4.8 Article

Non-social adaptation defers a tragedy of the commons in Pseudomonas aeruginosa quorum sensing

期刊

ISME JOURNAL
卷 9, 期 8, 页码 1734-1746

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2014.259

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSF [MCB-084302, 1158553]
  2. Div Of Molecular and Cellular Bioscience
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [1158553] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In a process termed quorum sensing (QS), the opportunistic bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa uses diffusible signaling molecules to regulate the expression of numerous secreted factors or public goods that are shared within the population. But not all cells respond to QS signals. These social cheaters typically harbor a mutation in the QS receptor gene lasR and exploit the public goods produced by cooperators. Here we show that non-social adaptation under growth conditions that require QS-dependent public goods increases tolerance to cheating and defers a tragedy of the commons. The underlying mutation is in the transcriptional repressor gene psdR. This mutation has no effect on public goods expression but instead increases individual fitness by derepressing growth-limiting intracellular metabolism. Even though psdR mutant populations remain susceptible to invasion by isogenic psdR lasR cheaters, they bear a lower cheater load than do wild-type populations, and they are completely resistant to invasion by lasR cheaters with functional psdR. Mutations in psdR also sustain growth near wild-type levels when paired with certain partial loss-of-function lasR mutations. Targeted sequencing of multiple evolved isolates revealed that mutations in psdR arise before mutations in lasR, and rapidly sweep through the population. Our results indicate that a QS-favoring environment can lead to adaptations in non-social, intracellular traits that increase the fitness of cooperating individuals and thereby contribute to population-wide maintenance of QS and associated cooperative behaviors.

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

4.8
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