Regulation of ribosomal protein synthesis in mycobacteria: autogenous control of rpsO

ABSTRACTAutogenous regulation of ribosomal protein (r-protein) synthesis plays a key role in maintaining the stoichiometry of ribosomal components in bacteria. Our main goal was to develop techniques for investigating the r-protein synthesis regulation in mycobacteria, Gram-positive organisms with a high GC-content, which has never been addressed. We started with the rpsO gene known to be autoregulated by its product, r-protein S15, in a broad range of bacterial species. To study the in vivo regulation of rpsO from Mycobacterium smegmatis (Msm), we first applied an approach based on chromosomally integrated Msm rpsO’-’lacZ reporters by using E. coli as a surrogate host. The β-galactosidase assay has shown that mycobacterial rpsO expression is feedback regulated at the translation level in the presence of Msm S15 in trans, like in E. coli. Next, to overcome difficulties caused by the inefficiency of mycobacterial gene expression in E. coli, we created a fluorescent reporter system based on M. smegmatis. To this end, the integrative shuttle plasmid pMV306 was modified to provide insertion of the Msm or Mtb (M. tuberculosis) rpsO-egfp reporters into the Msm chromosome, and a novel E. coli-mycobacteria replicative shuttle vector, pAMYC, a derivative of pACYC184, was built. Analysis of the eGFP expression in the presence of the pAMYC derivative expressing Msm rpsO vs an empty vector confirms the autogenous regulation of the rpsO gene in mycobacteria. Additionally, we have revealed that the mycobacterial rpsO core promoters are rather weak and require upstream activating elements to enhance their strength.IMPORTANCEBacterial ribosomes are targets for a majority of as-yet reported antibiotics, hence ribosome biogenesis and its regulation are central for development of new antimicrobials. One of the key mechanisms regulating ribosome biogenesis in bacteria is the autogenous control of r-protein synthesis, which has been so far explored for E. coli and Bacillus spp. but not yet for mycobacteria. Here, we describe experimental approaches for in vivo analysis of mechanisms regulating r-protein synthesis in mycobacteria, including M. tuberculosis, and show, for the first time, that the autogenous control at the translation level is really functioning in these microorganisms. The developed system paves the way for studying various regulatory circuits involving proteins or sRNAs as mRNA- targeting trans-regulators in mycobacteria as well as in other actinobacterial species.

RNase III-Independent Autogenous Regulation of Escherichia coli Polynucleotide Phosphorylase via Translational Repression

ABSTRACTThe complex posttranscriptional regulation mechanism of theEscherichia colipnpgene, which encodes the phosphorolytic exoribonuclease polynucleotide phosphorylase (PNPase), involves two endoribonucleases, namely, RNase III and RNase E, and PNPase itself, which thus autoregulates its own expression. The models proposed forpnpautoregulation posit that the target of PNPase is a maturepnpmRNA previously processed at its 5′ end by RNase III, rather than the primarypnptranscript (RNase III-dependent models), and that PNPase activity eventually leads topnpmRNA degradation by RNase E. However, some published data suggest thatpnpexpression may also be regulated through a PNPase-dependent, RNase III-independent mechanism. To address this issue, we constructed isogenic Δpnp rnc+and ΔpnpΔrncstrains with a chromosomalpnp-lacZtranslational fusion and measured β-galactosidase activity in the absence and presence of PNPase expressed by a plasmid. Our results show that PNPase also regulates its own expression via a reversible RNase III-independent pathway acting upstream from the RNase III-dependent branch. This pathway requires the PNPase RNA binding domains KH and S1 but not its phosphorolytic activity. We suggest that the RNase III-independent autoregulation of PNPase occurs at the level of translational repression, possibly by competition forpnpprimary transcript between PNPase and the ribosomal protein S1.IMPORTANCEInEscherichia coli, polynucleotide phosphorylase (PNPase, encoded bypnp) posttranscriptionally regulates its own expression. The two models proposed so far posit a two-step mechanism in which RNase III, by cutting the leader region of thepnpprimary transcript, creates the substrate for PNPase regulatory activity, eventually leading topnpmRNA degradation by RNase E. In this work, we provide evidence supporting an additional pathway for PNPase autogenous regulation in which PNPase acts as a translational repressor independently of RNase III cleavage. Our data make a new contribution to the understanding of the regulatory mechanism ofpnpmRNA, a process long since considered a paradigmatic example of posttranscriptional regulation at the level of mRNA stability.

Autogenous Regulation of Escherichia coli Polynucleotide Phosphorylase Expression Revisited

ABSTRACT The Escherichia coli polynucleotide phosphorylase (PNPase; encoded by pnp), a phosphorolytic exoribonuclease, posttranscriptionally regulates its own expression at the level of mRNA stability and translation. Its primary transcript is very efficiently processed by RNase III, an endonuclease that makes a staggered double-strand cleavage about in the middle of a long stem-loop in the 5′-untranslated region. The processed pnp mRNA is then rapidly degraded in a PNPase-dependent manner. Two non-mutually exclusive models have been proposed to explain PNPase autogenous regulation. The earlier one suggested that PNPase impedes translation of the RNase III-processed pnp mRNA, thus exposing the transcript to degradative pathways. More recently, this has been replaced by the current model, which maintains that PNPase would simply degrade the promoter proximal small RNA generated by the RNase III endonucleolytic cleavage, thus destroying the double-stranded structure at the 5′ end that otherwise stabilizes the pnp mRNA. In our opinion, however, the first model was not completely ruled out. Moreover, the RNA decay pathway acting upon the pnp mRNA after disruption of the 5′ double-stranded structure remained to be determined. Here we provide additional support to the current model and show that the RNase III-processed pnp mRNA devoid of the double-stranded structure at its 5′ end is not translatable and is degraded by RNase E in a PNPase-independent manner. Thus, the role of PNPase in autoregulation is simply to remove, in concert with RNase III, the 5′ fragment of the cleaved structure that both allows translation and prevents the RNase E-mediated PNPase-independent degradation of the pnp transcript.