title: Transcriptional effects of CRP* expression in Escherichia coli.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Escherichia coli exhibits diauxic growth in sugar mixtures due to CRP-mediated catabolite repression and inducer exclusion related to phosphotransferase system enzyme activity. Replacement of the native crp gene with a catabolite repression mutant (referred to as crp*) enables co-utilization of glucose and other sugars in E. coli. While previous studies have examined the effects of expressing CRP* mutants on the expression of specific catabolic genes, little is known about the global transcriptional effects of CRP* expression. In this study, we compare the transcriptome of E. coli W3110 (expressing wild-type CRP) to that of mutant strain PC05 (expressing CRP*) in the presence and absence of glucose.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The glucose effect is significantly suppressed in strain PC05 relative to strain W3110. The expression levels of glucose-sensitive genes are generally not altered by glucose to the same extent in strain PCO5 as compared to W3110. Only 23 of the 80 genes showing significant differential expression in the presence of glucose for strain PC05 are present among the 418 genes believed to be directly regulated by CRP. Genes involved in central carbon metabolism (including several TCA cycle genes) and amino acid biosynthesis, as well as genes encoding nutrient transport systems are among those whose transcript levels are most significantly affected by CRP* expression.We present a detailed transcription analysis and relate these results to phenotypic differences between strains expressing wild-type CRP and CRP*. Notably, CRP* expression in the presence of glucose results in an elevated intracellular NADPH concentration and reduced NADH concentration relative to wild-type CRP. Meanwhile, a more drastic decrease in the NADPH/NADP+ ratio is observed for the case of CRP* expression in strains engineered to reduce xylose to xylitol via a heterologously expressed, NADPH-dependent xylose reductase. Altered expression levels of transhydrogenase and TCA cycle genes, among others, are consistent with these observations.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  While the simplest model of CRP*-mediated gene expression assumes insensitivity to glucose (or cAMP), our results show that gene expression in the context of CRP* is very different from that of wild-type in the absence of glucose, and is influenced by the presence of glucose. Most of the transcription changes in response to CRP* expression are difficult to interpret in terms of possible systematic effects on metabolism. Elevated NADPH availability resulting from CRP* expression suggests potential biocatalytic applications of crp* strains that extend beyond relief of catabolite repression.
authors.affiliation: Department of Chemical Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA. khankal@engr.psu.edu
authors.forename: Reza
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Khankal
authors.forename: Jonathan W
authors.initials: JW
authors.lastname: Chin
authors.forename: Debashis
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Ghosh
authors.forename: Patrick C
authors.initials: PC
authors.lastname: Cirino
references.citation: Annu Rev Biochem. 1993;62:749-95
references.pmid: 8394684
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 1999 Feb;181(3):1030-4
references.pmid: 9922271
references.citation: Anal Biochem. 1997 Sep 5;251(2):153-7
references.pmid: 9299010
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 1975 Apr;122(1):338-40
references.pmid: 164435
references.citation: J Biotechnol. 2007 Mar 10;128(4):747-61
references.pmid: 17331609
references.citation: Biochim Biophys Acta. 2002 Sep 10;1555(1-3):122-7
references.pmid: 12206903
references.citation: Anal Biochem. 1973 Jun;53(2):452-8
references.pmid: 4351948
references.citation: Cell. 1985 Jul;41(3):745-51
references.pmid: 2988785
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 2004 Jun;186(11):3516-24
references.pmid: 15150239
references.citation: EMBO J. 1983;2(5):715-20
references.pmid: 16453452
references.citation: EMBO J. 1985 Dec 1;4(12):3329-32
references.pmid: 3004951
references.citation: Biochemistry. 2001 Nov 6;40(44):13177-87
references.pmid: 11683626
references.citation: Biotechnol Bioeng. 2009 May 1;103(1):148-61
references.pmid: 19189409
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1982 Mar;79(5):1457-61
references.pmid: 7041121
references.citation: FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2001 Nov 13;204(2):247-52
references.pmid: 11731130
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 2008 Apr;190(7):2323-30
references.pmid: 18223071
references.citation: Biotechnol Bioeng. 2006 Dec 20;95(6):1167-76
references.pmid: 16838379
references.citation: J Biotechnol. 2008 Apr 30;134(3-4):246-52
references.pmid: 18359531
references.citation: Nat Protoc. 2009;4(1):44-57
references.pmid: 19131956
references.citation: Biotechnol Prog. 2004 Mar-Apr;20(2):403-11
references.pmid: 15058984
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 1983 Oct;156(1):81-8
references.pmid: 6311808
references.citation: Mol Syst Biol. 2006;2:2006.0008
references.pmid: 16738554
references.citation: J Biol Chem. 2004 Feb 20;279(8):6613-9
references.pmid: 14660605
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 1995 Feb 25;23(4):599-605
references.pmid: 7899079
references.citation: J Biol Chem. 1970 Nov 25;245(22):5974-8
references.pmid: 4320794
references.citation: Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2000 Apr;11(2):187-98
references.pmid: 10753763
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 2009 Jan;37(Database issue):D464-70
references.pmid: 18974181
references.citation: Mol Microbiol. 1998 Nov;30(3):487-98
references.pmid: 9822815
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 1993 Apr 25;21(8):1827-35
references.pmid: 8388097
references.citation: Mol Syst Biol. 2006;2:2006.0007
references.pmid: 16738553
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 2008 Jun;190(11):3851-8
references.pmid: 18375566
references.citation: Microbiol Rev. 1992 Mar;56(1):100-22
references.pmid: 1315922
references.citation: Mol Microbiol. 1994 Sep;13(5):755-64
references.pmid: 7815935
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 1981 Dec;148(3):753-61
references.pmid: 6273380
references.citation: Genome Biol. 2003;4(5):P3
references.pmid: 12734009
references.citation: J Biol Chem. 1983 Mar 25;258(6):3750-8
references.pmid: 6300054
references.citation: J Biotechnol. 2004 Apr 8;109(1-2):21-30
references.pmid: 15063611
references.citation: J Biol Chem. 1995 Sep 15;270(37):21679-83
references.pmid: 7665583
references.citation: J Biol Chem. 1986 Dec 15;261(35):16332-9
references.pmid: 3023348
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 2009 Apr;191(7):2112-21
references.pmid: 19181802
references.citation: Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2005 Mar;69(1):12-50
references.pmid: 15755952
references.citation: Biochemistry. 2003 May 20;42(19):5555-65
references.pmid: 12741811
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1970 Jun;66(2):480-7
references.pmid: 4317918
references.citation: Methods. 2001 Dec;25(4):402-8
references.pmid: 11846609
references.citation: Microbiol Rev. 1989 Mar;53(1):109-20
references.pmid: 2651862
references.citation: Res Microbiol. 2004 Mar;155(2):76-9
references.pmid: 14990258
references.citation: Mol Microbiol. 1999 Sep;33(6):1221-31
references.pmid: 10510236
references.citation: Biotechnol Bioeng. 2009 Jan 1;102(1):209-20
references.pmid: 18698648
references.citation: J Bacteriol. 2007 Oct;189(19):6891-900
references.pmid: 17675376
references.citation: Biotechnol Lett. 2008 Sep;30(9):1645-53
references.pmid: 18414795
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 2004 Jan 1;32(Database issue):D277-80
references.pmid: 14681412
references.citation: Mol Microbiol. 1995 Jul;17(2):251-8
references.pmid: 7494474
references.citation: Mol Gen Genet. 1978 Sep 20;165(1):47-56
references.pmid: 213702
references.citation: Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol. 2004;3:Article3
references.pmid: 16646809
references.citation: Eur J Biochem. 2000 Oct;267(20):6102-9
references.pmid: 11012661
references.citation: J Biol Chem. 1995 May 19;270(20):11803-5
references.pmid: 7744829