ABSTRACT

Spore formation in Bacillus subtilis begins with an asymmetric cell division, following which differential gene expression is established by alternative compartment-specific RNA polymerase σ factors. The spoIISAB operon of B. subtilis was identified as a locus whose mutation leads to increased activity of the first sporulation-specific sigma factor, σF. Inappropriate spoIISA expression causes lysis of vegetatively growing B. subtilis cells and Escherichia coli cells when expressed heterologously, effects that are countered by co-expression of spoIISB, identifying SpoIISA-SpoIISB as a toxin-antitoxin system. SpoIISA has three putative membrane-spanning segments and a cytoplasmic domain. Here, the crystal structure of a cytoplasmic fragment of SpoIISA (CSpoIISA) in complex with SpoIISB has been determined by selenomethionine-multiwavelength anomalous dispersion phasing to 2.5 Å spacing, revealing a CSpoIISA2·SpoIISB2 heterotetramer. CSpoIISA has a single domain α/β structure resembling a GAF domain with an extended α-helix at its N terminus. The two CSpoIISA protomers form extensive interactions through an intermolecular four-helix bundle. Each SpoIISB chain is highly extended and lacking tertiary structure. The SpoIISB chains wrap around the CSpoIISA dimer, forming extensive interactions with both CSpoIISA protomers. CD spectroscopy experiments indicate that SpoIISB is a natively disordered protein that adopts structure only in the presence of CSpoIISA, whereas surface plasmon resonance experiments revealed that the CSpoIISA·SpoIISB complex is stable with a dissociation constant in the nanomolar range. The results are interpreted in relation to sequence conservation and mutational data, and possible mechanisms of cell killing by SpoIISA are discussed.

BackgroundYeast infections are often connected with formation of biofilms that are extremely difficult to eradicate. An excellent model system for deciphering multifactorial determinants of yeast biofilm development is the colony biofilm, composed of surface (“aerial”) and invasive (“root”) cells. While surface cells have been partially analyzed before, we know little about invasive root cells. In particular, information on the metabolic, chemical and morphogenetic properties of invasive versus surface cells is lacking. In this study, we used a new strategy to isolate invasive cells from agar and extracellular matrix, and employed it to perform genome wide expression profiling and biochemical analyses of surface and invasive cells.ResultsRNA sequencing revealed expression differences in 1245 genes with high statistical significance, indicating large genetically regulated metabolic differences between surface and invasive cells. Functional annotation analyses implicated genes involved in stress defense, peroxisomal fatty acid β-oxidation, autophagy, protein degradation, storage compound metabolism and meiosis as being important in surface cells. In contrast, numerous genes with functions in nutrient transport and diverse synthetic metabolic reactions, including genes involved in ribosome biogenesis, biosynthesis and translation, were found to be important in invasive cells. Variation in gene expression correlated significantly with cell-type specific processes such as autophagy and storage compound accumulation as identified by microscopic and biochemical analyses. Expression profiling also provided indications of cell-specific regulations. Subsequent knockout strain analyses identified Gip2p, a regulatory subunit of type 1 protein phosphatase Glc7p, to be essential for glycogen accumulation in surface cells.ConclusionsThis is the first study reporting genome wide differences between surface and invasive cells of yeast colony biofilms. New findings show that surface and invasive cells display very different physiology, adapting to different conditions in different colony areas and contributing to development and survival of the colony biofilm as a whole. Notably, surface and invasive cells of colony biofilms differ significantly from upper and lower cells of smooth colonies adapted to plentiful laboratory conditions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12864-017-4214-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.