One antitoxin—two functions: SR4 controls toxin mRNA decay and translation

Type I toxin–antitoxin systems encoded on bacterial chromosomes became the focus of research during the past years. However, little is known in terms of structural requirements, kinetics of interaction with their targets and regulatory mechanisms of the antitoxin RNAs. Here, we present a combined in vitro and in vivo analysis of the bsrG/SR4 type I toxin–antitoxin system from Bacillus subtilis. The secondary structures of SR4 and bsrG mRNA and of the SR4/bsrG RNA complex were determined, apparent binding rate constants calculated and functional segments required for complex formation narrowed down. The initial contact between SR4 and its target was shown to involve the SR4 terminator loop and loop 3 of bsrG mRNA. Additionally, a contribution of the stem of SR4 stem-loop 3 to target binding was found. On SR4/bsrG complex formation, a 4 bp double-stranded region sequestering the bsrG Shine Dalgarno (SD) sequence was extended to 8 bp. Experimental evidence was obtained that this extended region caused translation inhibition of bsrG mRNA. Therefore, we conclude that SR4 does not only promote degradation of the toxin mRNA but also additionally inhibit its translation. This is the first case of a dual-acting antitoxin RNA.     

Yeast Lsm1p-7p/Pat1p deadenylation-dependent mRNA-decapping factors are required for brome mosaic virus genomic RNA translation

Previously, we used the ability of the higher eukaryotic positive-strand RNA virus brome mosaic virus (BMV) to replicate in yeast to show that the yeast LSM1 gene is required for recruiting BMV RNA from translation to replication. Here we extend this observation to show that Lsm1p and other components of the Lsm1p-Lsm7p/Pat1p deadenylation-dependent mRNA decapping complex were also required for translating BMV RNAs. Inhibition of BMV RNA translation was selective, with no effect on general cellular translation. We show that viral genomic RNAs suitable for RNA replication were already distinguished from nonreplication templates at translation, well before RNA recruitment to replication. Among mRNA turnover pathways, only factors specific for deadenylated mRNA decapping were required for BMV RNA translation. Dependence on these factors was not only a consequence of the nonpolyadenylated nature of BMV RNAs but also involved the combined effects of the viral 5' and 3' noncoding regions and 2a polymerase open reading frame. High-resolution sucrose density gradient analysis showed that, while mutating factors in the Lsm1p-7p/Pat1p complex completely inhibited viral RNA translation, the levels of viral RNA associated with ribosomes were only slightly reduced in mutant yeast. This polysome association was further verified by using a conditional allele of essential translation initiation factor PRT1, which markedly decreased polysome association of viral genomic RNA in the presence or absence of an LSM7 mutation. Together, these results show that a defective Lsm1p-7p/Pat1p complex inhibits BMV RNA translation primarily by stalling or slowing the elongation of ribosomes along the viral open reading frame. Thus, factors in the Lsm1p-7p/Pat1p complex function not only in mRNA decapping but also in translation, and both translation and recruitment of BMV RNAs to viral RNA replication are regulated by a cell pathway that transfers mRNAs from translation to degradation.     

A specific RNA hairpin loop structure binds the RNA recognition motifs of the Drosophila SR protein B52.

B52, also known as SRp55, is a member of the Drosophila melanogaster SR protein family, a group of nuclear proteins that are both essential splicing factors and specific splicing regulators. Like most SR proteins, B52 contains two RNA recognition motifs in the N terminus and a C-terminal domain rich in serine-arginine dipeptide repeats. Since B52 is an essential protein and is expected to play a role in splicing a subset of Drosophila pre-mRNAs, its function is likely to be mediated by specific interactions with RNA. To investigate the RNA-binding specificity of B52, we isolated B52-binding RNAs by selection and amplification from a pool of random RNA sequences by using full-length B52 protein as the target. These RNAs contained a conserved consensus motif that constitutes the core of a secondary structural element predicted by energy minimization. Deletion and substitution mutations defined the B52-binding site on these RNAs as a hairpin loop structure covering about 20 nucleotides, which was confirmed by structure-specific enzymatic probing. Finally, we demonstrated that both RNA recognition motifs of B52 are required for RNA binding, while the RS domain is not involved in this interaction.     

Cycling of the Sm-like protein Hfq on the DsrA small regulatory RNA

Small RNAs (sRNAs) regulate bacterial genes involved in environmental adaptation. This RNA regulation requires Hfq, a bacterial Sm-like protein that stabilizes sRNAs and enhances RNA-RNA interactions. To understand the mechanism of target recognition by sRNAs, we investigated the interactions between Hfq, the sRNA DsrA, and its regulatory target rpoS mRNA, which encodes the stress response sigma factor. Nuclease footprinting revealed that Hfq recognized multiple sites in rpoS mRNA without significantly perturbing secondary structure in the 5' leader that inhibits translation initiation. Base-pairing with DsrA, however, made the rpoS ribosome binding site fully accessible, as predicted by genetic data. Hfq bound DsrA four times more tightly than the DsrA.rpoS RNA complex in gel mobility-shift assays. Consequently, Hfq is displaced rapidly from its high-affinity binding site on DsrA by conformational changes in DsrA, when DsrA base-pairs with rpoS mRNA. Hfq accelerated DsrA.rpoS RNA association and stabilized the RNA complex up to twofold. Hybridization of DsrA and rpoS mRNA was optimal when Hfq occupied its primary binding site on free DsrA, but was inhibited when Hfq associated with the DsrA.rpoS RNA complex. We conclude that recognition of rpoS mRNA is stimulated by binding of Hfq to free DsrA sRNA, followed by release of Hfq from the sRNA.mRNA complex.     

Translation repression in human cells by microRNA-induced gene silencing requires RCK/p54

RNA interference is triggered by double-stranded RNA that is processed into small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) by Dicer enzyme. Endogenously, RNA interference triggers are created from small noncoding RNAs called microRNAs (miRNAs). RNA-induced silencing complexes (RISC) in human cells can be programmed by exogenously introduced siRNA or endogenously expressed miRNA. siRNA-programmed RISC (siRISC) silences expression by cleaving a perfectly complementary target mRNA, whereas miRNA-induced silencing complexes (miRISC) inhibits translation by binding imperfectly matched sequences in the 3′ UTR of target mRNA. Both RISCs contain Argonaute2 (Ago2), which catalyzes target mRNA cleavage by siRISC and localizes to cytoplasmic mRNA processing bodies (P-bodies). Here, we show that RCK/p54, a DEAD box helicase, interacts with argonaute proteins, Ago1 and Ago2, in affinity-purified active siRISC or miRISC from human cells; directly interacts with Ago1 and Ago2 in vivo, facilitates formation of P-bodies, and is a general repressor of translation. Disrupting P-bodies by depleting Lsm1 did not affect RCK/p54 interactions with argonaute proteins and its function in miRNA-mediated translation repression. Depletion of RCK/p54 disrupted P-bodies and dispersed Ago2 throughout the cytoplasm but did not significantly affect siRNA-mediated RNA functions of RISC. Depleting RCK/p54 released general, miRNA-induced, and let-7-mediated translational repression. Therefore, we propose that translation repression is mediated by miRISC via RCK/p54 and its specificity is dictated by the miRNA sequence binding multiple copies of miRISC to complementary 3′ UTR sites in the target mRNA. These studies also suggest that translation suppression by miRISC does not require P-body structures, and location of miRISC to P-bodies is the consequence of translation repression.     

Activities of the Sex-lethal protein in RNA binding and protein:protein interactions.

The Drosophila sex determination gene Sex-lethal (Sxl) controls its own expression, and the expression of downstream target genes such as transformer , by regulating pre-mRNA splicing and mRNA translation. Sxl codes an RNA-binding protein that consists of an N-terminus of approximately 100 amino acids, two 90 amino acid RRM domains, R1 and R2, and an 80 amino acid C-terminus. In the studies reported here we have examined the functional properties of the different Sxl protein domains in RNA binding and in protein:protein interactions. The two RRM domains are responsible for RNA binding. Specificity in the recognition of target RNAs requires both RRM domains, and proteins which consist of the single domains or duplicated domains have anomalous RNA recognition properties. Moreover, the length of the linker between domains can affect RNA recognition properties. Our results indicate that the two RRM domains mediate Sxl:Sxl protein interactions, and that these interactions probably occur both in cis and trans. We speculate that cis interactions between R1 and R2 play a role in RNA recognition by the Sxl protein, while trans interactions stabilize complex formation on target RNAs that contain two or more closely spaced binding sites. Finally, we show that the interaction of Sxl with the snRNP protein Snf is mediated by the R1 RRM domain.     

The different pathways of HIV genomic RNA translation

Lentiviruses, the prototype of which is HIV-1, can initiate translation either by the classical cap-dependent mechanism or by internal recruitment of the ribosome through RNA domains called IRESs (internal ribosome entry sites). Depending on the virus considered, the mechanism of IRES-dependent translation differs widely. It can occur by direct binding of the 40S subunit to the mRNA, necessitating a subset or most of the canonical initiation factors and/or ITAF (IRES trans-acting factors). Nonetheless, a common feature of IRESs is that ribosomal recruitment relies, at least in part, on IRES structural determinants. Lentiviral genomic RNAs present an additional level of complexity, as, in addition to the 5'-UTR (untranslated region) IRES, the presence of a new type of IRES, embedded within Gag coding region was described recently. This IRES, conserved in all three lentiviruses examined, presents conserved structural motifs that are crucial for its activity, thus reinforcing the link between RNA structure and function. However, there are still important gaps in our understanding of the molecular mechanism underlying IRES-dependent translation initiation of HIV, including the determination of the initiation factors required, the dynamics of initiation complex assembly and the dynamics of the RNA structure during initiation complex formation. Finally, the ability of HIV genomic RNA to initiate translation through different pathways questions the possible mechanisms of regulation and their correlation to the viral paradigm, i.e. translation versus encapsidation of its genomic RNA.     

Alu RNA regulates the cellular pool of active ribosomes by targeted delivery of SRP9/14 to 40S subunits

The human genome contains about 1.5 million Alu elements, which are transcribed into Alu RNAs by RNA polymerase III. Their expression is upregulated following stress and viral infection, and they associate with the SRP9/14 protein dimer in the cytoplasm forming Alu RNPs. Using cell-free translation, we have previously shown that Alu RNPs inhibit polysome formation. Here, we describe the mechanism of Alu RNP-mediated inhibition of translation initiation and demonstrate its effect on translation of cellular and viral RNAs. Both cap-dependent and IRES-mediated initiation is inhibited. Inhibition involves direct binding of SRP9/14 to 40S ribosomal subunits and requires Alu RNA as an assembly factor but its continuous association with 40S subunits is not required for inhibition. Binding of SRP9/14 to 40S prevents 48S complex formation by interfering with the recruitment of mRNA to 40S subunits. In cells, overexpression of Alu RNA decreases translation of reporter mRNAs and this effect is alleviated with a mutation that reduces its affinity for SRP9/14. Alu RNPs also inhibit the translation of cellular mRNAs resuming translation after stress and of viral mRNAs suggesting a role of Alu RNPs in adapting the translational output in response to stress and viral infection.     

Four-way junctions in antisense RNA-mRNA complexes involved in plasmid replication control: a common theme?

In several groups of bacterial plasmids, antisense RNAs regulate copy number through inhibition of replication initiator protein synthesis. In plasmid R1, we have recently shown that the inhibitory complex between the antisense RNA (CopA) and its target mRNA (CopT) is characterized by the formation of two intermolecular helices, resulting in a four-way junction structure and a side-by-side helical alignment. Based on lead-induced cleavage and ribonuclease (RNase) V(1) probing combined with molecular modeling, a strikingly similar topology is supported for the complex formed between the antisense RNA (Inc) and mRNA (RepZ) of plasmid Col1b-P9. In particular, the position of the four-way junction and the location of divalent ion-binding site(s) indicate that the structural features of these two complexes are essentially the same in spite of sequence differences. Comparisons of several target and antisense RNAs in other plasmids further indicate that similar binding pathways are used to form the inhibitory antisense-target RNA complexes. Thus, in all these systems, the structural features of both antisense and target RNAs determine the topologically possible and kinetically favored pathway that is essential for efficient in vivo control.     

mRNA translation is not a prerequisite for small interfering RNA-mediated mRNA cleavage

RNA interference constitutes a major means of eliminating mRNAs, yet how the small interfering RNAs (siRNA) within the RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC) finds its homologous target in the cell remains unknown. An attractive hypothesis is that RNA interference is linked to translation which allows RISC ready access to every translated mRNA. To test whether translation could direct siRNAs to mRNAs, chemical and biological inhibitors of translation and their effects on mRNA cleavage were tested. Our results show that mRNA degradation by siRNAs is not dependent on mRNA translation.     

Bulged residues promote the progression of a loop-loop interaction to a stable and inhibitory antisense-target RNA complex

In several groups of bacterial plasmids, antisense RNAs regulate copy number through inhibition of replication initiator protein synthesis. These RNAs are characterized by a long hairpin structure interrupted by several unpaired residues or bulged loops. In plasmid R1, the inhibitory complex between the antisense RNA (CopA) and its target mRNA (CopT) is characterized by a four-way junction structure and a side-by-side helical alignment. This topology facilitates the formation of a stabilizer intermolecular helix between distal regions of both RNAs, essential for in vivo control. The bulged residues in CopA/CopT were shown to be required for high in vitro binding rate and in vivo activity. This study addresses the question of why removal of bulged nucleotides blocks stable complex formation. Structure mapping, modification interference, and molecular modeling of bulged-less mutant CopA–CopT complexes suggests that, subsequent to loop–loop contact, helix propagation is prevented. Instead, a fully base paired loop–loop interaction is formed, inducing a continuous stacking of three helices. Consequently, the stabilizer helix cannot be formed, and stable complex formation is blocked. In contrast to the four-way junction topology, the loop–loop interaction alone failed to prevent ribosome binding at its loading site and, thus, inhibition of RepA translation was alleviated.     

The role of microRNAs in the involvement of vascular smooth muscle cells in the development of atherosclerosis

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are a class of nonprotein‐encoding RNAs of ~22 nucleotides in length that bind to or complement each other with a target gene messenger RNA (mRNA) to promote mRNA degradation or inhibit translation of the target mRNA. The protein required [such as Toll‐like receptor (TLR) proteins] is controlled at an optimal level. By affecting protein translation, miRNAs have become powerful regulators of biological processes, including development, differentiation, cell proliferation, and apoptosis. MiRNAs are involved in the regulation of proliferation, migration, and apoptosis of vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs), thereby affecting the formation of atherosclerosis (AS). In recent years, the role and mechanism of miRNAs involved in AS development in VSMCs have been studied extensively. In the current study, the results and progress in miRNA research are reviewed.     

The ATP requirement for initiation of eukaryotic translation varies according to the mRNA species

The requirement for ATP for initiation of eukaryotic mRNA translation was tested using gel-filtered rabbit reticulocyte lysates incubated with labelled Met-tRNAfMet and exogenous RNA templates, and assaying the formation of labelled 80S initiation complexes in the presence of GTP, or labelled 40S initiation complexes in the presence of a non-hydrolysable analogue of GTP. Initiation complex formation on globin mRNA, or on capped viral RNAs such as papaya mosaic virus RNA and tobacco mosaic virus RNA, was strongly stimulated by ATP. In contrast, initiation complex formation on (uncapped) encephalomyocarditis virus RNA was uninfluenced by the presence or absence of ATP, which may be correlated with the recent evidence for scanning-independent internal initiation on this viral RNA. In addition, initiation complex formation on uncapped cowpea mosaic virus RNA and on poly(A,U,G) was only slightly stimulated by ATP, much less than in the case of the capped RNAs. These results suggest that most of the ATP hydrolysed during translation initiation is consumed in cap-dependent processes, probably in unwinding the mRNA, and relatively little in the actual migration or scanning of 40S subunits along the mRNA.     

Engagement of tumor necrosis factor mRNA by an endotoxin-inducible cytoplasmic protein.

BACKGROUND: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) production by macrophages plays an important role in the host response to infection. TNF-alpha gene expression in RAW 264.7 macrophages is predominantly regulated at the translational level. A key element in this regulation is an AU-rich (AUR) sequence located in the 3' untranslated region (UTR) of TNF mRNA. In unstimulated macrophages, the translation of TNF mRNA is inhibited via this AUR sequence. Upon stimulation with LPS, this repression is overcome and translation occurs. In this study, we attempted to identify cellular proteins that interact with the AUR sequence and thereby regulate TNF mRNA translation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: RNA probes corresponding to portions of TNF mRNA 3' UTR were synthesized. These labeled RNAs were incubated with cytoplasmic extracts of either unstimulated or lipopolysaccharides (LPS)-stimulated RAW 264.7 macrophages. The RNA/protein complexes formed were analyzed by gel retardation. Ultraviolet (UV) cross-linking experiments were performed to determine the molecular weight of the proteins involved in the complexes. RESULTS: TNF mRNA AUR sequence formed two complexes (1 and 2) of distinct electrophoretic mobilities. While the formation of complex 1 was independent of the activation state of the macrophages from which the extracts were obtained, complex 2 was detected only using cytoplasmic extracts from LPS-stimulated macrophages. Upon UV cross-linking, two proteins, of 50 and 80 kD, respectively, were capable of binding the UAR sequence. The 50-kD protein is likely to be part of the LPS-inducible complex 2, since its binding ability was enhanced upon LPS stimulation. Interestingly, complex 2 formation was also triggered by Sendaï virus infection, another potent activator of TNF mRNA translation in RAW 264.7 macrophages. In contrast, complex 2 was not detected with cytoplasmic extracts obtained from B and T cell lines which are unable to produce TNF in response to LPS. Protein tyrosine phosphorylation is required for LPS-induced TNF mRNA translation. Remarkably, the protein tyrosine phosphorylation inhibitor herbimycin A abolished LPS-induced complex 2 formation. Complex 2 was already detectable after 0.5 hr of LPS treatment and was triggered by a minimal LPS dose of 10 pg/ml. CONCLUSIONS: The tight correlation between TNF production and the formation of an LPS-inducible cytoplasmic complex suggests that this complex plays a role in the translational regulation of TNF mRNA.