Interplay between network structures, regulatory modes and sensing mechanisms of transcription factors in the transcriptional regulatory network of E. coli.
Though the bacterial transcription regulation apparatus is distinct in terms of several structural and functional features from its eukaryotic counterpart, the gross structure of the transcription regulatory network (TRN) is believed to be similar in both superkingdoms. Here, we explore the fine structure of the bacterial TRN and the underlying "co-regulatory network" (CRN) to show that despite the superficial similarities to the TRN of the eukaryotic model organism yeast, the bacterial networks display entirely different organizational principles. In particular unlike in eukaryotes, hubs of the bacterial networks are both global regulators and integrators of diverse disparate transcriptional responses. These and other organizational differences might correlate with the fundamental differences in gene and promoter organization in the two superkingdoms, especially the presence of operons and regulons in bacteria. Further we explored to find the interplay, if any, between network structures, mode of regulatory interactions and signal sensing of transcription factors (TFs) in shaping up the bacterial transcriptional regulatory responses. For this purpose, we first classified TFs according to their regulatory mode (activator, repressor or dual regulator) and sensory mechanism (one-component systems responding to internal or external signals, TFs from two-component systems and chromosomal structure modifying TFs) in the bacterial model organism Escherichia coli and then we studied the overall evolutionary optimization of network structures. The incorporation of TFs in different hierarchical elements of the TRN appears to involve on a multi-dimensional selection process depending on regulatory and sensory modes of TFs in motifs, co-regulatory associations between TFs of different functional classes and transcript half-lives. As a result it appears to have generated circuits that allow intricately regulated physiological state changes. We identified the biological significance of most of these optimizations, which can be further used as the basis to explore similar controls in other bacteria. We also show that, though on the larger evolutionary scale, unrelated TFs have evolved to become hubs, within lineages like gamma-proteobacteria there is strong tendency to retain hubs, as well as certain higher-order network modules that have emerged through lineage specific paralog duplications.
Balaji
S
S
National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20894, USA. Electronic address: sbalaji@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.
Babu
M Madan
MM
MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 2QH, UK. Electronic address: madanm@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk.
Aravind
L
L
National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20894, USA.
D004926:Escherichia coli / Q000378:metabolism*; D029968:Escherichia coli Proteins / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism*; D019143:Evolution, Molecular; D015964:Gene Expression Regulation, Bacterial; D053263:Gene Regulatory Networks; D015398:Signal Transduction / Q000502:physiology; D014157:Transcription Factors / Q000378:metabolism*; D014158:Transcription, Genetic
D029968:Escherichia coli Proteins; D014157:Transcription Factors
Science. 2002 Oct 25;298(5594):824-7
12399590
Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Feb 15;31(4):1234-44
12582243
Nat Rev Genet. 2004 Feb;5(2):101-13
14735121
Nat Rev Genet. 2004 Mar;5(3):169-78
14970819
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Mar 2;101(9):2758-63
14981237
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004 Jan;2(1):57-65
15035009
BMC Bioinformatics. 2004 Jan 30;5:10
15018656
Nat Genet. 2004 May;36(5):492-6
15107850
Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2004 Jun;14(3):283-91
15193307
Nature. 2004 Sep 2;431(7004):99-104
15343339
Nature. 2004 Sep 16;431(7006):308-12
15372033
Trends Microbiol. 1993 Nov;1(8):306-10
8162415
Nucleic Acids Res. 1998 Jan 1;26(1):55-9
9399800
Bioessays. 1998 May;20(5):433-40
9670816
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Apr 13;96(8):4285-8
10200254
Trends Microbiol. 1999 Mar;7(3):115-20
10203840
Science. 1999 Jul 30;285(5428):751-3
10427000
Trends Microbiol. 2005 Feb;13(2):52-6
15680762
FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2005 Apr;29(2):231-62
15808743
Sci STKE. 2005 May 3;2005(282):pe20
15870424
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 May 31;102(22):7841-6
15908506
Trends Genet. 2005 Sep;21(9):492-5
16026891
Phys Biol. 2005 Jun;2(2):81-8
16204860
Trends Microbiol. 2006 Jan;14(1):22-7
16311037
J Mol Biol. 2006 Apr 28;358(2):614-33
16530225
J Mol Biol. 2006 Jun 30;360(1):204-12
16730024
J Mol Biol. 2006 Jun 30;360(1):213-27
16762362
Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34(12):3434-45
16840530
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006 Sep;4(9):705-9
16894339
Curr Opin Microbiol. 2006 Oct;9(5):511-9
16942903
BMC Genomics. 2006;7:239
16984633
BMC Bioinformatics. 2006;7:478
17069658
Genome Biol. 2006;7(7):R62
16859509
J Mol Biol. 2007 Apr 20;368(1):263-72
17321548
PLoS Comput Biol. 2006 Dec 1;2(12):e164
17140283
BMC Bioinformatics. 2006;7:5
16398937
Nucleic Acids Res. 1999 Dec 1;27(23):4658-70
10556324
Nucleic Acids Res. 2000 Apr 15;28(8):1838-47
10734204
J Mol Biol. 2001 Apr 13;307(5):1271-92
11292341
Mol Microbiol. 2001 Apr;40(2):440-50
11309126
Nat Genet. 2002 May;31(1):60-3
11967534
Nat Genet. 2002 May;31(1):64-8
11967538
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Jul 23;99(15):9697-702
12119387
Science. 2002 Oct 25;298(5594):799-804
12399584