Fifty years after the replicon hypothesis: cell-specific master regulators as new players in chromosome replication control

AdpA Positively Regulates Morphological Differentiation and Chloramphenicol Biosynthesis in Streptomyces venezuelae

In members of genus Streptomyces, AdpA is a master transcriptional regulator that controls the expression of hundreds of genes involved in morphological differentiation, secondary metabolite biosynthesis, chromosome replication, etc. However, the function of AdpASv, an AdpA ortholog of Streptomyces venezuelae, is unknown. This bacterial species is a natural producer of chloramphenicol and has recently become a model organism for studies on Streptomyces. Here, we demonstrate that AdpASv is essential for differentiation and antibiotic biosynthesis in S. venezuelae and provide evidence suggesting that AdpASv positively regulates its own gene expression. We speculate that the different modes of AdpA-dependent transcriptional autoregulation observed in S. venezuelae and other Streptomyces species reflect the arrangement of AdpA binding sites in relation to the transcription start site. Lastly, we present preliminary data suggesting that AdpA may undergo a proteolytic processing and we speculate that this may potentially constitute a novel regulatory mechanism controlling cellular abundance of AdpA in Streptomyces. IMPORTANCEStreptomyces are well-known producers of valuable secondary metabolites which include a large variety of antibiotics and important model organisms for developmental studies in multicellular bacteria. The conserved transcriptional regulator AdpA of Streptomyces exerts a pleiotropic effect on cellular processes, including the morphological differentiation and biosynthesis of secondary metabolites. Despite extensive studies, the function of AdpA in these processes remains elusive. This work provides insights into the role of a yet unstudied AdpA ortholog of Streptomyces venezuelae, now considered a novel model organism. We found that AdpA plays essential role in morphological differentiation and biosynthesis of chloramphenicol, a broad-spectrum antibiotic. We also propose that AdpA may undergo a proteolytic processing that presumably constitutes a novel mechanism regulating cellular abundance of this master regulator.

Persistence of Intracellular Bacterial Pathogens-With a Focus on the Metabolic Perspective

Persistence has evolved as a potent survival strategy to overcome adverse environmental conditions. This capability is common to almost all bacteria, including all human bacterial pathogens and likely connected to chronic infections caused by some of these pathogens. Although the majority of a bacterial cell population will be killed by the particular stressors, like antibiotics, oxygen and nitrogen radicals, nutrient starvation and others, a varying subpopulation (termed persisters) will withstand the stress situation and will be able to revive once the stress is removed. Several factors and pathways have been identified in the past that apparently favor the formation of persistence, such as various toxin/antitoxin modules or stringent response together with the alarmone (p)ppGpp. However, persistence can occur stochastically in few cells even of stress-free bacterial populations. Growth of these cells could then be induced by the stress conditions. In this review, we focus on the persister formation of human intracellular bacterial pathogens, some of which belong to the most successful persister producers but lack some or even all of the assumed persistence-triggering factors and pathways. We propose a mechanism for the persister formation of these bacterial pathogens which is based on their specific intracellular bipartite metabolism. We postulate that this mode of metabolism ultimately leads, under certain starvation conditions, to the stalling of DNA replication initiation which may be causative for the persister state.

Master regulator genes and their impact on major diseases

Master regulator genes (MRGs) have become a hot topic in recent decades. They not only affect the development of tissue and organ systems but also play a role in other signal pathways by regulating additional MRGs. Because a MRG can regulate the concurrent expression of several genes, its mutation often leads to major diseases. Moreover, the occurrence of many tumors and cardiovascular and nervous system diseases are closely related to MRG changes. With the development in omics technology, an increasing amount of investigations will be directed toward MRGs because their regulation involves all aspects of an organism’s development. This review focuses on the definition and classification of MRGs as well as their influence on disease regulation.

Trends in Symbiont-Induced Host Cellular Differentiation

Bacteria participate in a wide diversity of symbiotic associations with eukaryotic hosts that require precise interactions for bacterial recognition and persistence. Most commonly, host-associated bacteria interfere with host gene expression to modulate the immune response to the infection. However, many of these bacteria also interfere with host cellular differentiation pathways to create a hospitable niche, resulting in the formation of novel cell types, tissues, and organs. In both of these situations, bacterial symbionts must interact with eukaryotic regulatory pathways. Here, we detail what is known about how bacterial symbionts, from pathogens to mutualists, control host cellular differentiation across the central dogma, from epigenetic chromatin modifications, to transcription and mRNA processing, to translation and protein modifications. We identify four main trends from this survey. First, mechanisms for controlling host gene expression appear to evolve from symbionts co-opting cross-talk between host signaling pathways. Second, symbiont regulatory capacity is constrained by the processes that drive reductive genome evolution in host-associated bacteria. Third, the regulatory mechanisms symbionts exhibit correlate with the cost/benefit nature of the association. And, fourth, symbiont mechanisms for interacting with host genetic regulatory elements are not bound by native bacterial capabilities. Using this knowledge, we explore how the ubiquitous intracellular Wolbachia symbiont of arthropods and nematodes may modulate host cellular differentiation to manipulate host reproduction. Our survey of the literature on how infection alters gene expression in Wolbachia and its hosts revealed that, despite their intermediate-sized genomes, different strains appear capable of a wide diversity of regulatory manipulations. Given this and Wolbachia's diversity of phenotypes and eukaryotic-like proteins, we expect that many symbiont-induced host differentiation mechanisms will be discovered in this system.

Crosstalk Regulation Between Bacterial Chromosome Replication and Chromosome Partitioning

Despite much effort, the bacterial cell cycle has proved difficult to study and understand. Bacteria do not conform to the standard eukaryotic model of sequential cell-cycle phases. Instead, for example, bacteria overlap their phases of chromosome replication and chromosome partitioning. In “eukaryotic terms,” bacteria simultaneously perform “S-phase” and “mitosis” whose coordination is absolutely required for rapid growth and survival. In this review, we focus on the signaling “crosstalk,” meaning the signaling mechanisms that advantageously commit bacteria to start both chromosome replication and chromosome partitioning. After briefly reviewing the molecular mechanisms of replication and partitioning, we highlight the crosstalk research from Bacillus subtilis, Vibrio cholerae, and Caulobacter crescentus. As the initiator of chromosome replication, DnaA also mediates crosstalk in each of these model bacteria but not always in the same way. We next focus on the C. crescentus cell cycle and describe how it is revealing novel crosstalk mechanisms. Recent experiments show that the novel nucleoid associated protein GapR has a special role(s) in starting and separating the replicating chromosomes, so that upon asymmetric cell division, the new chromosomes acquire different fates in C. crescentus’s distinct replicating and non-replicating cell types. The C. crescentus PopZ protein forms a special cell-pole organizing matrix that anchors the chromosomes through their centromere-like DNA sequences near the origin of replication. We also describe how PopZ anchors and interacts with several key cell-cycle regulators, thereby providing an organized subcellular environment for more novel crosstalk mechanisms.

Learning from the master: targets and functions of the CtrA response regulator in Brucella abortus and other alpha-proteobacteria

The α-proteobacteria are a fascinating group of free-living, symbiotic and pathogenic organisms, including the Brucella genus, which is responsible for a worldwide zoonosis. One common feature of α-proteobacteria is the presence of a conserved response regulator called CtrA, first described in the model bacterium Caulobacter crescentus, where it controls gene expression at different stages of the cell cycle. Here, we focus on Brucella abortus and other intracellular α-proteobacteria in order to better assess the potential role of CtrA in the infectious context. Comparative genomic analyses of the CtrA control pathway revealed the conservation of specific modules, as well as the acquisition of new factors during evolution. The comparison of CtrA regulons also suggests that specific clades of α-proteobacteria acquired distinct functions under its control, depending on the essentiality of the transcription factor. Other CtrA-controlled functions, for instance motility and DNA repair, are proposed to be more ancestral. Altogether, these analyses provide an interesting example of the plasticity of a regulation network, subject to the constraints of inherent imperatives such as cell division and the adaptations to diversified environmental niches.

Replicate Once Per Cell Cycle: Replication Control of Secondary Chromosomes

Faithful vertical transmission of genetic information, especially of essential core genes, is a prerequisite for bacterial survival. Hence, replication of all the replicons is tightly controlled to ensure that all daughter cells get the same genome copy as their mother cell. Essential core genes are very often carried by the main chromosome. However they can occasionally be found on secondary chromosomes, recently renamed chromids. Chromids have evolved from non-essential megaplasmids, and further acquired essential core genes and a genomic signature closed to that of the main chromosome. All chromids carry a plasmidic replication origin, belonging so far to either the iterons or repABC type. Based on these differences, two categories of chromids have been distinguished. In this review, we focus on the replication initiation controls of these two types of chromids. We show that the sophisticated mechanisms controlling their replication evolved from their plasmid counterparts to allow a timely controlled replication, occurring once per cell cycle.

Genomic Insights into Evolution of AdpA Family Master Regulators of Morphological Differentiation and Secondary Metabolism in Streptomyces

The AdpA protein from a streptomycin producer Streptomyces griseus is a founding member of the AdpA family of pleiotropic regulators, known to be ubiquitously present in streptomycetes. Functional genomic approaches revealed a huge number of AdpA targets, leading to the claim that the AdpA regulon is the largest one in bacteria. The expression of adpA is limited at the level of translation of the rare leucyl UUA codon. All known properties of AdpA regulators were discovered on a few streptomycete strains. There are open questions about the true abundance and diversity of AdpA across actinobacterial taxa (and beyond) and about the possible evolutionary forces that shape the AdpA orthologous group in Streptomyces. Here we show that, with respect to the TTA codon, streptomycete adpA is more diverse than has been previously thought, as the genes differ in presence/position of this codon. Reciprocal best hits to AdpA can be found in many actinobacterial orders, with a domain organization resembling that of the prototypical AdpA, but other configurations also exist. Diversifying positive selection was detected within the DNA-binding (AraC) domain in adpA of Streptomyces origin, most likely affecting residues enabling AdpA to recognize a degenerate operator. Sequence coding for putative glutamine amidotransferase (GATase-1) domain also shows signs of positive selection. The two-domain organization of AdpA most likely arose from a fusion of genes encoding separate GATase-1 and AraC domains. Indeed, we show that the AraC domain retains a biological function in the absence of the GATase-1 part. We suggest that acquisition of the regulatory role by TTA codon is a relatively recent event in the evolution of AdpA, which coincided with the rise of the Streptomycetales clade and, at present, is under relaxed selective constraints. Further experimental scrutiny of our findings is invited, which should provide new insights into the evolution and prospects for engineering of an AdpA-centered regulatory network.

Multiple conformational states of DnaA protein regulate its interaction with DnaA boxes in the initiation of DNA replication

DnaA protein is the initiator of genomic DNA replication in prokaryotes. It binds to specific DNA sequences in the origin of DNA replication and unwinds small AT-rich sequences downstream for the assembly of the replisome. The mechanism of activation of DnaA that enables it to bind and organize the origin DNA and leads to replication initiation remains unclear. In this study, we have developed double-labeled fluorescent DnaA probes to analyze conformational states of DnaA protein upon binding DNA, nucleotide, and Soj sporulation protein using Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer (FRET). Our studies demonstrate that DnaA protein undergoes large conformational changes upon binding to substrates and there are multiple distinct conformational states that enable it to initiate DNA replication. DnaA protein adopted a relaxed conformation by expanding ~15Å upon binding ATP and DNA to form the ATP·DnaA·DNA complex. Hydrolysis of bound ATP to ADP led to a contraction of DnaA within the complex. The relaxed conformation of DnaA is likely required for the formation of the multi-protein ATP·DnaA·DNA complex. In the initiation of sporulation, Soj binding to DnaA prevented relaxation of its conformation. Soj·ADP appeared to block the activation of DnaA, suggesting a mechanism for Soj·ADP in switching initiation of DNA replication to sporulation. Our studies demonstrate that multiple conformational states of DnaA protein regulate its binding to DNA in the initiation of DNA replication.

Random versus Cell Cycle-Regulated Replication Initiation in Bacteria: Insights from Studying Vibrio cholerae Chromosome 2

Bacterial chromosomes initiate replication at a fixed time in the cell cycle, whereas there is generally no particular time for plasmid replication initiation or chromosomal replication initiation from integrated plasmids. In bacteria with divided genomes, the replication system of one of the chromosomes typically resembles that of bacteria with undivided genomes, whereas the remaining chromosomes have plasmid-like replication systems. For example, in Vibrio cholerae, a bacterium with two chromosomes (chromosome 1 [Chr1] and Chr2), the Chr1 system resembles that of the Escherichia coli chromosome, and the Chr2 system resembles that of iteron-based plasmids. However, Chr2 still initiates replication at a fixed time in the cell cycle and thus offers an opportunity to understand the molecular basis for the difference between random and cell cycle-regulated modes of replication. Here we review studies of replication control in Chr2 and compare it to those of plasmids and chromosomes. We argue that although the Chr2 control mechanisms in many ways are reminiscent of those of plasmids, they also appear to combine more regulatory features than are found on a typical plasmid, including some that are more typical of chromosomes. One of the regulatory mechanisms is especially novel, the coordinated timing of replication initiation of Chr1 and Chr2, providing the first example of communication between chromosomes for replication initiation.

Regulatory (pan-)genome of an obligate intracellular pathogen in the PVC superphylum

Like other obligate intracellular bacteria, the Chlamydiae feature a compact regulatory genome that remains uncharted owing to poor genetic tractability. Exploiting the reduced number of transcription factors (TFs) encoded in the chlamydial (pan-)genome as a model for TF control supporting the intracellular lifestyle, we determined the conserved landscape of TF specificities by ChIP-Seq (chromatin immunoprecipitation-sequencing) in the chlamydial pathogen Waddlia chondrophila. Among 10 conserved TFs, Euo emerged as a master TF targeting >100 promoters through conserved residues in a DNA excisionase-like winged helix-turn-helix-like (wHTH) fold. Minimal target (Euo) boxes were found in conserved developmentally-regulated genes governing vertical genome transmission (cytokinesis and DNA replication) and genome plasticity (transposases). Our ChIP-Seq analysis with intracellular bacteria not only reveals that global TF regulation is maintained in the reduced regulatory genomes of Chlamydiae, but also predicts that master TFs interpret genomic information in the obligate intracellular α-proteobacteria, including the rickettsiae, from which modern day mitochondria evolved.

The Caulobacter crescentus Homolog of DnaA (HdaA) Also Regulates the Proteolysis of the Replication Initiator Protein DnaA

It is not known how diverse bacteria regulate chromosome replication. Based on Escherichia coli studies, DnaA initiates replication and the homolog of DnaA (Hda) inactivates DnaA using the RIDA (regulatory inactivation of DnaA) mechanism that thereby prevents extra chromosome replication cycles. RIDA may be widespread, because the distantly related Caulobacter crescentus homolog HdaA also prevents extra chromosome replication (J. Collier and L. Shapiro, J Bacteriol 191:5706-5715, 2009, http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JB.00525-09). To further study the HdaA/RIDA mechanism, we created a C. crescentus strain that shuts off hdaA transcription and rapidly clears HdaA protein. We confirm that HdaA prevents extra replication, since cells lacking HdaA accumulate extra chromosome DNA. DnaA binds nucleotides ATP and ADP, and our results are consistent with the established E. coli mechanism whereby Hda converts active DnaA-ATP to inactive DnaA-ADP. However, unlike E. coli DnaA, C. crescentus DnaA is also regulated by selective proteolysis. C. crescentus cells lacking HdaA reduce DnaA proteolysis in logarithmically growing cells, thereby implicating HdaA in this selective DnaA turnover mechanism. Also, wild-type C. crescentus cells remove all DnaA protein when they enter stationary phase. However, cells lacking HdaA retain stable DnaA protein even when they stop growing in nutrient-depleted medium that induces complete DnaA proteolysis in wild-type cells. Additional experiments argue for a distinct HdaA-dependent mechanism that selectively removes DnaA prior to stationary phase. Related freshwater Caulobacter species also remove DnaA during entry to stationary phase, implying a wider role for HdaA as a novel component of programed proteolysis.

IMPORTANCE

Bacteria must regulate chromosome replication, and yet the mechanisms are not completely understood and not fully exploited for antibiotic development. Based on Escherichia coli studies, DnaA initiates replication, and the homolog of DnaA (Hda) inactivates DnaA to prevent extra replication. The distantly related Caulobacter crescentus homolog HdaA also regulates chromosome replication. Here we unexpectedly discovered that unlike the E. coli Hda, the C. crescentus HdaA also regulates DnaA proteolysis. Furthermore, this HdaA proteolysis acts in logarithmically growing and in stationary-phase cells and therefore in two very different physiological states. We argue that HdaA acts to help time chromosome replications in logarithmically growing cells and that it is an unexpected component of the programed entry into stationary phase.

Redefining bacterial origins of replication as centralized information processors

In this review we stress the differences between eukaryotes and bacteria with respect to their different cell cycles, replication mechanisms and genome organizations. One of the most basic and underappreciated differences is that a bacterial chromosome uses only one ori while eukaryotic chromosome uses multiple oris. Consequently, eukaryotic oris work redundantly in a cell cycle divided into separate phases: First inactive replication proteins assemble on eukaryotic oris, and then they await conditions (in the separate “S-phase”) that activate only the ori-bound and pre-assembled replication proteins. S-phase activation (without re-assembly) ensures that a eukaryotic ori “fires” (starts replication) only once and that each chromosome consistently duplicates only once per cell cycle. This precise chromosome duplication does not require precise multiple ori firing in S-phase. A eukaryotic ori can fire early, late or not at all. The single bacterial ori has no such margin for error and a comparable imprecision is lethal. Single ori usage is not more primitive; it is a totally different strategy that distinguishes bacteria. We further argue that strong evolutionary pressures created more sophisticated single ori systems because bacteria experience extreme and rapidly changing conditions. A bacterial ori must rapidly receive and process much information in “real-time” and not just in “cell cycle time.” This redefinition of bacterial oris as centralized information processors makes at least two important predictions: First that bacterial oris use many and yet to be discovered control mechanisms and second that evolutionarily distinct bacteria will use many very distinct control mechanisms. We review recent literature that supports both predictions. We will highlight three key examples and describe how negative-feedback, phospho-relay, and chromosome-partitioning systems act to regulate chromosome replication. We also suggest future studies and discuss using replication proteins as novel antibiotic targets.

oriC-encoded instructions for the initiation of bacterial chromosome replication

Replication of the bacterial chromosome initiates at a single origin of replication that is called oriC. This occurs via the concerted action of numerous proteins, including DnaA, which acts as an initiator. The origin sequences vary across species, but all bacterial oriCs contain the information necessary to guide assembly of the DnaA protein complex at oriC, triggering the unwinding of DNA and the beginning of replication. The requisite information is encoded in the unique arrangement of specific sequences called DnaA boxes, which form a framework for DnaA binding and assembly. Other crucial sequences of bacterial origin include DNA unwinding element (DUE, which designates the site at which oriC melts under the influence of DnaA) and binding sites for additional proteins that positively or negatively regulate the initiation process. In this review, we summarize our current knowledge and understanding of the information encoded in bacterial origins of chromosomal replication, particularly in the context of replication initiation and its regulation. We show that oriC encoded instructions allow not only for initiation but also for precise regulation of replication initiation and coordination of chromosomal replication with the cell cycle (also in response to environmental signals). We focus on Escherichia coli, and then expand our discussion to include several other microorganisms in which additional regulatory proteins have been recently shown to be involved in coordinating replication initiation to other cellular processes (e.g., Bacillus, Caulobacter, Helicobacter, Mycobacterium, and Streptomyces). We discuss diversity of bacterial oriC regions with the main focus on roles of individual DNA recognition sequences at oriC in binding the initiator and regulatory proteins as well as the overall impact of these proteins on the formation of initiation complex.