We investigate the hypothesis that, in Escherichia coli, while the concentration of RNA polymerases differs in different growth conditions, the fraction of RNA polymerases free for transcription remains approximately constant within a certain range of these conditions. After establishing this, we apply a standard model-fitting procedure to fully characterize the in vivo kinetics of the rate-limiting steps in transcription initiation of the Plac/ara-1 promoter from distributions of intervals between transcription events in cells with different RNA polymerase concentrations. We find that, under full induction, the closed complex lasts ∼788 s while subsequent steps last ∼193 s, on average. We then establish that the closed complex formation usually occurs multiple times prior to each successful initiation event. Furthermore, the promoter intermittently switches to an inactive state that, on average, lasts ∼87 s. This is shown to arise from the intermittent repression of the promoter by LacI. The methods employed here should be of use to resolve the rate-limiting steps governing the in vivo dynamics of initiation of prokaryotic promoters, similar to established steady-state assays to resolve the in vitro dynamics.

No abstract

Transcription kinetics is limited by its initiation steps, which differ between promoters and with intra- and extracellular conditions. Regulation of these steps allows tuning both the rate and stochasticity of RNA production. We used time-lapse, single-RNA microscopy measurements in live Escherichia coli to study how the rate-limiting steps in initiation of the Plac/ara-1 promoter change with temperature and induction scheme. For this, we compared detailed stochastic models fit to the empirical data in maximum likelihood sense using statistical methods. Using this analysis, we found that temperature affects the rate limiting steps unequally, as nonlinear changes in the closed complex formation suffice to explain the differences in transcription dynamics between conditions. Meanwhile, a similar analysis of the PtetA promoter revealed that it has a different rate limiting step configuration, with temperature regulating different steps. Finally, we used the derived models to explore a possible cause for why the identified steps are preferred as the main cause for behavior modifications with temperature: we find that transcription dynamics is either insensitive or responds reciprocally to changes in the other steps. Our results suggests that different promoters employ different rate limiting step patterns that control not only their rate and variability, but also their sensitivity to environmental changes.

Antimicrobial resistance is an increasing problem on a global scale. Rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) is urgently needed in the clinic to enable personalized prescriptions in high-resistance environments and to limit the use of broad-spectrum drugs. Current rapid phenotypic AST methods do not include species identification (ID), leaving time-consuming plating or culturing as the only available option when ID is needed to make the sensitivity call. Here we describe a method to perform phenotypic AST at the single-cell level in a microfluidic chip that allows subsequent genotyping by in situ FISH. By stratifying the phenotypic AST response on the species of individual cells, it is possible to determine the susceptibility profile for each species in a mixed sample in 2 h. In this proof-of-principle study, we demonstrate the operation with four antibiotics and mixed samples with combinations of seven species.

Cell-to-cell variability in cellular components generates cell-to-cell diversity in RNA and protein production dynamics. As these components are inherited, this should also cause lineage-to-lineage variability in these dynamics. We conjectured that these effects on transcription are promoter initiation kinetics dependent. To test this, first we used stochastic models to predict that variability in the numbers of molecules involved in upstream processes, such as the intake of inducers from the environment, acts only as a transient source of variability in RNA production numbers, while variability in the numbers of a molecular species controlling transcription of an active promoter acts as a constant source. Next, from single-cell, single-RNA level time-lapse microscopy of independent lineages of Escherichia coli cells, we demonstrate the existence of lineage-to-lineage variability in gene activation times and mean RNA production rates, and that these variabilities differ between promoters and inducers used. Finally, we provide evidence that this can be explained by differences in the kinetics of the rate-limiting steps in transcription between promoters and induction schemes. We conclude that cell-to-cell and consequent lineage-to-lineage variability in RNA and protein numbers are both promoter sequence-dependent and subject to regulation.

Closely spaced promoters in tandem formation are abundant in bacteria. We investigated the evolutionary conservation, biological functions, and the RNA and single-cell protein expression of genes regulated by tandem promoters in E. coli. We also studied the sequence (distance between transcription start sites ‘dTSS’, pause sequences, and distances from oriC) and potential influence of the input transcription factors of these promoters. From this, we propose an analytical model of gene expression based on measured expression dynamics, where RNAP-promoter occupancy times and dTSS are the key regulators of transcription interference due to TSS occlusion by RNAP at one of the promoters (when dTSS ≤ 35 bp) and RNAP occupancy of the downstream promoter (when dTSS > 35 bp). Occlusion and downstream promoter occupancy are modeled as linear functions of occupancy time, while the influence of dTSS is implemented by a continuous step function, fit to in vivo data on mean single-cell protein numbers of 30 natural genes controlled by tandem promoters. The best-fitting step is at 35 bp, matching the length of DNA occupied by RNAP in the open complex formation. This model accurately predicts the squared coefficient of variation and skewness of the natural single-cell protein numbers as a function of dTSS. Additional predictions suggest that promoters in tandem formation can cover a wide range of transcription dynamics within realistic intervals of parameter values. By accurately capturing the dynamics of these promoters, this model can be helpful to predict the dynamics of new promoters and contribute to the expansion of the repertoire of expression dynamics available to synthetic genetic constructs.

No abstract

No abstract