Control of IS911 target selection: how OrfA may ensure IS dispersion

Copy-out-Paste-in Transposition of IS911: A Major Transposition Pathway

IS911 has provided a powerful model for studying the transposition of members of a large class of transposable element: the IS3 family of bacterial Insertion Sequences (IS). These transpose by a Copy-out-Paste-in mechanism in which a double-strand IS circle transposition intermediate is generated from the donor site by replication and proceeds to integrate into a suitable double strand DNA target. This is perhaps one of the most common transposition mechanisms known to date. Copy-out-Paste-in transposition has been adopted by members of at least eight large IS families. This chapter details the different steps of the Copy-out-Paste-in mechanism involved in IS911 transposition. At a more biological level it also describes various aspects of regulation of the transposition process. These include transposase production by programmed translational frameshifting, transposase expression from the circular intermediate using a specialized promoter assembled at the circle junction and binding of the nascent transposase while it remains attached to the ribosome during translation (co-translational binding). This co-translational binding of the transposase to neighboring IS ends provides an explanation for the longstanding observation that transposases show a cis-preference for their activities.

Bacterial insertion sequences: their genomic impact and diversity

Insertion sequences (ISs), arguably the smallest and most numerous autonomous transposable elements (TEs), are important players in shaping their host genomes. This review focuses on prokaryotic ISs. We discuss IS distribution and impact on genome evolution. We also examine their effects on gene expression, especially their role in activating neighbouring genes, a phenomenon of particular importance in the recent upsurge of bacterial antibiotic resistance. We explain how ISs are identified and classified into families by a combination of characteristics including their transposases (Tpases), their overall genetic organisation and the accessory genes which some ISs carry. We then describe the organisation of autonomous and nonautonomous IS‐related elements. This is used to illustrate the growing recognition that the boundaries between different types of mobile element are becoming increasingly difficult to define as more are being identified. We review the known Tpase types, their different catalytic activities used in cleaving and rejoining DNA strands during transposition, their organisation into functional domains and the role of this in regulation. Finally, we consider examples of prokaryotic IS domestication. In a more speculative section, we discuss the necessity of constructing more quantitative dynamic models to fully appreciate the continuing impact of TEs on prokaryotic populations.

Cotranslational control of DNA transposition: a window of opportunity

Transposable elements are important in genome dynamics and evolution. Bacterial insertion sequences (IS) constitute a major group in number and impact. Understanding their role in shaping genomes requires knowledge of how their transposition activity is regulated and interfaced with the host cell. One IS regulatory phenomenon is a preference of their transposases (Tpases) for action on the element from which they are expressed (cis) rather than on other copies of the same element (trans). Using IS911, we show in vivo that activity in cis was ~200 fold higher than in trans. We also demonstrate that a translational frameshifting pause signal influences cis preference presumably by facilitating sequential folding and cotranslational binding of the Tpase. In vitro, IS911 Tpase bound IS ends during translation but not after complete translation. Cotranslational binding of nascent Tpase permits tight control of IS proliferation providing a mechanistic explanation for cis regulation of transposition involving an unexpected partner, the ribosome.

Protein-DNA interactions define the mechanistic aspects of circle formation and insertion reactions in IS2 transposition

BACKGROUND

Transposition in IS3, IS30, IS21 and IS256 insertion sequence (IS) families utilizes an unconventional two-step pathway. A figure-of-eight intermediate in Step I, from asymmetric single-strand cleavage and joining reactions, is converted into a double-stranded minicircle whose junction (the abutted left and right ends) is the substrate for symmetrical transesterification attacks on target DNA in Step II, suggesting intrinsically different synaptic complexes (SC) for each step. Transposases of these ISs bind poorly to cognate DNA and comparative biophysical analyses of SC I and SC II have proven elusive. We have prepared a native, soluble, active, GFP-tagged fusion derivative of the IS2 transposase that creates fully formed complexes with single-end and minicircle junction (MCJ) substrates and used these successfully in hydroxyl radical footprinting experiments.

RESULTS

In IS2, Step I reactions are physically and chemically asymmetric; the left imperfect, inverted repeat (IRL), the exclusive recipient end, lacks donor function. In SC I, different protection patterns of the cleavage domains (CDs) of the right imperfect inverted repeat (IRR; extensive in cis) and IRL (selective in trans) at the single active cognate IRR catalytic center (CC) are related to their donor and recipient functions. In SC II, extensive binding of the IRL CD in trans and of the abutted IRR CD in cis at this CC represents the first phase of the complex. An MCJ substrate precleaved at the 3' end of IRR revealed a temporary transition state with the IRL CD disengaged from the protein. We propose that in SC II, sequential 3' cleavages at the bound abutted CDs trigger a conformational change, allowing the IRL CD to complex to its cognate CC, producing the second phase. Corroborating data from enhanced residues and curvature propensity plots suggest that CD to CD interactions in SC I and SC II require IRL to assume a bent structure, to facilitate binding in trans.

CONCLUSIONS

Different transpososomes are assembled in each step of the IS2 transposition pathway. Recipient versus donor end functions of the IRL CD in SC I and SC II and the conformational change in SC II that produces the phase needed for symmetrical IRL and IRR donor attacks on target DNA highlight the differences.

A model for the molecular organisation of the IS911 transpososome

Tight regulation of transposition activity is essential to limit damage transposons may cause by generating potentially lethal DNA rearrangements. Assembly of a bona fide protein-DNA complex, the transpososome, within which transposition is catalysed, is a crucial checkpoint in this regulation. In the case of IS911, a member of the large IS3 bacterial insertion sequence family, the transpososome (synaptic complex A; SCA) is composed of the right and left inverted repeated DNA sequences (IRR and IRL) bridged by the transposase, OrfAB (the IS911-encoded enzyme that catalyses transposition). To characterise further this important protein-DNA complex in vitro, we used different tagged and/or truncated transposase forms and analysed their interaction with IS911 ends using gel electrophoresis. Our results allow us to propose a model in which SCA is assembled with a dimeric form of the transposase. Furthermore, we present atomic force microscopy results showing that the terminal inverted repeat sequences are probably assembled in a parallel configuration within the SCA. These results represent the first step in the structural description of the IS911 transpososome, and are discussed in comparison with the very few other transpososome examples described in the literature.

Transposition of a bacterial insertion sequence in chloroplasts

Bacterial transposable elements (IS elements, transposons) represent an important determinant of genome structure and dynamics, and are a major force driving genome evolution. Here, we have tested whether bacterial insertion sequences (IS elements) can transpose in a prokaryotic compartment of the plant cell, the plastid (chloroplast). Using plastid transformation, we have integrated different versions of the Escherichia coli IS element IS150 into the plastid genome of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) plants. We show that IS150 is faithfully mobilized inside the chloroplast, and that enormous quantities of transposition intermediates accumulate. As synthesis of the IS150 transposase is dependent upon programmed ribosomal frame shifting, our data indicate that this process also occurs in chloroplasts. Interestingly, all insertion events detected affect a single site in the plastid genome, suggesting that the integration of IS150 is highly sequence dependent. In contrast, the initiation of the transposition process was found to be independent of the sequence context. Finally, our data also demonstrate that plastids lack the capacity to repair double-strand breaks in their genomes by non-homologous end joining, a finding that has important implications for genome stability, and which may explain the peculiar immunity of the plastid to invading promiscuous DNA sequences of nuclear and mitochondrial origin.

Bias between the left and right inverted repeats during IS911 targeted insertion

IS911 is a bacterial insertion sequence composed of two consecutive overlapping open reading frames (ORFs [orfA and orfB]) encoding the transposase (OrfAB) as well as a regulatory protein (OrfA). These ORFs are bordered by terminal left and right inverted repeats (IRL and IRR, respectively) with several differences in nucleotide sequence. IS911 transposition is asymmetric: each end is cleaved on one strand to generate a free 3'-OH, which is then used as the nucleophile in attacking the opposite insertion sequence (IS) end to generate a free IS circle. This will be inserted into a new target site. We show here that the ends exhibit functional differences which, in vivo, may favor the use of one compared to the other during transposition. Electromobility shift assays showed that a truncated form of the transposase [OrfAB(1-149)] exhibits higher affinity for IRR than for IRL. While there was no detectable difference in IR activities during the early steps of transposition, IRR was more efficient during the final insertion steps. We show here that the differential activities between the two IRs correlate with the different affinities of OrfAB(1-149) for the IRs during assembly of the nucleoprotein complexes leading to transposition. We conclude that the two inverted repeats are not equivalent during IS911 transposition and that this asymmetry may intervene to determine the ordered assembly of the different protein-DNA complexes involved in the reaction.