Skip to main content
RNA Biology logoLink to RNA Biology
. 2015 Aug 14;12(9):933–937. doi: 10.1080/15476286.2015.1073438

A Type III protein-RNA toxin-antitoxin system from Bacillus thuringiensis promotes plasmid retention during spore development

Francesca L Short #, Rita E Monson *, George PC Salmond *,*
PMCID: PMC4615649  PMID: 26274022

Abstract

Members of the Bacillus cereus sensu lato group of bacteria often contain multiple large plasmids, including those encoding virulence factors in B. anthracis. Bacillus species can develop into spores in response to stress. During sporulation the genomic content of the cell is heavily compressed, which could result in counterselection of extrachromosomal genomic elements, unless they have robust stabilization and segregation systems. Toxin-antitoxin (TA) systems are near-ubiquitous in prokaryotes and have multiple biological roles, including plasmid stabilization during vegetative growth. Here, we have shown that a Type III TA system, based on an RNA antitoxin and endoribonuclease toxin, from plasmid pAW63 in Bacillus thuringiensis serovar kurstaki HD-73 can dramatically promote plasmid retention in populations undergoing sporulation and germination, and we provide evidence that this occurs through the post-segregational killing of plasmid-free forespores. Our findings show how an extremely common genetic module can be used to ensure plasmid maintenance during stress-induced developmental transitions, with implications for plasmid dynamics in B. cereus s.l. bacteria.

Keywords: Bacillus cereus group, endoribonuclease, post-segregation killing, RNA antitoxin, sporulation, Type III Toxin-Antitoxin

Introduction

Bacteria of the Bacillus cereus sensu lato (s.l.) group (sensu lato meaning “in the widest sense”) often carry multiple large plasmids, which can define dramatic virulence phenotypes. The B. cereus s.l. group includes the etiological agent of anthrax, Bacillus anthracis, the insect pathogen Bacillus thuringiensis, emetic B. cereus sensu stricto strains, and several harmless soil-dwelling species.1 The need to differentiate the bioterrorism agent B. anthracis from other B. cereus s.l. species stimulated research into the relationships between these organisms. This revealed that the B. cereus s.l. bacteria in fact belong to the same phylogenetic unit, having a lower genome fluidity constant than Escherichia coli, and few or no distinguishing genetic features on their main chromosomes.2,3 Virulence determinants, such as the anthrax toxin and capsule genes, and the delta-endotoxin genes of B. thuringiensis, are encoded on large, mobile plasmids. The observation that B. cereus sensu stricto bacteria carrying B. anthracis virulence plasmids can cause anthrax, but B. anthracis strains lacking these plasmids are avirulent3-5 illustrates the necessity of plasmid-encoded products for pathogenicity. Defining the mechanisms of dissemination and retention of plasmids within the B. cereus s.l. group is central to understanding how pathogenesis phenotypes evolve, are maintained, and transferred among members of this group of normally harmless bacteria.

All Bacillus species can undergo sporulation – a developmental pathway that produces a highly resilient, dormant cell type – in response to certain types of stress, such as starvation.6 Spore development begins with an asymmetric cell division and at later stages requires the genomic content of the cell to be heavily compressed.6 These physical constraints may select against the retention of extrachromosomal elements in the spore, however, sporulation occurs against a backdrop of stress where keeping the extrachromosomal genome (the encoded products of which could provide adaptive advantages on germination) could be beneficial. The function of plasmid maintenance systems in the context of a sporulation cycle has been poorly explored. Inheritance of B. cereus s.l. plasmids during sporulation is often attributed to active partitioning systems, however very few of these have been studied specifically during spore development. AlfA of B. subtilis is an actin homolog with a role in plasmid partition during sporulation, and increased plasmid retention from 18% to 58%.7 The same study found that plasmid retention was also enhanced by the developmentally-regulated chromosome remodelling protein RacA, which is thought to tether the plasmid at the forespore pole.7 The B. thuringiensis virulence plasmid pBtoxis encodes a tubulin-like partition protein, TubZ, which increases plasmid retention during sporulation from 69% to 100%.8 Background loss of naturally-occurring Bacillus plasmids during sporulation varies dramatically, with loss rates ranging from 5–95% reported for 4 different plasmids in B. cereus.9 Though difficult to assess from such a small number of studies, it seems that known active partition systems alone are not sufficient to account for the extensive plasmid profiles observed in members of the B. cereus s.l. bacteria.

Toxin-antitoxin (TA) systems are a group of near-ubiquitous prokaryotic genetic modules that have multiple biological roles, including plasmid stabilization.10,11 TA loci are typically arranged as operons, and the encoded antitoxins are unstable in comparison with their toxin partners.11 TA systems can stabilize plasmids through post-segregational killing (PSK), also called plasmid “addiction,” in which the chance loss of the TA-encoding plasmid results in depletion of the unstable antitoxin, thereby releasing the toxin to kill the plasmid-free segregants.12

ToxINBt is a Type III (protein:RNA) TA system encoded by pAW63; a conjugative, cryptic plasmid of Bacillus thuringiensis sr kurstaki HD-73.13,14 Type III TA loci encode a ribonuclease toxin coupled to an antitoxic processed RNA, which suppresses the toxin by forming an inactive protein-RNA complex (Fig. 1A).14-16 Currently, there is no evidence that ToxINBt provides protection from bacteriophage, unlike some other Type III TA systems.14,15,17 ToxINBt does, however, promote plasmid maintenance during vegetative growth in B. subtilis, and is expressed at moderately high levels under standard laboratory growth conditions, suggesting its biological role may be to stabilize its source plasmid, pAW63.14,18

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

ToxINBt promotes plasmid retention during sporulation and germination while reducing sporulation efficiency (A) Schematic of the toxINBt system. The antitoxin, ToxIBt, is encoded as a series of repeats upstream of the toxNBt gene, and both are expressed from a constitutive promoter. The ribonuclease ToxNBt cleaves ToxIBt transcript into individual repeats, which then remain bound to their parent enzyme in an inactive, triangular assembly. (B) Retention of plasmids in B. subtilis YB886 after one round of sporulation and germination. Results shown are mean ± SD for 2 (ToxINBt-6×His) or 3 (ToxINBt, ToxINBt-FS) biological replicates. S-phase indicates stationary phase cultures. (C) Comparison of the toxicity of wild-type and hexahistidine-tagged ToxNBt. Viable counts of E. coli are shown where ToxNBt expression is repressed with D-glucose, or induced with L-arabinose.

In this study, we have examined the effect of the Type III TA system toxINBt of plasmid pAW63 on plasmid inheritance through a sporulation cycle in Bacillus subtilis. Our aim was to determine if TA systems could represent a general mechanism to ensure propagation of B. cereus s.l. plasmids, including those essential for virulence, in environments that favor sporulation.

Results and Discussion

The effect of toxINBt on plasmid retention during sporulation was tested using a medium copy-number pHCMC05-derived toxINBt plasmid in the host strain B. subtilis YB886, with a frameshifted toxINBt derivative encoding a truncated ToxNBt protein (toxINBt-FS) as a negative control. Cultures were grown to stationary phase under antibiotic selection and then transferred to sporulation medium, in order to minimise the window for plasmid loss prior to sporulation. Spores were harvested and plated after 18 hours, and individual colonies from the germinated spores were then patch-plated onto selective media to identify those that had retained the plasmid. As shown (Fig. 1B), the control plasmid was lost from 58% of cells in the culture following a single round of sporulation and germination. In contrast, the vector encoding functional toxINBt was lost from only 6% of cells. Note that the frequency of control plasmid loss during sporulation (58 ± 6%) is very high in comparison to the loss rate of the same plasmid during vegetative growth (4.75 × 10–3 per cell per generation).14 A third vector encoding toxINBt with a C-terminal hexahistidine tag on ToxNBt showed an intermediate phenotype and was lost in 25% of the germinated spores. A western blot against ToxNBt-6×His detected the protein in vegetative cells but not spores (data not shown). The difference in the stabilization effects of the native and hexahistidine-tagged toxINBt constructs could be due to the reduced toxicity of the tagged protein, as shown in an E. coli overexpression assay (Fig. 1C). The toxINBt locus therefore dramatically enhances plasmid retention during sporulation, and this appears to be through a toxicity-dependent mechanism.

If ToxINBt promotes plasmid retention by killing plasmid-free forespores at some point between septation and the formation of the mature spore, it would be expected that cells carrying a toxINBt-encoding plasmid would show reduced sporulation efficiency compared to cells without an addictive plasmid. We tested this possibility by comparing total viable counts and spore counts of B. subtilis YB886 strains carrying either a toxINBt or toxINBt-FS plasmid over the course of a sporulation cycle. Cultures were grown to stationary phase with antibiotic selection then transferred to sporulation medium, and viable cell and spore counts were measured at various time points from 16 to 48 hours following transfer. The total number of spores produced by each strain was then compared to determine whether the toxINBt-containing strain showed reduced sporulation efficiency. As shown (Fig. 2; Table 1), both B. subtilis YB886 strains had an average viable count of ∼1.3 × 109 on transfer to sporulation medium, and no spores were detected at this stage. After 16 hours' incubation in sporulation medium, the control strain had an average spore count of 9.9 × 106 colony forming units (cfu) per mL, and this increased to 2.5 × 108 cfu.mL-1 over the course of the experiment. The average spore count of cultures carrying the toxINBt-encoding plasmid was much lower, at 4.2 × 106 cfu.mL-1 after 16 hours and 8.8 × 107 cfu.mL-1 at the 48 hour endpoint. This trend was consistent across all time points (Fig. 2; Table 1), and a 2-way ANOVA performed on the data strongly supported the significance of the difference in spore count between the 2 strains (F = 63.3, p = 1.2 × 10–8). The overall efficiency of spore formation for bacteria carrying the toxINBt plasmid, as a proportion of the control strain, was 40.8% (average across all time points). Note that the average efficiency of sporulation in cells carrying a toxINBt plasmid (40.8%, Table 1) is similar to the background retention of the control vector during sporulation (42%, Table 1). Overall, our data demonstrate that the presence of toxINBt on a test plasmid dramatically increases retention of that plasmid in a bacterial population during sporulation and germination, but reduces the proportion of cells in a culture that form a mature spore. These results are consistent with the idea that, for a toxINBt-encoding strain to complete sporulation, a copy of the locus must be partitioned to the forespore. We suggest that toxINBt promotes plasmid retention in the context of a sporulation cycle through the killing of plasmid-free forespores by ToxNBt, prior to spore maturation (Fig. 3). To our knowledge, this is the first indication that a TA system can promote plasmid retention specifically in the context of spore development in Bacillus.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Plasmid-encoded toxINBt reduces sporulation efficiency. Total (A) and heat-resistant (B) viable count of B. subtilis YB886 cultures containing plasmid pFLS79 (toxINBt-FS; triangles) or pFLS80 (toxINBt; circles) measured over time following transfer to Difco sporulation medium at stationary phase. Results shown are mean ± SD for 3 biological replicates. Dashed lines in the right-hand chart indicate extrapolation to the detection limit. See Table 1 for calculated sporulation efficiency.

Table 1.

Effect of toxINBt on sporulation efficiency of B. subtilis YB886

    Efficiency of sporulation
  Average Spore count (cfu.ml−1)
toxINBt cfu.ml−1/
Time (hours) toxINBt toxINBt-FS toxINBt-FS cfu.ml−1
0 <100 <100  
16 4.2 × 106 9.9 × 106 0.42
18 6.0 × 107 8.7 × 107 0.69
20 5.2 × 107 1.8 × 108 0.29
22 9.4 × 107 2.5 × 108 0.38
24 7.1 × 107 2.2 × 108 0.32
48 8.8 × 107 2.5 × 108 0.35

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Schematic of toxINBt mechanism of plasmid stabilization during sporulation. ToxINBt is present in vegetative cells as an inactive complex, which is expressed constitutively to replenish the inhibitory ToxIBt. At sporulation, formation of the septum can exclude the toxINBt plasmid from the prespore (right), which will result in the release of ToxNBt in the prespore following ToxIBt degradation. The plasmid-free prespore is thus unable to form a mature spore. If the plasmid is retained in the prespore after the septum forms (left), ToxIBt is maintained at protective levels during sporulation. The spore can mature and the plasmid is retained.

ToxINBt is a Type III TA system, however we envisage that the stabilization phenotype observed here could be mediated by TA systems of other Types, provided they have the differential stability and toxicity required for PSK. Note that several B. subtilis Type I TA loci have been proposed to have stabilization activity, and one, txpA-ratA, was suggested to specifically prevent the loss of the excised form of the skn-1 prophage during sporulation though this was not shown experimentally.19

The notion that PSK during sporulation could also be mediated by other TA system Types leads to the question of whether enough B. cereus s.l. plasmids contain TA loci for these systems to represent a general strategy for promoting plasmid retention in populations of bacteria undergoing sporulation. Besides toxINBt, there are 3 experimentally validated TA systems from B. cereus s.l. plasmids.20,21 However, many more have been predicted through bioinformatic approaches.16,22, 23 Further work is warranted to determine the true prevalence of TA loci in plasmids of B. cereus s.l. bacteria, and how these contribute to plasmid dynamics.

The retention of Bacillus plasmids has usually been attributed to active partitioning systems, though very few of these systems have been tested during sporulation. The effect of the putative partition system from the toxINBt source plasmid (pAW63) has not been tested during sporulation, though during vegetative growth this system promotes retention to 87% over 40 generations.24 In this context, it seems that additional mechanisms must also have contributed to the extensive plasmid profiles observed in members of the B. cereus s.l. bacteria. Here we have shown that a TA system can provide a second-line mechanism if partitioning or replication fail, by preventing the maturation of plasmid-free forespores. We propose that TA systems contribute to plasmid dynamics within the B. cereus s.l. group by promoting plasmid retention during stress-induced developmental transitions, with implications for the retention and dissemination of virulence determinants in these bacteria.

Materials and Methods

Bacterial strains and plasmid construction

Strains and plasmids used are listed in Table 2. Plasmid pFLS78, which encodes toxINBt-6xHis, was generated by amplifying the toxINBt locus from B. thuringiensis sr kurstaki HD-73 genomic DNA using the primers FS105 (5′-CCTTGGTACCGCAGAGAGAGATAAATAA-3′) and FS101 (5′-GGTGCCCGGGTTAATGGTGATGGTGATGGTGTCTCTCACGCCCCATTTG-3′; encodes hexahistidine tag). The resulting PCR product was then cloned into pHCMC05 using the KpnI/SmaI restriction sites. Plasmid pFLS82, which encodes ToxNBt-6xHis under the control of a p-ARA promoter, was constructed using the primers PF197 (5′-TTTGAATTCGGAGAAGAAAGTTGACTAATAAAG-3′) and FS77 (5′-GGTGAAGCTTAATGGTGATGGTGATGGTGCGCTCTCTCACGCCCCATTTG-3′) to amplify the toxNBt gene and introduce the C-terminal 6xHis tag, and the PCR product was cloned into pBAD30 using the EcoRI/HindIII restriction sites. Toxicity tests in E. coli DH5α were performed as reported previously.15

Table 2.

Strains and plasmids used in this study

Strain Description Source
Bacillus subtilis YB886 trpC2 metB10 xin-1 SPβS Yasbin et al. 1980 25
Escherichia coli DH5α K-12 strain: F Φ80lacZΔM15 Δ(lacZYA-argF) U169 recA1 endA1 hsdR17(rK mK+) phoA supE44 λthi-1 relA1 gyrA96 Invitrogen
Plasmid    
pBAD30 E. coli overexpression vector, ApR, p-ARA promoter induced by L-arabinose, repressed by glucose Guzman et al. 1995 26
pFLS78 toxINBt-6×His in pHCMC05, native promoter, ApR CmR This study
pFLS79 toxINBt-FS in pHCMC05, native promoter, ApR CmR Short et al. 2013 14
pFLS80 toxINBt in pHCMC05, native promoter, ApR CmR Short et al. 2013 14
pFLS82 toxNBt-6×His in pBAD30, ApR This study
pHCMC05 E. coli-Bacillus shuttle vector, ApR CmR Nguyen et al. 2005 27
pTA117 toxNBt in pBAD30, ApR Fineran et al. 2009 15

Plasmid loss assays

Overnight cultures of B. subtilis YB886 containing plasmid pFLS78, pFLS79 or pFLS80 were used to inoculate 20 mL LB supplemented with 10μg.mL-1 chloramphenicol, and these cultures were grown at 30°C to stationary phase. A sample of each culture was taken at this stage and plated on LB agar, then incubated overnight at 30°C. Stationary phase cultures were harvested by centrifugation and washed twice with 20 mL Difco sporulation medium, then resuspended in 10 mL Difco sporulation medium without added antibiotics and incubated for 18 hours at 30°C. Cultures were harvested by centrifugation and resuspended in sterile phosphate-buffered saline, and then incubated at 70°C for 10 minutes to kill vegetative cells. Spore preparations were then serially diluted in sterile 1xPBS, plated on LB agar and incubated overnight at 30°C. Plasmid-containing cells in the stationary phase cultures, and in the spore preparations, were quantified by patching single colonies grown onto nonselective media onto LB plates containing 10 μg.mL-1 chloramphenicol, followed by incubation overnight at 30°C.

Sporulation efficiency tests

Cultures of B. subtilis YB886 carrying either pFLS79 or pFLS80 were grown in selective rich medium followed by nonselective Difco sporulation medium, as for the plasmid loss assays. At 0, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24 and 48 hours after transfer to Difco sporulation medium, a 0.5 mL sample of each culture was taken and serially diluted and plated for viable counts on plain LB agar. The same sample was then heat-treated at 80°C for 10 minutes to kill vegetative cells, and the treated sample was plated for viable counts on plain LB agar. Plates were incubated overnight at 30°C.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Acknowledgments

We thank Tim Blower and members of the Salmond lab for useful discussions, and Shue-Li Ong for technical assistance. We also thank the Bacillus Genetic Stock Center (Ohio) for providing plasmids and strains.

Funding

This work was supported by a Commonwealth Scholarship from the Commonwealth Scholarships Commission (UK) and Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral fellowship to FLS, and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (UK).

References

  • 1. Rasko DA, Altherr MR, Han CS, Ravel J. Genomics of the Bacillus cereus group of organisms. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2005; 29:303-29; PMID:15808746 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Zwick ME, Joseph SJ, Didelot X, Chen PE, Bishop-Lilly KA, Stewart AC, Willner K, Nolan N, Lentz S, Thomason MK, et al. Genomic characterization of the Bacillus cereus sensu lato species: backdrop to the evolution of Bacillus anthracis. Genome Res 2012; 22:1512-24; PMID:22645259; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1101/gr.134437.111 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Kolstø A-B, Tourasse NJ, Økstad OA. What sets Bacillus anthracis apart from other Bacillus species? Annu Rev Microbiol 2009; 63:451-76; PMID:19514852; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1146/annurev.micro.091208.073255 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Hoffmaster AR, Ravel J, Rasko DA, Chapman GD, Chute MD, Marston CK, De BK, Sacchi CT, Fitzgerald C, Mayer LW, et al. Identification of anthrax toxin genes in a Bacillus cereus associated with an illness resembling inhalation anthrax. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004; 101:8449-54; PMID:15155910; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.0402414101 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Klee SR, Brzuszkiewicz EB, Nattermann H, Brüggemann H, Dupke S, Wollherr A, Franz T, Pauli G, Appel B, Liebl W, et al. The genome of a Bacillus isolate causing anthrax in chimpanzees combines chromosomal properties of B. cereus with B. anthracis virulence plasmids. PLoS One 2010; 5:e10986; PMID:20634886; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pone.0010986 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Tan IS, Ramamurthi KS. Spore formation in Bacillus subtilis. Environ Microbiol Rep 2014; 6:212-25; PMID:24983526; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/1758-2229.12130 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Becker E, Herrera NC, Gunderson FQ, Derman AI, Dance AL, Sims J, Larsen R a, Pogliano J. DNA segregation by the bacterial actin AlfA during Bacillus subtilis growth and development. EMBO J 2006; 25:5919-31; PMID:17139259; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/sj.emboj.7601443 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Larsen RA, Cusumano C, Fujioka A, Lim-Fong G, Patterson P, Pogliano J. Treadmilling of a prokaryotic tubulin-like protein, TubZ, required for plasmid stability in Bacillus thuringiensis. Genes Dev 2007; 21:1340-52; PMID:17510284; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1101/gad.1546107 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Turgeon N, Laflamme C, Ho J, Duchaine C. Evaluation of the plasmid copy number in B. cereus spores, during germination, bacterial growth and sporulation using real-time PCR. Plasmid 2008; 60:118-24; PMID:18582938; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.plasmid.2008.05.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Van Melderen L. Toxin-antitoxin systems: why so many, what for? Curr Opin Microbiol 2010; 13:781-5; PMID:21041110; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.mib.2010.10.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Unterholzner SJ, Poppenberger B, Rozhon W. Toxin–antitoxin systems: Biology, identification, and application. Mob Genet Elements 2013; 3:e26219; PMID:24251069; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.4161/mge.26219 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Gerdes K, Rasmussen PB, Molin S. Unique type of plasmid maintenance function: postsegregational killing of plasmid-free cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1986; 83:3116-20; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.83.10.3116 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Van der Auwera GA, Andrup L, Mahillon J. Conjugative plasmid pAW63 brings new insights into the genesis of the Bacillus anthracis virulence plasmid pXO2 and of the Bacillus thuringiensis plasmid pBT9727. BMC Genomics 2005; 6:103; PMID:16042811; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1186/1471-2164-6-103 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Short FL, Pei XY, Blower TR, Ong S-L, Fineran PC, Luisi BF, Salmond GPC. Selectivity and self-assembly in the control of a bacterial toxin by an antitoxic noncoding RNA pseudoknot. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2013; 110:E241-249; PMID:23267117; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1216039110 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Fineran P, Blower T, Foulds IJ, Humphreys DP, Lilley KS, Salmond GPC. The phage abortive infection system, ToxIN, functions as a protein–RNA toxin–antitoxin pair. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009; 106:894-9; PMID:19124776; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.0808832106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Blower TR, Short FL, Rao F, Mizuguchi K, Pei XY, Fineran PC, Luisi BF, Salmond GPC. Identification and classification of bacterial Type III toxin-antitoxin systems encoded in chromosomal and plasmid genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 2012; 40:6158-73; PMID:22434880; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1093/nar/gks231 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Samson JE, Bélanger M, Moineau S. Effect of the abortive infection mechanism and type III toxin/antitoxin system AbiQ on the lytic cycle of Lactococcus lactis phages. J Bacteriol 2013; 195:3947-56; PMID:23813728; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1128/JB.00296-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Van der Auwera GA, Mahillon J. Transcriptional analysis of the conjugative plasmid pAW63 from Bacillus thuringiensis. Plasmid 2008; 60:190-9; PMID:18761035; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.plasmid.2008.07.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Durand S, Jahn N, Condon C, Brantl S. Type I toxin-antitoxin systems in Bacillus subtilis. RNA Biol 2012; 9:1491-7; PMID:23059907; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.4161/rna.22358 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Fico S, Mahillon J. TasA-tasB, a new putative toxin-antitoxin (TA) system from Bacillus thuringiensis pGI1 plasmid is a widely distributed composite mazE-doc TA system. BMC Genomics 2006; 7:259; PMID:17038198; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1186/1471-2164-7-259 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Liu X, Zhu S, Ye W, Ruan L, Yu Z, Zhao C, Sun M. Genetic characterisation of two putative toxin-antitoxin systems on cryptic plasmids from Bacillus thuringiensis strain YBT-1520. J Microbiol Biotechnol 2008; 18:1630-3; PMID:18955810 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Sevin EW, Barloy-Hubler F. RASTA-Bacteria: a web-based tool for identifying toxin-antitoxin loci in prokaryotes. Genome Biol 2007; 8:R155; PMID:17678530; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1186/gb-2007-8-8-r155 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Shao Y, Harrison EM, Bi D, Tai C, He X, Ou H-Y, Rajakumar K, Deng Z. TADB: a web-based resource for Type 2 toxin-antitoxin loci in bacteria and archaea. Nucleic Acids Res 2011; 39:D606-11; PMID:20929871; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1093/nar/gkq908 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Wilcks A, Smidt L, Okstad OA, Kolsto A B, Mahillon J, Andrup L. Replication mechanism and sequence analysis of the replicon of pAW63, a conjugative plasmid from Bacillus thuringiensis. J Bacteriol 1999; 181:3193-200; PMID:10322022 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Yasbin RE, Fields PI, Andersen BJ. Properties of Bacillus subtilis 168 derivatives freed of their natural prophages. Gene 1980; 12:155-9; PMID:6783474; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/0378-1119(80)90026-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Guzman LM, Belin D, Carson MJ, Beckwith J. Tight regulation, modulation, and high-level expression by vectors containing the arabinose pBAD promoter. J Bacteriol 1995; 177:4121-30; PMID:7608087 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Nguyen HD, Nguyen QA, Ferreira RC, Ferreira LCS, Tran LT, Schumann W. Construction of plasmid-based expression vectors for Bacillus subtilis exhibiting full structural stability. Plasmid 2005; 54:241-8; PMID:16005967; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.plasmid.2005.05.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from RNA Biology are provided here courtesy of Taylor & Francis

RESOURCES