* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Readings Problems Background Week 8
Genetic engineering wikipedia , lookup
Long non-coding RNA wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of neurodegenerative diseases wikipedia , lookup
Gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
Cre-Lox recombination wikipedia , lookup
Minimal genome wikipedia , lookup
Non-coding DNA wikipedia , lookup
Gene therapy of the human retina wikipedia , lookup
Gene nomenclature wikipedia , lookup
Short interspersed nuclear elements (SINEs) wikipedia , lookup
Gene expression programming wikipedia , lookup
Genome evolution wikipedia , lookup
Nucleic acid analogue wikipedia , lookup
X-inactivation wikipedia , lookup
Nucleic acid tertiary structure wikipedia , lookup
No-SCAR (Scarless Cas9 Assisted Recombineering) Genome Editing wikipedia , lookup
Genome (book) wikipedia , lookup
RNA interference wikipedia , lookup
Nutriepigenomics wikipedia , lookup
Epitranscriptome wikipedia , lookup
Polycomb Group Proteins and Cancer wikipedia , lookup
History of genetic engineering wikipedia , lookup
Deoxyribozyme wikipedia , lookup
Helitron (biology) wikipedia , lookup
Point mutation wikipedia , lookup
History of RNA biology wikipedia , lookup
Designer baby wikipedia , lookup
Primary transcript wikipedia , lookup
Gene expression profiling wikipedia , lookup
Vectors in gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
RNA silencing wikipedia , lookup
Microevolution wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of human development wikipedia , lookup
Site-specific recombinase technology wikipedia , lookup
Non-coding RNA wikipedia , lookup
Therapeutic gene modulation wikipedia , lookup
MCB 142 MAJOR ADVANCES IN UNDERSTANDING EVOLUTION AND HEREDITY FALL 2015 WEEK 8: OCTOBER 27 AND 29 OCTOBER 27: CONTROL OF GENE EXPRESSION Enzyme induction—the E. coli lac system. Negative control and the trans-acting repressor. OCTOBER 29: MESSENGER RNA The problem of information transfer from DNA to the site of protein synthesis. Kinetic evidence for a short-lived intermediate. Discovery of messenger RNA. Readings to be Discussed on Tuesday October 27 William Hayes 1967. The Mechanism of Bacterial Sexuality 1967. Endeavor 26: 33-38. Arthur B. Pardee, François Jacob and Jacques Monod 1959. The Genetic Control and Cytoplasmic Expression of Inducibility in the Synthesis of β-galactosidase by E. coli. Journal of Molecular Biology 1: 165-178. Read the article. Readings to be discussed Thursday October 29 Arthur Pardee 1958. Experiments on the transfer of information from DNA to enzymes. Experimental Cell Research, Supplement 6, 142-151. Read pages 148-150 starting from "Must DNA form an Intermediate Catalyst?" Sydney Brenner, François Jacob and Matthew Meselson 1961. An unstable intermediate carrying information from genes to ribosomes for protein synthesisis. Nature 190: 576-581. Read the article. Francis Crick 1988. "What Mad Pursuit", Basic Books, NY. pp 116-121. Read pages 116-121. François Jacob 1988. "The Statue Within", Basic Books, NY. Read pages 309-317. Matthew Meselson 2014. François and "X". Research in Microbiology 165: 313-315. Read the article. 1 Study Questions 1. Stable heterozygotes for the lac operon can be obtained in which one copy of the operon is on the bacterial chromosome and the other copy is on a stably inherited transmissible plasmid called F-lac. (The technology for constructing such stable partial heterozygotes had not been developed until after the experiments reported in the "PaJaMo" paper of this week's assignment.) What would be the phenotype, inducible or constitutive, of each of the following F-lac heterozygotes: a) i-z-y-/i-z+y+ b) i+z-y-/i-z+y+ Explain your answer in terms of the model of lac operon control proposed in the PaJaMo paper. + - 2. Which mating and which figure of the PaJaMo paper show that i is dominant to i ? Explain. 3. Why, without inducer added, does the production of β-galactosidase shut off at about 2 hours, as seen in Figure 4? 4. Pardee, Jacob and Monod on page 175 describe an "inducer" model that they reject. Instead, they favor the "repressor" model described on page 176. In addition to being more complex, the "inducer" model predicts a certain class of lac-minus mutations that were not known to exist (and do not exist). What would be the nature of such mutants on the "inducer" model? What properties would be expected of such mutations? 5. What evidence do Brenner et al. present to show that RNA made after phage infection is found on ribosomes made before phage infection? What evidence do they present to show that no ribosomes are made after cells are infected by phage T2? 6. What are models I, II and III of Brenner et al. for the synthesis of phage protein? What specific experimental observations argue for or against each model? note: BJM express surprise that the standard dialysis procedure for reassociating 30S and 50S ribosomal subunits into 70S ribosomes fails to reassociate what they believe to be the 30S and 50S particles in the “B band”. The reason for this unexpected result is that CsCl strips some of the protein subunits from the 50S and 30S particles, giving what are called core particles. Unlike 30S and 50S particles, core particles do not reassociate. It was fortunate that they do not, as the reassociated 70S ribosomes thereby formed would have been of various intermediate densities (heavy 30 with light 50; light 30 with heavy 50) making the density gradient analyses difficult to interpret. 2 Microbial Genetics & Control of Gene Expression -- Some Background As we saw last week, Crick's 1958 discussion of how the structure of genes determines the structure of proteins does not address the problem of what controls the expression of genes -- what determines whether a particular gene is or is not expressed. The first coherent picture of how gene expression is controlled emerged from studies of the E. coli lac operon conducted during the 1950s at the Institute Pasteur in Paris, led by Jacques Monod and François Jacob. By 1959, it had been determined that: François Jacob Jacques Monod (1910-1976) (1920-2013) -- The enzyme β-galactosidase, required for the utilization of the sugar lactose, is present at only very low levels in wild-type E. coli growing on a carbon source other than lactose. But if lactose (glucosyl-β-D-galactoside) or certain other β-Dgalactosides such as isopropyl-thio-β-D-galactoside (IPTG) or methyl-thio-β-D-galactoside (TMG) are added, the enzyme is produced in large amounts, amounting to about 5 percent of total protein synthesis in steady state. The enzyme is therefore said to be inducible. Although IPTG and TMG are good inducers they, unlike lactose, are not metabolizable. By using IPTG or TMG in induction experiments and a carbon/energy source such as glycerol or maltose (but not glucose, see “catabolite repression” below) instead of lactose, one is able to study induction phenomena free of complicating effects caused by variation in the availability or utilizability of the carbon/energy source. -- The utilization of lactose also requires lac-permease, a specific protein that transports lactose, IPTG and TMG into the cell. -- The genes that specify the structure of β-galactosidase and the permease, designated z and y, respectively, map very close to each other and are expressed coordinately, being part of the lac operon (see below). Arthur Pardee (1921-) -- A third gene, designated i, governs the inducibility of β-galactosidase and permease. It maps very close to z and y. In Arthur Pardee, Jacob and Monod (1959), a seminal paper that has come to be known as PaJaMo, the gene order is tentatively given as y i z. (The correct order is i z y but the misassignment has no consequences for the conclusions + of PaJaMo.) The gene in wild-type (inducible) E. coli is designated i , a designation given simply because it is the form of the gene found in wild-type E. coli, before it was + known whether i is dominant or recessive with respect to i-. Cells mutant for the i gene, designated i , produce β-galactosidase and permease constitutively, i.e., even in the absence of lactose, IPTG, TMG, or other inducer. As described in the reading by Hayes, the method of interrupted mating of Hfr ("male") with F- ("female") bacteria, developed by François Jacob and Elie Wollman (1957, C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris, 244:1840-) allowed the production of transient partial diploids called merozygotes. (Transient, because after an hour or so the injected DNA is either integrated into the bacterial genome, replacing the homologous DNA segment or else is lost, in either case leaving the recipient cell and its descendants haploid Elie Wollman Elie Wollman (1917-) (1917-2008) 3 again.) After mixing Hfr cells with F- cells the former begin to inject their chromosomes into the F- cells (via rolling-circle DNA replication), starting from a specific site on the circular E. coli chromosome. The site and the direction of transfer depend on the particular Hfr strain. Under the conditions employed in PaJaMo, i, z and y enter the F- cells starting at about 10 minutes after mixing the Hfr and F- bacteria. Owing to heterogeneity in the time when the Hfr cells attach to the F- cells and begin to inject their chromosomes, the number of F- cells that have received the izy gene cluster continues to increase steeply for an additional 20-25 minutes. Injection of an entire chromosome takes about 100 minutes and may be interrupted at any time by agitation in a blender. (For an excellent description of bacterial conjugation in addition to historical account in the Hayes reading see: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK21942/ ) Technical Notes: i) Streptomycin prevents protein synthesis in the Hfr strep-sensitive cells but does not prevent them from mating and transferring genes. Because the streptomycin resistance gene in the Hfr strains used in PaJaMo enter the F- recipient only very late in the Hfr X F- matings, the F- cells never become sensitive to streptomycin in these experiments. ii) The phage T6 lyses T6-sensitive Hfr cells and therefore prevents them from mating. By conducting matings with various combinations of i, z and y genes, and testing for the production of β-galactosidase in the presence and absence of inducer as a function of time after initiating the mating, Pardee, Jacob and Monod demonstrated that i+ is trans-acting and dominant to i-. Thus, an i- cell that is otherwise wild-type synthesizes β-galactosidase and permease at a high rate while injection into such a cell of the i+ gene by an Hfr causes β-galactosidase synthesis gradually to shut down, taking about two hours for complete shutdown. The simplest interpretation of these findings, the interpretation favored by PJ&M, is that the i+ gene makes a diffusible product and that the product, designated the lac repressor, prevents the production of β-galactosidase and permease. On this picture, the inducer, for example IPTG, prevents the repressor from acting (by binding to it, as was discovered later), rendering the repressor unable to bind to its target site. This allows the z and y genes to produce their products. Thus, in the lac system, the wild-type state of the z and y genes is "off" and turning them on (induction) is not the result of an interaction of the genes with an activator, the model considered but not preferred by PJM, but is instead is the result of inactivating the repressor. The control of z and y gene expression is therefore negative. Only later the repressor binding site was identified and its mode of action was determined. Two fundamental questions are posed at the end of the paper: (i) What is the chemical nature of the lac repressor--is it a primary gene product (an RNA) or a secondary gene product (a protein)? (ii) does the repressor act at the level of the gene or at the level of the cytoplasmic machinery that synthesizes βgalactosidase and permease (and a third gene in the lac operon, acetylase, not then known.) Unless the proteins are made directly on the DNA, there must be a gene product that carries information for protein synthesis from the gene to the site of protein synthesis, the ribosomes—a messenger. (Oddly, the word “messenger” as used in PaJaMo refers to the repressor, not to the yet to be discovered mRNA.) Within a year, cis-acting mutations were found immediately adjacent to z that made the expression of z and y independent of the state of the i gene. These mutations defined a site designated the operator, symbolized by O. Further mapping revealed the order i O z y. Jacob and Monod termed the operator 4 and the closely linked genes under the control of the i gene the lac "operon", the first to be characterized of several similar groups of closely linked genes under the control of a common control site. (There is a third gene in the lac operon, specifying a transacetylase and designated a. The map order is i O z y a and all three genes, z, y, and a are under the control of the same operator.) Walter Gilbert (1932-) Mark Ptashne 1940- Early genetic evidence (including the existence of nonsense suppressor mutations in the i gene) implied that the repressor is a protein. This was directly demonstrated by the isolation of the lac repressor by Walter Gilbert and Benno Müller-Hill in 1966 at Harvard who in the following year demonstrated its binding to DNA of the wild-type lac operon, as expected if repressor acts at the level of the gene, and the prevention of such binding by the Benno Müller-Hill inducer IPTG. At the same time, Mark Ptashne, also at Harvard, (1933-) isolated the phage lambda repressor, showing it to be a protein that binds to lambda DNA. Further studies of these and other systems supported the general picture of bacterial control genes that specify repressors that bind at specific sites on the DNA and thereby prevent expression of a group of adjacent genes by preventing transcription by the downstream passage of RNA polymerase. In the lac system, the inducer combines with the repressor preventing it from binding to the operator, resulting in activation of the genes of the lac operon. This arrangement insures that the enzymes needed for utilization of an exogenous substance, in this case lactose, are produced only when the substance is available. A simple variation on this mechanism allows cells to avoid the wastage of producing enzymes involved in the endogenous biosynthesis of a substance when the substance, for example an amino acid, is available exogenously. In that case, the interaction of the exogenous substance with the repressor facilitates rather than prevents the binding of the repressor to its operator, thereby silencing the genes under its control. An example is the operon that includes a cluster of genes for the biosynthesis of the amino acid tryptophan. In both sorts of control, binding of the repressor to its operator silences genes in the corresponding operon, the essential difference being whether repressor binding to the operator is prevented or facilitated by the exogenous metabolite. In both cases, therefore, it is the silencing of genes rather than their activation that is the common feature of the control circuit. In contrast to negative control accomplished by binding of a repressor to an operator, as in the lac and tryp systems, there are also bacterial systems with positive control. A particularly well-known system of positive control in E. coli is, somewhat awkwardly, designated catabolite repression. It functions to boost the expression of the lac operon and other carbon source utilization genes, like the maltose operon, etc., when glucose is absent and when the other carbon source is present. When glucose, the metabolically preferred carbon source, and another carbon source, such as lactose, are both present, the cell utilizes both. But when only the non-glucose carbon source is present, the efficiency of its utilization is increased. The absence of glucose in the PaJaMo experiments therefore enhanced the difference in lac operon expression between i- and i+ cells. ==== Already in 1952, it was found that when a saturating concentration of inducer is added to a growing culture of wild-type E. coli (i+z+), β-galactosidase production reaches its maximum rate within a very 5 few minutes, much less than the bacterial generation time (Monod, Pappenheimer, Cohen-Bazire 1952 Biochim. Biophys. Acta 9: 648-660). Citing this observation in a 1955 review, Monod wrote that the rate of synthesis per bacterium is "constant and maximal from the start". Although not mentioned in the 1959 PaJaMo paper, and apparently not yet realized by anyone at the Institut Pasteur or elsewhere, this observation poses the question of how it could be that the maximum rate of β-galactosidase synthesis is established so rapidly? Is the enzyme made directly on the gene, thereby achieving maximum rate as soon as repression is relieved? Or does the gene make an intermediate information carrier? But in that case, how could the maximum rate of synthesis be achieved so rapidly? If there is a carrier, the rate of enzyme synthesis should not reach maximum rate until the carrier reaches steady state concentration. But how could that happen so fast? There were two possibilities. Either there is no carrier and βgalactosidase is made directly on the DNA or else the carrier is very unstable, with a half life comparable to the short time required to reach the maximum rate of enzyme synthesis, less than 2-3 minutes, much less than the ~30-minute doubling time of the bacteria. Within a year, the short-lived carrier, mRNA, was discovered, as we will discuss on Thursday. Messenger RNA - Some Background Experiments done as early as 1952 showed that beta-galactosidase synthesis starts and reaches full rate almost immediately after the addition of inducer and subsequent experiments showed the same almost immediate attainment of full-rate synthesis upon introduction of the z+ gene of an Hfr into an F-, as shown by Arthur Pardee in the assigned reading. Similarly early experiments also showed that synthesis of the enzyme by an induced culture stops immediately when inducer is removed. The finding in such experiments of full rate synthesis almost immediately after inducer addition or gene entry and its prompt cessation upon removing inducer could be explained if (1) there is no intermediate and instead the enzyme is made directly on the DNA or if (2) there is an unstable intermediate with a short half-life so that its concentration reaches steady-state very quickly after the operon is activated by addition of inducer or by introducing the operon into an i- recipient cell in an Hfr X F- mating. At the time, however, no such unstable intermediate, presumably an RNA of size great enough to specify an entire peptide chain, was known. It was known, however, that protein synthesis takes place on ribosomes. Could ribosomal RNA carry the information for proteins synthesis? And is ribosoma RNA unstable? But a number of observations appeared to be at variance with the hypothesis that ribosomal RNA is the information carrier for protein synthesis: i) The ribosomal RNA of E. coli and other bacteria was found to be of just two sizes (1.5 kb and 2.9 kb) while the size of bacterial proteins covers a wide range. ii) The AT/GC ratio of bacterial DNA is uniform within any given species of bacteria but ranges widely, from about 0.3 to 3, depending on the species. But the nucleotide composition of ribosomal RNA is essentially the same in all bacteria. 6 iii) Density labeling experiments showed that all or nearly all of the ribosomal RNA is stable (Davern and Meselson 1960 J. Mol. Biol. 2: 153-160). Thus, the above observations meant that the “messenger” (as it was eventually named by Jacob, who initially called it “X”) had to be unstable and that it was not ribosomal RNA. The only other cellular RNA known at the time was "soluble RNA" (transfer RNA), too small to code for most proteins. Then what RNA was the short-lived messenger? An important but initially unrecognized clue was the discovery in 1956 by Elliot Volkin and Lazarus Astrachan at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee that a short-lived RNA made in E. coli after infection by phage T2, previously detected by Alfred Hershey, has a nucleotide composition resembling the phage DNA (high AT, low GC) -- quite unlike that of its E. coli bacterial host, for which AT equals GC (Virology 2: 149-161, 1956; Biochim Biophys Acta 29: 536-544, 1958.) At the time, Volkin and Astrachan thought the labile RNA might be an intermediate for phage DNA synthesis although, largely unnoticed, they did mention in a later paper (Volkin, Astrachan and Countryman 1958 Virology 6: 545-555), among other possibilities, that the newly synthesized RNA might be the template for phage protein. It was then, at a party in Sydney Brenner’s apartment in Cambridge on April 16, 1960 (Good Friday), where Jacob recounted recent additional evidence for a short-lived messenger (including that in the assigned Pardee reading) that Brenner and Crick suddenly realized the significance of the short-lived RNA described by Volkin and Astrachan four years before. A critical experiment to demonstrate the existence of a short-lived RNA that carries the information for amino acid sequence to pre-existing ribosomes -- messenger RNA was then conceived by Brenner and Jacob. E. coli would be grown several generations in heavy isotopic medium, making essentially all the ribosomes heavy. It was already known that essentially all protein synthesized after phage infection is phage protein and therefore that whatever template specified it was not present before infection. Upon switching the cells to light isotopic medium and infecting with phage in the presence of radioactive phosphorus (or radioactive uracil) and also with radioactive sulfur, it could then be asked if new RNA and new protein appeared on old (heavy) ribosomes or on newly synthesized (light) ribosomes, if any. If only on old ribosomes, this would rule out the possibility that the phage proteins are specified on new ribosomes. A separate experiment, not using density labels, could be done to see if RNA made subsequent to phage infection is found on ribosomes and if it resides there only briefly. The two sorts of experiment together showed that there is a species of RNA that appears only briefly on the pre-existing ribosomes where new protein is being made—and, further, that no ribosomes are even made after phage infection. The obvious way to conduct such an experiment was to employ equilibrium density-gradient centrifugation with density labels sufficiently different to separate labeled and labeled ribosomes, a Left to Right: Charles Steinberg, François Jacob, Max Delbruck, Matthew Meselson, Ronald Rolfe, Gunther Stent, Sydney Brenner. June 1960. 7 separation that required the use of both heavy nitrogen (15N) and heavy carbon (13C). As 15N 13C yeast extract made for growing E. coli had already been employed at CalTech in showing that ribosomal RNA is stable (Davern and Meselson, 1960) and attempts to examine bacterial ribosomes by equilibrium density gradient analtsis in CsCl solutions were already underway, Brenner and Jacob went to CalTech to conduct the experiment together with Meselson. The outcome would validate the prediction of Pardee (1958) and also of Jacob (1958), of a short-lived intermediate and show that it is a kind of RNA distinct from ribosomal RNA and transfer RNA (Brenner, Jacob and Meselson, 1961). An authentic account of the moment of realization in Brenner’s Cambridge apartment and the cliff-hanging experiment in California that followed is given by Jacob in his autobiographic "The Statue Within". 8