Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
    • JB Special Collection
    • JB Classic Spotlights
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JB
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Bacteriology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
    • JB Special Collection
    • JB Classic Spotlights
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JB
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
GENETICS AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY

SoxRS-Mediated Lipopolysaccharide Modification Enhances Resistance against Multiple Drugs in Escherichia coli

Joon-Hee Lee, Kang-Lok Lee, Won-Sik Yeo, Su-Jin Park, Jung-Hye Roe
Joon-Hee Lee
1Department of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Pusan National University, Busan 609-735, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: joonhee@pusan.ac.kr
Kang-Lok Lee
2Laboratory of Molecular Microbiology, School of Biological Sciences, and Institute of Microbiology, Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Won-Sik Yeo
2Laboratory of Molecular Microbiology, School of Biological Sciences, and Institute of Microbiology, Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Su-Jin Park
1Department of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Pusan National University, Busan 609-735, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jung-Hye Roe
2Laboratory of Molecular Microbiology, School of Biological Sciences, and Institute of Microbiology, Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JB.01474-08
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is a major constituent of the outer membrane of gram-negative bacteria that serves as a barrier against harmful molecules, including antibiotics. The waaYZ locus that encodes the LPS core biosynthetic function in Escherichia coli was found to be induced strongly by superoxide generators but not by H2O2, ethanol, or heat shock. This induction was dependent on SoxRS, a superoxide and nitric oxide sensing system, through a soxbox in the waaY promoter that binds SoxS. A ΔwaaYZ mutant became more sensitive to some superoxide generators, and the activation of SoxR by these drugs became more sensitized in the mutant. Through phenotypic microarray analysis, we found that the mutant became sensitive to a wide variety of chemicals not restricted to oxidizing agents. We found that the mutant is under envelope stress and is altered in LPS composition, as monitored by the level of σE activation and changes in the electrophoretic mobility of LPS, respectively. waaY expression was also regulated by MarA (multiple-antibiotic resistance regulator), which shares a binding site (soxbox) with SoxS, and was induced by salicylate, a nonoxidative compound. These results demonstrate a novel way of protecting gram-negative bacteria against various compounds by modifying LPS, possibly through phosphorylation. Since either oxidant or nonoxidant compounds elicit resistance toward themselves and other toxic drugs, this mechanism could serve as an efficient way for pathogenic bacteria to enhance survival during antibiotic treatment within an oxidant-rich host immune environment.

Living organisms have evolved efficient mechanisms to sense environmental stresses and to control the expression of related defense genes. Bacterial defense mechanisms against oxidative stress and antibiotic drugs are of particular interest because both are used by pathogenic bacteria to survive the phagocytic attack of immune cells that generate reactive oxygen species (ROS) and to escape from antibiotic medication. Antibiotic resistance in bacteria often arises from the acquisition of antibiotic-specific resistance genes or from a broader mechanism against multiple antibiotics. In Escherichia coli, the mar regulon (multiple antibiotic resistant) confers resistance not only to multiple antibiotics but also to organic solvents and disinfectants (2). MarR, a repressor of the marR-marAB operon, is inactivated by some antibiotics and phenolic compounds to derepress marR-marAB expression. MarA activates the expression of diverse genes, including acrAB, micF, mlr-1, -2, and -3, slp, and inaA, which endow cells with resistance (3).

The response to oxidative stress is mediated through two major regulatory systems in E. coli, namely, OxyR, targeted toward peroxides, and SoxRS, targeted toward superoxide and nitric oxides (27). Both contribute to increased survival of E. coli against oxidative attack by the host immune system. SoxR serves as a sensor for superoxide and nitric oxide through its [2Fe-2S] center and activates soxS transcription when oxidized. The increased level of SoxS then activates the expression of target genes that repair damaged DNAs, maintain the redox balance, and defend against toxic radicals.

The close relationship between the oxidative stress response and antibiotic resistance is manifested in the extensive overlap between soxRS and the mar regulon (7, 26) and was highlighted by a recent report that the killing mechanism of bactericidal antibiotics involves oxidative damage (16). The mar regulon includes many genes that are regulated by SoxRS in response to oxidative and nitrosative stresses (3, 21). This is due to the close relatedness of the two regulators SoxS and MarA (21), which bind to a common set of promoters with a regulatory sequence called either the “soxbox,” for SoxS binding, or the “marbox,” for MarA binding (3, 21). Although these promoters are not stimulated to the same extent by both activators, the members of the soxRS and mar regulons can roughly be regarded as the same.

More than 60 direct target genes of SoxRS and MarA have been catalogued, with functions related to drug resistance (acrAB, tolC, marAB, and micF), iron homeostasis (fur, yggX, and fpr), reducing oxidants (sodA and zwf), DNA repair (nfo), oxidant-resistant isoenzymes (fumC and acnA), and others (ribA and pqi-5) (7, 14, 15, 26, 27). Except for those related to drug efflux and outer membrane porin regulation, most genes are related to intracellular functions. In this study, we present a new target gene of the SoxRS system that modifies lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in the cell envelope and provides resistance against a broad range of drugs that include oxidants and antibiotics. This provides a new example of a mechanism for the cross talk between the oxidative stress response and drug resistance, which will enable pathogenic bacteria to survive the oxidative host defense and antibiotic medications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Strains, phages, and plasmids.All strains, phages, and plasmids used in this study are listed in Table 1. DH5α was used for the cloning of recombinant DNA, and GC4468 was used as a host strain to harbor chromosomal copies of various lacZ fusions and mutations. The promoter-probing plasmid pRS415, which contains the promoterless lacZYA genes, was used for the construction of promoter-lacZ fusions.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1.

Bacterial strains, plasmids, and phages used in this study

Culture conditions.LB medium (1% tryptone, 1% NaCl, and 0.5% yeast extract) was used for routine bacterial culture. Antibiotics were used at the following concentrations: ampicillin, 50 μg/ml; kanamycin, 25 μg/ml; tetracycline, 20 μg/ml; and chloramphenicol, 20 μg/ml. To determine the effects of various chemicals on gene expression, the lacZ fusion strains were grown in LB broth to an optical density at 600 nm (OD600) of 0.2 with vigorous shaking, treated with the agents at the indicated concentrations for 1 h, and assayed for β-galactosidase activity as described by Miller (22).

DNA and RNA manipulation.Reactions for DNA manipulation were carried out according to standard protocols or as recommended by the manufacturers. We always confirmed the final sequences of the constructs after every recombination process with DNA. Cellular RNA was extracted with Ultraspec-II total RNA isolation kits (Biotecx Laboratories Inc.) as recommended by the manufacturer, except that the cells were first treated with lysozyme (4 mg/ml) in 50 mM glucose, 25 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), and 10 mM EDTA for 5 min on ice.

Construction of single-copy lacZ fusions and P1vir transduction. waaY promoters of various lengths were cloned into pRS415 (pJH97, pJH98, and pJH99) and transformed into GC4468. The resulting transformants were infected with phage λRZ5 to bring about homologous recombination between the plasmid and phage DNAs in vivo, as described previously (32). The recombinant phage were then lysogenized into GC4468 at the att site to make single-copy lysogens (JH101, JH103, and JH104), which were screened by the lowest basal level of β-galactosidase activity. Introduction of various mutations into these lacZ fusion strains was done through P1vir transduction as previously described (31). The soxRS, oxyR, and waaYZ mutations were transduced from BW829 (sox-8::cat), BW831 (soxS3::Tn10), BW847 (soxR4::cat), BW900 (soxR9::cat), GSO18 (ΔoxyR::kan), JWK5249 (ΔmarA::kan), JH1001 (ΔwaaY::kan), and JH1003 (ΔwaaYZ::kan) into the recipient strains, such as GC4468 and soxS-lacZ (MS1343), rpoH P3-lacZ (CAG16037), and waaY-lacZ (JH101 and JH103) mutants.

Primer extension and Northern hybridization.Primer extension and Northern analysis were done as described by Sambrook et al. (28). For primer extension, an oligonucleotide (5′-AATAATTGATTTCGCATCTCGTGG-3′) (see Fig. 2B) complementary to the downstream region of the putative +1 site was labeled at the 5′ end with [γ-32P]ATP (Amersham) by T4 polynucleotide kinase. One hundred micrograms of RNA and 5′-end-labeled primer (104 to 105 cpm) were hybridized, and cDNA was synthesized by avian myeloblastosis virus reverse transcriptase (Promega). The resulting cDNAs were analyzed by electrophoresis on a 6% polyacrylamide gel containing 7 M urea. For Northern analysis, denatured RNA samples were electrophoresed in a 1% agarose gel containing formaldehyde and transferred to a Hybond-N+ membrane (Amersham). The 809-bp SspI-SspI fragment covering the whole waaY gene and upstream 303-bp HindIII-ScaI fragment (Fig. 1A) were used as probes that were labeled by the random priming method.

FIG. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 1.

waa gene cluster of E. coli K-12, location of the paraquat-inducible promoter, and structure of the LPS core region and action site of WaaY. (A) waa gene cluster and waaYZU region. The small arrow in waaR indicates the location of the H73 promoter. (B) Structure of the LPS core region of E. coli K-12 and genes involved in biosynthesis, shown at their approximate sites of action. P, phosphate; Hep, heptose; Glc, glucose; Gal, galactose; KDO, 3-deoxy-d-manno-2-octulosonic acid; PEtN, 2-aminoethyl phosphate. The proposed site of waaY action is circled.

Gel mobility shift assay.The 97-bp AluI-AluI fragment of the waaY promoter (Fig. 2B) was size fractionated from an agarose gel and labeled with [α-32P]dATP, using Klenow DNA polymerase. DNA binding reaction mixtures (20 μl) contained 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 75 mM KCl, 2 mM dithiothreitol, 10% (vol/vol) glycerol, 1 fmol of 32P-labeled probe, 10 ng of poly(dI-dC):poly(dI-dC) (Sigma), and the indicated amounts of purified SoxS. The reaction mixture was electrophoresed in a 5% polyacrylamide gel (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 3 mM sodium acetate, 1 mM EDTA) and visualized by autoradiography on X-ray film or by phosphorimaging. HaeIII-digested fragments of pGEM-3zf(+) (Promega) and unlabeled probe were used as nonspecific and specific competitors, respectively. The SoxS protein used in this experiment was a native form which was overexpressed and purified as described by Li and Demple, using the SoxS expression plasmid pKOXS (20).

FIG. 2.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 2.

Primer extension analysis and sequence of waaYp region. (A) Primer extension was carried out with total RNAs from paraquat-treated (0.8 mM) and untreated wild-type cells. +1 sites are indicated by arrows and asterisks. Growth conditions for RNA extraction were the same as those for the β-galactosidase assay. Induction was quantified as 19-fold by phosphorimager analysis (Bio-Rad). (B) Sequence of the waaY promoter region and details.

Gene disruption.Disruption of the waaY, waaZ, and waaYZ genes was done as described by Nagano et al. (25). The internal regions of the waaY, waaZ, and waaYZ genes (SspI-BssHII, ApaI-NsiI, and SspI-NsiI fragments, respectively) were displaced in vitro with a kanamycin/bleomycin resistance cassette from pUC4-KIXX (Pharmacia). The recombinant plasmids were transformed into a temperature-sensitive polA mutant (CP367) in which only cointegrates can form colonies at 42°C on antibiotic-containing plates. The cointegrates isolated at 42°C were further grown without antibiotics at 30°C for five consecutive generations to allow excision of the plasmid body by a second recombination event. The desired mutations were selected from Kanr Amps colonies and transferred from the CP367 to GC4468 background by P1vir transduction. The correct gene replacement in all mutants was confirmed by Southern hybridization. In-frame deletion of waaY was done as described by Baba et al. (6). The waaY::kan locus was transferred from JWK3600 to GC4468 by P1vir transduction. The kanamycin resistance cassette was excised from the flanking FRT site by using an FLP helper plasmid (pCP20; Ampr Chlr), which was then removed by cultivation without antibiotics at 37°C. Colonies that lost all resistance were selected by replica plating. The correct in-frame deletion of the waaY gene was confirmed by PCR and sequencing.

LPS extraction and electrophoresis.LPS was extracted from whole cells by the hot phenol method as described by Chart (10). An overnight culture of cells was harvested, washed, and resuspended in TE buffer (10 mM Tris-Cl, pH 8.0, 1 mM EDTA). An equal volume of hot phenol (68°C) was added, and the culture was mixed carefully to form a uniform “milky” emulsion and incubated at 68°C for 15 min. After centrifugation at 3,000 × g for 45 min, the upper, aqueous phase was collected. Further extraction by cold phenol was done twice to remove remaining proteins and lipids. LPS in the aqueous pool was electrophoresed by 15% sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) and visualized by silver staining.

PM.Phenotypic microarray (PM) analysis was performed by Biolog Inc., essentially as described elsewhere (9). Briefly, this analysis uses a redox chemistry employing cell respiration as a reporter. If the treatment of a drug is strongly positive for cell growth, the cells respire actively, reducing a tetrazolium dye and forming a strong color. If it is weakly positive or negative, the respiration is slowed or stopped, and less color or no color is formed. The differences in colorimetric intensities of the wild-type and mutant cells were recorded, with the colorimetric scores for the wild-type cells set as a reference. Thus, positive differences mean that the drug treatment enhanced mutant cell growth, and negative scores mean that the mutant cells became sensitive to the drug. In our study, the waaYZ mutant (JH1003) was compared pairwise with the isogenic parental strain (GC4468). The consensus results were taken from two independent runs with each of the two strains.

RESULTS

Oxidant-responsive promoter of waaY.Among paraquat-inducible promoters that were screened through cloning with the promoter-probing plasmid pRS415 (18, 19), a strongly induced one (H73) was located upstream of the waaY (formerly rfaY) gene, in the middle of the LPS core biosynthetic gene cluster (Fig. 1A). The waaQGPSBORYZU cluster has been suggested to constitute a single transcription unit, based on genetic studies (13, 29), and the WaaY protein has been suggested to be a kinase that phosphorylates HepII, a heptose of the LPS inner core (Fig. 1B) (40). The syntenic organization of the waaY gene is conserved in most E. coli strains, Shigella spp., and Salmonella spp. (13).

To precisely locate the inducible transcription start site of the waaY promoter (waaYp), we performed primer extension analysis of waaY transcripts in vivo. The results showed a dramatic induction of the transcripts by paraquat, and the primary start site was mapped 171 nucleotides upstream from the start codon for WaaY (Fig. 2A). Minor RNAs of shorter lengths might reflect either minor downstream start sites or non-full-length extension. From the major transcriptional start site (+1), the −35 and −10 elements of the paraquat-responsive waaYp were predicted. A consensus sequence for SoxS binding (soxbox) was located adjacent to the −35 element (Fig. 2B). The inducibility of waaYp by various oxidants was examined by monitoring β-galactosidase activity from a waaYp-lacZ fusion integrated into the chromosome as a single copy (JH101 strain). As demonstrated in Fig. 3, waaYp responded dramatically to superoxide generators, such as paraquat, lawsone, menadione, and plumbagin, and much less to H2O2 and ethanol. It did not respond to heat (42 to 50°C) or a reducing agent (dithiothreiol) (data not shown).

FIG. 3.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 3.

Response of waaYp to various chemicals. Single-copy waaYp-lacZ fusion cells (JH101) in early exponential phase (OD600 = 0.2) were treated aerobically with various concentrations of chemicals for 1 h at 37°C and then assayed for β-galactosidase activity (Miller units). The concentration of ethanol is indicated separately (%). These are the most representative results from multiple measurements.

SoxRS-dependent regulation of waaY transcription.Since waaYp responded almost exclusively to superoxide generators, we examined whether it is controlled by SoxRS. For this purpose, we introduced various soxRS and oxyR mutant loci into JH101 and estimated the expression of waaYp-lacZ (Fig. 4). As expected, the soxRS mutations (sox-8 and soxS3) abolished the paraquat induction of waaYp, whereas a soxR constitutive mutation (soxR4) elevated the expression in the absence of paraquat. The oxyR mutation did not affect induction. Therefore, it is clear that waaYp is under the control of SoxRS. To estimate the size of the waaY transcript, we performed Northern analysis (Fig. 4B). The size of the induced RNA, which was observed in the wild type but not in the soxRS mutant, was about 1.6 kb. This is much larger than the length of the waaY coding region and is predicted to encompass most of the waaZ gene. Since a probe upstream of waaYp (303-bp HindIII-ScaI fragment) (Fig. 1A) failed to detect paraquat-inducible transcripts (data not shown), waaYp most likely produces a waaY (or, at maximum, waaYZ) transcript under conditions of superoxide stress.

FIG. 4.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 4.

soxRS-dependent induction of waaY. (A) waaYp activity was assayed in various soxRS and oxyR mutant backgrounds, using single-copy lacZ fusions. The isogenic wild type (WT) is JH101, and all mutants are derivatives of JH101: the sox-8::cat mutant (JH201) has a deletion mutation of soxRS, the soxS3::Tn10 mutant (JH301) has an insertion mutation of soxS, the soxR4::cat mutant (JH401) has a constitutive soxR mutation, and the oxyR::kan mutant (JH501) has an insertion mutation of oxyR. β-Galactosidase activity was assayed after paraquat (PQ) treatment for 1 h with vigorous aeration. (B) Northern analysis was done with RNAs from the wild type (GC4468) and the soxRS mutant (BW829). An SspI-SspI fragment including the entire waaY open reading frame was used as a probe (Fig. 1A). A 1.6-kb transcript was induced 11.3-fold (quantified by phosphorimaging). (C) A 98-bp AluI-AluI fragment, from positions −101 to −4 (Fig. 2B), was used as a probe for a gel shift assay with increasing amounts of purified SoxS. Lanes 1 to 3, 0, 65, and 130 ng of purified SoxS, respectively (0, 250, and 500 nM, respectively); lanes 4 to 8, 130 ng of SoxS (500 nM), with nonspecific competitor in 65-, 130-, and 650-fold molar excess (lanes 4 to 6, respectively) or with specific competitor in 5- and 10-fold molar excess (lanes 7 and 8, respectively) over the labeled probe.

We then examined the direct binding of purified SoxS protein to the DNA fragment containing the putative soxbox and found that it binds specifically to the waaYp fragment (Fig. 4C). An in vitro transcription assay also demonstrated that SoxS acts as a sole activator for RNA polymerase containing σ70 to transcribe waaYp (data not shown).

waaYZ mutants become sensitive to menadione and plumbagin but not to paraquat.To find out the role of waaYZ genes in the oxidative stress response, we constructed ΔwaaY, ΔwaaZ, and ΔwaaYZ mutants and investigated their sensitivity to superoxide generators. While both ΔwaaY and ΔwaaYZ mutants became sensitive to menadione and plumbagin, the ΔwaaY mutant was a bit less sensitive than the ΔwaaYZ mutant, and the ΔwaaZ mutant was only slightly sensitive to these agents (data not shown). This indicated that waaY might play a major role in protection, but there might be a minor involvement of downstream genes, either waaZ or possibly waaU. To better address this possibility, we constructed an in-frame deletion mutant of waaY (ΔwaaYinf ) to exclude polar effects and performed a complementation test with a plasmid encoding WaaY or WaaYZ. Similar results were obtained, showing that the ΔwaaYinf mutant had significant sensitivity to menadione and plumbagin, but to a lesser extent than that of the ΔwaaYZ mutant (Fig. 5A). This phenotype was complemented by the plasmid carrying waaY, confirming the major role of WaaY, but the ΔwaaYinf mutant sometimes showed partial complementation (Fig. 5A). We suggest that waaY plays an important role in resistance, but we do not rule out the contribution of downstream waaZ for full activity.

FIG. 5.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 5.

Sensitivity of waaY mutant to superoxide stress. (A) Different amounts of wild-type (GC4468), ΔwaaYZ (JH1003), and ΔwaaYinf cells were grown on LB plates containing superoxide generators for 16 h, and growth was compared. For complementation, a plasmid expressing WaaY (pWaaY) was transformed into the ΔwaaYZ and ΔwaaYinf mutants, and the growth of the transformants was compared. Vec, empty plasmid control. (B) soxSp-lacZ fusions in the wild-type (MS1343) and ΔwaaYZ (JH2003) backgrounds were assayed for β-galactosidase activity to monitor SoxR activity after menadione, plumbagin, and paraquat treatment for 1 h. For complementation, a plasmid carrying waaYZ (pWaaYZ) was transformed into the wild-type and ΔwaaYZ strains, and cells were assayed for β-galactosidase activity. To see the SoxR dependence of the activation, a soxR null mutation (BW900) was introduced into both the wild-type and ΔwaaYZ strains and assayed for β-galactosidase activity.

Unexpectedly, waaYZ mutations did not increase the sensitivity to paraquat, and the ΔwaaYinf mutant was even slightly resistant to paraquat (Fig. 5A). We do not understand this unexpected resistance of the ΔwaaYinf mutant, but the selective sensitivity of the mutants could have arisen from a differential susceptibility toward the drugs, not from the loss of some defense mechanism toward superoxide in general. To test this hypothesis, we examined whether the waaY mutant exhibited differential sensitivity toward superoxide-generating drugs in inducing soxRS target genes. For this purpose, the ΔwaaYZ mutant allele was transduced into a soxSp-lacZ reporter strain, MS1343 (17), and the inducibility of LacZ activity was measured. Compared with the wild type, the ΔwaaYZ mutant became more sensitized to activate the SoxRS system in response to menadione and plumbagin, inducing soxSp-lacZ to higher levels at lower concentrations of oxidants (Fig. 5B). This induction was totally dependent on SoxR, since all of the response disappeared by introducing a soxR null mutation. However, upon paraquat treatment, there was no difference between the waaYZ mutant and the wild type (Fig. 5B). This coincides with no increase in susceptibility to paraquat. These results strongly support the hypothesis that the waaYZ genes determine susceptibility toward different drugs, not toward superoxide radical itself.

Changes in outer membrane structure, including LPS.Since WaaY and WaaZ are components of the LPS core synthetic system, disruption of their genes is likely to cause some alteration in the outer membrane structure, which can be monitored through activation of envelope stress-responsive genes. To do this, the ΔwaaYZ allele was introduced into a σE-dependent reporter strain containing an rpoH P3-lacZ fusion (11). The rpoH P3 promoter is recognized by σE, an ECF sigma factor that is activated in response to various forms of extracytoplasmic stresses, including abnormality in LPS (1, 24, 34). Compared with the isogenic parental strain (CAG16037), an about fivefold increase in rpoH P3 expression was observed in the ΔwaaYZ mutant (Fig. 6A), suggesting the presence of envelope stress in the mutant. To determine whether the mutant was indeed altered in LPS structure, we extracted LPSs from the ΔwaaY and ΔwaaYZ mutants and analyzed them by SDS-PAGE. LPSs from the mutants showed faster migration, revealing an alteration in LPSs from the mutants (Fig. 6B). These results indicated that WaaYZ-induced modification of LPS structure could serve as a barrier against certain oxidants and drugs. Since WaaY was suggested to be a kinase that phosphorylates heptose II in the LPS inner core (13, 40), a change in phosphorylation status might be one reason for this altered electrophoretic mobility.

FIG. 6.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 6.

Changes in outer membrane structure of waaYZ mutant. (A) β-Galactosidase activity of the envelope stress reporter strain (rpoH P3-lacZ single-copy fusion) was assayed in the wild-type background (CAG16037) or ΔwaaYZ mutant background (JH3003). (B) LPSs were extracted from the wild-type (wt) (GC4468), ΔwaaY (JH1001), and ΔwaaYZ (JH1003) strains, separated by 15% SDS-PAGE, and visualized by silver staining.

WaaYZ confers a protective function against a large number of toxic drugs.If LPS modification serves as a barrier to certain drugs, the waaYZ mutant should be sensitive to a wider range of drugs in addition to superoxide generators. Consistently, the waaYZ mutant was sensitive to lawsone and some antibiotics, including chloramphenicol and 8-hydroxyquinoline (data not shown). For further examination of this possibility, we performed PM analysis of the waaYZ mutant to find out its phenotype under broader growth conditions (9, 42). Among about 2,000 test conditions, including a wide variety of C, N, P, and S sources, a wide pH range, and chemical agents that disrupt various biological pathways, we found that the ΔwaaYZ mutant showed dramatic sensitivity to a large number of chemicals compared with the reference strain (GC4468). Table 2 summarizes the list of chemicals that exhibited a pronounced growth inhibitory effect on the mutant relative to the wild type (with differential growth values of <−150). It was evident that the ΔwaaYZ mutant was sensitive to a number of antibiotics and toxic compounds, in addition to redox cycling chemicals. Therefore, WaaYZ-mediated LPS modification confers protection on E. coli cells against a wide variety of chemicals not restricted to superoxide generators. We observed that the waaYZ mutant became resistant to four antibiotics (bleomycin, phleomycin, dihydrostreptomycin, and neomycin) (not listed in Table 2). This most likely resulted from the presence of the kanamycin/bleomycin resistance cassette in the disrupted waaYZ gene (30) and can be regarded as a good positive control for the validity of the PM assay.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2.

Compounds toward which the ΔwaaYZ mutant showed increased sensitivity

The waaY promoter is also induced by antibiotics through the MarA system.Since we found that WaaY confers resistance against a wide range of antibiotics, we were intrigued to find out whether the gene is inducible through the MarA system, which responds to various drugs and confers resistance against multiple antibiotics. We examined the effect of sodium salicylate, a known inducer of the marA regulon, in the waaYp-lacZ reporter strain with a different mutant background. The results in Fig. 7 demonstrate that sodium salicylate also induces the waaY gene as efficiently as paraquat does, and the induction is dependent on both the SoxRS and MarA systems. This contrasts with induction by paraquat, which was solely dependent on the SoxS system. We think that this partial SoxRS dependence of salicylate induction could be due to intracellular ROS generation by salicylate treatment, as reported recently (16). When the predicted soxbox sequence was deleted, induction by both paraquat and sodium salicylate was completely gone, indicating that MarA and SoxS activation was mediated through the same cis-acting site. Therefore, the waaY gene that is induced by superoxide generators (redox cyclers) is also induced by nonredox cyclers through the MarA system and confers resistance toward a wide range of chemicals.

FIG. 7.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 7.

waaY promoter is also induced by antibiotics through the mar system. Wild-type single-copy waaYp-lacZ fusion cells (JH103) and derivatives of the ΔsoxRS (JH203) and ΔmarA (JH603) mutants were treated with paraquat (0.1 mM) and sodium salicylate (10 mM) at early exponential phase (OD600 = 0.2), and after 1 h of incubation with vigorous aeration, β-galactosidase activity was assayed. For soxbox deletion in the wild-type background, JH104 was used. We confirmed that the soxbox was correctly deleted and the −35 box remained intact by sequencing.

DISCUSSION

It is generally accepted that LPS and the outer membranes of gram-negative bacteria function as a barrier against various antibacterial compounds. However, the mechanism by which this protective function is exerted is relatively less understood. While LPS has an extremely complicated and diverse structure, even in the same species (e.g., E. coli), genetic evidence suggests that the barrier property is attributed mainly to lipid A and the core oligosaccharides, since mutations in O-antigen synthesis do not markedly affect membrane integrity or permeability (13, 29). The negatively charged phosphoryl substituents of LPS core oligosaccharides have been postulated as a critical structure to ensure the integrity of the outer membrane through cross-linking of neighboring LPS molecules via binding of divalent cations, thereby conferring resistance to hydrophobic antibiotics and detergents (40, 41). So far, the critical phosphoryl decoration of LPS core in bacteria such as E. coli, Salmonella enterica, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa has been ascribed to the function of waaP (formally rfaP), whose product phosphorylates HepI (37, 39, 40), and waaP mutation has been reported to cause hypersensitivity to novobiocin and SDS (40).

Although the function of waaY was also assigned to the phosphorylation of HepII in the LPS inner core, the contribution of waaY to the barrier property for resistance has not been addressed. Because the waaP activity was prerequisite to the waaY function and only mutation of waaP resulted in hypersensitivity to novobiocin and SDS (40), little attention has been paid to a role for WaaY. Here we demonstrated that the waaYZ locus is particularly induced to function under specific conditions of oxidative stress or antibiotic challenge and apparently plays a role in conferring resistance to a wide range of chemicals and antibiotics under these conditions. waaY seems to play a major role in this resistance, possibly through the additional phosphorylation of LPS. However, we do not absolutely rule out the contribution of waaZ function, because waaZ mutation also causes some susceptibility to drugs. An independent study also showed that the overexpression of WaaZ could make structural changes in LPS, implying that waaZ may contribute to LPS structure (12).

While no relationship between oxidative stress and the structural modification of LPS has been reported, waaY was recently suggested as a member of the soxRS regulon in a genome-wide transcription analysis (8). In addition to the SoxRS-dependent regulation of waaY expression, our study demonstrated that the regulation occurred on an internal promoter upstream of waaY within the big waa operon cluster and that the loss of waaY caused a change in LPS structure, which must have been sensed as an extracytoplasmic stress that activated the SigE regulon (Fig. 6A). Therefore, WaaY is an active component in E. coli to guarantee the structural integrity of the outer membrane barrier. It echoes the effect of mutation in gmhD (formally known as rfaD, htrM, or hldD), encoding an epimerase in LPS biogenesis (Fig. 1A), which also results in envelope stress (23). This coincides with the proposal that structural changes in LPS can be sensed by the SigE system, which activates an additional set of genes to cope with external challenges (24). The additional phosphorylation by WaaY should give a significant advantage to the way that WaaP functions, and our PM analysis showed that the waaYZ mutant became sensitive to a large number of chemicals.

When we looked into the syntenic organization of the waa gene cluster, we found that waaY is conserved among most E. coli strains, Salmonella spp., and Shigella spp. but not in Pseudomonas spp., where waaP is conserved (http://string.embl.de/ ). Unlike waaY, waaZ is not conserved in some E. coli strains and Shigella spp., and its function is not known (13).

The expression of waaY is upregulated by both redox-cycling and non-redox-cycling drugs through the SoxRS and MarRA systems. In the previous regulatory model, the expression of waaP and waaY was regulated by RfaH (SfrB), an antiterminator protein, and this regulation was achieved over the whole transcript from the top promoter in front of waaQ (29). In this mechanism, however, even specific induction of the remote genes would demand the extravagant expression of the whole operon. However, our results demonstrate that waaY has its own inducible promoter that responds to a wide variety of chemicals and can be expressed specifically as the occasion arises.

It has been revealed that the ‘soxbox’ (ANNGCAYNNWNNNNCWA) accommodates binding by each of three transcriptional regulators, namely, SoxS, MarA, and Rob (21). The overexpression of Rob also confers resistance against multiple antibiotics and oxidative stress, although the triggering signal of Rob is not yet known (5). Through these multiple regulators, promoters with the soxbox sequence can respond to various stimuli, including multiple antibiotics, generators of superoxide or nitric oxide, and organic solvents (2, 27, 33). The SoxS/MarA/Rob regulon involves ROS scavengers, drug efflux systems, and repair functions (7, 26). Since recent results showed that treatment with many bactericidals produces intracellular ROS by transient depletion of NADH (16), antibiotic-derived induction of ROS scavengers in parallel would provide a great advantage in survival. So far, the induction of drug efflux systems has been regarded as the primary mechanism to confer multiple-drug resistance. However, if the induction of WaaY or WaaYZ by any compound triggering the SoxS/MarA/Rob system causes a modification of LPS capable of inducing resistance, it might serve as a reinforced barrier against other drugs. Therefore, strengthening of the outer membrane barrier against diverse drugs is another clever way of ensuring multiple-drug resistance. This strategy would be extremely beneficial for pathogenic bacteria to escape the oxidative attack by the immune system, which is often accompanied by treatment with chemotherapeutic drugs. Since WaaY can be induced by any oxidative stress and by drugs, we suggest that bacteria use WaaY as a common tool to deal with two stresses and to confer resistance during the infectious process, as it can efficiently meet attacks by both stresses.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to B. Weiss and C. A. Gross for providing various E. coli strains.

This work was supported by a genetic engineering research grant from the Ministry of Education, Korea. This work was also supported by a Korea Research Foundation grant funded by the Korean government (KRF-2007-331-C00222), by a Korea Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) grant funded by the Korean government (MOST) (no. R01-2007-000-20732-0), and by the Korea Ministry of Environment as The Eco-Technopia 21 Project (no. 102-081-067).

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 20 October 2008.
    • Accepted 11 April 2009.
  • Copyright © 2009 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Alba, B. M., and C. A. Gross. 2004. Regulation of the Escherichia coli sigma-dependent envelope stress response. Mol. Microbiol. 52 : 613-619.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. 2.↵
    Alekshun, M. N., and S. B. Levy. 1999. The mar regulon: multiple resistance to antibiotics and other toxic chemicals. Trends Microbiol. 7 : 410-413.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.↵
    Alekshun, M. N., and S. B. Levy. 1997. Regulation of chromosomally mediated multiple antibiotic resistance: the mar regulon. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 41 : 2067-2075.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  4. 4.
    Altuvia, S., M. Almiron, G. Huisman, R. Kolter, and G. Storz. 1994. The dps promoter is activated by OxyR during growth and by IHF and sigma S in stationary phase. Mol. Microbiol. 13 : 265-272.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.↵
    Ariza, R. R., Z. Li, N. Ringstad, and B. Demple. 1995. Activation of multiple antibiotic resistance and binding of stress-inducible promoters by Escherichia coli Rob protein. J. Bacteriol. 177 : 1655-1661.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    Baba, T., T. Ara, M. Hasegawa, Y. Takai, Y. Okumura, M. Baba, K. A. Datsenko, M. Tomita, B. L. Wanner, and H. Mori. 2006. Construction of Escherichia coli K-12 in-frame, single-gene knockout mutants: the Keio collection. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2 : 2006.0008.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    Barbosa, T. M., and S. B. Levy. 2000. Differential expression of over 60 chromosomal genes in Escherichia coli by constitutive expression of MarA. J. Bacteriol. 182 : 3467-3474.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    Blanchard, J. L., W. Y. Wholey, E. M. Conlon, and P. J. Pomposiello. 2007. Rapid changes in gene expression dynamics in response to superoxide reveal SoxRS-dependent and independent transcriptional networks. PLoS ONE 2 : e1186.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Bochner, B. R., P. Gadzinski, and E. Panomitros. 2001. Phenotype microarrays for high-throughput phenotypic testing and assay of gene function. Genome Res. 11 : 1246-1255.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    Chart, H. 1994. Methods in practical laboratory bacteriology, p.1-20. CRP Press Inc., Boca Raton, FL.
  11. 11.↵
    De Las Penas, A., L. Connolly, and C. A. Gross. 1997. The sigmaE-mediated response to extracytoplasmic stress in Escherichia coli is transduced by RseA and RseB, two negative regulators of sigmaE. Mol. Microbiol. 24 : 373-385.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. 12.↵
    Frirdich, E., B. Lindner, O. Holst, and C. Whitfield. 2003. Overexpression of the waaZ gene leads to modification of the structure of the inner core region of Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide, truncation of the outer core, and reduction of the amount of O polysaccharide on the cell surface. J. Bacteriol. 185 : 1659-1671.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    Heinrichs, D. E., J. A. Yethon, and C. Whitfield. 1998. Molecular basis for structural diversity in the core regions of the lipopolysaccharides of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica. Mol. Microbiol. 30 : 221-232.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. 14.↵
    Koh, Y. S., W. H. Chung, J. H. Lee, and J. H. Roe. 1999. The reversed SoxS-binding site upstream of the ribA promoter in Escherichia coli. Mol. Gen. Genet. 261 : 374-380.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.↵
    Koh, Y. S., and J. H. Roe. 1996. Dual regulation of the paraquat-inducible gene pqi-5 by SoxS and RpoS in Escherichia coli. Mol. Microbiol. 22 : 53-61.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    Kohanski, M. A., D. J. Dwyer, B. Hayete, C. A. Lawrence, and J. J. Collins. 2007. A common mechanism of cellular death induced by bactericidal antibiotics. Cell 130 : 797-810.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    Koo, M. S., J. H. Lee, S. Y. Rah, W. S. Yeo, J. W. Lee, K. L. Lee, Y. S. Koh, S. O. Kang, and J. H. Roe. 2003. A reducing system of the superoxide sensor SoxR in Escherichia coli. EMBO J. 22 : 2614-2622.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. 18.↵
    Lee, J. H. 2000. Regulation of superoxide-inducible genes in Escherichia coli. Ph.D. thesis. Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
  19. 19.↵
    Lee, J. H., and J. H. Roe. 1997. Isolation and characterization of paraquat-inducible promoters from Escherichia coli. J. Microbiol. 35 : 277-283.
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    Li, Z., and B. Demple. 1994. SoxS, an activator of superoxide stress genes in Escherichia coli. Purification and interaction with DNA. J. Biol. Chem. 269 : 18371-18377.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    Martin, R. G., W. K. Gillette, S. Rhee, and J. L. Rosner. 1999. Structural requirements for marbox function in transcriptional activation of mar/sox/rob regulon promoters in Escherichia coli: sequence, orientation and spatial relationship to the core promoter. Mol. Microbiol. 34 : 431-441.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. 22.↵
    Miller, J. H. 1972. A short course in bacterial genetics: a laboratory manual and handbook for Escherichia coli and related bacteria. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY.
  23. 23.↵
    Missiakas, D., J. M. Betton, and S. Raina. 1996. New components of protein folding in extracytoplasmic compartments of Escherichia coli SurA, FkpA and Skp/OmpH. Mol. Microbiol. 21 : 871-884.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. 24.↵
    Missiakas, D., and S. Raina. 1998. The extracytoplasmic function sigma factors: role and regulation. Mol. Microbiol. 28 : 1059-1066.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. 25.↵
    Nagano, Y., R. Matsuno, and Y. Sasaki. 1991. An essential gene of Escherichia coli that has sequence similarity to a chloroplast gene of unknown function. Mol. Gen. Genet. 228 : 62-64.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    Pomposiello, P. J., M. H. Bennik, and B. Demple. 2001. Genome-wide transcriptional profiling of the Escherichia coli responses to superoxide stress and sodium salicylate. J. Bacteriol. 183 : 3890-3902.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    Pomposiello, P. J., and B. Demple. 2001. Redox-operated genetic switches: the SoxR and OxyR transcription factors. Trends Biotechnol. 19 : 109-114.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. 28.↵
    Sambrook, J., E. F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY.
  29. 29.↵
    Schnaitman, C. A., and J. D. Klena. 1993. Genetics of lipopolysaccharide biosynthesis in enteric bacteria. Microbiol. Rev. 57 : 655-682.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    Shaw, K. J., P. N. Rather, R. S. Hare, and G. H. Miller. 1993. Molecular genetics of aminoglycoside resistance genes and familial relationships of the aminoglycoside-modifying enzymes. Microbiol. Rev. 57 : 138-163.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    Silhavy, T. S., M. L. Berman, and L. W. Enquist. 1984. Experiments with gene fusions. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY.
  32. 32.↵
    Simons, R. W., F. Houman, and N. Kleckner. 1987. Improved single and multicopy lac-based cloning vectors for protein and operon fusions. Gene 53 : 85-96.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  33. 33.↵
    Sulavik, M. C., L. F. Gambino, and P. F. Miller. 1995. The MarR repressor of the multiple antibiotic resistance (mar) operon in Escherichia coli: prototypic member of a family of bacterial regulatory proteins involved in sensing phenolic compounds. Mol. Med. 1 : 436-446.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. 34.↵
    Tam, C., and D. Missiakas. 2005. Changes in lipopolysaccharide structure induce the sigma(E)-dependent response of Escherichia coli. Mol. Microbiol. 55 : 1403-1412.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. 35.
    Touati, D. 1983. Cloning and mapping of the manganese superoxide dismutase gene (sodA) of Escherichia coli K-12. J. Bacteriol. 155 : 1078-1087.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.
    Tsaneva, I. R., and B. Weiss. 1990. soxR, a locus governing a superoxide response regulon in Escherichia coli K-12. J. Bacteriol. 172 : 4197-4205.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    Walsh, A. G., M. J. Matewish, L. L. Burrows, M. A. Monteiro, M. B. Perry, and J. S. Lam. 2000. Lipopolysaccharide core phosphates are required for viability and intrinsic drug resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Mol. Microbiol. 35 : 718-727.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  38. 38.
    Wu, J., and B. Weiss. 1992. Two-stage induction of the soxRS (superoxide response) regulon of Escherichia coli. J. Bacteriol. 174 : 3915-3920.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    Yethon, J. A., J. S. Gunn, R. K. Ernst, S. I. Miller, L. Laroche, D. Malo, and C. Whitfield. 2000. Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium waaP mutants show increased susceptibility to polymyxin and loss of virulence in vivo. Infect. Immun. 68 : 4485-4491.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    Yethon, J. A., D. E. Heinrichs, M. A. Monteiro, M. B. Perry, and C. Whitfield. 1998. Involvement of waaY, waaQ, and waaP in the modification of Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide and their role in the formation of a stable outer membrane. J. Biol. Chem. 273 : 26310-26316.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    Yethon, J. A., and C. Whitfield. 2001. Purification and characterization of WaaP from Escherichia coli, a lipopolysaccharide kinase essential for outer membrane stability. J. Biol. Chem. 276 : 5498-5504.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. 42.↵
    Zhou, L., X. H. Lei, B. R. Bochner, and B. L. Wanner. 2003. Phenotype microarray analysis of Escherichia coli K-12 mutants with deletions of all two-component systems. J. Bacteriol. 185 : 4956-4972.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
SoxRS-Mediated Lipopolysaccharide Modification Enhances Resistance against Multiple Drugs in Escherichia coli
Joon-Hee Lee, Kang-Lok Lee, Won-Sik Yeo, Su-Jin Park, Jung-Hye Roe
Journal of Bacteriology Jun 2009, 191 (13) 4441-4450; DOI: 10.1128/JB.01474-08

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Bacteriology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
SoxRS-Mediated Lipopolysaccharide Modification Enhances Resistance against Multiple Drugs in Escherichia coli
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Bacteriology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Bacteriology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
SoxRS-Mediated Lipopolysaccharide Modification Enhances Resistance against Multiple Drugs in Escherichia coli
Joon-Hee Lee, Kang-Lok Lee, Won-Sik Yeo, Su-Jin Park, Jung-Hye Roe
Journal of Bacteriology Jun 2009, 191 (13) 4441-4450; DOI: 10.1128/JB.01474-08
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Bacterial Proteins
Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial
Escherichia coli
Escherichia coli Proteins
Lipopolysaccharides
Trans-Activators
transcription factors

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JB
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #Jbacteriology

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0021-9193; Online ISSN: 1098-5530