Abstract
Understanding of sulfur metabolism has reached a new dimension with comprehension of its molecular regulation; however, knowledge underlining the evolutionary perspective and dynamics of this metabolism in cyanobacteria is still limited. In this review, we provided a comprehensive overview of sulfur metabolism with special emphasis on cyanobacteria and discussed the biosynthesis of cysteine and its downstream sulfur containing metabolites. Here, we invested efforts to understand the possible regulatory mechanisms of cyanobacterial sulfur assimilation process by comparing with that of other bacteria and plants. The impact of sulfur limitation on the morpho-physiological, biochemical, and molecular responses in cyanobacteria was also elucidated. The present work reflected that the cyanobacterial sulfur assimilatory pathway is identical to that of bacteria and plants since all of them employ similar enzymes in the process; however, the regulatory mechanism may vary in cyanobacteria. This communication comprehends the recent progresses made in the field of cyanobacterial sulfur metabolism research along with a comparative account of sulfur metabolism in some related organisms. Therefore, this review not only gives a broad overview on cyanobacterial sulfur metabolism but also increases our understanding of the importance and evolutionary perspective of this crucial metabolism.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The versatility of sulfur in the life processes is unequivocal because it is a crucial component of cellular metabolites and exhibits redox-dependent activity (Giordano et al. 2005). With the evolution of the Earth, the concentration of sulfur, particularly in oceans, has changed (Table 1); however, in recent times, the concentration of sulfate in marine ecosystem is approximately 28 mM, which indicates it is the prime reservoir of sulfate (Ksionzek et al. 2016). In contrast, majority of the freshwater systems exhibit very low concentration of sulfate ranging from 10 to 50 μM (Bochenek et al. 2013). Thus, organisms thriving in this low sulfate containing freshwater systems essentially require to compensate and maintain their cellular homeostasis. Some algae and cyanobacteria can respond to sulfate deficiency (Prioretti et al. 2014). According to the sulfate facilitation hypothesis, red algae is more susceptible to low sulfate availability than green algae and cyanobacteria (Ratti et al. 2011, 2013), suggesting that changes in the oceanic sulfate concentration affect the phytoplankton dominance.
Despite its bioavailability in different habitats, the organic form of sulfur is predominant, with the total concentration being 95% in the environment, whereas the remaining 5% is present in the inorganic forms. Although organic sulfur accounts for a major proportion in the environment, it does not provide any significant advantage to living biota because they preferably utilize sulfate as the sole source of sulfur along with thiosulfates, cysteine, methionine, and glutathione to satisfy cellular requirements (Fernandez-Gonzalez et al. 2019). Some microalgae can release arylsulfatase and alkylsulfatase, which generate sulfate from organic compounds after catalysis through cleavage, making them available for growth.
Sulfate acquisition, its subsequent reduction into cysteine, and further catabolism into secondary sulfur metabolites are sequential multistep processes catalyzed by specific enzymes (Fig. 1). Sulfur assimilation, which involves the conversion of sulfate to cysteine, is an eight-electron reduction process that commences with the uptake of sulfate through specific membrane transporters (i.e., energy-dependent proton/sulfate [presumably 3H+/SO42−] co-transporters) (Green and Grossman 1988; Laudenbach and Grossman 1991). To understand the crucial role of sulfur in the cell metabolism, it is vital to identify enzymes involved in the metabolism. Sulfate is first activated to form adenosine-5′-phosphosulfate (APS) and then phosphorylated to generate 3′-phosphoadenosine-5′-phosphosulfate (PAPS) by ATP sulfurylase (ATPS) and APS kinase (APSK), respectively. PAPS is successively reduced to sulfite (SO32−) followed by sulfide (S2−) by PAPS reductase and sulfite reductase (SR), respectively. The produced SO32− is required for sulfolipid biosynthesis, whereas S2− is involved in the protein modification and redox buffering. The incorporation of sulfide formed in the reductive process into cysteine is mediated by serine acetyltransferase (SAT) that is involved in the acetylation of serine to O-acetylserine (OAS), while O-acetylserine (thiol) lyase (OAS-TL) is involved in the condensation of OAS and sulfide to form cysteine (Fig. 2). The first product of primary sulfate assimilation, namely cysteine, is further used in protein synthesis or as a reduced sulfur donor for the biosynthesis of downstream metabolites, such as methionine, SAM, and glutathione, as well as in coenzymes and cofactors. Cysteine not only serves as a central hub for the synthesis of different sulfur containing metabolites but also merges assimilatory sulfate, nitrogen, and carbon pathways (Fig. 3).
The regulation of sulfur metabolism and its homeostasis at the cellular level are achieved at multiple levels that include the regulation of transporters and enzymes involved in the assimilatory process and their transcriptional regulation through regulatory proteins. CysB, CysM, and CysR are the LysR-type transcription regulators that control the expression of the cys operon in Escherichia coli, Salmonella typhimurium, and Synechococcus, respectively, whereas SAC1/SAC3 and SLIM1 are involved in green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii and Arabidopsis thaliana, respectively.
Studies have reviewed the assimilation and regulation of sulfur and their roles as well as how this process affect other cellular processes either directly or indirectly in cyanobacteria. In cyanobacteria, cysteine synthesis is a major regulator of different reactions. So far, numerous studies on sulfur metabolism of photoautotrophs have been performed of which maximum are focused on physiology, biochemistry, and transcript analysis. Schmidt (1988) and Schmidt and Jäger (1992) published an in-depth review on cyanobacterial sulfur metabolism. However, the review particularly focusing on the sulfur starvation and its regulation in the cyanobacteria is still lacking.
Cyanobacterial gene expression databases and physiological studies have indicated that genes and enzymes involved in sulfate assimilation are expressed not only in photosynthetic organisms, but also in heterotrophic organisms (Zhang et al. 2008; Ludwig and Bryant 2012; Kolesinski et al. 2017; Kumaresan et al. 2017; Hughes et al. 2018; Kharwar et al. 2021). Transcriptomic analysis of Synechocystis by using a DNA array technique have been performed by Zhang et al. in 2008. Similar studies have also been done in case of Arthrospira platensis (Kumaresan et al. 2017). Recently, Kharwar and Mishra (2020) performed the expression analysis of some of the crucial genes involved in the photosynthetic and fatty acid metabolic pathway in Anabaena sp. PCC 7120 (hereafter referred to as Anabaena 7120). Ultrastructures; cell growth, differentiation, and survival; photopigments; protein profile; and nitrogen, carbon, and sulfolipid metabolism are affected by sulfur limitation. These changes can result from sulfur stress-mediated events such as photosynthetic damage, pigment destruction/degradation, protein/enzyme inactivation, reduced protein synthesis, reduced nutrient uptake, changes in redox homeostasis, and signal transduction. Although in-depth reviews are available for sulfur metabolism in bacteria, algae, and plants, particularly those based on model organisms, very few reviews have focused on cyanobacteria.
The present review summarizes sulfur metabolism and its regulation with particular emphasis on cyanobacteria. Here, we provide a comprehensive view of sulfur metabolism and its regulation by gathering patchy information and briefly appraising current updates in sulfur metabolism from physiology to complex processes by integrating morpho-physiological, biochemical, and molecular findings.
Sulfur uptake and assimilation: an overveiw
Uptake of sulfur
Assimilation of sulfur commences with the uptake of sulfate and then, sulfate is reduced in a sequential multistep process (Fig. 2). Although sulfate is the most preferable source, alternative sources such as sulfonate, cysteine, methionine, glutathione, and taurine are also utilized by organisms. The model bacterium E. coli utilizes cysteine, glutathione, and various alkane sulfonates including taurine. In addition, some cyanobacteria can derive sulfur from sulfate ester (Plectonema), ethane sulfonate (Anabaena variabilis), methionine (Synechococcus 6301 and A. variabilis), taurine (A. variabilis) (Müller and Schmidt 1986; Biedlingmaier and Schmidt 1987), cysteine (Synechococcus 6301), cystine (Synechococcus sp.), thiosulfate (Synechococcus sp.), thiocyanate (Synechococcus sp.), and reduced glutathione (Synechococcus 6301) (Schmidt et al. 1982; Lawry and Jensen 1986; Laudenbach and Grossman 1991).
The uptake process of sulfate is a highly regulated as it involves different proteins and function jointly to acquire sulfur from the external environment; these proteins are encoded by a specific set of genes. Uptake of sulfur in case of cyanobacteria is an energy-requiring, light-dependent process and varies with both temperature and pH (Utkilen et al. 1976; Jeanjean and Broda 1977; Utkilen 1982). Metabolic poisons and structural analogs of sulfate such as chromate, selenate, molybdate, and sulfur compounds inhibit sulfate transport (Jeanjean and Broda 1977). The capacity for sulfate uptake increases in the deprived cyanobacterial cells. Many studies have observed that sulfate uptake increased within an hour after the removal of sulfate from growth medium and its sequential decrease after the resupply of sulfur, indicating that a low sulfur concentration induces the expression and activity of sulfate transporters, whereas high sulfur content suppresses them. Low sulfur content is determined by a decrease in the intracellular sulfur pools that cause an increase in nutrient-dependent sulfate uptake. Initial studies on Synechococcus PCC 7942 (hereafter referred to as PCC 7942) have demonstrated that Vmax value for sulfate transport increases by approximately 10–20 folds during sulfur deprivation, whereas the value of K1/2 remains 1 μM in both sulfur-sufficient and -deficient medium, indicating that sulfur deficiency causes increased accumulation of sulfate transporters (Green and Grossman 1988). Utkilen and his colleagues reported a K1/2 and Vmax of 0.75 × 10−6 M and 0.7 pmoL (106 cells × min−1), respectively, at 42 °C for sulfate transport in sulfur-starved cells of Synechococcus (Utkilen et al. 1976). Once sulfate is transported into the cell, it is reduced through the PAPS sulfotransferase pathway (i.e., bacterial type of sulfate reduction system) in case of Synechococcus (Schmidt and Christen 1978), whereas other cyanobacteria reduce sulfate through the APS sulfotransferase pathway (i.e., plant type of sulfate reduction system) (Tsang and Schiff 1975). The specificity of enzymatic activities toward these sulfate donors for further reduction process (APS and PAPS) serve as a useful taxonomic marker for studying the relationship between different groups of cyanobacteria and between cyanobacteria and other bacteria as well as for examining the phylogenetic problems of plant origin (Schmidt 1977a, 1977b).
Pioneering work identified that the genes such as cysP, cysT, cysW, cysA, and cysM harbored present on the cys operon encode transporter proteins for sulfate uptake in E. coli K-12. Activation of these genes requires CysB, an LysR-type autoregulatory protein (Hryniewicz and Kredich 1991). Moreover, the cys operon consists of many genes required for sulfur assimilation including enzymes catalyzing the conversion of sulfate to sulfide, OAS synthesis, and its further conversion to L-cysteine. The cys operon is regulated through the feedback inhibition of OAS by cysteine along with some activators (Ostrowski et al. 1989).
In cyanobacteria, genes encoding sulfate permease were first identified in PCC 7942 in an analogous region of S. typhimurium that contains genes crucial for their growth. A map of this region shown in Fig. 4a indicated that the transcripts of many genes were either undetectable or detected at a very low level in sulfur-deficient cyanobacteria. An increase in the accumulation of mRNA transcribed from these genes is apparent only when the cells are deprived of sulfur. Moreover, in the S. typhimurium DNA probe approach was utilized to determine genes involved in transportation; the following genes were determined to be involved: cysA, cys T, cysW, and sbpA. Furthermore, to prove the system involved in the sulfate transport, each of these genes was inactivated through mutagenesis, and the results suggested that if genes encoding integral membrane components and nucleotide-binding protein were inactivated, then the mutated cells could no longer transport sulfate; in this case, cells would require an alternate sulfur source for their growth. By contrast, if sbpA was inactivated, then mutated cells grew if sulfate was supplied as the sole source and did not show a marked increase in the transcript of permease genes exhibited by sulfur-deprived wild type cells, suggesting that Sbp is not required for growth (Green et al. 1989; Laudenbach et al. 1991; Laudenbach and Grossman 1991).
The first gene present in the restriction map of a region characterized which encodes a nucleotide-binding protein i.e., CysA of a periplasmic permease system. The transporter subunits namely cysA, cysT, cysW, and sbpA, are clustered on the pANL plasmid along with cysR (Table 2). This sulfate permease is likely to be the only sulfate transporter in PCC 7942 because the deletion of cysA, cysT, and cysW resulted in no observable growth when sulfate was supplied as the sole sulfur source. Schmidt and Jäger (1992) described the order of genes in PCC 7942: rhdA cysV cysU sbpB cysW cysR orfδ1 cysT sbpA cysA. The transcription of cysA and sbpA occurs in the opposite direction. Genes encoding sulfate permease have different arrangements among cyanobacteria (Aguilar-Barajas et al. 2011). Sulfate uptake is a light- and pH-dependent process (Utkilen et al. 1976; Jeanjean and Broda 1977). Ritchie (1996) suggested the presence of ATP-dependent active sulfate transport system rather than symport or antiport (Fig. 4b).
The influx of sulfate in the prokaryotes is carried out by specific ABC-type transporters (Fig. 4b) consisting of a periplasmic substrate-binding protein, a pair of intrinsic channel proteins, and an ATP-binding cytoplasmic protein (Laudenbach and Grossman 1991; Laudenbach et al. 1991). These proteins have conserved domain(s) among cyanobacteria and other bacteria (Table 3). One of the components localized in the periplasmic space is a polypeptide that is involved in the binding of the substrate called as substrate-binding protein (Sbp) that has two globular domains separated by a flexible hinge. When sulfate binds to globular domains, the conformation of Sbp changes leading to the bending of the hinge, thus resulting in the trapping of sulfate. Subsequently, a protein–ligand complex interacts with hydrophobic proteins such as CysT and CysW, which span over the cytoplasmic membrane and form a pore. Furthermore, this interaction causes the release of sulfate, which traverses pores and enters into a cell against a concentration gradient through ATP hydrolysis. However, preliminary analysis suggested that CysA constitute sulfate permease may also transport thiosulfate. A mutational analysis of cysA was performed to confirm proposed the gene function, and the finding suggested that cysA is associated with thiosulfate transport. The thiosulfate transport system can be augmented by binding of thiosulfate to a specific protein such as Sbp and CysP in E. coli (Hryniewicz and Kredich 1991). The sequence homology analysis of E. coli genes to cysP in PCC 7942 suggested its position as immediate downstream of cysW. The downstream position of thiosulfate transport genes, designated rhdA, encodes a protein that shows similarity to rhodanese, which cleaves the sulfane bond and transfers the thiol group to a thiophilic acceptor molecule (Laudenbach et al. 1991). These findings indicated that the function of rhdA is crucial for the survival of cyanobacteria during sulfur deficiency.
A sequence analysis of the sulfate/thiosulfate binding protein of E. coli K-12 showed similarities with the Sbp of S. typhimurium (Pardee et al. 1966). In addition, in E. coli, cysZ was identified as a crucial factor for sulfate influx (Parra et al. 1983; Byrne et al. 1988). Sulfate uptake in green alga C. reinhardtii commences through transporters present on the membrane and then actively translocated in the chloroplast. Chlamydomonas harbors two distinct sulfate transport systems, namely H+/SO42− co-transporters (SULTR), Na+/SO42− transporters (SLT) (Fig. 4b) which are localized and function at plasma membrane and chloroplast envelope (Melis and Chen 2005), respectively. By contrast, sulfate influx in plants occurs through proton/sulfate (H+/SO42−) co-transporters which utilize proton motive force (Lass and Ullrich-Eberius 1984; Smith et al. 1995a) suggested that Chlamydomonas diverge from the plant lineage before the loss of Na+/SO42− transporters (Pootakham et al. 2010). Structural analysis of co-transporters revealed that they belong to the intrinsic solute transporter family that contains 12 membrane-spanning domains (Smith et al. 1995b). However, in Arabidopsis, sulfate transporters encoded by 12–16 genes are classified into five distinct subfamilies (SULTR1 to SULTR5) based on protein sequence similarities (Takahashi et al. 1997; Takahashi 2010, Takahashi et al. 2011). In A. thaliana, three high-affinity sulfate transporters, namely AtSULTR1;1, AtSULTR1;2, and AtSULTR1;3, have been identified through knockout analysis; the functions of proteins are listed in the Table 4. These high-affinity sulfate transporters that have a low Km value are induced under sulfur limitation. Among them, AtSULTR1;1 and AtSULTR1;2 facilitates sulfate uptake in the root system, whereas AtSULTR1;3 is expressed only in phloem, establishing a source-sink relationship (Yoshimoto et al. 2007; Berberon et al. 2008). Despite the high-affinity of sulfate transporters, AtSULTR1;1 is expressed less in the roots compared with AtSULTR1;2 which is expressed in the root epidermis and plasma membrane of the root cortical cells. AtSULTR1;2 serves as a major sulfate permease because its mutant shows a considerable decrease in the uptake of sulfate (El Kassi et al. 2007). Apart from these sulfate transporters, several low-affinity sulfate transporters (AtSULTR2;1 and AtSULTR2;2) are expressed in vascular cylinders (Takahashi et al. 2012) and facilitate the vertical translocation of sulfate from the root to shoot. AtSULTR2;1 mediates sulfate influx into the xylem parenchyma along with AtSULTR3;5, which acts synergistically with AtSULTR2;1, resulting in the enhanced translocation of sulfate to a larger distance (Kataoka et al. 2004a, 2004b). The low-affinity sulfate transporter i.e., AtSULTR2;1 is expressed in the developing seeds (Awazuhara et al. 2005), whereas AtSULTR2;2 is expressed and controls sulfate influx into the companion cells (Takahashi et al. 2000). In additionally, two sub-families of the SULTR4 transporter ie., AtSULTR4;1 and AtSULTR4;2 are responsible for the remobilization of vacuolar sulfate to the cytosol (Kataoka et al. 2004b). Moreover, SULTR5 lacks both N- and C-terminal hydrophilic domains common to other transporter sub-families that have the STAS region and perhaps perform regulatory function. This transporter subfamily also contains a molybdenum transporter, namely MOT1 (SULTR5;2) (Tomatsu et al. 2007). However, knowledge regarding plastidic sulfate transporters in plants is limited, although studies have reported that plastidic sulfate transporters in green algae C. reinhardtii belong to ABC-type transporters (Lindberg and Melis 2008), reflecting the theory of endosymbiotic association.
Reduction of sulfate
Sulfate reduction commences with its uptake and ultimately leads to the biosynthesis of sulfur-containing metabolites (Fig. 5). Although the sulfate assimilation process is similar, the cellular localization process differs between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Prokaryotes assimilate sulfate in the cytosol, whereas eukaryotic phototrophs assimilate sulfate in the membrane-bound organelles (plastid and mitochondria) and cytosol. Moreover, sulfate assimilation in C. reinhardtii is performed in the chloroplast. Similar to other bacteria and cyanobacteria, higher plants also possess all enzymes involved in sulfate acquisition, namely ATPS, APSK, APS reductase (APR), PAPS sulfotransferase, SR, and OAS-TL indicating that assimilation is likely to be conserved among these life forms (Table 4).
Genes involved in sulfur assimilation are well described in other bacteria (Table 2). These genes are harbored on the chromosomes in the order cysCNDHIJ in E. coli K-12, whereas they are arranged in a different order i.e., cysJIHDC in S. typhimurium. Expression of these genes is controlled by CysB in E. coli, which is in contrast to cyanobacterial sulfur assimilation where genes involved in sulfur metabolism are controlled by the regulatory protein, CysR that belongs to the Crp superfamily of transcriptional regulator (Nicholson et al. 1995; Nicholson and Laudenbach 1995).
The standard reduction potential for the conversion of sulfate to sulfide is −454 mV, which is higher and beyond the range of biological reduction potential (Thauer et al. 1977). In the first step, sulfate must be activated before it can be reduced. In the bacterial system, ATPS acquires a tetrameric form, which consists of two regulatory and two catalytic domains. The regulatory domain, cysN (62 kDa) exhibits GTPase activity and hydrolyzes one GTP molecule for each APS formed, whereas the catalytic domain, cysD (27 kDa) is involved in a thermodynamically unfavorable reaction. The activation of sulfate catalyzed by ATPS was found to be inhibited by AMP, ADP, and inorganic phosphate in A. cylindrica, A. platensis, and Synechococcus 6301 (Schmidt 1977b, 1979; Menon and Varma 1978). Patron et al. (2008) performed a phylogenetic analysis of ATPS and observed that cyanobacteria and viridiplantae are not monophyletic. The tree depicted that the lateral gene transfer of ATPS among cyanobacteria rather than the cyanobacterial origin of enzymes in plastids plays a key role in the redox regulation (Prioretti et al. 2014).
APS, a product formed by ATPS, serves as a critical metabolic branch point channeling sulfur to cysteine (primary pathway) or PAPS (secondary pathway), where PAPS further serves as a substrate for the sulfation of metabolites (Giordano and Raven 2014). Assimilatory reduction of sulfur occurs either through the APS or PAPS pathway depending on the organisms. The findings of phylogenetic analysis indicated that in Plectonema strain 73,110, APS reductase lies in the same branch as plant APS reductases (implying that plants obtained genes for APS reductase from a chloroplast ancestor; cyanobacterial genes were then allocated to the plant nuclear genome through endosymbiotic gene transfer), but not as PAPS reductases from other cyanobacteria (Synechococcus and Synechocystis). Horizontal gene transfer plays a crucial role in the distribution of APS and PAPS. Furthermore, the APS-dependent pathway is an ancestral pathway because APS reductase was present in the ancient sulfate-reducing microbes which require one less ATP in the APS-dependent pathway than in the PAPS-dependent pathway (Kopriva et al. 2002). The primary pathway mainly occurs in PCC 7942, whereas the PAPS pathway occurs in all cyanobacteria (Tsang and Schiff 1975). Patron et al. (2008) performed a chemical analysis and observed APS reduction in Symploca, Nodularia, Leptolyngbya, and Chroococcus. And also suggested that APR phylogeny supports the theory of endosymbiotic origin.
APS is reduced to sulfite and subsequently to sulfide by APSR and SR, respectively. Conversion of sulfite to sulfide requires six electrons from NADPH in non-photosynthetic bacteria. However, in cyanobacteria, SR activity was observed in the presence of reduced ferredoxin, suggesting similar coupling of SiR and reducing power with green algae and plants (Schmidt 1979). SR consists of α- and β-subunits encoded by cysJ and cysI with the α8β4 structure, respectively (Siegel and Davis 1974). The α-subunit contains four FAD, four FMN, and NADPH-cytochrome c reductase activity, whereas the β-subunit consists of four Fe4S4 clusters and one siroheme group (Siegel and Davis 1974; Siegel et al. 1973; Siegel et al. 1974). Within the process, electron flow from NADPH to sulfite in the following sequential manner: NADPH → FAD → FMN → Fe4S4 → siroheme → sulfite (Siegel et al. 1974).
Cyanobacteria shares probable homology in cysteine biosynthesis with other life forms
The assimilatory pathway proceeds toward cysteine biosynthesis from OAS and sulfide, catalyzed by OAS-TL. The production of OAS from serine and acetyl-CoA is catalyzed by SAT and regulated by cysteine through feedback inhibition. In E. coli, SAT is encoded by cysE, whereas in PCC 7942, SAT is encoded by srpH harbored on the pANL plasmid (Nicholson et al. 1995). Furthermore, Kredich and his coworkers reported that cysK and cysM encoded OAS-TL A and OAS-TL B, respectively. By contrast, srpG harbored on the plasmid of PCC 7942 encodes a single form of OAS-TL (Nicholson and Laudenbach 1995). In 1981, Diessner and Schmidt (1981) proposed the presence of two distinct cysteine synthases, cysteine synthase I and II, in Synechococcus 6301 that are involved in the formation of cysteine, like cysteine synthase complex (CSC) in E. coli.
Pathways downstream of cysteine: sulfur-containing metabolites
Cysteine is the first molecule involved in the synthesis of sulfur-containing metabolites such as methionine (Met), glutathione (GSH), thioredoxin (Trx), and glutaredoxin (Grx) (Fig. 5). The thiol group of cysteine forms a disulfide bridge between two cysteine residues and play a role in maintaining the tertiary structure of the proteins. Similar to cysteine, Met is involved in translational processes. In addition, Met acts as a universal methylating agent for nucleic acids, proteins, and several other metabolites through SAM formation. GSH, a tripeptide composed of cysteine, glycine, and glutamic acid that has a thiol group of cysteine residue as an active group, is synthesized through the sequential action of two ATP-requiring enzymes. First, γ-glutamylcysteine synthetase encoded by gshA forms γ-glutamylcysteine to which glutathione synthase (encoded by gshB) add glycine and produce GSH. Furthermore, GSH is catabolized by γ-glutamyl transpeptidase (ggt), releasing cysteinyl-glycine dipeptide and transferring the glutamyl part to either water, thereby regenerating glutamate or amino acids producing glutamate-containing dipeptides (Narainsamy et al. 2016). GSH serves as a redox buffer and stabilizes cellular homeostasis based on the interconversion between reduced and oxidized forms.
Trx comprise a crucial antioxidant protein family. Trx was recently identified in cyanobacteria (Gleason 1994) and exhibits two distinct types: T1, thioredoxins similar to bacterial thioredoxins (in terms of structure and redox activity). The other protein (T2) is relatively unstable and appears to be unique among cyanobacteria. Several metabolic pathways such as carbon dioxide fixation, carbon catabolism, and nitrogen metabolism are redox regulated through Trx. Similar to Trx, another redox-regulated protein, Grx, also has two different types: class 1 and class 2. Class 1 forms a classical dithiol group and class 2 contains monothiols based on the number of cysteine residues present in their active site (Couturier et al. 2009, 2011). Grxs play crucial role in the various cellular processes such as photosynthesis, respiration, iron homeostasis, sulfur and nitrogen assimilation, chlorophyll catabolism, apoptosis, and the survival, growth, and fitness of the organism under fluctuating environment (Rouhier et al. 2010; Li and Outten 2012).
Phytochelatin abbreviated as PC (a cysteine-rich peptide), a polymer of γ-glutamylcysteine with the terminal glycine residue found in all the organisms, is synthesized non-ribosomally by PC synthase (PCS). Synthesis of PC is a two-step process. The first step involves the cleavage of glycine from GSH and the generation of γ-Glu-Cys. In the second step, the formed γ-Glu-Cys unit is transferred to an acceptor molecule that is either GSH or an oligomeric PC peptide to generate PCn + 1 (Grill et al. 1989). PC has been ascribed as a chelator compound that detoxifies heavy metals (Howe and Merchant 1992) and is involved in metal tolerance and xenobiotic metabolism (Gekeler et al. 1988).
Sulfur is needed for the production of redox active Fe–S centres. The Fe–S cluster is the most ancient and functionally versatile prosthetic group. In brief, S and Fe in metabolism meet at the scaffold protein, which provides a molecular platform to form the Fe–S cluster. Three biogenesis machineries for Fe–S biosynthesis have been proposed in prokaryotes: NIF system specialized in the assembly of enzyme complexes such as nitrogenase; ISC system responsible for the generation of the majority of cellular Fe–S proteins, and the SUF system, an independent assemblage used preferentially under oxidative and Fe stress (Zheng et al. 1998; Patzer and Hantke 1999). Fe–S clusters have a wide range of redox potential (−500 to +300 mV) and are thus involved in transfer of electron (Meyer 2008) in the biological processes.
Despite conventional phospholipid, sulfur-containing lipid (sulfolipid) is found in the most of photosynthetic and few non-photosynthetic organisms (Harwood and Okanenko 2003). Sulfolipid i.e., sulfoquinovosyldiacylglycerol (SQDG) is a glycoglycerolipid characterized by 6-deoxy-6-sulfoglucose head group at the sn-3 position of the glycerol backbone of diacylglycerol (Sato 2004). Synthesis of SQDG requires two enzymes: (i) UDP-SQ synthase responsible for the biosynthesis of the donor head group and (ii) SQDG synthase that catalyzes the final assembly of sulfolipid. Sulfolipid found in the thylakoid membrane have been reported in cyanobacteria except Gloeobacter violaceous which lack thylakoid and perform “thylakoid reactions” in its cell membrane (Selstam and Campbell 1996; Sato et al. 2017). In addition, SQDG helps in maintaining the structural and functional integrity of the membrane by stabilizing the pigment complex (Barber and Gounaris 1986; Sato et al. 1995; Sato et al. 2003a, b ; Sato et al. 2004).
Regulation of sulfur metabolism
Regulation of sulfur metabolism is based on its availability and demand, which are regulated at multiple levels to ensure intracellular homeostasis (Saito 2004). In prokaryotes, sulfur uptake is commenced by ABC-type transporters encoded by set of genes that are localized on cys operon (Table 4). However, gene encoding transporters, namely H+/SO42− co-transporters and ABC-type transporters, have been identified in Synechocystis 6803 (Kohn and Schumann 1993; Kaneko et al. 1996), thus raising questions regarding the coordination of functions between these two transporters. Moreover, the plants utilize H+/SO42− co-transporter to acquire sulfate.
Green et al. (1989) laid down the foundation to understand the regulation of sulfur metabolism in cyanobacteria; in addition, they identified ABC-type transporters that act as sulfate permease in Synechococcus 6301 and anticipated an elevated level of sulfate transport upon sufur starvation. Permease activity increases with an increase in the Vmax value, whereas the value of Km remains constant. Furthermore, Laudenbach et al. (1991) described that the accumulation of transcripts encoding sulfate permease is responsible for increased Vmax value. A 33 kDa polypeptide, rhodanese, was found to be a crucial factor and accumulate under sulfur deficiency. This protein encoded by rdhA harbored on the cys regulon shows thiosulfate reductase activity and is involved in thiol transfer from thiosulfate to an acceptor molecule. Moreover, further characterization of genes encoding sulfate permease in PCC 7942 showed that cysA, cysT, and cysW mutants failed to uptake sulfate under sulfur starvation, thus conferring their role. Cyanobacteria possess strong potential orthologs of cysT in viridiplantae and are considered as an ancestor (Lyubetsky et al. 2013). Laudenbach andGrossman (1991) mutated sbpA and cysR genes and indicated that sbpA and cysR function as a sulfate binding protein and regulator, respectively. CysR shows structural similarities to NtcA and BifA, allows its DNA binding, and further regulates the transcription of 36 kDa periplasmic protein (i.e., sulfate permease) (Nicholson and Laudenbach 1995). CysR contains SPXX motif located at its N-terminal domain (Churchill and Suzuki 1989; Suzuki et al. 1993) that is involved in DNA binding at the AT-rich regions and further guide sulfur metabolism. Insertional inactivation of cysR prevents an increment in the Vmax value of sulfate permease upon sulfur deprivation compared with its wild type (Laudenbach and Grossman 1991).
Similar to cyanobacteria, sulfate uptake increases in other bacteria because of the accumulation of transporters transcript under sulfur limitation. Transporters in E. coli are encoded by cysPUWAM operon and are homologous to cyanobacterial cysATW operon (Table 4). Regulation of sulfur metabolism in E. coli is achieved through two levels: the first level involves, inhibition of SAT encoded by cysE, whereas the second level involves the allosteric inhibition of CysB through sulfide and thiosulfate (Hryniewicz and Kredich 1991; Kredich 1966). CysB function as an analog to CysR for the derepression of cys regulon upon sulfur starvation. CysB acts either positively or negatively depending on presence or absence of N-acetyl serine (NAS) (Kredich 1966; Parry and Clark 2002). Transcriptional studies have revealed that the DNA binding site of CysB lies upstream of promoter −35 region, and the interaction of CysB to major activator sites allows stable conformation and recruitment of RNA polymerase, leading to the transcription of genes (Guédon and Martin-Verstraete 2006). Although CysB acts as a positive regulator, it represses its own transcription by blocking the binding site of RNA polymerase due to the overlapping of CysB with the promoter of its own gene (Kredich 1996). Such autoregulation of CysR is not yet reported in cyanobacteria. The three-dimensional structures of regulators generated using I-TASSER server (https://zhanglab.ccmb.med.umich.edu/I-TASSER/) are shown in Fig. 6, and the quality of models were evaluated using the RAMPAGE plot (http://mordred.bioc.cam.ac.uk/rapper/rampage.php). Furthermore, String (http://string-db.org/) network analysis was performed to understand the spectrum of protein–protein interactions for CysB and CysR that act as query protein (Fig. 7). CysB interacts with different proteins such as RpoA, CysE, and TopA, possibly exhibiting DNA-dependent RNA polymerase activity; catalyzes the transcription of DNA into RNA; participates in cysteine biosynthesis, and exhibits DNA topoisomerase activity. Several other proteins, namely CysD, CysH, CysJ, TauA, CysP, and CysI, involved in sulfur assimilation also interact with CysB, indicating that all possible interactive partners are regulated by CysB. However, CysR interacts with CysW and SbpA, which are involved in the sulfate transport system. In addition, CysR interacts with other proteins such as CysA, SrpH, CysE, SrpG, and CysT, suggesting the regulatory role played by CysR.
Similar to inorganic sulfur compounds, the assimilation of aliphatic sulfur (i.e., sulfonate and taurine) is regulated by CysB interacting with ssu and tau operon, respectively. The tauABCD and ssuEADCB operons of E. coli are induced in the absence of preferred sulfur sources such as inorganic sulfate, thiosulfate, and cysteine, whereas their expression is suppressed in the presence of these sources. Such phenomenon is termed sulfate starvation response, which are controlled by two transcriptional regulators, namely CysB and Cbl. No direct evidence is related to the binding of CysB to the ssu promoter, although it exerts a direct effect on tau operon in vivo (Van Der Ploeg et al. 2001). Furthermore, Iwanicka-Nowicka and Hryniewicz (1995) reported a second regulator, Cbl, regulated by CysB. In 2002, Bykowski and his colleagues reported that the direct interaction of Cbl with the −35 promoter region of both operons and activate gene transcription (Bykowski et al. 2002). By contrast, negative regulation of APS by Cbl is reported by the same research group. However, such a descriptive illustration for the regulation of sulfonate and taurine assimilation are not known in cyanobacteria. Moreover, knowledge regarding sulfonate and taurine assimilation in cyanobacteria is majorly confined to the work of Biedlingmaier and Schmidt (1987), who depicted that the growth of cyanobacteria depends on ethane sulfonate and taurine as the source of sulfur. Under sulfur limitation, A. variabilis uses ethane sulfonate and taurine, whereas no such apparent uptake was detected in Synechococcus 6301, indicating that some cyanobacteria possess sulfonic acid permease and thus utilize sulfonate and taurine as sulfur source. Recently, genome analysis of Vulcanococcus limneticus indicated that cyanobacteria utilize alkane sulfonate through two alkanesulfonate monooxygenases and six sulfonate ABC transporters (TauABCD and ssuEADCB) (Di Cesare et al. 2018).
Symbiotic cyanobacteria such as Nostoc, showed enriched functions for the transport and metabolism of organic sulfur compounds. Recently, Warshan et al. (2018) performed transcript profiling to identify gene families present in Nostoc and observed that domains involved in sulfur metabolism include putative aliphatic sulfonate transporters, substrate binding proteins (alkanesulfonate monooxygenase), and a putative aliphatic sulfonate monooxygenase. Up-regulation of these proteins during physical contact in the symbiont-component strains indicated that aliphatic sulfonate act as “currency” and are involved in symbiosis, reflecting that feathermoss probably transfers aliphatic sulfonate to the cyanobiont in exchange for fixed nitrogen (Warshan et al. 2017; Warshan et al. 2018).
The regulatory mechanism of C. reinhardtii is distinct from that of cyanobacteria because three genes, namely sac1, sac2, and sac3, are involved in the sulfur assilimation. Mutational analysis of these genes showed aberrant arylsulfatase activity in the mutant compared with its wild type. SAC1 has been characterized and appeared to play a crucial role in the regulation of sulfur assimilation because its mutation blocks APSR transcription (Davies et al. 1994, 1996; Wykoff et al. 1998). Nevertheless, SAC1 controls the distribution of resources under sulfur limitation by sensing the intracellular sulfur status. Moreover, sac1 controls cell wall reorganization by inducing the expression of proteins upon sulfur deficiency. Furthermore, SAC2, a second regulator, acted at translational and post-translational levels (Shibagaki and Grossman 2008) in a SAC2 mutant and showed the accumulation of APSR transcript with no significant increase in its protein level (Ravina et al. 2002). However, SAC3 is considered a putative SFN1-like serine–threonine kinase; however, it does not exert any significant effect on the transcription of genes involved in sulfur assimilation (Davies et al. 1999).
In recent years, increasing attention has been focused on plants for examining molecular mechanisms underlying sulfur metabolism. Metabolic products of sulfur metabolism, such as GSH and OAS, are considered which play central role in the signaling pathway and elicit several regulatory responses including the expression of most of the genes encoding sulfate transporters and sulfur assimilation enzymes. OAS does not perform a parallel role as NAS in prokaryotes (Hopkins et al. 2005; Davidian and Kopriva 2010). Moreover, no correlation has been demonstrated between the transcript levels of high-affinity sulfate transporters (AtSULTR1;1 and AtSULTR1;2) with intracellular OAS concentration in A. thaliana (Rouhier et al. 2010). Despite showing a similar response under sulfur limitation, regulatory mechanism of plants is more complex, consisting of several regulators coordinating together at multiple levels, unlike cys regulon-mediated regulation as observed in other bacteria and cyanobacteria. Maruyama-Nakashita et al. (2005) described SURE as a cis-acting element with 16 bp sequences in A. thaliana. Maruyama-Nakashita et al. found that the gene of AtSULTR1;1 harbored SURE element in its promoter. However, Howarth et al. (2009) depicted another cis-acting element (i.e., sdi-1) occupying a similar position in the promoter as the SURE element. Moreover, Maruyama-Nakashita et al. (2005) reported that SLIM, another transcriptional regulator, induces the genes of AtSULTR1;1, AtSULTR1;2, and AtSULTR4;2 upon sulfur limitation. The inducibility of AtSULTR1;1 is higher than that of AtSULTR1;2 because AtSULTR1;2 lacks the SURE element in its promoter, suggesting that SURE as an element induces high-affinity sulfate transporters under sulfur stress condition.
In plants, sulfur assimilation is dependent on APSR expression, which acts as a link between sulfur and nitrogen metabolism. Reduced sulfur compounds such as hydrogen sulfide, cysteine, and GSH inhibit APSR, whereas sulfur limitation restores APSR. In addition, Brunold and Suter (1984) observed that nitrogen starvation represses APSR, whereas ammonium and amino acid induces it. Kopriva and Koprivova (2004) described similar inducibility of APSR under sulfur and nitrogen stress condition. Other genes such as SAT and OAS-TL are strongly regulated by protein–protein interactions forming CSC which are feedback inhibited by OAS through the dissociating enzyme complex (Riemenschneider et al. 2005). Sulfide strengthens the association of both SAT and OAS-TL, thus suggesting that cysteine biosynthesis occurs only in the presence of adequate sulfide. This substrate-level regulation of CSC was observed in E. coli (Kredich et al. 1969). However, in cyanobacteria, CSC was not reported, despite the presence of SAT and OAS-TL, indicating that substrate-level regulation or protein–protein interactions between these two proteins suggest the presence of a unique regulatory pathway. Figure 7 shows an integrated view of sulfur assimilation in cyanobacteria. Although we have summarized the role of CysR, there are still unanswered questions concerning their elaborative mechanism of action that need further investigations. Little is known regarding the functional role of CysR. Because CysR acts as a key regulator of sulfur homeostasis by controlling sulfur acquisition, elucidation of other targets should provide novel insights into sulfur-dependent biochemical processes.
Metabolic adjustments upon sulfur stress
Schwarz and Forchhammer (2005) proposed two forms of state response upon nutrient limitation: general and specific. Rapid anabolism and arrested catabolism are considered as a general response, whereas specific response include modulation of metabolic circuits. These responses are either short- or long-term depending on the nutritional status (Hirai and Saito 2004). Likewise, sulfur deficiency elicits both short- and long-term as well as general and specific responses based on the magnitude of deficiency. Transcriptome profiling in A. platensis upon sulfur starvation showed that genes involved in the Fe–S cluster, amino acid biosynthesis, protein folding, translational machineries, and ribosomal assembly were down-regulated, whereas genes related to carbohydrate metabolism, phosphor-relay sensor kinase, membrane proteins, and DNA repair mechanisms were up-regulated (Kumaresan et al. 2017). In addition, the corresponding down-regulation of chaperon molecules, adenylylsulfate kinase, tyrosinephenol lyase, aspartate aminotransferase, adenosylhomocysteinase, and phosphate acetyl transferase were observed, suggesting changes in different cellular metabolism upon sulfur limitation. Some of the pronounced effects of sulfur deprivation on the various metabolic processes are as follows:
Effect of sulfur deprivation on the growth, ultrastructures, and cellular inclusions
A reduction in sulfur not only reduces cyanobacterial growth (Kharwar et al. 2021) but also alters the cellular ultrastructure (Allen 1984; Ariño et al. 1995). Specific responses upon sulfur deficiency in cyanobacteria include the accumulation of glycogen and polyphosphate bodies mimicking the responses of nitrogen limitation (Lawry and Simon 1982). Likewise, deposition of phosphate granules was observed in few bacteria and red alga (Callow and Evans 1979). Moreover, C. reinhardtii synthesizes polyphosphate granules under sulfur limitation (Ruiz et al. 2001). Deposition of condensed phosphate in Synechococcus prevent nutrient imbalance, and the concurrent loss of orthophosphate from growth media reflects phosphorus uptake by cyanobacteria (Lawry and Jensen 1979). Additionally, polyphosphate was significantly increased in Synechococcus leopoliensis upon sulfur limitation (Jensen and Rachlin 1984). A similar response shown by Klebsiella aerogenes (Enterobacter aerogenes) indicated the reciprocity of uptake and assimilation which exist between orthophosphate and sulfate.
Similar to many photosynthetic organisms, cyanobacteria produce polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB), a stored product (Hai et al. 2001). Granules of polyphosphate and lipid bodies containing β-hydroxybutyrate have been reported in cyanobacteria with photoautotrophic PHB production reaching less than 10% of dry cell weight (Bhati et al. 2010). In Aulosira fertilissima, the PHB content increased by 8.7% of dry cell weight upon sulfur deprivation (Samantaray and Mallick 2015), whereas Gloeothece PCC 6909 accumulated sulfate in its sheath during sulfur deficiency (Günal et al. 2019). A study reported concomitant repression of total cellular proteins and up-regulation of transcript levels and/or translated proteins involved in the biosynthesis of PHB, namely phaA-C and phaE for class III PHB synthase upon sulfur starvation (Hirai et al. 2019). An ultra-structural assessment of sulfur-deficient and -replete cells of cyanobacteria revealed morphological alterations such as structure-less sheath; cell wall thickening; and accumulation of cyanophycin, PHB, polyphosphate, and glycogen granules alongwith prominent reduction and/or disintegration of the thylakoid membrane. When PCC 7942 was grown in the presence of sulfate, 3–4 prominent concentric rings of the thylakoid membrane were produced, whereas the membrane was reduced to a single layer in sulfur-starved cells.
Under prolonged sulfur limitation, all vegetative cells eventually differentiated into akinetes in Nostoc ANTH (Kyndiah and Rai 2006), demonstrating sulfur limitation as a better circumstance to trigger akinete formation. In addition, reduction in cell size and subsequent programmed cell death of Anabaena 7120 were observed upon sulfur limitation (Kharwar and Mishra 2020).
Sulfur limitation alters photosynthesis and fluxes of central carbon metabolism
The optimum availability of sulfur is a pre-requisite for photosynthesis because the process displays a high demand for sulfur compounds; therefore, sulfur limitation exerts inhibitory effects on the process. Sulfur deprivation leads to the degradation of pigment displaying chlorosis/bleaching of the cells (Collier and Grossman 1992, 1994; Davies and Grossman 1998). Changes in the color of cyanobacteria from blue–green to yellow occur as a consequence of pigment degradation and cessation of new pigment biosynthesis (Bryant and Liu 2013). Plasticity and restructuring of phycobilisome are evident upon sulfur limitation (Schwarz and Grossman 1998; Richaud et al. 2001) largely due to phycobiliproteins (PBP) degradation and repressed transcript synthesis. A reduction in PBPs possibly reduces light harvesting capacity by narrowing PAR absorption (Schmidt et al. 1982). However, an alternative adaptive mechanism was observed in Fremeyella diplosiphon, where low sulfur-containing PBPs synthesized under sulfur limitation (Gutu et al. 2011).
Sulfur starvation damage the photosynthetic reaction center. The biosynthesis of D1 protein and PSII repair process was found to be ceased not only in Anabaena 7120 and PCC 7942 but also in green alage C. reinhartii (Vasilikiotis and Melis 1994; Wykoff et al. 1998; Melis 1999; Zhang et al. 2002; Zhang et al. 2004; Kharwar and Mishra 2020). Moreover, rbcL encoding the Rubisco large subunit was down-regulated (Kharwar and Mishra 2020). Furthermore, decreased transcription of cytochrome b6/f and ATP synthase accounts for decreased photosynthetic activity (Zhang et al. 2008). Thus, sulfur deficiency reduces the maximum photosynthetic efficiency (Pmax), but in Gloeothece, the photosynthetic efficiency (α) was less affected (Ortega-Calvo and Stal 1994). The decreased rate of photosynthetic electron transport chain resulted in the reduction of ATP and NADPH, thus affecting carbon dioxide fixation (Giordano et al 2000, Giordano et al. 2005, 2008, 2013). However, no significant effect on the glycogen content was observed in Synechocystis PCC 6803 (Monshupanee and Incharoensakdi 2016). Moreever, long-term sulfur deficiency causes significant perturbation in the gene expressions and metabolites of the Calvin cycle, leading to lower photosynthate assimilation (Lindblad 1999; Nikiforova et al. 2003; Hoefgen and Nikiforova 2008).
Similar to photosynthesis, the effect of sulfur limitation on the respiration was evident because of alterations in gene expressions involved in the TCA cycle and glycolysis. In the marine microalgae, Emiliania huxleyi, sulfur deficiency resulted in the up- or down-regulation of the transcripts of succinyl CoA synthetase, succinate dehydrogenase, and citrate synthase (Bochenek et al. 2013). Moreover, Zhang et al. (2008) reported the down-regulation of ccbA, which encodes fructose-1,6-bisphosphate aldolase, causes glycolysis impairment in Synechocystis 6803 upon sulfur deprivation. Sulfur deficiency affects the acetyl-CoA content and thiamine pyrophosphatase affecting respiration, thus causing lower energy assimilation. Genes encoding transketolase (tklA) and pentose-5-phosphate-3-epimerase (cfxE) were also altered, leading to the activation of sugar accumulation in cyanobacteria (Zhang et al. 2008). Recently, Klanchui and his colleagues demonstrated that A. platensis C1 (iAK888) increased their glycogen fluxes upon sulfate starvation. Thus, sulfur limitation affects carbon metabolism by modulating the activities of phosphoglycerate mutase, enolase, pyruvate kinase, and malate dehydrogenase (Klanchui et al. 2018).
Regulation of nitrogen and amino acid metabolism upon sulfur stress
It is imperative to maintain the harmony between sulfur and nitrogen metabolism for the optimal cell metabolism; therefore, the level of nitrogen assimilatory proteins was perceived as an indicator to balance the S:N ratio. At a low sulfur concentration, a lower expression of genes involved in nitrogen metabolism was observed to maintain the S:N ratio. In Gloeothece and Anabaena 7120, sulfur deprivation represses nitrogenase, where as sulfur replenishment reactivates it (Ortega-Calvo and Stal 1994). Furthermore, Nishihara et al. (2018) reported that the loss of nitrogenase activity in thermophilic microbes was partially recovered by the addition of hydrogen sulfate and carbon dioxide, anticipating their roles. In addition, impairment in the nitrate uptake and assimilation has been observed in plants under sulfur limitation (Prosser et al. 1997; Migge et al. 2000), suggesting the involvement of sulfur in nitrogen assimilation. A reduction in the nitrate uptake was probably due to decreased cysteine production upon sulfur deficiency, leading to OAS accumulation that acted as a feedback inhibitor (Prosser et al. 2001). Kaur et al. (2011) suggested that nitrate reductase (NR) and glutamine synthetase activity was reduced, whereas nitrite reductase (NiR) and glutamate synthase (GS) were not significantly affected. However, transcriptome analysis indicated a significant reduction in the mRNA expression of NR and GS, although the reduction in the transcript level of NR was more prominent than latter, indicating reduction in NR activity and its mRNA level appear to be an adaptative response. Furthermore, nitrite excretion occurred at a saturating carbon dioxide concentration during sulfur starvation in Synechococcus 6301 (Krämer and Schmidt 1989).
In A. variabilis, assimilatory sulfate reduction was restricted in the vegetative cells only, whereas heterocysts were restricted at a reduced level of sulfur metabolism, suggesting that heterocysts must be provided with reduced sulfur compounds (Giddings Jr et al. 1981). Moreover, reduced sulfur and their subsequent reduction into cysteine alter their translation, leading to the accumulation of organic nitrogen compounds such as asparagine and arginine in cyanobacteria (Kiyota et al. 2012). By contrast, decreased NR and nitrite accumulation upon sulfur starvation was observed by Krämer and Schmidt (1989), suggesting perturbation in the amino acid metabolism and changes in the physiology. Sulfur deficiency exerts different effects on the individual amino acids based on their composition and properties. Sulfur deficiency in plants resulted in a decreased rate of protein synthesis and increased contents of free amino acids, amides, and inorganic nitrogen (Thomas 1958). An increased content of basic amino acids such as glutamine, asparagine, and arginine has been reported in plants and cyanobacteria, whereas no significant change was reported in aspartate, glutamate, serine, and alanine contents upon sulfur deprivation (Kiyota et al. 2014). Similary, the total amino acid content in sulfur-deficient and starved cells increased significantly when compared with control cells in Anabaena 7120; however, reduction in methionine and cysteine was evident in Anabaena 7120 (Kharwar and Mishra 2020).
Nitrogen and sulfur act as an integral component of protein; thus, the nitrogen content was correlated with cellular protein. A decrease in the nitrogen content upon sulfur stress condition has been recently reported in cyanobacteria, suggesting the nitrogen content depends on the availability of sulfur (Kharwar and Mishra 2020; Zhang et al. 2020).
Effect of sulfur stress on lipid metabolism
Sulfur deficiency causes down-regulation of the fatty acid metabolism and exerts an adverse effect on both phospholipid and sulfolipid. Studies on E. huxleyi concluded that genes involved in fatty acid biosynthesis, including acetyl-CoA carboxylase, β-ketoactyl-ACP reductase, and acetyl-CoA dehydrogenase were affected when the sulfur content was low (Bochenek et al. 2013). Furthermore, increased desC transcript and fatty acid unsaturation were observed upon sulfur limitation in Anabaena 7120 (Kharwar and Mishra 2020). In addition, Zhang et al. (2020) found an increased accumulation of C16:0 and C18:1 in sulfur-limited groups that could be further used in the application of biodiesel production. However, no significant effect on the lipids was observed in Synechocystis 6803 (Monshupanee and Incharoensakdi 2016).
In C. reinhardtii, sulfolipid degrade within 6–12 h upon sulfur starvation, suggesting that sulfolipid act as a major source of sulfur for the protein synthesis (Sato et al. 2017). By contrast, high stability of SQDG is maintained in the cyanobacterium, Synechococcus and Synechocystis under sulfur-limiting condition (Sato 2004; Sato et al. 2017). However, in A. thaliana, genes involved in sulfolipid biosynthesis were down-regulated, thus resulting in the reduced sulfolipid biosynthesis upon sulfur limitation.
Increased hydrogen production upon sulfur stress
Nutrient starvation has been recently used for enhancing hydrogen (H2) production in the microorganisms by altering their cellular metabolism. Sulfur limitation triggers H2 production because the degradation of D1 protein results in a more rapid decline of photosynthesis than respiration enabling anaerobic condition at equilibrium, which is ideal for H2 production. In addition, sulfur starvation inhibits carbon dioixde fixation and thus removes another important electron sink. Furthermore, this process likely leads to decreased sugar catabolism and culminated carbohydrate accumulation that are crucial for sustained H2 production (Antal and Lindblad 2005). Similar to nitrogen starvation, mechanism underlining increased H2 production upon sulfur limitation involve a higher expression of the hox gene encoding cyanobacterial Hox-hydrogenase (Antal and Lindblad 2005; Baebprasert et al. 2010). The large-scale H2 production involves treating cells with sulfur limitation through inhibiting oxygenic photosynthesis in Gloeocapsa alpicola, Synechocystis 6803, and Anabaena 7120 (Antal and Lindblad 2005; Zhang et al. 2008; Hifney and Abdel-Basset 2014). Yodsang and his colleagues showed 17-fold increased H2 production under combined nitrogen and sulfur deprivation in Fischerella muscicola (Yodsang et al. 2018).
Modulations in the secondary metabolism in response to sulfur stress
Sulfur-containing compounds are known for their protective mechanism and enhance overall fitness. Cylindrospermopsin, a sulfur-containing hepatotoxin produced by Aphanizomenon ovalisporum, is affected by sulfate availability. Bácsi and his coworkers reported a reduction in the cylindrospermopsin pool, indicating the role of sulfur and its interaction with the biosynthesis of cylindrospermopsin (Bácsi et al. 2006). Furthermore, microcystin (MC), a hexapeptide, was affected after limiting sulfur supply, suggesting limitation of SAM production may outcompete for MC biosynthesis, thus requiring sulfur (methionine as metabolic demand) in the biosynthetic process of MC (Fig. 8) (Long 2010).
Mycosporine-like amino acids (MAAs) contain sulfate esters or glycosidic linkages through imine substituents, indicating the role of sulfur in the biosynthesis of MAAs. MAAs play a crucial role in the recycling of sulfur (in the form of methionine) under sulfur-deficient condition, in addition to their well-known photoprotective role (Singh et al. 2010). Under sulfur deficiency, methionine and its derivative SAM become limiting while increase in the homocysteine concentration. Furthermore, Singh et al. reported that the bioconversion of primary MAAs (MAA-shinorine) into secondary MAA (MAA palythine-serine) is regulated by sulfur in A. variabilis. This cyanobacterium synthesizes MAA-shinorine under control condition, whereas MAA palythine-serine is produced upon sulfur limiting condition for the recycling of sulfur (Fig. 8).
Future prospects and goals of sulfur research
With the increase in research on sulfur, we are moving toward deciphering the canonical regulation of sulfur metabolism in cyanobacteria. Although CysR regulation has been described in unicellular cyanobacteria, in-depth investigation of regulation in filamentous cyanobacteria has not yet been performed. Thus, future research should examine the effects of sulfur limitation and its crosstalk with other metabolic processes at genetic and proteomic levels, evaluate the perception of sulfur stress-induced signals, explore how sulfur regulates nutrient uptake, and investigate the ameloriative role of sulfur under stress condition. Possibly integrated omic approaches can be used to elucidate the role of sulfur in cyanobacteria. Figure 9 provide an integrated view of sulfur stress-mediated responses in cyanobacteria. Studies on this versatile macronutrient are crucial to broaden our understanding and help us further elucidate the response mechanisms and adaptive physiology of cyanobacteria.
Abbreviations
- ABC:
-
ATP- binding cassette
- APS :
-
Adenosine-5′-phosphosulfate
- ATPS:
-
ATP sulfurylase
- CSC:
-
Cysteine synthase complex
- SAM:
-
S-adenosylmethionine
- STAS :
-
Sulphate Transporter and Anti-Sigma factor antagonist.
References
Aguilar-Barajas E, Díaz-Pérez C, Ramírez-Díaz MI, Riveros-Rosas H, Cervantes C (2011) Bacterial transport of sulfate, molybdate, and related oxyanions. Biometals 24:687–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10534-011-9421-x
Allen MM (1984) Cyanobacterial cell inclusions. Ann Rev Microbiol 38:1–25. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.mi.38.100184.000245
Antal TK, Lindblad P (2005) Production of H2 by sulfur-deprived cells of the unicellular cyanobacteria Gloeocapsa alpicola and Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 during dark incubation with methane or at various extracellular pH. J Appl Microbiol 98:114–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2004.02431.x
Ariño X, Ortega-Calvo JJ, Hernandez-Marine M, Saiz-Jimenez C (1995) Effect of sulfur starvation on the morphology and ultrastructure of the cyanobacterium Gloeothece sp. PCC 6909. Arch Microbiol 163:447–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00272134
Awazuhara M, Fujiwara T, Hayashi H (2005) The function of SULTR2;1 sulfate transporter during seed development in Arabidopsis thaliana. Physiol Plant 125:95–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.2005.00543.x
Bácsi I, Vasas G, Surányi G, M-Hamvas M, Máthé C, Tóth E, Grigorszky I, Gáspár A, Tóth S, Borbely G (2006) Alteration of cylindrospermopsin production in sulfate-or phosphate-starved cyanobacterium Aphanizomenon ovalisporum. FEMS Microbiol Lett 259:303–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2006.00282.x
Baebprasert W, Lindblad P, Incharoensakdi A (2010) Response of H2 production and Hox-hydrogenase activity to external factors in the unicellular cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. strain PCC 6803. Int J Hydrogen Energy 35:6611–6616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.04.047
Barber J, Gounaris K (1986) What role does sulfolipid play within the thylakoid membrane? Photosyn Res 9:239–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00029747
Barberon M, Berthomieu P, Clairotte M, Shibagaki N, Davidian JC, Gosti F (2008) Unequal functional redundancy between the two Arabidopsis thaliana high‐affinity sulphate transporters SULTR1; 1 and SULTR1; 2. New Phytol 180:608–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02604.x
Bhati R, Samantaray S, Sharma L, Mallick N (2010) Poly-β-hydroxybutyrate accumulation in cyanobacteria under photoautotrophy. Biotechnol J 5:1181–1185. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.201000252
Biedlingmaier S, Schmidt A (1987) Uptake and utilization of sulfonic acids in the cyanobacterial strains Anabaena variabilis and Plectonema 73110. Z Naturforsch 42:891–896. https://doi.org/10.1515/znc-1987-7-827
Bochenek M, Etherington GJ, Koprivova A, Mugford ST, Bell TG, Malin G, Kopriva S (2013) Transcriptome analysis of the sulfate deficiency response in the marine microalga Emiliania huxleyi. New Phytol 199:650–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12303
Brunold C, Suter M (1984) Regulation of sulfate assimilation by nitrogen nutrition in the duckweed Lemna minor L. Plant Physiol 76:579–583. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.76.3.579
Bryant DA, Liu ZF (2013) Green bacteria: insights into green bacterial evolution through genomic analyses. In: Beatty JT (ed) Genome evolution of photosynthetic bacteria. Advances in botanical research. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 99–150
Bykowski T, Ploeg JR, Iwanicka-Nowicka R, Hryniewicz MM (2002) The switch from inorganic to organic Sulphur assimilation in Escherichia coli: adenosine 5′-phosphosulphate (APS) as a signalling molecule for sulphate excess. Mol Microbiol 43:1347–1358. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.02846.x
Byrne CR, Monroe RS, Ward KA, Kredich NM (1988) DNA sequences of the cysK regions of Salmonella typhimurium and Escherichia coli and linkage of the cysK regions to ptsH. J Bacteriol 170:3150–3157. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.170.7.3150-3157.1988
Callow ME, Evans LV (1979) Polyphosphate accumulation in Sulphur-starved cells of Rhodella maculata. Br Phycol J 14:27–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071617900650361
Churchill ME, Suzuki M (1989) 'SPKK' motifs prefer to bind to DNA at A/T-rich sites. EMBO J 8:4189–4195
Collier JL, Grossman AR (1992) Chlorosis induced by nutrient deprivation in Synechococcus sp. strain PCC 7942: not all bleaching is the same. J Bacteriol 174:4718–4726. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1460-2075.1989.tb08604.x
Collier JL, Grossman AR (1994) A small polypeptide triggers complete degradation of light-harvesting phycobiliproteins in nutrient-deprived cyanobacteria. EMBO J 13:1039–1047. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1460-2075.1994.tb06352.x
Couturier J, Jacquot JP, Rouhier N (2009) Evolution and diversity of glutaredoxins in photosynthetic organisms. Cell Mol Life Sci 66:2539–2557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-009-0054-y
Couturier J, Ströher E, Albetel AN, Roret T, Muthuramalingam M, Tarrago L, Seidel T, Tsan P, Jacquot JP, Johnson MK, Dietz KJ (2011) Arabidopsis chloroplastic glutaredoxin C5 as a model to explore molecular determinants for iron-sulfur cluster binding into glutaredoxins. J Biol Chem 286:27515–27527. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M111.228726
Davidian JC, Kopriva S (2010) Regulation of sulfate uptake and assimilation - the same or not the same? Mol Plant 3:314–325. https://doi.org/10.1093/mp/ssq001
Davies JP, Yildiz F, Grossman AR (1994) Mutants of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii with aberrant responses to sulfur deprivation. Plant Cell 6:53–63. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.6.1.53
Davies JP, Yildiz FH, Grossman AR (1996) Sac1, a putative regulator that is critical for survival of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii during sulfur deprivation. EMBO J 15:2150–2159. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1460-2075.1996.tb00568.x
Davies JP, Grossman AR (1998) Responses to deficiencies in macronutrients. In: Rochaix J-D, Goldschmidt-Clermont M, Merchant S (eds) The molecular biology of chloroplasts and mitochondria in Chlamydomonas. Kluwer Academic Publishers p, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 613–635
Davies JP, Yildiz FH, Grossman AR (1999) Sac3, an Snf1-like serine/threonine kinase that positively and negatively regulates the responses of Chlamydomonas to sulfur limitation. Plant Cell 11:1179–1190. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.11.6.1179
Di Cesare A, Cabello-Yeves PJ, Chrismas NA, Sánchez-Baracaldo P, Salcher MM, Callieri C (2018) Genome analysis of the freshwater planktonic Vulcanococcus limneticus sp. nov. reveals horizontal transfer of nitrogenase operon and alternative pathways of nitrogen utilization. BMC Genomics 19:259. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-4648-3
Diessner W, Schmidt A (1981) Isoenzymes of cysteine synthase in the cyanobacterium Synechococcus 6301. Z Pflanzenphysiol 102:57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-328X(81)80217-6
El Kassis E, Cathala N, Rouached H, Fourcroy P, Berthomieu P, Terry N, Davidian J (2007) Characterization of a selenate-resistant Arabidopsis mutant. Root growth as a potential target for selenate toxicity. Plant Physiol 143:1231–1241. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.091462
Fernandez-Gonzalez N, Sierra-Alvarez R, Field JA, Amils R, Sanz JL (2019) Adaptation of granular sludge microbial communities to nitrate, sulfide, and/or p-cresol removal. Int Microbiol 22:305–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10123-018-00050-4
Gekeler W, Grill E, Winnacker EL, Zenk MH (1988) Algae sequester heavy metals via synthesis of phytochelatin complexes. Arch Microbiol 150:197–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00425162
Giddings TH Jr, Wolk CP, Shomer-Ilan A (1981) Metabolism of sulfur compounds by whole filaments and heterocysts of Anabaena variabilis. J Bacteriol 146:1067–1074. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.146.3.1067-1074.1981
Gill BC, Lyons TW, Saltzman MR (2007) Parallel, high-resolution carbon and sulfur isotope records of the evolving Paleozoic marine sulfur reservoir. Palaeogeogr Palaeoclimatol Palaeoecol 256:156–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2007.02.030
Gill BC, Lyons TW, Young S, Kump L, Knoll AH, Saltzman MR (2011) Geochemical evidence for widespread euxinia in the Later Cambrian ocean. Nature 469:80–83. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09700
Giordano M, Pezzoni V, Hell R (2000) Strategies for the allocation of resources under sulfur limitation in the green alga Dunaliella salina. Plant Physiol 124:857–864. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.124.2.857
Giordano M, Raven JA (2014) Nitrogen and sulfur assimilation in plants and algae. Aqua Bot 118:45–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2014.06.012
Giordano M, Norici A, Hell R (2005) Tansley review. Sulfur and phytoplankton: acquisition, metabolism and impact on the environment. New Phytol 166:371–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01335.x
Giordano M, Norici A, Ratti S, Raven JA (2008) Role of sulfur for algae: acquisition, metabolism, ecology and evolution. In: Sulfur metabolism in phototrophic organisms. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 397–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6863-8_20
Giordano M, Pezzoni V, Hell R (2013) Strategies for the allocation of resources under sulfur limitation in the green alga Dunaliella salina. Plant Physiol 124:857–864. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.124.2.857
Gleason FK (1994) Thioredoxins in cyanobacteria: structure and redox regulation of enzyme activity. In The Molecular Biology of Cyanobacteria (pp. 715–729). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0227-8_24
Green LS, Grossman AR (1988) Changes in sulfate transport characteristics and protein composition of Anacystis nidulans R2 during sulfate deprivation. J Bacteriol 170:583–587. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.170.2.583-587.1988
Green LS, Laudenbach DE, Grossman AR (1989) A region of a cyanobacterial genome required for sulfate transport. Proc Natl Acad Sci 86:1949–1953. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.86.6.1949
Grill E, Löffler S, Winnacker EL, Zenk MH (1989) Phytochelatins, the heavy-metal-binding peptides of plants, are synthesized from glutathione by a specific γ-glutamylcysteine dipeptidyl transpeptidase (phytochelatin synthase). Proc Nat Acad Sci 86:6838–6842. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.86.18.6838
Guédon E, Martin-Verstraete I (2006) Cysteine metabolism and its regulation in Bacteria. Microbiol Monogr:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/7171_2006_060
Günal S, Hardman R, Kopriva S, Mueller JW (2019) Sulfation pathways from red to green. J Biol Chem 294:12293–12312. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.REV119.007422
Gutu A, Alvey RM, Bashour S, Zingg D, Kehoe DM (2011) Sulfate-driven elemental sparing is regulated at the transcriptional and posttranscriptional levels in a filamentous cyanobacterium. J Bacteriol 193:1449–1460. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.00885-10
Habicht KS, Gade M, Thamdrup B, Berg P, Canfield DE (2002) Calibration of sulfate levels in the Archean ocean. Science 298:2372–2374. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1078265
Hai T, Hein S, Steinbüchel A (2001) Multiple evidence for widespread and general occurrence of type-III PHA synthases in cyanobacteria and molecular characterization of the PHA synthases from two thermophilic cyanobacteria: Chlorogloeopsis fritschii PCC 6912 and Synechococcus sp. strain MA19. Microbiology 147:3047–3060. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-147-11-3047
Harwood JL, Okanenko AA (2003) Sulphoquinovosyl diacylglycerol (SQDG)-the sulpholipid of higher plants. In: Abrol YP, Ahmad A (eds) Sulphur in plants. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 189–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0289-8_11
Hesse H, Nikiforova V, Gakière B, Hoefgen R (2004) Molecular analysis and control of cysteine biosynthesis: integration of nitrogen and sulphur metabolism. J Exp Bot 55:1283–1292. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh136
Hifney AF, Abdel-Basset R (2014) Induction of hydrogen evolution in Nostoc spp. by nitrogen and/or sulphur deficiency. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci 3:1028–1044
Hirai MY, Saito K (2004) Post-genomics approaches for the elucidation of plant adaptive mechanisms to sulphur deficiency. J Exp Bot 55:1871–1879. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh184
Hirai K, Nojo M, Sato Y, Tsuzuki M, Sato N (2019) Contribution of protein synthesis depression to poly-β-hydroxybutyrate accumulation in Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 under nutrient-starved conditions. Sci Rep 9:1–0. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56520-w
Hoefgen R, Nikiforova VJ (2008) Metabolomics integrated with transcriptomics: assessing systems response to sulfur-deficiency stress. Physiol Plant132:190–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.2007.01012.x
Holmer M, Storkholm P (2001) Sulphate reduction and sulphur cycling in lake sediments: a review. Freshw Biol 46:431–451. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.2001.00687.x
Hopkins L, Parmar S, Błaszczyk A, Hesse H, Hoefgen R, Hawkesford MJ (2005) O-acetylserine and the regulation of expression of genes encoding components for sulfate uptake and assimilation in potato. Plant Physiol 138:433–440. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.104.057521
Howarth JR, Parmar S, Barraclough PB, Hawkesford MJ (2009) A Sulphur deficiency-induced gene sdi1, involved in the utilization of stored sulphate pools under sulphur-limiting conditions has potential as a diagnostic indicator of sulphur nutritional status. Plant Biotechnol J 7:200–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7652.2008.00391.x
Howe G, Merchant S (1992) Heavy metal-activated synthesis of peptides in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Plant Physiol 98:127–136. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.98.1.127
Hryniewicz MM, Kredich NM (1991) The cysP promoter of Salmonella typhimurium: characterization of two binding sites for CysB protein, studies of in vivo transcription initiation, and demonstration of the anti-inducer effects of thiosulfate. J Bacteriol 173:5876–5886. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.173.18.5876-5886.1991
Hughes AR, Sulesky A, Andersson B, Peers G (2018) Sulfate amendment improves the growth and bioremediation capacity of a cyanobacteria cultured on municipal wastewater centrate. Algal Res 32:30–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2018.03.004
Iwanicka-Nowicka R, Hryniewicz MM (1995) A new gene, cbl, encoding a member of the LysR family of transcriptional regulators belongs to Escherichia coli cys regulon. Gene 166:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1119(95)00606-8
Jeanjean R, Broda E (1977) Dependence of suifate uptake by Anacystis nidulanson energy, on osmotic shock and on sulfate starvation. Arch Microbiol 114:19–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00429625
Jensen TE, Rachlin JW (1984) Effect of varying sulfur deficiency on structural components of a cyanobacterium Synechococcus leopoliensis: a morphometric study. Cytobios 42:35–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413264
Kah LC, Lyons TW, Frank TD (2004) Low marine sulphate and protracted oxygenation of the Proterozoic biosphere. Nature 431:834–838. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02974
Kaneko T, Sato S, Kotani H, Tanaka A (1996) Sequence analysis of the genome of the unicellular cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. strain PCC6803. II. Sequence determination of the entire genome and assignment of potential protein-coding regions. DNA Res 3:109–136. https://doi.org/10.1093/dnares/3.3.10
Kataoka T, Hayashi N, Yamaya T, Takahashi H (2004a) Root-to-shoot transport of sulfate in Arabidopsis: evidence for the role of SULTR3;5 as a component of low-affinity sulfate transport system in the root vasculature. Plant Physiol 136:4198–4204. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.104.045625
Kataoka T, Watanabe-Takahashi A, Hayashi N, Ohnishi M, Mimura T, Buchner P, Hawkesford MJ, Yamaya T, Takahashi H (2004b) Vacuolar sulfate transporters are essential determinants controlling internal distribution of sulfate in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 16:2693–2704. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.104.023960
Kaur G, Chandna R, Pandey R, Abrol YP, Iqbal M, Ahmad A (2011) Sulfur starvation and restoration affect nitrate uptake and assimilation in rapeseed. Protoplasma 248:299–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00709-010-0171-3
Kharwar S, Mishra AK (2020) Unraveling the complexities underlying sulfur deficiency and starvation in the cyanobacterium Anabaena sp. PCC 7120. Environ Exp Bot:103966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2019.103966
Kharwar S, Bhattacharjee S, Mishra AK (2021) Disentangling the impact of sulfur limitation on exopolysaccharide and functionality of Alr2882 by in silico approaches in Anabaena sp. PCC 7120. Appl Biochem Biotechnol:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-021-03501-3
Kiyota H, Ikeuchi M, Hirai MK (2012) Response of amino acid metabolism to sulfur starvation in Synechocystis sp. PCC 683. In: Sulfur metabolism in plants. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands pp 53-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4450-9_6
Kiyota H, Hirai M, Ikeuchi M (2014) NblA1/A2-dependent homeostasis of amino acid pools during nitrogen starvation in Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. Metabolites 4:517–531. https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo4030517
Klanchui A, Dulsawat S, Chaloemngam K, Cheevadhanarak S, Prommeenate P, Meechai A (2018) An improved genome-scale metabolic model of Arthrospira platensis C1 (iAK888) and its application in glycogen overproduction. Metabolites 8:84. https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo8040084
Kohn C, Schumann J (1993) Nucleotide sequence and homology comparison of two genes of the sulfate transport operon from the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC6803. Plant Mol Biol 21:409–412. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M112.392407
Kolesinski P, Rydzy M, Szczepaniak A (2017) Is RAF1 protein from Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 really needed in the cyanobacterial Rubisco assembly process? Photosynth Res 132:135–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11120-017-0336-4
Kopriva S, Koprivova A (2004) Plant adenosine 5 phosphosulphate reductase: the past, the present, and the future. J Exp Bot 55:1775–1783. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh18
Kopriva S, Büchert T, Fritz G, Suter M, Benda R, Schünemann V, Koprivova A, Schürmann P, Trautwein AX, Kroneck PM, Brunold C (2002) The presence of an iron-sulfur cluster in adenosine 5′-phosphosulfate reductase separates organisms utilizing adenosine 5′-phosphosulfate and phosphoadenosine 5′-phosphosulfate for sulfate assimilation. J Biol Chem 277:21786–21791. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M202152200
Krämer E, Schmidt A (1989) Nitrite accumulation by Synechococcus 6301 as a consequence of carbon or sulfur deficiency. FEMS Microbiol Lett 59:191–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.1989.tb03108.x
Kredich NM (1966) Biosynthesis of cysteine. Cellular and molecular biology. In: Neidhardt FC, Curtiss R, Ingraham JL, Lin ECC, Low KB et al (eds) Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium. Washington, DC, ASM Press, pp 514–27
Kredich NM, Becker MA, Tomkins GM (1969) Purification and characterization of cysteine synthetase, a bifunctional protein complex, from Salmonella typhimurium. J Biol Chem 244:2428–2439. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)78241-6
Ksionzek KB, Lechtenfeld OJ, McCallister SL, Schmitt-Kopplin P, Geuer JK, Geibert W, Koch BP (2016) Dissolved organic sulfur in the ocean: biogeochemistry of a petagram inventory. Science 354:456–459. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf7796
Kumaresan V, Nizam F, Ravichandran G, Viswanathan K, Palanisamy R, Bhatt P, Arasu MV, Al-Dhabi NA, Mala K, Arockiaraj J (2017) Transcriptome changes of blue-green algae, Arthrospira sp. in response to sulfate stress. Algal Res 23:96–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2017.01.012
Kyndiah O, Rai AN (2006) Induction of sporulation by sulphate limitation in Nostoc ANTH, a symbiotic strain capable of colonizing roots of rice plants. Ind J Biotechnol 6:57–62
Lass B, Ullrich-Eberius CI (1984) Evidence for proton/sulfate cotransport and its kinetics in Lemna gibba G1. Planta 161:53–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00951460
Laudenbach DE, Grossman AR (1991) Characterization and mutagenesis of sulfur-regulated genes in a cyanobacterium: evidence for function in sulfate transport. J Bacteriol 173:2739–2750. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.173.9.2739-2750.1991
Laudenbach DE, Ehrhardt D, Green L, Grossman A (1991) Isolation and characterization of a sulfur-regulated gene encoding a periplasmically localized protein with sequence similarity to rhodanese. J Bacteriol 173:2751–2760. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.173.9.2751-2760.1991
Lawry NH, Jensen TE (1979) Deposition of condensed phosphate as an effect of varying sulfur deficiency in the cyanobacterium Synechococcus sp. (Anacystis nidulans). Arch Microbiol 120:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413264
Lawry NH, Jensen TE (1986) Condensed phosphate deposition, sulfur amino acid use, and unidirectional transsulfuration in Synechococcus leopoliensis. Arch Microbiol 144:317–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00409879
Lawry NH, Simon RD (1982) The normal and induced occurrence of cyanophycin inclusion bodies in several blue-green algae. J Phycol 18:391–399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-8817.1982.tb03201.x
Li H, Outten CE (2012) Monothiol CGFS glutaredoxins and BolA-like proteins: [2Fe-2S] binding partners in iron homeostasis. Biochemistry 51:4377–4389. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi300393z
Lindberg P, Melis A (2008) The chloroplast sulfate transport system in the green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Planta 228:951–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-008-0795-0
Lindblad P (1999) Cyanobacterial H2 metabolism: knowledge and potential/strategies for a photobiotechnological production of H2. Biotechnol Appl 16:141–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-003-1113-5
Long BM (2010) Evidence that sulfur metabolism plays a role in microcystin production by Microcystis aeruginosa. Harmful Algae 9:74–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hal.2009.08.003
Lowenstein TK, Hardie LA, Timofeeff MN, Demicco RV (2003) Secular variation in seawater chemistry and the origin of calcium chloride basinal brines. Geol 31:857–860. https://doi.org/10.1130/G19728R.1
Ludwig M, Bryant DA (2012) Acclimation of the global transcriptome of the cyanobacterium Synechococcus sp. strain PCC 7002 to nutrient limitations and different nitrogen sources. Front Microbiol 3:145. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2012.00145
Lyubetsky VA, Seliverstov AV, Zverkov OA (2013) Transcription regulation of plastid genes involved in sulfate transport in Viridiplantae. Bio Med Res Inter 2013:6. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/413450
Maruyama-Nakashita A, Nakamura Y, Watanabe-Takahashi A, Inoue E, Yamaya T, Takahashi H (2005) Identification of a novel cis-acting element conferring sulfur deficiency response in Arabidopsis roots. Plant J. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2005.02363.x
Melis A (1999) Photosystem-II damage and repair cycle in chloroplasts: what modulates the rate of photodamage in vivo? Trend Plant Sci 4:130–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1360-1385(99)01387-4
Melis A, Chen HC (2005) Chloroplast sulfate transport in green algae - genes, proteins and effects. Photosynth Res 86:299–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11120-005-7382-z
Menon VKN, Varma AK (1978) Adenosine 5′-triphosphate sulphurilase from Spirulina platensis. Experientia 35:854–855. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01955107
Meyer J (2008) Iron-sulfur protein folds, iron-sulfur chemistry, and evolution. J Biol Inorg Chem 13:157–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00775-007-0318-7
Migge A, Bork C, Hell R, Becker TW (2000) Negative regulation of nitrate reductase gene expression by glutamine or asparagine accumulating in leaves of sulfur deprived tobacco. Planta 211:587–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004250000322
Monshupanee T, Incharoensakdi A (2016) Enhanced accumulation of glycogen, lipids and polyhydroxybutyrate under optimal nutrients and light intensities in the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. J Appl Microbiol 116:830–838. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.12409
Müller S, Schmidt A (1986) Substrate-Dependent Arylsulfatase Activity in the Cyanobacterium Plectonema 73110. Z Naturforsch 41c:820–824. https://doi.org/10.1515/znc-1986-9-1004
Narainsamy K, Farci S, Braun E, Junot C, Cassier-Chauvat C, Chauvat F (2016) Oxidative-stress detoxification and signalling in cyanobacteria: the crucial glutathione synthesis pathway supports the production of ergothioneine and ophthalmate. Mol Microbiol 100:15–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/mmi.13296
Nicholson ML, Laudenbach DE (1995) Genes encoded on a cyanobacterial plasmid are transcriptionally regulated by sulfur availability and CysR. J Bacteriol 177:2143–2150. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.177.8.2143-2150.1995
Nicholson ML, Gaasenbeek M, Laudenbach DE (1995) Two enzymes together capable of cysteine biosynthesis are encoded on a cyanobacterial plasmid. Mol Gen Genet 247:623–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00290354
Nikiforova V, Freitag J, Kempa S, Adamik M, Hesse H, Hoefgen R (2003) Transcriptome analysis of sulfur depletion in Arabidopsis thaliana: interlacing of biosynthetic pathways provides response specificity. Plant J 33:633–650
Nishihara A, Haruta S, McGlynn SE, Thiel V, Matsuura K (2018) Nitrogen fixation in thermophilic chemosynthetic microbial communities depending on hydrogen, sulfate, and carbon dioxide. Microbes Environ 33:10-18. https://doi.org/10.1264/jsme2.ME17134
Ortega-Calvo JJ, Stal LJ (1994) Sulphate-limited growth in the N2-fixing unicellular cyanobacterium Gloeothece (Nageli) sp. PCC 6909. New Phytol 128:273–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1994.tb04011.x
Ostrowski J, Wu JY, Rueger DC, Miller BE, Siegel LM, Kredich NM (1989) Characterization of the cysJIH regions of Salmonella typhimurium and Escherichia coli B. DNA sequences of cysI and cysH and a model for the siroheme-Fe4S4 active center of sulfite reductase hemoprotein based on amino acid homology with spinach nitrite reductase. J Biol Chem 264:15726–15737
Pardee AB, Prestidge LS, Whipple MB (1966) A binding site for sulfate and its relation to sulfate transport into Salmonella typhimurium. J Biol Chem 241:3962–3969. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(18)99799-1
Parra F, Britton P, Castle C, Jones-Mortimer MC, Kornberg HL (1983) Two separate genes involved in sulphate transport in Escherichia coli K12. Microbiol 129:357–358. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-129-2-357
Parry J, Clark DP (2002) Identification of a CysB-regulated gene involved in glutathione transport in Escherichia coli. FEMS Microbiol Lett 209:81–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2002.tb11113.x
Patron NJ, Durnford DG, Kopriva S (2008) Sulfate assimilation in eukaryotes: fusions, relocations and lateral transfers. BMC Evolu Biol 8:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-8-39
Patzer SI, Hantke K (1999) SufS is a NifS-like protein, and SufD is necessary for stability of the [2Fe-2S] FhuF protein in Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol 181:3307–3309. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.181.10.3307-3309.1999
Petrychenko OY, Peryt TMT, Chechel EI (2005) Early Cambrian seawater chemistry from fluid inclusions in halite from Siberian evaporites. Chem Geol 219:149–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2005.02.003
Pootakham W, Gonzalez-Ballester D, Grossman AR (2010) Identification and regulation of plasma membrane sulfate transporters in Chlamydomonas. Plant Physiol 153:1653–1668. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.110.157875
Prioretti L, Gontero B, Hell R, Giordano M (2014) Diversity and regulation of ATP sulfurylase in photosynthetic organisms. Front Plant Sci 5:597. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00597
Prosser IM, Schneider A, Hawkesford MJ, Clarkson DT (1997) Changes in nutrient composition, metabolite concentrations and enzyme activities in spinach in the early stages of S-deprivation. Sulphur metabolism in higher plants: molecular, ecophysiological and nutritional aspects. In: Cram WJ, De Kok LJ, Stulen I, Brunold C, Rennenberg H (eds) Sulphur metabolism in higher plants. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden The Netherlands, pp 339–342
Prosser IM, Purves JV, Saker LR, Clarkson DT (2001) Rapid disruption of nitrogen metabolism and nitrate transport in spinach plants deprived of sulphate. J Exp Bot 52:113–121. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/52.354.113
Ratti S, Knoll AH, Giordano M (2011) Did sulfate availability facilitate the evolutionary expansion of chlorophyll a+ c phytoplankton in the oceans? Geobiology 9:301–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4669.2011.00284.x
Ratti S, Knoll AH, Giordano M (2013) Grazers and phytoplankton growth in the oceans: an experimental and evolutionary perspective. PLoS One 8:e77349. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077349
Ravilious GE, Nguyen A, Francois JA, Jez JM (2012) Structural basis and evolution of redox regulation in plant adenosine-5′-phosphosulfate kinase. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109:309–314. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1115772108
Ravina CG, Chang CI, Tsakraklides GP, McDermott JP, Vega JM, Leustek T, Gotor C, Davies JP (2002) The sac mutants of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii reveal transcriptional and post trascriptional control of cysteine biosynthesis. Plant Physiol 130:2076–2084. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.012484
Richaud C, Zabulon G, Joder A, Thomas JC (2001) Nitrogen or sulfur starvation differentially affects phycobilisome degradation and expression of the nblA gene in Synechocystis strain PCC 6803. J Bacteriol 183:2989–2994. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.183.10.2989-2994.2001
Riemenschneider A, Riedel K, Hoefgen R, Papenbrock J, Hesse H (2005) Impact of reduced O-acetylserine (thiol) lyase isoform contents on potato plant metabolism. Plant Physiol 137:892–900. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.104.057125
Ritchie RJ (1996) Sulphate transport in the cyanobacterium Synechococcus R2 (Anacystis nidulens, S. leopolensis) PCC 7942. Plant Cell Environ 19:1307–1315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1996.tb00009.x
Rouhier N, Couturier J, Johnson MK, Jacquot JP (2010) Glutaredoxins: roles in iron homeostasis. Trends Biochem Sci 35:43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2009.08.005
Ruiz FA, Marchesini N, Seufferheld M, Docampo R (2001) The polyphosphate bodies of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii possess a proton-pumping pyrophosphatase and are similar to acidocalcisomes. J Biol Chem 276:46196–46203. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M105268200
Saito K (2004) Sulfur assimilatory metabolism. The Long and smelling road. Plant Cell Physiol 136:2443–2450. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.104.046755
Samantaray S, Mallick N (2015) Impact of various stress conditions on poly-β-hydroxybutyrate (PHB) accumulation in Aulosira fertilissima CCC 444. Curr Biotechnol 4:366–372. https://doi.org/10.2174/2211550104666150806000642
Sato N (2004) Roles of the acidic lipids sulfoquinovosyldeacylglycerol and phosphotadylglycerol in photosynthesis: their specificity and evolution. J Plant Res 117:495–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10265-004-0183-1
Sato N, Sonoike K, Tsuzuk M, Kawaguchi A (1995) Impaired photosystem II in a mutant of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii defective in sulfoquinovosyl diacylglycerol. Eur J Biochem 234:16–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1432-1033.1995.016_c.x
Sato N, Aoki M, Maru Y, Sonoike K, Minoda A, Tsuzuki M (2003a) Involvement of sulfoquinovosyl diacylglycerol in the structural integrity and heat-tolerance of photosystem II. Planta 217:245–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-003-0992-9
Sato N, Sugimoto K, Meguro A, Tsuzuki M (2003b) Identification of a gene for UDP-sulfoquinovose synthase of a green alga, Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, and its phylogeny. DNA Res 10:229–237. https://doi.org/10.1093/dnares/10.6.229
Sato N, Suda K, Tsuzuki M (2004) Responsibility of phosphatidylglycerol for biogenesis of the PSI complex. Biochim Biophys Acta 1658:235–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbabio.2004.06.008
Sato N, Kamimura R, Kaneta K, Yoshikawa M, Tsuzuki M (2017) Species-specific roles of sulfolipid metabolism in acclimation of photosynthetic microbes to sulfur-starvation stress. PLoS One 12:e0186154. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186154
Schmidt A (1977a) Assimilatory sulfate reduction via 3′-phosphoadenosine-5′-phosphosulfate (PAPS) and adenosine-5′-phosphosulfate (APS) in blue-green algae. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1:137–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.1977.tb00599.x
Schmidt A (1977b) Exchange of cysteine-bound sulfide with free sulfide and cysteine synthase activity in Chlorella pyrenoidosa. Z Naturf C 84:435–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-328X(77)80235-3
Schmidt A (1979) Photosynthetic assimilation of sulfur compounds. In: Gibbs M, Latzko E (eds) Encyclopedia of plant physiology. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 481–496. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-67242-2_37
Schmidt A (1988) [62] Sulfur metabolism in cyanobacteria. Methods in Enzymology.167:572–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/0076-6879(88)67065-0
Schmidt A, Christen U (1978) A factor-dependent sulfotransferase specific for 3′-phosphoadenosine-5′-phosphosulfate (PAPS) in the cyanobacterium Synechococcus 6301. Planta 140:239–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00390254
Schmidt A, Jäger K (1992) Open questions about sulfur metabolism in plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 43:325–349. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pp.43.060192.001545
Schmidt A, Erdle I, Köst HP (1982) Changes of C-Phycocyanin in Synechococcus 6301 in relation to growth on various sulfur compounds materials and methods. Z Naturf 37:870–876. https://doi.org/10.1515/znc-1982-1004
Schwarz R, Forchhammer K (2005) Acclimation of unicellular cyanobacteria to macronutrient deficiency: emergence of a complex network of cellular responses. Microbiology 151:2503–2514. https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.27883-0
Schwarz R, Grossman AR (1998) A response regulator of cyanobacteria integrates diverse environmental signals and is critical for survival under extreme conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci 95:11008–11013. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.18.11008
Sekowska A, Kung HF, Danchin A (2000) Sulfur metabolism in Escherichia coli and related bacteria: facts and fiction. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 2:145–177
Selstam E, Campbell D (1996) Membrane lipid composition of the unusual cyanobacterium Gloeobacter violaceus sp. PCC 7421, which lacks sulfoquinovosyl diacylglycerol. Arch Microbiol 166:132–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002030050367
Shibagaki N, Grossman AR (2008) The state of sulfur metabolism in algae: from ecology to genomics. Hell R, Dahl C, Knaff D, Leustek T (eds) Advances in photosynthesis and respiration: sulfur metabolism in phototrophic organisms. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 231-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6863-8_13
Siegel LM, Davis PS (1974) Reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate-sulfite reductase of Enterobacteria. IV The Escherichia coli hemoflavoprotein: subunit structure and dissociation into hemoprotein and flavoprotein components. J Biol Chem 249:1587–1598. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)42922-0
Siegel LM, Murphy MJ, Kamin H (1973) Reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate-sulfite reductase of enterobacteria. I The Escherichia coli hemoflavoprotein: molecular parameters and prosthetic groups. J Biol Chem 248:251–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)44469-4
Siegel LM, Davis PS, Kamin H (1974) Reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate-sulfite reductase of Enterobacteria. III The Escherichia coli hemoflavoprotein: catalytic parameters and the sequence of electron flow. J Biol Chem 249:1572–1586. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)42921-9
Singh SP, Klisch M, Sinha RP, Häder DP (2010) Sulfur deficiency changes mycosporine-like amino acid (MAA) composition of Anabaena variabilis PCC 7937: a possible role of sulfur in MAA bioconversion. Photochem Photobiol 86:862–870. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-1097.2010.00736.x
Smith FW, Ealing PM, Hawkesford MJ, Clarkson DT (1995a) Plant members of a family of sulfate transporters reveal functional subtypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 92:9373–9377. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.92.20.9373
Smith FW, Hawkesford MJ, Prosser IM, Clarkson DT (1995b) Isolation of a cDNA from Saccharomyces cerevisiae that encodes a high-affinity sulfate transporter at the plasma-membrane. Mol Gen Genet 247:709–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00290402
Suzuki M, Gerstein M, Johnson T (1993) An NMR study on the DNA-binding SPKK motif and a model for its interaction with DNA. Protein Eng:565–574. https://doi.org/10.1093/protein/6.6.565
Takahashi H (2010) Regulation of sulfate transport and assimilation in plants. Int Rev Cell Mol Biol 281:129–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1937-6448(10)81004-4
Takahashi H, Yamazaki M, Sasakura N, Watanabe A, Leustek T, de Almeida EJ, Engler G, Van Montagu M, Saito K (1997) Regulation of sulfur assimilation in higher plants: a sulfate transporter induced in sulfate starved roots plays a central role in Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc Natl Acad Sci 94:11102–11107. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.20.11102
Takahashi H, Watanabe-Takahashi A, Smith FW, Blake-Kalff M, Hawkesford MJ, Saito K (2000) The role of three functional sulfate transporters involved in uptake and translocation of sulfate in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 23:171–182. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-313x.2000.00768.x
Takahashi H, Kopriva S, Giordano M, Saito K, Hell R (2011) Sulfur assimilation in photosynthetic organisms: molecular functions and regulations of transporters and assimilatory enzymes. Annu Rev Plant Biol 62:157–184. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-arplant-042110-103921
Takahashi H, Buchner P, Yoshimoto N, Hawkesford MJ, Shiu SH (2012) Evolutionary relationships and functional diversity of plant sulfate transporters. Front Plant Sci 2:119. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2011.00119
Thauer RK, Jungermann K, Decker K (1977) Energy conservation in chemotrophic anaerobic bacteria. Bacteriol Rev 41:100–180
Thomas MD (1958) Assimilation of sulfur and physiology of essential S-compounds. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology IX, pp37–63
Tomatsu H, Takano J, Takahashi H, Watanabe-Takahashi A, Shibagaki N, Fujiwara T (2007) An Arabidopsis thaliana high-affinity molybdate transporter required for efficient uptake of molybdate from soil. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:18807–18812. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0706373104
Tsang MLS, Schiff JA (1975) Studies of sulfate utilization by alage. 14. Distribution of adenosine 5′- phosphosulfate (APS) and adenosine 3′ phosphate 5′- phosphosulfate (PAPS) sulfotransferases in assimilatory sulfate reducers. Plant Sci Lett 4:301–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4211(75)90102-9
Utkilen HC (1982) Magnesium-limited growth of the cyanobacterium Anacystis nidulans. Microbiology 28:1849–1862. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-128-8-1849
Utkilen HC, Heldal M, Knutsen G (1976) Characterization of sulfate uptake in Anacystis nidulans. Plant Physiol 38:217–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1976.tb03993.x
Van Der Ploeg JR, Barone M, Leisinger T (2001) Expression of the Bacillus subtilis sulphonate-sulphur utilization genes is regulated at the levels of transcription initiation and termination. Mol Microbiol 39:1356–1136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2001.02327.x
Vasilikiotis C, Melis A (1994) Photosystem II reaction center damage and repair cycle: chloroplast acclimation strategy to irradiance stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci 91:7222–7226. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.91.15.7222
Warshan D, Espinoza JL, Stuart RK, Richter RA, Kim SY, Shapiro N, Woyke T, Kyrpides NC, Barry K, Singan V, Lindquist E (2017) Feathermoss and epiphytic Nostoc cooperate differently: expanding the spectrum of plant–cyanobacteria symbiosis. ISME J 11:2821–2833. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2017.134
Warshan D, Liaimer A, Pederson E, Kim SY, Shapiro N, Woyke T, Altermark B, Pawlowski K, Weyman PD, Dupont CL, Rasmussen U (2018) Genomic changes associated with the evolutionary transitions of Nostoc to a plant symbiont. Mol Biol Evol 35:1160–1175. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msy029
Wykoff DD, Davies JP, Melis A, Grossman AR (1998) The regulation of photosynthetic electron transport during nutrient deprivation in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Plant Physiol 117:129–139. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.117.1.129
Yodsang P, Raksajit W, Aro EM, Mäenpää P, Incharoensakdi A (2018) Factors affecting photobiological hydrogen production in five filamentous cyanobacteria from Thailand. Photosynthetica 56:334–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11099-018-0789-5
Yoshimoto N, Inoue E, Watanabe-Takahashi A, Saito K (2007) Posttranscriptional regulation of high-affinity sulfate transporters in Arabidopsis by sulfur nutrition. Plant Physiol 145:378–388. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.107.105742
Zhang L, Happe T, Melis A (2002) Biochemical and morphological characterization of sulfur-deprived and H2-producing Chlamydomonas reinhardtii (green alga). Planta 214:552–561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004250100660
Zhang Z, Shrager J, Jain M, Chang CW, Vallon O, Grossman AR (2004) Insights into the survival of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii during sulfur starvation based on microarray analysis of gene expression. Eukaryot Cell 3:1331–1348. https://doi.org/10.1128/EC.3.5.1331-1348.2004
Zhang Z, Pendse ND, Phillips KN, Cotner JB, Khodursky A (2008) Gene expression patterns of sulfur starvation in Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. BMC Genomics 9:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-9-344
Zhang Y, Huang Z, Zheng H, Wang Q, Li A (2020) Growth, biochemical composition and photosynthetic performance of Scenedesmus acuminatus under different initial sulfur supplies. Algal Res 45:101728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2019.101728
Zheng L, Cash VL, Flint DH, Dean DR (1998) Assembly of iron-sulfur clusters. Identification of an iscSUA-hscBA-fdx gene cluster from Azotobacter vinelandii. J Biol Chem 273:13264–13272. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.273.21.13264
Acknowledgments
The Head of Department of Botany, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India is gratefully acknowledged for providing laboratory facilities. Surbhi Kharwar and Samujjal Bhattacharjee are thankful to UGC and CSIR, New Delhi, India, for fellowship, respectively, and Sindhunath Chakraborty is thankful to ICAR-AMAAS for providing financial support. All content of the review article is fully acknowledged.
Funding
The Head of Department of Botany, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India is gratefully acknowledged for providing laboratory facilities. Surbhi Kharwar and Samujjal Bhattacharjee are thankful to UGC and CSIR, New Delhi, India in form of fellowship and Sindhunath Chakraborty is thankful to ICAR-AMAAS for providing financial support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.K.M and S.K. conceptualized the overall structure. S.K. and S.B. wrote the manuscript. S.K. and S.B. prepared illustrations, figures, tables, and references. S.K., S.B., and S.C. edited the manuscript. A.K.M contributed critical comments to the draft and approved the manuscript. All the authors reviewed the draft.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kharwar, S., Bhattacharjee, S., Chakraborty, S. et al. Regulation of sulfur metabolism, homeostasis and adaptive responses to sulfur limitation in cyanobacteria. Biologia 76, 2811–2835 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11756-021-00819-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11756-021-00819-5