The roles of the multiple CheW and CheA homologues in chemotaxis and in chemoreceptor localization in Rhodobacter sphaeroides

Rhodobacter sphaeroides has multiple homologues of most of the Escherichia coli chemotaxis genes, organized in two major operons and other, unlinked, loci. These include cheA1 and cheW1 (che Op1) and cheA2, cheW2 and cheW3 (che Op2). We have deleted each of these cheA and cheW homologues in-frame and examined the chemosensory behaviour of these strains on swarm plates and in tethered cell assays. In addition, we have examined the effect of these deletions on the polar localization of the chemoreceptor McpG. In E. coli, deletion of either cheA or cheW results in a non-chemotactic phenotype, and these strains also show no receptor clustering. Here, we demonstrate that CheW2 and CheA2 are required for the normal localization of McpG and for normal chemotactic responses under both aerobic and photoheterotrophic conditions. Under aerobic conditions, deletion of cheW3 has no significant effect on McpG localization and only has an effect on chemotaxis to shallow gradients in swarm plates. Under photoheterotrophic conditions, however, CheW3 is required for McpG localization and also for chemotaxis both on swarm plates and in the tethered cell assay. These phenotypes are not a direct result of delocalization of McpG, as this chemoreceptor does not mediate chemotaxis to any of the compounds tested and can therefore be considered a marker for general methyl-accepting chemotaxis protein (MCP) clustering. Thus, there is a correlation between the normal localization of McpG (and presumably other chemoreceptors) and chemotaxis. We propose a model in which the multiple different MCPs in R. sphaeroides are contained within a polar chemoreceptor cluster. Deletion of cheW2 and cheA2 under both aerobic and photoheterotrophic conditions, and cheW3 under photoheterotrophic conditions, disrupts the cluster and hence reduces chemotaxis to any compound sensed by these MCPs.     

Polar localization of CheA2 in Rhodobacter sphaeroides requires specific Che homologs

Rhodobacter sphaeroides is a motile bacterium that has multiple chemotaxis genes organized predominantly in three major operons (cheOp(1), cheOp(2), and cheOp(3)). The chemoreceptor proteins are clustered at two distinct locations, the cell poles and in one or more cytoplasmic clusters. One intriguing possibility is that the physically distinct chemoreceptor clusters are each composed of a defined subset of specific chemotaxis proteins, including the chemoreceptors themselves plus specific CheW and CheA proteins. Here we report the subcellular localization of one such protein, CheA(2), under aerobic and photoheterotrophic growth conditions. CheA(2) is predominantly clustered and localized at the cell poles under both growth conditions. Furthermore, its localization is dependent upon one or more genes in cheOp(2) but not those of cheOp(1) or cheOp(3). In E. coli, the polar localization of CheA depends upon CheW. The R. sphaeroides cheOp(2) contains two cheW genes. Interestingly, CheW(2) is required under both aerobic and photoheterotrophic conditions, whereas CheW(3) is not required under aerobic conditions but appears to play a modest role under photoheterotrophic conditions. This suggests that R. sphaeroides contains at least two distinct chemotaxis complexes, possibly composed of proteins dedicated for each subcellular location. Furthermore, the composition of these spatially distinct complexes may change under different growth conditions.     

CheR- and CheB-Dependent Chemosensory Adaptation System of Rhodobacter sphaeroides

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.     

Requirements for chemotaxis protein localization in Rhodobacter sphaeroides

Many proteins have recently been shown to localize to different regions of the bacterial cell. This is most striking in the case of the Escherichia coli chemotaxis pathway in which the components localize at the cell poles. Rhodobacter sphaeroides has a more complex chemotaxis system with two complete pathways, each localizing to different positions, one pathway at the pole and one at a discrete cluster within the cytoplasm of the bacterium. Using genomic replacement of the wild-type chemotaxis genes in R. sphaeroides with their corresponding fluorescent protein fusions in conjunction with in frame deletions of other chemotaxis genes, we have investigated which proteins are required for the formation of the polar and cytoplasmic chemotaxis protein clusters. As in E. coli, the polarly targeted CheA and CheW homologues are required for the formation of the polar cluster. However, the formation of the cytoplasmic cluster requires the cytoplasmic chemoreceptors and CheW but not the CheAs. Interestingly, even when deletion of a component resulted in the chemotaxis proteins of one pathway becoming delocalized and diffuse in the cytoplasm, in no case were any chemotaxis proteins seen to localize to the other signalling cluster.     

TlpC,a novel chemotaxis protein in Rhodobacter sphaeroides,localizes to a discrete region in the cytoplasm

TlpC is encoded in the second chemotaxis operon of Rhodobacter sphaeroides. This protein shows some homology to membrane-spanning chemoreceptors of many bacterial species but, unlike these, is essential for R. sphaeroides chemotaxis to all compounds tested. Genomic replacement of tlpC with a C-terminal gfp fusion demonstrated that TlpC localized to a discrete cluster within the cytoplasm. Immunogold electron microscopy also showed that TlpC localized to a cytoplasmic electron-dense region. Correct TlpC-GFP localization depended on the downstream signalling proteins, CheW3, CheW4 and CheA2, and was tightly linked to cell division. Newly divided cells contained a single cluster but, as the cell cycle progressed, a second cluster appeared close to the initial cluster. As elongation continued, these clusters moved apart so that, on septation, each daughter cell contained a single TlpC cluster. The data presented suggest that TlpC is either a cytoplasmic chemoreceptor responding to or integrating global signals of metabolic state or a novel and essential component of the chemotaxis signalling pathway. These data also suggest that clustering is essential for signalling and that a mechanism may exist for targeting and localizing proteins within the bacterial cytoplasm.     

Identification of a fourth cheY gene in Rhodobacter sphaeroides and interspecies interaction within the bacterial chemotaxis signal transduction pathway

The Escherichia coli chemotaxis signal transduction pathway has: CheA, a histidine protein kinase; CheW, a linker between CheA and sensory proteins; CheY, the effector; and CheZ, a signal terminator. Rhodobacter sphaeroides has multiple copies of these proteins (2 x CheA, 3 x CheW and 3 x CheY, but no CheZ). In this study, we found a fourth cheY and expressed these R. sphaeroides proteins in E. coli. CheA2 (but not CheA1) restored swarming to an E. coli cheA mutant (RP9535). CheW3 (but not CheW2) restored swarming to a cheW mutant of E. coli (RP4606). R. sphaeroides CheYs did not affect E. coli lacking CheY, but restored swarming to a cheZ strain (RP1616), indicating that they can act as signal terminators in E. coli. An E. coli CheY, which is phosphorylated but cannot bind the motor (CheY109KR), was expressed in RP1616 but had no effect. Overexpression of CheA2, CheW2, CheW3, CheY1, CheY3 and CheY4 inhibited chemotaxis of wild-type E. coli (RP437) by increasing its smooth-swimming bias. While some R. sphaeroides proteins restore tumbling to smooth-swimming E. coli mutants, their activity is not controlled by the chemosensory receptors. R. sphaeroides possesses a phosphorelay cascade compatible with that of E. coli, but has additional incompatible homologues.     

Hypoxia‐induced localization of chemotaxis‐related signaling proteins in Vibrio cholerae

Vibrio cholerae has three sets of chemotaxis‐related signaling proteins, of which only System II has been shown to be involved in chemotaxis. Here, we examined localization of green fluorescent protein (GFP)‐fused components of System I. The histidine kinase (CheA1) and the adaptor (CheW0) of System I localized to polar and lateral membrane regions with standing incubation (microaerobic conditions), but their localization was lost after shaking (aerobic conditions). A transmembrane receptor of System I also showed polar and lateral localization with standing incubation. By contrast, GFP‐fused components of System II localized constitutively to the flagellated pole. Nitrogen gas, sodium azide or carbonylcyanide m‐chlorophenylhydrazone induced localization of CheA1‐GFP even with shaking incubation, suggesting that the localization is controlled in response to changes in energy metabolism. Fluorescently labeled tetracysteine‐tagged CheA1 also showed azide‐induced localization, arguing against artifactual effects of GFP fusions. These results suggest that System I components are assembled into the supramolecular signaling complex in response to reduced cellular energy states, raising the possibility that the System I complex plays a role in sensing and signaling under microaerobic environments, such as in the host intestine.     

Polarized cells, polar actions.

The recognition of polar bacterial organization is just emerging. The examples of polar localization given here are from a variety of bacterial species and concern a disparate array of cellular functions. A number of well-characterized instances of polar localization of bacterial proteins, including the chemoreceptor complex in both C. crescentus and E. coli, the maltose-binding protein in E. coli, the B. japonicum surface attachment proteins, and the actin tail of L. monocytogenes within a mammalian cell, involve proteins or protein complexes that facilitate bacterial interaction with the environment, either the extracellular milieux or that within a plant or mammalian host. The significance of this observation remains unclear. Polarity in bacteria poses many problems, including the necessity for a mechanism for asymmetrically distributing proteins as well as a mechanism by which polar localization is maintained. Large structures, such as a flagellum, are anchored at the pole by means of the basal body that traverses the peptidoglycan wall. But for proteins and small complexes, whether in the periplasm or the membrane, one must invoke a mechanism that prevents the diffusion of these proteins away from the cell pole. Perhaps the periplasmic proteins are retained at the pole by the presence of the periseptal annulus (35). The constraining features for membrane components are not known. For large aggregates, such as the clusters of MCP, CheA, and CheW complexes, perhaps the size of the aggregate alone prevents displacement. In most cases of cellular asymmetry, bacteria are able to discriminate between the new pole and the old pole and to utilize this information for localization specificity. The maturation of new pole to old pole appears to be a common theme as well. Given numerous examples reported thus far, we propose that bacterial polarity displays specific rules and is a more general phenomenon than has been previously recognized.     

Organization of the receptor-kinase signaling array that regulates Escherichia coli chemotaxis

Motor behavior in prokaryotes is regulated by a phosphorelay network involving a histidine protein kinase, CheA, whose activity is controlled by a family of Type I membrane receptors. In a typical Escherichia coli cell, several thousand receptors are organized together with CheA and an Src homology 3-like protein, CheW, into complexes that tend to be localized at the cell poles. We found that these complexes have at least 6 receptors per CheA. CheW is not required for CheA binding to receptors, but is essential for kinase activation. The kinase activity per mole of bound CheA is proportional to the total bound CheW. Similar results were obtained with the E. coli serine receptor, Tsr, and the Salmonella typhimurium aspartate receptor, Tar. In the case of Tsr, under conditions optimal for kinase activation, the ratio of subunits in complexes is approximately 6 Tsr:4 CheW:1 CheA. Our results indicate that information from numerous receptors is integrated to control the activity of a relatively small number of kinase molecules.     

Stabilization of polar localization of a chemoreceptor via its covalent modifications and its communication with a different chemoreceptor

In the chemotaxis of Escherichia coli, polar clustering of the chemoreceptors, the histidine kinase CheA, and the adaptor protein CheW is thought to be involved in signal amplification and adaptation. However, the mechanism that leads to the polar localization of the receptor is still largely unknown. In this study, we examined the effect of receptor covalent modification on the polar localization of the aspartate chemoreceptor Tar fused to green fluorescent protein (GFP). Amidation (and presumably methylation) of Tar-GFP enhanced its own polar localization, although the effect was small. The slight but significant effect of amidation on receptor localization was reinforced by the fact that localization of a noncatalytic mutant version of GFP-CheR that targets to the C-terminal pentapeptide sequence of Tar was similarly facilitated by receptor amidation. Polar localization of the demethylated version of Tar-GFP was also enhanced by increasing levels of the serine chemoreceptor Tsr. The effect of covalent modification on receptor localization by itself may be too small to account for chemotactic adaptation, but receptor modification is suggested to contribute to the molecular assembly of the chemoreceptor/histidine kinase array at a cell pole, presumably by stabilizing the receptor dimer-to-dimer interaction.     

Characterization of the chemotaxis protein CheW from Rhodobacter sphaeroides and its effect on the behaviour of Escherichia coli

In contrast to the situation in enteric bacteria, chemotaxis in Rhodobacter sphaeroides requires transport and partial metabolism of chemoattractants. A chemotaxis operon has been identified containing homologues of the enteric cheA , cheW , cheR genes and two homologues of the cheY gene. However, mutations in these genes have only minor effects on chemotaxis. In enteric species, CheW transmits sensory information from the chemoreceptors to the histidine protein kinase, CheA. Expression of R. sphaeroides cheW in Escherichia coli showed concentration-dependent inhibition of wild-type behaviour, increasing counter-clockwise rotation and thus smooth swimming — a phenotype also seen when E. coli cheW is overexpressed in E. coli . In contrast, overexpression of R. sphaeroides cheW in wild-type R. sphaeroides inhibited motility completely, the equivalent of inducing tumbly motility in E. coli . Expression of R. sphaeroides cheW in an E. coli Δ cheW chemotaxis mutant complemented this mutation, confirming that CheW is involved in chemosensory signal transduction. However, unlike E. coli Δ cheW mutants, in-frame deletion of R. sphaeroides cheW did not affect either swimming behaviour or chemotaxis to weak organic acids, although the responses to sugars were enhanced. Therefore, although CheW may act as a signal-transduction protein in R. sphaeroides , it may have an unusual role in controlling the rotation of the flagellar motor. Furthermore, the ability of a Δ cheW mutant to swim normally and show wild-type responses to weak acids supports the existence of additional chemosensory signal-transduction pathways.     

Methylation segments are not required for chemotactic signalling by cytoplasmic fragments of Tsr, the methyl-accepting serine chemoreceptor of Escherichia coli

The serine chemoreceptor Tsr and other methyl-accepting chemotaxis proteins (MCPs) control the swimming behaviour of Escherichia coli by generating signals that influence the direction of flagellar rotation. MCPs produce clockwise (CW) signals by stimulating the autophosphorylation activity of CheA, a cytoplasmic histidine kinase, and counter-clockwise signals by inhibiting CheA. CheW couples CheA to chemoreceptor control by promoting formation of MCP/CheW/CheA ternary complexes. To identify MCP structural determinants essential for CheA stimulation, we inserted fragments of the tsr coding region into an inducible expression vector and used a swimming contest called 'pseudotaxis' to select for transformant cells carrying CW-signalling plasmids. The shortest active fragment we found, Tsr (350–470), stimulated CheA in a CheW-dependent manner, as full-length Tsr molecules do. It spans a highly conserved 'core' (370–420) that probably specifies the CheA and CheW contact sites and other determinants needed for stimulatory control of CheA. Tsr (350–470) also carries portions of the left and right arms flanking the core, which probably play roles in regulating MCP signalling state. However, this Tsr fragment lacks all of the methylation sites characteristic of MCP molecules, indicating that methylation segments are not essential for generating receptor output signals.     

Polar clustering of the chemoreceptor complex in Escherichia coli occurs in the absence of complete CheA function

Bacterial chemotaxis requires a phosphorelay system initiated by the interaction of a ligand with its chemoreceptor and culminating in a change in the directional bias of flagellar rotation. Chemoreceptor-CheA-CheW ternary complexes mediate transduction of the chemotactic signal. In vivo, these complexes cluster predominantly in large groups at the cell poles. The function of chemoreceptor clustering is currently unknown. To gain insight into the relationship between signaling and chemoreceptor clustering, we examined these properties in several Escherichia coli mutant strains that produce CheA variants altered in their ability to mediate chemotaxis, autophosphorylate, or bind ATP. We show here that polar clustering of chemoreceptor complexes does not require functional CheA protein, although maximal clustering occurred only in chemotactically competent cells. Surprisingly, in cells containing a minimum of 13 gold particles at the cell pole, a significant level of clustering was observed in the absence of CheA, demonstrating that CheA is not absolutely essential for chemoreceptor clustering. Nonchemotactic cells expressing only CheA(S), a C-terminal CheA deletion, or CheA bearing a mutation in the ATP-binding site mediated slightly less than maximal chemoreceptor clustering. Cells expressing only full-length CheA (CheA(L)) from either a chromosomal or a plasmid-encoded allele displayed a methyl-accepting chemotaxis protein localization pattern indistinguishable from that of strains carrying both CheA(L) and CheA(S), demonstrating that CheA(L) alone can mediate polar clustering.     

Noncritical Signaling Role of a Kinase–Receptor Interaction Surface in the Escherichia coli Chemosensory Core Complex

In Escherichia coli chemosensory arrays, transmembrane receptors, a histidine autokinase CheA, and a scaffolding protein CheW interact to form an extended hexagonal lattice of signaling complexes. One interaction, previously assigned a crucial signaling role, occurs between chemoreceptors and the CheW-binding P5 domain of CheA. Structural studies showed a receptor helix fitting into a hydrophobic cleft at the boundary between P5 subdomains. Our work aimed to elucidate the in vivo roles of the receptor–P5 interface, employing as a model the interaction between E. coli CheA and Tsr, the serine chemoreceptor. Crosslinking assays confirmed P5 and Tsr contacts in vivo and their strict dependence on CheW. Moreover, the P5 domain only mediated CheA recruitment to polar receptor clusters if CheW was also present. Amino acid replacements at CheA.P5 cleft residues reduced CheA kinase activity, lowered serine response cooperativity, and partially impaired chemotaxis. Pseudoreversion studies identified suppressors of P5 cleft defects at other P5 groove residues or at surface-exposed residues in P5 subdomain 1, which interacts with CheW in signaling complexes. Our results indicate that a high-affinity P5–receptor binding interaction is not essential for core complex function. Rather, P5 groove residues are probably required for proper cleft structure and/or dynamic behavior, which likely impact conformational communication between P5 subdomains and the strong binding interaction with CheW that is necessary for kinase activation. We propose a model for signal transmission in chemotaxis signaling complexes in which the CheW–receptor interface plays the key role in conveying signaling-related conformational changes from receptors to the CheA kinase.     

Chemotaxis in Bacillus subtilis requires either of two functionally redundant CheW homologs.

We have characterized mutants in a novel gene of Bacillus subtilis, cheV, which encodes a protein homologous to both CheW and CheY. A null mutant in cheV is only slightly defective in capillary and tethered cell assays. However, a double mutant lacking both CheV and CheW has a strong tumble bias, does not respond to addition of attractant, and shows essentially no accumulation in capillary assays. Thus, CheV and CheW appear in part to be functionally redundant. A strain lacking CheW and expressing only the CheW domain of CheV is chemotactic, suggesting that the truncated CheV protein retains in vivo function. We speculate that CheV and CheW function together to couple CheA activation to methyl-accepting chemotaxis protein receptor status and that possible CheA-dependent phosphorylation of CheV contributes to adaptation.     

Localization of components of the chemotaxis machinery of Escherichia coli using fluorescent protein fusions

We prepared fusions of yellow fluorescent protein [the YFP variant of green fluorescent protein (GFP)] with the cytoplasmic chemotaxis proteins CheY, CheZ and CheA and the flagellar motor protein FliM, and studied their localization in wild-type and mutant cells of Escherichia coli. All but the CheA fusions were functional. The cytoplasmic proteins CheY, CheZ and CheA tended to cluster at the cell poles in a manner similar to that observed earlier for methyl-accepting chemotaxis proteins (MCPs), but only if MCPs were present. Co-localization of CheY and CheZ with MCPs was CheA dependent, and co-localization of CheA with MCPs was CheW dependent, as expected. Co-localization with MCPs was confirmed by immunofluorescence using an anti-MCP primary antibody. The motor protein FliM appeared as discrete spots on the sides of the cell. These were seen in wild-type cells and in a fliN mutant, but not in flhC or fliG mutants. Co-localization with flagellar structures was confirmed by immunofluorescence using an antihook primary antibody. Surprisingly, we did not observe co-localization of CheY with motors, even under conditions in which cells tumbled.     

CheZ phosphatase localizes to chemoreceptor patches via CheA-short

We have investigated the conditions required for polar localization of the CheZ phosphatase by using a CheZ-green fluorescent protein fusion protein that, when expressed from a single gene in the chromosome, restored chemotaxis to a DeltacheZ strain. Localization was observed in wild-type, DeltacheZ, DeltacheYZ, and DeltacheRB cells but not in cells with cheA, cheW, or all chemoreceptor genes except aer deleted. Cells making only CheA-short (CheA(S)) or CheA lacking the P2 domain also retained normal localization, whereas cells producing only CheA-long or CheA missing the P1 and P2 domains did not. We conclude that CheZ localization requires the truncated C-terminal portion of the P1 domain present in CheA(S). Missense mutations targeting residues 83 through 120 of CheZ also abolished localization. Two of these mutations do not disrupt chemotaxis, indicating that they specifically prevent interaction with CheA(S) while leaving other activities of CheZ intact.     

Characterization of cheW genes of Leptospira interrogans and their effects in Escherichia coli

The motility and chemotaxis systems are critical for the virulence of leptospires. In this study, the phylogenetic profiles method was used to predict the interaction of chemotaxis proteins. It was shown that CheW1 links to CheA1, CheY, CheB and CheW2, CheW3 links to CheA2, MCP （LA2426）, CheB3 and CheD1; and CheW2 links only to CheW1. The similarity analysis demonstrated that CheW2 of Leptospira interrogans strain Lai had poor homology with Chew of Escherichia coli in the region of residues 30-50. In order to verify the function of these proteins, the putative cheW genes were cloned into pQE31 vector and expressed in wild-type E. coli strain RP437 or chew defective strain RP4606. The swarming results indicated that CheW1 and CheW3 could restore swarming of RP4606 while CheW2 could not. Overexpression of CheW1 and CheW3 in RP437 inhibited the swarming of RP437, whereas the inhibitory effect of CheW2 was much lower. Therefore, we presumed that CheW1 and CheW3 might have the function of CheW while CheW2 does not. The existence of multiple copies of chemotaxis homologue genes suggested that L. interrogans strain Lai might have a more complex chemosensory pathway.     

Targeting of the chemotaxis methylesterase/deamidase CheB to the polar receptor-kinase cluster in an Escherichia coli cell

Chemotactic adaptation to persisting stimulation involves reversible methylation of the chemoreceptors that form complexes with the histidine kinase CheA at a cell pole. The methyltransferase CheR targets to the C-terminal NWETF sequence of the chemoreceptor. In contrast, localization of the methylesterase CheB is largely unknown, although regulation of its activity via phosphorylation is central to adaptation. In this study, green fluorescent protein was fused to full-length CheB or its various parts: the N-terminal regulatory domain (N), the C-terminal catalytic domain (C) and the linker (L). The full-length and NL fusions and, to a lesser extent, the LC fusion localized to a pole. Deletion of the P2 domain from CheA abolished polar localization of the full-length and NL fusions, but did not affect that of the LC fusion. Pull-down assays demonstrated that the NL fragment, but not the LC fragment, binds to the P2 fragment of CheA. These results indicate that binding of the NL domain to the P2 domain targets CheB to the polar signalling complex. The LC fusion, like the chemoreceptor, partially localized in the absence of CheA, suggesting that the LC domain may interact with its substrate sites, either as part of the protein or as a proteolytic fragment.     

A CheW homologue is required for Myxococcus xanthus fruiting body development,social gliding motility,and fibril biogenesis

In bacteria with multiple sets of chemotaxis genes, the deletion of homologous genes or even different genes in the same operon can result in disparate phenotypes. Myxococcus xanthus is a bacterium with multiple sets of chemotaxis genes and/or homologues. It was shown previously that difA and difE, encoding homologues of the methyl-accepting chemoreceptor protein (MCP) and the CheA kinase, respectively, are required for M. xanthus social gliding (S) motility and development. Both difA and difE mutants were also defective in the biogenesis of the cell surface appendages known as extracellular matrix fibrils. In this study, we investigated the roles of the CheW homologue encoded by difC, a gene at the same locus as difA and difE. We showed that difC mutations resulted in defects in M. xanthus developmental aggregation, sporulation, and S motility. We demonstrated that difC is indispensable for wild-type cellular cohesion and fibril biogenesis but not for pilus production. We further illustrated the ectopic complementation of a difC in-frame deletion by a wild-type difC. The identical phenotypes of difA, difC, and difE mutants are consistent and supportive of the hypothesis that the Dif chemotaxis homologues constitute a chemotaxis-like signal transduction pathway that regulates M. xanthus fibril biogenesis and S motility.