and highly widespread but are still rarely described. IMEs encode their own excision and integration and use the conjugation machinery of unrelated co-resident conjugative element for their own transfer. Recent studies revealed a much more complex and much more diverse lifecycle than initially thought. Besides their main transmission as integrated elements, IMEs probably use plasmid-like strategies to ensure their maintenance after excision. Their interaction with conjugative elements reveals not only harmless hitchhikers but also hunters that use conjugative elements as target for their integration or harmful parasites that subvert the conjugative apparatus of incoming elements to invade cells that harbor them. IMEs carry genes conferring various functions, such as resistance to antibiotics, that can enhance the fitness of their hosts and that contribute to their maintenance in bacterial populations. Taken as a whole, IMEs are probably major contributors to bacterial evolution.

The 34 734-bp integrative and potentially conjugative element (putative ICE) ICESt1 has been previously found to be site-specifically integrated in the 3′ end of the fda locus of Streptococcus thermophilus CNRZ368. Four types of genomic islands related to ICESt1 are integrated in the same position in seven other strains of S. thermophilus. One of these elements, ICESt3, harbours conjugation and recombination modules closely related to those of ICESt1 and excises by site-specific recombination. Two other types of elements, CIME19258 and CIME302, are flanked by site-specific attachment sites closely related to attL and attR of ICESt1 and ICESt3, whereas ΔCIME308 only possesses a putative attR site; none of these three elements carry complete conjugation and recombination modules. ICESt1 contains a functional internal recombination site, attL′, that is almost identical to attL of CIME19258. The recombination between attL′ and attR of ICESt1 leads to the excision of the expected circular molecule (putative ICE); a cis-mobilizable element (CIME) flanked by an attL site and an attB′ site remains integrated into the 3′ end of fda. Furthermore, sequences that could be truncated att sites were found within ICESt1, ICESt3 and CIME302. All together, these data suggest that these genomic islands evolved by deletion and tandem accretion of ICEs and CIMEs resulting from site-specific recombination. A model for this evolution is proposed and its application to other genomic islands is discussed.