The Small RNA Chaperone Hfq and Multiple Small RNAs Control Quorum Sensing in Vibrio harveyi and Vibrio cholerae

Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA.
Cell (Impact Factor: 33.12). 08/2004; 118(1):69-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2004.06.009
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Quorum-sensing bacteria communicate with extracellular signal molecules called autoinducers. This process allows community-wide synchronization of gene expression. A screen for additional components of the Vibrio harveyi and Vibrio cholerae quorum-sensing circuits revealed the protein Hfq. Hfq mediates interactions between small, regulatory RNAs (sRNAs) and specific messenger RNA (mRNA) targets. These interactions typically alter the stability of the target transcripts. We show that Hfq mediates the destabilization of the mRNA encoding the quorum-sensing master regulators LuxR (V. harveyi) and HapR (V. cholerae), implicating an sRNA in the circuit. Using a bioinformatics approach to identify putative sRNAs, we identified four candidate sRNAs in V. cholerae. The simultaneous deletion of all four sRNAs is required to stabilize hapR mRNA. We propose that Hfq, together with these sRNAs, creates an ultrasensitive regulatory switch that controls the critical transition into the high cell density, quorum-sensing mode.


Available from: Rahul V Kulkarni, May 29, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Most bacterial pathogens have the remarkable ability to flourish in the external environment and in specialized host niches. This ability requires their metabolism, physiology, and virulence factors to be responsive to changes in their surroundings. It is no surprise that the underlying genetic circuitry that supports this adaptability is multilayered and exceedingly complex. Studies over the past 2 decades have established that the CsrA/RsmA proteins, global regulators of posttranscriptional gene expression, play important roles in the expression of virulence factors of numerous proteobacterial pathogens. To accomplish these tasks, CsrA binds to the 5' untranslated and/or early coding regions of mRNAs and alters translation, mRNA turnover, and/or transcript elongation. CsrA activity is regulated by noncoding small RNAs (sRNAs) that contain multiple CsrA binding sites, which permit them to sequester multiple CsrA homodimers away from mRNA targets. Environmental cues sensed by two-component signal transduction systems and other regulatory factors govern the expression of the CsrA-binding sRNAs and, ultimately, the effects of CsrA on secretion systems, surface molecules and biofilm formation, quorum sensing, motility, pigmentation, siderophore production, and phagocytic avoidance. This review presents the workings of the Csr system, the paradigm shift that it generated for understanding posttranscriptional regulation, and its roles in virulence networks of animal and plant pathogens. Copyright © 2015, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
    Microbiology and molecular biology reviews: MMBR 06/2015; 79(2):193-224. DOI:10.1128/MMBR.00052-14 · 15.26 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bacteria use quorum sensing (QS) for cell-cell communication to carry out group behaviors. This intercellular signaling process relies on cell density-dependent production and detection of chemical signals called autoinducers (AIs). Vibrio cholerae, the causative agent of cholera, detects two AIs, CAI-1 and AI-2, with two histidine kinases, CqsS and LuxQ, respectively, to control biofilm formation and virulence factor production. At low cell density, these two signal receptors function in parallel to activate the key regulator LuxO, which is essential for virulence of this pathogen. At high cell density, binding of AIs to their respective receptors leads to deactivation of LuxO and repression of virulence factor production. However, mutants lacking CqsS and LuxQ maintain a normal LuxO activation level and remain virulent, suggesting that LuxO is activated by additional, unidentified signaling pathways. Here we show that two other histidine kinases, CqsR (formerly known as VC1831) and VpsS, act upstream in the central QS circuit of V. cholerae to activate LuxO. V. cholerae strains expressing any one of these four receptors are QS proficient and capable of colonizing animal hosts. In contrast, mutants lacking all four receptors are phenotypically identical to LuxO-defective mutants. Importantly, these four functionally redundant receptors act together to prevent premature induction of a QS response caused by signal perturbations. We suggest that the V. cholerae QS circuit is composed of quadruple sensory inputs and has evolved to be refractory to sporadic AI level perturbations.
    PLoS Pathogens 04/2015; 11(4):e1004837. DOI:10.1371/journal.ppat.1004837 · 8.06 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In Vibrio cholerae, the genes required for biofilm development are repressed by quorum sensing at high cell density due to the accumulation in the medium of two signaling molecules, cholera autoinducer 1 (CAI-1) and autoinducer 2 (AI-2). A significant fraction of toxigenic V. cholerae isolates, however, exhibit dysfunctional quorum sensing pathways. It was reported that transition state analogs of the enzyme methylthioadenosine/S-adenosylhomocysteine nucleosidase (MtnN) required to make AI-2 inhibited biofilm formation in the prototype quorum sensing-deficient strain N16961. This finding prompted us to examine the role of both autoinducers and MtnN in biofilm development and virulence gene expression in a quorum sensing-deficient genetic background. Here we show that deletion of mtnN encoding methylthioadenosine/S-adenosylhomocysteine nucleosidase, cqsA (CAI-1), and/or luxS (AI-2) do not prevent biofilm development. However, two independent mtnN mutants exhibited diminished growth rate and motility in swarm agar plates suggesting that, under certain conditions, MtnN could influence biofilm formation indirectly. Nevertheless, MtnN is not required for the development of a mature biofilm. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.
    Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 04/2015; 461(1). DOI:10.1016/j.bbrc.2015.03.170 · 2.28 Impact Factor