Article

The LuxS-dependent autoinducer AI-2 controls the expression of an ABC transporter that functions in AI-2 uptake in Salmonella typhimurium.

Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544-1014, USA.
Molecular Microbiology (Impact Factor: 5.03). 12/2001; 42(3):777-93.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In a process called quorum sensing, bacteria communicate with one another using secreted chemical signalling molecules termed autoinducers. A novel autoinducer called AI-2, originally discovered in the quorum-sensing bacterium Vibrio harveyi, is made by many species of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria. In every case, production of AI-2 is dependent on the LuxS autoinducer synthase. The genes regulated by AI-2 in most of these luxS-containing species of bacteria are not known. Here, we describe the identification and characterization of AI-2-regulated genes in Salmonella typhimurium. We find that LuxS and AI-2 regulate the expression of a previously unidentified operon encoding an ATP binding cassette (ABC)-type transporter. We have named this operon the lsr (luxS regulated) operon. The Lsr transporter has homology to the ribose transporter of Escherichia coli and S. typhimurium. A gene encoding a DNA-binding protein that is located adjacent to the Lsr transporter structural operon is required to link AI-2 detection to operon expression. This gene, which we have named lsrR, encodes a protein that represses lsr operon expression in the absence of AI-2. Mutations in the lsr operon render S. typhimurium unable to eliminate AI-2 from the extracellular environment, suggesting that the role of the Lsr apparatus is to transport AI-2 into the cells. It is intriguing that an operon regulated by AI-2 encodes functions resembling the ribose transporter, given recent findings that AI-2 is derived from the ribosyl moiety of S-ribosylhomocysteine.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
68 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sobrinus are the major causative agents of human dental caries. Therefore, the removal or inhibition of these streptococcal biofilms is essential for dental caries prevention. In the present study, we evaluated the effects of ribose treatment alone or in combination with xylitol on streptococcal biofilm formation for both species. Furthermore, we examined the expression of genes responsible for dextran-dependent aggregation (DDAG). In addition, we investigated whether ribose affects the biofilm formation of xylitol-insensitive streptococci, which results from long-term exposure to xylitol. The viability of streptococci biofilms formed in a 24-well polystyrene plate was quantified by fluorescent staining with the LIVE/DEAD bacterial viability and counting kit, which was followed by fluorescence activated cell sorting analysis. The effects of ribose and/or xylitol on the mRNA expression of DDAG-responsible genes, gbpC and dblB, was evaluated by RT-qPCR. Our data showed that ribose and other pentose molecules significantly inhibited streptococcal biofilm formation and the expression of DDAG-responsible genes. In addition, co-treatment with ribose and xylitol decreased streptococcal biofilm formation to a further extent than ribose or xylitol treatment alone in both streptococcal species. Furthermore, ribose attenuated the increase of xylitol-insensitive streptococcal biofilm, which results in the reduced difference of biofilm formation between S. mutans that are sensitive and insensitive to xylitol. These data suggest that pentose may be used as an additive for teeth-protective materials or in sweets. Furthermore, ribose co-treatment with xylitol might help to increase the anti-cariogenic efficacy of xylitol.
    Archives of Oral Biology 11/2014; 60(2). DOI:10.1016/j.archoralbio.2014.11.004 · 1.88 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cholera, a known diarrheal disease is associated with various risk factors like hypovolemic shock, rice watery stools, and death in developing countries. The overuse of antibiotics to treat cholera imposed a selective pressure for the emergence and spread of multi-drug resistant Vibrio cholerae strains. The failure of conventional antimicrobial therapy urged the researchers to find an alternative therapy that could meddle the cholera murmurs (Quorum Sensing). It seems to effectively overcome the conventional cholera therapies in parallel to decrease the morbidity and mortality rate in the developing countries. The paramount objective of this review essentially focuses on the different Quorum Sensing (QS) regulatory switches governing virulence and pathogenicity of Vibrio cholerae. This review also provides an insight into the plausible QS targets that could be exploited to bring about a breakthrough to the prevailing cholera therapy.
    Indian Journal of Microbiology 06/2015; 55(2). DOI:10.1007/s12088-015-0520-1 · 0.83 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bacteria are able to sense an increase in population density and can respond to it by coordinated regulation of the expression of certain sets of genes in the total population of bacteria. This specific mode of regulation is known as Quorum Sensing (QS). The QS systems include low-molecular-weight signaling molecules of different chemical nature and the regulatory proteins that interact with the signaling molecules. The QS systems are global regulators of bacterial gene expression. They play an important role in controlling metabolic processes in bacteria. This review describes QS systems in members of the bacterial family Enterobacteriaceae functioning with the involvement of various signaling molecules, including N-acyl-homoserine lactones, AI-2, AI-3, peptides, and indole. The differences of the QS system in these bacteria from those in other taxonomic groups of bacteria are discussed. Data on the role of different types of QS systems in the regulation of different cellular processes in bacteria, i.e., their virulence, the synthesis of enzymes and antibiotics, biofilm formation, apoptosis, etc. are presented.
    Russian Journal of Genetics 04/2014; 50(4):323-340. DOI:10.1134/S1022795414030120 · 0.41 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
53 Downloads
Available from
May 29, 2014