<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD with MathML3 v1.3 20210610//EN"  "JATS-archivearticle1-3-mathml3.dtd"><article xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">elife</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">eLife</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>eLife</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="electronic" pub-type="epub">2050-084X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">87151</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.87151</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi" specific-use="version">10.7554/eLife.87151.3</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="display-channel"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Genetics and Genomics</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Microbiology and Infectious Disease</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent small RNA regulation of flagella biosynthesis</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" id="author-308078"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>Sahar</given-names></name><contrib-id authenticated="true" contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1360-1297</contrib-id><email>sahar.melamed@mail.huji.ac.il</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref><xref ref-type="other" rid="fund1"/><xref ref-type="other" rid="fund2"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con1"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" id="author-308430"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Aixia</given-names></name><contrib-id authenticated="true" contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0540-5990</contrib-id><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con2"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" id="author-107990"><name><surname>Jarnik</surname><given-names>Michal</given-names></name><contrib-id authenticated="true" contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1269-3508</contrib-id><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con3"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" id="author-308451"><name><surname>Mills</surname><given-names>Joshua</given-names></name><contrib-id authenticated="true" contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3179-5566</contrib-id><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="fn" rid="pa1">†</xref><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con4"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" id="author-308452"><name><surname>Silverman</surname><given-names>Aviezer</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con5"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" id="author-212334"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Hongen</given-names></name><contrib-id authenticated="true" contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6871-8463</contrib-id><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con6"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" id="author-308079"><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>Gisela</given-names></name><contrib-id authenticated="true" contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6698-1241</contrib-id><email>storzg@mail.nih.gov</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="other" rid="fund3"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con7"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/04byxyr05</institution-id><institution>Division of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development</institution></institution-wrap><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Bethesda</named-content></addr-line><country>United States</country></aff><aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/03qxff017</institution-id><institution>Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Institute for Medical Research Israel-Canada, Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem</institution></institution-wrap><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Jerusalem</named-content></addr-line><country>Israel</country></aff><aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/04byxyr05</institution-id><institution>Bioinformatics and Scientific Computing Core, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development</institution></institution-wrap><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Bethesda</named-content></addr-line><country>United States</country></aff></contrib-group><contrib-group content-type="section"><contrib contrib-type="editor"><name><surname>Contreras</surname><given-names>Lydia</given-names></name><role>Reviewing Editor</role><aff><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/00hj54h04</institution-id><institution>The University of Texas at Austin</institution></institution-wrap><country>United States</country></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="senior_editor"><name><surname>Garrett</surname><given-names>Wendy S</given-names></name><role>Senior Editor</role><aff><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/03vek6s52</institution-id><institution>Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health</institution></institution-wrap><country>United States</country></aff></contrib></contrib-group><author-notes><fn fn-type="present-address" id="pa1"><label>†</label><p>Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology, Bremen, Germany</p></fn></author-notes><pub-date publication-format="electronic" date-type="publication"><day>16</day><month>10</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>12</volume><elocation-id>RP87151</elocation-id><history><date date-type="sent-for-review" iso-8601-date="2023-03-08"><day>08</day><month>03</month><year>2023</year></date></history><pub-history><event><event-desc>This manuscript was published as a preprint.</event-desc><date date-type="preprint" iso-8601-date="2023-02-23"><day>23</day><month>02</month><year>2023</year></date><self-uri content-type="preprint" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.05.455139"/></event><event><event-desc>This manuscript was published as a reviewed preprint.</event-desc><date date-type="reviewed-preprint" iso-8601-date="2023-06-08"><day>08</day><month>06</month><year>2023</year></date><self-uri content-type="reviewed-preprint" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.87151.1"/></event><event><event-desc>The reviewed preprint was revised.</event-desc><date date-type="reviewed-preprint" iso-8601-date="2023-10-03"><day>03</day><month>10</month><year>2023</year></date><self-uri content-type="reviewed-preprint" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.87151.2"/></event></pub-history><permissions><ali:free_to_read/><license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/"><ali:license_ref>http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/</ali:license_ref><license-p>This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/">Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication</ext-link>.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="elife-87151-v1.pdf"/><self-uri content-type="figures-pdf" xlink:href="elife-87151-figures-v1.pdf"/><abstract><p>Flagella are important for bacterial motility as well as for pathogenesis. Synthesis of these structures is energy intensive and, while extensive transcriptional regulation has been described, little is known about the posttranscriptional regulation. Small RNAs (sRNAs) are widespread posttranscriptional regulators, most base pairing with mRNAs to affect their stability and/or translation. Here, we describe four UTR-derived sRNAs (UhpU, MotR, FliX and FlgO) whose expression is controlled by the flagella sigma factor σ<sup>28</sup> (<italic>fliA</italic>) in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic>. Interestingly, the four sRNAs have varied effects on flagellin protein levels, flagella number and cell motility. UhpU, corresponding to the 3´ UTR of a metabolic gene, likely has hundreds of targets including a transcriptional regulator at the top flagella regulatory cascade connecting metabolism and flagella synthesis. Unlike most sRNAs, MotR and FliX base pair within the coding sequences of target mRNAs and act on ribosomal protein mRNAs connecting ribosome production and flagella synthesis. The study shows how sRNA-mediated regulation can overlay a complex network enabling nuanced control of flagella synthesis.</p></abstract><kwd-group kwd-group-type="author-keywords"><kwd>Hfq</kwd><kwd>post-transcriptional regulation</kwd><kwd>S10</kwd><kwd>RIL-seq</kwd><kwd>flagella</kwd><kwd>fliA</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group kwd-group-type="research-organism"><title>Research organism</title><kwd><italic>E. coli</italic></kwd></kwd-group><funding-group><award-group id="fund1"><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="FundRef">http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003977</institution-id><institution>Israel Science Foundation</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source><award-id>826/22</award-id><principal-award-recipient><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>Sahar</given-names></name></principal-award-recipient></award-group><award-group id="fund2"><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="FundRef">http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003977</institution-id><institution>Israel Science Foundation</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source><award-id>2859/22</award-id><principal-award-recipient><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>Sahar</given-names></name></principal-award-recipient></award-group><award-group id="fund3"><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="FundRef">http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000002</institution-id><institution>National Institutes of Health</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source><award-id>1ZIAHD001608-32</award-id><principal-award-recipient><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>Gisela</given-names></name></principal-award-recipient></award-group><funding-statement>The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.</funding-statement></funding-group><custom-meta-group><custom-meta specific-use="meta-only"><meta-name>Author impact statement</meta-name><meta-value>σ<sup>28</sup>-Dependent sRNAs fine-tune flagella synthesis, with one sRNA connecting synthesis with metabolism and two sRNAs with opposing effects connecting synthesis with ribosomal protein production through unique binding within coding sequences.</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta specific-use="meta-only"><meta-name>publishing-route</meta-name><meta-value>prc</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1" sec-type="intro"><title>Introduction</title><p>Most bacteria are motile and can swim through liquid and semiliquid environments in large part driven by the flagellum. The highly complex bacterial flagellum consists of three major domains: an ion-driven motor, which can provide torque in either direction; a universal joint called the hook-basal body, which transmits motor torque; and a 20-nm-thick hollow filament tube composed of the flagellin subunit, which acts as a propeller (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib4">Altegoer and Bange, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib61">Nakamura and Minamino, 2019</xref>). The complete flagellum is comprised of many proteins, and the flagellar regulon encompasses more than 50 genes. Flagella are costly for the cell to synthesize, requiring up to ~2% of the cell’s biosynthetic energy expenditure and extensive use of ribosomes (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib77">Soutourina and Bertin, 2003</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib29">Guttenplan and Kearns, 2013</xref>).</p><p>To ensure that flagellar components are made in the order in which they are needed, transcription of the genes in the regulon is activated in a sequential manner in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib36">Kalir et al., 2001</xref>) and <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic> (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib13">Chevance and Hughes, 2008</xref>). The genes can be divided into three groups based on their time of activation: early genes, middle genes, and late genes (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1A</xref>). The FlhDC transcription regulators, encoded by the two early genes, activate the transcription of the middle genes (Class 2), which are required for the hook-basal body. FlhDC also activates transcription of <italic>fliA</italic>, encoding sigma factor σ<sup>28</sup> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>). σ<sup>28</sup> in turn activates transcription of the late genes responsible for completing the flagellum and the chemotaxis system (Class 3). σ<sup>28</sup> additionally increases expression of several of the middle genes (Class 2/3) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>). σ<sup>28</sup> activity itself is negatively regulated by the anti-sigma factor, FlgM, which is transported out of the cell, freeing σ<sup>28</sup>, when the hook-basal body complex is complete (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib76">Smith and Hoover, 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib62">Osterman et al., 2015</xref>). Given the numerous components required at different times and in different stoichiometries during flagellum assembly, various factors can be rate limiting under specific conditions (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib13">Chevance and Hughes, 2008</xref>). The dependence of flagella synthesis on FlhDC and σ<sup>28</sup> generates a coherent feed-forward loop. In this loop, the first regulator (FlhDC) activates the second regulator (σ<sup>28</sup>), and they both additively activate their target genes. This results in prolonged flagellar expression, protecting the flagella synthesis from a transient loss of input signal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib37">Kalir et al., 2005</xref>).</p><fig-group><fig id="fig1" position="float"><label>Figure 1.</label><caption><title>σ<sup>28</sup>-Dependent sRNAs are primarily expressed in log phase.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Overview of the flagellar regulon. The early genes initiate the transcription of the middle genes, including <italic>fliA</italic> which encodes σ<sup>28</sup>. In turn, σ<sup>28</sup> initiates the transcription of the late genes and enhances the transcription of some of the middle genes. For the middle and late genes, only selected operons are shown. The sRNAs analyzed in this study are colored in blue. This model was inspired by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib37">Kalir et al., 2005</xref>. (<bold>B</bold>) Browser images showing levels of UhpU, MotR, FliX, and FlgO sRNAs in total RNA (black) and Hfq co-immunoprecipitation (gray) libraries. Normalized read count ranges are shown in the upper right of each frame. Data analyzed is from (RIL-seq experiment 1, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>). (<bold>C</bold>) Northern blot analysis of total RNA from WT (GSO983) or ∆<italic>fliA</italic> (GSO1068) cells grown to the indicated time points. A full-length transcript (~260 nt) and several processed transcripts, of which one is predominant (UhpU-S,~60 nt), are detected for UhpU, one prominent band (~95 nt) is detected for MotR, one prominent band (~200 nt) is detected for FliX, and two bands close in size (~75 nt) are detected for FlgO. (<bold>D</bold>) Northern blot analysis of WT (GSO983) cells grown to OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.6 and~1.0. RNA was extracted from total lysates as well as samples from co-immunoprecipitation with Hfq, separated on an acrylamide gel, transferred to a membrane, and probed for σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs. A~100 nt FliX band (FliX-S) was revealed immunoprecipitating with Hfq. In (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>D</bold>), RNAs were probed sequentially on the same membrane, and the 5S RNA served as a loading control.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig1-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig1s1" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 1—figure supplement 1.</label><caption><title>Sequences and predicted structures of UhpU, MotR, FliX, and FlgO sRNAs and effect of carbon source on sRNA levels.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Genomic regions of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs. sRNAs sequences are in bold. The two FlgO bands (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1C and D</xref>) likely result from differential processing and the bold sequence corresponds to the higher molecular weight band. Stop codons are indicated in red whereas start codons are indicated in green. The –10 and –35 regions of the <italic>uhpU</italic> and <italic>motR</italic> promoters are in italics and underlined. Regions highlighted in blue reflect the suggested seed sequences (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>) and the regions that base pair with the targets tested in this study for <italic>uhpU</italic>, <italic>motR</italic> and <italic>fliX</italic>. The <italic>uhpU-S</italic> and <italic>fliX-S</italic> sequences are underlined. The <italic>uhpU-M1</italic>, <italic>uhpU-M2</italic>, <italic>motR*</italic>, <italic>motR-M1</italic> and <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutations are labeled in the corresponding sequences. The regions highlighted in gray denote the REP sequences in <italic>fliX</italic>. (<bold>B</bold>) Expression of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs in cells grown in different carbon sources. Total RNA was extracted from WT (GSO983) cells grown to exponential phase (OD<sub>600</sub>~0.6) in LB medium or M63 minimal medium supplemented with 0.2% of glucose, glucose-6-phosphate (G6P), ribose, maltose, or galactose or 0.4% glycerol, separated on an acrylamide gel and sequentially probed for UhpU, MotR, FliX, FlgO and 5S RNAs. This is the same membrane probed for the RbsZ sRNA and 5S RNA (same panel) in Supp. Figure S8A of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>. (<bold>C</bold>) Structures of UhpU-S, MotR, FliX-S and FlgO predicted by mfold (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib98">Zuker, 2003</xref>). Numbering for full-length UhpU and FliX is indicated in parentheses. Base pairing regions are highlighted in blue as in (<bold>A</bold>).</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig1-figsupp1-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig1s2" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 1—figure supplement 2.</label><caption><title>UhpU, MotR, FliX and FlgO levels across growth.</title><p>Expression of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs in cells across growth. Total RNA was extracted from WT (GSO983) cells grown to the indicated time points. RNA was separated on an acrylamide gel and sequentially probed for all four σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs and the 5S RNA. A full-length transcript (~260 nt) and several processed transcripts, of which one is predominant (UhpU-S,~60 nt), are detected for UhpU, one prominent band (~95 nt) is detected for MotR, one prominent band (~200 nt) is detected for FliX, and two close bands close in size (~75 nt) are detected for FlgO.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig1-figsupp2-v1.tif"/></fig></fig-group><p>Given flagella are so costly to produce, synthesis is tightly regulated such that flagellar components are only made when motility is beneficial. Thus, flagellar synthesis is strongly impacted by environmental signals. For instance, flagellar gene expression is decreased in the presence of D-glucose, in high temperatures, high salt, and extreme pH, as well as the presence of DNA gyrase inhibitors (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib73">Shi et al., 1993</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib3">Adler and Templeton, 1967</xref>). The flagellar genes are activated under oxygen-limited conditions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib42">Landini and Zehnder, 2002</xref>) and at various stages of infection (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib22">Erhardt, 2016</xref>). Consequently, transcription of many genes in the flagellar regulon is regulated in response to a range of environmental signals. For example, the transcription of <italic>flhDC</italic> is controlled by at least 13 transcription factors, each of them active under different conditions (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib71">Prüß, 2017</xref>).</p><p>While the activation of flagella synthesis has been examined in some detail, there has been less investigation into the termination of synthesis, which we presume is equally important for the conservation of resources. Additionally, while transcriptional regulation of flagella genes has been studied for many years, the post-transcriptional control of the regulon has only received limited attention. Small RNAs (sRNAs) that can originate from many different genetic loci (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib2">Adams and Storz, 2020</xref>) are key post-transcriptional regulators in bacteria. They usually regulate their targets in trans via limited base-pairing, affecting translation and/or mRNA stability (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib33">Hör et al., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib63">Papenfort and Melamed, 2023</xref>). Many characterized sRNAs are stabilized and their base pairing with targets increased by RNA chaperones, of which the hexameric, ring-shaped Hfq protein has been studied most extensively (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib85">Updegrove et al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib32">Holmqvist and Vogel, 2018</xref>). The only post-transcriptional control by base pairing sRNAs described for the <italic>E. coli</italic> flagellar regulon thus far is negative regulation of <italic>flhDC</italic> by ArcZ, OmrA, OmrB, OxyS (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib19">De Lay and Gottesman, 2012</xref>), and AsflhD (encoded antisense to <italic>flhD</italic>)(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib44">Lejars et al., 2022</xref>), positive regulation of the same mRNA by McaS (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib81">Thomason et al., 2012</xref>), and negative regulation of <italic>flgM</italic> by OmrA and OmrB (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib72">Romilly et al., 2020</xref>). These sRNAs and a few other sRNAs also were shown to affect motility and biofilm formation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib8">Bak et al., 2015</xref>).</p><p>In this study, we characterized four σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs, which were detected with their targets on Hfq through RIL-seq methodology that captures the sRNA-target interactome (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref> and reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib75">Silverman and Melamed, 2023</xref>). These sRNAs originate from the untranslated regions (UTRs) of mRNAs, three of which belong to the flagellar regulon. We identified a wide range of targets for the sRNAs, including genes related to flagella and ribosome synthesis and observed that the sRNAs act on some of these targets by unique modes of action. We also found that three of these sRNAs regulate flagella number and bacterial motility, possibly imposing temporal control on flagella synthesis and integrating metabolic signals into this complex regulatory network.</p></sec><sec id="s2" sec-type="results"><title>Results</title><sec id="s2-1"><title>σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs are expressed sequentially in log phase cells</title><p>Analysis of several different RNA-seq data sets suggested the expression of four σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs in <italic>E. coli</italic>. σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent expression of the sRNAs was detected using ChIP-seq and RNA-seq in a comprehensive analysis of the σ<sup>28</sup> regulon (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>), while the position and nature of the 5´ ends were revealed by a 5´ end mapping study (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib82">Thomason et al., 2015</xref>). Regulatory roles were indicated by binding to other RNAs in RIL-seq data (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib10">Bar et al., 2021</xref>). The four sRNAs originate from the UTRs of protein coding genes (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1B</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1A</xref>). UhpU corresponds to the 3´ UTR of <italic>uhpT</italic>, which encodes a hexose phosphate transporter (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib52">Marger and Saier, 1993</xref>). UhpU is transcribed from its own promoter inside the coding sequence (CDS) of <italic>uhpT</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib82">Thomason et al., 2015</xref>). The other three σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs correspond to the UTRs of the late genes in the flagellar regulon. MotR originates from the 5´ UTR of <italic>motA</italic>, which encodes part of the flagellar motor complex. Based on previous transcription start site analysis, the promoter for <italic>motR</italic> is within the <italic>flhC</italic> CDS and is also the promoter of the downstream <italic>motAB-cheAW</italic> operon (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib82">Thomason et al., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>). FliX originates from the 3´ UTR of <italic>fliC,</italic> which encodes flagellin, the core component of the flagellar filament (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib83">Thomson et al., 2018</xref>). FlgO originates from the 3´ UTR of <italic>flgL</italic>, a gene that encodes a junction protein shown to connect the flagella to the hook in <italic>S. enterica</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib35">Ikeda et al., 1987</xref>). The observation that FliX and FlgO levels decline substantially in RNA-seq libraries treated with 5´ phosphate-dependent exonuclease to deplete processed RNAs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib82">Thomason et al., 2015</xref>), indicates that both of these sRNAs are processed from their parental mRNAs.</p><p>Northern blot analysis confirmed σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent synthesis of these sRNAs since expression was significantly decreased in a mutant lacking σ<sup>28</sup> (Δ<italic>fliA</italic>) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1C</xref>). Given that most σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent mRNAs encode flagella components, the regulation suggests the sRNAs impact flagella synthesis. The northern analysis also showed that the levels of the four σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs are highest in the transition from mid-exponential to stationary phase growth, though there are some differences with UhpU and MotR peaking before FliX and FlgO (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1C</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s2">Figure 1—figure supplement 2</xref>). Since flagellar components are expressed at precise times, the difference in the UhpU and MotR peak times compared to the FliX and FlgO peak times hints at different roles for each of these sRNAs. For UhpU, two predominant bands were observed, a long transcript and a shorter transcript processed from UhpU (denoted UhpU-S), which corresponds to the higher peak in the sequencing data (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1B</xref>). One prominent band was detected for MotR and for FliX, while a doublet was observed for FlgO. Additional higher bands detected by the MotR probe could be explained by RNA polymerase readthrough of the MotR terminator into the downstream <italic>motAB-cheAW</italic> operon, while the additional bands seen for FliX could be explained by alternative processing of the <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA.</p><p>We also examined the levels of the four sRNAs in minimal media (M63) supplemented with different carbon sources (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1B</xref>). Generally, the sRNAs levels in minimal medium are comparable to or slightly higher to the levels in rich media (LB) except in medium with glucose-6-phosphate (G6P), where the levels of UhpU-S are significantly elevated while the levels of full-length UhpU transcript and the other σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs are decreased. These observations suggest an alternative means for UhpU-S generation from the <italic>uhpT</italic> mRNA known to be induced by G6P (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib70">Postma et al., 2001</xref>). We also observe more FliX products, particularly for cells grown in minimal medium with ribose or galactose.</p><p>The predicted structures for the four σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1C</xref>), with strong stem-loops at the 3´ ends, are consistent with the structures of known Hfq-binding sRNAs and the association with Hfq observed in the RIL-seq data (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>). To confirm Hfq binding, we probed RNA that co-immunoprecipitated with Hfq (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1D</xref>). Strong enrichment and fewer background bands were observed for all of the sRNAs; ~260 nt and ~60 nt bands for UhpU and UhpU-S, respectively, a~95 nt band for MotR, a ~200 nt band for FliX and a doublet of ~75 nt bands for FlgO. For FliX, we also detected a second ~100 nt FliX band (denoted FliX-S; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1A</xref>) that corresponds to the 3´ peak in the sequencing data (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1B</xref>) and includes one of the repetitive extragenic palindromic (REP) sequences downstream of <italic>fliC</italic>.</p></sec><sec id="s2-2"><title>σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs impact flagella number and bacterial motility</title><p>To begin to decipher the roles of the four σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs, we constructed plasmids for overexpression of the sRNAs (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2s1">Figure 2—figure supplement 1A</xref>). Given that it was challenging to obtain constructs constitutively overexpressing UhpU because all clones had mutations, this sRNA could only be expressed from a plasmid when controlled by an IPTG-inducible P<sub>lac</sub> promoter (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib28">Guo et al., 2014</xref>), hinting at a critical UhpU role in <italic>E. coli</italic> vitality. The other sRNAs were expressed from a plasmid with the constitutive P<sub>LlacO-1</sub> promoter (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib86">Urban and Vogel, 2007</xref>). We also obtained a plasmid constitutively overexpressing MotR*, a more abundant derivative of MotR identified by chance (TGC at positions 6–8 mutated to GAG; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1A</xref>).</p><p>We tested the effects of overexpressing the sRNAs on flagellar synthesis by determining the number of flagella by electron microscopy (EM) and on bacterial motility by assaying the spread of cells on 0.3% agar plates. The WT <italic>E. coli</italic> strain used throughout the paper is highly motile due to an IS1 insertion in the <italic>crl</italic> gene (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>), thus eliminating expression of a protein that promotes σ<sup>S</sup> binding to the RNA polymerase core enzyme (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib84">Typas et al., 2007</xref>), and resulting in higher expression of the flagellar regulatory cascade (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib68">Pesavento et al., 2008</xref>). However, we also assayed a less motile strain with the restored <italic>crl</italic><sup>+</sup> gene for UhpU and MotR effects on motility, given that no effects were observed with the highly motile <italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup> strain.</p><p>Intriguingly, overexpression of the individual sRNAs had different consequences. UhpU overexpression caused a slight increase in flagella number (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2A</xref>) and a marked increase in motility (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2B</xref>). Overexpression of MotR, particularly MotR*, led to a dramatic increase in the flagella number (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2C</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2s2">Figure 2—figure supplement 2A</xref>) and MotR but not MotR* had a slight effect on motility (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2D</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2s2">Figure 2—figure supplement 2B</xref>). It has been suggested that the run/tumble behavior of bacteria, which affect their swimming, is only weakly dependent on number of flagella (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib54">Mears et al., 2014</xref>), possibly explaining these somewhat contradictory effects on flagella number and motility. In contrast to UhpU and MotR, FliX overexpression led to a reduction in the number of flagella (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2E</xref>), an effect that was even more pronounced in a strain overexpressing FliX-S (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2s2">Figure 2—figure supplement 2C</xref>). Overexpression of FliX-S but not FliX also reduced bacterial motility (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2F</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2s2">Figure 2—figure supplement 2D</xref>). While FliX-S overexpression seems to lead to aflagellated bacteria, we hypothesize that the sRNA is delaying but not eliminating flagella gene expression, explaining why the bacteria are still moderately motile. Some motility phenotypes can be explained by differences in growth rate, but we do not think that this is the case for MotR and FliX as we observed only slight effects on growth upon MotR, MotR*, FliX and FliX-S overexpression (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2s1">Figure 2—figure supplement 1B</xref>). FlgO overexpression did not result in detectable changes in our assays (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2G</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2H</xref>). Together, these results show that the σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs have a range of effects on flagella number and motility, with UhpU and MotR, which are expressed first, increasing both phenotypes and FliX, which is expressed later, decreasing both. Given that MotR* and FliX-S have stronger effects for some phenotypes and provide a bigger dynamic range, these derivatives were included in subsequent assays.</p><fig-group><fig id="fig2" position="float"><label>Figure 2.</label><caption><title>Overexpression of the σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs leads to differences in flagella number and motility.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Moderate increase in flagella number with UhpU overexpression based on EM analysis for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing UhpU. (<bold>B</bold>) Increased motility with UhpU overexpression based on motility in 0.3% agar for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>+</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing UhpU. (<bold>C</bold>) Increase in flagella number with MotR overexpression based on EM analysis for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing MotR. (<bold>D</bold>) Slight increase in motility with MotR overexpression based on motility in 0.3% agar for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>+</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing MotR. (<bold>E</bold>) Reduction in flagella number with FliX overexpression based on EM analysis for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing FliX. (<bold>F</bold>) Reduced motility with FliX overexpression based on motility in 0.3% agar for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing FliX. (<bold>G</bold>) No change in flagella number with FlgO overexpression based on EM analysis for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing FlgO. (<bold>H</bold>) No change in motility with FlgO overexpression based on motility in 0.3% agar for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing FlgO. Cells in (<bold>A</bold>) and (<bold>B</bold>) were induced with 1 mM IPTG. Quantification for all the assays is shown on the right. For (<bold>A</bold>), (<bold>C</bold>), (<bold>E</bold>) and (<bold>G</bold>) quantification of the number of flagella per cell was done by counting the flagella for 20 cells (black dots), and a one-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in flagella number (ns = not significant, **=p &lt; 0.01, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). Each experiment was repeated three times, and one representative experiment is shown. The bottom and top of the box are the 25th and 75th percentiles, the line inside the box is the median, the lower and the upper whiskers represent the minimum and the maximum values of the dataset, respectively. While some differences in cells size and width were observed in the EM analysis, they were not statistically significant. The experiments presented in (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>E</bold>) were carried out on same day, and the same pZE sample is shown. Graphs for (<bold>B</bold>), (<bold>D</bold>), (<bold>F</bold>) and (<bold>H</bold>) show the average of nine biological repeats. Error bars represent one SD, and a one-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in motility (ns = not significant, *=p &lt; 0.05, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). The scales given in (<bold>A</bold>) and (<bold>B</bold>) are the same for all EM images and all motility plates, respectively.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig2-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig2s1" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 2—figure supplement 1.</label><caption><title>Expression of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs from plasmids and the effect of MotR and FliX overexpression on growth.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Expression of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs from plasmids. Total RNA was extracted from WT (GSO983) cells harboring plasmids indicated in the figure and grown to exponential phase (OD<sub>600</sub>~0.2) (with or without 1 mM IPTG for UhpU). RNA was separated on an acrylamide gel and sequentially probed for the indicated sRNA (UhpU, MotR, FliX, or FlgO). Subsequently, the blots were stripped and probed for the control 5S RNA. Higher bands were detected for MotR and FliX expressed from the pZE plasmid, likely due to some terminator readthrough. (<bold>B</bold>) Growth curves of WT (GSO983) harboring indicated plasmids grown in LB medium. Overnight cultures were diluted to OD<sub>600</sub>=0.05 and cell growth was monitored for 440 min by OD<sub>600</sub> measurements.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig2-figsupp1-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig2s2" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 2—figure supplement 2.</label><caption><title>Effects of MotR* and FliX-S overexpression on flagella number and motility.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Increase in flagella number with MotR* overexpression based on EM analysis for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing MotR*. (<bold>B</bold>) No significant change in motility with MotR* overexpression based on motility in 0.3% agar for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>+</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing MotR*. (<bold>C</bold>) Reduction in flagella number with FliX-S overexpression based on EM analysis for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing FliX-S. (<bold>D</bold>) Reduced motility with FliX-S overexpression based on motility in 0.3% agar for WT (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) cells carrying an empty vector or overexpressing FliX-S. The scales given in (<bold>A</bold>) and (<bold>B</bold>) are the same for all EM images and all motility plates, respectively.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig2-figsupp2-v1.tif"/></fig></fig-group></sec><sec id="s2-3"><title>σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs have wide range of potential targets based on RIL-seq analysis</title><p>To understand the phenotypes associated with overexpression of the σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs, we took advantage of the sRNA-target interactome data obtained by RIL-seq (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>). We analyzed the data (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp1">Supplementary file 1</xref>) generated from 18 samples representing six different growth conditions, which included different stages of bacterial growth in rich medium as well as growth in minimal medium and iron-limiting conditions. We selected targets for further characterization if they were detected in the datasets for least four different conditions. The sRNAs differ significantly in their target sets (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3s1">Figure 3—figure supplement 1A</xref>). In general, UhpU is a hub with hundreds of RIL-seq targets. Its target set comprises a wide range of genes, including multiple genes that have roles in flagella synthesis and carbon metabolism. MotR and FliX were associated with fewer targets, but intriguingly, both sets were enriched for genes encoding ribosomal proteins. We also noted that the <italic>fliC</italic> gene encoding flagellin was present in the target sets for UhpU, MotR, and FliX. Although FlgO is one of the most strongly enriched sRNAs upon Hfq purification (ranked fourth in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>), it had the smallest set of targets. Almost none of the targets were found in more than two conditions and only <italic>gatC</italic> was detected in four conditions, hinting FlgO might not act as a conventional Hfq-dependent base-pairing sRNA. Unlike for most characterized sRNA targets, the RIL-seq signal for the sRNA interactions with <italic>fliC</italic> and the ribosomal protein genes is internal to the CDSs (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp1">Supplementary file 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3s1">Figure 3—figure supplement 1B</xref>). Before turning our attention to these unique targets, we first examined the UhpU interaction with a canonical target.</p></sec><sec id="s2-4"><title>UhpU represses expression of the LrhA transcriptional repressor of <italic>flhDC</italic></title><p>We were intrigued to find that the mRNA encoding the transcription factor LrhA, which represses <italic>flhDC</italic> transcription, was among the top RIL-seq interactors for UhpU (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp1">Supplementary file 1</xref>). The signals that activate this LysR-type transcription factor (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib43">Lehnen et al., 2002</xref>), are not known, but the <italic>lrhA</italic> mRNA has an unusually long 371 nt 5´ UTR (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3A</xref>), a feature that has been found to correlate with post-transcriptional regulation (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib2">Adams and Storz, 2020</xref>). The predicted base pairing between UhpU and the <italic>lrhA</italic> 5´-UTR (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3B</xref>) corresponds to the seed sequence suggested for UhpU (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>).</p><fig-group><fig id="fig3" position="float"><label>Figure 3.</label><caption><title>Multiple sRNAs repress LrhA synthesis.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Browser image showing chimeras (in red) for UhpU, ArcZ, RprA and McaS, at the 5´ UTR region of <italic>lrhA</italic>. Blue highlighting indicates position of sRNA-<italic>lrhA</italic> base pairing. Data analyzed is from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>. (<bold>B</bold>) Base-pairing between <italic>lrhA</italic> and UhpU with sequences of mutants assayed. Seed sequence predicted by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref> is underlined. Numbering is from AUG of <italic>lrhA</italic> mRNA and +1 of UhpU sRNA. (<bold>C</bold>) UhpU represses <italic>lrhA-lacZ</italic> fusion based on β-galactosidase assay detecting the levels of <italic>lrhA-lacZ</italic> and <italic>lrhA-M1-lacZ</italic> translational fusions in response to UhpU and UhpU-M1 overexpression. (<bold>D</bold>) UhpU does not affect motility when LrhA is absent, based on motility in 0.3% agar for WT (<italic>crl<sup>+</sup></italic>) cells or Δ<italic>lrhA</italic> cells (GSO1179) carrying an empty vector or overexpressing UhpU. Graph shows the average of three biological repeats, and error bars represent one SD. One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in motility (ns = not significant, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). (<bold>E</bold>) Predicted base-pairing between <italic>lrhA</italic> and ArcZ, RprA or McaS. Numbering is from AUG of <italic>lrhA</italic> mRNA and +1 of indicated sRNAs. (<bold>F</bold>) Down regulation of <italic>lrhA</italic> by ArcZ and RprA but not McaS based on β-galactosidase assay detecting the levels of <italic>lrhA-lacZ</italic> translational fusions in response to ArcZ, RprA and McaS overexpression. For (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>F</bold>), graphs show the average of three biological repeats, and error bars represent one SD. One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in β-galactosidase activity (ns = not significant, ****=p &lt; 0.0001).</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig3-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig3s1" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 3—figure supplement 1.</label><caption><title>Interactomes for σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Circos plots showing σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs targets that were detected in at least four of the six RIL-seq conditions. Each sRNA has a unique pattern of partners. UhpU is hub that binds hundreds of targets, MotR and FliX have smaller datasets and FlgO only has one target even though it is one of the most abundant sRNAs on Hfq. Targets that were examined in this study are labeled on the plots. Circos plots were drawn using R RCircos Package (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib96">Zhang et al., 2013a</xref>). (<bold>B</bold>) Schematic representation of the S10 operon with positions of sRNA binding. sRNAs that have more than 100 chimeras with genes from the S10 operon are shown. Numbers in the brackets represent the number of chimeras. Data analyzed is from (RIL-seq experiment 1, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>).</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig3-figsupp1-v1.tif"/></fig></fig-group><p>To test the effects of UhpU on this target, we fused the 5´ UTR of <italic>lrhA</italic>, which includes the region of the RIL-seq <italic>lrhA</italic>-UhpU chimeras and the predicted base-pairing region, to a <italic>lacZ</italic> reporter (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib49">Mandin and Gottesman, 2009</xref>). UhpU overexpression reduced expression of the chromosomally-encoded P<sub>BAD</sub>-<italic>lrhA-lacZ</italic> reporter (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3C</xref>). A single nucleotide mutation in the base pairing region of <italic>uhpU</italic> (<italic>uhpU-M1</italic>) eliminated UhpU repression of <italic>lrhA-lacZ</italic>, while a complementary mutation introduced into the chromosomal <italic>lrhA-lacZ</italic> fusion (<italic>lrhA-M1</italic>) restored the repression providing direct evidence for UhpU base pairing to <italic>lrhA</italic> leading to repression. Down-regulation of LrhA by UhpU, which is expected to lead to increased FlhDC levels, is in accord with the positive impact of UhpU on motility (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). To test this model, we monitored the effect of UhpU on bacterial motility in a <italic>lrhA</italic> deletion strain compared to a WT strain (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3D</xref>). With UhpU overexpression, motility was increased in the WT background as expected. In contrast, while the ∆<italic>lrhA</italic> strain was more motile, likely due to <italic>flhDC</italic> de-repression, motility was unaltered by high levels of UhpU indicating that significant UhpU effects on motility are mediated by LrhA.</p><p>Interestingly, the RIL-seq data also suggested that <italic>lrhA</italic> directly interacts with other sRNAs such as ArcZ, RprA and McaS (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3A</xref>). Regions of predicted base pairing overlap known seed regions for these sRNAs (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3E</xref>). In translational reporter assays using the <italic>lrhA-lacZ</italic> fusion, both RprA and ArcZ reduced expression, while McaS, despite having the most chimeras, had no effect (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3F</xref>). Possibly the McaS-<italic>lrhA</italic> interaction has other regulatory consequences such as McaS inhibition. Intriguingly, ArcZ, RprA, and LrhA form a complex regulatory network with the general stress response sigma factor σ<sup>S</sup> encoded by <italic>rpoS</italic>, as previous studies showed that LrhA represses the expression of <italic>rprA</italic> and <italic>rpoS</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib69">Peterson et al., 2006</xref>), while ArcZ and RprA increase <italic>rpoS</italic> expression (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib59">Mika and Hengge, 2014</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s2-5"><title>UhpU, MotR and FliX modulate flagellin levels</title><p>The high numbers of chimeras between UhpU, MotR or FliX with the <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA encoding flagellin were striking, particularly between the 3´ end of <italic>fliC</italic> corresponding to FliX (blue) and the 5´ end of <italic>fliC</italic> (red) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4A</xref>). As mentioned above, it was also noteworthy that most of the chimeras were internal to the <italic>fliC</italic> CDS. When we examined the consequences of overexpressing UhpU, MotR, MotR*, FliX or FliX-S on the levels of the flagellin protein, we observed somewhat increased levels of flagellin, both as cytosolic monomers (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4B</xref>) and de-polymerized flagella (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4s1">Figure 4—figure supplement 1A</xref>) with UhpU and MotR* overexpression and reduced levels with FliX or FliX-S overexpression. These differences are reflected in increased levels of the <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA with overexpression of UhpU, particularly in a <italic>crl</italic><sup>+</sup> background, or MotR or MotR*, particularly at OD<sub>600</sub>~0.2 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4C</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4s1">Figure 4—figure supplement 1B</xref>). In contrast, <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels decreased with FliX and FliX-S overexpression (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4C</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4s1">Figure 4—figure supplement 1B</xref>). In general, the impacts of the sRNAs on flagellin protein and <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels are consistent with the increased flagella number and/or motility upon UhpU or MotR overexpression and decreased flagella number upon FliX overexpression. Comparatively, the effects of MotR and MotR* on flagella number and <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels were stronger than the effects on the flagellin protein; possibly increases in flagellin levels are masked by the abundance of the protein.</p><fig-group><fig id="fig4" position="float"><label>Figure 4.</label><caption><title>Multiple sRNAs regulate flagellin synthesis.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Browser image showing chimeras (red and blue) for UhpU, MotR, and FliX at the <italic>fliCX</italic> region. Data analyzed is from (RIL-seq experiment 1, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>). Red and blue lines indicate the RNA in the region is first or second RNA in the chimera, respectively. Blue highlighting indicates position of sRNA-<italic>fliC</italic> base pairing. (<bold>B</bold>) Immunoblot analysis showing UhpU and MotR overexpression leads to increased flagellin levels and FliX overexpression leads to reduced flagellin levels in the cytosol. Flagellin levels were determined by immunoblot analysis using α-FliC antibody. A sample from a ∆<italic>fliC</italic> strain was included as a control given the detection of a cross-reacting band slightly larger than flagellin. The Ponceau S-stained membrane serves as a loading control. Cells were grown with shaking at 180 rpm to OD<sub>600</sub> ~1.0, and cell fractions were separated by a series of centrifugation steps as detailed in Materials and Methods. (<bold>C</bold>) Northern blot analysis showing UhpU and MotR overexpression increases <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels and FliX overexpression reduces <italic>fliC</italic> levels across growth. The 5S RNA served as a loading control. The variation in <italic>fliC</italic> levels in the pBR* and pZE control samples is due to the different strain backgrounds (<italic>crl <sup>+</sup></italic> versus <italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) and the length of membrane exposure to film. (<bold>D</bold>) Predicted base-pairing between <italic>fliC</italic> and UhpU, MotR, or FliX. Seed sequences predicted by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref> or by this study are underlined. Numbering is from AUG of <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA and +1 of indicated sRNAs.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig4-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig4s1" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 4—figure supplement 1.</label><caption><title>Effects of UhpU, MotR* and FliX-S overexpression on flagellin and <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) An expanded view of the immunoblot analysis shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4B</xref>. UhpU and MotR overexpression leads to increased flagellin levels and FliX overexpression leads to reduced flagellin levels. Bacterial cells were fractionated to separate the flagellin cytosolic monomers from the polymerized flagella, and flagellin levels were determined by immunoblot analysis using α-FliC antibody. Numbers below the blots represent the fold change relative to the relevant pZE sample. (<bold>B</bold>) Northern blot analysis showing MotR* overexpression increases <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels and FliX-S overexpression reduces <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels. The 5S RNA served as a loading control. The differences in <italic>fliC</italic> levels in the pZE control samples are due differences in the length of exposure to film.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig4-figsupp1-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig4s2" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 4—figure supplement 2.</label><caption><title>In vitro structural probing of interaction between UhpU, MotR, and FliX sRNAs with <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA.</title><p>In vitro transcribed and <sup>32</sup>P-labeled <italic>fliC</italic> fragments (−70–220 and 171–460 relative to the AUG of the <italic>fliC</italic> open reading frame) were treated with RNase III for 1.5 min or lead for 10 min with or without Hfq and unlabeled UhpU, UhpU-M2, MotR, MotR-M1, FliX-S and FliX-S-M1, and separated, alongside T1 ladder, on sequencing gels. Changes in cleavage patterns due to the presence of an sRNA, which overlap regions of predicted base pairing, are indicated by the thick red brackets. Asterisks mark increased cleavage, possibly suggesting a change in folding, in the presence of either WT or mutant MotR, and the thin red brackets indicate a possible second site of MotR base pairing. Changes in the cleavage patterns due to Hfq binding are indicated by black brackets. Based on more relative cleavage with RNase III and less cleavage with lead, the <italic>fliC</italic><sub>-70 to 220</sub> fragment is more double-stranded than the <italic>fliC</italic><sub>171-460</sub> fragment. Numbering is from AUG of <italic>fliC</italic> CDS.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig4-figsupp2-v1.tif"/></fig></fig-group><p>We predicted base pairing between the three sRNAs and sequences overlapping the RIL-seq peaks internal to the <italic>fliC</italic> CDS (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4D</xref>) and encompassing seed sequences suggested for the sRNAs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>). To test for UhpU, MotR and FliX base pairing with these predicted sequences, we carried out in vitro footprinting with labeled fragments of the <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4s2">Figure 4—figure supplement 2</xref>). Upon cleavage with RNase III and lead, we observed changes in the regions predicted to be involved in base pairing (red brackets) that were dependent on the WT RNAs but not with derivatives carrying mutations in the regions predicted to be involved in base pairing. We also observed Hfq dependent changes (black bracket) in the region from ~+40 to+66 from the <italic>fliC</italic> AUG, which is enriched for ARN motif sequences (AAA, AAT, AAC, AAG, AAC), known to be important for mRNA binding to the distal face of Hfq binding (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib85">Updegrove et al., 2016</xref>). Additionally, we noted that both MotR and the MotR-M1 mutant RNAs led to additional protection at another region (thin red bracket) and increased cleavage (red asterisks) at other positions and suggesting a second region of MotR base pairing with <italic>fliC</italic> as well as MotR-induced structure changes. In general, the differences in cleavage by RNase III (preference for double-stranded RNA) and lead (preference for single-stranded RNA), indicate the <italic>fliC</italic> sequence from ~+40 to~+170 is more structured than the surrounding regions. These differences in secondary structure could be the reasons for positive regulation by UhpU and MotR and negative regulation by FliX but also complicate analysis using standard reporter fusions with compensatory mutations.</p></sec><sec id="s2-6"><title>MotR and FliX modulate the S10 operon</title><p>Given that genes encoding ribosomal proteins were among the top MotR and FliX targets in the RIL-seq data sets and were not detected for many other sRNAs (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp1">Supplementary file 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3s1">Figure 3—figure supplement 1B</xref>), we investigated MotR and FliX regulation of these genes. Several of the top interactions for MotR and FliX in the RIL-seq data mapped to the essential S10 operon, again within the CDSs (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3s1">Figure 3—figure supplement 1B</xref>). The co-transcriptional regulation of the S10 operon has been studied extensively (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib92">Zengel and Lindahl, 1996</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib93">Zengel et al., 2002</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib91">Zengel and Lindahl, 1992</xref>). The leader sequence upstream of the first gene <italic>rpsJ</italic> encoding S10 is bound by the ribosomal protein L4, encoded by the third gene in the operon (<italic>rplD</italic>), causing transcription termination, thus modulating the levels of all the ribosomal proteins in the operon in response to the levels of unincorporated L4. L4 binding also has been shown to specifically inhibit translation of <italic>rpsJ</italic>, an effect that can be genetically distinguished from the L4 effect on transcription termination (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib26">Freedman et al., 1987</xref>).</p><fig-group><fig id="fig5" position="float"><label>Figure 5.</label><caption><title>MotR and FliX base pair with the S10 mRNA leading to upregulation and downregulation, respectively.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Browser image showing MotR chimeras (in red) in S10 leader and <italic>rpsJ</italic> region. Data analyzed is from (RIL-seq experiment 1, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>). Coverage of the region in total RNA-seq libraries is shown for empty vector (pZE) and for pZE-MotR* overexpression (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp2">Supplementary file 2</xref>). The MotR and Hfq binding sites as detected in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s2">Figure 5—figure supplement 2A and B</xref> are highlighted in light blue. (<bold>B</bold>) Base-pairing between <italic>rpsJ</italic> and MotR with sequences of mutants assayed. Predicted MotR seed sequence is underlined. Numbering is from +1 of <italic>rpsJ</italic> mRNA and MotR sRNA. (<bold>C</bold>) MotR induces <italic>rpsJ-gfp</italic> reporter fusion based on reporter assays of <italic>rpsJ-gfp</italic> expressed from pXG10-SF with MotR or MotR* expressed from pZE. (<bold>D</bold>) MotR increases FLAG-tagged S10 levels. 3XFLAG-S10 was expressed from pBAD33 and MotR or MotR* was expressed from pZE. A mutation in MotR eliminates this regulation. 3XFLAG-S10 levels were determined by immunoblot analysis using α-FLAG antibody. The Ponceau S-stained membrane serves as a loading control. (<bold>E</bold>) Changes in RNase III-mediated cleavage of <italic>rpsJ</italic> due to MotR. <sup>32</sup>P-labeled <italic>rpsJ</italic> and <italic>rpsJ</italic>-M1 were treated with lead for 10 min with or without MotR and MotR-M1 and separated on a sequencing gel. Region protected by MotR binding, which overlaps the predicted base pairing sequence, is indicated by the red bracket. Numbering is from +1 of <italic>rpsJ</italic> mRNA. (<bold>F</bold>) Browser image showing FliX chimeras (in red) in the S10 operon. Highlighted in light blue are the base pairing regions between FliX and the S10 operon mRNA. Data analyzed is from (RIL-seq experiment 1, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>). (<bold>G</bold>) Base pairing between <italic>rplC, rpsS, rpsQ,</italic> and FliX with sequences of mutants assayed. FliX seed sequence predicted by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref> is underlined. Numbering is from AUG of indicated CDS and +1 of FliX sRNA. (<bold>H</bold>) Test of FliX interactions with reporter assays of <italic>rplC-gfp</italic>, <italic>rpsS-rplV-gfp,</italic> and <italic>rpsQ-gfp</italic> expressed from pXG10-SF or pXG30-SF and FliX or FliX-S expressed from pZE. (<bold>I</bold>) Changes in RNase III-mediated cleavage of <italic>rpsS</italic> due to FliX-S. <sup>32</sup>P-labeled <italic>rpsS</italic> and <italic>rpsS-M1</italic> were treated with RNase III for 1.5 min with or without FliX-S and FliX-S -M1 and separated on a sequencing gel. Region protected by FliX binding, which overlaps the predicted base pairing sequence, is indicated by the red bracket. Numbering is from AUG of <italic>rpsS</italic> CDS. For (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>H</bold>), the average of three independent measurements is shown. Error bars represent one SD. One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in GFP signal (ns = not significant, *=p &lt; 0.05, **=p &lt; 0.01, ****=p &lt; 0.0001).</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig5-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig5s1" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 5—figure supplement 1.</label><caption><title>Effects of MotR mutants on flagella number and <italic>rpsJ</italic> expression.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) MotR-M1 overexpression does not increase flagella number. Quantification of the number of flagella per cell by EM analysis for WT (GSO983) cells harboring the plasmids as indicated in the figure. One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in flagella number (ns = not significant, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). Box plot and error bars descriptions are as in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>. (<bold>B</bold>) MotR induces <italic>rpsJ-gfp</italic> levels only when the S10 leader and MotR binding sites are present. S10 leader sequence and secondary structure based on <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib93">Zengel et al., 2002</xref> (top). Hfq binding region is highlighted in blue. <italic>rpsJ</italic> start codon is labeled in green. The first boxed letters represent S10 leader terminator, and the second boxed letters represent the Shine-Dalgarno sequence. Lines (middle) represent the parts of the sequences that were assayed in the GFP reporter assay in bottom panel. Reporter assays of various <italic>rpsJ-gfp</italic> fusions expressed from pXG10-SF with MotR* expressed from pZE. One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in GFP signal (ns = not significant, **=p &lt; 0.01, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). (<bold>C</bold>) Northern blot analysis of total RNA from <italic>hfq<sup>+</sup></italic> (GSO614), and <italic>hfqY25D</italic> (GSO1110) grown to OD<sub>600</sub>~0.2. The <italic>hfq+</italic> and <italic>hfqY25D</italic> strains carried pZE and pZE-MotR*. Similar levels of MotR* RNA were detected for the <italic>hfq</italic> +and <italic>hfqY25D</italic> mutant backgrounds. Membranes were probed for MotR and then for 5S RNA as a loading control.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig5-figsupp1-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig5s2" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 5—figure supplement 2.</label><caption><title>In vitro structural probing of interaction between MotR sRNA and <italic>rpsJ</italic> mRNA<italic>,</italic> and FliX sRNA and <italic>rpsS</italic> mRNA.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) In vitro transcribed and <sup>32</sup>P-labeled MotR was treated with RNase T1 for 10 min, lead for 10 min or RNase III for 1.5 min with or without <italic>rpsJ</italic>, <italic>rplC</italic> and Hfq, and separated, alongside OH and T1 ladders, on a sequencing gel. Changes in cleavage pattern due to the presence of <italic>rpsJ</italic>, overlapping region of predicted base pairing, are indicated by thick blue brackets. Thin blue brackets indicate a possible second site of base pairing. Numbering is from +1 of MotR. (<bold>B</bold>) In vitro transcribed and <sup>32</sup>P-labeled S10 leader and <italic>rpsJ</italic> was treated with RNase T1 for 10 min, lead for 10 min or RNase III for 1.5 min with or without MotR, FliX-S and Hfq, and separated, alongside OH and T1 ladders, on a sequencing gel. Changes in the cleavage patterns due to the presence of MotR, overlapping region of predicted base pairing, are indicated by thick red brackets, and changes in the cleavage patterns due to Hfq binding are indicated by black brackets. Numbering is from +1 of <italic>rpsJ</italic> mRNA. (<bold>C</bold>) In vitro transcribed and <sup>32</sup>P-labeled FliX-S (with extra 3 nt on its 5´ end as specified in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref>) was treated with RNase T1 for 10 min, lead for 10 min or RNase III for 1.5 min with or without <italic>rpsS</italic>, <italic>rpsJ</italic>, <italic>rplC</italic> and Hfq, and separated, alongside OH and T1 ladders, on a sequencing gel. Changes in the cleavage patterns due to the presence of <italic>rpsS</italic>, overlapping region of predicted base pairing, are indicated by thick blue brackets. Numbering is from +1 of FliX. (<bold>D</bold>) In vitro transcribed and <sup>32</sup>P-labeled <italic>rpsS</italic> was treated with RNase T1 for 10 min, lead for 10 min or RNase III for 1.5 min with or without MotR, FliX-S and Hfq, and separated, alongside OH and T1 ladders, on a sequencing gel. Changes in the cleavage patterns due to the presence of FliX-S, overlapping region of predicted base pairing, are indicated by thick red brackets. Numbering is from AUG of <italic>rpsS</italic> CDS.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig5-figsupp2-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig5s3" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 5—figure supplement 3.</label><caption><title>In vivo effects of FliX and FliX-S overproduction on <italic>rpsS</italic> mRNA.</title><p>Total RNA was extracted from a WT strain (GSO983) harboring the indicated plasmids grown to OD<sub>600</sub>~0.6 and then subject to primer extension analysis using a primer hybridizing downstream of FliX binding site on the <italic>rpsS</italic> mRNA.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig5-figsupp3-v1.tif"/></fig></fig-group><p>To test for MotR regulation of <italic>rpsJ</italic> expression, we fused the S10 leader and part of the <italic>rpsJ</italic> CDS, including the position of the <italic>rpsJ</italic>-MotR chimeras (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5A</xref>) and the region of predicted base-pairing (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5B</xref>), to a GFP reporter (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib16">Corcoran et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib87">Urban and Vogel, 2009</xref>). MotR overexpression elevated the expression of the <italic>rpsJ-gfp</italic> fusion, and MotR* enhanced this effect (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5C</xref>). Positive regulation of S10 expression by MotR and MotR* was similarly observed by immunoblot analysis of an N-terminal FLAG-tagged S10 protein encoded along with the S10 leader behind the heterologous promoter on a pBAD plasmid (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5D</xref>). A mutation in the MotR seed sequence (MotR-M1 and MotR*-M1, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1A</xref>) eliminated the up-regulation of the FLAG-tagged S10 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5D</xref>) and the MotR effect on flagella number (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s1">Figure 5—figure supplement 1A</xref>). To examine base pairing between MotR and the sequences internal to the <italic>rpsJ</italic> CDS, we carried out in vitro structure probing in the presence of Hfq (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5E</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s2">Figure 5—figure supplement 2A and B</xref>). The RNase T1, RNase III and lead cleavage assays supported the position of the predicted base-pairing between MotR and <italic>rpsJ</italic> mRNA (red and blue brackets), indicating MotR binds to <italic>rpsJ</italic> at ~+150 nt in its CDS. Again, we detected Hfq binding (black bracket), here to the attenuator hairpin in the S10 leader sequence (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s2">Figure 5—figure supplement 2B</xref>), which has three ARN sequences (AGG, AGU and AAC). The M1 mutation eliminated binding in the predicted region of pairing but a complementary mutation in the corresponding region of <italic>rpsJ</italic> mRNA did not restore MotR binding (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5E</xref>). We suggest that, as for the MotR target region of <italic>fliC</italic>, MotR binds to more than one site, the MotR target region of <italic>rpsJ</italic> is highly structured, and MotR and Hfq binding might all lead to conformational changes that compound the interpretation of the mutations.</p><p>Nevertheless, to further define the determinants needed for MotR-mediated up regulation, we generated a series of <italic>rpsJ-gfp</italic> fusions to include the leader and only the first seven amino acids of S10 removing the MotR base pairing site, to remove the S10 leader sequence, to remove stem D required for L4-mediated regulation, or to remove the attenuator hairpin stem E (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s1">Figure 5—figure supplement 1B</xref>). MotR-dependent regulation was eliminated for each of these constructs suggesting that S10 leader sequence is needed along with the MotR binding site internal to the <italic>rpsJ</italic> CDS for MotR-dependent regulation (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s1">Figure 5—figure supplement 1B</xref>). To test if Hfq binding to <italic>rpsJ</italic> is critical for the activation, we repeated the GFP reporter assay in an Hfq<sup>Y25D</sup> mutant defective for binding ARN sequences on the distal face of the protein (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib97">Zhang et al., 2013b</xref>). Supporting a role for Hfq, MotR, which is present at the same levels in the Hfq WT and Hfq<sup>Y25D</sup> mutant strains, no longer upregulates <italic>rpsJ-gfp</italic> in the distal face mutant background (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s1">Figure 5—figure supplement 1C</xref>). Collectively, our results are consistent with MotR base pairing internal to <italic>rpsJ</italic> affecting Hfq binding to the S10 leader sequence, which in turn results in increased <italic>rpsJ</italic> translation.</p><p>Based on the RIL-seq data, FliX interacts with multiple regions in the S10 operon mRNA, all internal to CDSs (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5F</xref>). The predicted base-pairing regions (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5G</xref>) align with the highest peaks of chimeras in the RIL-seq data and overlap with the seed sequence suggested for FliX (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>). We tested the effects of FliX on expression from this operon by constructing <italic>gfp</italic> fusions to regions of <italic>rplC</italic>, <italic>rpsQ</italic>, and <italic>rpsS-rplV</italic>. In all cases, overproduction of FliX or FliX-S led to a reduction in the expression of these fusions (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5H</xref>). To test for a direct interaction between FliX-S and the <italic>rpsS</italic> mRNA, we again carried out structure probing (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5I</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s2">Figure 5—figure supplement 2C and D</xref>). The regions that were changed in <italic>rpsS</italic> and FliX-S in the in vitro footprinting aligned with the predicted binding region between the two RNAs. Introduction of the M1 mutation (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1A</xref>) eliminated FliX-S binding to the <italic>rpsS</italic> mRNA while introduction of a complementary mutation in the <italic>rpsS</italic> mRNA restored FliX-S-M1 binding (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5I</xref>). We hypothesize that FliX downregulation of the <italic>rplC</italic>, <italic>rpsQ</italic>, and <italic>rpsS-rplV</italic> fusions as well as the <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA is due to sRNA-directed mRNA degradation. Further experiments are needed to test this model, but in vivo primer extension assays carried out for RNA isolated from in mid-log phase cells (OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.6) showed an increase in 5´ ends in proximity to the binding site on the <italic>rpsS</italic> mRNA in FliX or FliX-S overexpressing strains (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5s3">Figure 5—figure supplement 3</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s2-7"><title>Increased S10 levels correlate with increased readthrough of flagellar operons</title><p>We wondered how the positive regulation of <italic>rpsJ</italic> by MotR might impact flagella synthesis. The S10 protein encoded by <italic>rpsJ</italic> has two roles in the cell. It is incorporated into the 30S ribosome subunit but also forms a transcription anti-termination complex with NusB (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib47">Lüttgen et al., 2002</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib46">Luo et al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib9">Baniulyte et al., 2017</xref>). We evaluated the importance of each of the two S10 roles to flagella number by EM. First, we overexpressed a S10 mutant (S10Δloop) that is missing the ribosome binding loop but is still active in anti-termination (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib46">Luo et al., 2008</xref>) from an inducible plasmid and analyzed the number of flagella per cell. Cells carrying the S10Δloop plasmid had higher number of flagella like cells overexpressing MotR* (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6A</xref>). We noted that overexpression of wild type S10 from the plasmid used for overexpression of S10∆loop did not lead to an increase in flagella number (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6A</xref>), although presumably MotR is normally increasing flagella number by impacting the levels of the WT protein. Possibly, only a specific concentration of S10 relative to other ribosome proteins increases the S10 role as an anti-terminator. Since <italic>rpsJ</italic> is essential and cannot be deleted, we also examined the effect of MotR* overexpression in a ∆<italic>nusB</italic> strain that cannot form the S10-NusB anti-termination complex. In this background, the stimulatory effect of MotR* on flagella number was eliminated (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6B</xref>) as is also observed for S10Δloop overexpression in the ∆<italic>nusB</italic> background (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6s1">Figure 6—figure supplement 1A</xref>). Based on these observations, we hypothesized that increased S10 levels upon MotR overexpression leads to increased anti-termination of some of the long flagella operons.</p><fig-group><fig id="fig6" position="float"><label>Figure 6.</label><caption><title>MotR overexpression leads to a <italic>nusB</italic>-dependent increase in expression from flagellar operons.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) MotR* and S10∆loop overexpression increase the number of flagella. The number of flagella per cell detected by EM were counted for WT cells (GSO983) harboring the indicated plasmids. (<bold>B</bold>) MotR effect is eliminated in ∆<italic>nusB</italic> background. The number of flagella per cell detected by EM were counted for WT (GSO983) or ∆<italic>nusB</italic> cells (GSO1077) harboring the indicated plasmids. (<bold>C</bold>) MotR induces mRNA levels throughout the flagellar operons in WT background (GSO983) but not in ∆<italic>nusB</italic> background (GSO1077). MotR was expressed from pZE plasmid and the levels of <italic>motB</italic>, <italic>cheW</italic>, <italic>tar</italic>, <italic>cheZ</italic>, <italic>ssrA</italic> and <italic>cadB</italic> were monitored in comparison to their levels in the pZE control vector by RT-qPCR. <italic>cadB</italic> served as a non-flagellar gene control and <italic>ssrA</italic> served as a reference gene; the same <italic>cadB</italic> data is shown in both plots. Experiments were done in three biological replicates and one-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in mRNA levels (ns = not significant, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). For (<bold>A</bold>) and (<bold>B</bold>), flagella were counted for 20 cells (black dots), and a one-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in flagella number (ns = not significant, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). Box plot and error bars descriptions as in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>. Each experiment was repeated three times, and one representative experiment is shown.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig6-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig6s1" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 6—figure supplement 1.</label><caption><title>Effects of MotR* and S10∆loop overexpression are lost in ∆<italic>nusB</italic> background.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) S10∆loop effect is eliminated in ∆<italic>nusB</italic> background. The number of flagella per cell detected by EM were counted for WT (GSO983) or ∆<italic>nusB</italic> (GSO1077) cells harboring the indicated plasmids. Flagella were counted for 20 cells (black dots), and a one-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in flagella number (ns = not significant, ***=p &lt; 0.001). Box plot and error bars descriptions as in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>. (<bold>B</bold>) MotR* effect on flagellar operons is eliminated in ∆<italic>nusB</italic> background (GSO1077). MotR* was expressed from pZE plasmid and the levels of <italic>motB</italic>, <italic>cheW</italic>, <italic>tar</italic>, <italic>cheZ</italic>, <italic>ssrA</italic> and <italic>cadB</italic> were monitored in comparison to their levels in the pZE control vector by RT-qPCR. <italic>cadB</italic> served as a non-flagellar gene control and <italic>ssrA</italic> served as a reference gene. Experiments were done in three biological replicates and one-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in mRNA levels (ns = not significant, ***=p &lt; 0.001, ****=p &lt; 0.0001).</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig6-figsupp1-v1.tif"/></fig></fig-group><p>To directly test this anti-termination hypothesis, we carried out RT-qPCR analysis in WT and ∆<italic>nusB</italic> backgrounds to examine the effects of MotR and MotR* overexpression on genes in the <italic>motAB-cheAW</italic> and <italic>tar-tap-cheRBYZ</italic> operons. For both operons, the mRNA levels of the tested genes were increased in WT upon MotR and MotR* overexpression (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6C</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6s1">Figure 6—figure supplement 1B</xref>). This increase was not observed for the non-flagellar control gene <italic>cadB</italic>. While the levels of the flagellar mRNAs in ∆<italic>nusB</italic> background were lower than in the WT, MotR and MotR* no longer induced these genes. Together these observations are consistent with the proposal that increased levels of non-ribosome associated S10 lead to increased levels of the S10-NusB anti-termination complex associated with RNA polymerase-σ<sup>28</sup> and increased anti-termination of the long operons encoding flagellar proteins. It is also conceivable that even a slight upregulation of the S10 operon, as well as the S6 operon, given a significant number of MotR-<italic>rpsF</italic> chimeras (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp1">Supplementary file 1</xref>), along with anti-termination of <italic>rrn</italic> operons, could lead to more active ribosomes, which are needed for flagellar protein synthesis. On the other hand, a negative effect of FliX on ribosomal components, which could reduce the number of active ribosomes, would be consistent with the repressive role of this sRNA.</p></sec><sec id="s2-8"><title>MotR and FliX have opposing effects on the expression of middle and late flagella genes</title><p>In a parallel line of experimentation, we examined the impact of overexpressing MotR* and FliX on the transcriptome by RNA-seq analysis (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp2">Supplementary file 2</xref>). The transcripts whose levels increased most with MotR* overexpression compared to the vector control (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7A</xref>) corresponded predominantly to late genes and, to a lesser extent, middle genes, of the flagellar regulon. Of the 332 genes whose expression increased significantly (FDR = 0.05) by MotR* overexpression, 40 are reduced significantly (FDR = 0.05) in a strain lacking σ<sup>28</sup> (Δ<italic>fliA</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7s1">Figure 7—figure supplement 1A</xref>). Additionally, the sequence motif found for the promoters of the transcription units for which expression increased the most (FDR = 0.05 and ≥2 fold) upon MotR* overproduction (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7s1">Figure 7—figure supplement 1B</xref>) is nearly identical to a σ<sup>28</sup> recognition motif (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib74">Shi et al., 2020</xref>). In contrast, transcripts for flagellar genes were reduced by FliX overexpression (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7B</xref>). Specifically, 28 of 149 genes for which the expression is reduced significantly (FDR = 0.05) are middle or late genes of the flagellar regulon (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>). We note that we did not observe differential levels of the S10 operon transcript in the RNA-seq analysis upon FliX overexpression but did detect decreased levels of some transcripts encoding ribosomal proteins upon MotR* overexpression (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7B</xref> and <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp2">Supplementary file 2</xref>). However, the total RNA for the RNA-seq experiments was isolated from cells early in growth (OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.2).</p><fig-group><fig id="fig7" position="float"><label>Figure 7.</label><caption><title>MotR and FliX overproduction leads to increased and decreased expression of flagellar genes, respectively.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) MotR* induces flagellar genes. Green symbols represent flagellar regulon genes as indicated on the graph. (<bold>B</bold>) FliX reduces flagellar genes. Red symbols represent flagellar regulon genes as indicated on the graph. In (<bold>A</bold>) and (<bold>B</bold>), differential expression analysis was conducted with DESeq2. The threshold for differentially expressed transcripts was set to adjusted value of <italic>P</italic>&lt;0.05. (<bold>C</bold>) MotR overexpression increases the activity of <italic>gfp</italic> fusions to P<italic><sub>flgB</sub></italic> and P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic>. (<bold>D</bold>) FliX overexpression decreases the activity of <italic>gfp</italic> fusions to P<italic><sub>flgB</sub></italic> and P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic>. In (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>D</bold>), the promoter activities were monitored for 330 min by measuring the GFP signal and dividing it with the culture OD<sub>600nm</sub>. For (<bold>A</bold>) and (<bold>B</bold>), WT (GSO983) harboring the control vector pZE or the MotR* or the FliX expression plasmid were grown to OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.2; total RNA was extracted and used for the construction of cDNA libraries, which were analyzed as described in Materials and methods. For (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>D</bold>), three biological repeats are shown in the graph. One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in GFP signal (ns = not significant, *=p &lt; 0.05, **=p &lt; 0.01, ***=p &lt; 0.001, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). The experiments presented in (<bold>C</bold>) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7s2">Figure 7—figure supplement 2B</xref>, and in (<bold>D</bold>) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7s2">Figure 7—figure supplement 2A</xref>, were carried out on same day, respectively, and the same pZE samples are shown.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig7-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig7s1" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 7—figure supplement 1.</label><caption><title>Overlap in MotR* overexpression profile with σ<sup>28</sup> regulon.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Deletion of <italic>fliA</italic> reduces σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent genes. RNA-seq data for ∆<italic>fliA</italic> from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref> was reanalyzed. Differential expression analysis was conducted with DESeq2, and threshold for differentially expressed transcripts was set to adjusted value of p&lt;0.05. Red symbols represent flagella regulon genes as indicated on the graph. (<bold>B</bold>) On top is the motif found for promoters of transcription units for genes whose expression increased the most (FDR = 0.05 and≥2 fold) upon MotR* overexpression (E-value: 5.1e<sup>–14</sup>). Of the 70 total sequences analyzed, 25 contain the motif. The bottom motif corresponds to a σ<sup>28</sup> recognition motif (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>).</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig7-figsupp1-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig7s2" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 7—figure supplement 2.</label><caption><title>Effects of MotR* and FliX-S overexpression on P<italic><sub>flgB</sub>-gfp,</italic> P<italic><sub>fliL</sub>-gfp</italic> and FlgJ-SPA expression.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) MotR* overexpression increases the activity of <italic>gfp</italic> fusions to P<italic><sub>flgB</sub></italic> and P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic>. The promoter activities were monitored for 330 min by measuring the GFP signal and dividing it with the culture OD<sub>600nm</sub>. (<bold>B</bold>) FliX-S overexpression decreases the activity of <italic>gfp</italic> fusions to P<italic><sub>flgB</sub></italic> and P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic>. The promoter activities were monitored for 330 min by measuring the GFP signal and dividing it with the culture OD<sub>600nm</sub>. (<bold>C</bold>) MotR* increases the levels of SPA-tagged FlgJ. FlgJ-SPA levels across growth of WT (GSO1080) cells carrying indicated plasmids were determined by immunoblot analysis using α-FLAG antibody. (<bold>D</bold>) FliX-S reduces the levels of SPA tagged-FlgJ. FlgJ-SPA levels across growth of WT (GSO1080) cells carrying the indicated plasmids were determined by immunoblot analysis using α-FLAG antibody. For (<bold>A</bold>) and (<bold>B</bold>), three biological repeats are shown in the graph. One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in GFP signal (ns = not significant, *=p &lt; 0.05, **=p &lt; 0.01, ***=p &lt; 0.001, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). The experiments presented in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5D</xref> and (<bold>A</bold>), and in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5C</xref> and (<bold>B</bold>), were carried out on same day, respectively, and the same pZE samples are shown. For (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>D</bold>), the Ponceau S-stained membrane serves as a loading control.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig7-figsupp2-v1.tif"/></fig></fig-group><p>The effects of MotR, MotR*, FliX, and FliX-S on flagella gene expression were further examined by monitoring fluorescence from <italic>gfp</italic> fused to the promoters of <italic>flgB</italic>, a representative Class 2 promoter, and <italic>fliL</italic>, a representative Class 2/3 promoter (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib89">Zaslaver et al., 2006</xref>). MotR and MotR* overexpression increased the activity of the two promoters, while FliX and FliX-S overexpression led to a reduction of their activity (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7C and D</xref>, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7s2">Figure 7—figure supplement 2A and B</xref>). The levels of C-terminally SPA-tagged FlgJ, also encoded by a Class 2 gene, similarly increased across growth upon MotR* overexpression, particularly early in growth, and decreased upon FliX-S overexpression (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7s2">Figure 7—figure supplement 2C and D</xref>). The data suggest that in addition to modulating anti-termination and/or ribosomal protein synthesis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>), MotR and FliX more broadly effect transcription initiation at flagellar genes though we do not know the mechanism. In general, these results are coherent with a positive effect of MotR on flagella synthesis and a negative effect of FliX.</p></sec><sec id="s2-9"><title>MotR increases and FliX decreases flagella synthesis</title><p>To examine the impact of chromosomally-encoded MotR and FliX on flagella synthesis and the flagellar regulon, we introduced the three-nucleotide M1 substitutions in the seed sequences of <italic>motR</italic> and <italic>fliX</italic> (MotR-M1 and FliX-M1, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1A</xref>) at their endogenous chromosomal positions, avoiding the disruption of the nearby genes. MotR-M1 levels were comparable to WT MotR levels (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8s1">Figure 8—figure supplement 1A</xref>). The prominent ~200 nt FliX band was reduced for FliX-M1, while other FliX processing products were affected less (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8s1">Figure 8—figure supplement 1B</xref>).</p><p>We first examined the flagella number and motility for these strains. The <italic>motR-M1</italic> chromosomal mutation was associated with a moderate reduction in flagella number at two time points (OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.6 and 2.0) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8A</xref>), while slightly higher numbers of flagella were observed for the <italic>fliX-M1</italic> strain at the later time point (OD<sub>600</sub> ~2.0) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8B</xref>). In motility assays carried out as in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>, we found reduced motility of the <italic>motR-M1</italic> strain compared to WT but no change was observed for the <italic>fliX-M1</italic> strain (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8s1">Figure 8—figure supplement 1C and D</xref>). We also compared the motility of the <italic>motR-M1</italic> and <italic>fliX-M1</italic> strains to WT strains by mixing strains transformed with plasmids expressing either GFP or mCherry. WT strains expressing GFP were mixed with <italic>motR-M1</italic> or <italic>fliX-M1</italic> cells expressing mCherry or vice versa, and their motility was compared on 0.3% agar plates. For both combinations of WT and <italic>motR-M1,</italic> the fluorescent signal produced by the WT strain was more extensive than the fluorescent signal generated by <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant outside of the site of inoculation (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8C</xref>). Thus, in two independent assays, the <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant exhibits reduced motility compared to the WT strain, while no significant difference was observed between WT and <italic>fliX-M1</italic> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8D</xref>).</p><fig-group><fig id="fig8" position="float"><label>Figure 8.</label><caption><title>Complex regulatory network of sRNAs controlling flagella synthesis.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Reduction in flagella number in <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant. (<bold>B</bold>) Increase in flagella number in <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutant. (<bold>C</bold>) Reduced motility in <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant (GSO1087) based on a competition assay with its corresponding WT (GSO1088). (<bold>D</bold>) No difference in motility in <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutant (GSO1076) based on a competition assay with its corresponding WT (GSO983). (<bold>E</bold>) Reduction in P<italic><sub>flgB</sub>-gfp</italic> and P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic><sub>-</sub><italic>gfp</italic> expression in <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant (GSO1087) background compared to WT background (GSO1088). (<bold>F</bold>) No difference in P<italic><sub>flgB</sub>-gfp</italic> and P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic><sub>-</sub><italic>gfp</italic> expression in <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutant (GSO1076) background compared to WT background (GSO983). (<bold>G</bold>) σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs control flagella synthesis at different levels. UhpU activates the flagellar regulon by repressing a regulator of <italic>flhDC</italic>. MotR and FliX, respectively, activate and repress middle and the late gene expression (dotted line indicates exact mechanism is not known, although we document base pairing with the <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA). MotR and FliX also connect ribosome and flagella synthesis by regulating genes in the S10 operon (solid line indicates documented base pairing with this mRNA). In (<bold>A</bold>) and (<bold>B</bold>), the number of flagella per cell detected by EM were counted for 40 cells (black dots) for the <italic>motR-M1</italic> (GSO1087) and its corresponding WT (GSO1088), and for <italic>fliX-M1</italic> (GSO1076) and its corresponding WT (GSO983), strains at three points in growth (OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.2, OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.6, and OD<sub>600</sub> ~2.0). A one-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in flagella number (ns = not significant, **=p &lt; 0.01, ***=p &lt; 0.001, ****=p &lt; 0.0001). Each experiment was repeated three times and one representative experiment is shown. Box plot and error bars descriptions as in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>. For (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>D</bold>), WT or the corresponding mutant, expressed either green fluorescent signal or red fluorescent signal by carrying pCON1.proC-GFP or pCON1.proC-mCherry plasmid, respectively. In the left images, WT cells expressing GFP were mixed with mutant cells expressing mCherry; in the middle images, WT cells expressing mCherry were mixed with mutant cells expressing GFP; in the right images, WT cells expressing GFP were mixed with WT cells expressing mCherry. The indicated mixed cultures were spotted on a soft agar (0.3%) plate, incubated at 30 °C, and imaged after 18 hr. The scale given in (<bold>C</bold>) is the same for all motility plates. For (<bold>E</bold>) and (<bold>F</bold>), three biological repeats are shown in the graph (except for P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic><sub>-</sub><italic>gfp</italic> in <italic>fliX-M1</italic>, for which two repeats are shown). One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in GFP signal (ns = not significant, **=p &lt; 0.01, ***=p &lt; 0.001, ****=p &lt; 0.0001).</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig8-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig8s1" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 8—figure supplement 1.</label><caption><title>Effects of chromosomal <italic>motR-M1</italic> and <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutations.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Northern blot analysis of total RNA from WT (GSO1088), and <italic>motR-M1</italic> (GSO1087) cells grown to OD<sub>600</sub>~1.0. The levels of MotR-M1 expressed from the chromosome are comparable to those of WT MotR. Membranes were probed for MotR and then for 5S RNA as a loading control. (<bold>B</bold>) Northern blot analysis of total RNA from WT (GSO983), and <italic>fliX-M1</italic> (GSO1076) cells grown to OD<sub>600</sub>~1.0. The levels of full-length FliX-M1 expressed from the chromosome are lower than WT FliX. Membranes were probed for FliX and then for 5S RNA as a loading control. (<bold>C</bold>) Reduced motility in <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant (GSO1087) compared to corresponding WT strain (GSO1088) based on motility assays with 0.3% agar. (<bold>D</bold>) No change in motility of <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutant (GSO1076) compared to corresponding WT strain (GSO983) based on motility assays with 0.3% agar. (<bold>E</bold>) Reduced FlgJ-SPA levels in a <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant. SPA-tagged FlgJ levels across growth in WT (GSO1081) and in <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant (GSO1082) were monitored. (<bold>F</bold>) Slightly increased in FlgJ-SPA levels in a <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutant. SPA-tagged FlgJ levels across growth in WT (GSO1080) and in <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutant (GSO1083) were monitored. Northern blot analysis showing (<bold>G</bold>) delayed expression of <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA in <italic>motR-M1</italic> background and (<bold>H</bold>) advanced expression in <italic>fliX-M1</italic> background. Graphs in (<bold>C</bold>) and (<bold>D</bold>) show the average of nine biological replicates, and error bars represent one SD. One-way ANOVA comparison was performed to calculate the significance of the change in motility (ns = not significant, ***=p &lt; 0.0001). In (<bold>E</bold>) and (<bold>F</bold>), FlgJ-SPA levels were determined by immunoblot analysis using α-FLAG antibody. The Ponceau S-stained membrane serves as a loading control. In (<bold>G</bold>) and (<bold>H</bold>), <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels were determined by northern analysis as in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>. RNA was separated on an acrylamide gel and probed for <italic>fliC</italic> and then for the 5S RNA as a loading control.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig8-figsupp1-v1.tif"/></fig><fig id="fig8s2" position="float" specific-use="child-fig"><label>Figure 8—figure supplement 2.</label><caption><title>Conservation of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs.</title><p>σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs sequences were examined for their conservation across the Gammaproteobacteria, revealing conservation in closely-related Enterobacteriaceael organisms. Sequences from representative bacterial species are aligned as follows. Gammaproteobacteria genomes were downloaded from PATRIC database (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib18">Davis et al., 2020</xref>) and searched for the query sRNAs using BLAST (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib5">Altschul et al., 1990</xref>), filtering for matches with at least 80% identity over 80% of the query sRNA sequence. Genomes containing each sRNA were marked as so on a text file. The process was written as a Nextflow pipeline (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib21">Di Tommaso et al., 2017</xref>) and is available on github: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://github.com/asafpr/sRNA_finder">https://github.com/asafpr/sRNA_finder</ext-link>(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib67">Peer, 2021</xref>). The analysis results were confirmed by aligning the sRNAs sequences to representative Gamma proteobacteria species. The <italic>uhpT</italic> and <italic>flhC</italic> stop codons are indicated in lower case. Regions highlighted in blue reflect the suggested seed sequences (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>) and the regions that base pair with the targets tested in this study for <italic>uhpU</italic>, <italic>motR</italic> and <italic>fliX</italic>. The <italic>uhpU-S</italic> and <italic>fliX-S</italic> sequences are underlined. Nucleotides that differ from the <italic>E. coli</italic> MG1655 sequence are indicated in red. The abbreviations in the figure represent the following species: <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> MG1655 (<italic>E. coli</italic> MG1655), <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> O127:H6 (EPEC), <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> O157:H7 (EHEC), <italic>Salmonella enterica serovar typhimurium</italic> (<italic>S. typhimurium</italic>), <italic>Shigella flexneri</italic> (<italic>S. flexneri</italic>), <italic>Enterobacter hormaechei</italic> (<italic>E. hormaechei</italic>), and <italic>Citrobacter youngae</italic> (<italic>C. youngae</italic>). <italic>S. typhimurium</italic> and <italic>C. youngae</italic> are missing from the alignment for FliX as the <italic>fliX</italic> region was missing in these species.</p></caption><graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="elife-87151-fig8-figsupp2-v1.tif"/></fig></fig-group><p>We also assessed the effects of the chromosomal mutations on the <italic>flgB-gfp</italic> and <italic>fliL-gfp</italic> fusions (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8</xref>) as well as on FlgJ-SPA and <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8s1">Figure 8—figure supplement 1</xref>). The <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutant showed reduced activity of the two promoters (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8E</xref>), as expected given the increased activity of the promoters that was observed upon MotR overexpression (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7C</xref>). The <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutant showed similar activity of the two promoters in comparison to WT (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8F</xref>). In western and northern analyses of the <italic>motR-M1</italic> strain compared to its parental WT, a delayed initiation of FlgJ-SPA and <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA synthesis, respectively, was observed in the mutant (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8s1">Figure 8—figure supplement 1E and G</xref>). In contrast, FlgJ-SPA and <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels increased in the <italic>fliX-M1</italic> strain compared to the parental WT strain (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8s1">Figure 8—figure supplement 1F and H</xref>).</p><p>While negative effects of the <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutation on flagella number, motility, and flagellar gene expression were observed in all assays, positive effects of the <italic>fliX-M1</italic> mutation were only detected for flagella number, FlgJ-SPA protein, and <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels. However, for both sRNAs the mutation phenotype is opposite that of the overexpression phenotype. Collectively these observations indicate that MotR, expressed earlier in growth, increases flagella synthesis by positively regulating the middle and the late genes, while FliX, whose levels peak later, decreases flagella synthesis by downregulating the flagellar regulon. Thus, MotR and FliX, along with UhpU, add another layer of regulation to the flagellar regulon (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8G</xref>).</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3" sec-type="discussion"><title>Discussion</title><p>In this study, we describe four <italic>E. coli</italic> sRNAs whose expression is dependent on σ<sup>28</sup>. We found three of these sRNAs affect flagella number and bacterial motility. Although previous studies showed that base pairing sRNAs act on the <italic>flhDC</italic> mRNA (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib81">Thomason et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib19">De Lay and Gottesman, 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib44">Lejars et al., 2022</xref>), our results revealed that the effect of sRNAs on flagellar synthesis is far more pervasive. Intriguingly, two of the σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs show opposite effects. MotR, expressed earlier in growth, increases expression of flagellar and ribosomal proteins along with flagella number, while FliX, expressed later in growth, decreases expression of the proteins and flagella number. Thus, the two sRNAs, respectively, might be considered an accelerator and a decelerator for flagellar synthesis.</p><sec id="s3-1"><title>Non-canonical mechanisms of sRNA action</title><p>Most commonly, sRNAs base pair with the 5´ UTRs of mRNA targets or at the very beginning of the CDS, primarily affecting ribosome binding or mRNA stability. However, MotR and FliX bind in the middle or even close to the ends of their target CDSs in the <italic>fliC</italic> gene and S10 operon. For both <italic>fliC</italic> and the S10 operon, the consequences of MotR and FliX overexpression are different. MotR leads to higher levels of <italic>fliC</italic> and the S10 protein, whereas FliX leads to lower levels of <italic>fliC</italic> and three genes in the S10 operon. We suggest that the positive and negative regulatory effects of MotR and FliX, respectively, occur by the same mechanisms on the <italic>fliC</italic> and S10 transcripts, with MotR changing the conformation of the RNAs and FliX leading to increased cleavage. However, these suggested mechanisms needed to be investigated further in future experiments. It is also noteworthy that, based on RIL-seq data, more examples of CDS internal interactions remain to be characterized.</p><p>Given that our study made extensive use of RIL-seq data, it provides an opportunity to evaluate these data. While RIL-seq provides a comprehensive map of RNA-RNA interactions that take place on Hfq under a specific condition, some caution about the interpretation is warranted as the interactions represent multiple types of relationships between two RNAs. As was found by a recent study (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib23">Faigenbaum-Romm et al., 2020</xref>), we suggest that if an interaction is highly abundant and discovered under multiple conditions, the sRNA is more likely to have a regulatory impact on the target mRNA though the mechanisms may be unknown. We noticed that the spread of the RIL-seq signal varies significantly between targets. One possible explanation for multiple peaks and a broad distribution is more than one base pairing site for the sRNA on the mRNA, but this hypothesis requires further testing. We predict additional studies of sRNA-target pairs with different types of RIL-seq signals will give further insights into the mechanisms and outcomes of base pairing.</p><p>The most studied and conserved sRNA-binding protein in gram-negative bacteria is Hfq. However, there are other sRNA-binding proteins (reviewed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib57">Melamed, 2020</xref>). Among these is ProQ, which was shown to have overlapping, complementary, and competing roles with Hfq in <italic>E. coli</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>). Interestingly, ProQ was found to affect motility and chemotaxis in <italic>S. enterica</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib88">Westermann et al., 2019</xref>). In the absence of ProQ, the target sets for the σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs on Hfq were changed significantly in <italic>E. coli</italic> (Table S5 in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>) suggesting that competition between Hfq and ProQ for binding RNAs likely also influences this regulatory circuit. In this context, it is worth noting that FlgO, the fourth σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNA, which originates from the 3´UTR of the <italic>flgL</italic> and strongly binds Hfq (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>), does not have many targets. Possibly, FlgO has a role in titrating Hfq from other sRNAs or proteins, or in the recruitment of other proteins to a complex with Hfq. Interestingly, while the overall sequence of <italic>flgO</italic> is conserved in other bacterial species (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8s2">Figure 8—figure supplement 2</xref>), the nucleotides in one of the single stranded loops (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1C</xref>) differ in <italic>S. typhimurium</italic>, possibly suggesting distinct regulatory mechanisms in different bacteria.</p></sec><sec id="s3-2"><title>Conservation of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs</title><p>We were surprised to find so many σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent Hfq-binding sRNAs and wondered about their phylogenic distribution. The σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs studied here are conserved among some of the Enterobacteriaceae (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8s2">Figure 8—figure supplement 2</xref>) and thus may play a role in pathogenicity. Two studies describing the application of RIL-seq to <italic>S. enterica</italic> and Enteropathogenic <italic>E. coli</italic> Hfq were recently published (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib64">Pearl Mizrahi et al., 2021</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib53">Matera et al., 2022</xref>). The RIL-seq analyses were carried out for cells grown under conditions that do not favor flagellar gene expression, but UhpU, MotR, FliX, and FlgO were detected, confirming their synthesis and association with Hfq in pathogenic bacteria. Previous work assessing the conservation of the <italic>motR</italic> and <italic>uhpU</italic> promoters showed that, while the <italic>motR</italic> promoter is well conserved across proteobacteria species, the <italic>uhpU</italic> promoter was not, implying different evolutionary pressures (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib25">Fitzgerald et al., 2018</xref>). Interestingly, however, a sRNA named RsaG, which originates from the 3´ UTR of <italic>uhpT</italic> and also is induced by glucose-6-phosphate, was found in the Gram-positive bacterium, <italic>Staphylococcus aureus</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib11">Bronesky et al., 2019</xref>). Although there is no sequence similarity between UhpU and RsaG, and RsaG has not been reported to regulate flagella synthesis, the independent evolution of regulatory sRNAs at the 3´ UTRs of <italic>uhpT</italic> in two disparate bacterial species is intriguing. RsaG was found to regulate redox homeostasis and to adjust metabolism to changing environmental conditions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib20">Desgranges et al., 2022</xref>). While we focused on the UhpU role in the flagellar regulon and in controlling motility, the sRNA has many targets that are part of different metabolic pathways and redox homeostasis (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp1">Supplementary file 1</xref>), hinting at parallels between the two sRNAs.</p><p>It is likely that several other sRNA regulators of the flagellar regulon remain to be characterized. In <italic>S. enterica</italic>, a leader RNA originating from the <italic>mgtCBR</italic> virulence operon was shown to affect the synthesis of one of the two flagellin genes that exist in this bacterium, impacting virulence and motility (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib14">Choi et al., 2017</xref>). In neonatal meningitis-causing <italic>E. coli</italic>, a sRNA missing from the <italic>E. coli</italic> MG1655 strain used in our study, was shown to reduce <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA levels (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib80">Sun et al., 2022</xref>). Additionally, a very recent study of the <italic>Campylobacter jejuni</italic> FlmE and FlmR sRNAs showed that these two sRNAs have opposite effects on flagellar gene expression (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib41">König et al., 2023</xref>), resembling the opposing effects of MotR and FliX in <italic>E. coli</italic>.</p></sec><sec id="s3-3"><title>Roles of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs</title><p>The UhpU RIL-seq target set includes many flagellar regulon genes and some transcription regulators of the flagellar regulon, such as LrhA (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib43">Lehnen et al., 2002</xref>), hinting at a mechanism by which UhpU can affect flagella number and bacterial motility. However, since UhpU can also be derived from the <italic>uhpT</italic> mRNA (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1s1">Figure 1—figure supplement 1B</xref>) and is predicted to have many targets that participate in carbon and nutrient metabolism (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp1">Supplementary file 1</xref>), we suggest this sRNA may play a broader role in linking carbon metabolism with flagella synthesis and motility.</p><p>MotR and FliX each have more limited target sets in the RIL-seq data but may comprise a unique regulatory toggle. While the transcription of the two sRNAs is dependent on the same sigma factor and they base pair in the CDS of targets in the same operons, base pairing results in opposing regulation. MotR, which is transcribed from within <italic>flhC</italic> at the top of the flagellar regulatory cascade, reaches its highest levels earlier than FliX and increases the flagella synthesis. In contrast, FliX, which is cleaved from the mRNA required to make the last protein needed to complete the flagellum, reaches its highest levels later in growth and appears to decrease flagella synthesis.</p><p>It is not yet clear how MotR and FliX base pairing with only a few targets can have pervasive effects on flagellar gene expression and flagella number, but we suggest multiple mechanisms may be involved. One possibility is that the levels of flagellin encoded by <italic>fliC</italic>, up and down regulated by MotR and FliX, respectively, could be part of an autoregulatory loop that impacts the transcription of <italic>flhDC</italic> or other middle or late flagellar gene promoters. The increased and decreased levels of ribosomal proteins brought about by MotR and FliX regulation of the S10 operon also could impact the levels of available ribosomes, where even slight changes could have consequences given the high ribosome cost of flagella synthesis. Finally, we hypothesize that elevated levels of the S10 protein, due to the regulation by MotR, could, in conjunction with NusB, lead to increased anti-termination of long flagellar operons.</p><p>Based on our hypothesis that the MotR-mediated increase in S10 levels leads to increased anti-termination, we speculate that MotR activation of S10 expression could serve an autoregulatory role. Early in growth, transcription initiating from the σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent promoter in <italic>flhC</italic> terminates at the 5´ of <italic>motA</italic> generating MotR. As MotR levels increase, there is a concomitant increase in S10 levels, which could promote readthrough of the <italic>motR</italic> terminator leading to decreased MotR levels and increased full-length <italic>motRAB-cheAW</italic> mRNA. The proposed FliX-directed cleavage of the <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA could have a similar negative feedback role, the cleavage would lead to less full-length <italic>fliC</italic> mRNA resulting in less FliX.</p><p>In general, the σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs add a new layer of regulation to the flagellar regulon and reinforce the conclusion that flagella synthesis is exquisitely regulated. The regulon will continue to serve as a model of a temporal and environmentally controlled regulatory network with contributions from both transcription factors and regulatory RNAs.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4" sec-type="materials|methods"><title>Materials and methods</title><table-wrap id="keyresource" position="anchor"><label>Key resources table</label><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" valign="bottom">Reagent type (species) or resource</th><th align="left" valign="bottom">Designation</th><th align="left" valign="bottom">Source or reference</th><th align="left" valign="bottom">Identifiers</th><th align="left" valign="bottom">Additional information</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">TRIzol Reagent</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Thermo Fisher Scientific</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#15596018</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">212–300 µm glass beads</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Sigma-Aldrich</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#G1277</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Protein A-Sepharose beads CL-4B</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GE Healthcare</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#17-0780-01</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Ureagel-8</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">National Diagnostics</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#EC-838</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Ureagel Complete</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">National Diagnostics</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#EC-841</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">NuSieve 3:1 Agarose</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Lonza</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#50090</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">37% Formaldehyde</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Fisher Scientific</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#BP531-500</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">RiboRuler High Range RNA Ladder</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Thermo Fisher Scientific</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#SM1821</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">RiboRuler Low Range RNA Ladder</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Thermo Fisher Scientific</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#SM1831</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Zeta-Probe GT membrane</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Bio-Rad</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#1620159</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">ULTRAhyb-Oligo Hybridization Buffer</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">New England Biolabs</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#AM8663</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">[γ-<sup>32</sup>P] ATP</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">PerkinElmer</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#NEG035C010MC</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">T4 Polynucleotide Kinase</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">New England Biolabs</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#M0201L</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Illustra MicroSpin G-50 Columns</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GE Healthcare</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#27533001</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Mini-PROTEAN TGX Gels</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Bio-Rad</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#456–1086</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">polyacrylamide SDS gel</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Nitrocellulose Membrane</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Thermo Fisher Scientific</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#LC2000</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Chemical compound, drug</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">RNase III</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Fisher Scientific</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#AM2290</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">QuikChange Lightning Site-Directed<break/>Mutagenesis Kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Agilent</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#210519</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Amersham ECL Western Blotting Detection Kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GE Healthcare</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#RPN2108</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">MEGAshortscript T7 High Yield Transcription Kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Thermo Fisher Scientific</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#AM1354</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Ambion RNase T1 Kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Thermo Fisher Scientific</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#AM2283</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Commercial assay or kit</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">iTaq Univer SYBR Green mix</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Bio-Rad</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#1725124</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Antibody</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Mouse monoclonal ANTI-FLAG M2-Peroxidase</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Sigma-Aldrich</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#A8592</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom">1:1,000</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Antibody</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Rabbit polyclonal anti-flagellin</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Abcam</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#ab93713</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom">1:5,000</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Sequence-based reagent</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Primers, probes and DNA fragments</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (NM400)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">NM400 (MG1655, <italic>mini-λ, cmR, ts</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">A gift from Nadim Majdalani (S. Gottesman lab)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">NM400</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS001 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">lab stock</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO983</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>+</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS046 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>+</sup></italic>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">lab stock</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO982</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (BW25113)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">JW0406 (BW25113 ∆<italic>nusB::kan</italic>)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib6">Baba et al., 2006</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom">JW0406</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (BW25113)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">JW2284 (BW25113 ∆<italic>lrhA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib6">Baba et al., 2006</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom">JW2284</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MC4100)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS078 (MC4100; <italic>hfq<sup>+</sup></italic>)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib97">Zhang et al., 2013b</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO614</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (AMD061)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP284 (AMD061 (MG1655 ∆<italic>thyA</italic> +pKD46))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib79">Stringer et al., 2012</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP284</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (PM1205)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">PM1205 (MG1655 <italic>mal::lacIq, ΔaraBAD, lacI′:: PBAD-cat-sacB:lacZ, mini λ tetR</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib49">Mandin and Gottesman, 2009</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom">PM1205</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MC4100)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS079 (MC4100 <italic>hfq-Y25D</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1110</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (NM400)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS007 (NM400 ∆<italic>fliA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1111</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS012 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>fliA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1068</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (NM400)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS031 (NM400 ∆<italic>fliCX::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1071</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS033 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>fliCX::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1072</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS035 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>fliCX</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1073</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">∆<italic>fliC,</italic> for requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (NM400)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SM215 (NM400 <italic>fliX-M1::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1074</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS249 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) <italic>fliX-M1::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1075</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS251 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) <italic>fliX-M1</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1076</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><italic>fliX-M1,</italic> for requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS044 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>nusB::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1077</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">∆<italic>nusB,</italic> for requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MC4100)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS216 (NM400 <italic>flgJ-SPA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1078</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS221 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) <italic>flgJ-SPA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1080</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS229 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>thyA flgJ-SPA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1081</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS224 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>thyA motR-M1 flgJ-SPA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1082</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS230 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) <italic>fliX-M1 flgJ-SPA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1083</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS202 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>thyA</italic> +pKD46)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1085</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS209 (MG1655 (<italic>crl</italic><sup>-</sup>) <italic>motR::thyA</italic> +pKD46)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1086</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS210 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>thyA motR-M1</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1087</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><italic>motR-M1,</italic> for requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS213 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>thyA</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1088</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><italic>motR-M1</italic> corresponding WT, for requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>+</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">AS003 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>+</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>lrhA::kan</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1178</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (MG1655 (crl<sup>+</sup>))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">AS004 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>+</sup></italic>) ∆<italic>lrhA</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1179</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">∆<italic>lrhA,</italic> for requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (PM1205)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS021 (PM1205 <italic>lrhA:lacZ</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1180</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><italic>lrhA-lacZ fusion,</italic> for requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Strain, strain background (PM1205)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMS050 (PM1205 <italic>lrhA.m1:lacZ</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1181</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><italic>lrhA-M1-lacZ,</italic> for requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP269 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pKD4)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib17">Datsenko and Wanner, 2000</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pKD4</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP046 (TOP10 +pCP20)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib12">Cherepanov and Wackernagel, 1995</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pCP20</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP284 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>)+pKD46)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib17">Datsenko and Wanner, 2000</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pKD46</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP045 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pJL148)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib90">Zeghouf et al., 2004</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pJL148</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP043 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>)+pBR*)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib28">Guo et al., 2014</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBR*</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP006 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>)+pZE12 luc)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib48">Lutz and Bujard, 1997</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE12-luc</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP004 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>)+pZE (pJV300))</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib86">Urban and Vogel, 2007</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP001 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>)+pXG0)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib86">Urban and Vogel, 2007</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG0</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP002 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>)+pXG10 SF)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib16">Corcoran et al., 2012</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG10-SF</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP002 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) pXG30-SF)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib16">Corcoran et al., 2012</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG30-SF</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP322 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pCON1.proC-GFP)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib15">Cooper et al., 2017</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pCON1.proC-GFP</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP323 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pCON1.proC-mCherry)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib15">Cooper et al., 2017</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pCON1.proC-mCherry</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP135 (MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>)+pBAD24)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib30">Guzman et al., 1995</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBAD24</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP164 (N9739 +pBAD nusE / pBAD-S10)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib46">Luo et al., 2008</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBAD-S10</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP165 (N9739 +pBAD-nusE∆loop / pBAD-S10∆loop)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib46">Luo et al., 2008</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBAD-S10∆loop</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP252 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pBAD33)</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib30">Guzman et al., 1995</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBAD33</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">AZ321 (JM109 +pBR)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib27">Guillier and Gottesman, 2006</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBR</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">AZ338 (JM109 +pBR ArcZ)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib50">Mandin and Gottesman, 2010</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBR-ArcZ</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">AZ329 (JM109 +pBR RprA)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib50">Mandin and Gottesman, 2010</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBR-RprA</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">AZ417 (Top10 +pBR McaS)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib81">Thomason et al., 2012</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBR-McaS</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP334 (MG1655 +P<italic><sub>flgB</sub></italic> GFP)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib89">Zaslaver et al., 2006</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">P<italic><sub>flgB</sub></italic>-GFP</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP340 (MG1655 +P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic> GFP)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib89">Zaslaver et al., 2006</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom">P<italic><sub>fliL</sub></italic>-GFP</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP044 (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>)+pBR*-UhpU)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1089</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBR*-UhpU;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP021 (TOP10 +pZE MotR)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1090</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE-MotR;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP076 (MG1655 (crl-)+pZE-MotR*)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1091</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE-MotR*;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP272 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pZE-MotR-M1)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1092</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE-MotR-M1;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP273 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pZE-MotR*-M1)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1093</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE-MotR*-M1;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP025 (TOP10 +pZE FliX)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1094</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE-FliX;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP194 (MG1655 (crl<sup>-</sup>)+pZE-FliX-S)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1095</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE-FliX-S;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP026 (TOP10 +pZE FlgO)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1096</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pZE-FlgO;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP017 (Top10 +pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJ-73aa</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1101</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJ-73aa;</italic><break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP178 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pXG30-SF-<italic>rplC</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1102</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG30-SF-<italic>rplC;</italic><break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP167 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsS-rplV</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1103</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsS-rplV;</italic><break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP124 (Top10 +pXG30-SF-<italic>rpsQ</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1104</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG30-SF-<italic>rpsQ;</italic><break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP137 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJ-7aa</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1105</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJ-7aa;</italic><break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP152 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJΔleader</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1106</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJΔleader;</italic><break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP313 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJΔstemD</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1107</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJΔstemD;</italic><break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP317 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJΔstemE</italic>)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1108</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pXG10-SF-<italic>rpsJΔstemE;</italic><break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Recombinant DNA reagent (plasmid)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">SMP293 (NEB5<italic>α</italic>+pBAD33-3XFLAG-rpsJ)</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">this study</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">GSO1109</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">pBAD33-3XFLAG-rpsJ;<break/>For requests, see “Data and Materials Availability” section</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Software, algorithm</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">ImageJ software</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">ImageJ</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij">http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij</ext-link></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Software, algorithm</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">EcoCyc version 20.0</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib40">Keseler et al., 2013</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Software, algorithm</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">R RCircos Package</td><td align="char" char="." valign="bottom"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib96">Zhang et al., 2013a</xref></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://cloud.r-project.org/web/packages/RCircos/index.html">https://cloud.r-project.org/web/packages/RCircos/index.html</ext-link></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Software, algorithm</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Kutools</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">ExtendOffice</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.extendoffice.com/product/kutools-for-excel.html">https://www.extendoffice.com/product/kutools-for-excel.html</ext-link></td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">Software, algorithm</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">CFX maestro analysis</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Bio-Rad</td><td align="left" valign="bottom">Cat#12013758</td><td align="left" valign="bottom"/></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><sec id="s4-1"><title>Bacterial strains and growth conditions</title><p><italic>E. coli</italic> MG1655 (GSO982 or GSO983) or MC4100 (GSO614) strains served as the WT strains in this study. All other bacterial strains studied here are listed in the <italic>Key Resources Table</italic> along with plasmids and oligonucleotides used. <italic>E. coli</italic> K-12 MG1655 genomic DNA was used as template to amplify mRNAs and sRNAs to be cloned into the respective constructs. Unless indicated otherwise, all strains were grown with shaking at 250 rpm at 37 °C in LB rich medium. Ampicillin (100 µg/ml), chloramphenicol (25 µg/ml), kanamycin (30 µg/ml), arabinose (0.2%), and IPTG (1 mM) were added where appropriate. Unless indicated otherwise, overnight cultures were diluted to an OD<sub>600</sub>=0.05 and grown for the indicated times or to the desired optical densities.</p><p>Strain construction <italic>fliA::kan</italic>, <italic>fliCX::kan</italic>, and <italic>fliX-M1:kan</italic> strains were constructed by amplifying the <italic>kan<sup>R</sup></italic> sequence from pKD4 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib17">Datsenko and Wanner, 2000</xref>) using oligonucleotides listed in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref> and recombining (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib17">Datsenko and Wanner, 2000</xref>) the product into the chromosome of strain NM400 (kind gift of Nadim Majdalani). <italic>flgJ</italic> was SPA-tagged by amplifying the SPA sequence adjacent to <italic>kan<sup>R</sup></italic> sequence from pJL148 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib90">Zeghouf et al., 2004</xref>) using oligonucleotides listed in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref> and recombining (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib17">Datsenko and Wanner, 2000</xref>) the product into the chromosome of strain NM400. <italic>motR-M1</italic> strain was constructed using the scar-free system, FRUIT (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib79">Stringer et al., 2012</xref>) as previously described. Briefly, <italic>thyA</italic> was deleted from MG1655 (<italic>crl<sup>-</sup></italic>) (GSO983) strain by PCR amplification of Δ<italic>thyA</italic> from AMD061 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib79">Stringer et al., 2012</xref> followed by recombination using pKD46 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib17">Datsenko and Wanner, 2000</xref>). Next, <italic>thyA</italic> was inserted back to the genome next to the site of mutation and selection was made by growth on minimal media lacking thymine. The <italic>motR-M1</italic> mutation was introduced while simultaneously removing <italic>thyA</italic>. The selection for colonies missing <italic>thyA</italic> was carried out using minimal medium M9 plates supplied with 0.4% glucose, 0.2% casamino acids, 20 µg/ml trimethoprim, and 100 µg/ml thymine. <italic>lrhA::kan</italic>, and <italic>nusB::kan</italic> deletion strains were obtained from other groups (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib6">Baba et al., 2006</xref>) as referenced in <italic>Key Resources Table</italic>. All deletions and mutations were confirmed by sequencing and then transferred to new backgrounds by P1 transduction. Where indicted, <italic>kan<sup>R</sup></italic> was removed from the chromosome using plasmid pCP20 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib12">Cherepanov and Wackernagel, 1995</xref>).</p><p>Construction of strains carrying chromosomal <italic>lacZ</italic> fusions was carried out using PM1205 as previously described (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib49">Mandin and Gottesman, 2009</xref>). In brief, the <italic>lrhA</italic> fragment was amplified using KAPA Hifi (Fisher Scientific) using oligonucleotides SM079 and SM080 (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref>) and transformed into PM1205 with a series of selective screens on minimal media plates supplemented with sucrose, LB, LB supplemented with chloramphenicol, and LB supplemented with tetracycline. Mutagenesis of <italic>lrhA-lacZ</italic> fusion was achieved by recombineering an <italic>lrhA-M1</italic> sequence instead of the WT <italic>lrhA</italic> sequence, using gBlock listed in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref>.</p></sec><sec id="s4-2"><title>Plasmid construction</title><p>Descriptions of plasmids used in this study are in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref>. Construction of the constitutive overexpression plasmids was done according to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib87">Urban and Vogel, 2009</xref> using pZE12-luc. The IPTG-inducible UhpU overexpression plasmid was constructed using a pBRplac derivative harboring <italic>kan<sup>R</sup></italic>, pMSG14 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib28">Guo et al., 2014</xref>). The <italic>uhpU</italic> sequence, starting from its second nt, was amplified by PCR using oligonucleotides TU558 and TU561 (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref>), digested with <italic>Aat</italic>II and <italic>Hin</italic>dIII and cloned into pMSG14 digested with the same restriction enzymes. 3XFLAG-<italic>rpsJ</italic> was expressed from pBAD33 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib30">Guzman et al., 1995</xref>). The S10 leader and <italic>rpsJ</italic> sequence along with the 3XFLAG sequence was PCR amplified using oligonucleotides SM533 and SM435, digested with <italic>Kpn</italic>I and <italic>Hin</italic>dIII and cloned into pBAD33 digested with the same restriction enzymes. Construction of GFP-fusion plasmids was carried out principally as described in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib87">Urban and Vogel, 2009</xref>, using the pXG10-SF or pXG30-SF (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib16">Corcoran et al., 2012</xref>). Briefly, regions of target genes, mainly regions captured in the chimeric fragments, were PCR amplified, digested with <italic>Mph</italic>1103I and <italic>Nhe</italic>I and cloned into pXG10-SF or pXG30-SF digested with the same restriction enzymes. The full list of oligonucleotides used in this study can be found in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref>. Mutagenesis of the different plasmids was achieved using the QuikChange Lightning Site-Directed Mutagenesis Kit (Agilent). All plasmids were freshly transformed into the appropriate strains before each of the experiments.</p></sec><sec id="s4-3"><title>RNA isolation</title><p>Cells corresponding to the equivalent of 10–20 OD<sub>600</sub> were collected, washed once with 1 X PBS, and frozen in liquid nitrogen. RNA was extracted according to the standard TRIzol protocol (Thermo Fisher Scientific) as described previously (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>). At the last step, RNA was resuspended in 20–50 µl of DEPC water and quantified using a NanoDrop (Thermo Fisher Scientific).</p></sec><sec id="s4-4"><title>RNA coimmunoprecipitation (Co-IP) assay</title><p>RNAs that co-IP using polyclonal antibodies to Hfq were isolated as described (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib95">Zhang et al., 2002</xref>) with the following modifications. MG1655 (GSO983) was grown to OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.6 and ~1.0 in LB medium. Cells corresponding to the equivalent of 20 OD<sub>600</sub> were collected, and cell lysates were prepared by vortexing with 212–300 µm glass beads (Sigma-Aldrich) in a final volume of 1 ml of lysis buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl/pH 8.0, 150 mM KCl, 1 mM MgCl<sub>2</sub>, 1 mM DTT). Co-IPs were carried out using 100 µl of α-Hfq, 120 mg of protein A-Sepharose beads (GE Healthcare), and 950 µl of cell lysate. Co-IP RNA was isolated from protein A-Sepharose beads by extraction with phenol: chloroform:isoamyl alcohol (25:24:1), followed by ethanol precipitation. Total RNA was isolated from 50 ml of cell lysate by TRIzol (Thermo Fisher Scientific) extraction followed by chloroform extraction and isopropanol precipitation. Total and co-IP RNA samples were resuspended in 15 µl of DEPC water, and 5 µg total RNA and 0.5 µg co-IP RNA were subjected to northern analysis as described below.</p></sec><sec id="s4-5"><title>Northern blot analysis</title><p>For smaller RNAs, total RNA (5 μg) was separated on a denaturing 8% polyacrylamide urea gel containing 6 M urea (1:4 mix of Ureagel Complete to Ureagel-8 (National Diagnostics) with 0.08% ammonium persulfate) in 1 X TBE buffer at 300 V for 90 min. The RNA was transferred to a Zeta-Probe GT membrane (Bio-Rad) at 20 V for 16 hr in 0.5 X TBE. For longer RNAs, total RNA (10 μg) was fractionated on formaldehyde-MOPS agarose gels as previously described (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1">Adams et al., 2017</xref>). Briefly, RNA was denatured in 3.7% formaldehyde (Fisher), 1 X MOPS (20 mM MOPS, 5 mM NaOAc, 1 mM EDTA, pH 7.0) and 1 X RNA loading dye (Thermo Fisher Scientific) for 10 min at 70 °C and incubated on ice. The RNA was loaded onto a 2% NuSieve 3:1 agarose (Lonza), 1 X MOPS, 2% formaldehyde gel and separated at 125–150 V at 4 °C for 1–2 hr and then transferred to a Zeta-Probe GT membrane (Bio-Rad) via capillary action overnight (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib78">Streit et al., 2009</xref>). For both types of blots, the RNA was crosslinked to the membranes by UV irradiation. RiboRuler High Range and Low Range RNA ladders (Thermo Fisher Scientific) were marked by UV-shadowing. Oligonucleotide probes (listed in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref>) for the different RNAs were labelled with 0.3 mCi of [γ-<sup>32</sup>P] ATP (Perkin Elmer) by incubating with 10 U of T4 polynucleotide kinase (New England Biolabs) at 37 °C for 1 hr.</p></sec><sec id="s4-6"><title>Primer extension assay</title><p>Primer extension analysis was performed using an oligonucleotide (listed in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp3">Supplementary file 3</xref>) specific to the <italic>rpsS</italic> as described (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib94">Zhang et al., 1998</xref>). RNA samples (5 µg of total RNA) were incubated with 2 pmol of 5-<sup>32</sup>P-end-labeled oligonucleotide primer at 80 °C and then slow-cooled to 42 °C. After the addition of dNTPs (1 mM each) and AMV reverse transcriptase (10 U, Life Sciences Advanced Technologies Inc), the reactions were incubated in a 10 μl-reaction volume at 42 °C for 1 hr. The reactions were terminated by adding 10 μl of Stop Loading Buffer. The cDNA products then were fractionated on 8% polyacrylamide urea gels containing 6 M urea in 1 X TBE buffer at 70 W for 70 min.</p></sec><sec id="s4-7"><title>RT-qPCR</title><p>Total RNA was isolated from cultures grown to OD<sub>600</sub>~0.2 and RNA concentrations were determined using a NanoDrop (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Samples were treated with DNase using TURBO DNA-free Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). DNA-free RNA was used for cDNA synthesis using iScript cDNA Synthesis Kit (Bio-Rad) and cDNA concentrations were measured by Qubit fluorimeter (Invitrogen). Equal amounts of cDNA were loaded into 96-well plate and cDNA was quantified by CFX Connect Real-Time system (Bio-Rad) using iTaq Univer SYBR Green mix (Bio-Rad) according to manufacturer instructions. Specific oligonucleotide primers were designed for each gene and the expression was normalized using <italic>ssrA</italic> levels. Serial dilutions of <italic>E. coli</italic> genomic DNA in known concentrations were used to generate a standard curve. CFX maestro analysis software (Bio-Rad) was used to determine the starting quantities of the cDNA samples based on the standard curve, and normalization was done using the starting quantities of <italic>ssrA</italic>. Reactions for each biological replicate were performed in technical duplicate or triplicate.</p></sec><sec id="s4-8"><title>RNA structure probing</title><p>gBlock fragments carrying the <italic>motR</italic>, <italic>fliX</italic>, <italic>rpsJ</italic> or <italic>rpsS</italic> CDS (IDT) were used as DNA templates for in vitro transcription with MEGAshortscript T7 High Yield Transcription Kit (Invitrogen). The transcripts were dephosphorylated with calf intestinal alkaline phosphatase (CIP, New England Biolabs) and then radioactively labeled at 5´ end with [γ-<sup>32</sup>P] ATP (Perkin Elmer) and T4 kinase (Invitrogen), and purified on an 8% polyacrylamide/6 M urea gel and eluted in buffer containing 20 mM Tris-HCl/pH 7.5, 0.5 M NaOAc, 10 mM EDTA and 1% SDS at 4 °C for overnight, followed by ethanol precipitation. The RNA concentration was determined by measuring the OD<sub>260</sub> on Nanodrop (Thermo Fisher Scientific).</p><p>For all the structural probing assays, 0.2 pmole of the labeled transcript, 2 pmole of unlabeled transcript and 1 µg of yeast RNA with or without 2 pmole (hexameric concentration) of purified Hfq were mixed in 10 µl of 1 x Structural Buffer in Ambion RNase T1 Kit (Invitrogen). The reactions were incubated at 37 °C for 10 min, followed by treatment at 37 °C with 0.02 U RNase T1 for 10 min, 1.3 U RNase III for 1.5 min, or 50 µmole lead acetate for 10 min, whereupon 20 µl Inactivation Buffer and 1 µl Glycoblue were added. The RNAs were precipitated and resuspended in 10 µl Gel Loading Buffer II (Thermo Fisher Scientific), and analyzed on a 8% polyacrylamide/7 M urea gel run in 1 x TBE. RNase T1 and alkali digestion ladders of the end-labeled transcripts were used as molecular size markers.</p></sec><sec id="s4-9"><title>Translational reporter assays</title><p>The GFP reporter assays were carried out essentially as described (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>). Overnight cultures were grown in 2 ml of LB media supplemented with the appropriate antibiotics at 37 °C with constant shaking at 250 rpm. Cells were then diluted to OD<sub>600</sub>~0.05 in 1 ml of fresh LB medium supplemented with the appropriate antibiotics in 96-well plate and grown at 37 °C with constant shaking at 250 rpm for 3 hr. Cells were pelleted and resuspended in filtered 1 X PBS. Fluorescence was measured using the BD LSRFortessa or Beckman Coulter Cytoflex flow cytometer. The level of regulation was calculated by subtracting the auto-fluorescence and then calculating the ratio between the fluorescence signal of a strain carrying the sRNA over-expressing plasmid and the signal of a strain carrying the control plasmid. Three biological repeats were prepared for every sample.</p><p>The β-galactosidase assays were carried out as described (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib60">Miller, 1992</xref>). Overnight cultures grown as for the GFP reporter assays were diluted 1:100 into 5 ml of fresh LB with antibiotic and 0.2% arabinose and grown at 37 °C with constant shaking at 250 rpm until OD<sub>600</sub> ~0.7. IPTG (1 mM) was added to cells harboring inducible sRNAs plasmids. After β-galactosidase activity was measured, the Miller units were calculated from the following formula:<disp-formula id="equ1"><mml:math id="m1"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi> </mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi> </mml:mi><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1000</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>420</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.75</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∙</mml:mo><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>∙</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>600</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:math></disp-formula></p></sec><sec id="s4-10"><title>Transcriptional reporter assays</title><p>Overnight cultures harboring <italic>flgB-gfp</italic> and <italic>fliL-gfp</italic> fusions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib89">Zaslaver et al., 2006</xref>) were grown as described for the translation reporter assays and then diluted to OD<sub>600</sub>~0.05 in 150 µl of fresh LB medium supplemented with the appropriate antibiotics in a transparent bottom 96-well plate. Bacterial growth and promoter activity were monitored for 330 min at 37 °C using OD<sub>600</sub> and GFP fluorescent measurements, respectively, using a Synergy H1 plate reader (Agilent).</p></sec><sec id="s4-11"><title>Immunoblot analysis</title><p>Bacteria were grown to the desired OD<sub>600</sub>, and the cells in 0.5 ml – 4 ml of culture were collected. Cell lysates were prepared by resuspending cell pellets with Laemmli sample buffer (Bio-Rad) normalized to the cell density, and samples were then heated for 10 min at 95 °C. Protein samples were subjected to a 4–15% polyacrylamide SDS gel electrophoresis followed by electrotransfer to a nitrocellulose membrane (Fisher Scientific). The membrane was blocked with 3% milk in 1X PBS with 0.1% Tween 20 (PBST), probed with anti-flagellin antibodies (1/10,000) (Abcam) and then with anti-rabbit secondary antibody (1/10,000) or with ANTI-FLAG M2-Peroxidase (HRP) (1/1000), (Sigma-Aldrich). Signals were visualized by the ECL system (Bio-Rad).</p></sec><sec id="s4-12"><title>Flagellin measurements</title><p>∆<italic>fliC</italic> (GSO1073) or WT (GSO983) cells harboring pBR*, pBR*-UhpU, pZE, pZE-MotR, pZE-MotR*, pZE-FliX or pZE-FliX-S were grown with shaking at 180 rpm in 5 ml of LB at 37 °C to OD<sub>600</sub> ~1.0. Cell pellets collected by centrifugation were suspended in 5 ml of PBS and then heated at 65 °C for 5 min, followed by centrifugation to obtain the cell pellets and supernatants, which contained the cytoplasmic flagellin molecules and depolymerized flagellin monomers, respectively. The cell pellets were resuspended in the Laemmli sample buffer (Bio-Rad), normalized to the cell density. Proteins in the supernatants were precipitated by 10% trichloroacetic acid, resuspended in Laemmli sample buffer (Bio-Rad) and heated at 95 °C for 10 min.</p></sec><sec id="s4-13"><title>Electron microscopy</title><p>Overnight cultures were diluted in fresh medium and grown with shaking at 180 rpm, at 37 °C to mid-log phase (OD<sub>600</sub>~0.6–0.8) unless indicated otherwise. Cells were collected by centrifugation at 1000 rpm for 20 min, and pellet was resuspended in 300 µl of saline. Next, 3 µl of bacterial suspension were placed on a freshly glow-discharged carbon covered electron microscopic support grid (EMS, Hatfield, PA) for 5 min. The grid was washed twice with distilled water and stained for 1 min with 0.75% aqueous solution of uranyl formate, pH 4.5. The grids were imaged in Thermo Fisher Scientific (Hillsboro, OR) FEI Tecnai 20 electron microscope operated at 120 kV. The images were recorded using AMT (Woburn, MA) XR81 CCD camera. Flagella were counted for 20–40 cells in each sample as indicated in the Figure legends. Each analysis was repeated a minimum of three times.</p></sec><sec id="s4-14"><title>Motility assays</title><p>Overnight cultures (~1 µl) were spotted onto 0.3% soft agar plates by touching the agar softly with the tip and ejecting the culture. Plates were incubated right-side up at 30 °C above a beaker filled with water for 9–24 hr. Plates were made with the appropriate antibiotics and with 1 mM IPTG when needed. The plates were imaged using Bio-Rad imager (using Colorimetric settings) and the diameter of the bacterial culture was calculated using ImageJ software. Two technical repeats and three biological repeats were carried out for each strain. For motility competition assays, cells were first transformed with pCON1.proC-GFP or pCON1.proC-mCherry plasmids (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib15">Cooper et al., 2017</xref>), resulting in a GFP or an mCherry signal, respectively. In each case, equal numbers of bacterial cells based on OD<sub>600</sub> of each overnight culture for one strain expressing a green fluorescence signal and a second strain expressing a red fluorescent signal were mixed before spotting them onto 0.3% soft agar plate and the plates were incubated as described above. Images were taken using Bio-Rad imager with the following settings: Colorimetric (1–2 s) for bright field, Cy2 for GFP (auto optimal exposure), Cy3 for mCherry (auto optimal exposure). Images were merged using Image Lab (Bio-Rad).</p></sec><sec id="s4-15"><title>RNA-seq</title><p>Overnight cultures were diluted in fresh LB medium and grown to early-log phase (OD<sub>600</sub>~0.2). RNA was extracted using the standard TRIzol protocol (Thermo Fisher Scientific) as described above. Total RNA libraries were constructed using the RNAtag-Seq protocol with a few modifications to allow capture of short RNA fragments as previously described (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib56">Melamed et al., 2018</xref>). The libraries were sequenced by paired-end sequencing using the HiSeq 2500 system (Illumina) at the Molecular Genomics Core, <italic>Eunice Kennedy Shriver</italic> National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. RNA-seq data processing followed the same procedures as RIL-seq data analysis for QC analysis, adaptor removal, and alignment with the Python RILSeq package (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib56">Melamed et al., 2018</xref>). The raw fastq records were demultiplexed with python script index_splitter.py (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://github.com/asafpr/RNAseq_scripts/blob/master/index_splitter.py">https://github.com/asafpr/RNAseq_scripts/blob/master/index_splitter.py</ext-link>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib65">Peer, 2015</xref>) followed by adapter removal with cutadpt software (version 3.4). The trimmed fastq reads were mapped to the <italic>E. coli</italic> genome (ecoli-k12-MG1655-NC_000913–3) with Python RILSeq package (version 0.74, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://github.com/asafpr/RILseq">https://github.com/asafpr/RILseq</ext-link>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib66">Peer, 2018</xref>). Deeptools software (version 3.5.1) was used to generate bigwig file for coverage visualization. Read counts were obtained with featureCounts tool of Subread software (version 2.0.3) and a customized annotation file based on EcoCyc version 20.0 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib40">Keseler et al., 2013</xref>) with manual addition of sRNAs and small proteins from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib33">Hör et al., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib31">Hemm et al., 2020</xref>. Differential expression analyses were conducted with R DESeq2 package (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib45">Love et al., 2014</xref>) and default normalization. Differentially-expressed genes were extracted with the parameter of ‘independentFiltering = FALSE’.</p></sec><sec id="s4-16"><title>Determination of sequence motifs and base-pairing predictions</title><p>Common binding motifs were searched with MEME software (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib7">Bailey et al., 2009</xref>). Genes that were induced the most by MotR* overexpression in RNA-seq data (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp2">Supplementary file 2</xref>) (FDR = 0.05 and ≥2 fold) were extracted and grouped into transcription units based on EcoCyc version 20.0 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib40">Keseler et al., 2013</xref>). For each transcription unit, genomic sequence was extracted using coordinates for the start codon of the first gene in the transcription unit and 250 nt upstream of the gene. For sRNAs, genomic sequence was extracted using coordinates for the transcription start site and 250 nt upstream to the gene. For outputs, motif length was restricted to 28 nt. Base-pairing regions between two RNAs were predicted using IntaRNA (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib51">Mann et al., 2017</xref>) or TargetRNA2 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib39">Kery et al., 2014</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s4-17"><title>Functional annotation analysis</title><p>Functional annotation analysis of sRNAs targets was carried out using the Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery (DAVID) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib34">Huang et al., 2009</xref>). Gene names served as the input list in each case. Targets that were present in at least three RIL-seq conditions in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="supp1">Supplementary file 1</xref> were included in the analysis.</p></sec><sec id="s4-18"><title>Circos plots</title><p>Circos plots were generated according to the R RCircos Package (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib96">Zhang et al., 2013a</xref>). Link lines are used to label the statistically significant chimeric fragments (S-chimeras as defined in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>). RIL-seq data from six different growth conditions was analyzed and S-chimeras present in at least four of the six conditions are included in the plots.</p></sec><sec id="s4-19"><title>Browser images</title><p>Data from RIL-seq experiment 1 from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref> extracted from unified S-chimera files for the different sRNAs were mapped based on the first nt of each read in the chimera. BED files were generated with Python RILSeq package (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib56">Melamed et al., 2018</xref>) and viewed using the UCSC genome browser (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib38">Kent et al., 2002</xref>). For previously annotated RNA in GTF file, BED files are directly generated with command of generate_BED_file_of_endpoints.py and EcoCyc ID. For genes annotated in the current study, significant chimeras which involve the relevant gene are first extracted from significant interaction file, then chimeric reads involving the S-chimeras are extracted from chimeric read file. To be a qualified chimeric read, RNA1 start position of the read must overlap with the genomic range of RNA1 in S-chimera and RNA2 start position of the read must overlap with the genomic range of RNA2 in S-chimera. Finally, the read list for genes annotated in the current study is supplied to generate_BED_file_of_endpoints.py command to generate BED file.</p></sec><sec id="s4-20"><title>Data and materials Availability</title><p>Further information and requests for resources and reagents should be directed to and will be fulfilled by the Lead Contact, Gisela Storz (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.nichd.nih.gov/research/atNICHD/Investigators/storz">storzg@mail.nih.gov</ext-link>). The sequencing data reported in this paper have been deposited in GEO under accession number GSE174487. Reused sequencing data from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref> have been deposited in ArrayExpress under accession number E-MTAB-3910 and in GEO under accession number GSE131520.</p></sec></sec></body><back><sec sec-type="additional-information" id="s5"><title>Additional information</title><fn-group content-type="competing-interest"><title>Competing interests</title><fn fn-type="COI-statement" id="conf1"><p>No competing interests declared</p></fn></fn-group><fn-group content-type="author-contribution"><title>Author contributions</title><fn fn-type="con" id="con1"><p>Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Validation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Writing – review and editing</p></fn><fn fn-type="con" id="con2"><p>Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing</p></fn><fn fn-type="con" id="con3"><p>Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, M.J. performed all EM analysis</p></fn><fn fn-type="con" id="con4"><p>Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation</p></fn><fn fn-type="con" id="con5"><p>Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation</p></fn><fn fn-type="con" id="con6"><p>Resources, Data curation, Software, Formal analysis, H.Z. performed all computational analyses</p></fn><fn fn-type="con" id="con7"><p>Conceptualization, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Writing – review and editing</p></fn></fn-group></sec><sec sec-type="supplementary-material" id="s6"><title>Additional files</title><supplementary-material id="supp1"><label>Supplementary file 1.</label><caption><title>Target sets of σ<sup>28</sup>-dependent sRNAs based on RIL-seq datasets.</title><p>RIL-seq datasets from experiments done in six different conditions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib58">Melamed et al., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib55">Melamed et al., 2016</xref>) were analyzed tin order to generate a target set for each of the four sRNAs. Tables are sorted according to the number of conditions in which a target was found. Functional annotation analysis of sRNA targets was done using DAVID. Targets that were present in at least three RIL-seq conditions in were included in the analysis. The top annotation cluster is shown for each dataset. (NOR = Normalized Odds Ratio)</p></caption><media xlink:href="elife-87151-supp1-v1.xlsx" mimetype="application" mime-subtype="xlsx"/></supplementary-material><supplementary-material id="supp2"><label>Supplementary file 2.</label><caption><title>RNA levels in different RNAseq datasets.</title><p>Total RNA libraries reads were subject to differential expression analyses conducted with DESeq2 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib45">Love et al., 2014</xref>). For MotR* and FliX data, three biological repeats were analyzed for the vector control strain (pZE) and for the MotR* or FliX overexpressing strain (pZE-MotR*, pZE-FliX). For Δ<italic>fliA</italic> data (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">Fitzgerald et al., 2014</xref>), two biological repeats were analyzed for the WT strain and for the Δ<italic>fliA</italic> strain.</p></caption><media xlink:href="elife-87151-supp2-v1.xlsx" mimetype="application" mime-subtype="xlsx"/></supplementary-material><supplementary-material id="supp3"><label>Supplementary file 3.</label><caption><title>List of oligonucleotides used in this work.</title></caption><media xlink:href="elife-87151-supp3-v1.xlsx" mimetype="application" mime-subtype="xlsx"/></supplementary-material><supplementary-material id="mdar"><label>MDAR checklist</label><media xlink:href="elife-87151-mdarchecklist1-v1.docx" mimetype="application" mime-subtype="docx"/></supplementary-material></sec><sec sec-type="data-availability" id="s7"><title>Data availability</title><p>The sequencing data reported in this paper have been deposited in GEO under accession number GSE174487.</p><p>The following dataset was generated:</p><p><element-citation publication-type="data" specific-use="isSupplementedBy" id="dataset1"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Jarnik</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Mills</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Silverman</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2023">2023</year><data-title>σ28-dependent small RNA regulation of flagella biosynthesis</data-title><source>NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus</source><pub-id pub-id-type="accession" xlink:href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE174487">GSE174487</pub-id></element-citation></p><p>The following previously published datasets were used:</p><p><element-citation publication-type="data" specific-use="references" id="dataset2"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Peer</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Faigenbaum-Romm</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Gatt</surname><given-names>YE</given-names></name><name><surname>Reiss</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Bar</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Altuvia</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Argaman</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Margalit</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2016">2016</year><data-title>Global mapping of small RNA-target interactions in bacteria</data-title><source>ArrayExpress</source><pub-id pub-id-type="accession" xlink:href="https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/arrayexpress/studies/E-MTAB-3910?accession=E-MTAB-3910">E-MTAB-3910</pub-id></element-citation></p><p><element-citation publication-type="data" specific-use="references" id="dataset3"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Adams</surname><given-names>PP</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><data-title>RNA-RNA interactomes of ProQ and Hfq reveal overlapping and competing roles</data-title><source>NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus</source><pub-id pub-id-type="accession" xlink:href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE131520">GSE131520</pub-id></element-citation></p></sec><ack id="ack"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>We thank M Gottesman for plasmids expressing wild type and <italic>rpsJ</italic> mutants, O Steele-Mortimer for plasmids constitutively expressing GFP or mCherry, and D Court for the S10 antibody. We thank J Wade for sharing the sequences used to generate the σ<sup>28</sup> binding motif and J Wade and G Baniulyte for advice on the FRUIT method. We thank the NICHD Molecular Genomics Core, particularly Tianwei Li, for all the library sequencing. We also appreciate the help of A Peer with the sRNA conservation analysis. We are grateful to the Storz and S Gottesman labs for all the helpful discussions and thank the Storz lab, S Gottesman, and J Wade for their comments on the manuscript. This work utilized the computational resources of the NIH HPC Beowulf cluster (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://hpc.nih.gov">http://hpc.nih.gov</ext-link>).</p></ack><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="bib1"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Adams</surname><given-names>PP</given-names></name><name><surname>Flores Avile</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Popitsch</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Bilusic</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Schroeder</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Lybecker</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Jewett</surname><given-names>MW</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2017">2017</year><article-title>In vivo expression technology and 5’ end mapping of the Borrelia burgdorferi transcriptome identify novel RNAs expressed during mammalian infection</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>45</volume><fpage>775</fpage><lpage>792</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gkw1180</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27913725</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib2"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Adams</surname><given-names>PP</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>Prevalence of small base-pairing RNAs derived from diverse genomic loci</article-title><source>Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. Gene Regulatory Mechanisms</source><volume>1863</volume><elocation-id>194524</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.bbagrm.2020.194524</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32147527</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib3"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Adler</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Templeton</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1967">1967</year><article-title>The effect of environmental conditions on the motility of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Journal of General Microbiology</source><volume>46</volume><fpage>175</fpage><lpage>184</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1099/00221287-46-2-175</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib4"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Altegoer</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Bange</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2015">2015</year><article-title>Undiscovered regions on the molecular landscape of flagellar assembly</article-title><source>Current Opinion in Microbiology</source><volume>28</volume><fpage>98</fpage><lpage>105</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.mib.2015.08.011</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26490009</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib5"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Altschul</surname><given-names>SF</given-names></name><name><surname>Gish</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Miller</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Myers</surname><given-names>EW</given-names></name><name><surname>Lipman</surname><given-names>DJ</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1990">1990</year><article-title>Basic local alignment search tool</article-title><source>Journal of Molecular Biology</source><volume>215</volume><fpage>403</fpage><lpage>410</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">2231712</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib6"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Baba</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Ara</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Hasegawa</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Takai</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Okumura</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Baba</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Datsenko</surname><given-names>KA</given-names></name><name><surname>Tomita</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Wanner</surname><given-names>BL</given-names></name><name><surname>Mori</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2006">2006</year><article-title>Construction of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> K-12 in-frame, single-gene knockout mutants: the Keio collection</article-title><source>Molecular Systems Biology</source><volume>2</volume><elocation-id>2006.0008</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/msb4100050</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16738554</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib7"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bailey</surname><given-names>TL</given-names></name><name><surname>Boden</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Buske</surname><given-names>FA</given-names></name><name><surname>Frith</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Grant</surname><given-names>CE</given-names></name><name><surname>Clementi</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Ren</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>WW</given-names></name><name><surname>Noble</surname><given-names>WS</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2009">2009</year><article-title>MEME SUITE: tools for motif discovery and searching</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>37</volume><fpage>W202</fpage><lpage>W208</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gkp335</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19458158</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib8"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bak</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Suk</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Young Lee</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>K-S</given-names></name><name><surname>Choi</surname><given-names>B-S</given-names></name><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2015">2015</year><article-title>Identification of novel sRNAs involved in biofilm formation, motility, and fimbriae formation in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Scientific Reports</source><volume>5</volume><elocation-id>15287</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/srep15287</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26469694</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib9"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Baniulyte</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Singh</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Benoit</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Johnson</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Ferguson</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Paramo</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Stringer</surname><given-names>AM</given-names></name><name><surname>Scott</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Lapierre</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Wade</surname><given-names>JT</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2017">2017</year><article-title>Identification of regulatory targets for the bacterial Nus factor complex</article-title><source>Nature Communications</source><volume>8</volume><elocation-id>2027</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41467-017-02124-9</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29229908</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib10"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bar</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Argaman</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Altuvia</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Margalit</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2021">2021</year><article-title>Prediction of Novel Bacterial Small RNAs From RIL-Seq RNA-RNA Interaction Data</article-title><source>Frontiers in Microbiology</source><volume>12</volume><elocation-id>635070</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fmicb.2021.635070</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34093460</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib11"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bronesky</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Desgranges</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Corvaglia</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>François</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Caballero</surname><given-names>CJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Prado</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Toledo-Arana</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Lasa</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Moreau</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Vandenesch</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Marzi</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Romby</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Caldelari</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2019">2019</year><article-title>A multifaceted small RNA modulates gene expression upon glucose limitation in <italic>Staphylococcus aureus</italic></article-title><source>The EMBO Journal</source><volume>38</volume><elocation-id>e99363</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15252/embj.201899363</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30760492</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib12"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cherepanov</surname><given-names>PP</given-names></name><name><surname>Wackernagel</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1995">1995</year><article-title>Gene disruption in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic>: TcR and KmR cassettes with the option of Flp-catalyzed excision of the antibiotic-resistance determinant</article-title><source>Gene</source><volume>158</volume><fpage>9</fpage><lpage>14</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0378-1119(95)00193-a</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">7789817</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib13"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chevance</surname><given-names>FFV</given-names></name><name><surname>Hughes</surname><given-names>KT</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2008">2008</year><article-title>Coordinating assembly of a bacterial macromolecular machine</article-title><source>Nature Reviews. Microbiology</source><volume>6</volume><fpage>455</fpage><lpage>465</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nrmicro1887</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18483484</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib14"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Choi</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Han</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Cho</surname><given-names>YJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Nam</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>EJ</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2017">2017</year><article-title>A trans-acting leader RNA from A Salmonella virulence gene</article-title><source>PNAS</source><volume>114</volume><fpage>10232</fpage><lpage>11023</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.1705437114</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib15"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cooper</surname><given-names>KG</given-names></name><name><surname>Chong</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Starr</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Finn</surname><given-names>CE</given-names></name><name><surname>Steele-Mortimer</surname><given-names>O</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2017">2017</year><article-title>Predictable, tunable protein production in <italic>Salmonella</italic> for studying host-pathogen interactions</article-title><source>Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology</source><volume>7</volume><elocation-id>475</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fcimb.2017.00475</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29201859</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib16"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Corcoran</surname><given-names>CP</given-names></name><name><surname>Podkaminski</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Papenfort</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Urban</surname><given-names>JH</given-names></name><name><surname>Hinton</surname><given-names>JCD</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogel</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2012">2012</year><article-title>Superfolder GFP reporters validate diverse new mRNA targets of the classic porin regulator, MicF RNA</article-title><source>Molecular Microbiology</source><volume>84</volume><fpage>428</fpage><lpage>445</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2958.2012.08031.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22458297</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib17"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Datsenko</surname><given-names>KA</given-names></name><name><surname>Wanner</surname><given-names>BL</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2000">2000</year><article-title>One-step inactivation of chromosomal genes in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> K-12 using PCR products</article-title><source>PNAS</source><volume>97</volume><fpage>6640</fpage><lpage>6645</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.120163297</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10829079</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib18"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Davis</surname><given-names>JJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Wattam</surname><given-names>AR</given-names></name><name><surname>Aziz</surname><given-names>RK</given-names></name><name><surname>Brettin</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Butler</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Butler</surname><given-names>RM</given-names></name><name><surname>Chlenski</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Conrad</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Dickerman</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Dietrich</surname><given-names>EM</given-names></name><name><surname>Gabbard</surname><given-names>JL</given-names></name><name><surname>Gerdes</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Guard</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Kenyon</surname><given-names>RW</given-names></name><name><surname>Machi</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Mao</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Murphy-Olson</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Nguyen</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Nordberg</surname><given-names>EK</given-names></name><name><surname>Olsen</surname><given-names>GJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Olson</surname><given-names>RD</given-names></name><name><surname>Overbeek</surname><given-names>JC</given-names></name><name><surname>Overbeek</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Parrello</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Pusch</surname><given-names>GD</given-names></name><name><surname>Shukla</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Thomas</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>VanOeffelen</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Vonstein</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Warren</surname><given-names>AS</given-names></name><name><surname>Xia</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Xie</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Yoo</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Stevens</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>The PATRIC bioinformatics resource center: expanding data and analysis capabilities</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>48</volume><fpage>D606</fpage><lpage>D612</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gkz943</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib19"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>De Lay</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Gottesman</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2012">2012</year><article-title>A complex network of small non-coding RNAs regulate motility in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Molecular Microbiology</source><volume>86</volume><fpage>524</fpage><lpage>538</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2958.2012.08209.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22925049</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib20"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Desgranges</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Barrientos</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Herrgott</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Marzi</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Toledo-Arana</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Moreau</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Vandenesch</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Romby</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Caldelari</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2022">2022</year><article-title>The 3’UTR-derived sRNA RsaG coordinates redox homeostasis and metabolism adaptation in response to glucose-6-phosphate uptake in <italic>Staphylococcus aureus</italic></article-title><source>Molecular Microbiology</source><volume>117</volume><fpage>193</fpage><lpage>214</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/mmi.14845</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34783400</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib21"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Di Tommaso</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Chatzou</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Floden</surname><given-names>EW</given-names></name><name><surname>Barja</surname><given-names>PP</given-names></name><name><surname>Palumbo</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Notredame</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2017">2017</year><article-title>Nextflow enables reproducible computational workflows</article-title><source>Nature Biotechnology</source><volume>35</volume><fpage>316</fpage><lpage>319</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nbt.3820</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28398311</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib22"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Erhardt</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2016">2016</year><article-title>Strategies to block bacterial pathogenesis by interference with motility and chemotaxis</article-title><source>Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology</source><volume>398</volume><fpage>185</fpage><lpage>205</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/82_2016_493</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27000091</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib23"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Faigenbaum-Romm</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Reich</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Gatt</surname><given-names>YE</given-names></name><name><surname>Barsheshet</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Argaman</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Margalit</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>Hierarchy in Hfq Chaperon occupancy of small RNA targets plays a major role in their regulation</article-title><source>Cell Reports</source><volume>30</volume><fpage>3127</fpage><lpage>3138</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.celrep.2020.02.016</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32130912</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib24"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fitzgerald</surname><given-names>DM</given-names></name><name><surname>Bonocora</surname><given-names>RP</given-names></name><name><surname>Wade</surname><given-names>JT</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2014">2014</year><article-title>Comprehensive mapping of the <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> flagellar regulatory network</article-title><source>PLOS Genetics</source><volume>10</volume><elocation-id>e1004649</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pgen.1004649</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25275371</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib25"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fitzgerald</surname><given-names>DM</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Lapierre</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Wade</surname><given-names>JT</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2018">2018</year><article-title>The evolutionary impact of intragenic FliA promoters in proteobacteria</article-title><source>Molecular Microbiology</source><volume>108</volume><fpage>361</fpage><lpage>378</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/mmi.13941</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29476659</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib26"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Freedman</surname><given-names>LP</given-names></name><name><surname>Zengel</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name><name><surname>Archer</surname><given-names>RH</given-names></name><name><surname>Lindahl</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1987">1987</year><article-title>Autogenous control of the S10 ribosomal protein operon of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic>: genetic dissection of transcriptional and posttranscriptional regulation</article-title><source>PNAS</source><volume>84</volume><fpage>6516</fpage><lpage>6520</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.84.18.6516</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">2442760</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib27"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guillier</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Gottesman</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2006">2006</year><article-title>Remodelling of the <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> outer membrane by two small regulatory RNAs</article-title><source>Molecular Microbiology</source><volume>59</volume><fpage>231</fpage><lpage>247</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2958.2005.04929.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16359331</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib28"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guo</surname><given-names>MS</given-names></name><name><surname>Updegrove</surname><given-names>TB</given-names></name><name><surname>Gogol</surname><given-names>EB</given-names></name><name><surname>Shabalina</surname><given-names>SA</given-names></name><name><surname>Gross</surname><given-names>CA</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2014">2014</year><article-title>MicL, a new σE-dependent sRNA, combats envelope stress by repressing synthesis of Lpp, the major outer membrane lipoprotein</article-title><source>Genes &amp; Development</source><volume>28</volume><fpage>1620</fpage><lpage>1634</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/gad.243485.114</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25030700</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib29"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guttenplan</surname><given-names>SB</given-names></name><name><surname>Kearns</surname><given-names>DB</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2013">2013</year><article-title>Regulation of flagellar motility during biofilm formation</article-title><source>FEMS Microbiology Reviews</source><volume>37</volume><fpage>849</fpage><lpage>871</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/1574-6976.12018</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23480406</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib30"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guzman</surname><given-names>LM</given-names></name><name><surname>Belin</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Carson</surname><given-names>MJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Beckwith</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1995">1995</year><article-title>Tight regulation, modulation, and high-level expression by vectors containing the arabinose PBAD promoter</article-title><source>Journal of Bacteriology</source><volume>177</volume><fpage>4121</fpage><lpage>4130</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/jb.177.14.4121-4130.1995</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">7608087</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib31"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hemm</surname><given-names>MR</given-names></name><name><surname>Weaver</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>Escherichia coli small proteome</article-title><source>EcoSal Plus</source><volume>9</volume><fpage>ESP</fpage><lpage>0031</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/ecosalplus.ESP-0031-2019</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib32"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Holmqvist</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogel</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2018">2018</year><article-title>RNA-binding proteins in bacteria</article-title><source>Nature Reviews. Microbiology</source><volume>16</volume><fpage>601</fpage><lpage>615</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41579-018-0049-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29995832</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib33"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hör</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Matera</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogel</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Gottesman</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>Trans-acting small RNAs and their effects on gene expression in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> and <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic></article-title><source>EcoSal Plus</source><volume>9</volume><elocation-id>ESP-0030-2019</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/ecosalplus.ESP-0030-2019</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib34"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>DW</given-names></name><name><surname>Sherman</surname><given-names>BT</given-names></name><name><surname>Lempicki</surname><given-names>RA</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2009">2009</year><article-title>Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources</article-title><source>Nature Protocols</source><volume>4</volume><fpage>44</fpage><lpage>57</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nprot.2008.211</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib35"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ikeda</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Homma</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Iino</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Asakura</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Kamiya</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1987">1987</year><article-title>Localization and stoichiometry of hook-associated proteins within <italic>Salmonella</italic> typhimurium flagella</article-title><source>Journal of Bacteriology</source><volume>169</volume><fpage>1168</fpage><lpage>1173</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/jb.169.3.1168-1173.1987</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">3546266</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib36"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kalir</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>McClure</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Pabbaraju</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Southward</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Ronen</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Leibler</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Surette</surname><given-names>MG</given-names></name><name><surname>Alon</surname><given-names>U</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2001">2001</year><article-title>Ordering genes in a flagella pathway by analysis of expression kinetics from living bacteria</article-title><source>Science</source><volume>292</volume><fpage>2080</fpage><lpage>2083</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1126/science.1058758</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib37"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kalir</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Mangan</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Alon</surname><given-names>U</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2005">2005</year><article-title>A coherent feed-forward loop with A SUM input function prolongs flagella expression in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Molecular Systems Biology</source><volume>1</volume><elocation-id>2005.0006</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/msb4100010</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16729041</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib38"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kent</surname><given-names>WJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Sugnet</surname><given-names>CW</given-names></name><name><surname>Furey</surname><given-names>TS</given-names></name><name><surname>Roskin</surname><given-names>KM</given-names></name><name><surname>Pringle</surname><given-names>TH</given-names></name><name><surname>Zahler</surname><given-names>AM</given-names></name><name><surname>Haussler</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2002">2002</year><article-title>The human genome browser at UCSC</article-title><source>Genome Research</source><volume>12</volume><fpage>996</fpage><lpage>1006</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/gr.229102</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12045153</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib39"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kery</surname><given-names>MB</given-names></name><name><surname>Feldman</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Livny</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Tjaden</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2014">2014</year><article-title>TargetRNA2: identifying targets of small regulatory RNAs in bacteria</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>42</volume><fpage>W124</fpage><lpage>W129</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gku317</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib40"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Keseler</surname><given-names>IM</given-names></name><name><surname>Mackie</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Peralta-Gil</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Santos-Zavaleta</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Gama-Castro</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Bonavides-Martínez</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Fulcher</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Huerta</surname><given-names>AM</given-names></name><name><surname>Kothari</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Krummenacker</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Latendresse</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Muñiz-Rascado</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Ong</surname><given-names>Q</given-names></name><name><surname>Paley</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Schröder</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Shearer</surname><given-names>AG</given-names></name><name><surname>Subhraveti</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Travers</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Weerasinghe</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Weiss</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Collado-Vides</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Gunsalus</surname><given-names>RP</given-names></name><name><surname>Paulsen</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Karp</surname><given-names>PD</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2013">2013</year><article-title>EcoCyc: fusing model organism databases with systems biology</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>41</volume><fpage>D605</fpage><lpage>D612</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gks1027</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib41"><element-citation publication-type="preprint"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>König</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Svensson</surname><given-names>SL</given-names></name><name><surname>Sharma</surname><given-names>CM</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2023">2023</year><article-title>Interplay of two small RNAs fine-tunes hierarchical flagellar gene expression in the foodborne pathogen campylobacter jejuni</article-title><source>bioRxiv</source><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/2023.04.21.537696</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib42"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Landini</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Zehnder</surname><given-names>AJB</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2002">2002</year><article-title>The global regulatory hns gene negatively affects adhesion to solid surfaces by anaerobically grown <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> by modulating expression of flagellar genes and lipopolysaccharide production</article-title><source>Journal of Bacteriology</source><volume>184</volume><fpage>1522</fpage><lpage>1529</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/JB.184.6.1522-1529.2002</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11872702</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib43"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lehnen</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Blumer</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Polen</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Wackwitz</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Wendisch</surname><given-names>VF</given-names></name><name><surname>Unden</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2002">2002</year><article-title>LrhA as a new transcriptional key regulator of flagella, motility and chemotaxis genes in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Molecular Microbiology</source><volume>45</volume><fpage>521</fpage><lpage>532</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.03032.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12123461</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib44"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lejars</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Caillet</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Solchaga-Flores</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Guillier</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Plumbridge</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Hajnsdorf</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2022">2022</year><article-title>Regulatory Interplay between RNase III and Antisense RNAs in <italic>E. coli</italic>: the Case of AsflhD and FlhD, Component of the Master Regulator of Motility</article-title><source>mBio</source><volume>13</volume><elocation-id>e0098122</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/mbio.00981-22</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36000733</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib45"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Love</surname><given-names>MI</given-names></name><name><surname>Huber</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Anders</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2014">2014</year><article-title>Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2</article-title><source>Genome Biology</source><volume>15</volume><elocation-id>550</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25516281</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib46"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Luo</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><name><surname>Hsiao</surname><given-names>HH</given-names></name><name><surname>Bubunenko</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Weber</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Court</surname><given-names>DL</given-names></name><name><surname>Gottesman</surname><given-names>ME</given-names></name><name><surname>Urlaub</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Wahl</surname><given-names>MC</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2008">2008</year><article-title>Structural and functional analysis of the <italic>E. coli</italic> NusB-S10 transcription antitermination complex</article-title><source>Molecular Cell</source><volume>32</volume><fpage>791</fpage><lpage>802</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.molcel.2008.10.028</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19111659</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib47"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lüttgen</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Robelek</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Mühlberger</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Diercks</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Schuster</surname><given-names>SC</given-names></name><name><surname>Köhler</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Kessler</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Bacher</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Richter</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2002">2002</year><article-title>Transcriptional regulation by antitermination</article-title><source>Journal of Molecular Biology</source><volume>316</volume><fpage>875</fpage><lpage>885</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1006/jmbi.2001.5388</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib48"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lutz</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Bujard</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1997">1997</year><article-title>Independent and tight regulation of transcriptional units in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> via the LacR/O, the TetR/O and AraC/I1-I2 regulatory elements</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>25</volume><fpage>1203</fpage><lpage>1210</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/25.6.1203</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9092630</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib49"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mandin</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Gottesman</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2009">2009</year><article-title>A genetic approach for finding small RNAs regulators of genes of interest identifies RybC as regulating the DpiA/DpiB two-component system</article-title><source>Molecular Microbiology</source><volume>72</volume><fpage>551</fpage><lpage>565</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2958.2009.06665.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19426207</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib50"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mandin</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Gottesman</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2010">2010</year><article-title>Integrating anaerobic/aerobic sensing and the general stress response through the ArcZ small RNA</article-title><source>The EMBO Journal</source><volume>29</volume><fpage>3094</fpage><lpage>3107</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/emboj.2010.179</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20683441</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib51"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mann</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Wright</surname><given-names>PR</given-names></name><name><surname>Backofen</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2017">2017</year><article-title>IntaRNA 2.0: enhanced and customizable prediction of RNA-RNA interactions</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>45</volume><fpage>W435</fpage><lpage>W439</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gkx279</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28472523</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib52"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Marger</surname><given-names>MD</given-names></name><name><surname>Saier</surname><given-names>MHJ</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1993">1993</year><article-title>A major superfamily of transmembrane facilitators that catalyse uniport, symport and antiport</article-title><source>Trends in Biochemical Sciences</source><volume>18</volume><fpage>13</fpage><lpage>20</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0968-0004(93)90081-w</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">8438231</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib53"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Matera</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Altuvia</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Gerovac</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>El Mouali</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Margalit</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogel</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2022">2022</year><article-title>Global RNA interactome of <italic>Salmonella</italic> discovers a 5’ UTR sponge for the MicF small RNA that connects membrane permeability to transport capacity</article-title><source>Molecular Cell</source><volume>82</volume><fpage>629</fpage><lpage>644</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.molcel.2021.12.030</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">35063132</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib54"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mears</surname><given-names>PJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Koirala</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Rao</surname><given-names>CV</given-names></name><name><surname>Golding</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Chemla</surname><given-names>YR</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2014">2014</year><article-title><italic>Escherichia coli</italic> swimming is robust against variations in flagellar number</article-title><source>eLife</source><volume>3</volume><elocation-id>e01916</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.01916</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24520165</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib55"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Peer</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Faigenbaum-Romm</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Gatt</surname><given-names>YE</given-names></name><name><surname>Reiss</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Bar</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Altuvia</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Argaman</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Margalit</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2016">2016</year><article-title>Global Mapping of Small RNA-Target Interactions in Bacteria</article-title><source>Molecular Cell</source><volume>63</volume><fpage>884</fpage><lpage>897</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.molcel.2016.07.026</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib56"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Faigenbaum-Romm</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Peer</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Reiss</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Shechter</surname><given-names>O</given-names></name><name><surname>Bar</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Altuvia</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Argaman</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Margalit</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2018">2018</year><article-title>Mapping the small RNA interactome in bacteria using RIL-seq</article-title><source>Nature Protocols</source><volume>13</volume><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>33</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nprot.2017.115</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29215635</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib57"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>New sequencing methodologies reveal interplay between multiple RNA-binding proteins and their RNAs</article-title><source>Current Genetics</source><volume>66</volume><fpage>713</fpage><lpage>717</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00294-020-01066-y</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32193580</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib58"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Adams</surname><given-names>PP</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>RNA-RNA Interactomes of ProQ and Hfq reveal overlapping and competing roles</article-title><source>Molecular Cell</source><volume>77</volume><fpage>411</fpage><lpage>425</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.molcel.2019.10.022</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib59"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mika</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Hengge</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2014">2014</year><article-title>Small RNAs in the control of RpoS, CsgD, and biofilm architecture of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>RNA Biology</source><volume>11</volume><fpage>494</fpage><lpage>507</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4161/rna.28867</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25028968</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib60"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Miller</surname><given-names>JH</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1992">1992</year><source>A Short Course in Bacterial Genetics: A Laboratory Manual and Handbook for Escherichia Coli and Related Bacteria</source><publisher-name>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press</publisher-name></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib61"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nakamura</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Minamino</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2019">2019</year><article-title>Flagella-Driven Motility of Bacteria</article-title><source>Biomolecules</source><volume>9</volume><elocation-id>279</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/biom9070279</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31337100</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib62"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Osterman</surname><given-names>IA</given-names></name><name><surname>Dikhtyar</surname><given-names>YY</given-names></name><name><surname>Bogdanov</surname><given-names>AA</given-names></name><name><surname>Dontsova</surname><given-names>OA</given-names></name><name><surname>Sergiev</surname><given-names>PV</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2015">2015</year><article-title>Regulation of flagellar gene expression in bacteria</article-title><source>Biochemistry. Biokhimiia</source><volume>80</volume><fpage>1447</fpage><lpage>1456</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1134/S000629791511005X</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26615435</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib63"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Papenfort</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2023">2023</year><article-title>Small RNAs, large networks: posttranscriptional regulons in gram-negative bacteria</article-title><source>Annual Review of Microbiology</source><volume>77</volume><fpage>23</fpage><lpage>43</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1146/annurev-micro-041320-025836</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36944261</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib64"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pearl Mizrahi</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Elbaz</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Argaman</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Altuvia</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Katsowich</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Socol</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Bar</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Rosenshine</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Margalit</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2021">2021</year><article-title>The impact of Hfq-mediated sRNA-mRNA interactome on the virulence of enteropathogenic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Science Advances</source><volume>7</volume><elocation-id>eabi8228</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1126/sciadv.abi8228</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34705501</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib65"><element-citation publication-type="software"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Peer</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2015">2015</year><data-title>Rnaseq_Scripts</data-title><version designator="234ca6e">234ca6e</version><source>Github</source><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://github.com/asafpr/RNAseq_scripts/blob/master/index_splitter.py">https://github.com/asafpr/RNAseq_scripts/blob/master/index_splitter.py</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib66"><element-citation publication-type="software"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Peer</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2018">2018</year><data-title>Rilseq</data-title><version designator="version 0.74">version 0.74</version><source>Github</source><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://github.com/asafpr/RILseq">https://github.com/asafpr/RILseq</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib67"><element-citation publication-type="software"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Peer</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2021">2021</year><data-title>Srna_Finder</data-title><version designator="2b8347c">2b8347c</version><source>GitHub</source><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://github.com/asafpr/sRNA_finder">https://github.com/asafpr/sRNA_finder</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib68"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pesavento</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Becker</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Sommerfeldt</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Possling</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Tschowri</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Mehlis</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Hengge</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2008">2008</year><article-title>Inverse regulatory coordination of motility and curli-mediated adhesion in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Genes &amp; Development</source><volume>22</volume><fpage>2434</fpage><lpage>2446</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/gad.475808</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18765794</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib69"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Peterson</surname><given-names>CN</given-names></name><name><surname>Carabetta</surname><given-names>VJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Chowdhury</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Silhavy</surname><given-names>TJ</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2006">2006</year><article-title>LrhA regulates rpoS translation in response to the Rcs phosphorelay system in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Journal of Bacteriology</source><volume>188</volume><fpage>3175</fpage><lpage>3181</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/JB.188.9.3175-3181.2006</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16621809</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib70"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Postma</surname><given-names>PW</given-names></name><name><surname>Crielaard</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Arents</surname><given-names>JC</given-names></name><name><surname>Verhamme</surname><given-names>DT</given-names></name><name><surname>Hellingwerf</surname><given-names>KJ</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2001">2001</year><article-title>Glucose-6-phosphate-dependent phosphoryl flow through the Uhp two-component regulatory system</article-title><source>Microbiology</source><volume>147</volume><fpage>3345</fpage><lpage>3352</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1099/00221287-147-12-3345</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib71"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Prüß</surname><given-names>BM</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2017">2017</year><article-title>Involvement of two-component signaling on bacterial motility and biofilm development</article-title><source>Journal of Bacteriology</source><volume>199</volume><elocation-id>e00259-17</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/JB.00259-17</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28533218</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib72"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Romilly</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Hoekzema</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Holmqvist</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Wagner</surname><given-names>EGH</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>Small RNAs OmrA and OmrB promote class III flagellar gene expression by inhibiting the synthesis of anti-Sigma factor FlgM</article-title><source>RNA Biology</source><volume>17</volume><fpage>872</fpage><lpage>880</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/15476286.2020.1733801</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32133913</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib73"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shi</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Louise</surname><given-names>CJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Adler</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1993">1993</year><article-title>Mechanism of adverse conditions causing lack of flagella in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Journal of Bacteriology</source><volume>175</volume><fpage>2236</fpage><lpage>2240</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/jb.175.8.2236-2240.1993</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">8468283</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib74"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shi</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Jiang</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Schammel</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Hu</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year><article-title>Structural basis of bacterial σ<sup>28</sup> -mediated transcription reveals roles of the RNA polymerase zinc-binding domain</article-title><source>The EMBO Journal</source><volume>39</volume><elocation-id>e104389</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15252/embj.2020104389</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32484956</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib75"><element-citation publication-type="preprint"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Silverman</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2023">2023</year><article-title>Biological Instights from RIL-Seq in Bacteria</article-title><source>arXiv</source><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2309/2309.11399.pdf">https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2309/2309.11399.pdf</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib76"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>TG</given-names></name><name><surname>Hoover</surname><given-names>TR</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2009">2009</year><article-title>Deciphering bacterial flagellar gene regulatory networks in the genomic era</article-title><source>Advances in Applied Microbiology</source><volume>67</volume><fpage>257</fpage><lpage>295</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0065-2164(08)01008-3</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19245942</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib77"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Soutourina</surname><given-names>OA</given-names></name><name><surname>Bertin</surname><given-names>PN</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2003">2003</year><article-title>Regulation cascade of flagellar expression in Gram-negative bacteria</article-title><source>FEMS Microbiology Reviews</source><volume>27</volume><fpage>505</fpage><lpage>523</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00064-0</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14550943</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib78"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Streit</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Michalski</surname><given-names>CW</given-names></name><name><surname>Erkan</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Kleeff</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Friess</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2009">2009</year><article-title>Northern blot analysis for detection and quantification of RNA in pancreatic cancer cells and tissues</article-title><source>Nature Protocols</source><volume>4</volume><fpage>37</fpage><lpage>43</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nprot.2008.216</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19131955</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib79"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Stringer</surname><given-names>AM</given-names></name><name><surname>Singh</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Yermakova</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Petrone</surname><given-names>BL</given-names></name><name><surname>Amarasinghe</surname><given-names>JJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Reyes-Diaz</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Mantis</surname><given-names>NJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Wade</surname><given-names>JT</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2012">2012</year><article-title>FRUIT, a scar-free system for targeted chromosomal mutagenesis, epitope tagging, and promoter replacement in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> and <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic></article-title><source>PLOS ONE</source><volume>7</volume><elocation-id>e44841</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0044841</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23028641</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib80"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sun</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Wan</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><name><surname>Fan</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Song</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Duan</surname><given-names>Z</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Q</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Zheng</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Ding</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Feng</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>KS</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2022">2022</year><article-title>Bacteria reduce flagellin synthesis to evade microglia-astrocyte-driven immunity in the brain</article-title><source>Cell Reports</source><volume>40</volume><elocation-id>111033</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.celrep.2022.111033</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">35793624</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib81"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Thomason</surname><given-names>MK</given-names></name><name><surname>Fontaine</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>De Lay</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2012">2012</year><article-title>A small RNA that regulates motility and biofilm formation in response to changes in nutrient availability in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Molecular Microbiology</source><volume>84</volume><fpage>17</fpage><lpage>35</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2958.2012.07965.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22289118</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib82"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Thomason</surname><given-names>MK</given-names></name><name><surname>Bischler</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Eisenbart</surname><given-names>SK</given-names></name><name><surname>Förstner</surname><given-names>KU</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Herbig</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Nieselt</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Sharma</surname><given-names>CM</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2015">2015</year><article-title>Global transcriptional start site mapping using differential RNA sequencing reveals novel antisense RNAs in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Journal of Bacteriology</source><volume>197</volume><fpage>18</fpage><lpage>28</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/JB.02096-14</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25266388</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib83"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Thomson</surname><given-names>NM</given-names></name><name><surname>Rossmann</surname><given-names>FM</given-names></name><name><surname>Ferreira</surname><given-names>JL</given-names></name><name><surname>Matthews-Palmer</surname><given-names>TR</given-names></name><name><surname>Beeby</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Pallen</surname><given-names>MJ</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2018">2018</year><article-title>Bacterial flagellins: does size matter?</article-title><source>Trends in Microbiology</source><volume>26</volume><fpage>575</fpage><lpage>581</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tim.2017.11.010</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29258714</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib84"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Typas</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Barembruch</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Possling</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Hengge</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2007">2007</year><article-title>Stationary phase reorganisation of the <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> transcription machinery by Crl protein, a fine-tuner of sigmas activity and levels</article-title><source>The EMBO Journal</source><volume>26</volume><fpage>1569</fpage><lpage>1578</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/sj.emboj.7601629</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17332743</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib85"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Updegrove</surname><given-names>TB</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2016">2016</year><article-title>Hfq: the flexible RNA matchmaker</article-title><source>Current Opinion in Microbiology</source><volume>30</volume><fpage>133</fpage><lpage>138</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.mib.2016.02.003</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26907610</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib86"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Urban</surname><given-names>JH</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogel</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2007">2007</year><article-title>Translational control and target recognition by <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> small RNAs in vivo</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>35</volume><fpage>1018</fpage><lpage>1037</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gkl1040</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib87"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Urban</surname><given-names>JH</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogel</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2009">2009</year><article-title>A green fluorescent protein (GFP)-based plasmid system to study post-transcriptional control of gene expression in vivo</article-title><source>Methods in Molecular Biology</source><volume>540</volume><fpage>301</fpage><lpage>319</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-1-59745-558-9_22</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19381569</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib88"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Westermann</surname><given-names>AJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Venturini</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Sellin</surname><given-names>ME</given-names></name><name><surname>Förstner</surname><given-names>KU</given-names></name><name><surname>Hardt</surname><given-names>WD</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogel</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Parkhill</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Charpentier</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><name><surname>Hinton</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2019">2019</year><article-title>The Major RNA-Binding Protein ProQ impacts virulence gene expression in <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic> serovar typhimurium</article-title><source>mBio</source><volume>10</volume><elocation-id>e02504-18</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/mBio.02504-18</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30602583</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib89"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zaslaver</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Bren</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Ronen</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Itzkovitz</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Kikoin</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Shavit</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Liebermeister</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Surette</surname><given-names>MG</given-names></name><name><surname>Alon</surname><given-names>U</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2006">2006</year><article-title>A comprehensive library of fluorescent transcriptional reporters for <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Nature Methods</source><volume>3</volume><fpage>623</fpage><lpage>628</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nmeth895</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16862137</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib90"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zeghouf</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Butland</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Borkowska</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Canadien</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Richards</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Beattie</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Emili</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Greenblatt</surname><given-names>JF</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2004">2004</year><article-title>Sequential Peptide Affinity (SPA) system for the identification of mammalian and bacterial protein complexes</article-title><source>Journal of Proteome Research</source><volume>3</volume><fpage>463</fpage><lpage>468</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1021/pr034084x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15253427</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib91"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zengel</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name><name><surname>Lindahl</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1992">1992</year><article-title>Ribosomal protein L4 and transcription factor NusA have separable roles in mediating terminating of transcription within the leader of the S10 operon of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Genes &amp; Development</source><volume>6</volume><fpage>2655</fpage><lpage>2662</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/gad.6.12b.2655</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">1285127</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib92"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zengel</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name><name><surname>Lindahl</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1996">1996</year><article-title>A hairpin structure upstream of the terminator hairpin required for ribosomal protein L4-mediated attenuation control of the S10 operon of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title><source>Journal of Bacteriology</source><volume>178</volume><fpage>2383</fpage><lpage>2387</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/jb.178.8.2383-2387.1996</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">8636042</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib93"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zengel</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name><name><surname>Sha</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Lindahl</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2002">2002</year><article-title>Surprising flexibility of leader RNA determinants for r-protein L4-mediated transcription termination in the <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> S10 operon</article-title><source>RNA</source><volume>8</volume><fpage>572</fpage><lpage>578</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S1355838202026237</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib94"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Altuvia</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Tiwari</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Argaman</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Hengge-Aronis</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="1998">1998</year><article-title>The OxyS regulatory RNA represses rpoS translation and binds the Hfq (HF-I) protein</article-title><source>The EMBO Journal</source><volume>17</volume><fpage>6061</fpage><lpage>6068</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/emboj/17.20.6061</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9774349</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib95"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Wassarman</surname><given-names>KM</given-names></name><name><surname>Ortega</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Steven</surname><given-names>AC</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2002">2002</year><article-title>The Sm-like Hfq protein increases OxyS RNA interaction with target mRNAs</article-title><source>Molecular Cell</source><volume>9</volume><fpage>11</fpage><lpage>22</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s1097-2765(01)00437-3</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11804582</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib96"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Meltzer</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Davis</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2013">2013a</year><article-title>RCircos: an R package for Circos 2D track plots</article-title><source>BMC Bioinformatics</source><volume>14</volume><elocation-id>244</elocation-id><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1471-2105-14-244</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23937229</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib97"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Schu</surname><given-names>DJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Tjaden</surname><given-names>BC</given-names></name><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Gottesman</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2013">2013b</year><article-title>Mutations in interaction surfaces differentially impact <italic>E. coli</italic> Hfq association with small RNAs and their mRNA targets</article-title><source>Journal of Molecular Biology</source><volume>425</volume><fpage>3678</fpage><lpage>3697</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jmb.2013.01.006</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23318956</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib98"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zuker</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><year iso-8601-date="2003">2003</year><article-title>Mfold web server for nucleic acid folding and hybridization prediction</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>31</volume><fpage>3406</fpage><lpage>3415</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gkg595</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12824337</pub-id></element-citation></ref></ref-list></back><sub-article article-type="editor-report" id="sa0"><front-stub><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.87151.3.sa0</article-id><title-group><article-title>eLife assessment</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Contreras</surname><given-names>Lydia</given-names></name><role specific-use="editor">Reviewing Editor</role><aff><institution>The University of Texas at Austin</institution><country>United States</country></aff></contrib></contrib-group><kwd-group kwd-group-type="evidence-strength"><kwd>Convincing</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group kwd-group-type="claim-importance"><kwd>Important</kwd></kwd-group></front-stub><body><p>This article provides <bold>important</bold> findings on how bacteria use small RNAs to regulate flagellar expression with implications for multiple fields. The data supporting the conclusions are <bold>convincing</bold> with a large amount of data that include results from phenotypic analyses, genomics approaches as well as in-vitro and in-vivo target identification and validation methods. This study on the varied effects of three sRNAs (UhpU, FliX and MotR) is of broad interest to RNA biochemists and microbiologists.</p></body></sub-article><sub-article article-type="referee-report" id="sa1"><front-stub><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.87151.3.sa1</article-id><title-group><article-title>Reviewer #1 (Public Review):</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><anonymous/><role specific-use="referee">Reviewer</role></contrib></contrib-group></front-stub><body><p>Bacteria can adapt to extremely diverse environments via extensive gene reprogramming at transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels. Small RNAs are key regulators of gene expression that participate in this adaptive response in bacteria, and often act as post-transcriptional regulators via pairing to multiple mRNA-targets.</p><p>In this study, Melamed et al. identify four <italic>E. coli</italic> small RNAs whose expression is dependent on sigma 28 (FliA), involved in the regulation of flagellar gene expression. Even though they are all under the control of FliA, expression of these 4 sRNAs peaks under slightly different growth conditions and each has different effects on flagella synthesis/number and motility. Combining RILseq data, structural probing, northern-blots and reporter assays, the authors show that 3 of these sRNAs control fliC expression (negatively for FliX, positively for MotR and UhpU) and two of them regulate r-protein genes from the S10 operon (again positively for MotR, and negatively for FliX). UhpU also directly represses synthesis of the LrhA transcriptional regulator, that in turn regulates flhDC (at the top of flagella regulation cascade). Based on RILseq data, the fourth sRNA (FlgO) has very few targets and may act via a mechanism other than base-pairing.</p><p>As r-protein S10 is also implicated in anti-termination via the NusB-S10 complex, the authors further hypothesize that the up-regulation of S10 gene expression by MotR promotes expression of the long flagellar operons through anti-termination. Consistent with this possible connection between ribosome and flagella synthesis, they show that MotR overexpression leads to an increase in flagella number and in the mRNA levels of two long flagellar operons, and that both effects are dependent on the NusB protein. Lastly, they provide data supporting a more general activating and repressing role for MotR and FliX, respectively, in flagellar genes expression and motility, via a still unclear detailed mechanism.</p><p>This study brings a lot of new information on the regulation of flagellar genes, from the identification of novel sigma 28-dependent sRNAs to their effects on flagella production and motility. It represents a considerable amount of work; the experimental data are clear and solid and support the conclusions of the paper. Even though mechanistic details underlying the observed regulations by MotR or FliX sRNAs are lacking, the effect of these sRNAs on fliC, several rps/rpl genes, and flagellar genes and motility is convincing.</p><p>The connection between r-protein genes regulation and flagellar operons is exciting, and so is the general effect of pMotR or pFliX on the expression of multiple middle and late flagellar genes.</p></body></sub-article><sub-article article-type="referee-report" id="sa2"><front-stub><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.87151.3.sa2</article-id><title-group><article-title>Reviewer #2 (Public Review):</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><anonymous/><role specific-use="referee">Reviewer</role></contrib></contrib-group></front-stub><body><p>This manuscript discusses the posttranscriptional regulation of flagella synthesis in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic>. The bacterial flagellum is a complex structure that consists of three major domains, and its synthesis is an energy-intensive process that requires extensive use of ribosomes. The flagellar regulon encompasses more than 50 genes, and the genes are activated in a sequential manner to ensure that flagellar components are made in the order in which they are needed. Transcription of the genes is regulated by various factors in response to environmental signals. However, little is known about the posttranscriptional regulation of flagella synthesis. The manuscript describes four UTR-derived sRNAs (UhpU, MotR, FliX, and FlgO) that are controlled by the flagella sigma factor σ28 (fliA) in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic>. The sRNAs have varied effects on flagellin protein levels, flagella number, and cell motility, and they regulate different aspects of flagella synthesis.</p><p>UhpU corresponds to the 3´ UTR of uhpT.</p><p>UhpU is transcribed from its own promoter inside the coding sequence of uhpT.</p><p>MotR originates from the 5´ UTR of motA. The promoter for motR is within the flhC CDS and is also the promoter of the downstream motAB-cheAW operon.</p><p>FliX originates from the 3´ UTR of fliC. Probably processed from parental mRNA.</p><p>FlgO originates from the 3´ UTR of flgL. Probably processed from parental mRNA.</p><p>This is a very interesting study that shows how sRNA-mediated regulation can create a complex network regulating flagella synthesis. The information is new and gives a fresh outlook at cellular mechanisms of flagellar synthesis.</p></body></sub-article><sub-article article-type="referee-report" id="sa3"><front-stub><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.87151.3.sa3</article-id><title-group><article-title>Reviewer #3 (Public Review):</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><anonymous/><role specific-use="referee">Reviewer</role></contrib></contrib-group></front-stub><body><p>Flagella are crucial for bacterial motility and virulence of pathogens. They represent large molecular machines that require strict hierarchical expression control of their components. So far, mainly transcriptional control mechanisms have been described to control flagella biogenesis. While several sRNAs have been reported that are environmentally controlled and regulate motility mainly via control of flagella master regulators, less is known about sRNAs that are co-regulated with flagella genes and control later steps of flagella biogenesis.</p><p>In this carefully designed and well-written study, the authors explore the role of four <italic>E. coli</italic> σ28-dependent 3' or 5' UTR-derived sRNAs in regulating flagella biogenesis. UhpU and MotR sRNAs are generated from their own σ28(FliA)-dependent promoter, while FliX and FlgO sRNAs are processed from the 3'UTRs of flagella genes under control of FliA. The authors provide an impressive amount of data and different experiments, including phenotypic analyses, genomics approaches as well as in-vitro and in-vivo target identification and validation methods, to demonstrate varied effects of three of these sRNAs (UhpU, FliX and MotR) on flagella biogenesis and motility. For example, they show different and for some sRNAs opposing phenotypes upon overexpression: While UhpU sRNA slightly increases flagella number and motility, FliX has the opposite effect. MotR sRNA also increases the number of flagella, with minor effects on motility.</p><p>While the mechanisms and functions of the fourth sRNA, FlgO, remain elusive, the authors provide convincing experiments demonstrating that the three sRNAs directly act on different targets (identified through the analysis of previous RIL-seq datasets), with a variety of mechanisms. The authors demonstrate, UhpU sRNA, which derives from the 3´UTR of a metabolic gene, downregulates LrhA, a transcriptional repressor of the flhDC operon encoding the early genes that activate the flagellar cascade. According to their RIL-seq data analyses, UhpU has hundreds of additional potential targets, including multiple genes involved in carbon metabolism. Due to the focus on flagellar biogenesis, these are not further investigated in this study and the authors further characterize the two other flagella-associated sRNAs, FliX and MotR. Interestingly, they found that these sRNAs seem to target coding sequences rather than acting via canonical targeting of ribosome binding sites. The authors show FliX sRNA represses flagellin expression by interacting with the CDS of the fliC mRNA. Both FliX and MotR sRNA turn out to modulate the levels of ribosomal proteins of the S10 operon with opposite effects. MotR, which is expressed earlier, interacts with the leader and the CDS of rpsJ mRNA, leading to increased S10 protein levels and S10-NusB complex mediated anti-termination, promoting readthrough of long flagellar operons. FliX interacts with the CDSs of rplC, rpsQ, rpsS-rplV, repressing the production of the encoded ribosomal proteins. The authors also uncover MotR and FliX affect transcription selected representative flagellar genes, with an unknown mechanism.</p><p>Overall, this comprehensive study expands the repertoire of characterized UTR derived sRNAs and integrates new layers of post-transcriptional regulation into the highly complex flagellar regulatory cascade. Moreover, these new flagella regulators (MotR, FliX) act non-canonically, and impact protein expression of their target genes by base-pairing with the CDS of the transcripts. Their findings directly connect flagella biosynthesis and motility, highly energy consuming processes, to ribosome production (MotR and FliX) and possibly to carbon metabolism (UhpU). In their revised version, the authors have addressed many of the previously raised questions and comments. This made their manuscript easier to read and to follow.</p></body></sub-article><sub-article article-type="author-comment" id="sa4"><front-stub><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.87151.3.sa4</article-id><title-group><article-title>Author Response</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Melamed</surname><given-names>Sahar</given-names></name><role specific-use="author">Author</role><aff><institution>Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development</institution><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Bethesda</named-content></addr-line><country>United States</country></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Aixia</given-names></name><role specific-use="author">Author</role><aff><institution>Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development</institution><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Bethesda</named-content></addr-line><country>United States</country></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Jarnik</surname><given-names>Michal</given-names></name><role specific-use="author">Author</role><aff><institution>National Institutes of Health</institution><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Bethesda</named-content></addr-line><country>United States</country></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Mills</surname><given-names>Joshua</given-names></name><role specific-use="author">Author</role><aff><institution>Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development</institution><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Bethesda</named-content></addr-line><country>United States</country></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Silverman</surname><given-names>Aviezer</given-names></name><role specific-use="author">Author</role><aff><institution>Hebrew University of Jerusalem</institution><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Jerusalem</named-content></addr-line><country>Israel</country></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Hongen</given-names></name><role specific-use="author">Author</role><aff><institution>Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH</institution><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Bethesda</named-content></addr-line><country>United States</country></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Storz</surname><given-names>Gisela</given-names></name><role specific-use="author">Author</role><aff><institution>Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development</institution><addr-line><named-content content-type="city">Bethesda</named-content></addr-line><country>United States</country></aff></contrib></contrib-group></front-stub><body><p>The following is the authors’ response to the original reviews.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p><bold>Reviewer #1 (Recommendations For The Authors):</bold></p><p>p. 5, l. 87-90: The control of flgM by OmrA/B (PMID 32133913) and the antisense RNA to flhD (PMID 36000733) are other examples of known regulatory RNAs that impact the flagellar regulon.</p></disp-quote><p>We thank the reviewer for pointing out these references and have added citations to them (page 5, lines 87-91).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>p.11/Fig. 3: it is intriguing that ArcZ and RprA, two of the rpoS-activating sRNAs, repress lrhA. I realize that it is outside of the scope of this study, but have the authors considered the possibility that ArcZ or McaS could have a role in the previously reported repression of rpoS by LrhA (PMID 16621809)?</p></disp-quote><p>We agree that it is intriguing that ArcZ and RprA, two of the rpoS-activating sRNAs, repress lrhA, and added mention of this regulatory connection (page 12, lines 247-250).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>p. 13/l. 272: I do not understand why the authors say that &quot;r-proteins were almost exclusively found in chimeras with MotR and FliX and no other sRNAs...&quot;, given that several other chimeras between r-prot and other sRNAs are found</p></disp-quote><p>While some r-proteins encoding genes were found with other sRNAs in RIL-seq datasets, MotR and FliX generally had the highest numbers. The text was revised to better describe the RIL-seq data for r-proteins interaction partners (page 14, lines 291-295), and a new panel showing the S10 operon with all the interacting sRNAs was added to Figure 3—figure supplement 1B.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. 4 and 5: One possible improvement would be to more systematically assess the effect of base-pairing mutants of the sRNAs, such as MotRM1 or FliXM1 on fliC and rps/rpl genes in vivo. This is especially important for the mutants that affected the sRNA effects in the in vitro probing assays, such as UhpU-M2, MotR-M1 and FliX-S-M1 on fliC (Fig. S7)</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we examined fliC mRNA levels across growth in motR-M1 and fliX-M1 chromosomal mutants. The results of these northern assays, now shown in Figure 8—figure supplement 1, are consistent with our model as we observed delayed expression of fliC mRNA in motR-M1 background and premature expression in fliX-M1 background (page 21, lines 444446, 449-453).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. 5: it may be worth including a schematic of the whole S10 operon to highlight its length and its organization?</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, a schematic representation of the S10 operon was added to Figure 3—figure supplement 1 with a summary of the RIL-seq data for this operon.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Probing data (Fig. 5, S7 and S9): in general, it is difficult to differentiate the thin and thick brackets, and what is indicated by the dashed brackets is not always clear. Maybe using a color-code instead could help? Highlighting the predicted pairing regions on the different gels could be useful as well.</p></disp-quote><p>We thank the reviewer for this suggestion and color-coded the brackets (Figure 5, Figure 4figure supplement 2, and Figure 5-figure supplement 2). The correspondences to regions of predicted pairing are described in the figures legends.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. S10: The experimental evidence used to support FliX-dependent degradation of the rpsS mRNA is indirect (primer extension to observe higher levels of cleavage intermediates). It would be nice to be able to observe a decrease in the mRNA levels as well, either by Northern, or primer extension from a region more distant to the FliX pairing site.</p></disp-quote><p>The S10 operon is long (~5 KB). We have tried multiple probes for this mRNA and detect many bands with each, likely due to extensive regulation of this operon. We think teasing out the origin of the different bands to appropriately interpret changes in patterns will require a significant amount of work.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>legend of Fig. S10: from the gel, it seems that only the plasmids differ in the samples, and it is not clear where the data corresponding to the WT strain mentioned in the legend is shown</p></disp-quote><p>The samples shown in this figure are all for the indicated plasmids in the WT strain. We corrected the figure legend.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Table S1: please define the NOR (normalized odds ratio?)</p></disp-quote><p>The definition of Normalized Odds Ratio was added to the legend of Supplementary file 1.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p><bold>Reviewer #2 (Recommendations For The Authors):</bold></p><p>Major comments:</p><p>Figure 1B. Please add a negative control (which could be in the supplementary section) from a large section showing transcripts that are not directly influenced by Hfq.</p></disp-quote><p>We think the flgKLO browser in this figure serves as a negative control; flgK and flgL clearly are not enriched on Hfq in contrast to FlgO. Figure 1B was generated using published datasets that are easily accessible to the readers at a genome browser and show many other examples of transcripts that are not influenced by Hfq:<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://genome.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgTracks?hubUrl=https://hpc.nih.gov/~NICHD-">https://genome.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgTracks?hubUrl=https://hpc.nih.gov/~NICHD-</ext-link>core0/storz/trackhubs/ecoli_rilseq/hub.hub.txt&amp;hgS_loadUrlName=<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://hpc.nih.gov/~NICHDcore0/storz/trackhubs/ecoli_rilseq/session.txt&amp;hgS_doLoadUrl=submit">https://hpc.nih.gov/~NICHDcore0/storz/trackhubs/ecoli_rilseq/session.txt&amp;hgS_doLoadUrl=submit</ext-link></p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Line 158. MotR* is a more abundant version of [the constitutively overexpressed] MotR. Is there a Northern or qPCR to confirm this? While I understand the relevance of these mutated constructs, their high expression can lead to artefactual effects.</p></disp-quote><p>This is a valuable point and therefore we provided a northern blot to document the relative levels of MotR and MotR* (Figure 2—figure supplement 1A).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Figure 2. The overexpression of MotR/MotR* from a plasmid is increasing the number of flagella. However, when the MotR gene is deleted, is there a reduction of the number of flagella? Same question with FliX: what happens when the fliX gene is deleted? According to the model described in the manuscript, we should expect fewer flagella in ΔmotR background and an increased number of flagella in ΔfliX background. Both Figure 2 and Figure 8 would benefit from additional experiments with deleted motR and fliX genes.</p></disp-quote><p>We agree that experiments regarding the endogenous effects of endogenous sRNAs are important. We provided such data in Figure 8 and Figure 8—figure supplement 1 for MotR and FliX in a variety of assays: flagella numbers by electron microscopy, motility and competition assays, expression of flagellar genes by RT-qPCR and western analysis. The chromosomallyexpressed MotR-M1 and FliX-M1 base pairing mutants did show the expected phenotypes of reduced and increased numbers of flagella, respectively (Figure 8A-B). As suggested by reviewer 1, we added northern analysis that examined fliC mRNA levels across growth in motRM1 and fliX-M1 chromosomal mutants. The results of these northern assays are consistent with our model as we observed delayed expression of fliC mRNA in motR-M1 background and premature expression in fliX-M1 background. We went to the trouble of constructing strains carrying point mutations in the chromosomal copies of these genes rather than deletions to avoid interfering with the expression of motA and fliC given that MotR and FliX encompass the 5’ and 3’ UTRs, respectively.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Figure 3 is key to demonstrating the sRNAs pairing with their specific targets and potential effect on bacterial swimming. However, these results would be more relevant with endogenous expression of the sRNAs and demonstration of their effects on the same targets. A Northern blot showing the overproduced sRNA level compared to endogenous sRNA level could help us appreciate the expression ratio.</p></disp-quote><p>The levels of the UhpU, MotR and FliX expressed from the overexpression plasmids are at least 100-fold higher than the endogenous levels. Thus, we agree that assays of chromosomal deletion/point mutants are important experiments. We did construct chromosomal uhpU-M1 and uhpU∆seed sequence mutants. However, under the conditions assayed, the uhpU chromosomal mutations did not result in observable effects on motility or FlhD-SPA protein levels. It is possible we would be able to detect differences between the wild type and uhpU chromosomal mutant strains under different growth conditions or in different assays, but this would require a significant amount of work. For many other sRNA chromosomal mutations have no or only subtle effects, suggesting redundancy between sRNAs or sRNA roles in fine tuning gene expression.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Figure 4. In panel B, the empty plasmid pZE alone seems to positively affect the flagellin expression when compared to the WT background. This can also be seen in Figure 4C. There is no fliC signal with empty plasmid pBR* but a strong fliC signal with empty plasmid pZE. Maybe the authors can explain this in the manuscript.</p></disp-quote><p>With respect to panel B and Figure 4—figure supplement 1A, we agree that there is some variation between the levels of flagellin in the WT and pZE control samples, possibly due to the addition of antibiotic to the pZE culture. We added quantification of the bands in Figure 4— figure supplement 1 to better document the changes in flagellin levels.</p><p>With respect to panel C, the pBR* samples were collected in crl+ background while the pZE samples were collected in crl- background, which explains the lack of fliC signal in the pBR* control sample. This is now noted in the figure legend.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>In lines 154-157, the justification for using two plasmids is described. An IPTG-inducible Plac promoter, the pBR*, is used because the constitutive overexpression of UhpU is resulting in mutated UhpU clones. These observations suggest a toxic expression level of UhpU that the cell can only tolerate when the UhpU RNA is somewhat deactivated by mutations. This does not seem like a detail and could be discussed further.</p></disp-quote><p>We agree with the reviewer that this observation is important and now mention that it suggests at a critical UhpU role (page 8, lines 160-163).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Figure 5E and I. While the bindings of MotR on rpsJ and Flix-S on rpsS are clear, the resolution of both gels in the areas of binding (upper part of both gels) could be improved.</p></disp-quote><p>We found it tricky to choose the mRNA fragments for the in vitro structure probing for the regions of predicted pairing internal to CDSs. Given that we hoped to retain native RNA folding, we chose long fragments; for rpsJ, we started with the +1 of S10 leader and for rpsS, we started 147 nt into the CDS, a region that overlaps the region that was cloned to the rpsS-rplV-gfp fusion. Consequently, the region of base pairing is in the upper part of both gels. The gels were already run for an unusually long time. Thus, we do not think the resolution could be improved further. Nevertheless, we think the region of protection is evident for both mRNAs.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Minor comments:</p><p>Fig 1B. The promoter symbols are extremely small, please increase the size.</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we have enlarged the promoter symbols in Figure 1B as well as in Figure 3A.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Line 211. &quot;the lrhA mRNA has an unusually long 5´ UTR&quot;. How long exactly?</p></disp-quote><p>The 5’ UTR of the lrhA mRNA is 371 nt long. This is now mentioned in the text (page 11, line 224)</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Line 320. Should &quot;Fig 9C&quot; be &quot;Fig S9C&quot; instead?</p></disp-quote><p>We thank the reviewer for noticing this typo. Callouts to supplementary figures have now been renumbered per eLife format.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Line 384. Something seems to be missing in the sentence &quot;a representative combined class 2 and 3 promoter&quot;.</p></disp-quote><p>The sentence has been modified to clarify the designation (page 19, lines 409-411).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p><bold>Reviewer #3 (Recommendations For The Authors):</bold></p><p>Recommendation to clarify/strengthen the presentation of science in the paper:</p><p>Lines 102-103: Can the authors provide some more information on how the sRNAs were initially discovered to be potentially sigma-28 dependent and selected?</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we expanded the section discussing the discovery and the selection of these sRNAs (page 6, lines 104-109).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Lines 192-193: It would be helpful to provide a bit more information in the main text about what are the different RIL-seq data sets (18 in total).</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we now provide more details about the different RIL-seq datasets we used in the analysis (page 10, lines 202-205).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>It would be helpful to specify the criteria for &quot;top&quot; interactions in targets retrieved from RIL-seq data (Table S1 and text, e.g., line 273): e.g. number of conditions, number of chimeras, etc.</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we now more explicitly specify the criteria for selecting targets to characterize (page 10, lines 205-206).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. 4B/ S6 and line 242: The flagellin amount in the empty vector control (pZE) looks higher than in WT, and the stated effect of MotR/MotR* OE on flagellin is not very clear from the blot. The &quot;cross-reacting band&quot; above flagellin also seems to vary among strains. Could the authors include a quantification of flagellin protein amount and normalize relative to a housekeeping protein (e.g., GroEL), instead of Ponceau S as loading control?</p></disp-quote><p>We agree that there is some variation between the levels of flagellin in the WT and pZE control sample, possibly due to the addition of antibiotic to the pZE culture. We added quantification of the bands in Figure 4—figure supplement 1 to better document the changes in flagellin levels.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Figure legends: It would be helpful to have a bit more information about the method used/displayed image rather than stating results in the legends.</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we now provide a bit more information about the methods used/displayed image in the figure legends to allow for easier comprehension of the data presented in the figures (while trying to balance this with the length of the legends).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. 2: Please include a scale for all electron microscopy images or, if it is the same for all panels, state it in the figure legend. Moreover, the same image is used for the pZE control in panel C, E and Figure S4A/C. It would be better to show different fields of bacteria for the pZE sample.</p></disp-quote><p>As is now mentioned in the legends to Figure 2, Figure 2—figure supplement 2, and Figure 8, the same scale was used for all panels. We thought it was better to show the same image for the pZE control in the different panels to emphasize that these samples were all analyzed on the same day.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. 2: The sRNA OE strains seem to show some heterogeneity in cell length (pZE-MotR) or width (pZE-FliX). The authors could, e.g., check whether this is a phenotype correlated to sRNA OE by quantifying these parameters for different fields and comparing to WT or comment on this in the text if this is not consistently seen.</p></disp-quote><p>We also were intrigued by the slightly different sizes and widths of cells in the EM images. However, our statistical analysis did not reveal significant differences between the different samples. We now comment on this (page 53, lines 1178-1179).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>As a follow-up to this study, it would be interesting to assess the impact of MotR and FliX regulation of ribosomal protein synthesis on overall ribosome activity (e.g., via Ribo-seq), also considering that antitermination regulates rRNA transcription. In the case of MotR, the authors suggest that MotR upregulation of S10 protein might not only impact antitermination, but also lead to the formation of more active ribosomes that would increase flagellar protein synthesis (lines 359-362). However, in the RNA-seq performed in OE MotR* several transcripts encoding rRNA and ribosomal proteins are significantly downregulated compared to EVC (Supplementary Table S2). Could the authors comment on this?</p></disp-quote><p>We share the reviewer’s enthusiasm for follow-up work and thank for the suggested experiments. We hope we will be able to decipher the full mechanism of MotR and FliX action on ribosomal protein synthesis in future experiments. The observation that some ribosomal protein-coding gene levels are reduced in the RNA-seq experiment with overexpression of MotR* is interesting but we do not have an explanation other than the fact that the samples were collected early in exponential growth. We now mention the observation in the text (page 19, lines 404-407).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Considering that OE of the WT MotR appears to increase fliC mRNA abundance but has no strong impact on flagellin protein levels, can the authors speculate what is the physiological relevance of MotR* for flagellin production?</p></disp-quote><p>We agree that while we do see significant increases in the flagella number and fliC mRNA abundance with MotR and MotR* overexpression, the western analysis did not reveal a striking increase in flagellin levels and also wonder how MotR strongly increases the flagella number, which requires flagellin subunits, but only has a weak effect on the intercellular levels of flagellin. One possibility explanation is that it is more difficult to see significant increases for a protein whose levels are high to begin with. These points are now discussed (page 13, lines 264-269).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. 4C: The pZE samples seem to show variable expression of fliC mRNA although the samples are collected at the same timepoints. Try to clarify in the text.</p></disp-quote><p>The northern membrane on the bottom was exposed for a longer time due to the lower fliC mRNA levels in the samples with FliX overexpression. We now note these differences in the legends to Figure 4 and Figure 4—figure supplement 1.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. 7/S13: While a volcano plot for MotR* is shown in Fig. 7A, quantification of GFP reporter fusion regulation is shown for MotR. Quantifications of MotR* are shown in Fig. S13. Maybe swap the figures.</p></disp-quote><p>Given that the data for MotR* are in the supplement figures for all other figures we would also like to retain this distribution for Figure 7 (aside from the volcano plot since this experiment was only carried out for MotR*).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Lines 135-136 (Fig. S1B): on the northern blots, only sRNA levels of MotR are comparable between rich and minimal media (excluding M63 G6P and M63 gal). Most other sRNA seem to be more abundantly expressed in minimal media conditions compared to LB. Maybe rephrase.</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, the text was revised to point out the differences in the sRNA levels for cells grown in different growth media (page 7, lines 140-144).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Lines 229-234: this paragraph seems not directly connected to the aims of the study (i.e., no effect on motility tested of these other sRNAs) and could be removed (or moved to discussion).</p></disp-quote><p>We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion but, considering Reviewer 1’s comments, think that showing the regulation of lrhA by other sRNAs has value in highlighting the complexity of the regulatory circuit. We have revised the text to incorporate Reviewer 1’s suggestions and better explain why these results are intriguing (page 12, lines 247-250).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Line 200 and Fig. S5: For FlgO sRNA only one target was identified in RIL-seq. This gene could be specified and labeled in Fig. S5 and the text. Does FlgO also bind ProQ?</p></disp-quote><p>We now mention the single FlgO target (gatC) detected in four datasets (page 10, lines 213215). In Figure 3—figure supplement 1, we labeled only targets that we followed up with in the current study. Therefore, to be consistent, we prefer not to label gatC in the FlgO plot. FlgO was found to co-immunoprecipitate with ProQ but at much lower levels than with Hfq, and to have very few RNA partners (Melamed et al., 2020).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Lines 493-498: It is mentioned that the four sRNAs were also detected in recent RIL-seq experiments of <italic>Salmonella</italic> and EPEC. Are any of the here identified targets also found in other species or was none detected as analyses were carried out under conditions that do not favor flagella expression?</p></disp-quote><p>The targets identified in this study were not detected in the <italic>Salmonella</italic> and EPEC RIL-seq datasets. However, the <italic>Salmonella</italic> and EPEC experiments were carried out under different growth conditions. Based on the sequence conservation of the Sigma 28-dependent sRNAs across several bacterial species (Figure 8—figure supplement 2), we do think overlapping targets will be found in other bacterial species under the appropriate growth conditions.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>The strongest evidence of MotR dependent target regulation is the one on rpsJ, which does not necessarily require the additional experiments with MotR<italic>. Since the authors were able to show upregulation of the rpsJ-gfp reporter upon OE of MotR WT, it would have strengthened the results if they performed the experiments in Fig. S8C with MotR WT. Similary as an increase of flagella number was seen with OE of MotR WT in Fig. 2A, the effect of the OE S10∆loop could be compared to OE MotR instead of OE MotR</italic> (Fig. 6A). At least if would be helpful, to briefly comment on why MotR* was used instead of MotR WT for these experiments.</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we state MotR* was used in some assays given the stronger effects for some phenotypes (page 10, lines 196-197). We think, given that we established MotR and MotR* cause the same effects, with increased intensity for the latter, it is reasonable to use MotR* in some of the experiments.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>p. lines 482-491 and 508-511: The authors discuss that both UhpU sRNAs and RsaG sRNA from <italic>S. aureus</italic> are derived from the 3'UTR of uhpT, but conclude there is no overlap regarding flagella regulation, suggesting independent evolution of these sRNAs. However, the authors also mention that UhpU sRNA has many additional targets beyond LhrA involved in carbon and nutrient metabolism. Thus, maybe regulation of metabolic traits could be a conserved theme and function for UhpU and RsaG? Maybe try to comment on or better connect these two parts in the discussion.</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we now comment on the possibility of the regulation of metabolic traits being a conserved theme and function for UhpU and RsaG (page 24, lines 520-527).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Check the text for consistency regarding the use of italics for gene names (e.g., legend of Figs. 7 and 8)</p></disp-quote><p>The text was corrected.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Please introduce abbreviations, e.g., G6P (line 139), REP (line 150), ARN (line 258), NOR/U (Table S1 legend)</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested, we now introduce the abbreviations for G6P (page 7, line 142), REP (page 8, lines 155-156), and NOR (Supplementary file 1 legend). Regarding ARN, these sequences are already written in parentheses in the same sentence. However, we revised this to “ARN motif sequences” (page 13, line 278).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. S1A: Highlight REP sequence mentioned in text (line 150).</p></disp-quote><p>REP sequences are now highlighted in gray in Figure 1—figure supplement 1A.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. S1C: It would be helpful to list number nt positions on the sRNAs based on full-length transcripts.</p></disp-quote><p>The corresponding positions based on the full-length transcripts have also been added to this figure.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. S2: Adjust the position of UhpU-S label.</p></disp-quote><p>UhpU-S label position was adjusted.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. S6: Include UhpU in the figure title.</p></disp-quote><p>UhpU was added to the title.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. S10: It would be helpful to indicate on the figure (or state more clearly in the legend) which RNA was extracted from WT or ΔfliCX background.</p></disp-quote><p>The samples shown in the Figure are all in a WT strain. We corrected the figure legend accordingly.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Line 290: the effect is on flagella number, not motility.</p></disp-quote><p>This typo is now corrected (page 15, line 312).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. S8: One-way ANOVA (panel A legend)</p></disp-quote><p>This typo is now corrected (page 64, line 1433).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Line 320: Fig. S9C instead of 9C</p></disp-quote><p>We thank the reviewer for noticing the typo. The numbering of the supplementary figures has now been changed to the eLife format.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>It would be helpful to add reference for statement in line 57.</p></disp-quote><p>A reference to (Fitzgerald et al., 2014) was added as suggested.</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Add PMID:32133913 as reference for post-transcriptional regulation of the flagellar regulon in the introduction (lines 87-91)</p></disp-quote><p>The indicated reference was added as suggested (page 5, lines 87-91).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Legend Fig. S6: expand view -&gt; expanded view</p></disp-quote><p>This typo is now corrected (page 63, line 1406).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>line 513: sRNA -&gt; sRNAs</p></disp-quote><p>This typo is now corrected (page 25, line 549).</p><disp-quote content-type="editor-comment"><p>Fig. 8G: Maybe include lrhA as target of UhpU sRNA at top of the cascade.</p></disp-quote><p>As suggested lrhA has been added as a target of UhpU at the top of the cascade.</p></body></sub-article></article>