MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414892378 · doi:10.1128/mbio.02521-25

Separation of <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> type IV pilus-dependent twitching motility and surface-sensing responses

2025· article· en· W4414892378 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebecca Barnshaw, Hanjeong Harvey, Matthew McCallum, Tomas S. Lazarou, Sheryl Nguyen, Ikram Qaderi, Veronica Tran, Nathan Roberge, Christopher J. Geiger, George A. O’Toole, P. Lynne Howell, Lori L. Burrows

Bibliographic record

VenuemBio · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiochemical and Structural Characterization
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for InnovationOntario Research Foundation
KeywordsPilinPilusMotilityComplementationMutantProtein subunitBiofilmBacterial adhesin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Many functions of Pseudomonas aeruginosa type IVa pili, including twitching motility and surface sensing, depend on dynamic cycles of filament assembly and disassembly powered by the cytoplasmic ATPases PilB, PilT, and PilU. Deletion of pilT results in loss of twitching and pilus-specific bacteriophage susceptibility, while non-twitching pilU mutants remain susceptible to pilus-specific phages, indicating that they still produce retractable pili. pilU mutants have high basal levels of the secondary messenger cyclic AMP (cAMP) that normally increases following surface contact, suggesting aberrant surface sensing. To better understand PilU’s role in pilus biology, we solved its X-ray crystal structure and used phylogenetic analyses to identify conserved differences between PilT and PilU. Chemical mutagenesis followed by whole-genome sequencing was used to identify suppressors in the Δ pilU mutant background that restored twitching motility. The mutations mapped to the major pilin, PilA, or the pilus tip adhesin, PilY1. Both the position and nature of the substitutions in PilA impacted restoration of motility, and it was dependent on functional PilT. Complementation of most pilU suppressors with PilU in trans further increased motility, while the expression of wild-type PilA in trans decreased motility in a dose-dependent manner. Notably, cAMP levels remained elevated in most twitching pilU suppressor mutants, showing that surface sensing and motility can be uncoupled. Together, our data suggest that the bacterial response to surfaces reflects a complex interaction of PilU function with specific alleles of PilY1 and PilA that together modulate pilus dynamics and function. IMPORTANCE The ability of bacteria to sense and respond to contact with surfaces is important for triggering changes in secondary messenger levels and gene expression, leading to the formation of biofilms and increased production of virulence factors. For Pseudomonas aeruginosa , the expression of functional type IVa pili is important for the accumulation of cyclic AMP (cAMP) following surface contact. Deletion of the PilT retraction ATPase paralog PilU leads to loss of pilus-mediated twitching motility but also high intracellular levels of cAMP, a phenotype mimicking that of surface-adapted cells. Here, we isolated twitching suppressors of a pilU deletion mutant that mapped to the pilin subunit PilA or pilus-tip adhesin PilY1 and showed that for most, elevated cAMP levels did not decrease when motility was restored. Twitching was dependent on functional PilT, and complementation with PilU further increased twitching for most mutants. These data show that in permissive contexts, PilU is not required for twitching motility, providing new insights into mechanisms of bacterial surface sensing and evolution of type IVa pilus motor function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemBioSame topicBiochemical and Structural CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207