Abstract
In the model organism Escherichia coli and related species, the general stress response relies on tight regulation of the intracellular levels of the promoter specificity subunit RpoS. RpoS turnover is exclusively dependent on RssB, a two‐domain response regulator that functions as an adaptor that delivers RpoS to ClpXP for proteolysis. Here, we report crystal structures of the receiver domain of RssB both in its unphosphorylated form and bound to the phosphomimic BeF3 −. Surprisingly, we find only modest differences between these two structures, suggesting that truncating RssB may partially activate the receiver domain to a “meta‐active” state. Our structural and sequence analysis points to RssB proteins not conforming to either the Y–T coupling scheme for signaling seen in prototypical response regulators, such as CheY, or to the signaling model of the less understood FATGUY proteins.
Keywords: adaptor, ClpXP, general stress response, response regulator, RpoS, RssB
Short abstract
1. INTRODUCTION
Two‐component systems mediate signal transduction in bacteria and consist of an environmental cue‐sensing histidine kinase that phosphorylates a response regulator composed of either a self‐standing “receiver” (REC) domain or a REC domain fused to an effector (EFF) domain. 1 The REC tunes the activity of the EFF domain in response to phosphorylation of a conserved aspartate within the REC. While early studies conceptualized the REC module in terms of a binary logic element (existing in the phosphorylated ON and a nonphosphorylated OFF form), numerous subsequent studies have documented that REC domains exist in a dynamic equilibrium of multiple conformations, with activation sometimes preceding phosphotransfer. 2 , 3 What has become clear is that phosphorylation‐dependent activation often involves small structural changes within self‐standing RECs, or oligomerization and closed‐to‐open transitions within multidomain REC proteins (reviewed by Gao et al. 1 ). These changes are often unique to each REC subfamily. Thus, despite a common architectural scaffold, a general mechanistic scheme for REC activation does not hold.
Here, we focus on RssB, a two‐domain response regulator (Figure 1a,b) and the poorly understood role of its phosphorylation. RssB, a key element of the general stress response in both commensal and pathogenic γ‐proteobacteria, is best understood in Escherichia coli, where it serves as the only ClpXP adaptor for RpoS, the master regulator of the general stress response. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 RssB delivers RpoS to the ClpXP proteolytic machine for degradation. 5 , 8 Thus, RpoS levels remain low due to rapid turnover when cells are actively dividing. Upon encountering stress, they increase in large part due to inhibition of RssB by so‐called anti‐adaptors (IraM, IraP, IraD, and IraL), 9 , 10 favoring competition of RpoS with other promoter specificity subunits for core RNA polymerase. 11 This results in large‐scale transcriptional reprogramming. 12 , 13
FIGURE 1.

Overall architecture of IraD‐bound RssBD58P and RssBREC in the absence/presence of phosphoryl analog, BeF3 −. (a) Primary and secondary structure of Escherichia coli RssBREC. Asp58 is indicated with a red circle. Green circles indicate locations at which substitutions result in defects in RpoS degradation. 16 Purple rectangles indicate residues, which together with Asp58 constitute the signaling quintet. (b) Structure of IraD‐bound RssBD58P variant with REC in cyan and the EFF domain in pink. IraD (gray) docks primarily on the 4‐5‐5 face of RssBREC. Residue 58 is shown as red sticks. (c) Superposition of apo RssBREC (pale cyan) and RssBREC bound to beryllofluoride (dark teal, r.m.s.d. of 0.41 Å). Apo RssBREC also superimposes well (r.m.s.d. of 0.28 Å) with a previously reported structure of the same domain in the nonphosphorylated state (PDB ID 6Z4C). 15 (d,e) The phosphorylation site in RssBREC•BeF3 −•Mg2+ (d) and RssBREC (e). Mg2+ is green, while beryllium is magenta and fluoride yellow. A Polder omit map contoured at 3σ (slate mesh) shows clear electron density for the phosphoryl analog, Mg2+ and two water molecules (red spheres). In apo RssBREC, Asp58 hydrogen bonds to Lys108, Ser86, and a water molecule (red sphere)
RpoS proteolysis is also modulated by phosphorylation of Asp58 in RssB, but the few existing reports do not agree on its role. 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 This prompted us to solve the crystal structure of the RssB REC domain (RssBREC) in its nonphosphorylated form and bound to the phosphomimetic BeF3 −. We find only subtle conformational differences between RssBREC in the presence/absence of Mg2+•BeF3 −, suggesting that deletion of the C‐terminal domain may partially activate RssBREC even in the absence of a phosphomimic. Such conformational states in which only a subset of residues switch to the conformers seen in phosphorylated RECs or RECs bound to phosphomimetics have been observed in the context of other response regulators, and have been dubbed “meta‐active” states. 19 , 20 , 21 Our analysis also indicates that signaling in RssB is atypical. RssB lacks canonical Tyr/Thr switch residues, and likely does not conform to the Y–T coupling model seen in classic receiver domains such as CheY. 22 Alternative signaling mechanisms, such as seen in the lesser understood FATGUY subfamily 23 are also unlikely to apply, making RssB a response regulator with an unusual mechanism of action.
2. RESULTS
2.1. The RssB phosphorylation site
We first attempted to determine the structure of full‐length RssB, but our crystallization efforts were hampered by the limited solubility of the full‐length protein construct. Instead, we determined the crystal structure of RssBREC (residues 1–129) with an intact phosphoacceptor site (Asp58) in its nonphosphorylated state and bound to the BeF3 − phosphomimetic (Table 1, Figure 1). This has been found to bind and activate numerous response regulators 24 and, due to the great lability in solution of the natural phosphate‐acid linkage, has been widely used in crystallization. RssBREC has the canonical (βα)5 REC fold (Figure 1c) and possesses a typical signaling quintet. This includes residues Asp15, Glu16, involved in Mg2+ binding, but also Lys108, which reaches toward Asp58, and Ser86 that stabilizes the Lys108 amide both in the absence and presence of beryllofluoride (Figure 1d,e). Substitution of Lys108 results in negative effects on RssB function in vivo 16 and in vitro, 15 , 16 consistent with our structures. Similar defects were observed for a Pro109 variant (Figure 1a). 16 Invariant Pro109 mediates a cis‐peptide bond in the β5‐α5 loop, a conserved feature of many response regulators, 24 , 25 which imposes more stringent constraints on stereochemistry and may explain why the rssB P109S allele is defective and temperature‐sensitive. 16
TABLE 1.
Crystallographic data and refinement statistics
| RssBREC | RssBREC•BeF3 −•Mg2+ | |
|---|---|---|
| Data collection | ||
| X‐ray source | Advanced Photon Source 24ID‐E | Advanced Photon Source 24ID‐C |
| Space group | P3121 | P3121 |
| Cell dimensions | ||
| a,b,c (Å) a | 46.46, 46.46, 95.85 | 46.33, 46.33, 95.89 |
| α,β,γ (°) | 90.0, 90.0, 90.0 | 90.0, 90.0, 120.0 |
| Mosaicity (°) | 0.17 | 0.14 |
| Wavelength (Å) | 0.97911 | 0.97918 |
| Resolution (Å) | 40.0–1.85 (1.92–1.85) a | 40.12‐1.91 (1.95‐1.91) a |
| No. reflections/unique reflections | 112,144/10,656 | 90,612/9,772 |
| Completeness (%) | 98.9 (92.52) | 99.4 (94.6) |
| Redundancy | 10.5 (6.4) | 9.3 (6.7) |
| <I/σ(I)> | 24.77 (2.2) | 21.0 (1.7) |
| R merge | 0.049 (0.745) | 0.087 (0.992) |
| R meas | 0.051 (0.806) | 0.088 (0.994) |
| R pim | 0.0155 (0.300) | 0.028 (0.366) |
| CC1/2 | 0.999 (0.943) | 0.999 (0.690) |
| Refinement | ||
| Resolution (Å) | 40.0–1.85 | 40.12–1.91 |
| No. reflections, working set | 10,632 (977) | 9,693 (898) |
| No. reflections, test set | 1,052 (96) | 962 (86) |
| R work/R free (%)c | 20.04/22.62 | 20.2/24.5 |
| No. nonhydrogen atoms | ||
| Protein | 983 | 987 |
| Water | 36 | 44 |
| B‐factors (Å2) | ||
| Protein | 45 | 42 |
| Water | 45 | 44 |
| Ion/ligand | ‐ | 36.5 |
| R.m.s.d. | ||
| Bond lengths (Å) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bond angles (°) | 1.11 | 1.14 |
| Coordinate error (Å) b | 0.17 | 0.17 |
| Ramachandran plot analysis | ||
| Preferred (%) | 99.2 | 98.4 |
| Allowed (%) | 0.8 | 1.59 |
| Disallowed (%) | 0 | 0 |
| Rotamer outliers (%) | 0.91 | 0 |
| PDB ID | 7L9C | 7LCM |
Values in parenthesis are for highest resolution shell.
Maximum likelihood estimate.
The octahedral coordination of Mg2+ involves Asp58, Asp15, the BeF3 − moiety, two water molecules and the D + 2 residue, Ala60 (Figure 1d,e). Located two residues downstream of Asp58, this augments the active site and likely plays key roles in determining the kinetics of REC autodephosphorylation. These can differ by orders of magnitude between different REC domains and depend heavily on the identity of the D + 2 residue. 26 An Ala at position D + 2 is atypical for a REC. 26 The K + 1 residue, Pro109, is invariant, while K + 2 (residue 110) is conserved as a branched amino acid (Figure S1). These two residues also affect the kinetics of REC phosphorylation/dephosphorylation but, unlike residue D + 2, they likely do so via an indirect mechanism that affects REC conformational equilibria. 27 Consistent with this, Val110 is located about 12 Å away from the phosphorylation site and does not engage in any hydrogen bonds or van der Waals contacts that could link it directly to the active site.
2.2. Signaling by the RssBREC domain does not involve Y–T coupling
A highly conserved RssB residue is Asp104, located in β5, on the 4‐5‐5 face (Figures 2 and S1). In many response regulators, including CheY, OmpR, NtrC, LytR, NarL, this residue is typically replaced by a tyrosine (e.g., Tyr106 in CheY). 1 This tyrosine, together with a threonine (Thr87 in CheY), is essential for signaling via Y–T coupling. Upon phosphorylation, both Tyr106 and Thr87 of CheY undergo rotameric changes that propagate from the phosphoacceptor site to the 4‐5‐5 face 22 , 28 , 29 (Figure 2c,d), where many regulators bind, and which, in some systems, supports activation by oligomerization. 30 Thus, the tyrosine sidechain points away from the phosphoryl group in the apo state and, upon phosphorylation, it swings inward to bury itself in a pocket vacated by the conserved threonine (or serine) in β4. In some cases, it has been found that the threonine equivalent to CheY Thr87 gates and engages the entire β4‐α4 loop and that the phosphorylation‐dependent active conformation of this loop favors burial of Tyr106, an extended mechanistic model that has been dubbed T‐loop‐Y coupling. 2 The presence of an Asp in RssB instead of an aromatic is inconsistent with Y–T coupling. Upon superposition, we also observe no major changes in RssBREC upon BeF3 −•Mg2+ binding (r.m.s.d. of 0.41 Å). The 4‐5‐5 face, the locus of the largest differences between ON and OFF conformations in REC domains, is remarkably similar, perhaps due to the partial activation of RssBREC in this truncated form. However, significant conformational differences are observed between the 4‐5‐5 face of RssBREC and of full‐length RssBD58P due to tilting of α5 as well as motion of the loop preceding it (Figure 2a). This points to this face of RssBREC being plastic and subject to regulation.
FIGURE 2.

RssB employs neither Y–T coupling nor SdrG‐like signaling. (a) Superposition of RssBREC (pale cyan) and full‐length RssBD58P mutant (PDB ID 6OD1, gray). 37 The signaling helix, site of class II mutations as defined by Gottesman and coworkers is colored green. Asp104 is shown as sticks. (b) Sequence conservation around the PvL[VIM]ISAT motif in the RssB family and equivalent region in SdrG. Residues are colored by charge/hydrophobicity. Substitution of boxed SdrG residues leads to loss of function. 23 (c,d) Structures of Escherichia coli CheY in OFF state (PDB ID 3CHY) 25 and ON state (PDB ID 1FQW). 41 Phosphoacceptor is shown in red. The ON state structure was solved by NMR and contains a Mn2+ rather than an Mg2+ ion. Two Tyr106 rotamers were observed. Overall r.m.s.d. after superposition of the ON/OFF states is 0.54 Å. (e,f) Sphingomonas melonis SdrG in the OFF state (PDB ID 5IEB) 23 and ON state (PDB ID 5IEJ). 23 Phosphorylation site is shown in red. Structures were solved using NMR, and the positions of the phosphomimetic and Mg2+ were not determined experimentally. For simplicity, they are not modeled. Overall superposition r.m.s.d. is 1.68 Å
2.3. Comparison to FATGUY response regulators
The lack of Y–T coupling is unusual, but not without precedent. In CheY2, the role of Tyr106 is taken by Phe59 located in the β3‐α3 loop, 31 while in NtrC, the rotameric state of the tyrosine is uncorrelated with the global conformational transition during activation. 32 In the NarL subfamily, the tyrosine exists but is constitutively pointing inward regardless of phosphorylation state, 33 , 34 suggesting it may not be involved in allostery. In response regulators of the FATGUY subfamily, such as SdrG, activation occurs instead via stabilization of the phosphoryl‐aspartate via hydrogen bonding with Lys102 (Lys108 in RssB) and Thr83 (Ser86 in RssB), which occupies the same position within β4 as the conserved CheY threonine involved in Y–T coupling (Figure 2). The rotation of Thr83 ensues in remodeling of several phenylalanines, in and around a highly conserved PFXFAT83G[G/Y] motif making up the β4 strand (Figure 2b,e,f). 23 Activation also leads to structuring of the α4 helix and changes in the loop C‐terminal to the phosphoacceptor site. In RssBREC, RssBREC•BeF3 −•Mg2+ and the recent structure of IraD‐bound RssBD58P (Figure 2a), we observe that the equivalent Lys108 points toward the phosphoacceptor location. This is usually associated with an ON state and is contrasted to the OFF conformer, in which Lys108 points away (Figure 2e,f). However, neither of the remodeled conserved FATGUY residues is present in the consensus RssB sequence. Instead, they are replaced by a highly conserved PvL[VIM]ISAT88 motif spanning β4 and the β4‐α4 loop (Figure 2b), with the phenylalanines being replaced by hydrophobes (Val, Ile, Met). Notably, substitution of Phe79, Phe81, and Phe94 lead to functional SdrG defects in vitro and in vivo. 23 While conservation of the residues in β4—part of the hydrophobic core—may be due to scaffolding reasons, Leu83, Val84, and Ile85 interact with Cys57 next to the phosphorylation site, and may relay phosphorylation status to more distant sites such as the β4‐α4 loop. This loop contains conserved residue Thr88 (also dubbed as T + 2 according to the nomenclature of Bourret and colleagues), which modulates dephosphorylation rates in family specific ways. 35 In both of our structures, Thr88 hydrogen bonds to residues Ser86 and Asn90. Consequently, there are minimal differences between the β4‐α4 loops in apo REC and the REC~P‐like form. We cannot rule out that this may be due to using truncated protein constructs for crystallization.
2.4. The importance of helix α5
Temperature factor analysis confirms that the β3‐α3 loop C‐terminal to Asp58 displays increased dynamics in RssBREC in the absence of phosphorylation (Figure S2a). Surprisingly, helix α5—part of the central helical bundle to which both the N‐terminal and C‐terminal domains contribute in full‐length RssB (Figure 2a)—undergoes only subtle changes, notably to the rotameric conformations of Lys111, Arg117, and Phe121 in α5 (Figure S2c–f).
The interactions of α5 residue Arg117 attracted our attention for four reasons. First, in RssBREC•BeF3 −•Mg2+, the amide of Arg117 hydrogen bonds to the carbonyl of Arg115, while in RssBREC, Arg117 is stabilized by contacts with Trp 26 (Figure S2c,d). Second, the tilting of α5 we observe in the RssBREC structure relative to IraD‐bound RssBD58P would cause a clash with α9 in the closed RssB structure (Figure 2a). α9 is, incidentally, the site of mutations (class II mutations as defined by Gottesman and coworkers and highlighted in green Figure S2b) that activate RssB in the absence of phosphorylation, bypassing the need for acetyl phosphate. 16 Third, in IraD‐bound RssBD58P, Arg117 interacts with Gln247, and this interaction dominates the REC–EFF interface (Figure S2b). Last, but not least, an alanine substitution of Arg117 results in loss of interaction with RpoS in the absence of acetyl phosphate, although degradation (and, presumably substrate binding) is only partially compromised in vitro in the presence of acetyl phosphate. 15 This points to Arg117 serving as a switch that modulates substrate binding.
3. DISCUSSION
As of November 2020, PFAM 36 lists over 324,000 REC sequences and the Protein Data Bank contains many structures of REC domains, mostly in the non‐phosphorylated state. With such a bounty of structural information, one would expect a thorough understanding of how signaling takes place in REC proteins. This is not so, since REC domains are often stringed to a variety of domains supporting different REC–EFF contacts, structures of REC~P‐like states are relatively rare, and reaction kinetics are strongly influenced by subfamily specific residues (e.g., D + 2, T + 2, but not only) outside the conserved architecture of the phosphorylation site. 26
RssB is an unusual response regulator, not in the least because its C‐terminal domain effector domain is a PP2C‐like pseudophosphatase domain that has been co‐opted for protein–protein interactions with ClpXP rather than being used for recognizing DNA. 15 , 37 Most models of RssB mechanism have been based on RssB sequence similarity with a Pseudomonas aeruginosa response regulator of known structure (PDB IDs 3EQ2 and 3F7A, unpublished), but uncharacterized function. This protein assumes an extended dimeric dumbbell conformation with two domains of one monomer linked by an extended helical linker. Subsequent studies of RssB revealed a compact, very different architecture, different sequence characteristics of the RssB linker and an inability of free RssB to oligomerize at physiological concentrations. 37 In light of this research, the structures presented here suggest that, while RssB may not adopt a dumbbell‐like architecture like that of the P. aeruginosa homolog, its phosphorylation may nevertheless reorganize RssBREC/RssBEFF contacts.
Our structure of apo RssBREC reveals a meta‐active conformation that resembles to a great extent RssBREC•BeF3 −•Mg2+. The structural differences between RssBREC within IraD‐inhibited RssBD58P and RssBREC•BeF3 −•Mg2+ primarily involve helix α5 and the loop preceding it, while differences between apo RssBREC and RssBREC•BeF3 −•Mg2+ are maximal in the β3‐α3 loop, C‐terminal to Asp58. While a full understanding of RssB mechanism will require the structure determination of full‐length RssB and RssB~P bound to its various partners, our work allows us to reconsider the role of phosphorylation in the RpoS general stress response. Phosphorylation, by either kinases or small phosphodonors, is generally believed to promote RpoS binding and turnover by ClpXP. 14 , 16 More recent studies have proposed that, on the contrary, phosphorylation reduces RssB affinity for RpoS, and consequently the rate of RpoS degradation. This model was based on equilibrium dissociation constant determination for core RssB‐RpoS complexes comprised of RssBREC and region 3 of RpoS (residues 163–220), and a less than twofold decrease in the affinity in the presence of acetyl phosphate. 17 This model is at odds with multiple observations, including the requirement for acetyl phosphate in promoting RpoS‐RssB 16 and RpoS‐RssB‐ClpXP complex formation, 5 and in stimulating RpoS degradation in an in vitro system. 16 , 37 It is, however, easily explained by our determination that removing the EFF domain partially activates RssBREC independent of phosphorylation, obfuscating the effects of phosphoryl transfer on the full‐length protein.
We suggest that RssB conforms to neither the Y‐T‐coupling model for signaling seen in many response regulators, nor to the signaling mechanism used by FATGUY proteins during the alphabacterial stress response. RssB deregulation achieved by a single amino acid substitution of Arg117 in helix α5 severely impairs function. 15 This, together with the major conformational differences between IraD‐bound RssBD58P (in an OFF state) and RssBREC point to helix α5 as key for signal propagation to the EFF domain. Consistent with this, mutations in the interdomain linker C‐terminal to α5 (W143R, P150S, E135A E136A E137A) have also been demonstrated to affect the adaptor function of RssB and its ability to be regulated by anti‐adaptors. 16 , 37 Without doubt, further understanding of the regulatory RssB system will require a multipronged approach, including determination of structures of full‐length RssB and RssB complexes, which, more than two decades since the discovery of RssB's role as an RpoS regulator, 5 , 6 , 38 remain eagerly awaited.
4. METHODS
4.1. RssBREC production and crystallization
RssBREC was purified as a hexahistidine tag RssB (residues 1–129) fusion by a succession of nickel‐affinity chromatography, tag cleavage and dialysis followed by gel filtration on a Superdex 75 HiLoad column 16/60 (GE Healthcare) preequilibrated with 20 mM HEPES pH 7, 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, and 2 mM TCEP. The sample was crystallized against 0.2 M lithium sulfate, 22% PEG 3,350, and 0.1 M Tris–HCl pH 8.8 in sitting drop format. Cryoprotection was achieved by supplementation of the well solution with 25% ethylene glycol. RssBNTD•BeF3 −•Mg2+ was crystallized in conditions similar to those identified for RssBNTD.
4.2. Structure determination and refinement
Diffraction data were processed using XDS 39 and phased using molecular replacement with the homologous domains of the structure with PDB ID 6OD1 in Phaser. 40 Iterative refinement and building were performed in PHENIX and Coot. Diffraction images have been deposited in the SBGrid Data Bank as dataset number 815 (doi: 10.15785/SBGRID/815) and 818 (doi: 10.15785/SBGRID/818). PDB IDs are listed in Table 1.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Jacob Schwartz: Purified protein and obtained crystals, and Jonghyeon Son: Collected diffraction data and refined structures. Alexandra M. Deaconescu: Designed the overall study, collected diffraction data, solved and refined structures, and wrote the manuscript with figure contributions from Christiane Brugger.
Supporting information
Appendix S1 Supporting information
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank Dr S. Gottesman (NIH) for critical reading of the manuscript. This work is based upon research conducted at the Northeastern Collaborative Access Team beamlines, which are funded by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences from the National Institutes of Health (P30 GM124165). The Eiger 16M detector on 24‐ID‐E is funded by a NIH‐ORIP HEI grant (S10OD021527). This research used resources of the Advanced Photon Source, a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science User Facility operated for the DOE Office of Science by Argonne National Laboratory under Contract No. DE‐AC02‐06CH11357. This research was supported by grant R01GM121975 (National Institutes of Health) and a Salomon Research Award (Brown University) to A. M. D.
Schwartz J, Son J, Brugger C, Deaconescu AM. Phospho‐dependent signaling during the general stress response by the atypical response regulator and ClpXP adaptor RssB. Protein Science. 2021;30:899–907. 10.1002/pro.4047
Funding information Salomon Research Award (Brown University); DOE, Grant/Award Number: DE‐AC02‐06CH11357; National Institute of Health, Grant/Award Number: R01GM121975; NIH‐ORIP HEI, Grant/Award Number: S10OD021527
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Data and reagents are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
REFERENCES
- 1. Gao R, Bouillet S, Stock AM. Structural basis of response regulator function. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2019;73:175–197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Stock AM, Guhaniyogi J. A new perspective on response regulator activation. J Bacteriol. 2006;188:7328–7330. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Gardino AK, Villali J, Kivenson A, et al. Transient non‐native hydrogen bonds promote activation of a signaling protein. Cell. 2009;139:1109–1118. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Gottesman S. Trouble is coming: Signaling pathways that regulate general stress responses in bacteria. J Biol Chem. 2019;294:11685–11700. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Zhou Y, Gottesman S, Hoskins JR, Maurizi MR, Wickner S. The RssB response regulator directly targets sigma(S) for degradation by ClpXP. Genes Dev. 2001;15:627–637. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Muffler A, Fischer D, Altuvia S, Storz G, Hengge‐Aronis R. The response regulator RssB controls stability of the sigma(S) subunit of RNA polymerase in Escherichia coli . EMBO J. 1996;15:1333–1339. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Becker G, Klauck E, Hengge‐Aronis R. Regulation of RpoS proteolysis in Escherichia coli: The response regulator RssB is a recognition factor that interacts with the turnover element in RpoS. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96:6439–6444. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Klauck E, Lingnau M, Hengge‐Aronis R. Role of the response regulator RssB in sigma recognition and initiation of sigma proteolysis in Escherichia coli . Mol Microbiol. 2001;40:1381–1390. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Battesti A, Gottesman S. Roles of adaptor proteins in regulation of bacterial proteolysis. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2013;16:140–147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Hryckowian AJ, Battesti A, Lemke JJ, Meyer ZC, Welch RA. IraL is an RssB anti‐adaptor that stabilizes RpoS during logarithmic phase growth in Escherichia coli and Shigella . MBio. 2014;5:e01043–e01014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Maeda H, Fujita N, Ishihama A. Competition among seven Escherichia coli sigma subunits: Relative binding affinities to the core RNA polymerase. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000;28:3497–3503. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Schellhorn HE. Elucidating the function of the RpoS regulon. Future Microbiol. 2014;9:497–507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Wong GT, Bonocora RP, Schep AN, et al. The genome‐wide transcriptional response to varying RpoS levels in Escherichia coli K‐12. J Bacteriol. 2017;199:e00755–e00716. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Bouche S, Klauck E, Fischer D, Lucassen M, Jung K, Hengge‐Aronis R. Regulation of RssB‐dependent proteolysis in Escherichia coli: A role for acetyl phosphate in a response regulator‐controlled process. Mol Microbiol. 1998;27:787–795. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Micevski D, Zeth K, Mulhern TD, et al. Insight into the RssB‐mediated recognition and delivery of sigma(s) to the AAA+ protease, ClpXP. Biomolecules. 2020;10:615. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Battesti A, Hoskins JR, Tong S, et al. Anti‐adaptors provide multiple modes for regulation of the RssB adaptor protein. Genes Dev. 2013;27:2722–2735. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Wang Z, Zhao S, Li Y, et al. RssB‐mediated sigmaS activation is regulated by a two‐tier mechanism via phosphorylation and adaptor protein—IraD. J Mol Biol. 2020;433:166757. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Peterson CN, Ruiz N, Silhavy TJ. RpoS proteolysis is regulated by a mechanism that does not require the SprE (RssB) response regulator phosphorylation site. J Bacteriol. 2004;186:7403–7410. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Fernandez I, Otero LH, Klinke S, Carrica MDC, Goldbaum FA. Snapshots of conformational changes shed light into the NtrX receiver domain signal transduction mechanism. J Mol Biol. 2015;427:3258–3272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Simonovic M, Volz K. A distinct meta‐active conformation in the 1.1‐A resolution structure of wild‐type ApoCheY. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:28637–28640. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Trajtenberg F, Albanesi D, Ruetalo N, et al. Allosteric activation of bacterial response regulators: The role of the cognate histidine kinase beyond phosphorylation. MBio. 2014;5:e02105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Cho HS, Lee SY, Yan D, et al. NMR structure of activated CheY. J Mol Biol. 2000;297:543–551. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Campagne S, Dintner S, Gottschlich L, et al. Role of the PFXFATG[G/Y] motif in the activation of SdrG, a response regulator involved in the alphaproteobacterial general stress response. Structure. 2016;24:1237–1247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Gao R, Stock AM. Biological insights from structures of two‐component proteins. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2009;63:133–154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Volz K, Matsumura P. Crystal structure of Escherichia coli CheY refined at 1.7‐A resolution. J Biol Chem. 1991;266:15511–15519. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Page SC, Immormino RM, Miller TH, Bourret RB. Experimental analysis of functional variation within protein families: Receiver domain autodephosphorylation kinetics. J Bacteriol. 2016;198:2483–2493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Straughn PB, Vass LR, Yuan C, Kennedy EN, Foster CA, Bourret RB. Modulation of response regulator CheY reaction kinetics by two variable residues that affect conformation. J Bacteriol. 2020;202:e00089–e00020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Lee SY, Cho HS, Pelton JG, et al. Crystal structure of an activated response regulator bound to its target. Nat Struct Biol. 2001;8:52–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Zhu X, Rebello J, Matsumura P, Volz K. Crystal structures of CheY mutants Y106W and T87I/Y106W. CheY activation correlates with movement of residue 106. J Biol Chem. 1997;272:5000–5006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Gao R, Stock AM. Molecular strategies for phosphorylation‐mediated regulation of response regulator activity. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2010;13:160–167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Riepl H, Scharf B, Schmitt R, Kalbitzer HR, Maurer T. Solution structures of the inactive and BeF3‐activated response regulator CheY2. J Mol Biol. 2004;338:287–297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Villali J, Pontiggia F, Clarkson MW, Hagan MF, Kern D. Evidence against the "Y‐T coupling" mechanism of activation in the response regulator NtrC. J Mol Biol. 2014;426:1554–1567. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Casino P, Miguel‐Romero L, Huesa J, Garcia P, Garcia‐Del Portillo F, Marina A. Conformational dynamism for DNA interaction in the Salmonella RcsB response regulator. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46:456–472. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Leonard PG, Golemi‐Kotra D, Stock AM. Phosphorylation‐dependent conformational changes and domain rearrangements in Staphylococcus aureus VraR activation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:8525–8530. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Thomas SA, Brewster JA, Bourret RB. Two variable active site residues modulate response regulator phosphoryl group stability. Mol Microbiol. 2008;69:453–465. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. El‐Gebali S, Mistry J, Bateman A, et al. The Pfam protein families database in 2019. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47:D427–D432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Dorich V, Brugger C, Tripathi A, et al. Structural basis for inhibition of a response regulator of sigma(S) stability by a ClpXP antiadaptor. Genes Dev. 2019;33:718–732. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Pratt LA, Silhavy TJ. The response regulator SprE controls the stability of RpoS. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996;93:2488–2492. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Kabsch W. XDS. Acta Cryst D. 2010;66:125–132. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Adams PD, Afonine PV, Bunkoczi G, et al. PHENIX: A comprehensive Python‐based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Cryst D. 2010;66:213–221. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Lee SY, Cho HS, Pelton JG, Yan D, Berry EA, Wemmer DE. Crystal structure of activated CheY. Comparison with other activated receiver domains. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:16425–16431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Appendix S1 Supporting information
Data Availability Statement
Data and reagents are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
