Among the many proteins needed for assembly and function of bacterial flagella, FliG, FliM, and FliN have attracted special attention because mutant phenotypes suggest that they are needed not only for flagellar assembly but also for torque generation and for controlling the direction of motor rotation. A role for these proteins in torque generation is suggested by the existence of mutations in each of them that produce the Mot ؊ (or paralyzed) phenotype, in which flagella are assembled and appear normal but do not rotate. The presumption is that Mot ؊ defects cause paralysis by specifically disrupting functions essential for torque generation, while preserving the features of a protein needed for flagellar assembly. Here, we present evidence that the reported mot mutations in fliM and fliN do not disrupt torque-generating functions specifically but, instead, affect the incorporation of proteins into the flagellum. The fliM and fliN mutants are immotile at normal expression levels but become motile when the mutant proteins and/or other, evidently interacting flagellar proteins are overexpressed. In contrast, many of the reported fliG mot mutations abolish motility at all expression levels, while permitting flagellar assembly, and thus appear to disrupt torque generation specifically. These mutations are clustered in a segment of about 100 residues at the carboxyl terminus of FliG. A slightly larger carboxyl-terminal segment of 126 residues accumulates in the cells when expressed alone and thus probably constitutes a stable, independently folded domain. We suggest that the carboxyl-terminal domain of FliG functions specifically in torque generation, forming the rotor portion of the site of energy transduction in the flagellar motor.Many motile bacteria are propelled by thin helical filaments that are each driven at the base by a rotary motor embedded in the cell membrane (reviewed in references 1, 20, 25). The filament/motor organelle is called a flagellum. In contrast to eukaryotic molecular motors, which use nucleoside triphosphates as an energy source, bacterial rotary motors are powered by the transmembrane gradient of protons (19,21) or, in some species, sodium ions (14). The mechanism by which bacterial flagellar motors convert the chemical energy of the ion gradient into the mechanical energy of rotation is not yet understood.Approximately 50 genes are needed for the assembly and operation of the flagella of Escherichia coli or Salmonella typhimurium (20). Among these, only a few encode products thought to be directly involved in the process of torque generation. Genes whose products might participate in torque generation have been identified in extensive mutant screens as those giving the Mot Ϫ phenotype, in which flagella are assembled but do not rotate. The presumption has been that mot mutations affect torque-generating activities specifically, while preserving the features of a protein needed for flagellar assembly. By using this criterion, five proteins that could have direct roles in torque generati...

No abstract

Rotation of the bacterial flagellar motor is powered by a transmembrane gradient of protons or, in some species, sodium ions. The molecular mechanism of coupling between ion flow and motor rotation is not understood. The proteins most closely involved in motor rotation are MotA, MotB, and FliG. MotA and MotB are transmembrane proteins that function in transmembrane proton conduction and that are believed to form the stator. FliG is a soluble protein located on the cytoplasmic face of the rotor. Two other proteins, FliM and FliN, are known to bind to FliG and have also been suggested to be involved to some extent in torque generation. Proton (or sodium)-binding sites in the motor are likely to be important to its function and might be formed from the side chains of acidic residues. To investigate the role of acidic residues in the function of the flagellar motor, we mutated each of the conserved acidic residues in the five proteins that have been suggested to be involved in torque generation and measured the effects on motility. None of the conserved acidic residues of MotA, FliG, FliM, or FliN proved essential for torque generation. An acidic residue at position 32 of MotB did prove essential. Of 15 different substitutions studied at this position, only the conservative-replacement D32E mutant retained any function. Previous studies, together with additional data presented here, indicate that the proteins involved in motor rotation do not contain any conserved basic residues that are critical for motor rotation per se. We propose that Asp 32 of MotB functions as a proton-binding site in the bacterial flagellar motor and that no other conserved, protonatable residues function in this capacity.

No abstract

Signaling through mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) is stimulated by amino acids and insulin. Insulin inactivates TSC1/2, the GTPase-activator complex for Rheb, and Rheb⅐GTP activates mTORC1. It is not clear how amino acids regulate mTORC1. FKBP38 (immunophilin FK506-binding protein, 38 kDa), was recently reported to exert a negative effect on mTORC1 function that is relieved by its binding to Rheb⅐GTP. We confirm that Rheb binds wild type FKBP38, but inactive Rheb mutants showed contrasting abilities to bind FKBP38. We were unable to observe any regulation of FKBP38/ mTOR binding by amino acids or insulin. Furthermore, FKBP38 did not inhibit mTORC1 signaling. The translationally controlled tumor protein (TCTP) in Drosophila was recently reported to act as the guanine nucleotide-exchange factor for Rheb. We have studied the role of TCTP in mammalian TORC1 signaling and its control by amino acids. Reducing TCTP levels did not reproducibly affect mTORC1 signaling in amino acidreplete/insulin-stimulated cells. Moreover, overexpressing TCTP did not rescue mTORC1 signaling in amino acid-starved cells. In addition, we were unable to see any stable interaction between TCTP and Rheb or mTORC1. Accumulation of uncharged tRNA has been previously proposed to be involved in the inhibition of mTORC1 signaling during amino acid starvation. To test this hypothesis, we used a Chinese hamster ovary cell line containing a temperature-sensitive mutation in leucyltRNA synthetase. Leucine deprivation markedly inhibited mTORC1 signaling in these cells, but shifting the cells to the nonpermissive temperature for the synthetase did not. These data indicate that uncharged tRNA Leu does not switch off mTORC1 signaling and suggest that mTORC1 is controlled by a distinct pathway that senses the availability of amino acids. Our data also indicate that, in the mammalian cell lines tested here, neither TCTP nor FKBP38 regulates mTORC1 signaling.