1. Cell Biology
  2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease

Class-A penicillin binding proteins do not contribute to cell shape but repair cell-wall defects

  1. Antoine Vigouroux
  2. Baptiste Cordier
  3. Andrey Aristov
  4. Laura Alvarez
  5. Gizem Özbaykal
  6. Thibault Chaze
  7. Enno Rainer Oldewurtel
  8. Mariette Matondo
  9. Felipe Cava
  10. David Bikard
  11. Sven van Teeffelen  Is a corresponding author
  1. Institut Pasteur, France
  2. Umeå University, Sweden
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51998
Share this article
Cite this article
  1. Antoine Vigouroux
  2. Baptiste Cordier
  3. Andrey Aristov
  4. Laura Alvarez
  5. Gizem Özbaykal
  6. Thibault Chaze
  7. Enno Rainer Oldewurtel
  8. Mariette Matondo
  9. Felipe Cava
  10. David Bikard
  11. Sven van Teeffelen
(2020)
Class-A penicillin binding proteins do not contribute to cell shape but repair cell-wall defects
eLife 9:e51998.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51998
  2. Download BibTeX
  3. Download .RIS

Abstract

Cell shape and cell-envelope integrity of bacteria are determined by the peptidoglycan cell wall. In rod-shaped Escherichia coli, two conserved sets of machinery are essential for cell-wall insertion in the cylindrical part of the cell: the Rod complex and the class-A penicillin-binding proteins (aPBPs). While the Rod complex governs rod-like cell shape, aPBP function is less well understood. aPBPs were previously hypothesized to either work in concert with the Rod complex or to independently repair cell-wall defects. First, we demonstrate through modulation of enzyme levels that aPBPs do not contribute to rod-like cell shape but are required for mechanical stability, supporting their independent activity. By combining measurements of cell-wall stiffness, cell-wall insertion, and PBP1b motion at the single-molecule level we then present evidence that PBP1b, the major aPBP, contributes to cell-wall integrity by repairing cell wall defects.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files or deposited on Dryad. Source data files have been provided for Figures 1-4.Dryad datasets:Tracking data Tracking.zip: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.m37pvmcxq.SDS-Page raw images: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.9s4mw6mb9

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Antoine Vigouroux

    Microbial Morphogenesis and Growth Laboratory, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  2. Baptiste Cordier

    Microbial Morphogenesis and Growth Laboratory, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  3. Andrey Aristov

    Microbial Morphogenesis and Growth Laboratory, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  4. Laura Alvarez

    Laboratory for Molecular Infection Medicine Sweden (MIMS), Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  5. Gizem Özbaykal

    Microbial Morphogenesis and Growth Laboratory, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  6. Thibault Chaze

    Proteomics Platform, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  7. Enno Rainer Oldewurtel

    Microbial Morphogenesis and Growth Laboratory, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  8. Mariette Matondo

    Proteomics Platform, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  9. Felipe Cava

    Laboratory for Molecular Infection Medicine Sweden (MIMS), Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  10. David Bikard

    Synthetic Biology Laboratory, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  11. Sven van Teeffelen

    Microbial Morphogenesis and Growth Laboratory, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    For correspondence
    sven.vanteeffelen@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0877-1294

Funding

H2020 European Research Council (679980)

  • Sven van Teeffelen

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-10-LABX-62-IBEID)

  • Antoine Vigouroux
  • David Bikard
  • Sven van Teeffelen

Volkswagen Foundation

  • Sven van Teeffelen

Mairie de Paris (Emergence(s))

  • Sven van Teeffelen

H2020 European Research Council (677823)

  • David Bikard

Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse

  • Felipe Cava

Swedish Research Council

  • Felipe Cava

Kempe Foundation

  • Felipe Cava

Laboratory for Molecular Infection Medicine Sweden

  • Felipe Cava

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2020, Vigouroux et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,214
    views
  • 714
    downloads
  • 112
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Antoine Vigouroux
  2. Baptiste Cordier
  3. Andrey Aristov
  4. Laura Alvarez
  5. Gizem Özbaykal
  6. Thibault Chaze
  7. Enno Rainer Oldewurtel
  8. Mariette Matondo
  9. Felipe Cava
  10. David Bikard
  11. Sven van Teeffelen
(2020)
Class-A penicillin binding proteins do not contribute to cell shape but repair cell-wall defects
eLife 9:e51998.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51998

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51998

Categories and tags

Research organism

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Physics of Living Systems

    Catalytic growth in a shared enzyme pool ensures robust control of centrosome size

    Deb Sankar Banerjee, Shiladitya Banerjee
    Research Article

    Accurate regulation of centrosome size is essential for ensuring error-free cell division, and dysregulation of centrosome size has been linked to various pathologies, including developmental defects and cancer. While a universally accepted model for centrosome size regulation is lacking, prior theoretical and experimental works suggest a centrosome growth model involving autocatalytic assembly of the pericentriolar material. Here, we show that the autocatalytic assembly model fails to explain the attainment of equal centrosome sizes, which is crucial for error-free cell division. Incorporating latest experimental findings into the molecular mechanisms governing centrosome assembly, we introduce a new quantitative theory for centrosome growth involving catalytic assembly within a shared pool of enzymes. Our model successfully achieves robust size equality between maturing centrosome pairs, mirroring cooperative growth dynamics observed in experiments. To validate our theoretical predictions, we compare them with available experimental data and demonstrate the broad applicability of the catalytic growth model across different organisms, which exhibit distinct growth dynamics and size scaling characteristics.

    1. Cell Biology

    Mechanisms of PP2A-Ankle2 dependent nuclear reassembly after mitosis

    Jingjing Li, Xinyue Wang ... Vincent Archambault
    Research Article

    In animals, mitosis involves the breakdown of the nucleus. The reassembly of a nucleus after mitosis requires the reformation of the nuclear envelope around a single mass of chromosomes. This process requires Ankle2 (also known as LEM4 in humans) which interacts with PP2A and promotes the function of the Barrier-to-Autointegration Factor (BAF). Upon dephosphorylation, BAF dimers cross-bridge chromosomes and bind lamins and transmembrane proteins of the reassembling nuclear envelope. How Ankle2 functions in mitosis is incompletely understood. Using a combination of approaches in Drosophila, along with structural modeling, we provide several lines of evidence that suggest that Ankle2 is a regulatory subunit of PP2A, explaining how it promotes BAF dephosphorylation. In addition, we discovered that Ankle2 interacts with the endoplasmic reticulum protein Vap33, which is required for Ankle2 localization at the reassembling nuclear envelope during telophase. We identified the interaction sites of PP2A and Vap33 on Ankle2. Through genetic rescue experiments, we show that the Ankle2/PP2A interaction is essential for the function of Ankle2 in nuclear reassembly and that the Ankle2/Vap33 interaction also promotes this process. Our study sheds light on the molecular mechanisms of post-mitotic nuclear reassembly and suggests that the endoplasmic reticulum is not merely a source of membranes in the process, but also provides localized enzymatic activity.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression

    The conserved ATPase PCH-2 controls the number and distribution of crossovers by antagonizing their formation in Caenorhabditis elegans

    Bhumil Patel, Maryke Grobler ... Needhi Bhalla
    Research Article

    Meiotic crossover recombination is essential for both accurate chromosome segregation and the generation of new haplotypes for natural selection to act upon. This requirement is known as crossover assurance and is one example of crossover control. While the conserved role of the ATPase, PCH-2, during meiotic prophase has been enigmatic, a universal phenotype when pch-2 or its orthologs are mutated is a change in the number and distribution of meiotic crossovers. Here, we show that PCH-2 controls the number and distribution of crossovers by antagonizing their formation. This antagonism produces different effects at different stages of meiotic prophase: early in meiotic prophase, PCH-2 prevents double-strand breaks from becoming crossover-eligible intermediates, limiting crossover formation at sites of initial double-strand break formation and homolog interactions. Later in meiotic prophase, PCH-2 winnows the number of crossover-eligible intermediates, contributing to the designation of crossovers and ultimately, crossover assurance. We also demonstrate that PCH-2 accomplishes this regulation through the meiotic HORMAD, HIM-3. Our data strongly support a model in which PCH-2’s conserved role is to remodel meiotic HORMADs throughout meiotic prophase to destabilize crossover-eligible precursors and coordinate meiotic recombination with synapsis, ensuring the progressive implementation of meiotic recombination and explaining its function in the pachytene checkpoint and crossover control.