[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Curr Opin Microbiol. 2021 Feb 25;60:96–103. doi: 10.1016/j.mib.2021.01.017

The ever-expanding world of bacterial cyclic oligonucleotide second messengers

Soo hun Yoon 1, Christopher M Waters 1,*
PMCID: PMC8026173  NIHMSID: NIHMS1674732  PMID: 33640793

Abstract

Cyclic dinucleotide (cdN) second messengers are essential for bacteria to sense and adapt to their environment. These signals were first discovered with the identification of 3’−5’, 3’−5’ cyclic di-GMP (c-di-GMP) in 1987, a second messenger that is now known to be the linchpin signaling pathway modulating bacterial motility and biofilm formation. In the past 15 years,three more cdNs were uncovered: 3’−5’, 3’−5’ cyclic di-AMP (c-di-AMP) and 3’−5’, 3’−5’ cyclic GMP-AMP (3’,3’ cGAMP) in bacteria and 2’−5’, 3’−5’ cyclic GMP-AMP (2’,3’ cGAMP) in eukaryotes. We now appreciate that bacteria can synthesize many varieties of cdNs from every ribonucleotide, and even cyclic trinucleotide (ctN) second messengers have been discovered. Here we highlight our current understanding of c-di-GMP and c-di-AMP in bacterial physiology and focus on recent advances in 3’,3’ cGAMP signaling effectors, its role in bacterial phage response, and the diversity of its synthase family.

Keywords: Cyclic di-GMP, Cyclic di-AMP, cyclic GMP-AMP, CD-NTases, second messenger, adaptation

Main text

Elucidating the molecular underpinnings of how bacteria sense and respond to their environment is central to understand their evolution and adaptation. Given their ecological diversity, it is therefore not surprising that bacteria encode a myriad of strategies to respond to ever changing challenges including transcription factors [1, 2], two-component and phosphorelay pathways, [3], mechanosensing [4], and chemotaxis [5]. Of primary importance to environmental sensing and adaptation are second messenger signaling pathways. These pathways recognize and respond to a “first” signal that modulates the activity of a synthesis or degradation enzyme that controls the level of an intracellular signal molecule. Second messengers in bacteria are primarily purine derived modified nucleotides, which exert global regulatory effects by altering transcription, translation, or even protein activity [6]. Second messenger systems have long been recognized as global regulatory networks in bacteria (and all living systems), but we have just begun to fully appreciate their diversity and central importance to many aspects of bacterial physiology. The original second messenger systems discovered include cyclic AMP, which is primarily associated with the regulation of carbon utilization [7, 8] as well as other central traits such as biofilm formation, virulence, and central metabolism [911], and guanine penta/tetraphosphate that drives the bacterial stringent response [12, 13]. However, this review will focus on the more recent additions to this chemical lexicon, cyclic di- and trinucleotide (cdN and ctN) second messengers (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Overview of major bacterial cdNs.

Figure 1.

C-di-GMP is synthesized by GGDEF DGC enzymes and degraded by EAL and HD-GYP PDE enzymes to regulate transitions between biofilm and motility. C-di-AMP, which is synthesized by DACs and degraded by DHH and DHHA1 PDEs, maintains cell osmotic balance by regulating transport of potassium and osmoprotective molecules. 3’,3’ cGAMP produced by cGAS/DncV-like nucleotidyltransferases (CD-NTases) primarily mediates bacterial phage defense, and degraded by both EAL and HD-GYP PDEs. CD-NTase enzymes also make a variety of cdN and ctN second messengers consisting of all ribonucleotides (not shown).

Cyclic di-GMP (c-di-GMP) controls transitions from motility to biofilm formation.

The first described cdN in any living organism is 3’−5’, 3’−5’ c-di-GMP. This second messenger was first identified and characterized by Moshe Benziman’s laboratory studying cellulose biosynthesis in Komagataeibacter xylinus [1416], although the prevalence of this cdN was not widely appreciated until 2000 – 2005 with the advent of bacterial genome sequencing and a renewed interest in understanding the molecular mechanisms that regulate biofilm formation [15]. Analysis of bacterial genomes revealed a widely conserved domain of unknown function that was homologous to Benziman’s c-di-GMP synthases [1719]. This domain, which possess diguanylate cyclase (DGC) activity, was named the “GGDEF” domain for the key amino acids in its active site [20]. The corresponding c-di-GMP phosphodiesterase (PDE) that degrades c-di-GMP was soon shown to be another widely conserved enzymatic domain that was named the “EAL” domain [21, 22]. Moreover, a second PDE domain termed the HD-GYP domain was demonstrated to also degrade c-di-GMP [23]. GGDEF, EAL, and HD-GYP enzymes are present in the vast majority of bacteria, and in addition to being widely conserved, bacterial genomes can encode up to dozens of enzymes involved in c-di-GMP synthesis or degradation [24]. Seminal studies of biofilm formation and motility in Escherichia coli, Vibrio cholerae, Salmonella Typhimurium sp., and development in Caulobacter crescentus demonstrated that c-di-GMP regulated by DGCs and PDEs was associated with the transitions between motile and sessile lifestyles [19, 25, 26].

C-di-GMP signaling enzymes typically are multidomain proteins consisting of an N-terminal sensory domain and a C-terminal enzymatic domain [15]. The N-terminal domain is proposed to bind specific environmental cues that regulate the synthesis and degradation of c-di-GMP, such that in specific environments a sessile lifestyle is initiated or inhibited. Although a handful of environmental cues are known (for example oxygen [27], spermine [28], bile and bicarbonate [29], and reducing conditions [30]), the majority of environmental signals regulating DGCs and PDEs remain to be discovered. Changes in the intracellular concentration of c-di-GMP is sensed by a myriad of transcription factors, riboswitches, and protein complexes whose activity is controlled by directly binding to c-di-GMP [15, 31]. Although classically known as an inducer of biofilm formation and repressor of motility, c-di-GMP functions as a global regulator controlling numerous phenotypes including but not limited to bacterial predation [32], virulence [33], development [34], DNA repair [35], and cell shape [36]. C-di-GMP signaling systems are primarily found in bacteria, although stalk cell formation in the slime mold Dictyostelium discoideum is dependent on c-di-GMP [37].

Cyclic di-AMP (c-di-AMP).

The next cdN to be discovered in 2008 was 3’−5’, 3’−5’ c-di-AMP, first observed to be synthesized by the DNA integrity scanning protein DisA [38]. As excellent reviews of c-di-AMP have been recently published, we will only briefly summarize it here [39, 40]. C-di-AMP is found in many bacterial and archaeal species, and it is notable for having been identified in many gram-positive bacteria not known to use c-di-GMP [41, 42]. C-di-AMP is synthesized by diadenylate cyclase enzymes (DAC) and degraded by PDEs that have a DHH-DHHA1 domain [39]. C-di-AMP has notable differences from c-di-GMP including that mostbacteria encode only one or a few DACs [41], and c-di-AMP is essential in many but not all bacterial species including the Firmicutes [39, 43]. This requirement for growth stems from c-di-AMP as a regulator of cellular osmolarity that controls the import and export of potassium and other osmoprotective molecules [44]. Although the mechanism of this sensing is not fully understood, high extracellular concentrations of potassium increase DAC activity and intracellular c-di-AMP, which then functions to limit potassium uptake while promoting potassium export [4446]. C-di-AMP plays an analogous role in controlling the intracellular concentrations of other water-soluble osmoregulatory molecules such as certain amino acids and sugars [45, 47]. Thus, in the absence of c-di-AMP, cells are not able to appropriately balance their osmotic state. Accordingly, c-di-AMP is not essential in rich media with lower salt concentrations or defined minimal media [44, 48].

Cyclic GMP-AMP, the third cdN in bacteria.

Bacterial 3’−5’, 3’−5’ cGAMP (3’3’cGAMP), the third known cdN was first discovered in 2012 from the El Tor Biotype of Vibrio cholerae, which is the causative agent of the 7th and current cholera pandemic [49]. 3’,3’ cGAMP is synthesized by DncV, which interestingly is encoded on the Vibrio Seventh Pandemic-1 (VSP-1) genomic island that is unique to El Tor [50]. DncV was reported to influence V. cholerae motility and colonization, but the receptor for 3’,3’cGAMP in V. cholerae was unknown [49]. However, we recently demonstrated that 3’,3’ cGAMP directly binds to and activates CapV, a patatin-like phospholipase encoded directly adjacent to dncV on the VSP-1 island. 3’,3’ cGAMP binding to CapV activates this enzyme, leading to degradation of the cell membrane [51]. 3’,3’ cGAMP synthesized by a DncV homolog also modulates biofilm formation in Escherichia coli ECOR1, an animal commensal, suggesting this signal may regulate broader functions [52]. DncV is structurally analogous to the eukaryotic enzyme cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS), and both enzymes evolved from a common ancestor [53]. Together, they belong to a novel protein superfamily termed cGAS/DncV-like nucleotidyltransferase (CD-NTases), which is genetically conserved throughout all bacterial phyla [54, 55]. In stark contrast to DGC and DAC protein families, CD-NTases produce an extensive array of nucleotide signals utilizing all four ribonucleotides to form linear oligonucleotides to cdN and ctN molecules, allowing for specificity and diversity in downstream pathways [55]. In bacteria, recent in vitro studies revealed the first examples of pyrimidine containing cdNs including cyclic UMP-AMP and cyclic di-UMP, and ctNs such as cyclic tri-AMP (cAAA) and cyclic AMP-AMP-GMP (cAAG) [5557].

A bioinformatic analysis by Burroughs et al predicted such nucleotide synthases might participate in biological conflicts [54]. Indeed, Cohen et. al. showed that dncV and capV initiate altruistic suicide by restricting cell growth upon phage infection, thereby aborting phage replication and limiting phage spread within the bacterial population [58]. Furthermore, 3’,3’ cGAMP synthesis by DncV is induced upon phage infection via an unknown mechanism [58]. CD-NTases like DncV are found genetically associated with putative effector proteins that suggest their primary function is phage defense (Figure 2). Such signaling modules were renamed as cyclic oligonucleotide (coN)-based anti-phage signaling systems (CBASS) [58]. Millman et al proposed a classification system that organizes CBASS systems according to their operonic architecture, effector function and dominant signaling nucleotide [59]. However, a major outstanding question is how phage infection modulates nucleotide synthesis by CD-NTases.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

(A) DncV CBASS is used to illustrate general CBASS operonic architecture. (B) General CBASS response pathway. Phage infection and other unknown stimuli activate CD-NTase to synthesize nucleotide signals. An effector is activated by binding the signaling molecule. Ancillary proteins (E2/E1/JAB-like & HORMA/TRIP13-like) are vital to CD-NTase response pathway through undefined interactions. Yellow circles – nucleotide signaling molecules. Gold oval – modifier.

CD-NTases are associated with a variety of putative effectors such as phospholipases, endonucleases, and transmembrane proteins [54, 55]. Patatin-like phospholipases are the most common effector found associated with CD-NTases. Many effector enzymes are fused to putative cdN and ctN sensing domains such as STING and SAVED, and binding of the nucleotide signal to these domains modulates effector function [54, 55, 60]. The SAVED domain, which contains two CRISPR-associated Rossman folds (CARF), binds the specific nucleotide signal produced by their cognate CD-NTase to activate the fused effector function [57]. This was recently demonstrated with the widespread Cap4 endonuclease that is activated after specifically binding to cyclic tri-AMP synthesized by its CD-NTase, CdnD, following phage infection [57].

The majority of CBASS exist as a two gene operon, comprised of a CD-NTase and effector, predicted to confer phage defense (Figure 2) [54, 55]. Many CBASS operons also encode eukaryotic-like ubiquitination or HORMA/TRIP13 ancillary systems predicted to modulate coN synthesis in phage infection [54, 55]. These accessory genes enhance bacterial resistance to more phage in addition to the CD-NTase and its effector [56, 58]. Bacterial HORMA1 initiates cAAG synthesis by binding its associated CD-NTase and TRIP13 dissociates the two [56]. The role of eukaryotic ubiquitination-like systems, however, remains undefined in bacteria. In eukaryotes, cGAS sensitivity to cytosolic DNA is modulated by E3 ubiquitin ligase and deubiquitinase [61]. Thus, a hypothetical function of eukaryotic-like ancillary proteins might be to modulate CD-NTase sensitivity to activating nucleic acids as in cGAS, or inhibitory molecules such as folates in DncV.

The enzymes that degrade 3’,3’ cGAMP remain relatively unstudied although a few examples of 3’,3’ cGAMP PDEs have emerged. 3’,3’ cGAMP is degraded via hydrolysis by the V-cGAP1/2/3s in V. cholerae and PmxA in Myxococcus xanthus, both of which are HD-GYPs [63, 64]. VcEAL is the first 3’,3’ cGAMP specific EAL type PDE encoded by V. cholerae [65]. Unlike the V-cGAP1/2/3 PDEs, VcEAL and PmxA hydrolyze both cdi-GMP and 3’,3’ c-GAMP.

3’,3’ cGAMP and Hypr GGDEFs.

Bacterial 3’3’-cGAMP has also been studied in delta-proteobacteria. Although, in these bacteria 3’3’-cGAMP is not synthesized by a CD-NTase, but by hybrid promiscuous GGDEF (Hypr GGDEF), a GGDEF-like enzyme with active site residue variations that coordinate synthesis of 3’,3’ cGAMP rather than c-di-GMP (Figure 3) [66]. 3’,3’ cGAMP binds riboswitches to modulate iron(III) oxide metal reduction in Geobacter sulfurreducens and mediates osmotic stress response in M. xanthus [66, 67]. Interestingly, in Geobacter c-di-GMP activates biofilm formation and energy production on electrode surfaces, suggesting 3’,3’ cGAMP and c-di-GMP are antagonistic signaling pathways that induce alternative lifestyles in this bacterium [68]. Structural analyses revealed Hypr-GGDEFs have a symmetric active site whose nucleotide product is dependent on substrate availability, in contrast to DncV, which has an asymmetric active site that preferentially binds ATP and GTP as substrates [68, 69]. However, 3’,3’ cGAMP is the major nucleotide signal for both enzymes.

Figure 3. Bacterial 3’3’-cGAMP is synthesized by two distinct mechanisms.

Figure 3.

3’3’ cGAMP is synthesized by DncV or Hypr-GGDEF enzymes using GTP and ATP available in the cell. In DncV systems, 3’,3’ cGAMP modulates cell motility, biofilm formation and phage defense. Hypr-GGDEF enzyme produces 3’,3’ cGAMP which binds riboswitches to control iron oxidation and osmotic stress response in betaproteobacteria. 3’,3’ cGAMP is then broken down via PDEs, which continue to be identified.

2’,3’ cGAMP as an immune modulator.

In human cells, a structural isomer of bacterial 3’3’-cGAMP, 2’−5’, 3’−5’-cGAMP, is synthesized by the CD-NTase cGAS upon binding cytosolic DNA introduced via viral invasion or intracellular damage [70]. 2’3’-cGAMP then activates the STING receptor which upregulates Type I interferon production, leading to an anti-viral or anti-cancer response [7173]. STING is also capable of sensing extracellular c-di-AMP released by the intracellular pathogen Listeria monocytogenes, leading to increased interferon response [42, 73]. A second eukaryotic cdN receptor named RECON, which specifically recognizes adenine containing cdNs, was also recently discovered, suggesting an intricate recognition and response of eukaryotic cells to cdNs [74].

CD-NTase – the newest enzyme family that synthesizes coNs.

In contrast to c-di-AMP and c-di-GMP, 3’,3’ cGAMP regulation and effector functions are not as well described. Given the diversity of CD-NTases, characterization of these signaling modules is an exciting new frontier in understanding the evolution of coN signaling systems across biological kingdoms and its adaptation to modulate specific response pathways in different environments from seawater to human hosts. Many CD-NTases that have been identified do not exhibit nucleotide synthesis activity and their function is unknown. Evidence of CD-NTases mediating signaling pathways vital for cellular adaptation and virulence present novel therapeutic targets amid growing concerns with antibiotic resistance. In theory, abortive infection driven by CBASS can be manipulated to limit infection by human pathogens.

Highlights.

  • Cyclic di- and trinucleotide second messengers are utilized by bacteria to sense and adapt to their environment.

  • 3’−5’, 3’−5’ cyclic di-GMP regulates transitions between biofilm formation and motility, and many additional bacterial behaviors.

  • 3’−5’, 3’−5’ cyclic di-AMP controls osmoregulation in bacteria.

  • CD-NTases synthesize 3’−5’, 3’−5’ cyclic GMP-AMP, and many other cyclicoligonucleotides (coNs), to induce phage defense.

Key questions for the field.

The last fifteen years has witnessed an explosion in our knowledge of cdN and ctN signaling pathways, yet fundamental questions remain.

  1. How do the myriad of c-di-GMP regulated phenotypes contribute to bacterial adaptation to new environments and what are the environmental signals that control intracellular levels of c-di-GMP?

  2. How do changes in potassium uptake control the activity of DACs to synthesize c-di-AMP and are there other environmental signals that influence c-di-AMP concentrations?

  3. How extensive is the diversity of signals produced by CD-NTases and what is the mechanism by which they sense phage infection? Do these systems all function in phage defense or have bacteria evolved to use CD-NTases for other phenotypic adaptation? What is the function of the accessory proteins in CBASS signaling?

  4. With our newfound appreciation of the diversity of signaling molecules, is crosstalk between signaling pathways common as shown for (p)ppGpp and c-di-AMP or c-di-GMP [75, 76]? What are the biological implications of such crosstalk?

  5. Both bacteria, eukaryotes, and to some extent, archaea, all produce and respond to cdN signaling molecules. Are cdNs a molecular language for inter-kingdom signaling?

With the diversity of coN signals, the phenotypes they regulate, and their fundamental impact on bacterial physiology, we eagerly anticipate what new findings will emerge in the next 15 years of research on these centrally important bacterial signaling pathways.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by NIH grants GM109259, GM110444, and AI130554 awarded to CMW.

Footnotes

Declarations of interest: none

Declaration of interests

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

REFERENCES (• special interest, •• outstanding interest)

  • 1.Willson C, Perrin D, Cohn M, Jacob F, and Monod J (1964) Non-Inducible Mutants of the Regulator Gene in the “Lactose” System of Escherichia Coli. J Mol Biol 8, 582–592 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Wilson CJ, Zhan H, Swint-Kruse L, and Matthews KS (2007) The lactose repressor system: paradigms for regulation, allosteric behavior and protein folding. Cell Mol Life Sci 64, 3–16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Laub MT, and Goulian M (2007) Specificity in two-component signal transduction pathways. Annu Rev Genet 41, 121–145 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Persat A, Inclan YF, Engel JN, Stone HA, and Gitai Z (2015) Type IV pili mechanochemically regulate virulence factors in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112, 7563–7568 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Berg HC (2016) The flagellar motor adapts, optimizing bacterial behavior. Protein Sci [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Botsford JL, and Harman JG (1992) Cyclic AMP in prokaryotes. Microbiol Rev 56, 100–122 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Makman RS, and Sutherland EW (1965) Adenosine 3’,5’-Phosphate in Escherichia Coli. J Biol Chem 240, 1309–1314 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.D’Ari R, Jaffe A, Bouloc P, and Robin A (1988) Cyclic AMP and cell division in Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol 170, 65–70 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Fong JC, and Yildiz FH (2008) Interplay between cyclic AMP-cyclic AMP receptor protein and cyclic di-GMP signaling in Vibrio cholerae biofilm formation. J Bacteriol 190, 6646–6659 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Petersen S, and Young GM (2002) Essential role for cyclic AMP and its receptor protein in Yersinia enterocolitica virulence. Infect Immun 70, 3665–3672 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Haseltine WA, and Block R (1973) Synthesis of guanosine tetra- and pentaphosphate requires the presence of a codon-specific, uncharged transfer ribonucleic acid in the acceptor site of ribosomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 70, 1564–1568 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Cashel M, and Gallant J (1969) Two compounds implicated in the function of the RC gene of Escherichia coli. Nature 221, 838–841 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ross P, Weinhouse H, Aloni Y, Michaeli D, Weinberger-Ohana P, Mayer R, Braun S, de Vroom E, van der Marel GA, van Boom JH, and Benziman M (1987) Regulation of cellulose synthesis in Acetobacter xylinum by cyclic diguanylic acid. Nature 325, 279–281 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Romling U, Galperin MY, and Gomelsky M (2013) Cyclic di-GMP: the first 25 years of a universal bacterial second messenger. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 77, 1–52 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Romling U, and Galperin MY (2017) Discovery of the Second Messenger Cyclic di-GMP. Methods Mol Biol 1657, 1–8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ausmees N, Mayer R, Weinhouse H, Volman G, Amikam D, Benziman M, and Lindberg M (2001) Genetic data indicate that proteins containing the GGDEF domain possess diguanylate cyclase activity. FEMS Microbiol Lett 204, 163–167 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Ryjenkov DA, Tarutina M, Moskvin OV, and Gomelsky M (2005) Cyclic diguanylate is a ubiquitous signaling molecule in bacteria: insights into biochemistry of the GGDEF protein domain. J Bacteriol 187, 1792–1798 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Chan C, Paul R, Samoray D, Amiot NC, Giese B, Jenal U, and Schirmer T (2004) Structural basis of activity and allosteric control of diguanylate cyclase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101, 17084–17089 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Hecht GB, and Newton A (1995) Identification of a novel response regulator required for the swarmer-to-stalked-cell transition in Caulobacter crescentus. J Bacteriol 177, 6223–6229 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Schmidt AJ, Ryjenkov DA, and Gomelsky M (2005) The ubiquitous protein domain EAL is a cyclic diguanylate-specific phosphodiesterase: enzymatically active and inactive EAL domains. J Bacteriol 187, 4774–4781 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Christen M, Christen B, Folcher M, Schauerte A, and Jenal U (2005) Identification and characterization of a cyclic di-GMP-specific phosphodiesterase and its allosteric control by GTP. J Biol Chem 280, 30829–30837 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Ryan RP, Fouhy Y, Lucey JF, Crossman LC, Spiro S, He YW, Zhang LH, Heeb S, Camara M, Williams P, and Dow JM (2006) Cell-cell signaling in Xanthomonas campestris involves an HD-GYP domain protein that functions in cyclic di-GMP turnover. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103, 6712–6717 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
  • 23.Galperin MY (2004) Bacterial signal transduction network in a genomic perspective. Environ Microbiol 6, 552–567 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Simm R, Morr M, Kader A, Nimtz M, and Romling U (2004) GGDEF and EAL domains inversely regulate cyclic di-GMP levels and transition from sessility to motility. Mol Microbiol 53, 1123–1134 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Tischler AD, and Camilli A (2004) Cyclic diguanylate (c-di-GMP) regulates Vibrio cholerae biofilm formation. Mol Microbiol 53, 857–869 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Tuckerman JR, Gonzalez G, Sousa EH, Wan X, Saito JA, Alam M, and Gilles-Gonzalez MA (2009) An oxygen-sensing diguanylate cyclase and phosphodiesterase couple for c-di-GMP control. Biochemistry 48, 9764–9774 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Sobe RC, Bond WG, Wotanis CK, Zayner JP, Burriss MA, Fernandez N, Bruger EL, Waters CM, Neufeld HS, and Karatan E (2017) Spermine inhibits Vibrio cholerae biofilm formation through the NspS-MbaA polyamine signaling system. J Biol Chem 292, 17025–17036 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Koestler BJ, and Waters CM (2014) Bile acids and bicarbonate inversely regulate intracellular cyclic di-GMP in Vibrio cholerae. Infect Immun 82, 3002–3014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Hufnagel DA, DePas WH, and Chapman MR (2014) The disulfide bonding system suppresses CsgD-independent cellulose production in Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol 196, 3690–3699 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Hsieh ML, Hinton DM, and Waters CM (2020) Cyclic di-GMP Regulation of Gene Expression. in Microbial Cyclic di Nucleotides (Romling U ed.), Springer Nature, Switzerland. pp [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Hobley L, Fung RK, Lambert C, Harris MA, Dabhi JM, King SS, Basford SM, Uchida K, Till R, Ahmad R, Aizawa S, Gomelsky M, and Sockett RE (2012) Discrete Cyclic di-GMP-Dependent Control of Bacterial Predation versus Axenic Growth in Bdellovibrio bacteriovorus. PLoS Pathog 8, e1002493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Tischler AD, and Camilli A (2005) Cyclic diguanylate regulates Vibrio cholerae virulence gene expression. Infect Immun 73, 5873–5882 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Tschowri N, Schumacher MA, Schlimpert S, Chinnam NB, Findlay KC, Brennan RG, and Buttner MJ (2014) Tetrameric c-di-GMP mediates effective transcription factor dimerization to control Streptomyces development. Cell 158, 1136–1147 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Fernandez NL, Srivastava D, Ngouajio AL, and Waters CM (2018) Cyclic di-GMP Positively Regulates DNA Repair in Vibrio cholerae. J Bacteriol 200 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Fernandez NL, Hsueh BY, Nhu NTQ, Franklin JL, Dufour YS, and Waters CM (2020) Vibrio cholerae adapts to sessile and motile lifestyles by cyclic di-GMP regulation of cell shape. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 117, 29046–29054•
  • 36.Chen ZH, and Schaap P (2012) The prokaryote messenger c-di-GMP triggers stalk cell differentiation in Dictyostelium. Nature 488, 680–683 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Witte G, Hartung S, Buttner K, and Hopfner KP (2008) Structural biochemistry of a bacterial checkpoint protein reveals diadenylate cyclase activity regulated by DNA recombination intermediates. Mol Cell 30, 167–178 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Stulke J, and Kruger L (2020) Cyclic di-AMP Signaling in Bacteria. Annu Rev Microbiol 74, 159–179 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.He J, Yin W, Galperin MY, and Chou SH (2020) Cyclic di-AMP, a second messenger of primary importance: tertiary structures and binding mechanisms. Nucleic Acids Res 48, 2807–2829 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Corrigan RM, and Grundling A (2013) Cyclic di-AMP: another second messenger enters the fray. Nat Rev Microbiol 11, 513–524 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Woodward JJ, Iavarone AT, and Portnoy DA (2010) c-di-AMP secreted by intracellular Listeria monocytogenes activates a host type I interferon response. Science 328, 1703–1705 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Luo Y, and Helmann JD (2012) Analysis of the role of Bacillus subtilis sigma(M) in beta-lactam resistance reveals an essential role for c-di-AMP in peptidoglycan homeostasis. Mol Microbiol 83, 623–639 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Gundlach J, Herzberg C, Kaever V, Gunka K, Hoffmann T, Weiss M, Gibhardt J, Thurmer A, Hertel D, Daniel R, Bremer E, Commichau FM, and Stulke J (2017) Control of potassium homeostasis is an essential function of the second messenger cyclic di-AMP in Bacillus subtilis. Sci Signal 10 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Pham HT, Nhiep NTH, Vu TNM, Huynh TN, Zhu Y, Huynh ALD, Chakrabortti A, Marcellin E, Lo R, Howard CB, Bansal N, Woodward JJ, Liang ZX, and Turner MS (2018) Enhanced uptake of potassium or glycine betaine or export of cyclic-di-AMP restores osmoresistance in a high cyclic-di-AMP Lactococcus lactis mutant. PLoS Genet 14, e1007574. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Zarrella TM, Metzger DW, and Bai G (2018) Stress Suppressor Screening Leads to Detection of Regulation of Cyclic di-AMP Homeostasis by a Trk Family Effector Protein in Streptococcus pneumoniae. J Bacteriol 200 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Schuster CF, Bellows LE, Tosi T, Campeotto I, Corrigan RM, Freemont P, and Grundling A (2016) The second messenger c-di-AMP inhibits the osmolyte uptake system OpuC in Staphylococcus aureus. Sci Signal 9, ra81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Zeden MS, Schuster CF, Bowman L, Zhong Q, Williams HD, and Grundling A (2018) Cyclic di-adenosine monophosphate (c-di-AMP) is required for osmotic regulation in Staphylococcus aureus but dispensable for viability in anaerobic conditions. J Biol Chem 293, 3180–3200•
  • 48.Davies BW, Bogard RW, Young TS, and Mekalanos JJ (2012) Coordinated regulation of accessory genetic elements produces cyclic di-nucleotides for V. cholerae virulence. Cell 149, 358–370 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Hu D, Liu B, Feng L, Ding P, Guo X, Wang M, Cao B, Reeves PR, and Wang L (2016) Origins of the current seventh cholera pandemic. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113, E7730–E7739 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Severin GB, Ramliden MR, Hawver LA, Wang K, Pell ME, Kieninger AK, Khataokar A, O’Hara BJ, Behrmann LV, Neiditch MB, Benning C, Waters CM, and Ng WL (2018) Direct activation of a phospholipase by cyclic GMP-AMP in El Tor Vibrio cholerae. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A in press•
  • 51.Li F, Cimdins A, Rohde M, Jansch L, Kaever V, Nimtz M, and Romling U (2019) DncV Synthesizes Cyclic GMP-AMP and Regulates Biofilm Formation and Motility in Escherichia coli ECOR31. mBio 10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Kranzusch PJ, Wilson SC, Lee AS, Berger JM, Doudna JA, and Vance RE (2015) Ancient Origin of cGAS-STING Reveals Mechanism of Universal 2’,3’ cGAMP Signaling. Mol Cell 59, 891–903 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Burroughs AM, Zhang D, Schaffer DE, Iyer LM, and Aravind L (2015) Comparative genomic analyses reveal a vast, novel network of nucleotide-centric systems in biological conflicts, immunity and signaling. Nucleic Acids Res 43, 10633–10654 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Whiteley AT, Eaglesham JB, de Oliveira Mann CC, Morehouse BR, Lowey B, Nieminen EA, Danilchanka O, King DS, Lee ASY, Mekalanos JJ, and Kranzusch PJ (2019) Bacterial cGAS-like enzymes synthesize diverse nucleotide signals. Nature 567, 194–199••
  • 55.Lau RK, Ye Q, Birkholz EA, Berg KR, Patel L, Mathews IT, Watrous JD, Ego K, Whiteley AT, Lowey B, Mekalanos JJ, Kranzusch PJ, Jain M, Pogliano J, and Corbett KD (2020) Structure and Mechanism of a Cyclic Trinucleotide-Activated Bacterial Endonuclease Mediating Bacteriophage Immunity. Mol Cell 77, 723–733 e726••
  • 56.Lowey B, Whiteley AT, Keszei AFA, Morehouse BR, Mathews IT, Antine SP, Cabrera VJ, Kashin D, Niemann P, Jain M, Schwede F, Mekalanos JJ, Shao S, Lee ASY, and Kranzusch PJ (2020) CBASS Immunity Uses CARF-Related Effectors to Sense 3’−5’- and 2’−5’-Linked Cyclic Oligonucleotide Signals and Protect Bacteria from Phage Infection. Cell 182, 38–49 e17•
  • 57.Cohen D, Melamed S, Millman A, Shulman G, Oppenheimer-Shaanan Y, Kacen A, Doron S, Amitai G, and Sorek R (2019) Cyclic GMP-AMP signalling protects bacteria against viral infection. Nature 574, 691–695••
  • 58.Millman A, Melamed S, Amitai G, and Sorek R (2020) Diversity and classification of cyclic-oligonucleotide-based anti-phage signalling systems. Nat Microbiol 5, 1608–1615 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Morehouse BR, Govande AA, Millman A, Keszei AFA, Lowey B, Ofir G, Shao S, Sorek R, and Kranzusch PJ (2020) STING cyclic dinucleotide sensing originated in bacteria. Nature 586, 429–433•
  • 60.Hu MM, Yang Q, Xie XQ, Liao CY, Lin H, Liu TT, Yin L, and Shu HB (2016) Sumoylation Promotes the Stability of the DNA Sensor cGAS and the Adaptor STING to Regulate the Kinetics of Response to DNA Virus. Immunity 45, 555–569 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Becker SH, and Darwin KH (2017) Bacterial Proteasomes: Mechanistic and Functional Insights. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 81 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Gao J, Tao J, Liang W, Zhao M, Du X, Cui S, Duan H, Kan B, Su X, and Jiang Z (2015) Identification and characterization of phosphodiesterases that specifically degrade 3’3’-cyclic GMP-AMP. Cell Res 25, 539–550 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Wright TA, Jiang L, Park JJ, Anderson WA, Chen G, Hallberg ZF, Nan B, and Hammond MC (2020) Second messengers and divergent HD-GYP phosphodiesterases regulate 3’,3’-cGAMP signaling. Mol Microbiol 113, 222–236•
  • 64.Yadav M, Pal K, and Sen U (2019) Structures of c-di-GMP/cGAMP degrading phosphodiesterase VcEAL: identification of a novel conformational switch and its implication. Biochem J 476, 3333–3353•
  • 65.Hallberg ZF, Wang XC, Wright TA, Nan B, Ad O, Yeo J, and Hammond MC (2016) Hybrid promiscuous (Hypr) GGDEF enzymes produce cyclic AMP-GMP (3’, 3’-cGAMP). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113, 1790–1795 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Kellenberger CA, Wilson SC, Hickey SF, Gonzalez TL, Su Y, Hallberg ZF, Brewer TF, Iavarone AT, Carlson HK, Hsieh YF, and Hammond MC (2015) GEMM-I riboswitches from Geobacter sense the bacterial second messenger cyclic AMP-GMP. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112, 5383–5388 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Hallberg ZF, Chan CH, Wright TA, Kranzusch PJ, Doxzen KW, Park JJ, Bond DR, and Hammond MC (2019) Structure and mechanism of a Hypr GGDEF enzyme that activates cGAMP signaling to control extracellular metal respiration. Elife 8••
  • 68.Zhu D, Wang L, Shang G, Liu X, Zhu J, Lu D, Wang L, Kan B, Zhang JR, and Xiang Y (2014) Structural biochemistry of a Vibrio cholerae dinucleotide cyclase reveals cyclase activity regulation by folates. Mol Cell 55, 931–937 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Sun L, Wu J, Du F, Chen X, and Chen ZJ (2013) Cyclic GMP-AMP synthase is a cytosolic DNA sensor that activates the type I interferon pathway. Science 339, 786–791 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Li X, Shu C, Yi G, Chaton CT, Shelton CL, Diao J, Zuo X, Kao CC, Herr AB, and Li P (2013) Cyclic GMP-AMP synthase is activated by double-stranded DNA-induced oligomerization. Immunity 39, 1019–1031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Schoggins JW, MacDuff DA, Imanaka N, Gainey MD, Shrestha B, Eitson JL, Mar KB, Richardson RB, Ratushny AV, Litvak V, Dabelic R, Manicassamy B, Aitchison JD, Aderem A, Elliott RM, Garcia-Sastre A, Racaniello V, Snijder EJ, Yokoyama WM, Diamond MS, Virgin HW, and Rice CM (2014) Pan-viral specificity of IFN-induced genes reveals new roles for cGAS in innate immunity. Nature 505, 691–695 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Liu H, Moura-Alves P, Pei G, Mollenkopf HJ, Hurwitz R, Wu X, Wang F, Liu S, Ma M, Fei Y, Zhu C, Koehler AB, Oberbeck-Mueller D, Hahnke K, Klemm M, Guhlich-Bornhof U, Ge B, Tuukkanen A, Kolbe M, Dorhoi A, and Kaufmann SH (2019) cGAS facilitates sensing of extracellular cyclic dinucleotides to activate innate immunity. EMBO Rep 20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.McFarland AP, Luo S, Ahmed-Qadri F, Zuck M, Thayer EF, Goo YA, Hybiske K, Tong L, and Woodward JJ (2017) Sensing of Bacterial Cyclic Dinucleotides by the Oxidoreductase RECON Promotes NF-kappaB Activation and Shapes a Proinflammatory Antibacterial State. Immunity 46, 433–445 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Shyp V, Dubey BN, Bohm R, Hartl J, Nesper J, Vorholt JA, Hiller S, Schirmer T, and Jenal U (2020) Reciprocal growth control by competitive binding of nucleotide second messengers to a metabolic switch in Caulobacter crescentus. Nat Microbiol [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Corrigan RM, Bowman L, Willis AR, Kaever V, and Grundling A (2015) Cross-talk between two nucleotide-signaling pathways in Staphylococcus aureus. J Biol Chem 290, 5826–5839 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Ye Q, Lau RK, Mathews IT, Birkholz EA, Watrous JD, Azimi CS, Pogliano J, Jain M, Corbett KD: HORMA domain proteins and a Trip13-like ATPase regulate bacterial cGAS-like enzymes to mediate bacteriophage immunity. Mol Cell 2020, 77:709–722.e7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES