One-way ticket to the cell pole: plasmid transport by the prokaryotic tubulin homolog TubZ

Tubulin-Like Proteins in Prokaryotic DNA Positioning

A family of tubulin-related proteins (TubZs) has been identified in prokaryotes as being important for the inheritance of virulence plasmids of several pathogenic Bacilli and also being implicated in the lysogenic life cycle of several bacteriophages. Cell biological studies and reconstitution experiments revealed that TubZs function as prokaryotic cytomotive filaments, providing one-dimensional motive forces. Plasmid-borne TubZ filaments most likely transport plasmid centromeric complexes by depolymerisation, pulling on the plasmid DNA, in vitro. In contrast, phage-borne TubZ (PhuZ) pushes bacteriophage particles (virions) to mid cell by filament growth. Structural studies by both crystallography and electron cryo-microscopy of multiple proteins, both from the plasmid partitioning sub-group and the bacteriophage virion centring group of TubZ homologues, allow a detailed consideration of the structural phylogeny of the group as a whole, while complete structures of both crystallographic protofilaments at high resolution and fully polymerised filaments at intermediate resolution by cryo-EM have revealed details of the polymerisation behaviour of both TubZ sub-groups.

Breaking and restoring the hydrophobic core of a centromere-binding protein

The ribbon-helix-helix (RHH) superfamily of DNA-binding proteins is dispersed widely in procaryotes. The dimeric RHH fold is generated by interlocking of two monomers into a 2-fold symmetrical structure that comprises four α-helices enwrapping a pair of antiparallel β-strands (ribbon). Residues in the ribbon region are the principal determinants of DNA binding, whereas the RHH hydrophobic core is assembled from amino acids in both the α-helices and ribbon element. The ParG protein encoded by multiresistance plasmid TP228 is a RHH protein that functions dually as a centromere binding factor during segrosome assembly and as a transcriptional repressor. Here we identify residues in the α-helices of ParG that are critical for DNA segregation and in organization of the protein hydrophobic core. A key hydrophobic aromatic amino acid at one position was functionally substitutable by other aromatic residues, but not by non-aromatic hydrophobic amino acids. Nevertheless, intramolecular suppression of the latter by complementary change of a residue that approaches nearby from the partner monomer fully restored activity in vivo and in vitro. The interactions involved in assembling the ParG core may be highly malleable and suggest that RHH proteins are tractable platforms for the rational design of diverse DNA binding factors useful for synthetic biology and other purposes.

A novel transcriptional activator, tubX, is required for the stability of Bacillus sphaericus mosquitocidal plasmid pBsph

Stable maintenance of the low-copy-number plasmid pBsph in Bacillus sphaericus requires a partitioning (par) system that consists of a filament-forming protein, B. sphaericus TubZ (TubZ-Bs); a centromere-binding protein, TubR-Bs; and a centromere-like DNA site, tubC, composed of three blocks (I, II, and III) of 12-bp degenerate repeats. Previous studies have shown that mini-pBsph replicons encoding the TubZ system are segregationally highly unstable, whereas the native pBsph is stably maintained. However, the mechanism underlying the stability discrepancy between pBsph and its minireplicon is poorly understood. Here orf187 (encoding TubX), a gene downstream of tubZ-Bs, was found to play a role in plasmid stabilization. Null mutation or overexpression of tubX resulted in a defect in pBsph stability and a significant decrease in the level of tubRZ-Bs expression, and the TubX-null phenotype was suppressed by ectopic expression of a wild-type copy of tubX and additional tubRZ-Bs. An electrophoresis mobility shift assay (EMSA) and a DNase I footprinting assay revealed that the TubX protein bound directly to five 8-bp degenerate repeats located in the par promoter region and that TubX competed with TubR-Bs for binding to the par promoter. Further studies demonstrated that TubX significantly stimulated the transcription of the par operon in the absence of tubR-Bs, and a higher level of gene activation was observed when tubR-Bs was present. These results suggested that TubX positively regulates tubRZ-Bs transcription by interfering with TubR-Bs-mediated repression and binding directly to the tubRZ-Bs promoter region.

A new tubRZ operon involved in the maintenance of the Bacillus sphaericus mosquitocidal plasmid pBsph

pBsph is a mosquitocidal plasmid first identified from Bacillus sphaericus, encoding binary toxins (Bin toxins) that are highly toxic to mosquito larvae. This plasmid plays an important role in the maintenance and evolution of the bin genes in B. sphaericus. However, little is known about its replication and partitioning. Here, we identified a 2.4 kb minimal replicon of pBsph plasmid that contained an operon encoding TubR-Bs and TubZ-Bs, each of which was shown to be required for plasmid replication. TubR-Bs was shown to be a transcriptional repressor of tubRZ-Bs genes and could bind cooperatively to the replication origin of eleven 12 bp degenerate repeats in three blocks, and this binding was essential for plasmid replication. TubZ-Bs exhibited GTPase activities and interacted with TubR-Bs : DNA complex to form a ternary nucleoprotein apparatus. Electron and fluorescence microscopy revealed that TubZ-Bs assembled filaments both in vitro and in vivo, and two point mutations in TubZ-Bs (T114A and Y260A) that severely impaired the GTPase and polymerization activities were found to be defective for plasmid maintenance. Further investigation demonstrated that overproduction of TubZ-Bs-GFP or its mutant forms significantly reduced the stability of pBsph. Taken together, these results suggested that TubR-Bs and TubZ-Bs are involved in the replication and probably in the partitioning of pBsph plasmid, increasing our understanding of the genetic particularity of TubZ systems.

Energetics and genetics across the prokaryote-eukaryote divide

BACKGROUND

All complex life on Earth is eukaryotic. All eukaryotic cells share a common ancestor that arose just once in four billion years of evolution. Prokaryotes show no tendency to evolve greater morphological complexity, despite their metabolic virtuosity. Here I argue that the eukaryotic cell originated in a unique prokaryotic endosymbiosis, a singular event that transformed the selection pressures acting on both host and endosymbiont.

RESULTS

The reductive evolution and specialisation of endosymbionts to mitochondria resulted in an extreme genomic asymmetry, in which the residual mitochondrial genomes enabled the expansion of bioenergetic membranes over several orders of magnitude, overcoming the energetic constraints on prokaryotic genome size, and permitting the host cell genome to expand (in principle) over 200,000-fold. This energetic transformation was permissive, not prescriptive; I suggest that the actual increase in early eukaryotic genome size was driven by a heavy early bombardment of genes and introns from the endosymbiont to the host cell, producing a high mutation rate. Unlike prokaryotes, with lower mutation rates and heavy selection pressure to lose genes, early eukaryotes without genome-size limitations could mask mutations by cell fusion and genome duplication, as in allopolyploidy, giving rise to a proto-sexual cell cycle. The side effect was that a large number of shared eukaryotic basal traits accumulated in the same population, a sexual eukaryotic common ancestor, radically different to any known prokaryote.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of massive bioenergetic expansion, release from genome-size constraints, and high mutation rate favoured a protosexual cell cycle and the accumulation of eukaryotic traits. These factors explain the unique origin of eukaryotes, the absence of true evolutionary intermediates, and the evolution of sex in eukaryotes but not prokaryotes.

REVIEWERS

This article was reviewed by: Eugene Koonin, William Martin, Ford Doolittle and Mark van der Giezen. For complete reports see the Reviewers' Comments section.