Journal of Bacteriology, December 2000, p. 6714-6723, Vol. 182, No. 23
0021-9193/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Department of Genetics, Stockholm University, S-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
Received 27 March 2000/Accepted 12 September 2000
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The Cox protein of bacteriophage P2 is a multifunctional protein of
91 amino acids. It is directly involved in the site-specific recombination event leading to excision of P2 DNA out of the host chromosome. In this context, it functions as an architectural protein
in the formation of the excisome. Cox is also a transcriptional repressor of the P2 Pc promoter, thereby ensuring lytic growth. Finally
it promotes derepression of prophage P4, a nonrelated defective
satellite phage, by activating the P4 PLL promoter that controls P4 DNA replication. In this case it binds upstream of the
PLL promoter, which normally is activated by the P4 Delta protein. In this work we have analyzed the native form of the Cox
protein in vivo, using a bacteriophage
cI-based
oligomerization assay system, and in vitro, using gel filtration,
cross-linking agents, and gel retardation assays. We found that P2 Cox
has a strong oligomerization function in vivo as well as in vitro. The in vitro analysis indicates that its native form is a tetramer that can
self-associate to octamers. Furthermore we show that oligomerization is
necessary for the biological activity by characterizing different
cox mutants and that oligomerization is mediated by the
C-terminal region.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Bacteriophage P2 belongs to a group of serologically related, nonlambdoid phages that can infect several enteric bacterial species (4). It is a temperate DNA phage; i.e., after infection it can either grow lytically, leading to cell lysis and release of progeny phage particles, or form lysogeny. In the latter case, the infected cell survives, and the P2 DNA becomes integrated into the host chromosome through a site-specific recombination event. P2 cox (control of excision) mutants were originally isolated as P2 phages that were unable to liberate phages spontaneously during growth of a lysogenic strain (16). In addition, the cox mutants showed an increased frequency of lysogenization and integrase-mediated site-specific recombination between infecting phages (2, 16).
The cox gene is the first gene of the P2 early operon, and it encodes a 91-amino-acid-long, slightly basic polypeptide of 10.3 kDa (12). P2 Cox is a multifunctional protein with at least three distinct functions: (i) P2 prophage excisionase, (ii) transcriptional repressor of P2 Pc promoter, and (iii) transcriptional activator of the unrelated phage P4 PLL promoter.
In the site-specific recombination event, P2 Cox protein is directly
involved as an architectural protein, where it has been shown to be
required for excisive recombination and inhibitory for integrative
recombination (32, 33). In this case Cox is analogous to
Xis. As a transcriptional repressor it represses the P2 Pc promoter
that controls the expression of the P2 integrase and the immunity
repressor C, thereby ensuring lytic growth (21). At high
concentrations it autoregulates its own expression, since it reduces
the activity of the early promoter Pe (21). Thus, the P2 Cox
protein has in this case a function analogous to that of the
well-studied
Cro protein.
The Cox protein has also been shown to be involved in the derepression
of satellite phage P4 (27). P4 is a defective phage that
needs a helper, like P2, for lytic growth, since P4 lacks all
structural genes, DNA packaging, and lysis functions (17). P2 and P4 are unrelated phages with a mutual capacity to derepress each
other. The derepression of prophage P4 by P2 is mediated by the Cox
protein, which functions as an activator of the P4 late promoter
PLL (20). The PLL promoter controls
the P4
gene required for P4 DNA replication. During P4 lytic
growth, the P4 PLL promoter is activated by the P4 Delta
protein, which is under immunity control (8, 15). Thus the
P2 Cox protein bypasses the normal P4 immunity and mimics the activity
of the P4 Delta protein.
The P2-related phages HP1 and 186 have proteins analogous to P2 Cox, named Cox and Apl, respectively; i.e., they act like repressors and excisionases (9, 10, 19). The Cox protein of HP1 has been shown to form tetramers, which can self-associate into octamers (9), while Apl of phage 186 is a monomer in solution (26). The biological significance of the multimeric forms of HP1 Cox has not yet been determined.
To gain further insights into the action of the multifunctional P2 Cox protein, we have characterized the native form of the protein and have shown that oligomerization is required for biological activity.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Chemicals and enzymes. Media were from Difco and acrylamide was from Saveen. Enzymes were purchased from Pharmacia Biotech, except for Vent DNA polymerase (New England Biolabs). Radioactive isotopes and the automatic sequencing kit were from Amersham. All other fine chemicals were purchased from Sigma, unless otherwise stated.
Oligonucleotides.
Oligonucleotides used are listed in Table
1 and were purchased from DNA-Technology,
KEBO, or Pharmacia.
|
Bacterial strains and plasmids.
The bacteria and plasmids
used are listed in Table 2. All plasmids
were made according to standard procedures (23) and sequenced using a Thermo Sequenase fluorescence-labeled primer cycle
sequencing kit (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) and run on an ALFexpressII
(Pharmacia Biotech), to confirm the orientation of the inserts and to
exclude possible PCR-induced mutations. Escherichia coli
C-1a was used as a host for all cloning procedures, except for pEE727
to pEE734, when AG1688 was used as a recipient.
|
(i) pEE720. Plasmid pEE720 was formed by cloning the cox gene into expression vector pET-8c. The cox gene was amplified by PCR using primers 77.4R-2 and 79.0L and inserted into the filled-in NcoI site of pET-8c.
(ii) pEE721 to pEE726. To form plasmids pEE721 through pEE726, the cox mutations were introduced into pEE720 by site-directed mutagenesis using the QuickChange site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene) with primers as indicated in Table 2.
(iii) pEE727.
For plasmid pEE727, the cox gene
was cloned into pJH391. pJH391 was cleaved with SalI and
BamHI, and the ends were filled in using Klenow fragment.
Thereafter the PCR amplified cox gene (using primers 77.4R
and 79.0L) was ligated in frame with the part of the
cI
indl gene that codes for amino acids 1 to 132 (the DNA
binding part of the
CI repressor). Since the indl
mutation, which generates the E117K amino acid substitution, does not
affect the dimerization or DNA-binding activity of the CI protein, its presence is not further indicated. Protein expression from the clones
was analyzed by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE).
(iv) pEE728 to pEE734. For plasmids pEE728 through pEE734, the cox mutations were made by site-directed mutagenesis using the QuickChange site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene) with pEE727 as a template and primers as indicated in Table 2.
(v) pEE735 to pEE740. To produce plasmids pEE735 through pEE740, the cox genes were cloned in pACYC177. The cox genes were amplified by PCR with primers T7 forward and T7 reverse from plasmids pEE721 to pEE726, and these amplified genes were inserted into the HincII site of pACYC177.
Protein purification.
P2 Cox protein was purified from
E. coli BL21(DE3)pLysE containing plasmid
pEE720, pEE721, pEE722, pEE723, pEE724, pEE725, or pEE726. The
bacteria were grown with shaking at 37°C until mid-log phase, when
isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG) was added to a
final concentration of 0.5 mM, and the incubation was continued for
about 4 h. The cells were harvested by centrifugation, and the
pellet was resuspended in Buffer A+ (0.3 M potassium phosphate buffer
[pH 7.5], 3 mM EDTA, 0.5 M KCl) and lysed by sonication on ice in
three 30-s bursts, at 8 to 14 µm with an MSE Soniprep150. The extract
was clarified by centrifugation in a Sorvall RC5C at 23,000 × g for 1 h, and ammonium sulfate was added to 25%
saturation in the supernatant. After being stirred at 4°C for 30 min,
the mixture was centrifuged at 17,000 × g for 30 min,
and the pellet was resuspended in 4 ml of Buffer A+. The extract was
loaded on a Sephacryl S-200 HR (Pharmacia) column. The Cox-containing
fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and concentrated using Centricon 3 or 10 (Amicon). The Cox protein was at least 95% pure as judged by SDS-PAGE. Glycerol was added to 40%, and the purified protein was
stored at
20°C. The protein concentration was determined by the
method of Bradford (5), with bovine serum albumin as a standard.
SDS-PAGE. Samples were precipitated with trichloroacetic acid (TCA) (18) and separated by electrophoresis using conditions developed to separate low-molecular-weight proteins (25) and stained with Coomassie brilliant blue R-250.
Cox activity. The activity was determined by gel retardation assay, and one unit was defined as the amount of protein extract needed for shifting 50% of the Cox box containing DNA substrate amplified by PCR from the P2 PePc region, using primers 7R and 77.6L. The intensities of the bands were measured with a PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics) and analyzed with the ImageQuant 3.3 software.
Gel retardation assay.
The gel retardation assays were
performed as described previously (33). DNA fragments were
5' end labeled with [
-32P]ATP and were purified using
MicroSpin S-200 HR columns (Pharmacia Biotech). The binding reactions
were run on a 5% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel (29:1) and run on a
water-cooled Protean II xi Cell (Bio-Rad) at 20 mA. The gels were dried
prior to autoradiography and PhosphorImager analysis.
In vivo dimerization/oligomerization assay.
Dimerization/oligomerization of the CI-Cox fusion protein was analyzed
by cross-streaking bacteriophage
KH54 and
KH54h80 (13) against bacteria containing plasmid pEE727.
Dimerization or oligomerization of the CI-Cox fusion should lead to
immunity. Repression of the reporter gene in the
ORPR-lacZ (strain JH372),
112OSPS-lacZ (strain JH607), and
XZ970-lacZ (strain XZ980) constructs (13) by
the CI-Cox fusion proteins was determined by measuring
-galactosidase activity in cells grown in A medium supplemented with
0.4% glucose-1 mM MgSO4-1% Casamino Acids-1 µg of
vitamin B1 per ml as previously described (23). The
OR operator contains an OR2
mutation that eliminates cooperative binding by the wild-type CI
repressor to the operator (13).
Gel filtration.
The size of native Cox was determined by
using a Sephacryl S-300 HR column (Pharmacia) connected to the
GradiFrac system (Pharmacia). All runs were performed at 4°C, with a
flow rate of 0.4 ml/min. The column was equilibrated with Buffer A+ and
calibrated with blue dextran, ribonuclease A (13.7 kDa),
chymotrypsinogen A (25 kDa), ovalbumin (43 kDa), albumin (67 kDa),
aldolase (158 kDa), catalase (232 kDa), ferritin (440 kDa), and
thyroglobulin (669 kDa). The eluate was monitored at an optical density
at 280 nm (OD280). Two milliliters of Cox protein (5 mg/ml)
was loaded. Two-milliliter fractions were collected, and the
Cox-containing fractions were detected by SDS-PAGE. The
Kav values were calculated according to the
formula Kav = (Ve
V0)/(Vt
V0), where Ve is the elution
volume for the protein, V0 is the column void
volume, and Vt is the total bed volume.
Cross-linking. The assays were performed using the 6.4 Å long Sulfo-disulfosuccinimidyl tartrate (DST) (Pierce). Cox was incubated with different amounts of Sulfo-DST cross-linker in Buffer A+ at room temperature for 1 h. The Sulfo-DST reactions were quenched with 50 mM Tris (pH 7.5) and TCA precipitated. The precipitated protein was dissolved in 1× sample buffer without mercaptoethanol (18) and thereafter analyzed by SDS-PAGE. The protein-cross-linking agent ratio was chosen where monomeric ribonuclease A still migrated as a monomer.
Determination of CAT activity. BL21(DE3) cells harboring plasmids pSS27-5, pEE735, pEE736, pEE737, pEE738, pEE739, or pEE740 together with pSS39-6 or pEE741 were grown to an OD600 of 0.8, and the extracts for chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) activity were prepared as described before (22). Total protein concentrations were determined by the method of Bradford (5). The extracts from cells harboring plasmid pSS39-6 were diluted to 0.1 µg, and the extracts from cells harboring plasmid pEE741 were diluted to 2 µg in the CAT reactions, which were performed as described in reference 11, with 14C-labeled D-threo-dichloroacetyl-1-1-chloramphenicol (Amersham). CAT activities, determined by PhosphorImager analysis, were calculated as the ratio of acetylated chloramphenicol to total chloramphenicol.
In vivo excision assay for Cox activity. The P2 cox3 lysogenic strain C-6005 was transformed with plasmid pSS27-5, pEE735, pEE736, pEE737, pEE738, pEE739, or pEE740. The level of spontaneous phage production was assayed in overnight cultures grown without aeration at 30°C in Luria-Bertani broth (LB) supplemented with kanamycin and 10 mM potassium phosphate (pH 6.8), which was used to prevent readsorption of released phages (3). The phage titer was determined as described earlier (3) using C-1757 as an indicator strain, after removing the bacteria by centrifugation and adding two drops of chloroform to the supernatants. The bacterial titer was determined by analysis of colony-forming ability, and the number of PFUs per CFU was calculated.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Alignment and secondary structure prediction of the P2 Cox, HP1 Cox
and 186 Apl proteins.
Alignment of the three analogous proteins
was performed using the Pile Up program (Genetics Computer Group,
Madison, Wis.), and the results (Fig. 1)
show higher amino acid identity between P2 Cox and HP1 Cox (19 identical residues) than between P2 Cox and 186 Apl (9 identical
residues). Further, the alignment revealed that the N-terminal parts of
the proteins show higher identity than the C-terminal parts. The region
with the highest resemblance between all three proteins is the first
helix,
1, which together with helix
2 is believed to be the
DNA-binding helix-turn-helix motif. It should be noted that the Apl
protein does not contain the second helix. Cox mutants analyzed in this
study affect amino acid residues which are evenly dispersed throughout
the protein (boxed residues).
|
Purification of P2 Cox protein.
The P2 cox gene was
inserted into the high-copy-number plasmid pET-8c, under the control of
the T7 promoter
10, generating plasmid pEE720. This plasmid was
transformed into E. coli strain BL21(DE3)pLysE, containing
the T7 RNA polymerase under the control of the lacUV5
promoter. In a strain without the pLysE plasmid, the induced Cox
protein formed inclusion bodies. Induction by IPTG produced extracts
containing the P2 Cox protein as judged by the size on SDS-PAGE and by
gel retardation assays with the P2 PePc region. P2 Cox was purified as
described in Materials and Methods. The results of the protein
purification are summarized in Table 3,
and the protein composition after the different purification steps is
visualized by SDS-PAGE, shown in Fig. 2.
|
|
Cox forms multimers in vivo.
The ability of Cox to form dimers
or higher multimers was investigated by using the repressor fusion
system, which is based on the interaction between the bacteriophage
CI repressor and the
OR (13). The C-terminal
domain of the
CI repressor mediates the dimerization, whereas the N
terminus is involved in protein-DNA interaction. The N-terminal domain
alone cannot function as a repressor, since it binds DNA very poorly,
due to inefficient dimerization (30). It has been shown
that, on replacing the C terminus of the
CI repressor with other
proteins, their ability to form dimers or higher oligomers in vivo can
be analyzed by comparing the biological activity of the fusion protein
with that of the wild-type
CI repressor (13).
CI repressor, and
the construct, pEE727, was transformed into reporter strain JH372,
which is an AG1688 derivative containing a
202 prophage carrying the
lacZ gene driven by
ORPR. In
JH372, the ability of the CI-Cox fusion protein to form dimers (or
oligomers) was first investigated by cross-streaking against
bacteriophage
. Bacteria expressing the CI-Cox fusion protein were
found to be immune to
infection, which indicates that the CI-Cox
fusion protein can form dimers (or oligomers) like the wild-type
CI repressor (results not shown). The ability of the CI-Cox fusion protein to bind to the
ORPR was then
quantified by measuring the
-galactosidase activity, with the
wild-type CI-expressing clone as a positive control (pFG157) and no
repressor (pZ150) and just the N-terminal part of the CI repressor
(pKH101) as negative controls. As can be seen in Fig.
3a the lacZ expression in the presence of the CI-Cox fusion protein (pEE727) is about sixfold lower
than its expression with pKH101. Furthermore, the CI-Cox fusion protein
represses the lacZ expression to the same extent as the
intact CI repressor (pFG157). These results show that the fusion
protein represses transcription from the PR promoter to the
same extent as wild-type
CI repressor, which implies that the P2
Cox protein has a strong dimerization (or oligomerization) function.
|
112OSPS or
XZ970 (35).
AG1688(
112OSPS) contains a synthetic
promoter that controls the expression of lacZ. A weak
operator (OS2) overlaps the promoter, and a strong operator (OS1) is situated upstream of the weak operator. If a
repressor fusion protein binds cooperatively or as an oligomer to the
strong upstream OS1 operator, then the lacZ
expression from the PS promoter will be repressed. In
AG1688(
XZ970), the OS1 operator is replaced by a 434 operator. This strain is used to analyze how much of the repression is
caused by binding of the fusion protein to the weak promoter-proximal
OS2 operator alone. Fig. 3b shows the
-galactosidase activity of the different extracts of
AG1688(
112OSPS)- and
AG1688(
XZ970)-transformed cells. pZ150 (no repressor) and
pJH370 (CI-GCN4 repressor fusion that only forms dimers) were used as
negative controls. pJH622 (modified CI-GCN4 repressor fusion that forms
tetramers) was used as a positive control. As can be seen in Fig. 3b,
the CI-Cox fusion protein represses transcription almost as well as the
tetrameric GCN4-repressor (pJH622) in strain
AG1688(
112OSPS). The values obtained for the
CI-Cox fusion protein in the control strain AG1688(
XZ970) exclude
the possibility that the low
-galactosidase activity in
AG1688(
112OSPS) was due to binding to the
weak OS2 operator alone. In fact, the tetrameric CI-GCN4
protein has a higher affinity for the weak OS2 operator
than does CI-Cox. The activities obtained with the positive control
(pJH622), and the CI-Cox fusion protein decreased the lacZ
expression four- to fivefold in strain
AG1688(
112OSPS) compared to the level
obtained in strain AG1688(
XZ970). This indicates that the CI-Cox
protein has the ability either to bind cooperatively to the strong
OS1 upstream operator in
112OSPS or to form multimers in vivo.
Cox forms tetramers and octamers in vitro.
To determine the
multimeric forms of Cox in vitro, a gel filtration experiment was
performed loading Cox protein onto a calibrated Sephacryl S-300 HR
(Pharmacia) column. Two Cox-containing peaks were obtained (Fig.
4), one corresponding to a molecular mass of about 36 kDa and a Stokes radius of about 26 Å. The other, more
rapidly eluting, Cox-containing peak corresponds to a molecular mass of
approximately 81 kDa and a Stokes radius of 37 Å. The latter contained
the majority of the Cox protein, which suggests that the Cox protein
has the capacity to form tetramers and octamers, under the conditions
used.
|
|
Cooperative binding of Cox to DNA.
To analyze how Cox binds to
its cognate DNA site, a gel retardation assay was used, incubating Cox
with PCR-amplified DNA from the attP region (primers 72.OR
and 72.5L). Three bands with retarded electrophoretic mobilities were
formed (Fig. 6a). Complex I was
preferentially formed at low protein concentrations, whereas at high
protein concentrations, complex II and complex III were detected. The
dependence of DNA retardation on concentration of the protein followed
a sigmoidal curve (Fig. 6b). The sigmoid nature of the curve suggests
that tight binding of the Cox protein to DNA requires the interaction
of two or more Cox subunits with the DNA and that Cox binds
cooperatively to its cognate sites.
|
cox mutations can affect the ability to form oligomers. Several mutations have been located in the cox gene (12; E. Haggård-Ljungquist, unpublished results). Three mutations, cox130, cox3, and cox107 are located in the N-terminal part containing the helix-turn-helix motif believed to be involved in DNA binding (Fig. 1), while three other mutations, cox2, cox4, and cox129, are located outside this region. The cox2, cox3, and cox4 mutants were originally isolated as excision-defective mutants of P2 (16), and they were later shown to be deficient also in derepression of satellite phage P4 (27). On the other hand, cox107, cox129, and cox130 were originally isolated as P2 mutants defective in the induction of a P4 lysogen after infection while maintaining the capacity to form phage spontaneously in growing lysogenic cultures, although at a reduced frequency (E. W. Six and M. G. Sunshine, personal communication).
To analyze the oligomerization capacity of the mutated Cox proteins and a truncated version, Cox38c, containing only the first 53 amino acids, these proteins were fused to the DNA-binding N-terminal part of the
CI protein, and their respective capacity to form at least dimers was
analyzed in the repression assay system described above. As can be seen
in Fig. 3a, the fusion protein containing the cox130
mutation (pEE733), which is located in the
-helix believed to be the
structural helix of the DNA-binding domain, maintains the capacity to
dimerize (or oligomerize) like the wild-type Cox fusion protein. Fusion
proteins containing cox3 (pEE729), cox107
(pEE731), and cox129 (pEE732) mutations, as well as the truncated Cox protein (pEE734), seem to have lost the capacity to
dimerize (or oligomerize), since the
-galactosidase activities overlap with those of the negative controls (pZ150 and pKH101), while
Cox2 (pEE728) and Cox4 (pEE730) seem to have some residual dimerization
(or oligomerization) function. The fact that cox130, located
at the N-terminal end, is able to form at least dimers made it
interesting to analyze Cox130 for multimerization/cooperative binding
in AG1688(
112OSPS) and the negative
control strain AG1688(
XZ970), where cox130 showed a
greater ability to repress the expression of the lacZ gene
than the wild-type Cox (Fig. 3b).
The mutated Cox proteins were also analyzed in vitro in cross-linking
assays where the SDS-PAGE gel was scanned with an AGFA Snapscan and
analyzed using NIH Image 1.61. The mutated Cox proteins were plotted
against the ratio between cross-linked Cox protein and total amount of
Cox protein (Fig. 5c). These data confirmed the in vivo data that the
mutated Cox proteins are defective in oligomerization (except Cox130).
It also showed that Cox2 is not completely defective in
oligomerization, since the percentage of cross-linked Cox tetramers is
almost as high as that of wild-type Cox. Cox3 was not analyzed in the
cross-linking assays, since it formed inclusion bodies upon induction.
The mutated Cox proteins are defective in excision, transcriptional
repression, and activation.
The respective mutated Cox proteins
were characterized in an in vivo excision assay. The plasmids pEE735
(wild-type cox), pEE736 (cox2), pEE737
(cox4), pEE738 (cox107), pEE739
(cox129), pEE740 (cox130), and pSS27-5 (no
cox) were transformed into a cox3-defective P2
lysogenic strain (C-6005). The capacity of the mutated Cox proteins to
complement the cox-defective prophage was determined by
scoring the level of free phage per bacterium in a bacterial overnight
culture (Table 4). The results show that
the cox2 mutation makes the Cox protein unable to complement the defective prophage, while Cox130 is almost as efficient as wild-type Cox. Cox4, Cox107, and Cox129 proteins have intermediate complementation capacities.
|
|
The mutated Cox proteins are defective in DNA binding. The ability of the mutated Cox protein to bind to its cognate DNA site was examined by gel retardation assay (Fig. 6c). Each Cox protein was incubated with 5'-end-labeled DNA from the attP region (amplified by PCR, using primers 72.0R and 72.5L), and the amount of shifted DNA was quantified (Fig. 6d). The results show that the mutated proteins, which were defective in oligomerization, were also unable to bind DNA. Cox130 on the other hand seemed to be able to bind to DNA. In fact, under the same conditions, the Cox130 protein bound better to DNA than the wild-type protein. Cox130 gave the second shift under conditions in which wild-type Cox gave only the first shift.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The P2 Cox protein is a small, multifunctional protein, which is
vitally important for excision of the phage genome, lytic development,
and derepression of the unrelated bacteriophage P4. Functionally it
resembles
Xis in site-specific recombination and
Cro as a
transcriptional repressor.
To facilitate the purification of Cox, the cox gene was
cloned under the control of the strong T7 promoter
10. Under the conditions used, induction leads to overexpression of soluble Cox
protein, when adding the T7 lysozyme on a plasmid (pLysE). A simple
purification procedure was developed that gives a >95% pure Cox
preparation, and this preparation specifically binds its DNA target.
Cox native size. The analogous Cox proteins of bacteriophage HP1 and Apl of bacteriophage 186 have been characterized, and their native sizes have been determined. HP1 Cox consists of four protomers, which can self-associate to octamers (9), while Apl is monomeric in solution (26). Both proteins have a dual role in prophage induction, as does P2 Cox. The native size of the P2 Cox protein was determined in this work both in vivo and in vitro.
In the in vivo repressor fusion system (13), the cox gene replaced the part of the cI gene encoding the dimerization domain of the CI repressor of bacteriophage
, and the capacity of the fusion protein was analyzed using a
reporter gene controlled by the
operator. In this system, the
CI-Cox fusion protein repressed transcription of the reporter gene as
strongly as wild-type
CI protein, which implies that Cox forms at
least dimers as efficiently as
CI. To further analyze the capacity
of P2 Cox proteins to form higher-order structures in vivo, the same
CI-Cox fusion protein was assayed in a system discriminating between
dimerization and cooperative binding or multimeric formation. In this
system, the lacZ reporter gene is under the control of a
synthetic promoter which is overlapped by a weak
operator but
preceded by a strong
operator. The CI-Cox fusion protein repressed
the reporter gene almost as well as a positive control known to form
tetramers. This indicates either that (i) binding of CI-Cox to the
strong upstream operator increases the affinity of the fusion protein to the weak operator, that is, cooperative binding or (ii) the fusion
protein has the capacity to form oligomers.
The native size was further characterized by gel filtration experiments
on a Sephacryl S-300 HR column. Cox eluted at two distinct peaks,
corresponding to tetrameric and octameric P2 Cox, as does HP1 Cox. The
native size of Cox was further determined at lower protein
concentration using the lysine-specific 6.4 Å, cross-linker Sulfo-DST,
which readily cross-linked Cox monomers, forming tetramers (Fig. 5a).
The cross-linking experiment showed that Cox can form tetramers at a
broad concentration range which indicates that the cross-links are
formed within the Cox tetramers and not between tetramers. In a gel
retardation assay, the cooperative binding of Cox to its DNA-binding
site at attP was analyzed, resulting in three shifts. The
sigmoidal nature of the binding curve indicates that tight binding of
the Cox protein to its cognate site requires the action of two or more
subunits. The results presented in this study, together with the
results in the extensive study of the Cox protein from bacteriophage
HP1 (9), make us believe that P2 Cox acts like HP1 Cox; that
is, the first shift contains tetrameric Cox while the second shift
includes octameric Cox bound to the DNA fragment. We also propose that
the third shift contains Cox binding nonspecifically to the DNA,
analogous to HP1 Cox.
Cox oligomerization is essential for Cox activity.
The results
obtained with the cox mutants are summarized in Table
5. The biological relevance of Cox
functioning as an oligomer was analyzed using cox mutants in
repressor fusion assays and cross-linking assays. Three classes of
cox mutants were distinguished regarding their ability to
oligomerize in vivo and in vitro. The cox130 mutation seemed
not to influence oligomerization negatively, while cox2 and
probably cox4 affected oligomerization to a certain degree,
whereas the C terminally deleted cox, cox38c, and
the point mutants cox3, cox107, and
cox129 completely blocked oligomerization. The fact that the
mutations located in the presumed DNA-binding motif also affected
oligomerization may be explained by the small size of the Cox protein.
Cox probably lacks independently folded domains, and a mutation in one
part of the protein affects other epitopes. This hypothesis is further
supported by the fact that the Cox3 protein forms inclusion bodies when
overexpressed in the same strain in which the wild-type protein is
soluble (results not shown). The cox3 mutation leads to the
replacement of a glycine with a glutamate, which may distort the
overall three-dimensional structure of the protein, leading to an
inactive protein. On the other hand, the cox2 and
cox130 mutations give defective Cox proteins, which formed
tetramers almost as well as wild-type Cox. Therefore, we suggest that
some amino acid substitutions, like cox3, affect the folding
of the entire protein, while other substitutions, like
cox130, do not change the overall structure and thus do not affect other epitopes.
|
What is the function of the presumed secondary structures?
When aligning the P2 Cox protein with the multimeric HP1 Cox protein
and the monomeric Apl of phage 186 (Fig. 1), the C-terminal part of the
P2 Cox protein is more similar to HP1 Cox. Around the cox4
mutation, four amino acids out of nine are identical to those of the
HP1 Cox, and they could be a part of the protein-protein interacting
interface. The
-strand next to the cox4 mutation,
3,
is made up of 100% hydrophobic amino acid residues, which could be a
potential protein-interacting epitope. Another mutation, cox129, gives a protein that is unable to oligomerize, which
further supports the idea that the interacting interface is located at the C-terminal part of the Cox protein. The cross-linking experiments indicate that lysines are situated near or in the interacting interface. The P2 Cox protein contains seven lysines, where five are
situated in the N terminus around the helix-turn-helix motif and two
are situated around the cox129 mutation, Lys67 and Lys75. Therefore, it is possible that one of these lysines or both, together with Ala69 (cox129), are situated in the interacting
interface. This was further supported by the fact that the presumed
helix
3, which contains the cox129 mutation, is an
amphipatic helix with Ala-69 as a part of the hydrophobic side of the
helix. This kind of helix is easily visualized as being involved in
protein-protein interfaces, where the hydrophobic side interacts with
the hydrophobic side of the helix of another protomer. The
cox129 mutation could also affect the length of the
3
helix, since when a secondary prediction of the
cox129-mutated protein was run, the helix became shorter
compared to the wild-type Cox protein (results not shown).
-strand next to the
cox2 mutation could be a hydrophobic core for the
DNA-binding domain, since there are several (seven out of nine)
hydrophobic amino acid residues. The cox130 mutation on the
other hand does not affect tetramerization negatively; it rather
enhances oligomerization of the Cox protein. Gel retardation assays
showed that it even binds better to DNA than wild-type Cox. The
appearance of the second shift could indicate a tendency to more easily
form oligomers compared to wild-type Cox, which would correlate with
the results from the in vivo cooperative-binding/multimerization assay.
In summary, we propose that the P2 Cox protein is tetrameric in
solution and that it binds cooperatively to DNA, as a tetramer at low
protein concentration and as an octamer at high protein concentrations.
Our results further show that oligomerization is essential for Cox
activity. A coupling between oligomerization and gene regulation has
been observed in other systems (31), like the
cI repressor (1), the tryptophan repressor
(14), and the lac repressor (6). The
results show that the protein-protein interacting interface is situated
in the C terminus. We also suggest that
-strand
3 and
-helix
3 could together make up the oligomerization epitope. Further, the
Cox protein seems to lack independent domain structures.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank J. Hu for providing strains, phages, and plasmids for the repressor fusion assay and Erich W. Six for providing unpublished cox mutants and helpful discussions.
This work was supported by grant nb 72 from the Swedish Medical Research Council.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Genetics, Stockholm University, S-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden. Phone: 46 8 161270. Fax: 46 8 164315. E-mail: Elisabeth.Haggard{at}genetics.su.se.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Bain, D. L., and G. K. Ackers.
1994.
Self-association and DNA binding of cI repressor N-terminal domains reveal linkage between sequence-specific binding and the C-terminal cooperativity domain.
Biochemistry
33:14679-14689[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2. | Bertani, L. E. 1980. Genetic interaction between the nip1 mutation and genes affecting integration and excision in phage P2. Mol. Gen. Genet. 178:91-99[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 3. |
Bertani, L. E., and G. Bertani.
1979.
Preparation and characterization of temperate, non-inducible bacteriophage P2 (host: Escherichia coli).
J. Gen. Virol.
6:201-212 |
| 4. | Bertani, L. E., and E. W. Six. 1988. The P2-like phages and their parasite, P4, vol. 2. Plenum Publishing Corp., New York, N.Y. |
| 5. | Bradford, M. M. 1976. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal. Biochem. 72:248-254[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 6. | Chakerian, A. E., and K. S. Matthews. 1992. Effect of lac repressor oligomerization on regulatory outcome. Mol. Microbiol. 6:963-968[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 7. |
Cuff, J. A.,
M. E. Clamp,
A. S. Siddiqui,
M. Finlay, and G. J. Barton.
1998.
Jpred: a consensus secondary structure prediction server.
Bioinformatics
14:892-893 |
| 8. |
Deho, G.,
S. Zangrossi,
D. Ghisotti, and G. Sironi.
1988.
Alternative promoters in the development of bacteriophage plasmid P4.
J. Virol.
62:1697-1704 |
| 9. |
Esposito, D., and J. J. Scocca.
1997.
Purification and characterization of HP1 Cox and definition of its role in controlling the direction of site-specific recombination.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:8660-8670 |
| 10. | Esposito, D., J. C. E. Wilson, and J. J. Scocca. 1997. Reciprocal regulation of the early promoter region of bacteriophage HP1 by the Cox and CI proteins. Virology 234:267-276[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 11. |
Gorman, C. M.,
L. F. Moffat, and B. H. Howard.
1982.
Recombinant genomes which express chloramphenicol acetyltransferase in mammalian cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
2:1044-1051 |
| 12. | Haggård-Ljungquist, E., K. Kockum, and L. E. Bertani. 1987. DNA sequences of bacteriophage P2 early genes cox and B and their regulatory sites. Mol. Gen. Genet. 208:52-56[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 13. |
Hu, J. C.,
E. K. O'Shea,
P. S. Kim, and R. T. Sauer.
1990.
Sequence requirements for coiled-coils: analysis with repressor-GCN4 leucine zipper fusions.
Science
250:1400-1403 |
| 14. | LeTilly, V., and C. A. Royer. 1993. Fluorescence anisotropy assays implicate protein-protein interactions in regulating trp repressor DNA binding. Biochemistry 32:7753-7758[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 15. |
Lin, C.-S.
1984.
Nucleotide sequence of the essential region of bacteriophage P4.
Nucleic Acids Res.
12:8667-8684 |
| 16. | Lindahl, G., and M. Sunshine. 1972. Excision-deficient mutants of bacteriophage P2. Virology 49:180-187[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 17. |
Lindqvist, B. H.,
G. Dehò, and R. Calendar.
1993.
Mechanisms of genome propagation and helper exploitation by satellite phage P4.
Microbiol. Rev.
57:683-702 |
| 18. | Marshak, D. R., J. T. Kadanoga, R. R. Burgess, M. W. Knuth, W. A. Brennan, and S.-H. Lin. 1996. Strategies for protein purification and characterization. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 19. | Reed, M. R., K. E. Shearwin, L. M. Pell, and J. B. Egan. 1997. The dual role of Apl in prophage induction of coliphage 186. Mol. Microbiol. 23:669-681[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 20. |
Saha, S.,
E. Haggård-Ljungquist, and K. Nordström.
1989.
Activation of prophage P4 by the Cox protein and the sites of action of the Cox protein on the two phage genomes.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
86:3973-3977 |
| 21. | Saha, S., E. Haggård-Ljungquist, and K. Nordström. 1987. The Cox protein of bacteriophage P2 inhibits the formation of the repressor protein and autoregulates the early operon. EMBO J. 6:3191-3199[Medline]. |
| 22. | Saha, S., B. Lundqvist, and E. Haggård-Ljungquist. 1987. Autoregulation of bacteriophage P2 repressor. EMBO J. 6:809-814[Medline]. |
| 23. | Sambrook, J., E. F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 24. | Sasaki, I., and G. Bertani. 1965. Growth abnormalities in Hfr derivatives of Escherichia coli strain C. J. Gen. Virol. 40:365-376. |
| 25. | Schägger, H., and G. von Jagow. 1987. Tricine-sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis for the separation of proteins in the range from 1 to 100 kDa. Anal. Biochem. 166:368-379[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 26. |
Shearwin, K. E., and J. B. Egan.
1996.
Purification and self-association equilibria of the lysis-lysogeny switch proteins of coliphage 186.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:11525-11531 |
| 27. | Six, E. W., and B. H. Lindqvist. 1978. Mutual derepression in the P2-P4 bacteriophage system. Virology 87:217-230[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 28. | Studier, E. W., and B. A. Moffat. 1986. Use of bacteriophage T7 RNA polymerase to direct selective high-level expression of cloned genes. Methods Enzymol. 185:60-89. |
| 29. | Sunshine, M. G., M. Thorn, W. Gibbs, R. Calendar, and B. Kelly. 1971. P2 phage amber mutants: characterization by use of a polarity supressor. Virology 46:691-702[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 30. | Weiss, M. A., C. O. Pabo, M. Karplus, and R. T. Sauer. 1987. Dimerization of the operator binding domain of phage lambda repressor. Biochemistry 26:897-904[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 31. | Wong, I., and T. M. Lohman. 1995. Linkage of protein assembly to protein-DNA binding. Methods Enzymol. 259:95-127[Medline]. |
| 32. |
Yu, A., and E. Haggård-Ljungquist.
1993.
Characterization of the binding sites of two proteins involved in the bacteriophage P2 site-specific recombination system.
J. Bacteriol.
175:1239-1249 |
| 33. |
Yu, A., and E. Haggård-Ljungquist.
1993.
The Cox protein is a modulator of directionality in bacteriophage P2 site-specific recombination.
J. Bacteriol.
175:7848-7855 |
| 34. | Zagursky, R. J., and M. L. Berman. 1984. Cloning vectors that yield high levels of single-stranded DNA for rapid DNA sequencing. Gene 27:183-191[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 35. | Zeng, X., and J. C. Hu. 1997. Detection of tetramerization domains in vivo by cooperative DNA binding to tandem lambda operator sites. Gene 185:245-249[CrossRef][Medline]. |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Appl. Environ. Microbiol. | Infect. Immun. | Eukaryot. Cell |
|---|---|---|
| Mol. Cell. Biol. | J. Virol. | Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. |
| ALL ASM JOURNALS |