4.4 Article

The redox regulator fnr is required for fermentative growth and enterotoxin synthesis in Bacillus cereus F4430/73

期刊

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
卷 189, 期 7, 页码 2813-2824

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.01701-06

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glucose-grown cells of Bacillus cereus respond to anaerobiosis and low extracellular oxidoreduction potentials (ORP), notably by enhancing enterotoxin production. This response involves the ResDE two-component system. We searched the B. cereus genome for other redox response regulators potentially involved in this adaptive process, and we identified one gene encoding a protein predicted to have an amino acid sequence 58% identical (80% similar) to that of the Bacillus subtilis Fur redox regulator. The fnr gene of the food-borne pathogen B. cereus F4430/73 has been cloned and partially characterized. We showed that fnr was up-regulated during anaerobic fermentation, especially when fermentation occurred at low ORP (under highly reducing conditions). The expression of fnr was down-regulated in the presence of O-2 and nitrate which, unlike fumarate, stimulated the respiratory pathways. The inactivation of B. cereus fnr abolished fermentative growth but only moderately affected aerobic and anaerobic nitrate respiratory growth. Analyses of glucose by-products and the transcription profiles of key catabolic genes confirmed the strong regulatory impact of Fur on B. cereus fermentative pathways. More importantly, the fnr mutation strongly decreased the expression of PlcR-dependent hbl and nhe genes, leading to the absence of hemolysin BL (Hbl) and nonhemolytic enterotoxin (Nhe) secretion by the mutant. These data indicate that fnr is essential for both fermentation and toxinogenesis. The results also suggest that both Fur and the ResDE two-component system belong to a redox regulatory pathway that functions at least partially independently of the pleiotropic virulence gene regulator PlcR to regulate enterotoxin gene expression.

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

4.4
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