Bacillus subtilis employs 10 chemoreceptors to move in response to chemicals in its environment. While the sensing mechanisms have been determined for many attractants, little is known about the sensing mechanisms for repellents. In this work, we investigated phenol chemotaxis in B. subtilis. Phenol is an attractant at low, micromolar concentrations and a repellent at high, millimolar concentrations. McpA was found to be the principal chemoreceptor governing the repellent response to phenol and other related aromatic compounds. In addition, the chemoreceptors McpC and HemAT were found to govern the attractant response to phenol and related compounds. Using chemoreceptor chimeras, McpA was found to sense phenol using its signaling domain rather than its sensing domain. These observations were substantiated in vitro, where direct binding of phenol to the signaling domain of McpA was observed using saturation transfer difference nuclear magnetic resonance. These results further advance our understanding of B. subtilis chemotaxis and further demonstrate that the signaling domain of B. subtilis chemoreceptors can directly sense chemoeffectors. IMPORTANCE Bacterial chemotaxis is commonly thought to employ a sensing mechanism involving the extracellular sensing domain of chemoreceptors. Some ligands, however, appear to be sensed by the signaling domain. Phenolic compounds, commonly found in soil and root exudates, provide environmental cues for soil microbes like Bacillus subtilis. We show that phenol is sensed as both an attractant and a repellent. While the mechanism for sensing phenol as an attractant is still unknown, we found that phenol is sensed as a repellent by the signaling domain of the chemoreceptor McpA. This study furthers our understanding of the unconventional sensing mechanisms employed by the B. subtilis chemotaxis pathway.

Motile bacteria sense chemical gradients using chemoreceptors, which consist of distinct sensing and signaling domains. The general model is that the sensing domain binds the chemical and the signaling domain induces the tactic response. Here, we investigated the unconventional sensing mechanism for ethanol taxis in Bacillus subtilis. Ethanol and other short-chain alcohols are attractants for B. subtilis. Two chemoreceptors, McpB and HemAT, sense these alcohols. In the case of McpB, the signaling domain directly binds ethanol. We were further able to identify a single amino acid residue, Ala431, on the cytoplasmic signaling domain of McpB that, when mutated to serine, reduces taxis to alcohols. Molecular dynamics simulations suggest that the conversion of Ala431 to serine increases coiled-coil packing within the signaling domain, thereby reducing the ability of ethanol to bind between the helices of the signaling domain. In the case of HemAT, the myoglobin-like sensing domain binds ethanol, likely between the helices encapsulating the heme group. Aside from being sensed by an unconventional mechanism, ethanol also differs from many other chemoattractants because it is not metabolized by B. subtilis and is toxic. We propose that B. subtilis uses ethanol and other short-chain alcohols to locate prey, namely, alcohol-producing microorganisms. IMPORTANCE Ethanol is a chemoattractant for Bacillus subtilis even though it is not metabolized and inhibits growth. B. subtilis likely uses ethanol to find ethanol-fermenting microorganisms to utilize as prey. Two chemoreceptors sense ethanol: HemAT and McpB. HemAT’s myoglobin-like sensing domain directly binds ethanol, but the heme group is not involved. McpB is a transmembrane receptor consisting of an extracellular sensing domain and a cytoplasmic signaling domain. While most attractants bind the extracellular sensing domain, we found that ethanol directly binds between intermonomer helices of the cytoplasmic signaling domain of McpB, using a mechanism akin to those identified in many mammalian ethanol-binding proteins. Our results indicate that the sensory repertoire of chemoreceptors extends beyond the sensing domain and can directly involve the signaling domain.

198 words; Importance: 121 words; Main Text: 5119 words 23

We investigated pH taxis in Bacillus subtilis This bacterium was found to perform bidirectional taxis in response to external pH gradients, enabling it to preferentially migrate to neutral environments. We next investigated the chemoreceptors involved in sensing pH gradients. We identified four chemoreceptors involved in sensing pH: McpA and TlpA for sensing acidic environments and McpB and TlpB for sensing alkaline ones. In addition, TlpA was found to also weakly sense alkaline environments. By analyzing chimeras between McpA and TlpB, the principal acid- and base-sensing chemoreceptors, we identified four critical amino acid residues-Thr199, Gln200, His273, and Glu274 on McpA and Lys199, Glu200, Gln273, and Asp274 on TlpB-involved in sensing pH. Swapping these four residues between McpA and TlpB converted the former into a base receptor and the latter into an acid receptor. Based on the results, we propose that disruption of hydrogen bonding between the adjacent residues upon pH changes induces signaling. Collectively, our results further our understanding of chemotaxis in B. subtilis and provide a new model for pH sensing in bacteria.IMPORTANCE Many bacteria can sense the pH in their environment and then use this information to direct their movement toward more favorable locations. In this study, we investigated the pH sensing mechanism in Bacillus subtilis This bacterium preferentially migrates to neutral environments. It employs four chemoreceptors to sense pH. Two are involved in sensing acidic environments, and two are involved in sensing alkaline ones. To identify the mechanism for pH sensing, we constructed receptor chimeras of acid- and base-sensing chemoreceptors. By analyzing the responses of these chimeric receptors, we were able to identify four critical amino acid residues involved in pH sensing and propose a model for the pH sensing mechanism in B. subtilis.

ABSTRACTWe investigated pH taxis inBacillus subtilis. This bacterium was found to perform bidirectional taxis in response to external pH gradients, enabling it to preferentially migrate to neutral environments. We next investigated the chemoreceptors involved in sensing pH gradients. We found that four chemoreceptors are involved in sensing pH: McpA and TlpA for sensing acidic environments and McpB and TlpB for alkaline ones. In addition, TlpA was found to also weakly sense alkaline environments. By analyzing chimeras between McpA and TlpB, the principal acid and base-sensing chemoreceptors, we identified four critical amino-acid residues – Thr199, Gln200, His273, and Glu274on McpA and Lys199, Glu200, Gln273, and Asp274on TlpB – involved in sensing pH. Swapping these four residues between McpA and TlpB converted the former into a base receptor and the latter into an acid receptor. Based on the results, we propose that disruption of hydrogen bonding between the adjacent residues upon pH changes induces signaling. Collectively, our results further our understanding of chemotaxis inB. subtilisand provide a new model for pH sensing in bacteria.IMPORTANCEMany bacteria can sense the pH in their environment and then use this information to direct their movement towards more favorable locations. In this study, we investigated the pH sensing mechanism inBacillus subtilis. This bacterium preferentially migrates to neutral environments. It employs four chemoreceptors to sense pH. Two are involved in sensing acidic environments and two are involved in sensing alkaline ones. To identify the mechanism for pH sensing, we constructed receptor chimeras of acid and base sensing chemoreceptors. By analyzing the response of these chimeric receptors, we were able to identify four critical amino-acid residues involved in pH sensing and propose a model for the pH sensing mechanism inB. subtilis.

Flagellar motility plays key roles in the survival of many bacteria and in the harmful action of many pathogens. Bacterial flagella rotate; the direction of flagellar rotation is controlled by a multisubunit protein complex termed the switch complex. This complex has been extensively studied in Gram-negative model species, but little is known about the complex in Bacillus subtilis or other Gram-positive species. Notably, the switch complex in Gram-positive species responds to its effector CheY-phosphate (CheY-P) by switching to CCW rotation, whereas in E. coli or Salmonella CheY-P acts in the opposite way, promoting CW rotation. In the work here, the architecture of the B. subtilis switch complex has been probed using cross-linking, protein interaction measurements, and mutational approaches. The results cast light on the organization of the complex and provide a framework for understanding the mechanism of flagellar direction control in B. subtilis and other Gram-positive species.

The sensing apparatus of the Bacillus subtilis chemotaxis pathway involves a complex consisting of chemoreceptors, the CheA histidine kinase, and the CheV and CheW adaptor proteins. Attractants and repellents alter the rate of CheA autophosphorylation, either by directly binding the receptors or by indirectly interacting with them through intermediate binding proteins. We describe an in vitro assay for measuring receptor-kinase activity in B. subtilis. This assay has been used to investigate the mechanism of signal transduction in B. subtilis chemotaxis and the disparate mechanisms employed by this bacterium for sensory adaptation and gradient sensing.

Chapter 31 Chemotaxis and Motility Shin-Ichi Aizawa, Shin-Ichi AizawaSearch for more papers by this authorIgor B. Zhulin, Igor B. ZhulinSearch for more papers by this authorLeticia Márquez-Magaña, Leticia Márquez-MagañaSearch for more papers by this authorGeorge W. Ordal, George W. OrdalSearch for more papers by this author Shin-Ichi Aizawa, Shin-Ichi AizawaSearch for more papers by this authorIgor B. Zhulin, Igor B. ZhulinSearch for more papers by this authorLeticia Márquez-Magaña, Leticia Márquez-MagañaSearch for more papers by this authorGeorge W. Ordal, George W. OrdalSearch for more papers by this author Book Editor(s):Abraham L. Sonenshein, Abraham L. Sonenshein Department of Molecular Biology and Microbiology, Tufts University, Boston, MassachusettsSearch for more papers by this authorJames A. Hoch, James A. Hoch Division of Cellular Biology Department of Molecular and Experimental Medicine, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CaliforniaSearch for more papers by this authorRichard Losick, Richard Losick Department of Cellular and Developmental Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MassachusettsSearch for more papers by this author First published: 13 September 2001 https://doi.org/10.1128/9781555817992.ch31 AboutPDFPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShareShare a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Summary Complete sequencing of bacterial and archaeal genomes has provided an opportunity to compare the chemotaxis machinery of Bacillus subtilis and E. coli with that of other organisms and should give insight into what the ancestral mechanism might have been. Two major findings indicate that B. subtilis emerges as a model organism for the study of microbial chemotaxis. First, homologs of several B. subtilis chemotaxis proteins that are not present in E. coli are found in other bacterial and archaeal species. Second, the CheZ phosphatase, the only E. coli chemotaxis protein that is not present in B. subtilis, is missing from most other microbial genomes and thus may be of marginal importance. For peritrichous bacteria, chemotaxis occurs by modulating the tendency to rotate the flagella counterclockwise (CCW), for smooth swimming, or rotate them clockwise, for tumbling. The features of B. subtilis chemotaxis include the methyltransferase (CheR) (R), which uses S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) to catalyze methylesterification of particular glutamate residues in the receptor, and the methylesterase, CheB, which removes them. Motility gene expression in B. subtilis is absolutely dependent on σD, and motility is absolutely required for chemotaxis. Bacillus subtilis and Its Closest Relatives: From Genes to Cells RelatedInformation

The Bacillus subtilis chemotaxis pathway employs three systems for sensory adaptation: the methylation system, the CheC/CheD/CheYp system, and the CheV system. Little is known in general about how these three adaptation systems contribute to chemotaxis in B. subtilis and whether they interact with one another. To further understand these three adaptation systems, we employed a quantitative in vitro receptor-kinase assay. Using this assay, we were able to determine how CheD and CheV affect receptor-kinase activity as a function of the receptor modification state. CheD was found to increase receptor-kinase activity, where the magnitude of the increase depends on the modification state of the receptor. The principal new findings concern CheV. Little was known about this protein before now. Our data suggest that this protein has two roles depending on the modification state of the receptor, one for sensory adaptation when the receptors are modified (methylated) and the other for signal amplification when they are unmodified (unmethylated). In addition, our data suggest that methylation of site 630 tunes the strength of the CheV adaptation system. Collectively, our results provide new insight regarding the integrated function of the three adaptation systems in B. subtilis.

SummaryChemotaxis by Bacillus subtilis requires the CheD protein for proper function. In a cheD mutant when McpB was the sole chemoreceptor in B. subtilis, chemotaxis to asparagine was quite good. When McpC was the sole chemoreceptor in a cheD mutant, chemotaxis to proline was very poor. The reason for the difference between the chemoreceptors is because CheD deamidates Q609 in McpC and does not deamidate McpB. When mcpC‐Q609E is expressed as the sole chemoreceptor in a cheD background, chemotaxis is almost fully restored. Concomitantly, in vitro McpC activates the CheA kinase poorly, whereas McpC‐Q609E activates it much more. Moreover, CheD, which activates chemoreceptors, binds better to McpC‐Q609E compared with unmodified McpC. Using hydroxyl radical susceptibility in the presence or absence of CheD, the most likely sites of CheD binding were the modification sites where CheD, CheB and CheR carry out their catalytic activities. Thus, CheD appears to have two separate roles in B. subtilis chemotaxis – to bind to chemoreceptors to activate them as part of the CheC/CheD/CheYp adaptation system and to deamidate selected residues to activate the chemoreceptors and enable them to mediate amino acid chemotaxis.

Bacillus subtilis can perform chemotaxis toward all 20 L-amino acids normally found in proteins. Loss of a single chemoreceptor, McpC, was previously found to reduce chemotaxis to 19 of these amino acids. In this study, we investigated the amino acid-sensing mechanism of McpC. We show that McpC alone can support chemotaxis to 17 of these amino acids to varying degrees. Eleven amino acids were found to directly bind the amino-terminal sensing domain of McpC in vitro. Sequence analysis indicates that the McpC sensing domain exhibits a dual Per-Arnt-Sim (PAS) domain structure. Using this structure as a guide, we were able to isolate mutants that suggest that four amino acids (arginine, glutamine, lysine, and methionine) are sensed by an indirect mechanism. We identified four candidate binding lipoproteins associated with amino acid transporters that may function in indirect sensing: ArtP, GlnH, MetQ, and YckB. ArtP was found to bind arginine and lysine; GlnH, glutamine; MetQ, methionine; and YckB, tryptophan. In addition, we found that ArtP, MetQ, and YckB bind the sensing domain of McpC, suggesting that the three participate in the indirect sensing of arginine, lysine, methionine, and possibly tryptophan as well. Taken together, these results further our understanding of amino acid chemotaxis in B. subtilis and gain insight into how a single chemoreceptor is able to sense many amino acids.

Bacillus subtilis use three systems for adaptation during chemotaxis. One of these systems involves two interacting proteins, CheC and CheD. CheD binds to the receptors and increases their ability to activate the CheA kinase. CheD also binds CheC, and the strength of this interaction is increased by phosphorylated CheY. CheC is believed to control the binding of CheD to the receptors in response to the levels of phosphorylated CheY. In addition to their role in adaptation, CheC and CheD also have separate enzymatic functions. CheC is a CheY phosphatase and CheD is a receptor deamidase. Previously, we demonstrated that CheC's phosphatase activity plays a minor role in chemotaxis whereas its ability to bind CheD plays a major one. In the present study, we demonstrate that CheD's deamidase activity also plays a minor role in chemotaxis whereas its ability to bind CheC plays a major one. In addition, we quantified the interaction between CheC and CheD using surface plasmon resonance. These results suggest that the most important features of CheC and CheD are not their enzymatic activities but rather their roles in adaptation.

Bacteria employ a modified two-component system for chemotaxis, where the receptors form ternary complexes with CheA histidine kinases and CheW adaptor proteins. These complexes are arranged in semi-ordered arrays clustered predominantly at the cell poles. The prevailing models assume that these arrays are static and reorganize only locally in response to attractant binding. Recent studies have shown, however, that these structures may in fact be much more fluid. We investigated the localization of the chemotaxis signaling arrays in Bacillus subtilis using immunofluorescence and live cell fluorescence microscopy. We found that the receptors were localized in clusters at the poles in most cells. However, when the cells were exposed to attractant, the number exhibiting polar clusters was reduced roughly 2-fold, whereas the number exhibiting lateral clusters distinct from the poles increased significantly. These changes in receptor clustering were reversible as polar localization was reestablished in adapted cells. We also investigated the dynamic localization of CheV, a hybrid protein consisting of an N-terminal CheW-like adaptor domain and a C-terminal response regulator domain that is known to be phosphorylated by CheA, using immunofluorescence. Interestingly, we found that CheV was localized predominantly at lateral clusters in unstimulated cells. However, upon exposure to attractant, CheV was found to be predominantly localized to the cell poles. Moreover, changes in CheV localization are phosphorylation-dependent. Collectively, these results suggest that the chemotaxis signaling arrays in B. subtilis are dynamic structures and that feedback loops involving phosphorylation may regulate the positioning of individual proteins.

TheBacillus subtilischemotaxis pathway employs a receptor methylation system that functions differently from the one in the canonicalEscherichia colipathway. Previously, we hypothesized thatB. subtilisemploys a site-specific methylation system for adaptation where methyl groups are added and removed at different sites. This study investigated how covalent modifications to the adaptation region of the chemotaxis receptor McpB altered its apparent affinity for its cognate ligand, asparagine, and also its ability to activate the CheA kinase. This receptor has three closely spaced adaptation sites located at residues Gln371, Glu630 and Glu637. We found that amidation, a putative methylation mimic, of site 371 increased the receptor's apparent affinity for asparagine and its ability to activate the CheA kinase. Conversely, amidation of sites 630 and 637 reduced the receptor's ability to activate the kinase but did not affect the apparent affinity for asparagine, suggesting that activity and sensitivity are independently controlled inB. subtilis. We also examined how electrostatic interactions may underlie this behaviour, using homology models. These findings further our understanding of the site-specific methylation system inB. subtilisby demonstrating how the modification of specific sites can have varying effects on receptor function.

The chemoreceptor-CheA kinase-CheW coupling protein complex, with ancillary associated proteins, is at the heart of chemotactic signal transduction in bacteria. The goal of this work was to determine the cellular stoichiometry of the chemotaxis signaling proteins in Bacillus subtilis. Quantitative immunoblotting was used to determine the total number of chemotaxis proteins in a single cell of B. subtilis. Significantly higher levels of chemoreceptors and much lower levels of CheA kinase were measured in B. subtilis than in Escherichia coli. The resulting cellular ratio of chemoreceptor dimers per CheA dimer in B. subtilis is roughly 23.0 ± 4.5 compared to 3.4 ± 0.8 receptor dimers per CheA dimer observed in E. coli, but the ratios of the coupling protein CheW to the CheA dimer are nearly identical in the two organisms. The ratios of CheB to CheR in B. subtilis are also very similar, although the overall levels of modification enzymes are higher. When the potential binding partners of CheD are deleted, the levels of CheD drop significantly. This finding suggests that B. subtilis selectively degrades excess chemotaxis proteins to maintain optimum ratios. Finally, the two cytoplasmic receptors were observed to localize among the other receptors at the cell poles and appear to participate in the chemoreceptor complex. These results suggest that there are many novel features of B. subtilis chemotaxis compared with the mechanism in E. coli, but they are built on a common core.

During chemotaxis toward asparagine by Bacillus subtilis, the ligand is thought to bind to the chemoreceptor McpB on the exterior of the cell and induce a conformational change. This change affects the degree of phosphorylation of the CheA kinase bound to the cytoplasmic region of the receptor. Until recently, the sensing domains of the B. subtilis receptors were thought to be structurally similar to the well studied Escherichia coli four-helical bundle. However, sequence analysis has shown the sensing domains of receptors from these two organisms to be vastly different. Homology modeling of the sensing domain of the B. subtilis asparagine receptor McpB revealed two tandem PAS domains. McpB mutants having alanine substitutions in key arginine and tyrosine residues of the upper PAS domain but not in any residues of the lower PAS domain exhibited a chemotactic defect in both swarm plates and capillary assays. Thus, binding does not appear to occur across any dimeric surface but within a monomer. A modified capillary assay designed to determine the concentration of attractant where chemotaxis is most sensitive showed that when Arg-111, Tyr-121, or Tyr-133 is mutated to an alanine, much more asparagine is required to obtain an active chemoreceptor. Isothermal titration calorimetry experiments on the purified sensing domain showed a K-D to asparagine of 14 mu M, with the three mutations leading to less efficient binding. Taken together, these results reveal not only a novel chemoreceptor sensing domain architecture but also, possibly, a different mechanism for chemoreceptor activation.

Chemotaxis is the process by which cells sense chemical gradients in their environment and then move towards more favorable conditions. In the case of Escherichia coli, the paradigm organism for chemotaxis, the pathway is now arguably the best characterized in all of biology. If one broadens their perspective to include other species of bacteria, then our knowledge of chemotaxis is far less developed. In particular, the chemotaxis pathways in unrelated species are quite different despite the conservation of many core signaling proteins. Here, we summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the chemotaxis pathways in E. coli and Bacillus subtilis, with a specific focus on the mechanisms for excitation and adaptation. The mechanisms vary widely, and the B. subtilis process, similar to those found in Thermotoga maritima and many archaea, may represent a new paradigm for bacterial chemotaxis. For instance, B. subtilis has three interacting means for restoring prestimulus behavior after stimulation, including one involving CheYp feedback. The one shared with E. coli, the receptor methylation system, is vastly different, as is the mechanism for conveying signals across the membrane.

Bacterial chemotaxis is a primitive behavioral system that shows great promise for being amenable to a description of its molecular mechanism. In Gram-negatives like Escherichia coli, addition of amino acid attractant begins a series of events, starting with binding to certain intrinsic membrane proteins, the MCPs, and ending with a period of smooth swimming. Immediately, methyl-esterification of these MCPs begins and continues during this period. By contrast in the Gram-positive Bacillus subtilis, demethylation of MCPs occurs during the same period. At least two other mechanisms for mediating chemotaxis toward the attractants oxygen and phosphotransferase sugars exist in E. coli, and in these, changes in methylation of MCPs plays no role. Moreover, chemotaxis away from many repellents by B. subtilis appears to involve different mechanisms. Many of the repellents include drugs and toxicants, many of them man-made, so that chemoreceptors could not have specifically evolved; yet the bacteria are often exquisitely sensitive to them. Indeed, the B. subtilis membrane seems to act like a generalized antenna for noxious membrane-active substances.

Adaptation has a crucial role in the gradient-sensing mechanism that underlies bacterial chemotaxis. The Escherichia coli chemotaxis pathway uses a single adaptation system involving reversible receptor methylation. In Bacillus subtilis, the chemotaxis pathway seems to use three adaptation systems. One involves reversible receptor methylation, although quite differently than in E. coli. The other two involve CheC, CheD and CheV, which are chemotaxis proteins not found in E. coli. Remarkably, no one system is absolutely required for adaptation or is independently capable of generating adaptation. In this review, we discuss these three novel adaptation systems in B. subtilis and propose a model for their integration.