Collective Motion of Surfactant-Producing Bacteria Imparts Superdiffusivity to Their Upper Surface

AbstractSwarming bacteria move on agar surfaces in groups, using flagella as motive organelles. Motility depends critically on surface wetness, which is enabled by osmotic agents and surfactants secreted by the bacteria. In a recent study, the upper surface of an Escherichia coli swarm was found to be stationary, as determined from the motion of MgO particles deposited on the swarm. This led to the remarkable conclusion that the bacteria move between two stationary surfaces—the agar gel below and the liquid/air interface above. That study suggested that secreted surfactants may contribute to immobilizing the upper surface of a swarm. Here, we test this proposition using two robust surfactant-producing bacteria. We find antithetically that the upper surfaces of both these swarms are mobile, showing a superdiffusive behavior in swarms with stronger surfactant activity. Superdiffusive behavior was not observed on the surface of a drop of bacterial culture, on bacteria-free culture supernatant, or on nonswarming surfactant-producer colonies, which suggests that superdiffusion is an emergent property resulting from the interaction of the collective motion of the bacteria within the swarm with the surfactant layer above. Swarming not only allows bacteria to forage for food, but also confers protective advantages against antimicrobial agents. Our results are therefore relevant to superdiffusive strategies in biological foraging and survival

The Mu story: how a maverick phage moved the field forward

Rasika M Harshey is with the Section of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology and Institute of Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USAThis article traces the pioneering contributions of phage Mu to our current knowledge of how movable elements move/transpose. Mu provided the first molecular evidence of insertion elements in E. coli, postulated by McClintock to control gene activity in maize in the pre-DNA era. An early Mu-based model successfully explained all the DNA rearrangements associated with transposition, providing a blueprint for navigating the deluge of accumulating reports on transposable element activity. Amplification of the Mu genome via transposition meant that its transposition frequencies were orders of magnitude greater than any rival, so it was only natural that the first in vitro system for transposition was established for Mu. These experiments unraveled the chemistry of the phosphoryl transfer reaction of transposition, and shed light on the nucleoprotein complexes within which they occur. They hastened a similar analysis of other transposons and ushered in the structural era where many transpososomes were crystallized. While it was a lucky break that the mechanism of HIV DNA integration turned out to be similar to that of Mu, it is no accident that current drugs for HIV integrase inhibitors owe their discovery to trailblazing experiments done with Mu. Shining the light on how movable elements restructure genomes, Mu has also given of itself generously to understanding the genome.Molecular BiosciencesInstitute for Cellular and Molecular [email protected]

Immunity of replicating Mu to self-integration: a novel mechanism employing MuB protein

We describe a new immunity mechanism that protects actively replicating/transposing Mu from self-integration. We show that this mechanism is distinct from the established cis-immunity mechanism, which operates by removal of MuB protein from DNA adjacent to Mu ends. MuB normally promotes integration into DNA to which it is bound, hence its removal prevents use of this DNA as target. Contrary to what might be expected from a cis-immunity mechanism, strong binding of MuB was observed throughout the Mu genome. We also show that the cis-immunity mechanism is apparently functional outside Mu ends, but that the level of protection offered by this mechanism is insufficient to explain the protection seen inside Mu. Thus, both strong binding of MuB inside and poor immunity outside Mu testify to a mechanism of immunity distinct from cis-immunity, which we call 'Mu genome immunity'. MuB has the potential to coat the Mu genome and prevent auto-integration as previously observed in vitro on synthetic A/T-only DNA, where strong MuB binding occluded the entire bound region from Mu insertions. The existence of two rival immunity mechanisms within and outside the Mu genome, both employing MuB, suggests that the replicating Mu genome must be segregated into an independent chromosomal domain. We propose a model for how formation of a 'Mu domain' may be aided by specific Mu sequences and nucleoid-associated proteins, promoting polymerization of MuB on the genome to form a barrier against self-integration

Transposable Prophage Mu Is Organized as a Stable Chromosomal Domain of E. coli

Rudra P. Saha, Zheng Lou, Luke Meng, Rasika M. Harshey, Department of Molecular Biosciences and Institute of Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of AmericaThe E. coli chromosome is compacted by segregation into 400–500 supercoiled domains by both active and passive mechanisms, for example, transcription and DNA-protein association. We find that prophage Mu is organized as a stable domain bounded by the proximal location of Mu termini L and R, which are 37 kbp apart on the Mu genome. Formation/maintenance of the Mu ‘domain’ configuration, reported by Cre-loxP recombination and 3C (chromosome conformation capture), is dependent on a strong gyrase site (SGS) at the center of Mu, the Mu L end and MuB protein, and the E. coli nucleoid proteins IHF, Fis and HU. The Mu domain was observed at two different chromosomal locations tested. By contrast, prophage λ does not form an independent domain. The establishment/maintenance of the Mu domain was promoted by low-level transcription from two phage promoters, one of which was domain dependent. We propose that the domain confers transposition readiness to Mu by fostering topological requirements of the reaction and the proximity of Mu ends. The potential benefits to the host cell from a subset of proteins expressed by the prophage may in turn help its long-term stability.This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grant GM 33247 and in part by the Robert Welch Foundation grant F-1351. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Molecular BiosciencesInstitute for Cellular and Molecular BiologyEmail: [email protected]

Domain III function of Mu transposase analysed by directed placement of subunits within the transpososome

Assembly of the functional tetrameric form of Mu transposase (MuA protein) at the two att ends of Mu depends on interaction of MuA with multiple att and enhancer sites on supercoiled DNA, and is stimulated by MuB protein. The N-terminal domain I of MuA harbours distinct regions for interaction with the att ends and enhancer; the C-terminal domain III contains separate regions essential for tetramer assembly and interaction with MuB protein (IIIα and IIIβ, respectively). Although the central domain II (the 'DDE' domain) of MuA harbours the known catalytic DDE residues, a 26 amino acid peptide within IIIα also has a non-specific DNA binding and nuclease activity which has been implicated in catalysis. One model proposes that active sites for Mu transposition are assembled by sharing structural/catalytic residues between domains II and III present on separate MuA monomers within the MuA tetramer. We have used substrates with altered att sites and mixtures of MuA proteins with either wild-type or altered att DNA binding specificities, to create tetrameric arrangements wherein specific MuA subunits are nonfunctional in II, IIIα or IIIβ domains. From the ability of these oriented tetramers to carry out DNA cleavage and strand transfer we conclude that domain IIIα or IIIβ function is not unique to a specific subunit within the tetramer, indicative of a structural rather than a catalytic function for domain III in Mu transposition

Mu Insertions Are Repaired by the Double-Strand Break Repair Pathway of Escherichia coli

Mu is both a transposable element and a temperate bacteriophage. During lytic growth, it amplifies its genome by replicative transposition. During infection, it integrates into the Escherichia coli chromosome through a mechanism not requiring extensive DNA replication. In the latter pathway, the transposition intermediate is repaired by transposase-mediated resecting of the 5′ flaps attached to the ends of the incoming Mu genome, followed by filling the remaining 5 bp gaps at each end of the Mu insertion. It is widely assumed that the gaps are repaired by a gap-filling host polymerase. Using the E. coli Keio Collection to screen for mutants defective in recovery of stable Mu insertions, we show in this study that the gaps are repaired by the machinery responsible for the repair of double-strand breaks in E. coli—the replication restart proteins PriA-DnaT and homologous recombination proteins RecABC. We discuss alternate models for recombinational repair of the Mu gaps

Transposable Phage Mu

Transposable phage Mu has played a major role in elucidating the mechanism of movement of mobile DNA elements. The high efficiency of Mu transposition has facilitated a detailed biochemical dissection of the reaction mechanism, as well as of protein and DNA elements that regulate transpososome assembly and function. The deduced phosphotransfer mechanism involves in-line orientation of metal ion-activated hydroxyl groups for nucleophilic attack on reactive diester bonds, a mechanism that appears to be used by all transposable elements examined to date. A crystal structure of the Mu transpososome is available. Mu differs from all other transposable elements in encoding unique adaptations that promote its viral lifestyle. These adaptations include multiple DNA (enhancer, SGS) and protein (MuB, HU, IHF) elements that enable efficient Mu end synapsis, efficient target capture, low target specificity, immunity to transposition near or into itself, and efficient mechanisms for recruiting host repair and replication machineries to resolve transposition intermediates. MuB has multiple functions, including target capture and immunity. The SGS element promotes gyrase-mediated Mu end synapsis, and the enhancer, aided by HU and IHF, participates in directing a unique topological architecture of the Mu synapse. The function of these DNA and protein elements is important during both lysogenic and lytic phases. Enhancer properties have been exploited in the design of mini-Mu vectors for genetic engineering. Mu ends assembled into active transpososomes have been delivered directly into bacterial, yeast, and human genomes, where they integrate efficiently, and may prove useful for gene therapy.Molecular Bioscience