![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||
Copyright © 2008 RNA Society The bacterial toxin RelE induces specific mRNA cleavage in the A site of the eukaryote ribosome 1Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Moscow State University, Moscow 119992, Russia 2Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, BMC, Uppsala University, S-75124 Uppsala, Sweden
Reprint requests to: Ivan Shatsky, Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Moscow State University, Building “A,” Moscow 119992, Russia; e-mail: shatsky/at/genebee.msu.su; fax: 7-495-9393181. Received June 20, 2007; Accepted November 7, 2007. Abstract RelE/RelB is a well-characterized toxin–anti-toxin pair involved in nutritional stress responses in Bacteria and Archae. RelE lacks any eukaryote homolog, but we demonstrate here that it efficiently and specifically cleaves mRNA in the A site of the eukaryote ribosome. The cleavage mechanism is similar to that in bacteria, showing the feasibility of A-site cleavage of mRNA for regulatory purposes also in eukaryotes. RelE cleavage in the A-site codon of a stalled eukaryote ribosome is precise and easily monitored, making “RelE printing” a useful complement to toeprinting to determine the exact mRNA location on the eukaryote ribosome and to probe the occupancy of its A site. Keywords: bacterial toxin RelE, eukaryotic ribosomes, mRNA cleavage, initiation complex assembly, toeprinting, RelE printing INTRODUCTION RelE/RelB is a well-characterized toxin (RelE)–anti-toxin (RelB) pair, expressed from the relBE-operon (Bech et al. 1985) and suggested to be part of the nutritional stress response of Bacteria and Archaea (for reviews, see Gerdes 2000; Gerdes et al. 2005). While RelE is a stable protein, RelB is rapidly hydrolyzed by the Lon protease. Accordingly, when RelE/RelB synthesis stops in the cell, RelB disappears rapidly, which liberates RelE from its complex with RelB and activates its toxic action (Christensen et al. 2001). The RelE toxin does not cleave free mRNA but targets ribosome-bound mRNA and induces hydrolytic cleavage of the A-site-exposed mRNA sequence (Pedersen et al. 2003). This reaction is stimulated not only by the A site of the 70S ribosome but also by the partial A site of the 30S subunit (Pedersen et al. 2003; Zavialov et al. 2005a,b). The exact positioning of ribosome-bound RelE has remained obscure. However, mRNA cleavage by RelE is inhibited by tRNA or protein factor binding to the A site, making it likely that RelE binds in the ribosomal A site or in an A-site-overlapping site. The size and overall shape of RelE and the A-site binding domain 4 of elongation factor G are similar, supporting the view that RelE is located to the ribosomal A site itself (Takagi et al. 2005). When a eukaryote ribosome is stalled by a stable stem–loop in the translated mRNA, this leads to endonucleolytic cleavage of the mRNA in the “no-go decay” pathway (Doma and Parker 2006), by a mechanism reminiscent of the action of RelE. Although no RelE homolog has so far been identified in eukaryotes, this does not preclude the existence of a eukaryotic toxin/anti-toxin pair with similar action as that of RelE/RelB. The eukaryotic pair could have originated independently, and furthermore, there is little sequence conservation among RNA targeting toxins although their general structure is conserved. Interestingly, expression of bacterial RelE in yeast restricts cell growth (Kristoffersen et al. 2000) and RelE expression in mammalian cell lines can induce apoptosis (Yamamoto et al. 2002), suggesting that RelE targets the translating eukaryotic ribosome and cleaves its mRNA as in Bacteria and Archae. Here we show that, indeed, the bacterial toxin RelE induces mRNA cleavage in the A site of both 48S and 80S eukaryotic translation initiation complexes assembled in vitro. Moreover, RelE induces cleavage of a stop codon positioned in the A site of a pretermination complex assembled from purified components (Andreev et al. 2006). The hydrolytic action of RelE requires a vacant A site and appears to require correct accommodation of the mRNA in the mRNA-binding channel of the ribosome. From these data we infer that the mechanism by which RelE cleaves mRNA on ribosomes is similar in all three kingdoms. Our observations emphasize that the A site is universally conserved, and highlight the possibility of mRNA cleavage on stalled ribosomes in Eukarya according to principles similar to those at work in Bacteria and Archaea. Since, finally, RelE cleavage in the A-site codon of a stalled eukaryote ribosome is precise and easily monitored, we suggest “RelE printing” as a useful complement to toeprinting to probe the exact mRNA location on the eukaryote ribosome and the occupancy of its A site. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION RelE cleaves mRNA in ribosomal 48S initiation complexes in rabbit reticulocyte lysate To check whether RelE can cleave an mRNA bound to the eukaryotic ribosome, 48S initiation complexes on capped β-globin mRNA were formed in rabbit reticulocyte lysate (RRL) and treated with the toxin. The reverse transcription (RT) reaction was then carried out on deproteinized mRNA samples. RelE treatment resulted in the appearance of two bands at positions +5 and +6 relative to the A of the AUG triplet (Fig. 1
We also formed 80S ribosomal complexes with the same mRNA in RRL supplied with the cycloheximide, an antibiotic drug known to block the elongation step of protein synthesis (Obrig et al. 1971). After incubation, the 80S complexes were subjected to RelE action and toeprinting analysis. The latter confirmed formation of the mRNA-containing 80S complex (Fig. 1 RelE-dependent cleavage of mRNA in the 80S ribosome requires a vacant A site The requirements for RelE-induced cleavage of mRNA on the bacterial 70S ribosome have been extensively characterized with the help of an in vitro system for protein synthesis with components of high purity, and they are (1) a vacant A site and (2) an mRNA anchored in its track on the 30S subunit (Pedersen et al. 2003; Zavialov et al. 2005a,b). To check whether RelE-induced cleavage of mRNA on the mammalian ribosome have the same requirements, we prepared 48S initiation complexes, which contained β-globin mRNA, eIF1, eIF1A, eIF2, eIF3, eIF4A, eIF4B, eIF4F, 40S subunits, and initiator Met-tRNA (tRNAi
Met). The formation of the 48S complex was verified by toeprinting (Fig. 2A
When eIF2 and tRNAi
Met were excluded from the 48S complex preparation, there was neither a toeprint nor an RelE print (Fig. 2A To form the 80S initiation complex, eIF5, eIF5B, and 60S subunits were added. This resulted in toeprints and RelE prints (Fig. 2B RelE-induced cleavage of the HCV RNA requires P-site bound tRNA In order to identify a minimal set of factors that allows for mRNA-induced cleavage by RelE on the eukaryote ribosome, we took advantage of the prokaryote-like hepatitis C virus (HCV) IRES-mediated and the c1 leaderless mRNA eukaryote translation systems (see Pestova et al. 1998b; Andreev et al. 2006). The HCV IRES element forms a stable initiation intermediate with the 40S ribosomal subunit (40S-HCV IRES binary complex henceforth), which in the presence of Met-tRNAi, eIF2, and eIF3 generates a functional 48S initiation complex (Pestova et al. 1998b). Translation initiation directed by the HCV IRES does not involve scanning (Pestova et al. 1998b). It has therefore been suggested that the initiation codon of this mRNA occupies the partial P site already in the 40S-HCV IRES binary complex, but direct experimental evidence for this assertion has been missing. In addition, we do not know whether the HCV mRNA is already correctly positioned in the mRNA binding cleft of the 40S ribosome in such a binary complex. As is evident from Figure 3A
Minimal set of translational components required for RelE-cleavage in the A site of mRNA The c1 leaderless mRNA can form a functional complex with the 80S ribosome and Met-tRNAi
Met in the absence of any initiation factor (Andreev et al. 2006). In line with this, the mRNA could in this case be efficiently cleaved by RelE (Fig. 3B To investigate whether RelE can induce cleavage of mRNA in the A site of a pretermination 80S ribosome, such a complex was reconstructed on a leaderless c1(UAA-7) mRNA, in which the seventh triplet of the c1 ORF was a UAA stop codon (Andreev et al. 2006). For this, elongation factors eEF1A, eEF2, and mammalian bulk aminoacyl-tRNA were added to 80S c1 leaderless mRNA initiation complexes (Fig. 3C RelE printing as a novel approach to study the selection of initiation codons on mRNAs by eukaryotic 40S ribosomal subunits The high precision of RelE cleavage in the A-site codon of stalled eukaryote ribosomes (Figs. 1 This advantage of the RelE print was illustrated by the experiments, where both RelE-prints and toeprints were formed in the RRL or in the RRL with the addition of 20% (v/v) of S30 extracts from HeLa cells (RRL+HeLa) (Fig. 4A
Two mRNAs, where the Fluc coding sequence was linked to the IRES-elements from either human rhinovirus (HRV) or foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) RNAs, were used. The toeprinting worked poorly in RRL+HeLa (Fig. 4A Complementation of toeprints with RelE printing can be a fruitful approach in studying ribosome–mRNA interactions both in terms of mRNA accommodation in the A site and the ribosome positioning on the mRNA as such. To illustrate this, we analyzed the complex formed near the 5′ end of β-globin mRNA in the absence of initiation factor eIF1, which is essential for proper scanning selection of the initiator triplet in the 48S initiation complex (Pestova et al. 1998a; Pestova and Kolupaeva 2002; Lomakin et al. 2006; Cheung et al. 2007). In the absence of eIF1, the small ribosomal subunit stalls near the 5′ end of β-globin mRNA (~20–24 nucleotides [nt] from the 5′ end) and forms a 48S complex, referred to as “complex 1” (Pestova et al. 1998a). It has remained unclear whether the polynucleotide chain was correctly accommodated in the mRNA binding channel of the 40S subunit in this aberrant 48S complex and, furthermore, which nucleotide triplets were positioned in the P and A sites of the 40S subunit. By itself, toeprinting cannot identify the A- and P-site codons of a stalled ribosome complex, since it only probes the position of the 3′ border of ribosome-covered mRNA. We therefore complemented toeprinting with RelE printing in order to identify the P- and A-site codons of the aberrant 48S complex formed in the absence of eIF1. A high-resolution toeprint analysis of 48S complexes assembled on the β-globin mRNA in the absence of eIF1 reveals several distinct bands near the 5′ end (Fig. 4B CONCLUSIONS We have demonstrated RelE-induced mRNA cleavage in the vacant A site of the mammalian ribosome or the partial A site of its small subunit, under conditions when the mRNA was properly positioned in its track on the 40S subunit. Our results demonstrate identical modes of action of RelE on mRNAs bound to bacterial and mammalian ribosomes, suggesting that there may exist mRNA degradation pathways via A-site mRNA cleavage in Eukarya similar to those in Bacteria. This is in line with an earlier proposal based on in silico comparative analyses of relE-like motifs in genomes from all tree domains of life (Anantharaman and Aravind 2003). In conjunction with previous data from bacterial systems (Pedersen et al. 2003; Zavialov et al. 2005a,b), the present findings support the view that the structural organization of the A site of the small ribosomal subunit is very similar in bacteria and mammals. Finally, we have demonstrated RelE printing as a feasible and precise experimental approach to monitor the position of mRNA on eukaryote ribosomes under all conditions when the A site is free. Toeprinting in combination with RelE printing can be used to monitor the mRNA location on the ribosome and to determine whether or not the A site is occupied. MATERIALS AND METHODS RelE expression and purification RelE was expressed and purified according to the method of Pedersen et al. (2002) with some modifications to the purification procedure. These modifications were limited to the final refolding step, which accounted for the large losses of yield in the original protocol. In the modified procedure, pure denatured RelE was precipitated by dialysis against buffer lacking any denaturing agent (50 mM NaCl, 20 mM Tris at pH 7.5, 2 mM β-mercaptoethanol). The precipitate was harvested and resuspended in buffer containing 10 M guanidinium·HCl, 20 mM Tris (pH 7.5), 20% glycerol, and 1 mg/mL BSA. Dissolved protein was shock-dialyzed against polimix buffer (Jelenc and Kurland 1979) supplemented with 20% glycerol and stored at −20°C. In vitro transcription Plasmid pbG coding for β-globin mRNA was described earlier (Dmitriev et al. 2003). Prior to T7 transcription, pbG was digested with Ecl136II. Plasmid pHCV(40–372) (see Pestova et al. 1998b) digested with EcoRI was used to obtain the mRNA containing the HCV IRES-element. The HRV-Fluc RNA was produced from a PCR product prepared on the base of the corresponding dicistronic plasmid (Dmitriev et al. 2007). The construct FMDV-Luc with Fluc linked to the second AUG codon of FMDV RNA was described by Andreev et al. (2007). The c1 and c1(TAA-7) mRNAs were obtained by T7 transcription from pc1 and pc1(TAA-7) plasmids (Andreev et al. 2006) respectively, following digestion with AwrII. Both capped and uncapped mRNAs were transcribed using a RiboMax kit (Promega). Preparation of ribosomes, initiation and elongation factors, Met-tRNAi, and total aminoacylated tRNA Translation initiation factors, 40S, and 60S ribosomal subunits were obtained as described (Pestova et al. 1996, 1998a; Dmitriev et al. 2003). 80S ribosomes, Met-tRNAi, and total aminoacylated tRNA were obtained as described previously (Andreev et al. 2006). eEF1A and eEF2 were kind gifts from B.S. Negrutskii (Institute of Molecular Biology, Kiev) and L.P. Ovchinnikov (Institute of Protein Research, Moscow Region), respectively. Toeprinting and RelE-printing assays 48S and 80S complex assembly on the capped β-globin mRNA in RRL (Promega) was performed as described previously (Dmitriev et al. 2003). The RelE printing and toeprinting in the mixture of 80% of RRL and 20% of S30 extract from HeLa cells (v/v) was performed in a similar way. Reconstitution of 48S and 80S complexes on the capped β-globin mRNA from purified components (Dmitriev et al. 2003) was performed as described before with one modification; i.e., natural prokaryotic tRNAi
Met was used instead of T7-transcribed Met-tRNAi. The former was previously shown to be a functional substitute for the mammalian Met-tRNAi in 40S and 80S translation initiation complexes assembly (Andreev et al. 2006). 80S complex assembly on the c1 lacZ leaderless mRNA and subsequent reconstruction of the polypeptide elongation step from purified components were performed as described previously (Andreev et al. 2006) with a minor modification—eEF1H was replaced with eEF1A. To perform RelE-printing in parallel to toeprinting, the volume of each reaction mix was doubled and the mix was incubated as described above, and then one aliquot was used for a RT reaction for toeprinting (Dmitriev et al. 2003). Another aliquot of the reaction mix was incubated with RelE (final concentration of 2 μM) or with the equivalent volume of buffer as a negative control for 10 min at 37°C. The RNA was purified by phenol/chloroform extraction and precipitated with ethanol, and then RT was carried out with the same primer as for toeprinting. cDNA products were analyzed on 6% sequencing gel and compared with a dideoxynucleotide sequence ladder obtained by using the same primers and corresponding plasmid DNAs. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank Boris Negrutskii and Lev Ovchinnikov for kindly providing us with highly purified elongation factors eEF1A and eEF2. This work was supported by grant 05-04-49704 from Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) to I.S. and by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research, Linneus Support from the Swedish Research Council to Uppsala RNA Research Center, and the Swedish Research Council to M.E. Footnotes Article published online ahead of print. Article and publication date are at http://www.rnajournal.org/cgi/doi/10.1261/rna.693208. REFERENCES
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||
EMBO J. 1985 Apr; 4(4):1059-66.
[EMBO J. 1985]J Bacteriol. 2000 Feb; 182(3):561-72.
[J Bacteriol. 2000]Nat Rev Microbiol. 2005 May; 3(5):371-82.
[Nat Rev Microbiol. 2005]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Dec 4; 98(25):14328-33.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001]Cell. 2003 Jan 10; 112(1):131-40.
[Cell. 2003]Nature. 2006 Mar 23; 440(7083):561-4.
[Nature. 2006]Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000 Dec; 66(12):5524-6.
[Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000]FEBS Lett. 2002 May 22; 519(1-3):191-4.
[FEBS Lett. 2002]Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Apr; 26(8):3164-9.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2006]J Biol Chem. 1971 Jan 10; 246(1):174-81.
[J Biol Chem. 1971]Cell. 2003 Jan 10; 112(1):131-40.
[Cell. 2003]Mol Cell Biol. 1996 Dec; 16(12):6859-69.
[Mol Cell Biol. 1996]FEBS Lett. 2003 Jan 2; 533(1-3):99-104.
[FEBS Lett. 2003]Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Apr; 26(8):3164-9.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2006]Cell. 2003 Jan 10; 112(1):131-40.
[Cell. 2003]Cell. 2003 Jan 10; 112(1):131-40.
[Cell. 2003]Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Apr; 26(8):3164-9.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2006]Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Apr; 26(8):3164-9.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2006]Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Apr; 26(8):3164-9.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2006]Nucleic Acids Res. 1995 Sep 25; 23(18):3656-63.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1995]Genes Dev. 2002 Nov 15; 16(22):2906-22.
[Genes Dev. 2002]EMBO J. 2006 Jan 11; 25(1):196-210.
[EMBO J. 2006]Genes Dev. 2007 May 15; 21(10):1217-30.
[Genes Dev. 2007]Genome Biol. 2003; 4(12):R81.
[Genome Biol. 2003]Cell. 2003 Jan 10; 112(1):131-40.
[Cell. 2003]Mol Microbiol. 2002 Jul; 45(2):501-10.
[Mol Microbiol. 2002]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1979 Jul; 76(7):3174-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1979]FEBS Lett. 2003 Jan 2; 533(1-3):99-104.
[FEBS Lett. 2003]Mol Cell Biol. 2007 Jul; 27(13):4685-97.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2007]RNA. 2007 Aug; 13(8):1366-74.
[RNA. 2007]Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Apr; 26(8):3164-9.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2006]Mol Cell Biol. 1996 Dec; 16(12):6859-69.
[Mol Cell Biol. 1996]FEBS Lett. 2003 Jan 2; 533(1-3):99-104.
[FEBS Lett. 2003]Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Apr; 26(8):3164-9.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2006]FEBS Lett. 2003 Jan 2; 533(1-3):99-104.
[FEBS Lett. 2003]FEBS Lett. 2003 Jan 2; 533(1-3):99-104.
[FEBS Lett. 2003]Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Apr; 26(8):3164-9.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2006]FEBS Lett. 2003 Jan 2; 533(1-3):99-104.
[FEBS Lett. 2003]