1887
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.

Transposons Tn and Tn

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • XML
    101.81 Kb
  • PDF
    566.20 Kb
  • HTML
    121.09 Kb
  • Authors: David B. Haniford1, Michael J. Ellis2
  • Editors: Mick Chandler3, Nancy Craig4
  • VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Department of Biochemistry, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5C1, Canada; 2: Department of Biochemistry, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5C1, Canada; 3: Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France; 4: Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
  • Source: microbiolspec January 2015 vol. 3 no. 1 doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014
  • Received 02 July 2014 Accepted 04 July 2014 Published 29 January 2015
  • David Haniford, haniford@uwo.ca
image of Transposons Tn<span class="jp-italic">10</span> and Tn<span class="jp-italic">5</span>
    Preview this microbiology spectrum article:
    Zoom in
    Zoomout

    Transposons Tn and Tn, Page 1 of 2

    | /docserver/preview/fulltext/microbiolspec/3/1/MDNA3-0002-2014-1.gif /docserver/preview/fulltext/microbiolspec/3/1/MDNA3-0002-2014-2.gif
  • Abstract:

    The study of the bacterial transposons Tn and Tn has provided a wealth of information regarding steps in nonreplicative DNA transposition, transpososome dynamics and structure, as well as mechanisms employed to regulate transposition. The focus of ongoing research on these transposons is mainly on host regulation and the use of the Tn antisense system as a platform to develop riboregulators for applications in synthetic biology. Over the past decade two new regulators of both Tn and Tn transposition have been identified, namely H-NS and Hfq proteins. These are both global regulators of gene expression in enteric bacteria with functions linked to stress-response pathways and virulence and potentially could link the Tn and Tn systems (and thus the transfer of antibiotic resistance genes) to environmental cues. Work summarized here is consistent with the H-NS protein working directly on transposition complexes to upregulate both Tn and Tn transposition. In contrast, evidence is discussed that is consistent with Hfq working at the level of transposase expression to downregulate both systems. With regard to Tn and synthetic biology, some recent work that incorporates the Tn antisense RNA into both transcriptional and translational riboswitches is summarized.

  • Citation: Haniford D, Ellis M. 2015. Transposons Tn and Tn. Microbiol Spectrum 3(1):MDNA3-0002-2014. doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014.

Key Concept Ranking

Gene Expression and Regulation
0.7340346
Genetic Elements
0.54156953
Ribosome Binding Site
0.41658255
0.7340346

References

1. Bender J, Kleckner N. 1986. Genetic evidence that Tn10 transposes by a nonreplicative mechanism. Cell 45:801–815. [PubMed][CrossRef]
2. Haniford DB, Chelouche AR, Kleckner N. 1989. A specific class of IS10 transposase mutants are blocked for target site interactions and promote formation of an excised transposon fragment. Cell 59:385–394. [PubMed][CrossRef]
3. Mahillon, J, Chandler, M. 1998. Insertion sequences. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 62:725–774. [PubMed]
4. Kennedy AK, Guhathakurta A, Kleckner N, Haniford DB. 1998. Tn10 transposition via a DNA hairpin intermediate. Cell 95:125–134. [PubMed][CrossRef]
5. Bhasin A, Goryshin IY, Reznikoff WS. 1999. Hairpin formation in Tn5 transposition. J Biol Chem 274:37021–37029. [PubMed][CrossRef]
6. Chalmers R, Guhathakurta A, Benjamin H, Kleckner N. 1998. IHF modulation of Tn10 transposition: sensory transduction of supercoiling status via a proposed protein/DNA molecular spring. Cell 93:897–908. [PubMed][CrossRef]
7. Sakai J, Chalmers RM, Kleckner N. 1995. Identification and characterization of a pre-cleavage synaptic complex that is an early intermediate in Tn10 transposition. EMBO J 14:4374–4383. [PubMed]
8. Crellin P, Chalmers R. 2001. Protein-DNA contacts and conformational changes in the Tn10 transpososome during assembly and activation for cleavage. EMBO J 20:3882–3891. [PubMed][CrossRef]
9. Crellin P, Sewitz S, Chalmers R. 2004. DNA looping and catalysis; the IHF-folded arm of Tn10 promotes conformational changes and hairpin resolution. Mol Cell 13:537–547. [PubMed][CrossRef]
10. Benjamin HW, Kleckner N. 1989. Intramolecular transposition by Tn10. Cell 59:373–383. [PubMed][CrossRef]
11. Davies DR, Goryshin IY, Reznikoff WS, Rayment I. 2000. Three-dimensional structure of the Tn5 synaptic complex transposition intermediate. Science 289:77–85. [PubMed][CrossRef]
12. Whitfield CR, Wardle SJ, Haniford DB. 2009. The global bacterial regulator H-NS promotes transpososome formation and transposition in the Tn5 system. Nucleic Acids Res 37:309–321. [PubMed][CrossRef]
13. Raleigh EA, Kleckner N. 1986. Quantitation of insertion sequence IS10 transposase gene expression by a method generally applicable to any rarely expressed gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 83:1787–1791. [PubMed][CrossRef]
14. Krebs MP, Reznikoff WS. 1986. Transcriptional and translational initiation sites of IS50. Control of transposase and inhibitor expression. J Mol Biol 192:781–791. [PubMed][CrossRef]
15. Davis MA, Simons RW, Kleckner N. 1985. Tn10 protects itself at two levels from fortuitous activation by external promoters. Cell 43:379–387. [PubMed][CrossRef]
16. Simons RW, Kleckner N. 1983. Translational control of IS10 transposition. Cell 34:683–691. [PubMed][CrossRef]
17. Mahnke Braam LA, Goryshin IY, Reznikoff WS. 1999. A mechanism for Tn5 inhibition. carboxyl-terminal dimerization. J Biol Chem 274:86–92. [PubMed][CrossRef]
18. Roberts D, Hoopes BC, McClure WR, Kleckner N. 1985. IS10 transposition is regulated by DNA adenine methylation. Cell 43:117–130. [PubMed][CrossRef]
19. Yin JC, Krebs MP, Reznikoff WS. 1988. Effect of dam methylation on Tn5 transposition. J Mol Biol 199:35–45. [PubMed][CrossRef]
20. Signon L, Kleckner N. 1995. Negative and positive regulation of Tn10/IS10-promoted recombination by IHF: two distinguishable processes inhibit transposition off of multicopy plasmid replicons and activate chromosomal events that favor evolution of new transposons. Genes Dev 9:1123–1136. [PubMed][CrossRef]
21. Makris JC, Nordmann PL, Reznikoff WS. 1990. Integration host factor plays a role in IS50 and Tn5 transposition. J Bacteriol 172:1368–1373. [PubMed]
22. Weinreich MD, Reznikoff WS. 1992. Fis plays a role in Tn5 and IS50 transposition. J Bacteriol 174:4530–4537. [PubMed]
23. Kuan CT, Tessman I. 1991. LexA protein of Escherichia coli represses expression of the Tn5 transposase gene. J Bacteriol 173:6406–6410. [PubMed]
24. Haniford DB. 2006. Transpososome dynamics and regulation in Tn10 transposition. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol 41:407–424. [PubMed][CrossRef]
25. Reznikoff WS. 2008. Transposon Tn5. Ann Rev Genet 42:269–286. [PubMed][CrossRef]
26. Dorman CJ. 2004. H-NS: a universal regulator for a dynamic genome. Nat Rev Microbiol 2:391–400. [PubMed][CrossRef]
27. Vogel, J, Luisi BF. 2011. Hfq and its constellation of RNA. Nat Rev Microbiol 9:578–589. [PubMed][CrossRef]
28. Coros AM, Twiss E, Tavakoli NP, Derbyshire KM. 2005. Genetic evidence that GTP is required for transposition of IS903 and Tn552 in Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol 187:4598–4606. [PubMed][CrossRef]
29. Navarre WW, McClelland M, Libby SJ, Fang FC. 2007. Silencing of xenogeneic DNA by H-NS-facilitation of lateral gene transfer in bacteria by a defense system that recognizes foreign DNA. Genes Dev 21:1456–1471. [PubMed][CrossRef]
30. Swingle B, O'Carroll M, Haniford D, Derbyshire KM. 2004. The effect of host-encoded nucleoid proteins on transposition: H-NS influences targeting of both IS903 and Tn10. Molec Microbiol 52:1055–1067. [PubMed][CrossRef]
31. Wardle SJ, O'Carroll M, Derbyshire KM, Haniford DB. 2005. The global regulator H-NS acts directly on the transpososome to promote Tn10 transposition. Genes Dev 19:2224–2235. [PubMed][CrossRef]
32. Spurio R, Falconi M, Brandi A, Pon CL, Gualerzi CO. 1997. The oligomeric structure of nucleoid protein H-NS is necessary for recognition of intrinsically curved DNA and for DNA bending. EMBO J 16:1795–1805. [PubMed][CrossRef]
33. Badaut C, Williams R, Arluison V, Bouffartigues E, Robert B, Buc H, Rimsky S. 2002. The degree of oligomerization of the H-NS nucleoid structuring protein is related to specific binding to DNA. J Biol Chem 277:41657–41666. [PubMed][CrossRef]
34. Ward CM, Wardle SJ, Singh RK, Haniford DB. 2007. The global regulator H-NS binds to two distinct classes of sites within the Tn10 transpososome to promote transposition. Molec Microbiol 64:1000–1013. [PubMed][CrossRef]
35. Liu D, Haniford DB, Chalmers RM. 2011. H-NS mediates the dissociation of a refractory protein–DNA complex during Tn10/IS10 transposition. Nucleic Acids Res 39:6660–6668. [PubMed][CrossRef]
36. Wardle SJ, Chan A, Haniford DB. 2009. H-NS binds with high affinity to the Tn10 transpososome and promotes transpososome stabilization. Nucleic Acids Res 37:6148–6160. [PubMed][CrossRef]
37. Bouffartigues E, Buckle M, Badaut C, Travers A, Rimsky S. 2007. H-NS cooperative binding to high-affinity sites in a regulatory element results in transcriptional silencing. Nat Struct Molec Biol 14:441–448. [PubMed][CrossRef]
38. Liu D, Crellin P, Chalmers R. 2005. Cyclic changes in the affinity of protein–DNA interactions drive the progression and regulate the outcome of the Tn10 transposition reaction. Nucleic Acids Res 33:1982–1992. [PubMed][CrossRef]
39. Singh RK, Liburd J, Wardle SJ, Haniford DB. 2008. The nucleoid binding protein H-NS acts as an anti-channeling factor to favor intermolecular Tn10 transposition and dissemination. J Mol Biol 376:950–962. [PubMed][CrossRef]
40. Lee MS, Craigie R. 1998. A previously unidentified host protein protects retroviral DNA from autointegration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95:1528–1533. [PubMed][CrossRef]
41. Chen H, Engelman A. 1998. The barrier-to-autointegration protein is a host factor for HIV type 1 integration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95:15270–15274. [PubMed][CrossRef]
42. York D, Reznikoff WS. 1997. DNA binding and phasing analyses of Tn5 transposase and a monomeric variant. Nucleic Acids Res 25:2153–2160. [PubMed][CrossRef]
43. Whitfield CR, Shilton BH, Haniford DB. 2012. Identification of basepairs within Tn5 termini that are critical for H-NS binding to the transpososome and regulation of Tn5 transposition. Mob DNA 3:7. [PubMed][CrossRef]
44. Lease RA, Belfort M. 2000. A trans-acting RNA as a control switch in Escherichia coli: DsrA modulates function by forming alternative structures. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 97:9919–9924. [PubMed][CrossRef]
45. Ross JA, Wardle SJ, Haniford DB. 2010. Tn10/IS10 transposition is downregulated at the level of transposase expression by the RNA-binding protein Hfq. Molec Microbiol 78:607–621. [PubMed][CrossRef]
46. Ansong C, Yoon H, Porwollik S, Mottaz-Brewer H, Petritis BO, Jaitly N, Adkins JN, McClelland M, Heffron F, Smith RD. 2009. Global systems-level analysis of Hfq and SmpB deletion mutants in Salmonella: implications for virulence and global protein translation. PloS One 4:e4809. [PubMed][CrossRef]
47. Case CC, Simons EL, Simons RW. 1990. The IS10 transposase mRNA is destabilized during antisense RNA control. EMBO J 9:1259–1266. [PubMed]
48. Kittle JD, Simons RW, Lee J, Kleckner N. 1989. Insertion sequence IS10 anti-sense pairing initiates by an interaction between the 5′ end of the target RNA and a loop in the anti-sense RNA. J Mol Biol 210:561–572. [PubMed][CrossRef]
49. Ross JA, Ellis MJ, Hossain S, Haniford DB. 2013. Hfq restructures RNA-IN and RNA-OUT and facilitates antisense pairing in the Tn10/IS10 system. RNA 19:670–684. [PubMed][CrossRef]
50. Salvail H, Caron MP, Belanger J, Masse E. 2013. Antagonistic functions between the RNA chaperone Hfq and an sRNA regulate sensitivity to the antibiotic colicin. EMBO J 32:2764–2778. [PubMed][CrossRef]
51. Desnoyers G, Masse E. 2012. Noncanonical repression of translation initiation through small RNA recruitment of the RNA chaperone Hfq. Genes Dev 26:726–739. [PubMed][CrossRef]
52. Vytvytska O, Moll I, Kaberdin VR, von Gabain A, Blasi U. 2000. Hfq (HF1) stimulates ompA mRNA decay by interfering with ribosome binding. Genes Dev 14:1109–1118. [PubMed]
53. Geissmann TA, Touati D. 2004. Hfq, a new chaperoning role: binding to messenger RNA determines access for small RNA regulator. EMBO J 23:396–405. [PubMed][CrossRef]
54. Soper TJ, Doxzen K, Woodson SA. 2011. Major role for mRNA binding and restructuring in sRNA recruitment by Hfq. RNA 17:1544–1550. [PubMed][CrossRef]
55. Case CC, Roels SM, Jensen PD, Lee J, Kleckner N, Simons RW. 1989. The unusual stability of the IS10 anti-sense RNA is critical for its function and is determined by the structure of its stem-domain. EMBO J 8:4297–4305. [PubMed]
56. Mikulecky PJ, Kaw MK, Brescia CC, Takach JC, Sledjeski DD, Feig AL. 2004. Escherichia coli Hfq has distinct interaction surfaces for DsrA, rpoS and poly(A) RNAs. Nat Struct Molec Biol 11:1206–1214. [PubMed][CrossRef]
57. Sauer E, Weichenrieder, O. 2011. Structural basis for RNA 3′-end recognition by Hfq. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:13065–13070. [PubMed][CrossRef]
58. Storz G, Vogel J, Wassarman KM. 2011. Regulation by small RNAs in bacteria: expanding frontiers. Molec Cell 43:880–891. [PubMed][CrossRef]
59. McLellan CR. 2012. Regulation of the bacterial transposon Tn5: target deformation drives integration and the Escherichia coli host proteins H-NS and Hfq modulate transposition. Ph.D. dissertation University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
60. Le Derout J, Boni IV, Regnier P, Hajnsdorf E. 2010. Hfq affects mRNA levels independently of degradation. BMC Molec Biol 11:17. [PubMed][CrossRef]
61. Kennedy AK, Haniford DB, Mizuuchi K. 2000. Single active site catalysis of the successive phosphoryl transfer steps by DNA transposases: insights from phosphorothioate stereoselectivity. Cell 101:295–305. [PubMed][CrossRef]
62. Zhou L, Mitra R, Atkinson PW, Hickman AB, Dyda F, Craig NL. 2004. Transposition of hAT elements links transposable elements and V(D)J recombination. Nature 432:995–1001. [PubMed][CrossRef]
63. Mitra R, Fain-Thornton J, Craig NL. 2008. piggyBac can bypass DNA synthesis during cut and paste transposition. EMBO J 27:1097–1109. [PubMed][CrossRef]
64. Hencken CG, Li X, Craig NL. 2012. Functional characterization of an active Rag-like transposase. Nat Struct Molec Biol 19:834–836. [PubMed][CrossRef]
65. Klimasauskas S, Kumar S, Roberts RJ, Cheng X. 1994. HhaI methyltransferase flips its target base out of the DNA helix. Cell 76:357–369. [PubMed][CrossRef]
66. Hollis T, Ichikawa Y, Ellenberger T. 2000. DNA bending and a flip-out mechanism for base excision by the helix-hairpin-helix DNA glycosylase, Escherichia coli AlkA. EMBO J 19:758–766. [PubMed][CrossRef]
67. Bischerour J, Chalmers R. 2007. Base-flipping dynamics in a DNA hairpin processing reaction. Nucleic Acids Res 35:2584–2595. [PubMed][CrossRef]
68. Bischerour J, Chalmers R. 2009. Base flipping in Tn10 transposition: an active flip and capture mechanism. PloS One 4:e6201. [PubMed][CrossRef]
69. Allingham JS, Wardle SJ, Haniford DB. 2001. Determinants for hairpin formation in Tn10 transposition. EMBO J 20:2931–2942. [PubMed][CrossRef]
70. Callura JM, Dwyer DJ, Isaacs FJ, Cantor CR, Collins JJ. 2010. Tracking, tuning, and terminating microbial physiology using synthetic riboregulators. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107:15898–15903. [PubMed][CrossRef]
71. Chappell J, Takahashi MK, Meyer S, Loughrey D, Watters KE, Lucks J. 2013. The centrality of RNA for engineering gene expression. Biotechnol J 8:1379–1395. [PubMed][CrossRef]
72. Ma C, Simons RW. 1990. The IS10 antisense RNA blocks ribosome binding at the transposase translation initiation site. EMBO J 9:1267–1274. [PubMed]
73. Mutalik VK, Qi L, Guimaraes JC, Lucks JB, Arkin AP. 2012. Rationally designed families of orthogonal RNA regulators of translation. Nat Chem Biol 8:447–454. [PubMed][CrossRef]
74. Qi L, Lucks JB, Liu CC, Mutalik VK, Arkin AP. 2012. Engineering naturally occurring trans-acting non-coding RNAs to sense molecular signals. Nucleic Acids Res 40:5775–5786. [PubMed][CrossRef]
75. Takahashi MK, Lucks JB. 2013. A modular strategy for engineering orthogonal chimeric RNA transcription regulators. Nucleic Acids Res 41:7577–7588. [PubMed][CrossRef]
76. Kleckner N, Bender J, Gottesman S. 1991. Uses of transposons with emphasis on Tn10. Methods Enzymol 204:139–180. [PubMed][CrossRef]
microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014.citations
cm/3/1
content/journal/microbiolspec/10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014
Loading

Citations loading...

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/microbiolspec/10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014
2015-01-29
2017-09-19

Abstract:

The study of the bacterial transposons Tn and Tn has provided a wealth of information regarding steps in nonreplicative DNA transposition, transpososome dynamics and structure, as well as mechanisms employed to regulate transposition. The focus of ongoing research on these transposons is mainly on host regulation and the use of the Tn antisense system as a platform to develop riboregulators for applications in synthetic biology. Over the past decade two new regulators of both Tn and Tn transposition have been identified, namely H-NS and Hfq proteins. These are both global regulators of gene expression in enteric bacteria with functions linked to stress-response pathways and virulence and potentially could link the Tn and Tn systems (and thus the transfer of antibiotic resistance genes) to environmental cues. Work summarized here is consistent with the H-NS protein working directly on transposition complexes to upregulate both Tn and Tn transposition. In contrast, evidence is discussed that is consistent with Hfq working at the level of transposase expression to downregulate both systems. With regard to Tn and synthetic biology, some recent work that incorporates the Tn antisense RNA into both transcriptional and translational riboswitches is summarized.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/microbiolspec/3/1/MDNA3-0002-2014.html?itemId=/content/journal/microbiolspec/10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Figures

Image of FIGURE 1

Click to view

FIGURE 1

Structure of Tn and Tn. Tn is a composite transposon that encodes resistance determinants for tetracycline. The OEs and IEs of IS-Right and IS-Left are shown as well as the transcription units of IS-Right. RNA-IN encodes the transposase and RNA-OUT encodes an antisense RNA. Pairing of RNA-IN and RNA-OUT. RNA-OUT is a highly structured antisense RNA to the transposase RNA, RNA-IN. There are 35 nucleotides of perfect base complementarity between RNA-IN and RNA-OUT. Pairing initiates between the 5′ end of RNA-IN and the hairpin loop of RNA-OUT and full pairing results in the sequestration of both the Shine–Dalgarno (SD) sequence of RNA-IN and the start codon (AUG). Positions of the two main internal bulges in the stem are indicated. Structure of Tn. Tn is a composite transposon that encodes resistance to kanamycin, bleomycin, and streptomycin. The OE and IE of IS-Right and IS-Left are shown as well as the transcription units in IS-Right. Transcripts Tnp and Inh encode the transposase and inhibitor proteins, respectively. doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014.f1

Source: microbiolspec January 2015 vol. 3 no. 1 doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 2

Click to view

FIGURE 2

Tsome dynamics in Tn transposition. The top line shows the initial Tsome with an IHF-folded arm (α-arm) transitioning to a single end break complex (αSEB) in which flanking donor DNA has been cleaved from one end and the α-arm remains folded, to an unfolded single end break complex (uf-SEB), and then to an unfolded double end break complex (uf-DEB) where flanking donor DNA has been cleaved from both transposon ends. At the branch point the uf-DEB can either capture a target DNA (TCC, target-capture complex) that is not part of the transposon and catalyze an intermolecular strand-transfer event (STC, strand-transfer complex) or the uf-DEB can rebind IHF to refold a transposon arm and undergo an intramolecular target-capture and strand-transfer event in which part of the transposon serves as the target DNA. The lower line shows the impact of H-NS on Tsome dynamics. An H-NS dimer is shown binding to the flanking DNA of the β-arm of the SEB that contains a distorted DNA structure (squiggly line in top panel). H-NS then facilitates the displacement of IHF (through an unknown mechanism) permitting the α-arm to unfold and subsequently additional H-NS dimers are recruited to the unfolded Tsome. H-NS binding within the transposon sequences is proposed to help maintain the Tsome in an unfolded form to both stabilize the fully cleaved unfolded Tsome and promote intermolecular target capture. Note that H-NS might first interact with the initial Tsome (denoted bPEC for historical reasons) instead of the α-SEB as shown. Transposon end sequences, arrows attached to black lines; flanking donor DNA, grey lines; target DNA, dashed lines; transposase, ovals. For clarity the two transposon ends are not joined (indicated by double dashes). doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014.f2

Source: microbiolspec January 2015 vol. 3 no. 1 doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 3

Click to view

FIGURE 3

Strand-transfer products formed in Tn transposition. If IHF (orange circle) maintains at least one OE in the folded form after excision (lower branch of diagram), insertion events are “channeled” into a target site (red line) located close to an OE within the transposon. Accordingly, intramolecular STPs are formed, and these products are “topologically simple” (UKIC) and unlinked deletion circles (DCs) because supercoiling nodes present in the excision product are not trapped between the OEs and the target site (dotted red line shows the recombination event; intrastrand strand transfer leads to the formation of DCs, whereas interstrand strand transfer leads to formation of ICs). If IHF does not remain bound to the OE and the OE unfolds, then the OE can interact with a target site through “random collision” (upper branches of diagram). If the target site is on a separate DNA molecule, intermolecular transposition occurs, whereas if the target site is within the transposon, intramolecular transposition occurs. The products of the latter include topologically complex (T-Cpx) DCs (catenated) and ICs (knotted). Green lines indicate transposon DNA; black lines, flanking donor DNA; ovals, transposase. Reprinted from the ( 39 ) with permission from Elsevier. doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014.f3

Source: microbiolspec January 2015 vol. 3 no. 1 doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 4

Click to view

FIGURE 4

Hfq-binding sites within RNA-IN and RNA-OUT. A portion of IS-Right is depicted along with partial sequences of the first 95 and 40 nucleotides of RNA-IN and RNA-OUT, respectively. The positions of Hfq-binding sites defined by footprinting are also shown (thick lines). Blue and red lettering distinguish sites thought to interact with the proximal and distal binding faces of Hfq, respectively. The SD and start codon of RNA-IN are underlined (thin lines). Note that the distal Hfq-binding site at the 5′ end of RNA-IN overlaps with the SD sequence. doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014.f4

Source: microbiolspec January 2015 vol. 3 no. 1 doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 5

Click to view

FIGURE 5

Structure and RNA-binding properties of Hfq. Hfq monomers assemble into a homohexameric ring-shaped complex with three distinct RNA-binding surfaces. The proximal surface (located close to the N-terminus) preferentially binds short U-rich stretches of RNA with each nucleotide binding to a pocket formed from adjacent protomers. The opposite face of the hexamer is termed the distal surface and binds longer RNA sequences that are purine rich. Each monomer contains three nucleotide-binding pockets termed the A, R, and N sites, which interact with adenines, purines, and the sugar-phosphate backbone, respectively. Each hexamer also possesses six additional RNA binding sites (lateral sites, not shown) positioned within each monomer between the distal and proximal sites. A lateral site can accommodate RNA extending from the proximal and distal sites. Hfq monomers are in red, blue, and green and RNA is in gold. Adapted from ( 27 ) with permission from Macmillan Publishers. doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014.f5

Source: microbiolspec January 2015 vol. 3 no. 1 doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0002-2014
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint

Supplemental Material

No supplementary material available for this content.

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error