Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Bacteriology, June 2005, p. 4116-4126, Vol. 187, No. 12
0021-9193/05/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JB.187.12.4116-4126.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Programa de Ingeniería Genómica, Centro de Ciencias Genómicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Apartado Postal 565-A, Cuernavaca, Morelos, México
Received 8 December 2004/ Accepted 11 March 2005
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
Gene conversion is one of the possible outcomes of a recombination event and has been defined as the nonreciprocal transfer of genetic information from one DNA duplex to another. This process was initially demonstrated in ascomycete fungi (18), and the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is still the preferred organism for its study due to the ability to recover all the products of a meiotic recombination event. This ability facilitates the demonstration of nonreciprocal transfer events. The need to understand gene conversion and its association with crossovers was the main motivation for the development of the Holliday model for recombination (18); the possibility for gene conversion has been retained in successive models of recombination, including the double-strand break repair model (18, 43, 44).
Gene conversion has been more difficult to study in other organisms, including bacteria. The main problem is that, since the recovery of all the products of a recombination event is not possible, the characteristic nonreciprocity of gene conversion events cannot be ensured. In fact, it has been argued that several possible examples of gene conversion in bacteria may be due to selection for rare double crossovers rather than to gene conversion (40). Despite this limitation, some groups have provided convincing evidence for gene conversion in bacteria, including Escherichia coli (13, 45) and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium (1, 3, 11), using substrates harboring repeated sequences in an inverted orientation. In these reports, selection is applied for gene conversion events occurring between inverted repeats, afterwards exploring their relation with crossover. In at least one case, there is convincing albeit indirect evidence for the nonreciprocal origin of these events (3).
Our group has been studying Rhizobium etli, an
-proteobacterium that is able to form nitrogen-fixing symbiotic associations with bean plants. Besides its symbiotic capabilities, R. etli is also interesting because of the presence of reiterated gene elements (8), which can play important roles in shaping genomic structure. One important multigene family is the nifH family (encoding one component of the nitrogenase enzyme), comprised of three identical members (31, 32) located in a large plasmid (371 kb) called the symbiotic plasmid or pSym (9, 35). Homologous recombination among the members of this family promotes different genomic rearrangements in pSym, having important symbiotic consequences (36, 37, 47). Phylogenetic evidence indicates the existence of concerted evolution among members of this family (E. Sepúlveda and D. Romero, unpublished data), perhaps generated through gene conversion (34). A previous evaluation of the occurrence of gene conversion in R. etli relied on the introduction of a 28-bp insertion into one of the nifH copies, followed by its elimination by recombinational interactions with either of the other two nifH copies (34). Although products consistent with the occurrence of gene conversion were isolated, it is formally possible that at least some of these arose from repeated reciprocal exchanges rather than true gene conversion (34).
In this work, we employ a novel approach to evaluate gene conversion, using a genetic system based on the cointegration between sequences harboring planned sequence alterations, or restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLPs). In this approach, selection is only applied for cointegration; any gene conversion arises as an unselected event. This avoids weaknesses present in previous approaches, where direct selection for gene convertants raises the possibility of multiple crossovers to explain its generation. Characterization of the gene convertants obtained through this approach allowed us to evaluate the association of recombination with gene conversion, the length of converted tracts, and the role of sequence heterology. Our results show that (i) crossover events are frequently accompanied (98%) by a gene conversion event occurring nearby; (ii) gene conversion events frequently encompass more than half of the length of this gene; (iii) gene conversion events display a strong polarity, favoring the preservation of incoming sequences; (iv) even small amounts (1.6%) of sequence divergence have a strong effect on recombination frequency; and (v) the MutS mismatch repair system plays an important role in determining the length of gene conversion segments.
|
|
|---|
General DNA manipulations and mutagenesis of the nifH gene.
All DNA manipulations were done using standard procedures (38). Most of the plasmid transformations employed Escherichia coli DH5
as a host (10). PCRs were done in a Techgene thermocycler using Platinum Taq High Fidelity DNA polymerase (Invitrogen) for mutagenesis and conventional Taq DNA polymerase for analytical characterization. For ligations, T4 polynucleotide ligase (Amersham Biosciences) was used. Restriction enzymes were purchased from diverse companies and used according to the recommendations of the supplier. Custom oligonucleotides were synthesized at the Unidad de Síntesis de Oligonucleótidos (Instituto de Biotecnología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México).
Introduction of specific restriction sites into the nifH gene was done by a variation of published PCR mutagenesis procedures (26). Specific oligonucleotide primers (see Table 1) containing one or more modified nucleotides to introduce a restriction site at the time of polymerization were designed. Only single base changes (either transitions or transversions) were used, avoiding the introduction of stop or otherwise rare codons. To introduce mutations, two PCR products were generated, using either the Hindu/Narl primer combination (product size, 567 bp) or the Apalu/Xbal combination (size 557 bp), employing as a template DNA from R. etli CFN42. Both products were gel purified, using a GeneClean II kit (Bio 101). The purified PCR products were mixed, heat denatured (at 90°C for 2 min), and annealed (at 60°C for 1 min), taking advantage of a 200=bp overlap between both products. A mixture of the four deoxyribonucleotides as well as Platinum Taq DNA polymerase was added to the annealing mixture and incubated at 72°C for 6 min to allow the generation of a complete nifH sequence. After this, the Hindu and Xbal oligonucleotides were added to the reaction and subjected to PCR (30 cycles with denaturation at 92°C for 1 min, annealing at 56°C for 1 min, and extension at 72°C for 2 min). The PCR products were cloned into pUC19 (48) and analyzed to verify the introduction of the restriction sites in the nifH sequence. Two full-sized nifH clones were obtained, one containing the HindIII, ApaLI, and XbaI restriction sites and the other with the HindIII, NarI, and XbaI sites.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. PCR primers used in this worka
|
-33P]ATP and T4 DNA kinase (Amersham Biosciences). Sequencing reactions were electrophoresed in 6% polyacrylamide-8 M urea gels. Besides the planned mutations, spontaneous sequence changes, perhaps occurring during the successive PCR steps, generated a novel MaeIII site. A map of the relevant restriction sites in the nifH gene is shown in Fig. 1.
![]() View larger version (11K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Locations of the nucleotide substitutions introduced on the nifH gene. Numbers below the horizontal line indicate the position of the base substitutions (showed above the line) with respect to the starting nucleotide of the gene. These substitutions generate unique sites for different restriction enzymes, which are indicated by a one-letter code (H, HindIII; B, BamHI; M, MaeIII; A, ApaLI; N, NarI; Ml, MluI; Bc, BclI; X, XbaI).
|
To simplify cointegrate selection in the mutS background, a kanamycin-resistant derivative from pMC11 was constructed by substitution of the HindIII-HindIII tetracycline resistance cassette with a 2.2-kb HindIII-HindIII kanamycin resistance cassette from pHP45
-Km (7), giving rise to pJGus28.
Molecular characterization of transconjugants. Escherichia coli S17-1 (F pro-82 thi-1 endA1 hsdR17 supE44 recA13, chromosomally integrated RP-4-2 [Tc::Mu, Km::Tn7]) was used as a host for conjugative transfer of integrative plasmids (42). To that end, biparental matings were set up on solid media between Escherichia coli S17-1 harboring the desired plasmid and R. etli as described previously (47); transconjugants were selected by its resistance to nalidixic acid and tetracycline. In most cases, R. etli CFNX55 (36) (harboring a large deletion that removes two of the three nifH genes in pSym) was used as a recipient. To ensure the independence of the observed events, 10 separate conjugation experiments were set up, retaining not more than five single-colony isolates from each experiment. Total DNA was isolated from each transconjugant and analyzed by PCR with specific primers (left PCR with primers 1 and 2, right PCR with primers 3 and 4, Fig. 2) to amplify both nifH products. All the PCR products were purified by using CentriSep spin columns (Applied Biosystems) before digestion with restriction enzymes. Determinations of conjugation frequency were repeated at least 10 times and are expressed as number of transconjugants per recipient cell ± standard deviation.
![]() View larger version (26K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Experimental strategy to detect gene conversion associated to cointegration. A shaded rectangle represents the nifH gene harboring different RFLPs (Fig. 1); the open rectangle corresponds to the wild-type nifH gene. Cointegration between circular molecules bearing these genes (indicated by crossed lines on the top part of the figure) generates three different types of cointegrate, depending on its possible association with gene conversion. In type a, a single crossover is depicted, without gene conversion. Gain of sites on both sides of the cointegrate (type b, sites A and N) or loss of sites (type c, sites A and N) is interpreted as evidence of gene conversion. The primers used to amplify each side of the cointegrate are indicated by numbered arrowheads.
|
Construction of a mutS derivative. To evaluate the participation of the mutS repair system in gene conversion, we employed strain CFNX706, a mutS::loxPSp derivative from R. etli (J. M. Martínez-Salazar, J. Zuñiga-Castillo, and D. Romero, unpublished data). This strain harbors a loxPSp insertion in the mutS gene, interrupting codon 292. Strain CFNX706 was modified by generating a large deletion on pSym that eliminates two of the three nifH genes, using the recombination enhancement by replication system (47). In this system, activation of a supernumerary replication origin on pSym leads to the high-frequency generation of a deletion on pSym identical to the one in strain CFNX55 (47).
To apply this system, plasmid pEYM13, harboring oriV from RK2 (47) was inserted by single-crossover recombination into one of the nifH genes of strain CFNX706, selecting integrants by their resistance to kanamycin. To activate replication from the supernumerary origin, plasmid pEYM5, encoding the replication initiator protein trfA from RK2, was introduced by conjugation with several integrants; transconjugants were selected by their resistance to chloramphenicol. Over 25% of the chloramphenicol-resistant transconjugants also displayed the loss of the kanamycin resistance marker, indicating the presence of possible deletions on pSym. The presence of the desired deletion was verified by analyses of plasmid profiles (revealing a 107-kb deletion on pSym) as well as by Southern hybridization against a nifH probe (data not shown). Spontaneous loss of pEYM5 from the mutS::loxPSp derivative harboring the desired deletion was screened by checking single-colony isolates for a chloramphenicol-sensitive phenotype, giving rise to strain CFNX712. This strain was then used as a recipient in crosses with plasmid pJGus28. Fifty transconjugants, coming from 10 independent experiments, were analyzed as described before.
|
|
|---|
This modified nifH gene was inserted into a plasmid (pMC11) that can be transferred by conjugation from Escherichia coli to Rhizobium etli, but it is unable to replicate in this latter host. The recipient for such crosses was Rhizobium etli CFNX55 (36), a derivative that harbors only one copy of the wild-type nifH gene. Upon single-crossover recombination in this strain, three types of cointegrates are possible (Fig. 2). The first type entails cointegrate formation without associated gene conversion (Fig. 2, type a), while the other two involve cointegrate formation associated with gene conversion, favoring either incoming sequences (type b) or endogenous sequences (type c). As shown in Fig. 2, these types can be easily distinguished by looking at the distribution of restriction sites in both sides of the cointegrate. Type a recombinants have only a redistribution of restriction sites at the crossover point, while types b and c display an increase in the number of restriction sites (double gain, type b) or a reduction in restriction sites (double loss, type c). Thus, the number and position of restriction sites modified in the gene conversion events allows an evaluation of the length and position of gene conversion tracts along the nifH gene.
In this experimental approach, selection is applied only for cointegration of the plasmid; no selection whatsoever was applied for recovery of gene conversion events. This is an important difference with previous studies, because it minimizes the likelihood that gene conversion events arise through selection for rare double crossover events, which would mimic gene convertants.
Independent isolation of both sides of the cointegrate is possible through PCR amplification, using primer pairs that amplify either the left side (primers 1 and 2) or the right side (primers 3 and 4) of the cointegrate (Fig. 2). These PCR products were then subjected to restriction analysis, searching for instances in which cutting with a specific enzyme occurred in both sides or in neither side of the cointegrate; these were interpreted as examples of gene conversion.
Crossover events are strongly associated with gene conversion. To evaluate the association of crossover formation to gene conversion, cointegrates between pMC11 (harboring eight different RFLPs) and pSym were selected, as described in Materials and Methods. In R. etli, formation of cointegrates of this kind is strictly dependent on recA (50). Interestingly, when plasmid pMC11 was used as a donor, integrants were obtained at a very low frequency (1.63 x 107± 0.52 x 107). Higher integration frequencies were seen when plasmids lacking RFLPs (pMC0, integration frequency 1.6 x 105± 0.05 x 105) or with RFLPs only on the 5' half (pMC32, 1.18 x 105± 0.12 x 105) or on the 3' half (pMC63, 6.6 x 106± 3.1 x 106) of the gene were used. Thus, the low integration frequency observed with pMC11 may be attributed to degree of sequence divergence (1.6%) between the recombining sequences. A similar sensitivity of recombination frequency to degree of heterology has been observed previously (33, 49).
DNA was purified from 50 independent cointegrates with pMC11 and subjected to separate PCRs to amplify the left- and right-hand sides of each cointegrate, which were then subjected to restriction analysis. An example of these analyses is shown in Fig. 3. In this case, digestion with BamHI, MaeIII, and ApaLI was observed for both sides of the cointegrate, while restriction on only one side was observed for the remaining enzymes. This indicates that a continuous gene conversion event encompassing these three sites had occurred in this particular cointegrate. Since it is impossible to determine the exact endpoint of conversions occurring between two markers, the middle zone between two restriction sites was chosen to register the end of every conversion event. Thus, this particular conversion event was roughly 400 bp in size.
![]() View larger version (68K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Detection of gene conversion in cointegrates. The left (L) and right (R) parts of a specific cointegrate were amplified by PCR (Fig. 2 and Material and Methods). These products were digested with different restriction enzymes (H, HindIII; B, BamHI; M, MaeIII; A, ApaLI; N, NarI; Ml, MluI; Bc, BclI; X, XbaI) and analyzed by agarose gel electrophoresis (top). Note that both sides of the cointegrate were cut with BamHI, MaeIII, and ApaLI, indicating a gene conversion event encompassing these markers. This is summarized in the lower part of the figure (shaded bar, regions of nifH not subjected to gene conversion; black bar, region undergoing gene conversion towards gain of the markers).
|
![]() View larger version (15K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. Structure of gene conversion tracts obtained upon introduction of pMC11 into R. etli CFNX55. The RFLP map of the nifH gene is shown on top as a reference. Letters at the left side represent the four cointegrate classes found (A, continuous conversion; B, discontinuous conversion; C, bipolar conversions; and D, single crossover with no evidence of gene conversion). Values indicate the number of isolates with the corresponding conversion tract. Black bars represent the extent of gene conversion tracts towards marker gain; white bars indicate gene conversion tracts showing marker loss; shaded bars are regions not subjected to gene conversion. Note that gene conversion is biased towards marker gain.
|
The second most frequent class corresponds to discontinuous gene conversion events (class B). Members of this class, encompassing 26% of the isolates, display two tracts of continuous gene conversion, with a marker or two between these tracts that do not display gene conversion. The most complex class corresponds to the bipolar conversions (class C), which represent 14% of the isolates characterized. Members of this class display at least two conversion tracts; these tracts are clearly discernible, because one of these displays gain of sites in the conversion tract (double gain, Fig. 2), while in the other tract the restriction sites were absent (double loss, Fig. 2). In a single isolate, the contrasting conversion tracts are contiguous, while in the rest these tracts are separated by an intervening marker that does not display conversion. Thus, class C conversions are a mixed class that contains both continuous and discontinuous events.
Length and distribution of gene conversion tracts. To evaluate the length distribution of gene conversion tracts, continuous and discontinuous classes were analyzed separately; bipolar conversions were included in either the continuous or discontinuous class depending on architecture (Fig. 5). The size of the conversion tract was evaluated for each class; isolates harboring a continuous conversion contribute only with a single tract to the total, but isolates in classes B and C contribute with two or three tracts, depending on structure. Therefore, the data in Fig. 5 are based on the analysis of 72 conversion tracts. Gene conversion tract length for the continuous class reveals a bimodal distribution, centered at 150 bp and 600 bp. The discontinuous tracts, in contrast, show a single unimodal distribution, centered at 150 bp. This is consistent with an interpretation that continuous tracts are formed through the cooperation of two separate processes, such as gap filling and heteroduplex correction (see Discussion).
![]() View larger version (13K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. Size distribution (A) and positions (B) involved in gene conversion events. Data are derived from Fig. 4. For both panels, vertical black bars represent continuous tracts, while shaded bars correspond to discontinuous tracts. The letters in panel B represent the different RFLPs, as shown in Fig. 1.
|
Biased transfer of genetic information by gene conversion. In the system described thus far, we have taken advantage of gain or loss of markers in both sides of each cointegrate (double gain and double loss, respectively, Fig. 2) to detect a gene conversion event. In principle, both kinds of convertants should be observed in the same proportions. Interestingly, we found that conversion is strongly biased towards the double gain class. From Fig. 4, it is clear that almost 90% of the tracts observed (64 out of 72) showed gain of sites. In fact, the few tracts displaying loss of sites come exclusively from class C (bipolar) convertants.
This lack of marker parity may be explained under two contrasting hypotheses. One alternative is that all the markers employed might have an intrinsic repair preference, favoring their use as templates for heteroduplex repair over the wild-type sequence of the nifH gene. A second possibility is that the observed bias may arise as a consequence of the way in which the recombining sequences are brought together. In all our experiments, the nifH copy harboring the RFLP markers is introduced by conjugation from Escherichia coli into an R. etli strain bearing a wild-type nifH gene. In this case, the observed bias is favoring conversion towards double gain (i.e., towards the incoming sequence) rather than its restoration to a wild-type sequence. This may be explained, under the double-strand break repair model of recombination by saying that the resident copy preferentially receives a double-strand cut, thus being a receptor of information (see Discussion).
These hypotheses may be distinguished by exchanging the configuration of markers participating in conversion, putting the RFLP markers in the resident copy. If the bias is due to preferential repair, convertants should be still biased towards double gain; if the bias is due to preferential cutting of the resident sequence, the bias should be reversed towards the double loss class. To that end, the BamHI, MaeIII, ApaLI, and NarI markers were transferred to the nifH gene present in pSym of R. etli, generating strain CFNX704 (see Materials and Methods). Plasmid pMC0, harboring a wild-type nifH gene, was introduced by conjugation into strain CFNX704 to generate 50 independent cointegrates, which were screened for conversion as before. The results of this experiment are shown in Fig. 6.
![]() View larger version (15K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. Structure of gene conversion tracts obtained upon introduction of pMC0 into R. etli CFNX704. Letters at the left side represent the three cointegrate classes found (A, continuous conversion; B, discontinuous conversion; and C, bipolar conversions). Black bars represent the extent of gene conversion tracts towards marker gain; white bars indicate gene conversion tracts showing marker loss; shaded bars are regions not subjected to gene conversion. Note that gene conversion is biased towards marker loss. (H, HindIII; B, BamHI; M, MaeIII; A, ApaLI; N, NarI; X, XbaI.)
|
MutS mismatch repair system is an important determinant for length of gene conversion segments. The data presented here suggest that continuous conversion segments may be formed through the cooperation of two separate processes, such as gap filling and heteroduplex correction (see Discussion). If that were the case, inactivation of the MutS system, one of the main systems for mismatch correction in bacteria (33, 49), would instigate a marked reduction in the length of gene conversion segments. To evaluate this possibility, a kanamycin-resistant derivative of pMC11 (pJGus28, containing the eight different RFLPs) was introduced by conjugation into an R. etli mutS::loxPSp derivative that harbors only one copy of the wild-type nifH gene on pSym (strain CFNX712, see Materials and Methods). As expected for knocking out one of the main barriers for recombination between divergent sequences, integrants were obtained readily in this mutant background (at a frequency of 2.8 x 105± 1.49 x 105). This frequency is 30-fold higher than the one obtained upon transfer of pJGus28 into CFNX55 (7.54 x 107± 3.84 x 107).
The analysis of 50 cointegrates obtained in the mutS::loxPSp derivative is shown in Fig. 7. In this mutant background, no effect was seen either on the proportion of the different conversion classes (A, 62%; B 24%; C, 14%) or on the bias towards the acquisition of markers present in the incoming sequence (62 out of 68 conversion tracts displayed double marker gain). Striking differences were detected, however, for both the length of gene conversion tracts and the sectors covered by these tracts.
![]() View larger version (44K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 7. Structure of gene conversion tracts obtained upon introduction of pJGus28 into R. etli CFNX712 (mutS::loxPSp). Letters at the left side represent the three cointegrate classes found (A, continuous conversion; B, discontinuous conversion; and C, bipolar conversions). Numbers indicate the amount of isolates with the corresponding conversion tract. Black bars represent the extent of gene conversion tracts towards marker gain; white bars indicate gene conversion tracts showing marker loss; shaded bars are regions not subjected to gene conversion. (H, HindIII; B, BamHI; M, MaeIII; A, ApaLI; N, NarI; Ml, MluI; Bc, BclI; X, XbaI.)
|
![]() View larger version (13K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 8. Size distribution (A) and positions (B) involved in gene conversion events in R. etli CFNX712 (mutS::loxPSp). Data are derived from Fig. 7. For both panels, vertical black bars represent the continuous tracts, while shaded bars correspond to discontinuous tracts. The letters in panel B represent the different RFLPs, as shown in Fig. 1.
|
|
|
|---|
There are two alternatives to explain these data, one based on sister exchanges and the other postulating gene conversion. As argued before (40), apparent gene conversion events may be formed through the chance formation of double crossover events between dissimilar alleles located on sister molecules; these products, upon segregation, would be scored as convertants. Thus, these products have been dubbed apparent gene convertants, to reflect the possibility that they may have formed through reciprocal events rather than the nonreciprocal events that are the hallmark of gene conversion.
The most likely scenario for the formation of these double crossover events would be after formation of the cointegrate. In Fig. 9 we present the sequence of events required to explain our results under this hypothesis. The initial crossover event required to form the cointegrate might generate a simple redistribution of markers. Upon replication of the cointegrate structure, unequal double crossovers may generate an apparent gene conversion segment. This might be a tenable explanation for the continuous gene conversion class (class A in Fig. 4), which represents 58% of the events observed. However, more complex rationales have to be used to explain the discontinuous (class B) and bipolar (class C) events, representing 40% of the events observed here. For these, unequal double crossovers do not suffice. As shown in Fig. 9, under this hypothesis, four crossovers are needed to generate these classes. In the case of discontinuous conversions, two crossovers would be needed to generate the first conversion tract, followed by two additional crossovers farther away from the first pair. A similar situation has to be posed for most of the cases of bipolar conversions, but in this case crossovers have to involve the four copies present in the replicated structure.
![]() View larger version (15K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 9. Alternative model to explain gene conversion through unequal crossovers. After a cointegration event, a partially replicated molecule would generate four nifH sequences (open rectangles). Vertical lines within the open rectangles represent RFLPs. Pairs of continuous or broken lines joining the rectangles indicate the region of the unequal crossover. The events needed to generate continuous conversion tracts (top), discontinuous conversions (middle), and bipolar conversions (bottom) are shown. Arrows indicate regions transferred in an apparent gene conversion event, leading to marker gain (black) or marker loss (shaded). Note that generation of continuous conversions can be explained by two unequal crossover events, but both discontinuous and bipolar conversions require the participation of four unequal crossover events.
|
We think that our data are better explained by invoking the occurrence of gene conversion, perhaps generated under the double-strand break repair model (44). This model for recombination is now widely accepted for both prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms (4). Variations of this model have been used to explain recombinational repair of collapsed replication forks, a rather frequent event in bacteria (15, 19, 24). As shown in Fig. 10, this model explains all our data in an economical way. In this model, a double-strand gap made on the resident nifH sequence may be repaired by the modified nifH sequence present in the incoming plasmid. The DNA synthesis associated with gap repair generates, in this case, a short conversion tract; migration of the Holliday junction generates heteroduplex DNA. If the mismatches in the heteroduplex segment are corrected using the strands containing the information for the RFLPs, a long continuous conversion tract will ensue (Fig. 10, class A). Correction favoring the strand containing the RFLP information in one heteroduplex and the wild-type information in the other would generate a short continuous tract (Fig. 10, class A). Thus, in this model, continuous tracts are formed in two ways: by gap repair and also by heteroduplex correction. The bimodal distribution observed for the size of continuous conversion tracts (Fig. 5) is consistent with this interpretation. Similar sizes for converted tracts have been observed in other systems, such as Escherichia coli (45) Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium (1, 11), and Acinetobacter calcoaceticus (14).
![]() View larger version (15K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 10. Model for gene conversion of one nifH gene to the other initiated by a double-strand break. Black dots in the black double-strand represent differences in nucleotide sequence (RFLPs). According to the double-strand break repair model, a double-strand cut on the recipient molecule is enlarged by degradation to a gap, followed by strand exchange and gap DNA resynthesis (discontinuous lines). After that, the DNA heteroduplex could appear because of the migration of the Holliday junction. Further cuts are needed to generate a cointegrate. In class A, a long continuous tract could be the result of the action of gap DNA resynthesis and the repair of both DNA heteroduplexes, favoring retention of the RFLPs. For a short continuous tract (class A), we suggest that both DNA heteroduplexes may be repaired using the wild-type sequence as a template. Thus, the short tracts may arise only by the action of gap repair. In class B, a discontinuous tract could be the result of gap resynthesis and, in some mismatches, their repair favoring the wild-type or the modified sequence. For bipolar tracts (class C), gap repair results in tracts biased toward marker gain, while mismatch repair using the wild-type sequence as a template would result in marker loss.
|
The presence of continuous and discontinuous conversion segments has also been observed in other studies of gene conversion in bacteria, particularly with the tufA-tufB genes in S. enterica serovar Typhimurium (1, 11). In that case, most of the converted segments belong to the continuous class, with a minority of discontinuous events. An important difference with our work is that in the case of S. enterica serovar Typhimurium (1, 11), selection was applied for isolation of the conversion events; this would reduce the representation of the discontinuous class.
The reduction in the length of conversion tracts in the mutS background presented here lends further support to the interpretation that these tracts appear through the operation of gap filling and heteroduplex correction. These data suggest that the MutS mismatch correction system is one of the major players in mismatch correction during gene conversion. This system, however, may not be the only one to participate in heteroduplex correction. Even in its absence, classes that should be reduced in abundance, such as the discontinuous and bipolar classes, are unabated. Thus, other mismatch repair systems, such as the very short repair system, are likely to participate in heteroduplex correction. Similar conclusions were also reached for the S. enterica serovar Typhimurium tufA-tufB system (1, 11), although in that case the characterization of the conversion tracts obtained in the mutS background was not presented.
This model also explains the close association between crossover formation (a selected event) and gene conversion (an unselected event). Under the double-strand break repair model, the strong association observed here should be the result of a preference to start a crossover in regions with a gap at least 100 bp in size. This will frequently include at least one marker, thus forcing the repair of that gap and the conversion of the restriction site. Association between crossover formation and conversion has been observed for S. enterica serovar Typhimurium (1, 11).
The fact that conversion is biased towards the incoming sequence is an unexpected characteristic from our data. To our knowledge, such a strong bias has not been reported previously, with the possible exception of natural transformation in Bacillus subtilis. In this organism, a weak preference to incorporate incoming markers has been observed (12). According to the double-strand break repair model, the molecule that receives the double-strand break will be the one to receive information through gap repair (i.e., the one to be converted). To explain the observed bias, we have to postulate that the resident molecule, not the incoming molecule, is the one that frequently receives a double-strand cut. This preference should arise in different ways, including generation of a double-strand break by collapse of a replication fork in the resident molecule and through the operation of endonucleases that preferentially cut resident molecules, to mention but two.
The proposed mechanisms for the bias towards the donor sequence may also help to illuminate the way in which cointegrates are generated in this organism. It is commonly thought that during conjugation, DNA is transferred as a linear concatemeric array that provides flanking homology for the selected marker (6, 41). A double crossover on such a direct duplication substrate could give rise to an integrant. If that were the case, there must be a strong bias favoring the retention of the resident sequence, because the discontinuity on the linear array should be detected (and corrected) by the mismatch repair system. The fact that the observed bias is toward the donor sequences militates against this view. Thus, we favor an alternative view in which the donor sequence is first circularized in the recipient cell and then integrated, using existing discontinuities on the resident sequence.
Although the specific mechanism involved in the observed bias remains to be clarified, these findings suggest an easy way to introduce specific mutations into the R. etli genome using gene conversion. Moreover, if the observed bias applies to other, more natural ways of transfer, this would make R. etli a rather permissive host to incorporate variations arising in a different host. Work in progress will clarify if this is the case.
In summary, we have provided evidence consistent with the operation of gene conversion in R. etli. Since the observed conversion tracts may frequently encompass more than half of the nifH gene, this process would be a good way to explain the concerted evolution among the members of this family. Moreover, our interpretation of these data lead to the prediction that both the size of the converted segment and the classes observed should be modified in backgrounds deficient in migration of the Holliday intermediates (ruvB, recG, and radA). Experiments are under way to test these hypotheses.
Work in our laboratory is partially supported by grant 31753-N (CONACyT, México). G.S. was supported by scholarships from CONACyT, México, and Dirección General de Estudios de Posgrado, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»