Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Bacteriology, April 2000, p. 1935-1941, Vol. 182, No. 7
Departamento de Microbiología del
Suelo y Sistemas Simbióticos, Estación Experimental del
Zaidín, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones
Científicas, 18008 Granada, Spain
Received 21 October 1999/Accepted 22 December 1999
Proline dehydrogenase (PutA) is a bifunctional enzyme that
catalyzes the oxidation of proline to glutamate. In Sinorhizobium meliloti, as in other microorganisms, the putA gene
is transcriptionally activated in response to proline. In
Rhodobacter capsulatus, Agrobacterium, and most
probably in Bradyrhizobium, this activation is dependent on
an Lrp-like protein encoded by the putR gene, located
immediately upstream of putA. Interestingly, sequence and
genetic analysis of the region upstream of the S. meliloti
putA gene did not reveal such a putR locus or any
other encoded transcriptional activator of putA.
Furthermore, results obtained with an S. meliloti putA null
mutation indicate the absence of any proline-responsive transcriptional activator and that PutA serves as an autogenous repressor. Therefore, the model of S. meliloti putA regulation completely
diverges from that of its Rhizobiaceae relatives and
resembles more that of enteric bacteria. However, some differences have
been found with the latter model: (i) S. meliloti putA gene
is not catabolite repressed, and (ii) the gene encoding for the major
proline permease (putP) does not form part of an operon
with the putA gene.
Proline can be catabolized to
glutamate by the action of two enzymatic activities: proline
dehydrogenase (PDH) and
0021-9193/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Sinorhizobium meliloti putA Gene
Regulation: a New Model within the Family
Rhizobiaceae
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
-pyrroline-5-carboxylate dehydrogenase
(P5CDH). Whereas in eukaryotes PDH and P5CDH are encoded by two
different genes (15, 38), in enteric bacteria (18,
21), Rhodobacter capsulatus (14),
Bradyrhizobium japonicum (36),
Photobacterium leiognathi (16),
Agrobacterium tumefaciens (8), and
Sinorhizobium meliloti (13), both steps for
proline utilization are catalyzed by a single polypeptide encoded by
the putA gene. Although this enzyme is highly conserved
among the different microorganisms, the genetic organization and
control of expression of the gene are quite divergent (Fig.
1).

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
Genetic organization and models of regulation of the
putA gene of different microorganisms. +, activator;
,
repressor.
In enteric bacteria, the putA gene belongs to the put operon together with the divergently transcribed putP gene, which encodes the major proline permease. In Escherichia coli, Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, and Klebsiella pneumoniae, in addition to its enzymatic activity, the PutA protein also functions as an autogenous transcriptional repressor of the putA and putP genes. In the absence of proline, PutA remains in the cytoplasm where it binds to the put operators, thereby preventing put gene expression. When a sufficient concentration of proline is available, PutA binds proline and functionally associates with the electron transport chain in the cytoplasmic membrane, where it is enzymatically active. The resulting decrease in cytoplasmic PutA levels releases the repression of the operators, allowing expression of the put genes (1, 19, 20, 24-26). PutA autophosphorylation has been implicated in these regulatory processes (27), and PutA proline dehydrogenase activity is required for the induction of the put operon by proline (23). The putA genes of Klebsiella aerogenes and K. pneumoniae are also positively regulated by the Nac protein (7, 17). Expression of the nac gene is dependent on the Ntr system in which the transcriptional activator NtrC is a key regulatory protein that is activated in nitrogen-limiting conditions. Additionally, the putA gene of all three enteric bacteria is catabolite repressed, requiring cyclic AMP (cAMP) and cAMP receptor protein CRP (7).
In R. capsulatus, the expression of proline dehydrogenase is regulated only by the presence of its substrate via the regulatory gene putR located immediately upstream of putA (14). The putR gene is constitutively expressed at a low level, and its product, which belongs to the class of Lrp-like activator proteins, negatively autoregulates its own transcription. In the absence of proline, PutR activates the expression of putA to a low level. The presence of proline may cause a conformational change in PutR protein, increasing the affinity for the putA promoter and, subsequently, putA gene expression. It has been suggested that the R. capsulatus PutA protein, similar to that of enteric bacteria, represses its own transcription because the expression of the putA promoter in the absence of proline dramatically increased in a putA mutant background. However, as indicated by Cho and Winans (8), it is equally plausible that this effect could be due to the inability of the mutant to catabolize proline, which means a higher pool size of the inducer. On the other hand, no indication of general nitrogen control could be observed in R. capsulatus.
The regulation of putA gene expression in A. tumefaciens is similar in some aspects to that of R. capsulatus: the Agrobacterium putA promoter is also positively regulated by the product of the regulatory gene putR in response to proline. This gene is divergently transcribed from the putA gene and negatively regulates its own synthesis. However, the Agrobacterium putA gene is not autorepressed (8).
The analysis of the sequence upstream of B. japonicum putA indicates the existence of a gene encoding a PutR homologue (8, 36). Thus, the regulation mechanism in this bacteria could be similar to that of Agrobacterium and Rhodobacter.
In P. leiognathi, the putA gene is linked to the lum and lux operons in the genome (16). In this bacterium, although the regulation mechanism of putA is not clearly defined, it has been found that a specific inverted repeat is required to initiate gene expression and that there is no catabolite repression. No putR homologue has been found in the 5' end of the putA gene.
The nucleotide sequence and initial characterization of the S. meliloti putA gene have been reported (12, 13). This gene has been found to be involved in root colonization, nodulation efficiency, and competitiveness of the bacteria on alfalfa roots. Recently, the S. meliloti putA gene has also been implicated in the utilization of stachydrine, a derivative of proline that occurs widely in Medicago species, strengthening the importance of the role of the putA gene in root colonization (28).
In our efforts to better understand the regulation of this key enzyme in S. meliloti, we have found that the expression of putA, contrary to its Rhizobiaceae relatives, is not dependent on a PutR-like protein and that, similarly to enteric bacteria, PutA plays a regulatory role, functioning as an autogenous repressor. Furthermore, some differences from the enteric situation have been found: the absence of carbon source regulation and of a linked proline transporter gene.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Bacterial strains, plasmids, media, and growth conditions.
The bacterial strains and plasmids used in this study are listed in
Table 1. E. coli was routinely
grown in Luria-Bertani medium (LB) (31) or in M3 (PANREAC)
medium when selecting with the antibiotic gentamicin. Rhizobial strains
were grown at 30°C in tryptone-yeast (4) or in defined
minimal medium (MM) (30). Antibiotics were used as required
at the following concentrations (in micrograms per milliliter):
ampicillin, 200; spectinomycin, 100; streptomycin, 50 for E. coli and 250 for Sinorhizobium; kanamycin, 50 for
E. coli and 200 for Sinorhizobium; gentamicin, 10 for E. coli and 30 for Sinorhizobium.
|
DNA manipulations and sequence analysis. Plasmid DNA was routinely isolated and manipulated following standard protocols (31). The nucleotide sequence presented in this work was determined by the chain termination method (32). Cloned DNA in plasmid pDIL102.1 was subjected to controlled exonuclease III-S1 nuclease digestion (Erase-a-Base kit; Promega) to a nested set of deletions, and overlapping clones were selected for sequencing. Plasmid DNA for sequencing was isolated with the Wizard Plus SV Minipreps DNA purification system (Promega), and sequencing was performed in an automatic laser fluorescent DNA sequencer (Applied Biosystems). DNA sequence edition, translation, and analysis were performed with the GeneWorks software package (Intelligenetics Inc.) and the program BLAST from the network service at the National Center for Biotechnology Information (2, 10). The potential secondary operator sites were located by using the DNA mfold server version 3.0 by Michael Zuker.
Construction of the R2 mutant.
The upstream region and 5'
end of the putA gene from S. meliloti GR4 were
excised from plasmid pPDH2 and subcloned in pUC18 as an
EcoRI-SalI fragment, creating pDIL102.1. The
sequence corresponding to the upstream region was disrupted by
introducing the gentamicin resistance (Gmr) cassette from
pAB2001 into the unique SacI site of pDIL102.1, generating
pDIL102.1G. The EcoRI-SalI fragment of the
resulting plasmid was cloned into the mobilizable suicide plasmid
pK18mob::sacB to give pK102.1. This plasmid was
mobilized from E. coli DH5
into S. meliloti
GRM8 by triparental mating using pRK2013 as a helper plasmid.
Transconjugants were selected on solid MM containing gentamicin and
10% sucrose and later tested for sensitivity to kanamycin. Five
colonies resulting from the mating (four kanamycin sensitive and one
kanamycin resistant) were analyzed by DNA hybridization, using the
765-bp SalI-EcoRI fragment of the putA
gene as a probe (Fig. 2). Colonies R1 to
R4 were shown to be the result of double crossing-over or gene
replacement, while R5 was the result of a single crossover carrying the
wild-type gene. Mutant R2 was chosen as an open reading frame 2 (ORF2)/ORF3 mutant for further analysis.
|
DNA hybridization. Total DNA from S. meliloti and Agrobacterium was isolated, digested, and blotted to nylon filters by standard procedures (31). Hybridizations were performed overnight at 42°C, using as probes either the 765-bp SalI-EcoRI fragment of the S. meliloti putA gene (Fig. 2), the 2.2-kb EcoRI-SalI fragment containing the upstream region and the 5' end of the putA gene (Fig. 2), or the 1.6-kb XhoI-ClaI fragment from plasmid pPC6 (26), containing the Salmonella serovar Typhimurium putP gene. Agarose gel-purified fragments were labeled with digoxigenin (DIG) by random priming. Filters were washed under high-stringency conditions, and detection of hybridized DNA was performed with a DIG luminescent detection kit as specified by the manufacturer (Boehringer, Mannheim, Germany).
Construction of transcriptional putA-lacZ fusions and
-galactosidase assays.
To analyze the regulation of the
S. meliloti putA expression, putA-lacZ fusions
were created.
C and T
C, respectively) (Fig. 3). To
create pMH310, a 749-bp SphI-SalI fragment of
pPDH2 was subcloned between the same sites of pUC18, creating pMH31.
This plasmid was digested with SphI, treated with T4 DNA
polymerase to obtain blunt ends, and digested with BamHI.
Finally, the resulting 756-bp fragment was introduced between the
SmaI and BamHI sites of pRG970. The putA-lacZ transcriptional fusions in pMP220, pMP301, and
pMP43 were obtained by subcloning the 2,184-bp BamHI
fragment from pJZ301 (13) and the 683-bp BamHI
fragment from pJZP4, respectively, in the BglII site of
pMP220. The hybrid plasmids pJZP3, pJZP4, pMH310, pMP301, and pMP43
were mobilized from E. coli DH5
into S. meliloti by triparental mating using pRK2013 as the helper plasmid.
|
strain by allelic exchange using
the mobilizable suicide plasmid pK18mob::sacB. The
putA-lacZ fusion of the plasmid pJZP4 was subcloned as a
7.3-kbp SmaI-PstI fragment between the same sites
of pK18mob::sacB, creating pKFP4. To facilitate
selection after recombination in the LM1 PutA
strain, the
-interposon cassette of pHP45
conferring resistance to
streptomycin and spectinomycin (Smr/Spr
cassette) was cloned into the SmaI site of pKFP4, resulting
in pFS2 (Fig. 4A). This plasmid was
mobilized to the S. meliloti strains by triparental mating.
The transconjugants were selected on solid MM containing kanamycin,
streptomycin, and spectinomycin and later tested for sensitivity to
sucrose. The resulting colonies were analyzed by DNA hybridization.
|
-galactosidase activity in the transconjugants were
determined by the sodium dodecyl sulfate-chloroform method as described
by Miller (22) in S. meliloti cultures grown
in MM broth under different inducing conditions.
Nucleotide sequence accession number. The nucleotide sequence presented here has been submitted to the EMBL database under accession no. AJ27335.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
DNA sequence analysis of the region upstream of the S. meliloti putA gene. To determine whether an additional gene belonging to a putative put operon was present upstream of the S. meliloti putA gene, we sequenced 1,500 bp of this upstream DNA region. Sequence analysis showed the presence of seven ORFs encoding proteins larger than 100 amino acids, four of which were divergently transcribed from the putA gene. However, database searches revealed that none of them showed significant homology to the putR gene or other members of the Lrp family of transcriptional regulators, either at the amino acid or the nucleotide level. Similarly, no significant homology to the gene encoding the major proline permease (putP) was found. Furthermore, hybridization experiments performed with a putP probe from Salmonella serovar Typhimurium indicated that an S. meliloti putP gene homologue is present in another location within the genome (data not shown). The 268-amino-acid protein encoded by ORF1 (Fig. 2) showed 20% identity to cyclic 3',5'-adenosine monophosphate phosphodiesterase (CpdA) from E. coli (11) and the CpdA homologues from Mycobacterium leprae and Haemophilus influenzae. The 104-amino-acid polypeptide encoded by ORF2 (Fig. 2) revealed 32% identity to a putative ferredoxin from Acinetobacter calcoaceticus (data not shown). In addition, analysis of the secondary structure of the DNA upstream of putA revealed the presence of a dyad symmetry sequence (Fig. 3) which could serve as operator site (see Discussion).
Mutational analysis of the upstream region of the S. meliloti
putA gene.
Despite the absence of homologies, ORF3 (Fig. 2)
shows some features similar to the putR gene identified in
Rhodobacter and Agrobacterium. It encodes a
polypeptide of similar size and is divergently transcribed from
putA. To determine whether this ORF codes for a
transcriptional activator of putA, a Gmr
cassette was cloned into its unique SacI restriction site
(thereby also disrupting ORF2) (Fig. 2). This mutation was introduced
into S. meliloti GRM8 by allelic exchange, and the resulting
strain R2 was tested for proline utilization. In contrast to the LM1 PutA
strain, mutant R2 was able to grow in media using
either ornithine (whose immediate and major degradation product is
proline [34]) or proline as sole carbon and nitrogen
source (data not shown). These results indicate that the ORF knocked
out in R2 (ORF2/ORF3) is not necessary for proline utilization.
Expression of transcriptional putA-lacZ fusions in
different genetic backgrounds.
To analyze the regulation of the
S. meliloti putA expression, we used putA-lacZ
plasmid fusions based on two different reporter systems (pRG970 and
pMP220) as well as a putA-lacZ chromosomal fusion. The
results obtained are presented in Tables
2 and 3.
|
|
-galactosidase activity in S. meliloti GRM8 and the PutA
strain LM1 carrying pRG970 or pMP220 were unaffected by the addition of
proline to the media; GRM8 cells carrying plasmid pJZ301 and grown in
MM supplemented with proline showed an increase in
-galactosidase activity of about 5-fold, whereas pMP301 fusion displayed a 15-fold increase in
-galactosidase activity in the same genetic background and culture conditions (Table 2). These values represent levels of
induction approximately threefold higher than those observed with the
equivalent pRG970-derived fusion, which could be due to an effect of
the reporter system. These data confirm previous results demonstrating
proline transcriptional activation of the S. meliloti putA
gene (13, 28). In Agrobacterium the amino acid
valine is also a putA gene inducer. However, the addition of
valine to the media did not significantly affect the basal levels of
-galactosidase activity in GRM8 cells carrying either pJZ301 or
pMP301 (data not shown).
In the PutA
strain LM1, the fusion pJZ301 exhibited a
basal
-galactosidase activity 9- to 17-fold higher than that in the parental strain GRM8 (Table 2). More interestingly, we found that in
the PutA
background, proline did not induce
putA gene expression. The increased basal expression and the
loss of proline inducibility of the putA promoter in a
PutA
background suggest that S. meliloti PutA
functions as an autogenous repressor and additionally that a
proline-responsive transcriptional activator is lacking. However,
Jiménez-Zurdo et al. (13) reported that in a
PutA
background, the inducibility of the putA
gene expression by proline was retained. To resolve this discrepancy in
results, we analyzed the expression of a similar putA-lacZ
transcriptional fusion in a different reporter system, the IncP vector
pMP220. As we observed with pJZ301, in the PutA
strain
LM1, the pMP301 fusion exhibited basal
-galactosidase activity 10- to 14-fold higher than that in the parental strain GRM8 (Table 2);
similarly, in the presence of proline we did not observe induction of
the putA gene. Thus, the data obtained using two different
reporter systems further confirm that S. meliloti PutA
functions as an autogenous repressor and that a proline-responsive transcriptional activator is lacking. However, an important drawback of
using transcriptional plasmid fusions is that we have no evidence that
the copy number of the plasmids remains unchanged in each of the
strains and under the different growth conditions, which therefore
could influence the determined levels of activity. To rule out this
possibility, we decided to integrate the putA-lacZ transcriptional fusion present in the pJZP4 construction (Fig. 2) into
the chromosome of the PutA+ strain GRM8 and the
PutA
strain LM1. To do this, we created the mobilizable
suicide plasmid pFS2 (Fig. 4A; Table 1). Campbell-type integration of
pFS2 in GRM8 and LM1 created the GRMFS2 and LMFS29 mutant strains,
respectively (Fig. 4B). Hybridization analysis performed using as a
probe the 2.2-kb EcoRI-SalI fragment containing
the upstream region and 5' end of the putA gene (Fig. 2),
revealed that whereas GRMFS2 is the result of integration of pFS2 in
the 700 bp of the putA upstream region, in LMFS29 the
integration occurred in the mob site of the Tn5
insertion present in LM1 (data not shown). We found that in the absence
of proline,
-galactosidase basal expression in the
PutA
strain LMFS29 was 10- to 13-fold higher than in the
PutA+ strain GRMFS2 (Table 2). In addition, whereas the
fusion in GRMFS2 was induced 9- to 11-fold in the presence of proline,
no proline inducibility of the fusion in LMFS29 was observed,
confirming the conclusions obtained with the plasmid reporter systems.
We have observed that the presence of proline in the MM caused problems
in the growth of the PutA
strain LM1. To rule out the
possibility that this could cause any effect in putA
expression, we decided to analyze the activity of the putA
promoter in exponential-phase growing cultures containing either the
plasmid or the chromosomal transcriptional fusion after short
incubation times with the inducer. Results showed that 2 h after
the addition of proline, both GRM8 cells containing the plasmid
transcriptional fusion and the GRMFS2 strain displayed levels of
putA induction similar to those described in Table 2, whereas in PutA
cells the
-galactosidase activity
remained constant 4 h after the addition of the inducer (data not
shown). These data indicate that the lower growth rate shown by the
PutA
strain in MM containing proline has no significant
effect in putA expression and confirm the results described above.
Deletion analysis of the putA gene promoter
region.
To further characterize the putA gene promoter,
three additional transcriptional fusions of putA promoter
fragments to lacZ were analyzed (Fig. 2; Table 3). Since the
fusions pJZP3 and pJZP4 showed similar
-galactosidase activities in
the different genetic backgrounds, only the results obtained with the
latter are shown. We observed a 17-fold increase in
-galactosidase
activity in GRM8 (pJZP4) cells grown in MM supplemented with proline;
the equivalent pMP220-derived fusion exhibited a 15-fold increase in
-galactosidase activity when GRM8 cells were grown in the presence
of proline; in a PutA
background, fusions pJZP4 and pMP43
displayed increased basal expression of the lacZ gene and
loss of proline inducibility (Table 3). These data define a functional
promoter region extended 290 nt upstream of the putA gene
start codon that contains the elements necessary for proline inducibility.
cells a basal level of
-galactosidase activity
similar to that of cells containing the control plasmid pRG970, and
this activity was not altered by the presence of proline (Table 3).
These data suggest that the transcriptional fusion pMH310 lacks
promoter sequences necessary for the expression of the putA
gene located in the additional 100 nt present in the pJZP4 construction.
S. meliloti putA gene is not catabolite repressed. The results described above suggest a model for putA repression similar to that described for Enterobacteriaceae. In enteric bacteria, the expression of the put operon is repressed by glucose. The catabolite repression of the Klebsiella and E. coli put operons is relieved during nitrogen starvation. In contrast, nitrogen starvation does not efficiently relieve catabolite repression of the Salmonella serovar Typhimurium put operon, which means that these bacteria are unable to grow in medium with glucose as a carbon source and proline as the sole nitrogen source (19). To test whether the S. meliloti putA gene is catabolite repressed, we compared putA expression of GRM8 cells containing pJZ301 when grown in different media. GRM8 was able to grow with glucose as a carbon source and proline as the sole nitrogen source. Furthermore, the levels of expression of S. meliloti putA were similar whether glucose is present or not (data not shown), strongly suggesting that the rhizobial gene is not catabolite repressed.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this report we show that the disruption of the S. meliloti putA gene increases basal expression of the putA promoter and abolishes induction of this gene by exogenous proline. These results indicate (i) that the S. meliloti PutA protein functions as an autogenous repressor and (ii) the lack of a proline responsive transcriptional activator of putA expression.
putA gene regulation has been studied in different bacteria. In Rhodobacter (14), Agrobacterium (8), and probably Bradyrhizobium (36), the expression of PDH is regulated via the transcriptional activator PutR, whose activity requires proline. In Rhodobacter, it has been reported that the PutA protein, similar to that of enteric bacteria, represses its own expression. However, in Agrobacterium the putA gene is not autorepressed. This conclusion has been based on several lines of evidence: (i) the proline inducibility of the gene remains in a putA mutant background; (ii) when saturating levels of proline are provided, the putA mutation has only a small effect on the expression of the putA promoter; and (iii) no differences were found when the noncatabolized inducer valine was used.
In S. meliloti, we found that valine is not an inducer of
putA expression. Therefore, we could not test whether a
noncatabolized inducer leads to differences between the putA
mutant and the parental strain. However, in a putA mutant
background, basal expression of the putA promoter increased
either 8- to 24-fold (plasmid fusions) or 10- to 16-fold (chromosomal
fusion), similar to the levels observed in a Salmonella
serovar Typhimurium PDH mutant (15-fold) and contrary to the modest
increase (4-fold) shown by an Agrobacterium lacking PutA
activity. This suggests that the S. meliloti PutA protein
could function as an autogenous repressor. On the other hand, genetic
and mutational analyses have revealed that a PutR-like protein is not
present upstream of the S. meliloti putA gene. Furthermore,
the existence of such an activator-encoded gene elsewhere seems
unlikely since proline inducibility of putA expression is not retained in a PutA
background.
A deletion analysis of the region located upstream of the
putA gene revealed that the proline inducibility of the
promoter is kept within the 290 nt present in the pJZP4 and pMP43
constructions. Furthermore, the decrease of
-galactosidase activity
to background levels in cells containing the pMH310 transcriptional
fusion indicate that the promoter sequences necessary for the
expression of the putA gene are located between nt 290 and
190 upstream of the translation initiation codon. Recent data in our
laboratory have revealed that although the 190 nt in the upstream
region do not contain all promoter sequences necessary for
putA expression, they are enough to allow proline-responsive
induction of the gene when located downstream of a functional promoter
(M. J. Soto, unpublished data). Thus, the sequence of dyad
symmetry identified within these 190 nt of the putA
functional promoter region could be a putative operator site in
putA gene regulation. In Salmonella serovar
Typhimurium, a complex model for regulation of the put
operon has been suggested in which proper contact between PutA proteins
bound to different operator sites is facilitated by a loop of
curved DNA (25). Whether this is the case in S. meliloti remains to be determined.
Our data suggest a model for regulation of the S. meliloti putA gene similar to that of enteric bacteria, in which the PutA protein is the main regulator of its own transcription in response to proline. However, some differences have been found: (i) the S. meliloti putA gene is not catabolite repressed, and (ii) although present in another location within the genome (data not shown), the gene encoding the major proline permease (putP) does not seem to form part of an operon with the PDH gene. It remains to be determined whether S. meliloti putP is also regulated by PutA.
The absence of a proline-responsive transcriptional activator of the putA gene in S. meliloti is noteworthy compared to the Rhizobiaceae relatives Agrobacterium and Bradyrhizobium. Some similarities at the nucleotide level have been found between the Agrobacterium putR gene and the upstream region of the S. meliloti putA gene (data not shown). If such a putR gene ever existed in S. meliloti, the changes which have occurred within the sequence have been large enough to eliminate the potential to encode a PutR-like protein. It is known that Lrp is a general regulatory protein responsible for the leucine-dependent control of several dozen operons in E. coli (5). However, in R. capsulatus PutR seems to be responsible only for the activation of genes involved in proline utilization. The distinct patterns in the regulation of putA expression within Rhizobiaceae are particularly interesting from an evolutionary point of view and can highlight adaptations to proline metabolism as a consequence of the different associations they establish with plants.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was funded by Comisión Asesora de Investigación Científica y Técnica (BIO96-0397) and by the Biotechnology Programme of the EU (grant B104-CT98-0483). M. J. Soto was supported by an EC (Training & Mobility of Researchers) and an MEC fellowship.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Departamento de Microbiología del Suelo y Sistemas Simbióticos, Estación Experimental del Zaidín, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Profesor Albareda 1, 18008 Granada, Spain. Phone: 34-958-121011. Fax: 34-958-129600. E-mail: ntoro{at}eez.csic.es.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Allen, S. W.,
A. Senti-Willis, and S. R. Maloy.
1993.
DNA sequence of the putA gene from Salmonella typhimurium: a bifunctional membrane-associated dehydrogenase that binds DNA.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:1676 |
| 2. | Altschul, S. F., W. Gish, W. Miller, E. W. Myers, and D. J. Lipman. 1990. Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215:403-410[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 3. | Becker, A., M. Schmidt, W. Jäger, and A. Pühler. 1995. New gentamicin-resistance and lacZ promoter-probe cassettes suitable for insertion mutagenesis and generation of transcriptional fusions. Gene 162:37-39[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 4. | Beringer, J. E. 1974. R factor transfer in Rhizobium leguminosarum. J. Gen. Microbiol. 84:188-198[Medline]. |
| 5. |
Calvo, J. M., and R. G. Matthews.
1994.
The leucine-responsive regulatory protein, a global regulator of metabolism in Escherichia coli.
Microbiol. Rev.
58:466-490 |
| 6. | Casadesús, J., and J. Olivares. 1979. Rough and fine linkage mapping of the Rhizobium meliloti chromosome. Mol. Gen. Genet. 174:203-209[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 7. |
Chen, L. M., and S. Maloy.
1991.
Regulation of proline utilization in enteric bacteria: cloning and characterization of the Klebsiella put control region.
J. Bacteriol.
173:783-790 |
| 8. | Cho, K., and S. C. Winans. 1996. The putA gene of Agrobacterium tumefaciens is transcriptionally activated in response to proline by an Lrp-like protein and is not autoregulated. Mol. Microbiol. 22:1025-1033[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 9. |
Figurski, D. H., and D. R. Helinski.
1979.
Replication of an origin-containing derivative of plasmid RK2 dependent on a plasmid function provided in trans.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
76:1648-1652 |
| 10. | Gish, W., and D. J. States. 1993. Identification of protein coding regions by database similarity search. Nat. Genet. 3:266-272[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 11. |
Imamura, R.,
K. Yamanaka,
T. Ogura,
S. Hiraga,
N. Fujita,
A. Ishihama, and H. Niki.
1996.
Identification of the cpdA gene encoding cyclic 3',5'-adenosine monophosphate phosphodiesterase in Escherichia coli.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:25423-25429 |
| 12. | Jiménez-Zurdo, J. I., P. van Dillewijn, M. J. Soto, M. R. de Felipe, J. Olivares, and N. Toro. 1995. Characterization of a Rhizobium meliloti proline dehydrogenase mutant altered in nodulation efficiency and competitiveness on alfalfa roots. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 8:492-498[Medline]. |
| 13. | Jiménez-Zurdo, J. I., F. M. García-Rodríguez, and N. Toro. 1997. The Rhizobium meliloti putA gene: its role in the establishment of the symbiotic interaction with alfalfa. Mol. Microbiol. 23:85-93[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 14. |
Keuntje, B.,
B. Masepohl, and W. Klipp.
1995.
Expression of the putA gene encoding proline dehydrogenase from Rhodobacter capsulatus is independent of NtrC regulation but requires an Lrp-like activator protein.
J. Bacteriol.
177:6432-6439 |
| 15. |
Krywicki, K. A., and M. C. Brandriss.
1984.
Primary structure of the nuclear PUT2 gene involved in the mitochondrial pathway for proline utilization in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
4:2837-2842 |
| 16. | Lin, J. W., K. Y. Yu, H. Y. Chen, and S. F. Weng. 1996. Regulatory region with putA gene of proline dehydrogenase that links to the lum and the lux operons in Photobacterium leiognathi. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 219:868-875[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 17. |
Macaluso, A.,
E. Best, and R. Bender.
1990.
Role of the nac gene product in the nitrogen regulation of some NTR-regulated operons in Klebsiella aerogenes.
J. Bacteriol.
172:7249-7255 |
| 18. | Maloy, S. R. 1987. The proline utilization operon, p. 1513-1519. In F. C. Neidhardt, J. L. Ingraham, K. B. Low, B. Magasanik, M. Schaechter, and H. E. Umbarger (ed.), Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium: cellular and molecular biology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C. |
| 19. |
Maloy, S. R., and J. R. Roth.
1983.
Regulation of proline utilization in Salmonella typhimurium: characterization of put::Mu d(Ap, lac) operon fusions.
J. Bacteriol.
154:561-568 |
| 20. |
Maloy, S. R., and V. Stewart.
1993.
Autogenous regulation of gene expression.
J. Bacteriol.
175:307-316 |
| 21. |
Menzel, R., and J. Roth.
1981.
Purification of the putA gene product: a bifunctional membrane-bound protein from Salmonella typhimurium responsible for the two-step oxidation of proline to glutamate.
J. Biol. Chem.
256:9755-9761 |
| 22. | Miller, J. H. 1972. Experiments in molecular genetics. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 23. |
Muro-Pastor, A. M., and S. Maloy.
1995.
Proline dehydrogenase activity of the transcriptional repressor PutA is required for induction of the put operon by proline.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:9819-9827 |
| 24. |
Muro-Pastor, A. M.,
P. Ostrovsky, and S. Maloy.
1997.
Regulation of gene expression by repressor localization: biochemical evidence that membrane and DNA binding by the PutA protein are mutually exclusive.
J. Bacteriol.
179:2788-2791 |
| 25. |
Ostrovsky, P.,
K. O'Brien, and S. Maloy.
1991.
Regulation of proline utilization in Salmonella typhimurium: a membrane-associated dehydrogenase binds DNA in vitro.
J. Bacteriol.
173:211-219 |
| 26. |
Ostrovsky, P., and S. Maloy.
1993.
PutA protein, a membrane-associated flavin dehydrogenase, acts as a redox-dependent transcriptional regulator.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
90:4295-4298 |
| 27. |
Ostrovsky, P. C., and S. Maloy.
1995.
Protein phosphorylation on serine, threonine, and tyrosine residues modulates membrane-protein interactions and transcriptional regulation in Salmonella typhimurium.
Genes Dev.
9:2034-2041 |
| 28. |
Phillips, D. A.,
E. S. Sande,
J. A. C. Vriezen,
F. J. De Bruijn,
D. Le Rudulier, and C. M. Joseph.
1998.
A new genetic locus in Sinorhizobium meliloti is involved in stachydrine utilization.
Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
64:3954-3960 |
| 29. | Prentki, P., and H. M. Krisch. 1984. In vitro insertional mutagenesis with a selectable DNA fragment. Gene 29:303-313[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 30. |
Robertsen, B. K.,
P. Aiman,
A. G. Darvill,
M. McNeil, and P. Alberstein.
1981.
The structure of acidic extracellular polysaccharides secreted by Rhizobium leguminosarum and Rhizobium trifolii.
Plant Physiol.
67:389-400 |
| 31. | Sambrook, J., E. F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 32. |
Sanger, F.,
S. Nicklen, and A. R. Coulson.
1977.
DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
74:5463-5467 |
| 33. | Schäfer, A., A. Tauch, W. Jäger, J. Kalinowski, G. Thierbach, and A. Pühler. 1994. Small mobilizable multi-purpose cloning vectors derived from the Escherichia coli plasmids pK18 and pK19: selection of defined deletions in the chromosome of Corynebacterium glutamicum. Gene 145:69-73[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 34. | Soto, M. J., P. van Dillewijn, J. Olivares, and N. Toro. 1994. Ornithine cyclodeaminase activity in Rhizobium meliloti. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 119:209-214[CrossRef]. |
| 35. | Spaink, H. P., R. J. H. Okker, C. A. Wijffelman, E. Pees, and B. J. J. Lugtenberg. 1987. Promoters in the nodulation region of the Rhizobium leguminosarum Sym plasmid pRL1JI. Plant Mol. Biol. 9:27-39. |
| 36. | Straub, P. F., P. H. S. Reynolds, S. Althomsons, V. Mett, Y. Zhu, G. Shearer, and D. H. Kohl. 1996. Isolation, DNA sequence analysis, and mutagenesis of a proline dehydrogenase gene (putA) from Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 62:221-229[Abstract]. |
| 37. | Van den Eede, G., R. Deblaere, K. Goethals, M. Van Montagu, and M. Holsters. 1992. Broad host range and promoter selection vectors for bacteria that interact with plants. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 5:228-234[Medline]. |
| 38. |
Wang, S. S., and M. C. Brandriss.
1987.
Proline utilization in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: sequence, regulation, and mitochondrial localization of the PUT1 gene product.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7:4431-4440 |
| 39. | Yanisch-Perron, C., J. Vieira, and J. Messing. 1985. Improved M13 phage cloning vectors and host strains: nucleotide sequences of the M13mp18 and pUC19 vectors. Gene 33:103-119[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 |