4.4 Article

The Rhl quorum sensing system is at the top of the regulatory hierarchy under phosphate limiting conditions in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1

期刊

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
卷 203, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.00475-20

关键词

-

资金

  1. CONACYT [CVU-741217]
  2. Programa de Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigacion e Innovacion Tecnologica [IN201819]
  3. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia (CONACYT) [252269]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reveals that under phosphate limitation, even in the PAO1 type strain, the absence of LasR has no effect on the production of virulence factors and gene expression profile, whereas in a condition of phosphate repletion, the LasR hierarchy is maintained.
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a major nosocomial pathogen that presents high-level resistance to antibiotics. Its ability to cause infections relies on the production of multiple virulence factors. Quorum sensing (QS) regulates the expression of many of these virulence factors through three QS systems: Las, Rhl and PQS. The Las system positively regulates the other two systems, so it is the top of a hierarchized regulation. Nevertheless, clinical and environmental strains that lack a functional Las system have been isolated and surprisingly, some of them still have the ability to produce virulence factors and infect animal models, so it has been suggested that the hierarchy could be flexible under some conditions or atypical strains. Here we analyze the PAO1 type strain and its Delta lasR-derived mutant and report for the first time a growth condition (phosphate limitation) where LasR absence has no effect either on virulence factors production nor on the gene expression profile, in contrast to a condition of phosphate repletion where the LasR hierarchy is maintained This work provides evidence on how the QS hierarchy can change from being strictly LasR-dependent to a LasR-independent Rh1R-based hierarchy under phosphate limitation even in the PAO1 type strain.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据