We used DNA microarrays to measure gene expression in cells where DNA synthesis was arrested. We have interpreted the increased signal from the arrays for particular genes as evidence of increased transcription initiation rather than increased message stability. Although the latter may be an important factor, it is unlikely as an explanation for all the genes that were monitored. Temperature-sensitive mutations in the
dnaA or
dnaC genes were used to stop the initiation process at different stages, i.e., before loading DnaB helicase. Incubation of both
dnaA46 and
dnaC2 mutants at the non-permissive temperature led to a substantial increase in the steady-state mRNA levels for genes involved in nucleotide biosynthesis and nucleotide interconversion. At the time of sampling at the non-permissive temperature, however, cells were no longer replicating their DNA () although the signal for gene de-repression could have been generated during chromosome replication. The results suggest an unknown regulatory response directly linking chromosome replication and nucleotide biosynthesis where cessation of replication leads to increased expression of nucleotide biosynthetic genes. Although counter-intuitive, the response is reminiscent of early studies on regulation of amino acid biosynthesis where starvation for a particular amino acid leads to derepression of the genes in the biosynthetic pathway for that amino acid
[33].
Further evidence suggesting a link between chromosome replication and expression of nucleotide biosynthesis genes was obtained from microarray data measuring the induction of genes in the SOS regulon after exposure of cells to UV-irradiation
[34]. However, the increased signals from the nucleotide biosynthetic genes was greater in a
lexA(Ind) mutant than in wildtype indicating that the increases were independent of the LexA regulon. This result confirmed a previous study showing that the specific activity of ribonucleotide reductase was increased in
dnaB and
dnaE mutants at the non-permissive temperature (a condition that induces the SOS system in these mutants) or in wildtype cells challenged with either nalidixic acid or bleomycin
[35]. The increase in ribonucleotide reductase activity, however, was not affected by mutations in the
recA or
lexA genes
[35]. Another study using
nrd::
lac fusions on multicopy plasmids and hydroxyurea exposure in wildtype indicated a substantial induction of beta-galactosidase after treatment which was substantially LexA-independent
[36]. Taken together, all the studies are compatible with a model in which replication fork arrest leads to SOS-independent increased expression of nucleotide biosynthesis genes. The mechanism by which this occurs is unknown.
Replication fork arrest is an explanation for induction of SOS and perhaps for nucleotide biosynthesis genes in
dnaC2 mutants. However, the increased expression of the same nucleotide biosynthesis genes in the
dnaA46 mutant indicates that another mechanism must exist. One possibility is that expression of these genes is normally repressed by DnaA. Apart from the
nrd genes, we know of no data to support such a regulatory scheme and there are no DnaA boxes in the promoters of nucleotide biosynthesis genes listed in
Table S1. Alternatively, this other mechanism is common to both mutant strains incubated at the non-permissive temperature for 90 min where one round of chromosome replication and cell division occur () and the cells are poised to re-initiate replication. We suggest that under these stressed conditions some mechanism coordinating nucleotide biosynthesis and chromosome replication is inactive. It may be related to that operating when DNA elongation is interrupted by spontaneous or induced replication-blocking lesions.
The increased steady-state mRNA levels of nucleotide biosynthetic genes observed in
E. coli dnaA46 and
dnaC2 bacteria at the non-permissive temperature appears to be at variance with a similar study with an initiation-defective
dnaD23(Ts) strain of
Bacillus subtilis [37]. DnaD, which has no counterpart in
E. coli, is part of the PriA primosome
[38], interacts with DnaA
[39] and has DNA remodeling activity
[40]. After 90 min incubation of
B. subtilis dnaD23 cells at the non-permissive temperature, no change in activity of nucleotide biosynthetic genes was observed
[37] except for the
nrdEF genes which showed 2.7 and 3.1-fold increases. Furthermore, mRNA levels for
dnaA and
dnaN (beta sliding clamp) were substantially decreased (7.4 and 5.5-fold respectively). This contrasts with the findings described here for the
E. coli dnaA46 strain in which mRNA levels for both
dnaA and
dnaN showed increases (3.6 and 3.4-fold respectively). We have no satisfying explanation to reconcile these differences in results obtained with
B. subtilis and
E. coli.
Although both
dnaA46 and
dnaC2 cells were arrested at early stages of the initiation process, there were differences in their gene expression profiles. The first finding from our study was the induction of the SOS response in
dnaC2 cells at the non-permissive temperature. The established requirement for DnaC in PriABC-dependent replication restart at arrested forks and its associated SOS induction during fork re-construction
[5] argue that this is a source of the inducing signal although only about 18% of forks fail to terminate in
dnaC2 cells at non-permissive temperature
[7]. The lack of the SOS response in the wildtype and the
dnaA46 mutant coupled with the demonstration () that the DnaA step in the initiation process had been completed, suggests that a persistent open complex at
oriC can also be an inducing signal. The open complex is present in every cell and is expected to contain single-stranded DNA, that serves as the inducer for the SOS response by activating the co-protease activity of RecA
[22]. Evidence for persistent single-stranded DNA at
oriC in
dnaC2 cells incubated for 60 min at 40° C was demonstrated by Gille and Messer
[28] who showed that KMnO
4 hypersensitive sites were detectable in the right
oriC 13-mer of a low copy
oriC plasmid. The hypersensitivity disappeared after return of the cells to the permissive temperature.
A previous study using an unusual dnaC mutant (dnaC1331), which is not conditionally-lethal for growth, indicated a three-fold increased level of SOS induction as measured by using a sulA::lac fusion {Harinarayanan, 2004 1222 /id}. This induction was suggested to be due to inability of DnaC1331 to be loaded by the PriA-PriB pathway for replication restart. A subsequent and more detailed analysis of this mutant strain, however, failed to confirm the increased SOS induction {Boonsombat, 2006 1223 /id}.
We also found an enhanced steady-state mRNA level of the dnaT-dnaC-yiiA operon in the dnaC2 strain growing at both 30°C and 38°C (). This result suggests that like dnaA, the dnaC gene is autoregulated. We know of no studies at the dnaT or yjjB operon promoter regions bearing on this hypothesis.
The up-regulation of genes containing DnaA boxes in their promoter regions was detected only in
dnaA46 bacteria at the non-permissive temperature. These included
dnaA,
mioC and
uvrD, confirming earlier results obtained by different experimental approaches
[1]. The increased level of
nrdAB mRNA in the
dnaA46 strain supports the hypothesis that DnaA acts as repressor of this operon
[19] and not as a transcriptional activator
[27]. The observation of increased transcription of fatty acid synthesis and breakdown genes in the
dnaA46 strains relative to
dnaC2 and wildtype was unexpected. Although membrane cadiolipin has been reported to activate DnaA
[41], it is unclear if this observation is related to the altered transcription of fatty acid genes described here. Alternatively, both
dnaA [42] and
fabHDG [43] gene transcription are subject to
relA (ppGpp synthesis) control and the increased activity of these genes in the
dnaA46 strain at 42°C may be related to it.
When
dnaC2 cells that had been arrested at initiation were returned to the permissive temperature, all cells initiated chromosome replication in synchrony. In these synchronized cells, we were not able to detect cell cycle regulated genes using microarrays. This result is in contrast to previous publications showing cell cycle dependence for a variety of genes (
nrdAB,
dam,
mukB,
seqA,
ftsQ,
ftsZ,
gid,
mioC and
hns)
[12]–
[15]. For some of these genes (
gid,
mioC,
ftsQ,
ftsZ) this may be a reflection of gene sequestration by SeqA
[44] which is expected to reduce transcription for about one third of the cell cycle
[45]. For others (
nrdAB), the reduced level of Dna-ATP after initiation should increase expression of these genes but as the level of Dna-ATP increases
nrdAB transcription should decrease. In general, these previous studies showing cell cycle dependence used similar synchronization methods to that used here and transcripts were detected by S1 nuclease protection of specific probes. It is possible that the array method is not as sensitive to detect the approximately 2- to 5-fold differences found in previous studies. Another possible explanation for our failure to detect these and other genes may be that our sampling interval (10 min) was too long thereby missing the window during which the alteration of steady-state mRNA levels occurred. Alternatively, it is unclear what advantage cell cycle regulated genes confer on an organism such as
E. coli with a short doubling time and generally stable proteins. For the cell cycle regulated genes mentioned above, the consequences of constitutive expression are unknown. However, a 10-fold increase in the level of Dam methyltransferase produced from a multicopy plasmid, which is expected to abrogate the effects of cell cycle dependence, has no obvious deleterious effect on cell growth
[46],
[47].
In
Caulobacter crescentus, where the cell cycle is longer and tied to defined morphological changes, master transcriptional regulators control cell cycle-dependent gene expression
[16],
[17]. DNA methylation by the CcrM methyltransferase is an essential feature of cell cycle regulation. If a similar mechanism operates in
E. coli, our method would not have detected it. It might be expected, however, that in a
dam mutant where no hemi- or full methylation is possible such cell cycle regulation might be abrogated if transcriptional regulators can bind only to specific states of methylated DNA. We know of no data indicating an altered cell cycle in
dam mutants.