256 - Construction of a recF deletion mutant of Azotobacter vinelandii and its characterization

So we saw that Azotobacter vinelandii seems to have multiple copies of its chromosome in each cell (253,255), but we also seemed to see that it doesn't exhibit the behavior expected of a polyploid organism, at least sometimes (445). Other times it might. One proposed explanation is that it has some mechanism by which it homogenizes its genotype, a type of homologous recombination or "homogenotization."

A possible mechanism for this is the RecF system found in E. coli, which is involved in repairing the genome after recombination. A. vinelandii has a homologous system, so this study investigated the phenotype of cells with it knocked out.

What They Saw
They knocked out recF, recA, or both from A. vinelandii UW (aka CA), by inserting tetracycline resistance cassettes. This was confirmed by Southern blotting. Actually they already had a recA knockout, so they just made that a double-knockout. That was somewhat tricky, since the recombination frequency is much lower than in the wild-type; that's not very surprising, since RecA is probably pretty important for recombination.

They found that knocking out recF seemed to impair recombination too (also not surprising), though not as much as lack of recA. With both gone, the recombination proficiency was even lower. They saw similar results with UV sensitivity (and thus ability to repair DNA damage).

Finally, the question of homogenotization: to test this, they knocked out the nifLA genes (which regulate/activate nitrogenase) by inserting a kanamycin resistance cassette, expecting that if RecA or RecF were involved in homogenotization, the lack of them would mean that it would be easy to isolate cells with kan resistance in some chromosome copies and yet capable of nitrogen fixation (because wild-type nifLA is still present in other copies to turn on the nitrogenase). This approach, again, seems questionable to me due to the presence of multiple nitrogenases. I'm not sure if NifLA are necessary to regulate all three versions, or just the Mo one.

However, they didn't find any transformants from any of the strains (wild-type or recA or recF or double-knockouts) that were both kan-resistant and nitrogen-fixing. So they conclude that these deleted genes aren't involved in so-called homogenotization, since their absence didn't make a difference. Is it possible that the homogenotization happened when cells divided and only those with kan resistance survived? I'm not sure that question was addressed. It doesn't seem known if progeny get just one copy and then make more, or if copies are equally partitioned. I suppose the latter makes more sense, since it is binary fission, as far as we know.

Also, they did say that antibiotics weren't necessary to prevent nitrogen fixation phenotypes, so I guess that addresses my question. And they did more Southern blotting to show that there was a cassette inserted in the nifLA locus in all the transformants, with no wild-type alleles visible.

I'm not convinced that homogenotization is a real thing, but I'm not yet sure how to explain these data. Somehow it seems like A. vinelandii has many copies of its genome, but it's just as possible to transform all of them the same way as to transform just some. Guess I'll keep reading.

Reference:

Badran, H., Sohoni, R., Venkatesh, T. V. & Das, H. K. Construction of a recF deletion mutant of Azotobacter vinelandii and its characterization. FEMS Microbiology Letters 174, 363–369 (1999).

255 - Segregation characteristics of multiple chromosomes of Azotobacter vinelandii

Again on the subject of multiple chromosome copies in Azotobacter vinelandii, they wanted to see if the larger amount of DNA in the cells compared to E. coli actually meant that many more copies of each gene.

What They Saw

They mutagenized A. vinelandii UW (aka CA) with transposons and tried to see if these insertions were present in as many copies as they had observed for other genes (30-40). They tried to find auxotroph mutants by conjugating with E. coli carrying a transposon. They didn't find any A. vinelandii that failed to grow on plates lacking certain amino acids, but they did find some that didn't grow very well unless the amino acids were present. This poor growth got less poor over time in successive generations though, but the cells were still resistant to the selective marker (ampicillin). They interpret this as being related to the proportion of genome copies with an insertion vs. without.

They also saw that mutagenized cells mostly couldn't grow with ampicillin when plated directly, though they could grow on antibiotic-free Burk medium. Then when cells from each of these conditions were transferred again to plates with antibiotic, only some from selective plates grew, while all from non-selective plates grew. The idea is that growing on selective plates, the ability to grow without added amino acids would be lost (since the transposon knocked out that ability in some copies, and those copies would be higher in proportion because of the selection). They should've tried growing cells from selective medium on non-selective medium to see if they got the same result.

And gaining the ability to resist the antibiotic? Shouldn't they have had that from the beginning? This whole set of experiments is unclear.

They also mutagenized cells with a different transposon that conferred tetracycline resistance, isolated DNA from them after growing on different amounts of tet, and probed with radioactive probes, correlating radioactivity to number of copies. They observed more radioactivity in cells grown with greater selective pressure, implying that there were multiple alleles and selection increased the proportion of resistant allele in a population.

I'm still somewhat dubious, but it seems like the data might be fairly solid.

Reference:

Phadnis, S. H., Dimri, G. P. & Das, H. K. Segregation characteristics of multiple chromosomes of Azotobacter vinelandii. J. Genet. 67, 37–42 (1988).

253 - Multiple chromosomes of Azotobacter vinelandii

Previous studies and some preliminary data supposedly showed that Azotobacter vinelandii cells had up to 40 times as much DNA material as Escherichia coli cells, so this study looks at the form that this excess of DNA takes. Is it all one molecule or are there multiple chromosomes or copies of the same chromosome?

What They Saw
They extracted DNA from A. vinelandii and E. coli and determined the amount per cell (by counting number of cells), finding that E. coli had about 3.4 femtograms per cell (3.4 * 10^-15 g) and A. vinelandii had 135 femtograms. Assuming E. coli's genome is about 4 megabases (actually 4.6, though it depends on the strain) and it has only one copy per cell, A. vinelandii should have about 160 megabases-worth of DNA per cell. A. vinelandii's genome is only about 5.4 megabases, so that's about 30 copies of the genome per cell.

However, they made an artificial mixture of known numbers of copies of a certain gene in A. vinelandii and measured the intensity of radioactivity for the correct band of a Southern blot when probed with a probe labeled with radioactive phosphorus. The amount of radioactivity for DNA extracted from cells was about twice the amount seen with 40 copies of the gene, so they concluded there must be about 80 copies of the gene present. Does this mean there are 80 copies of the chromosome per cell? Not necessarily; there could be multiple copies of the gene per chromosome. However, I don't think that is the case.

They also tried with nitrogenase nifDK genes and got similar amounts of radioactivity. nifH gave multiple bands (presumably because of the alternative nitrogenases), but the main band gave a similar brightness.

To distinguish between a giant chromosome with 80 copies of each gene, and 80 copies of a smaller chromosome (or something in between), they integrated a resistance marker in a particular place in the genome. If it were a single large genome, the marker would probably only integrate once or a few times, whereas after several generations, the cell would make copies of a smaller genome with an integrated marker such that the amount of marker would increase over time. They observed the latter result, suggesting single copies of genes on a chromosome with many copies.

What This Means
The copy number of Azotobacter chromosomes was about 30-40 compared to E. coli but about 80 in terms of specific gene copies. A possible way to reconcile this is that the E. coli cells might actually have had more than one copy too. In any case, this many copies of the genome might make it difficult to stably transform the organism.

Reference:

Nagpal, P., Jafri, S., Reddy, M. A. & Das, H. K. Multiple chromosomes of Azotobacter vinelandii. J. Bacteriol. 171, 3133–3138 (1989).