![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2008, Biophysical Society Small RNAs Establish Delays and Temporal Thresholds in Gene Expression Humboldt University Berlin, *Institute for Theoretical Biology, and †Institute of Biology, D-10115 Berlin, Germany Address reprint requests to Stefan Legewie, Tel.: 49-30-2093-9121; E-mail: s.legewie/at/biologie.hu-berlin.de. Received March 18, 2008; Accepted June 18, 2008. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.Abstract Noncoding RNAs are crucial regulators of gene expression in prokaryotes and eukaryotes, but how they affect the dynamics of transcriptional networks remains poorly understood. We analyzed the temporal characteristics of the cyanobacterial iron stress response by mathematical modeling and quantitative experimental analyses and focused on the role of a recently discovered small noncoding RNA, IsrR. We found that IsrR is responsible for a pronounced delay in the accumulation of isiA mRNA encoding the late-phase stress protein, IsiA, and that it ensures a rapid decline in isiA levels once external stress triggers are removed. These kinetic properties allow the system to selectively respond to sustained (as opposed to transient) stimuli and thus establish a temporal threshold, which prevents energetically costly IsiA accumulation under short-term stress conditions. Biological information is frequently encoded in the quantitative aspects of intracellular signals (e.g., amplitude and duration). Our simulations reveal that competitive inhibition and regulated degradation allow intracellular regulatory networks to efficiently discriminate between transient and sustained inputs. INTRODUCTION Nonprotein-coding RNA regulators such as microRNAs (miRNA) and short interfering RNAs (siRNA) control diverse processes in metazoa including development, cell differentiation, and cell proliferation (1,2). Recent research revealed that small noncoding RNAs (sRNAs) also play important roles in bacteria (3,4), where they are involved mainly in the modulation of stress responses. Approximately 80 sRNAs have been identified in Escherichia coli, many of which are evolutionary conserved (5). sRNA is typically <200 nucleotides in size and is either encoded in cis or in trans. Cis-encoded sRNAs are transcribed from the antisense strand of their target mRNAs and are thus perfectly complementary, whereas trans-encoded sRNAs have only limited complementarity (4). Most sRNAs inhibit gene expression employing a noncatalytic mechanism of action: basepairing with target mRNAs either interferes with ribosome binding, and thus with target mRNA translation, or induces degradation of the whole sRNA-target complex (4,6). Previous mathematical modeling indicated that sRNA-mediated regulation might allow faster control over gene expression than transcriptional and posttranslational regulation (7). Moreover, it was shown theoretically and experimentally that small noncoding RNAs (sRNAs) efficiently suppress steady-state target mRNA accumulation if the mRNA transcription rate is low, whereas it has little impact at higher mRNA transcription rates (8,9). Levine et al. (8) argue that this phenomenon, termed a “threshold-linear response”, efficiently prevents costly and potentially harmful expression of bacterial stress proteins under normal conditions. In this study, we set out to analyze the impact of sRNAs on the temporal regulation of gene expression. Theoretical predictions derived from mathematical modeling are confirmed by quantitative experimental analyses of the iron stress response in a cyanobacterial organism (Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803). The IsiA (iron stress induced protein A) stress response protein, which is transcriptionally induced upon iron depletion or oxidative stress (10), is controlled by a naturally occurring antisense sRNA, IsrR (iron stress repressed RNA) (11). By comparing strains expressing different levels of IsrR sRNA, we find that IsrR is responsible for a pronounced delay in isiA induction. This delay ensures that iron stress proteins are expressed in a temporally ordered manner, with the “emergency” protein IsiA accumulating only if the stress duration exceeds a critical temporal threshold. Moreover, we find that IsrR sRNA ensures a rapid decline in isiA levels once external stress triggers are removed. IsiA expression must be tightly controlled, as it reduces photosynthesis efficiency in unstressed cells and becomes highly abundant under stress conditions. Our results reveal how the IsrR sRNA ensures that isiA accumulation is restricted to severe, prolonged, and ongoing stress conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical modeling Numerical simulations were done in MATLAB 7.3 (MathWorks, Natick, MA; codes available upon request). PottersWheel, a multiexperiment fitting toolbox for MATLAB programmed by Thomas Maiwald, University of Freiburg (www.potterswheel.de), was used for parameter estimation (see Fig. 2, A and B
Experimental Bacterial strains and standard growth conditions were as described (11) with minor modifications (30°C; 50 μmol photons m−2s−1). Exponentially growing Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 liquid cultures (OD750 0.7) were washed four times with iron-free medium and further grown for 48 h in fermenters supplied with a continuous stream of air. Iron pulse was achieved by the addition of 43 nmol ferric ammonium citrate per 100 mL culture at an OD750 of 0.8. RNA isolation and analysis procedures were carried out as described before (11). RNA stability was determined as described (3) with the exception that after the addition of rifampicin-arresting transcription cells were harvested on ice at different time points, followed by short-term centrifugation and resuspension in TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). Total RNA was isolated with TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen) and separated on 10% polyacrylamide-urea or 1.3% agarose formaldehyde gels followed by Northern blotting. After hybridization with radiolabeled probes against either isiA or IsrR (16S or 5S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) as standard), Northern blot signals were detected and analyzed on a Personal Molecular Imager FX system with QUANTITY ONE software (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA). For loading control of Northern blots, we used hybridization signals of rRNA as an internal standard. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Mathematical model We implemented a mathematical model of sRNA-mediated regulation (schematically depicted in Fig. 1 A
The cyanobacterial stress response protein IsiA is induced by reactive oxygen species (ROS) and by iron depletion, and its expression is further modulated by a sRNA, IsrR (Fig. 1 A Theoretical analysis of steady-state and dynamical behavior We systematically analyzed the steady-state and dynamical behavior of the sRNA circuit by numerical simulations. In the following paragraphs, we focus mainly on the scenario where the heteroduplex is much less stable than the monomeric sRNA and target species, since such behavior was recently reported for the cyanobacterial stress response (11). However, the main conclusions drawn in this work remain valid even if the sRNA merely acts as a competitive inhibitor of translation, which does not enhance target degradation (see Conclusion). Recent work by Levine et al. (8) revealed that sRNAs establish sharp thresholds in the steady-state stimulus-response behavior of gene regulatory circuits. Similarly, our simulations also yielded an all-or-none expression pattern of target mRNA if physiologically relevant kinetic parameters were used (Fig. 1 B We compared the temporal dynamics of a reference system devoid of sRNA with those of the full system including sRNA-mediated regulation to derive experimentally testable predictions from the model. We focused on the time required to pass from one steady state to another (“response time”). Step-like increases in the external stimulus were applied, and the response time t50 required to reach 50% of the difference between the old and new steady state was calculated for the target mRNA. The dotted line in Fig. 1 B In the subthreshold regime, the sRNA is present in excess over the target mRNA. Under these conditions, the sRNA can be assumed to be constant so that mRNA degradation via the pair intermediate behaves like a first-order decay reaction, which dominates over the much slower direct mRNA degradation step (see Data S1). The response times of mRNA up- and downregulation are known to be solely determined by the (fastest) first-order decay rate (15), which explains why sRNA-mediated regulation accelerates target regulation in both directions under subthreshold stimulation conditions. The dynamic phenomena we observed upon strong stimulation originate from nonlinear threshold effects in the sRNA circuit. The upregulation time lag arises because the residual pool of free small RNAs (sRNAs) needs to be cleared before the target mRNA can accumulate. sRNAs accelerate downregulation, since the mRNA concentration quickly falls into a subthreshold range, where sRNA-mediated regulation efficiently degrades residual mRNA. This results in an abrupt termination of the mRNA expression time course, as can be seen from the solid line in Fig. 2 B Experimental verification of the simulated dynamical behavior Quantitative experimental analyses were performed to confirm the simulations in Fig. 1 B We also measured the time course of isiA target mRNA downregulation after removal of the stress trigger (see Fig. S1 A in Data S1). Hydrogen peroxide could not be used as the stimulus in these experiments, since it induces irreversible oxidation of cellular components so that stress might actually persist even after hydrogen peroxide is removed. isiA accumulation was therefore induced by iron depletion (48 h), and isiA expression was subsequently downregulated by iron readdition (t = 0 in Fig. 2 B Having established a qualitative agreement between experiments and simulations, we next asked whether our model could also quantitatively reproduce the dynamics of isiA target mRNA up- and downregulation. The model parameters were estimated from the time course data shown in Fig. 2, A and B
Pulse filtering properties of sRNA circuits The above RNA measurements (Fig. 2, A and B Taken together, our simulations indicate that IsrR-mediated control serves to prevent premature and unnecessarily prolonged isiA synthesis. This is consistent with the hypothesis that IsiA establishes a second line of defense against iron depletion and with the fact that its expression occurs relatively late during iron stress (17). The delay established by sRNA-mediated regulation thus enables cells to induce both early- and late-phase stress proteins in response to a single stress trigger in a temporally ordered manner. Two lines of evidence suggest that spike-like isiA expression (Fig. 2 C We sought to further confirm our hypothesis that sRNA circuits suppress short stimuli but efficiently transmit prolonged inputs. The time courses of target mRNA expression were, therefore, simulated for step-like stimulus pulses, and the time course maximum was analyzed as a function of pulse duration (Fig. 2 D CONCLUSION Using a combination of mathematical modeling and quantitative experimental analyses, we have shown that sRNAs establish delays and (steady-state and temporal) thresholds in gene expression. To allow a comparison of our simulations with experimental data, we analyzed the dynamical behavior of models with different sRNA expression levels for a given stimulus level and in most cases compared the wild-type model with a model devoid of sRNA. It should be noted that, from a systems theoretical point of view, the dynamical behavior of both models (±sRNA) is not directly comparable for a given stimulus level, as they differ in their steady-state dose-response curves. However, it can be seen in Fig. 1 B The key finding of our work is that sRNA-mediated regulation establishes a sign-sensitive delay for suprathreshold stimulation (Fig. 2, A and B In our simulations, we focused mainly on the scenario, where the heteroduplex is less stable than the single-stranded sRNA and target species. However, several bacterial sRNAs do not enhance target degradation but merely act as competitive inhibitors of translation (6). Importantly, sRNAs acting in this way still establish sharp thresholds and delays, as translation of subthreshold target mRNA levels is efficiently suppressed by sequestration into the heteroduplex (20) (Data S1). Eukaryotic miRNA action can also be described by the model scheme depicted in Fig. 1 A In Figs. 1 Cells face a specificity problem, as broadly overlapping signaling pathways are activated by diverse stimuli. Biological information is therefore encoded in the quantitative aspects of the signal, such as amplitude and duration (24,25). An important role for the signal duration in the initiation of cell fate decisions was described for various biological networks including mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling (24), transforming growth factor-β signaling (26), cyclic adenosine 3′:5′-cyclic monophosphate signaling (27), and nuclear factor-κB signaling (28). Previous work indicated that multistep regulation in the form of feedforward loops (29,30) and multisite phosphorylation (31,32) allows cells to discriminate transient and sustained stimuli. In this work, we identified competitive inhibition and/or regulated degradation as alternative plausible mechanisms for duration decoding (Fig. 2 D SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL To view all of the supplemental files associated with this article, visit www.biophysj.org. [Supplement]
Notes Editor: Edward H. Egelman. References 1. Bartel, D. P. 2004. MicroRNAs: genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and function. Cell. 116:281–297. [PubMed] 2. Tsang, J., J. Zhu, and A. van Oudenaarden. 2007. MicroRNA-mediated feedback and feedforward loops are recurrent network motifs in mammals. Mol. Cell. 26:753–767. [PubMed] 3. Axmann, I. M., P. Kensche, J. Vogel, S. Kohl, H. Herzel, and W. R. Hess. 2005. Identification of cyanobacterial non-coding RNAs by comparative genome analysis. Genome Biol. 6:R73. [PubMed] 4. Gottesman, S. 2005. Micros for microbes: non-coding regulatory RNAs in bacteria. Trends Genet. 21:399–404. [PubMed] 5. Altuvia, S. 2007. Identification of bacterial small non-coding RNAs: experimental approaches. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 10:257–261. [PubMed] 6. Morita, T., Y. Mochizuki, and H. Aiba. 2006. Translational repression is sufficient for gene silencing by bacterial small noncoding RNAs in the absence of mRNA destruction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 103:4858–4863. [PubMed] 7. Shimoni, Y., G. Friedlander, G. Hetzroni, G. Niv, S. Altuvia, O. Biham, and H. Margalit. 2007. Regulation of gene expression by small non-coding RNAs: a quantitative view. Mol. Syst. Biol. 3:138. [PubMed] 8. Levine, E., Z. Zhang, T. Kuhlman, and T. Hwa. 2007. Quantitative characteristics of gene regulation by small RNA. PLoS Biol. 5:e229. [PubMed] 9. Levine, E., P. McHale, and H. Levine. 2007. Small regulatory RNAs may sharpen spatial expression patterns. PLoS Comput. Biol. 3:e233. [PubMed] 10. Singh, A. K., and L. A. Sherman. 2007. Reflections on the function of IsiA, a cyanobacterial stress-inducible, Chl-binding protein. Photosynth. Res. 93:17–25. [PubMed] 11. Dühring, U., I. M. Axmann, W. R. Hess, and A. Wilde. 2006. An internal antisense RNA regulates expression of the photosynthesis gene isiA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 103:7054–7058. [PubMed] 12. Legewie, S., N. Bluthgen, and H. Herzel. 2005. Quantitative analysis of ultrasensitive responses. FEBS J. 272:4071–4079. [PubMed] 13. Wagner, E. G., S. Altuvia, and P. Romby. 2002. Antisense RNAs in bacteria and their genetic elements. Adv. Genet. 46:361–398. [PubMed] 14. Argaman, L., and S. Altuvia. 2000. fhlA repression by OxyS RNA: kissing complex formation at two sites results in a stable antisense-target RNA complex. J. Mol. Biol. 300:1101–1112. [PubMed] 15. Hargrove, J. L., M. G. Hulsey, and E. G. Beale. 1991. The kinetics of mammalian gene expression. Bioessays. 13:667–674. [PubMed] 16. Bernstein, J. A., A. B. Khodursky, P. H. Lin, S. Lin-Chao, and S. N. Cohen. 2002. Global analysis of mRNA decay and abundance in Escherichia coli at single-gene resolution using two-color fluorescent DNA microarrays. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:9697–9702. [PubMed] 17. Michel, K. P., and E. K. Pistorius. 2004. Adaptation of the photosynthetic electron transport chain in cyanobacteria to iron deficiency: the function of IdiA and IsiA. Physiol. Plant. 120:36–50. [PubMed] 18. Golden, S. S. 2006. Good old-fashioned (anti)sense. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 103:6781–6782. [PubMed] 19. Mangan, S., and U. Alon. 2003. Structure and function of the feed-forward loop network motif. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 100:11980–11985. [PubMed] 20. Ferrell, J. E. Jr. 1996. Tripping the switch fantastic: how a protein kinase cascade can convert graded inputs into switch-like outputs. Trends Biochem. Sci. 21:460–466. [PubMed] 21. Levine, E., E. Ben Jacob, and H. Levine. 2007. Target-specific and global effectors in gene regulation by MicroRNA. Biophys. J. 93:L52–L54. [PubMed] 22. Eichacker, L., H. Paulsen, and W. Rudiger. 1992. Synthesis of chlorophyll a regulates translation of chlorophyll a apoproteins P700, CP47, CP43 and D2 in barley etioplasts. Eur. J. Biochem. 205:17–24. [PubMed] 23. Li, H., and L. A. Sherman. 2000. A redox-responsive regulator of photosynthesis gene expression in the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. Strain PCC 6803. J. Bacteriol. 182:4268–4277. [PubMed] 24. Ebisuya, M., K. Kondoh, and E. Nishida. 2005. The duration, magnitude and compartmentalization of ERK MAP kinase activity: mechanisms for providing signaling specificity. J. Cell Sci. 118:2997–3002. [PubMed] 25. Miller-Jensen, K., K. A. Janes, J. S. Brugge, and D. A. Lauffenburger. 2007. Common effector processing mediates cell-specific responses to stimuli. Nature. 448:604–608. [PubMed] 26. Nicolas, F. J., and C. S. Hill. 2003. Attenuation of the TGF-beta-Smad signaling pathway in pancreatic tumor cells confers resistance to TGF-beta-induced growth arrest. Oncogene. 22:3698–3711. [PubMed] 27. Bito, H., K. Deisseroth, and R. W. Tsien. 1996. CREB phosphorylation and dephosphorylation: a Ca2+- and stimulus duration-dependent switch for hippocampal gene expression. Cell. 87:1203–1214. [PubMed] 28. Hoffmann, A., A. Levchenko, M. L. Scott, and D. Baltimore. 2002. The IkappaB-NF-kappaB signaling module: temporal control and selective gene activation. Science. 298:1241–1245. [PubMed] 29. Shen-Orr, S. S., R. Milo, S. Mangan, and U. Alon. 2002. Network motifs in the transcriptional regulation network of Escherichia coli. Nat. Genet. 31:64–68. [PubMed] 30. Mangan, S., A. Zaslaver, and U. Alon. 2003. The coherent feedforward loop serves as a sign-sensitive delay element in transcription networks. J. Mol. Biol. 334:197–204. [PubMed] 31. Deshaies, R. J., and J. E. Ferrell Jr. 2001. Multisite phosphorylation and the countdown to S phase. Cell. 107:819–822. [PubMed] 32. Bluthgen, N., F. J. Bruggeman, S. Legewie, H. Herzel, H. V. Westerhoff, and B. N. Kholodenko. 2006. Effects of sequestration on signal transduction cascades. FEBS J. 273:895–906. [PubMed] 33. Glauser, D. A., and W. Schlegel. 2006. Mechanisms of transcriptional regulation underlying temporal integration of signals. Nucleic Acids Res. 34:5175–5183. [PubMed] 34. Eissing, T., S. Waldherr, F. Allgower, P. Scheurich, and E. Bullinger. 2007. Response to bistability in apoptosis: roles of bax, bcl-2, and mitochondrial permeability transition pores. Biophys. J. 92:3332–3334. [PubMed] 35. Legewie, S., N. Bluthgen, and H. Herzel. 2006. Mathematical modeling identifies inhibitors of apoptosis as mediators of positive feedback and bistability. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2:e120. [PubMed] 36. Legewie, S., B. Schoeberl, N. Bluthgen, and H. Herzel. 2007. Competing docking interactions can bring about bistability in the MAPK cascade. Biophys. J. 93:2279–2288. [PubMed] 37. Kim, S. Y., and J. E. Ferrell Jr. 2007. Substrate competition as a source of ultrasensitivity in the inactivation of Wee1. Cell. 128:1133–1145. [PubMed] |
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||
Cell. 2004 Jan 23; 116(2):281-97.
[Cell. 2004]Mol Cell. 2007 Jun 8; 26(5):753-67.
[Mol Cell. 2007]Genome Biol. 2005; 6(9):R73.
[Genome Biol. 2005]Trends Genet. 2005 Jul; 21(7):399-404.
[Trends Genet. 2005]Curr Opin Microbiol. 2007 Jun; 10(3):257-61.
[Curr Opin Microbiol. 2007]Mol Syst Biol. 2007; 3():138.
[Mol Syst Biol. 2007]PLoS Biol. 2007 Sep; 5(9):e229.
[PLoS Biol. 2007]PLoS Comput Biol. 2007 Nov; 3(11):e233.
[PLoS Comput Biol. 2007]Photosynth Res. 2007 Jul-Sep; 93(1-3):17-25.
[Photosynth Res. 2007]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 May 2; 103(18):7054-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]FEBS J. 2005 Aug; 272(16):4071-9.
[FEBS J. 2005]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 May 2; 103(18):7054-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]Genome Biol. 2005; 6(9):R73.
[Genome Biol. 2005]Mol Syst Biol. 2007; 3():138.
[Mol Syst Biol. 2007]PLoS Biol. 2007 Sep; 5(9):e229.
[PLoS Biol. 2007]Adv Genet. 2002; 46():361-98.
[Adv Genet. 2002]J Mol Biol. 2000 Jul 28; 300(5):1101-12.
[J Mol Biol. 2000]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 May 2; 103(18):7054-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]PLoS Biol. 2007 Sep; 5(9):e229.
[PLoS Biol. 2007]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 May 2; 103(18):7054-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]Bioessays. 1991 Dec; 13(12):667-74.
[Bioessays. 1991]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 May 2; 103(18):7054-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Jul 23; 99(15):9697-702.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 May 2; 103(18):7054-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]Physiol Plant. 2004 Jan; 120(1):36-50.
[Physiol Plant. 2004]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 May 2; 103(18):6781-2.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Oct 14; 100(21):11980-5.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Mar 28; 103(13):4858-63.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]Trends Biochem Sci. 1996 Dec; 21(12):460-6.
[Trends Biochem Sci. 1996]Cell. 2004 Jan 23; 116(2):281-97.
[Cell. 2004]PLoS Biol. 2007 Sep; 5(9):e229.
[PLoS Biol. 2007]Biophys J. 2007 Dec 1; 93(11):L52-4.
[Biophys J. 2007]Eur J Biochem. 1992 Apr 1; 205(1):17-24.
[Eur J Biochem. 1992]J Bacteriol. 2000 Aug; 182(15):4268-77.
[J Bacteriol. 2000]J Cell Sci. 2005 Jul 15; 118(Pt 14):2997-3002.
[J Cell Sci. 2005]Nature. 2007 Aug 2; 448(7153):604-8.
[Nature. 2007]Oncogene. 2003 Jun 12; 22(24):3698-711.
[Oncogene. 2003]Cell. 1996 Dec 27; 87(7):1203-14.
[Cell. 1996]Science. 2002 Nov 8; 298(5596):1241-5.
[Science. 2002]