Gene expression in sea urchin development: Study of {\it LpS1\/} gene regulation and cloning and characterization of the {\it SpKrox}-{\it 1\/} gene

Cell differentiation are associated with activation of cell lineage-specific genes. The $LpS{\it 1}\beta$ gene of Lytechinus pictus is activated at the late cleavage stage. $LpS{\it 1}\beta$ transcripts accumulate exclusively in aboral ectoderm lineages. Previous studies demonstrated two G-string DNA-elements, proximal and distal G-strings, which bind to an ectoderm-enriched nuclear factor. In order to define the cis-elements which control positive expression of the $LpS{\it 1}\beta$ gene, the regulatory region from $-$108 to +17 bp of the $LpS{\it 1}\beta$ gene promoter was characterized. The ectoderm G-string factor binds to a G/C-rich region larger than the G-string itself and the binding of the G-string factor requires sequences immediately downstream from the G-string. These downstream sequences are essential for full promoter activity. In addition, only 108 bp of $LpS{\it 1}\beta\ 5\sp\prime$ flanking DNA drives $LpS{\it 1}\beta$ gene expression in aboral ectoderm/mesenchyme cells. Therefore, for positive control of $LpS{\it 1}\beta$ gene expression, two regions of 5$\sp\prime$ flanking DNA are required: region I from base pairs $-$762 to $-$511, and region II, which includes the G/C-rich element, from base pairs $-$108 to $-$61. A mesenchyme cell repressor element is located within region I.^ DNA-binding proteins play key roles in determination of cell differentiation. The zinc finger domain is a DNA-binding domain present in many transcription factors. Based on homologies in zinc fingers, a zinc finger-encoding gene, SpKrox-1, was cloned from S. purpuratus. The putative SpKrox-1 protein has all structural characteristics of a transcription factor: four zinc fingers for DNA binding; acidic domain for transactivation; basic domain for nuclear targeting; and leucine zipper for dimerization. SpKrox-1 RNA transcripts showed a transient expression pattern which correlates largely with early embryonic development. The spatial expression of SpKrox-1 mRNA was distributed throughout the gastrula and larva ectodermal wall. However, SpKrox-1 was not expressed in pigment cells. The SpKrox-1 gene is thus a marker of a subset of SMCs or ectoderm cells. The structural features, and the transient temporal and restricted spatial expression patterns suggest that SpKrox-1 plays a role in a specific developmental event. ^

Cis-acting elements and developmental regulators govern toxin gene expression in Bacillus anthracis

Expression of the structural genes for the anthrax toxin proteins is coordinately controlled by host-related signals such as elevated CO2 , and the trans-acting positive regulator, AtxA. No specific binding of AtxA to the toxin gene promoters has been demonstrated and no sequence-based similarities are apparent in the promoter regions of toxin genes. We hypothesized that the toxin genes possess common structural features that are required for positive regulation. To test this hypothesis, I performed an extensive characterization of the toxin gene promoters. I determined the minimal sequences required for atxA-mediated toxin gene expression and compared these sequences for structural similarities. In silico modeling and in vitro experiments indicated significant curvature within these regions. Random mutagenesis revealed that point mutations associated with reduced transcriptional activity, mostly mapped to areas of high curvature. This work enabled the identification of two potential cis-acting elements implicated in AtxA-mediated regulation of the toxin genes. In addition to the growth condition requirements and AtxA, toxin gene expression is under growth phase regulation. The transition state regulator AbrB represses atxA expression to influence toxin synthesis. Here I report that toxin gene expression also requires sigH, a gene encoding the RNA polymerase sigma factor associated with development in B. subtilis. In the well-studied B. subtilis system, σH is part of a feedback control pathway that involves AbrB and the major response regulator of sporulation initiation, Spo0A. My data indicate that in B. anthracis, regulatory relationships exist between these developmental regulators and atxA . Interestingly, during growth in toxin-inducing conditions, sigH and abrB expression deviates from that described for B. subtilis, affecting expression of the atxA gene. These findings, combined with previous observations, suggest that the steady state level of atxA expression is critical for optimal toxin gene transcription. I propose a model whereby, under toxin-inducing conditions, control of toxin gene expression is fine-tuned by the independent effects of the developmental regulators on the expression of atxA . The growth condition-dependent changes in expression of these regulators may be crucial for the correct timing and uninterrupted expression of the toxin genes during infection. ^

Functional Characterization of AtxA, the Bacillus anthracis Virulence Regulator

Coordinated expression of virulence genes in Bacillus anthracis occurs via a multi-faceted signal transduction pathway that is dependent upon the AtxA protein. Intricate control of atxA gene transcription and AtxA protein function have become apparent from studies of AtxA-induced synthesis of the anthrax toxin proteins and the poly-D-glutamic acid capsule, two factors with important roles in B. anthracis pathogenesis. The amino-terminal region of the AtxA protein contains winged-helix (WH) and helix-turn-helix (HTH) motifs, structural features associated with DNA-binding. Using filter binding assays, I determined that AtxA interacted non-specifically at a low nanomolar affinity with a target promoter (Plef) and AtxA-independent promoters. AtxA also contains motifs associated with phosphoenolpyruvate: sugar phosphotransferase system (PTS) regulation. These PTS-regulated domains, PRD1 and PRD2, are within the central amino acid sequence. Specific histidines in the PRDs serve as sites of phosphorylation (H199 and H379). Phosphorylation of H199 increases AtxA activity; whereas, H379 phosphorylation decreases AtxA function. For my dissertation, I hypothesized that AtxA binds target promoters to activate transcription and that DNA-binding activity is regulated via structural changes within the PRDs and a carboxy-terminal EIIB-like motif that are induced by phosphorylation and ligand binding. I determined that AtxA has one large protease-inaccessible domain containing the PRDs and the carboxy-terminal end of the protein. These results suggest that AtxA has a domain that is distinct from the putative DNA-binding region of the protein. My data indicate that AtxA activity is associated with AtxA multimerization. Oligomeric AtxA was detected when co-affinity purification, non-denaturing gel electrophoresis, and bis(maleimido)hexane (BMH) cross-linking techniques were employed. I exploited the specificity of BMH for cysteine residues to show that AtxA was cross-linked at C402, implicating the carboxy-terminal EIIB-like region in protein-protein interactions. In addition, higher amounts of the cross-linked dimeric form of AtxA were observed when cells were cultured in conditions that promote toxin gene expression. Based on the results, I propose that AtxA multimerization requires the EIIB-like motif and multimerization of AtxA positively impacts function. I investigated the role of the PTS in the function of AtxA and the impact of phosphomimetic residues on AtxA multimerization. B. anthracis Enzyme I (EI) and HPr did not facilitate phosphorylation of AtxA in vitro. Moreover, markerless deletion of ptsHI in B. anthracis did not perturb AtxA function. Taken together, these results suggest that proteins other than the PTS phosphorylate AtxA. Point mutations mimicking phosphohistidine (H to D) and non-phosphorylated histidine (H to A) were tested for an impact on AtxA activity and multimerization. AtxA H199D, AtxA H199A, and AtxA H379A displayed multimerization phenotypes similar to that of the native protein, whereas AtxA H379D was not susceptible to BMH cross-linking or co-affinity purification with AtxA-His. These data suggest that phosphorylation of H379 may decrease AtxA activity by preventing AtxA multimerization. Overall, my data support the following model of AtxA function. AtxA binds to target gene promoters in an oligomeric state. AtxA activity is increased in response to the host-related signal bicarbonate/CO2 because this signal enhances AtxA multimerization. In contrast, AtxA activity is decreased by phosphorylation at H379 because multimerization is inhibited. Future studies will address the interplay between bicarbonate/CO2 signaling and phosphorylation on AtxA function.