» Articles » PMID: 20133665

Predicting Strength and Function for Promoters of the Escherichia Coli Alternative Sigma Factor, SigmaE

Overview
Specialty Science
Date 2010 Feb 6
PMID 20133665
Citations 60
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Sequenced bacterial genomes provide a wealth of information but little understanding of transcriptional regulatory circuits largely because accurate prediction of promoters is difficult. We examined two important issues for accurate promoter prediction: (1) the ability to predict promoter strength and (2) the sequence properties that distinguish between active and weak/inactive promoters. We addressed promoter prediction using natural core promoters recognized by the well-studied alternative sigma factor, Escherichia coli sigma(E), as a representative of group 4 sigmas, the largest sigma group. To evaluate the contribution of sequence to promoter strength and function, we used modular position weight matrix models comprised of each promoter motif and a penalty score for suboptimal motif location. We find that a combination of select modules is moderately predictive of promoter strength and that imposing minimal motif scores distinguished active from weak/inactive promoters. The combined -35/-10 score is the most important predictor of activity. Our models also identified key sequence features associated with active promoters. A conserved "AAC" motif in the -35 region is likely to be a general predictor of function for promoters recognized by group 4 sigmas. These results provide valuable insights into sequences that govern promoter strength, distinguish active and inactive promoters for the first time, and are applicable to both in vivo and in vitro measures of promoter strength.

Citing Articles

QPromoters: sequence based prediction of promoter strength in .

Haresh Liya D, Elanchezhian M, Pahari M, Anand N, Suresh S, Balaji N All Life. 2024; 16(1):2168304.

PMID: 39416423 PMC: 11478184. DOI: 10.1080/26895293.2023.2168304.


The conserved σD envelope stress response monitors multiple aspects of envelope integrity in corynebacteria.

Hart E, Lyerly E, Bernhardt T PLoS Genet. 2024; 20(6):e1011127.

PMID: 38829907 PMC: 11175481. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1011127.


Machine Learning and Deep Learning in Synthetic Biology: Key Architectures, Applications, and Challenges.

Goshisht M ACS Omega. 2024; 9(9):9921-9945.

PMID: 38463314 PMC: 10918679. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.3c05913.


Alteration of the -35 and -10 sequences and deletion the upstream sequence of the -35 region of the promoter A1 of the phage T7 in dsDNA confirm the contribution of non-specific interactions with RNA polymerase to the transcription initiation....

Turecka K, Firczuk M, Werel W Front Mol Biosci. 2024; 10:1335409.

PMID: 38259683 PMC: 10800924. DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2023.1335409.


Experimental promoter identification of a foodborne pathogen subsp. serovar Typhimurium with near single base-pair resolution.

Lee S, Le H, Taizhanova A, Nong L, Park J, Lee E Front Microbiol. 2024; 14:1271121.

PMID: 38239730 PMC: 10794520. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1271121.


References
1.
Stormo G . DNA binding sites: representation and discovery. Bioinformatics. 2000; 16(1):16-23. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/16.1.16. View

2.
Stormo G . Consensus patterns in DNA. Methods Enzymol. 1990; 183:211-21. DOI: 10.1016/0076-6879(90)83015-2. View

3.
Hertz G, Stormo G . Escherichia coli promoter sequences: analysis and prediction. Methods Enzymol. 1996; 273:30-42. DOI: 10.1016/s0076-6879(96)73004-5. View

4.
Typas A, Hengge R . Differential ability of sigma(s) and sigma70 of Escherichia coli to utilize promoters containing half or full UP-element sites. Mol Microbiol. 2004; 55(1):250-60. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04382.x. View

5.
Benoff B, Yang H, Lawson C, Parkinson G, Liu J, Blatter E . Structural basis of transcription activation: the CAP-alpha CTD-DNA complex. Science. 2002; 297(5586):1562-6. DOI: 10.1126/science.1076376. View