| Literature DB >> 30691388 |
Holly Anne Martin1, Katelyn E Porter1, Carmen Vallin1, Tatiana Ermi1, Natalie Contreras1, Mario Pedraza-Reyes2, Eduardo A Robleto3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous reports showed that mutagenesis in nutrient-limiting conditions is dependent on Mfd in Bacillus subtilis. Mfd initiates one type of transcription-coupled repair (TCR); this type of repair is known to target bulky lesions, like those associated with UV exposure. Interestingly, the roles of Mfd in repair of oxidative-promoted DNA damage and regulation of transcription differ. Here, we used a genetic approach to test whether Mfd protected B. subtilis from exposure to two different oxidants.Entities:
Keywords: Mfd; MutY; Mutagenesis; Oxidative damage
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30691388 PMCID: PMC6350366 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-019-1394-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Fig. 1Percent cell survival, displayed on a log scale, in the parental strain (YB955) and cells deficient in the UvrA (YB9900), Mfd (YB9801), or MutY (PERM1029) respectively, following exposure to ROS via the oxidizing agent tert-butyl hydroperoxide (t-BHP). Percent survival of each strain was determined by dividing the number of colonies from each of the test concentrations by the number of colonies observed at 0 mM t-BHP. Means are shown for each strain. The error bars represent standard error. Means were compared using the SPSS software package and one-way ANOVA. To establish whether two means were significantly different, we used the least significant differnce (LSD) test (P < 0.05) between SPSS package. Lower case letters were used to denote significant differences between means. “a”, “b”, and “c” are significantly different mean groups. ANOVA and and LSD tests were conducted within each of the t-BHP concentrations. These experiments were replicated four times, and each replicate experiment comprise of three repetitions. The total number of observations is 12
Fig. 2Percent cell survival, displayed in log scale, in the parental strain (YB955) and cells containing single and double defects in Mfd and MutY, (YB9801, PERM1029, and PERM818, respectively), following exposure to tert-butyl hydroperoxide (t-BHP). Percent survival of each strain was determined by dividing the number of colonies from each of the test concentrations by the number of colonies observed in the no treatment. Means are shown for each strain. The error bars represent standard error. Means were compared using the SPSS software package and one-way ANOVA. To establish whether two means were significantly different, we used the least significant differnce (LSD) test (P < 0.05) between SPSS package. Means with the same letter are not significnatly different. ANOVA and and LSD tests were conducted within each of the t-BHP concentrations. These experiments were replicated four times, and each replicate experiment comprise of three repetitions. The total number of observations is 12
Fig. 3Accumulation of Arg+ mutations over nine days in the wild-type CV1000 strain and strains deficient in Mfd (CV1001), MutY (CV1002), or both (CV1003) when (a) no treatment, (b) induction with IPTG for two hours, (c) treatment with 1 mM t-BHP for two hours, or (d) induction with IPTG and treatment with 1 mM t-BHP for two hours. The line on each section is at the 5 revertants per 107 CFU for easier comparison. Means are shown for each strain. The error bars represent standard error. Means were compared using the SPSS software package and one-way ANOVA. To establish whether two means were significantly different, we used the least significant differnce (LSD) test (P < 0.05) between SPSS package. Lower case letters were used to denote significant differences between means. “a”, “b”, and “c” are significantly different mean groups. ANOVA and and LSD tests were conducted separately for each day after plating. These experiments were replicated three times, and each replicate experiment comprise of five repetitions. The total number of observations is 15
Fig. 4Viability of the wild-type (CV1000), Mfd-deficient (CV1001), MutY-deficient (CV1002), and double mutant (CV1003) cells over the nine-day SPM presented in Fig. 3. Procedure of how viability was measured is described in materials and methods. Each point represents an average of five samples. This is a representative figure for all four conditions (induced, uninduced, treated with t-BHP, and untreated with t-BHP)
Fig. 5Percent cell survival, displayed in log scale, of the wild-type (YB955), Mfd-deficient (YB9801), MutY-deficient (PERM1029), and the Mfd complemented (PERM1134) strains following exposure to the oxidizing agent diamide. Percent survival for each strain was determined by dividing the number of colonies from of the test concentration by the number of colonies observed at the no treatment control. Means are shown for each strain. The error bars represent standard error. Means were compared using the SPSS software package and one-way ANOVA. To establish whether two means were significantly different, we used the least significant differnce (LSD) test (P < 0.05) between SPSS package. Lower case letters were used to denote significant differences between means. “a”, “b”, and “c” are significantly different mean groups. These experiments were replicated four times, and each replicate experiment comprise of three repetitions. The total number of observations is 12
Fig. 6Effect of Mfd on gene expression after exposure to t-BHP or diamide. a) Fold-change in ohrR mRNA expression after two-hour exposure to 1 mM t-BHP in the parental strain (YB955) and the mfd mutant (YB9801). b) Fold-change in yodB mRNA expression after two-hour exposure to 1 mM diamide in the parental strain (YB955) and the mfd mutant (YB9801). Fold-change in expression was calculated using the 2-ΔΔCt method. Means and standard error are presented. The veg gene was used as the control. Each condition was replicated three independent times. For a) and b), there were three technical replicates for each condition (total n = 9)
Strains utilized in this study
| Strain Name | Construction or Reference | Genotype |
|---|---|---|
| YB955 | Sung and Yasbin, 2002 [ |
|
| YB9801 | Ross et al |
|
| PERM1029 | Gomez et al |
|
| PERM1134 | Ramírez-Guadiana et al., 2013 [ | |
| PERM818 | Gomez et al |
|
| YB9900 | Gomez et al |
|
| CV1000 | Constructed for this work | |
| CV1001 | Constructed for this work | |
| CV1002 | Constructed for this work | |
| CV1003 | Constructed for this work | |
| CV1004 | Constructed for this work |
Primers utilized in this study
| Primer | Sequencea |
|---|---|
| CV1000–1 | GGTGAGCTGAAA |
| CV1000-2 | ACCA |
| CV1000–3 | TAAACGCCTTGCTCGCAGAAGCCGGTGAGCTGAAATAAAACAAA |
| CV1000–4 | GATGTCGACTAAAAAGGAAGTGGCATCATGCACACAGTGACGCAA |
| CV1000–5 | ACCAGAATGCCCTCCTTTTTGCTGTAGTATGC |
| F sigB | GATGAAGTCGATCGGCTCATAAG |
| R sigB | AACGATTTGCCGACAACAGG |
| F veg | GGCGAAGACGTTCGATA |
| R veg | CAGCTCAACAGTCTCAGTCA |
| F mutY | AAGGGCTCGGCTATTATTCGC |
| R mutY | TCCTGGACATGACACGCATC |
| F perR | AGGAAACCGGAGTTCGCATT |
| R perR | CTGCTGGAAGCATCACCGTA |
| F ohrR | ACAAAGCAATACAAGCCGCTG |
| R ohrR | GGACCGCTCATCCTCTTCAG |
| F yodB | GGGCCGAAACGGTTTAAAGA |
| R yodB | AAATTGATCGGCCCATGCCT |
| F mfd | GAGAAGCGAGCAAGGGCTAT |
| R mfd | CTTAAACGCACGTATGG |
aUnderlined sequences indicate restriction sites introduced for cloning purposes