01.02.2013 Views

Page 2 Plant-Bacteria Interactions Edited by Iqbal Ahmad, John ...

Page 2 Plant-Bacteria Interactions Edited by Iqbal Ahmad, John ...

Page 2 Plant-Bacteria Interactions Edited by Iqbal Ahmad, John ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

120j 6 Molecular Mechanisms Underpinning <strong>Plant</strong> Colonization<br />

Figure 6.4 The SPyVET principle. (a) IVET<br />

strains will not grow in vitro in the absence of<br />

exogenous EGF owing to lack of P ES::egf expression<br />

(see Figure 6.2), but regulatory<br />

mutants (suppressors) that result in PES expression<br />

restore prototrophy enabling growth<br />

in the absence of exogenous EGF (Giddens,<br />

Jackson, Moon and Zhang, unpublished).<br />

(b) Two transposons were used to mutate<br />

IVET strains and disrupt expression of environment-specific<br />

regulators. (i) miniTn5 was<br />

used to solely disrupt repressors and (ii) IS-O-<br />

Km was used to disrupt repressors and induce<br />

environment-independent expression of<br />

neighboring activators <strong>by</strong> virtue of a constitutively<br />

expressed nptII promoter near one<br />

end of the transposon.<br />

disruption of a repressor gene enable expression of the plant-inducible gene linked<br />

to the dapB::lacZ reporter, thus allowing expression of dapB and growth. Similarly,<br />

IS-O-Km/hah nptII promoter activity enabled expression of positive regulators that<br />

activate the plant-inducible gene fusion. By using arbitrary-primed PCR [41] and<br />

sequencing, it was possible to identify the insertion points of the transposons, which<br />

were then mapped to the SBW25 genome sequence.<br />

Approximately 2–3 million mutants of each plant-inducible gene fusion were<br />

screened and a total of 16 regulators were identified for eight plant-inducible genes<br />

(Giddens, Jackson, Moon and Zhang, unpublished). Most of the activators identified<br />

were not isolated <strong>by</strong> IVET. This implies one of several possibilities. First, these<br />

activators are constitutively active and are themselves regulated post-transcriptionally.<br />

These would be recovered from an IVET screen through plants, but eliminated<br />

as housekeeping-type gene fusions that are also active in vitro. For example, one<br />

gene, algR, was identified as a positive regulator of the plant-inducible wss gene<br />

cluster, and also identified as a positive activator of hydrogen peroxide resistance<br />

[42]. This trait is expressed in vitro, which suggests the regulator must be active<br />

both in vitro and in vivo. A second possibility is that the activators are too weakly

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!