Determinants of interaction specificity of the Bacillus subtilis GlcT antitermination protein: functionality and phosphorylation specificity depend on the arrangement of the regulatory domains

Intermolecular Communication in Bacillus subtilis: RNA-RNA, RNA-Protein and Small Protein-Protein Interactions

In bacterial cells we find a variety of interacting macromolecules, among them RNAs and proteins. Not only small regulatory RNAs (sRNAs), but also small proteins have been increasingly recognized as regulators of bacterial gene expression. An average bacterial genome encodes between 200 and 300 sRNAs, but an unknown number of small proteins. sRNAs can be cis- or trans-encoded. Whereas cis-encoded sRNAs interact only with their single completely complementary mRNA target transcribed from the opposite DNA strand, trans-encoded sRNAs are only partially complementary to their numerous mRNA targets, resulting in huge regulatory networks. In addition to sRNAs, uncharged tRNAs can interact with mRNAs in T-box attenuation mechanisms. For a number of sRNA-mRNA interactions, the stability of sRNAs or translatability of mRNAs, RNA chaperones are required. In Gram-negative bacteria, the well-studied abundant RNA-chaperone Hfq fulfils this role, and recently another chaperone, ProQ, has been discovered and analyzed in this respect. By contrast, evidence for RNA chaperones or their role in Gram-positive bacteria is still scarce, but CsrA might be such a candidate. Other RNA-protein interactions involve tmRNA/SmpB, 6S RNA/RNA polymerase, the dual-function aconitase and protein-bound transcriptional terminators and antiterminators. Furthermore, small proteins, often missed in genome annotations and long ignored as potential regulators, can interact with individual regulatory proteins, large protein complexes, RNA or the membrane. Here, we review recent advances on biological role and regulatory principles of the currently known sRNA-mRNA interactions, sRNA-protein interactions and small protein-protein interactions in the Gram-positive model organism Bacillus subtilis. We do not discuss RNases, ribosomal proteins, RNA helicases or riboswitches.

Quo Vadis Biomolecular NMR Spectroscopy?

In-cell nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy offers the possibility to study proteins and other biomolecules at atomic resolution directly in cells. As such, it provides compelling means to complement existing tools in cellular structural biology. Given the dominance of electron microscopy (EM)-based methods in current structure determination routines, I share my personal view about the role of biomolecular NMR spectroscopy in the aftermath of the revolution in resolution. Specifically, I focus on spin-off applications that in-cell NMR has helped to develop and how they may provide broader and more generally applicable routes for future NMR investigations. I discuss the use of ‘static’ and time-resolved solution NMR spectroscopy to detect post-translational protein modifications (PTMs) and to investigate structural consequences that occur in their response. I argue that available examples vindicate the need for collective and systematic efforts to determine post-translationally modified protein structures in the future. Furthermore, I explain my reasoning behind a Quinary Structure Assessment (QSA) initiative to interrogate cellular effects on protein dynamics and transient interactions present in physiological environments.

Metabolic engineering of carbon overflow metabolism of Bacillus subtilis for improved N-acetyl-glucosamine production

Bacillus subtilis is widely used as cell factories for the production of important industrial biochemicals. Although many studies have demonstrated the effects of organic acidic byproducts, such as acetate, on microbial fermentation, little is known about the effects of blocking the neutral byproduct overflow, such as acetoin, on bioproduction. In this study, we focused on the influences of modulating overflow metabolism on the production of N-acetyl-d-glucosamine (GlcNAc) in engineered B. subtilis. We found that acetoin overflow competes with GlcNAc production, and blocking acetoin overflow increased GlcNAc titer and yield by 1.38- and 1.39-fold, reaching 48.9 g/L and 0.32 g GlcNAc/g glucose, respectively. Further blocking acetate overflow inhibited cell growth and GlcNAc production may be induced by inhibiting glucose uptake. Taken together, our results show that blocking acetoin overflow is a promising strategy for enhancing GlcNAc production. The strategies developed in this work may be useful for engineering strains of B. subtilis for producing other important biochemicals.

Competitive folding of RNA structures at a termination-antitermination site

Antitermination is a regulatory process based on the competitive folding of terminator-antiterminator structures that can form in the leader region of nascent transcripts. In the case of the Bacillus subtilis licS gene involved in β-glucosides utilization, the binding of the antitermination protein LicT to a short RNA hairpin (RAT) prevents the formation of an overlapping terminator and thereby allows transcription to proceed. Here, we monitored in vitro the competition between termination and antitermination by combining bulk and single-molecule fluorescence-based assays using labeled RNA oligonucleotide constructs of increasing length that mimic the progressive transcription of the terminator invading the antiterminator hairpin. Although high affinity binding is abolished as soon as the antiterminator basal stem is disrupted by the invading terminator, LicT can still bind and promote closing of the partially unfolded RAT hairpin. However, binding no longer occurs once the antiterminator structure has been disrupted by the full-length terminator. Based on these findings, we propose a kinetic competition model for the sequential events taking place at the termination-antitermination site, where LicT needs to capture its RAT target before completion of the terminator to remain tightly bound during RNAP pausing, before finally dissociating irreversibly from the elongated licS transcript.

Trigger Enzymes: Coordination of Metabolism and Virulence Gene Expression

Virulence gene expression serves two main functions, growth in/on the host, and the acquisition of nutrients. Therefore, it is obvious that nutrient availability is important to control expression of virulence genes. In any cell, enzymes are the components that are best informed about the availability of their respective substrates and products. It is thus not surprising that bacteria have evolved a variety of strategies to employ this information in the control of gene expression. Enzymes that have a second (so-called moonlighting) function in the regulation of gene expression are collectively referred to as trigger enzymes. Trigger enzymes may have a second activity as a direct regulatory protein that can bind specific DNA or RNA targets under particular conditions or they may affect the activity of transcription factors by covalent modification or direct protein-protein interaction. In this chapter, we provide an overview on these mechanisms and discuss the relevance of trigger enzymes for virulence gene expression in bacterial pathogens.