Effects of receptor interaction in bacterial chemotaxis

Biophysical Journal

Volumn 87, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 1578-1595

  Mello, Bernardo A ^a   Shaw, Leah ^b   Tu, Yuhai ^c  

^a UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DE BRASÍLIA   (Brazil)

^b Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^c IBM T J WATSON RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LIGAND;

ADAPTATION; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL STRAIN; BACTERIAL TRANSLOCATION; BACTERIUM MUTANT; CHEMORECEPTOR; CHEMOTAXIS; DEMETHYLATION; FLUORESCENCE RESONANCE ENERGY TRANSFER; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; OSCILLATION; PREDICTION; PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN METHYLATION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RECEPTOR BINDING; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; STEADY STATE;

BACTERIA (MICROORGANISMS);

EID: 4444270835     PISSN: 00063495     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1529/biophysj.104.042739     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adler, J. 1976. The sensing of chemical by bacteria. Sci. Am. 234:40-47.
2. Adler, J., and W. W. Tso. 1976. Decision-making in bacteria: chemotactic response of Escherichia coli to conflicting stimuli. Science. 184:1292-1294.
3. Alon, U., M. G. Surette, N. Barkai, and S. Leibler. 1999. Robustness in bacterial chemotaxis. Nature. 397:168-171.
4. Ames, P., and J. S. Parkinson. 2004. Crosslinking snapshots of bacterial chemoreceptor squads. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 101:2117-2122.
5. Ames, P., C. A. Studdert, R. H. Reiser, and J. S. Parkinson. 2002. Collaborative signaling by mixed chemoreceptor teams in Escherichia coli. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:7060-7065.
6. Barkai, N., and S. Leibler. 1997. Robustness in simple biochemical networks. Nature. 387:913-917.
7. Berg, H. C. 2000. Motile behavior of bacteria. Phys. Today. 53:24-29.
8. Berg, H. C., and P. M. Tedesco. 1975. Transient response to chemotactic stimuli in Escherichia coli. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 72:3235-3239.
9. Block, S. M., J. E. Segall, and H. C. Berg. 1982. Impulse responses in bacterial chemotaxis. Cell. 31:215-226.
10. Borkovich, K. A., L. A. Alex, and M. I. Simon. 1992. Attenuation of sensory receptor signaling by covalent modification. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 89:6756-6760.
11. Bornhorst, J. A., and J. J. Falke. 2001. Evidence mat both ligand binding and covalent adaptation drive a two-state equilibrium in the aspartate receptors signaling complex. J. Gen. Physiol. 118:693-710.
12. Bornhorst, J. A., and J. J. Falke. 2003. Quantitative analysis of aspartate receptor signaling complex reveals that the homogeneous two-state model is inadequate: development of a heterogeneous two-state model. J. Mol. Biol. 326:1597-1614.
13. Bren, A., and M. Eisenbach. 2000. How signal are heard during bacterial chemotaxis: protein-protein interactions in sensory signal propagation. J. Bacteriol. 182:6865-6873.
14. Cluzel, P., M. Surette, and S. Leibler. 2000. An ultrasensitive bacterial motor revealed by monitoring signaling proteins in single cells. Science. 287:1652-1655.
15. Bray, D., M. D. Levin, and C. J. Morton-Firth. 1998. Receptors clustering as a cellular mechanism to control sensibility. Nature. 393:85-88.
16. Duke, T. A. J., and D. Bray. 1999. Heightened sensitivity of a lattice of membrane of receptors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 96:10104-10108.
17. Falke, J. J., and G. Hazelbauer. 2001. Transmembrane signaling in bacterial chemoreceptors. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26:257-265.
18. Gestwicki, J. E., and L. L. Klessing. 2002. Inter-receptor communication through arrays of bacterial chemoreceptors. Nature. 415:81-84.
19. Grinstein, G., and L. H. Tang. 1995. Long-range correlations in systems with coherent (quasi)periodic oscillations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 74:912-915.
20. Khan, S., J. L. Spudich, J. A. McCray, and D. R. Trentham. 1995. Chemotatic signal integration in bacteria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 92:9757-9761.
21. Levit, M. N., and J. B. Stock. 2002. Receptor methylation controls the magnitude of stimulus-response coupling in bacterial chemotaxis. J. Biol. Chem. 277:36760-36765.
22. Li, G., and R. M. Weis. 2000. Covalent modification regulates ligand binding to receptor complexes in the chemosensory system of Escherichia coli. Cell. 100:357-365.
23. Maddock, J. R., and L. Shapiro. 1993. Polar location of the chemoreceptor complex in the Escherichia coli cell. Science. 259:1717-1723.
24. Mello, B. A., and Y. Tu. 2003a. Perfect and near perfect adaptation in a model of bacterial chemotaxis. Biophys. J. 84:2943-2956.
25. Mello, B. A., and Y. Tu. 2003b. Quantitative modeling of sensitivity in bacterial chemotaxis: the role of coupling among different chemoreceptor species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 100:8223-8228.
26. Morton-Firth, C. J., T. S. Simizu, and D. Bray. 1999. A free-energy-based stochastic simulation of the tar receptor complex. J. Mol. Biol. 286:1059-1074.
27. Segall, J. E., S. M. Block, and H. C. Berg. 1985. Temporal comparisons in bacterial chemotaxis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 83:8987-8991.
28. Shi, Y. 2000. Adaptative Ising model and bacterial chemotatic receptor network. Europhys. Lett. 50:113-119.
29. Shi, Y., and T. Duke. 1998. Cooperative model of bacterial sensing. Phys. Rev. E. 58:6399-6406.
30. Shimizu, T. S., S. V. Aksenov, and D. Bray. 2003. A spatially extended stochastic model of the bacterial chemotaxis signalling pathway. J. Mol. Biol. 329:291-309.
31. Sourjik, V., and H. C. Berg. 2000. Localization of components of the chemotaxis machinery of Escherichia coli using fluorescent protein fusions. Mol. Microbiol. 37:740-751.
32. Sourjik, V., and H. C. Berg. 2002a. Binding of the Escherichia coli response regulator CheY to its target is measured in vivo by fluorescence resonance energy transfer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:12669-12674.
33. Sourjik, V., and H. C. Berg. 2002b. Receptors sensitivity in bacterial chemotaxis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:123-127.
34. Sourjik, V., and H. C. Berg. 2004. Functional interactions between receptors in bacterial chemotaxis. Nature. 428:437-441.
35. Yi, T.-M., Y. Huang, M. I. Simon, and J. Doyle. 2000. Robust perfect adaptation in bacterial chemotaxis through integral feedback control. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 97:4649-4653.