Department of Molecular Biosciences,
University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The cyclic AMP (cAMP) receptor
protein (CRP) regulates the expression of more than 100 promoters in
Escherichia coli (for a review, see reference
15). As a prerequisite to activating transcription,
CRP must bind to a 22-bp twofold-symmetric recognition site on DNA
(2, 9, 15). Once bound, the predominant method of activation
by CRP appears to be through protein contacts with RNA polymerase
(RNAP). Depending upon the architecture of the promoter, one or two
activation regions on the surface of CRP (AR1 and AR2) are involved in
positive contacts with the
subunit of RNAP.
CRP AR1 is necessary for activation at class I CRP-dependent promoters,
where CRP binds upstream and not adjacent to RNAP, and interacts with a
defined set of amino acids on the carboxyl-terminal domain of the RNAP
subunit (
-CTD) (33, 38, 39) (reviewed in reference
8). To activate class II promoters, where CRP binds
immediately adjacent to RNAP, CRP AR2 is necessary for positive interactions with the amino-terminal domain of the
subunit
(21, 27, 30) (reviewed in reference 5).
At class II promoters, contacts are also made between CRP AR1 and
-CTD (36, 39). Finally, a third group of CRP-dependent
promoters, called class III, is characterized by the involvement of CRP
and a regulon-specific regulatory protein. The mechanism of CRP
activation at class III promoters is somewhat less well defined than at
class I or class II but in most cases seems to involve CRP contacts
with the other activator protein (12), contacts with
-CTD
(37), and/or structural changes in DNA (23, 25, 26,
28).
The L-rhamnose catabolic operon,
rhaBAD, is a class III CRP-dependent promoter
(9, 14). The rhaBAD operon is
transcribed divergently from another rha
operon, rhaSR, with approximately 240 bp of DNA separating their respective transcription start sites. The rhaSR operon encodes the two
L-rhamnose-specific activators, RhaS and RhaR
(9, 34, 35), which are both members of the AraC family
of transcription activators (11). Each monomer of the
dimeric RhaS and RhaR proteins contains two helix-turn-helix motifs and
contacts two major grooves of DNA. RhaR regulates transcription of
rhaSR by binding promoter DNA spanning
32 to
82 relative to the rhaSR transcription start
site. RhaR is able to bind to its DNA recognition sequence in the
absence of L-rhamnose, albeit with a lower affinity
than in the presence of L-rhamnose (34, 35); however, it has been proposed that activation by RhaR does not occur until the addition of L-rhamnose
(35). Upon L-rhamnose induction, RhaR was
found to activate rhaSR transcription 5-fold in vitro (35); however, in vivo measurements indicate that
overall rhaSR activation was approximately
440-fold (9). Subsequent to rhaSR
expression, RhaS binds DNA upstream of rhaBAD at
32 to
81 relative to the transcription start site to increase
rhaBAD expression by approximately 1,000-fold
(to 10 Miller units in single copy). An additional 50-fold
activation of rhaBAD expression occurs when CRP
occupies its binding site centered at
92.5, which places CRP adjacent
to RhaS (9).
This work grew out of studies of rhaBAD regulation
in which we discovered that deletion of the crp gene had a
100-fold-greater effect on rhaBAD activation
than did deletion of the CRP binding site. This result suggested that
CRP might have both direct and indirect effects on
rhaBAD expression. To explore the origin of the
indirect effect, we tested whether CRP was involved in regulation of
rhaSR expression. We identified additional
putative CRP binding sites in the
rhaSR-rhaBAD intergenic region and
determined that a site at
111.5 relative to the
rhaSR transcription start site has a direct effect
on rhaSR expression and thus can account for at
least part of the indirect effect of CRP on rhaBAD
expression. We further report the results of investigations into
the mechanisms of CRP activation.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
General methods.
Transformation of DNA, restriction
endonuclease digestion, and ligations were done using standard methods.
All PCRs done to generate DNA fragments for cloning were performed
using the Expand High Fidelity PCR System from Roche (Indianapolis,
Ind.). Most DNA sequences were verified by automated dideoxy sequencing
on a LI-COR 4000L sequencer (LI-COR, Inc., Lincoln, Nebr.). Primers (Table 1) for the LI-COR 4000L were
custom made and IRD-41 labeled by LI-COR, Inc. Sequencing reactions
were done using the Thermo Sequenase fluorescence-labeled primer cycle
sequencing kit from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech (Piscataway, N.J.).
Other sequencing was done on an ABI Prism 310 (Perkin-Elmer,
Branchburg, N.J.). ABI Prism sequencing primers were synthesized by
Oligos, Etc. (Wilsonville, Oreg.), and the Thermo Sequenase dye
terminator sequencing kit from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech was used for
these sequencing reactions. The wild-type rpoA gene carried
on pREII
was a gift from R. Gourse. Construction of the
carboxyl-terminal domain deletion mutant form of rpoA was
described by Holcroft and Egan (14).
Culture media.
Cultures for the
-galactosidase assay were
grown using 1× MOPS buffered medium (20), which consisted
of 40 mM 3-(N-morpholino)propanesulfonic acid (MOPS), 4 mM
Tricine, 0.01 mM FeSO4, 9.5 mM NH4Cl, 0.276 mM
K2SO4, 0.5 µM CaCl2, 0.528 mM
MgCl2, 50 mM NaCl, 3 × 10
9 M
Na2MO4, 4 × 10
7 M
H3BO3, 3 × 10
8 M
CoCl2, 10
8 M CuSO4, 8 × 10
8 M MnCl2, 10
8 M
ZnSO4, 1.32 mM K2HPO4, 10 mM
NaHCO3, 0.2% Casamino Acids, and 0.002% thiamine. 1×
MOPS medium containing either 0.04% glycerol or 0.04% fructose was
used to grow overnight cultures. Growth medium consisted of 1× MOPS
medium containing either 0.4% glycerol or 0.4% fructose. As
indicated, cultures contained 125 µg of ampicillin/ml, 0.2%
L-rhamnose, and 2 mM cAMP. For other experiments
(cloning, strain construction, etc.), cells were grown in
tryptone-yeast (TY) medium (17) with or without antibiotic.
Plasmids, phages, and strains.
Strains used in this study
are listed in Table 1.
crp-3 linked to
zhc-511::Tn10 (29) or
rhaS linked to
zih-35::Tn10 (9) was moved
into strains by P1 generalized transduction (18) with selection for the linked Tn10 on 20-µg/ml tetracycline
plates.
(rhaSR)::Km (9)
was moved into strains, also using P1 generalized transduction, with
selection on 75-µg/ml kanamycin plates.
crp,
rhaS, and
rhaSR
deletions were confirmed by streaking onto MacConkey agar plates with
1% L-rhamnose.
Construction of rhaS-lacZ fusions.
Oligonucleotides used in this study are listed in Table
2. Promoter fragments for fusions were
generated by PCR using pSE101 as a template, primer 896 as the
downstream oligonucleotide for all fusions, and upstream primers
1170 and 2153 for
(rhaS-lacZ)
128 and
(rhaS-lacZ)
90,
respectively. Promoter fragments were then cloned between the
EcoRI and BamHI sites of pRS414
(31) to generate translational fusions with lacZ.
The DNA sequences were confirmed on both strands by automated
[
(rhaS-lacZ)
90] and
manual [
(rhaS-lacZ)
128] DNA
sequencing. Fusions were transferred to
RS45
(
imm21) by in vivo recombination
(31) to generate recombinant
phages. ECL116 cells were
infected with the recombinant
phages to generate strains carrying
promoter fusions with lacZ. Lysogens were identified as blue
colonies on plates containing
5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-
-D-galactopyranoside (X-Gal) and L-rhamnose, and single lysogens were
identified by the
-galactosidase assay and the Ter test
(13).
To construct
(rhaS-lacZ)
309,
wild-type rhaSR-rhaBAD intergenic
DNA was PCR amplified using primers 896 and 744. The product was first
cloned into the BamHI site of plasmid vector pGEM-11Zf(+) (Promega Corp., Madison, Wis.) to yield plasmid pGEMrha and
then subcloned into the BamHI site of pRS414. Putative
clones were screened on nutrient agar plates with ampicillin (125 µg/ml), X-Gal (40 µg/ml), and
isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside (0.27 mg/ml). A clone
in the proper orientation was confirmed by successful PCR amplification
using primers 896 and 900, resulting in pSE213. The DNA sequence of the
entire rhaSR-rhaBAD promoter region
in pGEMrha and pSE213 was confirmed on both strands by
automated sequencing. Mutations to knock out putative CRP sites 2 and 3 were introduced into pGEMrha by site-directed mutagenesis
using the Gene Editor in vitro site-directed mutagenesis system from Promega (Madison, Wis.). Oligonucleotide primers for site-directed mutagenesis were synthesized by Oligos Etc.) (Table 1). Primer 2170 introduced a 3-bp mutation in putative CRP site 2, and primer 2172 introduced a 3-bp mutation in putative CRP site 3. The resultant plasmids were named pSE214 and pSE215, and the DNA sequence of the
rhaSR-rhaBAD region of both pSE214
and pSE215 was confirmed by automated sequencing. Subsequently, primers
896 and 744 were used for high-fidelity PCR amplification of the
rhaSR-rhaBAD intergenic region using
templates pSE214 and pSE215. The resulting PCR products were cloned
into the BamHI site of pRS414 to generate
(rhaS-lacZ)
309 CRP site
2
and
(rhaS-lacZ)
309 CRP site
3
. Clones in the proper orientation were identified by
PCR screening with oligonucleotides 900 and 744. The resultant plasmids
were named pSE216 and pSE217. Subsequently, the DNA sequences of the entire rhaSR-rhaBAD regions through
both fusion junctions in pSE216 and pSE217 were verified by automated
sequencing on both strands.
-Galactosidase assay.
Strains to be assayed were grown as
described by Bhende and Egan (3). Briefly, this procedure
involved inoculation of a limiting-carbon-source overnight culture from
a fresh TY broth culture. The overnight culture was then used to
inoculate a MOPS-buffered minimal growth medium, and these cultures
were allowed to grow to an A600 of approximately
0.4. The carbon source used for overnight and growth medium was
glycerol, with the exception that fructose plus cAMP was used in medium
for assays involving crp deletion strains with no added
crp on the plasmid.
-Galactosidase activity was
determined as described by Miller (18), except that
incubation with substrate
o-nitrophenyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside was at room temperature. Specific activities were averaged from three independent assays, with two replicates in each assay.
CRP overexpression and purification.
The
His6-CRP fusion was constructed using the
QIAexpress kit from QIAGEN (Valencia, Calif.). Wild-type
crp was PCR amplified using primers 2104 and 2105, and the
product was inserted between the KpnI and
BamHI sites of pQE30 to create pSE207. Ligation reactions were transformed into SME1461 [a
crp strain background
carrying
(rhaB-lacZ)
110], and
putative pSE207 clones were identified by their blue colony color on
nutrient agar plates with ampicillin (125 µg/ml), X-Gal (40 µg/ml), and L-rhamnose (0.2%). After the DNA
sequence of the crp gene and fusion junctions on the
His6-CRP fusion were verified on both strands, pSE207
was cotransformed with plasmid pREP4 (constitutively expressing
lacIq) into competent SME1461 to generate strain
SME1834. Selection for transformants was on enriched minimal glucose
plates containing ampicillin (100 µg/ml) and kanamycin (25 µg/ml).
Five milliliters of TY broth (17) containing ampicillin (100 µg/ml) and kanamycin (25 µg/ml) was inoculated with a single colony
of SME1834. Cultures were incubated at 37°C for approximately 16 h in a rotator. A 300-ml baffled flask containing 100 ml of TY with
ampicillin (100 µg/ml) and kanamycin (25 µg/ml) was inoculated with
5 ml of overnight culture and incubated in a 37°C water bath with
vigorous shaking for 30 min. A 100-µl aliquot of 0.1 M
isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside was then added, and
the culture was grown for 4 additional hours at 37°C with vigorous
shaking. The culture was split between two 50-ml tubes and centrifuged
for 15 min at approximately 4,000 × g at 4°C. After
storage overnight at
70°C, each pellet was resuspended in 750 µl
of lysis buffer (50 mM NaH2PO4 [pH 8.0], 300 mM NaCl, 10 mM imidazole, 100 µM cAMP) and transferred to a
microcentrifuge tube. Lysozyme (1 mg/ml) was added, and after a 30-min
incubation on ice, the cells were sonicated on ice. After centrifugation at 4,000 × g for 20 min at 4°C, the
supernatant was transferred to a fresh microcentrifuge tube, and 250 µl of nickel nitrilotriacetic acid agarose suspension (Qiagen) was
added. Subsequently, the Qiagen QIAexpress protocol for
batch purification under nondenaturing conditions was used to purify
His6-CRP. The final purified protein was approximately 90% CRP.
Electrophoretic gel mobility shift assay.
Oligonucleotide
primers were 5' endlabeled with T4 polynucleotide kinase (New England
Biolabs, Beverly, Mass.) using [
-32P]ATP. Linear DNA
fragments for gel mobility shift assays were generated using PCR
amplification with one labeled and one unlabeled primer, using plasmid
pSE101 as a template. PCR products were purified using the Qiagen PCR
purification kit. Binding reactions were done in a total volume of 20 µl. 1× MSA buffer used for binding reactions contained 10 mM
Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 1 mM KEDTA, 50 mM KCl, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 5%
(vol/vol) glycerol, 0.05% (vol/vol) Nonidet P-40, 100 µM cAMP, and
500 ng of salmon sperm DNA. Each binding reaction was incubated for 5 min at 37°C before CRP was added. After protein was added, reaction
mixtures were further incubated for 10 min at 37°C before being
loaded into the gel. DNA loading dye was added only to the free DNA
lane. Free DNA was separated from protein-bound DNA by electrophoresis
at approximately 8°C in a 6% polyacrylamide gel that had been prerun
at ~150 V for 60 min in MSA electrophoresis buffer (10 mM
Tris-acetate, pH 7.4, and 1 mM KEDTA, pH 7.0). Bands were subsequently
detected using Bio-Rad PhosphorImager FX (Hercules, Calif.).
 |
RESULTS |
CRP both directly and indirectly activates
rhaBAD.
During the course of our studies on CRP
activation of the rhaBAD operon, we
compared expression from various rhaBAD promoter fusions (Fig. 1) in
crp+ and
crp strain backgrounds.
Similar to previous results (9), deletion of the CRP-binding
site from the rhaBAD promoter resulted in an
approximately 45-fold defect (Table
3). However, deletion of the
crp gene resulted in an approximately 4,000-fold defect at each of the fusions that included the CRP-binding site
[
(rhaB-lacZ)
226 and
(rhaB-lacZ)
110]. Further, at
(rhaB-lacZ)
84, which has a
RhaS-binding site but lacks a CRP-binding site, we observed a
50-fold defect upon deletion of crp. This defect at
(rhaB-lacZ)
84 was eliminated by
expression of rhaS from a heterologous promoter (unpublished results), suggesting that the defect was due to decreased expression of rhaS in the crp deletion
strain. Thus, we hypothesized that CRP might be a direct activator of
rhaSR expression.

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
rhaSR-rhaBAD
intergenic region. (A) Schematic representation of the
rhaSR-rhaBAD intergenic region. The
relative positions of the two RNA polymerases and the activator
proteins RhaS, CRP, and RhaR are shown, as are the locations of the
three putative CRP binding sites identified in this work. The
activators and sites shown above the line all are located on one face
of the DNA, and the activators and sites shown below the line are
located on the opposite face. (B) The DNA sequence between the
rhaBAD and rhaSR
transcription start sites. The positions of the RhaS and RhaR binding
sites are shown by everted arrows, and the positions of the CRP binding
sites are shown as inverted arrows. The 10 and 35 hexamers of the
two promoters are marked. Deletion endpoints (marked ), binding
sites, and distances relative to the rhaBAD
promoter are shown above the line, and deletion endpoints, binding
sites, and distances relative to the rhaSR
promoter are shown below the line. (C) Comparison of the putative CRP
binding sites within the
rhaSR-rhaBAD intergenic region and
the CRP consensus binding site sequence. Nucleotides highlighted in
gray match the consensus sequence.
|
|
Possible CRP site(s) at rhaSR.
To explore
whether CRP is a direct activator of rhaSR
expression, we first inspected the rhaSR promoter
DNA sequence. The previously identified CRP site centered at
92.5
relative to the rhaBAD transcription start site
(9) matches the CRP-binding-site consensus sequence
(2) at 9 of 10 positions and appears to be the strongest CRP
site in the rhaSR-rhaBAD intergenic
region. We now refer to this as the CRP site 1 (Fig. 1). The next-best matches to the CRP consensus sequence are two overlapping sequences with eight and seven consensus base pairs centered at
111.5 and
116.5 relative to the rhaSR transcription start
site, respectively (Fig. 1). The site at
111.5 is expected to lie on
the same face of the DNA as the rhaSR promoter,
and the site at
116.5 is expected to lie on the opposite face of the
DNA, which is the same face as the rhaBAD
promoter. A variety of weaker matches to the CRP consensus site can
also be found in the rhaBAD-rhaSR
intergenic region. Noteworthy due to its position relative to the
rhaSR transcription start site is a site with 5 of
10 bp matches centered at
92.5. This site is located immediately
upstream of the RhaR-binding site and in the same relative position as
the functional CRP site at rhaBAD. We have named
the putative site at
92.5 CRP site 2, the putative site at
111.5
CRP site 3, and the putative site at
116.5 CRP site 4 (Fig. 1). We
hypothesize that CRP binding to some or all of these sites may
influence transcription activation at rhaSR.
Evidence for functional CRP sites at rhaSR.
As
an initial step toward determining whether any of the putative
CRP-binding sites had a direct effect on rhaSR
expression, we performed in vivo
-galactosidase assays at
rhaS-lacZ fusions with different lengths of
upstream DNA (Tables 4 and 5). Expression from
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 and that from
(rhaS-lacZ)
128 were very similar,
indicating that the DNA region between
216 and
128 (which contains
CRP site 1) is not required for full rhaSR
activation. In contrast, the fusion with a truncation of all of the
putative CRP sites
[
(rhaS-lacZ)
90] had
~100-fold-lower induced expression. These results suggest that the
DNA region between
90 and
128 is important for activation at
rhaSR and that putative CRP sites 2, 3, and/or 4 may be functional CRP sites. Deletion of crp (Table 5)
resulted in a level of expression from each fusion that was similar to
the expression from
(rhaS-lacZ)
90
in the crp+ strain background, supporting
our hypothesis that full rhaSR activation requires
CRP.
We constructed a longer rhaS-lacZ fusion that
included the entire rhaSR-rhaBAD
intergenic region [
(rhaS-lacZ)
309] and used site-directed mutagenesis to change three consensus base pairs in each
CRP site 2 and CRP site 3 to nonconsensus base pairs. We assayed the
plasmid-borne lacZ fusions carrying these mutations to
determine whether either of these two CRP sites was required for
rhaSR activation. For the wild-type promoter
fusion, the
-galactosidase specific activity was 272 ± 10. For
the promoter fusion with mutant CRP site 2
, the
-galactosidase specific activity was 240 ± 14. And for the
promoter fusion with mutant CRP site 3
, the
-galactosidase specific activity was 24 ± 3. Cultures were grown in
MOPS growth media containing glycerol, L-rhamnose,
and ampicillin. While mutations in site 2 had little to no effect on
rhaS-lacZ expression, the mutations in CRP site 3 resulted in an approximately 10-fold defect in
rhaS-lacZ expression. This suggests that CRP site
3 is responsible for at least part of the CRP activation of
rhaSR expression.
In vitro binding of CRP to sites at rhaSR.
We
constructed a fusion of His6 to CRP and purified the
protein using nickel affinity chromatography. We then used mobility shift assays to determine whether CRP protein could bind to any of
the putative CRP-binding sites upstream of
rhaSR (Fig. 2). Similar to previous results (9), our purified
His6-CRP protein shifted a DNA fragment containing CRP site
1. His6-CRP also shifted a DNA fragment that
contained CRP sites 2, 3, and 4 but did not significantly shift a
fragment that contained only CRP site 2. We have also tested CRP
binding to DNA fragments that contained a 3-bp mutation in site 3, as
described above, or a similar 3-bp mutation in CRP site 4. Although CRP
was able to shift the DNA fragments with sites
3+4+ and 3+4
, no
shift was detected with a site 3
4+ DNA
fragment (unpublished data). Taken together, our results suggest that
CRP site 3 is the major site required for CRP activation of
rhaSR expression.

View larger version (86K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
DNA mobility shift assays of CRP binding to sites 1, 2, 3, and 4. The fragment containing CRP site 1+ was PCR
amplified using primers 742 and 744. The upstream primer 896 was
used to generate fragments with sites
2+3+4+ and site
2+, with primers 1170 and 2165 used as downstream primers,
respectively. Primers 742 and 896 were
32P labeled. The major band in the second lane in each set
is at the position of the wells. Approximately 1 ng of
32P-labeled DNA fragment was added to each reaction
mixture. The approximate CRP concentrations per reaction were the
following: for the first lane in each set, F, none; for the second lane
in each set, 8.4 µM CRP; for the third lane in each set, 2.1 µM
CRP; and for the fourth lane in each set, 0.21 µM CRP.
|
|
AR1 and AR2 mutant CRP with changes at rhaSR.
Since we now had evidence that CRP was a direct activator of
rhaSR expression, we wished to determine
whether AR1 and/or AR2 of CRP were necessary for this
activation. We chose alanine substitutions in AR1 and AR2 which had
relatively large activation defects at class I and II promoters
(21, 22, 38) and assayed their activation at both the
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 and the
(rhaS-lacZ)
128 fusions
(Table 6). Surprisingly, the results at
the two fusions were very different. None of the AR1 nor AR2 mutants
were significantly defective for activation at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 (Table 6),
suggesting that the surface residues on CRP that are most important for
activation at simple CRP-dependent promoters may not have a significant
role in this context. However, at the shorter
(rhaS-lacZ)
128 fusion, one AR1
mutant (G162A) and two AR2 mutants (H19A and H21A) had small defects
compared with wild-type CRP, raising the possibility that a
CRP-
-CTD interaction may occur in this context. Interestingly, these same three CRP mutants had similar small activation defects at
the divergent rhaBAD promoter (14). The
differences in the effect of AR1 mutations at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 versus
(rhaS-lacZ)
128 could indicate
that AR1 has no role at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 or, as discussed
below, that redundancies in the activation at this promoter mask the
effects of AR1.
RNAP
-CTD truncation mutation at rhaSR.
To
more directly test for a role of
-CTD in rhaSR
activation, we assayed the effect of expressing a derivative of
with the entire C-terminal domain deleted,
-
235
(14), on expression from several
rhaSR promoter fusions. We first tested expression of
-
235 at
(rhaS-lacZ)
90 in
a
(rhaSR) strain background, which we propose
to be a measure of the basal promoter expression (Table
7). In this strain, expression of
-
235 had no effect, which was somewhat surprising, since there
are four phased A tracts immediately upstream of the
rhaSR core promoter (see Fig. 1). In contrast,
there was a 13-fold defect at
(rhaS-lacZ)
90 upon expression
of
-
235 in a (rhaSR)+ background
(Table 7). This result indicates that in the presence of RhaR,
-CTD
can contribute to transcription activation at
rhaSR, perhaps by interaction with DNA and/or
RhaR. The defect upon expression of
-
235 fell to
approximately two- to threefold at both
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 and
(rhaS-lacZ)
128. The smaller
defect at the promoters that included CRP-binding sites was not
expected based on the original hypothesis that
-CTD would activate
transcription by interacting with CRP.
RNAP
-CTD alanine substitution library.
To identify
specific residues in
-CTD that are involved in
rhaSR activation, we assayed an
-CTD plasmid
library with independent alanine substitutions at each residue in
-CTD (10, 30) at the
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 promoter fusion
(Fig. 3). We found that substitutions at
19 residues exhibited significant defects, ranging from 20 to
80% of wild-type
-CTD activation (Fig.
4). Twelve of the defective residues lie
in (R265, N268, C269, G296, K298, S299, E302) or very near (T263, K291,
K297, L300, D305) the DNA-binding determinant for
-CTD
(10, 33) (reviewed in reference 6). It
has been shown that the DNA contacts made by
-CTD can vary depending
on contacts with an activator or UP element (an A+T-rich DNA sequence recognized by
-CTD), so it is not surprising that we identified a
few additional DNA-binding residues (24).

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Effects of -CTD alanine substitution mutants on
rhaSR activation. Expression was measured from
(rhaS-lacZ) 216 (SME1074) cells
carrying wild-type (w.t.) rpoA on a plasmid or a plasmid
encoding with a single alanine substitution at each position in
-CTD. Cells were grown in MOPS growth media containing glycerol,
L-rhamnose, and 125 µg of ampicillin/ml. Values
are the average of at least three independent assays and are shown as a
percentage of the average expression from cells carrying wild-type
rpoA on a plasmid. Analysis of variance was used to
determine which alanine substitution mutants had significantly lower
levels of expression compared to the wild type, which are indicated by
an asterisk above the bar. -Gal Act., -galactosidase activity.
|
|

View larger version (76K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Space-filling model of the predicted -CTD structure,
with residues that were defective at rhaSR
highlighted. The model is based on the atomic coordinates of Jeon et
al. (15). Colored residues are those identified as important
at the (rhaS-lacZ) 216 promoter
fusion. Pink residues are those that may be involved in interaction
with DNA, and green residues are those that have some other role,
possibly protein-protein interactions. Residue numbers for some of the
important residues are shown. The two models are related to one another
by a 90° rotation on the vertical axis.
|
|
Six of the remaining seven residues that were defective at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 (G279, V282, Q283,
R284, N320, P322) lie near but not coincident with the
-CTD 287 determinant that has been shown to interact with CRP (21, 27,
30) (reviewed in reference 6). Of these,
residues G279 and V282 are quite buried in the
-CTD structure. In
contrast, residues Q283 and R284 are located adjacent to one another
and are very surface exposed, and residues N320 and P322 are also
adjacent to one another and very surface exposed, making these residues
candidates for protein-protein interactions. Two of these six residues
(G279 and P322) were also found to be defective at the truncated
rhaBAD promoter that included only the RhaS
binding site (14).
The seventh residue that was defective at rhaSR
was R255. Interestingly, R255 and three other residues that were
hyperactive at rhaSR, D258, D259, and K271, form
an elongated patch on the surface of
-CTD. The hyperactivity of
D258, D259, and K271 may suggest a surface of
-CTD that is in
very close proximity to another protein, while the defect with
R255 may suggest a site of interaction. Perhaps in support of this
region of
-CTD defining a protein-protein interaction, this
patch includes two of the four residues of the 261 determinant of
-CTD (V257, D258, D259, E261) (reviewed in reference
6).
 |
DISCUSSION |
CRP activates rhaSR from at least one newly
identified binding site.
We hypothesized that CRP might be a
direct activator of rhaSR expression. Although
there are many moderate to weak matches to the consensus CRP-binding
site sequence in the rhaSR-rhaBAD intergenic region, three of these, sites 2 through 4, seemed most likely to directly influence rhaSR activation.
While the position of CRP site 2 at rhaSR (
92.5)
was identical to that of the CRP site at rhaBAD,
our results provide no evidence that site 2 has a role in CRP
activation of rhaSR. CRP site 3 is located on the same face of the DNA as the rhaSR promoter and is
the strongest match to the CRP consensus (other than site 1). Both
mobility shift assay and mutagenesis results suggest that site 3 has a direct role in CRP activation of rhaSR; thus we
conclude that CRP bound at site 3 is required for full
rhaSR activation. It is unlikely that CRP binding
to site 4 contributes directly to an increase in
rhaSR expression, since transcription activation by CRP requires that its binding site be on the same face of the DNA as
the promoter (6). In addition, mobility shift assay results
suggest that binding to site 4 is very weak compared with binding to
site 3. It is possible, however, that CRP binding to site 4 or to other
sites within the rhaSR-rhaBAD
intergenic region may have subtle effects on rhaSR regulation.
Interdependence of activation by CRP,
-CTD, and RhaR.
We
can think of
-CTD along with CRP and RhaR as a third activator of
the rhaSR promoter. To determine whether the
function of each of these activators was independent of or dependent on the others, we converted the results in Table 7 into fold activation values (Table 8). We define fold
activation as the lacZ expression in the presence of one
activator (for example, RhaR in Table 8) divided by the lacZ
expression in the absence of that activator. This value was calculated
for each combination of the other two activators. The synergistic
effect was calculated by dividing the fold activation by a given
activator in the presence of one or both of the other activators by the
value for the given activator when alone. This value is a measure of
whether any of the activators can improve the activation by the other
activators. The concept of synergism has been recently discussed by
Langdon and Hochschild (16). A synergistic effect of 1 indicates independence of the activators involved, while a value
greater than 1 indicates synergism. To determine fold activation by
CRP, we compared expression from
(rhaS-lacZ)
90 to that from
fusions that included the CRP-binding sites. Since we assayed two
different fusions that included CRP-binding sites
[
(rhaS-lacZ)
128 and
(rhaS-lacZ)
216], and the
results with these fusions were not identical, we performed the fold
activation analysis separately for each.
Each of the activators, RhaR,
-CTD, and CRP, had a synergistic
effect on each of the other activators. In most cases, the magnitude of
this synergistic effect was greatest when a total of two but not all
three activators were present and ranged from 2.4- to 37-fold.
Interestingly, at
(rhaS-lacZ)
128
the synergistic effects for all combinations of two activators were of
nearly equivalent magnitudes, 17- to 19-fold. The finding of
synergistic effects between all pairs of activators suggests the
possibility of direct RhaR-CRP, RhaR-
-CTD, and CRP-
-CTD
interactions, although other mechanisms could also account for the synergism.
In all cases, three activators together resulted in a synergistic
effect that was smaller than the effect of two activators for one, if
not both, of the combinations of two activators. The first possible
explanation for this decreased synergism in the presence of a third
activator is that the third activator has a true negative effect on the
synergism between the first two activators. In this case the third
activator could partially block an interaction between the other two or
might have a less direct effect, such as altering the DNA bending to
result in decreased synergism between the other two. The second
possible explanation is that the apparent negative effect of the third
activator is actually an indication of redundancy in
rhaSR regulation. If, for example, activators A
and B are each able to overcome the same rate-limiting step in
transcription initiation, then the apparent activation by A would be
reduced in the presence of B due to B having already performed this
portion of A's potential function.
Although the overall level of expression from
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 was very
similar to that from
(rhaS-lacZ)
128, the
synergistic effects of the activators at this fusion were quite
different. Relative to
(rhaS-lacZ)
128, the synergism
between RhaR and CRP increased at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 (to 36- or
37-fold), and the synergism between CRP and
-CTD decreased (to
3.2- or 3.3-fold). This suggests that CRP binding at site 3 may be
destabilized at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216, and this destabilization may result in CRP activation from site 3 becoming more dependent upon RhaR. The ability of the promoter to
attain nearly the same level of expression with such different magnitudes of synergism could again be explained by inherent
redundancies among these activators. If the full potential
synergism between CRP and RhaR were not realized at
(rhaS-lacZ)
128 due to
redundancies, then at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216, where the
CRP-
-CTD synergism is apparently weakened, more of the
synergism between CRP and RhaR could be unmasked.
This analysis of our results suggests that both CRP and RhaR have a
component to their activation that is unique to that activator and that
can directly influence RNAP. This would represent the 4-fold
activation by RhaR, and the 20-fold and 13-fold activation by
CRP, in the absence of other activators. In the absence of both CRP and
RhaR,
-CTD did not contribute any activation. Each of the
activators, including
-CTD, could also enhance the activation by
each other activator (the synergistic effects), leading to a further
increase in rhaSR expression.
Mechanism of activation by CRP at rhaSR.
Clearly there is a component (13- to 20-fold) to the activation by
CRP at rhaSR that is independent of both
-CTD
and RhaR and hence does not function by the same mechanism used at
simple class I CRP-dependent promoters, nor does it function through cooperative binding with RhaR. This is similar to the finding at
several other class III CRP-dependent promoters that interactions with
-CTD and cooperative binding do not account for activation by CRP
(23, 25, 26, 28). This component of CRP activation at
rhaSR could account for the majority of the CRP
activation in a wild-type context and may involve a mechanism, such as
DNA bending, that can act from a distance. Alternatively, the five phased A tracts between CRP site 3 and the rhaSR
35 hexamer (Fig. 1) could provide sufficient bending for CRP at
111.5 to directly interact with RNAP. A recent model of the DNA path
in an RNAP open complex (19) proposes that the DNA just
upstream of the
35 hexamer may bend sharply around RNAP. Additional
A-tract- and protein-induced DNA bending could potentially bring fairly distant DNA sequences into close association with RNAP.
There is also a second component to CRP activation of
rhaSR that appears to function through synergism
with RhaR and
-CTD. This second mechanism could involve direct
interactions with RhaR and/or
-CTD. We have no evidence at this time
to argue either for or against a direct interaction between CRP and
RhaR; however, we do have some evidence to suggest that a direct
-CTD-CRP interaction could contribute to rhaSR
activation. First, the CRP G162A substitution in AR1 resulted in 43%
activation at
(rhaS-lacZ)
128 and
90% activation at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216. The decreased
effect of this substitution at
(rhaS-lacZ)
216 is consistent with
the reduced synergism between CRP and
-CTD at this promoter. Second,
the alanine scanning analysis of
-CTD identified five residues, 255, 283, 284, 320, and 322, that are possible candidates for
protein-protein interactions. Four of these residues (283, 284, 320, and 322) are very near the 287 determinant of
-CTD (reviewed in
reference 6) and therefore might define an
interaction with CRP. If an interaction between CRP and
-CTD does
occur at rhaSR, it appears to make a relatively
small contribution to activation in the wild-type context.
Role of
-CTD in rhaSR activation.
Maximal levels of rhaSR expression clearly require
-CTD. In addition to the possible interaction between
-CTD and
CRP, the alanine scan results indicate that DNA contacts by
-CTD are
important for its activation. Further, the synergism between
-CTD
and RhaR suggests the possibility that these two proteins could
directly interact. Our alanine scanning analysis of
-CTD identified
three residues (255, 320, and 322) that might be candidates for an
interaction with RhaR. Residue 255 may define an alternative 261 determinant and therefore a site of
-CTD-protein interaction. Since
there is no evidence for an interaction between the 261 determinant and
CRP, we propose that residue 255 might interact with RhaR. Alternatively,
-CTD residues 321, 322, and 323 were defective at a
rhaBAD promoter fusion that was activated only by
the RhaS protein. Given the sequence similarity between RhaS and RhaR, residues 320 and 322 might define a protein interaction with RhaR. Residues within this region of
-CTD have been implicated in
interactions with MerR (residues 311 and 323) (7) and OmpR
(residues 322 and 323) (32), suggesting that this may be a
common region for
-CTD contacts with activators.
This work was supported by Public Health Service grant GM55099 from the
National Institute of General Medical Sciences, the National Science
Foundation under grant no. EPS-9550487 with matching support from the
state of Kansas, a General Research Fund award from the University of
Kansas, and the Franklin Murphy Molecular Biology Endowment, all to
S.M.E.
| 1.
|
Backman, K.,
Y.-M. Chen, and B. Magasanik.
1981.
Physical and genetic characterization of the glnA-glnG region of the Escherichia coli chromosome.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
78:3743-3747[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Berg, O. G., and P. H. von Hippel.
1988.
Selection of DNA binding sites by regulatory proteins. II. The binding specificity of cyclic AMP receptor protein to recognition sites.
J. Mol. Biol.
200:709-723[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Bhende, P. M., and S. M. Egan.
1999.
Amino acid-DNA contacts by RhaS: an AraC family transcription activator.
J. Bacteriol.
181:5185-5192[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
Blatter, E. E.,
W. Ross,
H. Tang,
R. L. Gourse, and R. H. Ebright.
1994.
Domain organization of RNA polymerase subunit: C-terminal 85 amino acids constitute a domain capable of dimerization and DNA binding.
Cell
78:889-896[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Busby, S., and R. H. Ebright.
1997.
Transcription activation at class II CAP-dependent promoters.
Mol. Microbiol.
23:853-859[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Busby, S., and R. H. Ebright.
1999.
Transcription activation by catabolite activator protein (CAP).
J. Mol. Biol.
293:199-213[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Caslake, L. F.,
S. I. Ashraf, and A. O. Summers.
1997.
Mutations in the alpha and sigma-70 subunits of RNA polymerase affect expression of the mer operon.
J. Bacteriol.
179:1787-1795[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Ebright, R. H.
1993.
Transcription activation at Class I CAP-dependent promoters.
Mol. Microbiol.
8:797-802[Medline].
|
| 9.
|
Egan, S. M., and R. F. Schleif.
1993.
A regulatory cascade in the induction of rhaBAD.
J. Mol. Biol.
234:87-98[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Gaal, T.,
W. Ross,
E. E. Blatter,
H. Tang,
X. Jia,
V. V. Krishnan,
N. Assa-Munt,
R. H. Ebright, and R. L. Gourse.
1996.
DNA-binding determinants of the subunit of RNA polymerase: novel DNA-binding domain architecture.
Genes Dev.
10:16-26[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Gallegos, M.-T.,
R. Schleif,
A. Bairoch,
K. Hofmann, and J. L. Ramos.
1997.
AraC/XylS family of transcriptional regulators.
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.
61:393-410[Abstract].
|
| 12.
|
Gavigan, S. A.,
T. Nguyen,
N. Nguyen, and D. F. Senear.
1999.
Role of multiple CytR binding sites on cooperativity, competition, and induction at the Escherichia coli udp promoter.
J. Biol. Chem.
274:16010-16019[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Gottesman, M. E., and M. B. Yarmolinsky.
1968.
The integration and excision of the bacteriophage lambda genome.
Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol.
33:735-747[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Holcroft, C. C., and S. M. Egan.
2000.
Roles of cyclic AMP receptor protein and the carboxyl-terminal domain of the subunit in transcription activation of the Escherichia coli rhaBAD operon.
J. Bacteriol.
182:3529-3535[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Jeon, Y. H.,
T. Negishi,
M. Shirakawa,
T. Yamazaki,
N. Fujita,
A. Ishihama, and Y. Kyogoku.
1995.
Solution structure of the activator contact domain of the RNA polymerase subunit.
Science
270:1495-1497[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 16.
|
Langdon, R. C., and A. Hochschild.
1999.
A genetic method for dissecting the mechanism of transcriptional activator synergy by identical activators.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96:12673-12678[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Maloy, S. R.,
V. J. Stewart, and R. K. Taylor.
1996.
Genetic analysis of pathogenic bacteria.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 18.
|
Miller, J. H.
1972.
Experiments in molecular genetics.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 19.
|
Naryshkin, N.,
A. Revyakin,
Y. Kim,
V. Mekler, and R. H. Ebright.
2000.
Structural organization of the RNA polymerase-promoter open complex.
Cell
101:601-611[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Neidhardt, F. C.,
P. L. Bloch, and D. F. Smith.
1974.
Culture medium for enterobacteria.
J. Bacteriol.
119:736-747[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Niu, W.,
Y. Kim,
G. Tau,
T. Heyduk, and R. H. Ebright.
1996.
Transcription activation at class II CAP-dependent promoters: two interactions between CAP and RNA polymerase.
Cell
87:1123-1134[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Niu, W.,
Y. Zhou,
Q. Dong,
Y. W. Ebright, and R. H. Ebright.
1994.
Characterization of the activation region of Escherichia coli catabolite gene activator protein (CAP) I. Saturation and alanine-scanning mutagenesis.
J. Mol. Biol.
243:595-602[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Olekhnovich, I. N.,
J. L. Dahl, and R. J. Kadner.
1999.
Separate contributions of UhpA and CAP to activation of transcription of the uhpT promoter of Escherichia coli.
J. Mol. Biol.
292:973-986[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Ozoline, O. N.,
N. Fujita, and A. Ishihama.
2000.
Transcription activation mediated by the carboxyl-terminal domain of the RNA polymerase -subunit.
J. Biol. Chem.
275:1119-1127[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Plumbridge, J.
1990.
Induction of the nag regulon of Escherichia coli by N-acetylglucosamine and glucosamine: role of the cyclic AMP-catabolite activator protein complex in expression of the regulon.
J. Bacteriol.
172:2728-2735[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Plumbridge, J., and A. Kolb.
1998.
DNA bending and expression of the divergent nagE-B operons.
Nucleic Acids Res.
26:1254-1260[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Rhodius, V. A.,
D. M. West,
C. L. Webster,
S. J. W. Busby, and N. J. Savery.
1997.
Transcription activation at class II CRP-dependent promoters: the role of different activating regions.
Nucleic Acids Res.
25:326-332[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Richet, E., and L. Sogaard-Andersen.
1994.
CRP induces the repositioning of MalT at the Escherichia coli malKp promoter primarily through DNA bending.
EMBO J.
13:4558-4567[Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Sabourin, D., and J. Beckwith.
1975.
Deletion of the Escherichia coli crp gene.
J. Bacteriol.
122:338-340[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Savery, N. J.,
G. S. Lloyd,
M. Kainz,
T. Gaal,
W. Ross,
R. H. Ebright,
R. L. Gourse, and S. J. W. Busby.
1998.
Transcription activation at class II CRP-dependent promoters: identification of determinants in the C-terminal domain of the RNA polymerase -subunit.
EMBO J.
17:3439-3447[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Simons, R. W.,
F. Houman, and N. Kleckner.
1987.
Improved single and multicopy lac-based cloning vectors for protein and operon fusions.
Gene
53:85-96[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Slauch, J. M.,
F. D. Russo, and T. J. Silhavy.
1991.
Suppressor mutations in rpoA suggest that OmpR controls transcription by direct interaction with the subunit of RNA polymerase.
J. Bacteriol.
173:7501-7510[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Tang, H.,
K. Severinov,
A. Goldfarb,
D. Fenyo,
B. Chait, and R. H. Ebright.
1994.
Location, structure, and function of the target of a transcription activator protein.
Genes Dev.
8:3058-3067[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Tobin, J. F., and R. F. Schleif.
1990.
Purification and properties of RhaR, the positive regulator of the L-rhamnose operons of Escherichia coli.
J. Mol. Biol.
211:75-89[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 35.
|
Tobin, J. F., and R. F. Schleif.
1990.
Transcription from the rha operon psr promoter.
J. Mol. Biol.
211:1-4[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 36.
|
West, D.,
R. Williams,
V. Rhodius,
A. Bell,
N. Sharma,
C. Zou,
N. Fujita,
A. Ishihama, and S. Busby.
1993.
Interactions between the Escherichia coli cyclic AMP receptor protein and RNA polymerase at class II promoters.
Mol. Microbiol.
10:789-797[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 37.
|
Zhang, X., and R. Schleif.
1998.
Catabolite gene activator protein mutations affecting activity of the araBAD promoter.
J. Bacteriol.
180:195-200[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 38.
|
Zhou, Y.,
T. J. Merkel, and R. H. Ebright.
1994.
Characterization of the activation region of Escherichia coli catabolite gene activator protein (CAP). II. Role at class I and class II CAP-dependent promoters.
J. Mol. Biol.
243:603-610[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 39.
|
Zhou, Y.,
P. S. Pendergrast,
A. Bell,
R. Williams,
S. Busby, and R. H. Ebright.
1994.
The functional subunit of a dimeric transcription activator protein depends on promoter architecture.
EMBO J.
13:4549-4557[Medline].
|