Back

The bacterial cell membrane acts as a dynamic heme reservoir during group B Streptococcus bloodstream infection

Hillebrand, G. H.; Stephenson, H. A.; Giacobe, E. J.; Neel, A. S.; Carlin, S. M.; Kemp, F. D.; Hooven, T. A.

2026-05-16 microbiology
10.64898/2026.05.15.725516 bioRxiv
Show abstract

During bloodstream infection, most bacterial pathogens maintain homeostatic levels of heme, which serves as an essential biochemical cofactor and iron source, but becomes toxic at high intracellular concentrations. Well-characterized, surface exposed heme binding and acquisition systems exist in several blood-borne bacterial species. However, some gram-positive bacteria that invade the bloodstream do not encode surface displayed heme acquisition systems, despite showing clear evidence of heme utilization in blood. An example is Streptococcus agalactiae (group B Streptococcus; GBS), which is a major cause of infection in neonatal and immunocompromised populations. Here we show that GBS uses its cell membrane as a dynamic heme reservoir, which functions as the primary site of environmental heme capture, sensing, and transmembrane flux. Using positive and negative genetic selection screens, targeted mutagenesis, membrane fractionation, and spectroscopic heme detection and binding assays, we demonstrate that heme is partitioned into the GBS cell membrane, where it is sensed by the histidine kinase HssS and extracted for intracellular use by the CydDC transporter. Genetically disrupting the function of either HssS heme sensing or CydDC membrane heme extraction attenuates bacterial survival in human whole blood and in a mouse model of bacteremia. These results suggest that cell membrane-localized heme homeostasis is a determinant of fitness during blood survival. This work expands the current models of bacterial heme physiology and provides evidence that membrane localized, homeostatic heme reservoirs may represent an underrecognized strategy for blood-borne pathogens that lack canonical heme acquisition systems.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
mBio
750 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
22.9%
2
PLOS Pathogens
721 papers in training set
Top 2%
8.5%
3
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 7%
8.5%
4
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 6%
6.9%
5
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 11%
6.9%
50% of probability mass above
6
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 32%
4.9%
7
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 3%
4.4%
8
Cell Host & Microbe
113 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.4%
9
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.6%
10
Current Biology
596 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.5%
11
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 12%
2.1%
12
Microbiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
13
Journal of Bacteriology
190 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
14
Molecular Microbiology
66 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
15
mSystems
361 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
16
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
17
Nature Microbiology
133 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
18
Infection and Immunity
103 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
19
Molecular Cell
308 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.9%
20
Journal of Biological Chemistry
641 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
21
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.8%
22
Cell Chemical Biology
81 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
23
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
24
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 21%
0.5%