Computational and experimental investigation of constitutive behavior in AraC.

Many mutations in the N-terminal arm of AraC result in constitutive behavior in which transcription of the araBAD genes occurs even in the absence of arabinose. To begin to understand the mechanism underlying this class of mutations, we used molecular dynamics with self-guided Langevin dynamics to simulate (1) wild-type (WT) AraC, (2) known constitutive mutants resulting from alterations in the regulatory arm, particularly alanine and glycine substitutions at residue 8 because P8G is constitutive, whereas P8A behaves like wild type, and (3) selected variant AraC proteins containing alterations in the dimerization core. In all of the constitutive arm mutants, but not the WT protein, residues 37-42, which are located in the core of the dimerization domain, became restructured. This raised the question of whether or not these structural changes are an obligatory component of constitutivity. Using molecular dynamics, we identified alterations in the core that produced a similar restructuring. The corresponding mutants were constructed and their ara constitutivity status was determined experimentally. Because the core mutants were not found to be constitutive, we conclude that restructuring of core residues 37-42 does not, itself, lead to constitutivity of AraC. The available data lead to the hypothesis that the interaction of the N-terminal arm with something other than the front lip is the primary determinant of the inducing versus repressing state of AraC.

Constitutive mutations in the Escherichia coli AraC protein.

The Escherichia coli AraC protein represses and induces the araBAD operon in response to the absence or presence of l-arabinose. Constitutive mutations in the AraC gene no longer require the presence of l-arabinose to convert AraC from its repressing to its inducing state. Such mutations were isolated directly by virtue of their constitutivity or by their resistance to the nonmetabolizable arabinose analog, d-fucose. The majority of the constitutive mutations lie within the same residues of the N-terminal regulatory arm of AraC. Two, however, were found in the core of the dimerization domain. As predicted by the light switch mechanism of AraC, constitutive mutations increase the susceptibility of the N-terminal arms to digestion by trypsin or chymotrypsin, suggesting that these mutations weaken or disrupt the arm structure required for repression by AraC. Fluorescence, circular dichroism, and cysteine reactivity measurements show that the constitutive mutations in the core of the dimerization domain lead to a weakening of the support for the arms and reduce the stability of the minus-arabinose arm structure. These mutations also weaken the interaction between the two-helix bundle and the beta-barrel subdomains of the dimerization domain and reduce the structural stability of the beta-barrels.

Functional modes of the regulatory arm of AraC.

One of the two crystal structures of the arm-dimerization domain determined in the absence of arbinose fails to show the arm, whereas the other structure does show it. The two structures lead to different pictures for the regulatory behavior of the arms. Trypsin digestion, fluorescence anisotropy, and NMR experiments presented here were designed to resolve the issue and show that in arm-dimerization domain, the arms are structured, although differently, in the presence and absence of arabinose. The arms have also been shown to interact with the DNA binding domains of AraC by their requirement for the immobilization of the DNA binding domains that is necessary for DNA looping and repression. The binding of arabinose has been shown to release the DNA binding domains and looping ceases. The picture resulting from the new experiments and the crystal structures of the arm-dimerization domain is that in the absence of arabinose, the arm adopts one structure on the dimerization domain and that the DNA binding domain then binds to this complex. Upon binding arabinose, the arm restructures and as a result, no longer serves as a gasket between the DNA binding domain and dimerization domain. The DNA binding domain is then released, subject only to the constraints imposed by the flexible linker connecting it to dimerization domain, and the protein relocates on the DNA and activates transcription.