25 research outputs found

    RNA Methylation by the MIS Complex Regulates a Cell Fate Decision in Yeast

    Get PDF
    For the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, nutrient limitation is a key developmental signal causing diploid cells to switch from yeast-form budding to either foraging pseudohyphal (PH) growth or meiosis and sporulation. Prolonged starvation leads to lineage restriction, such that cells exiting meiotic prophase are committed to complete sporulation even if nutrients are restored. Here, we have identified an earlier commitment point in the starvation program. After this point, cells, returned to nutrient-rich medium, entered a form of synchronous PH development that was morphologically and genetically indistinguishable from starvation-induced PH growth. We show that lineage restriction during this time was, in part, dependent on the mRNA methyltransferase activity of Ime4, which played separable roles in meiotic induction and suppression of the PH program. Normal levels of meiotic mRNA methylation required the catalytic domain of Ime4, as well as two meiotic proteins, Mum2 and Slz1, which interacted and co-immunoprecipitated with Ime4. This MIS complex (Mum2, Ime4, and Slz1) functioned in both starvation pathways. Together, our results support the notion that the yeast starvation response is an extended process that progressively restricts cell fate and reveal a broad role of post-transcriptional RNA methylation in these decisions

    Interactions between Mei4, Rec114, and other proteins required for meiotic DNA double-strand break formation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

    No full text
    In most sexually reproducing organisms, meiotic recombination is initiated by DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) formed by the Spo11 protein. In budding yeast, nine other proteins are also required for DSB formation, but roles of these proteins and interactions among them are poorly understood. We report here further studies of the behaviors of these proteins. Consistent with other studies, we find that Mei4 and Rec114 bind to chromosomes from leptonema through early pachynema. Both proteins showed only limited colocalization with the meiotic cohesin subunit Rec8, suggesting that Mei4 and Rec114 associated preferentially with chromatin loops. Rec114 localization was independent of other DSB factors, but Mei4 localization was strongly dependent on Rec114 and Mer2. Systematic deletion analysis identified protein regions important for a previously described two-hybrid interaction between Mei4 and Rec114. We also report functional characterization of a previously misannotated 5′ coding exon of REC102. Sequences encoded in this exon are essential for DSB formation and for Rec102 interaction with Rec104, Spo11, Rec114, and Mei4. Finally, we also examined genetic requirements for a set of previously described two-hybrid interactions that can be detected only when the reporter strain is induced to enter meiosis. This analysis reveals new functional dependencies for interactions among the DSB proteins. Taken together, these studies support the view that Mei4, Rec114, and Mer2 make up a functional subgroup that is distinct from other subgroups of the DSB proteins: Spo11-Ski8, Rec102-Rec104, and Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2. These studies also suggest that an essential function of Rec102 and Rec104 is to connect Mei4 and Rec114 to Spo11

    Functional consequences of developmentally regulated alternative splicing

    No full text

    XerR, a negative regulator of XccR in Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris, relieves its repressor function in planta

    No full text
    We previously reported that XccR, a LuxR-type regulator of Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris (Xcc), activates the downstream proline iminopeptidase virulence gene (pip) in response to certain host plant factor(s). In this report, we further show that the expression of the xccR gene was repressed in the culture medium by an NtrC-type response regulator, which we named XerR (XccR expression-related, repressor), and that this repression was relieved when the bacteria were grown in planta. Such a regulatory mechanism is reinforced by the observations that XerR directly bound to the xccR promoter in vitro, and that mutations at the phosphorylation-related residues of XerR resulted in the loss of its repressor function. Furthermore, the expression level of xccR increased even in XerR-overexpressing Xcc cells when they were vacuum infiltrated into cabbage plants. We also preliminarily characterized the host factor(s) involved in the above mentioned interactions between Xcc and the host plant, showing that a plant material(s) with molecular weight(s) less than 1 kDa abolished the binding of XerR to the xccR promoter, while the same material enhanced the binding of XccR to the luxXc box in the pip promoter. Taken together, our results implicate XerR in a new layer of the regulatory mechanism controlling the expression of the virulence-related xccR/pip locus and provide clues to the identification of plant signal molecules that interact with XerR and XccR to enhance the virulence of Xcc

    Quorum sensing signal–response systems in Gram-negative bacteria

    No full text
    Bacteria use quorum sensing to orchestrate gene expression programmes that underlie collective behaviours. Quorum sensing relies on the production, release, detection and group-level response to extracellular signalling molecules, which are called autoinducers. Recent work has discovered new autoinducers in Gram-negative bacteria, shown how these molecules are recognized by cognate receptors, revealed new regulatory components that are embedded in canonical signalling circuits and identified novel regulatory network designs. In this Review we examine how, together, these features of quorum sensing signal–response systems combine to control collective behaviours in Gram-negative bacteria and we discuss the implications for host–microbial associations and antibacterial therapy
    corecore