Small RNA mediated repression of subtilisin production in Bacillus licheniformis

Hertel, Robert; Meyerjürgens, Sandra; Voigt, Birgit; Liesegang, Heiko; Volland, Sonja

doi:10.1038/s41598-017-05628-y

Download PDF

Article
Open access
Published: 18 July 2017

Small RNA mediated repression of subtilisin production in Bacillus licheniformis

Robert Hertel¹,
Sandra Meyerjürgens¹,
Birgit Voigt²^nAff3,
Heiko Liesegang¹ &
…
Sonja Volland¹

Scientific Reports volume 7, Article number: 5699 (2017) Cite this article

2032 Accesses
12 Citations
1 Altmetric
Metrics details

Subjects

Industrial microbiology

Abstract

The species Bacillus licheniformis includes important strains that are used in industrial production processes. Currently the physiological model used to adapt these processes is based on the closely related model organism B. subtilis. In this study we found that both organisms reveal significant differences in the regulation of subtilisin, their main natural protease and a product of industrial fermentation processes. We identified and characterized a novel antisense sRNA AprAs, which represents an RNA based repressor of apr, the gene encoding for the industrial relevant subtilisin protease. Reduction of the AprAs level leads to an enhanced proteolytic activity and an increase of Apr protein expression in the mutant strain. A vector based complementation of the AprAs deficient mutant confirmed this effect and demonstrated the necessity of cis transcription for full efficiency. A comparative analysis of the corresponding genome loci from B. licheniformis and B. subtilis revealed the absence of an aprAs promoter in B. subtilis and indicates that AprAs is a B. licheniformis species specific phenomenon. The discovery of AprAs is of great biotechnological interest since subtilisin Carlsberg is one of the main products of industrial fermentation by B. licheniformis.

DNA glycosylases provide antiviral defence in prokaryotes

Article Open access 17 April 2024

Improving prime editing with an endogenous small RNA-binding protein

Article Open access 03 April 2024

Streptomyces umbrella toxin particles block hyphal growth of competing species

Article Open access 17 April 2024

Introduction

Bacillus licheniformis was originally isolated and described by Weigman in 1898¹. The species is a member of the B. subtilis species complex² and exhibits a saprophytic life style on organic material^{3, 4}. The lifestyle results in three properties which promote B. licheniformis as platform for productive fermentations. (I) Bacilli can use a broad spectrum of plant derived C- and N-sources^{5, 6}. (II) Since the organisms live on organic matter they are evolved for high concentrations of nutrient supply which enables the them to reach high cell densities in fermentations⁷. Finally, (III) they secrete high amounts of many efficient bio-polymer hydrolases⁸ like lichenases⁹, lipases¹⁰, thermostable alpha-amylases¹¹, and many more^{12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20}. Exoproteases of the subtilisin Carlsberg family are an industrial fermentation product of B. licheniformis and B. subtilis strains with an annual production rate of about 500 t²¹. Subtilisin is highly thermostable, active under alkaline conditions (pH 10–11) and, due to its low substrate specificity, an important additive for household detergents^{21, 22}.

In 2004 the type strain B. licheniformis DSM13 (also ATCC14580) was sequenced by Rey et al. (Davis, USA)²³ and Veith et al. (Göttingen, Germany)²⁴ revealing a plasmid free 4.2 Mbp genome. Almost a decade later, the RNA based regulatory network of B. licheniformis DSM13 was analysed by RNA-Seq using samples from different stages of an industrial fermentation²⁵.The transcriptome data revealed a considerable number of protein encoding RNAs and also 3,314 non-coding RNAs, divided in 2853 mRNA-bound and 461 small RNAs. In general, small RNAs (sRNA) are versatile regulators of gene expression, which can facilitate their function in cis or trans, controlling e.g. mRNA stability, degradation, termination and translation^{26, 27}. Three prominent classes of sRNAs have been described: (i) structured sRNAs with limited complementarity to their targets, (ii) sRNAs that bind regulatory proteins and (iii) antisense RNAs synthesized from the strand complementary to their target mRNA²⁸.

In the transcriptome of B. licheniformis an antisense RNA element on the 3′ end of the apr gene, encoding the subtilisin protease, gained considerable attention, since the samples were taken from a subtilisin fermentation²⁵. Due to its association with apr, we called the RNA element AprAs. Its active region has a length of 144 nucleotides and shows complete sequence identity to the antisense 3′ coding region of the apr gene. The RNA-Seq data from Wiegand et al.²⁵ also indicated that the small RNA is transcribed by its own promoter. Its transcription rate exceeds the transcription rate of the apr mRNA by three orders of magnitude.

For the closely related organism B. subtilis no comparable antisense RNA associated with the 3′-end of aprE was described, although extensive transcriptome analyses were performed by Rasmussen et al. in 2009²⁹ and Nicolas et al. in 2012³⁰. The subtilisin gene aprE in B. subtilis was found to be regulated by the interacting global transcriptional regulators CodY and ScoC as well as by AbrB³¹. Barbieri et al.³¹ could also show that the regulatory network in B. subtilis results in a repression of the aprE gene within the exponential growth phase and an exclusive expression of AprE within the stationary phase. The genome of B. licheniformis DSM13 also exhibits orthologues of aprE regulators^{23, 24} and the transcriptome analysis of B. licheniformis DSM13²⁵ showed a corresponding expression pattern for apr. However, the association of the apr gene with a highly expressed small antisense RNA indicates an additional regulatory layer in B. licheniformis.

The here presented work focuses on the impact of the newly discovered antisense RNA AprAs. By inactivation of the aprAs promoter and vector encoded transcription of AprAs we could show its regulatory effect on proteolytic activity and Apr expression.

Results

Construction and characterization of an AprAs deficient mutant

To investigate the impact of the 144 base antisense sRNA AprAs (Bli_r0872 in Wiegand et al.²⁵), an AprAs deficient B. licheniformis MW3 mutant was generated. A direct deletion of aprAs was not possible due to its overlap with the apr gene on the complementary DNA strand (see Fig. 1a). However, the previous RNA-Seq experiment²⁵ also included differential RNA-Seq (dRNA-Seq, see Sharma et al.³²) and thus, the transcription start site of aprAs and a corresponding promoter pattern could be identified. The SigA pattern was located on the positive DNA strand between the stop codon of the apr coding region and its transcription terminator (see Fig. 1b). In order to prevent the transcription of AprAs, the AT-rich region of the −10 promoter box was replaced with the GC-rich recognition pattern of the AscI endonuclease. For easy detection of the desired mutation, a 2.6 kbp PCR product was amplified from the respective genomic region and digested with the endonuclease AscI. The mutant strain B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ exhibited the expected 1.3 kbp DNA band consisting of the degradation products of the 2.6 kbp PCR product (see Supplementary Figure S1). A slot blot experiment confirmed that no transcriptional activity of the aprAs gene was detectable in the mutant strain compared to the original strain B. licheniformis MW3 (see Fig. 2).

To investigate the impact of AprAs on the protease activity of B. licheniformis, the AprAs⁻ mutant and the original strain MW3 were grown on M9 skim milk agar plates. B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ exhibited increased halo formation, indicative for a stronger proteolytic activity compared to strain MW3 (Fig. 3a). These qualitative results were confirmed by quantitative non-specific exoprotease assays using 24 h M9 skim milk liquid cultures. Here, the AprAs deficient strain B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ showed an approximately four fold increased exoprotease activity compared to B. licheniformis MW3 (see Fig. 3b).

Verification of AprAs phenotype

B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ was complemented with a vector encoded aprAs gene to restore the original phenotype and confirm that the observed exoprotease phenotype of B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ is based on the inactivation of AprAs transcription. The aprAs gene with its native promoter was cloned into the Bacillus/E. coli shuttle vector pV2³³, creating pV2::aprAs. The vector was introduced into B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ and the original strain B. licheniformis MW3. The vector pV2 was used as a control. The slot blot analysis (Fig. 2) confirmed the re-establishment of AprAs transcription in B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ pV2::aprAs. B. licheniformis MW3 pV2 exhibited AprAs transcription due to the chromosomal aprAs gene. B. licheniformis MW3 pV2::aprAs showed an increased AprAs transcription due to expression from the chromosomal aprAs gene in addition to the multi-copy vector encoded aprAs gene.

The qualitative evaluation of the protease activity on M9 skim milk agar plates (Fig. 3c) showed that the complemented mutant strain B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ pV2::aprAs could re-establish the “wild type” phenotype. Its halo formation was comparable to B. licheniformis MW3 pV2 and reduced in comparison to B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻. These qualitative results were confirmed by the quantitative exoprotease activity evaluation (Fig. 3d), determined in the supernatant of 4 ml culture in liquid M9 skim milk media. The reduction of AprAs transcription in B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ resulted once more in an approximately 4 times increased exoprotease activity. This effect was reversed by the ectopic AprAs transcription in B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ pV2::aprAs. The in trans overexpression of AprAs in the original strain MW3 resulted in an additional reduction of exoprotease activity of approximately 50% (see B. licheniformis MW3 pV2::aprAs).

Impact of AprAs on Apr expression

In order to investigate the correlation between the AprAs level and the expression of the protease Apr, the extracellular proteomes of the original strain MW3, the AprAs⁻ mutant and the complemented strain were analysed by 2D-gelelectrophoresis and MALDI-TOF-MS/MS³⁴. All strains were grown in 400 ml liquid M9 skim milk medium and supernatants were harvested after 12 h, 24 h, 36 h and 48 h. The quantitative exoprotease assay was performed using the supernatants of three experiments (Fig. 4a). The overall proteolytic activity of the strains increased constantly from 12 h to 48 h. The AprAs deficient mutant strain B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ showed the highest activity levels with approximately 0.8 U/ml after 48 h. The initial strain B. licheniformis MW3 and the vector complemented strain MW3 AprAs⁻ pV2::aprAs showed both lower activity levels with the highest level of approximately 0.5 U/ml. The samples with the highest activity levels (48 h) were analysed in triplicates by 2D-gelelectrophoresis. Three Apr spots were identified in the supernatants of the cultures. Figure 4b exemplarily shows the dual channel images of 2D-gels from the strain B. licheniformis MW3 compared to the mutant strains B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ and B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ pV2::aprAs respectively. The first image demonstrates a strong increase of Apr protein expression in the extracellular proteome of the AprAs⁻ mutant compared to MW3. This effect is reversed after vector complementation of the mutant strain: B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs- pV2::aprAs shows only a slight increase in Apr expression compared to the original strain B. licheniformis MW3. To quantify the differences in Apr protein expression, the spot volumes of the Apr protein spots of all three replicates were compared. Figure 4c shows that the Apr expression in the extracellular proteome of B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ was three times increased compared to the original strain B. licheniformis MW3. After vector complementation of the AprAs⁻ mutant, a reduction of the Apr protein level was visible (see B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ pV2::aprAs), but was still two times increased in comparison to the original strain MW3.

The complete dual channel images of the compared strains (Supplementary Figure S2) showed no differential expression for protein spots of other known extracellular B. licheniformis proteases, such as the metalloprotease Mpr and the minor extracellular protease Vpr (Vpr_1–Vpr_6), as well as the extracellular bacillopeptidase Bpr (Bpr_1, Bpr_2).

Sequence comparison of the AprAs promoter region

Orthologues of the subtilisin gene are found in B. licheniformis and B. subtilis strains. Yet, to our knowledge no orthologous aprAs genes associated with apr genes were described in the transcriptome analyses of B. subtilis 168 from Rasmussen et al. in 2009²⁹ and Nicolas et al. in 2012³⁰. To find out if aprAs and especially its promoter region are conserved, we performed a comparative sequence analysis. The comparison (Fig. 5) comprised the intergenic region between yfhN and apr respectively aprE, with a special focus on the −10 promoter box (green coloration), which was experimentally verified to be responsible for the transcription of AprAs in B. licheniformis DSM13 in the present investigation (see also Fig. 1). The comparison of B. licheniformis DSM13 and B. subtilis 168 showed that the aprAs promoter box (green coloration) is missing in B. subtilis 168. (Fig. 5a). To clarify if AprAs is a strain or species specific phenomenon, we also aligned the concerning regions of 17 B. licheniformis strains (see Fig. 5b) and 35 B. subtilis strains (see Fig. 5c). The sequence comparison showed that the aprAs promoter is present in all investigated B. licheniformis strains but not in the compared B. subtilis strains.

Discussion

Our results clearly reveal the small RNA AprAs as a repressor of the protease Apr. The protease activity measurements also demonstrated the necessity of cis transcription of AprAs in relation to apr for highly efficient repression. The observed protease phenotypes of the initial strain and the complemented strain B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ pV2::aprAs were on the same level, showing that the transcription of one aprAs gene in cis amounts to approximately 50 copies^{33, 35} in trans. The combination of the single cis encoded aprAs gene and the multi-copy vector in B. licheniformis MW3 pV2::aprAs reduced the exoprotease activity even 50% below the initial level (Fig. 3c,d).

The exoproteome analysis (Fig. 4) showed the direct correlation between the observed protease related phenotype and the expression of the protease Apr. The comparison of MW3 and mutant proteomes revealed Apr as the only differentially expressed extracellular protease (Supplementary Figure S2). Protein spots of other known extracellular proteases^{36, 37} did not change in relation to the AprAs level. Thus, the observed protease phenotype was facilitated by the negative regulation of AprAs on Apr expression. Although the Apr protein expression levels in B. licheniformis MW3 and MW3 AprAs⁻ pV2::aprAs did not exactly correspond to the levels of the proteolytic activity, both analyses clearly indicate AprAs to be a repressor of Apr expression. Antisense RNA regulation on protein expression in Bacilli has been described before²⁷. However, this is, to our knowledge, the first time that an RNA repressor of a biotechnologically relevant product has been reported.

A requirement of the proteome analysis was the scale up of our experiment from 4 ml test tubes to 400 ml flask culture. Interestingly, after scaling up, we observed only a doubling of the proteolytic activity (Fig. 4a) in contrast to the four fold increased activity observed in the 4 ml volume experiment (Fig. 3b and d). Most likely, these differences result from the adaption of the experimental design, which can have an impact on productivity³⁸, but might also reflect additional regulatory layers. Investigations on the orthologous gene aprE from B. subtilis 168 revealed a complex regulatory network of the subtilisin protease including, as mentioned before, regulators such as ScoC, SinR, AbrB, DegU and further associated proteins^{31, 39}. The genome of B. licheniformis DSM13^{23, 24} encodes orthologues of these regulators, thus a regulatory network of similar complexity can be assumed.

In case of AprAs, no orthologous sRNA was identified in B. subtilis 168^{29, 30}. Our sequence comparison of the promoter box of aprAs showed its presence in all investigated B. licheniformis strains and its absence in all investigated B. subtilis strains. Therefore we assume that AprAs is a species specific sRNA and thus, our results demonstrate a clear difference on subtilisin protease regulation between B. licheniformis and B. subtilis. It remains unclear if a similar regulatory layer on the subtilisin protease exists in other B. subtilis species complex members or if it is unique for B. licheniformis.

Transcriptome analysis in B. subtilis and S. aureus revealed that antisense activities can arise from inefficient termination of the sense transcription or from spurious initiation by alternative sigma factors^{30, 40}. However, the strong transcriptional activity and the distinct transcription start site as well as the presence of a conserved SigA promoter pattern (Figs 1 and 5) support the hypothesis that AprAs is a real non-coding RNA and therefore a relevant regulatory layer of Apr expression.

The regulation by AprAs could involve a pairing of the small RNA and its mRNA target leading to a guided degradation, as has been discussed for antisense regulators in Thomason and Storz⁴¹ and in Desnoyers et al.⁴². The transcription of AprAs is three orders of magnitude stronger than the transcription of its target RNA²⁵, which resembles viral toxin/antitoxin type I systems⁴³, where the sense/antisense duplex is guided to degradation by RNaseIII⁴⁴. Apparently, a quantitative titration of the target mRNA by the small RNA is involved in the regulatory mechanism. This is supported by the observation that in Real-time PCR analysis the apr mRNA level varies in relation to the AprAs level in the investigated mutant strains (Supplementary Figure S3). However, since a cis encoded aprAs is more effective than multiple vector encoded gene copies, an additional regulatory layer is possible. Figure 1c shows that AprAs might form a secondary structure which could delay the interaction of the sRNA and target mRNA. Hence, the transcription of AprAs close to its target mRNA could be an advantage that may explain the differences in efficiency between cis and vector encoded AprAs.

It has been shown that the production of subtilisin in B. subtilis starts at the beginning of the stationary phase³¹. In contrast, Wiegand et al.²⁵ observed a delay between the beginning of the transcriptional activity of the apr gene at the end of the exponential growth phase and the actual occurrence of the Apr protease spot in the proteome of B. licheniformis. It is tempting to assume that an AprAs guided degradation of the apr mRNA may be responsible for this delay between transcription and expression of the apr gene. However, life time evaluations of small RNAs in a complex industrial high density medium are heavily challenged by the background RNase activity within the fermentation process.

The production of subtilisin proteases in Bacilli is of great biotechnological relevance since these production systems are extensively used to produce the main enzymatic components of household detergents⁸. Thus, a fourfold increase of the subtilisin activity, as has been achieved with the B. licheniformis wild type subtilisin gene in the AprAs⁻ mutant, is very promising. Although apr orthologues have been identified in most genomes of members of the B. subtilis species complex, the presence of AprAs-like RNA repressors seems less ubiquitous. AprAs was not identified in B. subtilis 168^{29, 30} or in the 35 investigated B. subtilis genomes (Fig. 5). However, the possibility to achieve an increased subtilisin production by an AprAs⁻ mutation in B. licheniformis has been demonstrated in our study and should be evaluated for B. licheniformis based fermentations of subtilisin-like enzymes.

Conclusion and outlook

The newly identified antisense sRNA AprAs was shown to be a negative regulator of the biotechnologically important subtilisin family protease Apr in the type strain Bacillus licheniformis DSM13. The prevention of AprAs transcription led to an up to 4-fold increase of exoprotease activity as a result of the increased Apr protein expression. This effect was reversed by ectopic overexpression of AprAs and correspondingly, the native AprAs transcription in addition to the ectopic AprAs expression led to a decrease of proteolytic activity, even below the natural level. AprAs represents a new regulatory feature of Apr expression in B. licheniformis which is not present in the model organism and its close relative B. subtilis 168. Sequence comparison revealed its presence in all investigated B. licheniformis strains and its absence in all compared B. subtilis strains, leading to the conclusion of a species-specific feature. Further analyses should focus on revealing the detailed mechanism of AprAs regulation and the search for AprAs homologues in other Bacilli and industrially used apr gene loci.

Material and Methods

Bacterial strains and culture conditions

The bacterial strains used in this study are listed in Table 1. If not stated otherwise, the strains were grown in NB medium at 37 °C. M9 medium was prepared as described by Sambrook and Russell⁴⁵. 1 L of M9 medium was additionally supplemented with 100 µl of SL-8 trace element solution as described by Atlas⁴⁶ and 100 µl vitamin solution. The vitamin solution contained per litre 50 mg pantothenic acid, 50 mg riboflavin, 10 mg pyridoxamine-HCl, 20 mg biotin, 20 mg folic acid, 25 mg niacin, 25 mg nicotinamide, 50 mg α-aminobenzoic acid, 50 mg thiamine-HCl and 50 mg cobalamine dissolved in H₂O. M9 medium was supplemented with a final concentration of 0.1% (w/v) sterile skim milk to generate M9 skim milk medium. For medium solidification agar with a final concentration of 1.5% (w/v) was added prior to sterilisation by autoclaving.

Table 1 Bacterial strains und plasmids.

Full size table

PCR, gel electrophoresis and vector construction

Primers used in this study are listed in Table 2 and plasmids in Table 1. PCRs (50 μl) consisted of 200 μM deoxynucleotides, 100 ng of template DNA, 5 pmol of each primer and 0.5 U Phusion High-Fidelity DNA Polymerase (Thermo Scientific, Darmstadt, Germany). PCR products were purified directly using the PCR Purification Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) or after gel electrophoresis using a Qiaquick Gel extraction Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). DNA was analysed using a TAE agarose gel system as described elsewhere⁴² and stained with Ethidium bromide (1 µg/mL) for 10 min. Vectors were constructed as described previously³⁰ using Escherichia coli TOP10 (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, USA) and isolated using the QIAprep Spin Miniprep Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). For sequence verification Sanger-sequencing was performed on an ABI3730XL capillary sequencer (BigDye 3.1 chemistry; Applied Biosystems, Darmstadt, Germany).

Table 2 Primers.

Full size table

Mutant construction

For construction of B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻, the markerless deletion protocol of Rachinger et al.⁴⁷ was applied to the strain B. licheniformis MW3⁴⁸, a restriction-modification (RM) system-negative derivative of B. licheniformis DSM13^{23, 24}. The deletion cassette consisted of flank A (primer pair HLRH300/301) and flank B (primer pair HLRH302/303), which were amplified from B. licheniformis MW3 chromosomal DNA. The used primers included the AscI restriction site instead of the −10 box of the putative AprAs promoter. The flanks were fused via SOE-PCR and cloned into the temperature-sensitive vector pKVM2 using BamHI and NcoI restriction sites (BamHI, NcoI, FastAP and T4-DNA-ligase (Thermo Scientific, Darmstadt, Germany)). Escherichia coli S17-1⁴⁹ was used for conjugative transfer of the resulting pKVM2 AprAs⁻ deletion vector. The introduced deletion was confirmed by restriction analysis. For this purpose, the region of interest was amplified via PCR using primer HLRH306/307 and digested with the endonuclease AscI. The introduced AscI restriction site in the mutant strains results in the degradation of the 2.6 kbp PCR product to 1.3 kbp. The genotype of B. licheniformis MW3 AprAs⁻ was also confirmed by sequencing using primer pair HLRH306/307 and the primers HLRH304/305/306/307.

The complementation vector pV2::aprAs was constructed by amplification of aprAs from B. licheniformis MW3 chromosomal DNA using primers HLRH320/321 and cloning of the PCR product into the Bacillus/E. coli shuttle vector pV2³³ using AscI and MluI restriction sites.

For construction of the B. licheniformis plasmid harbouring strains, pV2::aprAs or the empty pV2 were transferred via conjugation using Escherichia coli S17-1⁴⁹. The generated strains were controlled via plasmid re-isolation and restriction analysis.

Slot Blot analysis

Cells were collected at different time points and disrupted with a Mikrodismembrator U (B. Braun Biotech International GmbH, Melsungen, Germany). Total RNA was prepared using the RNeasy Mini Kit (Quiagen, Hilden, Germany). The RNA quality was analysed using the Agilent 2100 Bioanalyser and the Agilent RNA 6000 Nano ladder (Agilent Technologies, Waldbronn). Digoxigenin labelled RNA probes were prepared by in vitro transcription with T7 RNA polymerase using the DIG Northern Starter Kit (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) and templates for in vitro transcription were generated by PCR using the primer pair HLRH308/309. Total RNA was diluted in 10x SSC to a concentration of 0.5 μg/100 μl and blotted on to a positively charged Nylon membrane (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) using the Bio-Dot SF microfiltration unit (BIO-RAD Laboratories GmbH, Munich, Germany). Subsequently, the RNA was covalently bound by exposing the membrane to UV-light (302 nm) for 120 sec on a UV-light table (Image Quant 100, GE Healthcare, Little Chalfont, UK). RNA probe hybridization was performed using the DIG Northern Starter Kit (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) following the manufacturer’s instructions and detection was accomplished via the ChemoCam Imager (Intes, Göttingen, Germany).

Real-time PCR

Reverse transcription of 100 ng total RNA from each sample was performed using the RevertAid First Strand cDNA Synthesis Kit (Thermo Scientific, Darmstadt, Germany). For quantification of the apr cDNA the Real-time PCR Thermal Cycler IQ5 (Biorad, Munich, Germany) was used in combination with the QuaniTect SYBR® Green PCR Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) and the apr specific primer pair apr fwd/apr rev. For absolute quantification of apr transcripts a standard curve was calculated using vector pV2::aprAs with concentrations of 10¹ to 10⁸ copies/µl.

Protease assay

For exoprotease activity determination cells were cultivated 12–48 h in M9 skim milk medium and pelleted for 2 min at 16,200× g at 4 °C. The supernatants containing the exoprotease were analysed with Sigmas’ non-specific protease assay⁵⁰. The protease activity for each sample was determined in triplicates using 2 mL Eppendorf tubes. Each sample contained one blank as reference.

Preparation of extracellular protein extracts for 2D-PAGE

B. licheniformis cells were grown in M9 skim milk medium for 48 h and supernatants were harvested by centrifugation of 360 mL cell culture at 10,000 rpm and 4 °C for 10 min. Extracellular proteins were prepared according to Voigt et al.⁵¹. Briefly, TCA was added to the supernatant to a final concentration of 10% of the initial culture volume and proteins were precipitated at 7 °C overnight. The proteins were collected by centrifugation at 10,000 rpm and 4 °C for 60 min and washed 8 times with 96% ethanol, and two times with 70% ethanol. After drying, the pellets were dissolved in a solution containing 8 M urea and 2 M thiourea, and centrifuged at 15,000 rpm and 4 °C for 30 min. The protein concentration of the samples was determined with RotiNanoquant (Carl Roth, Karlsruhe, Germany).

2D-PAGE, gel image analysis and protein identification

Commercially available IPG strips (18 cm long, Serva, Heidelberg, Germany) in the pH-range 3–10 were used for isoelectric focusing (IEF). 100 µg protein was adjusted to 306 μL with a solution containing 2 M thiourea and 8 M urea. CHAPS solution (20 mM DTT, 1% w/v CHAPS, 0.5% v/v Pharmalyte, pH 3–10) was added (34 µL for each sample). IEF strips were rehydrated with this solution over night. IEF was performed with the following program: step 1, 150 V for 150 Vh, step 2, 300 V for 300 Vh, step 3, 600 V for 600 Vh, step 4, 1500 V for 1500 Vh, step 5, 3000 V for 37.5 kVh. Following IEF, strips were equilibrated as described by Görg et al.⁵². Flat top gels (2D HPE^TM Large Gel NF-12.5%; Serva, Heidelberg, Germany) were used for protein separation in the second dimension. Gels were stained with Lava Purple (Fluorotechnics, Sydney, Australia) according to the instructions of the manufacturer. Gel images were analyzed with the Delta2D software (Decodon, Greifswald, Germany). Spot quantification was done according to Wolf et al.³⁴. Briefly, gel images (three replicates) from the wild type samples were overlaid with the gels from the mutant samples. Fusion gels created with the image fusion function of the Delta2D software set to union fusion were used for spot detection. Spots were edited and transferred to the single gels. For spot quantification the % volume of each spot was calculated representing the relative portion of an individual spot of the total protein present on the gel.

Proteins were excised from the gels using the Ettan Spot Picker (GE Healthcare, Little Chalfont, UK). Digestion and spotting onto MALDI targets were performed in the Ettan Spot Handling Workstation (GE Healthcare, Little Chalfont, UK). MALDI-TOF-MS/MS with the Proteome Analyzer 4800 (Applied Biosystems, Darmstadt, Germany) was performed as described by Wolf et al.³⁴. Peak lists were searched with the MASCOT search engine version 2.1.0.4 (Matrix Science, London, UK) and search parameters as in Wolf et al.³⁴ against a B. subtilis data base.

Sequence analysis

For identification of the putative aprAs promoter region in 17 B. licheniformis strains and B. subtilis 168, the intergenic region between yhfN and apr from B licheniformis DSM13 was used to perform a blastn search. Correspondingly, the intergenic region between yhfN and aprE from B. subtilis 168 was used as query for a blastn search on 35 B. subtilis genomes. The identified regions were extracted from the respective genomes and used for a comparative sequence alignment performed with MUSCLE⁵³ using default parameters.

Transcriptional terminators were predicted with the program TransTermHP⁵⁴. Secondary structure predictions were performed using “The Vienna RNA Websuite”⁵⁵.

References

Weigmann, H. Über zwei an der Käsereifung beteiligte Bakterien. Zentralbl.Bakteriol.Hyg.II 4, 820–834 (1898).
Google Scholar
Rooney, A. P., Price, N. P. J., Ehrhardt, C., Swezey, J. L. & Bannan, J. D. Phylogeny and molecular taxonomy of the Bacillus subtilis species complex and description of Bacillus subtilis subsp. inaquosorum subsp. nov. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 59, 2429–36 (2009).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Yi, J. et al. Molecular phylogenetic diversity of Bacillus community and its temporal–spatial distribution during the swine manure of composting. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 93, 411–421 (2012).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Logan, N. A. & De Vos, P. Systematic Bacteriology, doi:10.1007/978-0-387-68489-5 (Springer New York, 2009).
Sonenshein, A. L. Control of key metabolic intersections in Bacillus subtilis. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 5, 917–927 (2007).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Jürgen, B. et al. Global expression profiling of Bacillus subtilis cells during industrial-close fed-batch fermentations with different nitrogen sources. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 92, 277–298 (2005).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Öztürk, S., Çalık, P. & Özdamar, T. H. Fed-Batch Biomolecule Production by Bacillus subtilis: A State of the Art Review. Trends Biotechnol. 34, 329–345 (2016).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Schallmey, M., Singh, A. & Ward, O. P. Developments in the use of Bacillus species for industrial production. Can. J. Microbiol. 50, 1–17 (2004).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Gao, Z. Purification and characterization of a novel lichenase from Bacillus licheniformis GZ-2. Biotechnol. Appl. Biochem. 63, 249–256 (2016).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Anbu, P. & Hur, B. K. Isolation of an organic solvent-tolerant bacterium Bacillus licheniformis PAL05 that is able to secrete solvent-stable lipase. Biotechnol. Appl. Biochem. 61, 528–534 (2014).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Khairnar, R. S., Mahabole, M. P. & Pathak, A. P. Nanoactivator mediated modifications in thermostable amylase from Bacillus licheniformis. Indian J. Biochem. Biophys. 49, 468–71 (2012).
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Fasimoye, F. O., Olajuyigbe, F. M. & Sanni, M. D. Purification and characterization of a thermostable extracellular phytase from bacillus licheniformis PFBL-03. Prep. Biochem. Biotechnol. 44, 193–205 (2014).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Rehman, H. U. et al. Degradation of complex carbohydrate: Immobilization of pectinase from Bacillus licheniformis KIBGE-IB21 using calcium alginate as a support. Food Chem. 139, 1081–1086 (2013).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Lu, L. et al. Cloning and expression of thermo-alkali-stable laccase of Bacillus licheniformis in Pichia pastoris and its characterization. Bioresour. Technol 134, 81–86 (2013).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Nakapong, S., Pichyangkura, R., Ito, K., Iizuka, M. & Pongsawasdi, P. High expression level of levansucrase from Bacillus licheniformis RN-01 and synthesis of levan nanoparticles. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 54, 30–36 (2013).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
liu, B. et al. Expression and characterization of extreme alkaline, oxidation-resistant keratinase from Bacillus licheniformis in recombinant Bacillus subtilis WB600 expression system and its application in wool fiber processing. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 29, 825–832 (2013).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Sarker, P., Talukdar, S., Deb, P., Sayem, S. & Mohsina, K. Optimization and partial characterization of culture conditions for the production of alkaline protease from Bacillus licheniformis P003. Springerplus 2, 506 (2013).
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Tang, X.-M. et al. Purification and characterisation of an alkaline protease used in tannery industry from Bacillus licheniformis. Biotechnol. Lett. 26, 1421–1424 (2004).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Rachadech, W., Navacharoen, A., Ruangsit, W., Pongtharangkul, T. & Vangnai, aS. An organic solvent-, detergent-, and thermostable alkaline protease from the mesophilic, organic solvent-tolerant Bacillus licheniformis 3C5. Microbiology 79, 620–629 (2010).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Borgi, M. A. et al. The attractive recombinant phytase from Bacillus licheniformis: biochemical and molecular characterization. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 98, 5937–5947 (2014).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Rao, M. B., Tanksale, A. M., Ghatge, M. S. & Deshpande, V. V. Molecular and biotechnological aspects of microbial proteases. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 62, 597–635 (1998).
CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Sellami-Kamoun, A. et al. Stability of thermostable alkaline protease from Bacillus licheniformis RP1 in commercial solid laundry detergent formulations. Microbiol. Res. 163, 299–306 (2008).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Rey, M. W. et al. Complete genome sequence of the industrial bacterium Bacillus licheniformis and comparisons with closely related Bacillus species. Genome Biol. 5, R77 (2004).
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Veith, B. et al. The complete genome sequence of Bacillus licheniformis DSM13, an organism with great industrial potential. J. Mol. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 7, 204–11 (2004).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Wiegand, S. et al. RNA-Seq of Bacillus licheniformis: active regulatory RNA features expressed within a productive fermentation. BMC Genomics 14, 667 (2013).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Brantl, S. & Brückner, R. Small regulatory RNAs from low-GC Gram-positive bacteria. RNA Biol. 11, 443–56 (2014).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Mars, R. A. T., Nicolas, P., Denham, E. L. & van Dijl, J. M. Regulatory RNAs in Bacillus subtilis: a Gram-Positive Perspective on Bacterial RNA-Mediated Regulation of Gene Expression. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 80, 1029–1057 (2016).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Gottesman, S. & Storz, G. Bacterial Small RNA Regulators: Versatile Roles and Rapidly Evolving Variations. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol 3, a003798–a003798 (2011).
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Rasmussen, S., Nielsen, H. B. & Jarmer, H. The transcriptionally active regions in the genome of Bacillus subtilis. Mol. Microbiol 73, 1043–1057 (2009).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Nicolas, P. et al. Condition-Dependent Transcriptome Reveals High-Level Regulatory Architecture in Bacillus subtilis. Science (80-.) 335, 1103–1106 (2012).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Barbieri, G., Albertini, A. M., Ferrari, E., Sonenshein, A. L. & Belitsky, B. R. Interplay of CodY and ScoC in the Regulation of Major Extracellular Protease Genes of Bacillus subtilis. J. Bacteriol. 198, 907–920 (2016).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Sharma, C. M. et al. The primary transcriptome of the major human pathogen Helicobacter pylori. Nature 464, 250–5 (2010).
Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Hertel, R., Volland, S. & Liesegang, H. Conjugative reporter system for the use in Bacillus licheniformis and closely related Bacilli. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 60, 162–7 (2015).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Wolf, C. et al. Proteomic analysis of antioxidant strategies of Staphylococcus aureus: Diverse responses to different oxidants. Proteomics 8, 3139–3153 (2008).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Gryczan, T. J., Contente, S. & Dubnau, D. Characterization of Staphylococcus aureus plasmids introduced by transformation into Bacillus subtilis. J. Bacteriol. 134, 318–29 (1978).
CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Voigt, B. et al. Cell physiology and protein secretion of Bacillus licheniformis compared to Bacillus subtilis. J. Mol. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 16, 53–68 (2009).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Voigt, B. et al. High-resolution proteome maps of Bacillus licheniformis cells growing in minimal medium. Proteomics 15, 2629–2633 (2015).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Gupta, R. K. et al. Scale-up of an alkaline protease from Bacillus pumilus MTCC 7514 utilizing fish meal as a sole source of nutrients. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol 22, 1230–6 (2012).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Abe, S., Yasumura, A. & Tanaka, T. Regulation of Bacillus subtilis aprE expression by glnA through inhibition of scoC and sigma(D)-dependent degR expression. J. Bacteriol. 191, 3050–8 (2009).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Mäder, U. et al. Staphylococcus aureus Transcriptome Architecture: From Laboratory to Infection-Mimicking Conditions. PLOS Genet. 12, e1005962 (2016).
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Thomason, M. K. & Storz, G. Bacterial Antisense RNAs: How Many Are There, and What Are They Doing? *. Annu. Rev. Genet. 44, 167–188 (2010).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Desnoyers, G., Bouchard, M.-P. & Massé, E. New insights into small RNA-dependent translational regulation in prokaryotes. Trends Genet. 29, 92–98 (2013).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Jahn, N., Preis, H., Wiedemann, C. & Brantl, S. BsrG/SR4 from Bacillus subtilis–the first temperature-dependent type I toxin-antitoxin system. Mol. Microbiol 83, 579–98 (2012).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Durand, S., Gilet, L. & Condon, C. The essential function of B. subtilis RNase III is to silence foreign toxin genes. PLoS Genet. 8, e1003181 (2012).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Sambrook, J. & Russell, D. W. Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual, Third Edition (3 volume set) (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2001).
Atlas, R. M. Handbook of Microbiological Media, Fourth Edition (CRC Press, 2010).
Rachinger, M. et al. Size unlimited markerless deletions by a transconjugative plasmid-system in Bacillus licheniformis. J. Biotechnol. 167, 365–9 (2013).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Waschkau, B., Waldeck, J., Wieland, S., Eichstädt, R. & Meinhardt, F. Generation of readily transformable Bacillus licheniformis mutants. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 78, 181–8 (2008).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Simon, R., Priefer, U. & Pühler, A. A Broad Host Range Mobilization System for In Vivo Genetic Engineering: Transposon Mutagenesis in Gram Negative Bacteria. Bio/Technology 1, 784–791 (1983).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Cupp-Enyard, C. Sigma’s Non-specific Protease Activity Assay - Casein as a Substrate. J. Vis. Exp., doi:10.3791/899 (2008).
Voigt, B. et al. The extracellular proteome ofBacillus licheniformis grown in different media and under different nutrient starvation conditions. Proteomics 6, 268–281 (2006).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Görg, A., Boguth, G., Obermaier, C., Posch, A. & Weiss, W. Two-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis with immobilized pH gradients in the first dimensin (IPG-Dalt): The state of the art and the controversy of verticalversus horizontal systems. Electrophoresis 16, 1079–1086 (1995).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Edgar, R. C. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 32, 1792–7 (2004).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Kingsford, C. L., Ayanbule, K. & Salzberg, S. L. Rapid, accurate, computational discovery of Rho-independent transcription terminators illuminates their relationship to DNA uptake. Genome Biol. 8, R22 (2007).
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Gruber, A. R., Lorenz, R., Bernhart, S. H., Neuböck, R. & Hofacker, I. L. The Vienna RNA websuite. Nucleic Acids Res 36, W70–4 (2008).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Dietrich, S., Wiegand, S. & Liesegang, H. TraV: A Genome Context Sensitive Transcriptome Browser. PLoS One 9, e93677 (2014).
Article ADS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) for funding of the project (FKZ-0315387) as well as Professor Dr. Rolf Daniel and Dr. Sandra Wiegand for valuable discussion. We also thank Stefania Neuber, Maria Drewicke and Mechthild Bömeke for supporting the lab work and Avril von Hoyningen-Huene for proofreading of the manuscript. In addition, we acknowledge support by the Open Access Publication Funds of the Göttingen University.

Author information

Birgit Voigt
Present address: Research Institute of Leather and Plastic Sheeting gGmbH, Freiberg, Germany

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Genomic and Applied Microbiology & Goettingen Genomics Laboratory, Institute of Microbiology and Genetics, University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany
Robert Hertel, Sandra Meyerjürgens, Heiko Liesegang & Sonja Volland
Institute for Microbiology, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt University, Greifswald, Germany
Birgit Voigt

Authors

Robert Hertel
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Sandra Meyerjürgens
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Birgit Voigt
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Heiko Liesegang
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Sonja Volland
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

R.H., H.L. and S.V. conceived and designed the research. S.V. supervised the experiments and performed the slot blot analysis. B.V. performed the proteome analysis. R.H. and S.M. designed and performed all not otherwise stated experiments. R.H., H.L. and S.V. wrote the manuscript and all authors analysed data and reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sonja Volland.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hertel, R., Meyerjürgens, S., Voigt, B. et al. Small RNA mediated repression of subtilisin production in Bacillus licheniformis . Sci Rep 7, 5699 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05628-y

Download citation

Received: 20 March 2017
Accepted: 31 May 2017
Published: 18 July 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05628-y

This article is cited by

Molecular strategies to increase keratinase production in heterologous expression systems for industrial applications
- Radin Shafierul Radin Yahaya
- Yahaya M. Normi
- Suriana Sabri
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (2021)
RNA sequencing reveals small RNAs in Bacillus pumilus under different growth phases of the protease fermentation process
- Yunfan Xu
- Xianxian Zhao
- Haiyan Wang
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (2020)
Improving the utilization rate of soybean meal for efficient production of bacitracin and heterologous proteins in the aprA-deficient strain of Bacillus licheniformis
- Dongbo Cai
- Bowen Zhang
- Shouwen Chen
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (2019)

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.