![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||
Copyright © 2009, American Society for Microbiology Department of Biochemistry, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5C1 *Corresponding author. Mailing address: The University of Western Ontario, Department of Biochemistry, London, Ontario, Canada N6G 1C7. Phone: 519-661-3133. Fax: 519-661-3175. E-mail: dedgell/at/uwo.ca Received December 15, 2008; Accepted January 21, 2009. Abstract Previous transcript mapping of the bacteriophage Aeh1 nrd operon revealed a predicted RNA hairpin upstream of the homing endonuclease mobE gene. We enzymatically mapped the hairpin, showing that the mobE ribosome binding site is sequestered. Cloning of the hairpin upstream of lacZ resulted in reduced β-galactosidase activity, consistent with translational regulation. Homing endonucleases are a unique class of site-specific, sequence-tolerant DNA endonucleases that promote the mobility of their coding region and flanking sequences by a recombination-dependent process termed homing (2). Homing endonucleases are associated with self-splicing group I or II introns (2, 16) or inteins (10, 11), but they are also found as freestanding versions in the intergenic regions separating evolutionarily conserved genes (6, 15, 21, 28). Whereas the mobility pathways of freestanding endonucleases are likely similar to those used by intron-encoded versions (3, 17, 22, 25), relatively little is understood about the mechanisms regulating the expression of free-standing endonucleases. Control of endonuclease function is crucial to the successful integration of a free-standing endonuclease into host transcriptional units upon invasion of a genome, because unregulated expression of the endonuclease may perturb expression patterns of essential neighboring genes required for viability. As a model system for studying the regulation of homing endonuclease function, we have focused on the aerobic ribonucleotide reductase (nrd) genomic region of T-even-like phage, which is a hot spot for endonuclease insertion (20, 21, 23, 26, 27). The genome of the Aeromonas hydrophila bacteriophage Aeh1 contains a putative freestanding endonuclease gene mobE, that has inserted into the large subunit gene (nrdA) of aerobic ribonucleotide reductase (Fig. (Fig.1A)1A
A previous transcriptional profiling study of the Aeh1 nrd operon revealed a complex, multilayered mechanism to regulate the expression of the nrd genes and the embedded homing endonuclease gene, mobE (9). Early transcripts that initiate upstream of the nrdA-a gene are polycistronic and include a predicted RNA hairpin that sequesters the mobE ribosome binding site (RBS), presumably preventing MobE translation at early stages in Aeh1 infection. However, transcripts that initiate at the late promoter immediately upstream of mobE do not include sufficient sequence to form this secondary structure, likely facilitating translation of MobE (Fig. (Fig.1A).1A The proposed model for translational repression of Aeh1 mobE predicts key canonical base pairs between the mobE RBS and the upstream RNA strand in a single internal loop hairpin. To obtain experimental evidence supporting the proposed hairpin structure, we enzymatically mapped in vitro-transcribed hairpin RNA. Enzymatic structural mapping is commonly used to confirm computer-predicted secondary structure models of RNA folds. For our study, three ribonucleases were chosen for secondary structure probing, as follows: RNase A, which cleaves 3′ to unpaired cytosine and uracil residues; RNase T1, which cleaves 3′ to unpaired guanine residues; and RNase V1, which cleaves base-paired or stacked regions of RNA. To generate a hairpin RNA substrate for enzymatic mapping, we ligated annealed oligonucleotides DE-286 (5′-CATTTGCACCCTCTAAATAGTCGTGTACGTTAAGAGGGTGCAATG) and DE-287 (5′-AATTCATTTGCACCCTCTTAACGTACACGACTATTTAGAGGGTGCAAATGGTAC) into the EcoRI and KpnI sites of pBluescript SK(−) to create pBS-Pin. Hairpin RNA of uniform length was transcribed from PstI-digested plasmid DNA by using T7 RNA polymerase (NEB), end labeled with γ-32P, gel purified, and resuspended in 1× structural buffer (Ambion). The end-labeled RNA was renatured at 30°C and digested with RNase A, RNase T1, or RNase V1. This temperature was chosen for structural studies because it is the optimal growth temperature for the Aeh1 host, A. hydrophila (5). All digestions were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions (Ambion), and the products were resolved on a 12% (wt/vol) denaturing polyacrylamide gel (19:1 acrylamide-to-bisacrylamide ratio) alongside a size marker generated by alkaline hydrolysis. The results of partial digestion with RNase A, RNase T1, and RNase V1 are summarized in Fig. Fig.1B.1B To test the capacity of the mobE hairpin to repress translation, we constructed a series of plasmids encoding lacZ under the control of a constitutive Escherichia coli promoter. We amplified the lacZ gene from E. coli strain HB101 by using primers DE-333 (5′-CCGGTACCTTGACAATTAATCATCGGCTCGTATAATGCTAGCAGGGTACATGACTATGATTACGGATCC) and DE-334 (5′-CCTCTAGATTATTTTTGACACCAGACCAACTGG) and ligated the PCR product into pSP72 (Promega) by using KpnI and XbaI to create pLacZ. DE-333 introduces a BamHI site just downstream of the start codon of lacZ and a NheI site immediately upstream of it. The NheI and BamHI sites were used to create a series of hairpin lacZ constructs by ligating annealed oligonucleotides into pLacZ. Each pair of oligonucleotides represented a structural variant of the mobE hairpin. For each construct, we maintained the sequence of the mobE RBS (5′-GAGG-3′), because the translation initiation region of other A. hydrophila genes functions in E. coli (13). The wild-type hairpin construct, pHP, was created using DE-335 (5′-CTAGCAGGGTACATTTGCACCCTCTAAATAGTCGTGTACGTTAAGAGGGTGCAAATATGACTATGATTACG) and DE-336 (5′-GATCCGTAATCATAGTCATATTTGCACCCTCTTAACGTACACGACTATTTAGAGGGTGCAAATGTACCCTG); a mutant hairpin construct, pMutHP, in which the RBS is intact but the hairpin is unable to form, was generated using DE-337 (5′-CTAGCAGGGTACTAAACGTGGGAGATTTATCAGCTGTACGTTAAGGGGTGCAAATATGACTATGATTACG) and DE-338 (5′-GATCCGTAATCATAGTCATATTTGCACCCTCTTAACGTCAGCTGATAAATCTCCCACGTTTAGTACCCTG); a restored mutant, pRmutHP, in which the mutant hairpin has compensatory mutations to restore the hairpin structure, was generated with DE-339 (5′-CTAGCAGGGTACTAAACGTGCCTCATTTATCAGCTGTAGCAATTGAGGCACGTTTAATGACTATGATTACG) and DE-340 (5′-GATCCGTAATCATAGTCATTAAACGTGCCTCAATTGCTACAGCTGATAAATGAGGCACGTTTAGTACCCTG); and a control construct, pRBS(+), closely resembling the late initiated mobE transcripts that would not contain sufficient sequence to sequester the RBS, was generated using DE-341 (5′-CTAGCAGGGTACGTACGTTAAGAGGGTGCAAATATGACTATGATTACG) and DE-342 (5′-GATCCGTAATCATAGTCATATTTGCACCCTCTTAACGTACGTACCCTG) (Fig. (Fig.2B).2B
The constructs were assayed for β-galactosidase activity using Miller assays. In the HP-LacZ constructs, β-galactosidase activity was decreased by ~97% for pHP with a wild-type hairpin relative to that in the pRBS(+) control (Fig. (Fig.2B).2B Many T4 late genes are cotranscribed with early genes on polycistronic messages, but translation of these late genes is repressed due to RNA secondary structures that are predicted to sequester the RBS. Examples of this arrangement include soc (capsid protein) (18), e (T4 lysozyme) (19), and gene 49 (endonuclease VII) (1) all of which are translationally repressed by an RNA hairpin on early transcripts. Similarly, translational repression regulates the expression of intron-encoded homing endonucleases I-TevI, I-TevII, and I-TevIII (7, 12) and has been suggested for the freestanding homing endonuclease gene segB (Fig. (Fig.3)3
It is intriguing that similar translational regulatory mechanisms are employed by diverse T-even phage to regulate the expression of unrelated homing endonucleases that are embedded within different transcriptional units. Strong negative regulation of endonuclease function may limit spurious cleavage of the phage genome during critical stages of replication and gene expression. For instance, overexpression of cloned T4 mobE in E. coli resulted in nonspecific DNA degradation within 15 min of induction (24). Similarly, attempts to clone the Aeh1 mobE gene in a wild-type form have not yet been successful, likely due to extreme toxicity of the enzyme (E. A. Gibb and D. R. Edgell, unpublished data). It is also possible that regulating endonuclease expression to late stages in the infective cycle may enhance endonuclease-mediated mobility because sufficient genome equivalents would be available to initiate and repair a homing event. Moreover, in phage, T4 endonuclease-mediated homing is dependent on key phage-encoded recombination and replication proteins (14, 22, 25), and limiting expression to late stages to coincide with the recombination-dependent mode of DNA replication may further enhance mobility. Acknowledgments This work was supported by an operating grant (MOP77779) from the Canadian Institute of Health Research, a discovery grant (311610-2005) to D.R.E. from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada, and an Early Researcher Award to D.R.E. from the Government of Ontario. Footnotes Published ahead of print on 30 January 2009.REFERENCES 1. Barth, K. A., D. Powell, M. Trupin, and G. Mosig. 1988. Regulation of two nested proteins from gene 49 (recombination endonuclease VII) and of a lambda RexA-like protein of bacteriophage T4. Genetics 120329-343. [PubMed] 2. Belfort, M., V. Derbyshire, B. Cousineau, and A. Lambowitz. 2002. Mobile introns: pathways and proteins, p. 761-783. In N. Craig, R. Craigie, M. Gellert, and A. Lambowitz (ed.), Mobile DNA II. ASM Press, Washington, DC. 3. Belle, A., M. Landthaler, and D. A. Shub. 2002. Intronless homing: site-specific endonuclease SegF of bacteriophage T4 mediates localized marker exclusion analogous to homing endonucleases of group I introns. Genes Dev. 16351-362. [PubMed] 4. Brok-Volchanskaya, V. S., F. A. Kadyrov, D. E. Sivogrivov, P. M. Kolosov, A. S. Sokolov, M. G. Shlyapnikov, V. M. Kryukov, and I. E. Granovsky. 2008. Phage T4 SegB protein is a homing endonuclease required for the preferred inheritance of T4 tRNA gene region occurring in co-infection with a related phage. Nucleic Acids Res. 362094-2105. [PubMed] 5. Chow, M. S., and M. A. Rouf. 1983. Isolation and partial characterization of two Aeromonas hydrophila bacteriophages. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 451670-1676. [PubMed] 6. Edgell, D. R. 2005. Free-standing endonucleases of T-even phages: free-loaders or functionaries?, p. 147-160. In M. Belfort, B. L. Stoddard, D. W. Wood, and V. Derbyshire (ed.), Homing endonucleases and inteins. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany. 7. Edgell, D. R., V. Derbyshire, P. Van Roey, S. LaBonne, M. J. Stanger, Z. Li, T. M. Boyd, D. A. Shub, and M. Belfort. 2004. Intron-encoded homing endonuclease I-TevI also functions as a transcriptional autorepressor. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 11936-944. [PubMed] 8. Friedrich, N. C., E. Torrents, E. A. Gibb, M. Sahlin, B. M. Sjoberg, and D. R. Edgell. 2007. Insertion of a homing endonuclease creates a genes-in-pieces ribonucleotide reductase that retains function. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1046176-6181. [PubMed] 9. Gibb, E. A., and D. R. Edgell. 2007. Multiple controls regulate the expression of mobE, an HNH homing endonuclease gene embedded within a ribonucleotide reductase gene of phage Aeh1. J. Bacteriol. 1894648-4661. [PubMed] 10. Gimble, F. S. 2000. Invasion of a multitude of genetic niches by mobile endonuclease genes. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 18599-107. [PubMed] 11. Gogarten, J. P., A. G. Senejani, O. Zhaxybayeva, L. Olendzenski, and E. Hilario. 2002. Inteins: structure, function, and evolution. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 56263-287. [PubMed] 12. Gott, J. M., A. Zeeh, D. Bell-Pedersen, K. Ehrenman, M. Belfort, and D. A. Shub. 1988. Genes within genes: independent expression of phage T4 intron open reading frames and the genes in which they reside. Genes Dev. 21791-1799. [PubMed] 13. Howard, S. P., and J. T. Buckley. 1986. Molecular cloning and expression in Escherichia coli of the structural gene for the hemolytic toxin aerolysin from Aeromonas hydrophila. Mol. Gen. Genet. 204289-295. [PubMed] 14. Huang, Y. J., M. M. Parker, and M. Belfort. 1999. Role of exonucleolytic degradation in group I intron homing in phage T4. Genetics 1531501-1512. [PubMed] 15. Kutter, E., K. Gachechiladze, A. Poglazov, E. Marusich, M. Shneider, P. Aronsson, A. Napuli, D. Porter, and V. Mesyanzhinov. 1995. Evolution of T4-related phages. Virus Genes 11285-297. [PubMed] 16. Lambowitz, A. M., and S. Zimmerly. 2004. Mobile group II introns. Annu. Rev. Genet. 381-35. [PubMed] 17. Liu, Q., A. Belle, D. A. Shub, M. Belfort, and D. R. Edgell. 2003. SegG endonuclease promotes marker exclusion and mediates co-conversion from a distant cleavage site. J. Mol. Biol. 33413-23. [PubMed] 18. Macdonald, P. M., E. Kutter, and G. Mosig. 1984. Regulation of a bacteriophage T4 late gene, soc, which maps in an early region. Genetics 10617-27. [PubMed] 19. McPheeters, D. S., A. Christensen, E. T. Young, G. Stormo, and L. Gold. 1986. Translational regulation of expression of the bacteriophage T4 lysozyme gene. Nucleic Acids Res. 145813-5826. [PubMed] 20. Miller, E. S., J. F. Heidelberg, J. A. Eisen, W. C. Nelson, A. S. Durkin, A. Ciecko, T. V. Feldblyum, O. White, I. T. Paulsen, W. C. Nierman, J. Lee, B. Szczypinski, and C. M. Fraser. 2003. Complete genome sequence of the broad-host-range vibriophage KVP40: comparative genomics of a T4-related bacteriophage. J. Bacteriol. 1855220-5233. [PubMed] 21. Miller, E. S., E. Kutter, G. Mosig, F. Arisaka, T. Kunisawa, and W. Ruger. 2003. Bacteriophage T4 genome. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 6786-156. [PubMed] 22. Mueller, J. E., J. Clyman, Y. J. Huang, M. M. Parker, and M. Belfort. 1996. Intron mobility in phage T4 occurs in the context of recombination-dependent DNA replication by way of multiple pathways. Genes Dev. 10351-364. [PubMed] 23. Nolan, J. M., V. Petrov, C. Bertrand, H. M. Krisch, and J. D. Karam. 2006. Genetic diversity among five T4-like bacteriophages. Virol. J. 330. [PubMed] 24. Nord, D. 2007. Homing endonucleases and horizontal gene transfer in bacteria and bacteriophages. Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden. 25. Parker, M. M., M. Belisle, and M. Belfort. 1999. Intron homing with limited exon homology. Illegitimate double-strand-break repair in intron acquisition by phage T4. Genetics 1531513-1523. [PubMed] 26. Sandegren, L., D. Nord, and B. M. Sjoberg. 2005. SegH and Hef: two novel homing endonucleases whose genes replace the mobC and mobE genes in several T4-related phages. Nucleic Acids Res. 336203-6213. [PubMed] 27. Sandegren, L., and B. M. Sjoberg. 2004. Distribution, sequence homology, and homing of group I introns among T-even-like bacteriophages: evidence for recent transfer of old introns. J. Biol. Chem. 27922218-22227. [PubMed] 28. Sharma, M., R. L. Ellis, and D. M. Hinton. 1992. Identification of a family of bacteriophage T4 genes encoding proteins similar to those present in group I introns of fungi and phage. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 896658-6662. [PubMed] 29. Zuker, M. 2003. Mfold web server for nucleic acid folding and hybridization prediction. Nucleic Acids Res. 313406-3415. [PubMed] |
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||
Annu Rev Genet. 2004; 38():1-35.
[Annu Rev Genet. 2004]FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2000 Apr 15; 185(2):99-107.
[FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2000]Annu Rev Microbiol. 2002; 56():263-87.
[Annu Rev Microbiol. 2002]Virus Genes. 1995; 11(2-3):285-97.
[Virus Genes. 1995]Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2003 Mar; 67(1):86-156, table of contents.
[Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2003]J Bacteriol. 2003 Sep; 185(17):5220-33.
[J Bacteriol. 2003]Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2003 Mar; 67(1):86-156, table of contents.
[Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2003]Virol J. 2006 May 23; 3():30.
[Virol J. 2006]Nucleic Acids Res. 2005; 33(19):6203-13.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2005]J Biol Chem. 2004 May 21; 279(21):22218-27.
[J Biol Chem. 2004]J Bacteriol. 2007 Jul; 189(13):4648-61.
[J Bacteriol. 2007]Appl Environ Microbiol. 1983 May; 45(5):1670-1676.
[Appl Environ Microbiol. 1983]Mol Gen Genet. 1986 Aug; 204(2):289-95.
[Mol Gen Genet. 1986]Genetics. 1984 Jan; 106(1):17-27.
[Genetics. 1984]Nucleic Acids Res. 1986 Jul 25; 14(14):5813-26.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1986]Genetics. 1988 Oct; 120(2):329-43.
[Genetics. 1988]Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2004 Oct; 11(10):936-44.
[Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2004]Genes Dev. 1988 Dec; 2(12B):1791-9.
[Genes Dev. 1988]Genetics. 1999 Dec; 153(4):1501-12.
[Genetics. 1999]Genes Dev. 1996 Feb 1; 10(3):351-64.
[Genes Dev. 1996]Genetics. 1999 Dec; 153(4):1513-23.
[Genetics. 1999]J Bacteriol. 2007 Jul; 189(13):4648-61.
[J Bacteriol. 2007]Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Jul 1; 31(13):3406-15.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2003]Genes Dev. 1988 Dec; 2(12B):1791-9.
[Genes Dev. 1988]J Biol Chem. 2004 May 21; 279(21):22218-27.
[J Biol Chem. 2004]J Bacteriol. 2007 Jul; 189(13):4648-61.
[J Bacteriol. 2007]Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Jul 1; 31(13):3406-15.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2003]J Bacteriol. 2007 Jul; 189(13):4648-61.
[J Bacteriol. 2007]Genes Dev. 1988 Dec; 2(12B):1791-9.
[Genes Dev. 1988]J Biol Chem. 2004 May 21; 279(21):22218-27.
[J Biol Chem. 2004]