Figure 6 Analysis of nikkomycin selleckchem production from 48 to 120 h fermentation

of the wild-type strain (WT), sabR disruption mutant (sabRDM) and SARE deletion strain (SAREDM). Error bars were calculated from three independent samples in each experiment. Discussion Our results revealed that SabR played not only the positive role for nikkomycin biosynthesis but also a negative role for morphological differentiation in S. ansochromogenes. Disruption of sabR BYL719 research buy resulted in the decrease of nikkomycin production, a phenomenon identical to pristinamycin production in spbR disruption mutant of S. pristinaespiralis [15]. However, disruption of arpA led to increased streptomycin biosynthesis in S. griseus [9] and inactivation of the barA led to precocious buy MM-102 virginiamycin biosynthesis in S. virginiae [29]. Different γ-butyrolactone receptors have different effects on the morphological differentiation. SabR and ArpA repressed the morphological differentiation of S. ansochromogenes and S. griseus [8, 24], BarA did not affect the morphological differentiation of S. virginiae. These results reflected that γ-butyrolactone receptors play alternative physiological roles involved in species-specific regulatory systems. In fact, two categories of homologs of autoregulator receptors are found in Streptomyces.

One group is real receptors (ArpA, BarA, FarA and ScbR) in which binding of autoregulator

is confirmed either by direct binding of natural or synthetic ligands or by gel-shift assay using crude culture filtrate [30]; the second group includes regulators (CrpA, CrpB, BarB, BarZ and so on) which show similarity to the first group receptors but lack binding of any autoregulators [31, 32]. The regulators belonging to the second group widely distribute Thiamet G in Streptomyces and are usually involved in control of secondary metabolism and/or morphological differentiation. So far, no γ-butyrolactone or its analogue has been identified in S. ansochromogenes and no any ligands of SabR were found, but SabR could bind to the SARE region without ligand (Figure 4). The lack of SabR binding to its upstream region, in spite of the clear repression on sabR expression and opposite effect on nikkomycin production, implied that SabR belongs to the second group. The demonstration that SabR interacted with the promoter region of sanG supported that ARE existed upstream of genes involved in antibiotic biosynthesis. The results of DNase 1 footprinting showed that SabR protected a sequence similar to those protected by PapR1, TylS and CcaR and provided the experimental evidence that γ-butyrolactone receptors recognized ARE motifs [15]. However, the disability of SabR binding to the upstream region of sabR was unexpected.