A Strategy for Antagonizing Quorum Sensing

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Volume 28, Issue 4, Pages (November 2007)
Advertisements

A Strategy for Antagonizing Quorum Sensing
Crystal Structure of the Tandem Phosphatase Domains of RPTP LAR
Volume 41, Issue 6, Pages (March 2011)
Volume 10, Issue 5, Pages (November 2002)
Volume 127, Issue 5, Pages (December 2006)
Volume 37, Issue 5, Pages (March 2010)
Interaction of Era with the 30S Ribosomal Subunit
Volume 129, Issue 6, Pages (June 2007)
Ping Wang, Katelyn A. Doxtader, Yunsun Nam  Molecular Cell 
Volume 20, Issue 11, Pages (November 2012)
Volume 125, Issue 1, Pages (April 2006)
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages (February 2002)
Volume 26, Issue 2, Pages (April 2007)
Volume 124, Issue 1, Pages (January 2006)
Volume 57, Issue 6, Pages (March 2015)
Volume 18, Issue 1, Pages (April 2005)
Volume 39, Issue 6, Pages (September 2010)
Volume 15, Issue 5, Pages (September 2004)
Volume 36, Issue 4, Pages (November 2009)
Volume 28, Issue 4, Pages (November 2007)
Structural Basis for an Unexpected Mode of SERM-Mediated ER Antagonism
Volume 130, Issue 6, Pages (September 2007)
Volume 20, Issue 5, Pages (May 2012)
The Mechanism of E. coli RNA Polymerase Regulation by ppGpp Is Suggested by the Structure of their Complex  Yuhong Zuo, Yeming Wang, Thomas A. Steitz 
Structural Basis of Atg8 Activation by a Homodimeric E1, Atg7
Volume 28, Issue 1, Pages (October 2007)
Volume 139, Issue 6, Pages (December 2009)
Rong Shi, Laura McDonald, Miroslaw Cygler, Irena Ekiel  Structure 
Volume 20, Issue 6, Pages (December 2005)
Volume 25, Issue 12, Pages e3 (December 2017)
Volume 108, Issue 1, Pages (January 2002)
Volume 31, Issue 2, Pages (July 2008)
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages (March 2007)
Volume 69, Issue 5, Pages e5 (March 2018)
Volume 133, Issue 1, Pages (April 2008)
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages 9-19 (October 2005)
Structural Basis for Endosomal Targeting by the Bro1 Domain
Zhenjian Cai, Nabil H. Chehab, Nikola P. Pavletich  Molecular Cell 
Volume 9, Issue 8, Pages (August 2001)
Hyunsuk Suh, Dane Z. Hazelbaker, Luis M. Soares, Stephen Buratowski 
Volume 95, Issue 7, Pages (December 1998)
Crystal Structure of the DegS Stress Sensor
Mode of Regulation and the Insulation of Bacterial Gene Expression
Volume 57, Issue 6, Pages (March 2015)
Claudia Schneider, James T. Anderson, David Tollervey  Molecular Cell 
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages (February 2014)
DNA-Induced Switch from Independent to Sequential dTTP Hydrolysis in the Bacteriophage T7 DNA Helicase  Donald J. Crampton, Sourav Mukherjee, Charles.
Structure of an RNA Silencing Complex of the CRISPR-Cas Immune System
Volume 24, Issue 3, Pages (November 2006)
Diverse Pore Loops of the AAA+ ClpX Machine Mediate Unassisted and Adaptor- Dependent Recognition of ssrA-Tagged Substrates  Andreas Martin, Tania A. Baker,
A Role for Intersubunit Interactions in Maintaining SAGA Deubiquitinating Module Structure and Activity  Nadine L. Samara, Alison E. Ringel, Cynthia Wolberger 
Volume 14, Issue 4, Pages (April 2006)
Volume 29, Issue 6, Pages (March 2008)
Volume 52, Issue 3, Pages (November 2013)
Volume 35, Issue 2, Pages (July 2009)
Specific DNA-RNA Hybrid Recognition by TAL Effectors
Volume 34, Issue 3, Pages (May 2009)
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages (January 2012)
Volume 139, Issue 4, Pages (November 2009)
Visualizing the ATPase Cycle in a Protein Disaggregating Machine: Structural Basis for Substrate Binding by ClpB  Sukyeong Lee, Jae-Mun Choi, Francis.
A YidC-like Protein in the Archaeal Plasma Membrane
Volume 21, Issue 10, Pages (October 2014)
Crystal Structures of RNase H Bound to an RNA/DNA Hybrid: Substrate Specificity and Metal-Dependent Catalysis  Marcin Nowotny, Sergei A. Gaidamakov, Robert.
Volume 18, Issue 5, Pages (May 2005)
Volume 13, Issue 5, Pages (May 2005)
Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages (November 2005)
Volume 6, Issue 3, Pages (February 2014)
Volume 20, Issue 5, Pages (May 2012)
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages (February 2002)
Presentation transcript:

A Strategy for Antagonizing Quorum Sensing Guozhou Chen, Lee R. Swem, Danielle L. Swem, Devin L. Stauff, Colleen T. O'Loughlin, Philip D. Jeffrey, Bonnie L. Bassler, Frederick M. Hughson  Molecular Cell  Volume 42, Issue 2, Pages 199-209 (April 2011) DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.003 Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Molecular Cell 2011 42, 199-209DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.003) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 CviR-Mediated Quorum Sensing (A) Agonist/antagonists studied in this work. (B) At high cell density, autoinducer (C6-HSL; circles) accumulates, binding to and stabilizing CviR. CviR:C6-HSL functions as a transcriptional activator of genes, including vioA, controlled by quorum sensing. Molecular Cell 2011 42, 199-209DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.003) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 CviR Bound to the Antagonist CL Adopts a Closed Conformation (A) The crossed-domain conformation of CviR:CL, with the two monomers colored orange and blue (Table S1). Importantly, although a portion of one of the interdomain linkers (residues 190–196; dashed line) is disordered in the crystal structure, the conformation of the other linker is supported by clear electron density. The CL molecules (Figure 1A) are shown with a space-filling representation. (B) Comparison of the X-ray structures of TraR bound to 3-oxo-C8-HSL and DNA (Zhang et al., 2002) and CviR bound to CL. (C) Surface representation of the LBD of CviR:CL. In the left panel, the region that interacts with the DBD of the other monomer is highlighted in blue. In the right panel, a subset of the LBD residues that contact the DBD are highlighted in red. (D) CviR:CL with the DNA recognition helices highlighted in red. See also Figure S2. Molecular Cell 2011 42, 199-209DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.003) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Response of CviR to AHLs (A) Agonist activity was evaluated by growing an E. coli CviR reporter strain 7 hr in the indicated AHL concentrations. Induction of vioA-gfp was measured by fluorimetry. Most error bars (standard deviation [SD], n = 3) are not visible because they are smaller than the symbols used. (B) Antagonist activity was evaluated by growing the reporter strain 7 hr in 1 μM C6-HSL autoinducer plus the indicated concentrations of C8-HSL, C10-HSL, or CL. Error bars represent the SD (n = 3). (C) Transcriptional activation by CviR was evaluated with in vitro transcription reactions containing RNA polymerase and α32P-UTP. Radiolabeled transcripts corresponding to vioA or to the constitutively transcribed RNAI (control) were analyzed by urea-PAGE and phosphorimaging. (D) Data in (C) were quantified with ImageQuant and are displayed as mean ± SD; n = 4. Molecular Cell 2011 42, 199-209DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.003) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Structure-Function Analysis of a CviR Ligand Series (A) Purified CviR or CviR M89S bound to the indicated AHL was included in DNA binding reactions with a fluorescein-labeled DNA containing the CviR′ binding site. Data are plotted as the change in fluorescence polarization resulting from CviR binding (ΔF) divided by fluorescence polarization in the absence of CviR (Fo). We note that using gel-shift assays, we previously (Swem et al., 2009) failed to detect the decreased DNA binding by the CviR:C10-HSL complex reported here. We attribute this discrepancy to our earlier use of much higher DNA concentrations, which had the effect of obscuring the relatively modest difference in affinity. Error bars represent the SD (n = 3). (B) CviR-RNA polymerase interaction assessed by bacterial adenylate cyclase two-hybrid (BACTH) analysis. E. coli BTH101 was transformed with plasmids expressing the Bordetella pertussis adenylate cyclase T25 domain fused to CviR and the T18 domain fused to either CviR, the N-terminal domain of Chromobacterium violaceum RNA polymerase alpha subunit (αNTD), the C-terminal domain of C. violaceum RNA polymerase alpha subunit (αCTD), or region 4 of C. violaceum RNA polymerase sigma-70 (σ4). T25-zip and T18-zip are fusions to the constitutively interacting GCN4 leucine zipper. Strains were grown on LB agar with the addition of the indicated AHL at 10 μM final concentration. CviR is unstable and rapidly degraded in the absence of AHL, accounting for the absence of BACTH signal in plates lacking AHL. (C) Close-up view of the ligand-binding pockets of CviR:C6-HSL and CviR:C10-HSL. The ligand and Met 89 residues in the CviR:C6-HSL and CviR:C10-HSL complexes are colored cyan and gray, respectively. (D) Stereo view of the ligand-binding pockets of CviR bound to C6-HSL (cyan) and CL (gray), respectively. See also Figure S3. Molecular Cell 2011 42, 199-209DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.003) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Transcriptional Activation by CviR In Vivo and In Vitro (A) E. coli vioA-gfp expressing CviR was grown in the indicated concentrations of C10-HSL or C10-HSL plus 1 μM C6-HSL. GFP fluorescence was measured and normalized to the optical density of the culture at 600 nm (OD600). Data are mean ± SD; n = 3. (B) E. coli vioA-gfp expressing CviR M89F or CviR M89L was grown in the indicated concentrations of C10-HSL or C10-HSL plus 1 μM C6-HSL and analyzed as in (A). (C) E. coli vioA-gfp expressing CviR M89A or CviR M89S was grown in the presence of the indicated concentrations of C6-HSL or C10-HSL and analyzed as in (A). (D) CviR in vitro transcription. CviR or CviR M89S bound to C10-HSL were included in in vitro transcription reactions containing RNA polymerase and α32P-UTP. Radiolabeled transcripts corresponding to vioA or the constitutively transcribed RNAI were analyzed by urea-PAGE and phosphorimaging. (E) Data in (D) were quantified with ImageQuant and are displayed as mean ± SD; n = 4. Molecular Cell 2011 42, 199-209DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.003) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 The Partial Antagonist C6-HSL Induces a Closed Conformation in CviR′ (A) E. coli vioA-gfp expressing CviR′ or CviR′ S89M/N77Y was grown in the presence of the indicated concentration of C6-HSL, C10-HSL, or CL. GFP fluorescence was measured and normalized to OD600. Data are mean ± SD; n = 3. (B) E. coli vioA-gfp expressing CviR′ S89M/N77Y was grown in the indicated concentration of C10-HSL or CL (agonist), or in the presence of 1 μM C6-HSL plus the indicated concentration of C10-HSL or CL (antagonist). Samples were analyzed as in (A). (C) The crossed-domain conformation of CviR′:C6-HSL (Table S1), with the two monomers colored green and yellow. The C6-HSL molecules are shown in magenta using a space-filling representation. (D) Comparison of the cross-domain conformations of CviR:CL (orange and blue) and CviR′:C6-HSL (green and yellow). The N-terminal LBDs were aligned in order to emphasize the different orientations of C-terminal DBDs. (E) The interactions between Met 253 and Met 257 side chains (cyan) and the cavity created when C6-HSL (magenta) binds in place of the native autoinducer is shown. The protein backbone is colored green and a surface representation for the LBD is gray. See also Figure S4. Molecular Cell 2011 42, 199-209DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.003) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions