Structure and Function of the Bacterial Genome. Charles J. Dorman. Читать онлайн. Newlib. NEWLIB.NET

Автор: Charles J. Dorman
Издательство: John Wiley & Sons Limited
Серия:
Жанр произведения: Биология
Год издания: 0
isbn: 9781119309680
Скачать книгу
of C. crescentus using ‘carbon copy chromosome conformation capture’ (5C) has shown that the replichores lying in between the cell‐pole‐located Ori and Ter regions are intertwined (Umbarger et al. 2011).

      The movement of the Ori and Ter domains within the E. coli cytosol is thought to reflect the separation of sister chromosomes that are connected along their length (Bates and Kleckner 2005). The molecular nature of the inter‐sister connections is unknown (Kleckner et al. 2014). The final phase of the replication process copies the Ter region, setting the stage for chromosome segregation (Figure 1.9). In fast‐growing bacteria, another round of chromosome replication will have started by the time this stage is reached (Youngren et al. 2014). The E. coli pattern of chromosome domain positioning with Ori and Ter at mid‐cell is not universal: C. crescentus has its Ori and Ter regions in opposite poles of the cell while B. subtilis oscillates between the two modes (Figure 1.11). The differences are thought to reflect different chromosome segregation mechanisms (Wang et al. 2014).

      Decatenation of the interlinked chromosome copies by topoisomerase IV and the resolution of any chromosome multimers by XerCD are needed prior to sister chromosome segregation (Hiraga 1993). In the absence of Topo IV, XerCD‐dif‐FtsK can achieve the same outcome by a process of local reconnection involving multiple rounds of site‐specific recombination (Grainge et al. 2007). Finally, the segregation process will move one chromosome, together with any associated live replication forks, into one of the daughter cells. In E. coli and its close relatives, this occurs without the aid of a dedicated protein‐based active partitioning system equivalent to the ParAB proteins and the parS cis‐acting partitioning DNA sequence that are found in most other bacteria (Badrinarayanan et al. 2015; Bignell and Thomas 2001). Radial confinement of the two sister chromosomes has been proposed as playing a role in segregation in the case of E. coli. Here the two chromosome polymers repel one another through an entropic exclusion mechanism that drives the copies into separate compartments before the closure of the cell division septum (Jun and Wright 2010; Junier et al. 2014).

      The specificity of chromosome orientation within the cytoplasm has led to the interesting proposal that the chromosome provides the prokaryotic cell with an internal frame of reference, something that has been lost in eukaryotes because the genetic material there is in a membrane‐enclosed nucleus (Theriot 2013). This reference frame is useful in providing each molecule in the cell with a set of spatial coordinates. Developing the point further, Theriot has proposed that eukaryotes rely on their cytoskeleton to provide a reference frame (Theriot 2013). We will return to the issue of spatial and temporal positioning of molecules (Chapter 8).

      The bacterial chromosome is maintained in an orderly superstructure to facilitate replication, transcription, and other DNA‐based transactions. The family of SMC proteins play an important role in achieving this organisation (Uhlmann 2016). These large polypeptides have a DNA‐binding head domain and long coiled‐coil domains that bring the head‐domain‐DNA complexes together in a condensed nucleoprotein complex (Figure 1.10). The head domains have ATPase activity and a DNA‐binding hinge region in the coiled‐coil domain promotes dimer formation (Chen, N., et al. 2008; Kumar et al. 2017a). SMC activity is found in eukaryotes and in prokaryotes, with one of the best‐studied examples of an SMC‐like protein in bacteria being the MukB protein from E. coli (Niki et al. 1991; Rybenkov et al. 2014).

      MukB forms topologically stable loops in the chromosomal DNA and protects the supercoils in these protected loops (Kumar et al. 2017a). It forms a complex with the MukE and MukF proteins, with these seeming to play a role in the turnover of the MukB complex on DNA in combination with the ATPase activity of MukB itself (Kumar et al. 2017a). MukF performs a bridging role between the ATPase heads of the two MukB in the complex (Figure 1.10). Proteins performing this task in SMC complexes are called kleisins. The equivalent system in B. subtilis and C. crescentus consists of the proteins Smc (MukB), ScpA (MukF, kleisin), and ScpB (MukE): the ‘Scp’ designation indicates that the protein is a ‘segregation and condensation protein’ (Britton et al. 1998; Burmann et al. 2013; Jensen and Shapiro 1999, 2003; Mascarenhas et al. 2005).

      The MukBEF complex has important architectural and segregational roles in the nucleoid, operating mainly outside the Ter macrodomain of the chromosome. Its principal site of action seems to be at ori and MukB requires MukE, MukF, and ATP hydrolysis to gain and maintain this association; MukBEF/SMC complexes do not seem to track moving replisomes (Badrinarayanan et al. 2012a,b; Danilova et al. 2007; Gruber and Errington 2009; Sullivan et al. 2009). MukBEF is responsible for guiding the newly replicated ori regions into the two halves of the cell, driving bipolar segregation; if MukBEF is removed, the ori shifts from mid‐cell to the pole, disturbing normal chromosome orientation and segregation patterns (Danilova et al. 2007). Inside the Ter macrodomain, the MatP protein prevents MukBEF from playing a structural role by displacing it and so making it available for ori binding (Lioy et al. 2018; Nolivos and Sherratt 2014; Nolivos et al. 2016). The MukBEF complex is not required for sister chromosome cohesion because muk mutants have a higher degree of cohesion of sister chromosomes than wild‐type cells (Danilova et al. 2007).