Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptNIH Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
ACS Chem Biol. Author manuscript; available in PMC Sep 21, 2008.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC2535799

Expanding the Nucleotide Repertoire of the Ribosome with Post-Transcriptional Modifications


In all kingdoms of life, RNAs undergo specific post-transcriptional modifications. More than 100 different analogues of the four standard RNA nucleosides have been identified. Modifications in ribosomal RNAs are highly prevalent and cluster in regions of the ribosome that have functional importance, a high level of nucleotide conservation, and that typically lack proteins. Modifications also play roles in determining antibiotic resistance or sensitivity. A wide spectrum of chemical diversity from the modifications provides the ribosome with a broader range of possible interactions between ribosomal RNA regions, transfer RNA, messenger RNA, proteins, or ligands by influencing local ribosomal RNA folds and fine-tuning the translation process. The collective importance of the modified nucleosides in ribosome function has been demonstrated for a number of organisms, and further studies may reveal how the individual players regulate these functions through synergistic or cooperative effects.

In all kingdoms of life, ribosomal RNAs (rRNAs), transfer RNAs (tRNAs), small nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs), and other RNAs undergo specific post-transcriptional modification by a wide variety of enzymes (1). To date, >100 different modifications of the four standard RNA nucleosides, adenosine, cytidine, guanosine, and uridine, have been identified (2). These modifications can be organized into four main types (Figure 1) (1). The first involves isomerization of uridine to pseudouridine (5-ribosyluracil, Ψ), which contains a C- rather than the typical N-glycosidic linkage, as well as an additional imino group that is available for unique hydrogen-bonding interactions. The second includes alterations to the bases, such as methylation (typically on carbon, primary nitrogen, or tertiary nitrogen), deamination (e.g., inosine), reduction (e.g., dihydrouridine), thiolation, or alkylation (e.g., isopentenylation or threonylation). The third involves methylation of the ribose 2′ hydroxyl (Nm). The fourth type includes more complex modifications, such as multiple modifications (e.g., 5-methylamino-methyl-2-thiouridine; 3-(3-amino-3-carboxypropyl)uridine, acp3U; 1-methyl-3-(3-amino-3-carboxypropyl)pseudouridine, m1acp3Ψ) or “hypermodifications” that can be incorporated by specific exchange mechanisms (e.g., queuosine). The possible electronic and steric effects of the nucleoside modifications on base pairing, base stacking, and sugar pucker in RNA have been discussed in detail by Davis (3) and Agris (4), among others (1). The effects of modifications such as Ψ on RNA hydration and dynamics have also been considered (4).

Figure 1
The four major types of rRNA modification are shown: a) isomerization of uridine to pseudouridine (Ψ); b) base modification of C and G to m5C and m2G, respectively; c) 2′-O-methylation of uridine to 2′-O-methyluridine (Um); and ...

Modified nucleotides in the ribosome are varied in their identity, but highly localized in their positions (5). If the sites of modification are mapped on the secondary structures of the small and large subunit (SSU and LSU) rRNAs, they might appear to be random; however, if the same modifications are located within the ribosome tertiary structures from high-resolution X-ray crystal structures (6, 7), they occur in the most functionally important regions (Figure 2). In particular, regions dedicated to peptidyl transfer, such as the A and P sites, the polypeptide exit tunnel, and the intersubunit bridges, are highly modified. Of note, the clustering of the modified nucleosides is conserved throughout phylogeny, and their number appears to rise with increasing complexity of the organism. One example is Ψ, which occurs 10 times in the LSU rRNA of Escherichia coli and 55 times in the corresponding human rRNA (810). In eukaryotes, the total number of modified nucleotides ranges from 100 in yeast to ~200 in humans (2, 10). The availability of high-resolution X-ray crystal structures of ribosomes (6, 7), along with knowledge of the modified nucleotide positions, has led to the generation of modification maps that allow ribosome structure and function to be correlated (11).

Figure 2
The distribution of the 36 naturally occurring modified nucleotides from E. coli rRNA is shown on the crystal structure of the 70S ribosome (Protein Data Bank ID: 2avy-30S subunit and 2aw4-50S subunit) (7). The left side shows the clustering of modified ...

The combined importance of the individual post-transcriptional modifications was first revealed by the greater ability of fully modified ribosomes to carry out protein synthesis compared with unmodified ribosomes (E. coli ribosomes reconstituted with unmodified 16S and 23S rRNAs) (12, 13). The global disruption of Ψ or Nm formation in ribosomes in vivo results in strong growth defects in yeast (14, 15). In contrast, most enzymes or RNA–enzyme complexes that are responsible for individual modifications in the ribosome can each be disrupted or deleted with only minimal effects on the survival or growth of the organism. Similarly, disruption or deletion of an enzyme responsible for modification at three specific sites in E. coli 23S rRNA (RluD) does not cause a major difference in the exponential growth rate compared with the wild-type strain; however, the mutants are out-competed by the wild-type strains, an indication that the Ψ residues confer a growth advantage to the bacteria (16). Thus, the hypothesis has been put forward by a number of groups that rRNA modifications are individually dispensable for survival of an organism, but that together they fine-tune rRNA structure and function and ensure production of accurate and efficient ribosomes (1, 17).

The reason for the presence of modified nucleosides is still largely unknown. Their occurrence in functionally important regions of the ribosome is highly suggestive of a role in protein synthesis. The bacterial ribosome is a target for many antibiotics, which also tend to interact with the functionally important regions. For example, the aminoglycoside antibiotics interact directly with the decoding region at the top of helix 44 in 16S rRNA (18, 19). Tetracycline also targets sites on the SSU rRNA, including helix 31 (20). Given these observed correlations between sites of nucleotide modifications, antibiotic binding, and regions of functional importance in the ribosome, perhaps it is not surprising that several cases exist in which specific rRNA modifications confer either resistance or sensitivity to the ribosome-targeting compounds (21). A recent example revealed that a cyclic peptide antibiotic, capreomycin, interacts across two modified regions on 16S (helix 44) and 23S (helix 69, H69) rRNAs (22). Therefore, it has become increasingly apparent that knowledge about the locations of rRNA modifications, as well as their specific effects on RNA structure and antibiotic binding, will be useful for the development of new classes of antibiotics that avoid certain resistance mechanisms.

RNA Modification by MTases, Ψ Synthases, and snoRNPs

The rRNAs in bacteria and eukaryotes are modified by different pathways, even though some sites of modification are conserved throughout phylogeny. RNA modifications in bacteria are mediated by single-protein enzymes, which are generally site-specific and target unique folded structures or RNA sequences. The two major classes of RNA modifying enzymes are methyltransferase (MTases) and Ψ synthases, which catalyze the most common rRNA modifications (23, 24). These enzymes often employ covalent catalysis by using specific amino-acid side chains (e.g., aspartic acid). MTases catalyze transfer of a methyl group from the cofactor S-adenosyl-L-methionine (SAM) to the target nucleotide in a highly specific fashion. With only a few exceptions, almost every site of modification in bacterial rRNAs requires a unique MTase, Ψ synthase, or other type of modifying enzyme.

Because of the presence of a much larger number of rRNA modifications in higher organisms (e.g., eukaryotes) compared with bacteria, using unique modifying enzymes for each site would be metabolically inefficient. Instead, eukaryotic rRNA modifications are carried out by RNA–protein complexes. In the late 1980s, it became apparent that a large number of antisense RNAs localized to the nucleolus of eukaryotic cells contained regions of complementarity to sites of methylation in rRNA (2527). These small noncoding nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs), which are typically 60–300 nucleotides in length, guide the site-specific modification of a target RNA. Each unique snoRNA combines with a set of common proteins to form a snoRNP (ribonucleoprotein) complex (28). The snoRNA contains a stretch of 10–20 nucleotides that are complementary to a particular region of the target rRNA. On the basis of the presence of conserved sequence motifs, the snoRNAs are divided into two major classes referred to as the C/D box and H/ACA box classes (29). The C/D box snoRNAs guide 2′-O-methylation, whereas the H/ACA box snoRNAs catalyze isomerization reactions of uridine to Ψ. The snoRNPs also have functions in addition to modification that will not be discussed here (29). In addition, C/D and H/ACA snoRNPs are universally present in eukaryotes, but they are also found in archaea (29).

The C/D box snoRNAs contain two conserved sequence motifs, the C box (5′RUGAUGA3′, where R is purine) and the D box (5′CUGA3′), which are located at the 5′ and 3′ termini of the snoRNA, respectively (Figure 3). Two additional motifs, the C′ and D′ boxes, lie between the C and D boxes. The C and D box motifs are in close proximity and form the stem box structure. A region of 10–21 nucleotides upstream of the D box is complementary to the methylation site and enables the snoRNA to form a duplex with the target rRNA (30). The residue to be modified is five nucleotides upstream of the D box (25, 26). The proteins associated with the eukaryotic C/D box snoRNAs are Nop1p/fibrillarin (the 2′-O-methyltransferase), Nop56p, Nop58p, and Snu13p/Nhpx (27, 28, 31).

Figure 3
The eukaryotic C/D and H/ACA box snoRNPs are represented. The binding of proteins to the snoRNAs (black) and target RNAs (red) are depicted in which the C/D box class (panel a) binds to Nop1p/fibrillarin, Nop56p, Nop58p, and Snu13p/Nhpx, and the H/ACA ...

The H/ACA box snoRNAs contain two conserved sequence motifs, the H box (5′ANANNA3′) and the ACA trinucleotide (three nucleotides away from the 3′ end), and they have two hairpin and two single-stranded regions, referred to as the hairpin–hinge–hairpin–tail structure (29) (Figure 3). Both motifs are typically located in the single-stranded regions of the snoRNA secondary structure. The antisense or complementary sequences to the target rRNA are found within the internal bulge regions. To date, four proteins have been found that associate with the H/ACA snoRNAs, Cbf5p/dyskerin (the putative Ψ synthase), Gar1p, Nhp2p, and Nop10p (27, 28, 31).

The discovery of snoRNAs has been critical for understanding the biological roles of rRNA modifications in higher organisms. The ability to specifically block individual modifications by snoRNP mutations or knockouts allows scientists to examine the roles of each nucleotide modification in the ribosome (32). <tep-common:author-comment>AU: Can you please give a brief description of what is known about these roles in euks before returning to bacterial rRNA?

Effects of rRNA Methylation on Ribosome Function

Numerous examples exist of methylated nucleotides in a variety of RNAs from different organisms (2). The focus here will be mainly on bacterial rRNAs (specifically E. coli), because most of the high-resolution structure data come from bacterial ribosomes (6, 7). The rRNAs in E. coli contain 24 methylated nucleotides, and 10 occur in the small ribosomal subunit (summarized in Table 1). Guanosine methylation at the N2 position (m2G or N2-methylguanosine) is frequent in the ribosome (33). Five m2G residues have been identified in the 16S (m2G966, m2G1207, and m2G1516) and 23S (m2G1835 and m2G2445) rRNAs of E. coli. Nucleotide m2G1835 of 23S rRNA is located in a region of the ribosome with extremely high functional importance, the intersubunit bridges B2b and B2c (Figure 2) (6, 7). This residue resides at the center of a four-way junction involving helices 67, 68, 69, and 71, a region that contains six modifications in E. coli. Residue m2G2445 of helix 74 of the 23S rRNA is also located within a cluster of modified nucleotides (including D2449 and m7G2069) concentrated at the peptidyl-transferase center (PTC) of the ribosome (Figure 2) (6, 7). This methylated residue is highly conserved among the LSU rRNAs. Furthermore, helix 74 resides in a densely packed area of the ribosome that is lacking proteins, similar to other highly modified regions. Inactivation of the ycbY or ygjO genes, encoding the MTases RlmL and RlmG for G2445 and G1835, respectively, leads to growth retardation of bacteria (34, 35).

Table 1
Modified nucleosides that are [delete?] found in E. coli 16S and 23S rRNAs (2)

In the small subunit of the ribosome, modified nucleotide m2G966 is located in the loop of helix 31 of 16S rRNA, adjacent to m5C967 (5-methylcytidine) (Figure 2) (36). These residues make direct contact with the tRNA anticodon during translation (6, 7). In bacteria, nucleotide 966 is predominately a guanosine, but occupied by acp3U in archaea (37) and m1acp3Ψ in eukarya (38). An E. coli strain lacking the G966 modification reveals only a moderate growth disadvantage compared with the wild-type strain (39); however, recent studies have shown that specific mutations at that locus cause mistranslation (P. Cunningham, A. Saraiya, and T. Lamichhane, Wayne State University, personal communication).

Three m5C residues are present in E. coli ribosomes (Table 1) at positions 967 and 1407 of 16S rRNA and residue 1962 of 23S rRNA. The m5C967 (helix 31) modification is catalyzed by the SAM-dependent MTase RsmB (Fmu) (36, 40). Nucleotide C1407 is also located at a functionally active region of the ribosome in the decoding region of 16S rRNA and close to the subunit interface and P-site tRNA (Figure 2) (6, 7). RsmF (YebU)-directed methylation of this nucleotide appears to be conserved in bacteria. A yebU-knockout strain displays slower growth rates and reduced fitness in competition with wild-type cells (41), further evidence of the fine-tuning of ribosome function through methylation.

RsmE (YggJ) belongs to a newly discovered family of uridine MTases and converts U1498 of E. coli 16S rRNA to 3-methyluridine (m3U) (42). This modification occurs in a highly conserved region (the P site) between residues 1492 and 1505 (Figure 2), and a yggj-deletion strain also shows growth defects when competing with wild-type cells. The fact that this modified residue is close to the 23S rRNA and P-site tRNA anticodon suggests that it could play a role in either intersubunit association or tRNA selection (6, 7).

The base-methylated residues (not all of which have been mentioned here) could be involved with specific hydrophobic interactions within the ribosome or used to prevent specific Watson–Crick or non-canonical base-pairing schemes, which may limit the range of conformations of the ribosomal helices (43). Specific structures that are regulated by the modified nucleotides could provide stabilization of the PTC, or stabilize specific rRNA contacts during translation. Of the methylase knockout strains that have been studied, most are still viable but have slow growth. These results all point to roles of the methylated nucleotides in fine-tuning the ribosome structure, rather than providing essential functions.

A second type of nucleotide modification involves methylation of the ribose 2′ hydroxyl (Nm). The MTase RrmJ (FtsJ) is responsible for 2′-O-methylation of the universally conserved U2552 in domain V of 23S rRNA (Table 1, Figures 1 and and2).2). This modification appears to be critical for ribosome stability, because the absence of RrmJ causes cellular accumulation of free 30S and 50S ribosomal subunits (44) and growth defects (45) in E. coli. The adjacent residue, G2553, is involved in A-site tRNA binding (the A loop) and base pairs with C75 of the tRNA. This interaction is essential for peptidyl-transferase activity in the ribosome (46). Furthermore, residues in the A loop are highly conserved, and mutations of residues in this loop reduce translational fidelity and efficiency of ribosome-catalyzed peptide-bond formation (47).

Solution NMR structures of the A loop in the presence and absence of modification (U2552 2′-O-methylation) have been solved, and they suggest that sugar methylation regulates RNA folding (48). The five-nucleotide A loop is closed by a non-canonical base pair between the universally conserved nucleotides C2556 and U2552. Although 2′-O-methylation has little effect on the global conformation of the A loop, the conformational properties of critical loop residues (U2552, U2555, and C2556) are influenced, and these residues mediate critical tertiary interactions within the ribosome. Thus, as with base modification, ribose modifications may also serve to regulate ribosome function by altering ribosome stability (subunit association/dissociation) or through interactions with key components of the translational machinery. <tep-common:author-comment>AU: For these modifications, could you speculate more on what might be going on? E.g., Could the modifications alter the pKa values of any of the bases? Can you make direct measurements of stabilty of small folding units?

Effects of rRNA Methylation on Antibiotic Action

Nucleotide modification has been closely associated with both antibiotic sensitivity and resistance (21). One well-studied example is the conversion of two adjacent adenosines (A1518 and A1519) in 16S/18S rRNA to N6, N6-dimethyladenosine (m26A), which occurs in all three domains of life (49). This is one case in which modified residues in the ribosome are almost completely conserved throughout phylogeny. Such conservation suggests that these modifications play an important role in ribosome function. These two m26A residues are modified by RsmA (KsgA) in bacteria and Dim1p in yeast. In bacteria, the loss of modification leads to resistance to the aminoglycoside kasugamycin, slower growth rates, and reduced translational fidelity (49, 50). In yeast, a knockout mutation of the dim1 gene that encodes the 18S rRNA dimethylase is lethal, which may be the result of misprocessed precursor rRNA (51, 52). Recent unexpected results revealed that kasugamycin binds to both wild-type ribosomes and those containing kasugamycin -resistance mutations (53). Thus, it appears that certain mutations in the ribosome can compensate for drug interactions and maintain binding affinity. It is also known that m26A modifications in helix 45 destabilize the tetraloop structure, possibly preventing formation of a sheared G-A mismatch (54). Further evidence shows a possible role for the modification in regulation of long-range RNA–RNA interactions (53). This example demonstrates, however, that even for highly conserved modifications that have been studied extensively for more than two decades, their main functions are still quite elusive.

A recent study revealed that in addition to modifying regions that are far apart on secondary structure maps, a single-RNA enzyme can also modify residues on different ribosomal subunits. The TlyA MTase from Mycobacterium tuberculosis modifies (2′-O-methylation) C1409 in helix 44 of 16S rRNA and C1920 in helix 69 of 23S rRNA (22). Resistance to the cyclic peptide antibiotics capreomycin and viomycin occurs upon inactivation of the tlyA gene in M. tuberculosis (22). Thus, TlyA belongs to a group of MTases that confer antibiotic resistance by losing their function. The two methylated residues reside at a region of high functional significance in the ribosome, the intersubunit bridge region referred to as B2a, in which the loop of 23S rRNA helix 69 contacts helix 44 of 16S rRNA near residue 1409 (6, 7). The location of methylations in this functionally important rRNA region suggests that the antibiotics inhibit ribosome function through specific effects at the subunit interface (22). The ribosomes of many other bacteria lack tlyA-encoded methylations, providing a possible reason why these pathogens are less susceptible to mycobacteria-targeting drugs. The exact role of the cytidine methylations in regulating antibiotic binding is still unknown, but further biophysical and biochemical studies could reveal whether the compounds make direct contacts with the methylated residues or alter the ribosome conformation in order to regulate ligand binding.

Resistance to ribosome-targeting drugs is generally associated with the addition of methyl groups rather than their loss (21). In fact, an increasingly large number of 16S rRNA methylase genes that lead to aminoglycoside antibiotic resistance have been identified (55, 56). There are numerous other methylated residues in both the LSU and SSU rRNAs throughout phylogeny that have not been discussed. In most cases, their effects on ribosome function or antibiotic action still remain a mystery.

Effects of Pseudouridylation on Ribosome Function

The most common type of RNA modification is the conversion of uridine to pseudouridine (Ψ). This modification is challenging to identify in RNA, mainly because it is mass-neutral compared with its precursor, uridine. Several groups have reported novel approaches for identifying Ψ by the addition of mass tags, employing a combination of specific chemical reactions and mass spectrometry analysis (5759).

As noted earlier, the number of Ψ modifications increases with complexity of the organism (9), and they are concentrated in the regions of functional importance in the ribosome, namely the PTC. The enzyme RsuA catalyzes the synthesis of the only Ψ residue (Ψ516) in the E. coli SSU rRNA. In contrast, 10 Ψ in the LSU bacterial 23S rRNA are catalyzed by six different enzymes, RluB (Ψ2605), RluE (Ψ2457), RluF (Ψ2604), RluA (Ψ746), RluC (Ψ955, Ψ2504, Ψ2580), and RluD (Ψ1911, Ψ1915, Ψ 1917) (Table 1) (24).

The process of Ψ formation (pseudouridylation) is different in bacteria and higher organisms (1). In eukaryotes, snoRNAs play a role in positioning the Ψ modifications. Pseudouridylation is guided by the H/ACA box snoRNAs (27, 29). In yeast, 30 Ψ are found in the LSU rRNA, and 14 have been identified in the SSU rRNA (8, 9, 60). Although many of the modifications appear to only have minor roles in regulating yeast ribosome function, translation is impaired significantly in the absence of Ψ2919 (corresponding to E. coli position 2554 in helix 92 of the LSU) in the conserved A loop of the LSU rRNA (32).

In certain sequence and structural contexts, Ψ has been shown to stabilize the RNA through a combination of base-stacking (6163) and hydrogen-bonding (6466) interactions. Although direct involvement of the N1-H of Ψ in hydrogen bonding with nucleotide bases has not yet been observed, water-mediated hydrogen bonds to the additional imino group have been reported. In eukaryotic U2 snRNA, the extra hydrogen bond of a highly conserved Ψ residue was shown to significantly alter the branch-site structure, which further influences the splicing activity (67, 68). In this case, the Ψ serves as a conformational switch in which it lowers the free energy of the system and leads to an extrahelical conformation needed for function.

Three highly conserved Ψ residues reside near the PTC of the ribosome: Ψ1911, Ψ1915, and Ψ1917 of helix 69 (H69)in domain IV of the LSU rRNA (Figure 2) (9). These highly conserved modified nucleotides are located at the ribosome intersubunit bridge B2a, which is also a highly conserved region of the ribosome. In bacteria, Ψ1915 is methylated to m3Ψ (69). These Ψ modifications have opposing effects on H69 structure and stability, depending on their locations (e.g., stem vs loop regions) (70). A recent study suggested that the ribosome-recycling factor (RRF) contacts H69 through direct interactions between m3Ψ of the 23S rRNA and residue V126 of the protein (71), although later studies have shown interactions with the stem region of H69 rather than the tip of the loop (72). E. coli strains with mutations in the rRNA at positions directly at or near the Ψ residues (e.g., Ψ1915A, Ψ1917C, A1912G, A1916G, or A1919G) show severe growth defects, and their ribosomes display weakened A-site tRNA binding, inhibition of translation, low translational fidelity, or defects in 70S formation (73, 74). Deletion of A1916 disrupts the intersubunit bridge B2a of the 70S ribosome, promotes misreading of the genetic code, and is lethal in E. coli (75). The same mutation has been associated with resistance to the antibiotics capreomycin and viomycin in M. tuberculosis (22). Thus, although not directly associated with the Ψ residues, these antibiotics are in contact with more than one highly modified region of the ribosome.

A recent unexpected finding revealed that when H69 is deleted (ΔH69), the resulting ribosomes carry out accurate and full-length synthesis of a phenylalanine peptide from a poly(U) template, with EF-G-dependent translocation at wild-type rates (76). However, some defects are observed in the ΔH69 ribosomes, such as the inability of 50S subunits to associate with 30S subunits in the absence of tRNA, a lack of RF1-catalyzed termination, and ribosome recycling in the absence of RRF. Deletion of RluD, the pseudouridine synthase responsible for in vivo synthesis of Ψ1911, Ψ1915, and Ψ1917 in E. coli, results in loss of the expected Ψ residues in 23 rRNA and defects in subunit association, and cells lacking this enzyme have growth defects (16, 77). Thus, H69 and the Ψ that reside in this helix seem to have an important role in maintaining ribosome stability. Furthermore, a snoRNA that guides the two most conserved Ψ modifications in the LSU rRNA (2258 and 2260, corresponding to positions 1915 and 1917 in E. coli 23S rRNA) confers a growth advantage in yeast (60). Despite a strong correlation with the functional sites on the ribosome, the exact roles of these three Ψ residues, as well as the helix in which they reside (H69), still remain obscure. However, this is one of the few cases in which a biological function (e.g., ribosome assembly or stability) can be correlated with the presence of conserved modified nucleotides.


rRNAs participate in all of the key interactions of the ribosome during protein synthesis. They must discriminate between functional and nonfunctional interactions during the multistep process of translation. They must also be involved with conformational switching during these processes. It seems reasonable to suggest that the four standard ribonucleotides are not enough for the ribosome to maintain translational fidelity; therefore, a wide range of modified nucleosides is employed. These post-transcriptional modifications occur in regions of the ribosome known for functional importance and a high level of nucleotide conservation, and they typically lack proteins. Because of the chemical diversity of the modifications (hydrogen-bonding groups, methylation, etc.), these nonstandard nucleotides provide the ribosome with a much broader range of possible interactions. The clustering of the modified nucleosides in the most functionally significant regions of the ribosome further supports the idea that they are important to the ribosome for decoding, peptide-bond formation, and release of the protein products. Although their individual effects may be subtle, the collective importance of the modified nucleosides is highlighted by the superior performance of native ribosomes compared with reconstituted ribosomes containing unmodified rRNAs transcribed in vitro. The mechanisms of insertion for the modifications may be fundamentally different among various organisms, but the presence of highly conserved sites, such as Ψ1915 and Ψ1917 in 23S rRNA, is highly suggestive of their functional relevance. The relationship of methylation of rRNA targets to antibiotic resistance further implicates these residues in a functional role in the ribosome. The addition of a methyl group or imino group (pseudouridine) may possibly lead to changes in the local environment and influence rRNA folding, interactions with other rRNA regions, tRNA, messenger RNA (mRNA), proteins, or ligands, or it may fine-tune the translation process. Further experiments on modified rRNAs will continue to lead to a better understanding of their biological functions. <tep-common:author-comment>AU: please include a discussion of snoRNAs in the conclusion, and also include them in the introduction


We are grateful for support from the National Institutes of Health (GM054632 and AI061192). We also thank P. Cunningham for helpful discussions and for sharing unpublished results.


Ribonucleoprotein complexes (rRNA and proteins) that manufacture proteins they contain a small subunit (SSU) and a large subunit (LSU)
Peptidyl-transferase center
The catalytic center of the ribosome, it is located on the large ribosomal subunit and catalyzes peptide-bond formation and peptide release
Decoding region
Located on the small subunit rRNA and contains highly conserved nucleotides that are involved in interactions with tRNAs and mRNA. The A site binds to aminoacyl-tRNA. The P site binds to peptidyl-tRNA
Intersubunit bridges
RNA–RNA and RNA–protein interactions at the interface formed upon association of the large and small ribosomal subunits during translation
The isomerization of uridines within RNA to pseudouridine (Ψ) by RNA enzymes known as Ψ synthases
MTases catalyze highly specific transfer of a methyl group from the cofactor S-adenosyl-L-methionine to the –O, –C, or –N position of a target nucleotide
Small nucleolar RNAs
SnoRNAs are a class of small non-coding RNA molecules that guide chemical modification (e.g., methylation or pseudouridylation) of eukaryotic rRNAs


1. Grosjean H. Modification and editing of RNA: historical overview and important facts to remember. In: Grosjean H, editor. Fine-Tuning of RNA Functions by Modification and Editing. 1. Springer-Verlag; New York: 2005. pp. 1–16.
2. Rozenski J, Crain PJ, McCloskey JA. The RNA modification database: 1999 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999;27:196–197. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
3. Davis DR. Biophysical and conformational properties of modified nucleosides in RNA (nuclear magnetic resonance studies) In: Grosjean H, Benne R, editors. Modification and Editing of RNA. 1. ASM Press; Washington D.C: 1998. pp. 85–102.
4. Agris PF. The importance of being modified: roles of modified nucleosides and Mg2+ in RNA structure and function. Prog Nucleic Acid Res. 1996;53:79–129. [PubMed]
5. Decatur WA, Fournier MJ. rRNA modifications and ribosome function. Trends Biochem Sci. 2002;27:344–351. [PubMed]
6. Yusupov MM, Yusupova GZh, Baucom A, Lieberman K, Earnest TN, Cate JHD, Noller HF. Crystal structure of the ribosome at 5.5 Å resolution. Science. 2001;292:883–896. [PubMed]
7. Schuwirth BS, Borovinskaya MA, Hau CW, Zhang W, Vila-Sanjurjo A, Holton JM, Cate JHD. Structures of the bacterial ribosome at 3.5 Å resolution. Science. 2005;310:827–834. [PubMed]
8. Ofengand J, Bakin A, Wrzesinski J, Nurse K, Lane BG. The pseudouridine residues of ribosomal RNA. Biochem Cell Biol. 1995;73:915–924. [PubMed]
9. Ofengand J, Bakin A. Mapping to nucleotide resolution of pseudouridine residues in large subunit ribosomal RNAs from representative eukaryotes, prokaryotes, archaebacteria, mitochondria, and chloroplasts. J Mol Biol. 1997;266:246–268. [PubMed]
10. Lestrade L, Weber MJ. snoRNA-LBME-db, a comprehensive database of human H/ACA and C/D box snoRNAs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34:D158–D162. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
11. Piekna-Przybylska D, Decatur WA, Fournier MJ. New bioinformatics tools for analysis of nucleotide modifications in eukaryotic rRNA. RNA. 2007;13:305–312. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
12. Krzyzosiak W, Denman R, Nurse K, Hellmann W, Boublik M, Gehrke CW, Agris PF, Ofengand J. In vitro synthesis of 16S ribosomal RNA containing single base changes and assembly into a functional 30S ribosome. Biochemistry. 1987;26:2353–2364. [PubMed]
13. Green R, Noller HF. In vitro complementation analysis localizes 23S rRNA posttranscriptional modifications that are required for Escherichia coli 50S ribosomal subunit assembly and function. RNA. 1999;2:1011–1021. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
14. Tollervey D, Lehtonen H, Jansen R, Kern H, Hurt EC. Temperature-sensitive mutations demonstrate roles for yeast fibrillarin in pre-rRNA processing, pre-rRNA methylation, and ribosome assembly. Cell. 1993;72:443–457. [PubMed]
15. Zebarjadian Y, King T, Fournier MJ, Clarke L, Carbon J. Point mutations in yeast CBF5 can abolish in vivo pseudouridylation of rRNA. Mol Cell Biol. 1999;19:7461–7472. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
16. Gutgsell NS, Deutscher MP, Ofengand J. The pseudouridine synthase RluD is required for normal ribosome assembly and function in Escherichia coli. RNA. 2005;11:1141–1152. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
17. Baxter-Roshek JL, Petrov AN, Dinman JD. Optimization of ribosome structure and function by rRNA base modification. PLoS One. 2007;1:e174. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
18. Carter AP, Clemons WM, Brodersen DE, Morgan-Warren RJ, Wimberly BT, Ramakrishnan V. Functional insights from the structure of the 30S ribosomal subunit and its interactions with antibiotics. Nature. 2000;407:340–348. [PubMed]
19. Ogle JM, Murphy FV, Tarry MJ, Ramakrishnan V. Selection of tRNA by the ribosome requires a transition from an open to a closed form. Cell. 2002;111:721–732. [PubMed]
20. Pioletti M, Schlünzen F, Harms J, Zarivach R, Glühmann M, Avila H, Bashan A, Bartels H, Auerbach T, Jacobi C, Hartsch T, Yonath A, Franceschi F. Crystal structures of complexes of the small ribosomal subunit with tetracycline, edeine, and IF3. EMBO J. 2001;20:1829–1839. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
21. Cundliffe E. Ribosomal modification and resistance in antibiotic-producing organisms. Biochem Soc Symp. 1987;53:1–8. [PubMed]
22. Johansen SK, Maus CE, Plikaytis BB, Douthwaite S. Capreomycin binds across the ribosomal subunit interface using tlyA-encoded 2’-O-methylations in 16S and 23S rRNAs. Mol Cell. 2006;23:173–182. [PubMed]
23. Hur S, Stroud RM, Finer-Moore J. Substrate-recognition by RNA 5-methyluridine methyltransferases and pseudouridine synthases: a structural perspective. J Biol Chem. 2006;281:38969–38973. [PubMed]
24. Hamma T, Ferré-D’Amaré AR. Pseudouridine synthases. Chem Biol. 2006;13:1125–1135. [PubMed]
25. Bachellerie JP, Cavaillé J. Guiding ribose methylation of rRNA. Trends Biochem Sci. 1997;22:257–261. [PubMed]
26. Kiss T. Small nucleolar RNAs: an abundant group of noncoding RNAs with diverse cellular functions. Cell. 2002;109:145–148. [PubMed]
27. Bachellerie J-P, Cavaillé J, Hüttenhofer A. The expanding snoRNA world. Biochimie. 2002;84:775–790. [PubMed]
28. Reichow RL, Hamma T, Ferré-D’Amaré AR, Varani G. The structure and function of small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:1452–1464. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
29. Tollervey D, Kiss T. Function and synthesis of small nucleolar RNAs. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 1997;9:337–342. [PubMed]
30. Kiss-Laszlo Z, Henry Y, Kiss T. Sequence and structural elements of methylation guide snoRNAs essential for site-specific ribosome methylation of pre-rRNA. EMBO J. 1998;17:797–807. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
31. Matera AG, Terns RM, Terns MP. Non-coding RNAs: lessons from the small nuclear and small nucleolar RNAs. Nature Rev. 2007;8:209–220. [PubMed]
32. King TH, Liu B, McCully RR, Fournier MJ. Ribosome structure and activity are altered in cells lacking snoRNPs that form pseudouridines in the peptidyl transferase center. Mol Cell. 2003;11:425–435. [PubMed]
33. Sergiev PV, Bogdanov AA, Dontsova OA. Ribosomal RNA guanine-(N2)-methyltransferases and their targets. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:2295–2301. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
34. Sergiev PV, Lesnyak DV, Bogdanov AA, Dontsova OA. Identification of Escherichia coli m2G methyltransferases: II. The ygjO gene encodes a methyltransferase specific for G1835 of the 23 S rRNA. J Mol Biol. 2006;364:26–31. [PubMed]
35. Lesnyak DV, Sergiev PV, Bogdanov AA, Dontsova OA. Identification of Escherichia coli m2G methyltransferases: I. The ycbY gene encodes a methyltransferase specific for G2445 of the 23 S rRNA. J Mol Biol. 2006;364:20–25. [PubMed]
36. Tscherne JS, Nurse K, Popienick P, Michel H, Sochacki M, Ofengand J. Purification, cloning, and characterization of the 16S RNA m5C967 methyltransferase from Escherichia coli. Biochemistry. 1999;38:1884–1892. [PubMed]
37. Kowalak JA, Bruenger E, Crain PF, McCloskey JA. Identities and phylogenetic comparisons of posttranscriptional modifications in 16 S ribosomal RNA from Haloferax volcanii. J Biol Chem. 2000;275:24484–24489. [PubMed]
38. Youvan DC, Hearst JE. A sequence from Drosophila melanogaster 18S rRNA bearing the conserved hypermodified nucleoside amΨ: analysis by reverse transcription and high-performance liquid chromatography. Nucleic Acids Res. 1981;9:1723–1741. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
39. Lesnyak DV, Osipiuk J, Skarina T, Sergiev PV, Bogdanov AA, Edwards A, Savchenko A, Joachimiak A, Dontsova OA. Methyltransferase that modifies guanine 966 of the 16 S rRNA. J Biol Chem. 2007;282:5880–5887. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
40. Reid R, Greene PJ, Santi DV. Exposition of a family of RNA m5C methyltransferases from searching genomic and proteomic sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999;27:3138–3145. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
41. Andersen NM, Douthwaite S. YebU is a m5C methyltransferase specific for 16 S rRNA nucleotide 1407. J Mol Biol. 2006;359:777–786. [PubMed]
42. Basturea GN, Rudd KE, Deutscher MP. Identification and characterization of RsmE, the founding member of a new RNA base methyltransferase family. RNA. 2006;12:426–434. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
43. Helm M. Post-transcriptional nucleotide modification and alternative folding of RNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34:721–733. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
44. Hager J, Staker BL, Jakob U. Substrate binding analysis of the 23S rRNA methyltransferase RrmJ. J Bacteriol. 2004;186:6634–6642. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
45. Bügl H, Fauman EB, Staker BL, Zheng F, Kushner SR, Saper MA, Bardwell JCA, Jakob U. RNA methylation under heat shock control. Mol Cell. 2000;6:349–360. [PubMed]
46. Kim DF, Green R. Base-pairing between 23S rRNA and tRNA in the ribosomal A site. Mol Cell. 1999;4:859–864. [PubMed]
47. O’Connor M, Dahlberg AE. Mutations at U2555, a tRNA-protected base in 23S rRNA, affect translational fidelity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1993;90:9214–9218. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
48. Blanchard SC, Puglisi JD. Solution structure of the A loop of 23S ribosomal RNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:3720–3725. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
49. van Buul CPJJ, van Knippenberg PH. Nucleotide sequence of the ksgA gene of Escherichia coli: comparison of methyltransferases effecting dimethylation of adenosine in ribosomal RNA. Gene. 1985;38:65–72. [PubMed]
50. van Buul CPJJ, Visser W, van Knippenberg PH. Increased translational fidelity caused by the antibiotic kasugamycin and ribosomal ambiguity in mutants harbouring the ksgA gene. FEBS Lett. 1984;177:119–124. [PubMed]
51. Lafontaine D, Delcour J, Glasser AL, Desgrés J, Vandenhaute J. The DIM1 gene responsible for the conserved m26A m26A dimethylation site in the 3′-terminal loop of 18 S rRNA is essential in yeast. J Mol Biol. 1994;241:492–497. [PubMed]
52. Lafontaine DLJ, Preiss T, Tollervey D. Yeast 18S rRNA dimethylase Dim1p: a quality control mechanism in ribosome synthesis? Mol Cell Biol. 1998;18:2360–2370. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
53. Schuwirth BS, Day JM, Hau CW, Janssen GR, Dahlberg AE, Cate JHD, Vila-Sanjurjo A. Structural analysis of kasugamycin inhibition of translation. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2006;13:879–886. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
54. Rife JP, Cheng CS, Moore PB, Strobel SA. N2-Methylguanosince is iso-energetic with guanosine in RNA duplexes and GNRA tetraloops. Nucleic Acids Res. 1998;26:3640–3644. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
55. Yamane K, Wachino J-i, Doi Y, Kurokawa H, Arakawa Y. Global spread of multiple aminoglycoside resistance genes. Emerg Infect Dis. 2005;11:951–953. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
56. Yamane K, Wachino J-i, Suzuki S, Shibata N, Kato H, Shibayama K, Kimura K, Kai K, Ishikawa S, Ozawa Y, Konda T, Arakawa Y. 16S rRNA methylase-producing, Gram-negative pathogens, Japan. Emerg Infect Dis. 2007;13:642–646. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
57. Patteson KG, Rodicio LP, Limbach PA. Identification of the mass-silent post-transcriptionally modified nucleoside pseudouridine in RNA by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001;29:E49. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
58. Mengel-Jørgensen J, Kirpekar F. Detection of pseudouridine and other modifications in tRNA by cyanoethylation and MALDI mass spectrometry. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:e135. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
59. Emmerechts G, Herdewijn P, Rozenski J. Pseudouridine detection improvement by derivatization with methyl vinyl sulfone and capillary HPLC-mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr B. 2005;825:233–238. [PubMed]
60. Badis G, Fromont-Racine M, Jacquier A. A snoRNA that guides the two most conserved pseudouridine modifications within rRNA confers a growth advantage in yeast. RNA. 2003;9:771–779. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
61. Davis DR. Stabilization of RNA stacking by pseudouridine. Nucleic Acids Res. 1995;23:5020–5026. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
62. Hall KB, McLaughlin LW. Properties of a U1/mRNA 5′ splice site duplex containing pseudouridine as measured by thermodynamic and NMR methods. Biochemistry. 1991;30:1795–1801. [PubMed]
63. Yarian CS, Basti MM, Cain RJ, Ansari G, Guenther RH, Sochacka E, Czerwinska G, Malkiewicz A, Agris PF. Structural and functional roles of the N1- and N3-protons of Ψ at tRNA’s position 39. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999;27:3543–3549. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
64. Newby MI, Greenbaum NL. Investigation of Overhauser effects between pseudouridine and water protons in RNA helices. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99:12697–12702. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
65. Arnez JG, Steitz TA. Crystal structure of unmodified tRNAGln complexes with glutaminyl-tRNA synthetase and ATP suggests a possible role for pseudouridines in stabilization of RNA structure. Biochemistry. 1994;33:7560–7567. [PubMed]
66. Auffinger P, Westhof E. RNA hydration: three nanoseconds of multiple molecular dynamics simulations of the solvated tRNAAsp anticodon hairpin. J Mol Biol. 1997;269:326–341. [PubMed]
67. Newby MI, Greenbaum NL. A conserved pseudouridine modification in eukaryotic U2 snRNA induces a change in branch-site architecture. RNA. 2001;7:833–845. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
68. Yu Y-T, Shu M-D, Steitz JA. Modifications of U2 snRNA are required for snRNP assembly and pre-mRNA splicing. EMBO J. 1998;17:5783–5795. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
69. Kowalak JA, Bruenger E, Hashizume T, Peltier JM, Ofengand J, McCloskey JA. Structural characterization of U*-1915 in domain IV from Escherichia coli 23S ribosomal RNA as 3-methylpseudouridine. Nucleic Acids Res. 1996;24:688–693. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
70. Meroueh M, Grohar PG, Qiu J, SantaLucia J, Jr, Scaringe SA, Chow CS. Unique structural and stabilizing roles for the individual pseudouridine residues in the 1920 region of Escherichia coli 23S rRNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000;28:2075–2073. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
71. Agrawal RK, Sharma MR, Kiel MC, Hirokawa G, Booth TM, Spahn CMT, Grassucci RA, Kaji A, Frank J. Visualization of ribosome-recycling factor on the Escherichia coli 70S ribosome: functional implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:8900–8905. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
72. Wilson DN, Schluenzen F, Harms JM, Yoshida T, Ohkubo T, Albrecht R, Buerger J, Kobayashi Y, Fucini P. X-ray crystallography study on ribosome recycling: the mechanism of binding and action of RRF on the 50S ribosomal subunit. EMBO J. 2005;24:251–260. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
73. Hirabayashi N, Sata NS, Suzuki T. Conserved loop sequence of helix 69 in Escherichia coli 23 S rRNA is involved in A-site tRNA binding and translational fidelity. J Biol Chem. 2006;281:17203–17211. [PubMed]
74. Liiv A, Karitkina D, Maiväli U, Remme J. Analysis of the function of E. coli 23S rRNA helix-loop 69 by mutagenesis. BMC Mol Biol. 2005;6:18. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
75. O’Connor M. Interaction between the ribosomal subunits: 16S rRNA suppressors of the lethal ΔA1916 mutation in the 23S rRNA of Escherichia coli. Mol Genet Genomics. 2007;278:307–315. [PubMed]
76. Ali IK, Lancaster L, Feinberg J, Joseph S, Noller HF. Deletion of a conserved, central ribosomal intersubunit RNA bridge. Mol Cell. 2006;23:865–874. [PubMed]
77. Raychaudhuri S, Conrad J, Hall BG, Ofengand J. A pseudouridine synthase required for the formation of two universally conserved pseudouridines in ribosomal RNA is essential for normal growth of Escherichia coli. RNA. 1998;4:1407–1417. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
PubReader format: click here to try


Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...


Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...