Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Growth control switch by a DNA-damage-inducible toxin–antitoxin system in Caulobacter crescentus

Abstract

Bacterial toxin–antitoxin systems (TASs) are thought to respond to various stresses, often inducing growth-arrested (persistent) sub-populations of cells whose housekeeping functions are inhibited. Many such TASs induce this effect through the translation-dependent RNA cleavage (RNase) activity of their toxins, which are held in check by their cognate antitoxins in the absence of stress. However, it is not always clear whether specific mRNA targets of orthologous RNase toxins are responsible for their phenotypic effect, which has made it difficult to accurately place the multitude of TASs within cellular and adaptive regulatory networks. Here, we show that the TAS HigBA of Caulobacter crescentus can promote and inhibit bacterial growth dependent on the dosage of HigB, a toxin regulated by the DNA damage (SOS) repressor LexA in addition to its antitoxin HigA, and the target selectivity of HigB's mRNA cleavage activity. HigB reduced the expression of an efflux pump that is toxic to a polarity control mutant, cripples the growth of cells lacking LexA, and targets the cell cycle circuitry. Thus, TASs can have outcome switching activity in bacterial adaptive (stress) and systemic (cell cycle) networks.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Loss of function of the antitoxin HigA improves ΔtipN Nal tolerance.
Figure 2: HigBA is auto-regulated but also subject to hierarchically superior repression by LexA.
Figure 3: HigB preferentially cleaves at UCG-Ser codons.
Figure 4: Quinolone antibiotics identified from high-throughput chemical screening simultaneously activate the SOS response, higBA and acrAB2nodT.
Figure 5: HigB activity exacerbates loss of viability during the SOS response, increases cell filamentation and decreases G1 cell accumulation in ΔlexA cells with constitutively activated SOS response.

References

  1. 1

    Cohen, N. R., Lobritz, M. A. & Collins, J. J. Microbial persistence and the road to drug resistance. Cell Host Microbe 13, 632–642 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Gerdes, K., Christensen, S. K. & Lobner-Olesen, A. Prokaryotic toxin–antitoxin stress response loci. Nature Rev. Microbiol. 3, 371–382 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Lewis, K. Persister cells. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 64, 357–372 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Schuster, C. F. & Bertram, R. Toxin–antitoxin systems are ubiquitous and versatile modulators of prokaryotic cell fate. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 340, 73–85 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Maisonneuve, E., Castro-Camargo, M. & Gerdes, K. (p)ppGpp controls bacterial persistence by stochastic induction of toxin–antitoxin activity. Cell 154, 1140–1150 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Wang, X. et al. Antitoxin MqsA helps mediate the bacterial general stress response. Nature Chem. Biol. 7, 359–366 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Maisonneuve, E., Shakespeare, L. J., Jorgensen, M. G. & Gerdes, K. Bacterial persistence by RNA endonucleases. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 13206–13211 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Pandey, D. P. & Gerdes, K. Toxin–antitoxin loci are highly abundant in free-living but lost from host-associated prokaryotes. Nucleic Acids Res. 33, 966–976 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Christensen-Dalsgaard, M. & Gerdes, K. Two higBA loci in the Vibrio cholerae superintegron encode mRNA cleaving enzymes and can stabilize plasmids. Mol. Microbiol. 62, 397–411 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Christensen-Dalsgaard, M., Jorgensen, M. G. & Gerdes, K. Three new RelE-homologous mRNA interferases of Escherichia coli differentially induced by environmental stresses. Mol. Microbiol. 75, 333–348 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Hurley, J. M. & Woychik, N. A. Bacterial toxin HigB associates with ribosomes and mediates translation-dependent mRNA cleavage at A-rich sites. J. Biol. Chem. 284, 18605–18613 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Schureck, M. A., Dunkle, J. A., Maehigashi, T., Miles, S. J. & Dunham, C. M. Defining the mRNA recognition signature of a bacterial toxin protein. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 13862–13867 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Schuessler, D. L. et al. Induced ectopic expression of HigB toxin in Mycobacterium tuberculosis results in growth inhibition, reduced abundance of a subset of mRNAs and cleavage of tmRNA. Mol. Microbiol. 90, 195–207 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Fiebig, A., Rojas, C. M., Siegal-Gaskins, D. & Crosson, S. Interaction specificity, toxicity, and regulation of a paralogous set of ParE/RelE-family toxin–antitoxin systems. Mol. Microbiol. 77, 236–251 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Huitema, E., Pritchard, S., Matteson, D., Radhakrishnan, S. K. & Viollier, P. H. Bacterial birth scar proteins mark future flagellum assembly site. Cell 124, 1025–1037 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Lam, H., Schofield, W. B. & Jacobs-Wagner, C. A landmark protein essential for establishing and perpetuating the polarity of a bacterial cell. Cell 124, 1011–1023 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Schofield, W. B., Lim, H. C. & Jacobs-Wagner, C. Cell cycle coordination and regulation of bacterial chromosome segregation dynamics by polarly localized proteins. EMBO J. 29, 3068–3081 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Kirkpatrick, C. L. & Viollier, P. H. Synthetic interaction between the TipN polarity factor and an AcrAB-family efflux pump implicates cell polarity in bacterial drug resistance. Chem. Biol. 21, 657–665 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Murray, S. M., Panis, G., Fumeaux, C., Viollier, P. H. & Howard, M. Computational and genetic reduction of a cell cycle to its simplest, primordial components. PLoS Biol. 11, e1001749 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Da Rocha, R. P., Paquola, A. C., Marques Mdo, V., Menck, C. F. & Galhardo, R. S. Characterization of the SOS regulon of Caulobacter crescentus. J. Bacteriol. 190, 1209–1218 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Modell, J. W., Kambara, T. K., Perchuk, B. S. & Laub, M. T. A DNA damage-induced, SOS-independent checkpoint regulates cell division in Caulobacter crescentus. PLoS Biol. 12, e1001977 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Linder, P., Lemeille, S. & Redder, P. Transcriptome-wide analyses of 5′-ends in RNase J mutants of a gram-positive pathogen reveal a role in RNA maturation, regulation and degradation. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004207 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Redder, P . in RNA Remodeling Proteins Vol. 1259 (ed. Boudvillain, M. ) 69–85 (2015).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Neubauer, C. et al. The structural basis for mRNA recognition and cleavage by the ribosome-dependent endonuclease RelE. Cell 139, 1084–1095 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Domian, I. J., Quon, K. C. & Shapiro, L. Cell type-specific phosphorylation and proteolysis of a transcriptional regulator controls the G1-to-S transition in a bacterial cell cycle. Cell 90, 415–424 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Pedersen, K. et al. The bacterial toxin RelE displays codon-specific cleavage of mRNAs in the ribosomal A site. Cell 112, 131–140 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Zhang, J. H., Chung, T. D. & Oldenburg, K. R. A simple statistical parameter for use in evaluation and validation of high throughput screening assays. J. Biomol. Screen 4, 67–73 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Heeb, S. et al. Quinolones: from antibiotics to autoinducers. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 35, 247–274 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Engelberg-Kulka, H., Amitai, S., Kolodkin-Gal, I. & Hazan, R. Bacterial programmed cell death and multicellular behavior in bacteria. PLoS Genet. 2, e135 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Ely, B. Genetics of Caulobacter crescentus. Methods Enzymol. 204, 372–384 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Viollier, P. H. et al. Rapid and sequential movement of individual chromosomal loci to specific subcellular locations during bacterial DNA replication. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 9257–9262 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Marks, M. E. et al. The genetic basis of laboratory adaptation in Caulobacter crescentus. J. Bacteriol. 192, 3678–3688 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Miller, J. H. in Experiments in Molecular Genetics (ed. Miller, J. H. ) 352–355 (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Radhakrishnan, S. K., Thanbichler, M. & Viollier, P. H. The dynamic interplay between a cell fate determinant and a lysozyme homolog drives the asymmetric division cycle of Caulobacter crescentus. Genes Dev. 22, 212–225 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Fumeaux, C. et al. Cell cycle transition from S-phase to G1 in Caulobacter is mediated by ancestral virulence regulators. Nature Commun. 5, 4081 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Radhakrishnan, S. K., Pritchard, S. & Viollier, P. H. Coupling prokaryotic cell fate and division control with a bifunctional and oscillating oxidoreductase homolog. Dev. Cell 18, 90–101 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    White, C. L., Kitich, A. & Gober, J. W. Positioning cell wall synthetic complexes by the bacterial morphogenetic proteins MreB and MreD. Mol. Microbiol. 76, 616–633 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Yasrebi, H. & Redder, P. EMOTE-conv: a computational pipeline to convert Exact Mapping Of Transcriptome Ends (EMOTE) data to the lists of quantified genomic positions correlated to related genomic information. J. Appl. Bioinform. Comput. Biol. 4. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2329-9533.1000118 (2015).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by grant no. SNF#31003A_143660 to P.H.V. and a grant from the Société Académique de Genève to C.L.K. The authors acknowledge SNF/NCCR Chemical Biology for support of the chemical screening experiments and S. Kicka, V. Trofimov, D. Moreau and H. Riezman for advice and assistance with high-throughput screening. The authors thank P. Linder for discussions and funding contributions (SNF#31003A_149228/1) for the nEMOTE experiments, G. Panis for assistance with flow cytometry data acquisition and interpretation, C. Menck for the PimuA-lac290 and pNPTSΔlexA plasmids, L. Théraulaz for technical assistance, H. Yasrebi for nEMOTE data tabularization and J. Prados for assistance with R programming.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

C.L.K. and P.H.V. conceived and designed the study and wrote the manuscript. D.M. performed experiments (reported in Figs 1, 2 and Supplementary Figs 1–4) under the guidance of C.L.K. and P.H.V. P.R. designed, performed and analysed the nEMOTE experiments and wrote the corresponding sections of the manuscript. J.M. designed, performed and analysed the Tn-SEQ experiment. A.F. and J.B.C. contributed data analysis tools and analysed ChIP-SEQ and codon usage (A.F.) and high-throughput screening (J.B.C.) data. C.L.K., G.T., J.B.C. and M.C. designed the high-throughput screening experiments and C.L.K. performed these and all other experiments. M.C. and J.B.C. co-wrote the high-throughput screening section of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Clare L. Kirkpatrick or Patrick H. Viollier.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figures 1–8, Note 1, Methods, Tables 1–4 and References. (PDF 1059 kb)

Supplementary Data 1

Analysis of LexA binding on the NA1000 chromosome by ChIPSEQ. (XLSX 67 kb)

Supplementary Data 2

Analysis of HigA binding on the NA1000 chromosome by ChIPSEQ. (XLSX 132 kb)

Supplementary Data 3

Validated HigB cleavage sites (5ʹ OH RNA ends) detected by nEMOTE. (XLS 154 kb)

Supplementary Data 4

Relative synonymous codon usage (RSCU) of the UCG-Ser codon per ORF in the NA1000 genome. (XLSX 220 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kirkpatrick, C., Martins, D., Redder, P. et al. Growth control switch by a DNA-damage-inducible toxin–antitoxin system in Caulobacter crescentus. Nat Microbiol 1, 16008 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.8

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing