B. subtilis Sec and Srp Systems Show Dynamic Adaptations to Different Conditions of Protein Secretion.

SecA is a widely conserved ATPase that drives the secretion of proteins across the cell membrane via the SecYEG translocon, while the SRP system is a key player in the insertion of membrane proteins via SecYEG. How SecA gains access to substrate proteins in Bacillus subtilis cells and copes with an increase in substrate availability during biotechnologically desired, high-level expression of secreted proteins is poorly understood. Using single molecule tracking, we found that SecA localization closely mimics that of ribosomes, and its molecule dynamics change similarly to those of ribosomes after inhibition of transcription or translation. These data suggest that B. subtilis SecA associates with signal peptides as they are synthesized at the ribosome, similar to the SRP system. In agreement with this, SecA is a largely mobile cytosolic protein; only a subset is statically associated with the cell membrane, i.e., likely with the Sec translocon. SecA dynamics were considerably different during the late exponential, transition, and stationary growth phases, revealing that single molecule dynamics considerably alter during different genetic programs in cells. During overproduction of a secretory protein, AmyE, SecA showed the strongest changes during the transition phase, i.e., where general protein secretion is high. To investigate whether the overproduction of AmyE also has an influence on other proteins that interact with SecYEG, we analyzed the dynamics of SecDF, YidC, and FtsY with and without AmyE overproduction. SecDF and YidC did not reveal considerable differences in single molecule dynamics during overexpression, while the SRP component FtsY changed markedly in its behavior and became more statically engaged. These findings indicate that the SRP pathway becomes involved in protein secretion upon an overload of proteins carrying a signal sequence. Thus, our data reveal high plasticity of the SecA and SRP systems in dealing with different needs for protein secretion.

Dynamics of cell wall-binding proteins at a single molecule level: B. subtilis autolysins show different kinds of motion.

The bacterial cell wall is a meshwork of crosslinked peptidoglycan strands, with a thickness of up to 50 nm in Firmicutes. Little is known about how proteins move through the cell wall to find sites of enzymatic activity. Cell wall synthesis for cell elongation involves the integration of new peptidoglycan strands by integral membrane proteins, as well as the degradation of existing strands by so-called autolysins, soluble proteins that are secreted through the cell membrane. Autolysins comprise different classes of proteases and glucanases and mostly contain cell-wall binding domains in addition to their catalytic domain. We have studied dynamics of Bacillus subtilis autolysins LytC, a major endopeptidase required for lateral cell wall growth, and LytF, a peptidase acting at the newly formed division site in order to achieve separation of daughter cells. We show that both proteins, fused to moxVenus are present as three distinct populations of different diffusion constants. The fastest population is compatible with free diffusion in a crowded liquid environment, that is similar to that of cytosolic enzymes, likely reflecting autolysins diffusing through the periplasm. The medium mobile fraction can be explained by constrained motion through a polymeric substance, indicating mobility of autolysins through the wall similar to that of DNA-binding proteins within the nucleoid. The slow-mobile fraction are most likely autolysins bound to their specific substrate sites. We show that LytF is more static during exponential phase, while LytC appears to be more active during the transition to stationary phase. Both autolysins became more static in backgrounds lacking redundant other autolysins, suggesting stochastic competition for binding sites. On the other hand, lack of inhibitor IseA or autolysin CwlS lead to an altered preference for polar localization of LytF within the cell wall, revealing that inhibitors and autolysins also affect each other's pattern of localization, in addition to their activity.