Interplay between Type 1A Topoisomerases and Gyrase in Chromosome Segregation in Escherichia coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Escherichia coli possesses two type 1A topoisomerases, Topo I (topA) and Topo III (topB). Topo I relaxes excess negative supercoiling, and topA mutants can grow only in the presence of compensatory mechanisms, such as gyrase mutations. topB mutants grow as well as wild-type cells. In vitro, Topo III, but not Topo I, can efficiently decatenate DNA during replication. However, in vivo, a chromosome segregation defect is seen only when both type 1A topoisomerases are absent. Here we present experimental evidence for an interplay between gyrase and type 1A topoisomerases in chromosome segregation. We found that both the growth defect and the Par(-) phenotypes of a gyrB(Ts) mutant at nonpermissive temperatures were significantly corrected by deleting topA, but only when topB was present. Overproducing Topo IV, the major cellular decatenase, could not substitute for topB. We also show that overproducing Topo III at a very high level could suppress the Par(-) phenotype. We previously found that the growth and chromosome segregation defects of a triple topA rnhA gyrB(Ts) mutant in which gyrase supercoiling activity was strongly inhibited could be corrected by overproducing Topo III (V. Usongo, F. Nolent, P. Sanscartier, C. Tanguay, S. Broccoli, I. Baaklini, K. Drlica, and M. Drolet, Mol. Microbiol. 69:968-981, 2008). We show here that this overproduction could be bypassed by substituting the gyrB(Ts) allele for a gyrB(+) one or by growing cells in a minimal medium, conditions that reduced both topA- and rnhA-dependent unregulated replication. Altogether, our data point to a role for Topo III in chromosome segregation when gyrase is inefficient and suggest that Topo I plays an indirect role via supercoiling regulation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".