Literature DB >> 8289243

Explanation for different types of regulation of arginine biosynthesis in Escherichia coli B and Escherichia coli K12 caused by a difference between their arginine repressors.

G Tian1, D Lim, J D Oppenheim, W K Maas.   

Abstract

In Escherichia coli K12, formation of the enzymes of arginine biosynthesis are controlled by arginine, with complete repression during growth with added arginine, severe repression (about 95%) during growth without added arginine and complete derepression during arginine-limited growth. In E. coli B, the degree of repression is not correlated with arginine concentrations. Under all conditions of growth enzyme formation is repressed, with repression being somewhat less in a medium with arginine than in a medium without arginine. These differences in repressibility between the two strains have been shown previously to be due to the presence of different alleles of argR, the gene for the arginine repressor. Here we have compared the binding of the two repressors to the operator sites of argF (ARG boxes). In DNase I footprinting and gel retardation experiments with argF ARG boxes we have shown that the arginine repressor of E. coli K12 bound to arginine (ArgRK-arg) has a greater affinity than the arginine repressor of E. coli B bound to arginine (ArgRB-arg), whereas free ArgRB (ArgRBf) has a much stronger affinity than free ArgRK (ArgRKf). The stronger binding of ArgRBf can explain the repression seen in E. coli B during arginine-limited growth and indicates that ArgRBf, but not ArgRKf, is able to repress enzyme synthesis under physiological conditions. The weaker repression of E. coli B than of E. coli K12 seen in the presence of arginine can be explained by the lower affinity of ArgRB-arg for operator sites as compared to ArgRK-arg. Another contributing cause for the weaker repression is the reduction of ArgRBf concentration due to autoregulation of the gene for the repressor. Thus the combined effects of repression by ArgRBf, but not ArgRKf, with the weaker repression by ArgRB-arg as compared to ArgRK-arg, convert the arginine dependent regulation in E. coli K12 to arginine independent regulation in E. coli B.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8289243     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-2836(05)80028-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Biol        ISSN: 0022-2836            Impact factor:   5.469


  7 in total

1.  A motif co-occurrence approach for genome-wide prediction of transcription-factor-binding sites in Escherichia coli.

Authors:  Martha L Bulyk; Abigail M McGuire; Nobuhisa Masuda; George M Church
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 9.043

2.  Fitness consequences of a regulatory polymorphism in a seasonal environment.

Authors:  Amy M Suiter; Otmar Bänziger; Antony M Dean
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-10-10       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Selection in a cyclical environment: possible impact of phenotypic lag on Darwinian fitness.

Authors:  Amy M Suiter; Antony M Dean
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2005-08-02       Impact factor: 2.395

4.  Dynamical behaviour of biological regulatory networks--I. Biological role of feedback loops and practical use of the concept of the loop-characteristic state.

Authors:  R Thomas; D Thieffry; M Kaufman
Journal:  Bull Math Biol       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 1.758

5.  ArgR and AhrC are both required for regulation of arginine metabolism in Lactococcus lactis.

Authors:  Rasmus Larsen; Girbe Buist; Oscar P Kuipers; Jan Kok
Journal:  J Bacteriol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.490

Review 6.  The arginine repressor of Escherichia coli.

Authors:  W K Maas
Journal:  Microbiol Rev       Date:  1994-12

7.  Catabolic Ornithine Carbamoyltransferase Activity Facilitates Growth of Staphylococcus aureus in Defined Medium Lacking Glucose and Arginine.

Authors:  Itidal Reslane; Cortney R Halsey; Amanda Stastny; Barbara J Cabrera; Jongsam Ahn; Dhananjay Shinde; Madeline R Galac; Margaret F Sladek; Fareha Razvi; McKenzie K Lehman; Kenneth W Bayles; Vinai C Thomas; Luke D Handke; Paul D Fey
Journal:  mBio       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 7.786

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.