Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Bacteriology, January 1999, p. 401-410, Vol. 181, No. 2
HSP Research Institute, Kyoto Research Park,
Kyoto 600-8813, Japan
Received 18 June 1998/Accepted 6 November 1998
The heat shock response in Escherichia coli depends
primarily on the increased synthesis and stabilization of otherwise
scarce and unstable The heat shock response is a
universal, adaptive, and homeostatic cellular response against damage
to protein folding under heat and other stresses. In Escherichia
coli, the response results primarily from a transient increase in
the level of As to the mechanism of translational induction of
0021-9193/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Heat-Induced Synthesis of
32 in
Escherichia coli: Structural and Functional Dissection of
rpoH mRNA Secondary Structure
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and methods
Results
Discussion
References
32 (rpoH gene product),
which is required for the transcription of heat shock genes. The
heat-induced synthesis of
32 occurs at the level of
translation, and genetic evidence has suggested the involvement of a
secondary structure at the 5' portion (nucleotides
19 to +247) of
rpoH mRNA in regulation. We now present evidence for the
mRNA secondary structure model by means of structure probing of RNA
with chemical and enzymatic probes. A similar analysis of several
mutant RNAs with a mutation predicted to alter a base pairing or with
two compensatory mutations revealed altered secondary structures
consistent with the expression and heat inducibility of the
corresponding fusion constructs observed in vivo. These findings led us
to assess the possible roles of each of the stem-loop structures by
analyzing an additional set of deletions and base substitutions. The
results indicated not only the primary importance of base pairings
between the translation initiation region of ca. 20 nucleotides (the
AUG initiation codon plus the "downstream box") and the internal
region of rpoH mRNA but also the requirement of appropriate
stability of mRNA secondary structures for characteristic thermoregulation, i.e., repression at a low temperature and induction upon a temperature upshift.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and methods
Results
Discussion
References
32, which is encoded by rpoH and
which is specifically required for the transcription of the set of
well-conserved heat shock genes (11, 35). The increase in
the
32 level results from both the enhanced synthesis
and the stabilization of normally unstable
32 (12,
30). Whereas the stabilization of
32 is thought to
be triggered by the titration of free DnaK/DnaJ chaperones by
stress-induced misfolded proteins (1, 4, 9, 16, 32), the
increased synthesis occurs at the level of translation (15, 21,
30) and presumably is regulated via a separate pathway (22,
29, 35). The production of abnormal proteins under various
conditions also induces the heat shock response through an increase in
the
32 level (10), but such induction appears
to involve only the stabilization and not the increased synthesis of
32 (16). Furthermore, exposure to extremely
high temperatures (e.g., 50°C) can induce
32 synthesis
by enhancing rpoH transcription by activating the second heat shock
factor,
E (7, 33), in response
to misfolded proteins accumulated in the periplasm (11, 19).
Thus, E. coli cells strictly regulate
32 at
various levels to cope with increasing demands for chaperones, ATP-dependent proteases, and other heat shock proteins under a variety
of stress conditions (1, 9, 11, 25, 35).
32,
extensive deletion analyses of an rpoH-lacZ gene fusion
revealed the involvement of positive and negative regulatory regions
(regions A and B, respectively) on the 5' portion of rpoH
mRNA (15, 21). Region A (15 nucleotides [nt]), located
close to the initiation codon, represents the "downstream box,"
(27) which is complementary to part of the 16S rRNA and
which potentially enhances translation. Region B, an internal coding
segment of ca. 100 nt, is a negative element involved in repressing
translation under nonstress conditions. A computer prediction revealed
a secondary structure for the 5' segment (nt
19 to +247) of
rpoH mRNA which is fully consistent with the above findings;
base pairings between region A and part of region B appeared to
negatively modulate rpoH translation (21) (Fig.
1).

View larger version (23K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
Schematic representation of the 5' portion (nt
19 to
+247) of E. coli rpoH mRNA as predicted by use of Mulfold
(14). (A) Secondary structure thought to be involved in
modulating heat-induced synthesis of
32 (21).
Region A (nt +6 to 20), the initiation codon, and the Shine-Dalgarno
(SD) sequence are indicated. Region B (nt +112 to 208) is shaded.
Numbers refer to the nucleotides of the coding sequence. (B) Putative
base pairing between the downstream box (region A) of rpoH
and the "anti-downstream box" of 16S rRNA (spanning nt 1469 to
1483).
, G-U pairs.
Mutational analyses of rpoH mRNA deficient in the expression
or regulation of a GF364 fusion carrying the initial 364 nt of the
rpoH coding region (Fig. 2A)
not only substantiated the importance of some of the critical base
pairings but also suggested the possible involvement of specific
nucleotide sequences in heat induction (36). It was surmised
that the translation of rpoH mRNA is restricted by the
formation of secondary structure(s) that would limit ribosome entry
under nonstress conditions. Upon mild heat shock (e.g., a shift from 30 to 42°C), such mRNA structures were thought to be disrupted to
enhance translation, although the mechanism remained unknown (21,
35, 36). In addition, the isolation and characterization of
rpoH homologs from a number of gram-negative bacteria
revealed evolutionary conservation of both region A and the mRNA
secondary structure among the gamma proteobacteria (23). All
members of the latter group of bacteria examined seemed to exhibit
heat-induced synthesis of
32 homologs at the
translational level, as in E. coli (24).
|
The translational induction of
32 is transient and is
followed by a shutoff phase mediated by the DnaK-DnaJ-GrpE chaperones (9, 12, 29). The translational repression and
destabilization of
32 during adaptation periods are part
of the feedback regulatory mechanisms (29, 31, 32) mediated
by a segment of
32 protein (18, 22, 35) which
contains a highly and uniquely conserved sequence among the
rpoH homologs (23, 34). Several lines of evidence
suggest that this region plays important roles in the
chaperone-mediated negative control of the synthesis and/or stability
of
32 (8, 17, 18). However, the exact
regulatory mechanisms of the transient heat induction of
32 synthesis, including the nature of the sensor(s) and
signaling pathway(s), remain largely unresolved.
We now report a structural and functional analysis of the 5' segment of
rpoH mRNA responsible for thermoregulation. We first probed
the structures of rpoH RNAs from the wild type and several mutants in vitro and then analyzed their expression in vivo after transcription from a single-copy rpoH-lacZ gene fusion. The
data supported some salient features of the predicted mRNA secondary structure and provided the basis for further analysis of each of the
component stem-loop structures. The results led us to propose that an
mRNA secondary structure with appropriate stability and formed between
the translation initiation region (the AUG initiation codon and region
A) and the internal coding region is a prerequisite for the
thermoregulation of
32 synthesis.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Strains, phages, and media.
E. coli K-12 strain
MC4100 [araD
(argF-lac)U169 rpsL
relA flbB deoC ptsF rbsR] (2) was used for all
experiments in vivo. The
TLF97-3 vector (28) was used to
construct rpoH-lacZ gene fusions. Minimal medium M9
(20) with 0.2% glucose, thiamine (2 µg/ml), and all amino
acids except for methionine (20 µg/ml each) was used for
pulse-labeling experiments. MacConkey lactose agar (Difco) and L agar
containing
5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-
-D-galactopyranoside (X-Gal)
(30 µg/ml) were used for isolating
lysogens containing rpoH-lacZ gene fusions. Recombinant DNA and other general
techniques were as described by Sambrook et al. (26) and by
Miller (20).
Chemicals, enzymes, and buffers. 1-Cyclohexyl-3-(2-morpholinoethyl)-carbodiimide metho-p-toluene sulfonate (CMCT) and diethyl pyrocarbonate (DEP) were purchased from Sigma. RNase V1 was obtained from Pharmacia, and avian myeloblastosis virus reverse transcriptase was obtained from Life Science. Buffer H was 70 mM HEPES-KOH (pH 7.8) containing 10 mM MgCl2, 270 mM KCl, and 1 mM dithiothreitol, and buffer V1 was 30 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.8) containing 20 mM MgCl2, 300 mM KCl, and 1 mM dithiothreitol.
Construction of rpoH-lacZ gene fusions.
The gene
fusion (translational fusion) designated TLF247 was constructed by
in-frame fusion between the XhoI-BamHI fragment of pGF247 (21) containing the rpoH promoters and
the 5' portion of the coding region (nt
677 to +247) and codon 9 of
lacZ on the
TLF97-3 vector. The same fragment of pGF247
was also inserted into pBluescript SK(+), yielding pBSK247. Derivatives
of TLF247 carrying base substitutions were constructed by PCR with
plasmid pFRP103 containing each of the mutations (36) as a
template and synthetic oligonucleotide primers that corresponded to the 5' (nt
46 to
27) and 3' (nt +227 to 247) portions of the coding region. Seven extra bases containing the BamHI site were
added to the latter primer to make in-frame fusions to lacZ
(21). A set of 3' deletions of GFR153 was constructed by PCR
with the same 5' primer as that used above and 3' primers that
corresponded to the end of each deletion (with the same seven extra
bases) and with
GFR153 (21) as a template. DNA fragments
with the desired sequences containing PCR-amplified products were
inserted into pBSK247, and nucleotide sequences were confirmed by
dideoxy sequencing. The XhoI-BamHI fragments of
the resulting plasmids were then transferred to the
TLF97-3 vector
by in vitro packaging. TLF229
(stemIII) was constructed from TLF247
by deleting the apical portion of stem II (nt +30 to 110) and all of
stem III (nt +128 to 178). Four synthetic oligonucleotides (ca. 60 nt
long) were annealed and ligated to create a DNA fragment with 5'
protruding ends for joining with the ClaI or
BamHI site at the 5' or 3' end, respectively. The resulting
fragment was cloned into pBSK247 by replacing the
ClaI-BamHI fragment to obtain
pBSK229
(stemIII).
Determination of rates of synthesis of fusion proteins.
The
procedure used for the determination of fusion protein synthesis rates
was essentially that described previously (21). Portions
(0.1 ml) of log-phase cultures were pulse-labeled with L-[35S]methionine (1,200 Ci/mmol). Extracts
were prepared, and portions with equal radioactivity were mixed with a
fixed amount of JM103 cell extract (labeled with
[35S]methionine) containing
-galactosidase
protein
and treated with antibody against
-galactosidase (Organon Teknika
Cappel). The immunoprecipitates were subjected to sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS)-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) (7.5% gel),
and the intensities of radioactive bands were quantified with a Fujix BAS2000 imaging analyzer to determine the rates of synthesis of fusion
proteins after correction for recovery with
protein as a reference.
RNA preparation.
RNA containing the upstream region and part
of the rpoH coding region (nt
60 to +247) was prepared in
vitro with T7 RNA polymerase by use of an RNA transcription kit
(Stratagene). The AflII-BamHI fragments of
pBSK247 were placed under the control of the T7 promoter of vector
pSP72, and the resulting plasmids were digested with BamHI
and used as templates for RNA synthesis. The RNA obtained was treated
at 65°C for 3 min, followed by slow cooling to room temperature prior
to use.
Structure probing of RNA. The procedures used for RNA structure probing were essentially those described by Christiansen et al. (3). Prior to treatment with CMCT, DEP, or RNase V1, RNA (4 µg) was renatured (heating and slow cooling) in 20 µl of buffer H, 200 µl of buffer H, or 20 µl of buffer V1, respectively. RNA was treated with CMCT (50 mM) or DEP (96 µM), and the reaction was terminated by the addition of ethanol on dry ice. For RNase V1 treatment, 6 µl of RNA was mixed with an equal volume of buffer V1 containing enzyme on ice for 30 min, treated with phenol, and precipitated with ethanol. RNA incubated without probes served as a control in all experiments. The identification of modified bases was carried out by primer extension analysis: 0.3 pmol of modified RNA and 3 pmol of 5'-fluorescence-labeled primer complementary to the 5' (nt +79 to 101) or 3' (nt +227 to 247) region were incubated with avian myeloblastosis virus reverse transcriptase. Portions of primer extention products were loaded on a 5% polyacrylamide-8 M urea sequencing gel and electrophoresed at 1,400 V for 2.5 h. The bands were detected with Fluorescence BioImage Analyzer FMBIO II Multi-View (Hitachi), and the modified bases were identified by comparison with sequence ladders simultaneously run with the same end-labeled primers.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Thermoregulation of a TLF247 gene fusion mediated by an mRNA secondary structure. To further understand the rpoH translational control mechanisms, it was important to analyze structural features of the "minimal" mRNA segment(s) essential for thermoregulation. Based on our previous work (21), we constructed a new rpoH-lacZ gene fusion carrying only the first 247 nt of rpoH (TLF247) (Fig. 2A) and reexamined the effects of mutations previously characterized with GF364 carrying the first 364 nt (36). Cells of MC4100 carrying TLF247 or its mutant derivatives were grown at 30°C, shifted to 42°C, and pulse-labeled with [35S]methionine to determine fusion protein synthesis rates (Fig. 2B). Wild-type TLF247 exhibited five- to sixfold induction upon the temperature upshift. In contrast, the mutant fusions (15A, 15C, or 124T) carrying a base substitution predicted to disrupt the 15G-124C base pairing showed enhanced expression at 30°C and reduced induction upon the shift to 42°C (Fig. 3B), consistent with our previous results obtained with GF364 (we discuss below the relatively small effect observed with 15C).
|
Structure probing of the rpoH mRNA secondary
structure.
The structure of the 5' segment of rpoH mRNA
(nt
60 to +247) used for construction of the TLF247 fusion was
examined with two chemical probes (CMCT and DEP) and an enzymatic probe
(RNase V1) (Fig. 3A). RNA prepared by in vitro
transcription with T7 RNA polymerase was heated at 65°C for 3 min,
slowly cooled to room temperature, and treated with CMCT or DEP, which
specifically modifies single-stranded U/G or A, respectively, or with
RNase V1, which cleaves double-stranded RNA with no
apparent sequence specificity. The modified bases were identified by
reverse transcription analysis, and the relative reactivities of
individual bases to each of the probes used are illustrated
semiquantitatively on the predicted RNA secondary structure (Fig. 3B).
The region upstream of nt
19 is not shown here, since it is known not
to be involved in thermoregulation (21).
Altered secondary structure of some mutant rpoH
RNAs.
To determine the effects of base changes on the mRNA
secondary structure, RNAs prepared from five mutants examined above
(Fig. 2B) were subjected to similar structural analyses (Fig. 3A). The results obtained, combined with those for the wild-type RNA, revealed certain interesting differences as well as similarities (Table 1). Evidently, stems II and III in the
15A and 15C mutant RNAs were modified to greater extents than those in
the wild-type RNA. A-15 was clearly modified by DEP in 15A RNA; in
contrast, G-15 in wild-type RNA was not modified by CMCT as expected.
More importantly, U-14 was also modified strongly in 15A RNA but not in
wild-type RNA, indicating that the neighboring structure was affected
by the G-to-A mutation at +15. Since C should not be modified by either
probe, the change at +15 could not be seen in 15C RNA. However, U-14
was not modified in 15C RNA, indicating that the change in the
neighboring structure was more pronounced in 15A RNA than in 15C RNA.
Such differential base modifications, which presumably reflected
differences in local secondary structures between the two RNAs, were
well correlated with differential fusion protein expression levels at
30°C, namely, higher expression of the 15A mutant than of the 15C
mutant (Fig. 2B).
|
19 to +247)
plays a major role in modulating translation initiation.
Further deletion analysis of critical regulatory regions.
To
further define the rpoH regions critical for
thermoregulation, we constructed and examined a set of 5' and 3'
deletions of the rpoH-lacZ fusion on
TLF247. It had been
shown that the internal segment of 127 nt that contains the 5' half of
region B (nt +27 to 153) (Fig. 2) could be deleted from GF364 without affecting regulation, despite the drastic alteration of the predicted mRNA secondary structure; part of stem III formed base pairings with
region A (nt +12 to 17) and with seven artificial nucleotides inserted
during construction (21) (see Fig. 5). Similarly, the newly
constructed fusion TLF247
(27-153), which lacked the same segment,
exhibited essentially normal expression at 30°C and induction at
42°C, indicating that the altered secondary structure due to the
(27-153) deletion fortuitously gained the capacity for
thermoregulation (Fig. 4A, line 2). In
spite of this anomaly, however, when some of the above mutations (15A,
15A-124T, and 17C-122G) were introduced into the latter construct, they
had similar effects on thermoregulation, although less striking than
those obtained with the TLF247 derivatives (data not shown). Thus, the
thermoregulation observed with TLF247
(27-153) appeared to involve
mechanisms similar to that found with the parental TLF247 fusion. These
results also suggested that the apical portion of stem II and the
intact form of stem III were not essential for regulation.
|
(27-153).
Deletion to nt +229 had little effect on heat induction (Fig. 4A, line
3), but deletion to near the 3' end of stem IV (and region B) (nt +211)
reduced basal expression appreciably (line 4) (see Discussion).
Deletions extending into stem IV (nt +205 or +199) affected heat
induction only slightly (Fig. 4A, lines 5 and 6), whereas further
deletion to nt +190 or +169 abolished induction completely, with a
concomitant increase in the expression at 30°C of the latter
construct (lines 7 and 8). These results appeared to indicate the
importance of stem I but not stem IV for thermoregulation within the
limitations of these experiments.
All of the above deletions except for TLF169
(27-153) are predicted
to form a structure with a single major stem-loop structure that
primarily consists of base pairings between the initiation codon plus
region A (nt +1 to 21) and part of region B (nt +170 to 189) (Fig. 5A
to C). However, the TLF190
(27-153)
deletion lacking stem IV is predicted to form fortuitous base pairings between part of the Shine-Dalgarno sequence (nt
11 to
6) and the
deletion junction with the BamHI site that would
hyperstabilize the local secondary structure (Fig. 5C); this prediction
probably explains the observed failure to respond to heat shock despite the identity of the major stem-loop structure with those of some of the
other constructs. The basal portion of the major stem-loop structure of
(27-153) constructs consists of base pairings between the initiation
codon plus most of region A (nt +1 to 17) and part of region B (nt +173
to 189), as in authentic rpoH except for the A-13/G-177
mismatch and the U-14·G-176 pairing. In contrast, the apical portion
contains A-18 to C-26, A-154 to C-172, and seven extra bases inserted
during construction (Fig. 5B, broken line) and differs drastically from
that of the parental TLF247 fusion (Fig. 3B). Thus, although the basal
portion around the translation initiation region appeared to be most
important, it was not sufficient for effective thermoregulation.
|
A minimal gene fusion that can respond to heat shock.
To
construct a minimal fusion with maximum structural similarity to
TLF247, the apical portion of the major stem, including seven extra
bases of TLF229
(27-153), was replaced with part of region B (nt
+111 to 127). The resulting fusion, called TLF229
(stemIII) (Fig.
5D), lacked the apical half of stem II and all of stem III, in
comparison with the parental TLF247 fusion (Fig. 3B). Despite the
structural similarity, this construct exhibited extremely low
expression at 30°C and was induced little at 42°C (Fig. 4B, line
1). These results were not unexpected, because GF364 lacking all of
stem III was unable to be induced upon heat shock, presumably due to
the hyperstabilization of stems I and II (36). Thus, to keep
the appropriate instability of the RNA secondary structure, the A-13/G-126 mismatch and the U-14·G-125 pairing derived
from A-13/G-177 and U-14·G-176, respectively, of
TLF247
(27-153) (Fig. 5A) were introduced into
TLF229
(stemIII). The resulting construct, TLF229
(stemIII)GG,
showed essentially normal thermoregulation, although expression at
30°C was significantly reduced (Fig. 4B, line 2).
(stemIII)GG was sufficient for exhibiting the characteristic thermoregulation of the
rpoH-lacZ fusion. These results, combined with the RNA
secondary structure prediction for various constructs, suggested that
the mRNA secondary structure involving the translation initiation
region (the initiation codon plus region A) with appropriate stability
or instability may be a primary requirement for the thermoregulation of
rpoH translation.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The efficiency of translation in E. coli is determined
primarily at the stage of initiation, which includes binding of the 30S
ribosome to 5' segments (from approximately nt
20 to +15) of mRNA
spanning the Shine-Dalgarno sequence and the initiation codon
(6). Thus, the secondary structure of such mRNA segments can
play an important role in modulating translation efficiency (5). In the case of rpoH, part of the ribosome
binding site (nt +1 to 20) including the AUG codon and region A
(downstream box) was thought to be masked through the formation of base
pairs with the internal region (region B). This idea was initially
suggested by computer prediction (21) and subsequently
supported by mutational analyses (21, 36) and structural
conservation among the rpoH homologs (23). Such a
structure seemed most likely to restrict translation by preventing
ribosome entry under nonstress conditions. The present results of
structure probing of rpoH mRNA directly supported this model
(Fig. 3). Based on the structural information, possible roles of each
of the major stems that constitute the whole structure were assessed by
further deletion analyses.
The structure probing analyses revealed that mutations within stem II affecting translational repression (15A and 15C) affect not only the neighboring structures of stem II but also the structures of stem III (Table 1). The simultaneous recovery of both of these effects of compensatory mutations (15A-124T and 15C-124G) was well correlated with the expression and regulation of fusion proteins in vivo (Fig. 2B). This finding was not unexpected, because some of the partially constitutive mutations previously isolated from GF346 (133A, 136A, and 142A) (36) were actually localized within stem III. All of these results indicated that the stabilities of stems II and III are interdependent and that changes in stem II stability, at least those involving the mutations analyzed in this study, have particularly striking effects on thermoregulation.
The results of deletion analyses indicated that most of stem II (nt +27
to 111) and stem III were not indispensable for thermoregulation (36) (Fig. 4). However, as discussed below, appropriate
stability or instability of the mRNA secondary structure was an
essential requirement for normal regulation. In the fusion construct
TLF247
(27-153), which lacked an appreciable portion of the internal
segment, part of stem III (nt +165 to 178) was predicted to form
several fortuitous base pairings (as well as some mismatches) with part
of stem II (nt +12 to 26) (Fig. 5A). Remarkably, the minimal fusion
construct TLF229
(stemIII)GG, with much greater similarity to the
parental TLF247 fusion, had to retain two mismatches (two G's) derived from TLF247
(27-153) to be heat inducible (Fig. 4B); a similar construct with the parental sequence but lacking the mismatches [TLF229
(stemIII)] failed to show heat induction. In this
connection, the inability to respond to heat shock was previously
observed when stem III was totally deleted from the GF364 fusion
(36). Although stem III was not essential, when it was
absent, certain mismatches had to be introduced to the remaining
segment of RNA to substitute for its function. In other words, stem III
appeared to serve as a "wedge" between stems I and II, conferring
appropriate instability to the mRNA secondary structure.
3' Deletions extending into stem IV reduced basal expression
significantly and slightly affected heat induction (Fig. 4A, lines 5 and 6). TLF211
(27-153) retained intact stem IV, but the sequence
immediately downstream at the lacZ junction
(BamHI site) was predicted to form base pairings with the
Shine-Dalgarno sequence and reduce basal-level expression, as was
actually observed (Fig. 4A, line 4), although not as strikingly as in
TLF190
(27-153) (line 7). These combined results suggested that stem
IV was not essential for thermoregulation but would serve to keep the
upstream Shine-Dalgarno and adjacent regions "open" for ribosome entry.
The internal deletion TLF247
(27-153), like GFR153 studied
previously (21), exhibited essentially normal heat induction despite the drastic alteration from the parental TLF247 fusion in the
apical (but not the basal) portion of the predicted RNA secondary
structure (Fig. 5A). This result indicated that the basal portion
containing the translation initiation region (stem I) was most critical
for thermoregulation. However, stem I by itself was not sufficient,
since TLF190
(27-153) containing stem I failed to be heat induced
(Fig. 4A, line 7). Also, TLF229
(stemIII), which retained intact stem
I and part of stem II, was not heat induced (Fig. 4B, line 1). The
facts that a drastic alteration in stems II and III did not affect
thermoregulation and that the two-G substitution could restore the
regulation of TLF229
(stemIII) (Fig. 4B, line 2) strongly suggested
that the stability of the translation initiation region of
rpoH mRNA rather than other structural features was
primarily important for thermoregulation. We conclude that there are
two major requirements for normal rpoH thermoregulation. First, the translation initiation region (initiation codon plus region
A) must be masked through formation of base pairs with part of the
internal coding sequence (region B); this factor is crucial for
translational repression at a low temperature (30°C). Second, the
secondary structure involving the initiation region that includes the
Shine-Dalgarno sequence must retain appropriate instability; this
factor is essential for heat induction to be observed upon the
temperature upshift (42°C).
Besides the mRNA secondary structure, previous results suggested the possible involvement of a specific sequence which may provide a site for protein binding in modulating the heat induction of rpoH translation. This suggestion was based mainly on the noninducible and barely inducible phenotypes of the 15C-124G and 16G-123C mutants, respectively, each containing two compensatory mutations (36). Although we confirmed the results for the latter mutant (16G-123C; data not shown), the 15C-124G mutant actually exhibited slightly reduced but appreciable heat induction (Fig. 2B), eliminating the major basis for suggesting the above possibility. It seemed possible that the subnormal heat induction observed with both of these mutants carrying an alteration in region A (G to C at +15 or C to G at +16) came from the differential effects of decreased complementarity for the anti-downstream box of 16S rRNA (G-15·U to C-15/U or C-16-G to G-16/G) on the translational efficiency at the two temperatures used (30 and 42°C). At present, the involvement of a trans-acting factor(s) in thermoregulation appears unlikely, although it cannot be excluded.
The fact that some of the nucleotides expected to form a stem I
structure were modified by chemical probes, albeit weakly (Fig. 3B),
suggested that this region was relatively unstable, presumably
permitting the limited entry of ribosomes at a low temperature.
Moreover, transcription-translation coupling may facilitate a
productive interaction between rpoH mRNA and ribosomes because of a delay in forming the stem I structure due to the distance
(ca. 180 nt) between the AUG codon and the internal region presumably
required for base pairings. In any event, such a dynamic mRNA secondary
structure should ensure the production of low but essential basal
levels of
32 at physiological temperatures under
nonstress conditions. Mutations such as 15A or 15C may decelerate the
formation of an inhibitory RNA structure, thereby permitting ribosome
entry and constitutively high expression even at low temperatures.
Finally,
S encoded by the rpoS gene is
another global regulator for a set of genes induced at the stationary
phase or upon hyperosmotic stress. Interestingly,
S
itself is regulated primarily at the posttranscriptional level, and
recent work indicated the involvement of some specific gene products in
the translational control of
S synthesis
(13). In addition, the rpoS mRNA secondary
structure was suggested to play a regulatory role, although the
mechanism remains unknown. Thus, translational control of global
transcription factors such as
32 and
S
appears to be mediated by an mRNA secondary structure and confers an
efficient means for a rapid response to heat or other stress. The
results reported here also raise the intriguing possibility that a 5'
portion of the rpoH mRNA secondary structure is involved in
direct sensing and responding to high temperatures by enhancing ribosome entry and translation initiation, leading to a rapid increase
in the
32 level and the induction of heat shock
proteins. Further work is in progress to examine such possibilities.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We are grateful to T. Linn for the kind gift of the
TLF97-3
vector and to M. Nakayama, H. Kanazawa, and M. Ueda for technical assistance.
This work was supported in part by grants from the Japan Health Sciences Foundation, Tokyo.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: HSP Research Institute, Kyoto Research Park, Kyoto 600-8813, Japan. Phone: (81)-75-315-8619. Fax: (81)-75-315-8659. E-mail: tyura{at}hsp.co.jp.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Bukau, B. 1993. Regulation of the Escherichia coli heat shock response. Mol. Microbiol. 9:671-680[Medline]. |
| 2. | Casadaban, M. J. 1976. Transposition and fusion of the lac genes to selected promoters in Escherichia coli using bacteriophage lambda and Mu. J. Mol. Biol. 104:541-555[Medline]. |
| 3. | Christiansen, J., J. Egebjerg, N. Larsen, and R. Garrett. 1991. Analysis of rRNA structure: experimental and theoretical considerations, p. 229-252. In G. Spedding (ed.), Ribosome and protein synthesis: a practical approach. IRL Press, Oxford, England. |
| 4. | Craig, E. A., and C. A. Gross. 1991. Is hsp70 the cellular thermometer? Trends Biochem. Sci. 16:135-140[Medline]. |
| 5. |
de Smit, M. H., and J. van Duin.
1990.
Secondary structure of the ribosome binding site determines translational efficiency: a quantitative analysis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
87:7668-7672 |
| 6. | Draper, D. E. 1996. Translational initiation, p. 902-908. In F. C. Neidhardt, R. Curtiss III, J. L. Ingraham, E. C. C. Lin, K. B. Low, B. Magasanik, W. S. Reznikoff, M. Riley, M. Schaechter, and H. E. Umbarger (ed.), Escherichia coli and Salmonella: cellular and molecular biology, 2nd ed. ASM Press, Washington, D.C. |
| 7. |
Erickson, J. W., and C. A. Gross.
1989.
Identification of the E subunit of Escherichia coli RNA polymerase: a second alternate factor involved in high-temperature gene expression.
Genes Dev.
3:1462-1471 |
| 8. |
Gamer, J.,
H. Bujard, and B. Bukau.
1992.
Physical interaction between heat shock proteins DnaK, DnaJ, and GrpE and the bacterial heat shock transcription factor 32.
Cell
69:833-842[Medline].
|
| 9. | Georgopoulos, C., K. Liberek, M. Zylicz, and D. Ang. 1994. Properties of the heat shock proteins of Escherichia coli and the autoregulation of the heat shock response, p. 209-249. In R. I. Morimoto, A. Tissieres, and C. Georgopoulos (ed.), The biology of heat shock proteins and molecular chaperones. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 10. | Goff, S. A., and A. L. Goldberg. 1985. Production of abnormal proteins in E. coli stimulates transcription of lon and other heat shock genes. Cell 41:587-595[Medline]. |
| 11. | Gross, C. A. 1996. Function and regulation of the heat shock proteins, p. 1382-1399. In F. C. Neidhardt, R. Curtiss III, J. L. Ingraham, E. C. C. Lin, K. B. Low, B. Magasanik, W. S. Reznikoff, M. Riley, M. Schaechter, and H. E. Umbarger (ed.), Escherichia coli and Salmonella: cellular and molecular biology, 2nd ed. ASM Press, Washington, D.C. |
| 12. |
Grossman, A. D.,
D. B. Straus,
W. A. Walter, and C. A. Gross.
1987.
32 synthesis can regulate the synthesis of heat shock proeins in Escherichia coli.
Genes Dev.
1:179-184 |
| 13. | Hengge-Aronis, R. 1996. Regulation of gene expression during entry into stationary phase, p. 1497-1512. In F. C. Neidhardt, R. Curtiss III, J. L. Ingraham, E. C. C. Lin, K. B. Low, B. Magasanik, W. S. Reznikoff, M. Riley, M. Schaechter, and H. E. Umbarger (ed.), Escherichia coli and Salmonella: cellular and molecular biology, 2nd ed. ASM Press, Washington, D.C. |
| 14. | Jaeger, J. A., D. H. Turner, and M. Zuker. 1990. Predicting optimal and suboptimal secondary structure for RNA. Methods Enzymol. 183:281-306[Medline]. |
| 15. |
Kamath-Loeb, A. S., and C. A. Gross.
1991.
Translational regulation of 32 synthesis: requirement for an internal control element.
J. Bacteriol.
173:3904-3906 |
| 16. |
Kanemori, M.,
H. Mori, and T. Yura.
1994.
Induction of heat shock proteins by abnormal proteins results from stabilization and not increased synthesis of 32 in Escherichia coli.
J. Bacteriol.
176:5648-5653 |
| 17. |
Liberek, K.,
T. P. Galitski,
M. Zylicz, and C. Georgopoulos.
1992.
The DnaK chaperone modulates the heat shock response of Escherichia coli by binding to the 32 transcription factor.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
89:3516-3520 |
| 18. |
McCarty, J. S.,
S. Rudiger,
H.-J. Schonfeld,
J. Schneider-Mergener,
K. Nakahigashi,
T. Yura, and B. Bukau.
1996.
Regulatory region C of the E. coli heat shock transcription factor, 32, constitutes a DnaK binding site and is conserved among eubacteria.
J. Mol. Biol.
256:829-837[Medline].
|
| 19. |
Mecsas, J.,
P. E. Rouviere,
J. W. Erickson,
T. Donohue, and C. A. Gross.
1993.
The activity of E, an Escherichia coli heat-inducible -factor, is modulated by expression of outer membrane proteins.
Genes Dev.
7:2619-2628.
|
| 20. | Miller, J. 1972. Experiments in molecular genetics. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 21. |
Nagai, H.,
H. Yuzawa, and T. Yura.
1991.
Interplay of two cis-acting mRNA regions in translational control of 32 synthesis during the heat shock response of Escherichia coli.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:10515-10519 |
| 22. |
Nagai, H.,
H. Yuzawa,
M. Kanemori, and T. Yura.
1994.
A distinct segment of the 32 polypeptide is involved in DnaK-mediated negative control of the heat shock response in Escherichia coli.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:10280-10284 |
| 23. |
Nakahigashi, K.,
H. Yanagi, and T. Yura.
1995.
Isolation and sequence analysis of rpoH genes encoding 32 homologs from gram negative bacteria: conserved mRNA and protein segments for heat shock regulation.
Nucleic Acids Res.
23:4383-4390.
|
| 24. |
Nakahigashi, K.,
H. Yanagi, and T. Yura.
1998.
Regulatory conservation and divergence of 32 homologs from gram-negative bacteria: Serratia marcescens, Proteus mirabilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Agrobacterium tumefaciens.
J. Bacteriol.
180:2402-2408 |
| 25. | Neidhardt, F. C., and R. A. VanBogelen. 1987. Heat shock response, p. 1334-1345. In F. C. Neidhardt, J. L. Ingraham, K. B. Low, B. Magasanik, M. Schaechter, and H. E. Umbarger (ed.), Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium: cellular and molecular biology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C. |
| 26. | Sambrook, J., E. F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 27. |
Sprengart, M. L.,
H. P. Fatscher, and E. Fuchs.
1990.
The initiation of translation in E. coli: apparent base pairing between the 16S rRNA and downstream sequences of the mRNA.
Nucleic Acids Res.
18:1719-1723 |
| 28. | St. Pierre, R., and T. Linn. 1996. A refined vector system for the in vitro construction of single-copy transcriptional or translational fusions to lacZ. Gene 169:65-68[Medline]. |
| 29. |
Straus, D.,
W. Walter, and C. A. Gross.
1990.
DnaK, DnaJ, and GrpE heat shock proteins negatively regulate heat shock gene expression by controlling the synthesis and stability of 32.
Genes Dev.
4:2202-2209 |
| 30. |
Straus, D. B.,
W. A. Walter, and C. A. Gross.
1987.
The heat shock response of E. coli is regulated by changes in the concentration of 32.
Nature
329:348-351[Medline].
|
| 31. | Tilly, K., N. McKittrick, M. Zylicz, and C. Georgopoulos. 1983. The dnaK protein modulates the heat-shock response of Escherichia coli. Cell 34:641-646[Medline]. |
| 32. |
Tilly, K.,
J. Spence, and C. Georgopoulos.
1989.
Modulation of stability of the Escherichia coli heat shock regulatory factor 32.
J. Bacteriol.
171:1585-1589 |
| 33. |
Wang, Q., and J. M. Kaguni.
1989.
A novel sigma factor is involved in expression of the rpoH gene of Escherichia coli.
J. Bacteriol.
171:4248-4253 |
| 34. |
Yura, T.
1996.
Regulation and conservation of the heat-shock transcription factor 32.
Genes Cells
1:277-284[Abstract].
|
| 35. | Yura, T., H. Nagai, and H. Mori. 1993. Regulation of heat shock response in bacteria. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 47:321-350[Medline]. |
| 36. |
Yuzawa, H.,
H. Nagai,
H. Mori, and T. Yura.
1993.
Heat induction of 32 synthesis mediated by mRNA secondary structure: a primary step of the heat shock response in Escherichia coli.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:5449-5455 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»