A genetic method for dissecting the mechanism of transcriptional activator synergy by identical activators

Development of a whole-cell biosensor for ethylene oxide and ethylene

Ethylene and ethylene oxide are widely used in the chemical industry, and ethylene is also important for its role in fruit ripening. Better sensing systems would assist risk management of these chemicals. Here, we characterise the ethylene regulatory system in Mycobacterium strain NBB4 and use these genetic parts to create a biosensor. The regulatory genes etnR1 and etnR2 and cognate promoter Petn were combined with a fluorescent reporter gene (fuGFP) in a Mycobacterium shuttle vector to create plasmid pUS301-EtnR12P. Cultures of M. smegmatis mc2-155(pUS301-EtnR12P) gave a fluorescent signal in response to ethylene oxide with a detection limit of 0.2 μM (9 ppb). By combining the epoxide biosensor cells with another culture expressing the ethylene monooxygenase, the system was converted into an ethylene biosensor. The co-culture was capable of detecting ethylene emission from banana fruit. These are the first examples of whole-cell biosensors for epoxides or aliphatic alkenes. This work also resolves long-standing questions concerning the regulation of ethylene catabolism in bacteria.

The Antiactivator of Type III Secretion, OspD1, Is Transcriptionally Regulated by VirB and H-NS from Remote Sequences in Shigella flexneri

Shigella species, the causal agents of bacillary dysentery, use a type III secretion system (T3SS) to inject two waves of virulence proteins, known as effectors, into the colonic epithelium to subvert host cell machinery. Prior to host cell contact and secretion of the first wave of T3SS effectors, OspD1, an effector and antiactivator protein, prevents premature production of the second wave of effectors. Despite this important role, regulation of the ospD1 gene is not well understood. While ospD1 belongs to the large regulon of VirB, a transcriptional antisilencing protein that counters silencing mediated by the histone-like nucleoid structuring protein H-NS, it remains unclear if VirB directly or indirectly regulates ospD1 Additionally, it is not known if ospD1 is regulated by H-NS. Here, we identify the primary ospD1 transcription start site (+1) and show that the ospD1 promoter is remotely regulated by both VirB and H-NS. Our findings demonstrate that VirB regulation of ospD1 requires at least one of the two newly identified VirB regulatory sites, centered at -978 and -1270 relative to the ospD1 +1. Intriguingly, one of these sites lies on a 193-bp sequence found in three conserved locations on the large virulence plasmids of Shigella The region required for H-NS-dependent silencing of ospD1 lies between -1120 and -820 relative to the ospD1 +1. Thus, our study provides further evidence that cis-acting regulatory sequences for transcriptional antisilencers and silencers, such as VirB and H-NS, can lie far upstream of the canonical bacterial promoter region (i.e., -250 to +1).IMPORTANCE Transcriptional silencing and antisilencing mechanisms regulate virulence gene expression in many important bacterial pathogens. In Shigella species, plasmid-borne virulence genes, such as those encoding the type III secretion system (T3SS), are silenced by the histone-like nucleoid structuring protein H-NS and antisilenced by VirB. Previous work at the plasmid-borne icsP locus revealed that VirB binds to a remotely located cis-acting regulatory site to relieve transcriptional silencing mediated by H-NS. Here, we characterize a second example of remote VirB antisilencing at ospD1, which encodes a T3SS antiactivator and effector. Our study highlights that remote transcriptional silencing and antisilencing occur more frequently in Shigella than previously thought, and it raises the possibility that long-range transcriptional regulation in bacteria is commonplace.

Combinatorial regulation of fmgD by MrpC2 and FruA during Myxococcus xanthus development

Upon starvation, a dense population of rod-shaped Myxococcus xanthus bacteria coordinate their movements to construct mounds in which some of the cells differentiate to spherical spores. During this process of fruiting body formation, short-range C-signaling between cells regulates their movements and the expression of genes important for sporulation. C-signaling activates FruA, a transcription factor that binds cooperatively with another transcription factor, MrpC2, upstream of the fmgA and fmgBC promoters, activating transcription. We have found that a third C-signal-dependent gene, herein named fmgD, is subject to combinatorial control by FruA and MrpC2. The two proteins appear to bind cooperatively upstream of the fmgD promoter and activate transcription. FruA binds proximal to the fmgD promoter, as in the fmgBC promoter region, whereas MrpC2 binds proximal to the fmgA promoter. A novel feature of the fmgD promoter region is the presence of a second MrpC2 binding site partially overlapping the promoter and therefore likely to mediate repression. The downstream MrpC2 site appears to overlap the FruA site, so the two transcription factors may compete for binding, which in both cases appears to be cooperative with MrpC2 at the upstream site. We propose that binding of MrpC2 to the downstream site represses fmgD transcription until C-signaling causes the concentration of active FruA to increase sufficiently to outcompete the downstream MrpC2 for cooperative binding with the upstream MrpC2. This would explain why fmgD transcription begins later during development and is more dependent on C-signaling than transcription of fmgA and fmgBC.

Mechanisms and evolution of control logic in prokaryotic transcriptional regulation

A major part of organismal complexity and versatility of prokaryotes resides in their ability to fine-tune gene expression to adequately respond to internal and external stimuli. Evolution has been very innovative in creating intricate mechanisms by which different regulatory signals operate and interact at promoters to drive gene expression. The regulation of target gene expression by transcription factors (TFs) is governed by control logic brought about by the interaction of regulators with TF binding sites (TFBSs) in cis-regulatory regions. A factor that in large part determines the strength of the response of a target to a given TF is motif stringency, the extent to which the TFBS fits the optimal TFBS sequence for a given TF. Advances in high-throughput technologies and computational genomics allow reconstruction of transcriptional regulatory networks in silico. To optimize the prediction of transcriptional regulatory networks, i.e., to separate direct regulation from indirect regulation, a thorough understanding of the control logic underlying the regulation of gene expression is required. This review summarizes the state of the art of the elements that determine the functionality of TFBSs by focusing on the molecular biological mechanisms and evolutionary origins of cis-regulatory regions.

Combinatorial regulation by a novel arrangement of FruA and MrpC2 transcription factors during Myxococcus xanthus development

Myxococcus xanthus is a gram-negative soil bacterium that undergoes multicellular development upon nutrient limitation. Intercellular signals control cell movements and regulate gene expression during the developmental process. C-signal is a short-range signal essential for aggregation and sporulation. C-signaling regulates the fmgA gene by a novel mechanism involving cooperative binding of the response regulator FruA and the transcription factor/antitoxin MrpC2. Here, we demonstrate that regulation of the C-signal-dependent fmgBC operon is under similar combinatorial control by FruA and MrpC2, but the arrangement of binding sites is different than in the fmgA promoter region. MrpC2 was shown to bind to a crucial cis-regulatory sequence in the fmgBC promoter region. FruA was required for MrpC and/or MrpC2 to associate with the fmgBC promoter region in vivo, and expression of an fmgB-lacZ fusion was abolished in a fruA mutant. Recombinant FruA was shown to bind to an essential regulatory sequence located slightly downstream of the MrpC2-binding site in the fmgBC promoter region. Full-length FruA, but not its C-terminal DNA-binding domain, enhanced the formation of complexes with fmgBC promoter region DNA, when combined with MrpC2. This effect was nearly abolished with fmgBC DNA fragments having a mutation in either the MrpC2- or FruA-binding site, indicating that binding of both proteins to DNA is important for enhancement of complex formation. These results are similar to those observed for fmgA, where FruA and MrpC2 bind cooperatively upstream of the promoter, except that in the fmgA promoter region the FruA-binding site is located slightly upstream of the MrpC2-binding site. Cooperative binding of FruA and MrpC2 appears to be a conserved mechanism of gene regulation that allows a flexible arrangement of binding sites and coordinates multiple signaling pathways.

Clp upregulates transcription of engA gene encoding a virulence factor in Xanthomonas campestris by direct binding to the upstream tandem Clp sites

In Xanthomonas campestris, the causative agent of black rot in crucifers, the endoglucanase level is greatly decreased in the mutant deficient in Clp, a homologue of cyclic AMP receptor protein (CRP). It is established that Clp has the same DNA binding specificity as CRP at positions 5, 6, and 7 (GTG motif) of the DNA half site. In this study, the engA transcription initiation site was determined by the 5' RACE method, and two consensus Clp-binding sites, site I and site II centered at -69.5 and -42.5, respectively, were located. Transcriptional fusion assays indicated that Clp greatly activates engA transcription. Site-directed mutagenesis indicated that position 5 of GTG motif in site II is essential for both DNA-protein complex formation in electrophoretic mobility shift assays and engA transcription in vivo. In addition, mutation at position 5 of site I drastically reduces the promoter activity, indicating that binding of Clp to site I exerts a synergistic effect on the transcription activation by site II. engA appears to be the first X. campestris gene known to be activated by Clp via a direct binding to the promoter.

Regulation at complex bacterial promoters: how bacteria use different promoter organizations to produce different regulatory outcomes

Most bacterial promoters are regulated by several signals. This is reflected in the complexity of their organization, with multiple binding sites for different transcription factors. Studies of a small number of complex promoters have revealed different distinct mechanisms that integrate the effects of multiple transcription factors.

Cyclic AMP receptor protein-dependent activation of the Escherichia coli acsP2 promoter by a synergistic class III mechanism

The cyclic AMP receptor protein (CRP) activates transcription of the Escherichia coli acs gene, which encodes an acetate-scavenging enzyme required for fitness during periods of carbon starvation. Two promoters direct transcription of acs, the distal acsP1 and the proximal acsP2. In this study, we demonstrated that acsP2 can function as the major promoter and showed by in vitro studies that CRP facilitates transcription by "focusing" RNA polymerase to acsP2. We proposed that CRP activates transcription from acsP2 by a synergistic class III mechanism. Consistent with this proposal, we showed that CRP binds two sites, CRP I and CRP II. Induction of acs expression absolutely required CRP I, while optimal expression required both CRP I and CRP II. The locations of these DNA sites for CRP (centered at positions -69.5 and -122.5, respectively) suggest that CRP interacts with RNA polymerase through class I interactions. In support of this hypothesis, we demonstrated that acs transcription requires the surfaces of CRP and the C-terminal domain of the alpha subunit of RNA polymerase holoenzyme (alpha-CTD), which is known to participate in class I interactions: activating region 1 of CRP and the 287, 265, and 261 determinants of the alpha-CTD. Other surface-exposed residues in the alpha-CTD contributed to acs transcription, suggesting that the alpha-CTD may interact with at least one protein other than CRP.

A sigmoidal transcriptional response: cooperativity, synergy and dosage effects

A sigmoidal transcriptional response (STR) is thought to act as a molecular switch to control gene expression. This nonlinear behaviour arises as a result of the cooperative recognition of a promoter/enhancer by transcription factors (TFs) and/or their synergy to attract the basal transcriptional machinery (BTM). Although this cooperation between TFs is additive in terms of energy, it leads to an exponential increase in affinity between the BTM and the pre-initiation complexes. This exponential increase in the strength of interactions is the principle that governs synergistic systems. Here, I propose a minimalist quasi-equilibrium model to explore qualitatively the STR taking into account cooperative recognition of the promoter/enhancer and synergy. Although the focus is on the effect of activators, a similar treatment can be applied to inhibitors. One of the main insights obtained from the model is that generation of a sigmoidal threshold is possible even in the absence of cooperative DNA binding provided the TFs synergistically interact with the BTM. On the contrary, when there is cooperative binding, the impact of synergy diminishes. It will also be shown that a sigmoidal response to a morphogenetic gradient can be used to generate a nested gradient of another morphogen. Previously, I had proposed that halving the amounts of TFs involved in sigmoidal transcriptional switches could account for the abnormal dominant phenotypes associated with some of these genes. This phenomenon, called haploinsufficiency (HI), has been recognised as the basis of many human diseases. Although a formal proof linking HI and a sigmoidal response is lacking, it is tempting to explore the model from the perspective of dosage effects.

Requirement for two copies of RNA polymerase alpha subunit C-terminal domain for synergistic transcription activation at complex bacterial promoters

Transcription activation by the Escherichia coli cyclic AMP receptor protein (CRP) at different promoters has been studied using RNA polymerase holoenzyme derivatives containing two full-length alpha subunits, or containing one full-length alpha subunit and one truncated alpha subunit lacking the alpha C-terminal domain (alpha CTD). At a promoter having a single DNA site for CRP, activation requires only one full-length alpha subunit. Likewise, at a promoter having a single DNA site for CRP and one adjacent UP-element subsite (high-affinity DNA site for alpha CTD), activation requires only one full-length alpha subunit. In contrast, at promoters having two DNA sites for CRP, or one DNA site for CRP and two UP-element subsites, activation requires two full-length alpha subunits. We conclude that a single copy of alpha CTD is sufficient to interact with one CRP molecule and one adjacent UP-element subsite, but two copies of alpha CTD are required to interact with two CRP molecules or with one CRP molecule and two UP-element subsites.

Architectural requirements for optimal activation by tandem CRP molecules at a class I CRP-dependent promoter

The Escherichia coli cyclic AMP receptor protein (CRP) activates transcription at target promoters by interacting with the C-terminal domain of the RNA polymerase alpha subunit. We have constructed a set of promoters carrying tandem DNA sites for CRP with one site centred at position -61.5 and the other site located at different upstream positions. Optimal CRP-dependent activation of transcription is observed when the upstream DNA site for CRP is located at position -93.5 or at position -103.5. Evidence is presented to suggest that activation by the upstream-bound CRP molecule is due to interaction with the C-terminal domain of the RNA polymerase alpha subunit.

A chimeric activator of transcription that uses two DNA-binding domains to make simultaneous contact with pairs of recognition sites

Many well-known transcriptional regulatory proteins are composed of at least two independently folding domains and, typically, only one of these is a DNA-binding domain. However, some transcriptional regulators have been described that have more than one DNA-binding domain. Regulators with a single DNA-binding domain often bind co-operatively to the DNA in homotypic or heterotypic combinations, and two or more DNA-binding domains of a single regulatory protein can also bind co-operatively to suitably positioned recognition sequences. Here, we examine the behaviour of a chimeric activator of transcription with two different DNA-binding domains, that of the bacteriophage lambda cI protein and that of the Escherichia coli cyclic AMP receptor protein. We show that these two DNA-binding moieties, when present in the same molecule, can bind co-operatively to a pair of cognate recognition sites located upstream of a test promoter, thereby permitting the chimera to function as a particularly strong activator of transcription from this promoter. Our results show how such a bivalent DNA-binding protein can be used to regulate transcription differentially from promoters that bear either one or both recognition sites.

The essential role of the promoter-proximal subunit of CAP in pap phase variation: Lrp- and helical phase-dependent activation of papBA transcription by CAP from -215

Catabolite gene activator protein (CAP) is essential for the expression of Pap pili by uropathogenic Escherichia coli. Both in vitro and in vivo analyses indicate that binding of cAMP-CAP centred at 215.5 bp upstream of the papBA promoter is essential for activation of transcription. CAP-dependent activation of papBA requires binding of the leucine-responsive regulatory protein (Lrp) at binding sites that extend from -180 to -149 relative to the start site of papBA. Our data indicate that CAP and Lrp bind independently to their respective pap DNA sites. Activation of papBA transcription was eliminated by mutations in the activating region 1 (AR1) of CAP, but not in the AR2 region, similar to class I CAP-dependent promoters. Also, like class I promoters, the C-terminal domain of the alpha-subunit of RNA polymerase appears to play a role in transcription activation. Moreover, phase variation is strictly dependent upon the helical phase of the CAP DNA binding site with respect to the papBA transcription start site. Using an 'oriented heterodimer' approach with wild-type and AR1 mutant CAPs, it was shown that the AR1 region of the CAP subunit proximal to papBA is required for stimulation of papBA transcription, whereas AR1 of the promoter-distal subunit is not. Previously, CAP was hypothesized to activate pap transcription indirectly by disrupting repression mediated by H-NS. The results presented here show that AR1 of the promoter-proximal CAP subunit was required for papBA transcription even in the absence of the histone-like protein H-NS. These results show that the promoter-proximal subunit of CAP, bound 215.5 bp upstream of the papBA transcription start site, plays an active role in stimulating papBA transcription, possibly by interacting with the C-terminal domain of the alpha-subunit of RNA polymerase.

Isolation of mutations that disrupt cooperative DNA binding by the Drosophila bicoid protein

Cooperative DNA binding is thought to contribute to the ability of the Drosophila melanogaster protein, Bicoid, to stimulate transcription of target genes in precise sub-domains within the embryo. As a first step toward testing this idea, we devised a genetic screen to isolate mutations in Bicoid that specifically disrupt cooperative interactions, but do not disrupt DNA recognition or transcription activation. The screen was carried out in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and 12 cooperativity mutants were identified. The mutations map across most of the Bicoid protein, with some located within the DNA-binding domain (homeodomain). Four homeodomain mutants were characterized in yeast and shown to activate a single-site reporter gene to levels comparable to that of wild-type, indicating that DNA binding per se is not affected. However, these mutants failed to show cooperative coupling between high and low-affinity sites, and showed reduced activation of a reporter gene carrying a natural Drosophila enhancer. Homology modeling indicated that none of the four mutations is in residues that contact DNA. Instead, these residues are likely to interact with other DNA-bound Bicoid monomers or other parts of the Bicoid protein. In vitro, the isolated homeodomains did not show strong cooperativity defects, supporting the idea that other regions of Bicoid are also important for cooperativity. This study describes the first systematic screen to identify cooperativity mutations in a eukaryotic DNA-binding protein.

Interdependence of activation at rhaSR by cyclic AMP receptor protein, the RNA polymerase alpha subunit C-terminal domain, and rhaR

The Escherichia coli rhaSR operon encodes two AraC family transcription activators, RhaS and RhaR, and is activated by RhaR in the presence of L-rhamnose. beta-Galactosidase assays of various rhaS-lacZ promoter fusions combined with mobility shift assays indicated that a cyclic AMP receptor protein (CRP) site located at -111.5 is also required for full activation of rhaSR expression. To address the mechanisms of activation by CRP and the RNA polymerase alpha-subunit C-terminal domain (alpha-CTD) at rhaSR, we tested the effects of alanine substitutions in CRP activating regions 1 and 2, overexpression of a truncated version of alpha (alpha-Delta235), and alanine substitutions throughout alpha-CTD. We found that DNA-contacting residues in alpha-CTD are required for full activation, and for simplicity, we discuss alpha-CTD as a third activator of rhaSR. CRP and RhaR could each partially activate transcription in the absence of the other two activators, and alpha-CTD was not capable of activation alone. In the case of CRP, this suggests that this activation involves neither an alpha-CTD interaction nor cooperative binding with RhaR, while in the case of RhaR, this suggests the likelihood of direct interactions with core RNA polymerase. We also found that CRP, RhaR, and alpha-CTD each have synergistic effects on activation by the others, suggesting direct or indirect interactions among all three. We have some evidence that the alpha-CTD-CRP and alpha-CTD-RhaR interactions might be direct. The magnitude of the synergistic effects was usually greater with just two activators than with all three, suggesting possible redundancies in the mechanisms of activation by CRP, alpha-CTD, and RhaR.

Transcription activation by catabolite activator protein (CAP)

Transcription activation by Escherichia coli catabolite activator protein (CAP) at each of two classes of simple CAP-dependent promoters is understood in structural and mechanistic detail. At class I CAP-dependent promoters, CAP activates transcription from a DNA site located upstream of the DNA site for RNA polymerase holoenzyme (RNAP); at these promoters, transcription activation involves protein-protein interactions between CAP and the RNAP alpha subunit C-terminal domain that facilitate binding of RNAP to promoter DNA to form the RNAP-promoter closed complex. At class II CAP-dependent promoters, CAP activates transcription from a DNA site that overlaps the DNA site for RNAP; at these promoters, transcription activation involves both: (i) protein-protein interactions between CAP and RNAP alpha subunit C-terminal domain that facilitate binding of RNAP to promoter DNA to form the RNAP-promoter closed complex; and (ii) protein-protein interactions between CAP and RNAP alpha subunit N-terminal domain that facilitates isomerization of the RNAP-promoter closed complex to the RNAP-promoter open complex. Straightforward combination of the mechanisms for transcription activation at class I and class II CAP-dependent promoters permits synergistic transcription activation by multiple molecules of CAP, or by CAP and other activators. Interference with determinants of CAP or RNAP involved in transcription activation at class I and class II CAP-dependent promoters permits "anti-activation" by negative regulators. Basic features of transcription activation at class I and class II CAP-dependent promoters appear to be generalizable to other activators.