4.4 Article

New regulatory gene that contributes to control of Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron starch utilization genes

Journal

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
Volume 183, Issue 24, Pages 7198-7205

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.183.24.7198-7205.2001

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [AI/GM 17876] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [F32 GM017876] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron uses starch as a source of carbon and energy. Early steps in the pathway of starch utilization, such as starch binding and starch hydrolysis, are encoded by sus genes, which have been characterized previously. The sus structural genes are expressed only if cells are grown in medium containing maltose or higher oligomers of glucose. Regulation of the sus structural genes is mediated by SusR, an activator that is encoded by a gene located next to the sax structural genes. A strain with a disruption in susR cannot grow on starch but can still grow on maltose and maltotriose. A search for transposon-generated mutants that could not grow on maltose and maltotriose unexpectedly located a gene, designated malR, which regulates expression of an alpha -glucosidase not controlled by SusR. Although a disruption in susR did not affect expression of the malR controlled gene, a disruption in malR reduced expression of the sus structural genes. Thus, MalR appears to participate with SusR in regulation of the sus genes. Results of transcriptional fusion assays and reverse transcription-PCR experiments showed that malR is expressed constitutively. Moreover, multiple copies of malR provided on a plasmid (5 to 10 copies per cell) more than doubled the amount of a-glucosidase activity in cell extracts. Our results demonstrate that the starch utilization system of B. thetaiotaomicron is controlled on at least two levels by the regulatory proteins SusR and MalR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available