Stress responses of Gram-positive bacteria to cationic antimicrobial peptides

As the resistance of bacteria to conventional antibiotics has become an increasing problem, new antimicrobial drugs are urgently needed. One possible source of new antibacterial agents is a group of cationic antimicrobial peptides (CAMPs) produced by practically all living organisms. These peptides are typically small, amphipathic and positively charged and contain well defined a-helical or b-sheet secondary structures. The main antibacterial action mechanism of CAMPs is considered to be disruption of the cell membrane, but other targets of CAMPs also exist. Some bacterial species have evolved defence mechanisms against the harmful effects of CAMPs. One of the most effective defence mechanisms is reduction of the net negative charge of bacterial cell surfaces. Global analysis of gene expression of two Gram-positive bacteria, Bacillus subtilis and Staphylococcus aureus, was used to further study the stress responses induced by different types of CAMPs. B. subtilis cells were treated with sublethal concentrations of a-helical peptide LL-37, b-sheet peptide protegrin 1 or synthetic analogue poly-L-lysine, and the changes in gene expression were studied using DNA macroarrays. In the case of S. aureus, three different a-helical peptides were selected for the transcriptome analyses: temporin L, ovispirin-1 and dermaseptin K4-S4(1-16). Transcriptional changes caused by peptide stress were examined using oligo DNA microarrays. The transcriptome analysis revealed two main cell signalling mechanisms mediating CAMP stress responses in Gram-positive bacteria: extracytoplasmic function (ECF)sigma factors and two-component systems (TCSs). In B. subtilis, ECF sigma factors sigW and sigM as well as TCS LiaRS responded to the cell membrane disruption caused by CAMPs. In S. aureus, CAMPs caused a similar stress response to antibiotics interfering in cell wall synthesis, and TCS VraSR was strongly activated. All of these transcriptional regulators are known to respond to several compounds other than CAMPs interfering with cell envelope integrity, suggesting that they sense cell envelope stress in general. Among the most strongly induced genes were yxdLM (in B. subtilis) and vraDE (in S. aureus) encoding homologous ABC transporters. Transcription of yxdLM and vraDE operons is controlled by TCSs YxdJK and ApsRS, respectively. These TCSs seemed to be responsible for the direct recognition of CAMPs. The yxdLM operon was specifically induced by LL-37, but its role in CAMP resistance remained unclear. VraDE was proven to be a bacitracin transporter. We also showed that the net positive charge of the cell wall affects the signalrecognition of different TCSs responding to cell envelope stress. Inactivation of the Dlt system responsible for the D-alanylation of teichoic acids had a strong and differential effect on the activity of the studied TCSs, depending on their functional role in cells and the stimuli they sense.