Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Bacteriology, November 2007, p. 7593-7599, Vol. 189, No. 21
0021-9193/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JB.01096-06
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
,
Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1048
Received 24 July 2006/ Accepted 15 August 2007
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
54-dependent RNA polymerase (13). In other cases, including the regulation of urease formation from the ureDABCEFG operon (2, 11), this regulation is mediated by the nitrogen assimilation control protein (NAC), which is itself under the control of NtrC phosphate (3, 11).
NAC has been shown to be an activator of transcription by the
70-dependent RNA polymerase, thus bringing
70-dependent operons under the control of the
54-dependent Ntr system (1). In the best-characterized example of NAC-mediated regulation, the histidine utilization (hut) operon, NAC binds to a site centered at –64 relative to the start of transcription and activates transcription independent of any small molecule or known modification (5). NAC also has been shown to activate from other positions, but in those cases the increase in transcription was less the 10-fold that seen at hut (7, 16, 17).
Macaluso et al. noted an apparent Ntr-independent regulation of urease formation in response to nitrogen limitation (11). At the time, this was the only known example of Ntr-independent nitrogen regulation, and this led us to explore the regulation of urease formation further.
The promoter region of the ure operon (ureDp region) was sequenced (8), and a NAC binding site in this region was identified both by gel mobility shift assay and by DNase I footprinting (5). NAC binds to a region that includes the sequence ATAA-N5-TGNTAT, located 90 bp upstream of the start of ureD translation. If this sequence were centered at –64, then a possible match to the –10 consensus sequence (TATCTT) would provide an arrangement similar to that seen in the hut operon. In a preliminary study of the ure operon from the related species K. oxytoca, Collins and her coworkers (2) used primer extension to search for a transcriptional start site. The transcriptional start site that they reported was only 5 or 6 bp upstream of the start of ureD translation, and this start did not correspond to the putative –10 sequence identified by them by assuming that NAC bound at –64. In fact, the putative –10 sequence would have been located at –30 relative to the start of transcription. Since the DNA sequence of this region from K. oxytoca is the same as that from K. pneumoniae, it was unclear where the promoter lay, and it seemed likely that the start of transcription was farther upstream than the site identified by Collins et al. (2). Moreover, their primer extension suggested that the principal ureD promoter was about 10-fold regulated, whereas their assays of ureDp-lacZ operon fusions suggested that the regulation was 1,000-fold or more.
In their study, larger ureDp fragments, extending 0.7 kb farther upstream, showed considerable transcriptional activity even in the presence of excess ammonium, in which the Ntr system (and NAC) would be nonfunctional (2). It was not determined whether (or how) this activity was regulated. Thus, there were several questions regarding the regulation of urease formation that seemed to suggest that there might be features unique to this NAC-regulated promoter. Where is the principle ureD promoter, and how strong is its regulation by NAC? Where is the upstream promoter, and is it regulated by nitrogen? Is expression from the upstream promoter sufficient to explain the Ntr-independent nitrogen regulation of urease formation?
|
|
|---|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. List of strains
|
Genetic techniques. Recombinant DNA techniques were carried out as described by Maniatis et al. (14). Transduction was performed as described previously (4) using the phage P1vir.
Enzyme assays. Cultures were grown at 30°C to a density of about 50 Klett units. All assays were performed with cells that had been washed in 1% KCl and suspended at a concentration that contained 1 to 1.5 mg of protein per ml. Assays for ß-galactosidase were performed on detergent-treated whole cells as described previously (11). Urease was assayed in the presence of 40 mM potassium phosphate, pH 7.5, 16 µg/ml cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, and 100 mM urea at 30°C. Reactions were initiated by the addition of urea. Portions of the assay mixtures were withdrawn at intervals, and the amount of ammonia released was determined by conversion to indolephenol (21), which was quantified by comparison to a standard curve and by measuring the absorbance at 546 nm. The protein content of whole cells was measured by the method of Lowry et al. (10) with bovine serum albumin as the standard. Specific activities are expressed as nanomoles of product formed (ß-galactosidase) or substrate consumed (urease) per minute per milligram of cell protein at 30°C. All data are the results of three or more independent assays with standard errors of the means of less than 10% in every case.
Primer extension.
Primer extension analysis was carried out as described by Yu and DiRita (23). Total RNA was isolated from DH5
/pCB1612 (for the full ureDp region), pCB634, or DH5
/pCB1630 (for UreP2) grown to mid-log phase in L broth. A template of 50 µg of total RNA was used in each reaction mixture. Two ureD open-reading-frame-specific primers, ure240 and ure200 (5'-CCGGCCTGGTGAAAGCGGAG-3' and 5'-CCTGCCAGCCTTTTTTGAGTGGTGGTAAC-3', respectively), were used for primer extension and for DNA sequencing. The DNA nucleotide sequence was determined for the primer extension by using the chain termination method with the Thermo sequenase radiolabeled terminator cycle sequencing kit (USB) supplied by the manufacturer.
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (25K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Sequence of the ureD promoter region. Bent arrowheads indicate the start of transcription from the two promoters (P2 and P1, respectively) in the region. Underlined regions indicate the presumed –35 and –10 regions corresponding to P2. The boxed nucleotides indicate the NAC binding site. The double-underlined nucleotides are the beginning of the ureD coding region. The vertical bars with numbers indicate the endpoints of the deletions and fusions used. Primer 200 and Primer 240 indicate the positions of the 5' end of the 29-mer and 20-mer primers, respectively, used in primer extension experiments.
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. NAC dependence of urease activity and ure-lac expression under nitrogen limitation and nitrogen excess growth conditions
|
In other words, the pattern of ß-galactosidase regulation was qualitatively similar to the pattern of urease regulation. However, there were significant quantitative differences. For example, in the Nac+ strain, urease expression was 75-fold higher under nitrogen-limiting conditions than under excess conditions, whereas ß-galactosidase expression was only 12-fold higher. Since there appeared to be both a NAC-dependent and a NAC-independent regulation affecting expression, we suspected that there might be more than one promoter in this region, as was found for K. oxytoca (2). We therefore generated a deletion fragment (Fig. 2, P1) that lacked 77 bp of the upstream region. This fragment retains the NAC binding site and all the material between the NAC binding site and the start of the ureD coding region. In the Nac+ strain there was a very strong NAC-dependent regulation of ß-galactosidase expression, with at least 370 times more ß-galactosidase formed under nitrogen limitation than under nitrogen excess. All of this regulation was NAC dependent, since there was no detectable ß-galactosidase expression in the Nac– strain. In the NacConst strain, ß-galactosidase expression was constitutive at high levels, and there was no increase under nitrogen limitation.
![]() View larger version (14K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. The ureD-lacZ transcriptional fusions used. Solid lines indicate DNA sequences present, and the numbers on the lines indicate the last nucleotide remaining, using the numbering of Fig. 1. P1 and P2 indicate the approximate positions of the two promoters, and SD indicates the approximate position of the Shine-Dalgarno sequence in front of the ureD coding sequence. Full refers to the 262-bp fragment illustrated in Fig. 1. The negative numbers indicate constructs that contain K. pneumoniae DNA upstream of the sequence shown in Fig. 1. lacZ indicates the promoterless lacZ sequence in plasmid pRS415 (19).
|
If the activities of the two promoters were independent of each other, we would expect that ß-galactosidase expression from the full-length promoter should be the sum of the expression from the two promoters in isolation. This clearly was not the case. For example, in the Nac– strain, all expression comes from P2 (P1 is inactive in the absence of NAC). However, the isolated P2 promoter gave significantly higher levels of ß-galactosidase than did the full promoter (Table 2). One explanation for this discrepancy might be that the long leader between P2 and the start of translation might be responsible for the reduction in expression. To test this, we examined a variant of the P1 construct (P1
) (Fig. 1) in which 50 bp of sequence between P1 and the start of translation had been deleted. In this construct, only NAC-dependent transcription should yield ß-galactosidase. Again, expression of ß-galactosidase was significantly higher in the deleted version than when the intervening sequence was present. Therefore, our working model is that some feature of the sequence between the promoters and the coding sequence is responsible for attenuating the effectiveness of the transcription.
The data in Table 2 suggest that there is a NAC-independent promoter within the 77-bp region present in construct P2 and a NAC-dependent promoter located in the 72-bp region between bp 78 and 149. To determine their locations precisely, we next carried out a primer extension analysis to identify the start of transcription in these regions. The data in Fig. 3 suggest that the transcript coming from P2 begins with the G at bp 48, and the transcript from P1 begins at bp 155 or 156 (T and G, respectively). An analysis of the sequence upstream of bp 48 reveals the sequence AATAAT about 10 bp upstream of the start of transcription (of P2), a reasonable match to the consensus –10 region of
70-dependent promoters. Eighteen base pairs upstream of that putative –10 region we found the sequence TTGACG, a good match to the consensus –35 region for
70-dependent promoters. We were concerned that the sequence of the promoter extends only to –47 in our constructs and that we might be missing regulatory information upstream of P2. However, similar constructs with an additional 30 or 253 bp of upstream sequence gave the same pattern of transcription (data not shown).
![]() View larger version (54K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Primer extension of mRNA from the ureD promoter region. Primers extending back to bp 200 and 240 were used to determine the start of transcription. The same primers were used to generate a DNA sequencing ladder. Arrows indicate the start of transcription, and the DNA sequence (complementary to the sequencing ladder but matching the sequence shown in Fig. 1) is indicated. GATC indicates the DNA sequencing ladder. RT indicates the experimental lane with reverse transcriptase present during the reaction. Primer indicates a control reaction with no reverse transcriptase. Note that Primer 200 gave an artifactual signal, somewhat shorter than the actual runoff transcript generated by reverse transcriptase. (A) Primer extension of mRNA isolated from strain DH5 carrying a plasmid with the complete ureDp region (designated Full in Fig. 2) and a plasmid expressing K. pneumoniae nac constitutively. (B) Primer extension of mRNA from DH5 carrying only a plasmid with ureDp2 (designated P2 in Fig. 2).
|
70-dependent promoters. At best, we noted a sequence, AATCAT, which might represent a –10 consensus sequence, but this was located at –13, a bit farther from the start of transcription than would be expected. The absence of an obvious promoter consensus for P1 is not surprising because, in the absence of NAC, no expression of the promoter was detectable. Posttranscriptional effects on urease activity. If there were no posttranscriptional effects, the ratio of urease to ß-galactosidase (enzyme activity to transcriptional activity) should be constant, at least for a given construct. However, the data in Table 2 contradict this assumption. For example, if we compare the ratio of enzymatic activity from the chromosomally encoded ure operon to transcriptional activity from the full-length fusion, we find that the ratio varies from a low of 0.04 to a high of 0.26. Two features became immediately obvious from the data in Table 2. First, even under conditions in which only P2 was expressed (the Nac– strain), the ratio of urease to ß-galactosidase was not constant. Second, in general, the lower the amount of transcription, the lower the ratio of urease to ß-galactosidase. Therefore, we examined this result in more detail.
A wild-type strain carrying the full-length ure-lac fusion (to measure transcription) and the wild-type ure operon was grown with three different nac alleles in a variety of nitrogen sources, as described in Materials and Methods, to give a range of transcriptional activities for the ure promoters (Fig. 4). The results of these 20 experiments show clearly that, below 2,000 U of transcription (measured as ß-galactosidase), the enzyme activity per transcript (measured as the urease/ß-galactosidase ratio) fell almost linearly with transcriptional activity. At amounts of transcription corresponding to 2,000 U of ß-galactosidase or more, the value of urease/ß-galactosidase more or less leveled off, though the actual value of that ratio was slightly dependent on the growth medium, with the most nitrogen-limited cultures giving the highest ratios (above 0.2). The raw data for this figure are given in Table S1 in the supplemental material. There was considerable scatter in the ratios for cells with high levels of transcriptional activity, but the linearity of the data at lower levels of transcription was clear.
![]() View larger version (9K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. Amount of urease activity formed per transcript as a function of transcription amount. Three strains differing only in their nac allele were used, KC2653 (Nac+), KC6122 (Nac–), and KC6146 (Nacconst) (which was grown both with and without IPTG present), and each carried a wild-type ure operon and a ure-lacZ fusion (designated Full in Fig. 2) inserted at the rbs locus. The strains were grown in glucose minimal medium with five different nitrogen sources, resulting in a variety of levels of ure transcription. The specific activity of the urease formed by the cells was determined by direct assay of urease, and the amount of transcription from the ure promoter was determined indirectly by measuring ß-galactosidase from the ure-lac fusion. The ratio of urease activity to ß-galactosidase activity (urease activity per transcript) was plotted against ß-galactosidase activity (amount of transcription). The raw data for the 20 different conditions are given in Table S1 in the supplemental material. All data were the result of three or more assays of independent cultures with standard errors of the means of less than 10% in all cases.
|
|
|
|---|
The earlier work with K. oxytoca (2) strongly suggested the existence of an Ntr-independent promoter for ureD, but its location and regulation were not identified. The primer extension data that identify the ureP2 transcription start site at bp 48 agree well with the presence of a rather good match to a consensus
70-dependent promoter (TTGACG-N18-AATAAT; located at bp 10 to 40 in Fig. 1). Growth rate limitation by poor nitrogen sources results in a slight (two- to threefold) increase in ureDp2 activity, but our data define only the quantity of the effect (and the fact that it increases with increasing limitation, up to the limit of two- to threefold), not the molecular mechanism. In other words, we are unable to distinguish among models such as growth rate control, stringent response (caused by nitrogen starvation), or a variety of other alternatives. In any event, this transcriptional effect on ureDp2 accounts for only a portion of the Ntr-independent nitrogen regulation of urease formation.
Another portion of that regulation is an indirect effect of the observation that, when transcription of the ure operon is low, the amount of active urease formed per transcript is low. Again, our data define the magnitude of the effect (the amount of active urease formed per transcript is at least sevenfold lower when transcription is 8% of the maximum) but do not address the molecular mechanism of the effect. The ure operon encodes not only the structural genes for the enzyme (ureABC) but also the genes required for nickel incorporation, ureD and ureEFG (21). It is tempting to speculate that it is a limitation for the nickel-incorporating apparatus that restricts the amount of active urease that can be formed. However, our data also are consistent with the hypothesis that at low concentrations of UreA, UreB, and UreC subunits, apoenzyme assembly is defective (9).
What is clear is that the two- to threefold activation of ureDp2 in response to nitrogen limitation is not mediated by NAC or the Ntr system. Strains lacking NAC (Table 2) or NtrC (data not shown) both show the elevation in response to growth-rate-limiting nitrogen sources. However, ureDp1 remains the focus of our future work. Its absolute dependence on NAC for expression is unique, and the position of the NAC binding site relative to the polymerase suggests a very different mechanism for the activation of ureDp1 than for hutP.
Published ahead of print on 24 August 2007. ![]()
Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://jb.asm.org/. ![]()
|
|
|---|
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»