Bacteria under SOS evolve anticancer phenotypes

The central role of the SOS DNA repair system in antibiotics resistance: A new target for a new infectious treatment strategy

Bacteria have a considerable ability and potential to acquire resistance against antimicrobial agents by acting diverse mechanisms such as target modification or overexpression, multidrug transporter systems, and acquisition of drug hydrolyzing enzymes. Studying the mechanisms of bacterial cell physiology is mandatory for the development of novel strategies to control the antimicrobial resistance phenomenon, as well as for the control of infections in clinics. The SOS response is a cellular DNA repair mechanism that has an essential role in the bacterial biologic process involved in resistance to antibiotics. The activation of the SOS network increases the resistance and tolerance of bacteria to stress and, as a consequence, to antimicrobial agents. Therefore, SOS can be an applicable target for the discovery of new antimicrobial drugs. In the present review, we focus on the central role of SOS response in bacterial resistance mechanisms and its potential as a new target for control of resistant pathogens.

Viral and cellular SOS-regulated motor proteins: dsDNA translocation mechanisms with divergent functions

DNA damage attacks on bacterial cells have been known to activate the SOS response, a transcriptional response affecting chromosome replication, DNA recombination and repair, cell division and prophage induction. All these functions require double-stranded (ds) DNA translocation by ASCE hexameric motors. This review seeks to delineate the structural and functional characteristics of the SOS response and the SOS-regulated DNA translocases FtsK and RuvB with the phi29 bacteriophage packaging motor gp16 ATPase as a prototype to study bacterial motors. While gp16 ATPase, cellular FtsK and RuvB are similarly comprised of hexameric rings encircling dsDNA and functioning as ATP-driven DNA translocases, they utilize different mechanisms to accomplish separate functions, suggesting a convergent evolution of these motors. The gp16 ATPase and FtsK use a novel revolution mechanism, generating a power stroke between subunits through an entropy-DNA affinity switch and pushing dsDNA inward without rotation of DNA and the motor, whereas RuvB seems to employ a rotation mechanism that remains to be further characterized. While FtsK and RuvB perform essential tasks during the SOS response, their roles may be far more significant as SOS response is involved in antibiotic-inducible bacterial vesiculation and biofilm formation as well as the perspective of the bacteria-cancer evolutionary interaction.

SOS involvement in stress-inducible biofilm formation

Bacterial biofilm formation can be induced by antimicrobial and DNA damage agents. These agents trigger the SOS response, in which SOS sensor RecA stimulates auto-cleavage of repressor LexA. These observations lead to a hypothesis of a connection between stress-inducible biofilm formation and the RecA-LexA interplay. To test this hypothesis, three biofilm assays were conducted, viz. the standard 96-well assay, confocal laser scanning microscopy, and the newly developed biofilm-on-paper assay. It was found that biofilm stimulation by the DNA replication inhibitor hydroxyurea was dependent on RecA and appeared repressed by the non-cleavable LexA of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Surprisingly, deletion of lexA led to reduction of both normal and stress-inducible biofilm formation, suggesting that the wild-type LexA contributes to biofilm formation. The decreases was not the result of poor growth of the mutants. These results suggest SOS involvement in hydroxyurea-inducible biofilm formation. In addition, with the paper biofilm assay, it was found that degradation of the biofilm matrix DNA by DNase I appeared to render the biofilms susceptible to the replication inhibitor. The puzzling questions concerning the roles of LexA in DNA release in the biofilm context are discussed.