1887

Microbiology Society logo

Volume 168, Issue 10

Chemosensory pathways of KHS3 control chemotaxis behaviour and biofilm formation Free

Abstract

KHS3 is a marine bacterium whose genome codes for two different chemosensory pathways. Chemosensory gene cluster 1 is very similar to the canonical Che cluster from . Chemosensory cluster 2 includes a gene coding for a diguanylate cyclase with receiver domains, suggesting that it belongs to the functional group that regulates alternative cellular functions other than chemotaxis. In this work we assess the functional roles of both chemosensory pathways through approaches that include the heterologous expression of proteins in strains and phenotypic analyses of mutants. Our results confirm that chemosensory cluster 1 is indeed involved in chemotaxis behaviour, and only proteins from this cluster complement defects. We present evidence suggesting that chemosensory cluster 2 resembles the Wsp pathway from , since the corresponding methylesterase mutant shows an increased methylation level of the cognate receptor and develops a wrinkly colony morphology correlated with an increased ability to form biofilm. Consistently, mutational interruption of this gene cluster correlates with low levels of biofilm. Our results suggest that the proteins from each pathway assemble and function independently. However, the phenotypic characteristics of the mutants show functional connections between the pathways controlled by each chemosensory system.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): biofilm , chemosensory pathways , chemotaxis and Halomonas titanicae KHS3
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Fondo para la Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (Award PICT2016-1629)
    • Principle Award Recipient: ClaudiaA. Studdert
© 2022 The Authors
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001251
2022-10-10
2024-05-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/168/10/mic001251.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001251&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bi S, Sourjik V. Stimulus sensing and signal processing in bacterial chemotaxis. Curr Opin Microbiol 2018; 45:22–29 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. D’Ippólito S, de Castro RE, Herrera Seitz K. Chemotactic responses to gas oil of Halomonas spp. strains isolated from saline environments in Argentina. Rev Argent Microbiol 2011; 43:107–110 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Gasperotti AF, Revuelta MV, Studdert CA, Herrera Seitz MK. Identification of two different chemosensory pathways in representatives of the genus Halomonas. BMC Genomics 2018; 19:266–272 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Gasperotti AF, Herrera Seitz MK, Balmaceda RS, Prosa LM, Jung K et al. Direct binding of benzoate derivatives to two chemoreceptors with cache sensor domains in Halomonas titanicae KHS3. Mol Microbiol 2021; 115:672–683 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Wuichet K, Zhulin IB. Origins and diversification of a complex signal transduction system in prokaryotes. Sci Signal 2010; 3:1–13 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Hickman JW, Tifrea DF, Harwood CS. A chemosensory system that regulates biofilm formation through modulation of cyclic diguanylate levels. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005; 102:14422–14427 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bantinaki E, Kassen R, Knight CG, Robinson Z, Spiers AJ et al. Adaptive divergence in experimental populations of Pseudomonas fluorescens. III. mutational origins of wrinkly spreader diversity. Genetics 2007; 176:441–453 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Hueso-Gil Á, Calles B, de Lorenzo V. The Wsp intermembrane complex mediates metabolic control of the swim-attach decision of Pseudomonas putida. Environ Microbiol 2020; 22:3535–3547 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Alexander RP, Zhulin IB. Evolutionary genomics reveals conserved structural determinants of signaling and adaptation in microbial chemoreceptors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007; 104:2885–2890 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Herrera Seitz MK, Frank V, Massazza DA, Vaknin A, Studdert CA. Bacterial chemoreceptors of different length classes signal independently. Mol Microbiol 2014; 93:814–822 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Fu XZ, Tan D, Aibaidula G, Wu Q, Chen JC et al. Development of Halomonas TD01 as a host for open production of chemicals. Metab Eng 2014; 23:78–91 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Laemmli UK. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 1970; 227:680–685 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Valderrama-Gómez MÁ, Schomer RA, Savageau MA, Parales RE. TaxisPy: a python-based software for the quantitative analysis of bacterial chemotaxis. J Microbiol Methods 2020; 175:105918 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. O’Toole GA, Kolter R. Initiation of biofilm formation in Pseudomonas fluorescens WCS365 proceeds via multiple, convergent signalling pathways: a genetic analysis. Mol Microbiol 1998; 28:449–461 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Suchanek VM, Esteban-López M, Colin R, Besharova O, Fritz K et al. Chemotaxis and cyclic-di-GMP signalling control surface attachment of Escherichia coli. Mol Microbiol 2020; 113:728–739 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Cardozo MJ, Massazza DA, Parkinson JS, Studdert CA. Disruption of chemoreceptor signalling arrays by high levels of CheW, the receptor-kinase coupling protein. Mol Microbiol 2010; 75:1171–1181 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Park S-Y, Borbat PP, Gonzalez-Bonet G, Bhatnagar J, Pollard AM et al. Reconstruction of the chemotaxis receptor-kinase assembly. Nat Struct Mol Biol 2006; 13:400–407 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Liu J, Hu B, Morado DR, Jani S, Manson MD et al. Molecular architecture of chemoreceptor arrays revealed by cryoelectron tomography of Escherichia coli minicells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012; 109:E1481–8 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Li X, Fleetwood AD, Bayas C, Bilwes AM, Ortega DR et al. The 3.2 Å resolution structure of a receptor: CheA:CheW signaling complex defines overlapping binding sites and key residue interactions within bacterial chemosensory arrays. Biochemistry 2013; 52:3852–3865 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Vu A, Wang X, Zhou H, Dahlquist FW. The receptor-CheW binding interface in bacterial chemotaxis. J Mol Biol 2012; 415:759–767 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Ames P, Studdert CA, Reiser RH, Parkinson JS. Collaborative signaling by mixed chemoreceptor teams in Escherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002; 99:7060–7065 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kita-Tsukamoto K, Wada M, Yao K, Nishino T, Kogure K. Flagellar motors of marine bacteria Halomonas are driven by both protons and sodium ions. Can J Microbiol 2004; 50:369–374 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Güvener ZT, Harwood CS. Subcellular location characteristics of the Pseudomonas aeruginosa GGDEF protein, WspR, indicate that it produces cyclic-di-GMP in response to growth on surfaces. Mol Microbiol 2007; 66:1459–1473 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Jones CJ, Wozniak DJ. Congo red stain identifies matrix overproduction and is an indirect measurement for c-di-GMP in many species of bacteria. Methods Mol Biol 2017; 1657:147–156 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Liu X, Cao B, Yang L, Gu JD. Biofilm control by interfering with c-di-GMP metabolism and signaling. Biotechnol Adv 2022; 56:107915 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Baraquet C, Harwood CS. Cyclic diguanosine monophosphate represses bacterial flagella synthesis by interacting with the walker a motif of the enhancer-binding protein FleQ. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2013; 110:18478–18483 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Österberg S, Åberg A, Herrera Seitz MK, Wolf-Watz M, Shingler V. Genetic dissection of a motility-associated c-di-GMP signalling protein of Pseudomonas putida. Environ Microbiol Rep 2013; 5:556–565 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Xu K, Shen D, Han S, Chou SH, Qian G. A non-flagellated, predatory soil bacterium reprograms a chemosensory system to control antifungal antibiotic production via cyclic di-GMP signalling. Environ Microbiol 2021; 23:878–892 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Kessler C, Mhatre E, Cooper V, Kim W. Evolutionary divergence of the wsp signal transduction systems in beta- and gammaproteo bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 2021; 87:e01306–21 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Cerna-Vargas JP, Santamaría-Hernando S, Matilla MA, Rodríguez-Herva JJ, Daddaoua A et al. Chemoperception of specific amino acids controls phytopathogenicity in Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato. mBio 2019; 10:e01868-19 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Huang Z, Wang Y-H, Zhu H-Z, Andrianova EP, Jiang C-Y et al. Cross talk between chemosensory pathways that modulate chemotaxis and biofilm formation. mBio 2019; 10:e02876-18 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001251
Loading
Chemosensory pathways of Halomonas titanicae KHS3 control chemotaxis behaviour and biofilm formation
Microbiology 168, 001251 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.001251
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001251
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001251
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error