Functional Characterization and Localization of a Bacillus subtilis Sortase and Its Substrate and Use of This Sortase System To Covalently Anchor a Heterologous Protein to the B. subtilis Cell Wall for Surface Display
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sortases catalyze the covalent anchoring of proteins to the cell surface on Gram-positive bacteria. Bioinformatic analysis suggests the presence of structural genes encoding sortases and their substrates in the Bacillus subtilis genome. In this study, a β-lactamase reporter was fused to the cell wall anchoring domain from a putative sortase substrate, YhcR. Covalent anchoring of this fusion protein to the cell wall was confirmed by using the eight-protease-deficient B. subtilis strain WB800 as the host. Inactivation of yhcS abolished the cell wall anchoring reaction. The amounts of fusion protein anchored to the cell wall were proportional to the levels of YhcS. These data demonstrate that YhcS and YhcR are the sortase and sortase substrate, respectively, in B. subtilis. Furthermore, yhcS is not essential for the survival of B. subtilis under the cultivation condition tested. YhcR fusions were distributed helically in the lateral cell wall. Interestingly, when viewed with an epifluorescence microscope, YhcS also appeared to form short helical arcs. This is the first report to illustrate such distribution of sortases in a rod-shaped bacterium. Models for the spatial distribution of both the sortase and its substrate are discussed. The amount of the reporters displayed on the surface was unambiguously quantified via a unique strategy. Under optimal conditions with the overproduction of YhcS, 47,300 YhcR fusions could be displayed per cell. Displayed reporters were biologically functional and surface accessible. Characterization of the sortase-substrate system allowed the successful development of a YhcR-based covalent surface display system. This system may have various biotechnological applications.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".