4.6 Article

The Pseudomonas aeruginosa Catabolite Repression Control Protein Crc Is Devoid of RNA Binding Activity

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064609

关键词

-

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund [T448-B20, F1722, F43, AF04311]
  2. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [F43] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Crc protein has been shown to mediate catabolite repression control in Pseudomonas, leading to a preferential assimilation of carbon sources. It has been suggested that Crc acts as a translational repressor of mRNAs, encoding functions involved in uptake and breakdown of different carbon sources. Moreover, the regulatory RNA CrcZ, the level of which is increased in the presence of less preferred carbon sources, was suggested to bind to and sequester Crc, resulting in a relief of catabolite repression. Here, we determined the crystal structure of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Crc, a member of apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) endonuclease family, at 1.8 angstrom. Although Crc displays high sequence similarity with its orthologs, there are amino acid alterations in the area corresponding to the active site in AP proteins. Unlike typical AP endonuclease family proteins, Crc has a reduced overall positive charge and the conserved positively charged amino-acid residues of the DNA-binding surface of AP proteins are partially substituted by negatively charged, polar and hydrophobic residues. Crc protein purified to homogeneity from P. aeruginosa did neither display DNase activity, nor did it bind to previously identified RNA substrates. Rather, the RNA chaperone Hfq was identified as a contaminant in His-tagged Crc preparations purified by one step Ni-affinity chromatography from Escherichia coli, and was shown to account for the RNA binding activity observed with the His-Crc preparations. Taken together, these data challenge a role of Crc as a direct translational repressor in carbon catabolite repression in P. aeruginosa.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据