Identification of essential alphaproteobacterial genes reveals operational variability in conserved developmental and cell cycle systems

The cell cycle of Caulobacter crescentus is controlled by a complex signalling network that co‐ordinates events. Genome sequencing has revealed many C. crescentus cell cycle genes are conserved in other Alphaproteobacteria, but it is not clear to what extent their function is conserved. As many cell cycle regulatory genes are essential in C. crescentus, the essential genes of two Alphaproteobacteria, Agrobacterium tumefaciens (Rhizobiales) and Brevundimonas subvibrioides (Caulobacterales), were elucidated to identify changes in cell cycle protein function over different phylogenetic distances as demonstrated by changes in essentiality. The results show the majority of conserved essential genes are involved in critical cell cycle processes. Changes in component essentiality reflect major changes in lifestyle, such as divisome components in A. tumefaciens resulting from that organism's different growth pattern. Larger variability of essentiality was observed in cell cycle regulators, suggesting regulatory mechanisms are more customizable than the processes they regulate. Examples include variability in the essentiality of divJ and divK spatial cell cycle regulators, and non‐essentiality of the highly conserved and usually essential DNA methyltransferase CcrM. These results show that while essential cell functions are conserved across varying genetic distance, much of a given organism's essential gene pool is specific to that organism.     

Computational and Genetic Reduction of a Cell Cycle to Its Simplest,Primordial Components

What are the minimal requirements to sustain an asymmetric cell cycle? Here we use mathematical modelling and forward genetics to reduce an asymmetric cell cycle to its simplest, primordial components. In the Alphaproteobacterium Caulobacter crescentus, cell cycle progression is believed to be controlled by a cyclical genetic circuit comprising four essential master regulators. Unexpectedly, our in silico modelling predicted that one of these regulators, GcrA, is in fact dispensable. We confirmed this experimentally, finding that ΔgcrA cells are viable, but slow-growing and elongated, with the latter mostly due to an insufficiency of a key cell division protein. Furthermore, suppressor analysis showed that another cell cycle regulator, the methyltransferase CcrM, is similarly dispensable with simultaneous gcrA/ccrM disruption ameliorating the cytokinetic and growth defect of ΔgcrA cells. Within the Alphaproteobacteria, gcrA and ccrM are consistently present or absent together, rather than either gene being present alone, suggesting that gcrA/ccrM constitutes an independent, dispensable genetic module. Together our approaches unveil the essential elements of a primordial asymmetric cell cycle that should help illuminate more complex cell cycles.     

Modeling the temporal dynamics of master regulators and CtrA proteolysis in Caulobacter crescentus cell cycle

The cell cycle of Caulobacter crescentus involves the polar morphogenesis and an asymmetric cell division driven by precise interactions and regulations of proteins, which makes Caulobacter an ideal model organism for investigating bacterial cell development and differentiation. The abundance of molecular data accumulated on Caulobacter motivates system biologists to analyze the complex regulatory network of cell cycle via quantitative modeling. In this paper, We propose a comprehensive model to accurately characterize the underlying mechanisms of cell cycle regulation based on the study of: a) chromosome replication and methylation; b) interactive pathways of five master regulatory proteins including DnaA, GcrA, CcrM, CtrA, and SciP, as well as novel consideration of their corresponding mRNAs; c) cell cycle-dependent proteolysis of CtrA through hierarchical protease complexes. The temporal dynamics of our simulation results are able to closely replicate an extensive set of experimental observations and capture the main phenotype of seven mutant strains of Caulobacter crescentus. Collectively, the proposed model can be used to predict phenotypes of other mutant cases, especially for nonviable strains which are hard to cultivate and observe. Moreover, the module of cyclic proteolysis is an efficient tool to study the metabolism of proteins with similar mechanisms.     

The noncoding RNA CcnA modulates the master cell cycle regulators CtrA and GcrA in Caulobacter crescentus

Bacteria are powerful models for understanding how cells divide and accomplish global regulatory programs. In Caulobacter crescentus, a cascade of essential master regulators supervises the correct and sequential activation of DNA replication, cell division, and development of different cell types. Among them, the response regulator CtrA plays a crucial role coordinating all those functions. Here, for the first time, we describe the role of a novel factor named CcnA (cell cycle noncoding RNA A), a cell cycle–regulated noncoding RNA (ncRNA) located at the origin of replication, presumably activated by CtrA, and responsible for the accumulation of CtrA itself. In addition, CcnA may be also involved in the inhibition of translation of the S-phase regulator, GcrA, by interacting with its 5′ untranslated region (5′ UTR). Performing in vitro experiments and mutagenesis, we propose a mechanism of action of CcnA based on liberation (ctrA) or sequestration (gcrA) of their ribosome-binding site (RBS). Finally, its role may be conserved in other alphaproteobacterial species, such as Sinorhizobium meliloti, representing indeed a potentially conserved process modulating cell cycle in Caulobacterales and Rhizobiales.

During cell cycle progression in the bacterium Caulobacter crescentus, the master cell cycle regulator CtrA is controlled by CcnA, a cell cycle-regulated non-coding RNA transcribed from a gene located at the origin of replication.     

Temporal Controls of the Asymmetric Cell Division Cycle in Caulobacter crescentus

The asymmetric cell division cycle of Caulobacter crescentus is orchestrated by an elaborate gene-protein regulatory network, centered on three major control proteins, DnaA, GcrA and CtrA. The regulatory network is cast into a quantitative computational model to investigate in a systematic fashion how these three proteins control the relevant genetic, biochemical and physiological properties of proliferating bacteria. Different controls for both swarmer and stalked cell cycles are represented in the mathematical scheme. The model is validated against observed phenotypes of wild-type cells and relevant mutants, and it predicts the phenotypes of novel mutants and of known mutants under novel experimental conditions. Because the cell cycle control proteins of Caulobacter are conserved across many species of alpha-proteobacteria, the model we are proposing here may be applicable to other genera of importance to agriculture and medicine (e.g., Rhizobium, Brucella).     

Genome-Scale Co-Expression Network Comparison across Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica Serovar Typhimurium Reveals Significant Conservation at the Regulon Level of Local Regulators Despite Their Dissimilar Lifestyles

Availability of genome-wide gene expression datasets provides the opportunity to study gene expression across different organisms under a plethora of experimental conditions. In our previous work, we developed an algorithm called COMODO (COnserved MODules across Organisms) that identifies conserved expression modules between two species. In the present study, we expanded COMODO to detect the co-expression conservation across three organisms by adapting the statistics behind it. We applied COMODO to study expression conservation/divergence between Escherichia coli, Salmonella enterica, and Bacillus subtilis. We observed that some parts of the regulatory interaction networks were conserved between E. coli and S. enterica especially in the regulon of local regulators. However, such conservation was not observed between the regulatory interaction networks of B. subtilis and the two other species. We found co-expression conservation on a number of genes involved in quorum sensing, but almost no conservation for genes involved in pathogenicity across E. coli and S. enterica which could partially explain their different lifestyles. We concluded that despite their different lifestyles, no significant rewiring have occurred at the level of local regulons involved for instance, and notable conservation can be detected in signaling pathways and stress sensing in the phylogenetically close species S. enterica and E. coli. Moreover, conservation of local regulons seems to depend on the evolutionary time of divergence across species disappearing at larger distances as shown by the comparison with B. subtilis. Global regulons follow a different trend and show major rewiring even at the limited evolutionary distance that separates E. coli and S. enterica.     

A quantitative study of the division cycle of Caulobacter crescentus stalked cells

Progression of a cell through the division cycle is tightly controlled at different steps to ensure the integrity of genome replication and partitioning to daughter cells. From published experimental evidence, we propose a molecular mechanism for control of the cell division cycle in Caulobacter crescentus. The mechanism, which is based on the synthesis and degradation of three “master regulator” proteins (CtrA, GcrA, and DnaA), is converted into a quantitative model, in order to study the temporal dynamics of these and other cell cycle proteins. The model accounts for important details of the physiology, biochemistry, and genetics of cell cycle control in stalked C. crescentus cell. It reproduces protein time courses in wild-type cells, mimics correctly the phenotypes of many mutant strains, and predicts the phenotypes of currently uncharacterized mutants. Since many of the proteins involved in regulating the cell cycle of C. crescentus are conserved among many genera of α-proteobacteria, the proposed mechanism may be applicable to other species of importance in agriculture and medicine.     

Coordination of Division and Development Influences Complex Multicellular Behavior in Agrobacterium tumefaciens

The α-Proteobacterium Agrobacterium tumefaciens has proteins homologous to known regulators that govern cell division and development in Caulobacter crescentus, many of which are also conserved among diverse α-Proteobacteria. In light of recent work demonstrating similarity between the division cycle of C. crescentus and that of A. tumefaciens, the functional conservation for this presumptive control pathway was examined. In C. crescentus the CtrA response regulator serves as the master regulator of cell cycle progression and cell division. CtrA activity is controlled by an integrated pair of multi-component phosphorelays: PleC/DivJ-DivK and CckA-ChpT-CtrA. Although several of the conserved orthologues appear to be essential in A. tumefaciens, deletions in pleC or divK were isolated and resulted in cell division defects, diminished swimming motility, and a decrease in biofilm formation. A. tumefaciens also has two additional pleC/divJ homologue sensor kinases called pdhS1 and pdhS2, absent in C. crescentus. Deletion of pdhS1 phenocopied the ΔpleC and ΔdivK mutants. Cells lacking pdhS2 morphologically resembled wild-type bacteria, but were decreased in swimming motility and elevated for biofilm formation, suggesting that pdhS2 may serve to regulate the motile to non-motile switch in A. tumefaciens. Genetic analysis suggests that the PleC/DivJ-DivK and CckA-ChpT-CtrA phosphorelays in A. tumefaciens are vertically-integrated, as in C. crescentus. A gain-of-function mutation in CckA (Y674D) was identified as a spontaneous suppressor of the ΔpleC motility phenotype. Thus, although the core architecture of the A. tumefaciens pathway resembles that of C. crescentus there are specific differences including additional regulators, divergent pathway architecture, and distinct target functions.