Open Access

Proteomic analysis of the response of the plant growth-promoting bacterium Pseudomonas putida UW4 to nickel stress

  • Zhenyu Cheng1,
  • Yi-Yun C Wei1,
  • Wilson WL Sung1,
  • Bernard R Glick1 and
  • Brendan J McConkey1Email author
Proteome Science20097:18

DOI: 10.1186/1477-5956-7-18

Received: 19 December 2008

Accepted: 07 May 2009

Published: 07 May 2009

Abstract

Background

Plant growth-promoting bacteria can alleviate the inhibitory effects of various heavy metals on plant growth, via decreasing levels of stress-induced ethylene. However, little has been done to detect any mechanisms specific for heavy metal resistance of this kind of bacteria. Here, we investigate the response of the wild-type plant growth-promoting bacterium Pseudomonas putida UW4 to nickel stress using proteomic approaches. The mutant strain P. putida UW4/AcdS-, lacking a functional 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid deaminase gene, was also assessed for its response to nickel stress.

Results

Two dimensional difference in-gel electrophoresis (DIGE) was used to detect significantly up- or down- regulated proteins (p < 0.05, | ratio | > 1.5) in P. putida in response to the presence of 2 mM Ni. Out of a total number of 1,702 proteins detected on the analytical gels for P. putida UW4, the expression levels of 82 (4.82%) proteins increased significantly while the expression of 81 (4.76%) proteins decreased significantly. Of 1,575 proteins detected on the analytical gels for P. putida UW4/AcdS-, the expression levels of 74 (4.70%) proteins increased and 51 (3.24%) proteins decreased significantly. Thirty-five proteins whose expression was altered were successfully identified by mass spectrometry and sequence comparisons with related species. Nineteen of the identified proteins were detected as differentially expressed in both wild-type and mutant expression profiles.

Conclusion

Functional assessment of proteins with significantly altered expression levels revealed several mechanisms thought to be involved in bacterial heavy metal detoxification, including general stress adaptation, anti-oxidative stress and heavy metal efflux proteins. This information may contribute to the development of plant growth-promoting bacteria mediated phytoremediation processes.

Background

Small amounts of nickel are essential for the functioning of a number of nickel-containing enzymes including hydrogenase, urease, carbon monoxide dehydrogenase, and superoxide dismutase [1]. However, nickel is one of the most common metal contaminants in the environment and is often toxic to bacteria at high concentrations. This toxicity is generally a consequence of nickel binding to sulfhydryl groups of sensitive enzymes or displacing essential metal ions in a variety biological processes [2]. Also, cationic nickel (mostly Ni2+) can cause a significant oxidative stress in bacteria by facilitating of the production of oxidized bis-glutathione, which releases hydrogen peroxide [2]. In bacterial cells, cation efflux-mediated nickel resistance is one of the best-known mechanisms of nickel detoxification [3, 4]. In addition, the up-regulation of genes encoding anti-oxidant enzymes is often the main response of many bacteria to various metals [5]. In this regard, thiol-containing molecules were shown to be capable of detoxifying cadmium in Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae [6] and nickel in human cells [7].

Recently, researchers have attempted to develop metal phytoremediation protocols including the harvesting and combusting of plants grown in metal-contaminated soil, as an alternative to the traditional remediation methods that involve excavation and removal of soil to secured landfill sites. Ideally, the plants used for metal phytoremediation grow rapidly and produce high levels of biomass. Unfortunately, plant growth, even plants that are relatively metal tolerant, is generally inhibited in the presence of high concentrations of metals. One of the strategies that have been used to overcome this problem is the addition of ACC deaminase-containing plant growth-promoting bacteria (PGPB) that can improve plant performance under various environmentally stressful conditions. The pyridoxal phosphate enzyme ACC (1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid) deaminase [EC 4.1.99.4] catalyzes the deamination of ACC to produce α-ketobutyrate and ammonia. ACC is the immediate precursor of the phytohormone ethylene, which becomes elevated as a consequence of various environmental stresses [8, 9] and is an important mediator of plant stress responses. ACC deaminase-containing PGPB attached to plant host surfaces can act as a sink for ACC, thereby allowing plants to maintain a beneficial level of ethylene without the risk of reaching inhibitory levels [8, 9]. By limiting the deleterious ethylene level that might otherwise be generated in plants in response to the presence of high levels of metals, PGPB containing ACC deaminase can dramatically increase plant biomass in the presence of a variety of heavy metals both in the laboratory [1016] and in the field [17, 18]. However, the mutant strain P. putida UW4/AcdS-, which lacks the acdS gene encoding ACC deaminase and is in turn responsible for modulating stress ethylene levels, does not promote plant growth to the same extent [19]. Although it is expected that the reduced impact of the P. putida UW4/AcdS- strain on plant growth is mostly likely due to higher levels of ethylene, the mutant strain was also compared to verify that the P. putida UW4 response to nickel stress was largely independent of the acdS gene.

Proteomic techniques such as 2-D (2 dimensional) gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry may be used to characterize and quantify bacterial responses to environmental stimuli. In particular, DIGE is a method that can be used to accurately quantify protein expression differences under various conditions [20]. Here, differences in expression levels in the proteome of the wild-type PGPB P. putida UW4 and mutant P. putida UW4/AcdS- were examined. This work further facilitates an understanding of the biochemical basis of bacterial resistance to nickel stress, which for P. putida is an important component of its ability to facilitate phytoremediation of heavy metals in soil.

Results

Bacterial growth

The growth rates of wild-type P. putida UW4 and mutant P. putida UW4/AcdS- in rich medium (TSB) without nickel at their optimal growth temperature (30°C) were 0.55 and 0.63 generation/hour, respectively (Table 1). These rates were reduced to 44% and 40% of the control level when growth was in TSB containing 2 mM nickel, and dropped to 15% and 14% in the presence of 5 mM nickel. The inhibitory effects of different concentrations of nickel on the growth rates of the wild type and mutant strains did not notably differ from each other (p > 0.05).
Table 1

The effects of nickel on the growth rates of P. putida UW4 wild-type and mutant strains.

Bacterial strains

P. putida UW4

P. putida UW4/acdS-

Added nickel

0 mM

2 mM

5 mM

0 mM

2 mM

5 mM

Growth rate (h-1)

0.55 ± 0.02

0.24 ± 0.03

0.08 ± 0.01

0.63 ± 0.05

0.25 ± 0.04

0.09 ± 0.01

Growth rate

(% of control)

100

44*

15*

100

40*

14*

* Denotes values determined not to be significantly different between the wild type and the mutant growth rate values by independent t-test (p > 0.05). Growth rates were measured in duplicate.

Protein expression profiles

The expression profiles of wild-type P. putida UW4 and the mutant UW4/AcdS- in response to 2 mM of nickel were analyzed. Of a total of 1,702 proteins detected on the analytical gels for wild-type P. putida UW4, the expression levels of 82 (4.82%) proteins increased significantly and 81 (4.76%) proteins decreased significantly (p < 0.05, | Ratio | > 1.5). Results were similar for the P. putida UW4/AcdS- strain, with 1,575 proteins detected on the analytical gels. In this case, the expression levels of 74 (4.70%) proteins increased significantly and 51 (3.24%) proteins decreased significantly.

Figure 1 (top) shows a representative analytical gel comparing protein expression of wild-type P. putida UW4 in the presence and absence of 2 mM nickel. On this gel, the 2 mM nickel treated sample is labeled with Cy5 (red) and the control labeled with Cy3 (Green), and up- regulated and down- regulated proteins appear as red and green spots respectively. A sample up-regulated protein, general stress protein CTC, is circled in Figure 1. The "spot view" (lower left) shows the enlarged gel area surrounding the highlighted spot for Cy3 and Cy5 channels, with corresponding volume calculations for each channel (lower right). The expression of the highlighted protein was increased 3.56-fold in the presence of nickel compared to the control, as calculated based on peak volume.
Figure 1

(top) An analytical gel comparing protein expression of the bacterium P. putida UW4 exposed to 2 mM of nickel (red) and control (green). (bottom) The "spot view" and the "volume view" from a standard DeCyder analysis showing a sample up-regulated protein, general stress protein CTC.

Mass spectrometric analysis

All protein spots identified as having significant changes expression levels and present in sufficient amounts to be visible on a coomassie-stained preparative gel were excised for mass spectrometric analysis. From the excised protein spots, a total of 35 proteins with significantly differential expression levels were identified by mass spectrometry (Table 2, Figure 2). Although the genomic sequence of P. putida UW4 has not yet been characterized, proteins were able to be identified via homologous proteins primarily from other Pseudomonas strains by the PEAKS software, which combines de novo peptide sequencing with database identifications (Table 2). Among these 35 proteins, the best sequence coverage (50.5%) was obtained from the protein identified as ion/magnesium superoxide dismutase by database match with an homologous P. fluorescens protein. The protein ArsA and the immunodominant antigen B were identified via matches to proteins from Bradyrhizobium and Staphylococcus, respectively.
Figure 2

A preparative gel of P. putida UW4 control proteins. About 1 mg of protein samples were loaded onto IPG 4–7 strip in the first dimension, and separated using 12% SDS-PAGE gel in the second dimension. Proteins spots were visualized by Coomassie staining. The 35 identified and labeled spots are annotated according to the numbering in Table 2.

Table 2

Differentially expressed proteins identified in P. putida UW4 wild-type (WT) and mutant strains, grouped by putative functional role.

Protein*

Accession number

MW(kDa)/pI§

Score/Sequence coverage %

WT Ratio

Mut Ratio

Amino acid metabolism

     

1. ACC deaminase

Q4KK38_PSEF5

35.1/5.37

84.15/9.06

1.58

N/A

2. diaminopimelate decarboxylase

Q3K4R9_PSEPF

45.1/4.97

93.68/10.6

10.3

2.80

3. porphyromonas-type peptidyl-arginine deiminase

Q3KJM1_PSEPF

40.7/4.81

40.07/8.7

2.08

1.54

4. arginine biosynthesis protein

Q3K7U0_PSEPF

42.6/5.16

96.15/8.89

-3.05

-2.48

5. aminotransferase

Q3KG66_PSEPF

43.3/6.01

98.92/19.14

-2.32

-2.87

6. 3-isopropylmalate dehydratase

Q3KF23_PSEPF

24.2/5.39

87.37/35.98

N/S

-1.79

7. anthranilate synthase

Q4K4Z5_PSEF5

54.2/5.08

92.94/15.96

N/S

-3.25

General stress

     

8. universal stress protein

Q4KFC6_PSEF5

16.2/5.95

78.23/20.69

1.99

1.80

9. general stress protein CTC

Q3K6W3_PSEPF

21.2/5.99

98.62/16

3.56

2.08

Transport/efflux

     

10. major outer membrane protein

Q9X4L6_PSEFL

36.5/4.68

90.82/13.08

2.00

2.15

11. outer membrane protein OMP85

Q4KHG8_PSEF5

87.5/5.21

128/20

3.58

1.56

12. porin D

Q48FB5_PSE14

46.9/4.94

60.66/4.32

2.44

3.66

13. ArsA

Q89K44_BRAJA

63.5/5.81

99/4

1.89

1.68

Protein synthesis and folding

     

14. peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase B

Q87YQ0_PSESM

18.2/5.86

71.15/6.59

-1.62

1.55

15. ribosome recycling protein

Q886P0_PSESM

20.4/6.76

46.7/8.65

-2.16

-1.51

16. glutaminyl-tRNA synthetase

Q1IBQ0_9PSED

64.5/5.62

91.43/10.41

-2.29

N/S

Cell cycle and communication

     

17. MinD

Q3KFL9_PSEPF

33.7/5.55

99.17/29.7

-1.59

-1.51

18. DNA-binding protein

Q889U1_PSESM

20.9/5.88

46.84/16.93

-2.27

N/S

19. transcription regulator TraR/DksA family

Q3K6R3_PSEPF

16.8/5.21

62.4/20.41

-1.59

N/S

Anti-oxidative

     

20. thiol specific antioxidant

Q3KD94_PSEPF

17.6/4.99

87.21/30.72

3.38

N/S

21. ferredoxin NADP-reductase

Q48FA2_PSE14

29.6/5.32

97.54/29.73

1.69

1.77

22. GTP-binding protein TypA

Q3KJG5_PSEPF

67.0/5.40

95.1/9.9

2.32

1.5

23. superoxide dismutase

Q3K7N1_PSEPF

22.0/5.56

99.86/50.51

5.62

4.63

24. thioredoxin

Q3K4W0_PSEPF

11.7/5.06

95.81/44.04

19.8

3.41

25. 2-oxo-acid dehydrogenase

Q3KJ49_PSEPF

99.4/5.48

98.77/9.31

N/S

1.73

Other

     

26. ubiquinone dehydrogenase

Q3KA62_PSEPF

25.3/5.16

73.16/22.77

N/S

-1.93

27. thiolase

Q4ZY90_PSEU2

40.4/5.91

89.57/6.89

-1.82

N/S

28. similar to immunodominant antigen B

Q4L351_STAHJ

18.3/5.08

48.52/10.56

29.6

N/S

29. aldo/keto reductase

Q3K722_PSEPF

38.9/5.88

69.66/12.72

-1.61

N/S

30. pterin-4-alpha-carbinolamine dehydratase

Q3KG65_PSEPF

13.3/5.83

99.4/78.81

-2.91

2.08

31. isocitrate dehydrogenase

Q4K9U5_PSEF5

45.3/5.27

99.97/27.75

-1.77

N/S

32. transaldolase

Q3K9H0_PSEPF

33.7/5.66

96.25/15.26

-2.8

N/S

33. dihydrodipicolinate synthase

Q3KGJ2_PSEPF

31.3/5.77

97.86/39.04

-1.83

N/S

34. hypothetical protein

Q3KFH8_PSEPF

55.6/5.51

82.14/5.87

2.01

1.52

35. hypothetical protein

Q3KI45_PSEPF

25.7/5.36

83.22/12.61

N/S

-1.51

* Protein numbering refer to numbers in Figure 2.

† Accession number of top database match from the UniprotKB database.

§MW and pI were calculated from amino acid sequence and compared with gel location.

¶Score and sequence coverage were calculated by PEAKS software except for the underlined value, which used MASCOT scores. All identifications were confirmed using MASCOT MS/MS ion search and/or peptide-fingerprinting and significant matches (p < 0.05) were retained.

‡ Ratios were calculated as R = (treated/control) or R = -(control/treated) for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins respectively. N/S, expression was not significantly altered; N/A, not applicable. All ratios shown are statistically significant (p < 0.05).

The functional annotation of these proteins revealed a variety of cellular functions and can be divided into 7 categories (Table 2). Out of the 35 identified proteins, nineteen were common to both wild-type and the mutant expression profiles. Eleven proteins were identified as having significantly different expression only in the wild-type profile and five proteins had altered expression only in the mutant profile. The "WT ratio" and "Mut ratio" represent the protein expression changes in response to 2 mM nickel.

ACC deaminase was identified in the wild-type P. putida UW4 profile where its expression was increased by 1.58 fold in response to 2 mM nickel (Table 2). Not surprisingly, there was no data available for its expression in the mutant strain P. putida UW4/AcdS- profile since the gene encoding ACC deaminase was deleted in this strain. The largest expression change was in the wild-type P. putida UW4 profile in the protein matching immunodominant antigen B where the increase was nearly 30-fold in response to 2 mM nickel (Table 2). This protein was not detected as significant in the mutant expression profile.

Surprisingly, the expression of peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase B and pterin-4-alpha-carbinolamine dehydratase were altered in opposite directions between the wild-type and mutant profiles, and both had relatively small changes in expression. While it is possible these may represent real differences between the two tested strains, they could simply represent artifacts or false positives within the set false discovery rate of 5%.

The nineteen proteins that were found in both the wild-type and the mutant expression profiles, and were changed in a similar manner in both strains, appear to be related to nickel stress and detoxification. Proteins involved in amino acid synthesis, such as arginine biosynthesis protein and aminotransferase were both down regulated, as was a ribosome-recycling protein, which is also involved in protein synthesis. In addition, MinD, a protein essential for cell division was also down regulated. On the other hand, transport proteins (both import and export), such as major outer membrane protein, outer membrane protein OMP85, porin D and ArsA, were all up regulated. The other up-regulated proteins were categorized as either general stress proteins, such as universal stress protein and general stress protein CTC, or anti-oxidative proteins such as ferredoxin NADP-reductase, GTP-binding protein TypA, superoxide dismutase, and thioredoxin. Among these stress-related proteins, superoxide dismutase expression was increased by 5.62-fold and 4.63-fold in the wild-type and the mutant respectively, and thioredoxin was increased by 19.84-fold in the wild-type and by 3.41-fold in the mutant.

Discussion

In spite of the lack of genomic information regarding P. putida UW4, proteins were identified by mass spectrometric analyses with high confidence. The quantitative proteomic analysis of differential protein expression profiles utilized in this work was effective in identifying both comprehensive and biologically significant bacterial responses to environmental factors.

More specifically, the effects of nickel on growth and protein expression were very similar for wild-type P. putida UW4 and mutant P. putida UW4/AcdS-. Although the growth rate of the mutant strain was slightly faster than the growth rate of the wild-type in the absence of nickel, they decreased to a similar extent in the presence of two different concentrations of nickel. More than half of the identified protein expression changes in the presence of nickel occurred in both wild-type and mutant strains, consistent with the P. putida UW4 ACC deaminase enzyme not having a direct role in the resistance of the bacterium to nickel toxicity. Similar results have been found previously, in which alterations to the non-essential endogenous ACC deaminase gene did not noticeably change the physiology of P. putida UW4 [19, 21]. As expected, ACC deaminase was only present in the wild-type expression profile; it was slightly up regulated in the presence of 2 mM nickel. No other notable changes were observed, suggesting that interactions between nickel response and ACC deaminase activity are minimal.

Interestingly, the expression of the protein spot matched with Q4L351_STAHJ was increased almost 30-fold in the wild-type P. putida UW4 in response to 2 mM nickel (Table 2). The identified match for this protein was a Staphylococcus haemolyticus protein annotated as 'similar to immunodominant antigen B' with a relatively low score (48.52%). S. haemolyticus is not closely related to P. putida UW4, and S. haemolyticus is Gram-positive whereas P. putida UW4 is Gram-negative. However, three peptides were matched with approximately 10% sequence coverage to Q4L351_STAHJ. And the observed molecular weight (18.3 kDa) and pI (5.08) of this protein on the gel matched well with the calculated values of Q4L351_STAHJ protein (18.4 kDa, pI 5.01). In addition, the possibility of S. haemolyticus contamination in the original culture is unlikely since 33 out of 35 proteins were identified as Pseudomonas proteins. The P. putida UW4/AcdS- mutant was constructed by specifically disrupting the ACC deaminase gene using homologous recombination [19], so that is possible that regulation of the this protein may be affected by ACC deaminase, a protein whose expression is regulated by a variety of factors in a complex manner [2224]. Very little is known about the function of this S. haemolyticus protein. An NCBI Blast analysis of this protein found no known homologous proteins in Pseudomonas species, and relatively few related proteins in other Staphylococcus species. Previous work has shown that another immunodominant antigen identified in Burkholderia cepacia functioned as efflux pump [25]. It is likely that the identified protein in P. putida UW4 is also a cell surface protein, and may be involved in import/export functions, but this is conjecture at this point. It is possible that the gene coding for this protein was acquired by P. putida UW4 by lateral gene transfer, a common mechanism for the acquisition of acdS and other genes by pseudomonads [26]. The ArsA protein that was identified via a match to a Bradyrhizobium protein may also have been obtained by P. putida UW4 via a similar mechanism.

As expected, bacterial cells responded to nickel stress by decreasing expression of proteins involved in cellular activities, such as amino acid synthesis, protein synthesis and folding, DNA replication, cell division and cell communication. Proteins involved in these processes were all down regulated when cells were exposed to nickel stress. Proteins involved in general, non-specific importation of metabolites into the cell were up-regulated, although this could possibly result in the intensification of the toxic effects of the nickel.

In addition, bacterial universal stress protein and general stress protein CTC, which were previously reported to be induced by and responsible for the resistance to various stresses [2729], were also up regulated in both strains and presumably participate in the nickel resistance response. An efflux protein ArsA, which is involved in arsenate exportation [3], was also up regulated in both strains. Although it was only one protein of many that are responsible for efflux-mediated detoxification of arsenate, the up regulation of this protein suggests that a similar efflux-mediated mechanism may be involved in nickel detoxification in P. putida UW4.

In Gram-negative bacteria, heavy metal cations can bind to glutathione and the resulting products (bisglutathione complex) tend to react with molecular oxygen to form oxidized bisglutathione, releasing the metal cation and hydrogen peroxide [2]. Since bisglutathione must be reduced in an NADPH-dependent reaction and the released metal cations immediately begin another cycle of binding and oxidation, this can cause considerable oxidative stress. Here, a variety of anti-oxidative proteins were up regulated in both strains in the presence of 2 mM nickel. In particular the expression of thioredoxin was increased almost 20-fold (Table 2). All anti-oxidative proteins that were observed to be up regulated in P. putida UW4 were previously shown to be responsible for anti-oxidative stress and/or up regulated in the presence of the oxidative stress [3037]. Both the numbers of the proteins that were up regulated and the magnitude of their changes suggested that the production of anti-oxidative stress proteins was a major response of P. putida UW4 to the presence of nickel. Other studies have also suggested that these proteins are involved in nickel detoxification [3037].

In this study, two hypothetical proteins with altered expression levels were identified and one of them was up regulated in both the wild-type and mutant. The NCBI Blast search of the hypothetical protein with accession number Q3KFH8_PSEPF matches a number of other hypothetical proteins, but none has been functionally annotated. The other hypothetical protein, with accession number Q3KI45_PSEPF, matches a putative Pseudomonas signal peptide with a 72% identity and a predicted Pseudomonas periplasmic/secreted protein with a 60% identity. In both cases, the hypothetical proteins may be involved in environmental signal transduction. In any event, additional studies focused on these genes may facilitate a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in bacterial heavy metal resistance.

Conclusion

Plant growth promoting bacteria containing ACC deaminase have been previously shown to alleviate the inhibitory effects of various heavy metals on plant growth [816]. However, how the bacteria react to the heavy metals stresses has not been previously characterized. In this work, an examination of the proteome of both the wild-type P. putida UW4 and the mutant P. putida UW4/AcdS- revealed systematic nickel resistance responses of this bacterium including general stress adaptation, anti-oxidative stress and heavy metal efflux, which may be useful in the development of PGPB-mediated phytoremediation protocols.

Methods

Bacterial strains and growth

Pseudomonas putida UW4 was originally isolated from the rhizosphere of common reeds and was initially classified as Pseudomonas sp. [38]. It was later reclassified as Enterobacter cloacae based on fatty acid analysis [39], and more recently as Pseudomonas putida based on 16S rDNA sequence analyses and metabolic activity [26]. The mutant strain P. putida UW4/AcdS- was constructed by disrupting the ACC deaminase gene (acdS). A tetracycline resistance gene was inserted within the coding region of the acdS gene by homologous recombination [19]. The wild-type and mutant strains were cultivated aerobically in Tryptic Soy broth (TSB; Fisher Scientific Co.) or plates at 30°C. An estimate of the tolerance of these bacterial strains to nickel was assessed by culturing them in the presence of 0, 2 or 5 mM nickel.

Bacterial treatment and protein extraction

P. putida UW4 and the mutant were grown to late-log phase in 50 mL of TSB medium or TSB medium supplemented with 2 mM nickel. Bacterial cells were harvested by centrifugation at 8,000 g at 4°C for 10 minutes. The pellets were washed twice with cold water, weighed and then stored at -70°C overnight. The cell pellet was thawed on ice for 15 minutes and resuspended in ice-cold lysis buffer (2 M thiourea, 7 M urea, 4% CHAPS, 30 mM Tris pH 8.5; 5 mL/g wet cells) containing 100 μL of protease inhibitor cocktail (Sigma-Aldrich Canada Ltd., Oakville, Ontario). The cells were then stirred at 4°C for 30 minutes. The lysate was centrifuged at 10,000 g at 4°C for 10 minutes, followed by centrifugation at 150,000 g at 4°C for 90 minutes. The final supernatant was saved as the whole cell extract and stored at -70°C until use.

Proteomic profiling and difference in-gel electrophoresis (DIGE)

The DIGE analyses were performed according to the supplier's instructions (GE Healthcare, Mississauga, ON). Fifty μg of each sample was labeled with 200 pmol of different CyDye DIGE fluors. After labeling, all three samples (internal standard, control sample, treated sample) were mixed together and loaded on Immobiline DryStrips (pH 4–7, 24 cm). Isoelectric focusing was performed using an Ettan IPGphor II (GE Healthcare, Mississauga, ON). The second dimension was run on 12% SDS-PAGE gels and the analytical gels were scanned on a Typhoon 9400 scanner (GE Healthcare, Mississauga, ON). Each analysis was done in triplicate. Differential expression profiles were analyzed using DeCyder V 6.0 software (GE Healthcare, Mississauga, ON). Ratios are based on standardized volumes of protein spots between the Ni-treated and control bacteria. Expression ratios were calculated by the DeCyder software as R = (treated/control) for up-regulated proteins, and calculated as R = -(control/treated) for down-regulated proteins, where a 2-fold up-regulation or down-regulation is represented by 2 and -2, respectively. Statistical significance was calculated using the DeCyder software and corrected for multiple hypothesis testing using the FDR option.

Preparative 2-D gels of samples intended for mass spectrometry, and loaded with 1.0 mg protein were stained overnight with Bio-Safe Coomassie (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) and destained with water. Spots of interest were excised from the gel, the gel pieces were washed with water and destained with 50 mM NH4HCO3/50% acetonitrile (ACN). Proteins were reduced by incubation with 10 mM dithiothreitol in 100 mM NH4HCO3 at 50°C for 30 min, and then alkylated by incubation with 55 mM iodoacetamide in 100 mM NH4HCO3 for 30 min in the dark. After being dehydrated with 100% ACN and air-dried, the gel pieces were rehydrated for ten minutes in a trypsin solution (Promega Corporation, Madison, Wisconsin) in a ratio of approximately 1:10 (w/w) of trypsin:protein. Fifty μL of 50 mM NH4HCO3 (pH 8.0) was added to each gel piece and the proteins were digested at 37°C for 18 hours. The peptides were extracted by vortexing and then concentrated to 10 μL in a Savant SpeedVac. The samples were cleaned using a C-18 ZipTip system (Millipore) and eluted with 5 μL of 50% ACN. One μL of 1% formic acid was added to the eluate to protonate the peptides. Mass spectrometry was performed using a Waters Micromass quadrupole time of flight (Q-TOF) Ultima using nano-spray injection as the sample delivery method. All proteins except one were identified by the PEAKS software 3.1 [40] (Bioinformatics Solutions Inc., Waterloo, ON), which combines auto de novo sequencing and database searching. Within the PEAKS software the parental and fragment mass error were 0.2 Da and 0.1 Da, respectively, and trypsin was set as the digestion enzyme with one missed cleavage allowed. Carbamidomethylation and methionine oxidation were set as the fixed and variable post-translational modifications, respectively. The MASCOT peptide-fingerprinting algorithm [38] was used in parallel with PEAKS, with the same parameters used for the digestion enzyme, post-translational modifications, and missed cleavages as with the PEAKS software. Default peptide tolerances were used. The non-redundant protein sequence database MSDB (Imperial College, London) was used as the target database for PEAKS and MASCOT. MSDB combines sequences from PIR, TrEMBL, GenBank, and SwissProt. MSDB was designed specifically for mass spectrometry applications and is distributed with the MASCOT search engine [41]. Identifications were confirmed using the MASCOT MS/MS ion search and/or peptide-fingerprinting algorithm [41], and only significant hits (p < 0.05) were retained in the list of identifications.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery grants to B.R.G. and B.J.M.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Biology, University of Waterloo

References

  1. Mulrooney SB, Hausinger RP: Nickel uptake and utilization by microorganisms. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2003,27(2–3):239–261.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Valko M, Morris H, Cronin MT: Metals, toxicity and oxidative stress. Curr Med Chem 2005,12(10):1161–1208.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Nies DH: Efflux-mediated heavy metal resistance in prokaryotes. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2003,27(2–3):313–339.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Schmidt T, Schlegel HG: Combined nickel-cobalt-cadmium resistance encoded by the ncc locus of Alcaligenes xylosoxidans 31A. J Bacteriol 1994,176(22):7045–7054.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Hu P, Brodie EL, Suzuki Y, McAdams HH, Andersen GL: Whole-genome transcriptional analysis of heavy metal stresses in Caulobacter crescentus . J Bacteriol 2005,187(24):8437–8449.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Figueira EM, Lima AI, Pereira SI: Cadmium tolerance plasticity in Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae: glutathione as a detoxifying agent. Can J Microbiol 2005,51(1):7–14.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Lynn S, Yu GL, Yan K: Vicinal-thiol-containing molecules enhance but mono-thiol-containing molecules reduce nickel-induced DNA strand breaks. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1999,160(2):198–205.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Glick BR, Penrose DM, Li J: A model for the lowering of plant ethylene concentrations by plant growth-promoting bacteria. J Theor Biol 1998,190(1):63–68.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Stearns JC, Glick BR: Transgenic plants with altered ethylene biosynthesis or perception. Biotechnol Adv 2003,21(3):193–210.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Belimov AA, Hontzeas N, Safronova VI, Demchinskaya SV, Piluzza G, Bullitta S, Glick BR: Cadmium-tolerant plant growth-promoting bacteria associated with the roots of Indian mustard ( Brassica juncea L. Czern.). Soil Biol Biochem 2005,37(2):241–250.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Burd GI, Dixon DG, Glick BR: A plant growth-promoting bacterium that decreases nickel toxicity in seedlings. Appl Environ Microbiol 1998,64(10):3663–3668.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Idris R, Trifonova R, Puschenreiter M, Wenzel WW, Sessitsch A: Bacterial communities associated with flowering plants of the Ni hyperaccumulator Thlaspi goesingense . Appl Environ Microbiol 2004,70(5):2667–2677.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Khan AG: Role of soil microbes in the rhizospheres of plants growing on trace metal contaminated soils in phytoremediation. J Trace Elem Med Biol 2005,18(4):355–364.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Reed ML, Glick BR: Growth of canola ( Brassica napus ) in the presence of plant growth-promoting bacteria and either copper or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Can J Microbiol 2005,51(12):1061–1069.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Safronova VI, Stepanok VV, Engqvist GL, Alekseyev YV, Belimov AA: Root-associated bacteria containing 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase improve growth and nutrient uptake by pea genotypes cultivated in cadmium supplemented soil. Biol Fert Soils 2006,42(3):267–272.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Zhuang X, Chen J, Shim H, Bai Z: New advances in plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria for bioremediation. Environ Int 2007,33(3):406–413.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Farwell AJ, Vesely S, Nero V, Rodriguez H, Shah S, Dixon DG, Glick BR: The use of transgenic canola ( Brassica napus ) and plant growth-promoting bacteria to enhance plant biomass at a nickel-contaminated field site. Plant Soil 2006, 288: 309–318.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Farwell AJ, Vesely S, Nero V, Rodriguez H, McCormack K, Shah S, Dixon DG, Glick BR: Tolerance of transgenic canola plants ( Brassica napus ) amended with plant growth-promoting bacteria to flooding stress at a metal-contaminated field site. Environ Pollut 2007,147(3):540–545.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Li J, Ovakim DH, Charles TC, Glick BR: An ACC deaminase minus mutant of Enterobacter cloacae UW4 no longer promotes root elongation. Curr Microbiol 2000,41(2):101–105.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Westermeier R: Electrophoresis in Practice: A Guide to Methods and Applications of DNA and Protein Separations. Wiley-VCH; 2006.Google Scholar
  21. Cheng Z, Duan J, Hao Y, McConkey BJ, Glick BR: Identification of bacterial proteins mediating the interactions between Pseudomonas putida UW4 and Brassica napus (Canola). Mol Plant Microbe Interact 2009,22(6):686–694.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Glick B, Cheng Z, Czarny J, Duan J: Promotion of plant growth by ACC deaminase-producing soil bacteria. Eur J Plant Pathol 2007,119(3):329–339.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Grichko VP, Glick BR: Identification of DNA sequences that regulate the expression of the Enterobacter cloacae UW4 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid deaminase gene. Can J Microbiol 2000,46(12):1159–1165.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Li J, Glick BR: Transcriptional regulation of the Enterobacter cloacae UW4 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase gene ( acdS ). Can J Microbiol 2001,47(4):359–367.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Wigfield SM, Rigg GP, Kavari M, Webb AK, Matthews RC, Burnie JP: Identification of an immunodominant drug efflux pump in Burkholderia cepacia . J Antimicrob Chemother 2002,49(4):619–624.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Hontzeas N, Richardson AO, Belimov A, Safronova V, Abu-Omar MM, Glick BR: Evidence for horizontal transfer of 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase genes. Appl Environ Microbiol 2005,71(11):7556–7558.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Duche O, Tremoulet F, Glaser P, Labadie J: Salt stress proteins induced in Listeria monocytogenes . Appl Environ Microbiol 2002,68(4):1491–1498.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Gardan R, Duche O, Leroy-Setrin S, Labadie J: Role of ctc from Listeria monocytogenes in osmotolerance. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003,69(1):154–161.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Kvint K, Nachin L, Diez A, Nystrom T: The bacterial universal stress protein: function and regulation. Curr Opin Microbiol 2003,6(2):140–145.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Bittel C, Tabares LC, Armesto M, Carrillo N, Cortez N: The oxidant-responsive diaphorase of Rhodobacter capsulatus is a ferredoxin (flavodoxin)-NADP(H) reductase. FEBS Lett 2003,553(3):408–412.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Bunik VI: 2-Oxo acid dehydrogenase complexes in redox regulation. Eur J Biochem 2003,270(6):1036–1042.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Bunik VI: 2-Oxo acid dehydrogenase complexes of multicellular organisms. Eur J Biochem 2003,270(6):1035.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Culotta VC: Superoxide dismutase, oxidative stress, and cell metabolism. Curr Top Cell Regul 2000, 36: 117–132.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Culotta VC, Yang M, O'Halloran TV: Activation of superoxide dismutases: putting the metal to the pedal. Biochim Biophys Acta 2006,1763(7):747–758.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Kiss E, Huguet T, Poinsot V, Batut J: The typA gene is required for stress adaptation as well as for symbiosis of Sinorhizobium meliloti 1021 with certain Medicago truncatula lines. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 2004,17(3):235–244.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Lee Y, Pena-Llopis S, Kang YS, Shin HD, Demple B, Madsen EL, Jeon CO, Park W: Expression analysis of the fpr (ferredoxin-NADP+ reductase) gene in Pseudomonas putida KT2440. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2006,339(4):1246–1254.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang G, Alamuri P, Maier RJ: The diverse antioxidant systems of Helicobacter pylori. Mol Microbiol 2006,61(4):847–860.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Glick BR: The enhancement of plant growth by free-living bacteria. Can J Microbiol 1995, 41: 109–117.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Shah S, Li J, Moffatt BA, Glick BR: Isolation and characterization of ACC deaminase genes from two different plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Can J Microbiol 1998,44(9):833–843.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Ma B, Zhang K, Hendrie C, Liang C, Li M, Doherty-Kirby A, Lajoie G: PEAKS: powerful software for peptide de novo sequencing by tandem mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 2003,17(20):2337–2342.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  41. Perkins DN, Pappin DJ, Creasy DM, Cottrell JS: Probability-based protein identification by searching sequence databases using mass spectrometry data. Electrophoresis 1999,20(18):3551–3567.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Cheng et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement