» Articles » PMID: 11717272

CheR- and CheB-dependent Chemosensory Adaptation System of Rhodobacter Sphaeroides

Overview
Journal J Bacteriol
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2001 Nov 22
PMID 11717272
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Rhodobacter sphaeroides has multiple homologues of most of the Escherichia coli chemotaxis genes, organized in three major operons and other, unlinked, loci. These include cheA(1) and cheR(1) (che Op(1)) and cheA(2), cheR(2), and cheB(1) (che Op(2)). In-frame deletions of these cheR and cheB homologues were constructed and the chemosensory behaviour of the resultant mutants examined on swarm plates and in tethered cell assays. Under the conditions tested, CheR(2) and CheB(1) were essential for normal chemotaxis, whereas CheR(1) was not. cheR(2) and cheB(1), but not cheR(1), were also able to complement the equivalent E. coli mutants. However, none of the proteins were required for the correct polar localization of the chemoreceptor McpG in R. sphaeroides. In E. coli, CheR binds to the NWETF motif on the high-abundance receptors, allowing methylation of both high- and low-abundance receptors. This motif is not contained on any R. sphaeroides chemoreceptors thus far identified, although 2 of the 13 putative chemoreceptors, McpA and TlpT, do have similar sequences. This suggests that CheR(2) either interacts with the NWETF motif of E. coli methyl-accepting chemotaxis proteins (MCPs), even though its native motif may be slightly different, or with another conserved region of the MCPs. Methanol release measurements show that R. sphaeroides has an adaptation system that is different from that of Bacillus subtilis and E. coli, with methanol release measurable on the addition of attractant but not on its removal. Intriguingly, CheA(2), but not CheA(1), is able to phosphorylate CheB(1), suggesting that signaling through CheA(1) cannot initiate feedback receptor adaptation via CheB(1)-P.

Citing Articles

Mechanism of Signalling and Adaptation through the Cytoplasmic Chemoreceptor Cluster.

de Beyer J, Szollossi A, Byles E, Fischer R, Armitage J Int J Mol Sci. 2019; 20(20).

PMID: 31615130 PMC: 6829392. DOI: 10.3390/ijms20205095.


Light-controlled motility in prokaryotes and the problem of directional light perception.

Wilde A, Mullineaux C FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2017; 41(6):900-922.

PMID: 29077840 PMC: 5812497. DOI: 10.1093/femsre/fux045.


(1)H, (13)C and (15)N resonance assignments for the response regulator CheY3 from Rhodobacter sphaeroides.

Varela L, Bell C, Armitage J, Redfield C Biomol NMR Assign. 2016; 10(2):373-8.

PMID: 27468962 PMC: 5039241. DOI: 10.1007/s12104-016-9703-x.


In Rhodobacter sphaeroides, chemotactic operon 1 regulates rotation of the flagellar system 2.

Martinez-Del Campo A, Ballado T, Camarena L, Dreyfus G J Bacteriol. 2011; 193(23):6781-6.

PMID: 21949068 PMC: 3232911. DOI: 10.1128/JB.05933-11.


Feedback control architecture and the bacterial chemotaxis network.

Hamadeh A, Roberts M, August E, McSharry P, Maini P, Armitage J PLoS Comput Biol. 2011; 7(5):e1001130.

PMID: 21573199 PMC: 3088647. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001130.


References
1.
Springer W, Koshland Jr D . Identification of a protein methyltransferase as the cheR gene product in the bacterial sensing system. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1977; 74(2):533-7. PMC: 392324. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.74.2.533. View

2.
Laemmli U . Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature. 1970; 227(5259):680-5. DOI: 10.1038/227680a0. View

3.
Yonekawa H, Hayashi H, PARKINSON J . Requirement of the cheB function for sensory adaptation in Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol. 1983; 156(3):1228-35. PMC: 217972. DOI: 10.1128/jb.156.3.1228-1235.1983. View

4.
Kehry M, Doak T, Dahlquist F . Stimulus-induced changes in methylesterase activity during chemotaxis in Escherichia coli. J Biol Chem. 1984; 259(19):11828-35. View

5.
Stock J, Clarke S, Koshland Jr D . The protein carboxylmethyltransferase involved in Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium chemotaxis. Methods Enzymol. 1984; 106:310-21. DOI: 10.1016/0076-6879(84)06031-6. View