Identifying how bacterial cells find their middle: a new perspective

Engineered bacterial membrane vesicles are promising carriers for vaccine design and tumor immunotherapy

Bacterial membrane vesicles (BMVs) have emerged as novel and promising platforms for the development of vaccines and immunotherapeutic strategies against infectious and noninfectious diseases. The rich microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs) and nanoscale membrane vesicle structure of BMVs make them highly immunogenic. In addition, BMVs can be endowed with more functions via genetic and chemical modifications. This article reviews the immunological characteristics and effects of BMVs, techniques for BMV production and modification, and the applications of BMVs as vaccines or vaccine carriers. In summary, given their versatile characteristics and immunomodulatory properties, BMVs can be used for clinical vaccine or immunotherapy applications.

The positioning of the asymmetric septum during sporulation in Bacillus subtilis

Probably one of the most controversial questions about the cell division of Bacillus subtilis, a rod-shaped bacterium, concerns the mechanism that ensures correct division septum placement-at mid-cell during vegetative growth but closer to one end during sporulation. In general, bacteria multiply by binary fission, in which the division septum forms almost exactly at the cell centre. How the division machinery achieves such accuracy is a question of continuing interest. We understand in some detail how this is achieved during vegetative growth in Escherichia coli and B. subtilis, where two main negative regulators, nucleoid occlusion and the Min system, help to determine the division site, but we still do not know exactly how the asymmetric septation site is determined during sporulation in B. subtilis. Clearly, the inhibitory effects of the nucleoid occlusion and Min system on polar division have to be overcome. We evaluated the positioning of the asymmetric septum and its accuracy by statistical analysis of the site of septation. We also clarified the role of SpoIIE, RefZ and MinCD on the accuracy of this process. We determined that the sporulation septum forms approximately 1/6 of a cell length from one of the cell poles with high precision and that SpoIIE, RefZ and MinCD have a crucial role in precisely localizing the sporulation septum. Our results strongly support the idea that asymmetric septum formation is a very precise and highly controlled process regulated by a still unknown mechanism.

Interaction of the Morphogenic Protein RodZ with the Bacillus subtilis Min System

Vegetative cell division in Bacillus subtilis takes place precisely at the middle of the cell to ensure that two viable daughter cells are formed. The first event in cell division is the positioning of the FtsZ Z-ring at the correct site. This is controlled by the coordinated action of both negative and positive regulators. The existence of positive regulators has been inferred, but none have presently been identified in B. subtilis. Noc and the Min system belong to negative regulators; Noc prevents division from occurring over the chromosomes, and the Min system inhibits cell division at the poles. Here we report that the morphogenic protein, RodZ, an essential cell shape determinant, is also required for proper septum positioning during vegetative growth. In rodZ mutant cells, the vegetative septum is positioned off center, giving rise to small, round, DNA-containing cells. Searching for the molecular mechanism giving rise to this phenotype led us to discover that RodZ directly interacts with MinJ. We hypothesize that RodZ may aid the Min system in preventing non-medial vegetative division.

FtsZ-ring Architecture and Its Control by MinCD

In bacteria and archaea, the most widespread cell division system is based on the tubulin homologue FtsZ protein, whose filaments form the cytokinetic Z-ring. FtsZ filaments are tethered to the membrane by anchors such as FtsA and SepF and are regulated by accessory proteins. One such set of proteins is responsible for Z-ring's spatiotemporal regulation, essential for the production of two equal-sized daughter cells. Here, we describe how our still partial understanding of the FtsZ-based cell division process has been progressed by visualising near-atomic structures of Z-rings and complexes that control Z-ring positioning in cells, most notably the MinCDE and Noc systems that act by negatively regulating FtsZ filaments. We summarise available data and how they inform mechanistic models for the cell division process.

Minicells, Back in Fashion

Cryo-electron tomography (cryo-ET) has emerged as a leading technique for three-dimensional visualization of large macromolecular complexes and their conformational changes in their native cellular environment. However, the resolution and potential applications of cryo-ET are fundamentally limited by specimen thickness, preventing high-resolution in situ visualization of macromolecular structures in many bacteria (such as Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica). Minicells, which were discovered nearly 50 years ago, have recently been exploited as model systems to visualize molecular machines in situ, due to their smaller size and other unique properties. In this review, we discuss strategies for producing minicells and highlight their use in the study of chemotactic signaling, protein secretion, and DNA translocation. In combination with powerful genetic tools and advanced imaging techniques, minicells provide a springboard for in-depth structural studies of bacterial macromolecular complexes in situ and therefore offer a unique approach for gaining novel structural insights into many important processes in microbiology.

The Min system and other nucleoid-independent regulators of Z ring positioning

Rod-shaped bacteria such as E. coli have mechanisms to position their cell division plane at the precise center of the cell, to ensure that the daughter cells are equal in size. The two main mechanisms are the Min system and nucleoid occlusion (NO), both of which work by inhibiting assembly of FtsZ, the tubulin-like scaffold that forms the cytokinetic Z ring. Whereas NO prevents Z rings from constricting over unsegregated nucleoids, the Min system is nucleoid-independent and even functions in cells lacking nucleoids and thus NO. The Min proteins of E. coli and B. subtilis form bipolar gradients that inhibit Z ring formation most at the cell poles and least at the nascent division plane. This article will outline the molecular mechanisms behind Min function in E. coli and B. subtilis, and discuss distinct Z ring positioning systems in other bacterial species.

MapZ marks the division sites and positions FtsZ rings in Streptococcus pneumoniae

In every living organism, cell division requires accurate identification of the division site and placement of the division machinery. In bacteria, this process is traditionally considered to begin with the polymerization of the highly conserved tubulin-like protein FtsZ into a ring that locates precisely at mid-cell. Over the past decades, several systems have been reported to regulate the spatiotemporal assembly and placement of the FtsZ ring. However, the human pathogen Streptococcus pneumoniae, in common with many other organisms, is devoid of these canonical systems and the mechanisms of positioning the division machinery remain unknown. Here we characterize a novel factor that locates at the division site before FtsZ and guides septum positioning in pneumococcus. Mid-cell-anchored protein Z (MapZ) forms ring structures at the cell equator and moves apart as the cell elongates, therefore behaving as a permanent beacon of division sites. MapZ then positions the FtsZ ring through direct protein-protein interactions. MapZ-mediated control differs from previously described systems mostly on the basis of negative regulation of FtsZ assembly. Furthermore, MapZ is an endogenous target of the Ser/Thr kinase StkP, which was recently shown to have a central role in cytokinesis and morphogenesis of S. pneumoniae. We show that both phosphorylated and non-phosphorylated forms of MapZ are required for proper Z-ring formation and dynamics. Altogether, this work uncovers a new mechanism for bacterial cell division that is regulated by phosphorylation and illustrates that nature has evolved a diversity of cell division mechanisms adapted to the different bacterial clades.

RNA localization in bacteria

One of the most important discoveries in the field of microbiology in the last two decades is that bacterial cells have intricate subcellular organization. This understanding has emerged mainly from the depiction of spatial and temporal organization of proteins in specific domains within bacterial cells, e.g., midcell, cell poles, membrane and periplasm. Because translation of bacterial RNA molecules was considered to be strictly coupled to their synthesis, they were not thought to specifically localize to regions outside the nucleoid. However, the increasing interest in RNAs, including non-coding RNAs, encouraged researchers to explore the spatial and temporal localization of RNAs in bacteria. The recent technological improvements in the field of fluorescence microscopy allowed subcellular imaging of RNAs even in the tiny bacterial cells. It has been reported by several groups, including ours that transcripts may specifically localize in such cells. Here we review what is known about localization of RNA and of the pathways that determine RNA fate in bacteria, and discuss the possible cues and mechanisms underlying these distribution patterns.

Division site positioning in bacteria: one size does not fit all

Spatial regulation of cell division in bacteria has been a focus of research for decades. It has been well studied in two model rod-shaped organisms, Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis, with the general belief that division site positioning occurs as a result of the combination of two negative regulatory systems, Min and nucleoid occlusion. These systems influence division by preventing the cytokinetic Z ring from forming anywhere other than midcell. However, evidence is accumulating for the existence of additional mechanisms that are involved in controlling Z ring positioning both in these organisms and in several other bacteria. In some cases the decision of where to divide is solved by variations on a common evolutionary theme, and in others completely different proteins and mechanisms are involved. Here we review the different ways bacteria solve the problem of finding the right place to divide. It appears that a one-size-fits-all model does not apply, and that individual species have adapted a division-site positioning mechanism that best suits their lifestyle, environmental niche and mode of growth to ensure equal partitioning of DNA for survival of the next generation.

The bacterial Min system

A mother cell giving rise to offspring usually needs to choose the site of cytokinesis carefully, as this will determine the size and shape of the daughter cells. Rod-shaped bacteria that divide by binary fission, such as Escherichia coli, often mark their cell division sites at their cell midpoint so that daughter cells are roughly equivalent in size and shape. So how does E. coli know where its middle is? Its cell poles are defined by the previous cell division, but, because E. coli grows by incorporating new cell wall and membrane uniformly along its length, the future cell division site at mid-cell is newly made and has no known pre-existing markers. One way to select the new mid-cell site would be to measure the distance from the two opposing cell poles, using a system that could recognize markers at those poles and define the spot furthest from both markers. This would require that both polar markers act negatively on cell division at equivalent intensities. The result would be a concentration gradient, with the lowest concentration of the negative regulator at the cell midpoint, the greatest distance from both cell poles. It turns out that E. coli and some other rod-shaped bacteria select their cell midpoint using such a negatively acting morphogen gradient, set up by the Min system, which is the focus of this Primer. As is true for many fascinating molecular mechanisms, the first inkling came from the behavior of cells in which this system was broken.

Multidimensional view of the bacterial cytoskeleton

The perspective of the cytoskeleton as a feature unique to eukaryotic organisms was overturned when homologs of the eukaryotic cytoskeletal elements were identified in prokaryotes and implicated in major cell functions, including growth, morphogenesis, cell division, DNA partitioning, and cell motility. FtsZ and MreB were the first identified homologs of tubulin and actin, respectively, followed by the discovery of crescentin as an intermediate filament-like protein. In addition, new elements were identified which have no apparent eukaryotic counterparts, such as the deviant Walker A-type ATPases, bactofilins, and several novel elements recently identified in streptomycetes, highlighting the unsuspected complexity of cytostructural components in bacteria. In vivo multidimensional fluorescence microscopy has demonstrated the dynamics of the bacterial intracellular world, and yet we are only starting to understand the role of cytoskeletal elements. Elucidating structure-function relationships remains challenging, because core cytoskeletal protein motifs show remarkable plasticity, with one element often performing various functions and one function being performed by several types of elements. Structural imaging techniques, such as cryo-electron tomography in combination with advanced light microscopy, are providing the missing links and enabling scientists to answer many outstanding questions regarding prokaryotic cellular architecture. Here we review the recent advances made toward understanding the different roles of cytoskeletal proteins in bacteria, with particular emphasis on modern imaging approaches.