AbstractToxin-antitoxin (TA) systems are widespread in bacterial chromosomes but their functions remain enigmatic. Although many are transcriptionally upregulated by stress conditions, it is unclear what role they play in cellular responses to stress and to what extent the role of a given TA system homologue varies between different bacterial species. In this work we investigate the role of the DNA damage-inducible TA system HigBA of Caulobacter crescentus in the SOS response and discover that in addition to the toxin HigB affecting cell cycle gene expression through inhibition of the master regulator CtrA, HigBA possesses a transcription factor third component, HigC, which both auto-regulates the TA system and acts independently of it. Through HigC, the system exerts downstream effects on antibiotic (ciprofloxacin) resistance and cell cycle gene expression. HigB and HigC had inverse effects on cell cycle gene regulation, with HigB reducing and HigC increasing the expression of CtrA-dependent promoters. Neither HigBA nor HigC had any effect on formation of persister cells in response to ciprofloxacin. Rather, their role in the SOS response appears to be as transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulators of cell cycle-dependent gene expression, transmitting the status of the SOS response as a regulatory input into the cell cycle control network via CtrA.ImportanceAlmost all bacteria respond to DNA damage by upregulating a set of genes that helps them to repair and recover from the damage, known as the SOS response. The set of genes induced during the SOS response varies between species, but frequently includes toxin-antitoxin systems. However, it is unknown what the consequence of inducing these systems is, and whether they provide any benefit to the cells. We show here that the DNA damage-induced TA system HigBA of the asymmetrically dividing bacterium Caulobacter crescentus affects the cell cycle regulation of this bacterium. HigBA also has a transcription factor encoded immediately downstream of it, named here HigC, which controls expression of the TA system and potentially other genes as well. Therefore, this work identifies a new role for TA systems in the DNA damage response, distinct from non-specific stress tolerance mechanisms which had been proposed previously.
Live-cell monitoring of periodic gene expression in synchronous human cells identifies Forkhead genes involved in cell cycle control
