Response tuning in bacterial chemotaxis.

Chemotaxis of enteric bacteria in spatial gradients toward a source of chemoattractant is accomplished by increases in the length of swimming runs up the gradient. Biochemical components of the intracellular signal pathway have been identified, but mechanisms for achieving the high response sensitivity remain unknown. Binding of attractant ligand to its receptor inactivates a receptor-associated histidine kinase, CheA, which phosphorylates the signal protein CheY. The reduction in phospho-CheY, CheY-P, levels prolongs swimming runs. Here, the stimulus-response relation has been determined by measurement of excitation responses mediated by the Tar receptor to defined concentration jumps of the attractant, aspartate, administered within milliseconds by photolysis of a photolabile precursor. The bacteria responded to <1% changes in Tar occupancy when adapted to aspartate over concentrations spanning three orders of magnitude. Response amplitudes increased approximately logarithmically with stimulus strength, extending responsiveness over a greater stimulus range. The extent and form of this relation indicates that, in contrast to mechanisms for adaptive recovery, excitation signal generation involves amplification based on cooperative interactions. These interactions could entail inactivation of multiple receptor-CheA signaling complexes and/or simultaneous activation of CheY-P dephosphorylation.

[1]  D E Koshland,et al.  Aspartate receptors of Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium bind ligand with negative and half-of-the-sites cooperativity. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[2]  L. Shapiro,et al.  Polar location of the chemoreceptor complex in the Escherichia coli cell. , 1993, Science.

[3]  D. Koshland,et al.  Quantitation of the sensory response in bacterial chemotaxis. , 1975, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  Karen A. Fahrner,et al.  Control of direction of flagellar rotation in bacterial chemotaxis. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  M. C. Chang,et al.  Effect of Prostaglandin F2α on the Early Pregnancy of Rabbits , 1972, Nature.

[6]  D. Bray,et al.  Receptor clustering as a cellular mechanism to control sensitivity , 1998, Nature.

[7]  J. Adler,et al.  Protein methylation in behavioural control mechanisms and in signal transduction , 1979, Nature.

[8]  H. Berg,et al.  Physics of chemoreception. , 1977, Biophysical journal.

[9]  H. Berg,et al.  Adaptation kinetics in bacterial chemotaxis , 1983, Journal of bacteriology.

[10]  E N Pugh,et al.  A quantitative account of the activation steps involved in phototransduction in amphibian photoreceptors. , 1992, The Journal of physiology.

[11]  Receptor interactions through phosphorylation and methylation pathways in bacterial chemotaxis. , 1988, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  P. R. Bevington,et al.  Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences , 1969 .

[13]  J. S. Parkinson,et al.  A model of excitation and adaptation in bacterial chemotaxis. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  D E Koshland,et al.  Quantitative analysis of bacterial migration in chemotaxis. , 1972, Nature: New biology.

[15]  D. Koshland,et al.  Tuning the responsiveness of a sensory receptor via covalent modification. , 1991, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[16]  D E Koshland,et al.  Membrane receptors for aspartate and serine in bacterial chemotaxis. , 1979, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[17]  J. Adler,et al.  The Range of Attractant Concentrations for Bacterial Chemotaxis and the Threshold and Size of Response over This Range , 1973, The Journal of general physiology.

[18]  J. Stock,et al.  Reconstitution of the bacterial chemotaxis signal transduction system from purified components. , 1991, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[19]  T. Duke,et al.  COOPERATIVE MODEL OF BACTERIAL SENSING , 1998, physics/9901052.

[20]  S. Chervitz,et al.  The two-component signaling pathway of bacterial chemotaxis: a molecular view of signal transduction by receptors, kinases, and adaptation enzymes. , 1997, Annual review of cell and developmental biology.

[21]  Ann M Stock,et al.  Structural basis for methylesterase CheB regulation by a phosphorylation-activated domain. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  D. Bray,et al.  Computer simulation of the phosphorylation cascade controlling bacterial chemotaxis. , 1993, Molecular biology of the cell.

[23]  M. Simon,et al.  Attenuation of sensory receptor signaling by covalent modification. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  G. Rapp,et al.  Flash lamp-based irradiation of caged compounds. , 1998, Methods in enzymology.

[25]  Kenji Oosawa,et al.  Phosphorylation of three proteins in the signaling pathway of bacterial chemotaxis , 1988, Cell.

[26]  R. C. Weast CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics , 1973 .

[27]  G. P. Reid,et al.  Chemotactic responses of Escherichia coli to small jumps of photoreleased L-aspartate. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[28]  J. S. Parkinson,et al.  Signal Transduction via the Multi-Step Phosphorelay: Not Necessarily a Road Less Traveled , 1996, Cell.

[29]  D. Brown,et al.  Temporal stimulation of chemotaxis in Escherichia coli. , 1974, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[30]  M. Simon,et al.  Transmembrane signal transduction in bacterial chemotaxis involves ligand-dependent activation of phosphate group transfer. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  H. Berg,et al.  Chemotaxis in Escherichia coli analysed by Three-dimensional Tracking , 1972, Nature.

[32]  J. S. Parkinson,et al.  Transmembrane signaling by bacterial chemoreceptors: E. coli transducers with locked signal output , 1988, Cell.

[33]  R. Weis,et al.  The serine receptor of bacterial chemotaxis exhibits half-site saturation for serine binding. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[34]  Uri Alon,et al.  Response regulator output in bacterial chemotaxis , 1998, The EMBO journal.

[35]  L. Buck,et al.  Information coding in the vertebrate olfactory system. , 1996, Annual review of neuroscience.

[36]  H. Berg,et al.  Transient response to chemotactic stimuli in Escherichia coli. , 1975, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[37]  G. P. Reid,et al.  Excitatory signaling in bacterial probed by caged chemoeffectors. , 1993, Biophysical journal.

[38]  H. Fujita,et al.  Genetic analysis of H2, the structural gene for phase-2 flagellin in Salmonella. , 1975, Journal of general microbiology.

[39]  J. Stock Sensitivity, cooperativity and gain in chemotaxis signal transduction. , 1999, Trends in microbiology.

[40]  S. Leibler,et al.  Robustness in simple biochemical networks , 1997, Nature.

[41]  P. Gardina,et al.  Attractant Signaling by an Aspartate Chemoreceptor Dimer with a Single Cytoplasmic Domain , 1996, Science.

[42]  D. Koshland,et al.  Reversible receptor methylation is essential for normal chemotaxis of Escherichia coli in gradients of aspartic acid. , 1988, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[43]  A J Hudspeth,et al.  How Hearing Happens , 1997, Neuron.

[44]  H. Berg,et al.  Temporal comparisons in bacterial chemotaxis. , 1986, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  R. Macnab,et al.  The gradient-sensing mechanism in bacterial chemotaxis. , 1972, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[46]  F. Neidhardt,et al.  Escherichia Coli and Salmonella: Typhimurium Cellular and Molecular Biology , 1987 .