This work was supported by the Australian Research Council [DP11010246].

1. Blocking Replication with FROS
<ol>
	<li>Inducing the Replication Blockage
	<ol>
		<li>Dilute a fresh overnight culture of an E. coli strain carrying a tetO array and pKM118 to OD600nm = 0.01 in a dilute complex medium (0.1% tryptone, 0.05% yeast extract, 0.1% NaCl, 0.17 M KH2PO4, 0.72 M K2HPO4) with antibiotics as required for selection. 
		Note: Do not add tetracycline for selection as it is not compatible with this system. Make the volume of the culture equivalent to 10 ml per sample required. For example, the culture volume for the experimental design in Figure 1 is 60 ml.</li>
		<li>Grow at 30 &#176;C with shaking until OD600 nm = 0.05-0.1. Remove a 10 ml sample to serve as the uninduced control and add 0.1% arabinose to the remaining culture to induce the production of TetR-YFP from pKM1. Continue to grow both the uninduced and induced cultures. After 1 hr, check for the presence of a single focal point within each cell of the induced culture using fluorescence microscopy (see section 2).</li>
		<li>If the induced cells are confirmed blocked (more than 70% of cells have a single focus), record the OD600nm and take a 7.5 ml sample for analysis by 2-D gels (see section 3). Take an equivalent sample from the uninduced control culture.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Releasing the Replication Blockage
	<ol>
		<li>To release the replication block, add 100 ng ml-1 of the gratuitous inducer anhydrotetracycline (AT) to a 10 ml sample of the blocked cells. Continue to grow at 30 &#176;C for 10 min and take samples for cell density (1 ml), microscopy analysis (10 &#181;l) and neutral-neutral 2-dimensional agarose gels (7.5 ml).</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Inducing Collapse of the Replisome
	<ol>
		<li>If the cells contain a temperature sensitive allele such as dnaBts or dnaCts that requires deactivation, move the flask containing the blocked cells to 42 &#176;C. Take samples for analysis at time points required (e.g., 1 hr after incubation). After the cells have incubated at 42 &#176;C for 1 hr, shift the cells to 30 &#176;C for 10 min (see Figure 1). 
		Note: The cells can be shifted to 30 &#176;C for restart analysis.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
</ol>
<img alt="Figure 1" src="/files/ftp_upload/54434/54434fig1.jpg" /> 
Figure 1: Overview of the FROS Replication Block and Release Experimental Procedure. E. coli strains carrying the tetO array are grown at 30 &#176;C. When the cells reach an OD600nm of above 0.05, TetR-YFP production is induced with arabinose (ara; 0.1%). Continue to grow a subpopulation of uninduced cells to act as controls at 30 &#176;C. A sample of the induced cells is analyzed via fluorescence microscopy after 1 - 2 hr (see 2.1). If replication is confirmed to be blocked, samples are taken for 2-D gel analysis indicated by the test tubes (see 3.1) and for viability tests (optional). The replication blockage can be removed with anhydrotetracycline (AT; 0.1 &#181;g/ml) and cells analyzed 10 min later. If cells carry a temperature sensitive allele (e.g. dnaBts), this can be inactivated by shifting the blocked cells to 42 &#176;C for appropriate analysis. <a href="https://www.jove.com/files/ftp_upload/54434/54434fig1large.jpg" target="_blank">Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.</a>
2. Fluorescence Microscopy
<ol>
	<li>Prepare an agarose pad by pipetting 500 &#181;l of molten agarose (1% in water) onto a microscope slide; overlay the coverslip immediately before the agarose solidifies. Store the slide(s) in wet tissues at 4 &#176;C until needed.</li>
	<li>When the agarose has solidified, remove the coverslip from the agarose pad and pipette 10 &#181;l of bacterial culture onto the center of the pad to prevent movement of the cells during visualization. Once the sample has dried (approximately 5 min), replace the coverslip. Place a drop of immersion oil onto the cover slip and place the slide under optics.</li>
	<li>Visualize the Cells Using Phase Microscopy at 100X Magnification.
	<ol>
		<li>On the Acquire dialog box within the imaging software, set exposure time to 100 msec. Capture the image by selecting Acquire. Do not move the stage. In the Acquire dialog box, select YFP as the illumination for the External Shutter Linked to Camera. Set the exporsure time to 1,000 msec. Turn off the stage light. Capture the fluorescence image by selecting Acquire. 
		Note: Time may vary depending upon light source, microscope and camera used.</li>
		<li>To overlay the phase and fluorescent images, select Color Combine from within the Display menu. In the Color Combine dialog box, select the YFP image as the green component and the phase image as the blue component. Click on color combine. Determine whether the population has had replication successfully blocked by establishing whether the majority of the cells have one focus per cell. 
		Note: Comparison to a sample from the control without added arabinose is useful to visually identify the difference in eYFP production.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
</ol>
3. DNA Extraction/Agarose Plugs
<ol>
	<li>Add sodium azide (final concentration of 0.1%) to the 7.5 ml culture samples from steps 1.1.3 and 1.2.1. Incubate on ice for at least 5 min. 
	Note: Sodium azide is extremely toxic. Consult the Safety Data Sheet prior to commencing work and do not handle it until all safety precautions have been read and understood.</li>
	<li>Centrifuge the cells 5,000 x g for 10 min to pellet cells. Discard the supernatant and resuspend the pellet in 200 &#181;l of Pett IV (PIV) buffer (10 mM Tris:HCl (pH 8.0), 1 M NaCl). Microcentrifuge (13, 000 x g for 2 min) to pellet cells. Discard the supernatant. At this stage, the process the pellets further or store at -20 &#176;C.</li>
	<li>Resuspend the cells with the lowest cell density in 50 &#181;l PIV and place at 50 &#176;C. For all other samples, adjust the volumes of PIV so the final cell density is the same in each tube (e.g. Sample 1 (OD600nm = 0.128) resuspended in 50 &#181;l; Sample 2 (OD600nm = 0.138) resuspended in 54 &#181;l).
	<ol>
		<li>Add an equal volume of freshly prepared 0.8% agarose solution in PIV (final conc. 0.4%; e.g. Sample 1 50 &#181;l, Sample 2 54 &#181;l). Ensure that the samples, agarose and PIV are above 50 &#176;C to prevent solidification.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Treat a microscope slide with 40 &#181;l of an appropriate glass water-repellent or silicone solution. Rub the slide with a tissue until it is dry. 
	Note: This may be done in advance and the treated slides stored long term at room temperature.</li>
	<li>Place 20 &#181;l drops of the cell/agarose suspension on the slide to produce plugs that are hemispherical. 
	Note: The first sample (resuspended in 50 &#181;l PIV) will produce 5 plugs on one slide.</li>
	<li>When the plugs have solidified, slide them gently into a microfuge tube and add 1 ml cell lysis buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8], 1 M NaCl, 100 mM Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), 0.2% sodium deoxycholate, 0.5% N-Lauroylsarcosine sodium salt (Sarkosyl), 100 &#181;g ml&#8722;1 lysozyme, 50 &#181;g ml&#8722;1 RNase A). Incubate at 37 &#176;C for 2 hr.</li>
	<li>Remove the cell lysis buffer and add 1 ml EDTA/Sarcosyl/Proteinase K (ESP) solution (0.5 M EDTA, 1% N-Lauroylsarcosine sodium salt (Sarkosyl), 1 mg ml&#8722;1 proteinase K). Incubate at 50 &#176;C overnight or until the plugs are transparent. If a second overnight incubation is required, replace the ESP solution with fresh buffer after approximately 18 hr.</li>
	<li>Remove the ESP buffer and wash the plugs 5 times with 12 ml Tris-EDTA (TE) buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, pH 8.0), allowing a 30 min equilibration with each wash. Store at 4 &#176;C in 1 ml TE buffer.</li>
</ol>
4. Neutral-neutral 2-Dimensional Gel Electrophoresis
<ol>
	<li>Transfer an agarose plug from step 3.8 to a fresh microfuge tube and add 150 &#181;l of restriction enzyme buffer (1x concentration). Add 25-100 units of restriction enzyme (e.g., 60 units of EcoRV; (see Figure 3A)). Digest at 37 &#176;C for 6-8 hr.</li>
	<li>At 4 &#176;C, pour a 0.4% agarose gel (300 ml) in 1x Tris/Borate/EDTA (TBE) into a gel tray of approximately 25 x 25 cm. Insert a comb to make wells approximately the same width as the diameter of the plug. When the gel is set, remove the comb and move the gel to room temperature.</li>
	<li>Slide one of the digested agarose plugs into a well, positioning the flat slide of the plug against the side of the well where the DNA will enter the gel. Insert a single plug in the same manner into every second well.</li>
	<li>Pipette molten 0.4% agarose into the wells to seal the plugs in position.</li>
	<li>Load 1 kb DNA ladder in an empty well, again leaving a gap between the ladder and samples, and run the gel overnight (16 hr, 55 V) in 1x TBE at room temperature.</li>
	<li>Stain the gel in a water bath containing ethidium bromide (0.3 &#181;g ml-1) for 20 min. 
	Note: Ethidium bromide is considered a potent mutagen and a toxin. Consult the Safety Data Sheet prior to commencing work and do not handle it until all safety precautions have been read and understood.</li>
	<li>Visualize the DNA with a long-wave UV transilluminator and cut out each lane fragment with a straight, even cut, minimizing the inclusion of excess agarose on either side of the lane. 
	Note: For example, if the fragment of interest is 5.5 kb, cut a 7.5 cm fragment to include the DNA fragments from 5 kb to approximately 12 kb (see Figure 3A).</li>
	<li>Place the excised gel lane in a gel tray at 90&#176; to direction of DNA migration. 
	Note: Two rows of 3 gel fragments can fit in a 25 x 252 cm gel tray. The first row of gel lanes is at the top of the tray, the second row at 12.5 cm.</li>
	<li>Prepare 300 ml agarose for the second dimension gel (0.9% in 1x TBE with 0.3 &#181;g ml-1 ethidium bromide). When the agarose is cooled to 50 &#176;C, pipette the molten agarose around the gel slices to solidify their position. Pour the remaining agarose into the tray to a depth that is at least level with the gel slices.</li>
	<li>Once the gel is solidified, electrophorese at 4 &#176;C in 1x TBE containing 0.3 &#181;g ml-1 ethidium bromide at 220 V until the DNA has migrated approximately 10 cm. 
	Note: 4 hr is sufficient for a 5.5 kb fragment but a smaller fragment will need less time.</li>
	<li>Excise the blocks where the genomic DNA is present using the edge of a metal ruler, including the gel above it to include the DNA that is not visible (see Figure 3C).</li>
</ol>
5. Southern Hybridization
<ol>
	<li>Solution Preparation
	<ol>
		<li>Prepare Depurination buffer (0.125 M HCl solution). 
		Note: This buffer can be reused and is stable at room temperature for up to 1 month.</li>
		<li>Prepare Denaturation buffer (1.5 M NaCl, 0.5 M NaOH). 
		Note: Denaturation buffer can be reused once and is stable for up to 3 months at room temperature.</li>
		<li>Prepare Neutralization buffer (1.5 M NaCl, 0.5 M Tris). Adjust to pH 7.5 with HCl. 
		Note: Neutralization buffer can be reused once and is stable for up to 3 months at room temperature.</li>
		<li>Prepare 10x Saline Sodium Citrate (SSC) buffer (0.15 M Tri-sodium citrate, 1.5 M NaCl, pH is 7 - 8) for use in steps 5.2.4 and 5.2.6. From this buffer, make a 2x SSC stock (for use in step 5.2.9). 
		Note: 10x SSC and 2x SSC are stable at RT for 3 months.</li>
		<li>Prepare Modified Church and Gilbert Hybridization Buffer19 (0.5 M phosphate buffer [pH 7.2], 7% (w/v) sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), 10 mM EDTA). Leave at 65 &#176;C to dissolve thoroughly prior to use.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Transfer
	<ol>
		<li>Rinse the excised gel blocks in depurination solution for 10 min at RT on a rocker or orbital shaker. Keep the agitation speed low to avoid damaging the agarose blocks.</li>
		<li>Rinse the gel blocks briefly with distilled water and then with denaturation buffer for 30 min. Rinse again briefly in distilled water and then incubate the gel blocks in neutralization buffer for 30 min with gentle agitation at room temperature.</li>
		<li>Cut a nylon membrane to the exact size of the gel(s). Cut a nick in the top right hand corner to assist in orienting the membrane in future steps. 
		Note: Two gel blocks (6 samples) can be visualized on one membrane.</li>
		<li>Pour enough 10x SSC into a tray so that it will not dry out overnight. Create a platform approximately 5 cm above the level of the buffer. Saturate 3 sheets of 3MM chromatography paper with 10x SSC and place on the platform. Cut the chromatography paper so that it is long enough to be immersed in buffer at both ends and wide enough to fit the membrane gel on.</li>
		<li>Place the gel(s) on top of the saturated chromatography paper. Frame the gel with plastic wrap to prevent the buffer by-passing the gel during transfer. Carefully lay the cut membrane on top of the gel(s). Remove air bubbles between the membrane and gel by rolling a bottle or serological pipette gently across the membrane.</li>
		<li>Cut three sheets of 3MM chromatography paper to the same size as the membrane. Saturate the chromatography paper sheets with 10x SSC and place on top of the membrane. Remove any air bubbles that have formed.</li>
		<li>Stack paper towels at least 5 cm high on top of the blotting paper followed by a solid support (approximate weight of 1 kg for a 23 x 16 cm membrane). Allow the transfer to proceed overnight.</li>
		<li>Expose the membrane (DNA side up) to 1,200 J/m2 of UV to crosslink the DNA to the membrane. Do not rinse prior to this step.</li>
		<li>Rinse the membrane thoroughly in 2x SSC to prevent high background on the blot images. Use the blot immediately for hybridization (see 5.3) or dry it at RT, wrap in plastic wrap and store at 4 &#176;C.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Hybridization
	<ol>
		<li>Preheat hybridization oven and bottles to 55 &#176;C.</li>
		<li>Add 100 &#181;g ml-1 bovine serum albumin (BSA) and 10 &#181;g ml-1 non-specific DNA (e.g. salmon sperm DNA) to the pre-warmed hybridization buffer.</li>
		<li>To allow for even coverage of the hybridization buffer when the membrane is rolled up, place the blot onto a similarly sized square of nylon mesh with the DNA-bound side of the membrane facing upwards. Roll the blot along its long edge. Slide the blot/mesh inside a hybridization bottle. Add an appropriate amount of pre-heated hybridization buffer to unroll the blot (e.g. 30 ml for a 23 x 16 cm2 membrane).</li>
		<li>Incubate in a pre-heated oven, rotating the bottles, for 1 hr.</li>
		<li>Prepare the probe by mixing 50 ng of purified PCR product homologous to the region of interest, 150 ng of random hexamer primers, buffer for Klenow fragment and H2O to make a volume of 13 &#181;l. Boil for 3 min then place immediately onto ice. Add 1 &#181;l of 1 mM dCTP/dGTP/dTTP mix, 1 &#181;l of Klenow fragment (5U) and 50 &#181;Ci deoxyadenosine 5&#39;-triphosphate radiolabeled on the alpha phosphate-(&#945;32P-dATP).</li>
		<li>Incubate at room temp for 1 hr. Add 1 &#181;l of 1 mM dNTP mix and 1 &#181;l of Klenow fragment. Incubate 20 min at RT.</li>
		<li>Boil probe for 5 min and add immediately to hybridization tubes. Hybridize overnight at 55 &#176;C, with rotation.</li>
		<li>Decant the probe from membrane. 
		Note: The probe is able to be reused once.</li>
		<li>Rinse the membrane briefly in pre-warmed, low stringency wash buffer (2x SSC, 0.1% (w/v) SDS). Add fresh low stringency wash buffer and incubate for 5 min at 55 &#176;C with rotation. Repeat.</li>
		<li>Wash twice in medium stringency wash buffer (1x SSC, 0.1% (w/v) SDS) for 10 min at 55 &#176;C with rotation.</li>
		<li>Wash twice in high stringency wash buffer (0.1x SSC, 0.1% (w/v) SDS) for 5 min at 55 &#176;C with rotation.</li>
		<li>Remove the membrane and dab with tissue to remove excess liquid. Wrap in plastic wrap ensuring there is no remaining moisture on the plastic wrap and place in exposure cassette with a pre-blanked storage phosphor screen. Close the cassette and expose for at least 2 hr before visualization using a phosphor imager.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
</ol>

<ol>
	<li>Mirkin, E. V., Mirkin, S. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Replication+fork+stalling+at+natural+impediments.">Replication fork stalling at natural impediments.</a> Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 71 (1), 13-35 (2007).</li><li>Gupta, M. K., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Protein-DNA+complexes+are+the+primary+sources+of+replication+fork+pausing+in+Escherichia+coli.">Protein-DNA complexes are the primary sources of replication fork pausing in Escherichia coli.</a> Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 110 (18), 7252-7257 (2013).</li><li>McGlynn, P., Guy, C. P. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Replication+forks+blocked+by+protein-DNA+complexes+have+limited+stability+in+vitro.">Replication forks blocked by protein-DNA complexes have limited stability in vitro.</a> J Mol Biol. 381 (2), 249-255 (2008).</li><li>Tanner, N. A., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Single-molecule+studies+of+fork+dynamics+in+Escherichia+coli+DNA+replication.">Single-molecule studies of fork dynamics in Escherichia coli DNA replication.</a> Nat Struct Mol Biol. 15 (2), 170-176 (2008).</li><li>Hamdan, S. M., Loparo, J. J., Takahashi, M., Richardson, C. C., van Oijen, A. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Dynamics+of+DNA+replication+loops+reveal+temporal+control+of+lagging-strand+synthesis.">Dynamics of DNA replication loops reveal temporal control of lagging-strand synthesis.</a> Nature. 457 (7227), 336-339 (2009).</li><li>Rudolph, C. J., Upton, A. L., Lloyd, R. G. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Replication+fork+stalling+and+cell+cycle+arrest+in+UV-irradiated+Escherichia+coli.">Replication fork stalling and cell cycle arrest in UV-irradiated Escherichia coli.</a> Genes Dev. 21 (6), 668-681 (2007).</li><li>Jeiranian, H. A., Courcelle, C. T., Courcelle, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Inefficient+replication+reduces+RecA-mediated+repair+of+UV-damaged+plasmids+introduced+into+competent+Escherichia+coli.">Inefficient replication reduces RecA-mediated repair of UV-damaged plasmids introduced into competent Escherichia coli.</a> Plasmid. 68 (2), 113-124 (2012).</li><li>Le Masson, M., Baharoglu, Z., Michel, B. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=ruvA+and+ruvB+mutants+specifically+impaired+for+replication+fork+reversal.">ruvA and ruvB mutants specifically impaired for replication fork reversal.</a> Mol Microbiol. 70 (2), 537-548 (2008).</li><li>Wang, X., Liu, X., Possoz, C., Sherratt, D. J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+two+Escherichia+coli+chromosome+arms+locate+to+separate+cell+halves.">The two Escherichia coli chromosome arms locate to separate cell halves.</a> Genes Dev. 20 (13), 1727-1731 (2006).</li><li>Lau, I. F., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Spatial+and+temporal+organization+of+replicating+Escherichia+coli+chromosomes.">Spatial and temporal organization of replicating Escherichia coli chromosomes.</a> Mol Microbiol. 49 (3), 731-743 (2003).</li><li>Gordon, G. S., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Chromosome+and+low+copy+plasmid+segregation+in+E.+coli:+visual+evidence+for+distinct+mechanisms.">Chromosome and low copy plasmid segregation in E. coli: visual evidence for distinct mechanisms.</a> Cell. 90 (6), 1113-1121 (1997).</li><li>Possoz, C., Filipe, S. R., Grainge, I., Sherratt, D. J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Tracking+of+controlled+Escherichia+coli+replication+fork+stalling+and+restart+at+repressor-bound+DNA+in+vivo.">Tracking of controlled Escherichia coli replication fork stalling and restart at repressor-bound DNA in vivo.</a> EMBO J. 25 (11), 2596-2604 (2006).</li><li>Payne, B. T., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Replication+fork+blockage+by+transcription+factor-DNA+complexes+in+Escherichia+coli.">Replication fork blockage by transcription factor-DNA complexes in Escherichia coli.</a> Nucleic Acids Res. 34 (18), 5194-5202 (2006).</li><li>Brewer, B. J., Fangman, W. L. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+localization+of+replication+origins+on+ARS+plasmids+in+S.+cerevisiae.">The localization of replication origins on ARS plasmids in S. cerevisiae.</a> Cell. 51 (3), 463-471 (1987).</li><li>Jeiranian, H. A., Schalow, B. J., Courcelle, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Visualization+of+UV-induced+replication+intermediates+in+E.+coli+using+two-dimensional+agarose-gel+analysis.">Visualization of UV-induced replication intermediates in E. coli using two-dimensional agarose-gel analysis.</a> J Vis Exp. (46), (2010).</li><li>Southern, E. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Detection+of+specific+sequences+among+DNA+fragments+separated+by+gel+electrophoresis.">Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis.</a> J Mol Biol. 98 (3), 503-517 (1975).</li><li>Courcelle, J., Donaldson, J. R., Chow, K. H., Courcelle, C. T. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=DNA+damage-induced+replication+fork+regression+and+processing+in+Escherichia+coli.">DNA damage-induced replication fork regression and processing in Escherichia coli.</a> Science. 299 (5609), 1064-1067 (2003).</li><li>Mettrick, K. A., Grainge, I. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Stability+of+blocked+replication+forks+in+vivo.">Stability of blocked replication forks in vivo.</a> Nucleic Acids Res. , (2015).</li><li>Church, G. M., Gilbert, W. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Genomic+sequencing.">Genomic sequencing.</a> Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 81 (7), 1991-1995 (1984).</li><li>Michel, B., Grompone, G., Flores, M. J., Bidnenko, V. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Multiple+pathways+process+stalled+replication+forks.">Multiple pathways process stalled replication forks.</a> Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 101 (35), 12783-12788 (2004).</li><li>Michel, B., Boubakri, H., Baharoglu, Z., LeMasson, M., Lestini, R. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Recombination+proteins+and+rescue+of+arrested+replication+forks.">Recombination proteins and rescue of arrested replication forks.</a> DNA Repair (Amst). 6 (7), 967-980 (2007).</li><li>Carl, P. L. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Escherichia+coli+mutants+with+temperature-sensitive+synthesis+of+DNA.">Escherichia coli mutants with temperature-sensitive synthesis of DNA.</a> Mol Gen Genet. 109 (2), 107-122 (1970).</li><li>Nawotka, K. A., Huberman, J. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Two-dimensional+gel+electrophoretic+method+for+mapping+DNA+replicons.">Two-dimensional gel electrophoretic method for mapping DNA replicons.</a> Mol Cell Biol. 8 (4), 1408-1413 (1988).</li><li>Cole, R. S., Levitan, D., Sinden, R. R. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Removal+of+psoralen+interstrand+cross-links+from+DNA+of+Escherichia+coli:+mechanism+and+genetic+control.">Removal of psoralen interstrand cross-links from DNA of Escherichia coli: mechanism and genetic control.</a> J Mol Biol. 103 (1), 39-59 (1976).</li></ol>

The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests.

During chromosome duplication, the replication machinery will encounter various impediments that prevent its progress. To ensure the entire single-origin chromosome is replicated, bacteria have numerous pathways for repair of the DNA that then enables the replisome to be reloaded20,21. Lesions, single stranded breaks, double stranded breaks and proteins tightly bound to the DNA may each be dealt with using a dedicated pathway, although there is likely to be significant overlap in these pathways. The most commo...

During DNA replication, the replisome faces obstacles on the DNA that impair its progression. DNA damage including lesions and gaps as well as aberrant structures can prevent the replisome from proceeding1. Recently, it has been found that proteins bound to the DNA are the most common source of impediment to replication fork progression2. The knowledge of the events following the encounter of the replisome with a nucleoprotein block has previously been limited by the inability to induce such a block in the chromosome of a living cell at a known location. In vitro analysis has enhanced our understanding of the kinetic behavior of an active replisome when it meets a nucleoprotein blockage3, as well as the mechanistic details of the replisome itself4,5. Current understanding of the repair of replication is generally undertaken with UV as the damaging agent and studied using plasmid DNA in vivo6-8. While the proteins that may be involved in repair of DNA after it encounters an in vivo nucleoprotein block are generally understood from these studies, whether there are variations in the molecular events within the repair pathways owing to the distinct cause in the replication block is still yet to be determined.
Here, we describe a system that allows a nucleoprotein block to be established in a specific location of the chromosome using a Fluorescent Repressor Operator System (FROS). We utilize a strain of E. coli that has had an array of 240 tetO sites incorporated into the chromosome9. Each tetO site within the array has a 10 bp random sequence flanking it to increase the stability of the array by preventing RecA-mediated recombination within the array. This array, and variations of it, were originally used to understand E. coli chromosome dynamics10,11 but were then adapted to prevent in vivo replication12. The array has been found to be stably maintained and to block close to 100% of replication forks when bound by TetR10,12. The use of the similar lacO array in vitro has found as few as 22 sites were sufficient to block 90% of replication, although this shorter array was less effective in vivo13. To adapt the array to create a nucleoprotein blockage, the repressor protein must be highly overproduced under optimized conditions where it then binds to the array to create a roadblock. The formation of the blockage, and its subsequent release, can be monitored through the use of fluorescence microscopy if a fluorescently tagged variant of the Tet repressor is used. The status of replication in each cell is indicated by the number of foci seen, where a single focal point means only one copy of the array is present within the cell and multiple foci are indicative of active replication. This active replication is enabled when the nucleoprotein blockage is reversed by the addition of the gratuitous inducer that decreases the binding affinity of TetR for the operator site sufficiently for the replisome to proceed through the array. The repressor protein is still able to bind to the DNA with high enough affinity that the now multiple copies of the array can be visualized.
More intricate details of the events at the nucleoprotein blockage can be discovered using neutral-neutral two-dimensional agarose gel electrophoresis and Southern hybridization14-16. These techniques allow the analysis of DNA structures across the population. The replication intermediates that are formed during the event, and potentially remain unrepaired, can be visualized. By varying the restriction enzyme and probe utilized, the intermediates can be visualized not only in the array region but also upstream of the array when the replication fork regresses17,18. The regression takes place subsequent to the replisome dissociation; the leading and lagging nascent strands separate from the template strands and anneal to each other as the template strands concurrently re-anneal resulting in a four-way DNA structure (a Holliday junction).
Using this system it has been shown that the replication fork is not stable when it encounters this block18. In addition, temperature sensitive derivatives of replisome components can be utilized to prevent reloading of the replication fork once it has collapsed. Once a block is established, the strain can be shifted to a non-permissive temperature to ensure a synchronous deactivation of the replisome and a controlled prevention of reloading. This temperature-induced deactivation ensures all of the forks within the population have collapsed at a given time and allows the assessment of what happens when the replisome collapses, how the DNA is processed, and what is required to restart the process of DNA replication.
An advantage of the system described here is that the nucleoprotein block is fully reversible; therefore, the ability of the cells to recover from the nucleoprotein block is able to be followed. The addition of anhydrotetracycline to the cells will relieve the tight binding of the repressor, allowing a replication fork to proceed through and the cell to regain viability. The relief of the blockage can be visualized by neutral-neutral two-dimensional agarose gel electrophoresis after 5 min, and by microscopy within 10 min. Furthermore, viability analysis can reveal the ability of the strain to recover from the replication blockage and continue to proliferate.
By altering the genetic background of the strains used in the experimental procedure described here, the repair pathways for this type of blockage can be elucidated.

<table><tbody><tr><td>Tryptone</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>16922</td><td>Growth media component</td></tr><tr><td>Sodium Chloride</td><td>VWR</td><td>27810.364</td><td>Growth media component</td></tr><tr><td>Yeast extract</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>92144</td><td>Growth media component</td></tr><tr><td>Potassium phosphate monobasic</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>P9791</td><td>Growth media component; Potassium buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Potassium phosphate dibasic</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>P3786</td><td>Growth media component; Potassium buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>L-Arabinose</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>A3256</td><td>For induction of TetR-YFP production</td></tr><tr><td>Anhydrotetracycline hydrochloride</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>37919</td><td>Release of replication bloackage</td></tr><tr><td>Axioskop 2 Fluorescence microscope</td><td>Zeiss</td><td>452310</td><td>Visualization of cells</td></tr><tr><td>eYFP filter set</td><td>Chroma Technology</td><td>41028</td><td>Visualization of YFP</td></tr><tr><td>CCD camera</td><td>Hamamatsu</td><td>Orca-AG</td><td>Visualization of cells</td></tr><tr><td>MetaMorph&amp;nbsp; Software (Molecular Devices)</td><td>SDR Scientific</td><td>31282</td><td>Version 7.8.0.0 used in the preparation of this manuscript</td></tr><tr><td>Agarose</td><td>Bioline</td><td>BIO-41025</td><td>For agarose plugs and gel electrophoresis</td></tr><tr><td>Original Glass Water Repellent (Rain-X)</td><td>Autobarn</td><td>DIO1470</td><td>For agarose plug manufacture</td></tr><tr><td>TRIS</td><td>VWR</td><td>VWRC103157P</td><td>TE, TBE buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Ethylene diaminetetraacetic acid</td><td>Ajax Finechem</td><td>AJA180</td><td>0.5 M EDTA disodium salt solution adjusted to pH 8.0 with NaOH.</td></tr><tr><td>Sodium azide</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>S2002</td><td>Bacteriostatic agent</td></tr><tr><td>Hydrochloric acid</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>258148</td><td>TE buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Sodium deoxycholate</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>D6750</td><td>Cell lysis buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>N-Lauroylsarcosine sodium salt (Sarkosyl)</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>L5125</td><td>Cell lysis and ESP buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Rnase A</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>R6513</td><td>Cell lysis buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Lysozyme</td><td>Amresco</td><td>6300</td><td>Cell lysis buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Proteinase K</td><td>Amresco</td><td>AM0706</td><td>ESP buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Sub-Cell Model 192 Cell</td><td>BioRad</td><td>1704507</td><td>Electrophoresis system</td></tr><tr><td>UV transilluminator 2000</td><td>BioRad</td><td>1708110</td><td>Visualization of DNA</td></tr><tr><td>Ethidium Bromide</td><td>BioRad</td><td>1610433</td><td>Visualization of DNA</td></tr><tr><td>Boric acid</td><td>VWR</td><td>PROL20185.360</td><td>TBE component</td></tr><tr><td>Hybond-XL nylon memrbane</td><td>Amersham</td><td>RPN203S</td><td>Zeta-Probe Memrbane (BioRad 1620159) can also be used</td></tr><tr><td>3MM Whatman chromatography paper</td><td>GE Healthcare Life Sciences</td><td>3030690</td><td>Southern blotting</td></tr><tr><td>HL-2000 Hybrilinker</td><td>UVP</td><td>95-0031-01/02</td><td>Crosslinking of DNA and hybridization</td></tr><tr><td>Deoxyribonucleic acid from salmon sperm</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>31149</td><td>Hybridization buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Sodium hydroxide</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>S5881</td><td>Denaturation buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Trisodium citrate dihydrate</td><td>VWR</td><td>PROL27833.363</td><td>Transfer buffer</td></tr><tr><td>Sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS)</td><td>Amresco</td><td>227</td><td>Wash buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Bovine serum albumin</td><td>Sigma-Aldrich</td><td>A7906</td><td>Hybridization buffer component</td></tr><tr><td>Random Hexamer Primers</td><td>Bioline</td><td>BIO-38028</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Klenow fragment</td><td>New England BioLabs</td><td>M0212L</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>dNTP Set</td><td>Bioline</td><td>BIO-39025</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Adenosine 5&amp;rsquo;-triphosphate-&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;P-ATP</td><td>PerkinElmer</td><td>BLU502A</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Storage Phosphor Screen</td><td>GE Healthcare Life Sciences</td><td>GEHE28-9564-76</td><td>BAS-IP MS 3543 E multipurpose standard 35 cm x 43 cm screen</td></tr><tr><td>Typhoon FLA 7000</td><td>GE Healthcare Life Sciences</td><td>28-9558-09</td><td>Visualization of blot</td></tr><tr><td>Hybridization bottle</td><td>UVP</td><td>07-0194-02</td><td>35 mm x 300 mm</td></tr></tbody></table>

inducing a site specific replication blockage in e. coli using a fluorescent repressor operator system

Obstacles present on DNA, including tightly-bound proteins and various lesions, can severely inhibit the progression of the cell&#39;s replication machinery. The stalling of a replisome can lead to its dissociation from the chromosome, either in part or its entirety, leading to the collapse of the replication fork. The recovery from this collapse is a necessity for the cell to accurately complete chromosomal duplication and subsequently divide. Therefore, when the collapse occurs, the cell has evolved diverse mechanisms that take place to restore the DNA fork and allow replication to be completed with high fidelity. Previously, these replication repair pathways in bacteria have been studied using UV damage, which has the disadvantage of not being localized to a known site. This manuscript describes a system utilizing a Fluorescence Repressor Operator System (FROS) to create a site-specific protein block that can induce the stalling and collapse of replication forks in Escherichia coli. Protocols detail how the status of replication can be visualized in single living cells using fluorescence microscopy and DNA replication intermediates can be analyzed by 2-dimensional agarose gel electrophoresis. Temperature sensitive mutants of replisome components (e.g. DnaBts) can be incorporated into the system to induce a synchronous collapse of the replication forks. Furthermore, the roles of the recombination proteins and helicases that are involved in these processes can be studied using genetic knockouts within this system.

The FROS is an inducible, site-specific nucleoprotein block that enables replication intermediates to be visualized in living cells12,18. A general experimental design for sampling cells is illustrated in Figure 1. The timing of the sampling and variations in genetic background make this a versatile system for studying the repair of such a block. The schematic illustrates how temperature sensitive mutants, such as dnaBts and dnaCts that have b...

Watch this Scientific Journal Video about Inducing a Site Specific Replication Blockage in E. coli Using a Fluorescent Repressor Operator System at JoVE.com

Inducing a Site Specific Replication Blockage in E. coli Using a Fluorescent Repressor Operator System

We describe here a system utilizing a site-specific, reversible in vivo protein block to stall and collapse replication forks in Escherichia coli. The establishment of the replication block is evaluated by fluorescence microscopy and neutral-neutral 2-dimensional agarose gel electrophoresis is used to visualize replication intermediates.

Inducing a Site Specific Replication Blockage in E. coli Using a Fluorescent Repressor Operator System

Obstacles present on DNA, including tightly-bound proteins and various lesions, can severely inhibit the progression of the cell&#39;s replication ...

inducing-site-specific-replication-blockage-e-coli-using-fluorescent

Research

JoVE Journal

Biology

8.9K Views.  University of Newcastle. We describe here a system utilizing a site-specific, reversible in vivo protein block to stall and collapse replication forks in Escherichia coli. The establishment of the replication block is evaluated by fluorescence microscopy and neutral-neutral 2-dimensional agarose gel electrophoresis is used to visualize replication intermediates.

Video: Inducing a Site Specific Replication Blockage in E. coli Using a Fluorescent Repressor Operator System

Determination of the Optimal Chromosomal Location(s) for a DNA Element in Escherichia coli Using a Novel Transposon-mediated Approach

The optimal chromosomal position(s) of a given DNA element was/were determined by transposon-mediated random insertion followed by fitness selection. In bacteria, the impact of the genetic context on the function of a genetic element can be difficult to assess. Several mechanisms, including topological effects, transcriptional interference from neighboring genes, and/or replication-associated gene dosage, may affect the function of a given genetic element. Here, we describe a method that permits the random integration of a DNA element into the chromosome of Escherichia coli and select the most favorable locations using a simple growth competition experiment. The method takes advantage of a well-described transposon-based system of random insertion, coupled with a selection of the fittest clone(s) by growth advantage, a procedure that is easily adjustable to experimental needs. The nature of the fittest clone(s) can be determined by whole-genome sequencing on a complex multi-clonal population or by easy gene walking for the rapid identification of selected clones. Here, the non-coding DNA region DARS2, which controls the initiation of chromosome replication in E. coli, was used as an example. The function of DARS2 is known to be affected by replication-associated gene dosage; the closer DARS2 gets to the origin of DNA replication, the more active it becomes. DARS2 was randomly inserted into the chromosome of a DARS2-deleted strain. The resultant clones containing individual insertions were pooled and competed against one another for hundreds of generations. Finally, the fittest clones were characterized and found to contain DARS2 inserted in close proximity to the original DARS2 location.

Determination of the Optimal Chromosomal Locations for a DNA Element in Escherichia coli Using a Novel Transposon-mediated Approach

Here, the power of a transposon-mediated random insertion of a non-coding DNA element was used to resolve its optimal chromosomal position.

The optimal chromosomal position(s) of a given DNA element was/were determined by transposon-mediated random insertion followed by fitness selection. In ...

Genetics

Testing the Role of Multicopy Plasmids in the Evolution of Antibiotic Resistance

Multicopy plasmids are extremely abundant in prokaryotes but their role in bacterial evolution remains poorly understood. We recently showed that the increase in gene copy number per cell provided by multicopy plasmids could accelerate the evolution of plasmid-encoded genes. In this work, we present an experimental system to test the ability of multicopy plasmids to promote gene evolution. Using simple molecular biology methods, we constructed a model system where an antibiotic resistance gene can be inserted into Escherichia coli MG1655, either in the chromosome or on a multicopy plasmid. We use an experimental evolution approach to propagate the different strains under increasing concentrations of antibiotics and we measure survival of bacterial populations over time. The choice of the antibiotic molecule and the resistance gene is so that the gene can only confer resistance through the acquisition of mutations. This &#34;evolutionary rescue&#34; approach provides a simple method to test the potential of multicopy plasmids to promote the acquisition of antibiotic resistance. In the next step of the experimental system, the molecular bases of antibiotic resistance are characterized. To identify mutations responsible for the acquisition of antibiotic resistance we use deep DNA sequencing of samples obtained from whole populations and clones. Finally, to confirm the role of the mutations in the gene under study, we reconstruct them in the parental background and test the resistance phenotype of the resulting strains.

Here we present an experimental method to test the role of multicopy plasmids in the evolution of antibiotic resistance.

Multicopy plasmids are extremely abundant in prokaryotes but their role in bacterial evolution remains poorly understood. We recently showed that the ...

Engineering Adherent Bacteria by Creating a Single Synthetic Curli Operon

The method described here consists in redesigning E. coli adherence properties by assembling the minimum number of curli genes under the control of a strong and metal-overinducible promoter, and in visualizing and quantifying the resulting gain of bacterial adherence. This method applies appropriate engineering principles of abstraction and standardization of synthetic biology, and results in the BBa_K540000 Biobrick (Best new Biobrick device, engineered, iGEM 2011).
The first step consists in the design of the synthetic operon devoted to curli overproduction in response to metal, and therefore in increasing the adherence abilities of the wild type strain. The original curli operon was modified in silico in order to optimize transcriptional and translational signals and escape the "natural" regulation of curli. This approach allowed to test with success our current understanding of curli production. Moreover, simplifying the curli regulation by switching the endogenous complex promoter (more than 10 transcriptional regulators identified) to a simple metal-regulated promoter makes adherence much easier to control.
The second step includes qualitative and quantitative assessment of adherence abilities by implementation of simple methods. These methods are applicable to a large range of adherent bacteria regardless of biological structures involved in biofilm formation. Adherence test in 24-well polystyrene plates provides a quick preliminary visualization of the bacterial biofilm after crystal violet staining. This qualitative test can be sharpened by the quantification of the percentage of adherence. Such a method is very simple but more accurate than only crystal violet staining as described previously 1 with both a good repeatability and reproducibility. Visualization of GFP-tagged bacteria on glass slides by fluorescence or laser confocal microscopy allows to strengthen the results obtained with the 24-well plate test by direct observation of the phenomenon.

The design of a synthetic operon encoding both the secretory apparatus and the structural monomers of curli fibers is described. Overproduction of these amyloids and adherent polymers allows a measurable gain of adherence of the E. coli chassis1. Easy ways to visualize and quantify adherence are explained.

The  method described here consists in redesigning E. coli adherence properties by assembling the minimum number of  curli genes under the control of a ...

Bioengineering

In Situ Measurement and Correlation of Cell Density and Light Emission of Bioluminescent Bacteria

There is a considerable number of bacterial species capable of emitting light. All of them share the same gene cluster, namely the lux operon. Despite this similarity, these bacteria show extreme variations in characteristics like growth behavior, intensity of light emission or regulation of bioluminescence. The method presented here is a newly developed assay that combines recording of cell growth and bioluminescent light emission intensity over time utilizing a plate reader. The resulting growth and light emission characteristics can be linked to important features of the respective bacterial strain, such as quorum sensing regulation. The cultivation of a range of bioluminescent bacteria requires a specific medium (e.g., artificial sea water medium) and defined temperatures. The easy to handle, non-bioluminescent standard-research bacterium Escherichia coli (E. coli), on the other hand, can be cultivated inexpensively in high quantities in laboratory scale. Exploiting E. coli by introducing a plasmid containing the whole lux operon can simplify experimental conditions and additionally opens up many possibilities for future applications. The expression of all lux genes utilizing an E. coli expression strain was achieved by construction of an expression plasmid via Gibson cloning and insertion of four fragments containing seven lux genes and three rib genes of the lux-rib operon into a pET28a vector. E. coli based lux gene expression can be induced and controlled via Isopropyl-&#946;-D-thiogalactopyranosid (IPTG) addition resulting in bioluminescent E. coli cells. The advantages of this system are to avoid quorum sensing regulation restrictions and complex medium compositions along with non-standard growth conditions, such as defined temperatures. This system enables analysis of lux genes and their interplay, by the exclusion of the respective gene from the lux operon, or even addition of novel genes, exchanging the luxAB genes from one bacterial strain by another, or analyzing protein complexes, such as luxCDE.

In Situ Measurement and Correlation of Cell Density and Light Emission of Bioluminescent Bacteria

Bioluminescent bacteria regulate light production through a variety of mechanisms, such as quorum sensing. This novel method allows the in situ investigation of bioluminescence and the correlation of light emission to cell density. An artificial bioluminescent Escherichia coli system allows the characterization of lux operons, Lux proteins, and their interplay.

There is a considerable number of bacterial species capable of emitting light. All of them share the same gene cluster, namely the lux operon. Despite ...

Biochemistry

A Fluorescence-based Method to Study Bacterial Gene Regulation in Infected Tissues

Bacterial virulence genes are often regulated at the transcriptional level by multiple factors that respond to different environmental signals. Some factors act directly on virulence genes; others control pathogenesis by adjusting the expression of downstream regulators or the accumulation of signals that affect regulator activity. While regulation has been studied extensively during in vitro growth, relatively little is known about how gene expression is adjusted during infection. Such information is important when a particular gene product is a candidate for therapeutic intervention. Transcriptional approaches like quantitative, real-time RT-PCR and RNA-Seq are powerful ways to examine gene expression on a global level but suffer from many technical challenges including low abundance of bacterial RNA compared to host RNA, and sample degradation by RNases. Evaluating regulation using fluorescent reporters is relatively easy and can be multiplexed with fluorescent proteins with unique spectral properties. The method allows for single-cell, spatiotemporal analysis of gene expression in tissues that exhibit complex three-dimensional architecture and physiochemical gradients that affect bacterial regulatory networks. Such information is lost when data are averaged over the bulk population. Herein, we describe a method for quantifying gene expression in bacterial pathogens in situ. The method is based on simple tissue processing and direct observation of fluorescence from reporter proteins. We demonstrate the utility of this system by examining the expression of Staphylococcus aureus thermonuclease (nuc), whose gene product is required for immune evasion and full virulence ex vivo and in vivo. We show that nuc-gfp is strongly expressed in renal abscesses and reveal heterogeneous gene expression due in part to apparent spatial regulation of nuc promoter activity in abscesses fully engaged with the immune response. The method can be applied to any bacterium with a manipulatable genetic system and any infection model, providing valuable information for preclinical studies and drug development.

Described here is a method for analyzing bacterial gene expression in animal tissues at a cellular level. This method provides a resource for studying the phenotypic diversity occurring within a bacterial population in response to the tissue environment during an infection.

Bacterial virulence genes are often regulated at the transcriptional level by multiple factors that respond to different environmental signals. Some ...

Continuous Measurement of Biological Noise in Escherichia Coli Using Time-lapse Microscopy

The protocol developed here offers a tool to enable computer tracking of Escherichia coli division and fluorescent levels over several hours. The process starts by screening for colonies that survive on minimal media, assuming that only Escherichia coli harboring the correct plasmid will be able to thrive in the specific conditions. Since the process of building large genetic circuits, requiring the assembly of many DNA parts, is challenging, circuit components are often distributed between multiple plasmids at different copy numbers requiring the use of several antibiotics. Mutations in the plasmid can destroy transcription of the antibiotic resistance genes and interject with resources management in the cell leading to necrosis. The selected colony is set on a glass-bottom Petri dish and a few focus planes are selected for microscopy tracking in both bright field and fluorescent domains. The protocol maintains the image focus for more than 12 hours under initial conditions that cannot be regulated, creating a few difficulties. For example, dead cells start to accumulate in the lenses' field of focus after a few hours of imaging, which causes toxins to buildup and the signal to blur and decay. Depletion of nutrients introduces new metabolic processes and hinder the desired response of the circuit. The experiment's temperature lowers the effectivity of inducers and antibiotics, which can further damage the reliability of the signal. The minimal media gel shrinks and dries, and as a result the optical focus changes over time. We developed this method to overcome these challenges in Escherichia coli, similar to previous works developing analogous methods for other micro-organisms. In addition, this method offers an algorithm to quantify the total stochastic noise in unaltered and altered cells, finding that the results are consistent with flow analyzer predictions as shown by a similar coefficient of variation (CV).

Continuous Measurement of Biological Noise in Escherichia Coli Using Time-lapse Microscopy

This work presents a microscopy method that allows live imaging of a single cell of Escherichia coli for analysis and quantification of the stochastic behavior of synthetic gene circuits.

The protocol developed here offers a tool to enable computer tracking of Escherichia coli division and fluorescent levels over several hours. The process ...

Mapping Bacterial Functional Networks and Pathways in Escherichia Coli using Synthetic Genetic Arrays

Phenotypes are determined by a complex series of physical (e.g. protein-protein) and functional (e.g. gene-gene or genetic) interactions (GI)1. While physical interactions can indicate which bacterial proteins are associated as complexes, they do not necessarily reveal pathway-level functional relationships1. GI screens, in which the growth of double mutants bearing two deleted or inactivated genes is measured and compared to the corresponding single mutants, can illuminate epistatic dependencies between loci and hence provide a means to query and discover novel functional relationships2. Large-scale GI maps have been reported for eukaryotic organisms like yeast3-7, but GI information remains sparse for prokaryotes8, which hinders the functional annotation of bacterial genomes. To this end, we and others have developed high-throughput quantitative bacterial GI screening methods9, 10.
Here, we present the key steps required to perform quantitative E. coli Synthetic Genetic Array (eSGA) screening procedure on a genome-scale9, using natural bacterial conjugation and homologous recombination to systemically generate and measure the fitness of large numbers of double mutants in a colony array format. Briefly, a robot is used to transfer, through conjugation, chloramphenicol (Cm) - marked mutant alleles from engineered Hfr (High frequency of recombination) 'donor strains' into an ordered array of kanamycin (Kan) - marked F- recipient strains. Typically, we use loss-of-function single mutants bearing non-essential gene deletions (e.g. the 'Keio' collection11) and essential gene hypomorphic mutations (i.e. alleles conferring reduced protein expression, stability, or activity9, 12, 13) to query the functional associations of non-essential and essential genes, respectively. After conjugation and ensuing genetic exchange mediated by homologous recombination, the resulting double mutants are selected on solid medium containing both antibiotics. After outgrowth, the plates are digitally imaged and colony sizes are quantitatively scored using an in-house automated image processing system14. GIs are revealed when the growth rate of a double mutant is either significantly better or worse than expected9. Aggravating (or negative) GIs often result between loss-of-function mutations in pairs of genes from compensatory pathways that impinge on the same essential process2. Here, the loss of a single gene is buffered, such that either single mutant is viable. However, the loss of both pathways is deleterious and results in synthetic lethality or sickness (i.e. slow growth). Conversely, alleviating (or positive) interactions can occur between genes in the same pathway or protein complex2 as the deletion of either gene alone is often sufficient to perturb the normal function of the pathway or complex such that additional perturbations do not reduce activity, and hence growth, further. Overall, systematically identifying and analyzing GI networks can provide unbiased, global maps of the functional relationships between large numbers of genes, from which pathway-level information missed by other approaches can be inferred9.

Mapping Bacterial Functional Networks and Pathways in Escherichia Coli using Synthetic Genetic Arrays

Systematic, large-scale synthetic genetic (gene-gene or epistasis) interaction screens can be used to explore genetic redundancy and pathway cross-talk. Here, we describe a high-throughput quantitative synthetic genetic array screening technology, termed eSGA that we developed for elucidating epistatic relationships and exploring genetic interaction networks in Escherichia coli.

Phenotypes  are determined by a complex series of physical (e.g. protein-protein) and  functional (e.g. gene-gene or genetic) interactions (GI)1. While ...

Single-molecule Imaging of Gene Regulation In vivo Using Cotranslational Activation by Cleavage (CoTrAC)

We describe a fluorescence microscopy method, Co-Translational Activation by Cleavage (CoTrAC) to image the production of protein molecules in live cells with single-molecule precision without perturbing the protein's functionality. This method makes it possible to count the numbers of protein molecules produced in one cell during sequential, five-minute time windows. It requires a fluorescence microscope with laser excitation power density of ~0.5 to 1 kW/cm2, which is sufficiently sensitive to detect single fluorescent protein molecules in live cells. The fluorescent reporter used in this method consists of three parts: a membrane targeting sequence, a fast-maturing, yellow fluorescent protein and a protease recognition sequence. The reporter is translationally fused to the N-terminus of a protein of interest. Cells are grown on a temperature-controlled microscope stage. Every five minutes, fluorescent molecules within cells are imaged (and later counted by analyzing fluorescence images) and subsequently photobleached so that only newly translated proteins are counted in the next measurement.
Fluorescence images resulting from this method can be analyzed by detecting fluorescent spots in each image, assigning them to individual cells and then assigning cells to cell lineages. The number of proteins produced within a time window in a given cell is calculated by dividing the integrated fluorescence intensity of spots by the average intensity of single fluorescent molecules. We used this method to measure expression levels in the range of 0-45 molecules in single 5 min time windows. This method enabled us to measure noise in the expression of the &lambda; repressor CI, and has many other potential applications in systems biology.

Single-molecule Imaging of Gene Regulation In vivo Using Cotranslational Activation by Cleavage CoTrAC

We describe a fluorescence microscopy method, Co-Translational Activation by Cleavage (CoTrAC), to image the production of protein molecules in live cells with single-molecule precision without perturbing the protein's functionality. This method has been used to follow the stochastic expression dynamics of a transcription factor, the &lambda; repressor CI 1.

We describe a fluorescence microscopy method, Co-Translational Activation by Cleavage (CoTrAC) to image the production of protein molecules in live cells ...

Generation of Marked and Markerless Mutants in Model Cyanobacterial Species

Cyanobacteria are ecologically important organisms and potential platforms for production of biofuels and useful industrial products. Genetic manipulation of cyanobacteria, especially model organisms such as Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 and Synechococcus sp. PCC7002, is a key tool for both basic and applied research. Generation of unmarked mutants, whereby chromosomal alterations are introduced into a strain via insertion of an antibiotic resistance cassette (a manipulatable fragment of DNA containing one or more genes), followed by subsequent removal of this cassette using a negative selectable marker, is a particularly powerful technique. Unmarked mutants can be repeatedly genetically manipulated, allowing as many alterations to be introduced into a strain as desired. In addition, the absence of genes encoding antibiotic resistance proteins in the mutated strain is desirable, as it avoids the possibility of 'escape' of antibiotic resistant organisms into the environment. However, detailed methods for repeated rounds of genetic manipulation of cyanobacteria are not well described in the scientific literature. Here we provide a comprehensive description of this technique, which we have successfully used to generate mutants with multiple deletions, single point mutations within a gene of interest and insertion of novel gene cassettes.

Introducing multiple genomic alterations into cyanobacteria is an essential tool in the development of strains for industrial and basic research purposes. We describe a system for generating unmarked mutants in the model cyanobacterial species Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 and marked mutants in Synechococcus sp. PCC7002.

Cyanobacteria are ecologically important organisms and potential platforms for production of biofuels and useful industrial products. Genetic manipulation ...

Live-Cell Imaging of Transcriptional Activity at DNA Double-Strand Breaks

DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) are the most severe type of DNA damage. Despite the catastrophic consequences on genome integrity, it remains so far elusive how DSBs affect transcription. A reason for this was the lack of suitable tools to simultaneously monitor transcription and the induction of a genic DSB with sufficient temporal and spatial resolution. This work describes a set of new reporters that directly visualize transcription in live cells immediately after the induction of a DSB in the DNA template. Bacteriophage RNA stem-loops are employed to monitor the transcription with single-molecule sensitivity. For targetting the DSB to a specific gene region, the reporter genes are engineered to contain a single recognition sequence of the homing endonuclease I-SceI, otherwise absent from the human genome. A single copy of each reporter gene was integrated into the genome of human cell lines. This experimental system allows the detection of single RNA molecules generated by the canonical gene transcription or by DNA break-induced transcription initiation. These reporters provide an unprecedented opportunity for interpreting the reciprocal interactions between transcription and DNA damage and to disclose hitherto unappreciated aspects of DNA break-induced transcription.

This protocol presents a new reporter gene system and the experimental setup to detect transcription at DNA double-strand breaks with single-molecule sensitivity.

DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) are the most severe type of DNA damage. Despite the catastrophic consequences on genome integrity, it remains so far ...

Inducing a Site Specific Replication Blockage in E. coli Using a Fluorescent Repressor Operator System

Podsumowanie

Przeglądaj więcej filmów

Rozdziały w tym wideo

Determination of the Optimal Chromosomal Location(s) for a DNA Element in Escherichia coli Using a Novel Transposon-mediated Approach

Testing the Role of Multicopy Plasmids in the Evolution of Antibiotic Resistance

Engineering Adherent Bacteria by Creating a Single Synthetic Curli Operon

In Situ Measurement and Correlation of Cell Density and Light Emission of Bioluminescent Bacteria

A Fluorescence-based Method to Study Bacterial Gene Regulation in Infected Tissues

Continuous Measurement of Biological Noise in Escherichia Coli Using Time-lapse Microscopy

Mapping Bacterial Functional Networks and Pathways in Escherichia Coli using Synthetic Genetic Arrays

Single-molecule Imaging of Gene Regulation In vivo Using Cotranslational Activation by Cleavage (CoTrAC)

Generation of Marked and Markerless Mutants in Model Cyanobacterial Species

Live-Cell Imaging of Transcriptional Activity at DNA Double-Strand Breaks