Proteins that act at specific DNA sequences bind DNA randomly and then translocate to the target site. The translocation is often ascribed to the protein sliding along the DNA while maintaining continuous contact with it. Proteins also can move on DNA by multiple cycles of dissociation/reassociation within the same chain. To distinguish these pathways, a strategy was developed to analyze protein motion between DNA sites. The strategy reveals whether the protein maintains contact with the DNA as it transfers from one site to another by sliding or whether it loses contact by a dissociation/reassociation step. In reactions at low salt, the test protein stayed on the DNA as it traveled between sites, but only when the sites were 30 bp at in vivo salt, and over distances of >50 bp at any salt, always included at least one dissociation step. Hence, for this enzyme, 1D sliding operates only over short distances at low salt, and 3D dissociation/reassociation is its main mode of translocation.

EMBO Press is an editorially independent publishing platform for the development of EMBO scientific publications.

The formation of intermolecular DNA triple helices offers the possibility of designing compounds with extensive sequence recognition properties which may be useful as antigene agents or tools in molecular biology. One major limitation of this approach is that these structures are generally restricted to homo-purine. homopyrimidine target sites. This review describes the strategies that have been employed to overcome this drawback and outlines the potential for triplex formation at mixed sequence DNA targets.

Hfq is a bacterial RNA binding protein that facilitates small RNA-mediated posttranscriptional gene regulation. In Vibrio cholerae, Hfq and four Hfq-dependent small RNAs are essential for the expression of virulence genes, but little is known about this mechanism at the molecular level. To better understand V. cholerae Hfq structure and mechanism, we characterized the protein, alongside Escherichia coli Hfq for comparison, using biochemical and biophysical techniques. The N-terminal domain (NTD) of the two proteins is highly conserved, but the C-terminal regions (CTRs) vary in both sequence and length. Small-angle X-ray scattering studies showed that both proteins adopt a star-shaped hexameric structure in which the conserved NTD adopts the expected Sm fold while the variable CTR is disordered and extends radially outwards from the folded core. Despite their structural similarity, SDS-PAGE stability assays and collision-induced dissociation mass spectrometry revealed that the V. cholerae hexamer is less stable than that of E. coli. We propose that this is due to minor differences between the intersubunit interface formed by the NTDs and the ability of the E. coli CTR to stabilize this interface. However, based on electrophoretic mobility shift assays, the divergent CTRs do appear to perform a common function with regard to RNA-binding specificity. Overall, the similarities and differences in the fundamental properties of V. cholerae and E. coli Hfq provide insight into their assembly and molecular mechanisms.

OxyS and RprA are two small noncoding RNAs (sRNAs) that modulate the expression ofrpoS,encoding an alternative sigma factor that activates transcription of multipleEscherichia colistress-response genes. While RprA activatesrpoSfor translation, OxyS down-regulates the transcript. Crucially, the RNA binding protein Hfq is required for both sRNAs to function, although the specific role played by Hfq remains unclear. We have investigated RprA and OxyS interactions with Hfq using biochemical and biophysical approaches. In particular, we have obtained the molecular envelopes of the Hfq–sRNA complexes using small-angle scattering methods, which reveal key molecular details. These data indicate that Hfq does not substantially change shape upon complex formation, whereas the sRNAs do. We link the impact of Hfq binding, and the sRNA structural changes induced, to transcript stability with respect to RNase E degradation. In light of these findings, we discuss the role of Hfq in the opposing regulatory functions played by RprA and OxyS inrpoSregulation.