Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Bacteriology, April 1999, p. 2430-2439, Vol. 181, No. 8
Department of Developmental Biology, Stanford
University School of Medicine, Stanford, California 94305-5329
Received 30 October 1998/Accepted 12 January 1999
In its role as a global response regulator, CtrA controls the
transcription of a diverse group of genes at different times in the
Caulobacter crescentus cell cycle. To understand the
differential regulation of CtrA-controlled genes, we compared the
expression of two of these genes, the fliQ flagellar gene
and the ccrM DNA methyltransferase gene. Despite their
similar promoter architecture, these genes are transcribed at different
times in the cell cycle. PfliQ is activated earlier than
PccrM. Phosphorylated CtrA (CtrA~P) bound to the CtrA
recognition sequence in both promoters but had a 10- to 20-fold greater
affinity for PfliQ. This difference in affinity correlates
with temporal changes in the cellular levels of CtrA. Disrupting a
unique inverted repeat element in PccrM significantly reduced promoter activity but not the timing of transcription initiation, suggesting that the inverted repeat does not
play a major role in the temporal control of ccrM
expression. Our data indicate that differences in the affinity of
CtrA~P for PfliQ and PccrM regulate, in part,
the temporal expression of these genes. However, the timing of
fliQ transcription but not of ccrM
transcription was altered in cells expressing a stable CtrA derivative,
indicating that changes in CtrA~P levels alone cannot govern the cell
cycle transcription of these genes. We propose that changes in the
cellular concentration of CtrA~P and its interaction with
accessory proteins influence the temporal expression of
fliQ, ccrM, and other key cell cycle genes and
ultimately the regulation of the cell cycle.
Temporal regulation of gene
expression is central to the progression of the Caulobacter
crescentus cell cycle. In each cell cycle (Fig.
1A), a motile swarmer cell releases its
flagellum and is transformed into a DNA replication-competent stalked
cell, which in turn differentiates into an asymmetric predivisional cell bearing a new flagellum at the pole opposite the stalk. Cell division then yields a flagellated swarmer cell and a nonmotile stalked
cell (2, 9, 15). Key events that occur at consecutive stages
of the cell cycle include the initiation of DNA replication in the
stalked cell, biogenesis of the flagellum, methylation of the newly
replicated DNA in predivisional cells, and cell division.
0021-9193/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
The CtrA Response Regulator Mediates Temporal
Control of Gene Expression during the Caulobacter Cell
Cycle
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
Temporal expression of CtrA and two target promoters in
a single synchronized culture. (A) The Caulobacter cell
cycle is shown schematically. The gray shading indicates the presence
of CtrA (4). The theta structures indicate replicating DNA,
and the ring structures within the cells represent nonreplicating DNA.
Cultures of LS2531 carrying two transcriptional fusions,
PfliQ-neo integrated into the chromosome and
PccrM-lacZ on plasmid pCS148, were allowed to progress
synchronously through the cell cycle. Every 15 min, samples were
pulse-labeled with [35S]methionine and the synthesis of
CtrA, neomycin phosphotransferase II,
-galactosidase, and flagellins
was assessed by immunoprecipitation as described in Materials and
Methods. Labeled proteins were separated by gel electrophoresis and
quantitated with a PhosphorImager. CtrA synthesis (
),
PfliQ transcription (
), and PccrM
transcription (
) are shown. Flagellin synthesis (data not shown) was
assayed as an internal control for cell cycle progression. Cell
division occurred at 180 min (1.0 division unit). (B) Immunoblot of
CtrA and CcrM in cells from the same synchronized culture. Equal
amounts of cellular protein (determined by measuring the
A280) were applied to an SDS-12%
polyacrylamide gel and probed with antibodies to the C. crescentus CtrA and CcrM proteins.
We have recently identified a regulatory protein that plays a pivotal role in orchestrating all of these cell cycle events. This protein, termed CtrA for cell cycle transcriptional regulator, is a member of the superfamily of response regulators (19). As part of a two-component regulatory system, the CtrA response regulator itself is controlled by phosphorylation. In addition, cell type-specific proteolysis of CtrA is essential for cell cycle progression (4). CtrA, which binds to five sites within the chromosomal origin of replication and inhibits DNA replication initiation, must be cleared from the stalked cell during the transition from swarmer cell to stalked cell (or G1-to-S-phase transition) to allow replication initiation (4, 20). Once DNA replication has begun, CtrA proteolysis stops and CtrA once again accumulates in early predivisional cells and is activated by phosphorylation (4, 19). CtrA is then selectively degraded in the stalked portion of late predivisional cells (4).
CtrA is an essential protein that, in addition to functioning as a negative regulator of DNA replication, controls the transcription of a number of genes. A key feature of the CtrA regulon is that these genes are differentially expressed at distinct times in the cell cycle. In early predivisional cells, CtrA activates the flagellar transcription hierarchy. Later in the cell cycle, CtrA initiates the transcription of ccrM, a gene encoding an essential DNA methyltransferase (19). CtrA also controls its own transcription by a positive feedback loop (5) and represses the transcription of ftsZ, which encodes a tubulin-like protein required for cell division (14).
To understand how CtrA activates or represses the appropriate promoter
at the correct time in the cell cycle, we compared two temporally
regulated events that are controlled by CtrA: the initiation of the
flagellar transcription cascade and, later in the cell cycle, the
transcription of the CcrM DNA methyltransferase. To examine
these events, we focused on the fliQ operon, one of several
class II flagellar operons that encode proteins required for the
initial stages of flagellar biogenesis (32), and the ccrM gene, encoding a DNA methyltransferase that converts
the newly replicated chromosomes from the hemimethylated to the fully methylated state in late predivisional cells (27). The
fliQ and ccrM genes are transcribed sequentially,
with fliQ being transcribed earlier than ccrM,
yet both are dependent on CtrA for expression (19). The
promoters of these genes have a similar architecture: both contain a
single CtrA recognition sequence overlapping the
35 promoter element.
We have previously shown that purified CtrA binds to this sequence in
the fliQ promoter in vitro (19).
In the present study, we demonstrate that phosphorylated CtrA (CtrA~P) preferentially binds to its recognition sequence in both the fliQ and the ccrM promoters but has a 10- to 20-fold greater affinity for the fliQ promoter. Because the differences in the timing of the initiation of fliQ transcription and ccrM transcription correlate with changes in cellular levels of total CtrA protein, we propose that the distinct affinities of CtrA~P for its recognition sequence in these promoters control, at least in part, the sequential transcription of the fliQ and ccrM genes. We evaluated the role of a unique inverted repeat (IR2) in the ccrM promoter and showed that disrupting IR2 without changing the CtrA recognition sequence significantly reduced promoter activity but not the temporal expression of ccrM. A comparison of the timing of fliQ transcription and ccrM transcription in cells expressing a stable derivative of CtrA revealed that CtrA levels alone do not govern the temporal expression of these genes. Transcription of fliQ was prolonged, but the stringent regulation of ccrM transcription was maintained. Thus, in addition to variations in the level of CtrA~P during the cell cycle, other transcription factors may contribute to the differential expression of these genes.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Bacterial strains and growth conditions.
The strains and
plasmids used in this study are listed in Table
1. The synchronizable strain
C. crescentus NA1000 (8) was used as the
wild-type strain in all experiments. C. crescentus strains were grown at 30°C in PYE medium (18) or
M2-glucose minimal medium (M2G) (7) supplemented with
kanamycin (5 µg/ml) or tetracycline (1 µg/ml). Plasmids were
mobilized from Escherichia coli S17-1 into C. crescentus by bacterial conjugation (6). E. coli strains were cultured at 37°C in Luria-Bertani broth
supplemented with ampicillin or kanamycin (50 µg/ml each) or with
tetracycline (10 µg/ml).
|
Culture synchronization, immunoprecipitation, and immunoblot
analysis.
Swarmer cells were isolated from late-log-phase cultures
by Ludox density centrifugation at 4°C (8), resuspended in
M2G at 30°C, and allowed to progress through the cell cycle. The
average cell cycle length was 150 min. To assess promoter expression
during the cell cycle, C. crescentus NA1000, LS2515, or
LS2531 cultures harboring the PccrM-lacZ transcriptional
fusion pCS148 or the PfliQ-lacZ transcriptional fusion
pWZ162 were synchronized as described above. Samples were taken at
15-min intervals, and 1-ml aliquots were labeled with 10 µCi of
[35S]Trans-Label (ICN Pharmaceuticals Inc.) for 5 min. Synthesis of neomycin phosphotransferase II,
-galactosidase,
and flagellins was monitored by immunoprecipitating these proteins from
equal amounts of labeled cellular proteins as previously described
(13). Flagellin synthesis was monitored as an indicator of
the quality of synchrony. Proteins were analyzed by gel
electrophoresis, and incorporated label was quantitated with a
Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager. Antibodies to NPT II and
-galactosidase were purchased from 5 Prime
3 Prime, Inc.
(Boulder, Colo.).
Protein purification and phosphorylation of His6-CtrA. The six-histidine (His6)-CtrA and His6-CtrAD51E fusion proteins were overexpressed from pTRC7.4 and pXD51E, respectively, in E. coli BL21 (Novagen). The proteins were purified from the soluble fraction as recommended by Novagen, except that the wash buffer contained 40 mM imidazole and the His6-tagged fusion proteins were eluted with 0.5 M imidazole in binding buffer. Purified proteins were stored in 20 mM Tris (pH 8)-5 mM MgCl2-1 mM dithiothreitol (DTT)-50% glycerol. Maltose-binding protein (MBP)-EnvZ was purified after overexpression from plasmid pKJH5 as described previously (11).
To phosphorylate CtrA, purified MBP-EnvZ (0.5 µM), 0.4 mM ATP, and 10 µCi of [
-32P]ATP were incubated in phosphorylation
buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.5], 50 mM KCl, 20 mM MgCl2,
1 mM DTT) in a total volume of 20 µl. After 5 min at 37°C, a 4-µl
aliquot was removed and added to SDS gel loading buffer as described
previously (12). Purified His6-CtrA or
His6-CtrAD51E (4.5 µM each) was added to the remainder of
the reaction mixture, which was then incubated at 37°C. Samples
were removed at various times and subjected to electrophoresis on
SDS-12% polyacrylamide gels and autoradiography. For experiments that
did not require radiolabeled protein, 5 mM ATP was added to the
reaction mixture, which was then incubated for 20 min at 37°C.
DNase I protection experiments.
The DNA templates used in
the footprinting reactions were generated by PCR as described below and
labeled with [
-32P]ATP by use of T4 DNA
polynucleotide kinase. The 3' end of the labeled template was
removed by digestion at introduced BamHI or EcoRI
sites. The labeled DNA was then purified with a QIAquik nucleotide
removal kit (Qiagen Inc.) and subjected to DNase I footprinting
analysis. The 347-bp fliQ promoter fragment
(PfliQ
122 to +225) was generated by PCR with fliQ468 and
fliQ815R as primers and pWZ20 as the template; the 330-bp
wild-type ccrM promoter fragment (PccrM
104 to
+226) was generated by PCR with ccrMecoRI and ccrM1129R as primers and
pCS179 as the template. For the ccrM mutant promoters 25M
and 35M, ccrMecoRI and ccrM1047R were the primers and pCS156 and pCS155
were the templates, respectively. The sequences of the oligonucleotide
primers used for PCR are shown in Table 1. Templates for footprinting
the ccrM mutant promoters IR2M(a) and IR2M(b) were
end-labeled XbaI/AseI fragments of plasmids
pAR154 and pAR155, respectively.
Assay of promoter activity.
The IR2M mutant promoters were
constructed by PCR with ccrMIR2mut and ccrMpstpe as primers and pCS179
as the template. The promoter fragments (
58 to +159 relative to the
transcription start site) were sequenced and then cloned into pRKlac290
upstream of a promoterless lacZ reporter to generate
plasmids pAR156 and pAR157.
-Galactosidase activity was measured at
30°C with log-phase cultures as described by Miller (17).
Assays were done in duplicate with a minimum of two independent
cultures for each promoter construct.
Filter binding assays.
The binding of His6-CtrA
to the fliQ and ccrM promoters was determined by
measuring the retention of protein-DNA complexes on nitrocellulose
filters as previously described (1, 3). DNA templates for
the fliQ and ccrM promoters were generated by PCR
with the CtrA binding site approximately centered within the fragment.
To generate the 416-bp fliQ promoter fragment, the synthetic oligonucleotides fliQ399 and fliQ815R were used as primers and pWZ20
provided the template DNA. For the 337-bp ccrM promoter fragment, ccrM725 and ccrMpstpe were used as primers and pCS179 was
used as the template. Table 1 gives the sequences of the oligonucleotide primers used for PCR. After purification with a QIAquik
PCR purification kit, the PCR products (5 pmol each) were end labeled
with T4 polynucleotide kinase and [
-32P]ATP, and
unincorporated label was removed with a QIAquik nucleotide removal kit
according to the manufacturer's instructions.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Expression of CtrA and two of its target genes during the cell cycle. A comparison of the temporal expression of CtrA-regulated genes in previous studies suggests that fliQ and other class II flagellar genes are transcribed earlier in the cell cycle than ccrM (26, 27, 32). To confirm this observation, we assessed the transcription of the fliQ and ccrM genes and the synthesis of CtrA protein in the same population of synchronized cells. In this experiment, the fliQ and ccrM promoters were fused to different reporters. A PfliQ-neo transcriptional fusion was integrated at the fliQ locus (strain LS2531), and a PccrM-lacZ transcriptional fusion was present on a low-copy-number plasmid (pCS148). Synchronized LS2531 cells containing pCS148 were pulse-labeled with [35S]methionine at different times in the cell cycle, and the incorporation of label into CtrA and the two reporter proteins was assessed by immunoprecipitation. As shown in Fig. 1A, the induction of CtrA synthesis coincided with fliQ transcription at 0.4 division unit, while the initiation of ccrM transcription was delayed until approximately 0.6 division unit. In addition, fliQ transcription stopped earlier than ccrM transcription. The timing of fliQ and ccrM expression relative to flagellin synthesis (used as an internal control in this experiment) agrees with that previously described in separate experiments with wild-type cultures (27, 32). These data provide definitive evidence that the fliQ and ccrM genes are expressed sequentially during the cell cycle. The pattern of CtrA synthesis mirrors that of ctrA transcription, which also initiates at approximately 0.4 division unit and peaks at 0.6 division unit (19).
The steady-state levels of the CcrM and CtrA proteins in cells isolated during this synchrony experiment are shown in the immunoblot in Fig. 1B. As previously described, CtrA protein is present in swarmer cells at the beginning of the cell cycle, is absent in stalked cells due to rapid proteolysis, and then reappears in predivisional cells at 0.4 division unit (4). In contrast, CcrM protein is present only in late predivisional cells and is first detected at 0.6 division unit, when the cellular levels of CtrA, its transcriptional activator, have increased approximately eightfold (determined by densitometry). CcrM is then rapidly degraded at cell division (30). We have been unsuccessful in raising antibodies to the FliQ integral membrane protein and so were unable measure cellular levels of this protein.Comparison of the ccrM and fliQ regulatory
regions.
The ccrM and fliQ promoters have a
similar architecture. As shown in Fig.
2A, both contain a single CtrA binding
site overlapping the
35 region, with the CtrA recognition
sequence closely matching the published consensus sequence
(TTAA-n7-TTAAC) (19, 27, 32). Mutations in the CtrA
recognition sequence dramatically decrease the transcription of both
fliQ and ccrM (27, 32), indicating
that CtrA activates the transcription of these target genes. In the
ccrM promoter, the CtrA recognition sequence is embedded in
a 25-bp inverted repeat (IR2) centered at
32. The regions from
20
to
45 in both promoters are similar: 14 of the 25 nucleotides in IR2
are identical to bases in the analogous region of the fliQ
promoter, with the least homology in the 5' region (Fig. 2B). The
ccrM promoter is the only identified CtrA target promoter
that contains the CtrA binding site in an inverted repeat.
|
CtrA~P binds to the CtrA recognition sequence in the ccrM and fliQ promoters. In the two-component system paradigm, phosphorylation activates the response regulator, enhancing its binding to promoter DNA and allowing the control of transcription of its target genes. We used an in vitro method to phosphorylate purified CtrA in order to assess the binding of CtrA~P to its target promoters. Purified MBP-EnvZ, a fusion of E. coli MBP and the C terminus of the E. coli histidine kinase EnvZ (11), was used as the phosphate donor. In the presence of [32P]ATP, MBP-EnvZ underwent autophosphorylation, and the phosphate was transferred to purified His6-CtrA (Fig. 3). The His6-CtrAD51E mutant protein, in which the aspartate 51 phosphorylation site has been mutated to glutamate, was not phosphorylated in the in vitro reaction. These data indicate that the phosphate was transferred to the conserved aspartate 51 residue of His6-CtrA. Using pulse-chase experiments (data not shown), we determined that His6-CtrA~P was stable in vitro in the presence of MBP-EnvZ (half-life, 50 min).
|
104 to +226 with respect to the
transcription start site (27), and the PfliQ template was a 347-bp fragment corresponding to positions
122 to +225
(32). As shown in Fig. 4A,
CtrA~P specifically protected a single 26-bp region from
21 to
46
relative to the transcription start site in the ccrM
promoter. However at the same protein concentrations, unphosphorylated
CtrA did not bind to this promoter, indicating that CtrA~P has a
greater affinity for the CtrA binding site in the ccrM
promoter. As expected, CtrA~P protected the CtrA recognition sequence
in the fliQ promoter. The single 26-bp protected region corresponded to the region protected by higher concentrations of
unphosphorylated CtrA (19). Because CtrA was phosphorylated by use of MBP-EnvZ and both proteins were present in the DNase I
protection reactions, we determined that MBP-EnvZ alone does not bind
to either promoter (data not shown). Figure 4B compares the sequences
protected from DNase I digestion in the ccrM and fliQ promoters. In both promoters, the protected regions
overlap the
35 promoter element and are the same size. In the
ccrM promoter, the region protected by CtrA~P coincides
with IR2.
|
CtrA~P has a greater affinity for the fliQ promoter than for the ccrM promoter. The DNase I footprinting analysis shown in Fig. 4 suggests that CtrA~P has a greater affinity for the fliQ promoter than for the ccrM promoter. To confirm this observation, we compared the affinity of CtrA~P for both promoters by using a filter binding assay (3). Although we cannot directly calculate the actual CtrA~P concentrations in the in vitro phosphorylation reactions, we used the same preparations of His6-CtrA and MBP-EnvZ in multiple assays to reveal relative binding affinities. As shown in Fig. 5A, CtrA~P had a 10- to 20-fold greater affinity for PfliQ than for PccrM (half-maximal binding occurred at 0.2 and 3 to 4 µM CtrA for the fliQ and ccrM promoters, respectively). The sigmoidal shape of these curves suggests cooperative binding of CtrA~P to both promoters. To verify this notion, we performed a fit of the Hill equation (23) to the data by using the program Statistica (Statsoft, Inc., Tulsa, Okla.). The Hill coefficient, an indicator of cooperativity, was 2.4 for the fliQ promoter (r2, 0.96), indicating that CtrA~P binds as a dimer to this promoter. We were unable to calculate a statistically significant value for the Hill coefficient for the ccrM promoter due to the variability in the data. The greater-than-10-fold difference in the apparent binding constants is consistent with our in vivo results indicating that ccrM transcription initiates after fliQ transcription, at a time when CtrA protein levels have increased at least eightfold (Fig. 2B). Together, our results suggest that changes in the cellular concentration of CtrA~P account, at least in part, for the differences in the timing of fliQ and ccrM transcription initiation.
|
Role of promoter architecture in regulating ccrM
transcription.
To assess the role of the IR2 element in the
temporal control of ccrM expression, we mutated the IR2
region in PccrM and examined the effects of the mutations on
transcriptional activity, temporal expression, and CtrA~P binding
(Fig. 6). First, the 5' end of IR2 was
disrupted without changing the CtrA consensus sequence by mutating
bases
39 to
44. Two IR2M mutant promoters were constructed: IR2M(a), in which the first 6 nucleotides in IR2 were replaced with
bases present at these positions in the fliQ promoter; and IR2M(b), which is identical to IR2M(a) except that the mutant sequence
was inserted 1 bp upstream and retained the complete TTAA arm of the
CtrA recognition sequence. As shown in Fig. 6A, both IR2M mutations
reduced promoter activity by approximately 80%. The effects of
mutations in PccrM from a previous study (27) are
shown for comparison. A 3-bp change in the region directly upstream of
IR2 (46M) had no effect on promoter activity. A 2-bp substitution at
35 (35M) reduced activity by 70%, while a 4-bp change in the CtrA
recognition sequence (25M) and a 3-bp substitution at
10 (10M)
reduced activity by greater than 90% (27). Comparable mutations in the
10,
25, and
35 regions of PfliQ also
reduced promoter activity by greater than 90% (32).
|
Temporal regulation of fliQ and ccrM
transcription in cells expressing a stable CtrA derivative.
To
determine if changes in the cellular level of CtrA affect the timing of
ccrM and fliQ transcription, we compared the in vivo expression of these genes in wild-type cells and in cells expressing CtrA
3, a biologically active, stable CtrA derivative that
lacks the C-terminal degradation signal (4). In these cells,
the stable ctrA
3M2 allele is expressed from the
ctrA promoter and replaces the chromosomal copy of
ctrA. The immunoblot in Fig. 7A compares the steady-state levels of
wild-type CtrA and the stable CtrA
3 derivative during the cell
cycle. As previously described, the wild-type protein is present in
swarmer cells and predivisional cells but absent in stalked cells. In
contrast, the stable CtrA
3 derivative is present throughout the cell
cycle (4). Phosphorylation of the wild-type CtrA protein
occurs shortly after its synthesis at 0.4 division unit. The timing
of CtrA phosphorylation is tightly regulated: if CtrA is forced to be
present throughout the cell cycle, it is still only
phosphorylated at 0.4 division unit in early predivisional cells.
Although CtrA
3 is present in stalked cells, it is not
phosphorylated (4).
|
3 in the stalked compartment of
late predivisional cells may signal the inappropriate transcription of
fliQ. In contrast, the timing of ccrM
transcription was identical in cells expressing either wild-type CtrA
or the stable CtrA
3 derivative. Thus, altering the temporal and
spatial distribution of total CtrA protein affected the timing of
fliQ transcription but not ccrM transcription,
which appears to be more stringently controlled. These data imply that changes in CtrA~P levels alone cannot govern the temporal expression of these genes. In addition, fliQ and ccrM are
not transcribed in swarmer cells, and the transcription of these genes
decreases in predivisional cells, although CtrA is present and active.
Furthermore, neither gene is transcribed efficiently in stalked cells
when CtrA is forced to be present, suggesting that unphosphorylated CtrA cannot activate their transcription.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The response regulator family of two-component signal transduction systems controls the expression of a wide variety of genes. One of these, the CtrA transcriptional activator, plays a key role in regulating diverse events that occur at different times in the Caulobacter cell cycle, including the initiation of DNA replication, the initiation of cell division, flagellar biogenesis, and the synthesis of the CcrM DNA methyltransferase (14, 19, 20). In order to understand how CtrA controls the timing of these events, we studied factors that contribute to the regulation of two genes, fliQ and ccrM, that are dependent on CtrA and that are transcribed sequentially. Differences in the affinity of CtrA~P for PfliQ and PccrM accompanied by changes in the cellular concentration of CtrA during the cell cycle contribute to the observed temporal regulation of fliQ and ccrM transcription. Similar differences in the affinity of the BvgA response regulator for promoter DNA regulate the expression of early and late virulence genes in Bordetella pertussis (33). In addition, changes in the intracellular concentration of BvgA correlate with the timing of the transcription of these virulence genes (22).
Phosphorylation increased the affinity of CtrA for its recognition sequence in promoter DNA in vitro, as is the case for OmpR and other response regulators (16, 19, 21). Moreover, CtrA~P exhibited distinct affinities for two promoters that are expressed sequentially in predivisional cells, the fliQ and ccrM promoters. Changes in the CtrA~P concentration during the cell cycle may therefore play an important role in the temporal regulation of its target promoters. Like those of other response regulators, CtrA~P levels are likely to be modulated by opposing kinase and phosphatase activities. In addition, controlled proteolysis of CtrA results in variations in the CtrA concentration during the cell cycle (4).
Although CtrA~P has a 10- to 20-fold greater affinity for the fliQ promoter than for the ccrM promoter, both promoters contain a single CtrA recognition sequence, and CtrA binds at the same location in each promoter. These differences in affinity appear to be related to subtle changes in promoter architecture. Even though the consensus CtrA recognition sequence is found in both promoters, this motif is embedded in an inverted repeat in the ccrM promoter. Altering the IR2 in the ccrM promoter without changing the CtrA recognition sequence did not change its time of transcription initiation but significantly reduced promoter activity. These data suggest that the inverted repeat structure may provide a binding site for an accessory factor that is required for activating ccrM transcription.
Other evidence supports the contention that changes in the cellular
CtrA~P concentration alone cannot control the sequential activation of fliQ and ccrM transcription. In
experiments with the ctrA
3M2 allele, which encodes the
stable CtrA
3 derivative, the precise timing of ccrM
expression was unchanged despite constant CtrA levels throughout the
cell cycle. In contrast, fliQ transcription was prolonged
under the same conditions. CtrA
3 not only is biologically active but
also is phosphorylated at the same time in the cell cycle as the
wild-type protein (0.4 division unit) (4). If variations in
the affinity of CtrA~P for promoter DNA alone control the timing of
gene expression, one would expect that ccrM would be
transcribed earlier in cells expressing the stable CtrA
3 derivative.
There is precedence for the control of gene expression by complexes of regulatory proteins in other prokaryotes. In E. coli, the RcsC-RcsB two-component regulatory system that activates the synthesis of capsule polysaccharides uses RcsA as an accessory factor. RcsA is an unstable protein that appears to interact directly with the RcsB response regulator to activate transcription (28). The interaction of two other transcriptional regulators, cyclic AMP receptor protein (CRP) and the CytR repressor, controls the expression of genes in the CytR regulon which encode enzymes and transport proteins required for nucleoside catabolism and recycling. Repression of CytR-regulated promoters requires direct protein-protein contact between CRP and CytR, while the binding of CRP alone activates transcription (24). A novel regulator, KipI, that inhibits the autophosphorylation of kinase A has recently been identified (29). Kinase A is one of the key proteins in the phosphorelay that activates Spo0A and initiates the sporulation pathway in Bacillus subtilis. Such interactions among regulatory proteins provide a mechanism that allows a small number of transcription factors, such as CRP, Spo0A, and CtrA, to control global regulatory programs.
We speculate that interactions of CtrA with other proteins influence the binding specificity of CtrA for different promoters at different stages of the cell cycle. Because the initiation of transcription of class II flagellar genes coincides with the initiation of CtrA synthesis and phosphorylation in early predivisional cells, we propose that the transcription of these genes is activated by low levels of CtrA~P alone. This concept is supported by our demonstration that the fliQ promoter contains a high-affinity binding site for CtrA~P and by the activation of in vitro transcription of other class II flagellar genes by CtrA~P (31). The initiation of ccrM transcription later in the cell cycle requires higher concentrations of CtrA~P and a putative accessory protein. Because mutations in the IR3 element extend ccrM expression to swarmer cells (27), we also propose that a repressor might bind to the inverted repeat element downstream of the ccrM start site to terminate transcription. Experiments to identify these additional regulators are in progress. In summary, accessory proteins may contribute to the specificity of CtrA~P for different promoters at different stages of the cell cycle. Changes in the cellular concentration of CtrA~P and its interaction with accessory proteins could influence the temporal expression of key cell cycle genes and ultimately the regulation of the cell cycle.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Rachel Wright and other members of the Shapiro laboratory for helpful discussions and for reading the manuscript. We are grateful to Adam Arkin for calculating the Hill coefficients; John Wang for constructing plasmid pXD51E, used for overexpressing His6-CtrAD51E; and Michele Igo and Ke-Jung Huang (University of California, Davis) for plasmid pKJH5, used for overexpressing the MBP-EnvZ fusion protein.
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grants GM 32506/5120MZ and GM 51426.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Developmental Biology, Beckman Center B300, Stanford, CA 94305-5329. Phone: (650) 725-7613. Fax: (650) 725-7739. E-mail: reisen{at}cmgm.stanford.edu.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Ausubel, F. M., R. Brent, R. E. Kingston, D. D. Moore, J. G. Seidman, J. A. Smith, and K. Struhl. 1989. Current protocols in molecular biology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y. |
| 2. | Brun, Y., G. Marczynski, and L. Shapiro. 1994. The expression of asymmetry during Caulobacter cell differentiation. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 63:419-450[Medline]. |
| 3. | Dombroski, A. J. 1996. Sigma factors: purification and DNA binding. Methods Enzymol. 273:134-144[Medline]. |
| 4. | Domian, I. J., K. C. Quon, and L. Shapiro. 1997. Cell type-specific phosphorylation and proteolysis of a transcriptional regulator controls the G1-to-S transition in a bacterial cell cycle. Cell 90:415-424[Medline]. |
| 5. | Domian, I. J., A. M. Reisenauer, and L. Shapiro. Unpublished results. |
| 6. | Ely, B. 1991. Genetics of Caulobacter crescentus. Methods Enzymol. 204:372-384[Medline]. |
| 7. |
Ely, B., and R. C. Johnson.
1977.
Generalized transduction in Caulobacter crescentus.
Genetics
87:391-399 |
| 8. |
Evinger, M., and N. Agabian.
1977.
Envelope-associated nucleoid from Caulobacter crescentus stalked and swarmer cells.
J. Bacteriol.
132:294-301 |
| 9. |
Gober, J. W., and M. V. Marques.
1995.
Regulation of cellular differentiation in Caulobacter crescentus.
Microbiol. Rev.
59:31-47 |
| 10. | Gober, J. W., and L. Shapiro. 1992. A developmentally regulated Caulobacter flagellar promoter is activated by 3' enhancer and IHF binding elements. Mol. Biol. Cell 3:913-926[Abstract]. |
| 11. | Huang, K.-J., and M. M. Igo. 1996. Identification of the bases in the ompF regulatory region which interact with the transcription factor OmpR. J. Mol. Biol. 262:615-628[Medline]. |
| 12. |
Igo, M. M.,
A. J. Ninfa,
J. B. Stock, and T. J. Silhavy.
1989.
Phosphorylation and dephosphorylation of a bacterial transcriptional activator by a transmembrane receptor.
Genes Dev.
3:1725-1734 |
| 13. | Jenal, U., J. White, and L. Shapiro. 1994. Caulobacter flagellar function, but not assembly, requires FliL, a non-polarly localized membrane protein present in all cell types. J. Mol. Biol. 243:227-244[Medline]. |
| 14. |
Kelly, A. J.,
M. J. Sackett,
N. Din,
E. Quardokus, and Y. V. Brun.
1998.
Cell cycle-dependent transcriptional and proteolytic regulation of FtsZ in Caulobacter.
Genes Dev.
12:880-893 |
| 15. | Lane, T., A. Benson, G. B. Hecht, J. B. Burton, and A. Newton. 1995. Switches and signal transduction networks in the Caulobacter crescentus cell cycle, p. 296-301. In J. A. Hoch, and T. J. Silhavy (ed.), Two-component signal transduction. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C. |
| 16. | McCleary, W. R. 1996. The activation of PhoB by acetylphosphate. Mol. Microbiol. 20:1155-1163[Medline]. |
| 17. | Miller, J. H. 1972. Experiments in molecular genetics. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 18. |
O'Regan, M.,
R. Gloeckler,
S. Bernard,
C. Ledoux,
I. Ohsawa, and Y. Lemoine.
1989.
Nucleotide sequence of the bioH gene of Escherichia coli.
Nucleic Acids Res.
17:8004 |
| 18a. | Quon, K. Unpublished data. |
| 19. | Quon, K., G. T. Marczynski, and L. Shapiro. 1996. Cell cycle control by an essential bacterial two-component signal transduction protein. Cell 84:83-93[Medline]. |
| 20. |
Quon, K. C.,
B. Yang,
I. J. Domian,
L. Shapiro, and G. T. Marczynski.
1998.
Negative control of bacterial DNA replication by a cell cycle regulatory protein that binds at the chromosome origin.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:120-125 |
| 21. |
Rampersaud, A.,
S. L. Harlocker, and M. Inouye.
1994.
The OmpR protein of Escherichia coli binds to sites in the ompF promoter region in a hierarchical manner determined by its degree of phosphorylation.
J. Biol. Chem.
269:12559-12566 |
| 22. | Scarlato, V., B. Arico, A. Prugnola, and R. Rappuoli. 1991. Sequential activation and environmental regulation of the virulence genes in Bordetella pertussis. EMBO J. 10:3971-3975[Medline]. |
| 23. | Segel, I. H. 1976. Biochemical calculations, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y. |
| 24. | Sogaard-Andersen, L., and P. Valentin-Hansen. 1993. Protein-protein interactions in gene regulation: the cAMP-CRP complex sets the specificity of a second DNA-binding protein, the CytR repressor. Cell 75:557-566[Medline]. |
| 25. |
Stephens, C.,
A. Reisenauer,
R. Wright, and L. Shapiro.
1996.
A cell cycle-regulated bacterial DNA methyltransferase is essential for viability.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:1210-1214 |
| 26. | Stephens, C. M., and L. Shapiro. 1993. An unusual promoter controls cell-cycle regulation and dependence on DNA replication of the Caulobacter fliLM early flagellar operon. Mol. Microbiol. 9:1169-1179[Medline]. |
| 27. |
Stephens, C. M.,
G. Zweiger, and L. Shapiro.
1995.
Coordinate cell cycle control of a Caulobacter DNA methyltransferase and the flagellar genetic hierarchy.
J. Bacteriol.
177:1662-1669 |
| 28. |
Stout, V.,
A. Torres-Cabassa,
M. R. Maurizi,
D. Gutnick, and S. Gottesman.
1991.
RcsA, an unstable positive regulator of capsular polysaccharide synthesis.
J. Bacteriol.
173:1738-1747 |
| 29. |
Wang, L.,
R. Grau,
M. Perego, and J. A. Hoch.
1997.
A novel histidine kinase inhibitor regulating development in Bacillus subtilis.
Genes Dev.
11:2569-2579 |
| 30. |
Wright, R.,
C. Stephens,
G. Zweiger,
L. Shapiro, and M. R. K. A. Alley.
1996.
Caulobacter Lon protease has a critical role in cell-cycle control of DNA methylation.
Genes Dev.
10:1532-1542 |
| 31. |
Wu, J.,
N. Ohta, and A. Newton.
1998.
An essential, multicomponent signal transduction pathway required for cell cycle regulation in Caulobacter.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:1443-1448 |
| 32. |
Zhuang, W. Y., and L. Shapiro.
1995.
Caulobacter FliQ and FliR membrane proteins, required for flagellar biogenesis and cell division, belong to a family of virulence factor export proteins.
J. Bacteriol.
177:343-356 |
| 33. | Zu, T., R. Manetti, R. Rappuoli, and V. Scarlato. 1996. Differential binding of BvgA to two classes of virulence genes of Bordetella pertussis directs promoter selectivity by RNA polymerase. Mol. Microbiol. 21:557-565[Medline]. |
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»