![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology Growth Rate Toxicity Phenotypes and Homeostatic Supercoil Control Differentiate Escherichia coli from Salmonella enterica Serovar Typhimurium † Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-0024 *Corresponding author. Mailing address: KAUL-524, 720 20th Street South, Birmingham, AL 35294. Phone: (205) 934-3299. Fax: (205) 975-5955. E-mail: nphiggin/at/uab.edu Received January 16, 2007; Accepted March 19, 2007. Abstract Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium share high degrees of DNA and amino acid identity for 65% of the homologous genes shared by the two genomes. Yet, there are different phenotypes for null mutants in several genes that contribute to DNA condensation and nucleoid formation. The mutant R436-S form of the GyrB protein has a temperature-sensitive phenotype in Salmonella, showing disruption of supercoiling near the terminus and replicon failure at 42°C. But this mutation in E. coli is lethal at the permissive temperature. A unifying hypothesis for why the same mutation in highly conserved homologous genes of different species leads to different physiologies focuses on homeotic supercoil control. During rapid growth in mid-log phase, E. coli generates 15% more negative supercoils in pBR322 DNA than Salmonella. Differences in compaction and torsional strain on chromosomal DNA explain a complex set of single-gene phenotypes and provide insight into how supercoiling may modulate epigenetic effects on chromosome structure and function and on prophage behavior in vivo. Dichotomous growth is an adaptation that allows certain bacteria to divide rapidly under nutrient-rich conditions. During dichotomous growth, wild-type (WT) Escherichia coli can divide every 20 min, even though it takes >50 min to replicate the genome. Cells can divide rapidly only as long as initiation of bidirectional DNA synthesis with the DnaA “initiator” complex at the oriC “replicator” (42) is well coordinated with the formation of nucleoids and the distribution of replicated copies of the chromosome to each daughter cell at the time of partition. Recent studies with live cells show that a highly organized traffic pattern deposits each replisome arm at opposing edges of growing nucleoids (2, 90). At high growth rates, the average cell has a complex chromosome structure, with nucleoids containing two or four partially replicated arcs spanning the oriC initiator region. To distribute nucleoids, the cell division machinery needs to find the cell midpoint, decatenate all cross-links between chromosomal replicas at the dif site (19, 49), and move the nucleoids into each new daughter cell. The initiation frequency at oriC is critical for cell division. Hyperinitiation is toxic or lethal (77), with one problem being fork overrun. If a fork from a recent initiation cycle overtakes a previously initiated fork, large chromosome fragments with double-strand ends can be generated (4). We previously showed that the Salmonella gyrB652 mutation causes “growth rate toxicity” that includes topological chaos near the dif site (68). Gyrase hypomorphs in Salmonella lose supercoiling near the terminus of replication, even though plasmids in the same cell maintain near-normal superhelical densities (68). Recent experiments suggest that a similar fate may occur in gyrase mutants of E. coli (29, 45). The GyrB protein is highly conserved in E. coli and Salmonella. Of its 804 amino acids, 97% are identical in the two species, with most substitutions being in the C-terminal region of the protein (18 of 28 substitutions are beyond H567). To see if the Salmonella GyrB652 mutation would cause terminal chaos in E. coli, we designed an oligonucleotide to introduce a single base pair substitution (Fig. (Fig.1).1
MATERIALS AND METHODS Media. All cells were grown in LB broth (36). Antibiotics were added to the media at concentrations of 50 μg/ml for kanamycin (Kan) and ampicillin (Amp), 20 μg/ml for chloramphenicol, 15 μg/ml for tetracycline, 10 μg/ml for gentamicin, and 5 μg/ml for nalidixic acid (Nal). Plasmids and strains. All bacterial strains and plasmids in this work are described in Tables 1 and 2. Plasmid pRW478 is derived from pBR322 by the introduction of a (CG)28 repeat into the EcoRI site (43).
Chromosomal modification. Chromosome modifications were made with the λ RED recombination system (95). Synthetic oligonucleotides were from IDT (Coralville, IA), and the sequences are given in Table 3. PCR products used for recombineering were made using a 1:1 mixture of Taq polymerase (Sigma) and Taq extender additive (Stratagene).
Plasmid maintenance assay. The abilities of cells to maintain plasmids were measured by comparing serial dilutions of the culture after plating them on selective and nonselective media. LB medium containing 50 μg/ml Amp (and IPTG [isopropyl-β-d-thiogalactopyranoside] when indicated) was inoculated with fresh overnight culture by 1:100 dilution. For stationary-phase measurements, cultures were allowed to grow 8 h or more at 30°C. A portion of each culture was serially diluted 1:10 in 96-well microtiter plates. Finally, 3-μl aliquots of each dilution were spotted onto LB plates both with and without 50 μg/ml Amp and plates were incubated overnight in a 30°C incubator. Supercoil density measurements. Plasmid supercoil density was determined by the band counting method using agarose gels containing chloroquine (75). DNA was prepared from log phase cells grown at 30°C. At indicated times, cells were collected and concentrated by centrifugation. Plasmid DNA was extracted with the Promega Wizard Plus midi prep DNA purification system and eluted into sterile water. DNA was further purified with phenol, phenol-chloroform, and chloroform extraction and concentrated with isobutanol. Ether was used to remove trace isobutanol. Purified plasmid DNA was separated in 25-cm 1.0% agarose gels containing chloroquine. For one-dimensional (1-D) gels, 1 to 2 μg of DNA was loaded into a gel containing 1.5 μM chloroquine and electrophoresis was carried out at room temperature at 2 V/cm for 46 h in 0.5× Tris-borate-EDTA (TBE), also containing 1.5 μM chloroquine. For 2-D gels, a topoisomer set from the first dimension was cut out, soaked in 0.5× TBE with 20 μM chloroquine for 4 hours, turned 90°, and recast in a new 25-cm 1.0% agarose gel containing 20 μM chloroquine. Electrophoresis in the second dimension was done at room temperature at 2 V/cm for 46 h in 0.5× TBE containing 20 μM chloroquine. After electrophoresis, the gels were soaked in deionized water for 30 min each for four changes and stained 60 min with ethidium bromide. DNA was visualized with UV light and captured on a Bio-Rad Zeta probe membrane using vacuum transfer. Southern blot analysis was done with probes made using Invitrogen's random-primed DNA labeling system with a pBR322 template. The membranes were exposed on a Molecular Dynamics phosphor screen and quantitated with Bio-Rad Gel Doc Software. RESULTS The GyrB652 protein is lethal in E. coli. The Salmonella gyrB652 mutation (27) results from a single C1306-to-A transversion mutation that substitutes serine for arginine at residue 436 (R436-S) (68). The 3-D model of the gyrase tetramer places this residue near a GyrB-GyrA interface (7, 47, 72). The GyrB652 form of gyrase has a lower in vitro catalytic efficiency (kcat) than the WT enzyme. The temperature-sensitive (TS) growth defect is not caused by enzyme inactivation at 42°C (68) but is due to the inability of gyrase to keep up with high metabolic rates and multiple rounds of chromosomal DNA replication. The signature of this defect is topological chaos near the dif site, which is the terminus of replication (68). To learn whether this suboptimal form of gyrase would cause terminal chaos in E. coli, we tried to introduce at a permissive temperature (30°C) the GyrB R436-S substitution into strains of E. coli derived from W3110, NH3423, and NH3612. Bacteriophage λ “recombineering” technology (95) exploits the regulated expression of λ recombination proteins Beta, Gam, and Exo to modify bacterial chromosomes efficiently using double-stranded or short single-stranded DNA substrates with only 30 bp of targeting homology (18). To introduce the gyrB652 mutation, a synthetic 70-mer oligonucleotide (oligonucleotide 1) was made with 35 nucleotides of 5′-flanking homology followed by a single mismatch (the gyrB652 C-to-A transversion mutation) and 34 nucleotides of 3′-flanking homology (Fig. (Fig.1)1 The R436-S substitution was easy to introduce into the Salmonella strain NH3702 by using the λ recombineering technology. The phenotype includes TS growth at 42°C and resistance to 5 μg/ml of Nal (27). After 100-μl aliquots of the 1-ml NH3702 electroporation culture was spread onto Nal plates, an average of 125 Nalr colonies was found on multiple plates. When 10 independent colonies from these plates were restreaked on LB agar at 30°C and 42°C, all 10 Nalr strains failed to grow at 42°C. Sequence analysis of DNA PCR amplified from four of the Salmonella NH3702-derived Nal-resistant TS colonies confirmed that each had the gyrB652 C-to-A transversion mutation. The efficiency of this chromosome modification reaction is similar to what others and we have observed for introducing single base pair changes into many different sites in both E. coli and Salmonella (13, 18). However, introducing the R436-S substitution into E. coli was not easy. The same volume of the NH3423 or NH3612 strain electroporated with oligonucleotide 1 yielded an average of six Nalr colonies. None of these colonies had a TS phenotype upon restreaking at 42°C. Low-level Nal resistance can be caused by mutations in several genes, including gyrA, rpoB, and tolC. The number of Nalr colonies arising from the E. coli electroporation experiment was the same as that for the control experiment. When 100 μl of unmodified stationary-phase cultures of E. coli or Salmonella was spread on Nal plates, they gave an average of seven Nalr colonies. Sequence analysis showed that none of the control strains of E. coli or Salmonella Nalr colonies and none of the Nalr E. coli NH3612 strains derived from plating electroporated cells carried the GyrB R436-S substitution. The difficulty of establishing the gyrB652 mutation in E. coli could be caused by intolerance of this variant protein. However, it could also be caused by a species-specific difference in gyrB652 phenotype or by differences in λ recombineering efficiency between E. coli and Salmonella. To increase target homology, a second strategy (Fig. (Fig.1B)1B To eliminate the possibility that the GyrB652 substitution in E. coli does not exhibit low-level Nal resistance, we changed our genetic selection scheme. A new strain (NH3703) was made using λ recombineering to insert a Kanr module in the intergenic space between gyrB and yidB (Fig. (Fig.1C).1C The failure to isolate an R436-S mutation linked to the Kanr gene in the last experiment was surprising and unique in our recombineering experience. The result could mean that the C-to-A mutation was lethal and that all Kanr recombinants from the last experiment resulted from a mismatch repair that corrected a heteroduplex recombination intermediate to the WT sequence during recombination. Alternatively, the PCR product might have been degraded from the upstream end in vivo to eliminate the gyrB652 segment, which would yield Kanr recombinants that did not include the C-to-A transversion. To test these possibilities, the experiment was carried out with a mutS::Tn10 strain (NH3704) that cannot perform mismatch repair (53). To determine how many Kanr recombinants would be expected from this experiment, a WT gyrB sequence was made with oligonucleotides 5 and 7 (Table 3 and Fig. Fig.1D).1D WT Salmonella gyrB is toxic in E. coli. To study the gyrB652 allele in E. coli, we introduced a plasmid with a copy of the Salmonella gyrB652 gene. pRC03 is a pGEM-derived plasmid containing a copy of the Salmonella gyrB652 gene cloned adjacent to a bacteriophage T7 promoter. This plasmid was used to express and purify the GyrB652 protein from E. coli BL21::DE3, a strain that harbors a Lac-inducible T7 RNA polymerase (68). However, in strains lacking the T7 RNA polymerase, the T7 promoter is slightly “leaky.” pRC03 was introduced into E. coli NH3706 and maintained by continuous selection on Amp. But the strain grew more erratically than strains with the pGEM vector alone or pGEM vectors with other cloned inserts (not shown). To test for a gyrB652-associated growth penalty, overnight cultures of NH3706 (with pRC03) were diluted 1:100 into triplicate LB-plus-Amp cultures and grown into stationary phase at 30°C. Aliquots (3 μl) of serially diluted samples were spotted onto both LB and LB-Amp plates (Fig. (Fig.2).2
Since the mutant form of gyrB is not well tolerated by E. coli, we carried out the same experiment with strain NH3707, an E. coli strain that contains a pGEM plasmid with a cloned copy of the WT Salmonella gyrB gene. Surprisingly, after inoculation of cultures carrying pRC05 into fresh LB-Amp medium and growth to stationary phase, the plasmid was eliminated from 99.9% of the cells. Thus, even WT Salmonella GyrB is deleterious in E. coli. To determine if the E. coli gyrB gene is toxic when cloned on a multicopy plasmid, pAG111 was introduced into both E. coli and Salmonella. In pAG111, the WT E. coli gyrB gene is cloned in the pTTQ-18 vector under Lac promoter control. Cells inoculated at a 1:100 dilution into fresh LB-Amp medium containing the indicated amounts of IPTG were grown to stationary phase at 30°C. Each culture was serially diluted, and 3-μl aliquots were spotted onto an LB-Amp plate (Fig. (Fig.3).3
Species-specific supercoil set points. The phenotypic differences described above led us to ask whether a difference in mean supercoil density (σ) exists between these organisms. To compare values of σ, the linking difference of pBR322 was analyzed in strains with a WT complement of the four topoisomerases. E. coli JTT1 (NH0572) has been used in several important topological analyses (15, 52, 82). Experiments were carried out with Salmonella LT2 (NH0742) and SL4213 (NH0405), a strain with WT topoisomerases that carries a restriction mutation that makes it easy to move plasmids from E. coli directly to Salmonella. Actively growing cultures at mid-log phase (50 to 70 Klett units) were harvested, and plasmid DNA was purified. Topoisomers were separated in 2-D 1.0% agarose gels, and DNA was blotted to nylon membranes for quantitation. On 2-D gels, one can measure two quantities. First is the linking difference, which is obtained by assigning a number to each topoisomer relative to a relaxed DNA. The second parameter that can be scored is a supercoil-induced change in DNA structure, like the cooperative transition from right-handed to left-handed conformation in plasmids that have sequences that adopt the Z conformation (70). Remarkably, the σ of pBR322 in Salmonella was significantly lower than that in E. coli (Fig. (Fig.4).4
Bacteria partition supercoils into unconstrained and constrained conformations (ΔLK = SU + SC) (see reference 43). Constrained supercoiling (SC) is created by the unwound region of DNA bound to 3,000 molecules of transcribing RNA polymerase (26) and by the writhe associated with binding of abundant DNA binding proteins like HU, H-NS, and FIS (35, 46). Unconstrained supercoiling (SU) causes torsion that stabilizes inter- and intramolecular triplex structures, left-handed Z-DNA, and cruciforms (35). In E. coli, SU and SC are distributed roughly 50:50 (5, 43, 71). To compare SU in E. coli and Salmonella, the Z-DNA-forming plasmid pRW478 was introduced in both organisms. pRW478 has a 56-bp repeating (CG) insert at the EcoRI site of pBR322; when SU is −0.025, 50% of the plasmid adopts a left-handed Z-DNA form in vitro (96). pRW478 was isolated from E. coli NH3716 and Salmonella NH3713 and analyzed on 2-D gels (Fig. (Fig.5).5
Species-specific phenotypes for SeqA and MukB. The differences in σ and SU in E. coli and Salmonella predict different regulatory response thresholds in each organism. For example, a supercoil-sensitive promoter tuned to the E. coli SU level would be inappropriately expressed in Salmonella unless a retuning mechanism alters the system. E. coli responded in a very negative way to the gyrB652 mutation, but how do other chromosome dynamics proteins behave? Null mutation in two genes, seqA and mukB, showed substantially different phenotypes when these two organisms were compared. The seqA gene encodes an A-methylation-sensitive DNA binding protein that recognizes the sequence GATC (51, 78, 88). SeqA binds preferentially to hemi-methylated GATC sites and sequesters the oriC region immediately after replication to block DnaA-dependent reinitiation of DNA synthesis for several minutes (6). E. coli seqA deletions were sensitive to growth in rich medium and failed to plate efficiently on rich LB plates at 30°C. A Salmonella seqA deletion plated efficiently on LB at 30°C (Fig. (Fig.6)6
The second case is that of the bacterial “condensin” (37), a protein composed of MukB, MukE, and MukF (63, 64). E. coli deletions of mukB, mukE, or mukF exhibit the same phenotype, which is associated with growth rate toxicity, frequent loss of F plasmids, and segregation of DNA-less cells (62, 91). E. coli mukB deletions were nearly 100% viable in minimal medium, and they plated efficiently on LB medium as long as the temperature was 30°C or lower (74) (Fig. (Fig.7.)7
DISCUSSION All organisms store DNA in a supercoiled conformation to condense the material into a functionally useful form. Eukaryotic organisms organize supercoils on the surface of a highly conserved histone octamer and separate the chromosome from most of the protein synthetic activity by the nuclear membrane. Bacteria have no nuclear membrane to separate chromosomal DNA from protein translation. Rather, they exploit the ATP-dependent enzyme DNA gyrase to supercoil DNA, which compacts the molecule by using torsional stress (10, 59, 69, 89). A bacterial cell must compact the DNA over 1,000-fold while it is being simultaneously transcribed and replicated (38, 85). Compaction in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes is assisted by structural maintenance of chromosome proteins, which are ATP-binding, pincer-like proteins that are conserved from bacteria to humans (9). The central importance of supercoiling in nucleoid formation requires that bacteria maintain DNA torsion levels within a narrow range (±15% of the normal value) (16, 89). Supercoil density is modulated by the activities of three topoisomerases, gyrase (56), Topo I (56), and Topo IV (97). These three enzymes are under strong selection to produce sufficient torsional strain to condense DNA, but not too much strain, which can trigger formation of alternative DNA conformations, such as Z-DNA, R loops, cruciforms, or intramolecular triplexes. These alternative DNA conformations stop replication forks, stall transcription complexes, and cause introduction of single- and double-strand chromosome breaks by several mechanisms (34). Species-specific gyrB mutations. The A-to-C transversion that causes the R436-S substitution in GyrB is nonviable in an otherwise WT strain of E. coli. The strongest evidence of a severe gyrB652 defect in E. coli comes from the electroporation of two PCR products into a mutS recombination-competent strain of E. coli (NH3704) (Fig. (Fig.1).1 Species-specific supercoil set points. WT strains of E. coli growing exponentially in LB medium maintained significantly higher supercoiled densities than Salmonella (σ values of −0.069 versus −0.059, respectively [Fig. [Fig.4]).4 Our results suggest that GyrB is part of the mechanism controlling σ. There are 28 species-specific substitutions (3.4%) among 804 amino acid residues of GyrB and 78 changes (8.9%) in 878 amino acids for GyrA. A significant fraction of the 15% difference in σ measured under identical growth conditions is likely caused by one or more of these substitutions. Internal metabolic flux changes the cellular phosphorylation state and ATP/ADP ratio, which modulates gyrase supercoiling activity (41, 44, 79, 92). But changes of metabolic flux are modest relative to the 15% difference shown in Fig. Fig.44 Species-specific phenotypes of chromosome dynamics. Supercoiling is critical during dichotomous growth for efficient formation of new nucleoids. Significant differences exist between E. coli and Salmonella in the phenotypes associated with several topologically sensitive genes other than gyrase, including topA, seqA (Fig. (Fig.6),6 First, topA amber mutations are lethal in WT strains of E. coli but are relatively healthy in Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium or Shigella flexneri (3, 15, 52). High torsional strain caused by elimination of topA from E. coli leads to formation of transcription-driven intermolecular triplexes or R loops (17, 40). R loops impede transcription and stall replication forks (35). Because Salmonella maintains a 15% lower level of σ, its supercoil level is already lower than that of E. coli strains carrying gyrB compensatory mutations that make introduction of topA mutations permissible (15, 43). Thus, R-loop formation would not cause the same type of problem in Salmonella that it does in E. coli. Second, seqA-null mutants in E. coli exhibit growth rate toxicity in rich LB medium while Salmonella does not (Fig. (Fig.6).6 Third, an exception that proves the rule is the mukB mutation, which has a much more striking phenotype in Salmonella than in E. coli (Fig. (Fig.7).7 The fourth example is the hns gene, which encodes a highly conserved gene for the abundant DNA binding protein H-NS. Like MukB, deletion of H-NS results in a more severe phenotype in Salmonella than it does in E. coli, where the growth rates and general physiologies of WT and hns-null mutations are nearly indistinguishable (21, 58). H-NS participates in chromosome condensation, regulation of gene expression, and the targeting of transposons (46). In E. coli, H-NS influences expression of about >200 genes directly or indirectly (39), while experiments with Salmonella indicate that expression levels of over 400 genes are altered in an hns-null mutant (61). Most of the genes in both organisms are derepressed when H-NS is eliminated. In addition to regulating genes, H-NS is one of the proteins that may organize loops in the bacterial chromosome (14). H-NS-induced looping in vitro has been demonstrated by atomic force microscopy (12) as well as by single-molecule manipulation using optical tweezers (11). When expressed, H-NS can cause a dramatic condensation of the nucleoid, which leads to inhibition of global transcription and an artificial stationary phase (55). The lower supercoiling level of Salmonella may contribute to the increased dependence of this organism on H-NS for maintaining nucleoid structure. Many of the genes that are bound by H-NS in Salmonella appear to be A/T rich and transferred horizontally from distantly related organisms (61). Why different supercoil densities in related enterics? Whereas the superhelical difference in Salmonella and E. coli provides a reasonable explanation for phenotypic differences in the mukB, seqA, gyrB, topA, and hns mutants, what selective force could lead to an altered state of mean superhelicity? We do not know the answer to this question. One strong selective pressure may come from prophages in the Salmonella genome (Fig. (Fig.8).8
Phage development changes in complex ways with the different growth conditions of the host. For lytic phages like T4, adsorption rate and burst size decrease at least an order of magnitude under poor growth conditions while eclipse time increases (30). For lysogenic phages Mu and λ, the lytic/lysogeny decision changes with physiology. Neither λ nor Mu produces significant single-cell bursts in stationary phase, and gyrase modulates the lytic/lysogeny outcome in both viruses. λ excision is reduced from some locations in the bacterial chromosome in himB (gyrB) mutants (57, 58). In E. coli, Mu burst size and plaque size are reduced in gyrB mutants (94) and the lysis/lysogeny fate is directly linked to negative supercoiling (33, 48). To test the influence of host environment on the lytic/lysogenic behavior of Mu, plaque-forming MupAp1 monolysogens were isolated in E. coli (NH1126) and Salmonella (NH742), which also carries the musA allele that changes the surface polysaccharide structure to permit Mu adsorption (20). Mu cts62 pAp1 carries the TS cts62 repressor allele (87). At 30°C, the Mu cts62 repressor binds to the operator and blocks pE promoter activity, but a shift to 42°C induces conformation change in the C-terminal domain of the repressor, causing immediate release of DNA and initiation of the lytic transcription pathway (86). Duplicate overnight cultures were diluted 100-fold into fresh LB broth and incubated at 30°C to an optical density at 600 nm (OD600) of 0.6, which corresponds to approximately 5 × 108 CFU/ml. Cultures were shifted to a 42°C shaking water bath, and the OD600 as well as the number of CFU that plated on LB agar at 30°C were sampled at 10-min intervals for the next 80 min. The OD600s of E. coli cultures dropped 30 min after the temperature shift, while Salmonella cultures started lysis 10 min later (Fig. (Fig.9).9
The E. coli-Salmonella comparison. The supercoiling behavior of Salmonella differs from that of E. coli in at least two ways, either or both of which might contribute to the dominant-negative phenotype of expressing the Salmonella GyrB protein in E. coli. The first difference is that E. coli generates 13% more negative supercoils than Salmonella during rapid growth in rich medium (Fig. (Fig.44 However, a second species difference is shown in Fig. S10 in the supplemental material. As E. coli enters stationary phase, the σ of pBR322 falls from −0.069 at the peak growth rate to below −0.055 as cells enter early stationary phase. This has been seen before in E. coli (43, 73). But in Salmonella, there is no loss of σ when cells enter or exit stationary phase. What controls the changes in supercoil levels in E. coli is not known, but the supercoiling recovery does not require new protein synthesis (73). One possibility is the GyrI gyrase inhibitory protein, which is under SOS regulatory control (60). Mechanisms notwithstanding, there is at least one system that modulates gyrase activity in stationary-phase E. coli that does not work in Salmonella. The separation of E. coli and Salmonella from a common ancestor occurred about 200 million years before the present (50), which is about the time of separation of the lineages for mouse and human. Both organisms retain approximately 65% of their homologous genes, with 35% of the genome moving via horizontal transfer, but the genetic map is largely conserved. Maintaining four prophages that can all kill the cell may mean that Salmonella's fitness is improved by damping the lysis/lysogeny trigger. The four Salmonella prophages have expression and gene amplification effects that can be monitored using microarray technology under stress conditions (23). On the other hand, selection pressure in E. coli may have increased the supercoiling level to maximize its growth rate under dichotomous conditions (E. coli outgrows Salmonella in mixed culture). One added benefit might be that higher supercoiling levels lead to rapid curing once E. coli is lysogenized by a prophage. Recent work shows that Mu transposition hotspots in Salmonella are different from those in E. coli (D. Manna, S. Porwollik, M. McClelland, and N. P. Higgins, submitted for publication), and lower negative supercoiling could account for different locations of unusual DNA structure that act as transposition hotspots (93). If the supercoiling set point is established by the gyrA and gyrB genes, it would be very interesting to see how Salmonella fitness and dichotomous growth rates would change after swapping the normal Salmonella gyrase alleles with E. coli gyrA and gyrB sequences. Acknowledgments We are grateful to Stuart Austin for carrying out flow cytometry on WT and seqA mutants of Salmonella and for providing seqA and mukB mutant strains of E. coli, to Don Court for providing the recombineering plasmid pSim5 prior to publication, and to members of the Higgins laboratory for critical comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by grant GM33143 to N.P.H. Footnotes Published ahead of print on 30 March 2007.†Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://jb.asm.org/. REFERENCES 1. Baker, T. A., K. Sekimizu, B. E. Funnell, and A. Kornberg. 1986. Extensive unwinding of the plasmid template during staged enzymatic initiation of DNA replication from the origin of the Escherichia coli chromosome. Cell 45:53-64. [PubMed] 2. Bates, D., and N. Kleckner. 2005. Chromosome and replisome dynamics in E. coli: loss of sister cohesion triggers global chromosome movement and mediates chromosome segregation. Cell 121:899-911. [PubMed] 3. Bhriain, N. N., and C. J. Dorman. 1993. Isolation and characterization of a topA mutant of Shigella flexneri. Mol. Microbiol. 7:351-358. [PubMed] 4. Bidnenko, V., S. D. Ehrlich, and B. Michel. 2002. Replication fork collapse at replication terminator sequences. EMBO J. 21:3898-3907. [PubMed] 5. Bliska, J. B., and N. R. Cozzarelli. 1987. Use of site-specific recombination as a probe of DNA structure and metabolism in vivo. J. Mol. Biol. 194:205-218. [PubMed] 6. Boye, E., T. Stokke, N. Kleckner, and K. Skarstad. 1996. Coordinating DNA replication initiation with cell growth: differential roles for DnaA and SeqA proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:12206-12211. [PubMed] 7. Cabral, J. H. M., A. P. Jackson, C. V. Smith, N. Shikotra, A. Maxwell, and R. C. Siddington. 1997. Crystal structure of the breakage-reunion domain of DNA gyrase. Nature 388:903. [PubMed] 8. Camara, J., and E. Crooke. 2005. Initiation of chromosomal replication, p. 177-191. In N. P. Higgins (ed.), The bacterial chromosome. ASM Press, Washington, DC. 9. Cobbe, N., and M. M. Heck. 2000. Review: SMCs in the world of chromosome biology—from prokaryotes to higher eukaryotes. J. Struct. Biol. 129:123-143. [PubMed] 10. Cozzarelli, N. R., and J. C. Wang. 1990. DNA topology and its biological effects. Cold Spring Harbor Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY. 11. Dame, R. T., M. C. Noom, and G. J. Wuite. 2006. Bacterial chromatin organization by H-NS protein unravelled using dual DNA manipulation. Nature 444:387-390. [PubMed] 12. Dame, R. T., C. Wyman, and N. Goosen. 2000. H-NS mediated compaction of DNA visualised by atomic force microscopy. Nucleic Acids Res. 28:3504-3510. [PubMed] 13. Datta, S., N. Costantino, and D. L. Court. 2006. A set of recombineering plasmids for gram-negative bacteria. Gene 379:109-115. [PubMed] 14. Deng, S., R. A. Stein, and N. P. Higgins. 2005. Organization of supercoil domains and their reorganization by transcription. Mol. Microbiol. 57:1511-1521. [PubMed] 15. DiNardo, S., K. A. Voelkel, R. Sternglanz, A. E. Reynolds, and A. Wright. 1982. Escherichia coli DNA topoisomerase I mutants have compensatory mutations in DNA gyrase genes. Cell 31:43-51. [PubMed] 16. Drlica, K. 1992. Control of bacterial supercoiling. Mol. Microbiol. 6:425-433. [PubMed] 17. Drolet, M., S. Broccoli, F. Rallu, C. Hraiky, C. Fortin, E. Masse, and I. Baaklini. 2003. The problem of hypernegative supercoiling and R-loop formation in transcription. Front. Biosci. 8:D210-D221. [PubMed] 18. Ellis, H. M., D. Yu, T. DiTizio, and D. L. Court. 2001. High efficiency mutagenesis, repair, and engineering of chromosomal DNA using single-stranded oligonucleotides. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98:6742-6746. [PubMed] 19. Espeli, O., and K. J. Marians. 2004. Untangling intracellular DNA topology. Mol. Microbiol. 52:925-931. [PubMed] 20. Faelen, M., M. Mergeay, J. Gerits, A. Toussaint, and N. Lefebvre. 1981. Genetic mapping of a mutation conferring sensitivity to bacteriophage Mu in Salmonella typhimurium LT2. J. Bacteriol. 146:914-919. [PubMed] 21. Falconi, M., V. McGovern, C. Gualerzi, D. Hillyard, and N. P. Higgins. 1991. Mutations altering chromosomal protein H-NS induce mini-Mu transposition. New Biol. 3:615-625. [PubMed] 22. Figueroa-Bossi, N., and L. Bossi. 1999. Inducible prophages contribute to Salmonella virulence in mice. Mol. Microbiol. 33:167-176. [PubMed] 23. Frye, J. G., S. Porwollik, F. Blackmer, P. Cheng, and M. McClelland. 2005. Host gene expression changes and DNA amplification during temperate phage induction. J. Bacteriol. 187:1485-1492. [PubMed] 24. Funnell, B. E., T. A. Baker, and A. Kornberg. 1986. Complete enzymatic replication of plasmids containing the origin of the Escherichia coli chromosome. J. Biol. Chem. 261:5616-5624. [PubMed] 25. Funnell, B. E., T. A. Baker, and A. Kornberg. 1987. In vitro assembly of a pre-priming complex at the origin of the Escherichia coli chromosome. J. Biol. Chem. 262:10327-10334. [PubMed] 26. Gamper, H. B., and J. E. Hearst. 1982. A topological model for transcription based on unwinding angle analysis of E. coli RNA polymerase binary, initiation and ternary complexes. Cell 29:81-90. [PubMed] 27. Gari, E., N. Figueroa-Bossi, A.-B. Blanc-Potard, F. Spirito, M. B. Schmid, and L. Bossi. 1996. A class of gyrase mutants of Salmonella typhimurium show quinolone-like lethality and require Rec functions for viability. Mol. Microbiol. 21:111-122. [PubMed] 28. Grigorian, A. V., R. B. Lustig, E. C. Guzman, J. M. Mahaffy, and J. W. Zyskind. 2003. Escherichia coli cells with increased levels of DnaA and deficient in recombinationalrepair have decreased viability. J. Bacteriol. 185:630-644. [PubMed] 29. Grompone, G., S. D. Ehrlich, and B. Michel. 2003. Replication restart in gyrB Escherichia coli mutants. Mol. Microbiol. 48:845-854. [PubMed] 30. Hadas, H., M. Einav, I. Fishov, and A. Zaritsky. 1997. Bacteriophage T4 development depends on the physiology of its host Escherichia coli. Microbiology 143:179-185. [PubMed] 31. Hallett, P., A. J. Grimshaw, D. B. Wigley, and A. Maxwell. 1990. Cloning of the DNA gyrase genes under tac promoter control: overproduction of the gyrase A and B proteins. Gene 93:139-142. [PubMed] 32. Higgins, N. P. 2007. Under DNA stress, gyrase makes the sign of the cross. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 14:256-258. [PubMed] 33. Higgins, N. P., D. A. Collier, M. W. Kilpatrick, and H. M. Krause. 1989. Supercoiling and integration host factor change the DNA conformation and alter the flow of convergent transcription in phage Mu. J. Biol. Chem. 264:3035-3042. [PubMed] 34. Higgins, N. P., S. Deng, Z. Pang, R. Stein, K. Champion, and D. Manna. 2005. Domain behavior and supercoil dynamics in bacterial chromosomes, p. 133-153. In N. P. Higgins (ed.), The bacterial chromosome. ASM Press, Washington, DC. 35. Higgins, N. P., and A. Vologodskii. 2004. Topological behavior of plasmid DNA, p. 181-201. In B. E. Funnell and G. J. Phillips (ed.), Plasmid biology. ASM Press, Washington, DC. 36. Higgins, N. P., X. Yang, Q. Fu, and J. R. Roth. 1996. Surveying a supercoil domain by using the gd resolution system in Salmonella typhimurium. J. Bacteriol. 178:2825-2835. [PubMed] 37. Hirano, T. 2002. The ABCs of SMC proteins: two-armed ATPases for chromosome condensation, cohesion, and repair. Genes Dev. 16:399-414. [PubMed] 38. Holmes, V. F., and N. R. Cozzarelli. 2000. Closing the ring: links between SMC proteins and chromosome partitioning, condensation, and supercoiling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:1322-1324. [PubMed] 39. Hommais, F., E. Krin, C. Laurent-Winter, O. Soutourina, A. Malpertuy, J. P. Le Caer, A. Danchin, and P. Bertin. 2001. Large-scale monitoring of pleiotropic regulation of gene expression by the prokaryotic nucleoid-associated protein, H-NS. Mol. Microbiol. 40:20-36. [PubMed] 40. Hraiky, C., M.-A. Raymond, and M. Drolet. 2000. RNase H overproduction corrects a defect at the level of transcription elongation during rRNA synthesis in the absence of DNA topoisomerase I in Escherichia coli. J. Biol. Chem. 275:11257-11263. [PubMed] 41. Hsieh, L.-S., J. Rouviere-Yaniv, and K. Drlica. 1991. Bacterial DNA supercoiling and ATP/ADP ratio: changes associated with salt shock. J. Bacteriol. 173:3914-3917. [PubMed] 42. Jacob, F., S. Brenner, and F. Cuzin. 1963. On the regulation of DNA replication in bacteria. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 28:329-348. 43. Jaworski, A., N. P. Higgins, R. D. Wells, and W. Zacharias. 1991. Topoisomerase mutants and physiological conditions control supercoiling and Z-DNA formation in vivo. J. Biol. Chem. 266:2576-2581. [PubMed] 44. Jensen, P. R., C. C. van der Weijden, L. B. Jensen, H. V. Westerhoff, and J. L. Snoep. 1999. Extensive regulation compromises the extent to which DNA gyrase controls DNA supercoiling and growth rate of Escherichia coli. Eur. J. Biochem. 226:865-877. 45. Jeong, K. S., J. Ahn, and A. B. Khodursky. 2004. Spatial patterns of transcriptional activity in the chromosome of Escherichia coli. Genome Biol. 5:R86. [PubMed] 46. Johnson, R. C., L. M. Johnson, J. W. Schmidt, and J. F. Gardner. 2005. The major nucleoid proteins in the structure and function of the E. coli chromosome, p. 65-132. In N. P. Higgins (ed.), The bacterial chromosome. ASM Press, Washington, DC. 47. Kampranis, S. C., A. D. Bates, and A. Maxwell. 1999. A model for the mechanism of strand passage by DNA gyrase. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96:8414-8419. [PubMed] 48. Krause, H. M., and N. P. Higgins. 1986. Positive and negative regulation of the Mu operator by Mu repressor and Escherichia coli integration host factor. J. Biol. Chem. 261:3744-3752. [PubMed] 49. Kuempel, P., J. Henson, L. Dircks, M. Tecklenburg, and D. Lim. 1991. dif, a recA-independent recombination site in the terminus region of the chromosome of Escherichia coli. New Biol. 3:799-811. [PubMed] 50. Lawrence, J. 2005. The dynamic bacterial genome, p. 19-37. In N. P. Higgins (ed.), The bacterial chromosome. ASM Press, Washington, DC. 51. Lu, M., J. L. Campbell, E. Boye, and N. Kleckner. 1994. SeqA: a negative modulator of replication initiation in E. coli. Cell 77:413-426. [PubMed] 52. Margolin, P., L. Zumstein, R. Sternglanz, and J. C. Wang. 1985. The Escherichia coli supX locus is topA, the structural gene for DNA topoisomerase I. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 82:5437-5441. [PubMed] 53. Marti, T. M., C. Kunz, and O. Fleck. 2002. DNA mismatch repair and mutation avoidance pathways. J. Cell. Phys. 191:28-41. 54. McClelland, M., K. E. Sanderson, J. Spieth, S. W. Clifton, P. Latreille, L. Courtney, S. Porwollik, J. Ali, M. Dante, F. Du, S. Hou, D. Layman, S. Leonard, C. Nguyen, K. Scott, A. Holmes, N. Grewal, E. Mulvaney, E. Ryan, H. Sun, L. Florea, W. Miller, T. Stoneking, M. Nhan, R. Waterston, and R. K. Wilson. 2001. The complete genome sequence of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium LT2. Nature 413:852-856. [PubMed] 55. McGovern, V., N. P. Higgins, S. Chiz, and A. Jaworski. 1994. H-NS over-expression induces an artificial stationary phase by silencing global transcription. Biochimie 76:1030-1040. [PubMed] 56. Menzel, R., and M. Gellert. 1983. Regulation of the genes for E. coli DNA gyrase: homeostatic control of DNA supercoiling. Cell 34:105-113. [PubMed] 57. Miller, H. I., J. Abraham, M. Benedik, A. Campbell, D. Court, H. Echols, R. Fischer, J. M. Galindo, G. Guarneros, T. Hernandez, D. Mascarenhas, C. Montanez, D. Schindler, U. Schmeissner, and L. Sosa. 1981. Regulation of the integration-excision reaction by bacteriophage lambda. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 45 Pt. 1:439-445. 58. Miller, H. I., A. Kikuchi, H. A. Nash, R. A. Weisberg, and D. I. Friedman. 1979. Site-specific recombination of bacteriophage l: the role of host gene products. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 43:1121-1126. [PubMed] 59. Miller, W. G., and R. W. Simons. 1993. Chromosomal supercoiling in Escherichia coli. Mol. Microbiol. 10:675-684. [PubMed] 60. Nakanishi, A., S. Imajoh-Ohmi, and F. Hanaoka. 2002. Characterization of the interaction between DNA gyrase inhibitor and DNA gyrase of Escherichia coli. J. Biol. Chem. 277:8949-8954. [PubMed] 61. Navarre, W. W., S. Porwollik, Y. Wang, M. McClelland, H. Rosen, S. J. Libby, and F. C. Fang. 2006. Selective silencing of foreign DNA with low GC content by the H-NS protein in Salmonella. Science 313:236-238. [PubMed] 62. Niki, H., and S. Hiraga. 1997. Subcellular distribution of actively partitioning F plasmid during the cell division cycle in E. coli. Cell 90:951-957. [PubMed] 63. Niki, H., R. Imamura, M. Kitaoka, K. Ymanaka, T. Ogura, and S. Hiraga. 1992. E. coli MukB protein involved in chromosome partition forms a homodimer with a rod-and-hinge strucure having DNA binding and ATP/GTp binding activities. EMBO J. 11:5101-5109. [PubMed] 64. Niki, H., A. Jaffe, R. Imamura, T. Ogura, and S. Hiraga. 1991. The new gene mukB codes for a 177 kd protein with coiled-coil domains involved in chromosome partitioning of E. coli. EMBO J. 10:183-193. [PubMed] 65. Nollmann, M., M. D. Stone, Z. Bryant, N. J. Crisona, S. C. Hong, S. Mitelheiser, A. Maxwell, C. Bustamante, and N. R. Cozzarelli. 2007. Multiple modes of Escherichia coli DNA gyrase activity revealed by force and torque. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 14:264-271. [PubMed] 66. Novick, A., and M. Weiner. 1957. Enzyme induction as an all-or-none phenomenon. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 43:553-566. [PubMed] 67. Ozbudak, E. M., M. Thattai, H. N. Lim, B. I. Shraiman, and A. van Oudenaarden. 2004. Multistability in the lactose utilization network of Escherichia coli. Nature 427:737-740. [PubMed] 68. Pang, Z., R. Chen, D. Manna, and N. P. Higgins. 2005. A gyrase mutant with low activity disrupts supercoiling at the replication terminus. J. Bacteriol. 187:7773-7783. [PubMed] 69. Pavitt, G. D., and C. F. Higgins. 1993. Chromosomal domains of supercoiling in Salmonella typhimurium. Mol. Microbiol. 10:685-696. [PubMed] 70. Peck, L. J., and J. C. Wang. 1983. Energetics of B-to-Z transition in DNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 80:6206-6210. [PubMed] 71. Pettijohn, D. E., and O. Pfenninger. 1980. Supercoils in prokaryotic DNA restrained in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77:1331-1335. [PubMed] 72. Reece, R., and A. Maxwell. 1991. DNA gyrase: structure and function. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 26:335-375. [PubMed] 73. Reyes-Dominguez, Y., G. Contreras-Ferrat, J. Ramirez-Santos, J. Membrillo-Hernandez, and M. C. Gomez-Eichelmann. 2003. Plasmid DNA supercoiling and gyrase activity in Escherichia coli wild-type and rpoS stationary-phase cells. J. Bacteriol. 185:1097-1100. [PubMed] 74. Sawitzke, J. A., and S. Austin. 2000. Suppression of chromosome segregation defects of Escherichia coli muk mutants by mutations in topoisomerase I. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:1671-1676. [PubMed] 75. Shure, M., and J. Vinograd. 1976. The number and superhelical turns in native virion SV40 DNA and minicol DNA determined by the band counting method. Cell 8:215-226. [PubMed] 76. Siegele, D. A., and J. C. Hu. 1997. Gene expression from plasmids containing the araBAD promoter at subsaturating inducer concentrations represents mixed populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:8168-8172. [PubMed] 77. Simmons, L. A., A. M. Breier, N. R. Cozzarelli, and J. M. Kaguni. 2004. Hyperinitiation of DNA replication in Escherichia coli leads to replication fork collapse and inviability. Mol. Microbiol. 51:349-358. [PubMed] 78. Slater, S., S. Wold, M. Lu, E. Boye, K. Skarstad, and N. Kleckner. 1995. E. coli SeqA protein binds oriC in two different methyl-modulated reactions appropriate to its roles in DNA replication initiation and origin sequestration. Cell 82:927-936. [PubMed] 79. Snoep, J. L., C. C. van der Weijden, H. W. Andersen, H. V. Westerhoff, and P. R. Jensen. 2002. DNA supercoiling in Escherichia coli is under tight and subtle homeostatic control, involving gene-expression and metabolic regulation of both topoisomerase I and DNA gyrase. Eur. J. Biochem. 269:1662-1669. [PubMed] 80. Staczek, P., and N. P. Higgins. 1998. DNA gyrase and Topoisomerase IV modulate chromosome domain size in vivo. Mol. Microbiol. 29:1435-1448. [PubMed] 81. Stark, M. J. R. 1987. Multicopy expression vectors carrying the lac repressor gene for regulated high-level expression of genes in Escherichia coli. Gene 51:255-267. [PubMed] 82. Sternglanz, R., S. DiNardo, K. A. Voelkel, Y. Nishimura, Y. Hirota, K. Becherer, L. Zumstein, and J. C. Wang. 1981. Mutations in the gene coding for Escherichia coli DNA topoisomerase I affect transcription and transposition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 78:2747-2751. [PubMed] 83. Studier, F. W. 1991. Use of bacteriophage T7 lysozyme to improve an inducible T7 expression system. J. Mol. Biol. 219:37-44. [PubMed] 84. Sutcliffe, J. G. 1979. Complete nucleotide sequence of the Escherichia coli plasmid pBR322. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 43:77-90. [PubMed] 85. Trun, N. J., and J. F. Marko. 1998. Architecture of a bacterial chromosome. ASM News 64:276-283. 86. Vogel, J. L., V. Geuskens, L. Desmet, N. P. Higgins, and A. Toussaint. 1996. C-terminal deletions can stabilize temperature sensitive Mu repressor mutants and block Clp-dependent proteolysis. Genetics 142:661-672. [PubMed] 87. Vogel, J. L., J. L. Zhu, M. M. Howe, A. Toussaint, and N. P. Higgins. 1991. Temperature sensitive mutations in the bacteriophage Mu c repressor locate a 63-amino-acid DNA-binding domain. J. Bacteriol. 173:6568-6577. [PubMed] 88. von Freiesleben, U., K. V. Rasmussen, and M. Schaechter. 1994. SeqA limits DnaA activity in replication from oriC in Escherichia coli. Mol. Microbiol. 14:763-772. [PubMed] 89. Wang, J. C. 1985. DNA topoisomerases. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 54:665-697. [PubMed] 90. Wang, X., X. Liu, C. Possoz, and D. J. Sherratt. 2006. The two Escherichia coli chromosome arms locate to separate cell halves. Genes Dev. 20:1727-1731. [PubMed] 91. Weitao, T., S. Dasgupta, and K. Nordstrom. 2000. Role of the mukB gene in chromosome and plasmid partition in Escherichia coli. Mol. Microbiol. 38:392-400. [PubMed] 92. Westerhoff, H. V., M. H. ODea, A. Maxwell, and M. Gellert. 1988. DNA supercoiling by DNA gyrase. A static head analysis. Cell Biophys. 12:157-181. [PubMed] 93. Yanagihara, K., and K. Mizuuchi. 2002. Mismatch-targeted transposition of Mu: a new strategy to map genetic polymorphism. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:11317-11321. [PubMed] 94. Yoshida, R. K., J. K. Miller, H. I. Miller, K. I. Friedman, and M. M. Howe. 1982. Isolation and mapping of Mu nu mutants which grow in him mutants of E. coli. Virology 120:269-272. [PubMed] 95. Yu, D., H. E. Ellis, E.-C. Lee, N. A. Jenkins, N. G. Copeland, and D. L. Court. 2000. An efficient recombination system for chromosome engineering in Escherichia coli. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:5978-5983. [PubMed] 96. Zacharias, W., A. Jaworski, J. E. Larson, and R. D. Wells. 1988. The B- to Z-DNA equilibrium in vivo is perturbed by biological processes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 85:7069-7073. [PubMed] 97. Zechiedrich, E. L., A. B. Khodursky, S. Bachellier, R. Schneider, D. Chen, D. M. Lilley, and N. R. Cozzarelli. 2000. Roles of topoisomerases in maintaining steady-state DNA supercoiling in Escherichia coli. J. Biol. Chem. 275:8103-8113. [PubMed] |
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cell. 2005 Jun 17; 121(6):899-911.
[Cell. 2005]Genes Dev. 2006 Jul 1; 20(13):1727-31.
[Genes Dev. 2006]Mol Microbiol. 2004 May; 52(4):925-31.
[Mol Microbiol. 2004]New Biol. 1991 Aug; 3(8):799-811.
[New Biol. 1991]Mol Microbiol. 2004 Jan; 51(2):349-58.
[Mol Microbiol. 2004]EMBO J. 2002 Jul 15; 21(14):3898-907.
[EMBO J. 2002]J Bacteriol. 2005 Nov; 187(22):7773-83.
[J Bacteriol. 2005]Mol Microbiol. 2003 May; 48(3):845-54.
[Mol Microbiol. 2003]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R86.
[Genome Biol. 2004]J Bacteriol. 1996 May; 178(10):2825-35.
[J Bacteriol. 1996]J Biol Chem. 1991 Feb 5; 266(4):2576-81.
[J Biol Chem. 1991]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 May 23; 97(11):5978-83.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]Cell. 1976 Jun; 8(2):215-26.
[Cell. 1976]Mol Microbiol. 1996 Jul; 21(1):111-22.
[Mol Microbiol. 1996]J Bacteriol. 2005 Nov; 187(22):7773-83.
[J Bacteriol. 2005]Nature. 1997 Aug 28; 388(6645):903-6.
[Nature. 1997]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Jul 20; 96(15):8414-9.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999]Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 1991; 26(3-4):335-75.
[Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 1991]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 May 23; 97(11):5978-83.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jun 5; 98(12):6742-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001]Mol Microbiol. 1996 Jul; 21(1):111-22.
[Mol Microbiol. 1996]Gene. 2006 Sep 1; 379():109-15.
[Gene. 2006]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jun 5; 98(12):6742-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001]J Bacteriol. 2005 Nov; 187(22):7773-83.
[J Bacteriol. 2005]J Mol Biol. 1991 May 5; 219(1):37-44.
[J Mol Biol. 1991]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1957 Jul 15; 43(7):553-66.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1957]Nature. 2004 Feb 19; 427(6976):737-40.
[Nature. 2004]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jul 22; 94(15):8168-72.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997]Gene. 1990 Sep 1; 93(1):139-42.
[Gene. 1990]Cell. 1982 Nov; 31(1):43-51.
[Cell. 1982]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985 Aug; 82(16):5437-41.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 May; 78(5):2747-51.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983 Oct; 80(20):6206-10.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983]Cell. 1976 Jun; 8(2):215-26.
[Cell. 1976]J Biol Chem. 1991 Feb 5; 266(4):2576-81.
[J Biol Chem. 1991]Cell. 1982 May; 29(1):81-90.
[Cell. 1982]J Mol Biol. 1987 Mar 20; 194(2):205-18.
[J Mol Biol. 1987]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1980 Mar; 77(3):1331-5.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1980]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1988 Oct; 85(19):7069-73.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1988]Cell. 1994 May 6; 77(3):413-26.
[Cell. 1994]Cell. 1995 Sep 22; 82(6):927-36.
[Cell. 1995]Mol Microbiol. 1994 Nov; 14(4):763-72.
[Mol Microbiol. 1994]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Oct 29; 93(22):12206-11.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996]Genes Dev. 2002 Feb 15; 16(4):399-414.
[Genes Dev. 2002]EMBO J. 1992 Dec; 11(13):5101-9.
[EMBO J. 1992]EMBO J. 1991 Jan; 10(1):183-93.
[EMBO J. 1991]Cell. 1997 Sep 5; 90(5):951-7.
[Cell. 1997]Mol Microbiol. 2000 Oct; 38(2):392-400.
[Mol Microbiol. 2000]Mol Microbiol. 1993 Nov; 10(3):675-84.
[Mol Microbiol. 1993]Mol Microbiol. 1993 Nov; 10(3):685-96.
[Mol Microbiol. 1993]Annu Rev Biochem. 1985; 54():665-97.
[Annu Rev Biochem. 1985]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Feb 15; 97(4):1322-4.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]J Struct Biol. 2000 Apr; 129(2-3):123-43.
[J Struct Biol. 2000]Mol Microbiol. 1992 Feb; 6(4):425-33.
[Mol Microbiol. 1992]Annu Rev Biochem. 1985; 54():665-97.
[Annu Rev Biochem. 1985]Cell. 1983 Aug; 34(1):105-13.
[Cell. 1983]J Biol Chem. 2000 Mar 17; 275(11):8103-13.
[J Biol Chem. 2000]Eur J Biochem. 2002 Mar; 269(6):1662-9.
[Eur J Biochem. 2002]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Feb 15; 97(4):1322-4.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Feb 15; 97(4):1671-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]J Bacteriol. 1991 Jun; 173(12):3914-7.
[J Bacteriol. 1991]Eur J Biochem. 2002 Mar; 269(6):1662-9.
[Eur J Biochem. 2002]Cell Biophys. 1988 Jan-Jun; 12():157-81.
[Cell Biophys. 1988]J Biol Chem. 1991 Feb 5; 266(4):2576-81.
[J Biol Chem. 1991]New Biol. 1991 Jun; 3(6):615-25.
[New Biol. 1991]Science. 2006 Jul 14; 313(5784):236-8.
[Science. 2006]Mol Microbiol. 1993 Feb; 7(3):351-8.
[Mol Microbiol. 1993]Cell. 1982 Nov; 31(1):43-51.
[Cell. 1982]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985 Aug; 82(16):5437-41.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985]Front Biosci. 2003 Jan 1; 8():d210-21.
[Front Biosci. 2003]J Biol Chem. 2000 Apr 14; 275(15):11257-63.
[J Biol Chem. 2000]J Bacteriol. 2003 Jan; 185(2):630-44.
[J Bacteriol. 2003]Mol Microbiol. 2004 Jan; 51(2):349-58.
[Mol Microbiol. 2004]Cell. 1986 Apr 11; 45(1):53-64.
[Cell. 1986]J Biol Chem. 1986 Apr 25; 261(12):5616-24.
[J Biol Chem. 1986]J Biol Chem. 1987 Jul 25; 262(21):10327-34.
[J Biol Chem. 1987]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Feb 15; 97(4):1322-4.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Feb 15; 97(4):1671-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]New Biol. 1991 Jun; 3(6):615-25.
[New Biol. 1991]Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1979; 43 Pt 2():1121-6.
[Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1979]Mol Microbiol. 2001 Apr; 40(1):20-36.
[Mol Microbiol. 2001]Science. 2006 Jul 14; 313(5784):236-8.
[Science. 2006]Mol Microbiol. 2005 Sep; 57(6):1511-21.
[Mol Microbiol. 2005]Nature. 2001 Oct 25; 413(6858):852-6.
[Nature. 2001]Mol Microbiol. 1999 Jul; 33(1):167-76.
[Mol Microbiol. 1999]Microbiology. 1997 Jan; 143 ( Pt 1)():179-85.
[Microbiology. 1997]Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1979; 43 Pt 2():1121-6.
[Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1979]Virology. 1982 Jul 15; 120(1):269-72.
[Virology. 1982]J Biol Chem. 1989 Feb 15; 264(5):3035-42.
[J Biol Chem. 1989]J Biol Chem. 1986 Mar 15; 261(8):3744-52.
[J Biol Chem. 1986]J Bacteriol. 1981 Jun; 146(3):914-9.
[J Bacteriol. 1981]J Bacteriol. 1991 Oct; 173(20):6568-77.
[J Bacteriol. 1991]Genetics. 1996 Mar; 142(3):661-72.
[Genetics. 1996]Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2007 Apr; 14(4):264-71.
[Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2007]Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2007 Apr; 14(4):256-8.
[Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2007]J Biol Chem. 1991 Feb 5; 266(4):2576-81.
[J Biol Chem. 1991]J Bacteriol. 2003 Feb; 185(3):1097-100.
[J Bacteriol. 2003]J Biol Chem. 2002 Mar 15; 277(11):8949-54.
[J Biol Chem. 2002]J Bacteriol. 2005 Feb; 187(4):1485-92.
[J Bacteriol. 2005]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Aug 20; 99(17):11317-21.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983 Oct; 80(20):6206-10.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983]J Biol Chem. 1991 Feb 5; 266(4):2576-81.
[J Biol Chem. 1991]