Literature DB >> 8369283

Selection and characterization of a mutant T7 RNA polymerase that recognizes an expanded range of T7 promoter-like sequences.

R A Ikeda1, L L Chang, G S Warshamana.   

Abstract

The compatible plasmids pKGP1-1 and pCM-X# will confer chloramphenicol resistance to Escherichia coli harboring the two plasmids if the T7 RNA polymerase produced from pKGP1-1 can recognize the T7 promoter carried on pCM-X# and transcribe the CAT gene that is cloned behind the promoter [Ikeda et al. (1992) Biochemistry 31, 9073-9080]. When E. coli harbor pKGP1-1 and a pCM-X# plasmid that carries a point mutation in the T7 promoter that destroys promoter activity (an inactive pCM-X#), the T7 RNA polymerase will not utilize the T7 promoter point mutant, will not produce CAT, and will not induce chloramphenicol resistance. The selection of mutants of T7 RNA polymerase that exhibit altered promoter recognition was pursued by randomly mutagenizing pKGP1-1 with aqueous hydroxylamine, cotransforming E. coli with the mutagenized pKGP1-1 and a mixture of seven different inactive pCM-X# plasmids, and isolating and characterizing the RNA polymerase that was present in those colonies that exhibited chloramphenicol resistance. It was established that E. coli harboring the mutant plasmid pKGP-HA1mut4 and an inactive pCM-X# are chloramphenicol-resistant and that the mutation responsible for the expression of CAT from the inactive pCM-X# plasmid is a G to A transition at nucleotide 664 of T7 gene 1 that converts glutamic acid (222) to lysine. Apparently this mutation expands the range of T7 promoter sequences that can be utilized by the enzyme. The mutant T7 RNA polymerase, GP1(Lys222), utilizes all seven inactive T7 promoter point mutants more efficiently than wild-type T7 RNA polymerase both in vivo and in vitro. Furthermore, the correlation of in vivo and in vitro promoter utilization suggests that the restoration of chloramphenicol resistance in the cotransformed E. coli results from the ability of GP1(Lys222) to initiate transcription from T7 promoter point mutants that are normally inactive.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8369283     DOI: 10.1021/bi00086a016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochemistry        ISSN: 0006-2960            Impact factor:   3.162


  6 in total

1.  Switching promotor recognition of phage RNA polymerase in silico along lab-directed evolution path.

Authors:  Chao E; Liqiang Dai; Jin Yu
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Spatial perturbations within an RNA promoter specifically recognized by a viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) reveal that RdRp can adjust its promoter binding sites.

Authors:  S S Stawicki; C C Kao
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 5.103

3.  A system for the continuous directed evolution of biomolecules.

Authors:  Kevin M Esvelt; Jacob C Carlson; David R Liu
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-04-10       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  A combined in vitro/in vivo selection for polymerases with novel promoter specificities.

Authors:  J Chelliserrykattil; G Cai; A D Ellington
Journal:  BMC Biotechnol       Date:  2001-12-28       Impact factor: 2.563

5.  Exploiting spatial dimensions to enable parallelized continuous directed evolution.

Authors:  Ting Wei; Wangsheng Lai; Qian Chen; Yi Zhang; Chenjian Sun; Xionglei He; Guoping Zhao; Xiongfei Fu; Chenli Liu
Journal:  Mol Syst Biol       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 13.068

6.  A population-based experimental model for protein evolution: effects of mutation rate and selection stringency on evolutionary outcomes.

Authors:  Aaron M Leconte; Bryan C Dickinson; David D Yang; Irene A Chen; Benjamin Allen; David R Liu
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2013-02-14       Impact factor: 3.162

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.