| Literature DB >> 33330989 |
Nina Pennetzdorfer1, Thomas Höfler1, Martina Wölflingseder1, Sarah Tutz1, Stefan Schild1,2,3, Joachim Reidl1,2,3.
Abstract
Bile resistance is essential for enteric pathogens, as exemplified by Vibrio cholerae, the causative agent of cholera. The outer membrane porin OmpU confers bacterial survival and colonization advantages in the presence of host-derived antimicrobial peptides as well as bile. Expression of ompU is controlled by the virulence regulator ToxR. rpoE knockouts are accompanied by suppressor mutations causing ompU downregulation. Therefore, OmpU constitutes an intersection of the ToxR regulon and the σE -pathway in V. cholerae. To understand the mechanism by which the sigma factor σE regulates OmpU synthesis, we performed transcription studies using ompU reporter fusions and immunoblot analysis. Our data revealed an increase in ompU promoter activity in ΔrpoE strains, as well as in a ΔompU background, indicating a negative feedback regulation circuit of ompU expression. This regulation seems necessary, since elevated lethality rates of ΔrpoE strains occur upon ompU overexpression. Manipulation of OmpU's C-terminal portion revealed its relevance for protein stability and potency of σE release. Furthermore, ΔrpoE strains are still capable of elevating OmpU levels under membrane stress conditions triggered by the bile salt sodium deoxycholate. This study provides new details about the impact of σE on ompU regulation, which is critical to the pathogen's intestinal survival.Entities:
Keywords: OmpU; RpoE; ToxR; stress response; transcriptional regulation and Vibrio cholerae
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33330989 PMCID: PMC8359247 DOI: 10.1111/mmi.14669
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Microbiol ISSN: 0950-382X Impact factor: 3.501
FIGURE 1Position of suppressor mutations within the ToxR binding box. Multiple DNA‐sequence alignment in ClustalW format (5′–3′) of ToxR binding box (O1) −184 to −150 bp upstream to the transcription start site +1 of ompU in WT, ΔompUΔrpoE, ΔdegS and ΔrpoE. Single nucleotide deletions in ΔdegS and ΔrpoE strains are marked by a hyphen; identical nucleotides are highlighted by asterisks. ToxR binding boxes are displayed in bold and underlined as described in Crawford et al. (1998)
FIGURE 2Analysis of bile salt‐dependent changes in OmpU‐ and ToxR levels in ompU operator mutants. (a) Immunoblot analysis of WCLs obtained from WT, ΔrpoE, ompUO1*, ompUΔO1, ompUO2*, ompUΔO2, ompUO3*, ompUΔO3 and ΔompU utilizing α‐OmpU antibodies grown in LB supplemented without or with 0.1% Na‐DC ON. (b). Operator regions with respective ToxR binding boxes are displayed in bold each with the respective spacing sequences of 5 bp. Promoter elements are drawn to scale to the transcription start site (+1) and are highlighted in dark grey. The 5′UTR is shown as an elliptical black shape, followed by the ompU CDS displayed as a light grey arrow, corresponding to the sequence published in (Sperandio et al., 1996). Light grey boxed sequences represent the loci of suppressor mutations: operator O1 was affected either by an insertion or a deletion of a single adenine within its spacing region found in four independently generated ΔrpoE strains. Furthermore, we characterized an insertion of 5′CAC AAC AA3′ at position +46 of ompU 5′UTR that corresponds to a duplication. To understand the relevance of each single operator, artificial point mutations and deletions of respective operator regions were inserted into the chromosome which were marked by an asterisk or by curved parenthesis, respectively
FIGURE 3OmpU dependency of degP expression. (a) Alkaline phosphatase activities (Miller units) were quantified in WT, ΔompU, ΔompUΔrpoE and ΔrpoE harboring a degP‐phoA transcriptional fusion grown in LB ON. Data represent mean values ± standard deviation of six biological replicates and a total sample size of 24. Significant differences between the WT and respective deletion strains are indicated by an asterisk (one‐way ANOVA followed by a Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test, *p < .05). (b) Alkaline phosphatase activities (Miller units) of degP‐phoA transcriptional fusion were measured in strain backgrounds of WT pBAD, ΔompU pBAD, ΔompU pBADompU, ΔompUΔrpoE pBAD, ΔompUΔrpoEpBADompU, ΔrpoE pBAD and ΔrpoE pBADrpoE (synonym for pBAD18‐Kanbla‐rpoE‐FLAGrseABC), see Table 1. After 2 h of induction with 0.05% arabinose in LB in mid‐log phase, cell samples were harvested and measured. Data represent mean values ± standard deviation of six biological replicates and a total sample size of 12. Significant differences are indicated by an asterisk (one‐way ANOVA followed by a Sidak’s multiple comparisons test, *p < .05)
Strains and plasmids used in this study
| Strain or plasmid | Genotype, description, resistance | References |
|---|---|---|
| DH5αλ | F‐Φ80Δ | Hanahan ( |
| SM10λ | Miller and Mekalanos ( | |
| WT | P27459‐S, O1 Inaba, El Tor, clinical isolate, Bangladesh 1976, spontaneously Smr | Pearson et al. ( |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | Fengler et al. ( |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | Provenzano and Klose ( |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | Lembke et al. ( |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | Lembke et al. ( |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | This study |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | This study |
|
| P27459‐S | This study |
| P27459‐S | This study | |
| P27459‐S | This study | |
| P27459‐S | This study | |
| P27459‐S | This study | |
| P27459‐S | This study | |
| P27459‐S | This study | |
| P27459‐S | This study | |
| P27459‐S | This study | |
| WT | P27459‐S with insertion of pGP704phoA downstream of | Lembke et al. ( |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | This study |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | This study |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | This study |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | This study |
| Δ | P27459‐S Δ | This study |
| Plasmids | ||
| pCVD442 | Suicide vector, | Donnenberg and Kaper ( |
| pBAD18‐Kanbla‐ | Expression vector, | Guzman et al. ( |
| pMMB67EH | Expression vector, RSF1010 | Morales et al. ( |
| pACYC184 | Cloning vector, | Rose ( |
| pGP704phoA | Cloning vector, | Berg et al. ( |
| pTAC3575 | pBR322 ori, promoterless | Atlung et al. ( |
| pCVD442rpoE::cat | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pCVD442ompUΔO1 | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pCVD442ompUO1* | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pCVD442ompUΔO2 | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pCVD442ompUO2* | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pCVD442ompUΔO3 | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pCVD442ompUO3* | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pCVD442ompUΔYDF | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pCVD442ompU‐gfp | pCVD442 encoding for up and down fragments of | This study |
| pBAD18‐Kanbla‐ rpoE‐FLAGrseABC | This study | |
| pBAD18‐Kanbla‐ompU | This study | |
| pMMB67EHdegP | Lembke et al. ( | |
| pGPdegPphoA | pGP704phoA with | Lembke et al. ( |
| pGPompUphoA | pGP704phoA with | Lembke et al. ( |
| pTAC3575ompU | Operator and promoter region of | This study |
| pTAC3575ompUO1* | Operator and promoter region of | This study |
FIGURE 4OmpU toxicity in ΔrpoE and rescue by DegP. (a). Survival plating of ΔompU and ΔompUΔrpoE carrying pBAD or pBADompU, respectively, was performed after induction of plasmid‐derived expression with 0.05% arabinose in mid‐log phase at time points 0, 2, and 24 h. (B). Shown are survival plating of strains ΔompUΔrpoE carrying pBAD or pBADompU under similar conditions as used in A) except that Na‐DC (0.1%) was added. Data in Figure A and B represent median values ± interquartile range of four biological replicates and a total sample size of at least 10. Significant differences (p < .05) between data sets at a given time point are marked by a symbol for the following comparisons: in panel A * ΔompUΔrpoE pBAD w/o pBAD versus ΔompUΔrpoE pBADompU; in panel B * ΔompUΔrpoE pBAD w/o versus ΔompUΔrpoE pBADompU w/o, + ΔompUΔrpoE pBAD w/o versus ΔompUΔrpoE pBAD Na‐DC, # ΔompUΔrpoE pBADompU w/o versus ΔompUΔrpoE pBADompU Na‐DC (Kruskal–Wallis test followed by Dunn’s multiple comparisons test; for a representative loading and quality control, see Kang‐stained gel in Figures S3A). C. log10 fold change presentation of survival plating of time point 2 h compared to time point 0 h obtained from ΔompUΔrpoE harboring pBAD and pMMB, pBADompU and pMMB, or pBADompU and pMMBdegP, respectively, was conducted after induction of plasmid‐derived expression with 0.05% arabinose and 1 mM IPTG in mid‐log phase. Data represent median with interquartile range of four biological replicates and a total sample size of 4. Significant differences are indicated by an asterisk (Kurskal–Wallis multiple comparison, *p < .05; for a representative loading and quality control, see Kang‐stained polyacrylamide gel in Figures S4A)
FIGURE 5σE‐dependency of ompU expression at consistent ToxR levels. (A). β‐galactosidase activities (Miller units) were quantified in WT and ΔrpoE harboring pTACompU and pTACompUO1*, respectively, obtained from cultures grown in LB ON. Data were normalized to pTAC, respectively, represent mean values ± standard deviation of six biological replicates and a total sample size of 24. Significant differences between the WT and respective deletion strains are indicated by an asterisk (Student’s t test, *p < .05). (b) Immunoblot analysis of WCLs derived from WT, ompUO1*, ΔrpoE, ΔompU and ΔtoxR utilizing α‐OmpU antibodies grown in LB ON. (●) represents a nonspecific cross‐reacting background band. (c). Immunoblot analysis of WCLs obtained from WT, ompUO1*, ΔrpoE, ΔompU, and ΔtoxR utilizing α‐ToxR antibodies grown in LB ON (For a representative loading and quality control, see Kang‐stained polyacrylamide gel in Figures S4A)
FIGURE 6OmpU feedback response on ompU expression. (a). β‐galactosidase activities (Miller units) were measured in WT and ΔompU harboring pTACompU grown in LB to mid‐log phase and ON. Data were normalized to pTAC, respectively, represent mean values ± standard deviation of four biological replicates and a total sample size of 8. Significant differences between the WT and respective deletion strains are indicated by an asterisk (one‐way ANOVA followed by a Sidak’s multiple comparisons test, *p < .05). (b). GFP fluorescence quantifications (RFU/OD600) were performed in ompU‐gfp carrying pBAD or pBADompU after 2 h of induction of plasmid‐derived expression with 0.03% arabinose in mid‐log phase in LB. Data represent mean values ± standard deviation of eight biological replicates. Significant differences are indicated by an asterisk (Student’s t test, *p < .05). (c). Alkaline phosphatase activities (Miller units) were quantified in WT, ΔompU and ΔompUΔrpoE harboring an ompU‐phoA transcriptional fusion grown in LB ON. Data represent mean values ± standard deviation of six biological replicates and a total sample size of 12. Significant differences are indicated by an asterisk (one‐way ANOVA followed by a Sidak’s multiple comparisons test, *p < .05). (d) GFP fluorescence quantifications (RFU/OD600) were conducted in ompU‐gfp and ompU‐gfp ΔrpoE incubated overnight in LB. Data represent mean values ± standard deviation of three biological replicates and a total sample size of 9. In the case of ompU‐gfp ΔrpoE, eight different clones were tested for each three biological and technical replicates were performed, resulting in a total sample size of 72. Significant differences are indicated by an asterisk (Student’s t test, *p < .05)
FIGURE 7Molecular characterization of OmpU terminal YDF motif. (a) Relative expression levels of degP in WT, ΔrpoE and ompU ΔYDF were determined by quantitative real time PCR during growth in LB normalized to rpoB levels. Data represent mean values ± standard deviation of a minimum of three to nine biological replicates and a total sample size of 9 to 27. Significant differences are indicated by an asterisk (one‐way ANOVA followed by a Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test, *p < .05). (b) Immunoblot analysis of WCLs derived from ΔompU, ΔompUΔdegP and ΔompUΔrpoE carrying pBAD, pBADompU or pBADompUΔYDF, respectively, utilizing α‐OmpU antibodies. WCLs were prepared after 2 h of plasmid‐derived expression induction with 0.05% arabinose in LB in mid‐log phase (For a representative loading and quality control, see Kang‐stained polyacrylamide gel in Figures S5)
FIGURE 8A regulatory circuit indicates the interplay between the major outer membrane porin OmpU, the σE response pathway and periplasmic stress stimuli in V.cholerae. This study reveals a negative feedback regulation resulting in fine‐tuning of the ompU expression level, balancing stress response and survival. In (a), OmpU serves to trigger DegS proteolytic attack (first scissor in the periplasm scheme) at the anti‐sigma factor RseA followed by attack through RseP (second scissor intra membrane scheme), which in consequence lead to a release of RpoE/ σE to act on gene regulation, for example, degP and others not shown. Also shown as dark gray arrow, a yet unknown regulatory factor mediate negative regulation on ompU expression. (b) in case of rpoE knockout mutation no negative regulation takes place, subsequently ompU promoter activity increases, as shown herein. As a consequence, rpoE deletion mutants can only be obtained if point mutations arise which decrease ompU expression. (c) for WT the presence of bile leads to increased ompU expression, either indicating bona fide ToxRS activation, or through inhibition of RpoE negative feedback regulation. Whether bile activation mechanism is separated from RpoE pathway or acts in concert with ToxRS must be further characterized
Oligonucleotides used in this study
| Primer name | Sequence (5′ to 3′) |
|---|---|
| F1_rpoE‐KO_ | ATA |
| F1_rpoE‐KO_ | ATA |
| cat‐pACYC184_ | ATA |
| cat‐pACYC184_ | TTA |
| F2_rpoE‐KO_ | ATA |
| F2_rpoE‐KO_ | ATA |
| F1_ompU‐KO_ | ATA |
| F1_ompU‐KO_ | AAT |
| F2_ompU‐KO_ | AAT |
| F2_ompU‐KO_ | ATA |
| F1_ompU_ | AA |
| F2_ompU_ | ATT |
| F1_ompUΔYDF_SOE_rv | |
| F2_ompUΔYDF_SOE_fw | |
| F1_ompU‐op_ | AAT |
| F2_ompU‐op_ | AAT |
| F1_ompU‐ΔO1_SOE_rv | TGTTGTATTTCGAGATTGAGCAAAATGCACGCAATC |
| F2_ompU‐ΔO1_SOE_fw | CAATCTCGAAATACAACAAATTAAATTAAAAAAAACACTTAC |
| F1_ompU‐ΔO2_SOE_rv | AGTTATTGTATGTTTGTTGGTAAGTGTTTTTTTTAA |
| F2_ompU‐ΔO2_SOE_fw | AACAAACATACAATAACTTGATAAATTTTTACCAAC |
| F1_ompU‐O2*_SOE_rv | GTTTTTAAAGATTTTAATGTTTGTTGGTAAGTGTTT |
| F2_ompU‐O2*_SOE_fw | ATTAAAATCTTTAAAAACAATAACTTGATAAATTTT |
| F1_ompU‐op_ | AAT |
| F2_ompU‐op_ | AAT |
| F1_ompU‐ΔO3_SOE_rv | ATCAGTTAGTCCAACTTATGAACACTGTTTTATTGT |
| F2_ompU‐ΔO3_SOE_fw | TAAGTTGGACTAACTGATAGCGGAACTTTGGGAGTA |
| F1_ompU‐O3*_SOE_rv | AGTAAAATGTATAAATCCAACTTATGAACACTGTTT |
| F2_ompU‐O3*_SOE_fw | GGATTTATACATTTTACTAACTGATAGCGGAACTTT |
| F1_ompU‐gfp_ | ATT |
| F1_ompU‐gfp_SOE_rv | CTTTACTCACTGCAGCAGCTGATACAG |
| F2_ompU‐gfp_SOE_fw | GCAGTGAGTAAAGGAGAAGAACTTTTCACTG |
| F2_ompU‐gfp_SOE_rv | TCAACAACTATTTGTATAGTTCATCCATGCC |
| F3_ompU‐gfp_SOE_fw | CAAATAGTTGTTGACTTCAGGTCACACG |
| F3_ompU‐gfp_ | ATT |
| rpoE‐FLAG_ | ATA |
| rpoE‐FLAG_ | ATA |
| ompU_ | AAT |
| ompU_ | AAT |
| ompU‐prom_ | ATT |
| ompU‐prom_ | ATT |
| rpoB_fw | CTG TCT CAA GCC GGT TAC AA |
| rpoB_rv | TTT CTA CCA GTG CAG AGA TGC |
| degP_fw | GCT TCC TCT CTC AGT CAA T |
| degP_rv | CAG ACG CTG TCT TGA AAC T |
Restriction sites are underlined; site directed mutations are in bold.