4.4 Article

Protein-protein interactions that regulate the energy stress activation of σB in Bacillus subtilis

期刊

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
卷 184, 期 20, 页码 5583-5589

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.184.20.5583-5589.2002

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

sigma(B) is an alternative or factor that controls the general stress response in Bacillus subtilis. In the absence of stress, sigma(B) is negatively regulated by anti-sigma factor RsbW. RsbW is also a protein kinase which can phosphorylate RsbV. When cells are stressed, RsbW binds to unphosphorylated RsbV, produced from the phosphorylated form of RsbV by two phosphatases (RsbU and RsbP) which are activated by stress. We now report the values of the K-m for ATP and the K-i for ADP of RsbW (0.9 and 0.19 mM, respectively), which reinforce the idea that the kinase activity of RsbW is directly regulated in vivo by the ratio of these nucleotides. RsbW, purified as a dimer, forms complexes with RsbV and sigma(B) with different stoichiometries, i.e., RsbW(2)-RsbV(2) and RsbW(2)-sigma(1)(B). As determined by surface plasmon resonance, the dissociation constants of the RsbW-RsbV and RsbW-sigma(B) interactions were found to be similar (63 and 92 nM, respectively). Nonetheless, an analysis of the complexes by nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis in competition assays suggested that the affinity of RsbW, for RsbV is much higher than that for sigma(B). The intracellular concentrations of RsbV, RsbW (as a monomer), and sigma(B) measured before stress were similar (1.5, 2.6, and 0.9 muM, respectively). After ethanol stress they all increased. The increase was greatest for RsbV, whose concentration reached 13 muM, while those of RsbW (as a monomer) and sigma(B) reached 11.8 and 4.9 muM, respectively. We conclude that the higher affinity of RsbW for RsbV than for sigma(B), rather than a difference in the concentrations of RsbV and sigma(B), is the driving force that is responsible for the switch of RsbW to unphosphorylated RsbV.

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