Cells were harvested, lysed and the expression of DnrO was detected by DnrO polyclonal antibody (Fig. 4a). The intensity of the band was measured by imagej software. A twofold excess of DnrO expression was observed in culture incubated with DNR compared with control without DNR (Fig. 4b). We could surmise that in the presence of DNR, the DnrO autorepression is alleviated because it cannot bind to its own promoter sequence (site of repression). This resulted in unhindered transcription of DnrO. As autorepression of dnrO and activation of dnrN is a simultaneous event, an increase

in DNR level in the cells would affect both. This led DAPT order us to investigate further the status of dnrN expression in the same scenario. The addition of DNR to a heterologous strain carrying dnrNO genes affected the in vivo expression of dnrO as shown by Western blot (Fig. 4, compare Lanes 1 and 2). As DnrO functions as an activator for dnrN, we analyzed the expression of dnrN in the presence and absence of DNR. This was done by fusion of dnrN to a promoterless EGFP as a single transcript

(pIJ8660/dnrNO). The construct Raf inhibitor was integrated to the S. lividans chromosomal attB site. This was accomplished by mobilizing the E. coli plasmid construct by conjugal transfer. The expression of EGFP was studied in the presence and absence of DNR by confocal microscopy. In the presence of DNR (2 ng), EGFP fluorescence was very low, implying that there is a decrease in dnrN expression (compare plates 1 and 2 in Fig. 5). This means that activation of dnrN is precluded because DnrO cannot bind to its activation site in the presence of DNR. This observation, along with results of the Western blot experiment, suggests that the repression/activation role of DnrO is affected by DNR. Regulation of DNR biosynthesis is a three-tier mechanism involving the three regulatory genes dnrO, dnrN and dnrI. Modulation of expression of these genes by DNR can affect biosynthesis. DNR has been shown to bind to a second site that overlaps with the DnrN-binding sequence (activator site) close to dnrI

promoter (Furuya & Hutchinson, 1996). Competitive inhibition of DnrN binding by DNR has been suggested already (Furuya & Hutchinson, 1996). Modulation Methamphetamine of three regulatory genes by the intracellular concentration of DNR and two critical intercalations (dnrN-binding site and dnrO-binding site) seem to regulate, as well as fine-tune, DNR biosynthesis. Based on the experiments described here and previously published work, we propose a model for feedback regulation. The model describes the importance of intracellular concentrations of DNR and DnrO in regulating DNR biosynthesis. DNR production in S. peucetius starts after 48 h of growth in liquid culture medium. DnrO being the first activator, its expression is expected at the early growth phase (Otten et al., 2000). Initially, dnrO promoters are active and dnrN promoter is dormant because of insufficient intracellular activator DnrO (Fig. 6a).