Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-rv6c5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-23T12:45:48.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A negative charge at position D+5 of Motif A is critical for function of the major facilitator superfamily multidrug/H+antiporter MdtM – RETRACTED

Subject: Life Science and Biomedicine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2022

Christopher J. Law*
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author. Email: c.law@qub.ac.uk

Abstract

The phenomenon of antimicrobial resistance represents a major public health risk. The activity of integral membrane transporter proteins contributes to antimicrobial resistance in pathogenic bacteria and proton gradient-driven multidrug efflux representatives of the major facilitator superfamily (MFS) of secondary transporters are the dominant antimicrobial efflux proteins in Escherichia coli. In many, but not all, of the characterized MFS multidrug transporters, an aspartic acid residue at position D+5 of the conserved signature Motif A is essential for transport activity. The present work extends those studies to the E. coli MFS multidrug/H+ antiporter MdtM and used a combination of mutagenesis, expression studies, antimicrobial resistance assays, and transport activity measurements to reveal that a negatively charged residue at position D+5 is critical for MdtM transport function.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Result type: Supplementary result, Replication
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Antimicrobial efflux phenotypes of Escherichia coli Δ mdtM cells that overexpressed wild type or mutant MdtM, or GlpT negative control, as determined by IC50 values. (a) IC50 values for chloramphenicol (Cm) as antimicrobial substrate. (b) IC50 values for TPP+ as antimicrobial substrate. In (a) and (b) bars and error bars represent the mean ± standard deviation of eight separate measurements. *, **, and *** denote IC50 values that represent a statistically significant p < .05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001 loss of efflux function, respectively.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Western blot analysis of expression levels of wild type MdtM, GlpT, and MdtM D73 mutants. Protein was visualized via detection of the C-terminal decahistidine tag. Each lane of the gels was loaded with 80 μg of dodecylmaltoside (DDM) detergent-solubilized total membrane protein.

Figure 2

Figure 3. MdtM-dependent TPP+/H+ and chloramphenicol (Cm)/H+ exchange in inverted vesicles. Transport measurements were performed by monitoring the fluorescence quench/dequench of acridine orange upon addition of antimicrobial substrate to inverted vesicles prepared from Escherichia coli TO114 cells that overproduced recombinant wild type or mutant MdtM or, as a control, GlpT. Respiration-dependent generation of ΔpH (acid inside) was established by addition of 2 mM Tris-D-L-lactate as indicated and once the fluorescence quench of acridine orange reached a steady state, substrate was added. Addition of 100 μM carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP) at the time indicated dissipated ΔpH and abolished transport. The traces are representative of experiments performed in triplicate on at least two separate preparations of inverted vesicles.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Western blot analysis of expression levels of wild type MdtM, GlpT, and MdtM D73 mutant protein from inverted vesicle membrane. Protein was visualized via detection of the C-terminal decahistidine tag. Each of the gel lanes was loaded with 80 μg of protein.

Supplementary material: PDF

Law supplementary material

Figure S1

Download Law supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 489.4 KB
Reviewing editor:  Steve Meaney Technological University Dublin - Dublin City Center Campus, School of Biological and Health Sciences, College of Sciences and Health, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
This article has been accepted because it is deemed to be scientifically sound, has the correct controls, has appropriate methodology and is statistically valid, and has been sent for additional statistical evaluation and met required revisions.

Review 1: A negative charge at position D+5 of Motif A is critical for function of the major facilitator superfamily multidrug/H+ antiporter MdtM

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none

Comments

Comments to the Author: Through site-directed mutagenesis, this paper nicely demonstrates that the conserved acidic Asp 73 residue of E. coli MdtM is not irreplaceable, however, a negatively charged amino acid such as glutamic acid is essential for the drug efflux activity of the transporter at this position. This has been well documented by combined experimental results of expression studies, antimicrobial resistance assays and transport activity measurements of MdtM mutants.

Excellent work, clear and concise manuscript which will be of great interest to scientific community working on antimicrobial resistance, but also on membrane transport and membrane proteins.

Presentation

Overall score 5 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
5 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
5 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
5 out of 5

Context

Overall score 5 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
5 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
5 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 5 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
5 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
5 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
5 out of 5

Review 2: A negative charge at position D+5 of Motif A is critical for function of the major facilitator superfamily multidrug/H+ antiporter MdtM

Conflict of interest statement

I declare that I have no conflicts of interest

Comments

Comments to the Author: A hallmark of MFS transporters is the presence of the so-called motif A, which features a highly conserved aspartic residue that in many but not all cases has been shown to be important for transport activity.

Here, Law tests the effect on activity of mutating this aspartic residue in the E. coli multidrug/H+ MFS antiporter MdtM, using both an antibiotic resistance assay and a vesicle-based transport assay.

Both assays show that the aspartic residue is important, and emphasize the role of the charge, since a mutation to glutamate is less detrimental than mutations to either alanine or asparagine.

I have only a few comments:

1)

Line 82: Change ‘vesicles generated E. coli’ to ‘vesicles generated from E. coli’

2)

Fig. 2 shows a control experiment for the assay reported in Fig. 1. Similarly, Fig. 4 shows a control experiment for the assay reported in Fig. 3. I think it would work better to fuse figures 1+2 and fuse figures 3+4. I will let it be up to the author and editor to evaluate if these proposed changes are needed.

3)

Jiang et al. 2013 is cited for proposing that motif A functions in proton transfer and stabilizing the outward facing conformation. Indeed the Jiang et al. paper (and other MFS structure papers) strongly suggests that motif A functions in orchestrating conformational changes (i.e. in ‘gating’) by stabilizing the outward facing conformation. However, I believe that the authors do not propose a role for motif A in proton transfer.

Presentation

Overall score 4.6 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
5 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
4 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
5 out of 5

Context

Overall score 5 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
5 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
5 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 5 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
5 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
5 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of he experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
5 out of 5