The inner workings of a supposedly simple bacterial cell have turned out to be much more sophisticated than expected.
An in-depth "blueprint" of an apparently minimalist species has revealed details that challenge preconceptions about how genes operate. It also brings closer the day when it may be possible to create artificial life.
Mycoplasma pneumoniae, which causes a form of pneumonia in people, has just 689 genes, compared with 25,000 in humans and 4000 or more in most other bacteria. Now a study of its inner workings has revealed that the bacterium has uncanny flexibility and sophistication, allowing it to react fast to changes in its diet and environment.
"There were a lot of surprises," says Peer Bork, joint head of the structural and computational biology unit at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) in Heidelberg, Germany. "Although it's a very tiny genome, it's much more complicated than we thought."
Master controllor
The biggest shock was that the organism gets by with just eight gene "switches", or transcription factors, compared with more than 50 in other bacteria such as Escherichia coli. Transcription factors are generally thought of as the key components enabling living things to respond to environmental conditions by switching genes on and off.
So how does the cell get by with so few "master controllers"? One possibility is that stretches of "antisense RNA" – basically genes copied back to front – stand in for the transcription factors as gene switches.
An even more intriguing possibility is that chemicals thought to serve as food – such as the sugar-like substance glycerol – are signalling messengers in their own right, helping to fine-tune what the cell does and how it reacts to changes in its environment.
Family surprise
Another unexpected discovery was that bacterial genes grouped together in clumps or families called "operons" don't work as had been thought. The assumption was that if there are four genes in an operon they always work in unison, but the new analyses show that only one, or perhaps two, operate at any one time.
Even more surprising, the proteins the genes make don't necessarily always couple with their nearest neighbours – again contrary to previous assumptions. Instead, they often join up with proteins originating from other, distant operons, vastly increasing the bacterium's flexibility and versatility when faced with a changed environment.
"What we've learned is that if you want to understand any cell and the protein complexes it makes, you can't infer what happens from the order the genes are in," says Anne-Claude Gavin, also at EMBL, who co-led the project.
The protein analysis also revealed that the bacterium compensates for having so few proteins by employing each one in a multitude of functions. "There's lots of moonlighting going on, as each protein has lots of jobs to do," says Bork.
Motor position
The researchers produced a "CT scan" of the bacterium, which shows the positions of some its major molecular "motors", such as ribosome protein factories (see image, above). The image was created by taking an electron tomograph of the bacterium itself.
This initially revealed no more than indistinct blobs. But by using profiles of electron density of similar molecular machines, taken from the scientific literature, and superimposing them on the tomograph image, the researchers were able to identify which blobs were which motors.
The hope is that when the resolution of such images is eventually increased, many of the smaller motors will also be identified, Bork says.
It may even one day be possible to monitor what is going on in real time, establishing exactly how the genes and proteins work together. If this can be achieved, it could help researchers build artificial organisms.
Journal references: Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.1176951 (how M. pneumoniae's 700 genes are coordinated and controlled); DOI: 10.1126/science.1177263 (how the bacterium extracts energy and building materials from food); DOI: 10.1126/science.1176343 (how proteins made by the 689 genes are bolted together to perform functions)
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.
Have your say
As per the title.
There's no patterns in nature. It's spaghetti programming all the way. Patterns you see are a sure sign your on the wrong path.
Of course there are patterns in nature. It's nothing but patterns.
http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/nonlinear/APS/Giants_Causeway.jpg
Patterns are created by the mind that perceives them. They don't exist in their own right, independant of an observer.
If something is too complex for us to easily perceive the underlying order, then we tend to call it 'random', or slightly more correctly, 'chaotic'. That's not to say that there isn't an eventually perceivable 'pattern' behind it all - but until we see the pattern, there isn't one there.
That's spot on, Dann. You can find a pattern in anything if you're intelligent enough. Patterns are in the mind.
Are you saying here reality has no independent existence?
More Zen "Does a tree make a sound if no one is around to hear it fall" speculation, eh?
That's a dark road to venture down, leading to infinitudes of refractory cognition.
The fact is "Mind" DOES exist in "Nature" or reality as it is, so therefore patterns also exist as well. It's a bootstrap structure, I would agree, but that's the way it works. It all works.
If perception is the initial cause, then mind follows in due time, stemming patterns. It may be one link in the great concatenation of being, but that don't mean IT AIN'T IS
This comment breached our terms of use and has been removed.
This comment breached our terms of use and has been removed.
This comment breached our terms of use and has been removed.
All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.
If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.