Molecular and General Genetics MGG

, Volume 251, Issue 2, pp 121–129 | Cite as

Analysis of chimeric UmuC proteins: identification of regions inSalmonella typhimurium UmuC important for mutagenic activity

  • W. H. Koch
  • G. Kopsidas
  • B. Meffle
  • A. S. Levine
  • R. Woodgate
Original Paper


UnlikeEscherichia coli, the closely related bacteriumSalmonella typhimurium is relatively unresponsive to the mutagenic effects of DNA-damaging agents. Previous experiments have suggested that these phenotypic differences might result from reduced activity of theS. typhimurium UmuC protein. To investigate this possibility, we have taken advantage of the high degree of homology between the UmuC proteins ofE. coli andS. typhimurium and have constructed a series of plasmid-encoded chimeric proteins. The possibility that the phenotypic differences might be due to differential expression of the respective UmuC proteins was eliminated by constructing chimeric proteins that retained the first 25 N-terminal amino acids of either of the UmuC proteins (and presumably the same translational signals), but substituting the remaining 397 C-terminal amino acids with the corresponding segments from the reciprocal operon. Constructs expressing mostlyE. coli UmuC were moderately proficient for mutagenesis whereas those expressing mostlyS. typhimurium UmuC exhibited much lower frequencies of mutation, indicating that the activity of the UmuC protein ofS. typhimurium is indeed curtailed. The regions responsible for this phenotype were more precisely localized by introducing smaller segments of theS. typhimurium UmuC protein into the UmuC protein ofE. coli. While some regions could be interchanged with few or no phenotypic effects, substitution of residues 212–395 and 396–422 ofE. coli UmuC with those fromS. typhimurium resulted in reduced mutability, while substitution of residues 26–59 caused a dramatic loss of activity. We suggest, therefore, that the primary cause for the poor mutability ofS. typhimurium can be attributed to mutations located within residues 26–59 of theS. typhimurium UmuC protein.

Key words

Escherichia coli Salmonella typhimurium SOS mutagenesis Chimeric proteins UmuC 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bailone A, Sommer S, Knezevic J, Dutreix M, Devoret R (1991) A RecA protein mutant deficient in its interaction with the UmuDC complex. Biochimie 73:479–484PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bridges BA, Woodgate R (1985) Mutagenic repair inEscherichia coli: products of therecA gene and of theumuD andumuC genes act at different steps in UV-induced mutagenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 82:4193–4197PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Burckhardt SE, Woodgate R, Scheuermann RH, Echols H (1988) UmuD mutagenesis protein ofEsherichia coli: overproduction, purification and cleavage by RecA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:1811–1815PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Doyle N, Strike P (1995) The spectra of base substitutions induced by theimpCAB, mucAB andumuDC error-prone DNA repair operons differ following exposure to methyl methansulfonate. Mol Gen Genet 247:735–741PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Echols H, Goodman MF (1990) Mutation induced by DNA damage: a many protein affair. Mutat Res 236:301–311PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Frank EG, Hauser J, Levine AS, Woodgate R (1993) Targeting of the UmuD, UmuD′ and MucA′ mutagenesis proteins to DNA by RecA protein. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:8169–8173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Friedberg EC, Walker GC, Siede W (1995) DNA repair and mutagenesis. ASM, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  8. Hauser J, Levine AS, Ennis DG, Chumakov KM, Woodgate R (1992) The enhanced mutagenic potential of the MucAB proteins correlates with the highly efficient processing of the MucA protein. J Bacteriol 174:6844–6851PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Ho C, Kulaeva OI, Levine AS, Woodgate R (1993) A rapid method for cloning mutagenic DNA repair genes: isolation ofumu-complementing genes from multidrug resistance plasmids R391, R446b, and R471a. J Bacteriol 175:5411–5419PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kitagawa Y, Akaboshi E, Shinagawa H, Horii T, Ogawa H, Kato T (1985) Structural analysis of theumu operon required for inducible mutagenesis inEscherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 82:4336–4340PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. MacPhee DG (1977) Spontaneous, ultraviolet and ionizing radiation mutagenesis in two auxotrophic strains ofSalmonella typhimurium carrying R plasmids. Mutat Res 45:1–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Murli S, Walker GC (1993) SOS mutagenesis. Curr Opin Genet Dev 3:719–725PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Nohmi T, Battista JR, Dodson LA, Walker GC (1988) RecA-mediated cleavage activates UmuD for mutagenesis: mechanistic relationship between transcriptional derepression and posttranslational activation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:1816–1820PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Orrego C, Eisenstadt E (1987) An inducible pathway is required for mutagenesis inSalmonella typhimurium LT2. J Bacteriol 169:2885–2888PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Overbye KM, Margolin P (1981) Role of thesupX gene in ultraviolet-light induced mutagensis inSalmonella typhimurium. J Bacteriol 146:170–178PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Perry KL, Elledge SJ, Mitchell B, Marsh L, Walker GC (1985)umuDC andmucAB operons whose products are required for UV light and chemical-induced mutagenesis: UmuD, MucA, and LexA products share homology. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 82:4331–4335PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Rajagopalan M, Lu C, Woodgate R, O'Donnell M, Goodman MF, Echols H (1992) Activity of the purified mutagenesis proteins UmuC, UmuD′ and RecA in replicative bypass of an abasic DNA lesion by DNA polymerase III. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:10777–10781PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Sedgwick SG, Goodwin P (1985) Differences in mutagenic and recombinational repair in enterobacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 82:4172–4176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Sedgwick SG, Ho C, Woodgate R (1991a) Mutagenic DNA repair in Enterobacteria. J Bacteriol 173:5604–5611PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Sedgwick SG, Lodwick DL, Doyle N, Crowne HM, Strike P (1991b) Functional complementation between chromosomal and plasmid mutagenic DNA repair genes. Mol Gen Genet 229:428–436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Shinagawa H, Iwasaki H, Kato T, Nakata A (1988) RecA protein-dependent cleavage of UmuD protein and SOS mutagenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:1806–1810PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Skavronskaya AG, Stepanova NF, Andreeva IV (1982) UV-mutable hybrids ofSalmonella incorporatingEscherichia coli region adjacent to tryptophan operon. Mol Gen Genet 15:315–318Google Scholar
  24. Smith CM, Koch WH, Franklin SB, Foster PL, Cebula TA, Eisenstadt E (1990) Sequence analysis of theSalmonella typhimurium LT2umuDC operon. J Bacteriol 172:4964–4978PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Sweasy JB, Witkin EM (1993) Novel SOS phenotypes caused by second-site mutations in therecA430 gene ofEscherichia coli. Biochimie 73:437–448Google Scholar
  26. Sweasy JB, Witkin EM, Sinha N, Roegner-Maniscalco V (1990) RecA protein ofEscherichia coli has a third essential role in SOS mutator activity. J Bacteriol 172:3030–3036PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Thomas SM, Crowne HM, Pidsley SC, Sedgwick SG (1990) Structural characterization of theSalmonella typhimurium LT2umu operon. J Bacteriol 172:4979–4987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Walker GC (1984) Mutagenesis and inducible responses to deoxyribonucleic acid damage inEscherichia coli. Microbiol Rev 48:60–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Witkin EM, RoegnerManiscalco V, Sweasy JB, McCall JO (1987) Recovery from ultraviolet light-inhibition of DNA synthesis requiresumuDC gene products inrecA718 mutant strains but not inrecA + strains ofEscherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 84:6804–6809Google Scholar
  30. Woodgate R (1992) Construction of aumuDC operon substitution mutation inEscherichia coli. Mutat Res 281:221–225PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Woodgate R, Sedgwick SG (1992) Mutagenesis induced by bacterial UmuDC proteins and their plasmid homologues. Mol Microbiol 6:2213–2218PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Woodgate R, Rajagopalan M, Lu C, Echols H (1989) UmuC mutagenesis protein ofEscherichia coli: purification and interaction with UmuD and UmuD′. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86:7301–7305PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Woodgate R, Levine AS, Koch WH, Cebula TA, Eisenstadt E (1991) Induction and cleavage ofSalmonella typhimurium UmuD protein. Mol Gen Genet 229:81–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Woodgate R, Singh M, Kulaeva OI, Frank EG, Levine AS, Koch WH (1994) Isolation and characterization of novel plasmid-encodedumuC mutants. J Bacteriol 176:5011–5021PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. H. Koch
    • 1
  • G. Kopsidas
    • 2
  • B. Meffle
    • 2
  • A. S. Levine
    • 2
  • R. Woodgate
    • 2
  1. 1.Molecular Biology Branch, Food and Drug AdministrationWashington, DCUSA
  2. 2.Section on DNA Replication, Repair and Mutagenesis, National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations