Bacterial Mitotic Machineries

Gerdes, Kenn; Møller‐Jensen, Jakob; Ebersbach, Gitte; Kruse, Thomas; Nordström, Kurt

doi:10.1016/s0092-8674(04)00116-3

Cited by 114 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 92 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For low-copy-number plasmids, partitioning loci ( par) ensure that daughter cells inherit plasmid copies (32). Many, but not all, bacteria have chromosomal equivalents of the par genes.…”

Section: Chromosome Movement During Colony Growth and Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil To Genomics: The Streptomyces Chromosome

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 8-9-Mb Streptomyces chromosome is linear, with a "core" containing essential genes and "arms" carrying conditionally adaptive genes that can sustain large deletions in the laboratory. Bidirectional chromosome replication from a central oriC is completed by "endpatching," primed from terminal proteins covalently bound to the free 5 -ends. Plasmid-mediated conjugation involves movement of double-stranded DNA by proteins resembling other bacterial motor proteins, probably via hyphal tip fusion, mediated by these transfer proteins. Circular plasmids probably transfer chromosomes by transient integration, but linear plasmids may lead the donor chromosome end-first into the recipient by noncovalent association of ends. Transfer of complete chromosomes may be the rule. The recipient mycelium is colonized by intramycelial spreading of plasmid copies, under the control of plasmid-borne "spread" genes. Chromosome partition into prespore compartments of the aerial mycelium is controlled in part by actin-and tubulin-like proteins, resembling MreB and FtsZ of other bacteria.

show abstract

“…For low-copy-number plasmids, partitioning loci ( par) ensure that daughter cells inherit plasmid copies (32). Many, but not all, bacteria have chromosomal equivalents of the par genes.…”

Section: Chromosome Movement During Colony Growth and Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil To Genomics: The Streptomyces Chromosome

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3), must either be duplicated and segregated before completion of cytokinesis or assembled de novo in the progeny cell to ensure that each daughter cell receives a single copy of the cellular element. In the only well studied example of this process, individual chromosomes are duplicated by a template-directed mechanism and then moved to opposite ends of the cell by mechanisms involving microtubules in eukaryotic cells (8) or actin homologs in the case of some unit-copy bacterial plasmids (9)(10)(11). We report here that the actin (MreB) cytoskeleton of E. coli is also duplicated and segregated before cell division, ensuring the equipartition of the cytoskeletal element into the two daughter cells.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Duplication and segregation of the actin (MreB) cytoskeleton during the prokaryotic cell cycle

Vats

Rothfield

2007

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The bacterial actin homolog MreB exists as a single-copy helical cytoskeletal structure that extends between the two poles of rod-shaped bacteria. In this study, we show that equipartition of the MreB cytoskeleton into daughter cells is accomplished by division and segregation of the helical MreB array into two equivalent structures located in opposite halves of the predivisional cell. This process ensures that each daughter cell inherits one copy of the MreB cytoskeleton. The process is triggered by the membrane association of the FtsZ cell division protein. The cytoskeletal division and segregation events occur before and independently of cytokinesis and involve specialized MreB structures that appear to be intermediates in this process.septasome ͉ FtsZ ͉ cell division

show abstract

“…A consensus view that seems to emerge from this more recent literature, at least in case of C. crescentus, favors the existence of putative ''eukaryotic-like'' mechanisms (11)(12)(13), which would actively push͞pull the duplicating bacterial chromosomes apart.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Entropy-driven spatial organization of highly confined polymers: Lessons for the bacterial chromosome

Jun

Mulder

2006

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

362

442

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite recent progress in visualization experiments, the mechanism underlying chromosome segregation in bacteria still remains elusive. Here we address a basic physical issue associated with bacterial chromosome segregation, namely the spatial organization of highly confined, self-avoiding polymers (of nontrivial topology) in a rod-shaped cell-like geometry. Through computer simulations, we present evidence that, under strong confinement conditions, topologically distinct domains of a polymer complex effectively repel each other to maximize their conformational entropy, suggesting that duplicated circular chromosomes could partition spontaneously. This mechanism not only is able to account for the spatial separation per se but also captures the major features of the spatiotemporal organization of the duplicating chromosomes observed in Escherichia coli and Caulobacter crescentus.bacterial chromosome segregation ͉ Caulobacter crescentus ͉ Escherichia coli ͉ polymer physics B acteria are arguably the simplest living organisms that are able to reproduce independently. The key step in cellular reproduction consists of the duplication of the genetic material and its subsequent distribution over the offspring. Successful as they are from an evolutionary perspective, bacteria are indeed considered to be highly efficient and accurate in these processes.What then is the mechanism underlying bacterial chromosome segregation? Perhaps the most influential model so far was proposed by Jacob et al. in 1963 (1) in their seminal paper on the replicon model of Escherichia coli; if replicating chromosomes are attached to the elongating cell-wall membrane, they can be segregated passively by insertion of membrane material between the attachment points. Although the hypothesis by Jacob et al.(1) is intuitive and elegant, it has been undermined by a series of recent visualization experiments. In Bacillus subtilis (2) and Caulobacter crescentus (3), for example, the measured rate of movement of the replication origin ranges from 0.1 to 0.3 m͞min, almost 10 times larger than the cell elongation rate. In E. coli, on the other hand, the movement rate of DNA segments is still a matter of debate [see, for example, Elmore et al. (4)]. Nevertheless, all three species, including E. coli, show striking dynamics and directed longitudinal movements of chromosome loci during replication; although details vary from organism to organism, typically the duplicated replication origins (ori) move toward opposite poles in the cell, and the terminus (ter) moves toward the cell center (3, 5-7).A number of alternative models have been proposed recently to explain the driving force for DNA segregation in bacteria [for recent reviews, see Woldringh (8), Errington et al. (9), and Gitai et al. (10) and references therein]. A consensus view that seems to emerge from this more recent literature, at least in case of C. crescentus, favors the existence of putative ''eukaryotic-like'' mechanisms (11-13), which would actively push͞pull the duplicating bacterial c...

show abstract

Bacterial Mitotic Machineries

Cited by 114 publications

References 92 publications

Soil To Genomics: The Streptomyces Chromosome

Soil To Genomics: The Streptomyces Chromosome

Duplication and segregation of the actin (MreB) cytoskeleton during the prokaryotic cell cycle

Entropy-driven spatial organization of highly confined polymers: Lessons for the bacterial chromosome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About