Underground isoleucine biosynthesis pathways in E. coli

  1. Charles AR Cotton
  2. Iria Bernhardsgrütter
  3. Hai He
  4. Simon Burgener
  5. Luca Schulz
  6. Nicole Paczia
  7. Beau Dronsella
  8. Alexander Erban
  9. Stepan Toman
  10. Marian Dempfle
  11. Alberto De Maria
  12. Joachim Kopka
  13. Steffen N Lindner
  14. Tobias J Erb
  15. Arren Bar-Even  Is a corresponding author
  1. Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Germany
  2. Max Planck Institute of Terrestrial Microbiology, Germany
  3. Max Planck Insitute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Germany

Abstract

The promiscuous activities of enzymes provide fertile ground for the evolution of new metabolic pathways. Here, we systematically explore the ability of E. coli to harness underground metabolism to compensate for the deletion of an essential biosynthetic pathway. By deleting all threonine deaminases, we generated a strain in which isoleucine biosynthesis was interrupted at the level of 2-ketobutyrate. Incubation of this strain under aerobic conditions resulted in the emergence of a novel 2-ketobutyrate biosynthesis pathway based upon the promiscuous cleavage of O-succinyl-L-homoserine by cystathionine γ-synthase (MetB). Under anaerobic conditions, pyruvate formate-lyase enabled 2-ketobutyrate biosynthesis from propionyl-CoA and formate. Surprisingly, we found this anaerobic route to provide a substantial fraction of isoleucine in a WT strain, when propionate is available in the medium. This study demonstrates the selective advantage underground metabolism offers, providing metabolic redundancy and flexibility which allow for the best use of environmental carbon sources.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files have been provided for Figures 2 and 7 as well as for the metabolomic analysis.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Charles AR Cotton

    Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Iria Bernhardsgrütter

    Max Planck Institute of Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5019-8188
  3. Hai He

    Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1223-2813
  4. Simon Burgener

    Max Planck Institute of Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Luca Schulz

    Max Planck Institute of Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Nicole Paczia

    Max Planck Institute of Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Beau Dronsella

    Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Alexander Erban

    Dept. III, Max Planck Insitute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam-Golm, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Stepan Toman

    Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Marian Dempfle

    Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Alberto De Maria

    Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Joachim Kopka

    Dept. III, Max Planck Insitute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam-Golm, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9675-4883
  13. Steffen N Lindner

    Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3226-3043
  14. Tobias J Erb

    Max Planck Institute of Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Arren Bar-Even

    Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    For correspondence
    Bar-Even@mpimp-golm.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1039-4328

Funding

Max Planck Society

  • Arren Bar-Even

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

Copyright

© 2020, Cotton 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

  • 4,206
    views
  • 517
    downloads
  • 29
    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. Charles AR Cotton
  2. Iria Bernhardsgrütter
  3. Hai He
  4. Simon Burgener
  5. Luca Schulz
  6. Nicole Paczia
  7. Beau Dronsella
  8. Alexander Erban
  9. Stepan Toman
  10. Marian Dempfle
  11. Alberto De Maria
  12. Joachim Kopka
  13. Steffen N Lindner
  14. Tobias J Erb
  15. Arren Bar-Even
(2020)
Underground isoleucine biosynthesis pathways in E. coli
eLife 9:e54207.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54207

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54207

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Mai Nguyen, Elda Bauda ... Cecile Morlot
    Research Article

    Teichoic acids (TA) are linear phospho-saccharidic polymers and important constituents of the cell envelope of Gram-positive bacteria, either bound to the peptidoglycan as wall teichoic acids (WTA) or to the membrane as lipoteichoic acids (LTA). The composition of TA varies greatly but the presence of both WTA and LTA is highly conserved, hinting at an underlying fundamental function that is distinct from their specific roles in diverse organisms. We report the observation of a periplasmic space in Streptococcus pneumoniae by cryo-electron microscopy of vitreous sections. The thickness and appearance of this region change upon deletion of genes involved in the attachment of TA, supporting their role in the maintenance of a periplasmic space in Gram-positive bacteria as a possible universal function. Consequences of these mutations were further examined by super-resolved microscopy, following metabolic labeling and fluorophore coupling by click chemistry. This novel labeling method also enabled in-gel analysis of cell fractions. With this approach, we were able to titrate the actual amount of TA per cell and to determine the ratio of WTA to LTA. In addition, we followed the change of TA length during growth phases, and discovered that a mutant devoid of LTA accumulates the membrane-bound polymerized TA precursor.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Shinichi Kawaguchi, Xin Xu ... Toshie Kai
    Research Article

    Protein–protein interactions are fundamental to understanding the molecular functions and regulation of proteins. Despite the availability of extensive databases, many interactions remain uncharacterized due to the labor-intensive nature of experimental validation. In this study, we utilized the AlphaFold2 program to predict interactions among proteins localized in the nuage, a germline-specific non-membrane organelle essential for piRNA biogenesis in Drosophila. We screened 20 nuage proteins for 1:1 interactions and predicted dimer structures. Among these, five represented novel interaction candidates. Three pairs, including Spn-E_Squ, were verified by co-immunoprecipitation. Disruption of the salt bridges at the Spn-E_Squ interface confirmed their functional importance, underscoring the predictive model’s accuracy. We extended our analysis to include interactions between three representative nuage components—Vas, Squ, and Tej—and approximately 430 oogenesis-related proteins. Co-immunoprecipitation verified interactions for three pairs: Mei-W68_Squ, CSN3_Squ, and Pka-C1_Tej. Furthermore, we screened the majority of Drosophila proteins (~12,000) for potential interaction with the Piwi protein, a central player in the piRNA pathway, identifying 164 pairs as potential binding partners. This in silico approach not only efficiently identifies potential interaction partners but also significantly bridges the gap by facilitating the integration of bioinformatics and experimental biology.