ProQ Is an RNA Chaperone that Controls ProP Levels in <i>Escherichia coli</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transporter ProP mediates osmolyte accumulation in Escherichia coli cells exposed to high osmolality media. The cytoplasmic ProQ protein amplifies ProP activity by an unknown mechanism. The N- and C-terminal domains of ProQ are predicted to be structurally similar to known RNA chaperone proteins FinO and Hfq from E. coli. Here we demonstrate that ProQ is an RNA chaperone, binding RNA and facilitating both RNA strand exchange and RNA duplexing. Experiments performed with the isolated ProQ domains showed that the FinO-like domain serves as a high-affinity RNA-binding domain, whereas the Hfq-like domain is largely responsible for RNA strand exchange and duplexing. These data suggest that ProQ may regulate ProP production. Transcription of proP proceeds from RpoD- and RpoS-dependent promoters. Lesions at proQ affected ProP levels in an osmolality- and growth phase-dependent manner, decreasing ProP levels when proP was expressed from its own chromosomal promoters or from a heterologous plasmid-based promoter. Small RNA molecules are known to regulate cellular levels of sigma factor RpoS. ProQ did not act by changing RpoS levels since proQ lesions did not influence RpoS-dependent stationary phase thermotolerance and they affected ProP production and activity similarly in bacteria without and with an rpoS defect. Taken together, these results suggest that ProQ does not regulate proP transcription. It may act as an RNA-binding protein to regulate proP translation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".