PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 1, 2010Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences111 citationsOpen Access

Predicting strength and function for promoters of the Escherichia coli alternative sigma factor, σ E

View Full Paper
VRVirgil A. RhodiusVMVivek K. Mutalik

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Sequenced bacterial genomes provide a wealth of information but little understanding of transcriptional regulatory circuits largely because accurate prediction of promoters is difficult. We examined two important issues for accurate promoter prediction: (1) the ability to predict promoter strength and (2) the sequence properties that distinguish between active and weak/inactive promoters. We addressed promoter prediction using natural core promoters recognized by the well-studied alternative sigma factor, Escherichia coli sigma(E), as a representative of group 4 sigmas, the largest sigma group. To evaluate the contribution of sequence to promoter strength and function, we used modular position weight matrix models comprised of each promoter motif and a penalty score for suboptimal motif location. We find that a combination of select modules is moderately predictive of promoter strength and that imposing minimal motif scores distinguished active from weak/inactive promoters. The combined -35/-10 score is the most important predictor of activity. Our models also identified key sequence features associated with active promoters. A conserved "AAC" motif in the -35 region is likely to be a general predictor of function for promoters recognized by group 4 sigmas. These results provide valuable insights into sequences that govern promoter strength, distinguish active and inactive promoters for the first time, and are applicable to both in vivo and in vitro measures of promoter strength.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Rhodius et al. (2010) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a07313e616fd0436a8434d8https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0915066107
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Investigations of the modular structure of bacterial promoters2006 · 42 citations
  2. 2Analysis of the sequence-specific interactions between Cro repressor and operator DNA by systematic base substitution experiments.1989 · 199 citations
  3. 3Determination of Intrinsic Transcription Termination Efficiency by RNA Polymerase Elongation Rate1994 · 127 citations
  4. 4Regulation of Tissue-Specific Gene Expression in Microcell Hybrids1996 · 17 citations
  5. 5Stalling of Escherichia coli RNA Polymerase in the +6 to +12 Region in Vivo is Associated with Tight Binding to Consensus Promoter Elements1994 · 93 citations