Back

Proteomic survey of the DNA damage response in Caulobacter crescentus reveals evidence of post-transcriptional control

Tashjian, T. F.; Zeinert, R. D.; Eyles, S. J.; Chien, P.

2023-03-25 microbiology
10.1101/2023.03.24.534141 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The bacterial DNA damage response is a critical, coordinated response to endogenous and exogenous sources of DNA damage. Response dynamics are dependent on coordinated synthesis and loss of relevant proteins. While much is known about its global transcriptional control, changes in protein abundance that occur upon DNA damage are less well characterized at the system level. Here, we perform a proteome-wide survey of the DNA damage response in Caulobacter crescentus. We find that while most protein abundance changes upon DNA damage are readily explained by changes in transcription, there are exceptions. The survey also allowed us to identify the novel DNA damage response factor, YaaA, which has been overlooked by previously published, transcription- focused studies. A similar survey in a {Delta}lon strain was performed to explore lons role in DNA damage survival. The {Delta}lon strain had a smaller dynamic range of protein abundance changes in general upon DNA damage compared to the wild type strain. This system-wide change to the dynamics of the response may explain this strains sensitivity to DNA damage. Our proteome survey of the DNA damage response provides additional insight into the complex regulation of stress response and nominates a novel response factor that was overlooked in prior studies. IMPORTANCEThe DNA damage response helps bacteria to react to and potentially survive DNA damage. The mutagenesis induced during this stress response contributes to the development of antibiotic resistance. Understanding how bacteria coordinate their response to DNA damage could help us to combat this growing threat to human health. While the transcriptional regulation of the bacterial DNA damage response has been characterized, this study is the first to our knowledge to assess the proteomic response to DNA damage in Caulobacter.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
mSystems
361 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
42.3%
2
mBio
750 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
15.7%
50% of probability mass above
3
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
5.2%
4
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.3%
5
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.8%
6
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 29%
2.0%
7
Journal of Bacteriology
190 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.0%
8
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 9%
2.0%
9
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.8%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.8%
11
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
301 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
12
PLOS Pathogens
721 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.3%
13
Journal of Biological Chemistry
641 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
14
Metallomics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
15
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 54%
0.8%
16
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 66%
0.8%
17
Molecular Microbiology
66 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
18
Environmental Microbiology
119 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
19
Microbiology
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
MicrobiologyOpen
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
21
Microbial Genomics
204 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Journal of Proteome Research
215 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
23
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
24
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 39%
0.5%
25
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%