Azotobacter vinelandii is known for its amazing ability to fix nitrogen, converting nitrogen gas into biological forms like protein even in the presence of oxygen. This is apparent even in its name—
Azotobacter—which translates approximately to "nitrogen bacteria."
But the nitrogen-fixing process and machinery is pretty complicated and difficult to study in a reductionist fashion. Many components don't work the same outside of the context of the rest of them or outside of the cell itself.
So in this study, scientists (some of whom were involved in sequencing
the first A. vinelandii genome) took a broad approach to the subject, by looking at the expression of all the genes in the organism, comparing their expression when the cells were fixing nitrogen compared to when they weren't.
In addition, they examined the expression of genes when the bacteria were grown with or without certain metals needed for the various nitrogenase versions: molybdenum, vanadium, etc. More specifically:
- To study non-nitrogen-fixing cells: they grew cells with ammonium
- Cells using the molybdenum nitrogenase: they grew cells with molybdenum and no ammonium
- Cells using the vanadium nitrogenase: they grew cells with vanadium and no Mo or ammonium
- Cells using the iron-only nitrogenase: they grew cells with iron and no other metals or ammonium
Simple enough.
Then, to measure levels of expression, they extracted RNA from the cells in each condition, converted the RNA sequences to DNA (called cDNA or complementary DNA, converted from RNA messengers), and then these chunks of DNA were sequenced using a high-throughput technology called SOLiD.
SOLiD (or
Sequencing by
Oligonucleotide
Ligation and
Detection) is one of the main kinds of next-generation sequencing, alongside Roche's 454 pyrosequencing and Illumina. I had to look it up. Apparently one machine these days can sequence 5 trillion bases per day (for reference, the human genome is about 3.2 billion bases long, so SOLiD could sequence more than 1500 human genomes per day). Of course, this is not cheap: that much sequence data would cost about $500,000.
The way it works is by cutting a piece of DNA into short sequences, binding them to tiny magnetic beads so there's one sequence per bead. Then the beads are mixed into an emulsion of oil so that on average, each bead is encased in a small bit of water in a sea of oil, along with reagents needed for polymerase chain reaction (PCR). This allows the DNA on each bead to be copied many times, all at once yet individually, so that many reactions can be done in the volume of liquid that would normally allow only one. Very cool. This is the same technology used to prepare samples for 454 pyrosequencing.
In pyrosequencing, the sequencing is done with DNA polymerase, which is what is normally used to copy DNA, and each base is added one at a time, so each bead will incorporate only the base that fits with the sequence bound to the bead. When a base is added, a tiny bit of light is given off, which a camera in the machine detects and registers it as the base that was added at that time.
However, SOLiD works a bit differently: instead of DNA polymerase, the enzyme is DNA ligase, which links together two strands of DNA. And instead of single bases, short DNA sequences called probes are added, with the two bases at one end known. When one of these matches the bead's sequence, ligase links it up. The probes are labeled with fluorescent molecules, so the next two bases in a sequence can be determined from the color of the fluorescent probe. Then this is cleaved off and another two bases are added. It's somewhat confusing;
this site might help a little.
This system avoids some of the problems that pyrosequencing experiences, such as with accuracy, but has some problems of its own (especially price), so it's useful in some cases and not as much in others.
So what good is sequencing all the cDNA? The number of copies of one cDNA, relative to the copies of others, shows how much the cell is transcribing that gene, which can be an indicator of expression levels (transcribing more may mean that the gene is translated into protein more, so there may be more of that specific protein in the cell). It doesn't always work quite proportionally, since there are mechanisms other than transcription for regulating cellular protein levels, but it can usually provide some interesting data. So they sequenced all the cDNA in the cell and compared the number of copies for each gene to see which ones were present in higher or lower numbers in different growth conditions.
Then after analyzing all this data (a large undertaking in itself) and finding genes that seemed to be expressed at higher or lower levels in the different conditions, the scientists confirmed the most interesting findings using real-time quantitative PCR, which is a more sensitive way of measuring the same information. It works by doing PCR on a gene but adding some kind of fluorescent molecule to detect exactly how much of that sequence is present over time in the PCR. Ideally PCR should double the number of sequences in every round of the reaction, but this doesn't always work exactly, so the most accurate measure is to determine the point at which the fluorescence becomes bright enough that the PCR machine can detect it, and then extrapolate back to figure out how much of the sequence was present at the beginning. It's another way to compare transcription levels.
Ok, finally on to results. The authors found that almost 30% of
A. vinelandii's genes were affected when fixing nitrogen compared to when not doing so. Many of these were affected regardless of which nitrogenase the cells were using. Mo nitrogenase growth affected the most genes on its own compared to the other two, but the two alternative nitrogenases (V and Fe) together affected more genes than any nitrogenase on its own. So overall, compared to non-fixing conditions, the using the alternatives affected many more genes than using the Mo version; but compared to each other, using the alternatives didn't change many genes. Apparently using the alternatives involves a large shift in the cell's gene regulation, compared to using the main Mo nitrogenase. I wonder why.
Genes Expressed When Using Mo Nitrogenase
The
nif genes that make up the Mo nitrogenase are found in two clusters in the genome, one near the beginning (relative to the origin of replication) and one near the end. Some of these genes form the actual enzyme structure itself, some help to put it together with its metal-containing cofactor and such, and some (especially
nifA) regulate the process.
Not surprisingly, the main structural genes increased their expression greatly when the cells switched to nitrogen-fixing mode, between 50 and 150 times higher. The primary dinitrogenase reductase, NifH, increased the most, which fits in with previous observations that a high ratio of this protein to the Mo-containing dinitrogenase allows higher nitrogenase activity.
More surprisingly, other
nif genes in the major cluster only increased expression up to about 14 times more. This could be because not much of their proteins is needed, or possibly that they were already expressed at high levels and their regulation is mostly post-transcriptional, so not much change would be visible in transcript levels. In the minor cluster, some genes necessary for making the metal cofactor increased around 20-fold.
Other than these expected increases, lots of other genes changed as well; not surprising, considering that nitrogen fixation is essential for growth in low-nitrogen environments but is also very energy-intensive. The most significant changes were in type IV pilus genes. These pili, little hairlike projections from the cell, are involved in lots of things: motility, sensing the environment, attachment to surfaces, etc. It's not entirely clear what they're doing in this context, but apparently something.
Another important factor for nitrogen fixation is protecting the nitrogenase from oxygen.
A. vinelandii seems to do this by consuming a lot of carbon in order to reduce whatever oxygen is present, transforming it to water. Its genome has many electron-transporting proteins such as oxidoreductases and terminal oxidases, some of which did appear to be somewhat upregulated in nitrogen-fixing conditions. This could also be useful for producing more energy to power the nitrogenase. The genes for the uptake hydrogenase, which recovers hydrogen produced by the nitrogenase and regenerates some energy from it, also showed increased expression.
There also seems to be a change in some genes associated with iron and sulfur organization, something else that is important for nitrogenase because it contains multiple atoms of these elements. Also, not very surprisingly, the genes related to molybdenum gathering increased also.
Genes Expressed When Using Alternative Nitrogenases
Obviously, the genes that encode the alternative nitrogenases themselves (
vnf genes for the vanadium-containing nitrogenase and
anf genes for the iron-only nitrogenase) are going to be upregulated when these are in use. The V (vanadium) nitrogenase is used when molybdenum is not present but vanadium is, and the Fe nitrogenase is used when neither of these metals is available.
But these alternative systems don't have alternative versions of all of the necessary enzymes for fixing nitrogen, only the main ones, so they share some of the proteins that the Mo nitrogenases uses. This is especially true of enzymes involved in assembling the nitrogenases and their cofactors, such as NifUSVMB.
When vanadium was present,
vnf genes were upregulated, as I said, but in this case, the
vnfH gene encoding the vanadium dinitrogenase reductase wasn't as high relative to the other V nitrogenase components as was the case with the molybdenum nitrogenase. Not sure why. There were some other differences, especially that
vnf homologs of
nif proteins involved in cofactor synthesis were expressed in different proportions, so the process of V-containing cofactor synthesis might be different somehow.
In the case of the iron-only nitrogenase, the
nifH and other components' homologs (
anfH, etc.) were upregulated in the same ratio as the
nif genes, distinct from the
vnf homologs: that is,
anfH was expressed much higher than
anfDK, around four- to five-fold higher.
Of the genes that don't have
anf homologs, some
nif genes were upregulated (
nifUSVMG again), but in other cases the
vnf versions were preferred (
vnfENXY).
vnfH was also upregulated, even though there is a separate
anfH. This is in agreement with other previous studies (
003), and may be because
vnfH has some kind of role in regulating gene expression.
Genes Related to Electron Transport
All of the nitrogenases require electron transport machinery, since the nitrogenase functions by putting electrons (and protons) onto nitrogen gas (N
2) to make ammonia (NH
3). This takes at least eight electrons for each molecule of nitrogen: six for two molecules of ammonia, and two for one molecule of hydrogen as a byproduct. The alternative nitrogenases produce more molecules of hydrogen, so they need even more.
Some of the genes involved are
nifF and
vnfF, which encode proteins called flavodoxins that transport electrons. They may not be necessary to fix nitrogen, but presumably they're helpful. When the cells were using the Mo nitrogenase,
nifF was upregulated, and both were higher when Mo was absent (though
vnfF much more so).
Some other genes that seemed involved included
rnf1 genes, whose products are membrane-bound and also help to transport electrons to nitrogenase; they also seem to be important for the iron-sulfur cofactor of dinitrogenase reductase. And
fix genes also seem important for electron transport. All of these were expressed more when fixing nitrogen in all conditions, but when Mo was absent,
fix genes were much higher than
rnf1 genes.
Regulatory Genes
Clearly
A. vinelandii's nitrogenase system has a lot of regulation going on, so regulatory genes are important.
vnfA and
anfA are necessary to use the alternative nitrogenases, as is
nifA for the primary nitrogenase, and these regulatory genes increased whenever their respective isozyme was in use, though low levels of them were present constantly. Regulation of these genes is likely to be how the cells turn on and off the alternative nitrogenases.
There are a few other homologs of
nifA and
vnfA that show similar patterns, but may fine-tune the regulation somehow (how is not yet known).
Other Differences in Global Expression
As mentioned, the transcriptional profile when using the Mo nitrogenase is very different from when using V or Fe nitrogenases, probably because the latter are less efficient. The most apparent difference in this study was in the
hutU gene, for urocatanase hydratase, which increased greatly when Mo was absent. This gene is necessary to degrade histidine, one of the 20 common amino acids, which makes sense because cells using a less efficient nitrogen-fixing enzyme might want to get nitrogen from other places too, like breaking down some less essential proteins. Similar results have been seen in other diazotrophs.
Also quite interesting, genes for a putative soluble hydrogenase discovered when the genome was sequenced were upregulated, especially when using the Fe nitrogenase. This may be a backup system for recycling the extra hydrogen molecules that these nitrogenases produce, to recover the valuable energy that would otherwise escape.
Some other genes increased also, but the function of their products is as yet unknown. Might be worth investigating.
Comparing expression when using the V nitrogenase vs. the Fe nitrogenase, there was at least one interesting point: there were a few genes near a
vnf operon upregulated during V nitrogenase growth, seemingly related to a transporter system, so they're probably a vanadate transporter.
Evolution of Nitrogenase
There's some debate about which came first in history: the Mo nitrogenase or the alternatives. Since the alternatives are less efficient, it would make some sense if they came first and the Mo nitrogenase just improved on them, especially since Mo and possibly V were probably difficult to find before there was much oxygen in the atmosphere. But no one has discovered a species that has alternative nitrogenases and not the Mo nitrogenase, though there are plenty that have only the latter, and not many that have all three. And this study seems to show that the alternatives evolved from the Mo nitrogenase to allow cells to thrive in environments where Mo is absent, which also makes sense.
So these results are very interesting and potentially useful, and seem to tell us a lot about what's going on inside the cells in different conditions!
Citation: Hamilton, T. L. et al. Transcriptional Profiling of Nitrogen Fixation in Azotobacter vinelandii. J. Bacteriol. 193, 4477–4486 (2011).
