No description available.

Le transport et la traduction localisée des ARN messagers sont observés chez plusieurs organismes et sont requis pour de multiples phénomènes tels la mémoire, la division cellulaire asymétrique et l’établissement des axes durant le développement. Staufen, une protéine liant l’ARN double-brin, a été identifié dans un premier temps chez la mouche à fruits Drosophila melanogaster. Il a été montré, chez cet organisme, que Staufen est requis pour la localisation des messagers bicoid et oskar aux pôles antérieur et postérieur de l’ovocyte, respectivement. Également, Staufen est requis afin que la répression traductionnelle du messager oskar soit levée une fois qu’il est bien localisé. Chez les mammifères, Stau1 est une protéine ubiquiste qui est présente dans des complexes prenant la forme de granules dans les dendrites des neurones. Également, Stau1 peut interagir de façon indépendante de l’ARN avec le ribosome et cofractionner tant avec la sous-unité 40S qu’avec la sous-unité 60S du ribosome dans un gradient de saccharose. L’implication de Stau1 dans un mécanisme permettant la dérépression traductionnelle de certains ARNm chez les mammifères était donc une voie d’investigation intéressante. Nous avons donc décidé de vérifier si Stau1 mammifère avait la capacité de stimuler la traduction d’un ARNm cellulaire via un mécanisme régulé. Au moment où cette thèse a été entreprise, aucun ARNm cellulaire lié par Stau1 n’avait été identifié chez les mammifères. Des structures d’ARN double-brin ont donc été employées afin de réprimer la traduction d’un ARNm rapporteur. C’est ainsi que nous avons montré que Stau1 peut stimuler la traduction d’un ARNm lorsqu’il lie celui-ci dans sa région 5’ non-traduite. Par la suite, en employant des micropuces d’ADN, nous avons identifié des messagers cellulaires dont la distribution dans les polysomes lourds est modifiée par Stau1. En effet, un groupe de messagers est enrichi dans les polysomes lourds suite à une surexpression de Stau1, ce qui suggère que Stau1 stimule la traduction de cette population d’ARNm. Afin d’identifier un mécanisme potentiel de régulation de l’activité traductionnelle de Stau1, nous nous sommes intéressés à la capacité d’auto-association de cette protéine. Nous avons montré que Stau1, tout comme plusieurs protéines liant l’ARN double-brin, est en mesure de s’associer à lui-même, et ce, d’une façon indépendante de l’ARN. Nous avons identifié les déterminants impliqués mettant ainsi au jour un nouveau mécanisme pouvant influencer les activités cellulaires de Stau1. Les résultats présentés dans cette thèse suggèrent donc que Stau1 est en mesure de stimuler la traduction d’une sous-population précise d’ARN messagers au sein de la cellule permettant ainsi de jeter un regard nouveau sur l’implication de cette protéine dans divers phénomènes au sein de l’organisme. / Transport and local translation of RNA are found in several organisms and are required for multiple phenomena such as memory, asymmetric cell division and establishment of the axis during development. Staufen, a double-stranded RNA binding protein, was first identified in Drosophila melanogaster. In the fruitfly, it was shown that Staufen is required for the proper localization of the bicoid and oskar transcripts to the anterior and posterior ends of the oocyte, respectively. It was also found that Staufen is important for the translational derepression of oskar once it is adequately localized. In mammals, Stau1 is a ubiquitous protein found in granules in the dendrites of neurons. Also, Stau1 can bind the ribosome in a RNA-independent manner and cofractionates with both ribosomal subunits in a sucrose gradient. The implication of Stau1 in a mechanism allowing translational derepression of certain RNAs in mammals was therefore an interesting path to explore. Accordingly, we decided to verify if mammalian Stau1 had the capacity to stimulate the translation of cellular RNAs through a regulated mechanism. When this thesis was initiated, no cellular RNA target of Stau1 had been identified in mammals. Therefore, double-stranded RNA structures were used to repress the translation of a reporter mRNA. With this model, we showed that Stau1 can stimulate the translation of a transcript when it is bound to its 5’ UTR. With the use of DNA microarrays, we identified cellular mRNAs which distribution in heavy polysomes was altered by Stau1. When Stau1 is overexpressed, this group of mRNAs is enriched heavy polysomes, suggesting a translational stimulation of this population by Stau1. To identify a regulatory mechanism that could influence Stau1’s translational activity, we studied the self-association capacity of this protein. We showed that Stau1, like several double-stranded RNA binding proteins, can self-associate in a RNA-independent manner. We have identified the determinants required for this interaction that as the potential to be important for the regulation of the cellular activities of Stau1. The results presented in this thesis suggest that Stau1 can stimulate the translation of a specific subset of mRNAs in the cell, letting us look at Stau1’s implication in different processes from a new point of view.

Le transport et la traduction localisée des ARN messagers sont observés chez plusieurs organismes et sont requis pour de multiples phénomènes tels la mémoire, la division cellulaire asymétrique et l’établissement des axes durant le développement. Staufen, une protéine liant l’ARN double-brin, a été identifié dans un premier temps chez la mouche à fruits Drosophila melanogaster. Il a été montré, chez cet organisme, que Staufen est requis pour la localisation des messagers bicoid et oskar aux pôles antérieur et postérieur de l’ovocyte, respectivement. Également, Staufen est requis afin que la répression traductionnelle du messager oskar soit levée une fois qu’il est bien localisé. Chez les mammifères, Stau1 est une protéine ubiquiste qui est présente dans des complexes prenant la forme de granules dans les dendrites des neurones. Également, Stau1 peut interagir de façon indépendante de l’ARN avec le ribosome et cofractionner tant avec la sous-unité 40S qu’avec la sous-unité 60S du ribosome dans un gradient de saccharose. L’implication de Stau1 dans un mécanisme permettant la dérépression traductionnelle de certains ARNm chez les mammifères était donc une voie d’investigation intéressante. Nous avons donc décidé de vérifier si Stau1 mammifère avait la capacité de stimuler la traduction d’un ARNm cellulaire via un mécanisme régulé. Au moment où cette thèse a été entreprise, aucun ARNm cellulaire lié par Stau1 n’avait été identifié chez les mammifères. Des structures d’ARN double-brin ont donc été employées afin de réprimer la traduction d’un ARNm rapporteur. C’est ainsi que nous avons montré que Stau1 peut stimuler la traduction d’un ARNm lorsqu’il lie celui-ci dans sa région 5’ non-traduite. Par la suite, en employant des micropuces d’ADN, nous avons identifié des messagers cellulaires dont la distribution dans les polysomes lourds est modifiée par Stau1. En effet, un groupe de messagers est enrichi dans les polysomes lourds suite à une surexpression de Stau1, ce qui suggère que Stau1 stimule la traduction de cette population d’ARNm. Afin d’identifier un mécanisme potentiel de régulation de l’activité traductionnelle de Stau1, nous nous sommes intéressés à la capacité d’auto-association de cette protéine. Nous avons montré que Stau1, tout comme plusieurs protéines liant l’ARN double-brin, est en mesure de s’associer à lui-même, et ce, d’une façon indépendante de l’ARN. Nous avons identifié les déterminants impliqués mettant ainsi au jour un nouveau mécanisme pouvant influencer les activités cellulaires de Stau1. Les résultats présentés dans cette thèse suggèrent donc que Stau1 est en mesure de stimuler la traduction d’une sous-population précise d’ARN messagers au sein de la cellule permettant ainsi de jeter un regard nouveau sur l’implication de cette protéine dans divers phénomènes au sein de l’organisme. / Transport and local translation of RNA are found in several organisms and are required for multiple phenomena such as memory, asymmetric cell division and establishment of the axis during development. Staufen, a double-stranded RNA binding protein, was first identified in Drosophila melanogaster. In the fruitfly, it was shown that Staufen is required for the proper localization of the bicoid and oskar transcripts to the anterior and posterior ends of the oocyte, respectively. It was also found that Staufen is important for the translational derepression of oskar once it is adequately localized. In mammals, Stau1 is a ubiquitous protein found in granules in the dendrites of neurons. Also, Stau1 can bind the ribosome in a RNA-independent manner and cofractionates with both ribosomal subunits in a sucrose gradient. The implication of Stau1 in a mechanism allowing translational derepression of certain RNAs in mammals was therefore an interesting path to explore. Accordingly, we decided to verify if mammalian Stau1 had the capacity to stimulate the translation of cellular RNAs through a regulated mechanism. When this thesis was initiated, no cellular RNA target of Stau1 had been identified in mammals. Therefore, double-stranded RNA structures were used to repress the translation of a reporter mRNA. With this model, we showed that Stau1 can stimulate the translation of a transcript when it is bound to its 5’ UTR. With the use of DNA microarrays, we identified cellular mRNAs which distribution in heavy polysomes was altered by Stau1. When Stau1 is overexpressed, this group of mRNAs is enriched heavy polysomes, suggesting a translational stimulation of this population by Stau1. To identify a regulatory mechanism that could influence Stau1’s translational activity, we studied the self-association capacity of this protein. We showed that Stau1, like several double-stranded RNA binding proteins, can self-associate in a RNA-independent manner. We have identified the determinants required for this interaction that as the potential to be important for the regulation of the cellular activities of Stau1. The results presented in this thesis suggest that Stau1 can stimulate the translation of a specific subset of mRNAs in the cell, letting us look at Stau1’s implication in different processes from a new point of view.

DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair is essential for maintenance of genome stability. However, the compaction of the eukaryotic genome into chromatin creates an inherent barrier to any DNA-mediated event, such as during DNA repair. This demands that there be mechanisms to modify the chromatin structure and thus access DNA. Recent work has implicated a host of chromatin regulators in the DNA damage response and several functional roles have been defined. Yet the mechanisms that control their recruitment to DNA lesions, and their relationship with concurrent histone modifications, remain unclear. We find that efficient DSB recruitment of many yeast chromatin regulators is cell-cycle dependent. Furthering this, we find recruitment of the INO80, SWR-C, NuA4, SWI/SNF, and RSC enzymes is inhibited by the non-homologous end joining machinery, and that their recruitment is controlled by early steps of homologous recombination. Strikingly, we find no significant role for H2A.X phosphorylation (γH2AX) in the recruitment of chromatin regulators, but rather that their recruitment coincides with reduced levels of γH2AX. We go on to determine the chromatin remodeling enzyme Fun30 functions in histone dynamics surround a DSB, but does not significantly affect γH2AX dynamics. Additionally, we describe a conserved functional interaction among the chromatin remodeling enzyme, SWI/SNF, the NuA4 and Gcn5 histone acetyltransferases, and phosphorylation of histone H2A.X. Specifically, we find that the NuA4 and Gcn5 enzymes are both required for the robust recruitment of SWI/SNF to a DSB, which in turn promotes the phosphorylation of H2A.X.

Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Biology / Susan J. Brown / RNA interference (RNAi) is a natural gene-silencing phenomenon triggered by dsRNA (dsRNA). While RNAi is an endogenous process that plays essential roles in regulating gene expression it can also be harnessed as a tool for the study of gene function. Introducing dsRNA that is homologous to target mRNA into a cell triggers the RNAi response causing the destruction of the homologous mRNA and a loss of function phenotype. In some organisms, such as the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, once dsRNA is introduced into the body cavity, the RNAi effect is seen throughout the organism because the dsRNA is taken up by individual cells and is then spread from cell to cell. This process has been termed the systemic RNAi response. For other organisms, such as the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, introduction of dsRNA into the body cavity does not result in a systemic RNAi response. This may be due to the cell’s inability to take up dsRNA or spread that dsRNA from cell to cell. For other organisms, including mammals, introduction of dsRNA into the body cavity does not result in a systemic RNAi response because the immune response causes dsRNA destruction before it can be utilized in the RNAi pathway. For organisms that do not exhibit a systemic RNAi response, complex genetic methods are needed to introduce dsRNA into cells to induce the RNAi response. Therefore, one of the challenges in utilizing RNAi as a genetic tool is introducing the dsRNA into individual cells. In recent years, systemic RNAi responses have been documented in both model and non-model organisms, making RNAi an accessible genetic tool. The red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum is an emerging model organism that has a robust systemic RNAi response. However, the mechanism of systemic RNAi and the specific parameters required to obtain a strong systemic RNAi response in this organism have not been thoroughly investigated. The aim of this work is to provide data that can allow RNAi to be better utilized as a genetic tool in Tribolium and to use this information as a basis for the use of RNAi in other insects in which it can be performed. Specifically we provide data on the essential parameters necessary to achieve an effective systemic response in Tribolium, we describe differences in the systemic RNAi response between Drosophila and Tribolium, we analyze the conservation and function of RNAi machinery genes in Tribolium and we provide information on the genes critical for a systemic RNAi response in Tribolium.

Chez la plupart des eucaryotes, la présence d’ARN double brin induit la mise en place de mécanismes qui peuvent inhiber l’expression de gènes sur la base d’une complémentarité de séquence. L’exemple le mieux connu est le cas de l’interférence par l’ARN telle qu’elle a été décrite initialement chez C. elegans, où les ARN double brin génèrent une endonucléase spécifique de séquence qui dégrade tout ARN parfaitement complémentaire du petit ARN guide contenu dans le complexe RISC. En plus de cette activité post-transcriptionnelle, il a été observé chez de nombreux eucaryotes l’existence de mécanismes apparentés à l’interférence par l’ARN et qui inhibent la transcription en agissant au niveau de la chromatine. Si ces mécanismes ont été clairement mis en évidence chez les plantes et les champignons il n’existe que quelques exemples de ce type de régulation chez les mammifères. De manière inattendue, le fait de cibler le promoteur d’un gène avec de petits ARN double brin peut conduire à une augmentation de son expression. Cette réponse paradoxale n’a été observée jusqu’à présent que dans des cellules de mammifère, et si elle suscite un intérêt en particulier pour stimuler l’expression de gènes suppresseurs de tumeurs, son mécanisme est encore inconnu.Mes travaux ont porté sur l’étude de l’induction de l’expression par des petits ARN. Ils reposent tout d’abord sur le développement d’une approche expérimentale qui permet de suivre l’activité du promoteur du gène ciblé. Pour cela, j’ai utilisé des constructions indicatrices organisées autour d’un promoteur bidirectionnel qui contrôle l’expression de deux protéines fluorescentes. Lorsque l’on cible le messager de l’une de ces protéines, l’expression de l’autre est augmentée et j’ai pu montrer que ceci corrèle avec la quantité d’ARN messager et de polymérase II présente sur le promoteur bidirectionnel. Ainsi, l’utilisation d’un promoteur bidirectionnel permet effectivement de suivre le niveau de transcription du gène ciblé par le petit ARN.Cette induction de l’expression détectée de manière « controlatérale » n’est pas due à un effet hors cible des petits ARN car elle nécessite la présence de la séquence cible sur l’un des transcrits de la construction indicatrice. L’induction peut être observée avec de nombreux petits ARN différents, y compris s’ils interagissent comme des micro ARN. Les constructions indicatrices que j’ai développées sont donc biaisées en faveur d’une réponse de type induction transcriptionnelle enréponse à un silencing. L’utilisation d’un promoteur bidirectionnel est probablement à l’origine de ce biais à travers la possibilité d’induire une transcription convergente sur les plasmides lorsqu’ils sont circulaires. De fait, la linéarisation de la construction indicatrice supprime l’induction, du moins pour les constructions les plus simples.Si le coeur du complexe RISC, la protéine Ago2, est nécessaire au silencing et à l’induction, j’ai pu montrer que dans le deuxième cas c’était en fait pour guider le complexe RISC sur les transcrits et non pas pour les couper. En effet, le silencing des protéines TNRC6A et B diminue fortement l’induction sans toucher au silencing s’il procède en mode siRNA. De plus l’ancrage sur le transcrit EGFP induit une réponse de même type que le petit ARN (silencing et induction). Cette approche d’ancrage m’a permis d’identifier les domaines nécessaires au silencing et à l’induction et de montrer qu’ils sont distincts.Ce travail permet donc de mettre en évidence que l’induction transcriptionnelle observée sur nos constructions indicatrices est due à une activité des partenaires des protéines Argonaute, la famille GW182/TNRC6. Cette observation ouvre la voie à une caractérisation du mécanisme de cette induction en montrant qu’elle relève d’une activité spécifique du complexe RISC. / In the majority of the eucaryote, the presence of double-strands RNA induce the inhibition of gene expression base on the complementary of sequence. The best known example is the case of RNA interference in C. elegans which is the first model described, in which the double-strands RNA generate an specific endonuclease who degrade all RNA complementary perfectly to the small RNA guide included in the complex RISC. In addition to this post-transcriptional activity, it has been observed in many eukaryotes the existence of mechanisms related to RNA interference and it inhibit transcription by acting at the chromatin. If these mechanisms have been clearly demonstrated in plants, fungi, there are only several examples of this type of regulation in mammals. Unexpectedly, the targeting the promoter of a gene with small double-stranded RNA can lead to increased expression. This paradoxical response has not been observed so far in mammalian cells, but it raises interest particularly to stimulate the expression of tumor suppressor genes, unfortunely the mechanism is still unknown.My work has focused on studying the induction of expression by small RNAs. They are based first on the development of an experimental approach that allows to monitor the promoter activity of the targeted gene. To do this I used indicator constructions organized around a bidirectional promoter that controls the expression of two fluorescent proteins. When targeting the messenger of one of these proteins, the expression of the other is increased and I was able to show that thisincrease correlates with the amount of RNA messenger polymerase II presented on the bidirectional promoter. Thus, the use of a bidirectional promoter can effectively monitor the level of transcription of the gene targeted by the small RNA. This induction of expression detected in a "contralateral" is not due to an off-target effect of siRNA because it requires the presence of the target sequence on one of the transcripts of the construction indicator. The induction can be observed with many different small RNAs, including the interact as micro RNA. Thus the construction indicator that I developed are biased in an induction response transcriptionally in response to a silencing. The use of a bidirectional promoter is probably the origin of this bias through the possibility of inducing a convergent transcription when the plasmids are circular. In fact, the linearization of the construction indicator removes the induction, at least for the simplest constructions. If the heart of the complex RISC is the protein Ago2, is necessary for the silencing and the induction, I was able to show that in the second case Ago2 was in fact to guide the RISC complex on the transcripts but not to cut it. Indeed, the silencing of proteins TNRC6A and B reduces induction significantly without affecting the silencing if it processe in the siRNA model. Also anchoring the transcript EGFP induces a response similar to the small RNA (silencing and induction). This anchor approach allowed me to identify domaines necessary for silencing and induction and show that they are distinct. This work makes it possible to demonstrate that the transcriptional induction observed in our constructions indicator is due to a activity partner ofArgonaute proteins, the GW182/TNRC6 family. This observation open the way for characterization of the mechanism of this induction by showing that it belongs to a specific activity of the RISC complex.

DNA double strand breaks (DSBs), which may occur during DNA replication or due to the action of genotoxic agents, are extremely dangerous DNA lesions as they can cause chromosomal rearrangements and cell death. Therefore, accurate DSB repair is vital for genome stability and cell survival. Two main mechanisms serve to repair DNA DSBs: non-homologous end joining, which re-ligates DNA ends together, and homologous recombination (HR), which restores broken DNA using homologous sequence as a template for repair. One-ended DSBs are a subject for the specialised HR-dependent repair pathway known as break-induced replication (BIR). At low frequency, DNA breaks can also be healed by telomerase, which normally extends telomeres at natural chromosome ends, but may also add de novo telomeres to DSBs due to their similarity to chromosome ends. De novo telomere addition is a deleterious event, which is effectively inhibited by the nuclear Pif1 (nPif1) helicase phosphorylated at the TLSSAES motif in response to DNA damage. In this study, it is reported that the same regulatory motif of nPif1 is also required for DSB repair via BIR. The requirement of the nPif1 TLSSAES sequence in BIR is dependent on the functional DNA damage response (DDR). Thus, nPif1 phosphorylation by the DDR machinery might mediate the role of nPif1 in BIR. In contrast, the nPif1 regulatory motif is not essential for BIR at telomeres in cells lacking telomerase. These observations indicate that the mechanism of nPif1 function in DSB repair via BIR and in BIR at telomeres might be different. In this work, a protocol for nPif1 pull-down was optimized to reveal the mechanism of the phosphorylation-dependent nPif1 functions in cells undergoing DNA repair, i. e. the mechanism of nPif1-mediated inhibition of de novo telomere addition and promoting DSB repair via BIR. In future, this protocol can be used to dissect the role of nPif1 in DNA repair through the identification of its potential interacting partners. The Srs2 helicase negatively regulates HR via dismantling Rad51 filaments. According to preliminary data from the laboratory of Sveta Makovets, Srs2 also promotes de novo telomere addition at DSBs in a Rad51-dependent manner. The work presented here establishes that Srs2 is dispensable for telomerase-mediated addition of TG1-3 repeats to DSBs. Instead, Srs2 is required for the reconstitution of the complementary DNA strand after telomerase action, thus ensuring the completion of de novo telomere addition. Overall, this study demonstrates that recombination-dependent DSB repair and de novo telomere addition share common regulatory components, i. e. the nPif1 helicase phosphorylated in response to DNA damage and the Srs2 helicase. Phosphorylated nPif1 promotes DSB repair via BIR in addition to its known role in inhibition of telomerase at DSBs, whereas Srs2 uses its well established ability to remove Rad51 from ssDNA to promote the restoration of dsDNA and thus to complete de novo telomere addition.

In diverse eukaryotic organisms, double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) induces robust silencing of cellular RNA cognate to either strand of the input dsRNA; a phenomenon now known as RNA interference (RNAi). Within the RNAi pathway, small, 21 nucleotide (nt) duplexed RNA, dubbed small interfering RNAs (siRNAs), derived from the longer input dsRNA, guide the RNA induced silencing complex (RISC) to destroy its target RNA. Due to its ability to silence virtually any gene, whether endogenous or exogenous, in a variety of model organisms and systems, RNAi has become a valuable laboratory tool, and is even being heralded as a potential therapy for an array of human diseases. In order to understand this complex and unique pathway, we have undertaken the biochemical characterization of RNAi in the model insect, Drosophila melanogaster. To begin, we investigated the role of ATP in the RNAi pathway. Our data reveal several ATP-dependent steps and suggest that the RNAi reaction comprises as least five sequential stages: ATP-dependent processing of double-stranded RNA into siRNAs, ATP-independent incorporation of siRNAs into an inactive ~360 kDa protein/RNA complex, ATP-dependent unwinding of the siRNA duplex to generate an active complex, ATP-dependent activation of RISC following siRNA unwinding, and ATP-independent recognition and cleavage of the RNA target. In addition, ATP is used to maintain 5´ phosphates on siRNAs, and only siRNAs with these characteristic 5´ phosphates gain entry into the RNAi pathway. Next, we determined that RISC programmed exogenously with an siRNA, like that programmed endogenously with microRNAs (miRNAs), is an enzyme. However, while RISC behaves like a classical Michaelis-Menten enzyme in the presence of ATP, without ATP, multiple rounds of catalysis are limited by release of RISC-produced cleavage products. Kinetic analysis of RISC suggests that different regions of the siRNA play distinct roles in the cycle of target recognition, cleavage and product release. Bases near the siRNA 5´ end disproportionately contribute to target RNA-binding energy, whereas base pairs formed by the central and 3´ region of the siRNA provide helical geometry required for catalysis. Lastly, the position of the scissile phosphate is determined during RISC assembly, before the siRNA encounters its RNA target. In the course of performing the kinetic assessment of RISC, we observed that when siRNAs are designed with regard to 'functional asymmetry' (by unpairing the 5´ terminal nucleotide of the siRNA's guide strand, i.e. the strand anti-sense to the target RNA), not all of the RISC formed was active for target cleavage. We observed, somewhat paradoxically, that increased siRNA unwinding and subsequent accumulation of single-stranded RNA into RISC led to reduced levels of active RISC formation. This inactive RISC did not act as a competitor for the active fraction. In order to characterize this non-cleaving complex, we performed a series of protein-siRNA photo-crosslinking assays. From these assays we found that thermodynamic stability and termini structure plays a role in determining which proteins an siRNA will associate with, and how association occurs. Furthermore, we have found, by means of the photo-crosslinking assays, that siRNAs commingle with components of the miRNA pathway, particularly Ago1, suggesting overlapping functions or crosstalk for factors thought to be involved in separate, distinct pathways.

Four type II toxin-antitoxin (TA) systems were previously identified in Burkholderia pseudomallei K96243. Type II TA toxins are able to induce cell growth arrest or death by interfering with key processes within the organism. BPSS0390-0391 is one of the TA systems previously identified and has homology to hicBA system in Acinetobacter baumannii. B. pseudomallei HicA is able to cause a reduction in the number of culturable cells after expression in E. coli. This study aimed to characterise B. pseudomallei HicA in three ways: by inducing expression of HicA in bacterial species other than E. coli, by identifying amino acids in HicA involved in toxicity and neutralisation by the antitoxin HicB and by examining the interaction of HicA with other TA antitoxins identified within B. pseudomallei genome. A broad host range plasmid encoding BPSS0390 was transformed into a range of Gram negative bacteria including Yersinia pseudotuberculosis IP32953, Vibrio vulnificus E64MW, Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium SL1344 and Burkholderia thailandensis E264. Expression of BPSS0390 was toxic in all bacterial species tested, despite the presence of antitoxin BPSS0391 homologues in some species. Unregulated expression in E. coli resulted in the appearance of escape mutants encoding non-toxic variants of HicA. An alanine scanning mutagenesis study of HicA identified 20 mutants where toxicity was abolished despite high levels of expression, but identified no mutants that affected TA complex formation. Finally an existing co-expression assay was modified to examine interactions between HicA and other type II TA antitoxins in B. pseudomallei. The assay revealed no interaction between HicA and non-cognate antitoxins and clarified the role of IPTG as an inhibitor of PBAD promoter on the arabinose operon.

La reconnaissance spécifique du génome viral et son encapsidation est une étape cruciale pour l’assemblage de particules virales. Chez SPP1, comme chez d’autres bactériophages à queue, le moteur moléculaire qui encapside le génome viral est composé de la terminase, une enzyme hétéro-oligomérique qui possède une activité ATPasique et nucléasique, et de la protéine portale, un oligomère cyclique par lequel l’ADN viral est transloqué. Dans un grand nombre de ses virus, l’encapsidation de l’ADN est initiée par la reconnaissance et le clivage d’une séquence spécifique nommée « pac ». C’est un évènement qui se produit une seule fois au début d’une série de cycles d’encapsidation processive à partir d’un concatémère issu de la réplication du génome du phage. La région pac de SPP1 contient deux séquences (pacL et pacR) où TerS (gp1) se lie entourant la région (pacC) où TerL (gp2) coupe l’ADN de SPP1.Ici, nous montrons qu’une région de la séquence pacL et qu’un motif polyadénine de pacR agissent ensemble pour promouvoir le clivage en pacC. La dégénération de la région pacC n’a pas montré d’effet sur que le clivage endonucléolytique qui a lieu à une position bien définie de pacC avec une précision de ~6 pb. Des études avec des phages proches de SPP1 ont montré une conservation dans la position du clivage, malgré des variations dans pacC, pacR ou dans la distance entre pacL et pacC. Les données sont compatibles avec un modèle dans lequel TerS interagit spécifiquement avec la région pacL, sur laquelle le multimère cyclique TerS doit s’enrouler, et le motif polyadénine de la région pacR. Le complexe nucléoprotéique résultant va créer un contexte structural qui permet de recruter et positionner le domaine nucléase de TerL pour une coupure très précise sur pacC sans spécificité de séquence. / The specific recognition of the viral genome and its packaging is a critical step in viral particle assembly. In SPP1, as in many tailed bacteriophages, the macromolecular motor that encapsidates viral DNA is composed of terminase, a hetero-oligomeric enzyme possessing ATPase and nuclease activities, and of portal protein, a cyclic oligomer through which DNA is translocated. In a large number of these viruses, DNA packaging is initiated by recognition and cleavage of a specific sequence pac. This event occurs once at the beginning of a series of processive encapsidation events along a substrate concatemer of replicated phage genomes. The SPP1 pac region has two sequences where TerS (gp1) binds (pacL and pacR) flanking the segment where TerL (gp2) cleaves the SPP1 DNA (pacC). Here we show that a sequence segment of pacL and a poly-adenine motif in pacR act together to promote cleavage at pacC. Extensive degeneration of pacC sequence has no detectable effect in pac cleavage. The endonucleolytic cut occurs at a defined position with a precision of ~6 bp. Studies with SPP1-related phages show conservation of the cut position, irrespectively of sequence variation in pacC, in pacR or changes in pacL-pacC distance. The data is compatible with a model in which TerS interacts specifically with a region of pacL that probably wraps around the TerS cyclical multimer, and a poly-A tract in pacR. The resulting nucleoprotein complex architecture positions TerL for accurate cleavage at pacC without specific sequence requirement.