Regulation of open complex formation at the Escherichia coli galactose operon promoters. Simultaneous interaction of RNA polymerase, gal repressor and CAP/cAMP.

The regulation of open complex formation at the Escherichia coli galactose operon promoters by galactose repressor and catabolite activator protein/cyclic AMP (CAP/cAMP) was investigated in DNA-binding and kinetic experiments performed in vitro. We found that gal repressor and CAP/cAMP bind to the gal regulatory region independently, resulting in simultaneous occupancy of the two gal operators and the CAP/cAMP binding site. Both CAP/cAMP and gal repressor altered the partitioning of RNA polymerase between the two overlapping gal promoters. Open complexes formed in the absence of added regulatory proteins were partitioned between gal P1 and P2 with occupancies of 25% and 75%, respectively. CAP/cAMP caused open complexes to be formed nearly exclusively at P1 (98% occupancy). gal repressor caused a co-ordinated, but incomplete, switch in promoter partitioning from P1 to P2 in both the absence and presence of CAP/cAMP. We measured the kinetic constants governing open complex formation and decay at the gal promoters in the absence and presence of gal repressor and CAP/cAMP. CAP/cAMP had the largest effect on the kinetics of open complex formation, resulting in a 30-fold increase in the apparent binding constant. We conclude that the regulation of open complex formation at the gal promoters does not result from competition between gal repressor, CAP/cAMP and RNA polymerase for binding at the gal operon regulatory region, but instead results from the interactions of the three proteins during the formation of a nucleoprotein complex on the gal DNA fragment. Finally, we present a kinetic model for the regulation of open complex formation at the gal operon.     

RNA polymerase and gal repressor bind simultaneously and with DNA bending to the control region of the Escherichia coli galactose operon.

The Escherichia coli galactose operon contains an unusual array of closely spaced binding sites for proteins governing the expression from the two physically overlapping gal promoters. Based on studies of two gal promoter-up mutants we have previously suggested RNA-polymerase-induced DNA bending of gal promoter DNA. Here we present new evidence confirming and extending this interpretation. It was obtained by the circular permutation assay of gel electrophoretic mobility [Wu and Crothers (1984), Nature, 308, 509-513] applied to three analogous series of circularly permuted fragments derived from wild-type and two promoter-up mutant DNAs. The same circularly permuted DNA fragments have further been used to study the binding of gal repressor to its operator sites by electrophoretic mobility shift and by DNase I footprinting techniques. The main results are: (i) complexes carrying repressor either exclusively at the upstream operator O1 or at the downstream operator O2 exhibit different electrophoretic mobilities; (ii) binding to either one of the operators results in protein-induced DNA bending by the criteria of the circular permutation mobility assay; and (iii) occupation of both gal operators by gal repressor does not prevent cAMP-CRP-independent binding of RNA polymerase to the gal promoters, as judged by DNase I protection and gel retardation assays. The latter finding imposes constraints on any attempt to model the regulation of gal expression by assumed DNA-protein and protein-protein interactions.     

Upstream curved sequences influence the initiation of transcription at the Escherichia coli galactose operon.

The two overlapping promoters that control mRNA synthesis at the galactose operon contain three phased stretches of adenine residues, located around positions -84.5, -74 and -63, with respect ot the start of the P1 promoter. As a result, the corresponding DNA sequence is bent, an anomaly that is relieved by the addition of small concentrations of drugs like distamycin A or netropsin. By abortive initiation assays performed on several DNA fragments derived from the wild-type promoter or from various mutants we show that the curved sequence increases the strength of the P1 promoter. In the absence of cyclic AMP (cAMP) and of the corresponding receptor protein (CRP), the upstream curved sequences enhance the rate of isomerization from the closed to the open complex at P1. This effect is abolished when distamycin A is bound in the bent region. In the presence of cAMP-CRP, a more drastic change is observed: activation of the gal P1 promoter takes place at a different formal step, depending whether the upstream curved sequence is present or not (enhancement of the rate of conversion from a closed to an open complex instead of an increase in the affinity of the enzyme during closed complex formation). These data, together with previous results obtained with other mutants of the gal control region, suggest that several closed complexes corresponding to different nucleoprotein arrangements are formed during open complex formation at gal P1, in the presence of CRP.     

Role of HU and DNA supercoiling in transcription repression: specialized nucleoprotein repression complex at gal promoters in Escherichia coli

Efficient repression of the two promoters P1 and P2 of the gal operon requires the formation of a DNA loop encompassing the promoters. In vitro, DNA looping-mediated repression involves binding of the Gal repressor (GalR) to two gal operators (OE and OI) and binding of the histone-like protein HU to a specific locus (hbs) about the midpoint between OE and OI, and supercoiled DNA. Without DNA looping, GalR binding to OE partially represses P1 and stimulates P2. We investigated the requirement for DNA supercoiling and HU in repression of the gal promoters in vivo in strains containing a fusion of a reporter gene, gusA or lacZ, to each promoter individually. While the P1 promoter was found to be repressible in the absence of DNA supercoiling and HU, the repression of P2 was entirely dependent upon DNA supercoiling in vivo. The P2 promoter was fully derepressed when supercoiling was inhibited by the addition of coumermycin in cells. P2, but not P1, was also totally derepressed by the absence of HU or the OI operator. From these results, we propose that the repression of the gal promoters in vivo is mediated by the formation of a higher order DNA-multiprotein complex containing GalR, HU and supercoiled DNA. In the absence of this complex, P1 but not P2 is still repressed by GalR binding to OE. The specific nucleoprotein complexes involving histone-like proteins, which repress promoter activity while remaining sensitive to inducing signals, as discussed, may occur more generally in bacterial nucleoids.     

A control element within a structural gene: the gal operon of Escherichia coli

The gal operon of Escherichia coli is transcribed from two overlapping promoters, PG1 and PG2. Cyclic AMP and its receptor protein (CRP) modulate the two promoters in opposite directions by binding to a single cat locus. Both the promoters are negatively regulated by a single repressor, the product of the galR gene. An operator site, defined by several mutations, has previously been located upstream from the cat locus. We have isolated and characterized a new set of cis-dominant constitutive mutations of the gal operon and determined their locations by DNA sequencing. From these studies, we propose the existence of a second functional gal operator element at an extraordinary site--within galE, the first structural gene. Both the operators, OE (exterior) and OI (interior), are involved in the repression of PG1 and PG2. This would be the first example of the presence of a functional operator element within a structural protein-coding region.     

Segment-specific mutagenesis of the regulatory region in the Escherichia coli galactose operon: isolation of mutations reducing the initiation of transcription and translation

Using hydroxylamine mutagenesis in vitro, mutations were introduced into a short DNA fragment containing the two overlapping promoters of the Escherichia coli galactose operon and the start of the first gal gene, galE. The mutagenised fragment was inserted into a lac expression plasmid. In such a vector, lac expression is controlled by the gal promoter region. Amongst eighteen candidates in which expression was reduced due to mutations in the gal fragment, twelve contained promoter mutations and six carried mutations that reduce the initiation of galE translation. The candidates in which promoter activity was reduced contained mutations affecting the promoter P1, which is dependent on the cyclic AMP-receptor protein complex (cAMP-CRP) for activation. All carried mutations in the sequence 5'GTGA3' at the CRP binding site. One of the twelve also contained a second mutation affecting the second promoter, P2, which normally functions in the absence of cAMP-CRP. Amongst the six candidates affecting galE translation, two contained a mutation that changes the initiator codon from AUG to AUA and almost completely suppresses galE expression. The mutations in the other four candidates affect the ribosome binding sequence, 5'GGAG3'. However, multiple mutations that abolish this sequence do not totally suppress galE expression, showing that there must be another way to guide ribosomes to the correct initiation site.     

Repression of galP, the galactose transporter in Escherichia coli, requires the specific regulator of N-acetylglucosamine metabolism

Soupene et al . [ J. Bacteriol. (2003) 185 5611–5626] made the unexpected observation that the presence of a mutation, in the gene for the N -acetylglucosamine repressor, nagC , increased the growth rate of Escherichia coli MG1655 on galactose, an unrelated sugar. We have found that NagC, binds to a single, high-affinity site overlapping the promoter of galP (galactose permease) gene and that expression of galP is repressed by a combination of NagC, GalR and GalS. In addition to the previously identified galOE operator, other gal operators further upstream are required for full repression. GalS has a specific role, as it binds with higher affinity to one of the upstream operators but its effect in vivo is only observed in the presence of GalR. Regulation of galP by three specific repressors, NagC, GalR and GalS is unusual in that it involves multiple, specific regulators from two different areas of metabolism. This novel regulation seems to be particular for E. coli and its nearest neighbour, Shigella. Other bacteria with galP orthologues, although retaining the metK-galP gene order, do not have the NagC site. Although quantitative effects were strain specific, nagC mutations increased the growth rate on galactose of all E. coli strains tested.     

Carbon catabolite repression of sucrose utilization in Staphylococcus xylosus: catabolite control protein CcpA ensures glucose preference and autoregulatory limitation of sucrose utilization

Sucrose utilization in Staphylococcus xylosus is dependent on two genes, scrA and scrB; encoding a PTS permease and a sucrose phosphate hydrolase, respectively. The genes are encoded on separate loci and are transcribed from two promoters, P(scrA) and P(scrB), both of which are controlled by the repressor ScrR by binding to the operator sequences O(A) and O(B). In the scrA promoter region, a catabolite-responsive element (cre), operator for the global catabolite control protein CcpA, is also present, but its contribution to scrA regulation has not been determined. Using an integrative promoter probe plasmid, the activities of the promoters P(scrA) and P(scrB) were determined under different growth conditions. Both promoters are induced by sucrose and induction is prevented when glucose is also present. Without a functional CcpA, glucose-mediated prevention of induction is lost, clearly demonstrating that CcpA ensures hierarchical sugar utilization with glucose as preferred substrate. Measurements of promoter activities in the absence of a functional ScrR repressor indicated that CcpA also acts upon the operators O(A) and O(B), albeit not as efficiently as on the genuine cre in P(srcA). Besides determining the choice of the carbon source, CcpA has a second effect on sucrose gene expression. When sucrose is the sole carbon source, sucrose catabolism activates carbon catabolite repression and CcpA prevents full induction of the sucrose utilization genes by partially repressing the scrA promoter. Thus, CcpA-dependent regulation serves as a built-in autoregulatory device to restrict sucrose uptake.