scholarly journals Changes in DnaA-Dependent Gene Expression Contribute to the Transcriptional and Developmental Response of Bacillus subtilis to Manganese Limitation in Luria-Bertani Medium

2010 ◽  
Vol 192 (15) ◽  
pp. 3915-3924 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon E. Hoover ◽  
Weihong Xu ◽  
Wenzhong Xiao ◽  
William F. Burkholder
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Bacillus Subtilis ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Transcriptional Response ◽  
Sos Response ◽  
Replication Initiation ◽  
Specific Gene ◽  
Transcriptional Responses

ABSTRACT The SOS response to DNA damage in bacteria is a well-known component of the complex transcriptional responses to genotoxic environmental stresses such as exposure to reactive oxygen species, alkylating agents, and many of the antibiotics targeting DNA replication. However, bacteria such as Bacillus subtilis also respond to conditions that perturb DNA replication via a transcriptional response mediated by the replication initiation protein DnaA. In addition to regulating the initiation of DNA replication, DnaA directly regulates the transcription of specific genes. Conditions that perturb DNA replication can trigger the accumulation of active DnaA, activating or repressing the transcription of genes in the DnaA regulon. We report here that simply growing B. subtilis in LB medium altered DnaA-dependent gene expression in a manner consistent with the accumulation of active DnaA and that this was part of a general transcriptional response to manganese limitation. The SOS response to DNA damage was not induced under these conditions. One of the genes positively regulated by DnaA in Bacillus subtilis encodes a protein that inhibits the initiation of sporulation, Sda. Sda expression was induced as cells entered stationary phase in LB medium but not in LB medium supplemented with manganese, and the induction of Sda inhibited sporulation-specific gene expression and the onset of spore morphogenesis. In the absence of Sda, manganese-limited cells initiated spore development but failed to form mature spores. These data highlight that DnaA-dependent gene expression may influence the response of bacteria to a range of environmental conditions, including conditions that are not obviously associated with genotoxic stress.

scholarly journals Regulation of Cell Division in Bacteria by Monitoring Genome Integrity and DNA Replication Status

2019 ◽  
Vol 202 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter E. Burby ◽  
Lyle A. Simmons
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Cell Division ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Genome Instability ◽  
Sos Response ◽  
Bacterial Cells ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Content Type

ABSTRACT All organisms regulate cell cycle progression by coordinating cell division with DNA replication status. In eukaryotes, DNA damage or problems with replication fork progression induce the DNA damage response (DDR), causing cyclin-dependent kinases to remain active, preventing further cell cycle progression until replication and repair are complete. In bacteria, cell division is coordinated with chromosome segregation, preventing cell division ring formation over the nucleoid in a process termed nucleoid occlusion. In addition to nucleoid occlusion, bacteria induce the SOS response after replication forks encounter DNA damage or impediments that slow or block their progression. During SOS induction, Escherichia coli expresses a cytoplasmic protein, SulA, that inhibits cell division by directly binding FtsZ. After the SOS response is turned off, SulA is degraded by Lon protease, allowing for cell division to resume. Recently, it has become clear that SulA is restricted to bacteria closely related to E. coli and that most bacteria enforce the DNA damage checkpoint by expressing a small integral membrane protein. Resumption of cell division is then mediated by membrane-bound proteases that cleave the cell division inhibitor. Further, many bacterial cells have mechanisms to inhibit cell division that are regulated independently from the canonical LexA-mediated SOS response. In this review, we discuss several pathways used by bacteria to prevent cell division from occurring when genome instability is detected or before the chromosome has been fully replicated and segregated.

scholarly journals Moxifloxacin Activates the SOS Response in Mycobacterium tuberculosis in a Dose- and Time-Dependent Manner

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 255
Author(s):  
Angelo Iacobino ◽  
Giovanni Piccaro ◽  
Manuela Pardini ◽  
Lanfranco Fattorini ◽  
Federico Giannoni
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Mycobacterium Tuberculosis ◽  
Physiological State ◽  
Transcriptional Response ◽  
Sos Response ◽  
Resistant Mutant ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Gyra Gene ◽  
Drug Concentrations

Previous studies on Escherichia coli demonstrated that sub-minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of fluoroquinolones induced the SOS response, increasing drug tolerance. We characterized the transcriptional response to moxifloxacin in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Reference strain H37Rv was treated with moxifloxacin and gene expression studied by qRT-PCR. Five SOS regulon genes, recA, lexA, dnaE2, Rv3074 and Rv3776, were induced in a dose- and time-dependent manner. A range of moxifloxacin concentrations induced recA, with a peak observed at 2 × MIC (0.25 μg/mL) after 16 h. Another seven SOS responses and three DNA repair genes were significantly induced by moxifloxacin. Induction of recA by moxifloxacin was higher in log-phase than in early- and stationary-phase cells, and absent in dormant bacilli. Furthermore, in an H37Rv fluoroquinolone-resistant mutant carrying the D94G mutation in the gyrA gene, the SOS response was induced at drug concentrations higher than the mutant MIC value. The 2 × MIC of moxifloxacin determined no significant changes in gene expression in a panel of 32 genes, except for up-regulation of the relK toxin and of Rv3290c and Rv2517c, two persistence-related genes. Overall, our data show that activation of the SOS response by moxifloxacin, a likely link to increased mutation rate and persister formation, is time, dose, physiological state and, possibly, MIC dependent.

scholarly journals Regulation of DNA Replication Licensing and Re-Replication by Cdt1

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 5195
Author(s):  
Hui Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Genome Stability ◽  
E3 Ligase ◽  
S Phase ◽  
Replication Initiation ◽  
Nuclear Antigen ◽  
Repair Synthesis ◽  
Ubiquitin E3 Ligase

In eukaryotic cells, DNA replication licensing is precisely regulated to ensure that the initiation of genomic DNA replication in S phase occurs once and only once for each mitotic cell division. A key regulatory mechanism by which DNA re-replication is suppressed is the S phase-dependent proteolysis of Cdt1, an essential replication protein for licensing DNA replication origins by loading the Mcm2-7 replication helicase for DNA duplication in S phase. Cdt1 degradation is mediated by CRL4Cdt2 ubiquitin E3 ligase, which further requires Cdt1 binding to proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) through a PIP box domain in Cdt1 during DNA synthesis. Recent studies found that Cdt2, the specific subunit of CRL4Cdt2 ubiquitin E3 ligase that targets Cdt1 for degradation, also contains an evolutionarily conserved PIP box-like domain that mediates the interaction with PCNA. These findings suggest that the initiation and elongation of DNA replication or DNA damage-induced repair synthesis provide a novel mechanism by which Cdt1 and CRL4Cdt2 are both recruited onto the trimeric PCNA clamp encircling the replicating DNA strands to promote the interaction between Cdt1 and CRL4Cdt2. The proximity of PCNA-bound Cdt1 to CRL4Cdt2 facilitates the destruction of Cdt1 in response to DNA damage or after DNA replication initiation to prevent DNA re-replication in the cell cycle. CRL4Cdt2 ubiquitin E3 ligase may also regulate the degradation of other PIP box-containing proteins, such as CDK inhibitor p21 and histone methylase Set8, to regulate DNA replication licensing, cell cycle progression, DNA repair, and genome stability by directly interacting with PCNA during DNA replication and repair synthesis.

Control of genome stability by Slx protein complexes

2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Rouse
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Protein Interactions ◽  
Cellular Response ◽  
Genome Stability ◽  
Molecular Mechanisms ◽  
Excision Repair ◽  
Protein Complexes ◽  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Strand Break

The six Saccharomyces cerevisiae SLX genes were identified in a screen for factors required for the viability of cells lacking Sgs1, a member of the RecQ helicase family involved in processing stalled replisomes and in the maintenance of genome stability. The six SLX gene products form three distinct heterodimeric complexes, and all three have catalytic activity. Slx3–Slx2 (also known as Mus81–Mms4) and Slx1–Slx4 are both heterodimeric endonucleases with a marked specificity for branched replication fork-like DNA species, whereas Slx5–Slx8 is a SUMO (small ubiquitin-related modifier)-targeted E3 ubiquitin ligase. All three complexes play important, but distinct, roles in different aspects of the cellular response to DNA damage and perturbed DNA replication. Slx4 interacts physically not only with Slx1, but also with Rad1–Rad10 [XPF (xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group F)–ERCC1 (excision repair cross-complementing 1) in humans], another structure-specific endonuclease that participates in the repair of UV-induced DNA damage and in a subpathway of recombinational DNA DSB (double-strand break) repair. Curiously, Slx4 is essential for repair of DSBs by Rad1–Rad10, but is not required for repair of UV damage. Slx4 also promotes cellular resistance to DNA-alkylating agents that block the progression of replisomes during DNA replication, by facilitating the error-free mode of lesion bypass. This does not require Slx1 or Rad1–Rad10, and so Slx4 has several distinct roles in protecting genome stability. In the present article, I provide an overview of our current understanding of the cellular roles of the Slx proteins, paying particular attention to the advances that have been made in understanding the cellular roles of Slx4. In particular, protein–protein interactions and underlying molecular mechanisms are discussed and I draw attention to the many questions that have yet to be answered.

scholarly journals Genetic Composition of the Bacillus subtilis SOS System

2005 ◽  
Vol 187 (22) ◽  
pp. 7655-7666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nora Au ◽  
Elke Kuester-Schoeck ◽  
Veena Mandava ◽  
Laura E. Bothwell ◽  
Susan P. Canny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Bacillus Subtilis ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Consensus Sequence ◽  
Transcriptional Response ◽  
Open Reading Frames ◽  
Mobility Shift ◽  
E Coli ◽  
Recombination Protein ◽  
Lexa Binding

ABSTRACT The SOS response in bacteria includes a global transcriptional response to DNA damage. DNA damage is sensed by the highly conserved recombination protein RecA, which facilitates inactivation of the transcriptional repressor LexA. Inactivation of LexA causes induction (derepression) of genes of the LexA regulon, many of which are involved in DNA repair and survival after DNA damage. To identify potential RecA-LexA-regulated genes in Bacillus subtilis, we searched the genome for putative LexA binding sites within 300 bp upstream of the start codons of all annotated open reading frames. We found 62 genes that could be regulated by putative LexA binding sites. Using mobility shift assays, we found that LexA binds specifically to DNA in the regulatory regions of 54 of these genes, which are organized in 34 putative operons. Using DNA microarray analyses, we found that 33 of the genes with LexA binding sites exhibit RecA-dependent induction by both mitomycin C and UV radiation. Among these 33 SOS genes, there are 22 distinct LexA binding sites preceding 18 putative operons. Alignment of the distinct LexA binding sites reveals an expanded consensus sequence for the B. subtilis operator: 5′-CGAACATATGTTCG-3′. Although the number of genes controlled by RecA and LexA in B. subtilis is similar to that of Escherichia coli, only eight B. subtilis RecA-dependent SOS genes have homologous counterparts in E. coli.

scholarly journals Control of Initiation of Sporulation by Replication Initiation Genes in Bacillus subtilis

2000 ◽  
Vol 182 (10) ◽  
pp. 2989-2991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine P. Lemon ◽  
Iren Kurtser ◽  
Judy Wu ◽  
Alan D. Grossman
Keyword(s):  
Bacillus Subtilis ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Replication Initiation ◽  
Spore Formation ◽  
Temperature Sensitive ◽  
Temperature Sensitive Mutation ◽  
Initiation Of Dna Replication ◽  
Replication Initiation Proteins

ABSTRACT Initiation of spore formation in Bacillus subtilisappears to depend on initiation of DNA replication. This regulation was first identified using a temperature-sensitive mutation indnaB. We found that mutations in the replication initiation genes dnaA and dnaD also inhibit sporulation, indicating that inhibition of sporulation is triggered by general defects in the function of replication initiation proteins.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document