-
Deciphering the regulatory genome of $\textit{Escherichia coli}$, one hundred promoters at a time
Authors:
William T. Ireland,
Suzannah M. Beeler,
Emanuel Flores-Bautista,
Nathan M. Belliveau,
Michael J. Sweredoski,
Annie Moradian,
Justin B. Kinney,
Rob Phillips
Abstract:
Advances in DNA sequencing have revolutionized our ability to read genomes. However, even in the most well-studied of organisms, the bacterium ${\it Escherichia coli}$, for $\approx$ 65$\%$ of the promoters we remain completely ignorant of their regulation. Until we have cracked this regulatory Rosetta Stone, efforts to read and write genomes will remain haphazard. We introduce a new method (Reg-S…
▽ More
Advances in DNA sequencing have revolutionized our ability to read genomes. However, even in the most well-studied of organisms, the bacterium ${\it Escherichia coli}$, for $\approx$ 65$\%$ of the promoters we remain completely ignorant of their regulation. Until we have cracked this regulatory Rosetta Stone, efforts to read and write genomes will remain haphazard. We introduce a new method (Reg-Seq) linking a massively-parallel reporter assay and mass spectrometry to produce a base pair resolution dissection of more than 100 promoters in ${\it E. coli}$ in 12 different growth conditions. First, we show that our method recapitulates regulatory information from known sequences. Then, we examine the regulatory architectures for more than 80 promoters in the ${\it E. coli}$ genome which previously had no known regulation. In many cases, we also identify which transcription factors mediate their regulation. The method introduced here clears a path for fully characterizing the regulatory genome of model organisms, with the potential of moving on to an array of other microbes of ecological and medical relevance.
△ Less
Submitted 21 January, 2020;
originally announced January 2020.
-
The Energetics of Molecular Adaptation in Transcriptional Regulation
Authors:
Griffin Chure,
Manuel Razo-Mejia,
Nathan M. Belliveau,
Tal Einav,
Zofii Kaczmarek,
Stephanie L. Barnes,
Mitchell Lewis,
Rob Phillips
Abstract:
Mutation is a critical mechanism by which evolution explores the functional landscape of proteins. Despite our ability to experimentally inflict mutations at will, it remains difficult to link sequence-level perturbations to systems-level responses. Here, we present a framework centered on measuring changes in the free energy of the system to link individual mutations in an allosteric transcriptio…
▽ More
Mutation is a critical mechanism by which evolution explores the functional landscape of proteins. Despite our ability to experimentally inflict mutations at will, it remains difficult to link sequence-level perturbations to systems-level responses. Here, we present a framework centered on measuring changes in the free energy of the system to link individual mutations in an allosteric transcriptional repressor to the parameters which govern its response. We find the energetic effects of the mutations can be categorized into several classes which have characteristic curves as a function of the inducer concentration. We experimentally test these diagnostic predictions using the well-characterized LacI repressor of Escherichia coli, probing several mutations in the DNA binding and inducer binding domains. We find that the change in gene expression due to a point mutation can be captured by modifying only a subset of the model parameters that describe the respective domain of the wild-type protein. These parameters appear to be insulated, with mutations in the DNA binding domain altering only the DNA affinity and those in the inducer binding domain altering only the allosteric parameters. Changing these subsets of parameters tunes the free energy of the system in a way that is concordant with theoretical expectations. Finally, we show that the induction profiles and resulting free energies associated with pairwise double mutants can be predicted with quantitative accuracy given knowledge of the single mutants, providing an avenue for identifying and quantifying epistatic interactions.
△ Less
Submitted 15 May, 2019;
originally announced May 2019.
-
Figure 1 Theory Meets Figure 2 Experiments in the Study of Gene Expression
Authors:
Rob Phillips,
Nathan M. Belliveau,
Griffin Chure,
Hernan G. Garcia,
Manuel Razo-Mejia,
Clarissa Scholes
Abstract:
It is tempting to believe that we now own the genome. The ability to read and re-write it at will has ushered in a stunning period in the history of science. Nonetheless, there is an Achilles heel exposed by all of the genomic data that has accrued: we still don't know how to interpret it. Many genes are subject to sophisticated programs of transcriptional regulation, mediated by DNA sequences tha…
▽ More
It is tempting to believe that we now own the genome. The ability to read and re-write it at will has ushered in a stunning period in the history of science. Nonetheless, there is an Achilles heel exposed by all of the genomic data that has accrued: we still don't know how to interpret it. Many genes are subject to sophisticated programs of transcriptional regulation, mediated by DNA sequences that harbor binding sites for transcription factors which can up- or down-regulate gene expression depending upon environmental conditions. This gives rise to an input-output function describing how the level of expression depends upon the parameters of the regulated gene { for instance, on the number and type of binding sites in its regulatory sequence. In recent years, the ability to make precision measurements of expression, coupled with the ability to make increasingly sophisticated theoretical predictions, have enabled an explicit dialogue between theory and experiment that holds the promise of covering this genomic Achilles heel. The goal is to reach a predictive understanding of transcriptional regulation that makes it possible to calculate gene expression levels from DNA regulatory sequence. This review focuses on the canonical simple repression motif to ask how well the models that have been used to characterize it actually work. We consider a hierarchy of increasingly sophisticated experiments in which the minimal parameter set learned at one level is applied to make quantitative predictions at the next. We show that these careful quantitative dissections provide a template for a predictive understanding of the many more complex regulatory arrangements found across all domains of life.
△ Less
Submitted 30 December, 2018;
originally announced December 2018.
-
Tuning transcriptional regulation through signaling: A predictive theory of allosteric induction
Authors:
Manuel Razo-Mejia,
Stephanie L. Barnes,
Nathan M. Belliveau,
Griffin Chure,
Tal Einav,
Mitchell Lewis,
Rob Phillips
Abstract:
Allosteric regulation is found across all domains of life, yet we still lack simple, predictive theories that directly link the experimentally tunable parameters of a system to its input-output response. To that end, we present a general theory of allosteric transcriptional regulation using the Monod-Wyman-Changeux model. We rigorously test this model using the ubiquitous simple repression motif i…
▽ More
Allosteric regulation is found across all domains of life, yet we still lack simple, predictive theories that directly link the experimentally tunable parameters of a system to its input-output response. To that end, we present a general theory of allosteric transcriptional regulation using the Monod-Wyman-Changeux model. We rigorously test this model using the ubiquitous simple repression motif in bacteria by first predicting the behavior of strains that span a large range of repressor copy numbers and DNA binding strengths and then constructing and measuring their response. Our model not only accurately captures the induction profiles of these strains but also enables us to derive analytic expressions for key properties such as the dynamic range and $[EC_{50}]$. Finally, we derive an expression for the free energy of allosteric repressors which enables us to collapse our experimental data onto a single master curve that captures the diverse phenomenology of the induction profiles.
△ Less
Submitted 21 June, 2017; v1 submitted 23 February, 2017;
originally announced February 2017.
