However, our data rule-out this possibility in ftnB regulation by showing

the involvement of Fur in the regulation of ftnB under aerobic conditions, where Fnr is inactive. Figure 7 Representation depicting the role of Fur and H-NS in the regulation of ftnB and the tdc operon. H-NS confirmed binding sites and transcriptional repression [31] were compared with our microarray data and Fur repression of hns [29]. Collectively, the data indicate that Fur-dependent activation of ftnB and the tdc operon may be due to the increased expression of H-NS in Δfur, which represses ftnB and the tdc operon. Thus, under Fur active conditions (left panel), hns is repressed by Fur thereby blocking H-NS repression of ftnB and the tdc operon (signified www.selleckchem.com/products/sis3.html by the circle with an “”X”"). While under Fur

inactive conditions (right panel), the overexpression of H-NS results in the repression of ftnB and the tdc operon under anaerobic conditions. H-NS controls diverse functions within the cell and forms complex structures when binding DNA that indicates a selleck screening library central role in DNA topology [109–113]. Similar to Fur, H-NS is a repressor of transcription [31, 34, 35, 114]. This implies that genes controlled by H-NS are regulated by iron through Fur. This interaction also demonstrates interaction between two regulators (Fur and H-NS) functioning in highly conserved physiological events, regulating a potentially toxic, but needed metal and regulating foreign DNA in a concerted manner. Thus, our results provided additional insight into iron-dependent regulation of H-NS. Another gene regulated by Fnr or Fur was the NO· detoxifying flavohemoglobin protein encoded by the hmpA. This gene (hmpA) is repressed by Fnr and contained a putative Fnr binding site, but did not contain a predicted Fur binding site [21, 95, 96]. Previous work determined that Fur was a repressor of hmpA [115]. However, it was later revealed that the reporter fusion was to the Fur repressed iroC and not to the hmpA [116]. Additionally, a previous report did not reveal a role for Fur in regulation of hmpA [97],

while two other studies found a modest effect of Fur science on hmpA expression [98, 117]. NsrR is another repressor of hmpA [97]. Thus, hmpA is repressed by two regulators that contain an iron-sulfur cluster. Despite contradictory reports, increased hmpA expression was detected in Δfur. Our initial hypothesis was that this was due to reduced Fnr function in Δfur. To support this hypothesis, we expected reporter activity to be similar in Δfnr and ΔfurΔfnr backgrounds. However, our results did not support this initial hypothesis since ΔfurΔfnr exhibited ~3.5-fold increased expression compared to Δfnr; indicating that Fur regulation was Fnr-independent. A striking finding was the shared regulation of several genes by Fur and Fnr.