Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America logoLink to Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
. 1988 Jan;85(1):83–87. doi: 10.1073/pnas.85.1.83

Reversible receptor methylation is essential for normal chemotaxis of Escherichia coli in gradients of aspartic acid.

R M Weis 1, D E Koshland Jr 1
PMCID: PMC279486  PMID: 2829179

Abstract

The chemotaxis of wild-type cells of Escherichia coli and double mutants lacking the methyltransferase and the methylesterase activities of the receptor modification system has been compared in spatial gradients of aspartic acid. Previous studies showing that a chemotactic response can be observed for the mutant raised questions about the role of methylation in the bacterial memory. To clarify the role of methylation, the redistribution of bacteria in stabilized defined gradients of aspartic acid was monitored by light scattering. There was no redistribution of the mutant cells in nonsaturating gradients of aspartic acid, but over the same range these mutant bacteria were observed to respond and to adapt during tethering experiments. In large saturating gradients of aspartate, slight movement of the mutant up the gradient was observed. These results show that dynamic receptor methylation is required for the chemotactic response to gentle gradients of aspartic acid and that methylation resets to zero and is part of the normal wild-type memory. There are certain gradients, however, in which the methylation-deficient mutants show chemotactic ability, thus explaining the apparent anomaly.

Full text

PDF
83

Images in this article

86Image
on p.86

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Aswad D., Koshland D. E., Jr Isolation, characterization and complementation of Salmonella typhimurium chemotaxis mutants. J Mol Biol. 1975 Sep 15;97(2):225–235. doi: 10.1016/s0022-2836(75)80036-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Berg H. C., Block S. M. A miniature flow cell designed for rapid exchange of media under high-power microscope objectives. J Gen Microbiol. 1984 Nov;130(11):2915–2920. doi: 10.1099/00221287-130-11-2915. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Berg H. C., Brown D. A. Chemotaxis in Escherichia coli analysed by three-dimensional tracking. Nature. 1972 Oct 27;239(5374):500–504. doi: 10.1038/239500a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Block S. M., Segall J. E., Berg H. C. Impulse responses in bacterial chemotaxis. Cell. 1982 Nov;31(1):215–226. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(82)90421-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Boyd A., Simon M. Bacterial chemotaxis. Annu Rev Physiol. 1982;44:501–517. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ph.44.030182.002441. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chelsky D., Gutterson N. I., Koshland D. E., Jr A diffusion assay for detection and quantitation of methyl-esterified proteins on polyacrylamide gels. Anal Biochem. 1984 Aug 15;141(1):143–148. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(84)90437-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Dahlquist F. W., Lovely P., Koshland D. E., Jr Quantitative analysis of bacterial migration in chemotaxis. Nat New Biol. 1972 Mar 29;236(65):120–123. doi: 10.1038/newbio236120a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Foster D. L., Mowbray S. L., Jap B. K., Koshland D. E., Jr Purification and characterization of the aspartate chemoreceptor. J Biol Chem. 1985 Sep 25;260(21):11706–11710. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Futrelle R. P., Berg H. C. Specification of gradients used for studies of chemotaxis. Nature. 1972 Oct 27;239(5374):517–518. doi: 10.1038/239517a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kehry M. R., Bond M. W., Hunkapiller M. W., Dahlquist F. W. Enzymatic deamidation of methyl-accepting chemotaxis proteins in Escherichia coli catalyzed by the cheB gene product. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983 Jun;80(12):3599–3603. doi: 10.1073/pnas.80.12.3599. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Koshland D. E., Jr Biochemistry of sensing and adaptation in a simple bacterial system. Annu Rev Biochem. 1981;50:765–782. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bi.50.070181.004001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Macnab R. M., Koshland D. E., Jr The gradient-sensing mechanism in bacterial chemotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1972 Sep;69(9):2509–2512. doi: 10.1073/pnas.69.9.2509. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Niwano M., Taylor B. L. Novel sensory adaptation mechanism in bacterial chemotaxis to oxygen and phosphotransferase substrates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1982 Jan;79(1):11–15. doi: 10.1073/pnas.79.1.11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Parkinson J. S., Houts S. E. Isolation and behavior of Escherichia coli deletion mutants lacking chemotaxis functions. J Bacteriol. 1982 Jul;151(1):106–113. doi: 10.1128/jb.151.1.106-113.1982. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Parkinson J. S., Parker S. R., Talbert P. B., Houts S. E. Interactions between chemotaxis genes and flagellar genes in Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol. 1983 Jul;155(1):265–274. doi: 10.1128/jb.155.1.265-274.1983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Russo A. F., Koshland D. E., Jr Separation of signal transduction and adaptation functions of the aspartate receptor in bacterial sensing. Science. 1983 Jun 3;220(4601):1016–1020. doi: 10.1126/science.6302843. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Segall J. E., Block S. M., Berg H. C. Temporal comparisons in bacterial chemotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1986 Dec;83(23):8987–8991. doi: 10.1073/pnas.83.23.8987. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Silverman M., Simon M. Flagellar rotation and the mechanism of bacterial motility. Nature. 1974 May 3;249(452):73–74. doi: 10.1038/249073a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Springer M. S., Goy M. F., Adler J. Protein methylation in behavioural control mechanisms and in signal transduction. Nature. 1979 Jul 26;280(5720):279–284. doi: 10.1038/280279a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Stock J. B., Maderis A. M., Koshland D. E., Jr Bacterial chemotaxis in the absence of receptor carboxylmethylation. Cell. 1981 Nov;27(1 Pt 2):37–44. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(81)90358-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Stock J., Borczuk A., Chiou F., Burchenal J. E. Compensatory mutations in receptor function: a reevaluation of the role of methylation in bacterial chemotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985 Dec;82(24):8364–8368. doi: 10.1073/pnas.82.24.8364. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Stock J., Kersulis G., Koshland D. E., Jr Neither methylating nor demethylating enzymes are required for bacterial chemotaxis. Cell. 1985 Sep;42(2):683–690. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(85)90125-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Taylor B. L. Role of proton motive force in sensory transduction in bacteria. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1983;37:551–573. doi: 10.1146/annurev.mi.37.100183.003003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Terwilliger T. C., Koshland D. E., Jr Sites of methyl esterification and deamination on the aspartate receptor involved in chemotaxis. J Biol Chem. 1984 Jun 25;259(12):7719–7725. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. VOGEL H. J., BONNER D. M. Acetylornithinase of Escherichia coli: partial purification and some properties. J Biol Chem. 1956 Jan;218(1):97–106. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America are provided here courtesy of National Academy of Sciences

RESOURCES