Search

In Escherichia coli , stringently controlled genes are highly transcribed during rapid growth, but “turned off” under nutrient limiting conditions, a process called the stringent response. To understand how transcriptional initiation at these promoters is coordinately regulated, we analyzed the interactions between RNA polymerase (RNAP) (both wild type and mutants) and four stringently controlled promoters. Our results show that the interactions between RNAP and stringently controlled promoters are intrinsically unstable and can alternate between relatively stable and metastable states. The mutant RNAPs appear to specifically further weaken interactions with these promoters in vitro and behave like “stringent” RNAPs in the absence of the stringent response in vivo , constituting a novel class of mutant RNAPs. Consistently, these mutant RNAPs also activate the expression of other genes that normally require the response. We propose that the stability of initiation complexes is coupled to the transcription of stringently controlled promoters, and this unique feature coordinates the expression of genes positively and negatively regulated by the stringent response.

Gal repressor inhibits transcription from the gal promoter ( P 1) when it binds to the cognate operator ( O E ). The repression is relieved by the presence of the inducer d -galactose. Compared with its interaction with free repressor, d -galactose binds to the repressor–operator complex with 10-fold reduced affinity as determined by fluorescence enhancement measurements. Thermodynamic analysis and fluorescence anisotropy showed that the stability of the repressor–operator complex is reduced by only 7-fold by the presence of the inducer in the complex. The formation of the inducer–repressor–operator ternary complex has been confirmed by CD spectral analysis. Fluorescence spectroscopy and energy transfer experiments suggest that individual allosteric effects of the two ligands, inducer and operator, on Gal repressor are responsible for the slightly weakened stability of the ternary complex compared with the stability of the inducer–repressor and repressor–operator complexes. In vitro transcription results demonstrated full derepression of transcription of the P 1 promoter under conditions in which the concentrations of the inducer–repressor binary complex are severalfold higher than the dissociation constant of the inducer–repressor–operator ternary complex into inducer–repressor and free DNA. These results strongly suggest that the inducer binding to the repressor–operator complex does not lead to dissociation of the repressor from the operator during transcription induction. Because Gal repressor inhibits transcription by modulating the α subunit of the P 1-bound RNA polymerase, we conclude that the inducer binding to the operator-bound repressor only allosterically relieves the inhibitory effect of repressor on RNA polymerase without dissociating the repressor from DNA.